Is piracy a serious issue for game developers?

[Numion]

Like you, I had several Gig of downloaded .pdf's on a hard drive that crashed without the desire to take the time to reacquire them. I had trouble finding one book in particular to complete a set, but I had the actual book. I decided to scan it in myself, but quit after only 5 pages because it was more trouble than it was worth. I guestimated it would take me 3 or 4 days without sleeping to scan in a 300 page book. These people that scan in 300+ page books either have vastly superior computers and software or don't seem to have a life that needs their attention.

I pirate a lot of stuff (just trust me), but DLing RPG stuff always seemed kinda waste of time. I used to download some, but I noticed that they just took up space, and I don't have the patience to read them any more than I would leaf one at the store. Real books are still a bit superior I did check out Barakus before buying it by DLing it.. just to make sure before I order stuff from USA.

Nyah-nyah-nyah, had I not DLed it, I wouldnt've bought it

 

[GeorgeFields]

I pirate a lot of stuff (just trust me), but DLing RPG stuff always seemed kinda waste of time. I used to download some, but I noticed that they just took up space, and I don't have the patience to read them any more than I would leaf one at the store. Real books are still a bit superior I did check out Barakus before buying it by DLing it.. just to make sure before I order stuff from USA.

Nyah-nyah-nyah, had I not DLed it, I wouldnt've bought it

Same here, but I've bought a few books I lost on that hard drive because they were so good. Even though I had SEVERAL gig of .pdf's, I had probably only looked at maybe a dozen beyond more than a glance.
I agree that books are far superior in all ways, and printing out hundreds of .pdf's to look at is just plain crazy. Even of the few .pdf's I've legitimately bought, only two of them have seen the printer.

 

[D_Sinclair]

Besides, I have to pay taxes to the record industry on blank CD-R and DVD-R. It's my legal right to download all the music I want as I've paid for it.

Must be a canadian thing. Here in the United States, the blank manufacturers pay a fee on packages of CDs marked a certain way. This is why packages of CD-Rs marked as "for music" cost significantly more those marked "for data". Physically there is no difference. the excess money pays the fees colled out to the recording industry. Once people realized there was no difference, this idiotic appeasement scheme fell apart. Unfortunately, most people still believe there is some sort of difference between the two that makes those "music CD-Rs" a necessity for burning music CDs.

 

[Storm Raven]

Besides copyrights last too long anyway .. they should be much shorter.

The only problem with this justification is that the vast majority of things that are downloaded on a regular basis are those things that would still be in copyright even if the term was vastly reduced down to something like 20 years, or even 10 years.

 

[Ralts Bloodthorne]

Lots of twisting and turning to validate what people know good and well is stealing.

And if all information is made free, whose going to bother making more information.

 

[Odhanan]

They are being Chaotic, not Evil. Piracy is a matter of ethics, not morals.

I'd argue it's both a problem of ethics and morals, and not really whether it has an effect on the market or not, from my point of view. To be honest, I don't care if it has an effect on the market or not (and to answer shortly, I think it does have an effect on small publishers - the vast majority - and none on the giants - the tiny minority).

For me theft is theft.

Morally speaking theft is wrong. Ethically speaking, thinking theft is not wrong is selfish and/or short-sighted.

 

[Numion]

Lots of twisting and turning to validate what people know good and well is stealing.

Nawh mayne, it's more like loaning it, like you'd loan a DVD from your friend. It starts when I've DLed the movie, CD, whatever, and ends when I kick it from the recycling bin

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

I'm not sure I understand your point. I would like some clarification. What kind of natural law, right, or principle specifies that information in general should be free?

The nature of information itself, being that when information is shared, the amount of information available is increased-- not only because of the additional copies, but because of the way that new information promote new connections between older pieces of information.

There is a difference in my mind between transparency for the common good (e.g., the US Freedom of Information Act, or SEC reporting requirements), and information that is private property by law and has no direct impact on public welfare.

There is such a difference in my mind, too. FOIA and SEC reporting, or the more stringent transparency measures in Sweden or Finland are far more important-- I'd argue morally necessary-- than simply spreading informational luxuries like games.

The vast majority of what I share is public domain and non-gaming related; non-classified military documents, pre-copyright books, MIT's free textbooks, and so on. If I could get my hands on "charred body in a ditch" information (thank you, Ralts), I'd share that, too; unfortunately, I'm neither a hacker nor a spy, and I have no inclination to become either.

For example, if a large company were poisoning groundwater, that should be made public. That same company's proprietary technology, however, should not. Eliminating their ability to compete effectively would drive them out of business, and do a net public harm through lost jobs, tax revenue, and GDP.

I don't know-- if a large company were poisoning groundwater, I'd think crippling them and driving them out of business would actually be a public good, despite the lost jobs/tax revenue.

But that's not really what we're talking about here, since we all know that the only game publisher that poisons groundwater (and kills puppies!) is White Wolf.

 

[Storm Raven]

Nawh mayne, it's more like loaning it, like you'd loan a DVD from your friend. It starts when I've DLed the movie, CD, whatever, and ends when I kick it from the recycling bin

Except that you are stealing exactly what the property in question is: the right to make additional copies. If your friend deleted the item from his computer when he sent it to yours, then that would be analogous to a lending arrangement.

 

[Storm Raven]

The nature of information itself, being that when information is shared, the amount of information available is increased-- not only because of the additional copies, but because of the way that new information promote new connections between older pieces of information.

The only problem with this view is that the net result will likely be less new information generated, decreasing the information avaliable in the long run, because you destroy one of the primary incentives to making information public at all.