The Forums Are Now Closed!

The content will remain as a historical reference, thank you.

Pirating/emulators, and all that good stuff.

By on March 26, 2010 5:59:19 PM from Demigod Forums Demigod Forums

Ya, ya; a lot of us yell pirating is wrong (even though some of us are hypocrites who have pirated stuff, you know who you are.) But, is it so wrong to pirate and use emulators for games that are 1. no longer being made or sold, and 2. games for console not even being made anymore?

+42 Karma | 228 Replies
March 28, 2010 4:44:17 PM from Demigod Forums Demigod Forums

"A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it"

Piracy: 

Piracy, or copyright infringement (or copyright violation) is the unauthorized use of material that is covered by copyright law, in a manner that violates one of the copyright owner's exclusive rights, such as the right to reproduce or perform the copyrighted work, or to make derivative works.

March 28, 2010 7:05:58 PM from Demigod Forums Demigod Forums

"'Flogging a dead horse', (alternatively "beating a dead horse" in some parts of the Anglophone world) is an idiom that means a particular request or line of conversation is already foreclosed or otherwise resolved, and any attempt to continue it is futile."

March 28, 2010 7:34:52 PM from Demigod Forums Demigod Forums

Flogging a dead horse sounds so much better than beating a dead horse. Why would they even put that? It totally dilutes the awesomeness of your post, you should have just deleted that part.

March 29, 2010 5:07:39 PM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

I am not advocating piracy by any means but if we didn't have pirates who invented the printing presses we would all be less informed today. Gutenburg was a pirate. He took someone elses hard work and translations and mass produced them for the masses.

A library is a huge pirating centre. You don't pay for books but you read them and return them and the author gets nothing for his work or creativity. If it is a good story he gets exposure which helps him sell more copies of his books hopefully in the future.

 

March 29, 2010 5:48:48 PM from Stardock Forums Stardock Forums

Quoting DariasDruss,

A library is a huge pirating centre. You don't pay for books but you read them and return them and the author gets nothing for his work or creativity. If it is a good story he gets exposure which helps him sell more copies of his books hopefully in the future.

While copyright holders fought libraries and the idea of renting in general, this is not entirely true. Libraries typically have legal copies of the products they are carrying for people to rent, not bootleg or illegal copies so the publisher was paid at least once or in some cases, the copies might have been donated from the source (publisher). A lot of libraries have personal donations but again, unless those books were taken out of the store under a trench coat, they were initially purchased.

Zehdon, flogging a dead horse would have worked if it had been your first post here, but it wasn't. Saying your piece and then trying to silence others afterwards, makes you hypocrite.

March 29, 2010 6:04:39 PM from Demigod Forums Demigod Forums

Quoting Nesrie,
Zehdon, flogging a dead horse would have worked if it had been your first post here, but it wasn't. Saying your piece and then trying to silence others afterwards, makes you hypocrite.

Actually Nesrie, it works because it wasn't Splitshadow's first post on the issue of definition, which has been covered numerous times before by many other people on this very forum in far greater detail and intelligence than what we're seeing here.  To make me a hypocrite, I would have had to post numerous times - thus 'beating a dead horse' - and then accuse someone else of it.

March 29, 2010 8:36:15 PM from Stardock Forums Stardock Forums

Quoting ZehDon,



Quoting Nesrie,
reply 55
Zehdon, flogging a dead horse would have worked if it had been your first post here, but it wasn't. Saying your piece and then trying to silence others afterwards, makes you hypocrite.
Actually Nesrie, it works because it wasn't Splitshadow's first post on the issue of definition, which has been covered numerous times before by many other people on this very forum in far greater detail and intelligence than what we're seeing here.  To make me a hypocrite, I would have had to post numerous times - thus 'beating a dead horse' - and then accuse someone else of it.


Telling people to stop posting about something while discussing it yourself makes you hypocrite.

March 29, 2010 11:40:54 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

I'm just curious:  How is this a discussion?  THe law is pretty clear on the facts here.  If you didn't buy it, or someone did not buy a copy for you, then it is stolen.  I've said what I believe to be right on the forst page, but there are people here actually arguing FOR piracy???  WTF???  If we don't buy the games, they will stop making them, because they won't be mamking a profit.  You want new games coming out, well, you gotta pay for them.

-Twilight Storm

March 30, 2010 12:16:40 AM from Demigod Forums Demigod Forums

Well said,

Quoting Nesrie,
Telling people to stop posting about something while discussing it yourself makes you hypocrite.

I didn't discuss anything - I mocked the lack of logic used in the so-called 'counter' argument. There is nothing to argue as far as I'm concerned, please see Twilight's post above.

March 30, 2010 12:25:37 AM from Stardock Forums Stardock Forums

Quoting ZehDon,
Well said,




Quoting Nesrie,
reply 57
Telling people to stop posting about something while discussing it yourself makes you hypocrite.
I didn't discuss anything - I mocked the lack of logic used in the so-called 'counter' argument. There is nothing to argue as far as I'm concerned, please see Twilight's post above.

Piracy, even the name itself, is a discussion. It is a very hot topic that businesses and consumers have been discussing for several years now. They're discussing with words, with policies, with laws, with lawsuits, with cases that are not open and shut and still working through the courts. You two act like you have some sort of magical knowledge everyoen else doesn't. You don't. Twilight's post has as much depth as a shallow pond. There might be some people who are advocating for piracy, but most the people discussing the issue that is piracy, are not. It's not just an act, its a society norm. It is well beyond simple theft, and if you two don't get that, then you should go work for Ubisoft. They've got pencil heads pushing bad policy there already and are probably looking for pats on the back.

March 30, 2010 1:11:57 AM from Demigod Forums Demigod Forums

Quoting Twilight_Storm,
I'm just curious:  How is this a discussion?  THe law is pretty clear on the facts here.  If you didn't buy it, or someone did not buy a copy for you, then it is stolen.  I've said what I believe to be right on the forst page, but there are people here actually arguing FOR piracy???  WTF???  If we don't buy the games, they will stop making them, because they won't be mamking a profit.  You want new games coming out, well, you gotta pay for them.

-Twilight Storm

I usually just sit back and let these topics go where they wish, but one thinkyou said that you don't get.  You said "I believe", which makes what you said your own opinion, not fact and not a universal truth. The laws of men have been discussed, reviewed, and changed for thousands of years. Piracy is no different in this issue, secondly the fact games are still being made with the level of piracy we have this day and age coughchinacough, shows that piracy will not be the stopping point for games being made. Believing this is no differentthen believing that because guns are banned, people will stop killing each other.

March 30, 2010 1:46:17 AM from Demigod Forums Demigod Forums

Ok, I'll weigh in now.

Quoting Nesrie,
Piracy, even the name itself, is a discussion.

Incorrect, sorry.  Piracy, in context and in its most common definition, is the illegal reproduction of intellectual property in its digital form.  There is no discussion.  The only people who argue any such way are the Pirates themselves who are quite content to continue business as usual; namely, getting things for free.  They have no argument to justify their actions and so argue definitions.

The most common argument is how can something that can be reproduced indefinately at no exspense, such as digital files, be stolen and thus how can their actions be considered theft as they've not deprived anyone of anything?  When you smack them sideways with copyright and intellectual laws and the reasoning behind them, they usually respond with any of, or any combination of, the following attitudes: 'Anti-corporate', 'Freedom of information', 'Freedom of Speech', 'Open source', etc. When the reasonsing of 'honest days work for an honests day pay' is presented, the Pirates beging to lose track of their original argument, because they have little to nothing to fall back on. Usually, at this point, the pirates devolve the argument into non-sensical thinking along the lines of 'Atlas Shrugged' and self-described 'Anarchists' who fail to grasp the concepts at hand, including their own, and their real world implications.

Quoting Nesrie,
It is a very hot topic that businesses and consumers have been discussing for several years now. They're discussing with words, with policies, with laws, with lawsuits, with cases that are not open and shut and still working through the courts.

The most common legal proceedings of these matters usually involve the provision of services, not the actual Intellectual law violations themselves. I assure you that the most commonly pirated items (movies, music and games) are well protected under the laws at play, and the cases against such violations are very much Open and Shut.  The other, more complicated, cases aren't 'Open and close'.  'Napster' was the first major one I can recall, and there have been many since, including 'The Pirate Bay'.  These cases are interesting because they deal with the provision of indirect services rather than the pirating of any singular intellectual property - P2P traffic on the internet is mostly illegal downloading, however because of the nature of the file sharing system, it itself is not in direct violation of any law.  They are also interesting because of the international nature of the services in question; there are no global laws regarding such things.  It's not a question of 'is Piracy wrong?' because that was already answered (the answer was Yes, by the way) through intellectual property laws long before the digital revolution, they simply needed to be tweaked to keep up.  The question, or discussion as you worded it, is 'Is it illegal to provide an international service for the purposes of File Transfers'.  The answer to this, so far, has been no because it's the individuals who use the service that swap illegal files (BitTorrent, for example).  With 'The Pirate Bay', however, they skimmed by on international law technicalities rather than on any resounding decisions made by one court or another.  Don't pretend that this is all 'up in the air', because it very much isn't.

Quoting Nesrie,
You two act like you have some sort of magical knowledge everyoen else doesn't. You don't. Twilight's post has as much depth as a shallow pond. There might be some people who are advocating for piracy, but most the people discussing the issue that is piracy, are not. It's not just an act, its a society norm. It is well beyond simple theft, and if you two don't get that, then you should go work for Ubisoft. They've got pencil heads pushing bad policy there already and are probably looking for pats on the back.

Attempting to discredit an argument through fantastical terms, such as 'magical', to imply the illogical thinking behind an argument is a poor method for discussion; you're smarter than that, Nesire.
Anyway, at last we arrive at the most common reply to all of my writing: "it's become normal to do so, thus it is not illegal".  While an interesting discussion topic from both a Legal and Philosophical grounds, are entirely fruitless.  In order to understand this argument better, take it to the most extreme end of the spectrum at hand.  If murder, property theft or any number of illegal activities were widespread, should they too become legal? I always return to the simpliest answer: an honest days work, for an honest day pay.  Argue as you want, piracy began as people getting something for free because they didn't want pay for it.  Don't confuse the issue by thinking it has some deeper philosophical meaning.

March 30, 2010 2:13:08 AM from Stardock Forums Stardock Forums

Quoting ZehDon,
Ok, I'll weigh in now.




Quoting Nesrie,
reply 60
Piracy, even the name itself, is a discussion.
Incorrect, sorry.  Piracy, in context and in its most common definition, is the illegal reproduction of intellectual property in its digital form.  There is no discussion.  The only people who argue any such way are the Pirates themselves who are quite content to continue business as usual; namely, getting things for free.  They have no argument to justify their actions and so argue definitions.


You're not actually claiming to be informed about piracy and yet be completely unaware of the fact that certain industries are literally trying to ditch the term piracy and pirates right? What I said was to be taken literally. But please, don't stop on my account

March 30, 2010 3:14:44 AM from Demigod Forums Demigod Forums

Quoting Nesrie,
You're not actually claiming to be informed about piracy and yet be completely unaware of the fact that certain industries are literally trying to ditch the term piracy and pirates right? What I said was to be taken literally. But please, don't stop on my account

Certain industries? Please, by all means, proceed to list any singular industry or industries as a whole who have come together to annouce that piracy isn't piracy and is in fact legal and thus ditching the terms or their inferred meanings. Unless of course you simply mean the word Pirate, in which case:

Quoting ZehDon,
...They have no argument to justify their actions and so argue definitions.

Call them what you will, I really don't care.  The rest of my post stands.  And when you get done there, head back to Kryo's post, it's a hell of a lot more direct than my own.

Quoting kryo,
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.

March 30, 2010 3:47:45 AM from Stardock Forums Stardock Forums

Quoting ZehDon,



Certain industries? Please, by all means, proceed to list any singular industry or industries as a whole who have come together to annouce that piracy isn't piracy and is in fact legal and thus ditching the terms or their inferred meanings. Unless of course you simply mean the word Pirate, in which case:

You can stop drinking or sleep walking or whatever it is you are doing and try to read this properly. They, the industry that created the term, are trying to ditch the word piracy. That is P I R A C Y and the P I R A T E S that are associated with term piracy. As in the word, the words. WORD. That does not mean they are saying it's legal. Piracy and pirates has become a sexy term. It not like a phisher or a spammer or people that are generally hated by almost everyone. Pirates is too "cool" of a word to be used (not my opinion, just the fact). So let me try this one more time. You are obviously not aware of the fact that after a decade of failing at the mentality that you promote so well, the new tactic on the block is to rename the pirates. It is so refreshing to see you talk about something you know so little about. I guess this would make sense though since you like to lecture people and not discuss anything, because this isn't worth discussing right?

So let's recap. Your type of thinking, piracy is theft and that's that, has been at play for a better part of a decade. Let's see how did that work out for everyone? Let's see. Piracy is on the way out the door... no. Suing one out of tens of thousands every once awhile is creating a real sense of fear and .... errr wait, no. DRM is getting more effective and not punishing people who actually pay for their games... err this is a hit or miss but generally nope, customers are not being rewarded for their purchases and games are still cracked.

So let's go back to the reason why the people who thought it was a great idea to call it piracy, might be rethinking their steps shall we. What is a word exactly. In this case, it's cultural and it's backfired. It was meant to create one image and wound up creating another. So for them to even attempt to try and think about relabeling what we call pirates today, whether it works or not, is basically an admittance there is a social issue attached to the problem. Theft is still theft (and since you read so well enough to pick apart words you hate, I am sure you know that I have called it theft from the beginning), but there is something more to the problem when certain ages groups have more pirates than not pirates. There is a social norm at work here. An acceptance and a rejection of how software copyright is handled today. I really don't care if you agree with me or not, but I am not going to let you sit back and try to label anyone who discusses piracy as more than just theft as a pirate themselves and a waste of time.

And next time you have a question about what someone wrote, try using a question. Then again you would have to get off that high horse of yours and actually discuss something instead of lecture which might be a difficult task for you.

March 30, 2010 6:05:18 AM from Demigod Forums Demigod Forums

Ok, firstly before anyone calls me on it, now I'm being a hypocrite for discussing this issue after calling doing so beating a dead horse and calling Splitshadow out on it. So, Splitshadow - feel free to mock me as you will.

Quoting Nesrie,
They, the industry that created the term, are trying to ditch the word piracy. That is P I R A C Y and the P I R A T E S that are associated with term piracy. As in the word, the words. WORD. That does not mean they are saying it's legal. Piracy and pirates has become a sexy term. It not like a phisher or a spammer or people that are generally hated by almost everyone. Pirates is too "cool" of a word to be used (not my opinion, just the fact). So let me try this one more time. You are obviously not aware of the fact that after a decade of failing at the mentality that you promote so well, the new tactic on the block is to rename the pirates. It is so refreshing to see you talk about something you know so little about. I guess this would make sense though since you like to lecture people and not discuss anything, because this isn't worth discussing right?

I understand completely what you meant in my previous reply, as I understand it now. The re-labeling of Pirates to - for the sake of ease let's call them douchebags - douchebags removes the 'Pirates are cool' mentality and attempts to prevent the social trend of pirates. Nice idea, however it won't work.
Let me link this to a campaign the New South Wales Government ran in Australia against young drivers behaving badly in cars with irresponsible drivers. 'Hoon' drivers, as we call them here in Australia, were mocked in the campaign by young attractive women who made jokes about them doing burn outs and the like as a way of compensating for their small penises. The campaign worked like a charm. Male drivers, the main culprits of irresponsible drivers on Australian roads, were mocked for irresponsible driving by society.
This type of re-educational campaign to make pirates uncool won't work. Why? The anonmity provided by the internet. You and I can mock one another for whatever reasons we want, however when we walk away, we suffer no lasting consequences from this discussion. You can label Pirates as douchebags or any other such term, and it doesn't change what a pirate is or what a pirate does, because a pirate is merely a person on the internet. Proving who a pirate is to make them open to the kind of mockery in the campaign I listed would constitute a violation of their privacy under current laws, and changing those laws would make it so what you do on the internet is viewable by your Government.
Again, I understand your point - but it simply won't work and is by its own logical extension a lose-lose. Trying a different tactic is all well and good, but you can't make pirates uncool in a world where being uncool is, well, cool.

You've come close to the solution in your inferals, however: society. We can't make people accountable on the internet, but we can offer that thet do voluntarily if we offer the right incentives. Modern Warfare 2 sold millions upon millions of copies on the first day in a world that should see every game pirated to hell and back if you listen to the large publishers like EA. Why did it do so? Because of the multiplayer component. People wanted to be recognised for their success in its multiplayer component on an offical level and so purchased the game to gain access to the offical channels. The Xbox Live gamer scores are a step in the right direction: provide socially viewable rewards. Having multiplayer accounts, such as your Xbox, Steam, Impulse, etc., linkable only hightens the incentives. Now, let me be clear - this won't increases purchases, it'll merely decrease piracy. People will hire games for a gamerscore, because they can't pirate them and have it be 'offical'.

Quoting Nesrie,
So let's recap. Your type of thinking, piracy is theft and that's that, has been at play for a better part of a decade. Let's see how did that work out for everyone? Let's see. Piracy is on the way out the door... no. Suing one out of tens of thousands every once awhile is creating a real sense of fear and .... errr wait, no. DRM is getting more effective and not punishing people who actually pay for their games... err this is a hit or miss but generally nope, customers are not being rewarded for their purchases and games are still cracked.

I have never said nor made mention to anything you've written here. Just for the record, I hate DRM on any level - even CD checks.

Quoting Nesrie,
There is a social norm at work here. An acceptance and a rejection of how software copyright is handled today. I really don't care if you agree with me or not, but I am not going to let you sit back and try to label anyone who discusses piracy as more than just theft as a pirate themselves and a waste of time.

I don't label anyone who discusses piracy as more than just theft as a pirate. I label anyone who tries to argue the reasons of piracy as being more than anyone wanting something for free, or provides any form of justifaction for piracy, a pirate. There is no justifaction for piracy, and anyone who tries to justify it is a pirate.


Quoting Nesrie,
And next time you have a question about what someone wrote, try using a question. Then again you would have to get off that high horse of yours and actually discuss something instead of lecture which might be a difficult task for you.

Haha, I lecture from atop of steed 'Logic' as I always have, and will continue to travel teh interwebs lecturing people with large walls of text until the next Elder Scrolls game is released at which point I will hibernate for several years, emerging paler than ever with even longer walls of text and even more informative lectures!

Now, I must be off - I believe someone just made an error on the offical Xbox Forums! Hi-ho Logic! Away!

March 30, 2010 9:18:27 AM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

I am not advocating piracy by any means but if we didn't have pirates who invented the printing presses we would all be less informed today.

ummm I'm pretty sure that happened before pirating laws went into effect(like 500 years before) giving them ex post facto immunity.

Just to let the pirates know ...... the pirate bay ,isohunt and others lost in court and found to be stealing product and have been punished for it.  And also its a riot to hear pirates using drm in their reasoning but then say that companies are trying to stop the word piracy... If that was true then drm and securom wouldn't exist.

I also like the argument... Everyone else is doing it so its ok. Heck there are people robbing banks and stealing cars every 10 minutes so I guess that s ok too.

p.s. not trying to say i'm abvove anyone. I was an offender back when cd burners were new but now have stopped...Got sick of not having inserts and cover art anyway.  Not to mention I'm musician and have many musician friends trying to get their band off the ground and have seen first hand how much harder pirating makes things for these people.

March 30, 2010 12:22:49 PM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

Even if it did happen before pirating laws went into effect what they were doing then is the same as they are doing now. Taking somebody's intellectual property and mass producing it.

 

My point about a library isn't that they were lending stolen books to people. Or anything like that just that they buy a copy and can lend it to thousands of people. Which is against the EULA on most software. They usually say if you buy, only you may use on your computer and only may install a few times. After you have to pay royalities for the right to use the product you initally bought. That is wrong. Nevermind that a EULA says you have to abide by their restrictions. That is wrong.

 

If I buy a book I will lend it and have lended many books to people to introduce them to a good author or story. I am not going to pay a royalty to read it more than a few times either or have it only read in a certain  room in my house.

 

Pirates are wrong. Any EULA which takes away rights from the purchaser and sets restrictions on them is wrong too. You can say don't use the program but most places if you open the box and start to install said program (which you must do to see the EULA) you can't return for a refund. That is wrong. What we need is an overhaul of the laws and systems in place. The pirates are wrong for taking programs and making them available for download and the companies are wrong for setting such tight restrictions. DRM's are wrong and just punish the people who buy the game, they don't stop any pirating.

 

If you buy a secondhand Ford car you don't have to pay Ford royalties. The person who originally bought the car did that. You can lend the car or give the car away if you like. Only difference is you can't mass produce them in your house or make them avaiable for anybody to produce.

March 30, 2010 1:41:22 PM from Stardock Forums Stardock Forums

Quoting Twilight_Storm,
I'm just curious:  How is this a discussion?  THe law is pretty clear on the facts here.  If you didn't buy it, or someone did not buy a copy for you, then it is stolen.

Wrong. That's why it's called "copyright infringement" and not "theft".

Quoting ZehDon,
Incorrect, sorry.  Piracy, in context and in its most common definition, is the illegal reproduction of intellectual property in its digital form.  There is no discussion.  The only people who argue any such way are the Pirates themselves who are quite content to continue business as usual; namely, getting things for free.  They have no argument to justify their actions and so argue definitions.

Wrong. "Piracy" is a marketing term invented by book publishers to demean those who printed their own books. Using it in a serious discussion is akin to calling black people "niggers" when discussing racism: it may refer to the exact same body of people, but the connotations are *drastically* different and it just feels like a cheap ad hominem to anybody else who doesn't already agree with your line of thought.

 

 

Quoting ZehDon,
The most common argument is how can something that can be reproduced indefinately at no exspense, such as digital files, be stolen and thus how can their actions be considered theft as they've not deprived anyone of anything?  When you smack them sideways with copyright and intellectual laws and the reasoning behind them, they usually respond with any of, or any combination of, the following attitudes: 'Anti-corporate', 'Freedom of information', 'Freedom of Speech', 'Open source', etc. When the reasonsing of 'honest days work for an honests day pay' is presented, the Pirates beging to lose track of their original argument, because they have little to nothing to fall back on. Usually, at this point, the pirates devolve the argument into non-sensical thinking along the lines of 'Atlas Shrugged' and self-described 'Anarchists' who fail to grasp the concepts at hand, including their own, and their real world implications.

Ad hominem and red herring.

Quoting ZehDon,
The most common legal proceedings of these matters usually involve the provision of services, not the actual Intellectual law violations themselves. I assure you that the most commonly pirated items (movies, music and games) are well protected under the laws at play, and the cases against such violations are very much Open and Shut.  The other, more complicated, cases aren't 'Open and close'.  'Napster' was the first major one I can recall, and there have been many since, including 'The Pirate Bay'.  These cases are interesting because they deal with the provision of indirect services rather than the pirating of any singular intellectual property - P2P traffic on the internet is mostly illegal downloading, however because of the nature of the file sharing system, it itself is not in direct violation of any law.  They are also interesting because of the international nature of the services in question; there are no global laws regarding such things.  It's not a question of 'is Piracy wrong?' because that was already answered (the answer was Yes, by the way) through intellectual property laws long before the digital revolution, they simply needed to be tweaked to keep up.  The question, or discussion as you worded it, is 'Is it illegal to provide an international service for the purposes of File Transfers'.  The answer to this, so far, has been no because it's the individuals who use the service that swap illegal files (BitTorrent, for example).  With 'The Pirate Bay', however, they skimmed by on international law technicalities rather than on any resounding decisions made by one court or another.  Don't pretend that this is all 'up in the air', because it very much isn't.

Wrong. You're drawing a link between ethics and legality, and as anybody who's ever studied ethics can tell you, that's problematic on so many levels it's not even funny.

We're arguing whether copyright infringement in specific contexts is acceptable or not. Legality does not, should not, and *cannot* enter in such an argument. The reasons behind the adoption of copyright can, of course, but I already debunked them in the specific context at hand (copyright was born out of a desire to maximize the number of works in existence, maximization has been shown to occur at 15 years of protection, therefore any protection past that is ethically wrong).

Quoting ZehDon,
Attempting to discredit an argument through fantastical terms, such as 'magical', to imply the illogical thinking behind an argument is a poor method for discussion; you're smarter than that, Nesire.
Anyway, at last we arrive at the most common reply to all of my writing: "it's become normal to do so, thus it is not illegal".  While an interesting discussion topic from both a Legal and Philosophical grounds, are entirely fruitless.  In order to understand this argument better, take it to the most extreme end of the spectrum at hand.  If murder, property theft or any number of illegal activities were widespread, should they too become legal?

In the minds of many: yes, and there is no inherent self-contradiction in believing as such so your counter-argument does not work.

Quoting ZehDon,
I always return to the simpliest answer: an honest days work, for an honest day pay.  Argue as you want, piracy began as people getting something for free because they didn't want pay for it.  Don't confuse the issue by thinking it has some deeper philosophical meaning.

It's not 'confusing' it, it's you oversimplifying it and, as such, failing to understand it properly.

 

 

March 30, 2010 4:31:56 PM from Demigod Forums Demigod Forums

Wait, so Zehdon, you're saying we should call them ninjas instead of pirates? I'd be OK with that.

 

March 30, 2010 8:00:56 PM from Demigod Forums Demigod Forums

Quoting DraekAlmasy,
Wrong. "Piracy" is a marketing term invented by book publishers to demean those who printed their own books. Using it in a serious discussion is akin to calling black people "niggers" when discussing racism: it may refer to the exact same body of people, but the connotations are *drastically* different and it just feels like a cheap ad hominem to anybody else who doesn't already agree with your line of thought.

I find your liking the criminal behaviour of a group of people to the racial descrimination that took place against Black Americans highly offensive.  Calling someone a Pirate is in no way the same on any level as insulting any person because of their racial background, and liking one to the other shows your complete misunderstanding of either.  The term 'Pirate' - in the context of the current discussion - refers to criminals who reproduce copyrighted works in digital form and is used for the sake of convienence.  If we're merely going to discuss definitions I'll refrain from posting further.

Quoting DraekAlmasy,
We're arguing whether copyright infringement in specific contexts is acceptable or not. Legality does not, should not, and *cannot* enter in such an argument.

Oh my.  Copyright infringement is never ok, as copyright exists to protect the Author's ownership and rights for their works.  Ignoring the fact that we should be discussing intellectual property rather than copyright, the most common used referral to previous behaviour was the illegal copying and redistribution of books some many, many years ago.  In this instance the infringement on what would become copyright was completely acceptable from an ethical or moral, although not legal, standpoint.  This is because in those times books were unavailable to the general masses who sought to educate themselves or others.  Books, and by extenstion information, were being withheld.  Comparing the education of the general population to illegally obtaining 'Call of Duty 4' or 'The Dark Knight' is a stretch in anyone's book, and this is why the current laws operate the way they do.  In the context of what we are discussing, and within the context of today's society, the infringement on the right of the author is unacceptables.

Quoting DraekAlmasy,
(copyright was born out of a desire to maximize the number of works in existence, maximization has been shown to occur at 15 years of protection, therefore any protection past that is ethically wrong).

I'm sorry, I don't quite understand what you mean.  Could you please explain this point further?  Thank you.

Quoting DraekAlmasy,
In the minds of many: yes, and there is no inherent self-contradiction in believing as such so your counter-argument does not work.

Actually the self-contradiction comes from those who hold such beliefs; they are most likely sitting behind a computer they own on a chair they own in a house they rent from someone who owns it, protected from rape, murder, theft by the police who uphold the laws of their country, which is in turn defended by the armed forces who consist of their country men who feel a duty to protect their home. The people who question the very fabric of their society are not free thinkers; they question it because they are so protected by the blanket of its security that they fail to see it and distinguish between its influence and human nature.  Look at any country where societal services have broken down or armed gangs roam the streets and impose the law of violence as the only way of life and tell me: because it is widespread, does that make it right?

Quoting DraekAlmasy,
It's not 'confusing' it, it's you oversimplifying it and, as such, failing to understand it properly.

I fail to see how stating that Piracy is merely people taking something for free is over-simplifying the issue at hand. There is no hidden level, no deeper understand.  Pirates are not some band of merry men who have morality on their side and are fighting 'the good fight' against a dictator ship who will eventually become to be recognised as heroes.  Pirates are little boys and girls sitting at their computers nice and safe in their houses downloading the latest Greenday album or the next Transformers movie for free because they can and because they don't care about their actions.  This is not an over-simplification of the facts at hand; it's calling them what they are.

March 30, 2010 8:37:59 PM from Demigod Forums Demigod Forums

dictator ship

Woo woo! All aboard the dictator ship!

Pirates are little boys and girls

Grats, you just killed any possible argument you may have provided with the word little.

 

Piracy is taking others people's work for free. There's no doubt about that. The reason some people see it as morally acceptable is because it causes no immediate harm. If you go hold up a liquor store, you're directly harming the owners of the store. If you pirate a CD of Elvis' greatest hits, you're depriving Elvis' great grandchildren of a few bucks. (They don't lose anything, the just don't gain anything) My example, of course, is just a best case scenario for piracy. It's much worse when people steal software that was made. The reason it is morally unacceptable is because if everyone did it, it would be problematic. (This is utilitarianism however, and you really can't solidify any moral argument unless you have a general moral consensus amongst the debaters) 

March 30, 2010 9:12:07 PM from Demigod Forums Demigod Forums

Quoting Splitshadow,
Woo woo! All aboard the dictator ship!

Ok, but I'm steering!

Quoting Splitshadow,
Grats, you just killed any possible argument you may have provided with the word little.

Haha, I'll let you have that because I picked on you earlier.

Quoting Splitshadow,
Piracy is taking others people's work for free. There's no doubt about that. The reason some people see it as morally acceptable is because it causes no immediate harm. If you go hold up a liquor store, you're directly harming the owners of the store. If you pirate a CD of Elvis' greatest hits, you're depriving Elvis' great grandchildren of a few bucks. (They don't lose anything, the just don't gain anything)...

Scarily enough, this is spot on.  The point that needs to be made here is that the people who take anothers work don't often make a $10,000,000.00 video game, a $500,000.00 album or a $300,000,000.00 movie and then release it for free, thus negating any of their arguments.  Many of the Open Source advocates fail to realise that they do so by choice; companies charge for their coded products and you have the choice to either pay for them or not have them.  Since we're dealing almost exclusively with Entertainment items whose profits ensure the way of life for hundreds, if not thousands, of people, it should be clearly obvious we're not in morally grey territory.  You don't need any of the shit on Torrent websites or P2P networks.  If people were copying books on how to make Water Wells for people who live in areas where there was no water, or books on how to grow food in areas where people have no food, the moral argument would be considered and I would be an advocate for it.

March 30, 2010 9:21:50 PM from Demigod Forums Demigod Forums

whoa whoa, kill it with the black history crap right now. This is not about the become a racial discussion in any way form, or direction.

Quoting Splitshadow,
Wait, so Zehdon, you're saying we should call them ninjas instead of pirates? I'd be OK with that.

 

How dare you! We honorable ninjas never let our wrong doing be seen by public eyes; except in anime which by logic we screw the rules.

March 30, 2010 9:29:13 PM from Demigod Forums Demigod Forums

I think the copyright laws for music and art should be changed. If your father made a song, died, and then it made millions, the money shouldn't go to you. What did you do to earn it? Absolutely nothing. Art in general should no longer be copyrighted after its creator dies.

Stardock Forums v1.0.0.0    #108436  walnut3   Server Load Time: 00:00:00.0000422   Page Render Time:

Stardock Magazine | Register | Online Privacy Policy | Terms of Use

Copyright ?? 2012 Stardock Entertainment and Gas Powered Games. Demigod is a trademark of Gas Powered Games. All rights reserved. All other trademarks and copyrights are the properties of their respective owners. Windows, the Windows Vista Start button and Xbox 360 are trademarks of the Microsoft group of companies, and 'Games for Windows' and the Windows Vista Start button logo are used under license from Microsoft. ?? 2012 Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. All rights reserved. AMD, the AMD Arrow logo and combinations thereof are trademarks of Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.