ISPs to Start Policing Copyrights by July 1st...

[Mountain Dewgong]

While it probably doesn't draw from direct statistics it is more than likely fairly spot on. "Piracy" hurts corporations which drives policy change.

 

[doughboy]

Not to disagree with you, but a fair amount of game piracy is games that are either old games not making money anymore, not localized to a certain area, or too rare to get a legitimate copy of (although this isn't as common as the other 2).

I would these are a fair amount, but the largemajority of games that are pirated are modern game releases: 2011 and All Time(though this one is close to a year old).

Could you please link? Its not that I don't believe you, its just a problem I never knew existed and I'd like to look into it to better formulate my opinions.

It certainly didn't ruin them but I remember it put them on edge: World of Goo.

What is so disheartening about the whole World of Goo fiasco is that it tossed the whole "I pirate to test it out and will pay for it anyway" notion aside and the "No support to Big Publishers". It also tossed out the whole "Too much DRM" thing aside because the developers made it clear that they released the game with absolutely no intention of implementing DRM in the first place. Having around 82% of your playerbase not having bought a legitimate copy of the game is terrible.

Aside from that if one wants to have a preview of a game before release, just read a decent amount of reviews for the game and/or wait a week after release. There are plenty of gaming sites out there now that offer indepth, not boughtout reviews. tl;dr don't go to ign for reviews

In regards to the Music industry, even if the artist only makes a small fraction of the profit, it is infinitely more than the $0 you gave them with piracy. I'm not saying what the big labels are doing is right (which is why I support independent labels like XL Recordings<3Vampire Weekend), but using the argument that you support artisit's more by pirating so you can hurt big labels is not true. If you want a change in the music industry, buy from independent labels to shift sales from bigger labels. It will show the better model to follow.

 

[aurora]

piracy is awful, period
it deprives corporations of money they should have earned from legit purchases
and it encourages others to do the same thing, therefore lessening profits and lessening the music industry's required prominence
therefore this act is a very good idea

 

[November Blue]

AFAIK, video game pirating is fairly small-scale. I think that the preowned game market is far worse for game designers. Unless you absolutely have to have the game on release day, most people will have the nous to wait until a (vastly cheaper) preowned copy is available. Game designers make zero money from preowned sales, as it's the same copy of the game being redistributed after being sold.

Also, why would you illegally download a song to "try before you buy" when you could just watch it on Youtube? What's to stop people ripping entire albums off Youtube for that matter? Most people have the tech know-how to get a song from Youtube to their iPod. Will video sites be on the chopping block next? I've already seen copyright holders have media pulled from Youtube. If a music video gets pulled, it's hurting the artist and filling the pockets of the copyright holders. Where do you draw the line? Where does it stop being a matter of intellectual property, and become one of money? (For the copyright holder, not the artist.)

 

[capefeather]

And that's the real point of this thread, isn't it? We can stand on our soapboxes and talk about how piracy hurts artists all we want, but that is not in itself a solution. This topic was never about legislation itself, and the thread shouldn't be, either. It's about effective legislation. Laws should be more or less in line with human behaviour.

 

[Matthew]

AFAIK, video game pirating is fairly small-scale. I think that the preowned game market is far worse for game designers. Unless you absolutely have to have the game on release day, most people will have the nous to wait until a (vastly cheaper) preowned copy is available. Game designers make zero money from preowned sales, as it's the same copy of the game being redistributed after being sold.

Also, why would you illegally download a song to "try before you buy" when you could just watch it on Youtube? What's to stop people ripping entire albums off Youtube for that matter? Most people have the tech know-how to get a song from Youtube to their iPod. Will video sites be on the chopping block next? I've already seen copyright holders have media pulled from Youtube. If a music video gets pulled, it's hurting the artist and filling the pockets of the copyright holders. Where do you draw the line? Where does it stop being a matter of intellectual property, and become one of money? (For the copyright holder, not the artist.)

I often do that. For instance I just downloaded an artist called Boy & Bear to hear them out. Now I'm looking for a vinyl copy of the album I just illegally downloaded because I like it so much. On the other hand I downloaded a band called Welkin the other day & it wasn't my cup of tea. So I deleted it from my music library. In both situations the music company wasn't hurt from my actions. In the first one it is actually helped while in the second one they made a net profit of 0 & lost 0.

 

[az]

I often do that. For instance I just downloaded an artist called Boy & Bear to hear them out. Now I'm looking for a vinyl copy of the album I just illegally downloaded because I like it so much. On the other hand I downloaded a band called Welkin the other day & it wasn't my cup of tea. So I deleted it from my music library. In both situations the music company wasn't hurt from my actions. In the first one it is actually helped while in the second one they made a net profit of 0 & lost 0.

idk about where you are, but over there that's legal -- you have 24 hours

 

[Matthew]

it is illegal in the united states

 

[az]

that was a typo of "over here"

 

[Razza]

Umbreon that is literally one of the dumbest things I've ever heard... if people started stealing CDs from shops in masses, that wouldn't be grounds to change the law to say "stealing CDs is no longer illegal"...

The only reason that it's not "immoral" to most people is because A.) it's incredibly easy compared to the alternative of buying digital music B.) it's not punished harshly / consistently and C.) they can't see the negative effects of their actions right away.

There's no positive spin you can put on this, it's stealing no matter how you look at it, and our basic human morality says that stealing is "wrong".

Lol, downloading stuff off the internet isn't stealing, it's called making good use of your computer, this law is just stupid, hope this crap doesn't come to the UK, also I dont really get why some people wouod actually buy their music or films online, I much prefer getting it for free, but hey whatever floats your boat :)

 

[Matthew]

Lol, downloading stuff off the internet isn't stealing, it's called making good use of your computer, this law is just stupid, hope this crap doesn't come to the UK, also I dont really get why some people wouod actually buy their music or films online, I much prefer getting it for free, but hey whatever floats your boat :)

We buy things because we like to support the artist or director in their efforts. I support Radiohead, & while I never purchased their music that's currently on my computer -- I have posters, & t-shirts, & I bought concert tickets to go see the live. I enjoy their music, so I contribute to them so they keep making it.

 

[LonelyNess]

Lol, downloading stuff off the internet isn't stealing, it's called making good use of your computer

robbing a bank isn't stealing, it's called making good use of a gun

god posts likes these make me cringe

 

[UltiMario]

Biggest issue with Anti-piracy laws is a lack of a time clause.

I should be able to pirate Ten+ year old games, movies, and other media. You literally CAN'T find them anywhere anymore, and if you do, they're used, so it's not like it's actually helping the companies that produced those things anymore.

Worst (or best, depending on your perspective I guess?) case scenario Companies re-release their games, music, and movies every 10 years to keep ahead of those free downloads, which at least means you have access to buy those things again.

 

[Ancien Régime]

lol theoretical profits.

If you pirate a game, obviously you would have paid 60 dollars for it if you couldn't pirate!

 

[Hipmonlee]

Sometimes people pirate games they wouldnt ordinarily buy. And sometimes people buy games they pirated in the past that they wouldnt otherwise have bought. It is slightly more complicated than just that.

 

[LonelyNess]

If you don't buy it, you don't deserve to play the game. Period. Just like if you don't buy a ticket to a concert, you don't get to sneak in for free. It's the price of admission to experiencing the content. You're not entitled to play whatever game you feel like playing for free just because you want to.

All of this "well I wouldn't have bought it anyway" stuff is complete bullshit and only serves to make yourself feel better about something that you know is illegal and that a majority of people will agree is objectively "wrong". If you wouldn't have bought it, then ok, you just don't get to experience the content... you don't get to then go and take it for free.

If you download stuff illegally, then at least own up to the fact that what you are doing is wrong, but that you plain don't give a shit. Just don't pretend that what you are doing is somehow morally OK, or try to justify it in any way shape or form, because you can't.

 

[az]

this is an interesting debate, but let's not start telling other people what they know

 

[Kromlech]

If I buy something preowned or from a flea market or whatever, I'm getting to experience the game without paying the IP owner a cent. How is that any different? (it doesn't matter that the seller can't experience it anymore, the point is that they didn't get any money from me, and I got to experience the content)

 

[LonelyNess]

It's not the experiencing of the content without paying the IP owner that is the problem, it's the making reproductions of a piece of media that the IP owner doesn't want produced that is the problem. The original owner has already been paid for that copy of the used game, it's free to do whatever it wants to do, AS LONG AS IT IS NOT REPRODUCED.

What I meant to say is, if you can't experience the content via a means that the Intellectual Property owner has deemed acceptable (in this case, borrowing a game from a friend is acceptable as is buying a used version), then you don't (and shouldn't) get to experience the content.

It's has nothing to do with who's getting paid and who's not getting paid, it has everything to do with respecting the IP owner's right to dictate how the media is reproduced and distributed.

 

[Matthew]

If you don't buy it, you don't deserve to play the game. Period. Just like if you don't buy a ticket to a concert, you don't get to sneak in for free. It's the price of admission to experiencing the content. You're not entitled to play whatever game you feel like playing for free just because you want to.

All of this "well I wouldn't have bought it anyway" stuff is complete bullshit and only serves to make yourself feel better about something that you know is illegal and that a majority of people will agree is objectively "wrong". If you wouldn't have bought it, then ok, you just don't get to experience the content... you don't get to then go and take it for free.

If you download stuff illegally, then at least own up to the fact that what you are doing is wrong, but that you plain don't give a shit. Just don't pretend that what you are doing is somehow morally OK, or try to justify it in any way shape or form, because you can't.

I don't understand why you're not considering any of the points which I made. Tons of people who download music illegally find new awesome bands which they then go to and support. I don't see why you find that hard to believe. Purchasing the music itself doesn't really get the bands a ton of money. It gives the record companies money. Go to concerts & buy apparel to support the bands.

 

[doughboy]

If I buy something preowned or from a flea market or whatever, I'm getting to experience the game without paying the IP owner a cent. How is that any different? (it doesn't matter that the seller can't experience it anymore, the point is that they didn't get any money from me, and I got to experience the content)

Because at one point in time where that game in the flea market was new, therefore there was an "instance of distribution" where the IP owner stood to gain money off that product. Piracy circumvents that original "instance of distribution" so the IP owner stands to have no ability to profit off of its product. That's why pre-game sales are much different (IMO), the developed/IP Owner had the opportunity to profit off it already.

Lol, downloading stuff off the internet isn't stealing, it's called making good use of your computer, this law is just stupid, hope this crap doesn't come to the UK, also I dont really get why some people wouod actually buy their music or films online, I much prefer getting it for free, but hey whatever floats your boat :)

It's a slippery slope, but if piracy did not act as a competing medium that had "free stuff" compared to the "paid" market, you would not have accessed whatever product you wanted. Basically since torrents exists you feel entitled enough to access a product (film, music, whatever) without compensating the owner's of the product? ...

It's has nothing to do with who's getting paid and who's not getting paid, it has everything to do with respecting the IP owner's right to dictate how the media is reproduced and distributed.

This right here. Sometimes companies overstep their bounds on the restrictions for paid owners of their media (don't get me started on piracy warning when I bought the dvd -.-). You can still respect a IP owners rights of reproduction by boycotting the product whist not pirating.

 

[Heroes Fall]

While it probably doesn't draw from direct statistics it is more than likely fairly spot on. "Piracy" hurts corporations which drives policy change.

Although I don't support piracy, I find it disgusting that these companies play victim and try to make the pirates feel bad by saying the musicians are the ones being harmed when the record company is already robbing the musicians of what they deserve.

 

[Alan]

Dead Kennedy's doing it right.

Piracy isn't necessarily good or bad. You can make the argument that it is both. It's good because it will eventually force big companies to change their policy (i.e. lower prices) but at the same time, it does hurt the other people (artists, musicians, programmers, etc.). I personally am not bothered in the slightest when I download an album. It's there, it's free, I'm an idiot not to take it. If I particularly like the album or the artist, I'll go buy it on iTunes, it's my way of reconciling.

A big problem though, with iTunes in particular, is that he tracks are pretty low quality compared to what you can find on PirateBay or whatever torrent site you fancy. So it's basically like you can have a nice steak dinner for free, or you can pay $10 for a hamburger from McDonalds. When you have to compete with free, you're going to take a paycut and big companies fail to realise this because they have had an enormous amount of control over distribution for about a 60 year period but thanks to the internet that grip is now slipping.

There is nothing that the government or labels can do at this point to combat piracy as far as I'm concerned, it's gone too far and it's too easy. They can try, but in the end, nothing will happen.

 

[jrrrrrrr]

There is so much ignorance in this thread that it's astounding. I know we aren't all copyright lawyers here, but seriously, did ANYONE actually read the article?

robbing a bank isn't stealing, it's called making good use of a gun

god posts likes these make me cringe

Posts like this make me cringe, so ignorant of what you're arguing against. Let me make it clear:

COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT IS NOT THEFT. It's infringement. There is nothing being stolen. Nobody is losing anything.

We could get into the ethics of putting price restrictions on something that can be copied infinitely for no cost, but that's neither here nor there. File sharing is here to stay and it's up to the suppliers to keep up with the times...yet consumers are being asked to play along as if we don't know we're being ripped off. I have no sympathy for the MPAA or RIAA because they are wasting our tax dollars and our government's resources trying to put people in jail and sue grandmas for everything theyre worth to protect their outdated business model.

 

[JimBob]

A big problem though, with iTunes in particular, is that he tracks are pretty low quality compared to what you can find on PirateBay or whatever torrent site you fancy. So it's basically like you can have a nice steak dinner for free, or you can pay $10 for a hamburger from McDonalds. When you have to compete with free, you're going to take a paycut and big companies fail to realise this because they have had an enormous amount of control over distribution for about a 60 year period but thanks to the internet that grip is now slipping.

You don't have to buy low quality itunes bs. You can in fact buy CDs, and a good many labels still press vinyl.