To publishers you can't. If you got rid of piracy tomorrow they'd STILL say that wasn't enough, used games are cutting into their profits too much. In fact lately I've heard more about used games from publishers than piracy.
The reality is, most people have convinced themselves that piracy is morally wrong but they really care why. Most people are only going to play a game once and then that's it--it's not like music or movies where people often rewatch it a bunch. While there are certainly a ton of gamers (most of which are on GAF) who will periodically replay good games, GameStop wouldn't be nearly as successful if a large majority weren't playing it once and then getting rid of it.
In that sense then, just borrowing a game is screwing the developer out of money too.
And no, I don't pirate video games. I'm a console gamer and while I'm sure it's possible--it just seems like too much work to me. I'd rather pay the $60.
I would think calling someone a cunt would be a bannable offense, but other than that you seem to have a thing for Marcel.
To publishers you can't. If you got rid of piracy tomorrow they'd STILL say that wasn't enough, used games are cutting into their profits too much. In fact lately I've heard more about used games from publishers than piracy.
Most people are only going to play a game once and then that's it--it's not like music or movies where people often rewatch it a bunch. While there are certainly a ton of gamers (most of which are on GAF) who will periodically replay good games, GameStop wouldn't be nearly as successful if a large majority weren't playing it once and then getting rid of it.
Who said this was a virus? Maybe its Ubisoft's way of making piracy profitable?
I'm not taking any sides to this discussion or anything but taking something from someone versus duplicating it is different. Kind of like if you had an expensive vase and I stole it versus I copied that vase that you worked hard on.This is possibly the funniest post I've seen on GAF. You're justifying stealing (piracy IS stealing) because a company will be fine anyway.
I'm off to steal $1,000,000 from Bill Gates because "he'll be fine anyway".
No it doesn't.Stealing (taking) something implies that the original owner is no longer in possession of the thing in question.
No it doesn't.
Look up irony
I agree with you because this is why there are patents and trademarks.
That's not what the original poster was claiming was ironic. He was saying because he used to pirate, that his first post on Gaf being in a thread about piracy was ironic.A game about hacking that was supposedly hacked and then distributed, turns out to be a fake release that when people use it, hacks their system to mine bitcoins.
Pretty ironic if you ask me. (Situational Irony, look it up)
You committed intellectual property theft. Look it up.I'm not taking any sides to this discussion or anything but taking something from someone versus duplicating it is different. Kind of like if you had an expensive vase and I stole it versus I copied that vase that you worked hard on.
No it doesn't.
Finished you post for ya.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theft
In common usage, theft is the taking of another person's property without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it.
The FBI disagrees with you: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/white_collar/ipr/iprpatent/trademark/copyright infringement are not theft, despite the best efforts of the IP cartels to hammer their favored version of the law into everyone's heads
I'm pretty sure this isn't the first time invid and others have chose to target me indiscriminately or use gendered insults against me. We can be free to disagree but calling someone a cunt is pretty much crossing the line.
Finished you post for ya.
That's not what the original poster was claiming was ironic. He was saying because he used to pirate, that his first post on Gaf being in a thread about piracy was ironic.
You have deprived that person of his intellectual property.
The FBI disagrees with you: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/white_collar/ipr/ipr
Exactly. Arguments are fine and all, that's a natural part of any discussions but a personal insult like that is definitely uncalled for and absolutely crossing the line.
No you haven't, the IP is still theirs.You have deprived that person of his intellectual property.
So there's no proof that Ubisoft is doing this themselves, right? I hope that nobody is genuinely going "yeah, take that pirates" if the people distributing the game - i.e., the people enabling piracy - are profiting from doing so. That isn't going to discourage piracy.
no, you have deprived them of hypothetical profits they may have made by selling you a license to their IP
No you haven't, the IP is still theirs.
You have deprived that person of his intellectual property.
The FBI disagrees with you: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/white_collar/ipr/ipr
I may not have a popular, friendly opinion but I don't think I'm saying anything that warrants that type of response.
Is FBI opinion universal law?
Brazil broke medicine patents in order to low their price and make them affordable for the poor population.
The sad thing are the usual suspects cheering him on like it's a good thing that he simply put down a dumb "cunt". I may not have a popular, friendly opinion but I don't think I'm saying anything that warrants that type of response.
is actually mindblowing.Great post.
And other countries use pirated software on their PCs. What is your point?
The sad thing are the usual suspects cheering him on like it's a good thing that he simply put down a dumb "cunt". I may not have a popular, friendly opinion but I don't think I'm saying anything that warrants that type of response.
And other countries use pirated software on their PCs. What is your point?
No problems on that statement. Legal and moral are different. The moral justification for downloading games is even harder to do though.i think he's saying that legal != moral
In which case Brazil is an awful example. They were one of the first countries to come up with IP rights. Their breaking of US patents is more of a economical sanction against the US than anything else.and laws aren't the same everywhere?
Luckily Brazil also has IP theft laws, and the link you posted is part of economic sanctions against the US, not some stance on IP laws.What FBI claims as theft could not be theft in other places. It's relative and still debatable.
Yup like not friendly at all, you just called a guy opinion ridiculous shit a while ago.
Yup like not friendly at all, you just called a guy opinion ridiculous shit a while ago.
What exactly is your opinion on piracy, if you don't mind me asking?
No problems on that statement. Legal and moral are different. The moral justification for downloading games is even harder to do though.
In which case Brazil is an awful example. They were one of the first countries to come up with IP rights. Their breaking of US patents is more of a economical sanction against the US than anything else.
Luckily Brazil also has IP theft laws, and the link you posted is part of economic sanctions against the US, not some stance on IP laws.
Haha... aren't the uploader(s) of the game trackable now since basically anyone could get their Bitcoin wallet address?
This thread went bonkers.
No problems on that statement. Legal and moral are different. The moral justification for downloading games is even harder to do though.
In which case Brazil is an awful example. They were one of the first countries to come up with IP rights. Their breaking of US patents is more of a economical sanction against the US than anything else.
Luckily Brazil also has IP theft laws, and the link you posted is part of economic sanctions against the US, not some stance on IP laws.
I'm pretty sure this isn't the first time invid and others have chose to target me indiscriminately or use gendered insults against me. We can be free to disagree but calling someone a cunt is pretty much crossing the line.
Calling someone's opinion ridiculous shit ≠ personal insult.
Come on now.
Bitch, please.
Yup like not friendly at all, you just called a guy opinion ridiculous shit a while ago.
Brazil is one of the bigger, more powerful countries. It is the seventh largest economy.in this particular case i would argue that IP laws are heavily tilted in favor of the bigger, more powerful countries and enable exploitation of poorer ones
It is, and it isn't. Making medicine for poor people is a good thing, but the research for medicine is also really expensive. That entire industry needs a reform with research into medicine being taken out of the private domain to be really effective. Brazil however isn't making a stand on that. They're more than happy to support their own IP holders and IP holders from other countries. It is part of a sanction against the US.brazil ignoring pressure from american IP industries to give medicine to poor people is morally correct
It is not a moral stance, it is an economic sanction against the US.Where did I implied it's not a crime in Brazil?
Just said that the sanction was a crime by FBI's perspective and still a right moral decision from Brazil's perspective.