Why is Piracy Bad?

[Soviet_Steelix]

So I go to a bakers(website/store) and see some bread (games), the bread is good, looks nice, one of those seeded loaves(genre) I like the look of it and think it will taste great(gameplay experience).

Instead of buying the loaf of bread i buy my own flour etc (harddrive) and bake a loaf my self. (download)

The baker sends me a notice that I must pay him as I stole his bread and that theft is a crime!

I was surprised to say the least!

But I see now that I stole the information/idea(bytes of data that do not physically exist) of the bread (game) from him that baking that type of bread may be tasty, and although i did not take any physical product, i denied him the sale of the bread. Despite the fact that I own the equipment (my computer) and ingredients (the Bytes) to make it.

personal experience: I pirate everything.

I do not believe that piracy is in any way slowing the gaming industry, sales are much better than they've ever been before and I believe that the possible decline in music sales is because people spend much more money on videogames now.

piracy is theft kids, pay for your games

 

[tape]

Bad analogy, you're saying that you're downloading the game, when you should be making it.

It is theft because you didn't make it, you downloaded it.

Redundancy.

Edit: Fixed stuff.

Go replicate the game you want, make it by yourself on the computer, not download. Then you can play with it. Don't try selling it, because it's already copyrighted, and although you made/created the game, it's not yours because it's already someone's else.

 

[CaptKirby]

Piracy is not theft, but is rather replication. There is a difference, and it is vital. Where piracy actually is "bad" is undoubtedly in how it damages intellectual property rights or the motivation for people to create, but piracy has been in effect for several years now, gaining momentum as time goes by, and it seems not to have destroyed the motivation to create yet.

 

[Soviet_Steelix]

Bad analogy, you're saying that you're downloading the game, when you should be making it.

It is theft because you didn't make it, you downloaded it.

Redundancy.

You obviously do not get it.
Why should someone be able to make money of an idea when you're not taking anything from them just copying it. Making a copy of something and leaving them with the original isn't theft because you're not depriving them of property.

 

[tape]

Not only you'd be stealing intellectual copyright, but also the time and money it took to make that game; do you think making games is cheap and/or easy? Here comes the point of "make it yourself" again.

You're stealing someone's time and work.

Edit: well, legally, work alone, because time is a given. You're stealing, and I repeat, their intellectual rights.

Ugh, I'll try wording it better when I get my head in place.

 

[Soviet_Steelix]

"Intellectual property" huh. There are lots of ideas that other people had before, I don't agree with slapping copywrite on it and having people just claim ideas for themselves. Did you know that there are companies that make a profit from copywriting lots of different names for drugs that could cure cancer, hiv etc. Just in case a drug is made and they get a profit from each bottle sold?

It costs the company nothing to keep reproducing the data and after one person has brought it you copying the already brought game costs them nothing. Unless you count the loss of a sale theft.

OH NO, YOU DIDN'T BUY BARBIE FOR NDS YOU COST HASBRO THE LOSS OF GAME. THEIVE. YOU'RE KILLING THE INDUSTRY.

Yeah.

 

[Ancien Régime]

Intellectual "property" is a legal and moral fraud.

It is essentially a way for a person to gain a legal coercive monopoly over the production and sale of a good.

If carried to it's logical conclusion, a person would have legal grounds to sue another person for memorizing a song - after all, it is still replication! Ideas are not property; there is no real way of tying an idea to a person.

 

[Deck Knight]

Intellectual property is vital to commerce and invention.

If you create something, you own it, and you should be able to prosecute any imitations who can damage your brand under the penalty of law.

Intellectual property rights exist to protect individuals, large corporations are merely beneficiaries of the concept.

If you worked hard to invent something new, be it software, a new technology, or even music you deserve the right to sell it at whatever price the market will bear and be its exclusive producer should you so desire.

What gives anyone else the right to say "no, your invention is too awesome/life-changing/valuable, I deserve to have it for free!"

The entitlement mentality of the pirates is infuriating. They want something for nothing.

 

[Firestorm]

If the person who created the content doesn't get paid for the content, they cannot continue to create that content. You are only able to continue to pirate because good people are paying these content creators to keep on creating.

You obviously do not get it.
Why should someone be able to make money of an idea when you're not taking anything from them just copying it. Making a copy of something and leaving them with the original isn't theft because you're not depriving them of property.

So you're just arguing the definition of theft? I thought this was about piracy?

"Intellectual property" huh. There are lots of ideas that other people had before, I don't agree with slapping copywrite on it and having people just claim ideas for themselves. Did you know that there are companies that make a profit from copywriting lots of different names for drugs that could cure cancer, hiv etc. Just in case a drug is made and they get a profit from each bottle sold?

Now you're just arguing copyright law, which is definitely in a bad state of affairs. I have no idea what that has to do with the idea that you should be able to download any piece of media for free.

It costs the company nothing to keep reproducing the data and after one person has brought it you copying the already brought game costs them nothing. Unless you count the loss of a sale theft.

OH NO, YOU DIDN'T BUY BARBIE FOR NDS YOU COST HASBRO THE LOSS OF GAME. THEIVE. YOU'RE KILLING THE INDUSTRY.

Yeah.

Are you insane? Take an economics class or something. Or math. Here's how your idea works:

Capcom sends $20,000,000 to develop Lost Planet
Capcom sells a copy of Lost Planet for $60
Capcom obviously made all their money back on that $60 game (some of which goes to retailer, distribution network, manufacturing, licensing), right?

Either you think that $60 = $20,000,000 or you think games cost $20,000,000 right now. Which is it?

 

[Tangerine]

I don't think anyone with an actual economical background could ever ever claim that patents/intellectual property is a "fraud". Simply put, R&D does not happen if thieves are allowed to simply steal the idea and copy it. There is no solid incentive for innovation under a system without copyright protection. It is extremely basic. They are necessary and they are protected to give people incentive to come up with new ideas, new pills, etc, without worrying about copycats undercutting them.

I'm not sure why people are feeding the obvious troll. If the OP is not a troll then I would presume that the person is heavily detached from reality...

 

[Soviet_Steelix]

@Firestorm:
Capcom sells their game at a highly expensive price for a while making a huge profit. Most videogames are overpriced and it's unfair to expect many parents to be able to afford video games for their kids.

No matter what happens Capcom will make a profit because they can always offer parts of their game that require you to have actually bought the game. Online multiplayer etc.

There will always be people who want to buy the game simply to own the disc(s) and manual.

Edit: Please stop insulting me, it's getting old.

 

[Firestorm]

@Firestorm:
Capcom sells their game at a highly expensive price for a while making a huge profit. Most videogames are overpriced and it's unfair to expect many parents to be able to afford video games for their kids.

No matter what happens Capcom will make a profit because they can always offer parts of their game that require you to have actually bought the game. Online multiplayer etc.

There will always be people who want to buy the game simply to own the disc(s) and manual.

Edit: Please stop insulting me, it's getting old.

What in the world are you talking about? And what do you mean about not being able to afford games? I got like 2 video games a year when I was a child and that kept me entertained.

I'm not sure what the rest of your post has to do with anything. "Someone else is going to pay for it so that entitles me to have it for free"?

 

[Warthog]

I still think its stealing because the product is sold. If it was for free then replicating products wouldn't be a problem.

think about it this way : if everyone downloaded music, games, movies etc there probably wouldn't be a movie to download.. they need to make money.

 

[Jikos]

@Firestorm:
Capcom sells their game at a highly expensive price for a while making a huge profit. Most videogames are overpriced and it's unfair to expect many parents to be able to afford video games for their kids.

No matter what happens Capcom will make a profit because they can always offer parts of their game that require you to have actually bought the game. Online multiplayer etc.

Well, the more people illegaly download games, the higher Capcom and other companies will have to raise their prices to fill the gap of money they are losing. It'll get to the point where nobody will buy anything at all, and neither the consumer nor the leecher (you) will be able to get anything.

You want free games? Go play a flash game or something.

 

[Soviet_Steelix]

I'm an air salesman. Theives!

Sorry Firestorm but when I was a kid I'd beat a videogame every fortnight. I also had older and younger sibllings who played videogames and we all shared our games.

They're expensive. It's not about getting something for nothing, think of a lot of piracy as advertising.

A goes out and buys a videogame, loves it and decides to share it with B.
B loves this game and thinks it's an amazing game.
B buys the sequel and shares it with C.
C " "
C " "

 

[SEO]

If you want to buy your child a video game, but it is to expensive for you to afford it does it make it ok to instead download the game for free? They are providing you with a service that you are meant to pay for, downloading it for free defeats the entire purpose of even creating a game.

Using your initial analogy, which is incorrect I may add, you should buy all the ingredients necessary to produce said bread you saw at the bakery. In video game terms, everything from the engine you run it on, the voice actors, designers, artists, software designers, music, everything. Then you would have created YOUR OWN bread that is similar to what the baker had. Piracy is wanting the bread, then taking it for free from some guy in the alley behind the store.

 

[Pirika]

Intellectual property is vital to commerce and invention.

If you create something, you own it, and you should be able to prosecute any imitations who can damage your brand under the penalty of law.

Intellectual property rights exist to protect individuals, large corporations are merely beneficiaries of the concept.

If you worked hard to invent something new, be it software, a new technology, or even music you deserve the right to sell it at whatever price the market will bear and be its exclusive producer should you so desire.

What gives anyone else the right to say "no, your invention is too awesome/life-changing/valuable, I deserve to have it for free!"

The entitlement mentality of the pirates is infuriating. They want something for nothing.

It's vital for commerce, not for invention. If that was true, open source softwares wouldn't exist. Also, a lot of musicians are now distributing their musics for free in the internet (like Tom Zé, CSS).

If intellectual property was really vital for invention and art we wouldn't have the wheel, the agriculture, the press, the writting, the math.

Things like information and ideas should be transformed in property or mercadory.

 

[Soviet_Steelix]

But that's where you're wrong. Videgames are just bytes similar to concepts and thoughts that one has in their head. They don't physically exist.

 

[SEO]

How is your obsession with videogames an excuse to steal. People work to earn money to buy the things they want. They provide a service, like anyother store, and expect you to use the money you made to buy those things. If it's to expensive earn more money.

Bytes do exist by the way...

As do thoughts...

They are physically stored into either your hard drive, or into your brain's memory through electrical signals.

@Pirika- I'm not sure which side you are taking but those artist chose to distribute their music online so that they can get their names out there. It is much easier than advertising, not to mention cheaper too. Videogame companies pay for advertisment, take E3 for example. They do not give out their games for free, they sell them for profit.

 

[Force Majeure]

Intellectual property is vital to commerce and invention.

If you create something, you own it, and you should be able to prosecute any imitations who can damage your brand under the penalty of law.

Intellectual property rights exist to protect individuals, large corporations are merely beneficiaries of the concept.

If you worked hard to invent something new, be it software, a new technology, or even music you deserve the right to sell it at whatever price the market will bear and be its exclusive producer should you so desire.

What gives anyone else the right to say "no, your invention is too awesome/life-changing/valuable, I deserve to have it for free!"

The entitlement mentality of the pirates is infuriating. They want something for nothing.

Best thing in this thread. Piracy is in effect stealing, not perhaps in the "grabbing-a-bagel-from-Starbucks-and-not-paying" vein, but incredibly similar in the ideology behind it. People put work into the things which are being pirated, and Deck's right in saying that people who pirate things seem to have a sense of enlightenment about what they are in effect stealing.

 

[Firestorm]

I'm an air salesman. Theives!

Sorry Firestorm but when I was a kid I'd beat a videogame every fortnight. I also had older and younger sibllings who played videogames and we all shared our games.

They're expensive. It's not about getting something for nothing, think of a lot of piracy as advertising.

A goes out and buys a videogame, loves it and decides to share it with B.
B loves this game and thinks it's an amazing game.
B buys the sequel and shares it with C.
C " "
C " "

Good for you? I finished games faster too. I replayed my games. Many games encourage you to go through them again. Nowadays I have a lot more money than when I was a kid and a lot less time so I only go through them once. However, a lot of my cherished memories with games as a child is because I didn't have a limitless supply of them.

And as mentioned by Jikos, there are a plethora of freely available Flash games as well as legacy games from 20 years ago that you can play online for free. Grand Theft Auto I and II comes to mind.

And that's why demos were made by the way. So people can try something out and buy them if they think it's cool. Also, for the most part, you've been discussing piracy as something you don't buy ever - even if you like it.

It's vital for commerce, not for invention. If that was true, open source softwares wouldn't exist. Also, a lot of musicians are now distributing their musics for free in the internet (like Tom Zé, CSS).

If intellectual property was really vital for invention and art we wouldn't have the wheel, the agriculture, the press, the writting, the math.

Things like information and ideas should be transformed in property or mercadory.

Open source software is done on the side by most people. They do have full time jobs as well. I'd say they're the equivalent of fan made games, rom hacks, and mods. Some also make their living on donations which can and can't work in some cases.

For a lot of musicians, the home copy isn't really their money maker. I think we're moving back to an age where the live show is the primary money driver. I really do think the music industry is completely set up wrong and they need to change things fast. I forget who said it, but the quote was "a record contract is like a credit card with 70% interest". Recording companies need to loosen the hell up. I think Zune Pass is a good first step.

 

[Wobby]

Wow it took me much too long to comprehend your analogy. Anyways, of course piracy is slowing industry!

I do not believe that piracy is in any way slowing the gaming industry, sales are much better than they've ever been before and I believe that the possible decline in music sales is because people spend much more money on videogames now.

Are you aware of the huge amount of free music that is illegally downloaded online? Since iTunes and Amazon make up about 30% of the music industry, I'd say that pirated music is the same (if not more!) as that, which definitely slows the industry down. In fact, I heard from some show that was on a few days ago (channel flipping...) that it is around 50%! I seriously doubt that people are buying games instead of music. LimeWire has huge amounts of pirated music as an example. I have never heard of someone pirating video games, however, so this is news to me...

I'm not really sure that in your case piracy was an issue. Going along with your analogy, you basically took the "baker's" recipe and made the "bread" yourself...which isn't too big of a problem. I would say that it would have been a problem if you claimed that the "recipe" was yours, then not only would it be piracy, but plagiarism =O. But other than that, I don't think you did anything wrong here...

 

[CaptKirby]

The entitlement mentality of the pirates is infuriating. They want something for nothing.

A statement like this can only come from someone who has no understanding of what piracy works like. Sites devoted to piracy are often filled with people wildly devoted to spreading works to others to view and engage with. There is no abundance of legal lossless downloads of music because the people selling them want to sell them to sheep, not the devoted fans that fuel pirate sites. Additionally, while some people are just hit and runners when it comes to piracy, they are a far less significant amount. Those who seed are giving something - their bandwidth, their time organizing files to provide them to others and maintain them on limited hard drive space, whatever. There is a whole level of passion here that you are blatantly ignoring to serve your argument's purpose. It may not make it "right" because this passion exists, but it obliterates the argument of pirates being horrible people who supposedly do not care about the works they are destroying.

 

[Deck Knight]

I'm an air salesman. Theives!

This air is terrible. I will sue your ass for your inferior product.

Sorry Firestorm but when I was a kid I'd beat a videogame every fortnight. I also had older and younger sibllings who played videogames and we all shared our games.

They're expensive. It's not about getting something for nothing, think of a lot of piracy as advertising.

"Hey duuuuuuuude, you know, I got Pokeymans Jade emulated on blorksnarfEMU, you should totally check it out."

Advertising revenue for Pokeymans derived: Zero.

A goes out and buys a videogame, loves it and decides to share it with B.
B loves this game and thinks it's an amazing game.
B buys the sequel and shares it with C.
C " "
C " "

Why would B buy instead of pirate?

You don't understand the noble freeloader's passion!

Piracy is ripping people off, no matter how much bandwidth they expend to do it. They make a product that normally requires payment to use available for free, and your argument only works if the pirates believe that piracy is wrong and they should buy if they really enjoy it. Your argument requires the users of pirated products to believe piracy is wrong.

Now I have used pirated products before, for games that are no longer commercially available (for old gaming systems with no reasonable expection to function) or never published in the United States. This is still technically wrong, however I would purchase them if they were made available.

 

[Pirika]

Open source software is done on the side by most people. They do have full time jobs as well. I'd say they're the equivalent of fan made games, rom hacks, and mods. Some also make their living on donations which can and can't work in some cases.

For a lot of musicians, the home copy isn't really their money maker. I think we're moving back to an age where the live show is the primary money driver. I really do think the music industry is completely set up wrong and they need to change things fast. I forget who said it, but the quote was "a record contract is like a credit card with 70% interest". Recording companies need to loosen the hell up. I think Zune Pass is a good first step.

Making a game is far more complicated than most softwares. Firefox, Blender, Open Office, Blender are excellent open-source softwares. They cannot be compared to fan games, hacks or mods. Also Android will be open-source too.