gbadev.org forum archive

Hello,

first: I don't want to do ANY offence, just explain some things.
And note: I'm not a pirate myself.

I some of the people (especially ones from the States and Western Europe) actually hate the pirates.
Why? Because they actually do damage to USA, UK and Japan industry? Because they don't respect what programmers made in all these months?
Because they 'support terrorist crimes'?

Neither of these statements is true. There is no actual damage. Proved. The authors get all the pay they deserve. Proved. The statement that money bought with, for example a SuperCard, goes to Al Queda is just a piece bull***t.

Now find a Eastern European or somebody from Asia (except Japan) if he CAN afford a game per month. No? See that's the problem.

Average pay in my country is about 700$ per month. In Norway for example it's about five times bigger. I assume it's the same in England or the USA/Japan. I was watching american documentary with 'poor people of America'. 'Poor people' were crying because they earn ONLY 900 per month. Only?! Shit, Chinese averagely earn 100$ per month. It's not a miracle that there's so much pirates!

What I want to say is: Stop screaming about how much you hate pirates, because they DON'T affect you (Lynx?!) in anyway. For an average Western person 50$ is dirt cheap. For a Chinese, it's all the month's food.

Think about it.

P.S.: I can afford only 1 game in about 2 months and still not pirating, but it's not the same (I don't think we're poor for eastern standards, it's just that I don't get enough money per month, I'm a kid).

P.P.S.: Sorry for the spelling mistakes and stuff.

So if, and I do mean if, you were to make a game that you spent months on, maybe even a year or 2, and when you got around to releasing it, someone pirated it, and began making copies to sell for their profit, and put your game on the internet for people to download for free........wouldn't you be ticked off?
_________________
DS - It's all about DiscoStew

No I wouldn't be. The developer gets the same amount of money no matter how much the game is pirated. But the percent of the pirates in the DS scene is so LOW, you couldn't even notice. At the very start of programming the commercial applications you must KNOW that it'll be pirated.

And I bet no developer is really sad that 100 or 200 of 10 millions of people haven't actually paid for ther work.

MaHe wrote:

There is no actual damage. Proved. The authors get all the pay they deserve. Proved.

I'm sorry, but how did you actually prove that?
There is a real damage on the game industry, and the fact that you say, that some people can't buy a game and won't pay for it unless it's "free", I see it every day in my country.
It is true what you say that the average income per capita is higher in some countries, but it's also true that life is a lot more expensive in those countries.
The "average" income in my country is around US$500-600, and that's what gets a normal person that has a "decent" job. The lowest legal wage is about US$280, and I must say that almost no one can live with that...
The point I'm trying to make clear is that only a small fraction of the population of poor countries can afford to buy games, the rest just have to pirate them, and that's not a good thing, is a social problem: the creation of false necessities.

"There is no actual damage. Proved."

Dreamcast...idiot...

MaHe wrote:

I was watching american documentary with 'poor people of America'. 'Poor people' were crying because they earn ONLY 900 per month. Only?! Shit, Chinese averagely earn 100$ per month.

They're not crying because they earn only 900 USD per month. They're crying because they happened to be born in a geographic area where rent, food, and taxes are 300 USD per month each.

MaHe wrote:

No I wouldn't be. The developer gets the same amount of money no matter how much the game is pirated.

But if the publisher doesn't get enough money, then the publisher won't work with the developer anymore, and all the developer's employees are laid off.
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.

Last edited by tepples on Mon Oct 10, 2005 5:22 pm; edited 1 time in total

Interesting arguments all around, but I have this to throw into the discussion -- the reason I hate piracy.

Because whether or not the companies really lose much, they THINK they do, and end up imposing all sorts of annoying restrictions on us because of it.

Copy-protected cd's and games, annoying cd keys, firmware upgrades that prevent homebrew development, "broadcast flags", it's all the companies reacting to piracy, and taking away my ability to use their products.

If the pirates suddenly stopped, games would be much easier to install and play. Cd's would be easier to rip to my computer. Homebrew development would be easier.

And since we happening to all be people involved in homebrew, I think that gives us enough reason to hate piracy.

(and living here in China, it's pretty easy to see just how little all that copy-protection does. If it exists, the Chinese have copied it. )

MaHe wrote:

No I wouldn't be. The developer gets the same amount of money no matter how much the game is pirated.

What a ridiculously obtuse thing to say. As though the money they get paid were to get picked from the magic money tree or something, and that the actual, bottom-line financial success of the game had no impact on or relevance towards their future income.

Between you and warsong, I'm starting to think people should need a license (or at least minimal proof of an education that goes beyond having a fervent opinion based on an editorial read online somewhere) before they post such nonsensical political rants. An argument like this would've gotten laughed out of any of my high school classes.

I'm sorry, ad hominem isn't normally my style, but I can't really reduce myself to taking such arguments seriously. Get out of your parents' basement, folks, and take a class or read a newspaper or something. Or do we need to add a section Beginners FAQ on how to formulate a rational argument?

Okay, I'm done. Back to your regularly scheduled programming.

Dan.

Well.. of course I have to replay, as I'm called out in the initial post.. but, I'm not going to waste my time pointing out all the misinformation in that post.. So, typing "FACT" or "PROVEN" at the end of a line.. doesn't actually make it a FACT or PROVEN.. sorry..

Quote:

What I want to say is: Stop screaming about how much you hate pirates, because they DON'T affect you (Lynx?!) in anyway. For an average Western person 50$ is dirt cheap. For a Chinese, it's all the month's food.

So... Just for fun.. let's ask some questions.. And I'll actually give facts I think everyone can agree with.

Piracy = Illegal? Uhh.. Yup.. that's a fact.
Murder = Illegal? Uhh. Yup.. that's a fact as well.
Theft = Illegal? Well, in the USA.. that's a fact as well.

So.. Piracy.. doesn't effect me, so I shouldn't care..
Gang bangers killing each other.. well, I don't live there.. it doesn't effect me, so I shouldn't care.
People getting robbed every day. Well.. I haven't been robbed lately, so it doesn't effect me and I shouldn't care..

So, basically.. what I read from your post.. is as long as I'm not the developer of the software being pirated.. I shouldn't care... As long as I'm not the one being murdered.. I shouldn't care.. And as long as I'm not the one being robbed.. I shouldn't care.

If you pirate software, YOU ARE A THEIF! You are stealing something you DID NOT pay for. You might not be stealing it from me, but that doesn't mean I should stand by and watch.. because it doesn't affect me. I'll tell you right now.. If I'm standing in a store, and see someone steal something.. I'm going to do something about it. Why? Because they are a theiving bastard!

Yeah.. I make good money.. and I could afford to buy all the DS games I want.. I own 6 of them.. of which I really only like 2. But, you know what? I worked to get where I am. Yeah.. I could have become a theif.. stole stuff my whole life, because it's easier then getting a job and being a respectable part of society.. But, you know what? I chose not to.. I'm sure every warezing bastard will think this next sentense is the stupidest thing they have ever heard:

I've paid for things I didn't have to.. I've corrected mistakes people have made when they undercharge me.. Why? Because IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO! If I buy something and it rings up $8 and it's supposed to be $12, I tell them.. If I order a $10 meal, and $5 worth of sides, and they forget to charge me for the sides.. I tell them. You know why? Because that is how ___I___ choose to live my life.

So, if you don't like being called a warezing bastard, then don't be one. If I state that I would like respectible homebrewers around me, or on my sites, and that makes you mad, then don't visit my sites. Don't read my posts.

So, I hate thieves, and pirates = theives. That's a fact.

Interesting discussion. I'd like to hear more from the pirate side, since it's easy for folks who dislike piracy to stamp our feet and say how evil it is. (I for one promise not to yell at you if you can present a reasoned argument.)

I dislike pirates. It's an emotional thing for me, though, not necessarily a logical one that I've thought out and could argue. I certainly don't have any statistics to back up the idea that pirates put people out of work or damage the economy. As a creative professional, it just makes me angry that people might take my stuff without paying me for it.

But with that being said, I have to be honest and say that I haven't always been an angel in that regard.

Nowadays, I pay for everything I use, from CDs to games to software. However, when I was in college, I couldn't afford to pay several hundred dollars for a Photoshop or Autocad or Premiere license key. If it wasn't for piracy, I wouldn't have been able to *touch* professional level tools like those, so I wouldn't have learned them, so I wouldn't have the career that I have today. Now that I get paid for using these tools, I pony up the license fees and feel good about doing so.

To this day, I feel that students should have access to FREE software for learning purposes, and I would be willing to provide such copies if I knew a student who needed them. Technically, this is piracy, so I guess I'm a hipocrite. :P

My $.02.

-Scott

ScottLininger wrote:

when I was in college, I couldn't afford to pay several hundred dollars for a Photoshop or Autocad or Premiere license key. [...] To this day, I feel that students should have access to FREE software for learning purposes, and I would be willing to provide such copies if I knew a student who needed them. Technically, this is piracy, so I guess I'm a hipocrite. :P

AutoCAD I can't help you with, but for Photoshop there is GIMP (and GimpShop for learning Photoshop's menu structure), for Illustrator there is Inkscape, and for Premiere there is Cinelerra.
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.

Lynx wrote:

I've paid for things I didn't have to.. I've corrected mistakes people have made when they undercharge me.. Why? Because IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO! If I buy something and it rings up $8 and it's supposed to be $12, I tell them.. If I order a $10 meal, and $5 worth of sides, and they forget to charge me for the sides.. I tell them. You know why? Because that is how ___I___ choose to live my life.

Yes, I totally agree with that. But it's because you CAN afford it.
Some people just can't afford it. Why? Because there are people who are rich and want money and only money. That's what I find disgusting and there are not the poor to be blamed. They SHOULD have same rights as we get, right?

It's a shame that e.g. RIAA attacks 10 years old and demands 5 millions of dollars. But when they see someone who could afford everything he pirates, he is left intact. A shame.

And there is NO DAMAGE to the industry, because PRICES ARE RAISED.
I know that's bad. Just stop blaming those (not all the pirates, of course) who are just victims of society.

Quote:

The authors get all the pay they deserve.

Um, no. Authors get paid both an upfront fee and ongoing Royalties. When piracy bites into the royalties side of the equation, we authors get affected as well as the publisher - usually more so. Publishers can usually setup their contracts such that the developers get a fee to almost cover their expenses, then they make their profit, then the remaining sales are divided between publisher and author side in some unbalanced way.

Piracy affects everyone. The author through lost sales, the publisher through lost sales, the consumer through higher prices to make up for lost sales, the pirate through thinking that he's not really doing anything wrong.

MaHe wrote:

Yes, I totally agree with that. But it's because you CAN afford it.

Uhh.. we are talking about video games, right? Last I checked, you CAN LIVE without them! So, you can't use that argument. I can't afford a BMW, but you don't see me out stealing one..

Quote:

Some people just can't afford it. Why? Because there are people who are rich and want money and only money. That's what I find disgusting and there are not the poor to be blamed. They SHOULD have same rights as we get, right?

What rights are you talking about? The right to play games? I said this on #dsdev this morning.. if you can't afford the games, why did you just waist $130 on a TOY? So, you have your priorities out of whack! You need to worry about having money for food and water, not an NDS and games.

Quote:

It's a shame that e.g. RIAA attacks 10 years old and demands 5 millions of dollars. But when they see someone who could afford everything he pirates, he is left intact. A shame.

I don't even know what the hell that is saying.. Sounds like.. "jee.. the police are bothering me cuase I'm a common theif with a recond 5 miles long.. How come they don't bother that guy over there, that doesn't have a record of stealing everything they can get ahold of?"

Quote:

And there is NO DAMAGE to the industry, because PRICES ARE RAISED.
I know that's bad. Just stop blaming those (not all the pirates, of course) who are just victims of society.

Ok.. So there you go.. You just proved your own misinformation... So, now pirating DOES affect me, as I have to pay more (ya'know, being the guy that actually PAYS for something?) because others think they should get it for free.. There are no victims of society! You are where you are because of the choices you made. If anything, you are a victim of yourself.

OK, I give up.

There's no better way to meet a new group of people than to argue with them! I think I heard that somewhere... or maybe not.

I don't have a problem with small-scale piracy.

First, I feel that whatever "damage" may be done by a person who downloads a game (or music, or a book, and so on) is partly offset by the increased exposure the product gets. On one hand they may not pay for the product, so that's a loss, but if they rave about it to some friends, or on a web forum, and two or three people go out and buy it because of that, then that's a win. Or a publisher might sense how popular the game was and decide to publish the developers' next game as well.

Second, much of the time when I download something illegally it's something I wouldn't have bought/couldn't find anyway. Sometimes I like a song I hear on the radio or heard about a game which sounds interesting, but I'm not willing to drop the cash on it to find out if its as good as it sounds. I think that's true for a lot of pirates. If the person wasn't or couldn't buy the product anyway then that's no loss to the developer or publisher. On the other hand, the downloader got what they wanted, and the folks trying to make money with the product recieved their favorable opinon (if the product is a good one). What's better? A person not buying a game (for whatever reason), or a person getting a copy for free? If the person who downloaded it likes it, they may even go out and buy the sequel, if it's easier to find or they have the cash at the time.

Third, downloading a game or music is different from "traditional" stealing because nothing is actually taken. So if thousands of people download a game you're not robbed of those thousands of copies. You've still got them, and they don't need replacing. You may not have made thousands more sales, but you haven't lost thousands of copies which you paid to produce. Downloading is "half as bad" (financially speaking anyway) as physical stealing.

I realize that there's a point at which you can't make money purely through mindshare. You do actually have to move product to eat. But I don't think that small-scale pirates have a large negative impact on earnings, if they have one at all.

I'd like to throw in a note about Cory Doctorow, a writer, here. He has released a few of his books as free downloads as well as publishing them in dead tree format. His first novel, Down and Out of the Magic Kingdown, according to his web site, "was downloaded hundreds of thousands of times and sold like hell." He even gave his blessing to downloading, but he still sold well. Maybe the negative impact downloading has on sales has been exaggerated by certain groups who want to milk us for every penny they can get.

I'm making a distinction between small-scale and large-scale pirates. Small scale pirates are folks who download games and music. Large scale pirates are those who get ahold of a work, duplicate it, and sell it. I'm not going to endorse them in any way. Making a copy of a work because you want it and selling another person's work to make money are far apart on my scale of badness.

* Some of you may be wondering what I'm doing here if my first post (this is my first one, right?) is to argue over something not even programming related. I'm mostly just lurking for now, since I'm just getting my feet wet with GBA programming. I only recently got a sane build environment set up.

MaHe wrote:

Western person 50$ is dirt cheap. For a Chinese, it's all the month's food.

A month? I think $50 USD goes a lot further than that in China. Food is dirt cheap there.

-Brendan

....getting more and more offtopic.....

It really depends on where in China, also. The differences between the countryside and the cities are huge, as well as WHAT you are eating.

I live in one of the richer cities, and a restaurant (I use that term loosely) meal can be anywhere from 75 cents US (at a small dirty street shop) to $2 (for mcdonalds/kfc/etc) to LOTS (for elegant dining and shark's fin soup). Most of my coworkers, who have decent IT jobs, think paying more than $2.50 for a lunch is a bit steep. Just for lunches, at the company cafeteria, I spend about $25 US per month. Of course, I could do it cheaper if I cooked all my own food, but it gives you a reference point.

On the other hand, in the poorer places, you can easily eat out for about 25 cents US.

And all that is assuming you want food with meat in it. If you're happy with mostly rice and vegetables (which the poorest people do), you can do it a lot cheaper.

Anyway, to bring it all back to piracy, my coworkers always laugh when I tell them how much non-pirated DVD's cost in the US. The pirated ones sell on the street here for 75 cents each.

</offtopic>

paul-donnelly wrote:

I'd like to throw in a note about Cory Doctorow, a writer, here. He has released a few of his books as free downloads as well as publishing them in dead tree format. His first novel, Down and Out of the Magic Kingdown, according to his web site, "was downloaded hundreds of thousands of times and sold like hell." He even gave his blessing to downloading, but he still sold well. Maybe the negative impact downloading has on sales has been exaggerated by certain groups who want to milk us for every penny they can get.

I knew Cory back when I was growing up in Toronto, back in the BBS days when the Internet was still a gleam in all of our eyes. This talk that he gave at Microsoft on DRM is a long read, but is an excellent insight into the history of how copyright law and consumer behaviour have evolved alongside technology.

What bothers me are the blanket statements like "piracy has no effect on the industry" and similar oversimplifications.

I'm sure that on some level Adobe realizes that it's unlikely Photoshop would be the tremendous success that it is today if not for literally the thousands of people who grew up becoming experts on pirated versions, and who now insist on using it in the various industry positions they hold.

Not all effects of piracy are positive, though, and it's foolhardy to assume that they are, or that even the benefits necessarily outweigh the drawbacks.

Dan.

I like the color blue.

Quote:

What bothers me are the blanket statements like "piracy has no effect on the industry" and similar oversimplifications.

I agree with that. I do, however, feel that it doesn't have a large negative impact in most cases, and has a positive impact occasionally.

paul-donnelly wrote:

I do, however, feel that it doesn't have a large negative impact in most cases

What are you basing that on?

Edited to add: bear in mind the question is posed based on your previous post, where only one of the three points you made dealt with the impact on the industry; the other two were morality justifications of piracy from the perspective of the consumer.

There ought to be more substance to this kind of claim than "it doesn't seem like it would have a large negative impact", since the developers would claim otherwise, and have spent over two decades investing in the development of technology to combat it. (Financially speaking, it wouldn't even make sense for them to pursue that route unless piracy was already costing them more than it does to find ways to copy-protect their software.)

Dan.

poslundc wrote:

paul-donnelly wrote:

I do, however, feel that it doesn't have a large negative impact in most cases

What are you basing that on?

Edited to add: bear in mind the question is posed based on your previous post, where only one of the three points you made dealt with the impact on the industry; the other two were morality justifications of piracy from the perspective of the consumer.

That's a very good question. I really don't have much. I've seen mildly convincing proof on both sides, but nothing that really impresses me. My impression is that it's very up in the air, with studies saying piracy is bad for the industry on one side, and studies saying piracy isn't bad on the other. None have struck me as me as especially persuasive yet. Until I see something that does, I'm just taking the side I prefer.

I felt my morality justifications were appropriate since my post was about my feelings towards piracy, and my morality judgements figure into my attitude. I'm not claiming to know the truth, but these are my opinions.

I think the term piracy can take a persons actions out of context and have it automatically labelled as theft. Although theft is wrong; and so is murder - but when put into the context of or abortion or downloading a song no longer in circulation it is difficult to put it into the same context as a group doing so and making profit, which may have an effect on the industry

---

EDIT: Also I think it is difficult to compare want for a car with that of a copied computer game and niether can the theft of tangible goods be compared to theft of intangible goods. (In response to someone's comment)

Last edited by keldon on Thu Oct 13, 2005 11:19 pm; edited 1 time in total

As to the affects of piracy, I wonder how much it specifically affects the producers of GBA games.

In other words, what's the percentage of people out there that own a GBA and a flash card used to play commerical roms out of the total GBA owners?

My guess is it's very small, but then again it's just a guess.

Good comments by paul-donnelly btw

Palamon wrote:

what's the percentage of people out there that own a GBA and a flash card used to play commerical roms out of the total GBA owners?

My guess is it's very small, but then again it's just a guess.

But what about people who download the ROM and just run it in VBA, without using a GBA at all? There are probably a lot more of those than people who use a NOR card.
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.

Quote:

As to the affects of piracy, I wonder how much it specifically affects the producers of GBA games.

i think the criminal level piracy effects the industry as a whole by the amount that has been spent on them as a whole ... i.e. a cart with 100 games (if there is such a thing) sold for ?80 probably accounts for 3-5 game losses

the other level of piracy .. i.e. home level copying is impossible to measure as there are various trends to take into account; such as whether the people who never buy music or games account for little, some, or most of home level piracy

official reports say that piracy both does and does not; but that is mostly down to the fact that the reports target different levels of copying; i.e. large scale criminal piracy, duplication / lending, downloading, pirate purchases, and radio recording which all takes the single title of 'piracy'

keldon wrote:

i think the criminal level piracy effects the industry as a whole by the amount that has been spent on them as a whole ... i.e. a cart with 100 games (if there is such a thing)

Yes there is. I've been to mall kiosks selling Famiclones bundled with a cart with 100 distinct pirated NES games on it. I didn't buy it, but I didn't report the seller to nintendo.com either.

Quote:

sold for ?80 probably accounts for 3-5 game losses

Even if those games aren't sold by their copyright owners anymore?
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.

Quote:

Even if those games aren't sold by their copyright owners anymore?

hmmmm Interesting. That is difficult to assess really. i didn't consider games out of production - i completely forgot about that whole era of doctor 64. It could be argued that without that option more commercial games would have been purchased on some small scale

In fact consider the gbadev cart bundle (which i would like to own); gbadev would not lose anything if i bought an illigitimate copy of their cart since they are out of stock ..... but from a jealous viewpoint they have. Besides redistribution can be done in a legal manor by buying the rights to do so

Quote:

Even if those games aren't sold by their copyright owners anymore?

Yes and no. That is $80 I'm not spending on current games. (To nail my point, I just bought a used PS2 for ~$70.) At any rate, owning the pirate budle might discourage one from buying the legit remake.

keldon wrote:

In fact consider the gbadev cart bundle (which i would like to own); gbadev would not lose anything if i bought an illigitimate copy of their cart since they are out of stock ..... but from a jealous viewpoint they have. Besides redistribution can be done in a legal manor by buying the rights to do so

The GBADEV bundle is current and probably limited edition, so I think it might be the exception to the rule. See above for a larger enterpise.

-Brendan

sgeos wrote:

Quote:

Even if those games aren't sold by their copyright owners anymore?

Yes and no. That is $80 I'm not spending on current games. (To nail my point, I just bought a used PS2 for ~$70.) At any rate, owning the pirate budle might discourage one from buying the legit remake.

I was just thinking that this introduces a point no one has made yet. When a game is pirated developers don't receive royalties, but they don't receive royalties if you by a used game either. And they only difference is that if you by the used game you have a legal copy of the game.

Joe_Sextus wrote:

I was just thinking that this introduces a point no one has made yet. When a game is pirated developers don't receive royalties, but they don't receive royalties if you by a used game either. And they only difference is that if you by the used game you have a legal copy of the game.

But if you are buying the used game then the previous owner can no longer use it (provided they haven't pirated it of course). So there is still the single copy in circulation for which the developer _has_ received a royalty.
_________________
Modasi Games
www.modasi.com

On another note, are people seriously advocating piracy here??? As a developer, if I choose to give away my software for free then that is my right, but if I choose to copyright it or license it under the GPL, then that is my right too. Even if the game is no longer in circulation, that doesn't give someone the right to pirate it. The moral argument may be that the copyright holder should release the rights to old titles into the public domain but for various reasons they may choose not to do so.
_________________
Modasi Games
www.modasi.com

byg wrote:

But if you are buying the used game then the previous owner can no longer use it (provided they haven't pirated it of course). So there is still the single copy in circulation for which the developer _has_ received a royalty.

What I was saying is that the author does not receive royalties from the person buying the used game. If I by a new game the developer gets royalties from that sale, but if I buy it used the author only receives royalties for the person who bought it first. It could have been several times.

Joe_Sextus wrote:

What I was saying is that the author does not receive royalties from the person buying the used game. If I by a new game the developer gets royalties from that sale, but if I buy it used the author only receives royalties for the person who bought it first. It could have been several times.

And they also do not get royalties from someone who gives their game to a friend or a family member. I don't think this is analogous to piracy, nor can be used as a reason to justify piracy.
_________________
Modasi Games
www.modasi.com

Joe_Sextus wrote:

What I was saying is that the author does not receive royalties from the person buying the used game.

Except in Japan, where there is no first sale exhaustion of the distribution right of audiovisual works. Used game stores in Japan are said to operate only by permission of the game publishers.
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.

byg wrote:

And they also do not get royalties from someone who gives their game to a friend or a family member. I don't think this is analogous to piracy, nor can be used as a reason to justify piracy.

I was not meaning it to justify piracy, just used as an example of where developers do not get royalties when their games are sold hands. If you look at some PC software your example is piracy.

The only reason I see to justify piracy on the GBA is the fact that you cannot rent a GBA games (at least where I live). That way you can try a game before you spend $30 on it.[/u]

Joe_Sextus wrote:

I was not meaning it to justify piracy, just used as an example of where developers do not get royalties when their games are sold hands. If you look at some PC software your example is piracy.

My apologies then. I thought that you were trying to draw a parallel by stating the following:

Joe_Sextus wrote:

When a game is pirated developers don't receive royalties, but they don't receive royalties if you by a used game either.

Anyway,

Joe_Sextus wrote:

The only reason I see to justify piracy on the GBA is the fact that you cannot rent a GBA games (at least where I live). That way you can try a game before you spend $30 on it.

Eh? This is no justification. You have no right to pirate a game just because you can't rent it.
_________________
Modasi Games
www.modasi.com

byg wrote:

Joe_Sextus wrote:

The only reason I see to justify piracy on the GBA is the fact that you cannot rent a GBA games (at least where I live). That way you can try a game before you spend $30 on it.

Eh? This is no justification. You have no right to pirate a game just because you can't rent it.

No right under man's law, but some would claim that there is a law enforced by entities who live outside this universe. Among major faiths, only Scientology has any tenet remotely resembling copyright.

So how can I play a GBA game for 30 minutes for less than $60 per hour?
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.

Last edited by tepples on Fri Oct 14, 2005 11:33 pm; edited 1 time in total

tepples wrote:

So how can I play a GBA game for 15 minutes for less than $120 per hour?

Purchase it and promptly return it? To my knowledge, most stores don't have a problem with you returning non CD/DVD media...

Dan.

poslundc wrote:

Purchase it and promptly return it? To my knowledge, most stores don't have a problem with you returning non CD/DVD media...

Since the days of NES, most retailers in my area have responded to a return of an opened console game with another copy of the same title, also opened.
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.

tepples wrote:

Among major faiths, only Scientology has any tenet remotely resembling copyright.

I guess most church-going pirates can rest easy then!
_________________
Modasi Games
www.modasi.com

byg wrote:

tepples wrote:

Among major faiths, only Scientology has any tenet remotely resembling copyright.

I guess most church-going pirates can rest easy then!

"Render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's and unto God what is God's"
Christians are bound to follow the law of the land unless it directly contravenes biblical law.

Last edited by notb4dinner on Sat Oct 15, 2005 12:30 am; edited 1 time in total

Quote:

Purchase it and promptly return it? To my knowledge, most stores don't have a problem with you returning non CD/DVD media...

are you implying that you feel buying the game and returning it within 10 days is in any way better than copying the game and playing it for 10 days? Having said that that is a very good area you brough up there

sometimes when i am undecided about games i will buy 5-6 at a time and return the ones i realize are not to my liking. but to buy a game with the intention of completing it within 10 days to return it is (in my opinion, i.e. i do not impose or preach this view) worse than copying a game as it involves direct deciet; especially in my area where you have to 'whistle innocently' while they are signing your refund reciept

one more thing question is whether you consider a person who copies a game for himself or a friend a pirate? I ask this as it is only recently that the consumer has been able to duplicate software; i.e. you are unlikely to see a surge of hardware pirates anytime soon but who knows what the future has to offer

keldon wrote:

one more thing question is whether you consider a person who copies a game for himself or a friend a pirate? I ask this as it is only recently that the consumer has been able to duplicate software; i.e. you are unlikely to see a surge of hardware pirates anytime soon but who knows what the future has to offer

That's an interesting one. I find wholesale piracy pretty disgusting most of the time due to the sheer selfishness of it - it's always 'give me, give me, give me'. On the other hand I like being able to share with others (this is a similar sentiment to what Stallman has expressed) and dislike the fact that I can't do as I like with something I bought. The problem is how far do you take it? Can a friend give a copy to another friend? How many friends can I give a copy to? It doesn't take too much of a leap to end up back at wholesale piracy.

keldon wrote:

Quote:

Purchase it and promptly return it? To my knowledge, most stores don't have a problem with you returning non CD/DVD media...

are you implying that you feel buying the game and returning it within 10 days is in any way better than copying the game and playing it for 10 days?

Sure am. Once I've returned the game to the store, I can't continue to play it. Even if I claim that I break every CD I burn after 10 days, there's no financial liability to bind me to my word. Why do you think that "you must delete these files within 24 hours of downloading them if you don't own the originals" nonsense never took?

Quote:

Since the days of NES, most retailers in my area have responded to a return of an opened console game with another copy of the same title, also opened.

That may very well be; I have memories of returning original GB and SNES cartridges, but that was over a decade ago. You might want to consider a Costco membership; I understand that they have a very consumer-friendly returns policy.

Dan.

keldon wrote:

one more thing question is whether you consider a person who copies a game for himself or a friend a pirate?

Well, dictionary.com does. Although is it worth tracking down and prosecuting these people? Probably not.

notb4dinner wrote:

On the other hand I like being able to share with others (this is a similar sentiment to what Stallman has expressed) and dislike the fact that I can't do as I like with something I bought.

How about lending them your copy of the game? Would you photocopy a whole novel to give to a friend or just lend them the book? Just because it is (often) easier to copy software doesn't mean you should.
_________________
Modasi Games
www.modasi.com

tepples wrote:

So how can I play a GBA game for 30 minutes for less than $60 per hour?

Go to a store with a demo setup. It's best to go when it's not busy.

Buying a used game takes it out of circulation and reduces supply. Home consoles are sold at a loss, so buying a used console is doing the manufacturer a favor (alhtough they'd rather see their console in two homes instead of one).

-Brendan

i think that put in some positions the decision is more realistic. i.e. i will never be able to afford this overpriced product, and what harm is it in me using it anyway? where is the loss? where is the harm?

i think it is also easy to feel disgust for someone to get what you got for less. i.e. i spent ?100 on this, why should he get it for free?

i think there is a bible verse about the value of money in which it says 10 pence from a poor man is a larger offering than that of 100 pounds from a millionnaire

---

thought i'd throw in the links between the debate and that of idealism and utilitarianism

idealists believe in a universal rule of right / wrong and the utilitarianists believe in the context of the action

playing a copied game has less of a negative effect on the surrounding environment and has a greater positive effect on themself than buying a [potentially high demand] product with the intention to return it where its boxes must resealed and other persons are deprived of using the game - and therefore utalitarianists favour copying a game to decietfully returning one

idealism does not favour context and opts for a universal rule such as all unprohibited copying is wrong in any case whether they want to try before they buy or want to ensure it works with their system

there are flaws with both views, i.e. if lying is wrong [in the idealists world] then what do you say to the killer who asks if a little girl is in a room; the flaws with utilitarianism need not be pointed out as they are obvious. also there are biological and socialogical links to a persons preference of which view they adopt

sgeos wrote:

tepples wrote:

So how can I play a GBA game for 30 minutes for less than $60 per hour?

Go to a store with a demo setup. It's best to go when it's not busy.

OK, so how do I play a game other than DK: King of Swing in a store demo?
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.

Quote:

Dreamcast...idiot...

LOL - If you think piracy is why the dreamcast failed, then you are the idiot.

keldon wrote:

playing a copied game has less of a negative effect on the surrounding environment and has a greater positive effect on themself than buying a [potentially high demand] product with the intention to return it where its boxes must resealed and other persons are deprived of using the game - and therefore utalitarianists favour copying a game to decietfully returning one

What utter nonsense. I'm more inclined to call those people "excusists" than "utilitarianists".

I don't believe for a second that so-called utilitarianists are pirating games instead of buying/returning them because of some kind of perverted notion of a moral high ground. I do believe they are pirating instead because:

- It's easier (less physical labour) to pirate than it is to buy something and then return it to the store later on

- There is no financial investment involved, and no repercussion if they forget to return something they pirate

- They know perfectly well that once they've bought something, if they like it, there's a good chance they'll want to keep it and have to lose their money

- Most importantly, with piracy, they can keep the game forever if they want to.

There are plenty of justifications for why people pirate, some more valid than others. But the notion that they are just doing what they consider to be a more noble alternative to the legal action of buying a piece of software and then returning it to the merchant? That's laughable.

Dan.

poslundc wrote:

But the notion that they are just doing what they consider to be a more noble alternative to the legal action of buying a piece of software and then returning it to the merchant? That's laughable.

It's laughable, but in the days of near-universal policies of accepting returns of an opened copy of a GBA or Nintendo DS video game only in exchange for an opened copy of the same title, what's the alternative?
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.

tepples wrote:

poslundc wrote:

But the notion that they are just doing what they consider to be a more noble alternative to the legal action of buying a piece of software and then returning it to the merchant? That's laughable.

It's laughable, but in the days of near-universal policies of accepting returns of an opened copy of a GBA or Nintendo DS video game only in exchange for an opened copy of the same title, what's the alternative?

A quick survey of Blockbuster's website shows that they still rent games for the GBA and DS. I'm not sure if they have Blockbusters in Muskogee, OK (where Joe_Sextus lives, who was the one claiming not to have the option of renting), or if Muskogee is excluded from their online program, but that would seem to be the reasonable alternative for the vast majority of people.

As was already said before, though, not having an alternative doesn't give you the legal right to try before you buy. In this case, the "alternative" is to do your homework, and if you don't like the choice you made, either suffer with it or sell it. Not liking those options doesn't make piracy okay, though.

Dan.

poslundc wrote:

But the notion that they are just doing what they consider to be a more noble alternative to the legal action of buying a piece of software and then returning it to the merchant? That's laughable.

Dan.

well it is all about your boundaries of right and wrong. if i know deep down that i do not intend to keep a game for more than 10 days (bearing in mind a majority of games nowadays can be completed in under that) then i am decietfully acquiring the game. when copying a game i know deep down that i am likely to enjoy the game and am unlawfully acquiring the game against the law

when highlighting the type of wrong involved in both it is easy to make the distinction between the two and favour one over the other. the law allowing it does not make it right; it's merely a loophole designed for the audience who genuinly planned on paying for the game not those for a free ride

these days shops are more lenient when it comes to returning; but at the same time i dont think they want to be taken advantage of, not to mention breaking the personal level of trust so i feel it is 'wrong' to do either and buying the game with the intention to complete it within the return time makes you no better or worse than a pirate

keldon wrote:

if i know deep down that i do not intend to keep a game for more than 10 days (bearing in mind a majority of games nowadays can be completed in under that) then i am decietfully acquiring the game. when copying a game i know deep down that i am likely to enjoy the game and am unlawfully acquiring the game against the law

Don't most stores either have a no-questions-asked returns policy and/or they will only exchange defective copies of a game for the same game. How is this deceitful? It is either expressly allowed by the company, or you will only be able to exchange it for the same game. And how many people actually do this as compared to piracy? Surely it is not worth the effort for most people to continually buy and return games in 10 days or so. In fact, the only reasons that I can think of that people will actually do this en-masse is so that they can pirate the game and then return it to the store and get their money back.
_________________
Modasi Games
www.modasi.com

keldon wrote:

well it is all about your boundaries of right and wrong. if i know deep down that i do not intend to keep a game for more than 10 days (bearing in mind a majority of games nowadays can be completed in under that) then i am decietfully acquiring the game.

There's nothing deceitful about it at all. You do not enter into a contract with the store you purchase from when you buy a game saying that you don't intend to return the product. Once it leaves their hands it belongs to you. If the store has a return policy, it's at their own discretion and if they feel you're jerking them around and exploiting their good nature then they have the option of denying it to you.

Retail companies know perfectly well that the vast majority of sales wind up being final, and it's worth the investment in customer satisfaction to take back the minority that are unwanted. Do you think Costco would let its members refund merchandise that's been used for several years if it wasn't a viable business strategy for them?

I'm not saying it isn't a cheap thing to do. It surely is. But it's hardly deceitful.

Quote:

these days shops are more lenient when it comes to returning; but at the same time i dont think they want to be taken advantage of, not to mention breaking the personal level of trust so i feel it is 'wrong' to do either and buying the game with the intention to complete it within the return time makes you no better or worse than a pirate

So you basically equate being a jerk with stealing in terms of morality. Which may or may not be true, but I don't think it's by accident that the law permits one and not the other.

Dan.

from what i read from the first statement....pirating a ds game takes alot of time especially if u dont know what u r doing...most peeps that have a ds do not even know what the hell a supercard is...and one more thing...why the hell are we talking about pirating on a develpment forum... i am sure that most of us all here download some thing off of the internet...in fact....if u want a percentage..about 73.5% of all computing done on the internet has some for of piracy involved in the data transfers..so dont complain...about something that u dont understand "kid" yea money is lost its the things that go on behind closed doors that cause really big problems...
_________________
don't click this link...

poslundc wrote:

So you basically equate being a jerk with stealing in terms of morality. Which may or may not be true, but I don't think it's by accident that the law permits one and not the other.

Dan.

i do not consider copying a game to be stealing any more than being a jerk is stealing - bearing in mind to steal is to deprive one of their goods. when you consider the end product of the actions; no game is sold yet a game is completed. how do you then decide which action is stealing and which is not when you consider its end result

i am also not under the belief that the law is the answer to why or what is right/wrong. for example most laws permits alcohol and cigarettes which are in 'some' views wrong. the laws of ohio prohibit oral sex; so is the rest of the world holding wrong practises or is 'that' law disallowing something right?

i brought up utilitarianism and idealism as they are philosophies covering what can be considered as right and wrong. i noticed that people here had conflicting definitions on what is considered to be right and wrong, which is the most difficult boundary to truthfully make

poslundc wrote:

A quick survey of Blockbuster's website shows that they still rent games for the GBA and DS. I'm not sure if they have Blockbusters in Muskogee, OK (where Joe_Sextus lives, who was the one claiming not to have the option of renting), or if Muskogee is excluded from their online program, but that would seem to be the reasonable alternative for the vast majority of people.

Last time I checked, all games were excluded from the online program. Only movies are available online; games are available only in stores, and even fewer stores have GBA, Nintendo DS, or PSP titles.

monsoon wrote:

why the hell are we talking about pirating on a development forum

The widely held opinion is that the pirates subsidize homebrew equipment.
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.

keldon wrote:

i do not consider copying a game to be stealing any more than being a jerk is stealing - bearing in mind to steal is to deprive one of their goods. when you consider the end product of the actions; no game is sold yet a game is completed. how do you then decide which action is stealing and which is not when you consider its end result

Rather than get into a semantic argument over what constitutes stealing (I'll go so far as to say the dictionary disagrees with you, though), I'll simply ask you: doesn't it seem awfully contrived to define stealing in terms which purposefully excludes intellectual property?

Quote:

i am also not under the belief that the law is the answer to why or what is right/wrong. for example most laws permits alcohol and cigarettes which are in 'some' views wrong. the laws of ohio prohibit oral sex; so is the rest of the world holding wrong practises or is 'that' law disallowing something right?

So do you think that software piracy should be made legal, or that returning games should be made illegal, since you believe the two to be morally equivalent?

Quote:

i brought up utilitarianism and idealism as they are philosophies covering what can be considered as right and wrong. i noticed that people here had conflicting definitions on what is considered to be right and wrong, which is the most difficult boundary to truthfully make

I have no problem with the philosophies, but I believe you are misapplying them if you think pirating a game is on a higher moral plane than returning a game to the store because you are creating a disruption to the store by doing so. I think you are deluding yourself into excusing it because if you go the way of piracy you don't have to work as hard, invest as much, or give up any of your ill-gotten gains at the end of the day. Why haven't you factored any of those elements into the utilitarianist philosophy?

Dan.

poslundc wrote:

'll simply ask you: doesn't it seem awfully contrived to define stealing in terms which purposefully excludes intellectual property?

The letter of the law defines "theft" separately from "copyright infringement".
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.

tepples wrote:

poslundc wrote:

'll simply ask you: doesn't it seem awfully contrived to define stealing in terms which purposefully excludes intellectual property?

The letter of the law defines "theft" separately from "copyright infringement".

Intellectual property is an unspecific term that is not exclusive to the domain of copyright law. In fact, I partly chose it because it is so unspecific that it belies how conspicuous it is for a definition of theft to specifically exclude everything covered by it.

Dan.

poslundc wrote:

A quick survey of Blockbuster's website shows that they still rent games for the GBA and DS. I'm not sure if they have Blockbusters in Muskogee, OK (where Joe_Sextus lives, who was the one claiming not to have the option of renting), or if Muskogee is excluded from their online program, but that would seem to be the reasonable alternative for the vast majority of people.

I'm not sure if the Blockbuster in Muskogee rents GBA games, the old never rented anything but console games. But they might as I haven't stepped foot in a Blockbuster since Muskogee got a Hasting (about 10-15) years ago. I may have to check it out and see.

tepples wrote:

poslundc wrote:

But the notion that they are just doing what they consider to be a more noble alternative to the legal action of buying a piece of software and then returning it to the merchant? That's laughable.

It's laughable, but in the days of near-universal policies of accepting returns of an opened copy of a GBA or Nintendo DS video game only in exchange for an opened copy of the same title, what's the alternative?

Actually, my local EB (Australia, so probably doesn't apply to Americans) has a seven day trial policy, which they advertise. IIRC If you don't like a game you can return it within seven days for a full refund.
_________________
http://chishm.drunkencoders.com
http://dldi.drunkencoders.com

poslundc wrote:

- It's easier (less physical labour) to pirate than it is to buy something and then return it to the store later on

Buying a product might actually take less time. Time/legal clear VS labour/money. What each individual chooses depends on his or her circumstances. Most people are honest, believe it or not.

keldon wrote:

well it is all about your boundaries of right and wrong. if i know deep down that i do not intend to keep a game for more than 10 days (bearing in mind a majority of games nowadays can be completed in under that) then i am decietfully acquiring the game. when copying a game i know deep down that i am likely to enjoy the game and am unlawfully acquiring the game against the law

The devil can always find some logical reason to justify immoral behavior. Regardless of how you want to word things, people basically know when they are doing something "wrong" or unaccepted.

-Brendan

poslundc wrote:

(I'll go so far as to say the dictionary disagrees with you, though)

i quoted 'deprive one of his goods' from a dictionary; or are you speaking of my application of it?

Quote:

I'll simply ask you: doesn't it seem awfully contrived to define stealing in terms which purposefully excludes intellectual property?

yes. IP is much more complex and different to a tangible object which when gone is gone. The loss concerned with IP is financial, and not easily measured - to have it defined as stealing is implying there was deprivation; i think another way to put it is that there is a line to cross before something is considered as theft; maybe one could better consider an action as theft under a certain circumstance and not possibly under another due to its complexity and implications of definition

Quote:

So do you think that software piracy should be made legal, or that returning games should be made illegal, since you believe the two to be morally equivalent?

i was merely exploring the angle. besides the law is there for a good/important reason. but the shops can handle the few '10th day jerk' returns as you [or someone else] stated so it is not a major problem. also i have learned not to label all of someones actions as right or wrong, as it conflicts with my drug workshops

Quote:

I have no problem with the philosophies, but I believe you are misapplying them if you think pirating a game is on a higher moral plane than returning a game to the store because you are creating a disruption to the store by doing so. I think you are deluding yourself into excusing it because if you go the way of piracy you don't have to work as hard, invest as much, or give up any of your ill-gotten gains at the end of the day. Why haven't you factored any of those elements into the utilitarianist philosophy?

Dan.

what i am pointing out is that there are various ways to weigh out what is right and wrong and what is better than one. i dont believe it to be on a higher moral plane, i am just showing you an viewpoint on which it may be

sorry i strayed and almost forgot to answer your question. A person working as hard, or investing as much as me is not something i would consider. Those thoughts veer away from my personality as they are quite the world-weary type of jealous thoughts. Although they are quite close to things which i would consider factoring, and in some moods i may

i dont adopt a single view; i prefer the best of both worlds. It is more than possible to put idealism aginst a context

Quote:

The devil can always find some logical reason to justify immoral behavior. Regardless of how you want to word things, people basically know when they are doing something "wrong" or unaccepted.

the devil can also tempt us to judge others and float on imaginary high ground too. Lack of depth can allow us to generalize vermillion to red, african to black, and in this case pressing a button to theft. Generalized labels have their place and use. it is much easier to define your idea as one of right vs wrong than it is to consider it as being no more than an idea

keldon wrote:

the devil can also tempt us to judge others and float on imaginary high ground too. Lack of depth can allow us to generalize vermillion to red, african to black, and in this case pressing a button to theft. Generalized labels have their place and use. it is much easier to define your idea as one of right vs wrong than it is to consider it as being no more than an idea

My point is that any behavior can be justified. "He looked at me funny, so I killed him" doesn't justify murder in the modern world, but given a time and place it might be a fact of life. Lines are fuzzy.

If all you make is $100 a month, justifying a $50 game purchase is hard to do. Can you justify spending half a month's pay on a single game? Probably not. Think of what else you could spend it on. If a meal out costs $0.25, and a DVD $0.75, can you justify spending dinner for three on a game (or DVD)? Probably. That is more or less what they run in the States depending on where and what you eat.

-Brendan

Sorry to bring up a dead topic, but Robin Hood has just sprung to mind. Him taking from the rich and gave to the poor. This made me think of a scenario dilema: pirating games for the good of giving the profits to poor and deprived nations as opposed to a tycoon.

Providing this billionairre tycoon would see no real gain from a $10k dollars on top of the $100'000k he already has that a poor town in kazakhstan would benefit from. Would one consider it bad because theft is wrong; or not because of the richer picture of cause and effect. Young boys and girls can now drink clean water; mothers no longer have to walk miles over broken glass in search of wild animals for supper; fathers no longer have to slave in coal mines - clogging their respiratory system with soot and poison.

what do you think?

p.s. i also realised that the legal system actually applies this practise through tax. The cause and effect of the action of tax is equivalent to this.

keldon wrote:

Providing this billionairre tycoon would see no real gain from a $10k dollars on top of the $100'000k he already has that a poor town in kazakhstan would benefit from. Would one consider it bad because theft is wrong; or not because of the richer picture of cause and effect. Young boys and girls can now drink clean water; mothers no longer have to walk miles over broken glass in search of wild animals for supper; fathers no longer have to slave in coal mines - clogging their respiratory system with soot and poison.

So you compare a small dev group that works merely just to get the bills paid, to the billionaire, and the spoiled pirating kid to an real poor from 3rd world?
_________________
GBAMP Multiboot

keldon wrote:

Providing this billionairre tycoon would see no real gain from a $10k dollars on top of the $100'000k he already has

what do you think?

It's not that simple. The $10K or whatnot is split between multiple parties. You'll pull money from some abstract rich dude and potentially drive the developer into bankruptcy at the same time.

-Brendan

Mighty Max wrote:

So you compare a small dev group that works merely just to get the bills paid, to the billionaire, and the spoiled pirating kid to an real poor from 3rd world?

no; i like to philosophise - and to do so i allow my imagination to run wild and create dilemas on which to philosophise about. but what you said has nothing to do with what i said? where did the small dev group and the spoiled pirating kid come into it?

are you under the misconception that i am justifying piracy or have you actually noticed that i am raising questions and ideas

Quote:

It's not that simple. The $10K or whatnot is split between multiple parties. You'll pull money from some abstract rich dude and potentially drive the developer into bankruptcy at the same time.

i would like to point out that i am not under the illusion that there is only one stakeholder and that there are not other people involved in the system. i am actually raising ideas for discussion and not for arguement

keldon wrote:

no; i like to philosophise - and to do so i allow my imagination to run wild and create dilemas on which to philosophise about.

Yes, but to the point of nothing very meaningful actually. This is gbadev, not philosopy.com. These 'what if's...' are almost like trolling. For instance, what if this small town in Kazakhstan was actually home to a bunch of people who go on to form a piracy group??? Or even terrorists?? Now where shall we take the argument?

And if you are talking about Robin Hood, here are a couple of quotes I lifted from the internet:

Quote:

He wasn't completely one-sided, though, as he would be the first to help a rich person in need.

Quote:

If the existing order was founded on the arbitrary will of evil men who could twist the law to their own ends, then it was the role of the outlaw to seek redress and justice by other means. In a violent age, these means were invariably violent. Robin Hood and his contemporaries were cunning, merciless and often brutal (in one instance Much the Miller's Son murders a monk's page to prevent him giving them away);

I think times have moved on since then.
_________________
Modasi Games
www.modasi.com

(Sorry for the double post)

keldon wrote:

This made me think of a scenario dilema: pirating games for the good of giving the profits to poor and deprived nations as opposed to a tycoon.

Do you think this actually happens? Or would happen? And have you heard of the ESC http://www.escuk.org/?
_________________
Modasi Games
www.modasi.com

byg wrote:

keldon wrote:

no; i like to philosophise - and to do so i allow my imagination to run wild and create dilemas on which to philosophise about.

Yes, but to the point of nothing very meaningful actually. This is gbadev, not philosopy.com.

Yes, but this is the OffTopic section, and video games piracy /is/ related to gbadev, especially if you consider the equipment we homebrewers use to develop at home. Remember Nintendo vs. Bung.

About the question, my personal view is that every association between the act of theft and a larger honorable fight between social-economical classes should be forbidden. Never gonna happen, of course, considering that if you have to go against any ruling power, you have no option but to go against its laws at some point. But it's very hard to separate a real struggle for freedom from crime under that context.

The brazilian scenario is just like that: Sony and Microsoft won't estabilish their video-games division here, because of piracy beyond control - so people have to import games, at a higher cost. Gamers complaint about prices, so they turn to the piracy market, which is magically cheap. For some reason, the SNAFU is good for the government, so they won't do anything to change it. I mean it - Nintendo (the only to have a estabilished base in Brazil) had to give financial help to the federal police in order to make the fight against piracy start moving, but personally I don't think it's paying. More and more you see piracy becoming the common place here, and more and more you see gamers - even inside the ridiculously small brazilian game industry - support piracy, because, you know, this is all the government's fault.

So, although Robin Hood might be a strech, piracy does indeed take the colors of fight between social classes given the right circumstances. At least here, people are against it by default, but they quickly change their opinions when you question if current prices for original games are fair.

cappeca wrote:

byg wrote:

keldon wrote:

no; i like to philosophise - and to do so i allow my imagination to run wild and create dilemas on which to philosophise about.

Yes, but to the point of nothing very meaningful actually. This is gbadev, not philosopy.com.

Yes, but this is the OffTopic section, and video games piracy /is/ related to gbadev, especially if you consider the equipment we homebrewers use to develop at home. Remember Nintendo vs. Bung.

Please re-read my post. I have not said anything against discussing the piracy issue. In fact, I have contributed several posts. My point was that these make-believe scenarios could go on forever and end up nowhere.

As for the rest of your post, it is interesting and seems like a genuine catch-22 situation for both the consumer and commercial entities involved.
_________________
Modasi Games
www.modasi.com

MaHe wrote:

No I wouldn't be. The developer gets the same amount of money no matter how much the game is pirated. But the percent of the pirates in the DS scene is so LOW, you couldn't even notice. At the very start of programming the commercial applications you must KNOW that it'll be pirated.

And I bet no developer is really sad that 100 or 200 of 10 millions of people haven't actually paid for ther work.

I Agree, MKDS sold over 112,000 copys less then 200 people would be pirating that game so do the math : $112, 000 times? $80 USD(not sure since im in australia) = $8, 960, 000 so we take the 200(theres probably less then 200 but ohhwell) people pirating it and you end up only loosing 16,000 of 9 million so honestly, it may be wrong but its not like its the end of the world.

EZ-034 wrote:

I Agree, MKDS sold over 112,000 copys less then 200 people would be pirating that game so do the math : $112, 000 times? $80 USD(not sure since im in australia) = $8, 960, 000 so we take the 200(theres probably less then 200 but ohhwell) people pirating it and you end up only loosing 16,000 of 9 million so honestly, it may be wrong but its not like its the end of the world.

I think most places in the US has it at $35usd but removing taxes, manufacturing costs, distribution and the profit of the store selling the game, how big is N's profit on each game? 5-10$?

Id have to wager that more than 200 people are pirating the game tho. At 35$ I cant really see a reason for this. Where I live its 50-55$ and even that is very reasonable for a game such as this.

Simon

EZ-034 wrote:

I Agree, MKDS sold over 112,000 copys less then 200 people would be pirating that game so do the math : $112, 000 times? $80 USD(not sure since im in australia) = $8, 960, 000 so we take the 200(theres probably less then 200 but ohhwell) people pirating it and you end up only loosing 16,000 of 9 million so honestly, it may be wrong but its not like its the end of the world.

Did you actually read all of this thread? How do you know there are 200 pirated copies? Do pirates keep records? If and when this game is pirated, do you think only 200 will be 'produced'? And at what figure do you draw the line at?
_________________
Modasi Games
www.modasi.com

The issue of piracy has nothing to do with much of what has been argued. For example it can be argued that piracy may not have any 'actual' financial loss since nothing has gone missing. In the same way a person has not taken from any money from miramax if he snuck in on one of the many 'unfortunately' empty seats at the empty showing of their unsuccessful movie that they would never have bought.

But that makes it no less wrong than if it had had a negative effect because it has just not been fair to every one else who did pay. That is what I think is most wrong of piracy. It is unfair for someone to cash in one someone elses product and unfair for someone to reap 'my' benefits. I personally think the law is catering for this much more than it is for the financial good of the companies. What do you think?

I think the worst parts of the law are those which exist but really should not; and those which really should exist which do not. And not because they do or do not exist - but because they are so complicated that its problem is in having a general conclusion in the first place.

Quote:

In fact, I have contributed several posts. My point was that these make-believe scenarios could go on forever and end up nowhere.

However these imaginary scenarios have led to contradictions of things implied by what some people have previously said. It relates to proof by contraction

keldon wrote:

The issue of piracy has nothing to do with much of what has been argued.

Er what? Isn't this whole topic about piracy in some way, shape or form?

keldon wrote:

For example it can be argued that piracy may not have any 'actual' financial loss since nothing has gone missing.

Phew, so we are talking about piracy then?

keldon wrote:

In the same way a person has not taken from any money from miramax if he snuck in on one of the many 'unfortunately' empty seats at the empty showing of their unsuccessful movie that they would never have bought.

But if one person can do it, then why can't two, and three and four. Why should anyone pay? Where do you draw the line?

keldon wrote:

It is unfair for someone to cash in one someone elses product and unfair for someone to reap 'my' benefits.

Exactly. This is what I think

keldon wrote:

I personally think the law is catering for this much more than it is for the financial good of the companies. What do you think?

Not sure what you mean. The law is catering for what exactly?

keldon wrote:

I think the worst parts of the law are those which exist but really should not; and those which really should exist which do not.

I think everyone is with you there :-)

keldon wrote:

Quote:

In fact, I have contributed several posts. My point was that these make-believe scenarios could go on forever and end up nowhere.

However these imaginary scenarios have led to contradictions of things implied by what some people have previously said. It relates to proof by contraction

Sorry - I must have missed these contradictions. But, let me see if I have this proof by contradiction thing right. If you insist on making up scenarios, then how about this one. You have heating in your home right? How would you feel if you came home and found several people there (whom you didn't know) because it was too cold outside? They are not stealing from you as you've already paid you bills. You've lost nothing. Would you be ok with this?
_________________
Modasi Games
www.modasi.com

byg wrote:

You have heating in your home right? How would you feel if you came home and found several people there (whom you didn't know) because it was too cold outside? They are not stealing from you as you've already paid you bills. You've lost nothing. Would you be ok with this?

I do not like to pick personal fights or such. I do not like squabbles or anything of that sort. However I will point out that they have lost their sense of security. I will however try to answer your question without that in mind as I think that I do see what you were intending to say.

I have given away my USB memory stick, USB MIDI Keyboard and have offered my beloved gamecube to my friend who has just moved into his house. So I don't think my answer would be of much help in answering such a question - as my answer is more than likely going to seem weird =)

Quote:

If you insist on making up scenarios

Quote:

But if one person can do it, then why can't two, and three and four. Why should anyone pay? Where do you draw the line?

I usually choose to draw them inbetween all of the other lines in order to make it twice as difficult for one to try to read inbetween them [the lines]

Honestly: In order to answer that I would have to come to a total conclusion. If I do reach a conclusion then my conclusion must satisfy the proposition that the amount of sales in a world without piracy is the same as a world living to my conclusion. I think that many people are happy to cut their arm of if it itches - whereas I strive to find a way to remove the itch and nothing more. With the itch refering to loss of sales; and removing your arm refering to 'simply' outlawing all forms of piracy whether all of it leads to loss of sales 'simply' because you know that some of it does.

Quote:

Er what? Isn't this whole topic about piracy in some way, shape or form?

The lines which followed my first line supported the first line quite well. Try refreshing the page as I don't think it loaded very well. Note: if English is not your native tongue and you are having problems then I can alter my text so that you may understand it better.

Sorry for the bitter tone I do not think I can justify it. So can we please resort to non bitter speak? I for one would prefer this and believe it to be much more constructive.

Too much time is spent correcting peoples misinterpretations. Maybe we [including myself] could better invest time in communicating our ideas better so that we do not have to explain what we have just said. It is quite infinitely recursive when you think about it.

keldon wrote:

byg wrote:

You have heating in your home right? How would you feel if you came home and found several people there (whom you didn't know) because it was too cold outside? They are not stealing from you as you've already paid you bills. You've lost nothing. Would you be ok with this?

I do not like to pick personal fights or such. I do not like squabbles or anything of that sort. However I will point out that they have lost their sense of security. I will however try to answer your question without that in mind as I think that I do see what you were intending to say.

Hmm, well, I've read your posts and I don't really see an answer to my question. But that's OK. Maybe I've found a proof by contradiction? FYI - I wasn't picking a personal fight. Just asking for your thoughts and views on a scenario I made up. Maybe this is what you mean by 'picking a personal fight':

keldon wrote:

Note: if English is not your native tongue and you are having problems then I can alter my text so that you may understand it better.

keldon wrote:

I have given away my USB memory stick, USB MIDI Keyboard and have offered my beloved gamecube to my friend who has just moved into his house.

Er, OK great. Good for you. You paid for these things right? They are yours to do with as you please.

keldon wrote:

Honestly: In order to answer that I would have to come to a total conclusion. If I do reach a conclusion then my conclusion must satisfy the proposition that the amount of sales in a world without piracy is the same as a world living to my conclusion.

My conclusion is that I'm not sure what your conclusion is :-) What is a 'world living to your conclusion'?

keldon wrote:

I think that many people are happy to cut their arm of if it itches

I think that's a little dramatic and must disagree. Can you back this up with some examples and facts? EDIT: I am sure there are a _few_ people like this - some people literally do maim and injure themselves. But you say there are _many_. This is what I disagree with.

keldon wrote:

Sorry for the bitter tone I do not think I can justify it.

Yet you still do it, even though you can't justify it?

keldon wrote:

So can we please resort to non bitter speak?

I'm sorry if you think I was. Please let me know where I offended you.
_________________
Modasi Games
www.modasi.com

Last edited by byg on Mon Nov 28, 2005 11:48 am; edited 1 time in total

Quote:

What is a 'world living to your conclusion'?

It basically means that if every body did what I said. People always like to say, "well if everybody did that then ...". And if everybody did what I said I would like them to have nothing to complain about

Quote:

I think that's a little dramatic and must disagree. Can you back this up with some examples and facts?

My following line did give an example with the attitude to piracy.

Quote:

Yet you still do it, even though you can't justify it?

I am under the belief that is easier for me to admit that I was wrong than try to prove I was right when I wasn't. Unless you're stupid and in that case I will tell you a whole load of stupid stuff you're not smart enough to not believe.

Quote:

I'm sorry if you think I was. Please let me know where I offended you.

I was how I misread your question that I thought was a pick. But since you say that then I guess I misunderstood.

Last edited by keldon on Mon Nov 28, 2005 12:09 pm; edited 2 times in total

keldon wrote:

Quote:

What is a 'world living to your conclusion'?

It basically means that if every body did what I said. People always like to say, "well if everybody did that then ...". And if everybody did what I said I would like them to have nothing to complain about

So, a dictatorship then? We should all do what you say and then we will have nothing to complain about. That's what we should strive for?

keldon wrote:

Quote:

I think that's a little dramatic and must disagree. Can you back this up with some examples and facts?

My following line did give an example with the attitude to piracy

Not really what I was asking for. Do you have any solid examples and _facts_ that you are not sharing with us? Or is it just a scenario you made up.

keldon wrote:

I am under the belief that is easier for me to admit that I was wrong than try to prove I was right when I wasn't. Unless you're stupid and in that case I will tell you a whole load of stupid stuff you're not smart enough to not believe.

I actually can't believe you write this!

But anyway. This seems to be going OT and you don't seem to want to answer anything directly without and going round in circles. I'm getting dizzy, so I guess you just are too clever for me. For now I'll just see if any one else has anything to add.
_________________
Modasi Games
www.modasi.com

Quote:

Not really what I was asking for. Do you have any solid examples and _facts_ that you are not sharing with us? Or is it just a scenario you made up.

I think it is just something you just see around you. Some people abuse their lunch break so they remove lunch break. Someone left food in the lab so they ban all foods in the lab. A fight happened after hours so we now close early. These are widespread examples of chopping off your arm for a quick fix solution. It has the side effect of havnig no lunch break; no food in the labs; and the night not being any good. It is natural to choose the obvious answer that surely works as it is easier than finding something that has minimal side effects - like providing eating areas and making the lunch breaks coincide with the happy hour.

Quote:

So, a dictatorship then? We should all do what you say and then we will have nothing to complain about. That's what we should strive for?

No. We all have beliefs. Some beliefs just do not work in practise - i.e. having all forms of piracy as legal may ruin something if it happened. What I am actually talking about is the concept that [if] my idea of things is right that it could actually be put into real widespread practise and work.

Quote:

I actually can't believe you write this!

Well on the bright side I guess it's better to not believe somthing you see than it is to believe something you can't see. Honestly though - I am happy to admit when I am wrong. I just do not see the point in lying about it and pretending it to be something correct. I am under no illusion that I am 100 percent right.

Quote:

you don't seem to want to answer anything directly

I have gone through the trouble of answering [nearly] every question. I think it is more the case that the view did not come across clearly - hence the amount explaining what was 'just' said.

Piracy is bad.. Mkay..

Please, lock this thread, I've got your point, people.

gbadev.org forum archive

OffTopic > About "I hate pirates, those w4r3zing bastardz!!!"

#56564 - MaHe - Sun Oct 09, 2005 7:38 pm

#56567 - DiscoStew - Sun Oct 09, 2005 7:47 pm

#56569 - MaHe - Sun Oct 09, 2005 8:26 pm

#56573 - funkaster - Sun Oct 09, 2005 9:36 pm

#56577 - Cbass182 - Sun Oct 09, 2005 10:43 pm

#56583 - tepples - Sun Oct 09, 2005 11:09 pm

#56605 - gauauu - Mon Oct 10, 2005 2:34 am

#56606 - poslundc - Mon Oct 10, 2005 2:42 am

#56612 - Lynx - Mon Oct 10, 2005 3:47 am

#56614 - ScottLininger - Mon Oct 10, 2005 4:28 am

#56624 - tepples - Mon Oct 10, 2005 6:26 am

#56650 - MaHe - Mon Oct 10, 2005 1:56 pm

#56672 - Miked0801 - Mon Oct 10, 2005 3:59 pm

#56688 - Lynx - Mon Oct 10, 2005 5:06 pm

#56695 - MaHe - Mon Oct 10, 2005 5:28 pm

#56749 - paul-donnelly - Tue Oct 11, 2005 2:50 am

#56758 - sgeos - Tue Oct 11, 2005 4:53 am

#56763 - gauauu - Tue Oct 11, 2005 8:39 am

#56804 - poslundc - Tue Oct 11, 2005 6:15 pm

#56810 - Miked0801 - Tue Oct 11, 2005 7:16 pm

#56857 - paul-donnelly - Wed Oct 12, 2005 12:08 am

#56861 - poslundc - Wed Oct 12, 2005 12:41 am

#56994 - paul-donnelly - Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:19 pm

#56999 - keldon - Wed Oct 12, 2005 11:54 pm

#57117 - Palamon - Thu Oct 13, 2005 9:37 pm

#57140 - tepples - Thu Oct 13, 2005 10:56 pm

#57144 - keldon - Thu Oct 13, 2005 11:17 pm

#57168 - tepples - Fri Oct 14, 2005 1:11 am

#57205 - keldon - Fri Oct 14, 2005 9:42 am

#57225 - sgeos - Fri Oct 14, 2005 12:44 pm

#57237 - Joe_Sextus - Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:22 pm

#57238 - byg - Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:26 pm

#57240 - byg - Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:35 pm

#57247 - Joe_Sextus - Fri Oct 14, 2005 3:27 pm

#57255 - byg - Fri Oct 14, 2005 4:38 pm

#57256 - tepples - Fri Oct 14, 2005 4:38 pm

#57308 - Joe_Sextus - Fri Oct 14, 2005 9:44 pm

#57315 - byg - Fri Oct 14, 2005 10:16 pm

#57323 - tepples - Fri Oct 14, 2005 10:54 pm

#57333 - poslundc - Fri Oct 14, 2005 11:32 pm

#57335 - tepples - Fri Oct 14, 2005 11:35 pm

#57337 - byg - Fri Oct 14, 2005 11:45 pm

#57338 - notb4dinner - Sat Oct 15, 2005 12:24 am

#57339 - keldon - Sat Oct 15, 2005 12:24 am

#57342 - notb4dinner - Sat Oct 15, 2005 12:37 am

#57343 - poslundc - Sat Oct 15, 2005 12:44 am

#57344 - byg - Sat Oct 15, 2005 12:45 am

#57611 - sgeos - Mon Oct 17, 2005 11:50 am

#57621 - keldon - Mon Oct 17, 2005 12:36 pm

#57638 - tepples - Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:28 pm

#57642 - Bojangles - Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:54 pm

#57682 - poslundc - Mon Oct 17, 2005 7:37 pm

#57698 - tepples - Mon Oct 17, 2005 8:37 pm

#57712 - poslundc - Mon Oct 17, 2005 10:07 pm

#57714 - keldon - Mon Oct 17, 2005 10:32 pm

#57716 - byg - Mon Oct 17, 2005 10:56 pm

#57717 - poslundc - Mon Oct 17, 2005 11:18 pm

#57719 - monsoon - Mon Oct 17, 2005 11:37 pm

#57721 - keldon - Mon Oct 17, 2005 11:51 pm

#57729 - tepples - Tue Oct 18, 2005 12:52 am

#57731 - poslundc - Tue Oct 18, 2005 1:04 am

#57734 - tepples - Tue Oct 18, 2005 1:27 am

#57738 - poslundc - Tue Oct 18, 2005 1:46 am

#57739 - Joe_Sextus - Tue Oct 18, 2005 2:09 am

#57759 - chishm - Tue Oct 18, 2005 8:06 am

#57766 - sgeos - Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:09 am

#57769 - keldon - Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:41 am

#57936 - sgeos - Wed Oct 19, 2005 12:55 pm

#59206 - keldon - Sun Oct 30, 2005 10:25 am

#59207 - Mighty Max - Sun Oct 30, 2005 10:39 am

#59208 - sgeos - Sun Oct 30, 2005 10:44 am

#59209 - keldon - Sun Oct 30, 2005 10:44 am

#59225 - byg - Sun Oct 30, 2005 3:23 pm

#59226 - byg - Sun Oct 30, 2005 3:26 pm

#59450 - cappeca - Tue Nov 01, 2005 9:48 pm

#59519 - byg - Wed Nov 02, 2005 11:17 am

#62109 - EZ-034 - Sun Nov 27, 2005 2:56 pm

#62117 - SimonB - Sun Nov 27, 2005 4:22 pm