Pirating/emulators, and all that good stuff.

I believe, that if the developer/builder/what have you no longer makes a profit off of the product, (i.e. they are no longer in business, or no longer ship the product in any way, even through download) Then piracy should not apply to the ripping of the software. The only people that could possibly be losing money are pawn shops and game-trader stores that take obsolete games. Neither has rights to the software, they just re-sell it, with no ties to the developers.

Just out of curiosity, why did you come up with this post?

-Twilight Storm

Quoting Twilight_Storm,

reply 1

I believe, that if the developer/builder/what have you no longer makes a profit off of the product, (i.e. they are no longer in business, or no longer ship the product in any way, even through download) Then piracy should not apply to the ripping of the software. The only people that could possibly be losing money are pawn shops and game-trader stores that take obsolete games. Neither has rights to the software, they just re-sell it, with no ties to the developers.

Just out of curiosity, why did you come up with this post?

-Twilight Storm

Game design student in college.

So this for some paper or something, or just a curiosity?

-Twilight Storm

some are freeware today... 3d realms can't die it seems.

If you're pirating Donkey Kong 64 or Pokemon Crystal you're not doing anything that bad. If you're pirating the SC2 Beta and playing offline, you're not doing anything that bad. If you're pirating current software/music, it's slightly bad. It's still not that bad IMO. It is not stealing, you don't take anything from anyone. You just unfairly take someones hard work without compensation. They don't lose anything, but, of course, if everyone pirated everything, then the producer of whatever product you are pirating would lose the time and work and money they put in to create it. If you're basing your morality off of the writings of Emmanuel Kant, pirating is definitely bad. In my mind, pirating music is sort of a meritocracy that I control. Entertainers do not deserve the salaries they currently enjoy.

Entertainers do not deserve the salaries they currently enjoy.

Neither do you.

Quoting Twilight_Storm,

reply 3

So this for some paper or something, or just a curiosity?

-Twilight Storm

No, why would it be?

IDK. just curious.

Splitshadow, that's ridiculous. Pirating current material is stealing. They own the copyright to the product, and are onl releasing liscences for its use. You rip it, you stole it. Simple as that. I'm not saying it's not stealing the way I described, but that was the only way to get it. Pirating a new movie/game/whatever, is the same as going into a store and putting the disc under your shirt.

-Twilight Storm

thats shoplifting a lot harder to get away with then to pirate something of the internet, youtube seems to be just as bad as torrents... google is almost the same as pirate bay.

Neither do you.Neither do you.

Whatchu talkin' 'bout Willis? I make $900 / year and I am deserving of it.

Pirating a new movie/game/whatever, is the same as going into a store and putting the disc under your shirt.

Maybe in your emotional mind, but logically, the two are vastly different. First, if you are a pirate, you aren't taking anything tangible, such as a CD, but rather you are "stealing" "intellectual property." I'll say this, intellectual property is a stupid concept. Open source is a necessary business practice if we want programmers to learn. We need to share our knowledge, not hide it from the serfs you copyright junkie.

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

-Twilight Storm

Maybe in your emotional mind, but logically, the two are vastly different.

You may not be depriving them of a phsyical item that could be sold to someone else, but at the end of the day you're still taking advantage of their work while refusing to compensate them, and doing so purely for your own pleasure.

You can spout platitudes about open source all you like, but that will never justify taking the fruits of someone else's labor against their will just because you think you deserve it; you don't. It's not something you need and no amount of logical gymnastics can justify taking it.

If you don't like the terms someone offers the product of their efforts under, your one and only logical and ethical option is to do without. You can argue that they should change said terms, but simultaneously violating them just exposes you as a greedy hypocrite and renders any debate you may offer meaningless.

Maybe in your emotional mind, but logically, the two are vastly different.

You may not be depriving them of a phsyical item that could be sold to someone else, but at the end of the day you're still taking advantage of their work while refusing to compensate them, and doing so purely for your own pleasure.

You can spout platitudes about open source all you like, but that will never justify taking the fruits of someone else's labor against their will just because you think you deserve it; you don't. It's not something you need and no amount of logical gymnastics can justify taking it.

If you don't like the terms someone offers the product of their efforts under, your one and only logical and ethical option is to do without. You can argue that they should change said terms, but simultaneously violating them just exposes you as a greedy hypocrite and renders any debate you may offer meaningless.

Boom........Headshot!

Kryo FTW!!! Two pirates shot down in one day. Can you say "Killing Spree?"

Because it's worth 2.

-Twilight Storm

Copyright infringement = illegal/unethical does not => copyright infringement = theft

and

Copyright infringement != theft does not => copyright infringement = legal/ethical

Personally, for the most part(1) I respect copyright of any work under 15 years (2), but anything older than that and screw them, legalities be damned. Though I don't really care for NES games and such, and most of the good DOS games are freeware anyways (OMF:2097 ) so in practice I don't do much, if any, actual copyright infringement.

(1) getting a second license of Windows to run on a VM or buying a second copy of PvZ to run on my notebook do not qualify as "reasonable".

(2) the lenght of copyright that's been deemed by scientific studies to be the optimal to maximize the amount of work being created, and incidentally only one year longer than the original duration of copyright in the US.

You can spout platitudes about open source all you like

OMG, you said something that has been said by someone else, you must be unoriginal, all of your thoughts meaningless. Oh, and by the way, I'm playing devil's advocate here.

Just to let some of you know, copyright capitalism is the number one killer in the United States. Do you know why we can't cure cancer or any other disease for that matter? Because it isn't profitable to research a cure if it can't be copyrighted. For example, cord blood cells are over 9000% more effective than stem cells, but no company will make a profit developing methods to use stem cells. PROTIP: We cured cancer in 1962, but because it can't be sold to at a profit, it won't happen.

I've only pirated one game in my life, and it was two years after it came out to test if my graphics card could run it. (it couldn't, so I saved myself $30 and a big disappointment, after I got my new computer I did buy it however)

Also, you're allowed by the terms and conditions of most games to use emulators of them IFF you buy the game first (the second f isn't a typo)

Also, stop sucking up to the SD employee. You won't get anything special, you just make yourselves look silly.

Oh, and you just lost the game. And got trolled massively.

Pirating is stealing..Thats is why its called pirating. Because pirates steal. However i give applause to anyone who does it to EA... They deserve it considering they just pirate ideas for games and if the person complains they buy them out.

Pirating is like copying your friends homework. It's unfair to your friend, but it's not at all the same as taking his homework and writing your name on it.

Its definitely not the same as copying someone's homework.. Your friend lets you copy it for one thing. Also it might seem ok to you because you see the big faceless corporation but you dont see the programmers that are making 25-30 grand a year that end up losing theyre job because the game they made didnt gross enough because of pirating .. then they cant afford health insurance for theyre kid and when they catch something really bad get refused care and then maybe die from it... Or at the very least can't afford food or lose thier house.I know that sounds extreme but its definitely possible. Still look like homework to you? Oh . And I dont care what any company thinks of me.. didnt you see the comment about EA????

1 ) Not sucking up, I actually thought it was awsome that Kryo found two pro-piracy posts on seperate threads and shot both of you down. (Shut one down, by locking it i believe.)

http://forums.sinsofasolarempire.com/378706 Here.

2 ) No matter how you spin it, if you did not pay for the software, and the developer is still charging for it and distributing openly, it is wrong.

3 ) I do concede to your downloading to check the graphics, that, I believe is reasonable, since most stores will not take returns on a disc that has been opened.

-Twilight Storm

Quoting kryo,

reply 12

Maybe in your emotional mind, but logically, the two are vastly different.
You may not be depriving them of a phsyical item that could be sold to someone else, but at the end of the day you're still taking advantage of their work while refusing to compensate them, and doing so purely for your own pleasure.

And if the game is so horrible it brings you no pleasure; then what?

THe market is flawed, but there's no way to fix it. THe fact of the matter is that people are not trustworthy. People pirate because they're cheap, or greedy. If the discs could be returned aftrer being opened, then some people would simply buy a disc, make a copy, and return it, which ruins any opportun ity to return a game you genuinely do not like.

-Twilight Storm

Quoting synnworld,

reply 21

Quoting kryo, reply 12
Maybe in your emotional mind, but logically, the two are vastly different.
You may not be depriving them of a phsyical item that could be sold to someone else, but at the end of the day you're still taking advantage of their work while refusing to compensate them, and doing so purely for your own pleasure.

And if the game is so horrible it brings you no pleasure; then what?

If the company is reasonable like Stardock, try to return if. If not, then don't buy a product from them again.

And since I seem to have taken the response out of context - people don't pirate games they think they won't like. But pirating a game you dont like doesn't make it any more right.

Quoting Twilight_Storm,

reply 20

2 ) No matter how you spin it, if you did not pay for the software, and the developer is still charging for it and distributing openly, it is wrong.

-Twilight Storm

This guy speaketh the truth!

Quoting SwerydAss,

reply 19

Its definitely not the same as copying someone's homework.. Your friend lets you copy it for one thing. Also it might seem ok to you because you see the big faceless corporation but you dont see the programmers that are making 25-30 grand a year that end up losing theyre job because the game they made didnt gross enough because of pirating .. then they cant afford health insurance for theyre kid and when they catch something really bad get refused care and then maybe die from it... Or at the very least can't afford food or lose thier house.I know that sounds extreme but its definitely possible. Still look like homework to you? Oh . And I dont care what any company thinks of me.. didnt you see the comment about EA????

Yeah. It's also possible that, by you writing your post you've denied me valuable study time that I would've used to study mathematics instead, leading to my discovery of a brand new theory that leads to a scientific revolution, that'd ultimately lead to a cure for cancer and save millions of lives. Therefore, by your writing of this post, you've killed millions. Extreme, but it's definitely possible.

Don't be so freaking melodramatic, will ya? treat such far-fetched, edge scenarios as statistical improbabilities and just stick to the 'normal' stuff if you want to argue from the consequences. And again, "copyright infringement" being "wrong" does not imply it being the same as "theft", otherwise you'd be guilty of rape given what you've done to the English language in this thread.

And to those who argue from the notion that 'copyright' is a 'right' of the authors, please stop it. That idea's logical conclusion is that the rights should therefore be permanent (Einstein doesn't stop being the father of Relativity just because he's dead, does he?), and *that* idea was so utterly moronic and dangerous even the US' founding fathers prohibited it in the US constitution explicitly. Copyright is a time-limited monopoly society grants creators of artistic works as incentive to create them in the first place, and while an argument could be made that such thinking would logically lead to copying anything still for sale being invariably 'wrong', regardless of its age, that same argument could be used to determine that copying anything that's *not* on sale is invariably 'right' again independantly from its age. If you really believe that, cool, but please think of the consequences of the arguments you use to support your position.

The Forums Are Now Closed!

The content will remain as a historical reference, thank you.