The Ethics of Piracy

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Here we go again on the topic of ethics and pirating. It’s the same ol’ debate, if I already bought a copy of (insert item) is it wrong for me to pirate a digital copy?

But what if you've already paid for it? Are you then entitled to use the global dark Internet of pirated materials as your own backup library? This is not the first time I've encountered this ethical problem.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I don't think the argument is as important as the fact that it is actually being talked about., We all hear tons of silly statements based on piracy. good to hear that a health debate is taking place.
 
No. Because in most DRM schemes these days you never bought the software, you only rented the software (for as long as they keep the DRM servers active) and bought a fancy box and plastic disk.
 
I see nothing wrong with pirating a copy if you bought a legit copy.

Example AC2, Silent hunter 5? All have Draconian DRM. If i am going to play a single player game, I don't want to be attached to a fucking server.

Pirated copies just work better than the legit copies.
 
I question if games are sometimes, thats why I love steam.

Movies, if I cant make a backup or if it doesnt come with the DigDownload then I will pirate them (IF I OWN THEM)
 
No.

If I own the DVD of a movie, I would have no qualms at all about torrenting it too (although I'd probably just rip it instead :p).

Likewise, if some freak accident caused me to lose all the tracks I bought from iTunes, and the backups, I would have little issue about finding them again for "free".
 
if your shit gets stolen nobody is going to help you.

i'm all for subscription based fees though
 
Isn't it even piracy to modify your own executable? Hacking the .exe from a file you bought shouldn't be against the law. Redistribution is another topic. It's akin to making a law stating that you can't pull the tag off your own couch. Now we don't own what we purchase, we just pay for a revoke-able license.
 
vengence said:
in most DRM schemes these days you never bought the software, you only rented the software (for as long as they keep the DRM servers active) and bought a fancy box and plastic disk.
Click to expand...

This is a scary fact. Cracked backups and burned 360 games will work in 5 years when a lot of pc purchased games wont.
 
[RIP]Zeus;1035645850 said:
I see nothing wrong with pirating a copy if you bought a legit copy.

Example AC2, Silent hunter 5? All have Draconian DRM. If i am going to play a single player game, I don't want to be attached to a fucking server.

Pirated copies just work better than the legit copies.
Click to expand...

This.
 
vengence said:
... in most DRM schemes these days you never bought the software, you only rented the software (for as long as they keep the DRM servers active) and bought a fancy box and plastic disk.
Click to expand...
Which is where things have gone wrong...

I shouldn't be allowed to download pirate copies from the net if I have purchased the original. I should have no trouble making personal backup copies directly from my original! That's the essence of fair use!
In Sweden we even have to pay a royalty fee on all recordable media to compensate for this (fully legal) "private copying", no matter if I use it to store other's IP or just to backup my own IP material. But the main problem is that the major IP holders have been able to push through a legislation making it illegal to circumvent DRM, and still they want royalties for the private copying of said material!
IMO it should definitely read: Copy protection => No royalties!
 
Its no more unethical than selling something, giving them the reasonable assumption that they own it, then witholding what they 'bought' and pointing out they never actualy owned it when they complan.

The funny thing about the whole 'software as a service' concept when it comes to DRM is it makes it (in my opinion) even more ethical to pirate software you paid for but can't access.

For example, (playing devils advocate here) if you bought a game on DVD and you scratch it to the point it won't work (not geting into the rights of wrongs of making 'backups') you could argue that ethicaly you have to buy another copy because you broke yours, it was your property and you are responsible for it...

But if you only buy the right to play the game, and the companies DRM servers or whatever are offline, then how can it be unethical to aquire it from other sources? you are simply exercising the right that you paid for, the contract you have with the publisher may dictate you must use their service, but if its unavailable they are in breach before you anyway.

Of course ethical doesn't always equal legal.
 
Steve said:
It’s the same ol’ debate, if I already bought a copy of (insert item) is it wrong for me to pirate a digital copy?
Click to expand...

Funny, I just had this debate with someone too. It really does feel like deja vu sometimes. I've always thought that it's acceptable, so long as the digital copy is identical; specifically, you should not gain anything material in the process.

Acceptable: You own Assassin's Creed 2 on Steam, but you'll be without internet so you download a cracked copy to play.

Unacceptable: You owned Megadeth's "Peace Sells" in the late 1980s, but lost it; you download a pirated copy of the remastered version. The copy you've downloaded has had value added to it, and is not what you originally purchased, and you therefore gain where you should not.
 
Doh, I fell foul of the 'no edits on front page news' rule :eek:

That first sentence should say:
Its no more unethical than selling a person something, giving them the reasonable assumption that they own it, then witholding what they 'bought' and pointing out they never actualy owned it in the first place when they complan.
Click to expand...
 
I refuse to jump through hoops to play a game I pay money for. So it mostly invovles me boycotting said game. most of the time its on my "meh" list anyway. Any good company knows invasive DRM is bad for buisness.
 
As most people have said, I too, have no problem downloading another copy of something I have already paid for.
 
Meh. If they don't offer me a digital copy (or in a format I can use) then I make a digital copy, simple no.
 
insane drm that hurts the end user = piracy its sad that people pay for a product that they can not use how they see fit
 
When a company attacks or accuses it's customer base of doing something or fights them, it doesn't end good for the company.
 
That's the kind of bullshit that I've thought about. The idea came about from emulators.

I have no way of getting a copy of Sega Genesis Sonic games onto my computer, unless I torrent. It's illegal, but I still have my original copy of all my games. In fact, I have 3 copies of Sonic the Hedgehog, and 2 copies of Sonic 2. Yet, Sonic 2 is on iPhone, but I gotta pay for a copy. A lot of those old retro packs on PS2, are games I've already owned.

The same thing for movies and music. I have a VHS copy of Terminator 2, so why I gotta pay for a DVD or Blu-Ra copy? I can't image how many times I've bought the same copy of music. Cassette, CD, itunes, when is this going to stop?

Those new PSP owners who can't use UMD discs, have to buy a new copy of their games again. For the same platform.

The way I see it, if you own a copy, you have rights to the media no matter what format it's in. When I bought Doom 2 back in 1996, I got it in floppy. The floppies broke and ID was more then happy to replace it with a CD. Why can't other companies do the same?
 
maxius said:
insane drm that hurts the end user = piracy its sad that people pay for a product that they can not use how they see fit
Click to expand...

No one really owns everything. In a sense even property tax is like an upkeep on land we lease from the gov't. The EULA you clearly agree on when you install a game clearly states that you do not own the product (though it makes no sense you agree to it after you buy it from a game store with a clear no return to opened games). I just saw a movie where it was suggested that they have a 100% inheritance tax and it made sense, it forced people to be consumers rather then hoarders and got rid of people living off of trusts. The only reason and principle that DRM can work on is that you don't own the game, otherwise the company wouldn't have a right to spy on you or tie you down. Clear up those kinds of laws, and ownership and there would be no way to enforce DRM.
 
The Anonymous side of me says "Yea fuck the corporations and bad laws, steal the damn game to teach these bastards a lesson"

The pseudo-anon side (DocFaustus) says, "If I bought it, I should own it, free to copy and use however I like. I shouldn't be burdened with DRM and I should have the right to download a proper version should it work better for me."

The real side of me says, "I barely make enough money to cover living expenses, I am too much of a pussy to take the risk of having pirated software (legit or not) hanging around. I don't want to defend my moral decisions in the court of law, so lets not take the risk."
 
Raxiel said:
Its no more unethical than selling something, giving them the reasonable assumption that they own it, then witholding what they 'bought' and pointing out they never actualy owned it when they complan.

The funny thing about the whole 'software as a service' concept when it comes to DRM is it makes it (in my opinion) even more ethical to pirate software you paid for but can't access.

For example, (playing devils advocate here) if you bought a game on DVD and you scratch it to the point it won't work (not geting into the rights of wrongs of making 'backups') you could argue that ethicaly you have to buy another copy because you broke yours, it was your property and you are responsible for it...

But if you only buy the right to play the game, and the companies DRM servers or whatever are offline, then how can it be unethical to aquire it from other sources? you are simply exercising the right that you paid for, the contract you have with the publisher may dictate you must use their service, but if its unavailable they are in breach before you anyway.

Of course ethical doesn't always equal legal.
Click to expand...

You do raise an interesting point. Either you are responsible for preserving the copy you purchased, otherwise if we go with the "software as a service" model, they are responsible for preserving the service you purchased. A good service should be responsible for replacement parts. Anything in between the "either or" would qualify as poor service. I'm not one for lawsuits... but if they don't provide the service advertised then then they might be held liable.
 
What about television programming? I have no problem downloading an episode that I missed, especially since I am paying the cable company a healthy amount each month. I would have been able to watch that same program on television because it is one of the channels I have. Typically, that episode gets deleted from the hard drive after it is watched.

I think that most large networks would agree with that because they allow you to stream their shows for quite some time even after they have been broadcast.

What if you don't have cable television, but you have and pay for cable internet only?

There are too many scenarios to be able to put a rule on everything. The larger our broadband networks become, the easier it is to find and share information. As long as the information is available (not protected), people will access it.
 
dunno. look at the concept of music. you pay for a cd. record companies would like you to pay again to put it on your ipod and yet again to get it as a ring tone. my phone ringing is a performance? REALLY?
 
jiminator said:
dunno. look at the concept of music. you pay for a cd. record companies would like you to pay again to put it on your ipod and yet again to get it as a ring tone. my phone ringing is a performance? REALLY?
Click to expand...

The "public performance" thing was struck down, no? And using iPod as an example, iTunes will rip your CDs for you so you can listen to them on your iPod or iPhone; record companies may not particularly like that but they aren't prosecuting it. If you buy your music straight from the iTunes store, iTunes will let you make a free ringtone from it.
 
See my view is if you bought the game, and I view going into one store (online or not) plunking down money as you actually having bought to OWN that product not a rental or lease on that product until it breaks, you having bought the game are not pirating if you download a digital copy, crack, NO-CD, Server-busting, etc.

The analogy with a physical objects that wears is an interesting one to take as well, and at that point I can understand that view point, CDs/DVDs don't last forever. However I don't think you should be able to make the claim that data is something that can wear out, yes the medium its on can, but the data itself is not something physical and unique. Not to mention with many mediums going to digital downloads, why should you be restricted to use one service as your medium to "backup" and not another (steam vs the pirate bay), why shouldn't you be able to manipulate YOUR product as you see fit.

I paid cash for an item, I did not sign a contract for the purchase of that item that limits me to what I can do it with it.
 
With entertainment companies trying to say you didn't buy a copy, you just have a license for it, even with music/movies I've often thought about it this way; I've bought 3 copies of Star Wars 4, 5, 6 on VHS and two on DVD, 5 licenses worth. The VHS wore out, the 1st DVD set was eventually damaged. Why can't I just call up and say "I'm licensed for this content already, here's the $2 in materials and shipping it'll cost you to send me a new disc."?

They want to say you don't own it, and you cannot transfer it. They're scared of digital, claiming digital is perfect, it's just like an original. Well, if it's just like my purchased original why can't I have a digital, after all, it's the same.
 
If I paid for a working version of your game but the DRM scheme won't let me play it, and you refuse to give me, the legitimate consumer who can prove I purchased this legitimately, a means to play it like I want to, what do you think I'm going to do? Sigh and give up is not a correct answer, because that's not what I personally would do and I don't think others will take that kind of bullshit lying down either.

Is it wrong that I would pirate my own legitimately purchased game? Maybe. But what about selling me something that doesn't work and then refusing to help me get it working? Isn't that just as wrong? I believe so.

I have no problem buying games that I can actually play. I have a big problem with just handing my money over to someone and getting nothing in exchange.
 
My opinion only,
If I buy something and currently have possession of it (cd/dvd/game/book) I am going to download a digital copy or rip it. Digital copies make life easier for me like reinstalling from an ISO with a virtual cd rom or burning a new music disc when the copy that has been sliding around my car floor mat fails to read. Also exe cracks so I dont have to put the game disc in every time I want to play the game.
If this is ethically wrong then cuff me and send me to jail.

But if I lose it then I have to buy another copy. Come on people if you lose any other item that can not be turned into digits and downloaded do you expect to get another one for free?

The way I see it its the company's/publishers old time ways getting in the way of a great money making opportunity. Like COAs if I have a COA from my windows 7 but lose/break the disc does that mean I have to buy an entire new copy of windows 7? I hope not or bring cuffs and come get me.

I should be able to use my COA to obtain a digital copy, I would even be willing to pay a small fee for this but I am not going to pay full price for something I already purchased and possess a COA for just to replace my non working hard copy.

So my opinion is if the publishers of this media would get with the digital times,
1. Pirating an illegal copy of something you own would not be necessary and this ethics question would not exist.
2. For "artists" that feels they deserve money with every copy of their "art" that is distributed. Maybe you should talk to your publisher and find out how much of a pain in the ass they make it for your fans to obtain and use your "art" and then you would not see your "art" got to the top of the torrent sites hot list.
3. DRM is a joke leading to more pirating, I and many people I know that purchase PC games regularly (1-2 every few months) will not purchase a game with DRM, sorry your games get downloaded because we the fan/gamer would like to game and not jump through hoops to get your media to work. Game studios blame your publisher for your slumping sales not the pirates.

Steam is no different then DRM in a lot of fronts, you must hook to a server to access your games. (exclude valve games at least the single player version you dont have to sign in to play I love you valve and buy all your stuff) But almost all games from other publishers you have to sign in to play even if its single player. But the HUGE difference is you can download it again! Crazy I know and its been around for how long. Hey MPAA and RIAA look whats been going on for YEARS and it works!

Sorry for being so long winded but this stuff gets me all in a tissy.
 
Pretty sure Canadian law allows me to download any TV currently being broadcast OTA.
So I'm in the clear there.

As for tunes, haven't bought a disc in a long time. There's a lot of music coming into the public domain worth checking out...and as for the rest, good luck finding what I have in the back catalogs of either HMV or Sunrise.(Both crappy big box B&M media shops, the main ones around these days, since Sam the Record Man (the ONLY place I had any luck with) closed.) I sure haven't been able! Hence why I'm all about unfettered access to culture!

And I still say, someone needs to start a library...of everything. I mean music, movies, heck it could even be digital representations of the visual arts.

As humans would it not be nice to be able to access and share this with EVERYONE...no matter the income level?

Oh sure, there would be some kind of fee or taxation involved. And those funds could fund the maintenance, as well as fair compensation of the artists involved in the works.

Certainly beats the current scenario with this grey area we have, and the many RIAA/MPAA/CMPDA-type organizations who ARE NOT giving money to the people producing the works...and suing even poorer people into bankruptcy.

So is it legit to acquire a backup when your media bites the dust when you legally purchased it originally? I say of course...especially now that it is possible to do so.
 
[RIP]Zeus;1035645850 said:
I see nothing wrong with pirating a copy if you bought a legit copy.

Example AC2, Silent hunter 5? All have Draconian DRM. If i am going to play a single player game, I don't want to be attached to a fucking server.

Pirated copies just work better than the legit copies.
Click to expand...



That's not piracy, that is fixing a broken product. It is in vioalation of the DMCA, but it can hardley be called piracy. I used to do the same as you, but now I hardley even bother with a game if it's DRM is bad enough to require cracking it to play it in a convenient fashion.
 
GORANKAR said:
That's not piracy, that is fixing a broken product. It is in vioalation of the DMCA, but it can hardley be called piracy. I used to do the same as you, but now I hardley even bother with a game if it's DRM is bad enough to require cracking it to play it in a convenient fashion.
Click to expand...

I haven't paid for a game with DRM on it. I refuse to even play games with heavy DRM. I was wanting to play AC2, but till I can buy a legit copy and play it without being attached, it will be just a game I missed.

Also this is my opinion, If i think a game is worth 50 bucks I will pay full price, but if the game I think is worth 10 to 20 dollars and it's price tag is $50, I will pirate it, play the game, and purchase it when it gets down to the range I think it's worth. Am I in the wrong for this? To me and many other people, I'm not. I refuse to pay what a "The Developer" thinks is a fair price, If I think it's worth $20, I'm only paying $20.
 
developers don't set prices and overall they get a small cut of the pie. In this case your issue is with the publisher.

all that being said, in many cases a publisher adds no value to a game (ordered electronically) aside from acting as an investor for the developer

I really wish it was possible for developers (and artists) to get more of the actual money I pay for their products. Annoying to see things like a band only receives ten cents for each song purchased on itunes. That leads to thoughts that I love the artist, but spending money on their products does not directly support them. A shame really.
 
ewb302 said:
What about television programming? I have no problem downloading an episode that I missed, especially since I am paying the cable company a healthy amount each month. I would have been able to watch that same program on television because it is one of the channels I have. Typically, that episode gets deleted from the hard drive after it is watched.
Click to expand...

Are we talking about broadcast or premium stations? Do you still watch the commercials?
 
Got a question?

I have a TV Card, if i record a show like House, and since it is now in a digital format, and i watch it 2 days later and skip all the annoying comercials, and then send it to my brother who missed it to, would that be piracy?
 
If I buy a brand new $35,000 car and crash it without insurance, can I go jump in another and take it home for free? Of course feckin' not.
 
Completely off-topic, but what if microsoft bought out steam and started doing movies/music on steam. If you buy a game on steam you can play it on your computer or your Xbox, watch it on your PC or XBox, save movies to your WHS like steam games on your PC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top