# Online Piracy Poll



## pcharles93 (Feb 20, 2012)

I'm doing this survey for an English essay. It'd be a huge help if you guys could just quickly fill out the poll. If you'd like to explain your answer or if in my midmorning rush, the poll turns out all poopy and not specific enough, that would help too.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 20, 2012)

Hell yes. It's a crime that piracy is illegal.

(you missed the option No, other reason)


----------



## Godmil (Feb 20, 2012)

Agh, too binary, I know some people who wont dl games, but have no problem dling music... some who wont get movies, but will get TV shows.
I generally don't pirate things online, but if I own another copy (music/tv/films) or I know where is no way of paying for a legit version (retro games), I don't have a problem.


----------



## Specs112 (Feb 20, 2012)

I only ever do it to try out a game that doesn't have a trial version or a demo or whatever. If it's good then once I have money I buy a legit copy. 

Of course I say that, but I rarely have money.


----------



## emolover (Feb 20, 2012)

I say that if it is something that is on the Internet/computer, you can not expect people to not illegally download it.


----------



## applemobile (Feb 20, 2012)

I haven't ever bought a CD. And have probably bought 2 dvd's. Why would I pay for something I can get for free?


----------



## Olji (Feb 20, 2012)

I download things I can't get a hold of over here, which isn't that much.
I pay for games and music but not for movies, that is because I rarely watch any, if I do it's something that is at home since my family buys them.
All in all, I don't pirate much, mostly if I want to try a game out when it doesn't have any demo, which I usually end up buying.



applemobile said:


> I haven't ever bought a CD. And have probably bought 2 dvd's. Why would I pay for something I can get for free?


 
Here's a crazy idea: for supporting the creators maybe?


----------



## Specs112 (Feb 20, 2012)

Olji said:


> Here's a crazy idea: for supporting the creators maybe?


 
So it's one lost sale. Big goddamn deal. 

Actually, people with applemobile's mindset wouldn't pay for anything regardless, so it isn't even a lost sale.


----------



## Godmil (Feb 20, 2012)

Specs112 said:


> So it's one lost sale. Big goddamn deal.



If piracy only equated to one lost sale per product that would be a wonderful argument.



Specs112 said:


> Actually, people with applemobile's mindset wouldn't pay for anything regardless, so it isn't even a lost sale.



If his options were pay for things or don't have them, I'm sure he'd actually pay for some stuff.


----------



## applemobile (Feb 20, 2012)

They make enough money, if they didn't, then the buisness wouldn't exist. And if they do make less money because of people like me, then it's their own fault for going into a buisness with a major flaw. If I set up a buisness selling apples, and people had to walk through my orchards to get to my stall, do you think I would have the right to complain when people didn't buy my product?


----------



## Specs112 (Feb 20, 2012)

applemobile said:


> If I set up a buisness selling apples, and people had to walk through my orchards to get to my stall, do you think I would have the right to complain when people didn't buy my product?


 
This is the Metaphor Police. You're under arrest.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 20, 2012)

These days a pirated product is higher quality.

Making piracy illegal is like making cars illegal because it'll put horse salesman out of business.


----------



## Specs112 (Feb 20, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> These days a pirated product is higher quality.
> 
> Making piracy illegal is like making cars illegal because it'll put horse salesman out of business.


 
Exactly. Companies have to stop looking at pirated as "stolen" and just look at it as "free". They have to provide something with their product that can compete with free.


----------



## insane569 (Feb 20, 2012)

Specs112 said:


> This is the Metaphor Police. You're under arrest.


 
Haha great.
Most people pirate things because they are either overpriced or their just broke and realized that they can get it for free. China is a big fan of pirating software. Even companies. Why, because they can.


----------



## TheMachanga (Feb 20, 2012)

Unless you count youtube to mp3 as illegally getting music, then no, I don't pirate, because I don't ever watch movies on my computer, just on tv. If I really really wanted to see a movie that's already on dvd, I would actually by the actual dvd the next time I'm in the store, or go a hulu or something, or youtube or whatever, since they now provide some movies on their, legally, I think.


----------



## musicninja17 (Feb 20, 2012)

If I paid for all the music that I listen to and enjoy, I'd be broke many times over.

Why make one of my favorite things in my life responsible for making me not able to afford anything else?


----------



## Ranzha (Feb 20, 2012)

I usually do it for stuff I can't find commercially anymore.
My argument for doing it is pretty much saying that if demand is low or works become old and obsolete, the products won't be produced anymore. As someone who is in the low demand portion of the pie, it's infinitely easier to download something rather than waste the time trying to find a hard copy. It doesn't hurt the manufacturer, to boot.


----------



## CubeLTD (Feb 20, 2012)

Manga/Anime =S.


----------



## Olji (Feb 20, 2012)

I have nothing against piracy. It's just the mindset of "Why would I pay for something I can get for free?" that bugs me, I seriously doubt that most persons who say that would apply it to everything they do.

Buy gas? Why not get some from the cars around the area?
Get a car? Why not hijack one close by? *Insert car brand here* makes enough money as it is.
Pay for my food? I can just grab some and leave, it's not that expensive so they won't mind. It's not like everyone's doing it, they're still in business at least.


For bigger businesses a couple of pirates doesn't do much of an impact, but for indie developers it becomes more important to pay for what you get, especially if you like it, more profit for them creates a better chance for a sequel/dlc later on.

For a comparison, EA doesn't really care that much about their customers, and 2000 pirated copies doesn't make much of an impact for them while Mode 7 Games cares more about what their users want, and 2000 pirated copies for them makes a bigger impact.
So I usually pay just for a little "Thank you" since I (mostly) enjoy what I'm paying for.


----------



## cmasirius (Feb 20, 2012)

I've given this some thought, and I've even had discussions with my older brother about this. We live in a day where an actor's or artist's income comes largely from companies to promote their merchandise, say coca cola or dr pepper, even perscription drugs, shoes and pretty much everything, exposure of the actor and wide availability of their work benefits all, right? If famous people weren't so famous, the commercials and adds wouldn't be so effective, and merchandise wouldn't sell! They are paid for tv apperances, and pretty much anything. When they make a movie or album or whatever else, they are paid to do it, i doubt that actors are paid only if the movie makes money. Sure, royalties make them some money, but they have already been paid, right? There are just some things that can't be pirated online, like the experience of going to a live concert, and t-shirts, and other merchandise. In those cases public access to their work benefits them, and makes them more popular, and we are bound to buy some of their goods. I see it as exposure. That being said, I'm poor, and realize that I'm justifying it in a biased way.


----------



## tx789 (Feb 20, 2012)

So many pirtes on this forum I'm 14 I don't pirtate stuff
Some hing else if you want a game and buy then foind out you dislike it yyou spend ominey on it and if you pirite it you get it for free and if you likre it you might just buy it.
Sorry about spelling


----------



## Ranzha (Feb 20, 2012)

tx789 said:


> So many pirtes on this forum I'm 14 I don't pirtate stuff
> Some hing else if you want a game and buy then foind out you dislike it yyou spend ominey on it and if you pirite it you get it for free and if you likre it you might just buy it.
> Sorry about spelling


 
Not necessarily. In the first example, you get what you paid for, and there's no mistaking that. In the second, there would be no need to spend money on the actual version if the version you pirated is quality.


----------



## Me Myself & Pi (Feb 20, 2012)

About a month & a half ago, I had my teraminx disassembly video copied & uploaded on ebaumsworld.com. There it got featured on it's home page where it got 56,000 views. That would've been about $100 in advertising given to someone else. Put yourself in my shoes, does piracy sound as good then?

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/82130726/


----------



## Cool Frog (Feb 20, 2012)

Nothing wrong with free market.

I usually buy things that I find worth buying/supporting.


----------



## insane569 (Feb 20, 2012)

Me Myself & Pi said:


> About a month & a half ago, I had my teraminx disassembly video copied & uploaded on ebaumsworld.com. There it got featured on it's home page where it got 56,000 views. That would've been about $100 in advertising given to someone else. Put yourself in my shoes, does piracy sound as good then?
> 
> http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/82130726/


 
Do you have copyright on your videos? Or a water mark? Like MM&PI or something like that in a corner.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 20, 2012)

Me Myself & Pi said:


> About a month & a half ago, I had my teraminx disassembly video copied & uploaded on ebaumsworld.com. There it got featured on it's home page where it got 56,000 views. That would've been about $100 in advertising given to someone else.


 
You think that the people who saw it on ebaumsworld would've seen it on your youtube channel instead if it wasn't linked on ebaums?

Please think things through in future before posting again.


----------



## chrissyD (Feb 20, 2012)

I only buy music from people I really like. The other I couldn't care less if they don't get any money from me. I have loads of xbox games as well that are downloaded and played on my flashed xbox. The price for games is stupid.


----------



## BrainOfSweden (Feb 20, 2012)

I mostly pirate software. I don't want to pay thousands of dollars to edit a picture every now and then. Thanks to Steam, who made it super easy to lose all my money, I rarely pirate games anymore, only if I want to try before I buy and there's no demo available, or if the game is kinda abandonware and hard to get legaly. As for music and movies, I mostly pirate *and* pay. I pay for legal streaming, and pirate just to keep copies on my iPod when I'm offline. That's about it. Oh, yes, the only reason I pirate TV-shows is because it takes too long for American shows to get to Sweden. If I'd wait to watch them on TV, I'd watch them for free anyway. 
Let's hope FBI doesn't read this


----------



## JohnLaurain (Feb 20, 2012)

The only reason that I've ever pirated anything is because it's not supported on my operating system. I've payed for TF2, Minecraft, and other games, but I did have to get a torrent of League of Legends, Counter Strike 1.6, and Terraria because those games are only supported with windows.


----------



## Nestor (Feb 20, 2012)

I pirate movies that otherwise I would not be able to see in my country. Sometimes a few great indy/classic films are shown in the art cinema and I gladly pay to see them. But I have to pirate everything else except for the Hollywood blockbusters 
(which make my brains melt in agony most of the times).


----------



## Me Myself & Pi (Feb 20, 2012)

insane569 said:


> Do you have copyright on your videos? Or a water mark? Like MM&PI or something like that in a corner.


Well I didn't think that would be necessary, I'm not super popular or anything. But after that incident, I did put a water mark on my most popular video, "A Lego Candy Machine" when I remade it. 



Kirjava said:


> You think that the people who saw it on ebaumsworld would've seen it on your youtube channel instead if it wasn't linked on ebaums?


True, they wouldn't have. But it's still not a comforting thought that someone's making money off of my hard work. If my content is thought to be good enough to be shared to more audiences, I should at least get a portion of revenue generated from that. Just imagine the chaos that would ensue if every newspaper started posting other articles as their own.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 20, 2012)

Me Myself & Pi said:


> True, they wouldn't have. But it's still not a comforting thought that someone's making money off of my hard work. If my content is thought to be good enough to be shared to more audiences, I should at least get a portion of revenue generated from that.



I disagree. Your content was distributed for free - people should be able to do what they wish with it.



Me Myself & Pi said:


> Just imagine the chaos that would ensue if every newspaper started posting other articles as their own.


 
This already happens, so I'm going to go with 'literally no chaos'.


----------



## CommaYou (Feb 21, 2012)

Look, imo there are 5 major things being pirated and they all have reasons why they're copied - I think that's music, movies, games, software and tv series.

I have no problem pirating anything really, but my opinions on every one does differ.
Music - I mainly listen to a few bands and would really like to have hard copies of their albums, to have them and to support the artists. However, those are pretty much impossible to find here. So I download them. The 'mainstream music', imo cheap music made by companies and not so much by artists, I would never even consider buying, but I do not think piracy is mainly a bad thing. Artists these days make most of their money off of live shows and if the piracy of their music helps them be more famous, it's eventually in their advantage as well.

Moves - As with mainstream music, I think the price that has to be paid is way too high for what you get. Here, a visit to the cinema costs around €10 (without overpriced food/drinks), later the dvd costs about €20. imo, one movie isn't worth that amount of money. When the price of the dvd drops, I might consider buying it.

TV-series - I can be short on this one: the main problem is that most of the world only gets to see them a long time after they were aired in the US, if they are even aired. People want to follow them as soon as possible.

Software - Most software is WAY too expensive for individuals to buy, I don't want to spend €1000 on some adobe stuff. Companies and such buy them anyway, I don't think individuals are the main target for software developers.

Games - I have respect for game developers, so I only download games if they're pretty much unobtainable elsewhere or if I only want to try it out. I also usually don't buy games at the release (skyrim being the exception ), a year later, most are very reasonably priced.

tl;dr - I think piracy is a good thing for everyone, people can obtain stuff that would otherwise be inaccessible, and authors of work get more noticed, aiding them in other acivities.
I do not, however think, people should just go about and download everything because it's free. If you can buy it and really want it, why not pay for it and support the authors.

-all just my opinion btw


----------



## hyunchoi98 (Feb 21, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> This already happens, so I'm going to go with 'literally no chaos'.


 
HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA I laughed so hard on that.

Although I do not agree with "Why would I pay for something I can get for free?" b/c i do believe in the content makers earning revenue, but i do pirate movies/tv shows myself.

Music- I... don't really listen to music and the ones i do, i download off youtube. I figure it's not piracy if the original content maker uploaded it for all to watch/listen to for free.

Movies-I am not paying more than 20 dollars just for one movie. Maybe 99 cents. maybe.

TV- I refuse to miss a show b/c i couldn't watch it for any reason.

Software- Thousands of dollars on adobe premiere? really? If i was rich, yes i would pay for it. I'm not (and i'm 13) so no.

Games- The only game i really play is minecraft and i started out using a pirated version.
But i figured the game was so good, i wanted to support the developers so i bought it. 
Plus my friend bought it thanks to me.


----------



## Athefre (Feb 21, 2012)

I think an important thing is that piracy isn't very accessible. Not everyone knows how or knows it is possible and not everyone has the patience to learn how. Some are even too afraid that they'll get caught.

I'm not going to take a side. I buy all of my video games with one reason being to support the developers/publishers that deserve it. I haven't ever been involved or observed a piracy discussion so I would really like to know the logical argument from the piracy side.


----------



## Me Myself & Pi (Feb 21, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> I disagree. Your content was distributed for free - people should be able to do what they wish with it.


Yes, it's free in the aspect that people don't have to pay to watch it. But it's not free in the aspect that they have to see an ad on the side of the video. Just because you don't have to pay for something doesn't mean you can copy it & post it as your own. How would you feel if I downloaded your video, "Sub 20 with 20 different methods," & uploaded it under my account where it got 10,000 views? I would make at least $15 from advertising.



Kirjava said:


> This already happens, so I'm going to go with 'literally no chaos'.


If what you are saying is true, then it must not be very rampant. I was implying something like the Wall Street Journal posting every other article from smaller papers. Either the WSJ would be sued out of business, or the other papers would be put out of business.


----------



## insane569 (Feb 21, 2012)

Athefre said:


> I think an important thing is that piracy isn't very accessible. Not everyone knows how or knows it is possible and not everyone has the patience to learn how. Some are even too afraid that they'll get caught.
> 
> I'm not going to take a side. I buy all of my video games with one reason being to support the developers/publishers that deserve it. I haven't ever been involved or observed a piracy discussion so I would really like to know the logical argument from the piracy side.


 
Do you know how much it cost to buy an OS for a company that has alot of computers. Alot of money. Which is why companies in china usually don't have genuine versions of windows. One OS is relatively expensive here where I live. Now imagine having to buy a couple hundred. That's alot of money.


----------



## vcuber13 (Feb 21, 2012)

Me Myself & Pi said:


> Yes, it's free in the aspect that people don't have to pay to watch it. But it's not free in the aspect that they have to see an ad on the side of the video. Just because you don't have to pay for something doesn't mean you can copy it & post it as your own. How would you feel if I downloaded your video, "Sub 20 with 20 different methods," & uploaded it under my account where it got 10,000 views? I would make at least $15 from advertising.
> 
> If what you are saying is true, then it must not be very rampant. I was implying something like the Wall Street Journal posting every other article from smaller papers. Either the WSJ would be sued out of business, or the other papers would be put out a business.


 
i don't have to see any ads on youtube and i'm sure there are many others the same.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 21, 2012)

Me Myself & Pi said:


> Yes, it's free in the aspect that people don't have to pay to watch it. But it's not free in the aspect that they have to see an ad on the side of the video. Just because you don't have to pay for something doesn't mean you can copy it & post it as your own. How would you feel if I downloaded your video, "Sub 20 with 20 different methods," & uploaded it under my account where it got 10,000 views? I would make at least $15 from advertising.



Please download my video and host it on your own channel to get views. I would like that. Keep any money you make. No permission is required to copy, modify, redistribute or sell any of the content I have made. Copy my content and pass it on, spread it to everyone. It's free!



Me Myself & Pi said:


> If what you are saying is true, then it must not be very rampant. I was implying something like the Wall Street Journal posting every other article from smaller papers. Either the WSJ would be sued out of business, or the other papers would be put out a business.


 
Doesn't have to be verbatim. Do you honestly think that each news outlet gets all their stories independently?


----------



## Me Myself & Pi (Feb 21, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Please download my video and host it on your own channel to get views. I would like that. Keep any money you make. No permission is required to copy, modify, redistribute or sell any of the content I have made. Copy my content and pass it on, spread it to everyone. It's free!


Well you may not value your videos so much, but for someone like me who would like to one day go into a YouTube full time, I do value the ownership of my videos. But it's clear that there's nothing more that I can say to convince you. Thank you for your time in this debate.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 21, 2012)

Me Myself & Pi said:


> Well you may not value your videos so much



You don't quite understand where I'm coming from.

I like making videos, they're important to me and I like showing them to other people. I'm not doing it to make money or so that people RATE COMMENT AND SUBSCRIBE to me, I'm doing it so I can show people - and this means that where they are viewing the video does not matter to me too much.

Just because I'm uploading my videos because I want to and not for money doesn't mean I don't value them. 

Interesting to find out that your motives for making videos are profit driven though - it explains all the "sorry I haven't made a made video for a while" etc bs that plagues channels like yours. Your channel would be better if you just made videos because you wanted to, instead of feeling like you had to.


----------



## qqwref (Feb 21, 2012)

This is an interesting thread. I'm not going to vote on the poll though.

The concept of intellectual property piracy is pretty new, and I think it's too early to predict what things will be like in the long term. The thing is, piracy of intellectual property has been around forever, but never really got much attention. Libraries have allowed millions of people to read books without paying the author per read, and museums have allowed millions of people to look at art without necessarily paying the artist per view. Movie rental stores have been around for decades, and the movie's producers didn't get any extra money for each viewing of the film. It could be argued that it is naive to think a musician or a game company deserves money for each download, and that getting a copy of a song or game without buying it deprives the author of revenue. Or maybe digital downloading is fundamentally different from looking at a painting you don't own or reading a book you didn't buy. I'm not completely sure.

PS: If anyone is worrying that their piracy will hurt poorer media producers (such as the people who make indie games), remember that you are always free to donate money. The Humble Indie Bundle more or less works off this concept (with no minimum donation the download is essentially free), although the donation and free download are done together.


----------



## blakedacuber (Feb 21, 2012)

Saw an interveiw on youtube interviewing eminem and they asked him what he do if somone infront of him in a bus was illegaly his response was id let them do it because its the modern world and thats what people do


I agree with kir though i mean if its it free for someone to access why not have it for free? You could pay for it yeah and if i think the artist /developer or whatever deserves money then yeah ill pay for it but if its a thing im not gunna use everyday like solidworks why would i bother buying it?


----------



## Me Myself & Pi (Feb 21, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> You don't quite understand where I'm coming from... Just because I'm uploading my videos because I want to and not for money doesn't mean I don't value them.


 True.



Kirjava said:


> Interesting to find out that your motives for making videos are profit driven though - it explains all the "sorry I haven't made a made video for a while" etc bs that plagues channels like yours. Your channel would be better if you just made videos because you wanted to, instead of feeling like you had to.


Well I certainly wouldn't be putting as much time into my videos if it weren't for the money. But this topic should be reserved for another thread.


----------



## insane569 (Feb 21, 2012)

Me Myself & Pi said:


> Well I certainly wouldn't be putting as much time into my videos if it weren't for the money. But this topic should be reserved for another thread.


 
Well if you're only making cubing vids for money then I would suggest stoping. Cubing is my hobby as well as many others and I know I put in as much effort into all my cubing vids regardless of if I make any bit of money. Even if its something simple like an Ao5 or something. Its my hobby, I love it and I do it with pride because I'm good at it. Not because I wanna make money off of a little ad on my videos. Get your motives straight.


----------



## Cheese11 (Feb 21, 2012)

insane569 said:


> Well if you're only making cubing vids for money then I would suggest stoping. Cubing is my hobby as well as many others and I know I put in as much effort into all my cubing vids regardless of if I make any bit of money. Even if its something simple like an Ao5 or something. Its my hobby, I love it and I do it with pride because I'm good at it. Not because I wanna make money off of a little ad on my videos. Get your motives straight.


 
Come on, not everybody has the same motives for doing things. At least respect that.


----------



## asportking (Feb 21, 2012)

I think a lot of people exaggerate on how much pirating hurts the company. It's not like they're stealing money straight from the company. Most people who have downloaded movies/music for free wouldn't have bought it if they had to pay for it.


----------



## Andrew Ricci (Feb 21, 2012)

I have never illegally downloaded anything off the internet. I enjoy supporting artists and developers I like, and no matter how you look at it, piracy only harms the people who make content you consume. The only paid content I think should be downloaded for free are covers and adaptations of other's work. If the people who made the cover or adaptation didn't originally make what they produced, they don't really deserve any profits from it. (Although I have bought many covers)


----------



## emolover (Feb 21, 2012)

I know it takes a lot of money to make movies and video games, but how much could it have really cost to make Sony Vegas 10 Pro or Coral Paint? I really do not know but if it took lets say $100,000 to make Vegas 10 and it cost $800 if you buy it, that means it takes 125 people for them to make backt there initial investment of making the product. Clearly more than 125 people have forked over the $800 so the people who made it are clearly not in trouble of not making there money back. I know there is more then 1 person involved in making it but if 5000 people paid for it that is 4,000,000 which if the product was made by 100(doubt it), they would make 40,000 if it was split evenly.

My point is is that they make enough money off of these program's and music(probably) to the point where they are just being greedy if they care about the pirating.


----------



## aronpm (Feb 21, 2012)

theanonymouscuber said:


> If the people who made the cover or adaptation didn't originally make what they produced, they don't really deserve any profits from it. (Although I have bought many covers)


 
Yeah, it's not like it's hard work to make a cover or adaptation. It's easy work and nobody should ever be paid for it.


----------



## Athefre (Feb 21, 2012)

asportking said:


> I think a lot of people exaggerate on how much pirating hurts the company. It's not like they're stealing money straight from the company. Most people who have downloaded movies/music for free wouldn't have bought it if they had to pay for it.



I used to be into PS3 Gamesharing. I would create or join groups that vote on games to download as they release and we all would split the price five ways and could play the games on our own PS3s any time. I know that if I hadn't been a part of those groups, I would have bought only one or two of the ~40 games we accumulated.

That's 40 sales for the publishers/developers where if the group hadn't been created, there would have been many fewer.


----------



## Zarxrax (Feb 21, 2012)

First of all, anyone who says they don't pirate anything is either a hypocrite, a liar, or just ignorant.
I guarantee you that you have pirated something. I GUARANTEE IT.

Next, I can find no logical fault in piracy.
We are sharing and duplicating things. How is that bad?

Is piracy bad because you don't pay someone because you enjoyed their product?
Ok, let's follow this line of thought. Let's say I buy a video game and play it. Then I trade that game to someone else for another game that I want. I never bought the 2nd game, and the creator never saw any additional revenue, though I obtained it fair and square. Did I do something bad? I enjoyed a game without letting the creator profit.

Let's say I go to the park and sit on a bench. I am getting enjoyment and relaxation from that bench. Should I owe money to the guy who created it? Why not? Seriously think about this. Why can many people enjoy sitting on a bench, while the bench creator gets no residual profit from each sitting? He put time and effort into creating that bench, then someone buys it, one lump sum, and then lots of people can come by and just keep using it. Why can't this same logic apply to a song? Someone buys a song, then he lets others enjoy and listen to it. What is the actual difference here?


----------



## Andrew Ricci (Feb 21, 2012)

aronpm said:


> Yeah, it's not like it's hard work to make a cover or adaptation. It's easy work and nobody should ever be paid for it.


 
Honestly, most covers don't actually add anything to an original song. There are, obviously, many exceptions, such as Johnny Cash's cover of Hurt, in which there was clearly a lot of effort put into. I happily paid $1.29 for that song, and others like Nirvana's cover of Lake of Fire, and Pearl Jam's cover of Last Kiss. Many other covers clearly don't have much effort put into them, and it's not too hard to tell where this exists. 

If an artist makes a great cover that adds greatly to the original song, I will happily pay, believe me. Without the effort to make a song theirs, I probably wouldn't pay.


----------



## Athefre (Feb 21, 2012)

Zarxrax said:


> Let's say I go to the park and sit on a bench. I am getting enjoyment and relaxation from that bench. Should I owe money to the guy who created it? Why not? Seriously think about this. Why can many people enjoy sitting on a bench, while the bench creator gets no residual profit from each sitting? He put time and effort into creating that bench, then someone buys it, one lump sum, and then lots of people can come by and just keep using it. Why can't this same logic apply to a song? Someone buys a song, then he lets others enjoy and listen to it. What is the actual difference here?



The bench designer/builder has already been paid for his or her work, probably by a government. From where does the video game designer, programmer, etc. receive his or her millions?


----------



## Cool Frog (Feb 21, 2012)

theanonymouscuber said:


> I have never illegally downloaded anything off the internet. I enjoy supporting artists and developers I like, and no matter how you look at it, piracy only harms the people who make content you consume. The only paid content I think should be downloaded for free are covers and adaptations of other's work. If the people who made the cover or adaptation didn't originally make what they produced, they don't really deserve any profits from it. (Although I have bought many covers)


 
So what are your views of libraries, or places like blockbuster?


----------



## Zarxrax (Feb 21, 2012)

Athefre said:


> The bench designer/builder has already been paid for his or her work, probably by a government. From where does the video game designer, programmer, etc. receive his or her millions?


Are you seriously saying that a bench builder makes millions? Per bench?


----------



## Andrew Ricci (Feb 21, 2012)

Cool Frog said:


> So what are your views of libraries, or places like blockbuster?


 
Movies and books are much different than music or games, at least for me. With movies, I really only ever end up watching them once or twice, and then never really again. This is similar to books, although I often end up reading a good book 3+ times. As far as the businesses themselves, since the copies of books and movies have already been paid for, I see no reason why people shouldn't be able to use them once for free. If they want to again later, then they can re-rent them. I don't see anything wrong with that. Honestly, if someone finds a book or movie they rented to be good enough, they'll probably purchase a copy to own anyway.

Something I don't really know (that someone else might be able to inform me about) is whether some of Blockbuster's sales go to the producers themselves. That wouldn't really change my opinion, though, as they have already purchased the movies/games. 

That is really the part that makes me differentiate between piracy and free (or less expensive) but restricted use. You can rent a book as many times as you want for free, but that ends up being a bit of a hassle having to return and re-rent it so many times, people will likely just buy it if they enjoy it enough.


----------



## Athefre (Feb 21, 2012)

Zarxrax said:


> Are you seriously saying that a bench builder makes millions? Per bench?



No. That was just a poor random number. Video game programmers don't make millions per game either.


----------



## aronpm (Feb 21, 2012)

Athefre said:


> No. That was just a poor random number. Video game programmers don't make millions per game either.


 
Unless you're Notch.


----------



## Specs112 (Feb 21, 2012)

aronpm said:


> Unless you're Notch.


 
And he doesn't need millions since all he owns and all he will ever need to own is that hat.


----------



## Zarxrax (Feb 21, 2012)

Athefre said:


> No. That was just a poor random number. Video game programmers don't make millions per game either.


Ok, so here we go back to the question, why does a bench builder only get paid once, while a game creator is supposed to get paid by everyone who plays?


----------



## Rpotts (Feb 21, 2012)

A bench builder would get paid for each bench, same as what a game developer should.


----------



## Athefre (Feb 21, 2012)

Zarxrax said:


> Ok, so here we go back to the question, why does a bench builder only get paid once, while a game creator is supposed to get paid by everyone who plays?



Maybe you did pay for the newly installed bench with your taxes.


----------



## applemobile (Feb 21, 2012)

What's the difference between 'pirating' a film from the Internet, and borrowing a DVD from a friend?


----------



## Specs112 (Feb 21, 2012)

applemobile said:


> What's the difference between 'pirating' a film from the Internet, and borrowing a DVD from a friend?


 
The internet scares corporations who don't really understand it because they were created before it and are still trying to figure out what it does to their business.

Other than that, no difference.


----------



## Zarxrax (Feb 21, 2012)

Rpotts said:


> A bench builder would get paid for each bench, same as what a game developer should.


 
A rather vague statement. What do you mean by "a bench builder would get paid for each bench"?

If he builds 100 benches, but no one wants them, should he get paid? Maybe you mean "he should be paid by everyone who wants to purchase a bench". It seems like you don't want to go with "he should get paid by everyone who uses the bench".

Ok, so we are going with "he should get paid by everyone who wants to purchase a bench". Is that ok?

Ok now lets apply it to a video game. "the programmer should get paid by everyone who decides to purchase the game". 

So... In this scenario, a person may use something without choosing to purchase it. And thus, where is the problem with piracy?


----------



## applemobile (Feb 21, 2012)

Can I get free trial on this bench first?


----------



## RyanO (Feb 21, 2012)

I see no reason that downloading something from the internet (for personal use) is any different than recording a television program with your DVR/VCR. It should be protected as such. Uploading something on the internet is a trickier subject, as you aren't limiting usage to personal use.


----------



## Rpotts (Feb 21, 2012)

Zarxrax said:


> A rather vague statement. What do you mean by "a bench builder would get paid for each bench"?



Paid for each bench he was contracted to build/install. I'm thinking of concrete benches in parks/playgrounds. 



Zarxrax said:


> If he builds 100 benches, but no one wants them, should he get paid?



No. 



Zarxrax said:


> Ok, so we are going with "he should get paid by everyone who wants to purchase a bench". Is that ok?



Well, yes, I suppose that's fine.



Zarxrax said:


> Ok now lets apply it to a video game. "the programmer should get paid by everyone who decides to purchase the game".



Still fine.



Zarxrax said:


> So... In this scenario, a person may use something without choosing to purchase it. And thus, where is the problem with piracy?


 
In any scenario you can use something without choosing to purchase it. It's called theft.


----------



## Meep (Feb 21, 2012)

Zarxrax said:


> Ok, so here we go back to the question, why does a bench builder only get paid once, while a game creator is supposed to get paid by everyone who plays?


 
He doesn't get paid once, he gets paid per bench. The only thing is it takes much more effort to make a copy of the first bench than to make a copy of a game/song. That, and the tools/resources for duplicating the digital information is more readily available (and practical) to the public.

I do pirate things, and I do because there're way too many occurrences where I feel I'm not getting my money's worth. In the odd occasion that for example, I play a game for much more than $15 worth (to me), I'd go out and buy it -after- knowing it's worth it.


----------



## LarsN (Feb 21, 2012)

It seems to me that since we are talking about a digital product and not some physical thing, people doesn't relate to it in the same way.

How many of you would go into a shop, pull down several CD's, walk out of the shop without paying and not feel like you've done something wrong?


----------



## applemobile (Feb 21, 2012)

Terrible analagy, a cd is a physical thing. How about if you went into a shop, saw a painting for sale, liked it but couldn't afford it. If you took a photo of it on your phone and printed it out when you got home to stick on your wall, would you feel like you had stolen it?


----------



## LarsN (Feb 21, 2012)

You do know that you can buy cheap posters of expensive paintings? That's because they lose the quality of the painting.

You can also record songs from concerts on your phone. It's perfectly legal.

You're just adding to my point. It shouldn't be accepted the steal the software, when you would never steal the hardware.


----------



## applemobile (Feb 21, 2012)

I don't want to buy a cheap copy. What if I make a very high quality scan and print it out on a very high quality printer? So anyway, are you saying I shoul be able to buy a cheap copy of a DVD because it's poorer quality?


----------



## LarsN (Feb 21, 2012)

If you want quality you should pay for it.

A lot products are sold with both a high quality and a cheaper low quality version. Mobile phones, televisions, headphones, you name it. For a better quality movie, you can buy blue-ray.

I know that wether or not something is expensive is a matter of opinion, but I live in a country with extreme taxes and whatnot added to the price, and I don't find movies or music to be expensive. I find games to be expensive, but if you choose wisely you get many hours of fun.


----------



## Tim Major (Feb 21, 2012)

Whilst this isn't to justify piracy, I often download something illegally, if I like it/use it often, I buy it. EG: Terraria. DL'd it, liked it, bought it, got bored of it


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 21, 2012)

LarsN said:


> If you want quality you should pay for it.


 
What happens when the highest quality version is the pirated one?


----------



## LarsN (Feb 21, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> What happens when the highest quality version is the pirated one?



Pay the pirate 

Seriously, I don't understand the question. Could you give an example?


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 21, 2012)

Lack of DRM.


----------



## LarsN (Feb 21, 2012)

I'm not an expert on DRM, but as I understand it some platforms can't play songs with DRM? Or is it that when you buy a song for one platform and the song is DRM protectet, then you cannot play the song on other devices?

If that is the case, then it's a matter of accessibility instead of pricing. In those cases I'm a bit more split about pirating. For instance I find that Onlive is a really great service, but it's not open in my country. I had to make some detours to get to their service, but I do pay for it though.

What I don't like about pirating is the part where people just want to have a whole lot of things for free. In my opinion you have to give something to get something.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 21, 2012)

LarsN said:


> If that is the case, then it's a matter of accessibility instead of pricing.


 
Huh? You said if you wanted quality you should pay for it. I then gave an example of how the free version is higher quality. Then you said it's not a matter of price?


----------



## Godmil (Feb 21, 2012)

qqwref said:


> Libraries have allowed millions of people to read books without paying the author per read,



That's true, but there is a limited number of books in the library, and they only lend each copy out to one person at a time, I'm sure some publishers see it as lost sales, but I think it's long since been incorporated into the business model, and doesn't count for a large loss.



qqwref said:


> museums have allowed millions of people to look at art without necessarily paying the artist per view.



However, The artist, knowing that the Museum will be profitting off his work, sells it at a premium... a lot more money than he could sell to an individual who casually likes his work. Also by making it public he can possibly then make money from selling prints. It's an established business model that everyone is aware what is going to happen going into it.



qqwref said:


> Movie rental stores have been around for decades,



Rental stores don't buy the products at normal price, again they pay a premium price for it. Some companies may not like rentals, but at least it does bring in some money.



qqwref said:


> It could be argued that it is naive to think a musician or a game company deserves money for each download, and that getting a copy of a song or game without buying it deprives the author of revenue.


You're right that every download doesn't equal a lost sale.... but a chunk of them do, and it is significant enough to cause major problems for their old business models. Also this is different from your other analogies, because in almost everything else you said you are talking about temporarily having a copy, with pirating you have a copy to keep that doesn't remove it from anyone else.



qqwref said:


> The Humble Indie Bundle more or less works off this concept...


But remember when the stats for the the first HIB came in, a substantial number of copies were pirated... for something that was almost free, many many people still thought it didn't deserve any money.



theanonymouscuber said:


> The only paid content I think should be downloaded for free are covers and adaptations of other's work. If the people who made the cover or adaptation didn't originally make what they produced, they don't really deserve any profits from it.



You do realise that when people release a cover of a song, a good chunk of the money goes to the original composer.
I remember a guy from Merciful Fate saying that they made more money off Metallica releasing a cover of one of their songs than they ever did from selling their one copies.
I think the composers share of the profits is more than the performers.



emolover said:


> I know it takes a lot of money to make movies and video games, but how much could it have really cost to make Sony Vegas 10 Pro or Coral Paint?



That is an excellent point, some companies grossly inflate prices because they are a market leader. (Read about the difference between Geforce and Quadro graphics cards... same hardware, massively different prices). What many producers of creative software do though is release free versions, or not care too much about home users. The advantage being if you learn how to use their software then when you work for a company they're more likely to buy the software you're trained in.
That is an example of where personal pirating is actually good for a company.
A really clever businiess model is the one Epic does with Unreal Engine 3. Anyone is free to download all the software to make a game with it... you can even start selling your game, and you don't have to pay Epic anything until you're profits go over something like $50,000, then you start paying them a share. Genius method of encouraging large scale adoption/market dominance.



Zarxrax said:


> Let's say I go to the park and sit on a bench....



Ok, I like you Zarxrax... but seriously, this is the dumbest analogy I've ever heard, it sounds like you've come up with some crazy cognitive dissonance to justify pirating to yourself.
Lets look at the models.
Benchmaker: takes 2 days to build a bench... needs ~$300 to cover his time and make his work worth while. He uses $50 of raw material. He sells his bench to the council for $350. Done! If he can keep the supply and demand balanced he now has a successful business.
Game studio: Needs 2 years to make a game... needs ~$20,000,000 to cover the expenses for all the staff and outsourcing. They can either 1) Sell one copy of the game for >$20,000,000 and that owner will then probably let other people have a shot on it. or 2) Sell the game at a much smaller price, but aiming to sell as many copies as they can.
Which do you think is the more realistic business model? (I'll give you a clue, it's not the one that's analogous to the benchmaker) 
(before anyone gets pedantic, I'm lumping the development and publishing sides together for simplicity)



Kirjava said:


> Lack of DRM.


 
How does DRM affect the quality?
If you're talking about convenience, then yes, sometimes pirating software is more convenient than buying it... which is where companies go wrong... as soon as you make it more convenient to buy it legitimately then you make it more appealing than pirating. A great example of this is Steam, it's sooo easy to buy games on there, and not have to worry about installing them or typing in codes, or having to update them, and there are tons of nice user features, like achievements. Without Steam, PC games would be in a lot of trouble.

There are some good arguments in this thread... but there are many more people who have an inflated sense of entitlement, and seem to be doing some amazing mental gymnastics to try to justify it to themselves.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 21, 2012)

Godmil said:


> How does DRM affect the quality?


 
If something has DRM, the product is inferior to the no-DRM version - making the DRM free version a higher quality product.

Here's another reason;









Godmil said:


> There are some good arguments in this thread... but there are many more people who have an inflated sense of entitlement, and seem to be doing some amazing mental gymnastics to try to justify it to themselves.


 
Can you post an example of this happening? I do not see it anywhere in the thread.


----------



## LarsN (Feb 21, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Huh? You said if you wanted quality you should pay for it. I then gave an example of how the illegal version is higher quality. Then you said it's not a matter of price?


 
I think it's a poor example. DRM is a matter of putting limitations on an item which the user has already paid for. That's a different discussion and the reason I started to talk about accessibility. But I don't think that is the topic of this poll.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 21, 2012)

LarsN said:


> I think it's a poor example. DRM is a matter of putting limitations on an item which the user has already paid for.



Maybe you prefer the other example that I posted in my last post. The image.



LarsN said:


> That's a different discussion and the reason I started to talk about accessibility. But I don't think that is the topic of this poll.



Please stop posting in this thread if you're going to refuse to reply to something because you don't believe it matches the original intent of the poll closely enough. If it is that badly off topic, a moderator will delete it - something that will blatently not happen here as it is clearly on topic.


----------



## applemobile (Feb 21, 2012)

That image above forgot to mention the 10 mins it took to peel the celophane wrapper off the case. Companies in the intelectual property market are just too humble to admit that they haven't moved with the times. They need to find new ways of making revenue, such as advertising. If your company is making losses because of some people not paying for your product, there is no point sitting shouting at them to give you more millions of pounds, they just won't listen. They need to adapt, hell, even when I was growing up and we all recorded songs onto tape off the radio, they always spoke over the start and end to stop people doing it, untill And generally it worked, well untill i discovered Napster/bearshare and limewire. A provider should not blame the 'customer' for their own losses, they should adapt and change to suit. You will never stop Piracy, it will only get worse.


----------



## Godmil (Feb 21, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> If something has DRM, the product is inferior to the no-DRM version - making the DRM free version a higher quality product.



You're talking about the overall 'quality' of the experience - which is valid. But we both know LarsN was talking about the perceivable quality of the experience (sound quality for music, image/sound quality for films) I have some pirated dvd's that fit perfectly with what he was saying.
And OMG do I know about the pain of starting some DVDs/BluRays... I have two small kids who love their Disney/Pixar collection, but I can seriously jam on the Skip Chapter/Main Menu buttons for a minute before I'm even close to getting the film to start. I was thinking the other day about filming myself loading one of those Disney DVD's to show how the fastest way possible of starting it takes an age. It's rediculous. However at the moment it is still more convenient for me to pop a disc in than sort out any other way of getting it on the main tv.



Kirjava said:


> Can you post an example of this happening? I do not see it anywhere in the thread.



Sure, let me just skim through the first page of examples of one or both of the things I suggested:


musicninja17 said:


> If I paid for all the music that I listen to and enjoy, I'd be broke many times over.
> Why make one of my favorite things in my life responsible for making me not able to afford anything else?





applemobile said:


> Why would I pay for something I can get for free?





Specs112 said:


> So it's one lost sale. Big goddamn deal.





applemobile said:


> If I set up a buisness selling apples, and people had to walk through my orchards to get to my stall, do you think I would have the right to complain when people didn't buy my product?



Lets look at that first one again... If I had to pay for all the things I wanted, I'd be poor.... so I shouldn't need to pay for them. Tell me that doesn't sound like an inflated sense of entitlement.
And as for the mental gymnastics... do I really have to go over the Park Bench argument again.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 21, 2012)

applemobile said:


> You will never stop Piracy, it will only get worse.


 
You say that like it's a bad thing.


----------



## Godmil (Feb 21, 2012)

applemobile said:


> Companies in the intelectual property market are just too humble to admit that they haven't moved with the times.
> You will never stop Piracy, it will only get worse.


There are some excellent points in that post. Companies have to learn to adapt to the market. You can't stop piracy, so you have to work out a way to make your product more attractive to buy than steal.
Someone did an excellent tweet the other day that Kickstarter is the best anti-piracy approach... sell your game before you've even made it


----------



## applemobile (Feb 21, 2012)

Look at the Xbox 360. If I want to play a game online, I need to buy the genuine game. If I don't, then you get banned for life. Now I do know that there are ways around this, but they are not easy, and certainly not cheap. They have pretty mich stopped piracy on online multiplayer games.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 21, 2012)

Godmil said:


> You're talking about the overall 'quality' of the experience - which is valid. But we both know LarsN was talking about the perceivable quality of the experience (sound quality for music, image/sound quality for films) I have some pirated dvd's that fit perfectly with what he was saying.



I don't see how that is not part of the experience. The point I was making is that pirated content doesn't mean poorer quality, and often leads to a better experience for the user.

I've had to download torrents of films I've paid for before because the DVD won't play in my computer. 



Godmil said:


> Sure, let me just skim through the first page of examples of one or both of the things I suggested:


 
Thanks for doing that, but personally I don't see why justification is even required. In my eyes there is nothing wrong with doing what they are doing.


----------



## Godmil (Feb 21, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> I don't see how that is not part of the experience. The point I was making is that pirated content doesn't mean poorer quality, and often leads to a better experience for the user.



Oh, no you're right, it is part of the overall experience. However what larsN was saying was that frequently pirated copies of things have poorer sound/visual quality (not always, but that certainly is the case sometimes), and so people may buy legal version to get the better image/sound quality. And that is true, I've had some poor quality pirated copies of films, and rather than eating up my bandwidth downloading different versions to see if any of them are better, I've just bought the DVD, cause you know it will work fine. sound that goes out of sync by a second is more of a showstopper for me than a couple of minutes of trailer.... although both are annoying.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 21, 2012)

Godmil said:


> frequently pirated copies of things have poorer sound/visual quality (not always, but that certainly is the case sometimes)


 
Instead of a cam or telesync, download an R5 or DVDrip.

I don't think this is a good complaint against piracy, as it is a very minor con compared to the advantages piracy gives you.



Godmil said:


> I've just bought the DVD, cause you know it will work fine.



It's actually illegal for me to play DVD's I've bought on my computer. That is not 'working fine'.



Godmil said:


> sound that goes out of sync by a second is more of a showstopper for me than a couple of minutes of trailer....



VLC has an option to resync audio and video ^^


----------



## LarsN (Feb 21, 2012)

I understand the argument that pirating gives a better experience as in the second example by Kirjava.

I do however find it hard to believe that people will stop pirating if the producers start offering their movies as paid direct downloads with no ads, trailers, DRM or piracy warnings. I imagine that the majority will continue to pirate because it saves them money.


----------



## Godmil (Feb 21, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Instead of a cam or telesync, download an R5 or DVDrip.



Oh I'd never deliberately download a Cam recording... I can't believe people still make those. But some have found there way into my house. But still even with testers you can get random logo's appearing on the screen.



Kirjava said:


> it is a very minor con compared to the advantages piracy gives you.



The advantages are: doesn't cost anything, no filler, more options for where you can play them.
The disadvantages are, sometimes the encoding is poor, it can be tricky sometimes sourcing a good/correct version, may not work on all your devices.

For a legal product to be more practical than pirating it has to be more convenient... and you're right that is so rarely the case. But some times it is the case (I've one touch bought some stuff on my ipod that was pretty cheap and was more convenient for me than tracking down pirated versions) and if companies want to survive in the future they need to understand that.



Kirjava said:


> It's actually illegal for me to play DVD's I've bought on my computer. That is not 'working fine'.


Do you mean it doesn't work on your computer? Because you haven't given the impression that legallity was much of an issue for you.



Kirjava said:


> VLC has an option to resync audio and video ^^


True... but at some point the hastle of fixing something is more of a problem than the cost of buying something.

Anyway, like I said... Piracy is a massive massive grey area. I don't think a yes/no answer can really sum it up.


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 21, 2012)

LarsN said:


> I do however find it hard to believe that people will stop pirating if the producers start offering their movies as paid direct downloads with no ads, trailers, DRM or piracy warnings. I imagine that the majority will continue to pirate because it saves them money.



Of course. My point was that you can get a better experience by pirating, that's all.



Godmil said:


> The disadvantages are ... may not work on all your devices.



huh?



Godmil said:


> For a legal product to be more practical than pirating it has to be more convenient... and you're right that is so rarely the case. But some times it is the case (I've one touch bought some stuff on my ipod that was pretty cheap and was more convenient for me than tracking down pirated versions) and if companies want to survive in the future they need to understand that.



This is what's so good about Steam.



Godmil said:


> Do you mean it doesn't work on your computer? Because you haven't given the impression that legallity was much of an issue for you.



No, I mean that I have to break the law if I want to watch a legally purchased DVD on my computer. See: DeCSS

Another reason why paying for films is problematic.



Godmil said:


> True... but at some point the hastle of fixing something is more of a problem than the cost of buying something.



You have to press a single key to fix it.


----------



## Godmil (Feb 21, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> huh?


It's not easy trying to find a copy in a codec that will easily work on my ipod.. or PS3.
My ideal codec for the PC does nothing on my ipod, then I've also got to consider recoding it in a different resolution cause the file size is rediculous for what I'd see on the smaller screen.
I'm just saying 'sometimes' pirating can be a pain in the ass.
I'd love a steam equivalent for films where you just buy it and it works, you can redownload it on whatever machine with no hastle.



Kirjava said:


> No, I mean that I have to break the law if I want to watch a legally purchased DVD on my computer. See: DeCSS



So one of your arguments is that you pirate films because you don't want to break the law?


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 21, 2012)

Godmil said:


> It's not easy trying to find a copy in a codec that will easily work on my ipod.. or PS3.
> My ideal codec for the PC does nothing on my ipod, then I've also got to consider recoding it in a different resolution cause the file size is rediculous for what I'd see on the smaller screen.
> I'm just saying 'sometimes' pirating can be a pain in the ass.



If you buy a DVD, you are not able to play it on any of these devices anyway, so this is no disadvantage.



Godmil said:


> So one of your arguments is that you pirate films because you don't want to break the law?


 
No, one of your arguments was that when you buy a DVD it 'just works'. This is clearly not the case for some users who are unable to play their legally purchased media.


----------



## Godmil (Feb 21, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> If you buy a DVD, you are not able to play it on any of these devices anyway, so this is no disadvantage.



That is also true... it was a dissadvantage for both I guess.



Kirjava said:


> No, one of your arguments was that when you buy a DVD it 'just works'. This is clearly not the case for some users who are unable to play their legally purchased media.



But you said it does work; it's just illegal. By that argument I could say that pirated movies don't work - but I wont


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 21, 2012)

Godmil said:


> But you said it does work; it's just illegal.



Your original point was that playing a purchased copy was easier because it 'just works'. Being illegal is a side point, you have to download and install software to break the copy protection to play it. 

If people paying for the film cannot watch it legally anyway, why bother paying?



Godmil said:


> By that argument I could say that pirated movies don't work - but I wont


 
Pirated movies don't require copy protection breaking software to play - they just play.


----------



## Godmil (Feb 21, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> Pirated movies don't require copy protection breaking software to play - they just play.



As long as you've got the right codecs... actually I had some tv shows that for the subtitles to work I had to dl a particular media player which took a bit of research.
But that's besides the point cause I remember a few years ago having a hellava time trying to get a basic dvd to work on my pc...
However, I kinda mistyped my previous comment, I didn't mean to be completely general, I was more meaning, I knew it would work for me.


----------



## qqwref (Feb 21, 2012)

Codecs are always an issue for video files from new sources, which is probably why big codec packs exist. I don't think it's much of an argument against pirated materials to say that you might need to find a new codec to play it properly, because this is true of video files in general (legal ones too, I mean).

Kir is right in saying that pirated materials are often easier to use. It's really one of the biggest ironies in the copyright wars. If the purchased movie was the one that had no ads, had no weird copy protection stuff, and worked on many devices, there would be a good reason to avoid the pirated one... but when it's the other way around it's really easy to see why people would deliberately avoid paying for the film.


----------



## Zarxrax (Feb 21, 2012)

*Have you ever applied a rubik's color scheme to your non-rubik's brand cube? Congratulations, you just violated copyright.*
And if we want to follow the absurd notion that many people take, that copyright infringement = theft, then you just stole something


----------



## Goosly (Feb 21, 2012)

Zarxrax said:


> *Have you ever applied a rubik's color scheme to your non-rubik's brand cube? Congratulations, you just violated copyright.*



I don't think it's a crime if you apply the color scheme to your own cube and don't sell it.


----------



## Zarxrax (Feb 21, 2012)

Goosly said:


> I don't think it's a crime if you apply the color scheme to your own cube and don't sell it.


So as long as its for your own personal use, and you don't sell it, then copyright doesn't apply?
So as long as I pirate music and movies and games for my own personal use, and don't sell them, it's cool?


----------



## Goosly (Feb 21, 2012)

^
Actually, it is. Belgium has a law that says you are allowed to have digital copies of music, movies, etc.. if it is for personal use. You do not need to have an original version (DVD, CD, ...)
We even pay extra taxes on USB-sticks or external HDD's for this, called Auvibel-tax.

Wikipedia page (Dutch):
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auvibel-taks


----------



## applemobile (Feb 21, 2012)

See, that makes complete and utter sense. People who pirate films, then make copies to sell on for a profit are the people who should be targeted.


----------



## Godmil (Feb 21, 2012)

Zarxrax said:


> So as long as its for your own personal use, and you don't sell it, then copyright doesn't apply?
> So as long as I pirate music and movies and games for my own personal use, and don't sell them, it's cool?


 
Nonono, you're talking about the difference between making something that is the same as something else and benefiting from having a copy of something that was intended to be paid for. For your analogy to work you'd have to do something like record a version of a song by yourself and not sell it... That would be fine.


----------



## Ranzha (Feb 21, 2012)

applemobile said:


> See, that makes complete and utter sense. People who pirate films, then make copies to sell on for a profit are the people who should be targeted.


 
However, how does the media moderate piracy in this way? They don't. They honestly just want their products free from reproduction. Hello DMCA.


----------



## Zarxrax (Feb 21, 2012)

Godmil said:


> Nonono, you're talking about the difference between making something that is the same as something else and benefiting from having a copy of something that was intended to be paid for. For your analogy to work you'd have to do something like record a version of a song by yourself and not sell it... That would be fine.


 
I'm sorry, but if you make something that is similar to something else, you are still possibly violating copyright. See this case: http://aandalawblog.blogspot.com/2012/01/red-bus-suggests-copyright-law-is-not.html

The "image" of the cube is a work of art, and as such, is copyrighted. By reason, if you go to a public place (such as a competition) with your unauthorized cube, you are in fact displaying a copy of that image publicly, which could be a violation of copyright law.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Feb 21, 2012)

Goosly said:


> Actually, it is. Belgium has a law that says you are allowed to have digital copies of music, movies, etc.. if it is for personal use. You do not need to have an original version (DVD, CD, ...)
> We even pay extra taxes on USB-sticks or external HDD's for this, called Auvibel-tax.



There are actually many countries that do something like this, including the USA. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_copying_levy.

I always heavily resented this fee, since I bought a lot of blank CDs to record my own personal music (a symphony I wrote and performed on a keyboard, and some classical organ music which is well past copyright date) to distribute to family and friends, and so the recording industry got a cut on my own private work. It just seems outrageously unfair that they can collect royalties on my stuff which they have contributed absolutely nothing to.


----------



## stricgoogle (Feb 21, 2012)

I always pirate stuff. Maybe, if I REALLY want to play online, I will buy the game. Of course, if there's no other way around it. I can get it for free, so I do. I wouldn't buy stuff anyway, so it isn't like they lost money with it. 

This thread was very interesting to read.



Godmil said:


> The disadvantages are, sometimes the encoding is poor, it can be tricky sometimes sourcing a good/correct version, may not work on all your devices.


Would just like to say, all of these are "sometimes", and all can be avoided.


----------



## aznanimedude (Feb 23, 2012)

many justify it as piracy lets you decide whether something is crap or not. many pirate it and then when they realize it's crap are now glad they didn't get suckered into paying money for it, and vice versa many are more than willing to financially support things they like

i personally have done that, the stuff i pirated and ended up liking, i bought because in my mind that helps them to keep developing or writing music or whatnot


----------



## Kirjava (Feb 23, 2012)

My justification is that I am being the change I want to see in the world.


----------



## Escher (Feb 23, 2012)

Kirjava said:


> My justification is that I am being the change I want to see in the world.


 
You go sister <3


----------



## EntireTV (Feb 1, 2017)

I'm a (hobbyist) EDM music producer. Of course I pirate VST's.


----------

