1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Other Piracy

Discussion in 'Software' started by Zinfandel, 2 Aug 2010.

  1. stuartpb

    stuartpb Modder

    Joined:
    16 May 2008
    Posts:
    1,768
    Likes Received:
    149
    ^No this is ********!^ Corrected for you there!

    If you are trying something with the consent of the copyright owner, then knock yourself out and go for it. If you wish to try and justify your acts of software piracy as some sort of self appointed "try b4 u buy" scheme, then you fail miserably. It just isn't a legal defense, or a moral one either, contrary to what people like you would wish us to believe. I used the same lines when I was using pirate copies, and it didn't make my actions any more right than your excuse does now.

    And yet again, we see prison being mentioned. Boy can some people exaggerate on here. I said:

    THE PUNISHMENT SHOULD BEFIT THE CRIME!

    I also said:


    HELLOOO????
     
    Last edited: 17 Aug 2010
  2. Elledan

    Elledan What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    4 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    948
    Likes Received:
    34
    We'll be releasing our first game title around the end of next month, via Steam and similar services. We plan to use gaming blogs, word of mouth and such methods to market our titles.

    We plan to make our games a success by appealing to our audience. Worrying about copyright infringement isn't on our TODO list, as there isn't a darn thing we can do about it.

    Now you're just being spiteful. Read the documents phulshof linked to for example to see how silly your wild exclamations are. Independent research does show so far that non-commercial copyright infringement is just that: a soft, fluffy kitten.

    You apparently haven't even read those research documents yet, probably won't either, and will just continue to spout your uninformed, flippant and often outrageous opinions. Sorry, but you are making for a lousy discussion partner as you seem to revel in personal 'victories', even if it's just deceiving yourself. You aren't winning anything here, you see :)
     
  3. phulshof

    phulshof What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    62
    Likes Received:
    2
    Well, it's not a legal defense, but it's certainly a moral one. People are treating copyright like it's a goal in itself; it is not. It is a means to achieve a goal, like in the US: to promote the progress of science, culture and art. His actions may not be legal, but considering his actions don't actually harm anyone (he would not have bought if he could not have copied) I certainly consider them moral. The author hasn't lost anything here, not even a potential sale. In fact, the reverse may be true in his case: no try, no buy.
     
    Last edited: 17 Aug 2010
  4. phulshof

    phulshof What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    62
    Likes Received:
    2
    Certainly, but when you ask why copyright infringement fits the bill but used sales are not we go from:
    - It deprives the producer of income.
    but so does used sales.
    - Yes, but it's illegal
    but so is used sales of certain products under recent laws.
    - Sure, but copyright infringement is a larger scale.
    Not if you believe the recent complaints from the industry.
    - ...
    Just because a cow and a tiger both have 4 legs, that doesn't make them akin. There are huge differences between what is judicial defined as "theft" and "copyright infringement", not in the least the fact that when a copy is made the owner still has the original.
     
  5. Pieface

    Pieface Modder

    Joined:
    8 Mar 2009
    Posts:
    3,355
    Likes Received:
    134
    You're not getting it. I see.

    - It deprives the producer of income.
    but so does used sales.


    They have already made a sale from that 1 item. It's most likely going from one hand towards one or two others. Not one hand to 10,000 others.

    - Yes, but it's illegal
    but so is used sales of certain products under recent laws.


    What recent laws? Everything has a used sale market.

    - Sure, but copyright infringement is a larger scale.
    Not if you believe the recent complaints from the industry.


    A larger scale than what? Theft? Of course it is. You don't see Game constantly out of stock because hundreds of thieves keep stealing their games.

    Just because a cow and a tiger both have 4 legs, that doesn't make them akin. There are huge differences between what is judicial defined as "theft" and "copyright infringement", not in the least the fact that when a copy is made the owner still has the original.

    That's a stupid analogy really. Copyright Infringement is taking (Stealing) peoples intellectual ideas and using them for your own use. The only difference between theft and copyright infringement is the fact in theft there is a hard copy involved which makes people think copyright infringement is OK because they don't see the effects of the store losing a sale. But they ignorantly ignore who else might lose a sale.
     
  6. stuartpb

    stuartpb Modder

    Joined:
    16 May 2008
    Posts:
    1,768
    Likes Received:
    149
    @ Elledan, I said what I did tongue in cheek, it wasn't spite, maybe it was the wrong thing to say, so I apologise for that. I do still stand by my statement that I find it worrying a startup company, with NO commercial trading experience as yet is treating a potential problem so flippantly. Mixing your own personal opinions with business can, and often does, have unforseen consequences. I'm not suggesting that DRM is the right way to go, but doing your homework, and doing so with professional research should be, for any potential problem.

    As for the independant research, I did read it, and each piece was concerned with music sales, NOT software/ games sales. This gives absolutley NO evidence that the same conclusions can be drawn in the software/ games sector. Sure you can suggest that the same trends COULD exist, but this isn't conclusive evidence or anything like.

    @ Phulshof ,we have discussed the "try b4 u buy" argument extensively within this thread. I hear this excuse a lot, from clients who have pirate software on their systems, and feel obliged to excuse having on said systems. I know from experience that it's very rarely that these clients will actually go out and buy the software they have pirated. There are occassions when they do, for example when they cannot use the online functions of certain applications or in the case of gamers where they cannot join online play. It's a tired excuse, and those who do convert, in my experience, are just too few to make it a moral right.
     
  7. stuartpb

    stuartpb Modder

    Joined:
    16 May 2008
    Posts:
    1,768
    Likes Received:
    149
    As an example of my last statement, I get around 7 or 8 potential clients a week on average, who present their PC's for repair, after their OS (or application) has been locked out due to it being a pirate copy. These people are from a very broad range of socio-economic backgrounds, and they have been quite content using the pirate OS, and would have continued doing so, but couldn't. Nearly every time, they tell me that they were just trying the OS or application out, so they could decide whether to buy it or not. The remaining times I hear the "I bought it like that" excuse, even though there is evidence on their systems that this is not the case. There are people who do buy used PC's though, only to find that their OS is pirate, and this is a worryingly growing trend too.

    Out of these 7 or 8, I get at least 4 that will ask if I can just install another pirate copy, as they can't afford to purchase the OS or application. On telling them no I can't, and it wouldn't be worth potentially losing my company over, they usually get the hump and tell me that they will find someone who can.

    1 or 2 will try and talk me into finding a way to activate the pirate product. Because I am an IT support technician, then I must know a way. The same result happens as above when I say no.

    Then we come to those who will bite the bullet, and tell me to uninstall the pirate version, and proceed to purchase the original, either from me or other retailers. This happens a lot less than it should, and I think that most people who pirate will continue using the pirate copies as long as they can, regardless of motive.

    Sure there are going to be some good natured people, as you claim, but in my professional capacity, I know this to be a minority.
     
  8. phulshof

    phulshof What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    62
    Likes Received:
    2
    So, if I make a copy of an original it's suddenly ok? The fact of the matter is that used sales don't bring any extra income for the producers, just like the copies.

    Account binding DRM combined with DRM-circumvention laws; the DiRT2 game I bought is not resellable, something I didn't find out until after I purchased it.

    A larger scale than copyright infringement. According to the latest cry stories from the games industry, used sales have a larger impact than copyright infringement. In Australia they already have a royalty on reselling paintings, and some industries have already asked for a similar royalty on music, movies and software. Either that or make it impossible via DRM.

    Actually, as independent research I linked to earlier has shown: that is simply not the case. I'm against copyright infringement, but from a social economic perspective it really is a victimless crime, in spite of all the cry stories and the gut feelings people may have. Yes, there are some similarities between copyright infringement and theft, just like there are similarities between cows and tigers. There are also huge differences. As said before: feel free to copy anything I own if in return I can steal your equivalent.
     
  9. phulshof

    phulshof What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    62
    Likes Received:
    2
    As far as I can tell: she has. She has concluded that she is unable to prevent it or stop it, and as such she decided to fight it the only way she can: by giving her customers a good product for their money. Any alternative to that is a waste of time and money, and can only backfire.

    Point taken, but that should lead to only one conclusion: independent research into this area is needed before deciding on any measure to tackle the "problem". What the papers do show however that cry stories and gut feelings about copyright infringement are not necessarily true.

    While I don't see it as a valid argument for myself, I do believe it can be a moral argument for some. If it's an excuse to hide behind, which is not followed by actually purchasing if you like the product, then I agree it's not a moral argument either.
     
  10. stuartpb

    stuartpb Modder

    Joined:
    16 May 2008
    Posts:
    1,768
    Likes Received:
    149
    I have experience of the effects of piracy in a professional capacity, and it is this experience that drives my opinions. These opinions are absolutely nothing to do with the scaremongering we see from the media moguls, and the anti piracy lobbyists. I would place my own commercial experience over any "evidence" they care to put forward.

    The fact remains that the excuses we hear in favour of piracy are extremely flimsy at best, and nothing more than outright excuses for personal bad behaviour at worst.
     
  11. Elledan

    Elledan What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    4 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    948
    Likes Received:
    34
    Talking about facts, where are your references? :)
     
  12. Pieface

    Pieface Modder

    Joined:
    8 Mar 2009
    Posts:
    3,355
    Likes Received:
    134
    So, if I make a copy of an original it's suddenly ok? The fact of the matter is that used sales don't bring any extra income for the producers, just like the copies.

    You do know, that IS piracy right? As I stated, Used sales have brought money to the company and will go to 1 or 2 other users. Copies mainly go to hundreds if not thousands of people.

    Account binding DRM combined with DRM-circumvention laws; the DiRT2 game I bought is not resellable, something I didn't find out until after I purchased it.

    That's up to the company in what to do. Not up to the customer.

    A larger scale than copyright infringement. According to the latest cry stories from the games industry, used sales have a larger impact than copyright infringement. In Australia they already have a royalty on reselling paintings, and some industries have already asked for a similar royalty on music, movies and software. Either that or make it impossible via DRM.

    Used sales are the latest trend as they realise that they can't get over piracy so try and get over another way to try and make something illegal. And Australia have been a country known to make ridiculous rules and laws before. But the fact of the matter is there will never be a royalty on reselling. Do you know which industry is probably most affected by second hand sales? Cars. A majority of cars on the roads are second hand and the companies get no royalties. You don't really see them complaining as such. Used sales are just a trend by companies to try and get more new sales, but it comes from a legitimate sale and it stays how the company released it. Used sales aren't there to make profits as Piracy may be.

    Actually, as independent research I linked to earlier has shown: that is simply not the case. I'm against copyright infringement, but from a social economic perspective it really is a victimless crime, in spite of all the cry stories and the gut feelings people may have. Yes, there are some similarities between copyright infringement and theft, just like there are similarities between cows and tigers. There are also huge differences. As said before: feel free to copy anything I own if in return I can steal your equivalent.

    It isn't a victimless crime though. One industry that's suffered majorly from copyright infringement is photography. It's caused people to go out of business because people take their images, make illegal copies and then sell of the their friends and family. Just because a company has millions doesn't mean it loses it's status on lost sales become victimless. So don't think copyright infringement is victimless. It can and has destroyed businesses.
     
  13. phulshof

    phulshof What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    62
    Likes Received:
    2
    I'm curious though how you define your experience though. I can imagine that in a time of economic crisis you have noticed more piracy and fewer sales. Whether the sales would have been better without the piracy remains to be seen. Simultaneous occurrence does not equal correlation, as the papers I linked to clearly show.

    Of course the fact remains that it's illegal, but depending on the research we may have to decide to enhance our enforcement of the law (will be very difficult), legalize in return for a levy/tax or legalize without compensation. Each of these solutions has been used in the past depending on the copyright problem at hand.
     
  14. Krazeh

    Krazeh Minimodder

    Joined:
    12 Aug 2003
    Posts:
    2,124
    Likes Received:
    56
    As Altron pointed out earlier all software, whether bought, downloaded or copied off someone, is a copy. There is only one original and that remains safely at the developer/publisher, everything else is a copy of that one original piece of software. It makes no difference if the developer/publisher recieves some recompense for a copy before it's then sold onto other people second hand; the second hand purchasers are still using a copy of the software without having paid any recompense to the creator which is exactly the same situation as occurs when people download software.
     
  15. phulshof

    phulshof What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    62
    Likes Received:
    2
    No, actually it's copyright infringement; piracy is what Jack Sparrow does with the Black Pearl, but that's beside the point. A copy is usually made from an original at some point in time, so there too money has gone to the company. You do quote the scale though, but the latest stories appear to indicate otherwise. As people mentioned before in this thread: copied games usually require converted hardware, and not that many people seem willing to do that.

    So resale rights should be up to the selling company? I think you and stuartb may have something to discuss. :) Resale rights were not left out of copyright by accident.

    I think you'll find that the majority of copyright infringement complained about lately is non-profit. Actually, used-sales usually are for profit.

    I'm sure you can link to some independent study to support this, as I have done before?
     
  16. stuartpb

    stuartpb Modder

    Joined:
    16 May 2008
    Posts:
    1,768
    Likes Received:
    149
    I back up what I find within my sales ledgers with good old fashioned communication with my clients. I have completed several client surveys before, with clients that I trust to give me a honest opinion. I also try to engage in a non-judgemental and open manner with potential clients that do have pirate OS'es or applications installed, to get a feel of why they do use pirate software, and what the driving force for this choice was. I am interested in the problem, both in a professional and personal capacity, and I do seriously take time to consider how it affects me and my business.

    Obviously, in these times of global financial crisis, being able to spot trends within the sales ledgers of any company is incredibly frustrating. The thing is though, I have 6yrs worth of business intelligence at my disposal, and 6yrs worth of hearing what my clients (both potential, past and present) think of piracy. Back this up with my own previous history of piracy, and I feel pretty able to form a qualified opinion on the ramifications of piracy within my own organisation, and somewhat qualified to give a general opinion too.
     
  17. stuartpb

    stuartpb Modder

    Joined:
    16 May 2008
    Posts:
    1,768
    Likes Received:
    149
    Regarding used sales, it should always remain the right of the purchaser to decide if they want to resell that which is legally theirs. I would take strong exception to any company who tried to limit my rights to do so.

    I buy and sell used PC's, as a means for people with limited disposable income to be able to get a foot on the IT ladder. My profit margin for each PC sold is very low, but there is an obvious advantage to me in doing this, in the form of repeat sales, and also ancillary sales. I also sell new pre configured or bespoke PC's. I embraced the used market, and found a way in which it would raise further avenues of income for my business, and it works well.

    The games market is claiming that second hand sales are hurting their profits, and in a big way. I say that is rubbish. They have failed to embrace the market, and take advantage of it. Their answer is to try and ban it, or to lock the market out. Even though they have generated income from every single used copy out there. They could look at ways to generate income from used units, such as expansion packs or exclusive content etc, which some companies have switched on to.

    The companies have no right to complain that the second hand market is hurting them. They have generated income already, and as has been said umpteen times, 1 unit will always be 1 unit.

    EDIT: Forgot to add, they do have the right to complain about people using their intellectual and commercial property illegally.
     
    Last edited: 17 Aug 2010
  18. Pieface

    Pieface Modder

    Joined:
    8 Mar 2009
    Posts:
    3,355
    Likes Received:
    134
  19. Krazeh

    Krazeh Minimodder

    Joined:
    12 Aug 2003
    Posts:
    2,124
    Likes Received:
    56
    Except the software on the disc isn't legally yours. You don't own it, you're merely licensing it from the developer/publisher.

    Second hand sales of physical items you legally own aren't the same as second hand sales of software you've licensed.

    It's no more rubbish than the claims that piracy are hurting their profits. Arguments that they have failed to embrace the changing markets and taking advantage of new opportunities can equally be levelled at the current trends in piracy.

    They have every right to complain. There is only ever 1 unit of a piece of software, everything else available anywhere is a copy of that original unit. When you buy a game, application, OS you aren't buying the software, you're buying a license to use the copy of the software supplied to you on the disc. The disc, and to a lesser extent the copy of the software, is immaterial to the sale, the important part is the license. So a company sells you a license to use their software, you then go and sell on whatever it is you bought and now someone who hasn't paid the company for a license is using their software. How is that not something they should be bothered about?
     
  20. phulshof

    phulshof What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    62
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hmm, how about some links that don't require registration. Also, these appear to be links to forum threads; I would like to see independent research performed by a reliable research institute like the ones I linked to.
     

Share This Page