News Microsoft will not apologise for Xbox bans

Actually I did read that post and didn't ignore it, hence my reference to people modding their consoles for playing backups not being an isolated incident. Or are you claiming that because you subsequently said you "guess their MIGHT be one person out there who modded for backup reasons but I find that hard to believe" that your entire earlier comment was rescinded and should be ignored by everyone?

 

To start i will say again: Piracy is illegal! we all agree on that.

Were would the value of C (from my example above) go?

But you made me start thinking... imagine a world where everyone has the know how and the equipment to commit piracy, every single human being would have access to a computer, internet access, electricity, enough knowledge and education on how to use a computer and the internet, uncensored internet. Logically for each human to have this level of "comfort" they must have enough disposable income to sustain these things and feed themselves and their family, pay their taxes, etc... a world without war, poverty and hunger... but what about music, movies and games? Would they still be produced in such a world? Is there any artist/programmer that releases their stuff for free?

Enough daydreaming, you may now call me an idiot and a thief and each time you call me that i will think about the above hypothetical world.

hmmm... so anything that copies or removes an attribute or object from another person "is theft and akin to piracy"?

And the university did ensure access to the software, with 5 really crappy computers that wont work most of the time.

If you are poor or have a standard level of income then you are are not allowed to do any kind of engineering, multimedia, medical and design courses... you have eradicated "theft" from my university, congratulations, but at the same time you have made the gap between rich and poor bigger and you will be responsible for the university closing. Why?
Most of the students have gone to other universities or countries that don't do that kind of thing (thus making the university loose lots of money and be made redundant) and the ones that can't (i live in an island) or wont (because they refuse to commit piracy) will enlarge the already huge number of unemployed...

If you want to start your own business it will be better to search for investors or talk to a bank and ask for a loan, it will be smarter and better than robbing the bank, in the end you will be using money that is not yours but you will not go to prison if you are caught.

You have NEVER copied any part of any book or document that you don't know the author personally?

Have you ever played music on some device in such a way that other people, that are not from your closest family, can hear it?

Have you ever given a game to another person?

 

No I have not.

Yes I have but that does not make me a thief.

Again yes but whats your point on this?

 

Both make you a copyright infringer.

edit:

Since by your views: copyright infringement (a fancy word for piracy) = theft....

 

Im afraid you are wrong on this buddy. In britain the public music licence only applies if you are a business. If I play a CD in my home and everyone in my home can hear it then that is ok. And giving a game away doesn't infringe on any copyright.

Now how about you attempt to explain why I am a copyright infringer?

EDIT

So by giving games away and allowing my friends to listen to my music collection I am a thief?

You obviously have a screw loose somewhere, this is the end of my conversation with you.

 

By copyright law you are not allowed to play a CD in public (pick up a CD or a DVD, read what is on the rim or on the booklet), this does not involve your family or close friends. Meaning that if you are outside playing music in your car in a way that more than the passengers of your car can hear it then you are committing copyright infringement.

Also notice on a EULA of a game has a line that says:

"You shall not Sell, rent, lease, licence, distribute or otherwise transfer this Program, or any copies if this Program, without the express prior written consent of [company name]"

Did you by any chance transfer (give) ownership of a game to another person or sell a game to a second hand shop without written consent of the maker of the game?

Notice what you said there, you are allowing a person to use a software that they did not pay to use. The creators of that software will never see any profit from you "giving games away and allowing my friends to listen to" your "music collection".

I have lots of screws loose but i do have some of my games opened in front of me and i am reading the EULA, of the ones i can, just for you, i just lost another screw.

 

Just looked at a couple of 360 games.

Unauthorised copying, reverse engineering, transmission, public performance, rental, pay for play, or circumvention of copy protection is strictly prohibited.

Nowhere on any of the games I have does it say I cant give away/sell on. What games are you looking at?

Hopefully someone with a better understanding of the law than me can clear this up but im 99.9% sure than by giving a game away or even selling it for that matter does NOT infringe on any copyright.

 

Are you reading the back of the boxes or the manuals that came with the games? If it's the back of the boxes then you should also take a look at the manual which will likely have a section about the license somewhere towards the back of it. GH2 and GH:WT both do and they clearly state that you are given a non-transferable license and have no rights to sell or give away the game to anyone else.

 

Soldier of fortune 1 and 2.

Do you want me to scan the page?

 

I was reading the back of the cases. I looked at one manual (GH3) and it does indeed say it is non trasferable licence. However im not sure that this makes it illegal to sell on. If this is the case then major retailers such as Game, Gamestation, HMV and countless others are commiting copyright theft/infringment everytime they sell a pre-owned game. Again I would like someone to clarify the exact laws to this. Just because its written doesnt make it bound by law.

Very good

 

My scanner bugging me, in the meantime i will let you read page 2 of the UT3 EULA:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1921409/Eula1.tif

save the file and navigate to page 2.

edit:

 

I am not going to download it, but I do accept that eula will say something along the lines that you are unable to transfer the game.

However this does not make it illegal to do so (i am open to be proved wrong on this). Just because something is in writing doesnt make it enforcable by law.

My objection is that you are trying to brand me a pirate/thief for giving games away. I really dont see how this compares to downloading a computer game.

Giving a game away doe snot infringe on ANY copyright laws therefore I can not possibly be labeled a pirate.

 

By giving games away you are giving someone the opportunity to benefit from a developer's work without that developer getting any recompense. It's not all that different from someone offering a copy for download, is just a matter of scale.

 

If it is written in the End User Licence Agreement and you approved the EULA then you are bound by what it says in the EULA, you can not transfer it to another person or sell it.

As for second hand shops and media companies:
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/ea-second-hand-sales-are-a-critical-situation

I am not branding you as a thief, i am branding you as a pirate (you are violating the EULA), thanks to you the person that you gave the game to will not buy that game, the developer will never see profit being made from that person, if that person gives the game away again then there's 2 people in the world that will be playing that game and will never pay the developer a cent and will enjoy the fruits of his labour.

But, by selling the game second hand to another person, or shop, you go a level above this, you are effectively profiting from the sale of the game and the developer is still getting nothing.

Now imagine if everyone did this.

Also remember the debacle about you being able to re-sell Spore?

 

I will agree to disagree. I am in no way a pirate, piracy is illegal. Doing something that contradicts a eula doesn't mean you are breaking the law. If a software company wrote into their eula that 'by opening this product you agree that you give us your first born child' this doesnt mean that i must hand over a baby to them. My example is absurd but the point remains the same.

Anyways my head is bursting and the wife is shouting on me to go and fulfill some of my marital duties so I will pick up on any replys in the morning.

 

That very much depends on whether the specific EULA terms are binding or fall foul of legislation such as the Unfair Contract Terms Act. In respect of giving away or selling the license for games I believe it to be a legal grey area and is not something which has yet been challenged in the Courts.

I do find it interesting that you appear to have no moral issues with a developer losing out on a sale when you give/sell a game to someone but find it morally reprehensible for a developer to have lost out on a sale due to someone having downloaded a copy of a game. The end result in both cases is exactly the same, someone has benefited from the developer's time and effort without having paid any recompense.

 

You took the words out of my keyboard.

 

<3

Indeed it doesn't, because giving children away (EULA or not) is illegal in most countries. There, now you've learned something.

Giving away/selling a game is something I agree with you on, though (having said that: I don't agree with anything else you've said). Morally speaking (****, and I do mean ****, letter-of-the-law speaking; because the laws governing this are made just to profit the companies. A EULA is a legally binding agreement, ffs, and it comes with OSs/software made for people who revel in being idiots) when you buy a game (or any object), it is your property. After purchasing it, you should be able to do what you will with it. Play it, have sex with it, sell it, break it. (OK, don't make a thousand copies and sell them on the street corner.)

Selling it second-hand after you're done with it is perfectly acceptable in my book. If the EULA forbids it, then that EULA is nothing but proof that these companies are greedy *******s who waste too much money on lawyers writing EULAs, because any sane person knows (a) barely anyone reads EULAs because they're unreadable to us proles and (b) that, even if they read EULAs, people would still sell their game and not care.

So, solution? Less money on lawyers, more money on development! Less money on management, more money on development! Less lying about the 500 billion the company lost (to the demise of Fluffy, the company hamster) because of evil pirates in the Gulf Of Aden!

Wait, what? Sorry, I got real pirates (the scary kind with guns and ****ing rockets) confused again with kids who live with their parents and download a game they can't afford anyway/wouldn't buy anyway because the price of alcohol's gone up. Big deal.

Poor Fluffy, though. It's time we think about the real victims of non-commercial copyright infringement (you know, "piracy"): Fluffy and my blood pressure.

 

Justice!

 

So I'm back from the Louvre. I stole the Mona lisa 12 times. You'd all better watch out. Interpol is going to be nosing around for me now.

All I'm trying to say is that the concept of "theft" is derivative. Generally speaking, it's about loss - measurable, quantifyable, hard loss. If you steal something from someone, or a store - they lose money, or an object. If you make a copy of something from this person or store - they may be hurt emotionally, but they have suffered no loss. So really, you need to look at it in this fashion;

Piracy, by no manner of grey area, is simply unethical. It's also technically "wrong". But as I've always said, you have your two groups of people - your consumers, and your pirates. Consumers will always buy - through whatever means or methods they feel the compulsion to. Pirates will be more likely to try and gain things for free. Removing the person's ability to attain this "Free" entertainment, will simply make them consume it at a normal paid rate.

But there's the thing. You can't say that "Piracy lost us xxxx dollars", because in theory, that money was never yours in the first place. It was potential.