Download Services-Piracy or Justice?

[Sweetcurse]

In the "What Video Game are You Playing" thread a discussion flared up about whether downloading on torrent or limewire was wrong if the publisher did not provide a demo. Nowadays with demo downloads in next gen consoles and PCs, it's easy to preview games before forking over money. But what if the game has no demo, is it ok to download the game to "preview" it? Does purchasing the game later make it ok? Is it different than distributing copies from games you own?

Here's a wiki on the topic. Read it before you post please.

Wikipedia

Now, let's not make this about any particular person. Rather let's stick to the topic in general. I'll be generous with rep here for smar answers. Not that my rep is mighty, but I may convince heavier weights to add to yours. So let's keep it civil and smart.

[Ranior]

This is a very interesting topic. I've always been somewhat split on this issue and think it is one of the more confusing issues of our day. However I will try and sum up my beliefs:

I think that if a company doesn't have a demo it is not correct to download it to try it out. That is against the law and the company doesn't want it. I think they are idiots for not putting out a demo, however idiots don't deserve your cash so don't buy their game. Buying the game later does not make it okay to download it.

Next getting the game from online or other sources isn't really any different than coping and distributing the game yourself. Both are illegal and are immoral.

Finally I think that as consumers we should not try to get around what a company has set out. If they have laws protecting their product, respect them. However I think as consumers we need to have our purchasing power heard. Buy games that have demos and help make it become an industry standard.

[Sweetcurse]

Will downloading the game prompt them to offer demos in the future?

[Pumpkin_King]

Originally Posted by Sweetcurse

Will downloading the game prompt them to offer demos in the future?

I think it will, and in that it might be seen as a neccessary evil. Not that advocate downloading it in the first place. But I'm convinced that the number of people using piracy as a "demoing service" can be lowered if the developers would take a few days and prepare a demo. Like jschild said in the other thread, he not only paid for a full copy of Fallout 3, he's going to buy all the DLC because the game's that good. He might not have bought it if he hadn't tried it first. I think Valve and Steam have a good thing going, with their demos for nearly every game and beta participation.

Also, stop using restrictive DRM, please. Do you know what the most pirated game ever is? Spore! The DRM made people jump through hoops to do it legally, and did nothing but make mighty Anonymous laugh and seed their torrents. A bit of this is being brought on by developers themselves.

[jschild]

Think about this scenario. Bob visits his friends Ted's house. Bob see's a cool game and Ted lets him borrow it. Then these possible actions happen....

A) Bob likes the game so much after borrowing it, he goes out and buys it.

B) Bob likes the game so much he plays through it in two days, and does not buy it.

C) Bob decides he doesn't like it after all and gives it back.

First, do you consider Ted a criminal for letting Bob borrow the game?

Second, Who is the loser in situation A?

Who is the loser in Situation B?

Who is the loser in Situation C?

Do you consider letting a friend borrow a book stealing? How about letting them borrow a game? Does the EULA permit you to let anyone other than you play the game on any other computer?

[Pumpkin_King]

Originally Posted by jschild

First, do you consider Ted a criminal for letting Bob borrow the game?

Second, Who is the loser in situation A?

Who is the loser in Situation B?

Who is the loser in Situation C?

Do you consider letting a friend borrow a book stealing? How about letting them borrow a game? Does the EULA permit you to let anyone other than you play the game on any other computer?

This is why the question is so sticky.

I would not consider him a criminal, no. Maybe I'm splitting hairs, but the actual number of copies of the game has not changed (unless A happens, but that's the most optimal thing that could happen). The loser is no one in Option A, of course. He goes out and buys the game, and capitalism marches on. In Option B, the person losing the most is the game company. This here is the closest thing to piracy we're going to see here. But again, the actual number of copies has not changed. Unless we're talking about a computer game with no DRM on it. But even then, only one person can play at a time because 99% of the time, you need the disc to play it. In Option C, no one is the loser. Bob would not have bought the game anyway.

This is my opinion, anyway.

[ParaGoomba Slayer]

I think it should be up to the company to provide anti-piracy devices (For example, like those CD-keys. Many online games have CD-keys that will not let you play if they are already resgistered on another computer).

I would argue that piracy isn't stealing. Becuase stealing is taking something. With piracy, however, you are simply making a copy of something.

I think that once someone buys something, it is theirs and they should be able to do what they please with it (including copying it), as long as they aren't taking credit for it/making money off of it.

[johnny139]

Originally Posted by ParaGoomba Slayer

I think that once someone buys something, it is theirs and they should be able to do what they please with it (including copying it), as long as they aren't taking credit for it/making money off of it.

Owning a COPY of something isn't the same as owning a COPYRIGHT of something.

[Grungebob]

I don't do it because I am convinced that it is wrong pure and simple. At the same time, I don't see at all how it can be illegal to freely share what you own.

[holylink718]

Well, I can sure say I would be PISSED if someone copied my product and passed it out to their friends. Go get a job like everyone else and buy it yourself! Geez.

[jschild]

PGS - As I asked before, would you be fine if one person bought your game, and made millions of copies and distributed them for free?

There is at least a distinction between letting someone borrow or have your original game (assuming you didn't make a copy of it) because you cannot enjoy it at the same time (as there is only one disc).

The second you start distributing copies to potentially millions, you are getting to have your cake and eat it too.

As I said in the other thread what is your intent? I said my intent was not to prevent Bethesda from getting my $50. My intent was to check out the game to see if Bethesda deserved my $50.

In your examples, you seem to be fully implying that your intent is to fully prevent the creator of the product you are distributing for free from getting any money whatsoever. That is the problem. You are robbing that creator of income, by giving a product you do not own (the copies you made, not the original disc) to others for free.

[ParaGoomba Slayer]

Originally Posted by jschild

PGS - As I asked before, would you be fine if one person bought your game, and made millions of copies and distributed them for free?

Yes.

In your examples, you seem to be fully implying that your intent is to fully prevent the creator of the product you are distributing for free from getting any money whatsoever. That is the problem. You are robbing that creator of income, by giving a product you do not own (the copies you made, not the original disc) to others for free.

The point of pirating something is to get it for free/easier, not to "rob" them of money.

Going into Best Buy and stealing a copy of Halo = Stealing.

Having your friend make a copy of Halo for you = Not stealing.