Opinions on "Illegal" Torrenting?

[puddingkip]

Oh, but let's say you were selling those notes for some reason. Ok, so people bought them, and you would be happy about the money! But then someone buys one of them, copies multiple of them and hands them out free. You don't get as much money anymore. Would you be happy? The problem is, the "pirate" isn't copying just 1 for himself to use, he is giving it to other people. Also, i'm 2lazy to multiquote, and also was so in flames i couldn't think at that time. Im sorry.

Well then why did you quadruplepost again. And Awesome's argument was based on the fact somebody compared it to theft. It's not theft. Yes he probably would be pissed, but by far not as pissed as when they would have stolen the original. Pirating in essence isn't nice, but it still is not theft

So if you don't think a product isn't good enough, you just pirate it? If it's not good enough, just don't get it! I can't go to a store, take a thing and say it isn't good enough so i wont pay!

Once again a bad comparison. In the store you are taking away the ownership from the store owner, with pirating you leave his copy but make another one for yourself. He would still have his can of coke, you just made a new one for yourself.

 

And I will show you a basic demand curve: 

The green line is the demand. Q1 people want it at P1 and Q5 people at P5 (Q being quantity and P being price)

So if the current price is P1 only Q1 people are willing to buy it at that price. But there are other people that do want it but find it too expensive. They will then pirate it as that has lower costs than purchasing it. Say that pirating costs P5 (costs as in time investments and internet costs and risk at malicious files etc.) then people Q1-Q5 will pirate the file. They would not have bought it at P1. This is why lowering prices of products means people will pirate it way less. If a game costs $60 more people will pirate it than a $1 game, even if they like it the same

But the problem is, that car is for your own use. Games are not developed for the creators own use, they are created to make revenue. And by pirating you are decreasing revenue. I don't think piracy is theft, i think it is sabotage.

It is highly questionable if pirating actually decreases revenue as I explained above. People will not purchase it at the price the seller asks but will pirate it.

 

Also sorry if i say something you have already proved wrong, my native language is not English, thus i do not understand all the fancy economic word you use.

It's alright, I'm currently at university studying Economics so I might get a bit fancy if this was directed at me

[Zerr]

Well then why did you quadruplepost again. And Awesome's argument was based on the fact somebody compared it to theft. It's not theft. Yes he probably would be pissed, but by far not as pissed as when they would have stolen the original. Pirating in essence isn't nice, but it still is not theft

Once again a bad comparison. In the store you are taking away the ownership from the store owner, with pirating you leave his copy but make another one for yourself. He would still have his can of coke, you just made a new one for yourself.

 

And I will show you a basic demand curve: 

The green line is the demand. Q1 people want it at P1 and Q5 people at P5 (Q being quantity and P being price)

So if the current price is P1 only Q1 people are willing to buy it at that price. But there are other people that do want it but find it too expensive. They will then pirate it as that has lower costs than purchasing it. Say that pirating costs P5 (costs as in time investments and internet costs and risk at malicious files etc.) then people Q1-Q5 will pirate the file. They would not have bought it at P1. This is why lowering prices of products means people will pirate it way less. If a game costs $60 more people will pirate it than a $1 game, even if they like it the same

It is highly questionable if pirating actually decreases revenue as I explained above. People will not purchase it at the price the seller asks but will pirate it.

 

It's alright, I'm currently at university studying Economics so I might get a bit fancy if this was directed at me

A bit confusing but i get the basic. So, if pirating wasn't here, the people who pirate, wouldn't pay for it and just leave it and not bothering with it? That is an interesting thought. So let's say pirating just suddenly wasn't a thing. (Of course this would not happen, but the only way obtaining the would be to purchase it.) Some of the people that pirated all the games they played, would just not play/get them anymore. But some people would start buying the games. If you get what i am trying to say. Demand would never really go to 0. So when it doesn't affect revenue that much, it does a little. Also remember that you are studying economics, and i'm just a kid getting these thoughts from thin air so

[Zerr]

A bit confusing but i get the basic. So, if pirating wasn't here, the people who pirate, wouldn't pay for it and just leave it and not bothering with it? That is an interesting thought. So let's say pirating just suddenly wasn't a thing. (Of course this would not happen, but the only way obtaining the would be to purchase it.) Some of the people that pirated all the games they played, would just not play/get them anymore. But some people would start buying the games. If you get what i am trying to say. Demand would never really go to 0. So when it doesn't affect revenue that much, it does a little. Also remember that you are studying economics, and i'm just a kid getting these thoughts from thin air so

Also, from my own experience, a lot of pirates are people who can't buy the game. Like, lets say under-aged people who don't have a credit card, and their parents don't want to pay the money. If they had a chance, they would pay P1, but they can't. And so they fall under the P5 category. In this case, it doesn't matter if it's P2, P3 or P4, they just can't buy it and decreasing the price wont change anything in that matter. 

[puddingkip]

A bit confusing but i get the basic. So, if pirating wasn't here, the people who pirate, wouldn't pay for it and just leave it and not bothering with it? That is an interesting thought. So let's say pirating just suddenly wasn't a thing. (Of course this would not happen, but the only way obtaining the would be to purchase it.) Some of the people that pirated all the games they played, would just not play/get them anymore. But some people would start buying the games. If you get what i am trying to say. Demand would never really go to 0. So when it doesn't affect revenue that much, it does a little. Also remember that you are studying economics, and i'm just a kid getting these thoughts from thin air so

No you got the basics right. What I was trying to point out with the graph was that it indeed wasn't so that all people who pirate now would purchase the game if pirating wasn't a thing.

And you are not calculating the extra sales for the company because of the advertising by piraters as Awesome points out. If I tell you a certain game is epic because I pirated it you might purchase it whilst you never would have bought the game if I never told you. It is very doubtful if pirating actually harms sales, some studies say it does but others actually claim it increases sales

 

Edit: use the edit function to add to previous posts you made if you were the last poster.

 

And people who are not able to purchase the game are theoretically not part of the economy thus their demand would not actually be on the graph but that's quite advanced economics. And you mixed up P and Q. The people you described aren't prices (P) but people who purchase an item in a certain quantity (Q)

[Zerr]

No you got the basics right. What I was trying to point out with the graph was that it indeed wasn't so that all people who pirate now would purchase the game if pirating wasn't a thing.

And you are not calculating the extra sales for the company because of the advertising by piraters as Awesome points out. If I tell you a certain game is epic because I pirated it you might purchase it whilst you never would have bought the game if I never told you. It is very doubtful if pirating actually harms sales, some studies say it does but others actually claim it increases sales

 

Edit: use the edit function to add to previous posts you made if you were the last poster.

The advertising point is all great for companies, but it shouldn't be considered a pro if it was not under the consent of the company. Even if it is good for the company, if the company says in their terms you can't do it, it should be illegal. Let the company decide if they want extra sales or extra advertisement. Don't do it on your own, even if it would increase revenue.

[jelly jiggler]

What would manga scanlations on the internet be considered?

[AwesomeMcCoolName]

Oh, but let's say you were selling those notes for some reason. Ok, so people bought them, and you would be happy about the money! But then someone buys one of them, copies multiple of them and hands them out free. You don't get as much money anymore. Would you be happy? The problem is, the "pirate" isn't copying just 1 for himself to use, he is giving it to other people. Also, i'm 2lazy to multiquote, and also was so in flames i couldn't think at that time. Im sorry.

So if you don't think a product isn't good enough, you just pirate it? If it's not good enough, just don't get it! I can't go to a store, take a thing and say it isn't good enough so i wont pay!

Actually you can. You can go to Gamestop, buy a used game, beat it and then return it for a full refund within a week. And then theres pretty much every other store you can think of who will accept pretty much anything you want to return -- the only exception being cd code type purchases and perishable foods -- but even the latter isn't entirely valid as Shop Rite (grocery super store, and most others I've dealt with) will accept milk/ice cream/pretty much anything else you may want to return.

 

But the problem is, that car is for your own use. Games are not developed for the creators own use, they are created to make revenue. And by pirating you are decreasing revenue. I don't think piracy is theft, i think it is sabotage.

 Cars aren't made to create revenue?

/TIL

The advertising point is all great for companies, but it shouldn't be considered a pro if it was not under the consent of the company. Even if it is good for the company, if the company says in their terms you can't do it, it should be illegal. Let the company decide if they want extra sales or extra advertisement. Don't do it on your own, even if it would increase revenue.

Any publicity is good publicity. The issue with officially condoning pirates is that then the people who are convinced to buy the game because they believe torrenting is wrong will torrent the game -- yes, some will buy the game in order to support the devs, but a lot more would torrent the game.

[Zerr]

Actually you can. You can go to Gamestop, buy a used game, beat it and then return it for a full refund within a week. And then theres pretty much every other store you can think of who will accept pretty much anything you want to return -- the only exception being cd code type purchases and perishable foods -- but even the latter isn't entirely valid as Shop Rite (grocery super store, and most others I've dealt with) will accept milk/ice cream/pretty much anything else you may want to return.

 

 Cars aren't made to create revenue?

/TIL

Any publicity with the consent of the company is good publicity. The issue with officially condoning pirates is that then the people who are convinced to buy the game because they believe torrenting is wrong will torrent the game -- yes, some will buy the game in order to support the devs, but a lot more would torrent the game.

FTFY, if the company says no, its a no, your opinion does not matter there.

[AwesomeMcCoolName]

FTFY, if the company says no, its a no, your opinion does not matter there.

No, any publicity is good publicity regardless of whether it was "approved", good, or bad.

[Zerr]

No, any publicity is good publicity regardless of whether it was "approved", good, or bad.

Let me reword it. If a company says no to a good way of getting publicity, it's a no. No questions asked.

[puddingkip]

Let me reword it. If a company says no to a good way of getting publicity, it's a no. No questions asked.

So if EA didn't want news sites to write about Fifa 15 according to you news sites can't publish stories about Fifa 15?

[Zerr]

So if EA didn't want news sites to write about Fifa 15 according to you news sites can't publish stories about Fifa 15?

If it was in EA's Terms&Conditions, then yes.

 

EDIT: A company should have the right to decide anything they want about their products etc. even if their choices would affect them negatevilly.

[Explosion-chan]

I torrent some stuff because it's not black or white in law, it's gray. It would be hard to charge anyone with piracy after torrenting in the USA if they didn't distribute it and just kept for personal purposes. The illegal part is the upload, not the download

[Zerr]

I torrent some stuff because it's not black or white in law, it's gray. It would be hard to charge anyone with piracy after torrenting in the USA if they didn't distribute it and just kept for personal purposes. The illegal part is the upload, not the download

Here in finland, if you see a crime and don't report it, thats a crime.

[Genzarata]

So if EA didn't want news sites to write about Fifa 15 according to you news sites can't publish stories about Fifa 15?

 

This post remind me of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfgoDDh4kE0. Censoring negative opinions by claiming a copyright breach. A disgusting practice through-and-through.

[Zerr]

This post remind me of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfgoDDh4kE0. Censoring negative opinions by claiming a copyright breach. A disgusting practice through-and-through.

It's a dick move, and that's wrong. If he censors negative opinions, he should censor positive ones too. It's wrong that he basically states that "Oh, you can't use footage of the game with a negative opinion" That should be illegal to prevent negative opinions like that. If it's a copyright breach, it should apply to anyone, not just negative opinions.

[Scott Bakula]

What would manga scanlations on the internet be considered?

 

That's a bit of a greyer area. They'd be technically piracy, but a large amount of the stuff would never see releases in that language otherwise, so most companies turn a blind eye to it (also because more fans = more merchandising).

[AwesomeMcCoolName]

*cough* Piracy as a marketing tool *cough*

http://torrentfreak.com/sony-planned-flood-torrent-sites-promo-torrents-141213/

[Zerr]

*cough* Piracy as a marketing tool *cough*

http://torrentfreak.com/sony-planned-flood-torrent-sites-promo-torrents-141213/

That's an interesting idea.

[Rambro]

I dont do it because I dont watch lots of tv/listen to lots of music/play a wide variety of games, but if you do it I couldnt care less.

 

Not to mention I could get any game I want on Steam for cheap using TF2 currsncy, so whats the point.

[Chimera]

Only torrent what you need. If you like it, it's a nice thing to support the creator (unless it's EA, fuck them). Other than that, only programs that are stupid to pay for (music, minecraft) should be torrented, or games that you want to try out.

[λngelღмander]

Only torrent what you need. If you like it, it's a nice thing to support the creator (unless it's EA, fuck them). Other than that, only programs that are stupid to pay for (music, minecraft) should be torrented, or games that you want to try out.

Minecraft is something you have to purchase to play online, and playing online is the only good reason to play minecraft, solo gets boring fast.

[Plato to Aristotle]

*you walk into back alley with weird person you met on the street

*there's a notepad he hands you 

*primewire.ag

"Beware of the ads and media player scams" says the stranger

*You nod and walk away

[Skylineee]

Big business that usually does pretty well- Go ahead

Big business that is not making lots of sales right now- Proceed with caution

Small team of developers- No, no, no.

Single developer- NO.

[Zar_]

Big business that usually does pretty well- Go ahead

Big business that is not making lots of sales right now- Proceed with caution

Small team of developers- No, no, no.

Single developer- NO.

amen.

That is how I feel IMO.