|
dear pirates... (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Clovis |
| I like buying stuff. :conf: |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
How so?
Taking goods and/or services without paying has always been my traditional idae of "theft." |
"Taking" implies a forceful transfer of some kind of scarce good (i.e. something with a non-negligible cost of reproduction). But digital bits are not a scarce good, at least not in the above sense. |
|
|
| RJT |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
"Taking" implies a forceful transfer of some kind of scarce good (i.e. something with a non-negligible cost of reproduction). But digital bits are not a scarce good, at least not in the above sense. |
Sure they are - I think you're marginalizing software by making the effective claim that all "bits are bits" (so to speak), which is simply not the case.
I also think it's a mistake to describe the cost of reproduction as negligible, because it's really not the reproduction that matters, but rather the production of the original intellectual property.
Your argument would seem to make the case that stealing music via CD or vinyl qualifies as theft, while stealing music in any digital format doesn't - I simply don't think that's the case. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
I also think it's a mistake to describe the cost of reproduction as negligible, because it's really not the reproduction that matters, but rather the production of the original intellectual property. |
The cost of copying a digital file is negligible. But I also agree with you that the reproduction itself is not the most important issue.
| quote: | | Your argument would seem to make the case that stealing music via CD or vinyl qualifies as theft, while stealing music in any digital format doesn't - I simply don't think that's the case. |
You're prejudicing the debate by using the term "stealing" throughout. Not fair. :p
If I see a painting for sale, then go and paint an exact replica of it, have I stolen the original painting? I don't think so, but that's the sort of thinking that is implied by the idea that copyright infringement is "theft." |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
Don't blame pirates, blame the ing lame gamers who aren't satisfied without ridiculous graphics that cost millions to produce and do very little to enhance the actual "fun" of the game.
These companies have to invest huge amounts of cash into graphics that essentially bog the game down and create high system requirements, hardware driver incompatibilities, and sometimes just plain worse game play than they would have had with simpler graphics. Why? Because gamers are daft idiots who judge a game by how many ing polygons there are in the character's face. If the game doesn't look pretty enough, they won't buy it.
The high cost of producing such graphics-intensive games stifles creativity because the cost of a failure is so high. It drives smaller developers out of business because there's no way they can keep up with the ever-increasing costs and compete with the graphics put out by the titanic multi-billion dollar producers. And what we're left is with a small handful of mega-developers who are only really interested in cranking out MEGA-SERIES installment #238.
If you buy games based on graphics: die. That is all. |
im sure you read the original post? your point is irrelevant because those same "lame gamers" are purchasing such software on consoles. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
The cost of copying a digital file is negligible. But I also agree with you that the reproduction itself is not the most important issue.
You're prejudicing the debate by using the term "stealing" throughout. Not fair. :p
If I see a painting for sale, then go and paint an exact replica of it, have I stolen the original painting? I don't think so, but that's the sort of thinking that is implied by the idea that copyright infringement is "theft." |
call it whatever you will, semantic discussions concerning the theft of intellectual property is bull and irrelevant. |
|
|
| SuspicionVandit |
| not to fear. if PC gaming dies, we still have enough horsepower to emulate PS2 games. |
|
|
| RJT |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
You're prejudicing the debate by using the term "stealing" throughout. Not fair. :p
If I see a painting for sale, then go and paint an exact replica of it, have I stolen the original painting? That's the sort of thinking that is implied by the idea that copyright infringement is "theft." |
In what sense are we talking about copyright infringement here? I don't think I have ever seen anyone frame the argument in such terms, and my understanding of copyright law has more to do with explicit profit from the intellectual properties of others, and doesn't have anything to do with private use of an IP.
It sounds like you're trying to frame the issue in terms that don't apply to it at all. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
In what sense are we talking about copyright infringement here? |
The exclusive legal right of a copyright owner to reproduce his copyrighted work. That right is certainly infringed by unauthorized downloading. |
|
|
| Darkarbiter |
Wow... pretty much all of those points were pretty ing stupid.
"We had one reviewer who didn't know he could portal back to town" and how is that not your fault or bad luck? And I doubt that you've had that much more badluck than anyone else.
And what about
"Hardwire manufacturers are making crappy products." Is that suggesting that other game makers don't have to deal with that? Seriously.
and
"There are a lot of stupid people out there..." Same point. Why don't you deal with it like every other game company? Or make a more compatible game. The piracy point is fair deal... but well this isn't. Why didn't you design a program that detects what stuff your computers running and what driver version? If this was such a major point.
For every idiotic review of TQ there is going to be an idiotic review of something else. Seriously.
I find it highly amusing they didn't even mention the ing rubber banding in the expansion.
These kinds of posts/threads is why pkc is on ignore. Seriously. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Darkarbiter
Wow... pretty much all of those points were pretty ing stupid.
"We had one reviewer who didn't know he could portal back to town" and how is that not your fault or bad luck? And I doubt that you've had that much more badluck than anyone else.
And what about
"Hardwire manufacturers are making crappy products." Is that suggesting that other game makers don't have to deal with that? Seriously.
and
"There are a lot of stupid people out there..." Same point. Why don't you deal with it like every other game company? Or make a more compatible game. The piracy point is fair deal... but well this isn't. Why didn't you design a program that detects what stuff your computers running and what driver version? If this was such a major point.
For every idiotic review of TQ there is going to be an idiotic review of something else. Seriously.
I find it highly amusing they didn't even mention the ing rubber banding in the expansion. |
no, youre the one that's pretty ing stupid. he wasn't talking just about TQ you halfwit, he was talking about developers in general. way to miss the point arseclown :rolleyes: |
|
|
| RJT |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
The exclusive legal right of a copyright owner to reproduce his copyrighted work. That right is certainly infringed by unauthorized downloading. |
Add it to the list then - it doesn't discount software piracy/theft from being just that: theft. |
|
|
|
|
