Is piracy a serious issue for game developers?

[S'mon]

PSS: Can we please leave Chinese copy right laws out of this? I think this board is pretty clear on political content in threads... :-/

Why is Chinese copyright more political than US copyright? :\

 

[Numion]

"Is piracy a serious issue for game developers?"

Of course not. That's how they make money. By not selling their products.

W3RD. I wouldn't have bought Barakus if I hadn't pirated it off the net first.

 

[The_Magician]

And I like Tomato Ice Cream. They should produce and sell more tomato ice cream, because I like it, so it has to be profitable.

 

[Wormwood]

Please discuss the upcoming release: "the Paladin's Guide to Orc and Kobold Babies".

Retailing for $120 USD (Does anyone have a PDF to trade?)

Which begs the question: is 4e why the market is dying?

/perfect storm

 

[Babylon Knight]

C'mon guys, if we're lucky, we can surpass the previous topic which hit 12 pages.

 

[Falkus]

Why not? Everything I need to do on a computer, I can do with open source software-- I even have a handful of entertaining games. And not all fan fiction is creepy erotica.

Okay, you've got a handful, compared ot the tens of thousands of entertaining games that cost money. When are you going to understand that your ludicirious ideals would result in the destruction of information, not the creation of it. Information should not be free, it should never be free without permission of its creator, and information does not want to be free. The best things in life are the things you work for.

You're also leaving aside the fact that they're not the only possible replacements. We've got shareware (which works for non-software electronic information), ransom, and donation models-- and while all have their drawbacks, so does the current system

Shareware cannot possibly work for anything with any significant d evelopment time. The donation model relies on the goodwill of people and as aptly demonstrated by you, people are greedy people who won't pay if they have a choice not to.

Now who's dreaming?

It's less of a stretch than your plsnd to destroy all creation of new information.

But (as I see it), he's not arguing for any change at all

The only reason he's arguing for this is because he's trying to morally justify his thefts. At least I was honest with myself when I pirated. I pirated because I was greedy and I wanted stuff for free.

To refer this back to the argument at-hand, the unfettered spread of information is both natural and right

Where exactly did you get this crazy idea from? The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the last word when it comes to natural rights, only says you have the right to seek information, not that it should be free. You are confusing things.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

Okay, you've got a handful, compared ot the tens of thousands of entertaining games that cost money.

*shrug* Most of those tens of thousands are sequels to older games-- much like open source games being improved as they develop.

When are you going to understand that your ludicrous ideals would result in the destruction of information, not the creation of it?

Never, since it's not true and you haven't managed to demonstrate it in any meaningful fashion. You're slipping back into ad nauseum argumentation; if it didn't work three pages ago, what makes you think it'll work now?

Information should not be free, it should never be free without permission of its creator, and information does not want to be free. The best things in life are the things you work for.

The very nature of information proves you wrong on the first two statements; the third is nothing more than a platitude, and a silly one at that.

The best things in life are the ones you enjoy the most-- and hard work is its own reward.

... and as aptly demonstrated by you, people are greedy people who won't pay if they have a choice not to.

I always have a choice, and I do actually pay for what I can. I put most of my free money into roleplaying products-- even ones that I already have clean, bookmarked, and more-functional copies of. I like having a hard copy.

And it's awfully hypocritical to keep accusing me of greed when your argument is that you should be getting more money.

The only reason he's arguing for this is because he's trying to morally justify his thefts. At least I was honest with myself when I pirated. I pirated because I was greedy and I wanted stuff for free.

I don't have to justify anything, because I am not stealing anything and what I am doing is not wrong. If all I wanted was free stuff, I could've continued downloading it without ever mentioning it in this thread-- because I can get all the free stuff I want without telling anyone about it.

I'm glad you're capable of recognizing that you were morally bankrupt-- but I'm not you and I don't have your motivations.

Yeah, I'm getting stuff for free. It's stuff I should be able to get for free, and it's stuff I help other people to get for free-- even though there's absolutely no profit for me doing so. If I just wanted free stuff, why would I help others? Why would I post here, when I know my position is going to hurt my reputation among people whose opinions I care about?

I'm doing it because it's right.

You can call me a thief all you want-- because I know that I'm not.

Where exactly did you get this crazy idea from? The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the last word when it comes to natural rights, only says you have the right to seek information, not that it should be free. You are confusing things.

Wait-- are you trying to tell me that a document, written by a committee, composed of government officials-- is some kind of objective source of truth?

What makes you think "natural" rights come from government declarations and pieces of paper?

I think you're a little confused, yourself.

 

[Falkus]

*shrug* Most of those tens of thousands are sequels to older games-- much like open source games being improved as they develop.

You really don't know much about computer games, do you? Most games on the market are not sequels. And I don't see how bringing up non-sequitors helps your argument.

Never, since it's not true and you haven't managed to demonstrate it in any meaningful fashion. You're slipping back into ad nauseum argumentation; if it didn't work three pages ago, what makes you think it'll work now?

I believe I did demonstrate it quite adequately. There would be no incentive for people to spend any significant amount of money to produce information, since they could expect no compensation for it.

You've admitted it anyway, when you said how the freeware stuff on the internet could replace computer games, for instance. Freeware on the internet is 99% crap, and the remaning 1% doesn't measure up to the stuff you pay for.

The very nature of information proves you wrong on the first two statements

Information is a product. And like all products, it has a price. Some people are willing to offer their products for free, and that's nice of them. Most aren't willing to offer it for free.

And it's awfully hypocritical to keep accusing me of greed when your argument is that you should be getting more money.

Hypocrisy is saying one thing and doing another. Please point out where I did that.

I don't have to justify anything, because I am not stealing anything

As was noted earlier in this thread I believe,piracy is considered to be theft by the laws of the land.

Yeah, I'm getting stuff for free. It's stuff I should be able to get for free

The people who spent their time and their money on producing said stuff disagree, and I think their belief is worth a lot more than yours.

Wait-- are you trying to tell me that a document, written by a committee, composed of government officials-- is some kind of objective source of truth?

The Universal Declaration is not the source of human rights, it merely enumerates them. It gains its power because nearly every government in the world has agreed to abide by its tenets, though some do it better than others. Where do you get your idea that freedom of information is a right?

 

[Morrus]

Wait-- are you trying to tell me that a document, written by a committee, composed of government officials-- is some kind of objective source of truth?

What makes you think "natural" rights come from government declarations and pieces of paper?

The point of such things isn't to grant rights, but to protect them. Such documents assume that the rights incorporated into them are natural rights.

Essentially, they codify what society as a whole agrees are natural rights.

 

[tensen]

In China, copyright infringement is punishable by death. It does not appear to have the effect some have wished.

I just had a weird thought.
Hmm, back in the time of cassette tapes in my car I was known to make multiple copies of a CD in tape format to play. Mostly I made the multiple copies because my tape player ate them. Note, 1 backup copy is usually allowed by law.
Can you imagine the effect in China?

"But my car eats them regularlly. Really I'm only using them myself."
"Sorry, the law states it quite clearly. You must die."
"Nooo."
"Your time is up."
"Help help. I'm being opressed."
"No, just killed."
"Soylent Green is people."
"Yes, sir Everyone knows that. Now please come to the processing facility. Upon execution you get the choic eof becoming either Soylent Blue or Soylent Green."

Dang, where was I going with this?