Pirating RPGs. (And were not talking "arggg" pirate stuff here.)

[JBowtie]

Piracy is theft. Piracy is theft. Piracy is theft.

Not according to the laws of most of the countries I am familiar with (assuming you mean copyright infringement). And, as I've pointed out, copyright infringement is not a criminal offense in certain jurisdictions.

There are in fact grey areas, both within the law and ethically. If the only copy of a film is decaying, and you cannot locate the copyright owner, can you make a copy to preserve it? Both legally and ethically, this is a grey area.

Not to mention that the definition of fair use in US law requires context to be taken into account and needs to be determined on a case-by-case basis, as per the legislation! How is that *not* a grey area?

Finally, certain types of copyright infringement are explicitly legal in some circumstances, even if the publisher does not give permission. If I take Eden's PDF and make a Braille version, is that infringement? Is that ethical? The answer depends on what country I'm standing in.

 

[nothing to see here]

While I cannot speak to details there is currently a LOT of research being done on the demographic and psychographic makeup of P2P file sharing program users. There are polls and focus groups in the field right now.

Without giving away sources, some of the research I've seen indicates that there seem to be 3 value 'clusters' into which the vast majority of filesharers fall.

The first group are what I call the "lazy apathetics" -- a demographic that is young compared to the overall population yet a little older compared to the fiesharing community. They are also a little more 'mainstream' (not necessarily integrated into hacker/computer culture). who are clearly and simply interested in something for nothing. They like getting their movies and music for free, and don't even waste the energy considering the moral implicatios of their actions. This group, however, is also the group most likely to be influenced by lawsuits, improved enforcement, or tougher penalties.

The second cluser are much younger...children, teenagers and college students who I call the 'tech empowered". This demographic likes the feeling of mastery that comes with their expertise over technology that allows them to 'skip to the head of the line' and exist outside the rules of the game. By and large these kids are computer gamers hackers, and generally come from a tech-heavy subculture. It doesn't matter what they're stealing, it's the power they feel when they steal it (and can brag about it afterwords) that is important. While this group is actually the most likely to recognize that their approach is 'wrong', they are among the hardest to deter from using this programs, as active deterrance actually increases their incentive to 'beat' the system.

The final cluster are people who I call "anti-establishment" are people who believe that the consumer market is unfair, big business is ripping them off, artists already get compensated too much, prices are too high, information is born free etc etc etc. This demographic phrases their piracy activities in moral and political terms, and the range of justifications they use is staggering. By and large though every excuse they use starts with "well, if only they would...I wouldn't"...or "the real problem isn't file sharers...it's XXX". I use the word excuse because by and large, beneath the surface the majority of this cluser SEEM (research still very young) to be an attempt to justify their criminal acts by framing the victims as worse than the perpetrators. Those with you with a background in criminology might see an analog to this mindset, I know I do.

What we absolutely categorically do NOT see, is any mass demographic consensus that any number of people are using P2P to sample new media for later purchase (the "if I like it I'll buy it"). While individuals may do this, such evidence is always anectdotal. The vast majority using this technoloigy are playing for keeps. To download and actively use filesharing technology are part of cultural subsets where "fair payment" is an alien sentiment.

 

[JoeBlank]

The incorrect use of "theft" annoys me too. But perhaps that is because I'm a lawyer who took a class in IP in law school and used to do criminal defense.

Even if correcting the semantics is a common tactic of copiers, that doesn't mean others might not be annoyed by the term or that the usage is correct.

I am also a lawyer, and took several IP classes in law school, as well as serving on the editorial board of the Journal of Intellectual Property Law.

In my opinion, referring to copyright infringement as "theft" or "stealing" is justified. While it is not technically correct, it still describes the practice from the viewpoint of the victims.

For example, if Bert kills Ernie then Ernie's family is likely to refer to Bert as a murderer, and his actions as murder. But we know that Bert may only be guilty of voluntary manslaughter, or even justifiable homicide. Still, to Ernie's family he is a murderer. They may not be using the legally correct term, but they are describing the actions from the viewpoint of a layperson affected by the actions.

To those in the pdf business, the people who obtain illegal copies of their products are thieves. I can certainly understand that description.

 

[S'mon]

Piracy is theft. Piracy is theft. Piracy is theft.

You can try to justify it however you want, but you'll just be lying to yourself.

Piracy is theft. Piracy is theft. Piracy is theft.

Stealing ships at sea is indeed theft. However copyright infringement is not theft*. You can claim otherwise however much you want, but you'll just be lying to yourself.

*In fact as the Economist pointed out recently, all reproduction creates more works, which are an economic good, so 'copyright piracy' is a positive-sum game economically that increases utility.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

It made them sleep better, but it's utter crap too. If more than one person can be viewing it per purchased license, it's copyright infringement.

Funny, I don't think I've ever rented or purchased a DVD with the intent to view it alone.

 

[S'mon]

I use the word excuse because by and large, beneath the surface the majority of this cluser SEEM (research still very young) to be an attempt to justify their criminal acts by framing the victims as worse than the perpetrators.

If by victims you mean groups like the MPAA & RIAA or corporations like Disney I certainly see them as worse than not-for-profit unauthorised downloaders, yup. I do think there should be copyright law (and I would advocate paying for Eden's product rather than downloading a free copy, or preferably doing neither since their download price is ridiculously high) , but what we have currently is far worse than no law at all. I'm not sure how anyone can say that executing copyright infringers, as apparently required by the US in WTO negotiations, is better than doing nothing. I'd advocate a return to original Statute of Anne principles - copyright needs to be registered & lasts 14 years from publication.

 

[jasper]

First let me said I an old gamer who is passed the age where stealing gum from the local stop and rob gives me a thrill.

….That said, it's wrong. Copyright infringement is as wrong as theft, but they are not the same thing. Thanks….
Pea sonic test where I from we all don’t need no stinking lawyer talk to call a thief a thief. Let Barney and Andy pencil in the charges as they lock the thief up. (Can anyone tell I tried of nitpickers wanting to be specific when the general thing is the same.)

Gee some of people here know thieves who watch movies downloaded illegally from net. And if thieves like what they see after watching the movie fully, then the thieves may go buy it. Kind like sneaking into a theatre thru the exit door at the multiplex. The only difference is theatre has limited seating and the net has unlimited seating. Nice to know D&D crowd still attract such fine citizens.

Wings and sword. Not every illegal download is a "lost sale",.. but is a thief.
A friend ( who is a thief) of mine downloaded a pirated .pdf … p2p.
Also, a lot of downloads on p2p are downloads of convenienence, (for thieves)

Turjan … The proper price is hat one that the producer deems the right one, but the market price is that one that consumers are willing to pay. Just made two changes here Turjan. Will add if producers do not change the proper price to market price the producers will be out of business.

Gilwen .. Cost of doing business. That what this is....no matter what you do your stuff is going to get stolen...period. Looks like we took the same business class.

Brent nail. I would not say that it is wrong for someone to make information, not property, available for free… but it is. The cost of pdf covers in part paying for the time of someone to collect the information. On bills especially plumber and car bills this is generally called labor and both of those guys charge a min hourly free. So next time don’t pay your plumber his full bill because he just used his specific information to do the job, the pipes were only $3 a foot from Lowes.
… serious infringements on individual liberty.. you forgot the duty of individual not to harm other individuals because the liberty thief is stealing from the creator.
… Um, that would be me . . . in response of some calling illegal download theft..
.. Information cannot be stolen. Only property can be stolen. Just because some people will pay for information, does not mean that information has an intrinsic value in and of itself. Furthermore, by obtaining information a person does not deprive another person of anything….. Hmmm I wonder what my ex co Captain Kirk would say if I uploaded the daily intercepts from Russia. Or what both the state and Microsoft would do I upload the beta products I working on.
Enworld meet Brent Nail. Brent Nail is at least an honest THIEF. So lock up your D&D supplies. Oh BN since information is free can you pm the numbers from the bottom of your check, after all that is just information you, the bank, and store used. It is no use for you.

Bryon D. .. Information itself, really is free by its own nature. It can be replicated perpetually for no cost…. Um no.Even if I don’t include the hourly labor cost of your time to copy information unless like the perfect memory example. Cost of cd, floppy, or the small cost in hard drive space the information takes up and the power it takes to get to the information. My last batch of blank cds were about fifty cents each. So the information on that cd has a min cost of fifty cents.

 

[BryonD]

I am also a lawyer, and took several IP classes in law school, as well as serving on the editorial board of the Journal of Intellectual Property Law.

In my opinion, referring to copyright infringement as "theft" or "stealing" is justified. While it is not technically correct, it still describes the practice from the viewpoint of the victims.

For example, if Bert kills Ernie then Ernie's family is likely to refer to Bert as a murderer, and his actions as murder. But we know that Bert may only be guilty of voluntary manslaughter, or even justifiable homicide. Still, to Ernie's family he is a murderer. They may not be using the legally correct term, but they are describing the actions from the viewpoint of a layperson affected by the actions.

To those in the pdf business, the people who obtain illegal copies of their products are thieves. I can certainly understand that description.

Bad anology. It isn't simply a matter of legal defintion of an equivalent result.
Murder vs. manslaughter both describe the equivlent result of a death.

Ten instances of infrigement results in some unknown number of lost sales.
Theft of ten items results in some unknown number of lost sales PLUS the loss of the ten physical items.

It isn't simply a layperson simplification of terms. It is wrong.

 

[BryonD]

Vandalism is theft. Vandalism is theft. Vandalism is theft.

You can try to justify it however you want, but you'll just be lying to yourself.

Vandalism is theft. Vandalism is theft. Vandalism is theft.




Running a red light is theft. Running a red light is theft. Running a red light is theft.

You can try to justify it however you want, but you'll just be lying to yourself.

Running a red light is theft. Running a red light is theft. Running a red light is theft.

 

[BryonD]

Bryon D. .. Information itself, really is free by its own nature. It can be replicated perpetually for no cost…. Um no.Even if I don’t include the hourly labor cost of your time to copy information unless like the perfect memory example. Cost of cd, floppy, or the small cost in hard drive space the information takes up and the power it takes to get to the information. My last batch of blank cds were about fifty cents each. So the information on that cd has a min cost of fifty cents.

None of the things you listed as having a cost are "information".

If there are two CDs, one with IP and one with Public domain data the value of material is equivlent.

If the IP is illegally copied, then the one with IP is also a case of infringement.
If I steal either one from you, I have stolen 50 cents.

Time and media are not free != information is not free