What does religion have to say about copyright?

[MR_Soren]

To sum up the pieratcy argument:

I have two copies of The Club sitting on this desk, to my left. Obviously piracy didn't win this time.

Of course, the RIAA and Apple and Our Other Benefactors are doing their best to put a stop to the funtimes.

I don't like Apple being lumped in with the RIAA. Apple is opposed to DRM and frequently fights with the record companies. They have very liberal restrictions compared to other music download services, and they have never taken any actions to stop people from using pirated music obtained elsewhere.

Oh noez.

Apple isn't that bad, but they're control freaks when it comes to user experience. "It must be done the Apple way so...no user written programs on the iPhone." I'm going OT here, but even if Google's phone system may be crap, you'll be able to write your own stuff for it.

You can also write stuff for the iPhone. You just have to go through Apple to distribute it. I don't agree with Apple's rejection of certain applications from the iPhone App Store, but SONY, Microsoft, and Nintendo do the same thing to game developers. It's just that console game developers tend to obey their NDAs instead of screaming about it in a blog.

[neorichieb1971]

Ok time to go to STAGE 2 : There is a 1up here for anyone that can find it!


You all made good points. But lets say I'm species A. Species A is the good old honest lets buy everything because its good good good. I don't have a fancy car because I buy alot of games and movies.

Lets say your species B. Species B is a no caring person who buys equipment only after its been hacked, jacked, sliced and diced. For £100 of your money you can reach £50000 of content, share it with your friends, show them how to copy games and movies as well. Species B saves lots and lots of money, drives a BMW M5 and has a fat wallet with a big house.

The scenario is, should I buy games and be myself, doing the right thing. Or should I feel somewhat cheated that species B gets everything I get except he don't pay for it. And I don't have a flash car either. So really, the way things stand, its beneficial for him rather than me. In my eyes, I feel equally as cheated being the buyer as the copyright holder. Also, If I don't buy this content, who will? The person who stated that we should buy content to encourage further content was bang on the button imo. That is the single most effective reason/argument I can come up with.

Its also a kick in my balls that DVD is the most supported medium by the industries, yet its the one that is the most vulnerable. Its almost like they want you to pirate it.

Next stage is a big boss, so watch out!!!!

[Taylor]

illustrated how high the piracy rates are, thus disqualifying your statement that “many” people didn't pirate.

Wrong, you illustrated no such thing. I hate to repeat myself, but if you can find some concrete numbers I'll listen to you. Until then, quoting some developer saying he was "astounded" at the number of pirated copies does not illustrate how high piracy rates are.

I did enough to disprove your vague statement that had no supporting evidence, and so far I have more factual backing to my claim. People don't release concrete numbers for obvious reasons. You only get estimates like the RPS article you ignored. Sure you’ve got claims like Crysis selling only 89,000 in the first month but some download sites having 300,000 leechers but, of course, this is purposely misconstrued as the timeframe the for latter isn’t stated. You’ve got Epic developers saying they had 40 million unauthorised key attempts, but clearly a lot of these are the same people retrying the same key because no game has that many players. There's also countless developers complaining about piracy on the PC and the future decline of the platform -- I think this would at least hint there is a problem even if it’s not to the dramatic proportions alleged; but apparently these have no merit because they don’t release private information and are earning money (and if they aren’t earning money, they are making stuff up).

This is going to go on forever. Just enjoy your free stuff.

[Daedalus]

This is going to go on forever. Just enjoy your free stuff.

I said about five times I pay for my games, bro. More proof you don't read my posts.

[Taylor]

To reiterate: I don't believe you.

[szycag]

http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/03 ... ic-piracy/

[Ed Oscuro]

You can also write stuff for the iPhone. You just have to go through Apple to distribute it. I don't agree with Apple's rejection of certain applications from the iPhone App Store, but SONY, Microsoft, and Nintendo do the same thing to game developers. It's just that console game developers tend to obey their NDAs instead of screaming about it in a blog.

Pretty soon mobile phones will outnumber traditional personal computers of all stripes in developing markets, and soon the rest of the world will follow.

I hope we can agree that moving to a world where "end-to-end experience management" like the iPhone or, even worse, game consoles is not something to look forward too. I like games and consistency in design, but I value being able to choose from a range of free applications much better.

[OmniGLH]

Lets say your species B. Species B is a no caring person who buys equipment only after its been hacked, jacked, sliced and diced. For £100 of your money you can reach £50000 of content, share it with your friends, show them how to copy games and movies as well. Species B saves lots and lots of money, drives a BMW M5 and has a fat wallet with a big house.

I want to be Species B
I want to drive a BMW M5

Good riddance Dodge Omni!

[Ed Oscuro]

No kidding, OmniGLH.

I wince when I look at somebody's stack of $60 WHEN IT WAS NEW high production run vidya gaems, but even though those add up quick, it's not going to make the difference in being able to comfortably afford a BMW someday.

Besides, you still gotta buy your A/V equipment, controllers, and whatnot.

[Daedalus]

Actually, if you would normally buy 8 games a year...

If you invested that money instead, 37 years later you could buy a brand new BMW M5 at full price.


See? Piracy gets you a BMW!

[OmniGLH]

Oh well then.

Back to my boosted Omni

[MR_Soren]

You can also write stuff for the iPhone. You just have to go through Apple to distribute it. I don't agree with Apple's rejection of certain applications from the iPhone App Store, but SONY, Microsoft, and Nintendo do the same thing to game developers. It's just that console game developers tend to obey their NDAs instead of screaming about it in a blog.

Pretty soon mobile phones will outnumber traditional personal computers of all stripes in developing markets, and soon the rest of the world will follow.

I hope we can agree that moving to a world where "end-to-end experience management" like the iPhone or, even worse, game consoles is not something to look forward too. I like games and consistency in design, but I value being able to choose from a range of free applications much better.

I was just pointing out that it's a common practice on proprietary electronics, not just the iPhone. I agree that less restrictions and more freedom would be better. Unfortunately, the freedom only matters to tech geeks and programmers, so it can be taken away from the masses without incident.

Hopefully the restrictions on iPhone developers are just a first step. Perhaps it will open up more as Apple continues developing the tools and software. Remember that the dev tools weren't even available at first and nobody but Apple could develop for it. That situation has improved.

[Ed Oscuro]

Unfortunately, the freedom only matters to tech geeks and programmers, so it can be taken away from the masses without incident.

That's an awfully pessimistic view of the market you have. Right now companies can focus on squeezing out profits and restricting stuff - which is why Verizon (for example) asks me to pay through the nose for any additional feature, why they can use BREW, and why their loaded-in phone UI is such shit. But when the market fills up (which can take a very long time - the market isn't really saturated right now despite appearances), they will have to start making concessions to consumers.

As the features of phones develop further, people will start using them as laptop and handheld PC replacements, as well as cameras and lots of other things.

In any case, I think a company which takes an early lead on getting useful applications into the hands of phone users stands to reap rewards in the future, even if (as Google does) they let bits and pieces of their success onto other platforms (such as Google search on an iPhone).

[Daedalus]

which is why Verizon (for example) asks me to pay through the nose for any additional feature, why they can use BREW, and why their loaded-in phone UI is such shit.

Ugh, I feel your pain.

BREW games are the worst... The Java Doom RPG costs a couple bucks, but the BREW one costs $6 for a "subscription" and $11 for unlimited use? That's fucked up.

[MR_Soren]

Unfortunately, the freedom only matters to tech geeks and programmers, so it can be taken away from the masses without incident.

That's an awfully pessimistic view of the market you have. Right now companies can focus on squeezing out profits and restricting stuff - which is why Verizon (for example) asks me to pay through the nose for any additional feature, why they can use BREW, and why their loaded-in phone UI is such shit. But when the market fills up (which can take a very long time - the market isn't really saturated right now despite appearances), they will have to start making concessions to consumers.

As the features of phones develop further, people will start using them as laptop and handheld PC replacements, as well as cameras and lots of other things.

In any case, I think a company which takes an early lead on getting useful applications into the hands of phone users stands to reap rewards in the future, even if (as Google does) they let bits and pieces of their success onto other platforms (such as Google search on an iPhone).

... or Google Android (and Chrome) using Apple's webkit for page rendering.

Anyway, if I understand what you're getting at, phone makers and service providers are currently focused on scooping up new customers from the pool of people who do not have smart phones. Only when that pool is empty will they need to focus on quality because then most new customers will be obtained by luring them away from another company.

Supposing that is how things go, developer freedom doesn't necessarily make a difference. If a phone offers a great user experience, most people aren't going to care that some guy halfway across the world can't get his app onto it.

However, if enough developers are pushed away from a particular phone, some of them could write "killer apps" that give a huge advantage to the competition. I just don't think that's a concern yet. The market is still quite young and there will be a lot of changes and a lot of casualties as it matures.


Um, and religion probably frowns upon digital piracy if it's resulting in lost income for the creators.

[Neon]

Pretty much the only games I pirate are those where there is an enormous cost to acquire it - for example, artificial barriers such as region restriction.

Haha, so you pirate import shooters, the genre so hurting for sales that most new ones don't even get ports, because you can't spend the extra $10? Way to shoot yourself in the foot you fucking clownshoe. Ibara has gone up to $80 since I bought it new for $65ish - hell, I've made money on every single PS2 shooter I've bought, even if I got them new. It's all gone up in value. Same with Under Defeat, the rare Saturn stuff I have that you pirate because it's too expensive and out of print...everything. And you think you're so superior and wise for saving your money, lololol

PS - bought Border Down LE new for $75, sold for $150 recently. E=mc squared and Piracy = Epic Fail

[JoshF]

Any time you get a bunch of collectors together you end up with slumlords.

No, that piece of cardboard w/ Charizard on it is really worth 2 million dollars not the 25 cents I paid for it.

Hey let's make fun of Sealed Games Guy when my nest egg is a copy of RSG and Ketsui PCB.

[Ed Oscuro]

Any time you get a bunch of collectors together you end up with slumlords.

What is it with giving up all the secrets today, JoshF

No, that piece of cardboard w/ Charizard on it is really worth 2 million dollars not the 25 cents I paid for it.

Hey, I'll sell you a boxed Charizard TALKING ACTIONS FIGURE!? and it only cost $20! Bargain!

Hey let's make fun of Sealed Games Guy when my nest egg is a copy of RSG and Ketsui PCB. :o

buuurn

[Daedalus]

Haha, so you pirate import shooters, the genre so hurting for sales that most new ones don't even get ports, because you can't spend the extra $10? Way to shoot yourself in the foot you fucking clownshoe. Ibara has gone up to $80 since I bought it new for $65ish - hell, I've made money on every single PS2 shooter I've bought, even if I got them new. It's all gone up in value. Same with Under Defeat, the rare Saturn stuff I have that you pirate because it's too expensive and out of print...everything. And you think you're so superior and wise for saving your money, lololol

PS - bought Border Down LE new for $75, sold for $150 recently. E=mc squared and Piracy = Epic Fail

Erm... a change in price isn't realized until you sell it. If you buy Ibara and plan on keeping it, you haven't made any money, "clownshoe". And the only people that benefit from me buying OOP titles are people like you... and judging by how much of a bitch you are, it's not a group I'm keen to give my money to.

I never tried to assert that I was somehow superior for not wanting to buy imports or OOP titles. If you have the money to do so and want to spend it that way, then great. I'd likely be envious of your collection. But you don't have to take offense and start crying at every little thing I say.

[JoshF]

What is it with giving up all the secrets today, JoshF

New truth every week. Like the indian man says in that giant fuck you john hodgman ad on my site, we are all different expressions of the same consciousness. And I Am A PC.

[Blade]

Call me naiive but even from the developers perspective, sharing "information" of any kind, even rumors, is considered theft.

[Abhi]

I know two Asian people who are fasting right now for ramadam or whatever its called.

Dude, they're not asians. They're MUSLIMS.

Thank you, I get fucked off when peeps label Asians as Muslims

You look at what Asians do what and se what religion they are and then you will find a pattern

[Neon]

Haha, so you pirate import shooters, the genre so hurting for sales that most new ones don't even get ports, because you can't spend the extra $10? Way to shoot yourself in the foot you fucking clownshoe. Ibara has gone up to $80 since I bought it new for $65ish - hell, I've made money on every single PS2 shooter I've bought, even if I got them new. It's all gone up in value. Same with Under Defeat, the rare Saturn stuff I have that you pirate because it's too expensive and out of print...everything. And you think you're so superior and wise for saving your money, lololol

PS - bought Border Down LE new for $75, sold for $150 recently. E=mc squared and Piracy = Epic Fail

Erm... a change in price isn't realized until you sell it. If you buy Ibara and plan on keeping it, you haven't made any money, "clownshoe". And the only people that benefit from me buying OOP titles are people like you... and judging by how much of a bitch you are, it's not a group I'm keen to give my money to.

I never tried to assert that I was somehow superior for not wanting to buy imports or OOP titles. If you have the money to do so and want to spend it that way, then great. I'd likely be envious of your collection. But you don't have to take offense and start crying at every little thing I say.

Why do you try to continue the one-upmanship when you've been thoroughly owned? Just admit the error of your ways, matey. Even if devs don't lose money from your piracy, it still makes you a douche. If you're playing videogames so often that you need to pirate extras to support your habit, your high scores suck, you're probably broke, and you need to get laid

[Daedalus]

Why do you try to continue the one-upmanship when you've been thoroughly owned? Just admit the error of your ways, matey. Even if devs don't lose money from your piracy, it still makes you a douche. If you're playing videogames so often that you need to pirate extras to support your habit, your high scores suck, you're probably broke, and you need to get laid

I don't know if being the target of ad hominems interspersed with "Just admit you're wrong!" really counts as getting "owned"...

[Ex-Cyber]

Enjoying someone else's work without even taking into concern the myriad of reasons that they worked, and the entire structure that they have set up for the sale of this item is no doubt stealing.

By that logic, pretty much any of the following (which, to the best of my knowledge, are all completely legal) qualifies as stealing:

- Listening to a busker perform after someone else gave him some money, without giving any yourself

- Changing the TV channel / radio station during commericals

- Borrowing/lending/trading authorized copies of CDs/DVDs/movies/books among friends/family/whoever

- Buying CDs/DVDs/movies/books used instead of new

IMO what it comes down to is that copyright is no longer aligned with economic reality. In the past, the production of copies was almost entirely a centralized activity that required a large captial investment; it was a privileged activity by necessity, regardless of whether governments regulated it. It made perfect sense for that to be the financial anchor of the business model and the primary point of regulation, because there were few players worth worrying about and most of them were big enough to have something to lose. Today, anyone with a $300 PC an Internet connection can copy almost anything with minimal effort. It in no way makes sense to expand a regulatory structure designed for that past situation to cover the present one, but copyright and the mindset of "intellectual property" have become such cultural fixtures that many people can't imagine a world without it. I think something like the Street Performer Protocol has the right basic idea (distributed patronage), but it's not clear to me that there's a really good way to implement it. The biggest barriers may be cultural; it would essentially require people to think about investing in works rather than buying them like a product. That said, it's also not clear to me that there's really a good way to implement the charging-for-copies model in the modern world either; DRM is a disaster.

[Daedalus]

Well said, Ex-Cyber.

I took a look at the SPP, and it's an interesting idea. But I think it has a couple flaws, especially considering modern society.

[neorichieb1971]

Enjoying someone else's work without even taking into concern the myriad of reasons that they worked, and the entire structure that they have set up for the sale of this item is no doubt stealing.

By that logic, pretty much any of the following (which, to the best of my knowledge, are all completely legal) qualifies as stealing:

- Listening to a busker perform after someone else gave him some money, without giving any yourself

- Changing the TV channel / radio station during commericals

- Borrowing/lending/trading authorized copies of CDs/DVDs/movies/books among friends/family/whoever

- Buying CDs/DVDs/movies/books used instead of new

IMO what it comes down to is that copyright is no longer aligned with economic reality. In the past, the production of copies was almost entirely a centralized activity that required a large captial investment; it was a privileged activity by necessity, regardless of whether governments regulated it. It made perfect sense for that to be the financial anchor of the business model and the primary point of regulation, because there were few players worth worrying about and most of them were big enough to have something to lose. Today, anyone with a $300 PC an Internet connection can copy almost anything with minimal effort. It in no way makes sense to expand a regulatory structure designed for that past situation to cover the present one, but copyright and the mindset of "intellectual property" have become such cultural fixtures that many people can't imagine a world without it. I think something like the Street Performer Protocol has the right basic idea (distributed patronage), but it's not clear to me that there's a really good way to implement it. The biggest barriers may be cultural; it would essentially require people to think about investing in works rather than buying them like a product. That said, it's also not clear to me that there's really a good way to implement the charging-for-copies model in the modern world either; DRM is a disaster.

The problem with this is that any money you saved by not buying a videogame, piece of music or movie is put to other uses. So your getting a large wallet or other materialistic items with stolen goods.

Part B of the problem is that your expecting other people to buy it so the artists will flourish enough so that you can copy their future products as well.

Part C of the problem is that you probably bought that $300 PC with the only aim of infringing copyright laws and rabbiting on about how cool it is in public forums.

If your a freeloader thats fine, but don't gloat about it, it says alot about your character stinking to high heaven.

[Ex-Cyber]

Part B of the problem is that your expecting other people to buy it so the artists will flourish enough so that you can copy their future products as well.

This already happens to a degree. Anyone who ever waited for a budget game re-release, didn't catch a movie until it was on basic cable, or listened to new music on the radio (while, naturally, avoiding the commercials) was effectively "expecting other people to buy it so the artists will flourish enough" for their works to become available through those lower-cost channels. I suppose that we should abolish game rental stores as well. After all, they enable "freeloading" by paying for one copy and then letting lots of people enjoy it instead of buying their own copies. What's more, these establishments are so brazen that they openly engage in such behavior for profit.

Part C of the problem is that you probably bought that $300 PC with the only aim of infringing copyright laws and rabbiting on about how cool it is in public forums.

Huh? What I wrote was an exposition on copyright policy. I'm not sure how you got copyright infringement being "cool" out of that. I don't want copyright to be infringed, I want the copyright-based model of publishing to be deliberately replaced by something better (roughly: lighter regulatory load, fewer middlemen, more freedom for everyone involved). I want a model under which the very premise of cases like Fantasy v. Fogerty and Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music would be laughed out of court. I want people to realize that there is nothing even close to a perfect fit between the regulatory structure of copyright and the problem of paying the original authors/artists; that is the point of my examples of "freeloading" or "stealing". If we want to solve the problem of getting authors and artists fairly paid for their work, then we need to come up with a solution to the problem of getting authors and artists fairly paid for their work, not a solution to the problem of people making unauthorized copies.

If your a freeloader thats fine, but don't gloat about it, it says alot about your character stinking to high heaven.

I have no idea what you're on about here.

I took a look at the SPP, and it's an interesting idea. But I think it has a couple flaws, especially considering modern society.

Any alternative business model will have to fight for acceptance, just by virtue of the fact that the current model has been around for so long and people are so used to it. SPP arguably has a free rider problem, but I've pretty much just argued that the same is true of the current situation, so I'm not sure where that leaves us.

[Michaelm]

Call me naiive but even from the developers perspective, sharing "information" of any kind, even rumors, is considered theft.

Where did you get that bullshit from ?
Sharing information is exactly what is responsible for getting us to where we are now.
If noone ever shared any information we would still house in caves.
As a developer I would still be honored if my software got pirated all over the world. I wouldn't like not getting paid for it, true. But I would still be very much honored that people would choose to use my software.

[OmniGLH]

Some one help me out here --

As we have discussed at great length it's illegal to download music, games, movies, ect. online, but we can borrow a book from the library?

Isn't this the same thing? we are still depriving a artist of his % of the pie, or do authors of books consider themselves above it all?

we can't download a movie on line legally but we can borrow a movie from the library also..

we can borrow Cds from the library also

anyone know what this magic line is?

why do the artist allow us to walk into our local public library and take their stuff with the full backing of everyone involved but if we do it online it's a federal crime