Its also interesting since its a fun clash between two "goods"; the ability for people to access and tinker with their property, and the ability for makers to profit. Right now these two things are completely conflicted.
They're perceived to be conflicted. In reality, it seems highly doubtful that piracy impacts the profits of creators negatively. Most of the studies have been made on music piracy, and so far, it looks like piracy has a zero or positive net effect on music sales. While the traditional music publishers ("record companies") have nosedived during the last decade, the independent artists make more money than ever, and the total revenues of the music industry have increased. The number of albums produced have more than doubled in the USA in the last ten years.
It becomes easier to understand why music piracy can be beneficial to the artists when you realise that 1) they only receive around 8% (downloadable music) to 14% (CDs) of the sales price when they go through traditional publishers, 2) piracy works as word-of-mouth advertising, 3) many people use the money they save through pirating on concerts, merchandise and donations instead, and 4) artists receive a much higher percentage of the revenues on concerts, merchandise and donations.
Downloading is illegal in Sweden. Until the early/mid 200x's, it was legal to download movies and music (but not software) for personal use, not that's illegal too. Downloading via BitTorrent is, however, risk-free in practice so far, since the courts require proof that that the crime is completed, i.e that someone has illegally downloaded a complete copy. Right now, the pirate hunters are waiting for the EU court to decide if they have the right to get the IP addresses of a swarm of BitTorrent users from the ISPs.
There are some European countries where downloading for personal use is still legal, but I think it's illegal in most of them.
People are flocking to DRM free software not ultimately because of DRM but because of pirates. PIRATES necessitate the need for DRM.
Sure, but they'll never be able to hunt down every pirate and close every pirate site. We have to accept reality and realise that piracy is here to stay, whether we want it or not, and then ask ourselves what's the best way to deal with it.
I believe the best way to deal with piracy is to make the game as cheap and convenient as possible for your paying users, and simply ignore the non-paying ones, since a pirate copy does not equal a lost sale. The net effect of piracy on sales may very well be zero or positive, since piracy acts as word-of-mouth advertising. Comparing the number of sales to the number of pirate copies is meaningless; 1 000 000 pirates and 100 paying users is better than 0 pirates and 95 paying users.
Most piracy is driven by avoidance of payment as seen by the heavy piracy of DRM free indy games like world of goo. If everyone was like you then DRM wouldn't exist but sadly that isn't the case. When it comes to the pc there are plenty of people that can afford the games (and high end gaming rig) but choose not to pay for them.
I'm not so sure about that. Studies on music piracy in multiple countries show that the people who pirate the most music also spend the most money on music overall. It seems that people pirate music mostly for convenience and to get access to a wider range of titles, not to save money. That's also supported by the fact that the music industry's total revenues, if you include independents, collections agencies like ASCAP, and sales of downloadable music, have increased substantially during the period 1999 - 2009, the same period during which music piracy exploded. It's only the traditional music publishers, that spend large amounts of money on advertising and try to charge $15+ for pieces of plastic, which are in deep trouble.
I wouldn't be suprised if people pirate games mostly for the same reasons: convenience and to get access to a wider range of titles. Sure, there are people with $2000+ gaming rigs who are too cheap to buy most of their games, but many of them may be too cheap to buy most games even if they had no access to pirate copies.
Well, on the one hand, the lack of DRM will make it slightly easier to pirate (but only a little, since DRM:ed games are cracked within a day). On the other hand, the lack of DRM could lead to increased sales since it makes the product more convenient for the people who buy it. I wouldn't be that surprised if the latter had a larger effect than the former.
There's a Canadian study showing that music piracy has virtually zero effect on sales, a japanese study showing that animé piracy has a small positive effect on sales, and a number of studies from different countries showing that the people who pirate the most music also spend the most money overall on music, so it's not so far-fetched.
My SO has weight problems. Long before I met her, she did go to a doctor about them. They operated on her, and the operation was too successful. She almost became unable to eat, and almost starved to death. She got convulsions from potassium deficiency - but she still didn't want to reverse the operation. She'd rather die thin. Her relatives had to talk her into it, and she went back to being fat.
Which is why I tend to be pretty annoyed when people assume obesity is voluntary. Contrary to popular belief, fat people are generally not so stupid they don't realise eating more makes you fatter. Often, obesity is caused by an unusual metabolism (the body converts as much of the food intake as it can into fat), and by a weak hunger feedback system (an inability to feel hunger OR fullness). Both of these can be explained as evolutionary strategies developed in sub-populations which have been exposed to famine during several generations. If your body converts your food intake directly into fat instead of usable energy, there's not much you can do about it without literally starving yourself, which in itself is very detrimental to your health.
Would you tell a diabetic that he "should stop complaining and not eat so much sugar"? Or a skin cancer patient that he "should stop complaining and start using sunblock"? After all, both diabetes and skin cancer are often caused by life-style choices. Why is it more socially acceptable to assume obese people are idiots?
I'm in my 30's and reasonably well off financially. I pirate some games and buy others, and I'm happy to support the people who can't afford games. If some kid or student can't afford it, I think it's better they pirate than do without. It's not like I (or the game publisher) lose anything if they can't afford to buy the game anyway.
Then why don't I have any problem with malware? I've been using a PC since 1995, and I've only been hit by malware twice. The first time I was infected by a virus from a driver diskette included with a mouse - presumably, it had been included at the factory. The other time I discovered a keylogger on my system, presumably because I was stupid enough to download a keygen from an untrusted source (now I make sure to use scene releases).
LOL at "pirate games are safe". Malware ridden keygens and cracks on usenet say otherwise. Of course, there's plenty of little nubbins infecting their system by saying it's AV false positives...
Don't download cracks from Usenet or direct download web sites. Go to a BitTorrent site and looks for scene releases (the ones with a release group name tagged to the end).
I've downloaded software from BitTorrent hundreds of times, and only found confirmed malware once (a keylogger).
Antivirus programs report cracks as malware, though, since it's the same thing from the software vendors' perspective. The solution is to ignore the antivirus warnings and make sure you get the crack from a reputable source - like a known release group. Their reputation is the only reason they're in this game - they don't earn any money from cracking.
A lot of people say that - and not just about DRM - but in the end just go out and spend the money on the DRM infestation anyway because they don't want random warez possibly infecting them with something perhaps more offensive than DRM.
Hm? If you go to a BitTorrent site and download cracks from one of the release groups, you're safe. Pirate Bay also has little icons for Trusted and V.I.P users.
And you can always join a closed network or BitTorrent site, where only high-quality warez are posted ("high quality" meaning the crack/rip is competently done, not that the original product is necessarily of high quality;-) ).
I'm guessing that it's very hard to measure the effect on sales, since sales vary wildly between games. Most games don't even break even, while a few games recoup many times their development costs.
I don't believe anyone is entitled to be entertained. I do, however, believe that the current copyright system is extremely inefficient, and one of those inefficiencies is the inability to play media on any computer platform due to access protection.
If commercial copyright was reduced to five years, access protection outlawed, and private, non-commercial use legalised, I think the world would be much better off. Until then, I think the world is better off if people simply ignore copyright and pirate to their heart's content.
Downloading illegally is voting with your wallet... it's a way to avoid putting money into a dysfunctional system.
If you try to stay legal, you play by the publishing industry's rules. They have the money and power to buy the laws they want.
If your conscience troubles you, you can donate half the retail price directly to the artists. You save 50%, and the artists get roughly FIVE TIMES what they would have received in royalties from a sale through the record companies.
Because then when he said that he was happy to pay, but that the DRM forced him to pirate, it would sound like he meant it, rather than him just making excuses.
Legally, there's no difference, but perhaps a jury of peers would be swayed by that argument.
I don't think that falls under fair use. Fair use mainly applies to parodies, satires, educational and research purposes, and so on.
There are other exceptions to copyright, such as the US Audio Home Recording Act, which grants permission to make copies of audio works for private, non-commercial use, but I'm not sure there are exceptions which allow someone to download pirated copies of computer software they already own.
Here in Sweden, it's legal to make first-generation copies from movies or music albums which are manufactured with permission of the copyright holder. For example, you can borrow a store-bought movie or music album from a friend and make copies of it. But you're not allowed to download a copy from the Pirate Bay, even if you own the original, since in that case, the source of the copy is not authorised by the copyright holder.
With respect to computer software, you're not even allowed to make copies for private, personal use, except for backup purposes and similar. You are, however, allowed to download and use cracks.
I regularly obtain cracks for my purchased games so I don't need to shuffle disks, and can install them on my laptop and under Linux.
And he's hardly unique. I've purchased, and then downloaded no-cd cracks for, Civilization IV, Black & White, Fable: The Lost Chapters, and other games I've forgot about.
And btw, it's legal to circumvent access protection in order to play content here in Europe.
There's a difference between that and what Hotz did: Hotz' hacks didn't disrupt any other people's games - that was done by people who chose to use the hacks for cheating. It makes more sense to hold those people responsible.
Slashdot Mirror
Its also interesting since its a fun clash between two "goods"; the ability for people to access and tinker with their property, and the ability for makers to profit. Right now these two things are completely conflicted.
They're perceived to be conflicted. In reality, it seems highly doubtful that piracy impacts the profits of creators negatively. Most of the studies have been made on music piracy, and so far, it looks like piracy has a zero or positive net effect on music sales. While the traditional music publishers ("record companies") have nosedived during the last decade, the independent artists make more money than ever, and the total revenues of the music industry have increased. The number of albums produced have more than doubled in the USA in the last ten years.
It becomes easier to understand why music piracy can be beneficial to the artists when you realise that 1) they only receive around 8% (downloadable music) to 14% (CDs) of the sales price when they go through traditional publishers, 2) piracy works as word-of-mouth advertising, 3) many people use the money they save through pirating on concerts, merchandise and donations instead, and 4) artists receive a much higher percentage of the revenues on concerts, merchandise and donations.
I think, technically, he's in his right to make a backup of his copy. Downloading the movie is a backup of a different copy.
That's how it works here in Sweden (and, I believe, most other European countries).
Downloading is illegal in Sweden. Until the early/mid 200x's, it was legal to download movies and music (but not software) for personal use, not that's illegal too.
Downloading via BitTorrent is, however, risk-free in practice so far, since the courts require proof that that the crime is completed, i.e that someone has illegally downloaded a complete copy. Right now, the pirate hunters are waiting for the EU court to decide if they have the right to get the IP addresses of a swarm of BitTorrent users from the ISPs.
There are some European countries where downloading for personal use is still legal, but I think it's illegal in most of them.
^--- This. Please mod up.
People are flocking to DRM free software not ultimately because of DRM but because of pirates. PIRATES necessitate the need for DRM.
Sure, but they'll never be able to hunt down every pirate and close every pirate site. We have to accept reality and realise that piracy is here to stay, whether we want it or not, and then ask ourselves what's the best way to deal with it.
I believe the best way to deal with piracy is to make the game as cheap and convenient as possible for your paying users, and simply ignore the non-paying ones, since a pirate copy does not equal a lost sale. The net effect of piracy on sales may very well be zero or positive, since piracy acts as word-of-mouth advertising. Comparing the number of sales to the number of pirate copies is meaningless; 1 000 000 pirates and 100 paying users is better than 0 pirates and 95 paying users.
Most piracy is driven by avoidance of payment as seen by the heavy piracy of DRM free indy games like world of goo. If everyone was like you then DRM wouldn't exist but sadly that isn't the case. When it comes to the pc there are plenty of people that can afford the games (and high end gaming rig) but choose not to pay for them.
I'm not so sure about that. Studies on music piracy in multiple countries show that the people who pirate the most music also spend the most money on music overall. It seems that people pirate music mostly for convenience and to get access to a wider range of titles, not to save money. That's also supported by the fact that the music industry's total revenues, if you include independents, collections agencies like ASCAP, and sales of downloadable music, have increased substantially during the period 1999 - 2009, the same period during which music piracy exploded. It's only the traditional music publishers, that spend large amounts of money on advertising and try to charge $15+ for pieces of plastic, which are in deep trouble.
I wouldn't be suprised if people pirate games mostly for the same reasons: convenience and to get access to a wider range of titles. Sure, there are people with $2000+ gaming rigs who are too cheap to buy most of their games, but many of them may be too cheap to buy most games even if they had no access to pirate copies.
Well, on the one hand, the lack of DRM will make it slightly easier to pirate (but only a little, since DRM:ed games are cracked within a day). On the other hand, the lack of DRM could lead to increased sales since it makes the product more convenient for the people who buy it. I wouldn't be that surprised if the latter had a larger effect than the former.
There's a Canadian study showing that music piracy has virtually zero effect on sales, a japanese study showing that animé piracy has a small positive effect on sales, and a number of studies from different countries showing that the people who pirate the most music also spend the most money overall on music, so it's not so far-fetched.
I wouldn't be surprised if it did work to some extent, since finding and downloading a pirate copy is beyond the skill of many users.
I think you answered your own question :)
My SO has weight problems. Long before I met her, she did go to a doctor about them. They operated on her, and the operation was too successful. She almost became unable to eat, and almost starved to death. She got convulsions from potassium deficiency - but she still didn't want to reverse the operation. She'd rather die thin. Her relatives had to talk her into it, and she went back to being fat.
Which is why I tend to be pretty annoyed when people assume obesity is voluntary. Contrary to popular belief, fat people are generally not so stupid they don't realise eating more makes you fatter. Often, obesity is caused by an unusual metabolism (the body converts as much of the food intake as it can into fat), and by a weak hunger feedback system (an inability to feel hunger OR fullness). Both of these can be explained as evolutionary strategies developed in sub-populations which have been exposed to famine during several generations. If your body converts your food intake directly into fat instead of usable energy, there's not much you can do about it without literally starving yourself, which in itself is very detrimental to your health.
Would you tell a diabetic that he "should stop complaining and not eat so much sugar"? Or a skin cancer patient that he "should stop complaining and start using sunblock"? After all, both diabetes and skin cancer are often caused by life-style choices. Why is it more socially acceptable to assume obese people are idiots?
I'm in my 30's and reasonably well off financially. I pirate some games and buy others, and I'm happy to support the people who can't afford games. If some kid or student can't afford it, I think it's better they pirate than do without. It's not like I (or the game publisher) lose anything if they can't afford to buy the game anyway.
Then why don't I have any problem with malware? I've been using a PC since 1995, and I've only been hit by malware twice. The first time I was infected by a virus from a driver diskette included with a mouse - presumably, it had been included at the factory. The other time I discovered a keylogger on my system, presumably because I was stupid enough to download a keygen from an untrusted source (now I make sure to use scene releases).
LOL at "pirate games are safe". Malware ridden keygens and cracks on usenet say otherwise. Of course, there's plenty of little nubbins infecting their system by saying it's AV false positives...
Don't download cracks from Usenet or direct download web sites. Go to a BitTorrent site and looks for scene releases (the ones with a release group name tagged to the end).
Because people download games to try them, or download a bunch of games in a package to get the one they want and throw the rest away.
A 50% piracy rate just means there is one illegal download for every sale. The number of illegal users per illegal download is probably very low.
I've downloaded software from BitTorrent hundreds of times, and only found confirmed malware once (a keylogger).
Antivirus programs report cracks as malware, though, since it's the same thing from the software vendors' perspective. The solution is to ignore the antivirus warnings and make sure you get the crack from a reputable source - like a known release group. Their reputation is the only reason they're in this game - they don't earn any money from cracking.
A lot of people say that - and not just about DRM - but in the end just go out and spend the money on the DRM infestation anyway because they don't want random warez possibly infecting them with something perhaps more offensive than DRM.
Hm? If you go to a BitTorrent site and download cracks from one of the release groups, you're safe. Pirate Bay also has little icons for Trusted and V.I.P users.
And you can always join a closed network or BitTorrent site, where only high-quality warez are posted ("high quality" meaning the crack/rip is competently done, not that the original product is necessarily of high quality ;-) ).
I'm guessing that it's very hard to measure the effect on sales, since sales vary wildly between games. Most games don't even break even, while a few games recoup many times their development costs.
Now, now, let's be polite. Let's show that pirates are intelligent, polite people who try to look out for the common good of society.
I don't believe anyone is entitled to be entertained. I do, however, believe that the current copyright system is extremely inefficient, and one of those inefficiencies is the inability to play media on any computer platform due to access protection.
If commercial copyright was reduced to five years, access protection outlawed, and private, non-commercial use legalised, I think the world would be much better off. Until then, I think the world is better off if people simply ignore copyright and pirate to their heart's content.
Downloading illegally is voting with your wallet... it's a way to avoid putting money into a dysfunctional system.
If you try to stay legal, you play by the publishing industry's rules. They have the money and power to buy the laws they want.
If your conscience troubles you, you can donate half the retail price directly to the artists. You save 50%, and the artists get roughly FIVE TIMES what they would have received in royalties from a sale through the record companies.
Because then when he said that he was happy to pay, but that the DRM forced him to pirate, it would sound like he meant it, rather than him just making excuses.
Legally, there's no difference, but perhaps a jury of peers would be swayed by that argument.
I don't think that falls under fair use. Fair use mainly applies to parodies, satires, educational and research purposes, and so on.
There are other exceptions to copyright, such as the US Audio Home Recording Act, which grants permission to make copies of audio works for private, non-commercial use, but I'm not sure there are exceptions which allow someone to download pirated copies of computer software they already own.
Here in Sweden, it's legal to make first-generation copies from movies or music albums which are manufactured with permission of the copyright holder. For example, you can borrow a store-bought movie or music album from a friend and make copies of it. But you're not allowed to download a copy from the Pirate Bay, even if you own the original, since in that case, the source of the copy is not authorised by the copyright holder.
With respect to computer software, you're not even allowed to make copies for private, personal use, except for backup purposes and similar. You are, however, allowed to download and use cracks.
I regularly obtain cracks for my purchased games so I don't need to shuffle disks, and can install them on my laptop and under Linux.
I'm just guessing here, but is it possible that some copy protections install the 32-bit code as a hook instead of a driver?
And he's hardly unique. I've purchased, and then downloaded no-cd cracks for, Civilization IV, Black & White, Fable: The Lost Chapters, and other games I've forgot about.
And btw, it's legal to circumvent access protection in order to play content here in Europe.
There's a difference between that and what Hotz did: Hotz' hacks didn't disrupt any other people's games - that was done by people who chose to use the hacks for cheating. It makes more sense to hold those people responsible.