Morpheus and DnD
- Thread starter JacktheRabbit
- Start date
I'm a file sharer.
Not a thief. A thief steals property. Despite the delusions of the corporations, copyrighted material is not property - it is material that they have a limited monopoly on for a supposedly limited period of time. If you can't put it in a box it is not property. If its not propery, it can't be stolen.
Not a pirate either. Pirates board other ships, killing and raping everyone on board. Its like calling people who download songs from Morpheus 'carjackers.'
Now I don't jsut download anything, just the stuff that I need to. Music, because I don't trust the Britney Spears machine in letting me know what an album is like. One two many times of liking a couple singles, buying the album, and discovering the rest of it is filler.
The only software I will copy is those by Microsoft and Adobe. I despise these companies and causing them harm gives me warm fuzzies.
I've seen the stuff out there on kazaa, but haven't downloaded any of them. I think it would be more tempting to get them just to have them in an electronic form, in addition to the book. Then I could do neat things like cut and paste all the feats from all my books into one document. Or combine all the spells, whatever.
THis is an excellent example actually of the p2p system having 'substantial non-infringing use'
Not a thief. A thief steals property. Despite the delusions of the corporations, copyrighted material is not property - it is material that they have a limited monopoly on for a supposedly limited period of time. If you can't put it in a box it is not property. If its not propery, it can't be stolen.
Not a pirate either. Pirates board other ships, killing and raping everyone on board. Its like calling people who download songs from Morpheus 'carjackers.'
Now I don't jsut download anything, just the stuff that I need to. Music, because I don't trust the Britney Spears machine in letting me know what an album is like. One two many times of liking a couple singles, buying the album, and discovering the rest of it is filler.
The only software I will copy is those by Microsoft and Adobe. I despise these companies and causing them harm gives me warm fuzzies.
I've seen the stuff out there on kazaa, but haven't downloaded any of them. I think it would be more tempting to get them just to have them in an electronic form, in addition to the book. Then I could do neat things like cut and paste all the feats from all my books into one document. Or combine all the spells, whatever.
THis is an excellent example actually of the p2p system having 'substantial non-infringing use'
Berandor
lunatic
Hey, all!
Speaking as someone who has had pirated software on his computer, is not too dumb, and has spent hours and hours discussing this topic with firends:
I can understand people who say they don't like the laws as is, who are wary because the laws protect the company's interests, but only to a small degree the author's and the customer's interests. I can understand people who don't support these laws because the development is even to the worse (not being allowed to read an e-book out loud, for example). I can understand people making a stand for their beliefs.
However, most of the filesharer's don't have this view, even if they state it. It is a common and easy excuse because how could somebody say something against it?
The truth is that most people don't feel bad about the laws. Most people don't want to make a stand.
Most people just don't care. They want their product without paying for it. They have the possibility to get it free, and so they get it free. They have absolutely no qualms abpout breaking a law, and it's only stupid because they are on the wrong side of it.
If you'd really care about how laws are, you would not only have a silent protest by filesharing, but you would start a campaign to change the law. You would try and raise money to hire a lawyer, or you would go press. You would write letters to the companies in question. You would DO something.
But most people don't. They just get their files for free.They are content with the knowledge of doing wrong, but getting served their meal in the process. They don't care.
Furthermore, speaking as an author, piracy is immoral. It is theft. Because I have to make money from my ideas to live, and if you dl it somewhere for free, or make it available to others for free, I lose money. If I have a part in sales, I lose it directly. If I don't have, I lose because you change sales statistics to the worse, and with fewer sales, I will get less money for my next project, if there is any.
Finally, you need to learn something about our culture. We live in something called "capitalism". A society built on a free economic market, where the demand regulates the price.
How does it work? Simple.
You like something, and the price is o.k. - you buy it.
You don't like it, but it's a bargain - you might buy it.
You like something, but it's too expensive - you might buy it.
You don't like something, and the price isn't very low - you don't buy it.
That way, companies need to put out interesting products at a reasonable price, because you can't survive with bad products at a bargain price all the time.
You know what's not in this example?
You like it, but it's too expensive - you steal it.
That's because this is not how it works. In our society, this is working outside of the boundaries of communicated behaviour, it is breaking the law.
If there is a product that is too expensive to buy, but you want to have nonetheless, then you might have to cope with either not getting it, or with saving money until you can buy it.
I would like to have a flat screen for my PC, but it's too expensive, and guess what? I didn't steal one. I'm waiting until I can afford one.
I think prices for movie tickets are getting almost too high, so I wait for most movies to see on TV or DVD. That way, I can read more reviews, see what my friends think about it, and perhaps I might decide not to see it at all, or to spend the money for a ticket nonetheless. But I don't DL a pirated copy.
I know most people of my age think filesharing is O.K., because it hurts only nameless big companies, and I honestly think this development is scary.
If big companies lose enough money on filesharers, they let people go. They fire Joe Average. They don't risk a product with young shakespeare/madonna, because it is too risky at the current market situation.
If you don't like the current situation and laws, then try to do something about it.
Don't buy ANY product of said company, write letters, etc. - and perhaps people will notice, and perhaps you instigate a change. Yes, you! You can do it.
You might be a small person against big companies, but "even the smalles person can change the course of the world".
I know I am angry at the DVD country code system (don't even get me started). But I have written e-mails to each company regarding this, and I write an e-mail every time I see a DVD that has less features than a pack of handkerchiefs. I talk to friends and other people about it, trying to raise awareness to the issue.
If you do the same, I can wholeheartedly understand you infringe on copyright laws as part of your stand, and I might even join you in your quest for better customer/artist laws.
But until you do that, don't try and tell people you do the morally correct thing by pirating/stealing/infringing on other's property.
Berandor
Speaking as someone who has had pirated software on his computer, is not too dumb, and has spent hours and hours discussing this topic with firends:
I can understand people who say they don't like the laws as is, who are wary because the laws protect the company's interests, but only to a small degree the author's and the customer's interests. I can understand people who don't support these laws because the development is even to the worse (not being allowed to read an e-book out loud, for example). I can understand people making a stand for their beliefs.
However, most of the filesharer's don't have this view, even if they state it. It is a common and easy excuse because how could somebody say something against it?
The truth is that most people don't feel bad about the laws. Most people don't want to make a stand.
Most people just don't care. They want their product without paying for it. They have the possibility to get it free, and so they get it free. They have absolutely no qualms abpout breaking a law, and it's only stupid because they are on the wrong side of it.
If you'd really care about how laws are, you would not only have a silent protest by filesharing, but you would start a campaign to change the law. You would try and raise money to hire a lawyer, or you would go press. You would write letters to the companies in question. You would DO something.
But most people don't. They just get their files for free.They are content with the knowledge of doing wrong, but getting served their meal in the process. They don't care.
Furthermore, speaking as an author, piracy is immoral. It is theft. Because I have to make money from my ideas to live, and if you dl it somewhere for free, or make it available to others for free, I lose money. If I have a part in sales, I lose it directly. If I don't have, I lose because you change sales statistics to the worse, and with fewer sales, I will get less money for my next project, if there is any.
Finally, you need to learn something about our culture. We live in something called "capitalism". A society built on a free economic market, where the demand regulates the price.
How does it work? Simple.
You like something, and the price is o.k. - you buy it.
You don't like it, but it's a bargain - you might buy it.
You like something, but it's too expensive - you might buy it.
You don't like something, and the price isn't very low - you don't buy it.
That way, companies need to put out interesting products at a reasonable price, because you can't survive with bad products at a bargain price all the time.
You know what's not in this example?
You like it, but it's too expensive - you steal it.
That's because this is not how it works. In our society, this is working outside of the boundaries of communicated behaviour, it is breaking the law.
If there is a product that is too expensive to buy, but you want to have nonetheless, then you might have to cope with either not getting it, or with saving money until you can buy it.
I would like to have a flat screen for my PC, but it's too expensive, and guess what? I didn't steal one. I'm waiting until I can afford one.
I think prices for movie tickets are getting almost too high, so I wait for most movies to see on TV or DVD. That way, I can read more reviews, see what my friends think about it, and perhaps I might decide not to see it at all, or to spend the money for a ticket nonetheless. But I don't DL a pirated copy.
I know most people of my age think filesharing is O.K., because it hurts only nameless big companies, and I honestly think this development is scary.
If big companies lose enough money on filesharers, they let people go. They fire Joe Average. They don't risk a product with young shakespeare/madonna, because it is too risky at the current market situation.
If you don't like the current situation and laws, then try to do something about it.
Don't buy ANY product of said company, write letters, etc. - and perhaps people will notice, and perhaps you instigate a change. Yes, you! You can do it.
You might be a small person against big companies, but "even the smalles person can change the course of the world".
I know I am angry at the DVD country code system (don't even get me started). But I have written e-mails to each company regarding this, and I write an e-mail every time I see a DVD that has less features than a pack of handkerchiefs. I talk to friends and other people about it, trying to raise awareness to the issue.
If you do the same, I can wholeheartedly understand you infringe on copyright laws as part of your stand, and I might even join you in your quest for better customer/artist laws.
But until you do that, don't try and tell people you do the morally correct thing by pirating/stealing/infringing on other's property.
Berandor
Last edited:
Teflon Billy said:
The laws never have protected you as you seem to think they should have. And there is a good, simple reason for it, and I am surprised that you seem ignorant of it:
There is no accounting for taste.
With a toaster, or a television set, or any physical mechanism, you can turn the thing on and see if it operates properly. If it doesn't, you have rights and recourse.
Publishers of books and music are not in the business of publishing physical mechanisms, whose operation is easily quantified. They publish intellectual material and art. They cannot, both as a practical and a theoretical matter, promise that you will like that art. The phrase "let the buyer beware" has always applied to such things.
Those "previewing" works aren't the issue, really. If you are physically kind to a book, most places will take it back without asking any questions within a week of pruchase. That's rather equivalent to a preview. The issue are those who never actually purchase the things they previewed and liked.
Last edited:
A note on capitalism, system which I fully endorse:
Captalism is based on individual greed. Getting as much as possible for as little as possible is at a core of capitalism. Paying "fairly" for other people's products, not getting something unless one is willing to pay the asked price and so on are noble ideas but not ones that are realy jiving with the basic capitalist view of human nature.
That is why capitalism goes hand in hand with criminal law: potential dangers from theft should outweight the benefits of it (modified by chances of getting caught). If they do not then the "rational agent" of classical capitalist economy will steal all the time.
As in so many other situations classical economy is right and vast majority of people *do* steal...
It is therefore not somehow "uncapitialistic" to pirat software, music or what have you...
A law that most people do not find moraly binding *and* is unenforcable is a meaningless one.
For the record: I do not pirate books, not for moral reasons (altrough I probably would buy the small d20 publishers stuff in any case) but because I hate reading of the screen and can not be bothered to print 100+ pages.
Captalism is based on individual greed. Getting as much as possible for as little as possible is at a core of capitalism. Paying "fairly" for other people's products, not getting something unless one is willing to pay the asked price and so on are noble ideas but not ones that are realy jiving with the basic capitalist view of human nature.
That is why capitalism goes hand in hand with criminal law: potential dangers from theft should outweight the benefits of it (modified by chances of getting caught). If they do not then the "rational agent" of classical capitalist economy will steal all the time.
As in so many other situations classical economy is right and vast majority of people *do* steal...
It is therefore not somehow "uncapitialistic" to pirat software, music or what have you...
A law that most people do not find moraly binding *and* is unenforcable is a meaningless one.
For the record: I do not pirate books, not for moral reasons (altrough I probably would buy the small d20 publishers stuff in any case) but because I hate reading of the screen and can not be bothered to print 100+ pages.
King_Stannis
Explorer
this is tangentally related.....
some years ago i had a "little black box"...to steal cable tv. now, i am under no delusion that i was stealing - it was. but i justified it as so: the local cable company did give crappy service. we had cable outages that sometimes lasted up to a day, with no corresponding credit. not to mention the fact that the product was only sporadically good. still, i paid the $30 a month for basic service, and used the black box to get the pay tv channels. i always said that if my box got scrambled the cable company would lose out in the end.....
eventually, it did get scrambled. i promptly cancelled my cable and ordered direct tv. end result - direct tv gets my $30 a month - cable company now get $0. i've had direct tv for over 5 years now, which means that the cable company has lost out on $1,800 by scrambling my box. so did the cable company really win in the end? i know they must protect their signal, but i'm just telling you the end result here.
and no. i do not in any way steal direct tv's signal - i'm perfectly happy with them and their excellent customer service.
so i kind of support the fileshare as preview point of view. as teflon billy mentioned earlier, alot of companies put out crap with tons of errors in it and then charge an arm and a leg. (then you have ryan dancey saying that rpg products as a whole are UNDERPRICED(?))...which all leads to lots of people who now like to preview stuff first before buying. i can see both sides, but if anything this might have the effect of forcing companies to put out better product. if word gets out that a product is a dog before lots of people make the mistake of buying it, those companies producing it may be forced to do better next time.
just some random thoughts.
some years ago i had a "little black box"...to steal cable tv. now, i am under no delusion that i was stealing - it was. but i justified it as so: the local cable company did give crappy service. we had cable outages that sometimes lasted up to a day, with no corresponding credit. not to mention the fact that the product was only sporadically good. still, i paid the $30 a month for basic service, and used the black box to get the pay tv channels. i always said that if my box got scrambled the cable company would lose out in the end.....
eventually, it did get scrambled. i promptly cancelled my cable and ordered direct tv. end result - direct tv gets my $30 a month - cable company now get $0. i've had direct tv for over 5 years now, which means that the cable company has lost out on $1,800 by scrambling my box. so did the cable company really win in the end? i know they must protect their signal, but i'm just telling you the end result here.
and no. i do not in any way steal direct tv's signal - i'm perfectly happy with them and their excellent customer service.
so i kind of support the fileshare as preview point of view. as teflon billy mentioned earlier, alot of companies put out crap with tons of errors in it and then charge an arm and a leg. (then you have ryan dancey saying that rpg products as a whole are UNDERPRICED(?))...which all leads to lots of people who now like to preview stuff first before buying. i can see both sides, but if anything this might have the effect of forcing companies to put out better product. if word gets out that a product is a dog before lots of people make the mistake of buying it, those companies producing it may be forced to do better next time.
just some random thoughts.
Berandor
lunatic
bramadan said:
You are right, of course. I was partially wrong because I stated my point kind of poorly.
Of course, that's why we don't have a total capitalism out there, but laws and regulations to control, guard, and influence the degree of personal greed that is in order.
On the one hand, these mechanisms tend to help companies who get security and legal backing, on the other hand, it benefits those working for companies as the companies that make good product are able to put out more of that and keep on employing you.
In my opinion, capitalism is not the ideal society, but one very close to the human mindset as a whole, and the best there is for now. Total capitalism, however, would lead straight into a world where the conmpanies with the financial power to protect their property would become very powerful, with a good amount of thieves still trying to satisfy their greed by theft. Think Shadowrun.
Anyway, you are right that uncontrolled capitalism only benefits those who play the hardest ball and are able to still their needs the cheapest way while making the biggest profit in return.
Still, that's not quite how our society works right now, though the development points there (companies influencing law-makers and public opinion with their assets).
Berandor
Teflon Billy
Explorer
Umbran said:
I don't really understand what that comment means.
Ha!...Good try. Art my ass.
When I am buying game supplements (like the aforementioned Sword and Fist) I am buying new "mechanisms whose operation is easily quantified", not some "art form". I can do my own "art"...balanced, well tested game mechanics are, however, beyond my scope.
The overall crappiness of Sword and Fist made me write off future classbooks, filesharing brought me back to them. WotC should rejoice. They were granted a second kick at the can.
They don't have to guarantee that their product matches my tastes. But I do expect them to guarantee that it is what it claims to be: a balanced, well-tested addition to their game system. Not some tossed together horse
rushed to market becasue they needed a unit-shifter out there right now.As for software...there is no longer even an attempt to get a fully-functional product to market (The new Civilization game was nearly unplayable out of the box).
I'm not complaining that a strategy game about the rise of civilization doesn't appeal to me; I'm saying that a crappy, unplayable game about the rise of civilization doesn't appeal to me. I downloaded this from Morpheus. It's gone from my Hardrive now, and I am happy they got no money out of me for it. they didn't deserve any.
Well, let me assure you...this buyer is being wary as hell, having earned his lessons.
then I wonder why you began your post with a quote from me when I had stated that I was, indeed, previewing.
Last edited:
Teflon Billy said:
First, and formost - please watch your language.
Are you a published novelist? Or painter? Do people buy your art in the thousands upon thousands? If not, perhaps you should be a little more careful about how you classify art as something one can easily do oneself. If art were easy, novels and movies wouldn't sell.
Whether the game mechanics are well balanced are a matter of opinion. It is easy to tell if your toaster fails to toast bread, but it is obvious from discussions here that people can chew over a given rule for days on end, and still not come to agreement on whether it is balanced. The fact that people can still have differing opinions on balance means it is more an art than a science.
Because I had more than one thing to say. The first was a response to some things you said, the second was a general statement. My apologies if that wasn't clear.
Similar Threads
