-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Is it legal to keep my PC games sealed and play downloaded copies of them?
- Thread starter xelios
- Start date
- Status
Steve Youngblood
Member
Sure. I mean, in this particular example if we want to get down into the nitty gritty, there is the possibility of an interesting back and forth in regards to the ethical implications. It's a little off the beaten path of normal queries about the topic. However, I think what the white knighting was more in reference to was the group of people who just hear "download an unlicensed copy off the internet" and just immediately launch into the "that's stealing/piracy/copyright infringement/other bad sounding word here" statements and call it a day.Minsc said:
Seems like a clear cut case of piracy to me.
As the owner of a game, you are entitled to make ONE copy of that game. Since that game is still in plastic, it's pretty clear you would not have followed the rules.
http://www.bbb.org/us/article/computer-software-piracy-406
As the owner of a game, you are entitled to make ONE copy of that game. Since that game is still in plastic, it's pretty clear you would not have followed the rules.
http://www.bbb.org/us/article/computer-software-piracy-406
BigBadShamoo
Banned
Is this morally wrong aswell? I buy and install a game, dowload a no-cd patch given by the publisher. Then give the copy to someone else.
I mean am I really the only one who's given friends a game?
I mean am I really the only one who's given friends a game?
xelios said:
But then you're actually getting something (box/manual/extras) you didn't have because you only had a digital copy.
As long as you're careful opening the box and don't rip it or anything I don't see how the boxed version is worth any less to yourself by not being sealed any more.
Steve Youngblood
Member
Meaning that you still have the game installed on your computer with the intent to play it at any moment? Are you really questioning the morality of this, or are you making a rhetorical point I'm not seeing.BigBadShamoo said:
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
That seems wrong actually. Two people get to play the game simultaneously for the price of one.BigBadShamoo said:
Here's another scenario: probably 2/3rds of the DS games I've played have been on loan from friends because I have a "trade-circle" of about four other people who swap games around all the time.
BigBadShamoo
Banned
Ah, I didn't mean actually make a "copy". I meant just give them my game. I guess it doesn't change anything tho.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
I thought I'd raise the point, see what responses it got.Billychu said:
This isn't true at all. PC, Wii, and DS games are ridiculously easy to pirate and I still buy them. There's no way I'd ever be caught for it, but I do it anyway. I also pay for Netflix despite the fact I could just pirate anything on it I want to watch.YYZ said:
If you borrow a game, only one person can play at a time. If you both have it installed both of you can play at the same time, which is less ethical to me.kpeezy said:
BuddhaRockstar
Member
I will never understand people's obsession with shrink wrapped cardboard boxes.
Wthermans said:
Well, the middle man often provides the money to not only develop the game, but also press/ship the discs or host the game for download, and advertise the game so people like us know it exists. Publishers serve a purpose.
Now, nothing's stopping you from just sending, say, Vigil a check for $20 to say thanks for making Darksiders.
NeoGAF isn't the majority. It is true, otherwise we wouldn't need laws and a punishment system. Everything is becoming easy and convenient except the sale of disposables like games and movies. But in some cases like Steam and Netflix, it's just that so that's why those things are successful. I don't think that with each successive generation that boxes and stupid collector's edition shit are getting more popular.Billychu said:
PsychoJecht
Banned
Lard said:
Interesting concept. I can see the parallel.
Steve Youngblood
Member
I think a more interesting question can arise from the retail packages of some PC games that come completely DRM free. For instance, something I've wondered about is how kosher it is to sell these games. Let's take my copy of Civilization IV Complete. The retail package of this doesn't have any key checks, or even a CD check for that matter. If I decided that I'm never going to play this again because I now own Civ V, should another person feel comfortable buying it from me? After all, the only assurance such an individual would have that they're buying a complete transfer of the product is my gentleman's word that I uninstalled it from my PC before handing them the disc.kpeezy said:
Furthermore, what about lending it out? Even if I uninstall before lending it out -- making me personally in the clear -- I'm once again stuck with nothing but their word that they uninstalled before giving it back in order to make me feel like this exchange was kosher.
PsychoJecht
Banned
Zoe said:
A Pc can't play an NES cart.
I'm sorry, but I find this whole line of thinking completely bonkers.Steve Youngblood said:
Has our position as consumers eroded so intensely that we now have to be worried that the copies of the games we're buying have, at one time, been used for piracy? If a previous owner didn't uninstall the game, then fine, they're committing copyright infringement if they resell the game and still decide to play it; but it's not the responsibility of the new owner to ensure that the publisher's revenue stream isn't being interfered with.
PsychoJecht
Banned
Zoe said:
Same side of a different street. The principal of piracy is the same no matter what system the game is on.
Billychu said:
Services like Steam actually get some people who might pirate games to buy them instead, and it's because of two things: cheap prices, and the centralization of the games. I know people who might pirate older games on their PC just because it might be out of print and impossible to find in stores. But if a game like Beyond Good & Evil, for example, is available on Steam, they're much more likely to buy than pirate because, to them, the price justifies being able to find and reinstall it again at any time by just selecting it from their Library, rather than scouring warez sites for a torrent that may or may not be seeded.
Stumpokapow said:
Stumpokapow said:
Same goes for (S)NES carts. Even if unsealed, I'm sure you're aware that the > the condition of your cart, the better the price it's going to fetch down the road. Mint Secret of Mana vs. a beat up, well used one?
Certainly you're not playing roms just so you can prevent wear & tear to keep your NES carts in better condition for when you ultimately sell them down the road. Argument could work for anyone, but everyone has their own excuse. Yours is convenience, that makes you better than me I guess.
Steve Youngblood
Member
Let me rephrase it. Civ 4 is kind of a silly example because, especially now, nobody is going to want to pay what I'd sell it for since is shows up insanely cheap in sales from practically every DD site. However, from the perspective of a potential buyer of this copy of Civ 4 that I want to sell, I think I might have to wonder whether or not I'm simply subsidizing the original purchase price of the game for the seller since the seller will still have complete and total access to the game provided they didn't uninstall before selling the game.Fugu said:
I'm not saying that selling these games is wrong at all. However, I think the complete lack of any security around the title right out of the box makes for a slightly more interesting discussion of its resale value as opposed to a lot of other examples.
I think you're misunderstanding copyright infringement. It's a commonplace event, and is rarely morally wrong.Lyphen said:
Even by simply quoting your post, I may be infringing upon your copyright. Perhaps its fair use, perhaps not. To find out, you'd have to take me to court over it. Though, traditionally, you'd also need to prove that the infringement caused you some sort of harm in order to make a case.
Zoe said:
What? CDs come with tools for ripping the mp3s? edit: Oh, a completely unrelated 3rd party provides the tools for completely different reasons. Gotcha.
Most people seem to be fine with ripping your own media and using that backup but using someone else's backup of the same media (that you still own) is wrong? They are literally the exact same file with the only difference being the transfer process.
I understand the consequences under the law but any rational human being should be able to make their own decision on this issue depending on the game/system in question.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
xelios said:
I think this is true but only to a limited extent.
I'm very familiar with the valuation of used games, and there isn't a fine gradation like something like comic books. When it comes to games, there's basically: Sealed (>MSRP down the line), CIB but unsealed (~MSRP at most down the line), Game-only (almost certainly <MSRP down the line), Game-only with heavy damage. The only thing I'd add to those four categories is that some games have secondary seals (sealed, but not with original manufacturer seal) and those generally evaluate like CIB games.
The distinction in value between an opened but complete copy of Zelda that's never been played and an open but complete copy of Zelda that's been played is 0.
Still, I appreciate this reply because when I read it I initially got caught off guard and had to think about it for a little while to reconcile things. Always nice to read posts that make you think.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
dallow_bg said:
This might be the most succinct description of my position on the matter, right down to the "feel" and "is cheating"--I can't come up with any rigorous logic on the matter, it just intuitively feels like it subverts the system in a way that buying the game, opening it, and ripping it doesn't feel like it subverts the system.
Lyphen said:
Fair use is both a legal and a moral term. In the legal sense, it depends what jurisdiction you're in, and it's not rigorously defined anywhere. It's not like there is an exhaustive list of things that count as fair use and you can do all of those things. It's been slowly filled out by jurisprudence, and it's very inexact. One of the things that is poorly defined but protected by law is format shifting. Format shifting refers to the ability of an individual to copy or convert something they own in another format to be able to use it with other machines. There has literally never been a case that tested whether format shifting by proxy is legal in the US, at least partially because there has literally never been a case where someone has been sued for downloading rather than uploading.
In this case, the OP is asking three things:
- 1) Is format shifting ok? (Is it ok to rip a game you own?)
- 2) Is the use of a proxy to facilitate format shifting ok? (Is it ok to download someone else's rip of a game you own rather than ripping it yourself?)
- 3) Is the reason for using a proxy--in order to keep the original copy sealed and thus keep its value higher--something that impacts the second question?
If he's asking from a legal perspective, the answers are:
1) yes, maybe
2) maybe, maybe not
3) totally unclear
If he's asking from a moral perspective, I'd say:
1) yes, definitely
2) yes, probably
3) unclear to me.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll