| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
SoilMan
Status: Offline
Joined: 24 Jun 2009
Posts: 25
$poons: 0.80
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 12:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 |
|
| Benza wrote: | | Getting the content you pay for isn't a reward, it's a business transaction. |
And getting that content without paying for it is theft. Until that business transaction is carried out that content is still legally the property of the developer/publisher. I agree that not all the people who pirate that content would have bought the game, but to say that what they is doing isn't stealing is flagrantly wrong.
Yes, there is a massive difference between actual and potential sales. However, regardless of whether that sale is made or not pirates are playing content that is not legally their's as no business transaction has taken place -- they are getting to use a developer's property for free, hence the illegality.
It doesn't matter about sales or potential sales anymore, it is about the illegal activity.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SoilMan
Status: Offline
Joined: 24 Jun 2009
Posts: 25
$poons: 0.80
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 12:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Karai Pantsu wrote: | | My point is this - Piracy hasn't killed gaming, not even PC gaming, even though that's all we've been hearing for the last ~10 years or more. |
Hmm, and that would be why PC gamers so rarely get exclusives? The only way developers get money from PC release is becasue consoles are the lead development and PCs get the (often lazy) port.
Name as many PC only chart games of the last year you can.
I only have the Total War, Civ5, WoW,, Torchlight Sims3 (kinda) and Starcraft. That's pretty meagre for the most powerful and arguable most widely distributed games playing device in homes.
Although PC gaming isn't dead and never will be, it is certainly stymied by the amount of profit that can be made from it and will always run second place to the more pirating robust consoles.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benza
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 14586
$poons: 119.20
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
but to say that what they is doing isn't stealing is flagrantly wrong. |
No to say what they're doing is stealing is flagrantly wrong.
No ones arguing that it isn't illegal. But it's not theft.
Theft as defined by Australian law is
| Quote: | | Intention to permanently deprive - defined at s.73(12) as treating property as it belongs to the accused, rather than the owner. |
Pirating software does not permanently deprive anyone of any property.
Copyright infringement is illegal, we already have laws built around that. You can't just suddenly decide "Well I don't like those laws we should charge them with something else" That's not how justice works.
If you don't think the copyright infringement laws are strong enough, then those need to be changed, not just randomly changing what the laws actually mean based on gut feelings.
| Quote: | | Hmm, and that would be why PC gamers so rarely get exclusives? The only way developers get money from PC release is becasue consoles are the lead development and PCs get the (often lazy) port. |
I'm sure it has nothing to do with more people owning consoles then dedicated gaming rig pcs and the price associated with both.
| Quote: | | I only have the Total War, Civ5, WoW,, Torchlight Sims3 (kinda) and Starcraft. That's pretty meagre for the most powerful and arguable most widely distributed games playing device in homes. |
Name the PS3 only games that charted last year, or the 360 only games that charted last year. There arn't that many if you count them individually and not just as 'console' games. And as for being the most widely distributed. Sure lots of people have computers, but how many people have computers that can run next gen games? Not that many.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SoilMan
Status: Offline
Joined: 24 Jun 2009
Posts: 25
$poons: 0.80
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 12:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Benza wrote: | | Intention to permanently deprive - defined at s.73(12) as treating property as it belongs to the accused, rather than the owner. |
Fair point, I should have stated I was speaking philosophically and without knowledge of the law. Cheers for clarifying that though.
| Benza wrote: | | I'm sure it has nothing to do with more people owning consoles then dedicated gaming rig pcs and the price associated with both |
Just about any PC over a grand bought in the last 3 years will run all of the multi-platform games because of the technology lock that consoles inherantly have.
| Benza wrote: | | Name the PS3 only games that charted last year, or the 360 only games that charted last year. There arn't that many if you count them individually and not just as 'console' games. |
No, that is the point, I specifically differentiated based on console vs. PC on the basis of ease to pirate software. And there are many console only games that have charted.
An interesting question, there is still a very profitable market for mid to high end PC gaming hardware, so where are all the games these people are playing coming from? They sure as hell aren't buying Crysis legitimately, or Crytek wouldn't have complained and gone multi-platform.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frozencry
Status: Offline
Joined: 04 Nov 2005
Posts: 9277
$poons: 1628.10
Location: Sydney
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Windburn
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 1302
$poons: 222.60
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Very juicy topic, I likey 
I'll get stuck into the real meaty bits later when I have more time, but for now I'd just like to say how tired I am of hearing the same ignorant arguments against the 'lost sales' the industry is crying foul over.
Everyone loves to jump at the fact that none of these pirates would have bought the property in any case, and so they aren't a "lost" sale. What proponents of this argument seem to entirely forget, is that the only way these pirates could otherwise have obtained any such property is by purchasing it.
Legal Mumbo Jumbo Alert:
The fact of the matter is, ANY pirate, no matter whether just a one-time user or a heavy pirator, is now in possession of property to which they have NO legal rights whatsoever. It's circular-- the fact that they are now claiming a possessory right over the property and dealing with it is conversion, and so the exclusive right of the developer/publisher to distribute and make a commercial profit in the property is repudiated.
THAT repudiation is the lost sale. Gamers as a whole seem entirely incapable of conceiving that the dealing with property over which you have no equitable or legal interest in any way is an imposition of the rights of the title holder.
/End Legal Mumbo Jumbo
There's nothing wrong in their lost sale claim; if you have the property, you SHOULD have paid for it, and the failure to do so is what they're coming after you for.
@ Benza
Let's not forget theft is only one sanction at law, and a limited one at that. The tort of conversion, criminal provisions built into the Copyright Act, and the civil penalties in the CA and even the TRIPs guidelines all provide avenues for dealing with individual and commercial pirates to varying degrees, and nearly all would be identified by the average Joe as a form of 'stealing'.
Some of these can lead to whopping penalties too.
_________________
Last edited by Windburn on Thu Nov 25, 2010 1:41 pm, edited 4 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JackSlack
Status: Offline
Joined: 10 Sep 2003
Posts: 1175
$poons: 244.60
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 1:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Karai Pantsu wrote: | | I'd rather DRM than the prosecution of one-time downloaders and petty offenders, actually - yeah |
Fair enough. We're on dead set opposite sides of the debate here, then: I think DRM is a worthless snake oil being peddled to game companies; only Ubisoft's DRM actually worked in any real way, and in the end you're punishing the paying users (who have to put up with the annoying DRM) than the pirates (who have it stripped out). It's actually providing the pirates with a better product.
Now, I do acknowledge the difficulties with the legal strategy. But the people who downloaded games illegally did something wrong. In the end, it's at least targeting people who aren't your paying customers. My issues with the strategy are scale (this is a biiiiig undertaking) and accuracy (getting things wrong are well and truly a bad thing).
And yes, I apologise for the patronising remark.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Karai Pantsu
PALGN Moderator
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Posts: 10109
$poons: 29.06
Location: Melbexico
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 1:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Yeah, fair enough. I don't care for DRM myself (in fact, generally speaking, I truly loathe it), but in the end both strategies tend to be utterly useless in the face of the people doing the worst of the piracy.
It comes to the same point as these matters nearly always do: we need to find a better way of dealing with piracy.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benza
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 14586
$poons: 119.20
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 1:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Quote: | | Let's not forget theft is only one sanction at law, and a limited one at that. The tort of conversion, criminal provisions built into the Copyright Act, and the civil penalties in the CA and even the TRIPs guidelines all provide avenues for dealing with individual and commercial pirates to varying degrees. |
Exactly, there are all ready plenty of laws in place for dealing with copyright infringement without saying it's theft.
| Quote: | | Everyone loves to jump at the fact that none of these pirates would have bought the property in any case, and so they aren't a "lost" sale. What proponents of this argument seem to entirely forget, is that the only way these pirates could otherwise have obtained any such property is by purchasing it. |
This isn't accurate. If the person pirating it doesn't have the means to actually purchase it legitamtley then it isn't a lost sale cause there was no potential for the sale to actually occur.
Example: I had no intention on ever spending money on imagine: Fashion designer. I downloaded a copy for my flash card on the DS for shits and giggles. That is not a lost sale to Ubisoft because there was never a potential to sell that game to me. If the piracy option had not been there I would have just never played the game.
Possession of a game does not mean a potential sale of the game.
It is still illegal and still in violation of there rights as copyright holders. That however does not equate to it being a lost sale.
| Quote: | | No, that is the point, I specifically differentiated based on console vs. PC on the basis of ease to pirate software. And there are many console only games that have charted. |
But that isn't what's causing the disparity. Sure there are less PC exclusive titles then there were 10 years ago, but there are also less Sony exclusive and X-box exclusive titles then there were 10 years ago.
People arn't developing exclusives cause cutting out a significant portion of your potential customer base is a stupid thing to do.
| Quote: | The ten golden rules of piracy.
Can't beat it guys. |
Wow, way to tell the entire homebrew community for consoles that they don't exist and are all lying thieves. Uh, thanks Destructoid. I guess those 8000 plus registered users on NDSHB are all figments of my imagination? The thing that got the most use on my DS flashcard was the MP3 player.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Windburn
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 1302
$poons: 222.60
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Benza wrote: | This isn't accurate. If the person pirating it doesn't have the means to actually purchase it legitamtley then it isn't a lost sale cause there was no potential for the sale to actually occur.
Example: I had no intention on ever spending money on imagine: Fashion designer. I downloaded a copy for my flash card on the DS for **** and giggles. That is not a lost sale to Ubisoft because there was never a potential to sell that game to me. If the piracy option had not been there I would have just never played the game.
Possession of a game does not mean a potential sale of the game.
It is still illegal and still in violation of there rights as copyright holders. That however does not equate to it being a lost sale.
|
Yeah, sorry mate, but that argument is arse-backwards.
Firstly, your comment begins by asserting some form of means-testing on the ability to quantify a sale. The fact that you even OWN a DS disqualifies this point, as you certainly had the MEANS to purchase it, just not the willingness.
So in effect what you're actually saying, is that record companies should QUANTIFY their losses on the individual subjective testing of EVERY single pirate?
Are you starting to sound ridiculous to yourself too, or is it just to everyone else?
If there was any sense being exercised here at all, it's easily seen that when quantifying to the courts the damage that piracy has on the industry, there is NO other feasible way of framing it than relying on their legal rights infringed upon.
Because after all, you're the one sitting there at the end of the day on your DS dressing up Barbie dolls in your underwear without paying a lick of consideration to recompense the efforts of the developers.
THAT is a lost sale.
_________________
Last edited by Windburn on Thu Nov 25, 2010 2:15 pm, edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SoilMan
Status: Offline
Joined: 24 Jun 2009
Posts: 25
$poons: 0.80
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Benza wrote: | | People arn't developing exclusives cause cutting out a significant portion of your potential customer base is a stupid thing to do. |
I agree, unless there is a potential for a specific medium to provide a specific market that can't be reached in cross-platform games, e.g. motion control games. The PC always has been a unique platform (being the cutting edge of games technology) allowing developers to do things on it that aren't possible on other platforms (e.g. Crysis, Unreal, Quake, Falcon x.0, etc.). But currently, I suggest, that few developers are taking up this market (re the above point on PC hardware) because of the inability to turn a profit due to prolific piracy.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SoilMan
Status: Offline
Joined: 24 Jun 2009
Posts: 25
$poons: 0.80
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Windburn wrote: | | Are you starting to sound ridiculous to yourself too, or is it just to everyone else |
Hey mate, no need to get nasty. I'm enjoying this debate without the insults, so let's not start a shit fight
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benza
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 14586
$poons: 119.20
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
So in effect what you're actually saying, is that record companies should QUANTIFY their losses on the individual subjective testing of EVERY single pirate? |
I'm not saying it's practical. But just cause what they're doing is the practical way to go about doesn't make it an accurate reflection on the money they've lost through piracy.
And sorry but I think in cases we're they're suing people for multiple millions of dollars in lost sales the least they can do is prove they actually lost that amount of sales instead of what is basically just guessing.
| Quote: | | because of the inability to turn a profit due to prolific piracy. |
I agree with most of what you said but this bit. I really do doubt that the perceived lack of success by PC games is due to piracy over a myriad of other reasons. I mean I have a pc capable of running most games but I buy the console versions because PC gaming shits me to no end and I find it more comfortable playing on a couch. There's also things like perceived social stigmas of pc gaming vs console gaming, trends in multiplayer games (IE: My friends all have modern warfare on x-box so I'll get it on x-box too) etc I'm sure piracy is a problem, but I'd wager it's only part of the problem not the entire thing.
Of course since we're both really speculating here so I don't think we can really come to a concrete answer.
_________________
Last edited by Benza on Thu Nov 25, 2010 2:23 pm, edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Windburn
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 1302
$poons: 222.60
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Benza wrote: | | And sorry but I think in cases we're they're suing people for multiple millions of dollars in lost sales the least they can do is prove they actually lost that amount of sales instead of what is basically just guessing. |
In Utopia maybe
In the real world, the quantification of damages, particularly consequential losses (individual users aren't hit up for millions, just commercial distributors), are very much done by the guess-work of a few good men in smocks.
And what they'll base their decision upon is the actual legal rights infringed, like it or not.
| Quote: | | Hey mate, no need to get nasty. I'm enjoying this debate without the insults, so let's not start a **** fight |
I'm sure Benza wasn't offended, I honestly just wanted to point out the absurdity of trying to establish any sort of quantification of losses under those terms. It's impossible without every single pirate coming forward, expressing their intentions, and not lying in doing so.
_________________
Last edited by Windburn on Thu Nov 25, 2010 2:30 pm, edited 2 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benza
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 14586
$poons: 119.20
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 2:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Quote: | | (individual users aren't hit up for millions, just commercial distributors) |
Considering that most piracy is done via P2P methods these days that line is blurring. Which ends up with things like when the RIAA sued a 12 yearold girl for 150 grand + per song.
| Quote: | | And what they'll base their decision upon is the actual legal rights infringed, like it or not. |
I know they'll do it weather or not I like it, but I still think that the rights of the individual should outweigh the rights of a corporation.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SoilMan
Status: Offline
Joined: 24 Jun 2009
Posts: 25
$poons: 0.80
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 2:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Benza wrote: | | I agree with most of what you said but this bit |
I'm not saying that PC games per se can't turn a profit, just that the exclusives struggle. I'm ignoring the obvious demographic differences between console and PC gamers, but as you say we are both speculating and these no doubt have a role in the decline of PC games.
Though, solely working off the fact that if nVidia and ATI can bother releasing gaming graphics cards then there is clearly a unique market present in PC land. The fact that we don't see a developer boasting that they are making a game utilising this market suggests that there is a problem i.e. piracy.
Otherwise the capitalist principle of making a profit in every market available with the offset of reasonable risk would hold true -- clearly the level of risk is too high.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Windburn
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 Oct 2007
Posts: 1302
$poons: 222.60
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 2:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Benza wrote: |
Considering that most piracy is done via P2P methods these days that line is blurring. Which ends up with things like when the RIAA sued a 12 yearold girl for 150 grand + per song. |
Good luck, they'll be losing more money in court than they'd ever gain. It is economically infeasible to go after individual end-users for massive damage claims like that (nor would an Australian court impose it)-- it's much better for them to target corporations and commercial distributors.
Or in CD Project's case, to threaten legal action and hope that the pirate will settle. It's a perfectly legitimate tactic and I'm all for it if it will scare end-users off piracy once and for all. It's about time people woke up to themselves and to the age-old adage: if you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SoilMan
Status: Offline
Joined: 24 Jun 2009
Posts: 25
$poons: 0.80
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Windburn wrote: | | I'm sure Benza wasn't offended, I honestly just wanted to point out the absurdity of trying to establish any sort of quantification of losses under those terms. It's impossible without every single pirate coming forward, expressing their intentions, and not lying in doing so. |
Yeah, my apologies. I don't frequent these boards enough to know the intricacies of people's relationships here. I was probably out of line posting that, but I had just been in a meeting with arseholes ridiculing people unnecessarily and I vented. Cheers
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benza
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 14586
$poons: 119.20
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 2:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Quote: | | I'm sure Benza wasn't offended, |
I was in tears I'll have you know 
| Quote: | | Or in CD Project's case, to threaten legal action and hope that the pirate will settle. It's a perfectly legitimate tactic and I'm all for it if it will scare end-users off piracy once and for all. |
So basically if the pirates decided to actually fight it then cd project would be fucked.
| Quote: | | It's a perfectly legitimate tactic and I'm all for it if it will scare end-users off piracy once and for all. |
This is were I take issue with the tactic.
It won't. The RIAA have been chasing down pirates for years, sueing the pants off of anyone they can get a hold of, threating ISP's with legal action if they don't disconnect there internet, petitioning governments to change there laws and bring in things like the three strikes system being implemented in Europe.
It sure as hell hasn't stopped music piracy.
In fact the thing that has had the biggest effect on shrinking the size of music piracy is shit like iTunes. That goes back to my original point. The best way to combat piracy is to convert the pirates into customers. iTunes addressed the need and appealed to the reason a lot of people were pirating stuff (Convenience) and showed that you can do it through us as well.
If they want to combat piracy properly they need to do the same look at why pirates are pirating instead of purchasing. And see how they can meet that need. They're not going to be 100% effective in stamping out piracy cause that's impossible. But if they do it right they'd end up getting more sales and not have the legal fees.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nic_231
Status: Offline
Joined: 15 Nov 2004
Posts: 574
$poons: 63.30
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Benza wrote: | Sorry but it isn't.
Theft deprives someone of something while supplying you with something
Downloading a game, if as people have pointed out there was no way the pirate was ever going to buy doesn't deprive anyone of anything.
|
That still doesn't give you the right to take it.
You are still infringing intellectual property, which is a crime. Draw the distinction between copyright infringment and theft or rivalrous and non-rivalrous property all you want, but it really adds nothing to your argument.
People who knowinlgy infringe somebody else's itellectual property rights are guilt of a crime and they deserve to be punished for it.
Yes copyright infringment is not 'theft' per se, but it is a crime in its own right. The theft that occurs is the money you are taking from the developers. You are essentially taking food off the table of hard working people because you don't feel like paying.
I wonder how you would feel if you had a fantastic idea, spent a lot of time and money developing it and then everybody just took it from you without giving you any compensation.
People have a right to protect thier intellectual property, copyright law exists for a reason and its binding on you whether you like it or not.
We don't get to choose which laws we want to obey, if we did, I'd kill everyone who looked at me cock eyed!
_________________
http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197997175012
PSN: Nic_231
Xbox Live: Noobman_5000
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jesuslol
Status: Offline
Joined: 13 May 2007
Posts: 597
$poons: 57.20
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
I'm confused. Do pirates have no intention to pay for things making their piracy not equal to a loss sale or are they potential customers that could have purchased the software but didn't making it a loss sale? You can't have it both ways. Either the pirates are customers and pirating = loss sale or they aren't potential customers and the devs aren't losing anything.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benza
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 14586
$poons: 119.20
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 4:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Nic_231 wrote: |
That still doesn't give you the right to take it.
You are still infringing intellectual property, which is a crime.
|
That was my entire point. It's allready one crime that has laws in place based around punishing you for commiting that crime. You can't just then decide that it's something completley different.
| Quote: | | Draw the distinction between copyright infringment and theft or rivalrous and non-rivalrous property all you want, but it really adds nothing to your argument. |
And here's were I begin to suspect you haven't actually read my arguments.
| Quote: |
People who knowinlgy infringe somebody else's itellectual property rights are guilt of a crime and they deserve to be punished for it.
Yes copyright infringment is not 'theft' per se, but it is a crime in its own right. The theft that occurs is the money you are taking from the developers. You are essentially taking food off the table of hard working people because you don't feel like paying.
I wonder how you would feel if you had a fantastic idea, spent a lot of time and money developing it and then everybody just took it from you without giving you any compensation.
People have a right to protect thier intellectual property, copyright law exists for a reason and its binding on you whether you like it or not.
We don't get to choose which laws we want to obey, if we did, I'd kill everyone who looked at me **** eyed!
|
Uh... what?
My argument was that there are better ways for companies to handle piracy and they would find more value in attempting to convert a pirate into a paying customer? I never said that piracy was ok? In fact I've repeatedly stated that it is illegal. In fact no one has argued that piracy of the games are ok, the only argument against the developer here is that they're going about combating it the wrong way.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Passa
Status: Offline
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 2613
$poons: 0.00
Location: Sydney
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Denny wrote: | | Yeah, nah. And a damn high amount of those aren't random shovelware either. |
Denny.. come on man.. my screenshot wasn't selective, I just screencapped the top 10 games on sale. All those new releases are not cheap by any understanding of the word. Above what you'd pay at AU retail. Your point that there's lots of $5/$10 games on Steam is meaningless, I've picked up plenty of dirt cheap <$10 titles on PC over the years when they're re-released under bargain publishers. Digital distribution hasn't given us better prices, it has simply made things more convenient (and increased margins for publishers). With the exception of Valve, new releases are at RRP.
| Denny wrote: | | Let the ones who still refuse to pay to take the slap on the wrist. |
Again missing the point. This isn't a legal fine coming from some government body, this is a letter saying "pay us X amount of dollars or we will sue". This is extortion. This is exactly what the RIAA and MPAA does.
The hypocrisy is astounding - everyone is willing to bash both the RIAA and MPAA given any opportunity - somehow a small Polish game dev is different? Will everyone here also continue the self congratulatory "piracy is theft!" pat on the backs when Uwe Boll starts doling out the extortion letters to people who pirate his film adaptation of The Witcher, like he did with Far Cry? (don't worry, Uwe Boll is not doing a film adaptation of The Witcher).
Here's a harsh, if unwanted reality - piracy is always going to exist. It always has existed. But in the 24/7 internet age, piracy is now most visible. Publishers, film studios, distributors etc around the world are wringing their hands, seeing 10290 leechers of their latest game/album/film. Is it any more severe than in the early 90s when we were told to not copy that floppy? Who knows. It's simply occurring in full public view now, with a measurably metric of distribution. This circlejerk of "pirates are destroying the industry, burn them with fire!!" and "pirates are killing great titles like BGAE!!!" is ridiculous, especially once everyone comes out swinging at the RIAA when they sue another 12 year old.
The frustrating thing is - this has no impact on piracy. Other industries have been suing for years, extorting for years, and look where they are. The RIAA admits they've spent more on legal fees than what they've recouped in settlements. All they have to show for it is a shit-tonne of hate. This will do nothing for CD Projekt, this will not miraculously stem piracy of The Witcher 2 - no matter how much self-righteous stuff you guys post about how "piracy is theft".
_________________
Xbox 360 Gamertag + Xfire Username + PlayStation Network ID: Passa91
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lord Haart
Status: Offline
Joined: 19 Jul 2007
Posts: 1293
$poons: 179.90
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 8:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Passa wrote: | | Um. I don't understand this approach and I never will. The people who illegally download these things are fans - by taking legal action against them, you're suing your fans. |
Bull. If I'm a "fan" of your house it doesn't give me the right to rob it, or even to use it myself when you aren't home.
Being a fan of a franchise kind of implies that you respect said franchise enough to pay for what it offers.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Karai Pantsu
PALGN Moderator
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Posts: 10109
$poons: 29.06
Location: Melbexico
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 25, 2010 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Passa wrote: | | The hypocrisy is astounding - everyone is willing to bash both the RIAA and MPAA given any opportunity - somehow a small Polish game dev is different? Will everyone here also continue the self congratulatory "piracy is theft!" pat on the backs when Uwe Boll starts doling out the extortion letters to people who pirate his film adaptation of The Witcher, like he did with Far Cry? (don't worry, Uwe Boll is not doing a film adaptation of The Witcher). |
High-fucking-five.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
