Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Piracy - You can't have your cake and eat it

broadmuse.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 334 posts

Re: Piracy - You can't have your cake and eat it

#221

Post by chaz »

lena wrote: post #190
chaz wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying that they missed out on 90% of their revenue (though it's fair to say they lost out on some revenue). Rather, they did everything right: a fun game that anyone can play, great press, broad distribution through multiple channels, and no DRM. And yet a huge audience still saw it fit to pirate their game. It'll be interesting to watch the evolution of game distribution. Xbox and iOS are massively growing…

Your point is valid, but it is still worth noting that a huge audience also did buy their game. They just sold their millionth game on the App Store alone. http://2dboy.com/2012/01/09/one-million-downloads/

Yes, and the price is dramatically lower as well: $2.99. I paid $19.99 on Steam three years ago. I'd be curious if they could do it all over again today, if they would do iOS first.

Re: Piracy - You can't have your cake and eat it

#222

Post by robryan »

ap22213 wrote: post #172
VMG wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens if everybody eats mince pie on Christmas? Life goes on as usual. What happens if nobody pays for a copy of Windows 8? There won't be a Windows 9. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_rider_problem

Was there ever a software company, or music artist, or movie studio that decided not to put out a product because of this so-called free rider problem? Just curious.

You would gave to think that reduced revenue from music has lead to less artists getting funding to produce an album. Of course they can still make it but it might make it harder. Book advance sizes and quantity gave gone down.

Re: Piracy - You can't have your cake and eat it

#223

Post by e40 »

VMG wrote: post #159
alextingle wrote: post #125

The author has a fundamental misunderstanding of what laws mean, and how they change. In England, it is illegal to eat mince pies on Christmas day? Why? Because centuries ago England was governed by a despotic, fundamentalist Christian regime that did not approve of Christmas celebrations. Should I then refrain from eating the mince pie? No. I and millions of my fellow countrymen eat mince pies, and most are complete…

What happens if everybody eats mince pie on Christmas? Life goes on as usual. What happens if nobody pays for a copy of Windows 8? There won't be a Windows 9. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_rider_problem

What happens if nobody pays for a copy of Windows 8? There won't be a Windows 9.

That would never happen unless MS charged an outrageous sum for it.

If any company finds itself in the position where nearly all of the users are pirating, then there's something wrong. They're charging too much or the DRM is too onerous, or something.

EDIT: if you charge a fair price and make something available, people will buy it rather than pirate it. Louis CK and lots of other people have shown this.

Re: Piracy - You can't have your cake and eat it

#224

Post by noonespecial »

I'm still not sure why so many people care if its "right" or "wrong" to pirate stuff like this. It gets pirated. Making the product easier to buy would mean it gets pirated less, not more. Companies don't seem to get it. This fact is interesting.

The pirate is a datapoint, not a moral lesson.

Re: Piracy - You can't have your cake and eat it

#225

Post by [deleted] »

v0cab wrote: post #205
tmh88j wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd really like to hear your explanation for why you have no obligation. Just because pirating isn't theft in the technical sense, it doesn't mean you're excempt from paying for someone else's work if you use it for their intended purposes. (as in downloading a song and listening to it)

Somebody probably bought that song originally, and they are sharing it with you.

[deleted]

Re: Piracy - You can't have your cake and eat it

#226

Post by mikeash »

jmilloy wrote: post #151
mikeash wrote: post #25

I don't really understand these posts that simply declare that the correct choice is not to use their stuff, that piracy is wrong, and it's not your choice. I happen to agree with the overall conclusion that one should seek alternatives in these cases, but this is just an argument by shouting. It's foolish to simply declare, "it's not your choice". Clearly, people think it is their choice. If you want to convince the…

I think that's only part of the argument. The other part is that, regardless of what's right or wrong, the OP thinks that using the software/service perpetuates it, and choosing not to pay for it isn't enough.

That's an excellent point, and in fact that's why I think people should cease consuming this content altogether rather than pirating it. If that was the focus of the argument, it would be great. But sadly, everyone who might listen will be turned off by the bit that goes, "you can't just choose to pirate stuff, because you just can't."

Re: Piracy - You can't have your cake and eat it

#227

Post by jarek »

VMG wrote: post #183
ap22213 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was there ever a software company, or music artist, or movie studio that decided not to put out a product because of this so-called free rider problem? Just curious.

impossible to know

What we do know is that many companies who do put out software are implicitly, and sometimes explicitly as in Gates quote elsewhere in this thread, okay with some users pirating as long as their main revenue streams are not threatened.

Re: Piracy - You can't have your cake and eat it

#228

Post by zathen »

v0cab wrote: post #205
tmh88j wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd really like to hear your explanation for why you have no obligation. Just because pirating isn't theft in the technical sense, it doesn't mean you're excempt from paying for someone else's work if you use it for their intended purposes. (as in downloading a song and listening to it)

Somebody probably bought that song originally, and they are sharing it with you.

You cannot equate taking a cd and lending it to a friend to taking the contents of a cd and giving it away to a million people that you do not know. Sharing involves one party having to sacrifice and the other having to benefit, not both parties benefiting with absolutely no loss. You know, like sharing your lunch with someone. One sacrifices something so another can benefit. Stop redefining the meaning of the word.

Re: Piracy - You can't have your cake and eat it

#229

Post by v0cab »

hnal943 wrote: post #131
Jugglernaut wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you and most others miss is that people don't really care about the right of things when they pirate. It's a non-issue.

Pirating is immoral regardless of the pirate's opinion on the matter.

Merriam-Webster: "Definition of IMMORAL : not moral; broadly : conflicting with generally or traditionally held moral principles"

Based on this, whether piracy is moral or not depends on people's opinions. I would argue that society does not consider copyright infringement to be especially immoral.

Sing 'Happy Birthday' in public without paying the guy who bought the company holding the copyright to it. Is your audience disgusted by this immoral act?

Now the owner of the company holding the copyright sues you for your unauthorized use of 'his' song. Would more people think that you acted immorally, or that the copyright holder is acting immorally?

Re: Piracy - You can't have your cake and eat it

#230

Post by jes5199 »

roguecoder wrote: post #207
VMG wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not your decision to make. By the way, are GPL violations equally just anachronistic hippie pipe dreams or real crimes?

GPL violations are hypocrisy. We can judge people on their proclaimed beliefs without sharing those beliefs ;-)

"You know, when I was a young man, hypocrisy was deemed the worst of vices"
Post reply on HN