morality of piracy (was: Final Fantasy III update)

Halifirien said:
I've gotta admit, watching Rones try to use this argument in a courtroom would be pretty fucking spectacular right up until the moment the judge clonks him with the gavel.
LOL :106:
Sculli said:
If I were a developer, you better believe that my happyness would change if the guy next door was playing the game, that I have invested a few years of my life into, without to compensate me for it.
I would then question why he was unhappy? If he knows he could not get any money out of the person, then his reasoning for being upset is flawed.

This is going to sound like a appeal for pity, but that really isn't my aim, it just goes with the subject. Imagine the poor and medical treatment. Do you feel upset someone is given life saving medical treatment at a reduced or free price because they could never afford it? That poor person is not compensating the medical providers. There are many instances in society where not all acts are directly compensated.
 
Last edited:
Marajade said:
Also, for the DS outselling the PSP, i point to christmas, and parents getting them for thier kids. The PSP's price put it out of that range for many christmas gifts. Also, those numbers are alot closer now then they were right after christmas.


Not to mention, the PSP is no where near worth its price point. Portable DVD players are what? $50? Good MP3 players can be purchased for the same amount(Of the PSP, that is.) Better game platforms for half the cost...

While it's good to have all of those rolled in to one item, it sucks at being any one of them.
 
Rones does have a good argument and I would personally hate getting into a debate with him. (No offense, I highly respect you for that) but it seems like a back-up for a wrong cause. Stealing is stealing. What is the difference of downloading a game you do not own which is on the market versus taking it in you pocket at the store? It's like illegally downloading music and video, everyone suffers for it. The reason music CD's shot up in prices over the past years is due to downloading. Now, I'm not casting any stones since I have expressed my internet sins in the past. I used to DL music, movies and games in middle school and highschool. Most of the games were Japanese games that weren't released in this country that I would find patches for and play. (Curse you anime RPGs!) I haven't downloaded any of these in about 4 years now. It's illegal and I consider morally wrong :(
 
Skaw said:
Not to mention, the PSP is no where near worth its price point. Portable DVD players are what? $50? Good MP3 players can be purchased for the same amount(Of the PSP, that is.) Better game platforms for half the cost...

While it's good to have all of those rolled in to one item, it sucks at being any one of them.

I own a portable DVD player, they're too bulky to carry around and just crack open at a Bus stop like i can with my PSP (not to mention mine doesnt have a built in battery, but i know some do) The screen isnt near the quality of the PSP. Also, i cant load my movie trailers/AMV's/Video Clips onto it like i can with my PSP. The large screen on the PSP also helps with the MP3 function. Ever try finding the right song out of 200+ on a normal MP3? Takes forever.

Again, i admit the game lineup on the PSP is limited currently, but it looks to be changing in the near future.

Also, to the person who commented on how anime Games are generaly Lackluster, the Ghost in the Shell one is actualy being done by the anime Creator, so i'm expecting good things from it.
 
Rones said:
I would then question why he [the developer] was unhappy? If he knows he could not get any money out of the person, then his reasoning for being upset is flawed.

This is going to sound like a appeal for pity, but that really isn't my aim, it just goes with the subject. Imagine the poor and medical treatment. Do you feel upset someone is given life saving medical treatment at a reduced or free price because they could never afford it? That poor person is not compensating the medical providers. There are many instances in society where not all acts are directly compensated.
Actually, it wasn't until a federal statue came about that mandates that any health care provider is required by law to administer life saving treatment regardless of whether the patient is able to pay for such treatment.

As far as giving a medical treatment at a reuced price of free of charge goes; that doesn't compare. It doesn't compare because the choice to administer such treatment is with the provider of the treatment.

In the case of software piracy the developer has no choice.
That's the difference.

The developer is upset because someone who is not entitled to use his product is doing so anyway. Why wouldn't he be upset. I as developer (if I were one) do not want people who do not pay to benefit from my work. The fact that there are people who benefit from my work and do not pay makes me a sad panda. It's irrelevant whether they may never purchase my work if they had only the option to pay or not to use it. If they wouldn't by my work anyway, so be it, at least they do not get any benefit they don't deserve from me.
 
So .. i'ma play devil's advocate to a point here, cos i can and piracy is something close to my heart from back in the days of DoS and windows 3.x.

No one's commented to those titles out there, that i noticed, (on the video game side of things) that simply aren't worth the price put on them. Normally i nab something from the internet to test it out. I don't crack programs and rip off developers simply to save a buck, hell 9/10 times it's more effort than it's worth. I pirate to test, if i like something i go buy a resale copy simply because having said cracks and going through what it takes to pirate something can occasionally cause performance issues and if the game's worth the buy it's not worth sacking performance or jumping through hoops just to have a load screen crash on you or sit through 4 hours of hacks just to *maybe* have it up and running.

Case in point. I'dve wasted 50 bucks that i don't have on flatout just to find out it's crap. Personally i pirate what i do simply because i know there's more than enough developers out there who don't give a damn about the quality of games they put out. I call it being a smart consumer. Morality is something i concern myself with as little as possible on this issue.

Slightly off topic: Being on the opposing side of a serious debate about something with Rones is the equivalent of an intellectual ironman marathon.
 
I've done a lot of "play before you pay" ROM stuff, mostly GBA games because there's no place I can rent them (before Gamefly popped on the scene, anyway). I was also playing the SNES Final Fantasy II on my PSP, but I was happy as hell to find out it was hitting GBA.
 
I rarely screw around with console stuff, blackbuster and gamefly give me an easy (legal) out on trying stuff. But i've yet to find a place that rents out PC games. We had a kroger that did that for a minute but A.) it didn't draw in enough cash. and B.) people kept stealing games .... oddly enough.
 
You know, Rones, there's one FATAL flaw in the Utilitarianism argument.

If everyone followed that same example, if every single person decided that no actual 'theft' was going on and that downloading one of an infinite number of perfect copies of the software was completely fine... not a single game developer would make a single dime, except from the charity of the select few remaining people who would feel sorry for the money lost developing the game.

You can run around with your "WELL I ONRY GOTS MY $100 A MONTH TO PAY ANYWAY" argument, but I guarantee the majourity wouldn't even spend that much per month if the Utilitarianism argument became law. Nobody would pay for games anymore if it became law; if that were the case, nobody would develop games anymore either, because it simply would not be economically feasible.
 
The reason music CD's shot up in prices over the past years is due to downloading.
LOL. :biggrin: Music is a very different matter from games. I was hoping someone would bring this one up.

Music industry is a giant rip off. With the advent of the internet and its rapid distribution of music, the middle man leechs aka Record Industry are no longer needed. Music should be freely distributed across the internet. Then let the artists reap massive profits on live tours (as that is where they already make much of their money). I also don't feel bad about seeing music artists who currently earn multi millions a year get knocked down a couple rungs on the ladder. What they do is important and should be appreciated, but they are being way overcompensated for it.

The stories the record industry circulate of lost profits to mp3 piracy are scape goats and lies. In many cases data has showen the record industry is actually still earning more profits, not losing them. DVD sales are down, but that is because back when dvds became big, everyone rebought past movies as DVD format. Now that the rush is gone, of course sales will decrease. They are just throwing smoke.
The fact that there are people who benefit from my work and do not pay makes me a sad panda. It's irrelevant whether they may never purchase my work if they had only the option to pay or not to use it. If they wouldn't by my work anyway, so be it, at least they do not get any benefit they don't deserve from me.
Why would you be sad though? If these are people who weren't ever going to pay you anyway, you should feel good that you still got to bring more happiness to them and the world at no loss to yourself. You say I am only thinking of my self, but perhaps that is you. If you can bring happiness to others at no cost or benefit to yourself, you should still feel good about it.

Tagrineth said:
You can run around with your "WELL I ONRY GOTS MY $100 A MONTH TO PAY ANYWAY" argument, but I guarantee the majourity wouldn't even spend that much per month if the Utilitarianism argument became law. Nobody would pay for games anymore if it became law; if that were the case, nobody would develop games anymore either, because it simply would not be economically feasible.
I refer you to my previous posts where I mentioned a few solutions should that arrive.
A) Software developers merge with hardware developers.
B) Valve's episodic content where you must buy the authentic game for the full expereince, patches, updates, online play, etc
C)Software developers learn to develop games more effiently focusing on more origonal ideas (cheap) than just fancy graphics and textures (expensive).

This would only come about though if people refused to pay anything, and only pirated. Should it become that serious then I'm sure software developers would become more serious in their anti piracy techniques (again I refer you to valve's steam approach that requires online activation). I doubt piracy would ever become so prevalent. It is beyond the ability of most casual gamers currently, and as games get more complicated it requires more effort.
 
Last edited:
Quoted from http://www.gandalf.it/stupid/stupid.htm


A stupid person is more dangerous than a bandit

leads us to the heart of the Cipolla Theory. There are four types of people, he says, depending on their behavior in a transaction:

Hapless (or “hopeless”)
Someone whose actions tend to generate self-damage, but also to create advantage for someone else.

Intelligent
Someone whose actions tend to generate self-advantage, as well as advantage for others.


Bandit
Someone whose actions tend to generate self-advantage while causing damage to others.

Stupid
We already have this definition in the Third Law.

I thought of this immediately after reading rones' post. Whereas rones idea is at base intelligent, the arguement can't neccessarily be made that pirates are all bandits. Antipiracy laws for media of any form would fall under hapless IMHO as they only popularize the notion of pirating.. The only stupid people out there are the ones doing mass distribution of copied pirated material. i didn't wanna make a huge post about it so you'll have to dig up the third law of stupidity if you're curious.
 
Last edited:
Rones said:
If you can bring happiness to others at no cost or benefit to yourself, you should still feel good about it.
Only if I have a choice in that matter. I could say: Here guys, 100,000 free copies cause you can't afford it: FUN NOW - GO!!!

If I give out of my own free will, then that is a choice I made, and I can feel good about it. If someone takes, with disrespect, and disregard, then that makes me angry. I wouldn't want a pirate to be happy, and I wouldn't want to be happy for them, I would want them in jail where the 400lbs Earl takes good care of them every night, that's what would make me happy, if I were a developer (which luckily for many, I am not).
 
Ok, what about this situation I thought of a little while ago on your mention of 'choice'. I believe it will draw a good analogy...Garbage. The trash you throw out. Some of it is quite valuable and useful to others. You choose to throw it out, but not to give it to others. Do you feel it would be wrong for them to take what you are no longer want and benefit from it, even though it is your work that created it in the first place?

This is much like piracy. They (the people going through the garbage) aren't going to buy anything from you, you aren't losing or gaining anything, and the person who utilizes your trash becomes happier. You should then feel happy that someone was able to benefit from you even though it was not by your choice.
 
Rones said:
If you can bring happiness to others at no cost or benefit to yourself, you should still feel good about it.

Yeah, but you can't eat happiness. As any corner prostitute will tell you, "Happiness ain't free, my friend." :crazy:
 
Rones said:
They (the people going through the garbage) aren't going to buy anything from you, you aren't losing or gaining anything, and the person who utilizes your trash becomes happier. You should then feel happy that someone was able to benefit from you even though it was not by your choice.

That's different. When you throw something out, you choose to stop caring about its fate. When you sell a video game, you sell a license for its use. You have a reasonable expectation (backed by copyright law, though difficult to enforce) of the fate of your product. Duplicating a game does not duplicate that licensed and authorized user.

Edited to add: Chuck Norris can eat happiness, but Vin Diesel has to cook it for him.
 
I was trying to create an example on Sculli's subject of 'choice'. Sculli said it was only ok for people to benefit from him if it was by his choice. In the case of garbage it is not his choice for them to benefit, only his choice that the garbage is created. He should feel good if someone is able to use his garbage at no cost to himself.
 
In the case of garbage I chose to give up any rights I have to it. In most cases garbage becomes public domain, anyone can look through it once it leaves your property.

No matter how hard you look, you won't find an analogy where someone who pirates software doesn't run into the expressed wishes of those who own the rights to the software. ;)
 
Trippyhippy said:
http://ds.ign.com/articles/662/662230p1.html

Chugg666 showed me this. I suppose I'm gonna need a Nintendo DS soon.

[EDIT:
I moved this to Off-Topic.
If you read this for the first time, make sure you read the ENTIRE THREAD before replying.
If you choose to add some random post to this thread, potentially quoting something out of context or previously discussed, then I will make a voodoo doll of you, and start sticking needles in places you wouldn't ever want to feel needles in. -Sculli]


I've been edited :shok:

has anyone here ever actally played Final Fantasy III? I haven't ever seen english versions of II or III.

I'd play an emulated version if I could find it...

which of these statements are Off Topic now??
 
Back
Top