Buggy games certainly have to account for a portion of "piracy" out there. A few bad experiences of dropping $50 for a piece of trash can make individuals who aren't quite in the middle-class less than eager to take the risk again.
Consoles are even worse. At least for PC games we can anticipate patches, which generally tend to do a pretty good job fixes bugs, especially if its a big game (or an online one.)
Hmm the RIAA and the people behind the DoS attacks seem to have alot in common. Both are using force when their position in the status quo is threatened.
While the RIAA and associates have been contracting third parties to scan networks for quite some time now, do ISPs keep logs long enough to have any information to turn over to them reguarding activity, say 4 months to a year ago?
Do you think that a never expiring copyright could actually stifile innovation, rather than promote it -- as the founding fathers intended?
Do you believe that intellectual property is greater, less then, or equal to physical property rights?
How do you feel about Disney making an enormous profit off of public domain works, and at the same time being one of the driving forces behind extending the life of copyright, and thus preventing their own IP from entering the public domain?
If you knew that in 100 years, IP theft would be as rampant, or more rampant, than it is today, would you get a different job, or just work harder than you do now?
Do you believe that it is morally ok to take every legal means necessary to put an end to IP crimes, even if it would bring about strong negative effects to the world economy as a whole?
If this wasn't HL/CS we were talking about here, I'd probably have little tolerance for Steam. Why do I want a program running in the background for some game I might play once a week? If every game in the future runs like Steam, its not going to be pretty.
Not to mention the whole dial up thing, thank god I migrated to broadband when I did.
not to mention, Microsoft is about the only player out there that can afford to give away stuff practically for free. A law like your proposing would give Microsoft a major advantage.
And in the long term, what will happen to the companies (short of some super DMCA law)? They will fail.
Take the record labels for example. Some of you may know Jim Cramer from CNBC or his radio show. Well, I was listening to his radio show a few weeks ago, right after the big RIAA threat that they were going after individuals. A caller asked Jim if he should invest in the companies which are basically doing the mass-scanning of Kazaa. Cramer said no. I wish I had an audio clip of the next statement he said, but it was basically this:
I had managed money for some major players in the music industry, and back in the late 90s they got out of it. The people in the industry now are delusional, etc.. (I really really wish I had a direct quote of this because its already escaping my mind.)
Reguardless, if experienced investors are no longer willing to put their money in the record industry it will ultimately fall. The point is, if an industry chooses to ignore a problem that is causing them to loose sales, they will cease to exist (or become a government subsidy, like say, amtrack.) The RIAA knows they are loosing sales to p2p, and they are fighting for their life right now. Piracy takes a big bight into the pockets of content producers. However, sometimes the free market players seek a solution with the government in an effort to make money, and in the process violate the rights of individuals.
DRM is one thing. For many hackers its just a game. The protection of DRM itself, through the law, is a whole different thing, and frankly I feel it is immoral.
Of course you aren't required to buy it, but thats not the point. The point is, if I buy something why can't I do what I want with it? I'm not talking about buying chemicals and making bombs, or constructing biological weapons in your basement. The point is, circumventing DRM systems would (presumably) require you to break the DMCA. So say I bought a pen, and wanted to learn about it. In the process I happened to "reverse engineer" it. According to the DMCA, I am now a criminal.
So what just happened? Big business used the government as a solution to their own problem. In other words, us, American taxpayers, are risking our money on an investment with no return to us, but an infinate return to a select group of other individuals. Thats not part of the free market, and it certainly wasn't my choice.
Slashdot Mirror
Moral? Ask Bill Bennett, he seems to be an expert on those things.
Going Postal? Mowing down pedestrians in GTA3? Nah.
Friendly fire? PKing? Using cheats? I got a problem with that (and I won't be the first person to admit to these "crimes"..but it got old fast.)
Buggy games certainly have to account for a portion of "piracy" out there. A few bad experiences of dropping $50 for a piece of trash can make individuals who aren't quite in the middle-class less than eager to take the risk again.
Consoles are even worse. At least for PC games we can anticipate patches, which generally tend to do a pretty good job fixes bugs, especially if its a big game (or an online one.)
Download a copy of PeerGuardian, and hang out in some channel on EFnet or something. You'll get port scanned by the RIAA and other known "offenders."
Hmm the RIAA and the people behind the DoS attacks seem to have alot in common. Both are using force when their position in the status quo is threatened.
Thats one small step for robot, one giant leap for robotkind.
Sounds like Microsoft-style contract agreement.
While the RIAA and associates have been contracting third parties to scan networks for quite some time now, do ISPs keep logs long enough to have any information to turn over to them reguarding activity, say 4 months to a year ago?
Do you think that a never expiring copyright could actually stifile innovation, rather than promote it -- as the founding fathers intended? Do you believe that intellectual property is greater, less then, or equal to physical property rights? How do you feel about Disney making an enormous profit off of public domain works, and at the same time being one of the driving forces behind extending the life of copyright, and thus preventing their own IP from entering the public domain? If you knew that in 100 years, IP theft would be as rampant, or more rampant, than it is today, would you get a different job, or just work harder than you do now? Do you believe that it is morally ok to take every legal means necessary to put an end to IP crimes, even if it would bring about strong negative effects to the world economy as a whole?
How about some kind of Interstate 76/Roadwarrior/Carwars hybrid?
If this wasn't HL/CS we were talking about here, I'd probably have little tolerance for Steam. Why do I want a program running in the background for some game I might play once a week? If every game in the future runs like Steam, its not going to be pretty. Not to mention the whole dial up thing, thank god I migrated to broadband when I did.
not to mention, Microsoft is about the only player out there that can afford to give away stuff practically for free. A law like your proposing would give Microsoft a major advantage.
So as long as no money is involved its ok? Sounds kind of like something that Microsoft did with IE.
And in the long term, what will happen to the companies (short of some super DMCA law)? They will fail.
Take the record labels for example. Some of you may know Jim Cramer from CNBC or his radio show. Well, I was listening to his radio show a few weeks ago, right after the big RIAA threat that they were going after individuals. A caller asked Jim if he should invest in the companies which are basically doing the mass-scanning of Kazaa. Cramer said no. I wish I had an audio clip of the next statement he said, but it was basically this:
I had managed money for some major players in the music industry, and back in the late 90s they got out of it. The people in the industry now are delusional, etc.. (I really really wish I had a direct quote of this because its already escaping my mind.)
Reguardless, if experienced investors are no longer willing to put their money in the record industry it will ultimately fall. The point is, if an industry chooses to ignore a problem that is causing them to loose sales, they will cease to exist (or become a government subsidy, like say, amtrack.) The RIAA knows they are loosing sales to p2p, and they are fighting for their life right now. Piracy takes a big bight into the pockets of content producers. However, sometimes the free market players seek a solution with the government in an effort to make money, and in the process violate the rights of individuals.
DRM is one thing. For many hackers its just a game. The protection of DRM itself, through the law, is a whole different thing, and frankly I feel it is immoral.
Is this guy going to sue Dr Laura?
Of course you aren't required to buy it, but thats not the point. The point is, if I buy something why can't I do what I want with it? I'm not talking about buying chemicals and making bombs, or constructing biological weapons in your basement. The point is, circumventing DRM systems would (presumably) require you to break the DMCA. So say I bought a pen, and wanted to learn about it. In the process I happened to "reverse engineer" it. According to the DMCA, I am now a criminal.
So what just happened? Big business used the government as a solution to their own problem. In other words, us, American taxpayers, are risking our money on an investment with no return to us, but an infinate return to a select group of other individuals. Thats not part of the free market, and it certainly wasn't my choice.