Piracy is not really a crime

 
challengerX
| custom title
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: challengerX
IP: Logged

39,314 posts
I DONT GIVE A SINGLE -blam!- MOTHER -blam!-ER ITS A MOTHER -blam!-ING FORUM, OH WOW, YOU HAVE THE WORD NINJA BELOW YOUR NAME, HOW MOTHER -blam!-ING COOL, NOT, YOUR ARE NOTHING TO ME BUT A BRAINWASHED PIECE OF SHIT BLOGGER, PEOPLE ONLY LIKE YOU BECAUSE YOU HAVE NINJA BELOW YOUR NAME, SO PLEASE PUNCH YOURAELF IN THE FACE AND STAB YOUR EYE BECAUSE YOU ARE NOTHING BUT A PIECE OF SHIT OF SOCIETY
We live in an age where food and shelter could easily be provided for everyone. Leave your politics out of it.


 
Verbatim
| Silver Version
 
more |
XBL:
PSN: Verbatim-1
Steam: Jaco230
ID: Verbatim
IP: Logged

43,547 posts
Still a shitty thing to do.
i never cared what's considered a "crime" as much as i care about what's a bad or stupid thing to do
How is it a bad thing to do? This study proves otherwise.
you don't pay for thing

you don't get thing

simple

i don't care if it boosts sales in the long run by making the product more accessible or whatever bullshit justification there is

i'm sure if we broke every law in existence, there are specific circumstances that it might end up being good in the long term

but they're still not okay
bold words for someone who thinks food and shelter should be free
not really, considering those are necessities, whereas movies and games are just entertainment
So if you don't pay for a thing, you may or may not get a thing, depending on  whether or not Verbatim thinks you are entitled to it?
and you realize i could flip this around on you very easily, right

if you don't pay for a thing, you may or may not get a thing, depending on  whether or not solonoid thinks you're entitled to it

in other words, theft is okay, because challengerX and solonoid think it's okay


 
challengerX
| custom title
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: challengerX
IP: Logged

39,314 posts
I DONT GIVE A SINGLE -blam!- MOTHER -blam!-ER ITS A MOTHER -blam!-ING FORUM, OH WOW, YOU HAVE THE WORD NINJA BELOW YOUR NAME, HOW MOTHER -blam!-ING COOL, NOT, YOUR ARE NOTHING TO ME BUT A BRAINWASHED PIECE OF SHIT BLOGGER, PEOPLE ONLY LIKE YOU BECAUSE YOU HAVE NINJA BELOW YOUR NAME, SO PLEASE PUNCH YOURAELF IN THE FACE AND STAB YOUR EYE BECAUSE YOU ARE NOTHING BUT A PIECE OF SHIT OF SOCIETY
Still a shitty thing to do.
i never cared what's considered a "crime" as much as i care about what's a bad or stupid thing to do
How is it a bad thing to do? This study proves otherwise.
you don't pay for thing

you don't get thing

simple

i don't care if it boosts sales in the long run by making the product more accessible or whatever bullshit justification there is

i'm sure if we broke every law in existence, there are specific circumstances that it might end up being good in the long term

but they're still not okay
bold words for someone who thinks food and shelter should be free
not really, considering those are necessities, whereas movies and games are just entertainment
So if you don't pay for a thing, you may or may not get a thing, depending on  whether or not Verbatim thinks you are entitled to it?
and you realize i could flip this around on you very easily, right

if you don't pay for a thing, you may or may not get a thing, depending on  whether or not solonoid thinks you're entitled to it

in other words, theft is okay, because challengerX and solonoid think it's okay
I never said piracy is ok, it's just not this industry killer a lot of people are claiming it is.


Dɪᴏ Nᴏʟᴏs | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL: Jx493
PSN: Jx493
Steam: Jx493
ID: Solonoid
IP: Logged

12,557 posts
Knees go weak, and I swoon, underneath the pallid moon.
Praise the night, and praise the night!
The only time I feel alright.
We live in an age where food and shelter could easily be provided for everyone. Leave your politics out of it.
My politics aren't part of it.

Either its okay to get things without earning them or it isn't. I'm not saying one way or the other is right, merely that you must eschew a mentality which allows for the answer to be both. It's laden with hypocrisy.

An able bodied man who consciously chooses charity over employ as a solution to his indegence is the same as a thief. I, personally, have been a thief for much of my life, and my two cents is that whatever you can take was always for you anyway.

But one shouldn't preach from some moral high ground about earning what you get, then demand to be cared for. It's just asinine.


 
Verbatim
| Silver Version
 
more |
XBL:
PSN: Verbatim-1
Steam: Jaco230
ID: Verbatim
IP: Logged

43,547 posts
There is literally nothing hypocritical or asinine about it.

You don't need video games, so you shouldn't get them for free.

You need food, so you should get it for free. Not complicated.


Fedorekd | Mythic Invincible!
 
more |
XBL: Fedorekd
PSN:
Steam: Fedorekd
ID: Fedorekd
IP: Logged

7,598 posts
I love you, son.
YouTube

Gotta love the desperate attempts by pirates to paint their activities as something positive that a video like this has to be made.
Last Edit: October 01, 2017, 04:28:35 AM by Fedorekd


Vien | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Vien
IP: Logged

12,793 posts
Just some bloke who wanted to be anyone but himself.
YouTube

Gotta love the desperate attempts by pirates to paint their activities as something positive that a video like this has to be made.
I felt that it belonged here for discussion value.


Turkey | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL: Viva Redemption
PSN: HurtfulTurkey
Steam: HurtfulTurkey
ID: HurtfulTurkey
IP: Logged

7,942 posts
 
There is literally nothing hypocritical or asinine about it.

You don't need video games, so you shouldn't get them for free.

You need food, so you should get it for free. Not complicated.

Self actualization is the apex of Mazlow's hierarchy of needs, though.


 
Verbatim
| Silver Version
 
more |
XBL:
PSN: Verbatim-1
Steam: Jaco230
ID: Verbatim
IP: Logged

43,547 posts
There is literally nothing hypocritical or asinine about it.

You don't need video games, so you shouldn't get them for free.

You need food, so you should get it for free. Not complicated.
Self actualization is the apex of Mazlow's hierarchy of needs, though.
the idea behind the hierarchy of needs is that you can only achieve self-actualization once all the other needs have been fulfilled, starting with basic physiological needs (food clothing shelter) at the very bottom, not because they're the least important, but because they're the most important

but i'm sure you understand that, which makes your response confusing


Turkey | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL: Viva Redemption
PSN: HurtfulTurkey
Steam: HurtfulTurkey
ID: HurtfulTurkey
IP: Logged

7,942 posts
 
There is literally nothing hypocritical or asinine about it.

You don't need video games, so you shouldn't get them for free.

You need food, so you should get it for free. Not complicated.
Self actualization is the apex of Mazlow's hierarchy of needs, though.
the idea behind the hierarchy of needs is that you can only achieve self-actualization once all the other needs have been fulfilled, starting with basic physiological needs (food clothing shelter) at the very bottom, not because they're the least important, but because they're the most important

but i'm sure you understand that, which makes your response confusing

Yeah I'm pretty tired and just meant it to be smarmy. I concur that video games should not be free; I'm more concerned with the compensation of the creator than the payment of the user, if that makes sense at all.


Dɪᴏ Nᴏʟᴏs | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL: Jx493
PSN: Jx493
Steam: Jx493
ID: Solonoid
IP: Logged

12,557 posts
Knees go weak, and I swoon, underneath the pallid moon.
Praise the night, and praise the night!
The only time I feel alright.
There is literally nothing hypocritical or asinine about it.

You don't need video games, so you shouldn't get them for free.

You need food, so you should get it for free. Not complicated.
Self actualization is the apex of Mazlow's hierarchy of needs, though.
the idea behind the hierarchy of needs is that you can only achieve self-actualization once all the other needs have been fulfilled, starting with basic physiological needs (food clothing shelter) at the very bottom, not because they're the least important, but because they're the most important

but i'm sure you understand that, which makes your response confusing

Yeah I'm pretty tired and just meant it to be smarmy. I concur that video games should not be free; I'm more concerned with the compensation of the creator than the payment of the user, if that makes sense at all.
When it comes down to it though, the vast majority of pirates would sooner go without altogether than pay for what they're downloading.

So, from a material standpoint, the result nets zero.


Turkey | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL: Viva Redemption
PSN: HurtfulTurkey
Steam: HurtfulTurkey
ID: HurtfulTurkey
IP: Logged

7,942 posts
 
There is literally nothing hypocritical or asinine about it.

You don't need video games, so you shouldn't get them for free.

You need food, so you should get it for free. Not complicated.
Self actualization is the apex of Mazlow's hierarchy of needs, though.
the idea behind the hierarchy of needs is that you can only achieve self-actualization once all the other needs have been fulfilled, starting with basic physiological needs (food clothing shelter) at the very bottom, not because they're the least important, but because they're the most important

but i'm sure you understand that, which makes your response confusing

Yeah I'm pretty tired and just meant it to be smarmy. I concur that video games should not be free; I'm more concerned with the compensation of the creator than the payment of the user, if that makes sense at all.
When it comes down to it though, the vast majority of pirates would sooner go without altogether than pay for what they're downloading.

So, from a material standpoint, the result nets zero.

But is that because they already have the luxury of easy access to that free content? It's easy to say, "I only pirate what I wouldn't buy", but if you removed piracy as a means to get games, how many do you think would fall back to finding deals online, like CD keys, steam, Humble Bundle, etc.? Do you seriously think most would just give up gaming? How many do you think would outright just accept paying full price to continue their favorite hobby? Probably a large percentage.

Last Edit: October 02, 2017, 05:29:42 AM by Turkey


Dɪᴏ Nᴏʟᴏs | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL: Jx493
PSN: Jx493
Steam: Jx493
ID: Solonoid
IP: Logged

12,557 posts
Knees go weak, and I swoon, underneath the pallid moon.
Praise the night, and praise the night!
The only time I feel alright.
There is literally nothing hypocritical or asinine about it.

You don't need video games, so you shouldn't get them for free.

You need food, so you should get it for free. Not complicated.
Self actualization is the apex of Mazlow's hierarchy of needs, though.
the idea behind the hierarchy of needs is that you can only achieve self-actualization once all the other needs have been fulfilled, starting with basic physiological needs (food clothing shelter) at the very bottom, not because they're the least important, but because they're the most important

but i'm sure you understand that, which makes your response confusing

Yeah I'm pretty tired and just meant it to be smarmy. I concur that video games should not be free; I'm more concerned with the compensation of the creator than the payment of the user, if that makes sense at all.
When it comes down to it though, the vast majority of pirates would sooner go without altogether than pay for what they're downloading.

So, from a material standpoint, the result nets zero.

But is that because they already have the luxury of easy access to that free content? It's easy to say, "I only pirate what I wouldn't buy", but if you removed piracy as a means to get games, how many do you think would fall back to finding deals online, like CD keys, steam, Humble Bundle, etc.? How many do you think would outright just accept paying full price to continue their favorite hobby? Probably a large percentage.
I don't know about that.
The torrenting community is strange, to say the least.

There's almost something lackadaisical to their consumption of media. It's a lot like shopping at the dollar store. Like, "I'm here for whatever's getting seeded today, mainly because I'm bored."

At the end of the day there's an ocean of content that's free by design, and pirates would probably just turn there.

A large number never actually money to spend anyway, so they're not buying anything.

I'm not saying piracy is positive, but it's often altogether benign.


Turkey | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL: Viva Redemption
PSN: HurtfulTurkey
Steam: HurtfulTurkey
ID: HurtfulTurkey
IP: Logged

7,942 posts
 
I'm not saying piracy is positive, but it's often altogether benign.

Not to ignore the rest of your post, but this is probably the most honest way to describe piracy that I've seen. I know that when I pirated, I would start for one specific thing, then follow up with a bunch of stuff that happened to be available, so I can see that being the case for others.


 
SecondClass
| Nothing to see here
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: SecondClass
IP: Logged

27,822 posts
Join epicmafia.com we have lobbies
Why defend piracy

who cares about being a good person


Turkey | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL: Viva Redemption
PSN: HurtfulTurkey
Steam: HurtfulTurkey
ID: HurtfulTurkey
IP: Logged

7,942 posts
 
Tangent, but what is the practical difference between recording something on DVR or even old-school VHS, and piracy? Is it because the show is readily available on some medium that you already have access to, such as cable or public channels? In that case, would that mean I have a right via fair use to pirate any show or movie that I'd have access to on whatever channels I subscribe to, like cable or HBO? Maybe someone would argue that it's the scale that is important, but one act of file sharing is as illegal as 1,000.


 
Verbatim
| Silver Version
 
more |
XBL:
PSN: Verbatim-1
Steam: Jaco230
ID: Verbatim
IP: Logged

43,547 posts
Tangent, but what is the practical difference between recording something on DVR or even old-school VHS, and piracy? Is it because the show is readily available on some medium that you already have access to, such as cable or public channels? In that case, would that mean I have a right via fair use to pirate any show or movie that I'd have access to on whatever channels I subscribe to, like cable or HBO? Maybe someone would argue that it's the scale that is important, but one act of file sharing is as illegal as 1,000.
DVR/VHS recordings are for personal use; it only becomes piracy when you start distributing it to others.
Last Edit: October 05, 2017, 07:47:27 PM by Verbatim


Turkey | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL: Viva Redemption
PSN: HurtfulTurkey
Steam: HurtfulTurkey
ID: HurtfulTurkey
IP: Logged

7,942 posts
 
Tangent, but what is the practical difference between recording something on DVR or even old-school VHS, and piracy? Is it because the show is readily available on some medium that you already have access to, such as cable or public channels? In that case, would that mean I have a right via fair use to pirate any show or movie that I'd have access to on whatever channels I subscribe to, like cable or HBO? Maybe someone would argue that it's the scale that is important, but one act of file sharing is as illegal as 1,000.
DVR/VHS recordings are for personal use; it only becomes an issue when you start distributing it to others.

This goes back to many pirates' legal defense that downloading is fine, and the real issue is uploading. Ignoring the fact that leeching typically requires seeding, if a person downloads a movie but never distributes it, has he/she done anything wrong, and how is that different from a DVR?

Mostly asking your opinion, since I don't expect you to research the legal explanation of it.
Last Edit: October 05, 2017, 07:53:02 PM by Turkey


 
Verbatim
| Silver Version
 
more |
XBL:
PSN: Verbatim-1
Steam: Jaco230
ID: Verbatim
IP: Logged

43,547 posts
Tangent, but what is the practical difference between recording something on DVR or even old-school VHS, and piracy? Is it because the show is readily available on some medium that you already have access to, such as cable or public channels? In that case, would that mean I have a right via fair use to pirate any show or movie that I'd have access to on whatever channels I subscribe to, like cable or HBO? Maybe someone would argue that it's the scale that is important, but one act of file sharing is as illegal as 1,000.
DVR/VHS recordings are for personal use; it only becomes an issue when you start distributing it to others.
This goes back to many pirates' legal defense that downloading is fine, and the real issue is uploading. Ignoring the fact that leeching typically requires seeding, if a person downloads a movie but never distributes it, has that he/she done anything wrong, and how is that different from a DVR?

Mostly asking your opinion, since I don't expect you to research the legal explanation of it.
Personally, I don't really see any legal or moral issues with downloading shit for personal use, so long as you've already paid for the original copy (first and foremost), and you do not plan on distributing it to anyone else.

Pirates do neither.


 
Nipples the Enchilada
| It's kind of chilly...
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Lord Commissar
IP: Logged

11,832 posts
 
Ignoring the fact that leeching typically requires seeding

just one small thing. one of the biggest distributors of pirated content right now uses direct downloads because (for people who aren't using private trackers or VPNs) it doesn't allow corporations to snoop on who is and isn't down loading something.


Vien | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Vien
IP: Logged

12,793 posts
Just some bloke who wanted to be anyone but himself.
Band manager literally encouraged me to pirate his music since they make almost nothing from albums. Pirating his band's music spreads popularity more so than harming them. Current day musicians use their music for soundtracks or other applications, since they make a small cut every time someone clicks on said video or app.


CIS | Legendary Invincible!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: AutisticComputer
IP: Logged

3,334 posts
 
There's nothing wrong with emulating old games
Yes there is, especially if they were just rereleased (like Pokémon Gold/Silver).
Why should you buy the remaster (or whatever this is I don't care about Pokémon) instead of emulating it?
Because then you'd be a thief and a bad person. You're not supporting the company that produced the game, and you no longer have the excuse of "it's an old game that they're not profiting from anymore."
But they're just rehashing an old game. I don't really see how they deserve the money that badly.
They're not just rehashing an old game. They're putting it on a modern device with newer and more reliable technology that's less likely to fail on you. The games I'm talking about are so old, they were on these big cartridges that had little batteries inside of them that are only designed to last a few years before they burn out. Once it burns out, you can no longer save your game anymore and it's basically just worthless.

Replacing these batteries is expensive and dangerous, because it requires you to know how to use a soldering iron if you want to do the job right, and even if you still have a working battery, it's gonna die again eventually and there's no way to transfer your Pokémon to newer generations like you can with every subsequent game. Gold/Silver were the only generation of Pokémon games up until now that didn't let you do that, because there wasn't a way to connect a Game Boy to a Game Boy Advance.

Re-releasing the games on 3DS solves all of these problems.

They're also only $10 and if you can't spare that much for such an excellent game, you're really just a pathetic waste of skin.
So after paying for the game and being boned by substandard technology, you're gonna buy it again? Why not emulate it?
Not "substandard" technology, outdated technology.

Because it's a fucking amazing game that Game Freak deserves billions of dollars for making.

I'd buy both versions 30 more times.

I don't emulate games ever because I'm not a piece of shit.
Seems like a lot of fanboying tbb. It's substandard technology to have it run on batteries that aren't easily replaceable.
Not if they last nearly a decade. People weren't even 100% sure video games would still be around in that long.

I know you're slightly stupid, but come on.
So they planned for failure and the industry collapsing within a decade?
Welcome to reality.

And yes, they do deserve money. I'll buy 100 copies every day.

>hates capitalism
>openly shills for a broken copyright system designed to protect big corporations and the capitalist status quo.
Last Edit: November 06, 2017, 02:51:39 AM by CIS


 
Verbatim
| Silver Version
 
more |
XBL:
PSN: Verbatim-1
Steam: Jaco230
ID: Verbatim
IP: Logged

43,547 posts
There's nothing wrong with emulating old games
Yes there is, especially if they were just rereleased (like Pokémon Gold/Silver).
Why should you buy the remaster (or whatever this is I don't care about Pokémon) instead of emulating it?
Because then you'd be a thief and a bad person. You're not supporting the company that produced the game, and you no longer have the excuse of "it's an old game that they're not profiting from anymore."
But they're just rehashing an old game. I don't really see how they deserve the money that badly.
They're not just rehashing an old game. They're putting it on a modern device with newer and more reliable technology that's less likely to fail on you. The games I'm talking about are so old, they were on these big cartridges that had little batteries inside of them that are only designed to last a few years before they burn out. Once it burns out, you can no longer save your game anymore and it's basically just worthless.

Replacing these batteries is expensive and dangerous, because it requires you to know how to use a soldering iron if you want to do the job right, and even if you still have a working battery, it's gonna die again eventually and there's no way to transfer your Pokémon to newer generations like you can with every subsequent game. Gold/Silver were the only generation of Pokémon games up until now that didn't let you do that, because there wasn't a way to connect a Game Boy to a Game Boy Advance.

Re-releasing the games on 3DS solves all of these problems.

They're also only $10 and if you can't spare that much for such an excellent game, you're really just a pathetic waste of skin.
So after paying for the game and being boned by substandard technology, you're gonna buy it again? Why not emulate it?
Not "substandard" technology, outdated technology.

Because it's a fucking amazing game that Game Freak deserves billions of dollars for making.

I'd buy both versions 30 more times.

I don't emulate games ever because I'm not a piece of shit.
Seems like a lot of fanboying tbb. It's substandard technology to have it run on batteries that aren't easily replaceable.
Not if they last nearly a decade. People weren't even 100% sure video games would still be around in that long.

I know you're slightly stupid, but come on.
So they planned for failure and the industry collapsing within a decade?
Welcome to reality.

And yes, they do deserve money. I'll buy 100 copies every day.
>hates capitalism
>openly shills for a broken copyright system designed to protect big corporations and the capitalist status quo.
I'm not "openly shilling" for it. I'm saying "this is the system that you all want, so this is the system that you should get."

If you don't like this system, feel free to reject it and become a socialist, That would be the most intelligent way to respond to the problem. But either way, wanting to change the law doesn't give you the right to break the current law.

Nobody hates the fact that I have to buy stuff more than I do, but that still doesn't give me the right to be a thief, and that doesn't mean that people shouldn't receive compensation for their work of some form in an economic climate where you NEED compensation just to fucking survive. It's stupid, but that's the way it is, and that's the way capitalists like you want it. So good job making it so fucking difficult for everybody else, and pulling the hypocrisy or shill card on any socialist who tries to peacefully coexist with you by acquiescing to your godawful system while openly protesting it.
Last Edit: November 06, 2017, 08:08:14 AM by Verbatim


 
Verbatim
| Silver Version
 
more |
XBL:
PSN: Verbatim-1
Steam: Jaco230
ID: Verbatim
IP: Logged

43,547 posts
Band manager literally encouraged me to pirate his music since they make almost nothing from albums. Pirating his band's music spreads popularity more so than harming them. Current day musicians use their music for soundtracks or other applications, since they make a small cut every time someone clicks on said video or app.
So why doesn't he just give the album out for free, and then have a donate button or some shit? What a fucking idiot.


Genghis Khan | Heroic Posting Rampage
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Karjala takaisin
IP: Logged

1,391 posts
 


Vien | Mythic Inconceivable!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Vien
IP: Logged

12,793 posts
Just some bloke who wanted to be anyone but himself.
Band manager literally encouraged me to pirate his music since they make almost nothing from albums. Pirating his band's music spreads popularity more so than harming them. Current day musicians use their music for soundtracks or other applications, since they make a small cut every time someone clicks on said video or app.
So why doesn't he just give the album out for free, and then have a donate button or some shit? What a fucking idiot.
Costs money to create an album in physical form. The same happens in iTunes, due to multiple other fees. Bandicamp or whatever that site is called has a donation option, which actually gives benefits.