Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Proponents of pirating would have you believe that it is a victim less crime that doesn't cost the corporation in question any money. The reasoning is that someone who pirates probably had no intention of buying the product anyway. So the extra word of mouth the pirate gives the product is like sugar on top of honey. On the other hand, anti- pirates say stealing is stealing. Yet, why not hold all these thieves to the same penalty and punishment any shop-lifter receives? What do you think?
Personally, I own a PS4 and buy the games, but I use a Ps2 emulator to play all the pirate ps2 games. For me, it is simply about what is convenient. It's not convenient. to pirate computer games because I don't understand a thing about getting them to work. I always buy them. We have a basic cable package because my wife likes watching certain shows 'live', and because I enjoy certain sports. But otherwise we could just use Netflix or watch the content streaming online.
It's so strange. Millions of people pirate, but millions of people don't get charged with theft. Right or wrong?
The common belief (or excuse) is that piracy is not theft. People argue, that if you steal a bike, the original is lost and it financially damages the owner. If you copy a game or software, there are simply more of them in the world, and the original is not lost.
But this kind of logic only has limited appeal.
This same sort of reasoning could very easily apply to copying books, medication, theories, designs, intellectual property and so on.
No matter what someone tells you, piracy equals theft. It is just so prevalent because pirating software and music is very easy. And enforcing laws to punish this kind of theft is extremely difficult.
Here's the thing that is tough to figure out. I could legally get a CD and rip them onto my computer. That itself is legal and then give the original or even burnt cds to others. That itself is technically not illegal and how some bands like Metallica got big (mainly through cassette trading rather than burning cds properly.) It's when you sell them for profit that it is. The emulators aren't illegal and most are for systems you cannot really play anymore. There are a number of emulators for Genesis, SNES and N64 but you don't see them say for WiiU (why would anyone do that is beyond me), PS4 or XBOne.
Here's the thing that is tough to figure out. I could legally get a CD and rip them onto my computer. That itself is legal and then give the original or even burnt cds to others. That itself is technically not illegal and how some bands like Metallica got big (mainly through cassette trading rather than burning cds properly.) It's when you sell them for profit that it is.
That's a good point. It is like sharing a movie or music CD. Technically, what you are saying can be extended .... you could buy a movie DVD legally and copy it onto your PC and then pass the original onto a friend. The friend could do the same and pass it to his friend. This could continue and theoretically, one legal copy could be distributed to an unlimited number of people. Is this legal? Yes. It is like reading a book and passing it to a friend.
But in the real world, such distribution can only have a very limited reach. The problem arises when movies and music is uploaded onto websites and it results in instant mass-distribution. That's illegal.
Quote:
The emulators aren't illegal and most are for systems you cannot really play anymore. There are a number of emulators for Genesis, SNES and N64 but you don't see them say for WiiU (why would anyone do that is beyond me), PS4 or XBOne.
I dont know if emulators are illegal. The games that you run on these emulators ... where do those come from?
That's a good point. It is like sharing a movie or music CD. Technically, what you are saying can be extended .... you could buy a movie DVD legally and copy it onto your PC and then pass the original onto a friend. The friend could do the same and pass it to his friend. This could continue and theoretically, one legal copy could be distributed to an unlimited number of people. Is this legal? Yes. It is like reading a book and passing it to a friend.
But in the real world, such distribution can only have a very limited reach. The problem arises when movies and music is uploaded onto websites and it results in instant mass-distribution. That's illegal.
Agreed. That's the problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandman249
I dont know if emulators are illegal. The games that you run on these emulators ... where do those come from?
The games are the same. Basically you take a game and convert it into a file. I am not quite sure how it exactly works but that is the basics of it. So I am guessing that is similar to the CD and DVD conversions. It also helps that they don't do it for the more recent gaming systems and stopped at PS2/Game Cube levels.
The games are the same. Basically you take a game and convert it into a file. I am not quite sure how it exactly works but that is the basics of it. So I am guessing that is similar to the CD and DVD conversions. It also helps that they don't do it for the more recent gaming systems and stopped at PS2/Game Cube levels.
Well, if you think about it, copying music vs console games is not the same. Music CD says nothing about not making digital copies for something like a PC or MP3 player. But, why would anyone want to make a copy of an X-Box or PlayStation game if not for illegal sharing/distribution? In fact, by purchasing these consoles and games, you are signing an agreement with Sony and Microsoft that clearly stipulates that you will not copy their games.
Converting the older Nintendo type games, 16 bit, 32 bit proprietary formats into digital formats for emulation on a PC is illegal on multiple levels.
pirating is a lesser more accepted form of stealing. it's much worse to be a shop-lifter than a random pirate of content. the law and generic views of the average citizen (often even including those in the arts) reflects this.
The common belief (or excuse) is that piracy is not theft. People argue, that if you steal a bike, the original is lost and it financially damages the owner. If you copy a game or software, there are simply more of them in the world, and the original is not lost.
But this kind of logic only has limited appeal.
This same sort of reasoning could very easily apply to copying books, medication, theories, designs, intellectual property and so on.
No matter what someone tells you, piracy equals theft. It is just so prevalent because pirating software and music is very easy. And enforcing laws to punish this kind of theft is extremely difficult.
This is a gross oversimplification. The issue at hand is very action-specific and it boils down to one question: to what extent does the piracy/theft inflict economic damages to the producer/publisher? From least harmful to most harmful. This the profit from the physical good and software are the same, that the physical good costs something to the producer to replace, and the software essentially costs zero for the producer to replace.
A-I copy software (music, computer software, or an e-book) I otherwise would have no intention of buying. Or maybe I would borrow the book or CD from a library otherwise. This would also need to have no impact on my future buying habits of other books/music/software, ie, it's not a substitute. There is zero economic loss to the producer.
B-I do the same as above, but instead I would otherwise intend to buy the good or a similar good from the producer. This is a loss of a sale.
C-I shoplift a physical good. The physical good also can not be replaced at basically zero cost by the producer. This is the loss of a sale + the cost of good replacement.
D-I make available software to be copied at will be many (maybe even thousands) of people. This is the loss of many, many sales to the producer.
On an economic basis, A is not theft and B, C, and D are. Only D is as or more damaging than shoplifting.
Then there is another alternative we'll call A1: copying the software with no intention of buying or substituting, then liking it and buying a legit copy. Piracy in this case is actually a net benefit to the producer.
In many cases piracy = theft, but not in all cases. Additionally, all thefts aren't equal. It depends upon the economic loss incurred by the seller/producer. Shoplifting a tube of toothpaste is not equal to stealing a Rolls Royce off a car lot for example.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
