Current Events > Pirate logic

(+) Yeah! (+)

Bouncer: Sir, I'm afraid if you don't have a ticket I can't let you into this gig venue.
Pirate: But I can't afford a ticket. I simply wouldn't come to this gig if I had to pay for it.
Bouncer: You do have to pay for it, and I'm sorry but we can't let you in unless you pay.
Pirate: That's such bullshit though. This gig is happening anyway. It's not costing you anything to have me here, I'm not taking anything from you.
Bouncer: That's...not the point. The terms of being here and listening to the artists play is that you pay the entrance fee. The artists and the venue managers set the price and terms of entry. Not you, not me.
Pirate: It's a fucking scam though. And frankly the band isn't even that good. I don't see the value in it to be honest.
Bouncer: So you want to be here but you don't see any value in it?
Pirate: It's overpriced!
Bouncer: Duly noted and I'll pass that feedback onto upper management, but that still doesn't mean you get to be at the gig.
Pirate: But can't you see I really like this band? I've always enjoyed their music. And coming to this gig and listening to them might persuade me to buy one of their albums.
Bouncers: I'm sure your gratitude is valuable to their income, but unfortunately this still doesn't get around the whole not honouring the terms of entry problem. And I'm afraid I still can't let you break the rules on the basis of a hypothetical future album purchase.
Pirate: It's bullshit though because this venue sucks. You spend too much on advertising and your CEOs make too much money and the entire service is crappy. Maybe if you guys had a better service and a cleaner venue I would pay for gigs. In fact regardless of what you say I'm going to sneak in, but don't worry - it's not costing you anything.
Bouncer: So you honestly think the solution here to all your grievances with our company is to ignore our explicitly stated price point and terms of use?
Pirate: Look, I want it. If you don't give it to me then I'm going to have it anyway.

Etc.
---

Pirate logic:
*gets drunk on rum while in the crows nest, falls down and dies and blames the captain*

Marklar posted...

Pirate logic:
*gets drunk on rum while in the crows nest, falls down and dies and blames the captain*

shiver me Tinders
---

Piracy is bad, but it's also unavoidable.
---

I don't think they really care about logic. It's a simple case of "I want this game but don't want to pay for it so fuck em"
---

Wedge Antilles posted...

I don't think they really care about logic. It's a simple case of "I want this game but don't want to pay for it so fuck em"

Most pirates can't admit that's the reason.
---

Wedge Antilles posted...

"I want this game but don't want to pay for it so fuck em"

If I was a pirate I'd admit that this is my reasoning.

But I'm totally not.

Totally.
---

*dies of scurvy*
---

You going into that gig is depriving someone else of their seat. Copying shit doesn't deprive anyone.
---

Monday posted...

Piracy is bad, but it's also unavoidable.

I think all the old arguments that I would actually almost argue in favour of concerning piracy are fast dying out, e.g. around dinosaur music industry and region locking. We now have platforms like Steam which are way more convenient and easy to use than torrenting and mounting an ISO and so on. If you told 10 year old me that in the near future you'll be able to download pretty much any videogame in a matter of hours and then redownload it onto any computer anywhere in the world again as much as you like, I'd say that was fucking incredible.
---

lilORANG posted...

You going into that gig is depriving someone else of their seat. Copying shit doesn't deprive anyone.

I think we both know that specific council laws around venue management and seat capacity is a million miles away from the point of the analogy.

Let's just say for arguments sake that in this hypothetical, it's a venue with 20,000 seats and never fills up past 10,000, pirates included.
---

pinky0926 posted...

lilORANG posted...

You going into that gig is depriving someone else of their seat. Copying shit doesn't deprive anyone.

I think we both know that specific council laws around venue management and seat capacity is a million miles away from the point of the analogy.

Let's just say for arguments sake that in this hypothetical, it's a venue with 20,000 seats and never fills up past 10,000, pirates included.

That's a nice strawman you've got there. Video game piracy is a victimless crime. The guys who pirate the game weren't going to buy it anyway. The company doesn't lose any money AND it gives them free advertisement.
---

What are your opinions on downloading and watching a just-aired episode of a TV show? Like if you were out during the time of airing and didn't have TiVo? It's technically piracy, but there's not really a way to buy episodes of a show whose season is still airing

it's more like:

"hey there pirate we've duplicated the show with no bouncer and nobody in it, but the band but remember if you like the show PLEASE SUPPORT THE BAND"

and then you share word about said unheard of good band making that band more money then they would have received otherwise.


buuuut Game developers already have something called marketing teams and suing individual pirates is actually very costly and useless
---

REMercsChamp posted...

That's a nice strawman you've got there. Video game piracy is a victimless crime. The guys who pirate the game weren't going to buy it anyway. The company doesn't lose any money AND it gives them free advertisement.

But since it's still a crime - i.e. you are going out of your way to break the clearly stated terms of use - you're still absolutely in the wrong.

Again, let it be repeated a million times: It is never up to the customer to dictate the terms of use for intellectual property or content. Your only freedom in the transaction is the decision to agree or reject the terms, or at best barter them. You are never in the right for breaking the terms.
---

I pirated games when I didn't have an income because I was still a student. Now that I do, I buy the sequels to those games and other games by the same developers. I'm not sure how they expect to get my money when I literally don't have it.

Nowadays, I don't pirate stuff, but I do seriously think about it with games that make a habit of selling me the initial game, then parading on $40-100 of DLC campaigns that make me feel like I didn't get the full experience when I paid for the full game. Or even worse, games that launch with meaningful content behind some sort of additional paywall. I can see arguments for not wanting certain kinds of DRM installed on your system as well. This is why I generally buy only like one or two titles a year from AAA developers. If you find good indie games, they last just as long, are still incredibly fun, and if they do create DLC, it's only down the line because the game was really well received and generally gets priced at like $5-10 for a meaningful addition like another campaign.

On the other hand, pirating stuff that you can easily afford where the pirated version isn't superior is an absolute scumbag move at this point, especially now that we have 2 hour no-questions-asked refunds on Steam in case it doesn't run well or it's not fun.
---

pinky0926 posted...

REMercsChamp posted...

That's a nice strawman you've got there. Video game piracy is a victimless crime. The guys who pirate the game weren't going to buy it anyway. The company doesn't lose any money AND it gives them free advertisement.

But since it's still a crime - i.e. you are going out of your way to break the clearly stated terms of use - you're still absolutely in the wrong.

Again, let it be repeated a million times: It is never up to the customer to dictate the terms of use for intellectual property or content. Your only freedom in the transaction is the decision to agree or reject the terms, or at best barter them. You are never in the right for breaking them.

Okay, right. So poor people don't deserve to play games, that's only for rich people right? "Let them eat cake?" Want to ask Marie Antoinette how that one worked out?
---

pinky0926 posted...

But since it's still a crime - i.e. you are going out of your way to break the clearly stated terms of use - you're still absolutely in the wrong.

but then you're not using the "pirate" logic above. You're using a separate legal analysis, which is fine, but don't shy away from your stupid OP.
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMhfbLRoGEw
---

REMercsChamp posted...

pinky0926 posted...

REMercsChamp posted...

That's a nice strawman you've got there. Video game piracy is a victimless crime. The guys who pirate the game weren't going to buy it anyway. The company doesn't lose any money AND it gives them free advertisement.

But since it's still a crime - i.e. you are going out of your way to break the clearly stated terms of use - you're still absolutely in the wrong.

Again, let it be repeated a million times: It is never up to the customer to dictate the terms of use for intellectual property or content. Your only freedom in the transaction is the decision to agree or reject the terms, or at best barter them. You are never in the right for breaking them.

Okay, right. So poor people don't deserve to play games, that's only for rich people right? "Let them eat cake?" Want to ask Marie Antoinette how that one worked out?

I wasn't aware games were necessary for one's survival. Your analogy seems to have lost its head.
---

Ampelas posted...

What are your opinions on downloading and watching a just-aired episode of a TV show? Like if you were out during the time of airing and didn't have TiVo? It's technically piracy, but there's not really a way to buy episodes of a show whose season is still airing

Fuzzy, if I'm honest. I take the Gabe Newell argument on this: the issue is not cost, but convenience and service, hence why Steam has been so successful. I think the way to go would be distributers that put up this content. It works really well for BBC iPlayer, which does exaclty what you just said.

In that context, pirates are not right but they are at least responding to a problem.
---

anth0ny posted...

it's more like:

"hey there pirate we've duplicated the show with no bouncer and nobody in it, but the band but remember if you like the show PLEASE SUPPORT THE BAND"

and then you share word about said unheard of good band making that band more money then they would have received otherwise.


buuuut Game developers already have something called marketing teams and suing individual pirates is actually very costly and useless

This still depends on what the band thinks about said duplication. It's their content, their intellectual property. Would you still feel it's right if the band explicitly said it's not ok to do that with their stuff?
---

lilORANG posted...

pinky0926 posted...

But since it's still a crime - i.e. you are going out of your way to break the clearly stated terms of use - you're still absolutely in the wrong.

but then you're not using the "pirate" logic above. You're using a separate legal analysis, which is fine, but don't shy away from your stupid OP.

No, it's the entire point of the OP. The point of the OP is entirely about honouring the terms of use set out by the content creators.
---

The23rdMagus posted...

REMercsChamp posted...

pinky0926 posted...

REMercsChamp posted...

That's a nice strawman you've got there. Video game piracy is a victimless crime. The guys who pirate the game weren't going to buy it anyway. The company doesn't lose any money AND it gives them free advertisement.

But since it's still a crime - i.e. you are going out of your way to break the clearly stated terms of use - you're still absolutely in the wrong.

Again, let it be repeated a million times: It is never up to the customer to dictate the terms of use for intellectual property or content. Your only freedom in the transaction is the decision to agree or reject the terms, or at best barter them. You are never in the right for breaking them.

Okay, right. So poor people don't deserve to play games, that's only for rich people right? "Let them eat cake?" Want to ask Marie Antoinette how that one worked out?

I wasn't aware games were necessary for one's survival. Your analogy seems to have lost its head.

It's REMercsChamp, he's a career troll. I only responded to his initial comment because it brought up a reasonable point, but at this point it's descended into typically unintelligable troll nonsense
---

pinky0926 posted...

It works really well for BBC iPlayer, which does exactly what you just said.

On iplayer stuff, what is your stance on people using it who dont pay the licence fee now? Seeing as need to now, even if not live.
---

It baffles me that people try to justify piracy. Obviously it's at best a gray area morally and legally. Just fucking own it. Where does their desire for righteousness stem from?

Funkydog posted...

pinky0926 posted...

It works really well for BBC iPlayer, which does exactly what you just said.

On iplayer stuff, what is your stance on people using it who dont pay the licence fee now? Seeing as need to now, even if not live.

Also fuzzy, but mostly because I'm unsure about TV licenses anyway. It's still wrong isn't it? But it doesn't feel wrong, because it's one of those things that everybody does and no one really knows the consequences of doing so.
---

NeoShadowhen posted...

It baffles me that people try to justify piracy. Obviously it's at best a gray area morally and legally. Just fucking own it. Where does their desire for righteousness stem from?

Romantic notions of anti-establishment rebeliion and bitterness towards capitalistic greed is my guess.
---

NeoShadowhen posted...

It baffles me that people try to justify piracy. Obviously it's at best a gray area morally and legally. Just fucking own it. Where does their desire for righteousness stem from?

what I don't get is... honestly... where does the desire to cry about it come from (I find it kind of pathetic)
---

NeoShadowhen posted...

It baffles me that people try to justify piracy. Obviously it's at best a gray area morally and legally. Just fucking own it. Where does their desire for righteousness stem from?

there is a caveat that doing work 1 time and getting paid for that work over and over for an unlimited time because of how digital media works is also unethical

imagine if you worked at McDonalds for a day and then for the rest of your life cashed in on it, like that 1 burger you sold, everyday you get paid for that over and over again

so for a small few it is a push against digital media and further how copyright law keeps getting longer and longer before something drops into public domain

more nuanced is the original person who made the software isn't the one who gets the money either, but the publisher
---

Marklar posted...

Pirate logic:
*gets drunk on rum while in the crows nest, falls down and dies and blames the captain*

Now how do blame someone after you die?

Did you wake up dead
---

darkphoenix181 posted...

NeoShadowhen posted...

It baffles me that people try to justify piracy. Obviously it's at best a gray area morally and legally. Just fucking own it. Where does their desire for righteousness stem from?

there is a caveat that doing work 1 time and getting paid for that work over and over for an unlimited time because of how digital media works is also unethical

imagine if you worked at McDonalds for a day and then for the rest of your life cashed in on it, like that 1 burger you sold, everyday you get paid for that over and over again

so for a small few it is a push against digital media and further how copyright law keeps getting longer and longer before something drops into public domain

more nuanced is the original person who made the software isn't the one who gets the money either, but the publisher

THIS. After a reasonable amount of time, the game should be owned by the public domain.
---

pinky0926 posted...

Funkydog posted...

pinky0926 posted...

It works really well for BBC iPlayer, which does exactly what you just said.

On iplayer stuff, what is your stance on people using it who dont pay the licence fee now? Seeing as need to now, even if not live.

Also fuzzy, but mostly because I'm unsure about TV licenses anyway. It's still wrong isn't it? But it doesn't feel wrong, because it's one of those things that everybody does and no one really knows the consequences of doing so.

But you will get letters telling you off in the mail (possibly even if you do pay for one too)
---

anth0ny posted...

NeoShadowhen posted...

It baffles me that people try to justify piracy. Obviously it's at best a gray area morally and legally. Just fucking own it. Where does their desire for righteousness stem from?

what I don't get is... honestly... where does the desire to cry about it come from (I find it kind of pathetic)

Because this attitude is pervasive and goes beyond simply downloading music, and actually affects my professional life on a daily basis.

I work in a creative industry. I have a lot of graphic designers, web designers, photographers, developers etc. that all do hard and great work and my full time job is basically to assess the value of and manage their time. But largely the work they do is not really tangible, and people do not value the level of skill and time and effort and equipment that goes into what they do. A photograph can be duplicated a million times online for no additional cost, regardless of the cost of making it in the first place. And so in the eyes of some people, that photograph cost exactly 2 minutes to organise.

So do you know what I deal with on a weekly basis? People who want to pay for the work we do in "exposure". You know -" I can't pay you for the photography shoot, but it will be really good for your portfolio". People who think that they get to decide the monetary value of the work. People who want to try your work for free before they buy it. Those people. I can't tell you how frustrating it is to sit down with a client and prepare a brief for a couple of hours only to find out that the client expects that I'll be happy with free coffee at their cafe on the other side of town as payment for our services.

It amuses me that you brought up the musician example by the way, because this is the singlemost destructive element in a musicians career. Everyone wants to pay you in beers and "exposure".
---

Trying to convince or engage morally ambiguous individuals who don't care about the law to care about or consider what you think is probably a useless endeavor
---

anth0ny posted...

it's more like:

"hey there pirate we've duplicated the show with no bouncer and nobody in it, but the band but remember if you like the show PLEASE SUPPORT THE BAND"

and then you share word about said unheard of good band making that band more money then they would have received otherwise.

---

That's complete false because your average pirate would not be that confrontational.
---

REMercsChamp posted...

Video game piracy is a victimless crime.

False
---

*applauds the OP*
---

REMercsChamp posted...

THIS. After a reasonable amount of time, the game should be owned by the public domain.

Sure, I actually agree with that. And I also think that there's a lot of fuckery in the industry around that kind of thing. But really, we know that a lot of people will pirate no matter what. Could be the most easily accessible AAA title available on every system in every region in the world and released just last week, and people will still pirate it.
---

darkphoenix181 posted...

there is a caveat that doing work 1 time and getting paid for that work over and over for an unlimited time because of how digital media works is also unethical

I don't know if "ethics" really comes into play there. Is it unethical to accumulate interest?

There are two other problems: It's not unreasonable for EACH person who experiences a digital media work to pay once for it. It perhaps would be unreasonable for me to continue paying forever for the rights to continue watching a certain movie, playing a certain game, etc. but certainly in your hamburger example, you should at least be paid for each person who buys a hamburger.

The other is that while copyright laws are getting too long, the majority of pirated games are freshly released. I don't really have a moral problem with people pirating SNES games, for example. That's different than pirating Skyrim on release day.
---

pinky0926 posted...

anth0ny posted...

NeoShadowhen posted...

It baffles me that people try to justify piracy. Obviously it's at best a gray area morally and legally. Just fucking own it. Where does their desire for righteousness stem from?

what I don't get is... honestly... where does the desire to cry about it come from (I find it kind of pathetic)

Because this attitude is pervasive and goes beyond simply downloading music, and actually affects my professional life on a daily basis.

I work in a creative industry. I have a lot of graphic designers, web designers, photographers, developers etc. that all do hard and great work and my full time job is basically to assess the value of and manage their time. But largely the work they do is not really tangible, and people do not value the level of skill and time and effort and equipment that goes into what they do. A photograph can be duplicated a million times online for no additional cost, regardless of the cost of making it in the first place. And so in the eyes of some people, that photograph cost exactly 2 minutes to organise.

So do you know what I deal with on a weekly basis? People who want to pay for the work we do in "exposure". You know -" I can't pay you for the photography shoot, but it will be really good for your portfolio". People who think that they get to decide the monetary value of the work. People who want to try your work for free before they buy it. Those people.

It amuses me that you brought up the musician example by the way, because this is the singlemost destructive element in a musicians career. Everyone wants to pay you in beers and "exposure".

Are you an agent?
---

pinky0926 posted...

REMercsChamp posted...

THIS. After a reasonable amount of time, the game should be owned by the public domain.

Sure, I actually agree with that. And I also think that there's a lot of fuckery in the industry around that kind of thing. But really, we know that a lot of people will pirate no matter what. Could be the most easily accessible AAA title available on every system in every region in the world and released just last week, and people will still pirate it.

Yeah, there's actually a reddit where they sort of compete to be the first to crack a new game and release a torrent of it.

Anteaterking posted...

Are you an agent?

Account manager for software/web company.
---

pinky0926 posted...

Anteaterking posted...

Are you an agent?

Account manager for software/web company.

That's cool. I feel like I previously had a very generic idea of what you did.
---

yarrrrr
---

I assume you feel the same way about people who use adblockers?
---

Non-pirate logic: Let's conflate opportunity cost with expenses

Rexdragon125 posted...

Non-pirate logic: Let's conflate opportunity cost with expenses

Where did I conflate opportunity cost with expenses?
---

Piracy is a victimless "crime". Like punching someone in the dark.
---