Major Copyright Judgement

[Belz...]

It really isn't theft. You can make a semantic argument that it is because it does share some commonalities with theft, but there are some very key differences.

To me it isn't a semantics argument. Theft = taking something that isn't yours to have. Copying a game means taking the damned copy. And it isn't yours. Ergo, theft.

 

[Belz...]

Anyone who insists that copyright infringement is theft either doesn't understand what "copyright infringement" means or doesn't understand what "theft" means.

So, it's no longer an "interesting argument" ?

 

[CatInTheBag]

At nothing resembling the rates of PC games. First, to pirate games on a console, you must physically modify your console. Welding a pirate chip onto the board is necessary for XBox or Playstation mods. Purchasing a physically altered console or modifying your console by hand is quite a barrier to entry as compared to installing Daemon Tools and knowing where to find torrents (www.google.com).

Second, there are constant updates of firmware with new games. So if you purchase a game, it tends to update the pirate firmware, occasionally 'bricking' the illegal console. So you are forced to wait for the hacked version.

Third, online play is impossible with a hacked console. Will not happen. Both the XBox and the PS3 have games with large online components.

Piracy on a console is an ignorable joke compared to piracy on a computer. It is not a matter of downloading a few programs, it's a matter of buying a chip and getting a soldering iron. If you just try to burn a DVD and stick it in your console, well... heh. Good luck. You can't copy the disks, and that's that.

The hacked versions of Halo 3 from the dev thing bricked a few hundred consoles and in general saw almost no distribution. The hacked version of Assassin's Creed for the Computer had 700,000 downloads before the game was released. It's millions now.

Evidence?

 

[CatInTheBag]

No. Taking something that doesn't belong to you is by definition, theft. If you don't pay for the copyrights, then it doesn't belong to you.

You're interpretation of theft is woefully inaccurate. But feel free to move the goal posts of what the definition means to you, if it supports your argument.

 

[Ian Osborne]

Piracy is not theft.

(Cussword in the title, so maybe NSFW)

 

[CatInTheBag]

That's theft, we define it as such.

No. We don't. We define it as plagiarism. Or copyright infringement.

 

[Belz...]

Interesting that you consider this a matter of "ownership."

What else would I consider it to be ?

So, when I pay my monies, I only am provided access to the game/music as SONY/BMG/Valve/Infinity Ward/etc deem to allow without any actual real ownership, right?

Yes. You own the CD, but not the music.

In that case, why shouldn't I just pirate it and have, ya know, actual, real ownership of the music/games so that I can do with it as I please?

You wouldn't. At this point you would be a criminal, specifically because you didn't own it.

Like, say, play the same mp3 on my 2 different computers, in my car and in my truck without having to pay extra for that privilege?

Personally, I don't think you should have to pay twice for this. The copying of stuff you've purchased for your own use doesn't really infringe on my rights as an artist, in my opinion.

 

[Wildy]

So if I steal apples but they grow back, it's not stealing?

From what I understand from the apple argument it's wrong to steal the apples because the farmer makes money off of them but it's ok to copy games and music because, apparently, there is no right to make money off of an idea.

(Huh... I see the apple thing's been already used as an analogy... weird)

In this thread? Or in the forum in general?

 

[CatInTheBag]

Oh come on. If I work for 18 hours to get something done, and another person tells everyone that he did that, then he stole the credit.

Could you convict him in a court of law of theft? No. It's a different charge, if it could be proved at all.

Your pointless inability to recognize this is humiliating to you.

From a semantic perspective at best. From a legal perspective, no.

 

[CatInTheBag]

In many cases stealing IP is more serious than theft. If a drug company starts making generic versions of a new drug on the market, they're undercutting tens of millions of dollars in research, and imperils a company that researches lifesaving drugs. This can negatively impact millions of people, and cost them a fortune.

Irrespective of the fact that the bulk of the cost is from marketing. Not R&D.

But you say this is less severe than a kid swiping a tube of lipstick from the store?

If you want to play strawmen - Isn't it better to allow the creation and production of generic pharmaceuticals, for example HIV retardation drugs, to allow mass treatment for those unable to afford the prices charged by the big players (southern Afric, for example), who are afforded the ability to inflated the price based on unbalanced IP laws?

Bang. Headshot.

 

[CatInTheBag]

Lets see what your God says about that.

Many people go to jail for manslaughter when we all know it was murder.

Technicalities and semantics aside, downloading is stealing.

I've downloaded the words you have written. Am I stealing?

 

[Belz...]

Needing certain prerequisites to play a game has ALWAYS been understood. This is software, it has certain requirements before it can be run.

While I agree with the rest of your post, system requirements are fine when the game needs those in order to function. But the internet connexion thing is specifically an anti-piracy issue. The game can work fine without it. I'm not saying it's a good idea or a bad idea, because I've had internet for most of the last 12 years, simply that it's not the same thing as system requirements.

 

[CatInTheBag]

But they deprive the IP owner of revenue and benefit that directly accrues as a result of their ownership of the IP. So you're wrong there TOO Avalon.

Not buying the product is also depriving the IP owner of revenue. Is that, too, unlawful?

 

[CatInTheBag]

So how about we just all agree that the copying of datafiles, be it games, music or other, that you do not have a licence to copy, for your own personal gain (be it finanical or just entertainment,) or in the aiding of another's personal gain, is illegal and wrong.

I think we can all agree it's illegal.

That's entirely dependent on jurisdiction.

 

[Belz...]

Only if by "technically" you mean "in Bizarro world."

Indeed. It's not illegal unless said friend makes a copy of the CD.

Hell, if I'm not mistaken you can make MP3s out of purchased CDs for your own use legally.

I hope so, anyway.

 

[CatInTheBag]

Avalon, you keep asking for people to show you a case where a copyright infringer has been convicted of "larceny." Nobody is claiming that copyright infringement is "larceny"--they are claiming that it is "theft." Theft is a word with far less precise legal definition than "larceny." It is used every day to describe acts of "improper taking" that do not deprive anyone of any physical good. No one would be confused by my describing a plagiarist as having "stolen" the essay they copied from their friend, for example--even though the essay remains in the possession of the friend.

But perhaps more to the point, even by strict legal definitions, there can be "theft" where no physical property changes hands: "identity theft" is theft according to statute law in numerous states, but it exactly parallels the case of illegal copying: the owner of the "identity" is not deprived of identity by the person who illegally assumes it. So, you're simply and demonstrably wrong.

Identity theft is a concept, as opposed to a crime. The crime would probably be fraud, or some other form of misrepresentation.

 

[CatInTheBag]

You keep saying this, but it clearly deprives the IP owner of revenue that would rightfully be theirs by virtue of their ownership.

Stealing the apples off an apple tree is still stealing, even if the owner still has the apple tree.

But they don't have the apples, do they? That's remarkably disingenuous.

This has been explained to you a lot of times at this point.

It's been claimed. It's not been demonstrated.

 

[Belz...]

There's no 'cost analysis,' the pirates just steal it.

To be fair, before I started working in 2000 I used to pirate video games (almost all the ones I owned). When I started working I decided I no longer had an excuse (money), and I've purchased my games from that point on.

 

[CatInTheBag]

Here, answer me these questions to see if you're on the same planet as me:

If you get a haircut and walk out without paying is it theft?
If you sneak onto a train without a ticket, is it theft?
If you sneak into the movie theater without paying, is it theft?
If you take someone's jewelry for a month because they're out of town but return it before they're back, is it theft?

It depends on the jurisdiction. Joyriding in the UK, for example, is not prosecuted as theft, but as taking without consent. It is not theft, because there is no intention to permanently deprive the owner of the vehicle.

 

[CatInTheBag]

By the way, Avalon, is "identity theft" theft?

Nominally, yes. In practice, no. Nothing is actually stolen (unless something actually is stolen as a consequence). Identities are fraudulently misrepresented.