[Talbain]

[Corinth]

[EmX]

Slipstream are you still mad because you said something dumb earlier in this thread?

[slipstream]

[Toto]

Is it a joke that all libertarians are morons or something?

[CubaLibre]

[EmX]

[The Soviet Onion]

[Shapermc]

While I'm not going to chime in on this because, well, internet argument lol, I will state that I don't agree with many current Digital Media Rights and Anti-Pirate formats going around. Mainly because I know how this shit works, and the only people getting burned on this stuff are the ones who actually own/pay for the shit.

For example, the 360's XBLA works like this: If you buy a game you can play it online from any console and you can redownload it later no problem. You can only play it offline on the system you bought it on initially with the memory hardware you first downloaded it to. So, for example you download it on System A and HDD A but then upgrade to HDD B which is larger. You can only play the game online now because the dmr shit notices that you may be faking free games on your system. Another example which is more irritating and common is that System A crashes and you replace it with System B then you have to jump through hoops again.

Anyways, it's irritating. The same with dialing into Steam/Whathaveyou to confirm your key. I mean, this is just a mild deterrent which may push a few more copies for a week, but people who really don't want to pay will find ways around this. It's inevitable.

That kind of thing pisses me off because I have to jump through about the same amount of hoops to get something I paid good money for that someone who knows their way around a computer will probably be able to get for free.

Anyways, I don't agree with/enjoy/support paying for "digital content." Be it MP3s, Movies, Books, or Art. I just can't grasp it. I have no problems paying for physical media because I know that if I take care of it that I will always have it (barring degrading over time, but that happens with digital storage devices too). I don't like paying for something that's dependent on either A) My hard drive never crashing or B) Accessing a server/company that I know has a high chance of not being around in 5-10 years.

Umm, basically this amounts to fuck iTunes.
_________________


The bad sleep well at The Gamer's Quarter

[showka]

[CubaLibre]

Well, really what I was saying is that a product is, as a moral (but not legal) matter, the property of both the publisher (aka big corporation) and the artist. So more often than not I buy my music. I was being glib because um, this discussion has been had before.

Keep in mind that I have metaphysical, political, and legal problems with the very existence of corporations as such and therefore have weird opinions regarding my relationship to their property. Elucidation of these opinions doesn't really belong in this thread.

EDIT: For the record, I have Netflix and occasionally buy CDs and don't have the time to pirate anything these days.
_________________
Let's Play, starring me.

[sawtooth]

i know i'd die without my animes on tap........
_________________
(  (  

[BotageL]

I'm a cheap bastard with little money, so I pirate, borrow, rent, freeload, etc. Sometimes a piece of media is worth it for me to enjoy, but isn't worth the full purchase price to me, so I pick another avenue of access. Technically speaking, renting or borrowing a piece of media is only slightly better than illegally downloading the media. Sure, someone paid for that copy, but if you hadn't had the other avenue available to you, maybe you would've bought it, you know?

In other words, I'm picking the "I'm killing the anime industry, but I'm not really feeling like stopping" option.
_________________

http://www.mdgeist.com/

[Mr. Apol]

i mean, i just try to look at it from the perspective of someone who makes the material. i know a lot of artists who don't have huge record deals on huge labels and some of them are very good. i know they'd be sort of irritated of people were just taking their product and not paying for it, since if they're asking for money in the first place they're probably trying to make a living off of it. my friend makes music, but it's not his livelihood so he puts it all up for free on his website.

i guess people don't steal as many books as they do music, but i know for a lot of writers that are starting out, every book counts.

it's still sort of an iffy issue. i don't see it being extremely wrong to pirate music from artists it won't really effect, but really, i rarely want to listen to that music anyway.

on a side note: try going to a small music show and telling one of the kids in a band there that you don't think there's anything wrong with stealing their music.
_________________

[Leau]

That was a really well stated argument Showka. I have a newfound respect for you.
_________________

[Talbain]

showka, I think your argument falls apart when you start talking about intellectual property. Were you to perhaps define what intellectual property means to you, you could then derive a type of value. To me, the term intellectual property is analogous to something that has no value, but has a perceived value to certain people. But if a certain person doesn't see that perceived value, unless you can convince them that the perceived value is important, there's no argument to be made, because there's no principle for them to support or criticize. Basically, the perceived value is important to person x, but not person y. Person x will not be able to explain it to person y unless they explain the perceived value and why they should change their view on the perceived value of the media in question.
_________________

[Leau]

I don't want to be dismissive Talbain, but that's not how Intellectual property works under current IP law. You don't have to prove that it has value to you personally or just even anybody. If that were the case lawyers could bring in Judith Galford from Iowa and have her state that Super Mario Sunshine has no percieved value to her, and if the court accepted that analysis, it would be free to distribute because that one person doesn't see the value. The percieved value comes from whomever created the thing. Who cares if I can't prove whatever has value to you in particular?

Perhaps I'm not understanding your argument?
_________________

[Talbain]

Except that showka's arguments are talking about individual values, such as morality, and not aggregate values, which is what IP is (unless I'm misunderstanding his argument). Essentially, showka's arguments are talking about Judith Galford (though not necessarily in the case you've mentioned).
_________________

[SplashBeats]

if you're anti-piracy, you must also be anti-used game sales.

[dhex]

[DonMarco]

[extrabastardformula]

[Talbain]

[SplashBeats]

[CubaLibre]

[Internetics]

[BotageL]

But if you bought a used copy of a game, that's revenue the publisher (and the developer) wouldn't recieve. When you buy a previously-unowned copy of the game, you're purchasing a copy of the game which, through the game store -> distributor -> publisher -> developer chain has directly resulted in filling the coffers of the companies involved in the game's production. If you buy a used copy of the game, you are only compensating the previous owner of that copy of the product. If you weren't able to buy a used copy of the game, you would have been forced to buy a new copy of the product at the price set by the publisher and game store, which would have rewarded the publisher (and maybe the developer). Arguably, this is worse than piracy, as buying a used game is directly a lost sale for the publisher. People who pirate the games probably have a much better chance to have elected to spend their money on another title if piracy was unavailable, but people who bought a used copy of the game were willing to pay money for the product, but elected not to pay the people who produced and developed the product.

[Mr. Apol]

someone argue with me dammit
_________________

[Leau]

Firstly Cubalibre! Settle down! Of course the law is flexible. If it wasn't there would be no need for lawyers because you couldn't argue points. When I say current IP law I don't mean to imply that there is an iron over-reaching policy. I wasn't speaking in a singular sense as in "the" IP law, yeah? Of course its blossoming in all different directions. That's why so many law studentsa want to go into it.

[BotageL]

[CubaLibre]

[Talbain]

I believe that pirating actually has positive social effects overall and I'd argue that's more important than any ill effects that may occur as a result of it. A simple example is that I would never have had the opportunity to listen to The Beatles were it not for pirating. I think that everyone should have the opportunity to listen to this music, not just those that can afford to do so, because it has a great deal of cultural and historical relevance. I'd say the same is true with certain books, films, movies and even videogames. They should be experienced because the experience itself is the value. While I'd pay for these experiences when possible, paying for something like The Tale of Genji helps nobody except the publisher. I don't believe the publisher has the right to profit from a work they have no stake in. They're not helping this author create anything, nor will they ever be able to. In some ways it's along the line of LegatoB's argument, though I don't entirely agree with his argument, since buying a used copy of a game assumes that at some point a producer or developer got paid for their work.

Another example: I recently got a used copy of Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater for free at a Hollywood Video that was going out of business. Am I "stealing" the game since they gave it to me free of charge? By most of these arguments that are anti-piracy, they assume that I am. At best, they assume that even if I get a free copy of something, I should pay somebody at some point because that's the only way to really appreciate the work or something, but I don't really support this viewpoint.
_________________

[Mr. Apol]

[Talbain]

[CubaLibre]

[Talbain]

[CubaLibre]

A WoW account is an ongoing contractual agreement and it's part of the agreement's terms that you can't transfer your consideration onto another party. A WoW account is not your "property" at all, it's Blizzard's side of a deal you've made with them.

Gamestop's copy of MGS3 is property they own and it's their prerogative to give it to whomever they see fit. If they couldn't it wouldn't be "property" at all.

Of course, that's what makes IP so weird: no physical object to transfer, and the ability to make unlimited fungible copies.
_________________
Let's Play, starring me.

[Talbain]

[DonMarco]

[SplashBeats]

donmarco stick to one account when you argue with someone, it makes things less confusing.

also i think this thread should now be about how elvis was an artistic pioneer in regards to rock and roll music

because damn i haven't heard something dumber than that in a long time

[Talbain]