Ubisoft: Piracy's basically killing PC

alf101 said:
Lets make it shorter...
What do you call it?
Do you think there is nothing wrong with it?
Click to expand...

No no no.. you called it "stealing" Icyrus is not debating its morality with you, he is saying its not theft or stealing.

Nice dodge though ;)
 
icyrus said:
Copyright infringement is copyright infringement.

I don't condone piracy but I am not blinded by the bullsh*t these publishers talk.
Click to expand...

w1z4rd said:
No no no.. you called it "stealing" Icyrus is not debating its morality with you, he is saying its not theft or stealing.

Nice dodge though ;)
Click to expand...

:)
Ok, so can we say it's a bad thing to do then?
 
is the world going to be different if I install Turok 3, play it for 5 minutes, and uninstall it?

simple answer: no.
 
I wrote a post about this on my blog a short while ago. I have been pondering this for ages myself.

Not too long ago, a friend of mine got me some games off of UCT's DC+ network. All games I wanted to play, but hadn't yet bought. Of them, Bioshock simply wouldn't work without an internet connection to update itself. The Witcher image refused to mount. Unreal Tournament 3 works but crashes every time I look at. Neverwinter Nights 2 is so buggy as well. Only Call of Duty 4 worked perfectly.

The end result is that I've deleted all those games. I will purchase COD4 after next payday, as well as Neverwinter Nights 2 so that I can properly update it. I wanted UT3, but the way it crashes has put me off.

Overall, the most painful thing with these games was the effort involved to crack and play. Some of them needed mini images mounted and who knows what all else. The moment a patch comes out, the game stops working.

Contrast that with Crysis Warhead which I recently bought. Installed it, hooked up my cell phone to my computer, and activated it in seconds. Clean, simple, and hassle free. Don't even need the disk in the drive to play. It was such a simple relief.

I've gotten rid of just about every pirated game I've ever owned, and have gone legal. Some of the games sucked, but some are priceless gems. I feel good knowing that I've supported good developers, since I have some idea of what goes into creating a good game.

Also, many good games come out on budget sooner or later, which makes it ideal to pick up at that time. I know I've picked up quite a few excellent games like that.

Piracy will always be around, but I suggest that instead of moaning about it, developers work on improving their games. Make PC gaming attractive again. Games must be far less buggy, not resource hogs, and most importantly, be fun. If they can do that, a large crowd would return back to pc gaming. If they can fix the price parity, reasons to pirate dwindle. Well at least here in SA with slow broadband anyway.
 
icyrus said:
Terrible, terrible analogy. Copyright infringement is not stealing, end of story. That is not justification for copyright infringement, just a simple fact. I wish people would get this through their heads already.
Click to expand...

You missed my point here.

I was not saying that copyright infringement is stealing. Obviously its not, its copyright infringement. I aknowledge a difference. My point was rather that in terms of rights of ownership and use, pirating games is equivalent to stealing. You have no legal or ethical right to play a game which you have not payed for.Just like you have no legal or ethical right to to drive away in another persons car against their permission. Does this make more sense to you?

And I dont see how the clause regarding intent to deprive doesnt fit into what we are talking about. Surely piracy is based around an intent to deprive publishers,retailers, developers and game studios of the money which they are demanding in return for the games they sell? I dont see how there is no intent to deprive here,please explain.
 
Last edited:
tinman said:
You missed my point here.

I was not saying that copyright infringement is stealing. Obviously its not, its copyright infringement. I aknowledge a difference. My point was rather that in terms of rights of ownership and use, pirating games is equivalent to stealing.
Click to expand...
No its not.


Just like you have no legal or ethical right to to drive away in another persons car against their permission. Does this make more sense to you?
Click to expand...

So if I get a super duper special intergalactic photocopy machine. And I walk past the said car, make a copy of it, and drive off with the copy... I have stolen the car?

As far as I know.. the persons car is still there, I simply have a copy of it.

Piracy is not stealing. To use the word like you are doing, seems dishonest. Or have you changed the word to suite your own perspective, do you also see jaywalking as stealing?
 
Wizard what about machine that replicates a car to the T, you walk past the latest ferrari and the machine makes a copy, your driving the latest ferrari, have you stolen it? :)

That sounds better hahah, not stolen just copied :p
 
As a huge RPG fan I was reading all the articles about Diablo3 and went and bought DiabloII a second time cause my CD's was gone. It just shows that if a game is good Ill buy it twice:)
 
You are still misunderstanding me. I am not equating stealing the car to being identical to copying a game.

However, they are similar in many ways, and identical in some. This means that certain principles surounding theft are going to be identical to principles regarding copy right infringement.

For example, rights of ownership. A software pirate has identical ownership rights to a pirated game as a car thief has to a stolen car: that is, zero.

To word it differently, you have no more right to use and own a piece of software that you do not purchase than a car thief has to use and own a car they do not purchase.

My point rather focuses on the dynamic regarding rights of use and ownership. When it comes to buying software, you are esentially not paying for the box and the disk, nor are you paying for the game, that would cost millions.The majority of the cash you are spending when purchasing intellectual property is on ownership and user rights. When you spend R350 on a game, you are not necessarily buying the game, but rather the ethical and legal rights to play it. If you play or own the game wrongfully, ie copy it, you have not obtained a right to do so, therefore, you are equivelant to a car thief in regards to rights and ownership.

As for your question regarding the "intergalactic copier", Im sure that BMW will have industrial rights designs on their vehicles, this prevents anyone else from COPYING their designs. If you literally copied one of their cars, then you would own a car which is based on their patented design and it could be labeled intellectual property theft, I dont want to go down this road to much though.

I never said that Theft and piracy were identical in every way, just the one i have discussed above.
 
tinman said:
As for your question regarding the "intergalactic copier", Im sure that BMW will have industrial rights designs on their vehicles, this prevents anyone else from COPYING their designs.
Click to expand...

so if i make photocopies of a book in the library, i'm stealing?

me trying out a game for a few minutes at home is the same as playing 5 minutes at the CNA's Demo Gaming Stand.

I "Try" out a few games a month, and buy what I want/like.
 
Keeper said:
so if i make photocopies of a book in the library, i'm stealing?

me trying out a game for a few minutes at home is the same as playing 5 minutes at the CNA's Demo Gaming Stand.

I "Try" out a few games a month, and buy what I want/like.
Click to expand...

Are you installing cracks and patches when you do those things?
 
Alf i try games out before i buy them with cracks and patches.

If i don;t like it i uninstall t, if i like it i go buy.
 
Keeper said:
so if i make photocopies of a book in the library, i'm stealing?
QUOTE]

Iv said in it in all my posts in this thread, and Ill say it once more.

1.COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT IS NOT STEALING

My point, for the last time, is that:

2.COPYING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY UNLAWFULLY GIVES THE USER IDENTICAL USER AND OWNERSHIP RIGHTS TO SAID MATERIALS AS A THIEF WOULD HAVE TO STOLEN PROPERTY.

Libraries have special legislation regarding copyright infringement because they are technically learning institutions. However, there are distinct limits to what you can copy in a library. Basically, if you do not purchase a book you have limited user rights with regards to photocopying, and going beyond those rights is deemed copyright infrigement, and could be called "Intellectual property theft"

"libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be "used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research. " If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of "fair use," that user may be liable for copyright infringement"

and

"Copying a complete work from the library collection is prohibited unless the work is not available at a "fair price." This is generally the case when the work is out of print and used copies are not available at a reasonable price."

http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter7/7-d.html
Click to expand...
 
tinman said:
The whole "pirates wouldnt buy it anyways therefore there is no loss of sale" argument really doesnt hold much water imo. Its really quite simple: people spend years working their asses off making a single game, and no one has a right to enjoy the product of their hard work without paying them. Quite simple really, so if pirates werent going to buy the game anyways, then they have no right to play it. Its like saying that people who steal BMWs cant afford them anyways and would never buy one legally therefore its ok because there is no loss of sale. They do not deserve a bmw if they cannot, or willnot pay for one. Just because games are digital doesnt meen that each individual game downloaded doesnt cost anything to make, it cost a crap load to make the source code from which all copies were made, and the purpose of those copies is to pay for the original development process.

If you arent sure if a game is worth the money, look at some reviews, do a bit of reading and THINK about whether its the kind of game you will enjoy before buying it. The "i dont want to spend money on somehtin which may suck" argument is also bs. Its like going to a resturant, and asking for a free meal and saying you will pay for it once you have finished only if you really enjoyed it.

If you believe that pirating games is ok, then you have absolutely NO right to moan next time your car is stolen. You are no better than a common criminal
Click to expand...

The problem with your example is that nobody here is stealing a BMW. Piracy is not theft. If your example was accurate we would have a situation where people could make their own exact duplicates of BMWs. Nobody has lost their BMW, not any owners or the manufacturers. There are simply more BMWs on the road, but nobody has lost any money. It is copyright violation and it may deprive the sellers of revenue. But it is not theft. .. and there simply is no way to prove how much money was actually lost, because a duplication does not necessarily equal a lost sale. This is just common sense. A baby could understand it.

maybe this will help you understand...

piracy.jpg
 
why not use a Steam type service for all pc games >.>
 
Garyvdh said:
The problem with your example is that nobody here is stealing a BMW. Piracy is not theft. If your example was accurate we would have a situation where people could make their own exact duplicates of BMWs. Nobody has lost their BMW, not any owners or the manufacturers. There are simply more BMWs on the road, but nobody has lost any money. It is copyright violation and it may deprive the sellers of revenue. But it is not theft. .. and there simply is no way to prove how much money was actually lost, because a duplication does not necessarily equal a lost sale. This is just common sense. A baby could understand it.

maybe this will help you understand...

piracy.jpg
Click to expand...

Did you actually read my post?Or any of the following posts? Im not saying that piracy = theft. A baby could understand that if it were able to read the rest of my argument. Im not rehashing this. Iv stated my argument in my previous post, if you want to read it and think about it then feel free to do so and post again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X