This doesn't make sense. If there's no way to buy the game where the copyright holder does recieve money then there should be no ethical qualms by aquiring it via torrent or second hand. It's a case of I would have gave you the money but you don't have it anymore, but I still want to have it.

Legally? I'm not too sure but morally? S'all good.

No we haven't.

What if some dying grandpa desperately wants to play Tiny Tank on his deathbed and the only option is to pirate it? And the company expressly gives consent/doesn't give a flying fuck if you do so? What if a musical artist releases his tracks for free as well as for purchase? (as many do) and then his label denies the previously free tracks? You really don't sound like you understand the variables here beyond pirating a brand new video game.

I've also given money to musical artists who distribute their stuff for free on Bandcamp. I guess it all balances out in the end.

When my mother was dying of cancer, and was clearly in her last days, I bought a bootlegged copy of Star Wars Episode III for her to watch, as the movie had just come into theatres. I didn't feel bad about that.

Sounds like a nice guy.

Whoever wrote that article meticulously weaved in every old person stereotype he could. I can't tell if he meant it in an endearing way or not.

that makes me feel good about piracy. lawl.

fucking good on him. good old geezer.

I will never feel bad for having pirated Westwood stuff. No way am i gonna send my money to EA instead.

I usually pirate stuff either is it's way too expensive for what it is and I only need for one time (I needed Dreamweaver because of coursework, that's all), or the site you buy the program from looks unsafe to trust with my money.

I'm pretty sure when I get a new PC, I'll be torrenting FL Studio. I think its just convenience mainly, whatever you want, whenever you want it. Tempting. Also, like I said, I have no money.

Admittedly I've pirated stuff before, but i've never really felt like I'm doing any real harm. I just watch this and try to take my mind off what I'm doing.

This sums up my views on piracy: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/vide...-Becomes-Theft

As an extension, I feel that pirating things that we would never have access to otherwise is acceptable - such as Adobe software. A company that feels it can sell its software for £150 for a single license to students is a company that does not deserve my money. Its not that I can use alternatives - because there simply aren't alternatives that offer the same as some Adobe software, like Flash and Premiere.

This is dumb. How is pirating an indie game ethically any different from pirating a non-indie game?

If you pirate World Of Goo you are taking money away from two people who spent years making a game and publishing it themselves - they profit directly from sales.

If you pirate Battlefield 3 the developers are paid by the publisher once the game is finished - after that, the publisher takes all the money and the creators see none of it.

EDIT: And I wouldn't say never pirate something indie, I just don't like to as a rule of thumb. I pirated Minecraft back in the day because there wasn't a demo for it (besides that crappy Classic thing on the website). I have since bought it, but I really didn't know if I'd like it and didn't wanna spend £12 on something I might not end up enjoying. Yes its a flawed argument but whatever. Notch ended up the winner anyway, because it went from Alpha to Beta while I was playing with my torrented copy, meaning I had to pay 2x as much.

Indie developers are usually small teams or solo people working on a pet project, from their own pocket. They’re passionate about what they’re doing and generally don’t produce cynical mass-marketed money-grabs.

Big publishers meanwhile are often the ones who drive the industry into underhanded practices like shitty DRM and day-one DLC. They’re the ones who produce the bland mass-market drivel. They can afford massive advertising campaigns and huge teams of developers to work on their shit.


I’ve heard it can often be more complex than that – one example I heard was that a publisher didn’t pay its developers the royalties from their game until the quarter after its release.

This is what's commonly referred to as an "untruth". Publishers, and developers split profits from games.

Okay, fair enough - but even still, I'm willing to bet that the creators in most circumstances don't see more than 15% of their games profits.

Supposing that was true, how does that make it okay?

Not supporting the publisher should be the responsibility of the artist by choosing another publisher or self publishing or the responsibility of the consumer by refusing to buy the publisher's stock.

The same way that stealing shit from Tesco is considered more ethical by most than stealing from a corner shop.

EDIT: Not that I do either of those, I'd be bricking it for weeks after thinking i'd get caught

The fact that Tesco won't miss the money you steal from them doesn't mean they won't miss money from everyone stealing from them.

Even if you were the only person in the world that stole from them, the fact that they are bloated doesn't mean they deserve it. It doesn't justify your actions.

Come on, this is kiddie morality here.

I agree that it's silly to argue that piracy is morally right just to justify doing it, but I don't feel terrible about doing it either. I see lots of people say that they pirate stuff to see what it's like, and buy it if they think it's a worthwhile purchase. There are lots of people who just wouldn't be buying something at all, but actually end up buying it after trying it out. Obviously, anecdotes like that aren't any sort of justification for piracy in general, but there's a definite trend there.

Some people would pirate a cracked DRM game if it's a better experience than paying for DRM that punishes paying customers and doesn't affect pirates. I never pirate games actually, but THAT is the one example where I couldn't possibly feel bad about pirating in any way.

I don't believe that piracy can ever be considered morally right, but neither can it can take the majority of the blame for damaging an industry that fails to adapt to the internet and lobbies to create legislation which restricts people's freedom online instead. Pragmatically, I just don't care about piracy.

Very true, though with Tesco they cannot sell that product you've nicked, with piracy they still can

No, no, NO. I am tired of people comparing digital distribution to retail in "piracy is fine" arguments. There are literally infinite available copies of a DD game. Attempting to use the "it doesn't diminish their stock" argument is therefore absolutely meaningless.

Nobody is going to buy that same packet of Cheetos you nicked from Tesco. And nobody is going to buy that same copy of Modern Warfare you pirated. That doesn't necessarily mean a lost sale overall, it just means you can't compare digital thieves favourably to a physical thief.

They are never going to run out of digital copies. Saying that you haven't deprived anyone of a copy is always going to be true, whether you bought it or pirated it. It's just... it's just a non-argument.

My wording is terrible, so I'll just direct you to the Piracy trilogy of Jimquisition episodes which explains it much better.

Please no. If I wanted to listen to fat arrogant faggots then...

well

I'd watch a lot more online 'celebrities'.

Jim is a celeb? News to me. (and in case you didn't realize, he is actually playing a character in that series. He isn't that arrogant really. Well, maybe a bit.)

The point is that he's wrong, and we've made very compelling, and honest arguments in this thread that point that out.

I think at times, old Jimmy can be funny, not in his old episodes though...needs to lose 100 lbs too. Fuck.