Software Piracy

[DemonDeLuxe]

Proof? I need to prove to you that piracy costs software companies money?

No. But you should at least try to prove that this happens to an extent worth the whining and especially the trouble like diehard copy protection mechanisms (which are cracked in a matter of minutes, anyway, and are problematic primarily for those least guilty of "Piracy". The pirates simply laugh about it). There is a difference between "causing damage" and "causing an amount of damage worth the trouble". You see, e.g. my cat used to cause damage to my sofa. Nevertheless, this was no reason to kill the cat, much less all cats. It's not the question if there is damage. The question is "how much?".

How about deductive reasoning, dude?

How about some hard facts for a change?

Some of the pirates getting the software would have paid for it if pirating were not so easy and carefree.

Certainly. And some of those getting pirated copies might never have been interested in the game (or computer games at all) had they not received the pirated copies first. As for which effect is stronger, that's all speculation. Let me tell you a little lesson about personal computer history: It was a well-known fact that the Commodore 64 was so successful primarily because there were so many programs (mainly games) for it - AND because most people had drawers full of pirated floppy discs. Those were the times when you could go into a computer store, asking around: "Who has game X? Who wants game Y?" and where you could put ads into the computer magazines saying: "I offer the newest games for 10 cents per kbyte!". Many, many people of my generation who are computer fans / freaks / nerds / geeks today had the C64 as their first computer. Today, many of those by sophisticated games regularly. A similar thing happened a little later with the Amiga, which was the computer responsible for PCs going multimedia (they would have done so, anyway, but a bit later without the competition Amiga and, to a lesser extent, Atari ST). Now, how many computer games consumers less would there be today if those millions of people hadn't been infected by "the computer virus" primarily because there were "free" games? It is not a daring hypothesis to say: "Without the C64, the market for computer games today would be only a fraction of what it is".

This, again, is not to advocate piracy. It is only to show you that there are VERY beneficial effects, as well, and it would be damned difficult indeed to judge what was / is stronger.

That represents a direct loss of sales, a drop in revenue, and at the end of the day lower profits.

Yes, yes, yes... and as always, you don't deliver facts in the form of numbers. It's a bit tiring, to be honest.

There’s a large population of people who would otherwise be willing and able to pay full price for a product taking it for free, and you’re going to sit here and tell me I need to prove to you that this represents a loss for the company that produces said product?

If what you proclaim was as definitely and unquestioningly true as you try to make it sound, you could easily prove it instead of whining that someone actually is as demanding as to ask you for proof. Instead of having a hard time complaining on how hilarious these demands are, you could simply slap down a couple of Excel sheets (or links to those), bearing the letterhead of some official and independent statistical institution. Go ahead. But please stop the whining.

Piracy represents a loss of sales. You cannot honestly deny this. Granted, not every pirated copy represents a lost sale, but there are certainly plenty of people who would be buying these games if they weren’t so easy to get for free.

Yes. "Certainly". Certainly as in "I guess there are some, although I do not have any figures that could back up my assumption, but I like my guesses anyhow."

For third-party developers there is also the ever-present and real threat of project cancellation or the loss of future contracts due to lower sales on existing titles.

Awwwwwwwwwwwww... as a web developer, the concept of cancelled projects is, of course, totally unimaginable for me. It is, indeed, an unfair fate only illuminated people like you are prone to suffer, since - as we all know - the only possible reason for this is... (from outside, we hear the wind blowing around the house, and then we see a sudden flash of light, accompanied by a rolling thunder) PIRACY (tm)!!!

It's getting a little embarassing here, you know...

You’re basically trying to argue that because we do not know the cost, it must be insignificant and therefore piracy must be “okay.”

Again, you excel in not understanding at all. If one would try to argue that way, one would make exactly the same mistake like you do: Taking the lack of hard facts & figures as proof for one's opinion. No, it's just that the prejected self-righteousness you utter is based on nothing but on assumptions and estimations.

That’s a straight-up Tobacco company argument. “Gee, we don’t know to what extent cigarettes contribute to any of these things precisely, so smoke up!”

Oh boy, if you had only 1/100th of the scientific FACTS they have collected about smoking in the previous 20 years, you would have thrown them into the discussion on page one. Sadly for you, you don't - and try to make up for facts with emotion.

Of course you have, you already agreed with them to begin with. Most people think there are shades of grey, because that makes them feel better when the queue up their free MP3s and boot up their pirated copy of Counterstrike…

Hear y'all the holy words of the white knight! Hooray!

 

[Machete Phil]

Loss of potential profits, possibly, but software companies do not withdraw money and send them to the pirates.

I defy you to explain how the two affect the company any differently.

At the end of the day as a development studio you must have X amount of capital available to continue to function.

Whether you're talking about things that subtract from that amount (rent, salaries, equipment, management, maintenance, etc.) or things that prevent possible additions to it, the end result is a lower balance, possibly falling below X and causing you a heap of difficulties, cost-cutting, layoffs, closings, etc.

That's it.

 

[CyberChrist]

@Machete Phil:
I am sorry that you can't see the major difference between:
1) handing someone hard currency out of your own pocket
2) maybe (or maybe not) receive money months later by a largely annonymous and unconnected group of people

If you still can't see the difference then I can only suggest that you never pursue a career that requires an understanding of economics.

 

[mbecerikli]

HELLO BOYS.i am living in Turkey.i am still waiting play for civ4.
because i want to play legal version.i have so many friend play civ4 illegal version. firaxis dont send civ4 in my country.i want to buy d2d version on internet.but i cant buy.
i dont understand why its very difficult.
amazon.com wanted 140 u.s dollars for sent to my contry for civ4.
who want to tell me.what can i do.believe me i dont want to play illegal version.but i dont have any choice.

 

[Bhruic]

Proof? I need to prove to you that piracy costs software companies money? How about deductive reasoning, dude? Some of the pirates getting the software would have paid for it if pirating were not so easy and carefree. That represents a direct loss of sales, a drop in revenue, and at the end of the day lower profits.

There’s a large population of people who would otherwise be willing and able to pay full price for a product taking it for free, and you’re going to sit here and tell me I need to prove to you that this represents a loss for the company that produces said product?

And where's your evidence that they would have paid for it? You didn't merely say that there is a cost, you said "not insigificant cost". Where's your evidence of how significant it is?

If you want to simply throw off claims, go ahead. But don't expect everyone to simply take your word for it.

Aww, cute little semantic dodge there.

Development cost is unrelated to sales? Sales generate revenue. Revenue is necessary to offset development costs before profit is possible. Sounds to me like they’re pretty well intertwined.

Oh, so now you're changing your position, are you? So you don't believe "Higher development cost, to which piracy contributes in a real way and not in insignificant amounts, result directly in lower profits." anymore?

Yes, development costs are unrelated to sales, because the cost of development does not depend on sales. The game costs the same to make whether you sell it to 10 people or you sell it to 10 million people.

Piracy represents a loss of sales. You cannot honestly deny this. Granted, not every pirated copy represents a lost sale, but there are certainly plenty of people who would be buying these games if they weren’t so easy to get for free. How many of you know people who pirate PC games but buy console games? I think I knew about 6,000 people in college who would fall into this category.

Oh, please. You make it sound as if there's no piracy on consoles, when there's at least as much as the PC. Your claim that everyone buys console games but pirates PC games just demonstrates your lack of knowledge in this area.

As for your "plenty of people", no, I'm not simply going to accept your word for the fact there are "plenty of people".

Added development costs, lower revenue, cancelled projects, it’s the bottom line that matters – at the end of the day they need to have enough money to continue to pay their employees - and if you’re honestly going to say that piracy has no affect on the bottom line profits of the release of a piece of software (any software, not just games), then I can do nothing but laugh. Laugh long and heartily right near (or possibly in) your face.

No effect? I don't think I've ever claimed it has no effect. I have, however, claimed that you have no idea how much of an effect it has.

Hahaha. Brilliant! We’re not talking chaos theory here dude, it’s relatively simple economics. Lower profits for a studio = the possibility for all those things I listed to happen. It doesn’t take a chain reaction. It takes one person picking up a phone and saying “Let’s find another studio to do the sequel.”

I mean, seriously? This is really your argument?

And this is yours? I mean, you honestly expect people to believe that someone is going to say "let's find another studio" in the belief that that will somehow lower the amount of piracy?

I realize how convenient it must be for you to try and hide behind the inability to calculate this cost exactly, but it’s a really weak shield, because you’re side of the argument suffers the same shortcoming.

You’re basically trying to argue that because we do not know the cost, it must be insignificant and therefore piracy must be “okay.”

It's relatively straight-forward. You are suggesting piracy is a major (or "significant", in your words) cost. I'm saying you can't determine that. You, now, are trying to completely dodge the issue. Great argument style. If you can't back up your claim of "significant", just admit it. If you can, do so. But don't act like the degree of piracy is unrelated to the discussion, because you've made it plain in your many posts that it isn't.

If people buy games from stores, the stores order more to replace the inventory. This means more profit. If the people who were going to buy them download them for free instead, the retailers don’t need to restock. This means lower revenue. Lower revenue means lower profits.

Did you not read what I wrote? Let me try again.

Someone who would not have bought the game anyway who pirates the game, costs the developer nothing. Period. There is no way the developer/publisher would have got money from them. So there was no cost or loss of profit, because there was no chance of profit to begin with.

If they go out of business before they have a chance to put it out, you won’t know either way genius. A studios first title is rarely its best. If they can manage to make enough money to parlay their experience into another titles, it’s usually a lot more polished.

Of course, lost sales due to piracy can affect whether or not they make enough money to do this, and hence determine whether you’re able to see the new content.

Again, you are acting as if this is a major factor. If so, prove it.

It’s not an opinion that some pirates would buy the game.

Until you prove it, it is.

Of course you have, you already agreed with them to begin with. Most people think there are shades of grey, because that makes them feel better when the queue up their free MP3s and boot up their pirated copy of Counterstrike…

And how do you know if I've agreed with them? How do you know whether I've pirated anything? Once again, you are making a large assumption without any evidence to back it up.

Bh

 

[Nightfang]

You also need to keep in mind that a small percentage of people who pirate a game may actually go and purchase the title after playing it a bit. They may find it worth paying for (like an extended play demo) or want to play online multiplayer matches (Doom 3 and many other games use a CD Key that is verified, after all). Sure, there are some ways around those, too, but they are not worth it most of the time.

If this were a game the consumer would never have bought (I would have never bought Doom 3 had I not been able to play on a friend's copy for a few weeks, which game me more access than the demo levels), then the developer wins. Perhaps they were on the fence, and the piravted copy was the final piece that pushed them to buy it. Again, the developer wins.

 

[Sorceresss]

Have I somehow flamed someone in this thread that I didn't know about? And what's with all these Johnny-come-latelys that have nothing to say about the topic, but are allowed to troll? Are they getting warned by mods? EDIT: Normally, I don't question the mods, they have a tough and thankless job to do, and 99% of the time I agree with them. I'm asking this, because the posts of at least 3 individuals in this thread seem to be aimed at doing nothing but stirring up trouble. In the past, on this board, whenever I have even come CLOSE to flaming someone, I get a warning. Is this yet ANOTHER message board where some people get special treatment? I hope not, I'd like to stick around, but I'm not going to if certain people are gonna be allowed to post OT flames and suffer no consequences.

I must be a really dumb girl : I fail to perceive in this weird post any relevant content related to the main topic of this very intelligent thread.

 

[Frewfrux]

You also need to keep in mind that a small percentage of people who pirate a game may actually go and purchase the title after playing it a bit.

This is what I did in my first few years of college. Being a student living off of nothing but student loans I couldn't afford many computer games. What I did was to either borrow a friends copy, or get a pirated copy, and play the game for a week. If after the week I realized that I had liked the game, then I would go out and buy it. If I didn't like the game (or if it wouldn't run on my crapy computer) then I was not out a weeks worth of groceries. Either way I felt that the developers got what they deserved.

My priorities were a little different then. (For one thing I would go a whole week on nothing but peanut butter and jam sandwitches just so I could buy a computer game.)

The biggest problem with this line of thinking is the whole "Works great in theory" principle. Once you get your self to justify piracy in this manner, there's not too far to go before you start saying to yourself "Yeah I liked that game...but how much?" and then "Oh, I liked it allright, but not $50.00 worth, and since I can't give them the $40 I think it's worth I won't give anything at all." After that why bother even pretending that your 'might' pay them if you think it's worth something?

As a student I was an idealist. I actually did follow through with the theory of "if I like it I will buy it". I don't think I could do that now, so I don't even try.

 

[MadMaligor]

RE: the buying Civ in a foriegn country problem--

Admitedly I didnt read the whole thread so this may have been suggested but I will say it anyway...

If you can get on the internet there are a variety of ways to buy Civ, the most flexible being ebay.

Before I would try eBay I would seriouslly make an attempt to speak to retailers or software vendors in your own country first (there are exceptions but if you have the internet and you cant find a vendor somewhere in the city you live in that might be able to get you the game, there is something very wrong or your not even trying) Alot of people think because they dont see someone selling games it means they cant get them. Thats bull. They have contacts in the right places and if you establish a relationship with the person and are polite, respectful, and make it worth their while, you will be suprised by what you can accomplish.

If you go the internet route, establishing an ebay ID is easy as cake no matter where you live. Find a reputable red star (or better) power seller whos selling the game and has an excellent feedback rating, send them a note regarding the item, tell them your needs, where you live exactly, and that you will be more than happy to pay for exact shipping, the game price, and a reasonable small handling fee ($5-$10 US is normal). It may indeed cost you in the $70-$80 range (If it costs you more than $100 US your doing something wrong) but so long as you are patient shipping wise (yes it may take a few weeks or so to send them the payment via money order or check, clear it, and have them send the game). Its not hard to find a good rate to even the most remote countries if you dont have to have it sent "NOW!" (I have shipped to customers in Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Portugal, and Indonesia...though I admit I deal in equipment parts not software, the issue is the same).

So when someone says to me they cant get the game legally but can find a way to get a pirated version....I basically and

*Edit*- I just wanted to add that if you do go the eBay route, and you dont mind buying a used copy, you can save yourself most of the actual game cost and only pay shipping. Oh and eBay horror stories are like Urban legends, dont believe most of what you hear, its pretty darn reliable, but yes protect yourself as much as possible by keeping emails and electronic copies of any money order or check you send with mail reciepts.

 

[Mirc]

So when someone says to me they cant get the game legally but can find a way to get a pirated version....I basically and

What do you mean?
I can right now lock the door from my house, get in the street and after walking 30 meters there's someone who gives me the game for 6$! But legally, it's simply too hard (look through all the shops from Bucharest or buy from the internet).

Oh, and BTW, I'm not telling anyone to do it or I'm not learning anyone how to do it.

 

[Gaias]

What about abandonware?

I am making the assumption that a game that is not even published by anyone, does not produce revenue to companies in general. So if one was to dowload via internet a software title that wasn't made available through the general legal oulets, is that illegal? Or immoral? I mean if it not available by the creators of the software yet available through illegal means, is it still stealing?

 

[Beamup]

As a legal matter, yes. Downloading "abandonware" is still illegal, and I have heard of cases where lawsuits were brought over it (as a pretext, admittedly - i.e. that was the only thing they could really prove).

Immoral? I'm not going to touch that one with a standard-issue 10-ft. pole.

 

[Machete Phil]

Bhruic

It’s not an opinion that some pirates would buy the game.

Until you prove it, it is.

Haha.

Wow.

To claim the contrary would imply that no person who ever pirated software would have purchased it otherwise.

So you're going to stand there and make this claim, and then tell me that it's my job to prove otherwise? Haha. No, sorry my friend. That's like the old Christian staple of "prove to me that there is no God."

I'm pretty sure burden of proof lies on you in this case being that your claim is the one that defies all common sense and is being used to try and justify breaking the law. Wouldn't you agree?

Someone who would not have bought the game anyway who pirates the game, costs the developer nothing. Period.

Right, and until you can show me that these people represent more than 90% of the pirates out there, the point really isn't relevant at all. Period.

And this is yours? I mean, you honestly expect people to believe that someone is going to say "let's find another studio" in the belief that that will somehow lower the amount of piracy?

Umm, no. That's nothing at all like what I'm saying.

I'm saying Joe Funds-Your-Studio at the Publisher is going to look at your lower sales, and call up his boss and say "let's find another studio" as in to work on the next project, as in so we're not working with these guys with low sales anymore.

 

[Machete Phil]

And this is yours? I mean, you honestly expect people to believe that someone is going to say "let's find another studio" in the belief that that will somehow lower the amount of piracy?

What difference does it make?

Once again you seem to imply that the degree to which your actions harm the developers is somehow relevant to whether or not it's okay to do it.

 

[Nightfang]

I'm saying Joe Funds-Your-Studio at the Publisher is going to look at your lower sales, and call up his boss and say "let's find another studio" as in to work on the next project, as in so we're not working with these guys with low sales anymore.

Despite the real reason the game studio has low sales - a POS game that no one wants to play and got terrible reviews from EVERYONE. Your argument lacks logic, Phil. Any number of factors contribute to this, and piracy is NOT that big of a factor.

Unless you can prove otherwise, which so far, you have been unable to.

Phil, you have argued yourself into a corner, and now, to get yourself out, you need to show some proof to backup what you say.

 

[DemonDeLuxe]

Once again you seem to imply that the degree to which your actions harm the developers is somehow relevant to whether or not it's okay to do it.

The degree is basically all that counts in every respect. The real impact of piracy is determined by the total of degrees of

- real losses (with "real" as in "how many people who pirate the game would REALly have bought it otherwise?")

- marketing effect (a game being pirated much DOES have a marketing effect on it - and a much more credible one, at that)

- general impact on consumer interest in games (as I pointed out in the C64/Amiga reference)

All these can only be estimated. It is extremely narrow-minded to consider the "real losses" ONLY, and it is an outright LIE to set one pirated copy as an equivalent to ONE lost sale. Repeating that lie again and again as the media industry's mantra doesn't make it any more true.

Consider this: One guy stumbles across a pirated copy of a game. He installs it, checks it out and, hey, it's fun. He wants to share the fun, play it online etc. but discovers that, as with most modern games, you need to have the newest patch installed. Sadly for him, the newest patch isn't compatible with his pirated copy, so chances are that he actually buys the original - something he wouldn't have done normally because he at first didn't know of the game anyway. This is what happened to me a couple of years before with "Star Wars Galactic Battlegrounds" - i was not interested at all in any game with the "Star Wars" license and got that game only because it was falsely labeled as something else in a P2P network. Now that I had it - coincidentially - I tested it and found it simply superb, so I went and bought it. Here, the P2P network in fact worked as an alternative means of marketing (although in a very twisted way *g*).

 

[warpus]

^^ that is actually how i first got addicted to civ. a friend copied a game for me, said "here, check this out".. i installed it (turned out it was civ1), and wow, i was addicted. i was still in highschool at the time so i didn't have much money.. but as a result i've bought civ3, civ ctp, and now civ4.

if i never got that first copy i doubt that i would have ever been introduced to the series and spent any money on it.

 

[TylerDurdon]

Even thought it is EASY to get pirated games, I do buy my games!!! It is a way to thanks those who developped a game that I love and a game that I will spend some time on!

But in the other hand, I have a hard time to consider it ROBBERY (or "theft": could be the same thing but how would I know i'm french )... The real crime is to do distribution of pirated game... on any scale it is wrong to make profit over someone else works!!! This is the real moral issue... as downloading pirated games for personal use, especially second rated games that dont really worth buying (more often will be deleted in less than a week) is not! For example "Flatout" A funny game... but completly depleted of any deepness, I would have feel raped if I would have spend 50 bucks for!! So I see nothing wrong with D/L that one, having fun a night or two with some friends (by the way one of them did buy it) and then GONE!!!. Computer games are tricky because you almost always blindly buy them!!! You can THRUST a franchise enough to commit money before even trying it (LIKE CIV !!!) but more often than not games dont worth it!!!

Console gaming has renting... and computer does not!!! It is a huge deal and why i consider pirated product as necessary! But I always will send some money (buying the actual product) to any company would deserve it, to any product I'm going to play and love!!! and that a MORAL way of handling software piracy... in my humble opinion!

 

[Bhruic]

Bhruic

To claim the contrary would imply that no person who ever pirated software would have purchased it otherwise.

So you're going to stand there and make this claim, and then tell me that it's my job to prove otherwise? Haha. No, sorry my friend. That's like the old Christian staple of "prove to me that there is no God."

I'm pretty sure burden of proof lies on you in this case being that your claim is the one that defies all common sense and is being used to try and justify breaking the law. Wouldn't you agree?

No, I'm not the one making a claim - you are. I'm simply saying that I don't accept your claim without proof. Of course, you are doing a bang-up job trying to twist around this fact without, once again, providing any evidence to back up your position.

Right, and until you can show me that these people represent more than 90% of the pirates out there, the point really isn't relevant at all. Period.

Again, I don't have to show you anything. I'm not making a claim about how many people are represented - you are. If you want me (and everyone else reading this) to believe your numbers, prove them.

Look, in a discussion, like any other form of argument, you have one person that is advocating a position. You have other people that are challenging that position. It is, therefore, up to the person who originally advocated the position to attempt to prove it. Since that person is you, it is up to you to try and prove what you have been claiming. I, on the other hand, don't need to prove anything because I'm not claiming anything. I'm simply saying "I don't believe you". If you want me (and, as before, everyone else reading this) to believe you, prove what you are saying.

I'm saying Joe Funds-Your-Studio at the Publisher is going to look at your lower sales, and call up his boss and say "let's find another studio" as in to work on the next project, as in so we're not working with these guys with low sales anymore.

Because another studio is somehow going to magically stop piracy?

I mean, have you even looked at your argument? If they go with another studio, then it must be in the belief the other studio can make a game that sells better. For it to sell better, there must be more people actually buying the game. Since the percentage of people pirating the game is not likely to change, that means more people, in general, actually get the game. Since piracy does not have a negative effect on how many people get the game, and, in fact, is more likely to increase the number, this particular argument you've made makes no sense.

---

Look, if you aren't going to present any evidence for your position, just say so. We can stop this pointless back and forth, and I can dismiss your position as the simple "just your opinion" that it appears to be.

Bh

 

[Glerp]

Ok, I haven't read the whole thread, but after reading the first post I thought of something.

Is there anyone here that could buy a copy of civ 4 and ship it to him?

Either that or Ebay. But I dunno.