A bill is not a product. A bill is an obligation of the government. Thus copying the bill is "counterfeiting", because you lie, pretending the bill is something it isn't. Thus you mislead other people into giving you something (something material, therefore you deprive them of their property) you don't have right to. Hope it's clear now why copying the bill is not the same as copying the game.
There is nothing like "game inflation". Your analogy is unproven, false and misleading. The price of the game doesn't change (why should it, since I am not going to buy it anyway) and the number of units sold is not "not as many", it is precisely one unit less. Below is how things really work. First, the lost sale of the 30$ game is not an asset worth 30$. From the economy point of view it is worth 0$, because I am paying for the game, so I am parting with 30$ while someone else is gaining them. Net economic effect from the sale is precisely zero.
Let's have an example. Assume that there are only two products in the economy - games and Big Macs. A game costs 30$, while a Big Mac costs 3$. Furthermore, let's assume that every Big Mac eaten adds 1 unit of happiness (utility) and every game played adds 10 units. The goal of the economy is to maximise the utility, as macroeconomics teaches us. There are three possible cases, let's examing them in detail.
1) I neither buy, nor copy the game. I eat 10 Big Macs. Nobody plays the game. I don't play it because I don't have it and the producer doesn't play it because he made it and it's not fun for him. Total utility: 10 units. 2) I buy the game. Now the producer gets to eat 10 Big Macs, while I play the game. Total utility: 20 units. 3) I pirate the game. The producer doesn't get anything. I still have my money, so I buy and eat 10 Big Macs, and I also get to play the game. Total utility: 20 units.
What can we see? First of all, it is patently obvious that there is a really bad possible outcome - that's the one where I don't get to play the game. It really sucks because the whole economy suffers - there are only half as many utility points earned. So it should be out of the question that I must get the game one way or another, and not just me, but every human, who wants to play it. There is also a question - should I pay for it or should I just copy it? The economic theory doesn't have a simple answer here. The producer would argue that I should pay, why from my point of view it is obvious that I should copy. A logical conclusion would be that if I am willing to pay, I probably should buy the game and if I am unwilling to pay for it, I should definitely be allowed to play for free.
Sometimes you have owners who care about the business (ad in product and customers) first and about the money second. As long as they can keep the company profitable, they can continue to do things as they like. Only public companies where a large fraction of shares is traded on open markets are forced to make money at all costs.
It seems to me that you are very quick to judge me, without asking me any questions or trying to understand my position whatsoever. First, I did not judge you, I just ascertained the fact that you feel very attached to fruits of your labour. As one of the characters proclaims in Boiler Room, "greed is good".
It also seems to me that you could not have been a good financial analyst nor a good business consultant, since nothing has monetary (or at least nothing SHOULD have monetary) value in your little make believe world. I also feel pretty sad for your students, since what you are espousing is completely at odds with capitalism and basically every marketplace as they currently operate worldwide. Second, I was a very good financial analyst and business consultant, judging by the fact that both companies would hire me back at a minutes notice. Though I wasn't perfect, partly because I'd rather work on something interesting than something boring but important, and partly because in corporate culture of most investment banks you need to be motivated by money to a large degree. As for students, they are illiterate anyway, I teach better than most teachers, and financial management is pretty value-neutral discipline. So don't feel that sad for them (except for the fact that they don't know basic math).
you are crazy and delusional, and actually believe the world works this way. Finally, it's not me who is delusional.:) I know that most people actually love money and care a lot about their personal consumption. I know that the first reaction of most people would be "I made it, it's mine, my precioussss!". But I also know (and you would know if you read Harvard Business Review or any similar business magazine) that most people are not motivated by money (after certain level), they are motivated by interesting and creative work. This is a widely accepted notion today in the business world, even though it is not always applied to practice.
I understand how the world works, I understand that it is far from perfect. But please note that almost everything I wrote in my previous post applied to me and to me only. I wrote that I don't care about money, because I have more than I need already. I wrote that I let everyone use what I make freely. I never said I believe most people share the same values already.
As for whether the world can work this way, I am sure it can. First, you can observe the phenomenon of Open Source. Second, in many parts of Russia, such as science cities (research centre + infrastructure) things did work this way, with no crime, with polite and friendly people working for the benefit of the society/humankind. And I am pretty sure that the society I want to live in will emerge in a few decades, once people are freed from the necessity to earn their living. The seeds (and sprouts) are already visible, it's people creating something for others and sharing it for free.
So have a great life too, but wait, relatively soon it will suddenly become a whole lot better.:)
Perhaps building a sim where the idea is to think about what you are doing before you kill thousands of civillians would be a good idea. Check out September 12th, this is precisely the sim you are talking about!
they are vastly ahead of the civilian world in a lot of things They were vastly agead of the civilian world as long as the technology was too expensive for the market to bear. The military can waste nearly as much money on their projects as they want.
As soon as the technology matured enough to be useful for mass-market products, competition and the free market were able to further improve it so rapidly as to render military tech in this area virtually useless.
Theoretically they can ask FBI to arrest said American citizen, just like Adobe asked them to arrest Sklyarov (only to release him later). But in reality there is no reason for the American to be involved directly. In Russia this is usually done by registering the company with a passport of some homeless alcoholic or some dead guy. This is such a common practice (with many variations), even large retail chains do almost the same stuff to avoid taxes.
And the best thing, of course, is that it would be legal for everyone involved. And Disney would hopefully have a hard time fighting on foreign turf. Consider that even the mighty Microsoft (their Russian office) has made pretty much zero progress fighing the real pirates (who actually break Russian laws).
As for the state of the Net infrastructure, there are many backbone connections as of today, provided by a variety of telcos. Most of them connect the European part of Russia (Moscow, St. Petersburg and other cities) with Scandinavia, but there are also some transcontinental lines as well (Europe Russia China). There is plenty of free capacity at the moment and hosting prices (traffic costs) are relatively benign.
The problem is that Russian pirates make more money then they know how to spend by printing CDs/DVDs for the local market, so they don't really think about the Western market. And they don't care about exploting legal loopholes, since they are accustomed to breaking the copyright law alltogether.:) I just hope that someone will realise this possibility exists, before the whole world is DRMed to death by RIAA/MPAA/BSA. Disney deserves to be beaten and what could be a more devastating blow than them finally losing a huge chunk of their "intellectual property" to public domain.:)
Then they can order it over the Internet. I can't. I live in Russia and I can't get a credit card very easily and even if I could, there is no guarantee at all that it will be accepted by American stores. Not to mention a credit card is not that useful here as in the US and is rather expensive.
If they don't have enough money to buy it, then they shouldn't be using it, it's that simple. This is only simple to an American. The presumption that free market was given to us by God is an American-only axiom (no offence meant). The same logic dictates that those people who are starving, don't have access to drinking water and medical services, shouldn't be having that. Which sound kind of absurd, doesn't it? Average salary in Russia is 100$, as opposed to how much in the States? Does that mean Russians should pay 2-week salary for a game or just not play it? Why? Do you somehow deserve to play games more? Do you believe you are so much more productive and benefit the world so much more?
And so it's easier to download the full 650 MB version instead of the 100 MB demo? That statement is completely illogical. I never said those people download warez, they just buy it in the store.
I honestly don't have too much of a problem with using a cracked version as a demo to see if I want to buy it, but I imagine most people who download cracked version of stuff never buy the real thing. Sure. But most of them would never have bought the licensed game in the first place. Just think, if you could somehow make a copy of an Intel P4 computer and send it to kids in Africa so that they can too download porn, play games and access MIT Open Course, would you do that, knowing that Intel will lose "potential revenue"? How is that different from allowing people who would not have bought the legit game to play it for free?
Well, your motivation is extremely easy to understand. To put it bluntly, it's banal greed, to put it more politely, it's the feeling of attachment or some kind of ownership towards the fruits of your labour.
As for me, I have created things in my life, but it practically never occured to me (only once, when I was a kid) that I should somehow own these creations (besides the physical objects themselves). I even sell software (and some of it I give away) to supplement my income, but I wouldn't dare stop anyone from distributing it for free. As for making a living, I am pretty confident in my ability to support myself, baring a serious accident. I used to work as a financial analyst and as business consultant. Right now I teach stupid kids financial management in the university (although I don't do it for money) and work on my Ph.D. Since I don't feel the need to buy lots of stuff to be happy, I don't need lots of money either. And I much prefer working 40+ hours/week (or more) creating something just because it is interesting, enjoyable and useful to others. Money doesn't enter the equation. I just believe somehow I will earn enough money anyway.
This requires a bit of foresight. When you are upgrading your old notebook, take care to move all files from 3.5" floppies onto CD-RWs or HDD, because new notebooks usually don't have floppy drives. Don't keep any media that you can't read with your hardware, convert it until it's too late.
I guess he said that a long time ago. Today there are better ways to back up your stuff - just share it on P2P. That's where I store my movie collection.
I mean, even the Russians are saying Kyoto just kills economies... Russian officials are corrupted retards. They are using the protocol as a tool in their political games (related to WTO and local elections). All this despite the fact that economic growth in Russia will be unaffected and Russia will get about 20$ billion selling the quotas, because the limits are set according to 1990 emission levels (and production about halved in Russia after the collapse of the USSR).
In a sense the parent is correct. Economic pressures (e.g. billion dollar losses from floods and hurricanes) will solve the problem. But they will solve it by forcing people and governments to create regulations, start programs and generally do stuff.
It is also true that an economic solution exists, e.g. impose huge fines on emissions. Or consider the carbon emission markets. But these solutions do not come naturally from the free-for-all market, they need to be carefully engineered.
You don't seem to realise that all pirates do for people the same thing NO-CD crackers do for you. Some people can't get a legit version because it is not sold where they live. Some can't buy it because they don't have enough money. Some can't download a demo, because their Net access sucks, but they want to sample the game. There are many reasons why people need pirated copies. Pirates provide the choice and this is their function in society.
I guess my point is - I'm GLAD that my government actually attempts to enforce the law. What you fail to realise is that this is a bad law (copyright) and that the net effect of piracy is positive.
When you copy a bill you don't copy the product, you appropriate the right to get products. Everyone else loses. This is akin to copying someone else's serial number to play online - you directly harm that other person. Copying the game (any software) itself doesn't harm anyone.
I know that as a tax-payer I don't want to have to subsidize every creative work that is made, a zillionth of a percent of which I will actually use. I hope you do realise that for works that you will use you will only finance a zillionth of a percent, while the rest will be financed by your fellow citizens. Just like with the highways - do you drive over all of them? Please keep in mind also that works like Spiderman, LOTR, Star Wars, etc. are seen by a huge chunk of the population and this is true about a large portion of the creative products currently made.
I'm skeptical of the government's ability to do most things and their ability to decide what I see, hear, read, and experience is somewhere near the top of that long list. This can be done by a number of public organisations that would be financed from the government according to their performance (such as the number of viewers, number of Oscars for works they financed, etc.). And please keep in mind that once you don't have to shell out 10$ for each book/CD/DVD the society would benefit greatly and that benefit is likely to cover the potential inefficiencies. And please also keep in mind that modern producers also do a piss poor job of producing quality content that we want.
If the government won't raise funds for a given project, but there is sufficient demand for it, how does then artists then get compensated for his work without any IP protections? Simple - those who want the product collect the money and pay the creators. Then the work is made available for free to everyone.
Anyone have information? I do. There are very decent hosting services in Russia. Moreover, due to some legal issues it is quite difficult to prosecute copyright violation online, because it is somewhat legal.:) Only recently have our RIAAs (Russians Imitating American Assholes) started to crack down/lobby/etc. Unfortunately, those FUCKERs in the Duma just passed a new law, extending copyrights to 70 (?) years.:( But it is still pretty fine here with pirated discs sold at most major chains next to licensed copies.
BTW, there is a nice loophole that can be used by anyone with a few grands to spare. According to Russian law, most movies released before 1974 are in public domain. Thus, unlike in the US, where everything after the Mickey Mouse first cartoon is copyrighted, in Russia a huge chunk of films from the golden age of cinema are in public domain. The partial list of the films is hosted on the ministry of culture website, so it's 100% official and legal. It should be possible to start a free/ad-supported/paid service (1$/film) offering these films. Would piss Disney and might also become sustainable/profitable - who knows...
Crime organizations are only interested in warez business in countries where they can easily sell large quantities of pirated discs, such as Russia, China. There they might be slightly interested, although the volumes in money terms are rather small. But in any case the CD-printing plants are not run by the mob, they are run by enterpreneurs, sometimes the same people who make CDs for legal publishers. So all these talks about mafia are 100% pure refined bullshit, just like associating child porn with terrorism (the FBI does that kind of FUD too).
Piracy raids and copy-restriction is not going to make me buy more games. Period. And I'd rather see the whole game industry go under than have the rights to share/copy taken from me. And since the choice in this matter is not mine, I have only one choice left - whether to buy legal copies or not (and I will buy/download pirated).
I'd say the right to distribute copyrighted works or parts of them is more important than universal access to the Net. Tell me, GraZZ, what good is internet access if you're unable to share information? If everything is DRMed, if distribution channels are monopolised, and if free speech is gradually killed for competing with commercial speech and copyrighted commercial works?
P.S. I completely, totally and irrevocably support any and all use, including piracy, of my past, present and future works.
P.P.S. I completely, unquestionably and fully support any and all distribution, including sharing, of all materials, including religious texts, political publications, child pornography, warez, music, movies, books, snuff films and everything else that can be distributed.
Do you want to know what the future of ubiquitous DRM would look like? Imagine "a boot stamping on a human face -- forever", that's what it would look like. When you stop me from sharing ed2k://|file|learn_for_yourself_whatitis|515186644 |6202383FC96BB34EAA20B890B9B7281C|/ you stop me from sharing political documentaries, you stop me from exercising my freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and other freedoms. One person can't do much to avert the coming dictatorship, but there is hope. It lies in the fact that what little we can do will be multiplied by the sheer number of people opposing the restrictions on our rights. And in the fact that technologies empower everyone and there is no end seen to the progress of science and technology. I beleive that Asscroft will answer to me personally in the coming ~30 years for everything he did and it won't be a pleasant sight.
Sony can take their DRM and stick it up their arse. And to think of it, how perverse is it to call a DRM system "Open MG"? From where I stand, there is nothing open about it...
I am sticking to pirated ebooks, thank you very much (and occasionally some publishers like Baen who "get it"). And I will continue to do so, unless it occures to major publishers that the inherent qualities of electronic books are easy distribution and easy modifiability.
FYI, in Soviet Russia there were about 16 or so levels that are still used today in government and state-owned organisations. The system is called "Unified Tariff Scale". It might not be the most efficient system, but it works.
It is extremely difficult to measure white-collar productivity. At my last job (and the one before) I sometimes managed to waste the whole day without writing as much as a line of text (/. posts don't count). Other times I got the inspiration and could maintain high productivity long enough to finish work on time. On average the quantity was good enough and the quality was excellent. To the manager (if only he knew) I was wasting my time and may be I was. But not all time wasting is bad and this story is an example of good one. If I could openly say "I don't feel like working at the moment, let's have some fun for 30 minutes", I might have gotten the break I needed so much and start being productive immediately after that.
It is very easy to create an impression that you are working. But let people have some fun and they won't just pretend to be working later.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's be logical, shall we?
A bill is not a product. A bill is an obligation of the government. Thus copying the bill is "counterfeiting", because you lie, pretending the bill is something it isn't. Thus you mislead other people into giving you something (something material, therefore you deprive them of their property) you don't have right to. Hope it's clear now why copying the bill is not the same as copying the game.
There is nothing like "game inflation". Your analogy is unproven, false and misleading. The price of the game doesn't change (why should it, since I am not going to buy it anyway) and the number of units sold is not "not as many", it is precisely one unit less. Below is how things really work. First, the lost sale of the 30$ game is not an asset worth 30$. From the economy point of view it is worth 0$, because I am paying for the game, so I am parting with 30$ while someone else is gaining them. Net economic effect from the sale is precisely zero.
Let's have an example. Assume that there are only two products in the economy - games and Big Macs. A game costs 30$, while a Big Mac costs 3$. Furthermore, let's assume that every Big Mac eaten adds 1 unit of happiness (utility) and every game played adds 10 units. The goal of the economy is to maximise the utility, as macroeconomics teaches us. There are three possible cases, let's examing them in detail.
1) I neither buy, nor copy the game. I eat 10 Big Macs. Nobody plays the game. I don't play it because I don't have it and the producer doesn't play it because he made it and it's not fun for him. Total utility: 10 units.
2) I buy the game. Now the producer gets to eat 10 Big Macs, while I play the game. Total utility: 20 units.
3) I pirate the game. The producer doesn't get anything. I still have my money, so I buy and eat 10 Big Macs, and I also get to play the game. Total utility: 20 units.
What can we see? First of all, it is patently obvious that there is a really bad possible outcome - that's the one where I don't get to play the game. It really sucks because the whole economy suffers - there are only half as many utility points earned. So it should be out of the question that I must get the game one way or another, and not just me, but every human, who wants to play it. There is also a question - should I pay for it or should I just copy it? The economic theory doesn't have a simple answer here. The producer would argue that I should pay, why from my point of view it is obvious that I should copy. A logical conclusion would be that if I am willing to pay, I probably should buy the game and if I am unwilling to pay for it, I should definitely be allowed to play for free.
Hope it is clearer now.
Sometimes you have owners who care about the business (ad in product and customers) first and about the money second. As long as they can keep the company profitable, they can continue to do things as they like. Only public companies where a large fraction of shares is traded on open markets are forced to make money at all costs.
It seems to me that you are very quick to judge me, without asking me any questions or trying to understand my position whatsoever.
:) I know that most people actually love money and care a lot about their personal consumption. I know that the first reaction of most people would be "I made it, it's mine, my precioussss!". But I also know (and you would know if you read Harvard Business Review or any similar business magazine) that most people are not motivated by money (after certain level), they are motivated by interesting and creative work. This is a widely accepted notion today in the business world, even though it is not always applied to practice.
:)
First, I did not judge you, I just ascertained the fact that you feel very attached to fruits of your labour. As one of the characters proclaims in Boiler Room, "greed is good".
It also seems to me that you could not have been a good financial analyst nor a good business consultant, since nothing has monetary (or at least nothing SHOULD have monetary) value in your little make believe world. I also feel pretty sad for your students, since what you are espousing is completely at odds with capitalism and basically every marketplace as they currently operate worldwide.
Second, I was a very good financial analyst and business consultant, judging by the fact that both companies would hire me back at a minutes notice. Though I wasn't perfect, partly because I'd rather work on something interesting than something boring but important, and partly because in corporate culture of most investment banks you need to be motivated by money to a large degree. As for students, they are illiterate anyway, I teach better than most teachers, and financial management is pretty value-neutral discipline. So don't feel that sad for them (except for the fact that they don't know basic math).
you are crazy and delusional, and actually believe the world works this way.
Finally, it's not me who is delusional.
I understand how the world works, I understand that it is far from perfect. But please note that almost everything I wrote in my previous post applied to me and to me only. I wrote that I don't care about money, because I have more than I need already. I wrote that I let everyone use what I make freely. I never said I believe most people share the same values already.
As for whether the world can work this way, I am sure it can. First, you can observe the phenomenon of Open Source. Second, in many parts of Russia, such as science cities (research centre + infrastructure) things did work this way, with no crime, with polite and friendly people working for the benefit of the society/humankind. And I am pretty sure that the society I want to live in will emerge in a few decades, once people are freed from the necessity to earn their living. The seeds (and sprouts) are already visible, it's people creating something for others and sharing it for free.
So have a great life too, but wait, relatively soon it will suddenly become a whole lot better.
Perhaps building a sim where the idea is to think about what you are doing before you kill thousands of civillians would be a good idea.
Check out September 12th, this is precisely the sim you are talking about!
they are vastly ahead of the civilian world in a lot of things
They were vastly agead of the civilian world as long as the technology was too expensive for the market to bear. The military can waste nearly as much money on their projects as they want.
As soon as the technology matured enough to be useful for mass-market products, competition and the free market were able to further improve it so rapidly as to render military tech in this area virtually useless.
Theoretically they can ask FBI to arrest said American citizen, just like Adobe asked them to arrest Sklyarov (only to release him later). But in reality there is no reason for the American to be involved directly. In Russia this is usually done by registering the company with a passport of some homeless alcoholic or some dead guy. This is such a common practice (with many variations), even large retail chains do almost the same stuff to avoid taxes.
:) I just hope that someone will realise this possibility exists, before the whole world is DRMed to death by RIAA/MPAA/BSA. Disney deserves to be beaten and what could be a more devastating blow than them finally losing a huge chunk of their "intellectual property" to public domain. :)
And the best thing, of course, is that it would be legal for everyone involved. And Disney would hopefully have a hard time fighting on foreign turf. Consider that even the mighty Microsoft (their Russian office) has made pretty much zero progress fighing the real pirates (who actually break Russian laws).
As for the state of the Net infrastructure, there are many backbone connections as of today, provided by a variety of telcos. Most of them connect the European part of Russia (Moscow, St. Petersburg and other cities) with Scandinavia, but there are also some transcontinental lines as well (Europe Russia China). There is plenty of free capacity at the moment and hosting prices (traffic costs) are relatively benign.
The problem is that Russian pirates make more money then they know how to spend by printing CDs/DVDs for the local market, so they don't really think about the Western market. And they don't care about exploting legal loopholes, since they are accustomed to breaking the copyright law alltogether.
Then they can order it over the Internet.
I can't. I live in Russia and I can't get a credit card very easily and even if I could, there is no guarantee at all that it will be accepted by American stores. Not to mention a credit card is not that useful here as in the US and is rather expensive.
If they don't have enough money to buy it, then they shouldn't be using it, it's that simple.
This is only simple to an American. The presumption that free market was given to us by God is an American-only axiom (no offence meant). The same logic dictates that those people who are starving, don't have access to drinking water and medical services, shouldn't be having that. Which sound kind of absurd, doesn't it? Average salary in Russia is 100$, as opposed to how much in the States? Does that mean Russians should pay 2-week salary for a game or just not play it? Why? Do you somehow deserve to play games more? Do you believe you are so much more productive and benefit the world so much more?
And so it's easier to download the full 650 MB version instead of the 100 MB demo? That statement is completely illogical.
I never said those people download warez, they just buy it in the store.
I honestly don't have too much of a problem with using a cracked version as a demo to see if I want to buy it, but I imagine most people who download cracked version of stuff never buy the real thing.
Sure. But most of them would never have bought the licensed game in the first place. Just think, if you could somehow make a copy of an Intel P4 computer and send it to kids in Africa so that they can too download porn, play games and access MIT Open Course, would you do that, knowing that Intel will lose "potential revenue"? How is that different from allowing people who would not have bought the legit game to play it for free?
Well, your motivation is extremely easy to understand. To put it bluntly, it's banal greed, to put it more politely, it's the feeling of attachment or some kind of ownership towards the fruits of your labour.
As for me, I have created things in my life, but it practically never occured to me (only once, when I was a kid) that I should somehow own these creations (besides the physical objects themselves). I even sell software (and some of it I give away) to supplement my income, but I wouldn't dare stop anyone from distributing it for free. As for making a living, I am pretty confident in my ability to support myself, baring a serious accident. I used to work as a financial analyst and as business consultant. Right now I teach stupid kids financial management in the university (although I don't do it for money) and work on my Ph.D. Since I don't feel the need to buy lots of stuff to be happy, I don't need lots of money either. And I much prefer working 40+ hours/week (or more) creating something just because it is interesting, enjoyable and useful to others. Money doesn't enter the equation. I just believe somehow I will earn enough money anyway.
This requires a bit of foresight. When you are upgrading your old notebook, take care to move all files from 3.5" floppies onto CD-RWs or HDD, because new notebooks usually don't have floppy drives. Don't keep any media that you can't read with your hardware, convert it until it's too late.
I guess he said that a long time ago. Today there are better ways to back up your stuff - just share it on P2P. That's where I store my movie collection.
I mean, even the Russians are saying Kyoto just kills economies...
Russian officials are corrupted retards. They are using the protocol as a tool in their political games (related to WTO and local elections). All this despite the fact that economic growth in Russia will be unaffected and Russia will get about 20$ billion selling the quotas, because the limits are set according to 1990 emission levels (and production about halved in Russia after the collapse of the USSR).
P.S. I live in Russia.
In a sense the parent is correct. Economic pressures (e.g. billion dollar losses from floods and hurricanes) will solve the problem. But they will solve it by forcing people and governments to create regulations, start programs and generally do stuff.
It is also true that an economic solution exists, e.g. impose huge fines on emissions. Or consider the carbon emission markets. But these solutions do not come naturally from the free-for-all market, they need to be carefully engineered.
You don't seem to realise that all pirates do for people the same thing NO-CD crackers do for you. Some people can't get a legit version because it is not sold where they live. Some can't buy it because they don't have enough money. Some can't download a demo, because their Net access sucks, but they want to sample the game. There are many reasons why people need pirated copies. Pirates provide the choice and this is their function in society.
Can you read? The parent spoke about the damage to the CD-drive, not to compact discs.
I guess my point is - I'm GLAD that my government actually attempts to enforce the law.
What you fail to realise is that this is a bad law (copyright) and that the net effect of piracy is positive.
When you copy a bill you don't copy the product, you appropriate the right to get products. Everyone else loses. This is akin to copying someone else's serial number to play online - you directly harm that other person. Copying the game (any software) itself doesn't harm anyone.
What's the problem if that doesn't harm anyone? If someone came to your house and copied your TV, would you mind? If yes, why?
I know that as a tax-payer I don't want to have to subsidize every creative work that is made, a zillionth of a percent of which I will actually use.
I hope you do realise that for works that you will use you will only finance a zillionth of a percent, while the rest will be financed by your fellow citizens. Just like with the highways - do you drive over all of them? Please keep in mind also that works like Spiderman, LOTR, Star Wars, etc. are seen by a huge chunk of the population and this is true about a large portion of the creative products currently made.
I'm skeptical of the government's ability to do most things and their ability to decide what I see, hear, read, and experience is somewhere near the top of that long list.
This can be done by a number of public organisations that would be financed from the government according to their performance (such as the number of viewers, number of Oscars for works they financed, etc.). And please keep in mind that once you don't have to shell out 10$ for each book/CD/DVD the society would benefit greatly and that benefit is likely to cover the potential inefficiencies. And please also keep in mind that modern producers also do a piss poor job of producing quality content that we want.
If the government won't raise funds for a given project, but there is sufficient demand for it, how does then artists then get compensated for his work without any IP protections?
Simple - those who want the product collect the money and pay the creators. Then the work is made available for free to everyone.
Anyone have information? :) Only recently have our RIAAs (Russians Imitating American Assholes) started to crack down/lobby/etc. Unfortunately, those FUCKERs in the Duma just passed a new law, extending copyrights to 70 (?) years. :( But it is still pretty fine here with pirated discs sold at most major chains next to licensed copies.
I do. There are very decent hosting services in Russia. Moreover, due to some legal issues it is quite difficult to prosecute copyright violation online, because it is somewhat legal.
BTW, there is a nice loophole that can be used by anyone with a few grands to spare. According to Russian law, most movies released before 1974 are in public domain. Thus, unlike in the US, where everything after the Mickey Mouse first cartoon is copyrighted, in Russia a huge chunk of films from the golden age of cinema are in public domain. The partial list of the films is hosted on the ministry of culture website, so it's 100% official and legal. It should be possible to start a free/ad-supported/paid service (1$/film) offering these films. Would piss Disney and might also become sustainable/profitable - who knows...
Crime organizations are only interested in warez business in countries where they can easily sell large quantities of pirated discs, such as Russia, China. There they might be slightly interested, although the volumes in money terms are rather small. But in any case the CD-printing plants are not run by the mob, they are run by enterpreneurs, sometimes the same people who make CDs for legal publishers. So all these talks about mafia are 100% pure refined bullshit, just like associating child porn with terrorism (the FBI does that kind of FUD too).
Piracy raids and copy-restriction is not going to make me buy more games. Period. And I'd rather see the whole game industry go under than have the rights to share/copy taken from me. And since the choice in this matter is not mine, I have only one choice left - whether to buy legal copies or not (and I will buy/download pirated).
I'd say the right to distribute copyrighted works or parts of them is more important than universal access to the Net. Tell me, GraZZ, what good is internet access if you're unable to share information? If everything is DRMed, if distribution channels are monopolised, and if free speech is gradually killed for competing with commercial speech and copyrighted commercial works?
4 |6202383FC96BB34EAA20B890B9B7281C|/ you stop me from sharing political documentaries, you stop me from exercising my freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and other freedoms. One person can't do much to avert the coming dictatorship, but there is hope. It lies in the fact that what little we can do will be multiplied by the sheer number of people opposing the restrictions on our rights. And in the fact that technologies empower everyone and there is no end seen to the progress of science and technology. I beleive that Asscroft will answer to me personally in the coming ~30 years for everything he did and it won't be a pleasant sight.
P.S. I completely, totally and irrevocably support any and all use, including piracy, of my past, present and future works.
P.P.S. I completely, unquestionably and fully support any and all distribution, including sharing, of all materials, including religious texts, political publications, child pornography, warez, music, movies, books, snuff films and everything else that can be distributed.
Do you want to know what the future of ubiquitous DRM would look like? Imagine "a boot stamping on a human face -- forever", that's what it would look like. When you stop me from sharing ed2k://|file|learn_for_yourself_whatitis|51518664
Sony can take their DRM and stick it up their arse. And to think of it, how perverse is it to call a DRM system "Open MG"? From where I stand, there is nothing open about it...
I am sticking to pirated ebooks, thank you very much (and occasionally some publishers like Baen who "get it"). And I will continue to do so, unless it occures to major publishers that the inherent qualities of electronic books are easy distribution and easy modifiability.
FYI, in Soviet Russia there were about 16 or so levels that are still used today in government and state-owned organisations. The system is called "Unified Tariff Scale". It might not be the most efficient system, but it works.
It is extremely difficult to measure white-collar productivity. At my last job (and the one before) I sometimes managed to waste the whole day without writing as much as a line of text (/. posts don't count). Other times I got the inspiration and could maintain high productivity long enough to finish work on time. On average the quantity was good enough and the quality was excellent. To the manager (if only he knew) I was wasting my time and may be I was. But not all time wasting is bad and this story is an example of good one. If I could openly say "I don't feel like working at the moment, let's have some fun for 30 minutes", I might have gotten the break I needed so much and start being productive immediately after that.
It is very easy to create an impression that you are working. But let people have some fun and they won't just pretend to be working later.