Blu-Ray has Updatable DRM (CMS)

[bapenguin]

Here's something to be wary about. The upcoming Blu-Ray disc format allows for updatable copy protection through it's lifecycle. (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1845993,00.asp?kc=ETRSS02129TX1K0000532) This way, as the copy protection gets cracked (and you know it will), studios can release a new form of the protection on a disc and it would update players.

The BD+ mechanism, meanwhile, will serve as a counter to attacks like DeCSS, which stripped the DVD player of its protections and allowed content to be copied and posted on the Internet. Since the DVD player code was read-only, "once the DVD was hacked, that was it," Gordon said.

BD+ was modeled after the mechanisms used by BSkyB and other DBS providers, which use a concept called "renewability" to reinstate the content protection schemes with updated code. If a hack is published, a fix will be circulated until a crack for the fix is published -- a never-ending cycle, but one that will allow studios and device makers to remain in business, Setos said. It is based upon the concept of Self-Protecting Digital Content, authored by Cryptographics Research Inc., he said.

"Everything can be hacked, and so it's handy to renew the system," Setos said.
This whole thing is ludicrious. If you KNOW your copy protection is going to get cracked, why do they keep fighting back at it. Spend the money making better quality product that people are willing to pay for. Now you risk ruining the players themselves rendering movies unplayable due to bad updates and the like. Who's going to regulate the whole process as well? What if one studio decides to go with one format for DRM, and that breaks an older one? You just have to love this quote:

"We don't expect there to be any false positives," Setos said, when asked about the possibility for error.
That's utter bullshit. Don't expect. I would hope you wouldn't f'n expect it...doesn't mean it won't happen. There's been so many issues with PC and copy protection with games making them practically unplayable. Now it looks like watching movies is going to have the same ill-fate.

[Zurik]

I totally agree, I've taken a few games back do to StarForce, and how it doesn't work with the game you paid for.

[Savok]

Luckily this stuff gets cracked within 12 hours of public consumption. Annoying as all hell and utterly stupid as always though.

[Gigadafud]

this is a disaster waiting to happen. i personally agree with 'make a better product' statement. and what i mean when i agree with that, is reduce the stupid pricing for the movies cause personally i think its alot to ask someone to pay 18+ bucks for a movie. if movies were 10 bucks, i bet piracy would see a drop.

[JazGalaxy]

Then don't buy a PS3.

But certainly you can't really be suggesting that the way to curb piracy is to "make better products". Piracy has nothing to do with a product not being good enough to pay for, and everything to do with getting something for nothing.

[Deadend]

So... if there are discs that can update the DRM, than in theory someone could make a hack update disc that fixed it all?

[bean19]

Then don't buy a PS3.

But certainly you can't really be suggesting that the way to curb piracy is to "make better products". Piracy has nothing to do with a product not being good enough to pay for, and everything to do with getting something for nothing.

I agree with you about piracy.

What I'm scared of is being a legitimate customer and then having to do a dance to get stuff I paid for working. Also, I don't want the increased security to translate into additional costs to me.

As far as solving piracy, I don't know enough to comment.

[51|RandoM]

I don't know why people get so upset by this stuff. If you don't want stuff with DRM, don't buy stuff with DRM, your choice.

Copy protection does work, you know. Sure, it doesn't deter the hardcore pirates, but it does stop Joe Blow from easily churning out copies for all of his friends.

Funny thing about this type of solution is that you can crack the update process and then use what looks like a normal update to blow away the DRM.

[thecrazyd]

Then don't buy a PS3.

But certainly you can't really be suggesting that the way to curb piracy is to "make better products". Piracy has nothing to do with a product not being good enough to pay for, and everything to do with getting something for nothing.
Not always. When I pirate (not that I pirate), I only pirate stuff that I do not feel is worth my money (I have never pirated in my life). When I download movies (I have paid for every movie I have ever seen), I do so because I do not want to dump 20 bucks on a DVD, especially since most follow the current trend of putting comercials before the feature (I love comercials, and I love paying to see them). I LOVE THE RIAA/MPAA!

[Borys]

Not to rain on EvilAvatar.com's weekly Sony hate parade but just you wait till MS's DRM in the form of Palladium. Windows IRM in Office 2003 is already pretty scary. Print-screen button disabled? No offline *.doc or mail reading without proper on-line authorization first?

It's like STEAM only for documents and e-mails. And always on.

[GrinR]

I think the pirate's collective laughter, like the sound of car alarms in NYC, has simply become background noise.

[jeffool]

a never-ending cycle, but one that will allow studios and device makers to remain in business, Setos said.Whew, that's good to know. I was so worried that Sony, Fox, WB, Universal, Samsung, Toshiba, and others were going out of business...

There's a good argument for piracy hurting sales, and following that logic smaller studios can be hurt by it... But that statement just seems silly .

[Heretic Machine]

This is irrelevent, as Blu-ray will not succeed as a format. The only thing you'll be buying that will be Blu-ray are PS3 games.

[XxSATANxX]

Not to rain on EvilAvatar.com's weekly Sony hate but just you wait till MS's DRM in the form of Palladium. Windows IRM in Office 2003 is already pretty scary. Print-screen button disabled? No offline *.doc or mail reading without proper on-line authorization first?

It's like STEAM only for documents and e-mails. And always on.

A seriously funny thread.

As for Office, MS has made it clear that Open Office is the way to go. Thanks Bill for teaching me about Open Source!

As for Blu-Ray hahahahahhaahhah no wait, nah nevar mind hahahahahah.

[Vermillion]

If you KNOW your copy protection is going to get cracked, why do they keep fighting back at it. Spend the money making better quality product that people are willing to pay for.

That's a fairly interesting statement on so many levels.

- Better quality products mean people will pay for them? How do you justify that? So, it's something like this:

"Well, my neighbor keeps stealing my paper. He keeps getting up earlier than me to take it. I have asked him to stop, but he told me no, and that the paper is crap anyway. Maybe if I buy a better paper, he'll stop taking mine and go buy his own."

Last time I checked, pirates wanted to steal things cause it was a) free b) because they could c) they desire just to have things they otherwise couldn't. It had nothing to do with the quality of the object. It's not like the major thing being pirated is Bio Dome, people are hot and heavy stealing quality movies and software.

- You are fighting piracy, but you are in a tough fight, so just give up? That's the spirit. Same arguement:

"Well, my neighbor keeps stealing my paper. He keeps getting up earlier than me to take it. I have asked him to stop, but he told me no. I started trying different things to keep my paper, like letting the grass grow long, buying a dog, ordering the paper to come at night, etc.. Sometimes I get to keep my paper for a long time, but he eventually starts stealing it again. I should just give up and let him take it even though it's mine."

- As a run of the mill consumer, all these DRM issues have no little to no affect on me. Until they do, they are not an issue. You can't go drumming up fear on the possibility that somewhere, at some point, something may or may not go wrong. Hell, you shouldn't even be on a computer, because at some point, someone, somewhere may or may not release a patch that breaks something that you think is important.

[Deadend]

I don't think the stealing the paper is a good metaphor, as the downloaders are NOT stealing, as there is not a missing copy from a store.

It's insane how downloading a movie is a larger crime than stealing a DVD, which is a physical thing and you are directly taking value from someone else.

[bapenguin]

Not to rain on EvilAvatar.com's weekly Sony hate parade but just you wait till MS's DRM in the form of Palladium. Windows IRM in Office 2003 is already pretty scary. Print-screen button disabled? No offline *.doc or mail reading without proper on-line authorization first?

It's like STEAM only for documents and e-mails. And always on.

I really wasn't trashing Sony specifically...just the whole way the Blu-Ray association is going around this is ludicrious. HD-DVD also adopted this standard, but to a lesser extent because of the same fears I mentioned. I'm not saying don't have copy protection, standard copy protection works just find to "thwart" Joe Blow. It's just a really bad trend that more and more copy protection is being piled on top of products ruining the quality of products.

And yes...having a better quality product helps decrease piracy.

The reason better quality brings less piracy is because more people want it and are willing to pay for the product. When more people get the product, it drives down cost which in turn makes it available to more people.

[Vermillion]

I don't think the stealing the paper is a good metaphor, as the downloaders are NOT stealing, as there is not a missing copy from a store.

I can't believe you said that. Last time I checked, stealing was taking something that did not belong to you without permission of the owner, which is EXACTLY what pirating is. Just because a box doesn't go missing out of a store, doesn't mean that you didn't willingly take an item that did not belong to you. The company owns the rights to the CONTENT, the media its on is superficial to the arguement.

[DeadPixel]

A seriously funny thread.

As for Office, MS has made it clear that Open Office is the way to go. Thanks Bill for teaching me about Open Source!

As for Blu-Ray hahahahahhaahhah no wait, nah nevar mind hahahahahah.

Man! You are my hero.

[FyrionX]

I really don't understand why you are promoting piracy. People work hard to create these products and therefore should be paid for their services. They have a right and a duty to protect their products from illegal copying.

[Ernst_Jager]

The first time I get a movie take it home to watch and can't because of some fucking DRM shit installed will be the last day I buy a movie. When will these companies realize people DO NOT WANT these shitty features on stuff they pay for. When I buy something I consider it mine. Not renting it or licensing it for personal use. Mine.

[Rone]

Vermy, the reason it's a flawed metaphor is that when the paper is stolen, you no longer have access to it. Piracy means making a COPY, which does not destroy/prevent access to the original. It's copyright violation, not theft. I'm not saying it's any more legal than theft, but it is different.

[XxSATANxX]

One thought here might be this.

Are Pirates customers?

My job involves selling Big Box Retail. Best Buy, Target, many more. The general thinking among retailers that sell hardware is Piracy is a good thing and drives sales.
Retailers that provide content i.e. records, movies, games see piracy as the end of all things. Oddly, they will admit the numbers of actual lost sales to piracy are fairly low. Also that to a degree pirates are also very good consumers. If your into music or movies chances are you download a few, you buy a few.

Sure this is a generalization however the flip side to pirates is they do buy stuff. Not
all the stuff they pirate = a lost sale.

I understand that this is a rampant generalization but it's funny how many retailers do
play the piracy thing to their advantage. I'm out there selling these guys and trust me they do in fact get it.

If GameStop re-sells the same music/game/move CD/DVD let say 4 or 5 times for an average price of 5 dollars how much is the artist paid on? See what I mean they figured out how to get something for nothing as well.

[LilBunnyFuFu]

Stuff about Papers

If you want to use the paper analogy, then you have to look at it this way. The neighbor isn't stealing the paper, but making a copy of it, which is provided by the customer who bought the paper. There is no paper missing, just profits that could be made. So, to protect their business, the paper distributor creates more and more elaborate papers, making them harder to copy, and sometimes unreadable, and even raising the price of the paper to compensate for the lack of sales and the cost of antipiracy.

Based on that, everyone here shouldn't be mad at the companies making the copy protection, because as you can see, there would be no need for it if there weren't any pirates. In reality, be pissed at the pirates for fucking it up for the rest of us. If you want to fight piracy, start with yourself. Get rid of the roms, photoshop, and bittorent apps on your PC. Because, honestly, if you are still pirating, you have no right to be mad about copy protection. To bring the cheese, if you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

/soapbox

Now, for me, when I used to pirate, it was always the stuff that I didn't have any plans on buying. I'm too poor to buy photoshop, so I would pirate it. Then othertimes, with music, I would pirate it, but if I liked it, I would buy it. I like that tactile feeling of new stuff. I get enjoyment from buying something. That may not be the case for other "h4rdc0r3" pirates, but for me, thats how I operated.

[H.Bogard]

certainly you can't really be suggesting that the way to curb piracy is to "make better products". Piracy has nothing to do with a product not being good enough to pay for, and everything to do with getting something for nothing

I really don't understand why you are promoting piracy. People work hard to create these products and therefore should be paid for their services. They have a right and a duty to protect their products from illegal copying.

I know I`m gonna be flamebait here, but here goes nothing

out of all games that i have played in my life, 99.9 percent of them were pirated , now before you call me a crook or whatever...let me have you know this first :
I live in a third world asian country , there are no games here...the only games that you can buy here are pirated discs that are imported from malaysia . If I order an orignal game, the currency exchange rate fucks everything up totally ... (i can buy a geforce 6600 gt LOCALLY at the same price i need to spend buying an orignal disc of Half life 2 )

Let us suppose that this whole security thing works out and there isnt any more piracy, people like me (believe me there are millions here) wouldnt play the games at all. The point I`m trying to make here is that I`m not buying your game either way, then whats up with wasting your time on it? I`m sick of companies releasing statements and figures on how much they lose $$$ because of piracy, they talk as if it werent for the piracy, EVERYONE would have bought their games/movie dvds ....which is utter bullshit

ok i`m done...bring on the flames :(

[mister_slim]

It'll be funny when the PS3 gets revoked, followed by the Xbox 360 Service Pack One (now with added HD-DVD).

[falak]

There is no paper missing, just profits that could be made.Potential profits. Lets not legitimise those ridiculous figures the consortiums keep putting out. It is a logical fallacy to say "this was pirated, therefore we have lost this sale."

[Vermillion]

I bow to LiLBunnyFuFu for the better analogy.

And I find it interesting that you proved both mine and Bap's points. You would prefer to buy things that you like, thus you reduce piracy for quality goods (quality being subjective to user tastes). But at the same time, if it was a quality production and if it is beyond your means to obtain, you would still steal it.

So which is harder now, developing generic enough products to appeal to the most amount of people to reduce piracy, or to develop a wide range of products varying in preceived quality and implementing better copy protection. While not enjoying a majority of what is passed as mainstream, I'll go with option two.

[GrinR]

Frankly, I thought my comment basically summed it up. Clearly the ouroboros of the piracy "discussion" is impenetrable.

[Varsity]

DRM is a tool for me. It can be used to sensibly provide a web service like Steam (if you are downloading) or iTunes, or it can be abused to 'secure' old formats that don't take to it, like CDs and DVDs (and yes, that includes retail HL2) which only harms people.

It's perhaps a little ironic that P2P is in a similar situation, except with a far larger degree of abuse than use.

[Borys]

I really wasn't trashing Sony specifically...just the whole way the Blu-Ray association is going around this is ludicrious. HD-DVD also adopted this standard, but to a lesser extent because of the same fears I mentioned. I'm not saying don't have copy protection, standard copy protection works just find to "thwart" Joe Blow. It's just a really bad trend that more and more copy protection is being piled on top of products ruining the quality of products.

And yes...having a better quality product helps decrease piracy.

The reason better quality brings less piracy is because more people want it and are willing to pay for the product. When more people get the product, it drives down cost which in turn makes it available to more people.

It's only going to get worse, bap. The movie/music industry is pressing HARD on everyone involved in creating ANY new data media to incorporate the highest (even most expensive) anti-piracy/ unauthorized copying methods possible. They want to control every possible way you buy, view and store music or movie media.

Apple's iTunes success showed them that it can be done, that the majority of that "OMG! RIAA IS FUCKS!" crowd are geeks, nerds and they (industry) aren't really aiming at that kind of target.

Now if Sony wants to step in with OWN but standardized media format (like Blu-Ray) they have to "bend over" and listen to the bigger guys.

Microsoft's plans for controlling what you do on your PC aren't any different. Now because I'm a goddamn computer scientist writing a M.T. on computer security I really can approve the massive, how do you say it, "backbone" of Microsoft's future DRM service. It really sounds great and they thought about securing many "things" or even better "ideas" how you operate on your own data, but from a consumer POV it'll be a pain in the ass. Even MS's own power point presentations, which aren't that hard to find if you know HOW to look for them :wink: acknowledge the fact that people will be AGAINST this idea. Corporations, firms, law etc. will be happy because it gives them a much tighter control on lest's say - intranet e-mails. No more forwarding to your pals on hotmail - if it says DO NOT FORWARD you won't be able to forward it or even CTRL-C + CTRL-V it, or even screencap it.
Tighter security and respect for copyrights owners - that's the whole idea behind any DRM system.

Don't get me started on hardware DRM that can automatically disable ANY part of your hardware on boot, no less when your "key" expires.

That shit is scary but unevitable.

[XxSATANxX]

No more forwarding to your pals on hotmail - if it says DO NOT FORWARD you won't be able to forward it or even CTRL-C + CTRL-V it, or even screencap it.
Tighter security and respect for copyrights owners - that's the whole idea behind any DRM system.
That shit is scary but unevitable.

Yea just took a pic of my screen with my cell phone and e-mailed to myself
very readable and yes I sent to my pals on Hotmail ;-)

[Borys]

Yea just took a pic of my screen with my cell phone and e-mailed to myself
very readable and yes I sent to my pals on Hotmail ;-)

:)

MS knows that and that's one weakness they can't overcome. They also allow for 3rd party screencapture programs but I suppose in your work you can't install them anyway.

Digital cameras, audio recording equipment = DRM fail.

Hey, nobody said it's perfect.
If one person ciphers something there will be another that deciphers it :)

[JazGalaxy]

I know I`m gonna be flamebait here, but here goes nothing

out of all games that i have played in my life, 99.9 percent of them were pirated , now before you call me a crook or whatever...let me have you know this first :
I live in a third world asian country , there are no games here...the only games that you can buy here are pirated discs that are imported from malaysia . If I order an orignal game, the currency exchange rate fucks everything up totally ... (i can buy a geforce 6600 gt LOCALLY at the same price i need to spend buying an orignal disc of Half life 2 )

Let us suppose that this whole security thing works out and there isnt any more piracy, people like me (believe me there are millions here) wouldnt play the games at all. The point I`m trying to make here is that I`m not buying your game either way, then whats up with wasting your time on it? I`m sick of companies releasing statements and figures on how much they lose $$$ because of piracy, they talk as if it werent for the piracy, EVERYONE would have bought their games/movie dvds ....which is utter bullshit

ok i`m done...bring on the flames :(

NO flame, mate, but theoretically, if everyone in your country would quit pirating, then the develpers like Sony and Microsoft would open distribution to your country. The reason they stay out of regions like china, for instance, is because piracy is so rampant that they realize they could not make a profit in those conditions.

[DevDict]

Piracy? Everyone should read what iHobo (http://www.ihobo.com/articles/mag_piracy.shtml) have to say about it. If you know Discworld, Discworld 2, Discworld Noir and Ghost Master, you should know that iHobo participated in both projects.

And yes...having a better quality product helps decrease piracy.
YES! The better the game/movie/book/song is, the more people will buy it. There will be always people who will pirate just because they can or because they don't care, but we're talking about average people.
The market is full of 20$ DVDs such as xXx 2 or Dungeons & Dragons: The movie. I am not buying this crap. I don't even want to spend a dollar renting it. I'll download it, watch it, laugh my ass off and delete it. The end. On the other hand, I spent 200$ buying the four Futurama seasons because it's just cool and worth every cent I paid. Same for Lord of the Rings or any other good movie.

NO flame, mate, but theoretically, if everyone in your country would quit pirating, then the develpers like Sony and Microsoft would open distribution to your country. The reason they stay out of regions like china, for instance, is because piracy is so rampant that they realize they could not make a profit in those conditions.
I am terribly sorry, but that's bullshit.
Russia, India, China, Maylasia. Do you see a connection? In those countries few people can't afford shelling out 60$ for a computer game. They can barely pay the rent. In US, most bums are richer than an average russian citizen.

[XenonCJ]

I like to think of piracy in terms of the replicators in Star Trek. Imagine in the future when there is a device that simply creates\copies any configuration of matter out of energy. Basically these devices take the perspective of E=MC^2 and look at it like this: M=E/c^2. Not only can you copy\pirate data, but you can put a television\car\cell phone\money\a-great-work-of-art\another-replicator in the replicator and make a perfect copy of it. Since energy is basically free due to antimatter and fusion technoligies, this makes EVERYTHING free.

So what happens? Money becomes irrelevent. The only real valuable comodities are talents, intelligence, skill, of course there are always unique items like land, but with unlimited energy, you could easily find a cool part of the galaxy to live in....

I think real matter replicators are not that far off, less than 50-100 years would be my estimate.

The point here is that I think we have witnessed the begining of the end of economies as well know them with the ease of copying data. So get used to it =)

[JazGalaxy]

In all honesty I'm not sure how I feel about piracy. In terms of music, I know the reason I didn't feel bad about logging onto Napster was because the music industry was basically telling customers to screw themselves. Tapes were being sold at a price point of 10-15 dollars, and when CDs came out, which cost MUCH less to produce, they should have passed the savings on to the consumers. Rather than that, though, they INCREASED the price for "better quality" and kept the profic differential for themselves. Afterall, they had consumers by the throat. Not only that, they had worked out a system where they had musicians by the throat as well. Bands would put out a hit record and wind up owing the STUDIO money. That's why a lot of bands were all for free internet music. So when it comes down to me buying a CD in the store just out of the goodness of my heart... I didn't feel bad for a second about downloading the song and screwing a few jerks who had nothing to do with the creation of the music out of a few dollars. Especially whent he bands I listen to were telling me they were fine with it. But, of course, such days are behind us.

As for PC games, I feel worse about piracy becuase real artist are not getting paid for their efforts. I think that image does factor into it a little, interestingly enough. I don't think I would feel bad about pirating from someone like EA, where I would feel terrible about pirating from Valve. It doesn't make sense, I know, but it's the truth. Also, I think sometimes piracy is good becuase, for instane, I know that my friend making me a copy of Alone In The Dark 10 years ago is the ONLY thing that made me run out and buy the rest of the series.

[DevDict]

Wait a second! Do you imply that the Voyager crew pirate pizza?!

:D

[51|RandoM]

I don't think the stealing the paper is a good metaphor, as the downloaders are NOT stealing, as there is not a missing copy from a store.


bullshit. It is stealing. It is a shame that people are so crooked they can't even admit they're stealing, much less stop doing it.

And then we have the people who think it is fair to pirate because of how that particular industry is run.

Get over it. If you want something, you pay for it. It doesn't matter who/how it was produced, it doesn't matter if you hate the pricing structure. If you want it, pay for it.

We're not talking necessities of life here, you don't have a right to free movies, free music, or free games.

[Draknodred]

... couldn't you just disable the internet connection from the device so the DRM wouldn't be updated?

Just a thought to all those who wouldn't want the DRM updates... but about pirating, it IS stealing... but in these days it is going to happen no matter what, but I don't think companies should give up... If they put these measures in it'll be harder for people to copy and if nothing else that will stop the 'casual' pirate from doing it, I've never pirated a movie or DVD but if I did I know I wouldn't want to go through the trouble of BS after the DRM updates... but the hardcore people who don't pay for movies will crack the code every time and do it, but it turns some people off and that's a good thing =)

Although one thing I really hate is after buying music off of iTunes I found out I could only burn it to CD 5 times and transfer it to another computer 5 times, the latter understandable, the former, bullshit... I bought it and I make lots of mix CDs for myself so I should be able to burn it as much as I want... some people can ruin it for all of us

[XxSATANxX]

I bought it and I make lots of mix CDs for myself so I should be able to burn it as much as I want... some people can ruin it for all of us


There is a fix for that.....Ahhh nevar mind arrgh arrrgh arrgh *limps away slaps parrot*

[Deadend]

bullshit. It is stealing. It is a shame that people are so crooked they can't even admit they're stealing, much less stop doing it.

And then we have the people who think it is fair to pirate because of how that particular industry is run.

Get over it. If you want something, you pay for it. It doesn't matter who/how it was produced, it doesn't matter if you hate the pricing structure. If you want it, pay for it.

We're not talking necessities of life here, you don't have a right to free movies, free music, or free games.

Oh, I know I have no right to free content.

That does not stop the fact that stealing is a direct effect of loss, say... me stealing your car. Piracy would be me making a copy of your car. But, the thing is... me having a copy of your car would not harm you as much as it would potentialy harm GM or whatever company.

Piracy is a weaker form of stealing, that deals in potentials and maybes.

Who should be in more trouble? The kid who steals a CD from a store, or the kid who downloads a CD off the net?

I think the kid who physically stole a CD, as there is value in a real object, as if there was not... why do they have copy protection on a CD? If I am buying the content of the CD, I should be able to do what I wish with the content, short of giving it away, correct? But, you can't copy some newer CD's.

Also, right now, the kid who downloads a CD, would be in deeper trouble than the one who stole a CD from a store, in spite of the Downloaded version having no REAL value, it does not physically exist. There could be 100 million digital copies of it, that does not mean it would have sold 100 million copies.

Want more shit? In China... people are charged money for pirate goods, that means those pirates, really ARE stealing, they are selling the goods of someone else as their own.

Of course, there are always going to be people who think that pirating music and movies are the greatest evil ever to attack our country. But please keep in mind that REAL stealing causes REAL losses. Kinda stealing such as downloading, kinda causes losses, maybe. I know the Arcade Fire got popular due to online downloading, it really helps the smaller bands out there.

XenonCJ, you should read "Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom" it takes place in the future where there is free energy, so item creation is free and so is immortality, so the only currency that exists is respect, which is given to you by others. http://craphound.com/down/ is a link, free download of book as well.

[XxSATANxX]

bullshit. It is stealing. It is a shame that people are so crooked they can't even admit they're stealing, much less stop doing it.


Yea man like when someone sells a game 5 times and only pays on the copywrite once. or you buy a used CD or DVD. Or like when Blockbuster sells you a used CD but nevar pays a royalty...

Or like when you sell a game but the EULA says you were only renting and nevar owned the game or software.

Hey by the way did you ever play Black and White? I'm looking forward to the add on pack Grey area.

[thecrazyd]

I do not understand how people cannot accept that there is a difference between copyright infringement and stealing. There is a fundamental difference, that is easily explained. If you still think copyright infringement is bad, go for it. But it's not stealing.

[51|RandoM]

What you think isn't a factor. The laws in your society are what matters. If you don't like them, work to change them.

Most people grow out of this stuff when they start producing things of value and get a chance to be on the other side of the situation.

I do not understand how people cannot accept that there is a difference between copyright infringement and stealing. There is a fundamental difference, that is easily explained. If you still think copyright infringement is bad, go for it. But it's not stealing.

[Furious Wang]

I saw Wedding Crashers in the theatre. My roommate refused to go because he thought it looked dumb from the trailers. I loved it. I came home, downloaded a copy. He saw the first 15 minutes and decided to go see it in on the big screen.

[Furious Wang]

What you think isn't a factor. The laws in your society are what matters. If you don't like them, work to change them.

Most people grow out of this stuff when they start producing things of value and get a chance to be on the other side of the situation.

Dude, what are you thinking?

There is a legal difference between stealing and piracy. Ask anyone with a basic knowledge of the law. Piracy is generally wrong but it is *not* stealing.

Stealing:
To take (the property of another) without right or permission.

Piracy:
The unauthorized use or reproduction of copyrighted or patented material.

[thecrazyd]

What you think isn't a factor. The laws in your society are what matters. If you don't like them, work to change them.

Most people grow out of this stuff when they start producing things of value and get a chance to be on the other side of the situation.
It's not "what I think." Pirating is not stealing, pure and simple. It is not an opinion. There is a fundamental difference.

[RMan]

I think the kid who physically stole a CD, as there is value in a real object...
Actually, no, this is not true, and should not be used as a validation that physical theft is "worse". The CD is a delivery medium for the content, and has as much value as the box your corn flakes come in. The physical product's cost is negligible, and this argument makes as much sense as saying “Wal-Mart dropped the price on this product by a dollar, now it’s not as bad to take it”.

Look, if you’re going to be a pirate, just be one and don’t try to be self-righteous about it. Some of these rationalizations are a bit off, let’s look at a few…

“I can’t afford to buy <insert product here>”
Although I sympathize with the people for which this statement is true, the moment they say it they almost always prove the statement false. IOW, if you’re poor, don’t say that you’re too poor so you have to steal your luxuries. This is especially bad with computer games, as I’ve seen people use this comment while running their games on an expensive gaming rig. They could have bought a 10% less powerful video card and bought an extra two games with it, that’s just selfish, IMO. Although there are some really expensive products that are hard for the average consumer to afford, entertainment seldom falls into that category.

“I only pirate the games I wouldn’t buy anyway”
Umm, then why do you pirate them? If the product is worth your time, then why is it not worth your money? Although some people may truly believe this, they’d have to have some kind of crystal ball to be able to determine every product’s worth before pirating them (and if they’re perception is that good it still begs the question of why it’s worthwhile).

“I only pirate games that I’m unsure of, if they’re good then I buy them”
Likely the most valid rationalization of all, but in the end my bet is even the most diligent of consumers only live up to half this promise. The simple truth is that most will not go to the trouble, or will wait too long (sometimes hoping for a price drop) then the product won’t be in stores anymore, or will just forget. Doing something dishonorable with the intention of later redeeming it doesn’t, in my opinion, make it honorable.

I’m no angel though, I’ve pirated plenty of products in my time, and at one time or another used each of these excuses. I do know now, though, that these are ultimately destructive rationalizations that don’t change the fact that it’s wrong.

[MasterKwan]

I don't think either HD format will succeed unless they get the Porn industry on board and from what I've read, the porn industry isn't really interested in new physical media. They know that cracking the DRM is inevitable so, they don't want to play the game anymore. Streaming porn's where it's going to be. Porn made the video tape and the DVD what it is today. It'll make or break HD.

As for Piracy, it's here now and it's not going away. I know people who download 10-30 gigs a DAY of content. I'm not condoning it but, the only way to stop it would be to shut down the internet and then they'll just sneaker net like they did in the pre-internet days.

The world of the replicator is here now, for data that is. Valve see's it. Subscription content is where it's going to be in the future. The old guard's (RIAA/MPAA) either stupid and trying to keep the buggy whip manufacturers from going out of business after the car was invented or they're playing a delaying game until the come up with their own subscription services. I'm not sure which it is though, I've lately been leaning toward "stupid".

What I think's going to eventually happen is universal licensing. Everyone will pay a $10 surcharge a month on internet access and will be allowed to download whatever they damn well please. Then the only problem will be figuring out how to divy the money up between the content generators. People with more downloads should get a bigger share. You put out crap, you get nothing.

[XxSATANxX]

Piracy is good!

http://www.mindjack.com/feature/piracy051305.html

[thecrazyd]

“I only pirate the games I wouldn’t buy anyway”
Umm, then why do you pirate them? If the product is worth your time, then why is it not worth your money? Although some people may truly believe this, they’d have to have some kind of crystal ball to be able to determine every product’s worth before pirating them (and if they’re perception is that good it still begs the question of why it’s worthwhile).
You are making the asumption that my time == money. In that case, when you buy a game you are saying it is worth your time and money, instead of just being worth your time. In my opinion, time < money. Then again, I am not rich. If I were, I would buy every damn thing that caught my fancy. As it is, I sometimes like to try before I buy. You know, the whole buyer beware thing. And yes, I do buy the software if I like it.

[Mrbunchypants]

FYI this wont work. one would assume that there will be different version of the code to be copyed to the player. Some hacker will just up the version the player reads the old version and does not update. Done and Done.

As for poeple stealing/ take code that happends to be the same as a game or movie. well. it's not stealing in my mind. the whole most of the movies out right now are crap thing... just makes me want ot stay home. then theres the issues about stuff thats not released in your local area. Like Anime. I pirate most of my anime. i mean yes i could buy it if i lived in a big city, but i live in a small one. one that might not have every dvd/game on there release date. Hell some times they never get them at all. So I am stealing? Does this mean i have to spend a few hundred bucks to go get what i want? do you really think i'm going to do that? not likely. ANd it is true that the ones i really like i do try and buy them online, even then it can be more of a hassel to get them to me.

I don't know i just give up some times.

The whole world is crap!

[Furious Wang]

- You are fighting piracy, but you are in a tough fight, so just give up? That's the spirit. Same arguement:


First, your paper analogy ranks among the worst I've seen.

Second, referring to the above quote, its isn't a "tough fight" its an impossible fight. Its a fight the studios *cannot* win. *Billions* have been spent on copy protection (I despise the DRM term) with *zero* success. That is money wasted. That wasted money is supplied by legitimate sales. People legally buying music and movies are being charged to subsidize prevention of the piracy of the product they just paid for. This has been an issue for decades now and the studios have only lost ground. They *should* give up because it is costing legitimate consumers money.

[Furious Wang]

Actually, no, this is not true, and should not be used as a validation that physical theft is "worse". The CD is a delivery medium for the content, and has as much value as the box your corn flakes come in. The physical product's cost is negligible, and this argument makes as much sense as saying “Wal-Mart dropped the price on this product by a dollar, now it’s not as bad to take it”.


Physical theft *IS* worse. You steal a CD from WalMart, WalMart takes a 10$ hit. They had to pay money to buy that CD. You download a CD off the net no one loses money. The record company loses a potential sale, not real money. Theft is the worse crime without a doubt.

The rest of your post is good though. There are no serious rationalizations for piracy.

And I'm only being halfway serious with the following:

Ii want to know when the studios are going to put DRM *in my head* I never bought a Kelis album but her song "Milkshake" is burned into my brain and loops endlessly note for note.

[RMan]

There is a legal difference between stealing and piracy. Ask anyone with a basic knowledge of the law. Piracy is generally wrong but it is *not* stealing.

Stealing:
To take (the property of another) without right or permission.

Piracy:
The unauthorized use or reproduction of copyrighted or patented material.
Piracy is a type of theft, like larceny is a type of theft. If someone commits larceny, they are committing theft. I would like to know though, what is it about piracy that makes pirates think it’s not theft?

Is it the fact that it’s not actually a physical property? If that’s the case, then when you steal a book, are you only stealing from the publisher and not doing any wrong to the author? After all, by that logic the words on the pages have no worth, just the pages (even though it's almost assuredly not being stolen for the pages). In reality the physical product when it comes to electronic or intellectual property is NEVER what’s being sold, and has no value to the seller (which is why unsold property is often destroyed rather than shipped back to the publisher).

Is it the idea that you’re taking something that someone else is using? The example of stealing a car, obviously it’s going to hurt the owner more than stealing the car from the car lot, but we still consider stealing from a car lot stealing. Do we think that the car lot is using all these cars, like any of their lives will be halted by the loss of a car, no, they’re waiting to be sold, and not needed for anything else. The same is true of these entertainment products, the store has no use for them other than their sale, and since the actual physical product has no value either, when stealing it you’re still taking potential revenue, it’s just that the product distributor can still charge the store for it.

Other than software piracy being a far more convenient and less dangerous form of theft, I fail to see anything that comes close to an argument that it’s not theft.

[Kelegacy]

Ii want to know when the studios are going to put DRM *in my head* I never bought a Kelis album but her song "Milkshake" is burned into my brain and loops endlessly note for note.

Good point, actually. Don't be surprised when the RIAA knocks on your door. In an Orwellian universe it could happen. And we aren't too far away.

[thecrazyd]

Piracy is a type of theft, like larceny is a type of theft. If someone commits larceny, they are committing theft. I would like to know though, what is it about piracy that makes pirates think it’s not theft?

Is it the fact that it’s not actually a physical property? If that’s the case, then when you steal a book, are you only stealing from the publisher and not doing any wrong to the author? After all, by that logic the words on the pages have no worth, just the pages (even though it's almost assuredly not being stolen for the pages). In reality the physical product when it comes to electronic or intellectual property is NEVER what’s being sold, and has no value to the seller (which is why unsold property is often destroyed rather than shipped back to the publisher).

Is it the idea that you’re taking something that someone else is using? The example of stealing a car, obviously it’s going to hurt the owner more than stealing the car from the car lot, but we still consider stealing from a car lot stealing. Do we think that the car lot is using all these cars, like any of their lives will be halted by the loss of a car, no, they’re waiting to be sold, and not needed for anything else. The same is true of these entertainment products, the store has no use for them other than their sale, and since the actual physical product has no value either, when stealing it you’re still taking potential revenue, it’s just that the product distributor can still charge the store for it.

Other than software piracy being a far more convenient and less dangerous form of theft, I fail to see anything that comes close to an argument that it’s not theft.
It's the fact that you are only taking a copy and they are only losing a potential sale, and no actual money that makes it not theft. And a grey area.

[Cyrano]

To go with the newspaper analogy, if a newspaper started printing with blue ink on blue paper to make it harder for pirates to copy, legitimate customers would get pissed because it would make the paper harder for them to read. Meanwhile, pirates would find a way around the color problem, and would end up with a nice black-and-white copy that's easier to read than the original. That's what happens with copy protection on games. The legitimate customer gets screwed, the pirate has fun cracking the protection, and the game manufacturer is no better off.

[Deadend]

It's not quite a grey area. It's still wrong. But like how there is a diffrence between assissted suicide and hacking off a strangers head with a rusty hatchet.

Similar, but extremely diffrent.

Thanks Furious for helping point out that there is a diffrence betwen a tangible loss and a potential loss.

Rman... you will never change your viewpont on this, in spite of how much evidence we give you.

I will continue to hate DRM and anything that infringes on my fair usage, such as unskippable trailers in DVDs... that my hacked Xbox with a region free mode can skip.
Oh, I hate DVD regions, they suck and were invented by jerks.

I had to download Spaced, which happens to be one of the funniest tV series ever made, know why? It will not come out in the US due to song rights. I cannot play the European DVD in a regular player either.

The digital age is here, and DRM is a pathetic attempt to stop it, that has failed and will keep failing.

The only company that seems to have done a decent job of DRM is Valve.
I can install Half-Life 2 on any computer I want, but only *I* can play it, unless the computer lacks internet access and was previously signed in.
Apples DRM is crap, as when you reformat your computer, your songs are no longer there, and you must buy them all over again... utter crap.

Hell, how about just making DRM more Steam-like? Let me have an account, I can download anything and everything, but if I go to play it... I have to pay for it.
Just make it so DRM does not fuck up as much as it currently does, and that it gives me freedom.

The way DRM is now, they tell you that your buying the content... not the DVD, but if the DVD breaks, you have no content... and must buy it over again. Is that really fair?

[RMan]

Physical theft *IS* worse. You steal a CD from WalMart, WalMart takes a 10$ hit. They had to pay money to buy that CD. You download a CD off the net no one loses money. The record company loses a potential sale, not real money. Theft is the worse crime without a doubt.
Ahh, now here's where it gets fun. First off, the simple question I have to you is this, is it "worse" because it costs more? And the next, perhaps more interesting question, is it worse because the retailer has to pay, or because the publisher has to pay? The reason these are important is because of the finances of what you just said...

First off, assuming that Wal-mart paid $10 for the product is highly questionable, often stores stock product and can pay up to 90 days after stocking the product, and can pay based on sell-through (IOW, they don’t pay for returned products). They may even have a clause that says sell-through doesn’t include stolen property, in that case wal-mart actually doesn’t pay anything for the stolen property, the publisher does. If wal-mart has to pay for stolen property, then stealing from the store loses $10 from wal-mart but makes $7 for the publisher (assuming a $3 distribution/production cost). With this in mind, it can certainly be argued that stealing from the store is better for the publisher/developer. Wal-mart can also write off the cost of the stolen property, so that helps them too. In the end, no matter how you slice it, physical theft doesn’t cost much, since the vast majority of the money involved is not in the physical part.

Second, if it’s worse because it costs more to steal the physical product, then is it worse to pirate a game when it’s first released, or stealing it from the store 3 months later after a price drop?

In the end, saying the theft is fundamentally different because there’s less money involved is an incredibly slippery slope and muddies the issue significantly. In short, you’re stealing the media, not the medium, and how much money or people are involved in the chain of damage should not be a factor in determining if it’s theft or not. If you’re talking about worse from a legal/punitive standpoint, then I’d agree that in-store theft is worse, since it exhibits more potential for future crime, but I assumed this was more about the morality of it.

[thecrazyd]

Ahh, now here's where it gets fun. First off, the simple question I have to you is this, is it "worse" because it costs more? And the next, perhaps more interesting question, is it worse because the retailer has to pay, or because the publisher has to pay? The reason these are important is because of the finances of what you just said...

First off, assuming that Wal-mart paid $10 for the product is highly questionable, often stores stock product and can pay up to 90 days after stocking the product, and can pay based on sell-through (IOW, they don’t pay for returned products). They may even have a clause that says sell-through doesn’t include stolen property, in that case wal-mart actually doesn’t pay anything for the stolen property, the publisher does. If wal-mart has to pay for stolen property, then stealing from the store loses $10 from wal-mart but makes $7 for the publisher (assuming a $3 distribution/production cost). With this in mind, it can certainly be argued that stealing from the store is better for the publisher/developer. Wal-mart can also write off the cost of the stolen property, so that helps them too. In the end, no matter how you slice it, physical theft doesn’t cost much, since the vast majority of the money involved is not in the physical part.

Second, if it’s worse because it costs more to steal the physical product, then is it worse to pirate a game when it’s first released, or stealing it from the store 3 months later after a price drop?

In the end, saying the theft is fundamentally different because there’s less money involved is an incredibly slippery slope and muddies the issue significantly. In short, you’re stealing the media, not the medium, and how much money or people are involved in the chain of damage should not be a factor in determining if it’s theft or not. If you’re talking about worse from a legal/punitive standpoint, then I’d agree that in-store theft is worse, since it exhibits more potential for future crime, but I assumed this was more about the morality of it.
... except we have already verified that it is not stealing.

[MasterKwan]

If I download a song from Usenet, nobody knows about it and it has no affect on anyone. It's as if it never happened. If I steal a CD from Walmart, someone loses the real $1.00 it took to press and package the CD. We all end up paying higher prices for all things Walmart because of in house shrinkage and shoplifting.

Who is directly penalized when I download something, who's lost real money? Nobody.
Who suffers when I steal a CD? First the retailer, then the customers.

So, while my (theoretical) downloading might mean I don't buy, I haven't actually taken real money from someone's pocket. It has nothing to do with the amount of money involved either.

The only question is, what punishes more people? Stealing a phisical object clearly punished more people than stealing a virtual thing like a digitized song.

I'm not saying either is the moral thing to do. Just that one is clearly worse.

[RMan]

... except we have already verified that it is not stealing.
Hehe, "we" being the people that have decided it's not stealing. Again, there are some that believe that intellectual property or any "non-physical" property is not really property. I think they are wrong, and many are using it as a rationalization so they can easier do what they want to do. I think much of what will divide people on this is the same thing that divides them on many issues, and that's conditioning. I think many people, especially younger people, have been raised with it and don’t find it morally objectionable because of it’s frequency.

[Furious Wang]

Hehe, "we" being the people that have decided it's not stealing. Again, there are some that believe that intellectual property or any "non-physical" property is not really property. I think they are wrong, and many are using it as a rationalization so they can easier do what they want to do. I think much of what will divide people on this is the same thing that divides them on many issues, and that's conditioning. I think many people, especially younger people, have been raised with it and don’t find it morally objectionable because of it’s frequency.

Pay attention son. The courts, the law of the land, makes an exact distinction between theft of real property and copyright infringement. We are not being radical, extreme, or even liberal with our usage of terminology. The difference between stealing and piracy is clearly delineated.

[RMan]

If I download a song from Usenet, nobody knows about it and it has no affect on anyone. It's as if it never happened. If I steal a CD from Walmart, someone loses the real $1.00 it took to press and package the CD. We all end up paying higher prices for all things Walmart because of in house shrinkage and shoplifting.
Although I don't think others not knowing about the piracy is necessarily good, but I can't argue with the second part. I think the influence on pricing is incredibly small, but yea, I’m sure you’re right and it has an effect. However, I also think that piracy is having a much greater effect (only because it is far more rampant). Specifically with PC games, I think it’s having an effect on the number of products released for the PC, but not much of a factor in pricing (pricing is determined almost wholly by what the consumer is willing to pay, after all).

Anyway, like many arguments, it’s breaking down to the extremes. We know that the people that count the number of pirated products then multiply that by product cost and say “we’ve lost 20 billion to piracy” are full of crap. At the same time, the pirate advocates that claim that they’re only losing possible revenue and that’s not real money are equally full of crap. The lost revenue for a pirated game is not 0%, nor is it 100%, it’s somewhere in between.

Honestly, I thought those messages about piracy being a crime playing at the start of movies was utterly stupid. I figured the awareness of it being a crime was pretty obvious, but apparently there’s a lot of logic in showing those things. This is also not a jab at piracy advocates, I just now believe there are many people that actually don’t see it as a crime, or at least put it in the same category as jaywalking.

[51|RandoM]

It's not "what I think." Pirating is not stealing, pure and simple. It is not an opinion. There is a fundamental difference.

funny, the courts, at least in the U.S., don't seem to agree with you.

[Heretic Machine]

Piracy is "wrong" in the sence of traditional moral values. But I don't have morals, so I couldn't give a rat's ass about Crazy Jimbo downloading 10,000 copies of Half-life 2. But when a company decides to fuck with the products I buy just to fight back against Crazy Jimbo, that alienates me, and then I stop buying their products.

So when it comes to me, and people like me... Fighting piracy will only cost you more sales.

[Heretic Machine]

funny, the courts, at least in the U.S., don't seem to agree with you.

They also don't think that gay people should be married, and for a long time, black people shouldn't drink from the white folk's water fountain. You think that the US courts' decisions give you any kind of evidence to use in this discussion?

[RMan]

Pay attention son. The courts, the law of the land, makes an exact distinction between theft of real property and copyright infringement. We are not being radical, extreme, or even liberal with our usage of terminology. The difference between stealing and piracy is clearly delineated.
The law makes distinctions between lots of different types of property, the taking of which most people would call stealing (but legally we have embezzlement, larceny, and auto theft to name a few). Stealing is not generally a legal term, but one we use to define a group of acts wherein someone takes something they are not entitled to. Your definition may include the need for something tangible to be taken from the victim, but mine does not (nor does many others or we wouldn't have phrases like "you stole my idea"). Typically terms like theft are more associated with the physical taking of property, but even then some people’s definition may vary. In the end, when someone says software piracy is not stealing, I’d disagree. If he had said software piracy is different than larceny, then I’d agree with that.

[Furious Wang]

Piracy is a type of theft, like larceny is a type of theft. If someone commits larceny, they are committing theft. I would like to know though, what is it about piracy that makes pirates think it’s not theft?

This: When you are caught pirating you are charged with copyright infringement. When you are caught stealing you are charged with larceny.

The law makes a distinction between the two crimes because they are ***DIFFERENT***

Is it the fact that it’s not actually a physical property?

Yes. Crimes involving tangible property are called larceny.

If that’s the case, then when you steal a book, are you only stealing from the publisher and not doing any wrong to the author? After all, by that logic the words on the pages have no worth, just the pages (even though it's almost assuredly not being stolen for the pages). In reality the physical product when it comes to electronic or intellectual property is NEVER what’s being sold, and has no value to the seller (which is why unsold property is often destroyed rather than shipped back to the publisher).

I don't know what the fuck you are using in that argument but it isn't logic. When you steal a book from a store the store loses *real* money that they spent to buy that book. You do know how the retail industry works right? A store gives money to a distributor and gets a product. The store then sell the product for a profit.

Now if you were to break in to a publisher's warehouse and steal copies of a book the publisher would lose *real* money that they spent to print that book. You do know how the printing idustry works right? A publisher pays money to get a book printed. The publisher then sells the book to a retailer for a profit.

And if you were to break in to an author's home and steal his draft of a book he was writing the author would lose *real* value in the form of time spent producing that work. An author writes a book and sells it to a publisher for money.

Seriously, I try reading your argument over and over and have NO FUCKING IDEA what you are trying to say.

Is it the idea that you’re taking something that someone else is using? The example of stealing a car, obviously it’s going to hurt the owner more than stealing the car from the car lot, but we still consider stealing from a car lot stealing. Do we think that the car lot is using all these cars, like any of their lives will be halted by the loss of a car, no, they’re waiting to be sold, and not needed for anything else. The same is true of these entertainment products, the store has no use for them other than their sale, and since the actual physical product has no value either, when stealing it you’re still taking potential revenue, it’s just that the product distributor can still charge the store for it.

If you steal a person's car, the owner of the car experiences a tangible loss of real money that he spent on the car. IF you steal a car from a car lot the business you stole the car from experiences a tangible loss of real money that they spent on the car. The auto dealership had to spend real money to buy that car from a manufacturer.

Entertainment products in a store do have *real* physical value - the money the store paid to buy them so they can resell it for a profit. When a CD is stolen the store loses the ~10$ they spent to buy that CD. WHY CAN'T YOU UNDERSTAND THIS. The CD did not just show up at their store in the middle of the night, delivered by the CD Fairy.

Other than software piracy being a far more convenient and less dangerous form of theft, I fail to see anything that comes close to an argument that it’s not theft.

Then you are a fool. Data is not tangible. No money was spent manufacturing the data you download during copyright infringement. The only money spent was during the original production of that data. That is the clear distinction between theft and piracy.

You steal a CD from a store you damage the store and the copyright holder.

You download a CD from the internet you damage only the copyright holder.

[thecrazyd]

So say you have a really awesome sweater you bought from some store, I dunno, say the fucking Gap. Now, I see that sweater, and I say, "that is an awesome sweater." So respond by saying, "Well, shucks. I am an awesome knitter. I can make you one just like this." Does wearing that sweater make me a theif?

[ElectricMonk]

i honestly don't see what's so wrong about this. at least they're fighting piracy through a good invention rather than by making it illegal to crack stuff

and the idea that people should just 'make better products' is so retarded i don't think any amount of logic can convince anybody who actually believes that otherwise. gta:sa is a great game, does that curb it's piracy? i bet it was pirated more times than 'britney's dance beat' sold copies of.

[Furious Wang]

Ahh, now here's where it gets fun. First off, the simple question I have to you is this, is it "worse" because it costs more?

Yes, we as a society judge the severity of crimes based on the extent of damage the crimes cause. If I yell at you I get Harassment. If I hit you I get Assault. If I shoot you in the leg I get Assault with a Deadly Weapon. If I shoot you in the chest I get Assault with Intent to Kill. If I shoot you in the heart I get Murder. If I plan to and then shoot you in the heart I get Murder 1st. Murder 1st is "worse" than Harassment because more damage is done. Larceny is worse than Piracy because more damage is done.


And the next, perhaps more interesting question, is it worse because the retailer has to pay, or because the publisher has to pay? The reason these are important is because of the finances of what you just said...

Stop pretending to be an intellect. You are not. Larceny is worse because the retailer AND the copyright holder suffer damage. In Piracy only the copyright holder suffers damage.

They may even have a clause that says sell-through doesn’t include stolen property, in that case wal-mart actually doesn’t pay anything for the stolen property, the publisher does.

You've lost your mind here. What you're talking about does not exist. I have worked at Wal Mart. That is not the way things are done. And sure, there are tons of ways to reduce shrinkage, but "no matter how you slice it" when you steal a product from a store that store loses money. The copyright holder is also damaged because that stolen CD isn't recorded as a sale thus his album doesn't move up the charts and his royalties don't go up.


Second, if it’s worse because it costs more to steal the physical product, then is it worse to pirate a game when it’s first released, or stealing it from the store 3 months later after a price drop?

Again, stealing it from the store 3 months later after a price drop because the store experiences a loss. Even selling the game at a reduced price would have earned some money. Did you even think for a second before you wrote that?

In the end, saying the theft is fundamentally different because there’s less money involved is an incredibly slippery slope and muddies the issue significantly.

No it doesn't. Let me use your absurd method of logic as satire.

In the end, saying the assault is fundamentally different (from the murder) because there's less death involved is an incredibly slippery slope and muddies the issue significantly.

Now can you see?


In short, you’re stealing the media, not the medium, and how much money or people are involved in the chain of damage should not be a factor in determining if it’s theft or not.

You're stealing the media AND the medium. When you steal a CD you don't just transport the music alone out of the store, drifting in tiny particles above your head while the disc and case it was shipped in remains back in the rack. You take the medium with you.

And it is the courts who decide and have the final say whether piracy is theft or not and they say it isn't. You want to change that then go to law school and get nominated to the SCOTUS.

If you’re talking about worse from a legal/punitive standpoint, then I’d agree that in-store theft is worse, since it exhibits more potential for future crime, but I assumed this was more about the morality of it.

Both are immoral, but as I have argued, theft is the greater sin both legally and morally.

[Furious Wang]

i honestly don't see what's so wrong about this. at least they're fighting piracy through a good invention rather than by making it illegal to crack stuff

and the idea that people should just 'make better products' is so retarded i don't think any amount of logic can convince anybody who actually believes that otherwise. gta:sa is a great game, does that curb it's piracy? i bet it was pirated more times than 'britney's dance beat' sold copies of.

It is illegal to crack stuff.

The Digital Millenium Copyright Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millenium_Copyright_Act)

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is a controversial United States copyright law. The act criminalizes production and dissemination of technology that can circumvent measures taken to protect copyright, not merely infringement of copyright itself, and heightens the penalties for copyright infringement on the Internet. Passed on May 14, 1998 by a unanimous vote in the United States Senate and signed into law by President Bill Clinton on October 28, 1998, the DMCA amended title 17 of the US Code to extend the reach of copyright, while limiting the liability of Online Providers from copyright infringement by their users.

[Furious Wang]

So say you have a really awesome sweater you bought from some store, I dunno, say the fucking Gap. Now, I see that sweater, and I say, "that is an awesome sweater." So respond by saying, "Well, shucks. I am an awesome knitter. I can make you one just like this." Does wearing that sweater make me a theif?

If you knit an exact copy of the sweater, right down to the GAP logo, it makes you a copyright infringer. Things like that go on all the time.

[darkwarrior]

Sigh, the next wave was looking so promising but all this DRM...People who download stuff will never go out and buy it, people who pay for crappy cam quality films simply fancy something to watch but they never go to the cinema. It won't change that or make any more money, its just wasting everyones time and lots of money.

[RMan]

This: When you are caught pirating you are charged with copyright infringement. When you are caught stealing you are charged with larceny.
Ok, try to read this more carefully. I would say the statement you made was false, because my definition, and the definition of most people, does not require stealing to be restricted to larceny. IOW, if you are caught stealing property from a store, you are charged with larceny, and if you steal software from the net, you are charged with copyright infringement. Also, if you are caught stealing from the company you work at, that would likely be embezzlement, but it’d still be called stealing by practically everyone, there are more types of stealing than the legal definition of larceny.
The law makes a distinction between the two crimes because they are ***DIFFERENT***
The law makes plenty of distinctions between different crimes, and they are not mutually exclusive to a group. Again, I'll try to make this simple, murder is a cime, as is larceny, just like larceny is a form of stealing just as piracy is a form of stealing.
You do know how the retail industry works right?... You do know how the printing idustry works right?
Yea, I did know that, but thanks for the condescending, unnecessary, and wholly irrelevant information. Again, my definition of stealing doesn’t have the same stringent qualifiers yours does.
Seriously, I try reading your argument over and over and have NO FUCKING IDEA what you are trying to say.
And your counter arguments express this pretty well.
Entertainment products in a store do have *real* physical value - the money the store paid to buy them so they can resell it for a profit. When a CD is stolen the store loses the ~10$ they spent to buy that CD. WHY CAN'T YOU UNDERSTAND THIS.
Because it's not really true, again, the cost of the product is not in the physical medium. Overall loss when all is said and done would never be $10.
Then you are a fool. Data is not tangible. No money was spent manufacturing the data you download during copyright infringement. The only money spent was during the original production of that data.
Data is legally tangible or we would not have laws protecting it, we infact would not have patents or copyrights at all. My definition of stealing or theft for that matter doesn't require the loss of manufacturing costs (although theft is borderline because it does conjure images of a physical act, I'll use stealing from now on to be clear).

[Furious Wang]

funny, the courts, at least in the U.S., don't seem to agree with you.
Actually they do.

Larceny is a common law crime involving stealing. Under common law, larceny is the

trespassory
taking and asportation
of the (tangible) personal property
of another
with the intent to deprive him or her of it
permanently.


Theft
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
(Redirected from Stealing)
Theft (also known as stealing) is in general, the wrongful taking of someone else's property without that person's willful consent. In law, it is usually the broadest term for a crime against property. It is a general term that encompasses offences such as burglary, embezzlement, larceny, looting, robbery, trespassing, shoplifting, intrusion, fraud (theft by deception) and sometimes criminal conversion. Legally, theft is generally considered to be synonymous with larceny.

In the common law, theft is usually defined as the unauthorised taking or use of someone else's property with the intent to permanently deprive the owner or the person with rightful possession of that property or its use.

As with other common law crimes, it is composed of two elements, the actus reus — the unauthorized taking or use — and the intent to deprive — the mens rea.

Copyright infringement is the unauthorized use of copyrighted material in a manner that violates one of the copyright owner's exclusive rights, such as the right to reproduce or perform the copyrighted work, or to make derivative works that build upon it.

In many jurisdictions, such as the United States, copyright infringement is a strict liability tort or crime. This means that the plaintiff or prosecutor must only prove that the act of copying or actus reus was committed by the defendant, and need not prove mens rea.


***GAME OVER***

[thecrazyd]

If you knit an exact copy of the sweater, right down to the GAP logo, it makes you a copyright infringer. Things like that go on all the time.
Yes, but does it make me a theif?

[Furious Wang]

no. you are not a theif. you are a copyright infringer.

[RMan]

Yes, we as a society judge the severity of crimes based on the extent of damage the crimes cause.
That discussion was about right and wrong, I understand the legal difference, but thanks again for the condescention, it was helpful as always.
Stop pretending to be an intellect. You are not. Larceny is worse because the retailer AND the copyright holder suffer damage. In Piracy only the copyright holder suffers damage.
I'm assuming you meant intellectual, but I'm really appreciating you putting me in my place. Again, the simple mathematics involved should be read again, because if wal-mart pays then wal-mart loses, and the copyright owner gets paid for a sale he likely wouldn't have otherwise gotten, the MAKE money on the transaction.
The copyright holder is also damaged because that stolen CD isn't recorded as a sale thus his album doesn't move up the charts and his royalties don't go up.
Ok, even if that was the case, I have a feeling that most publishers would rather have the money than the bragging rights, but nice try anyway.
Did you even think for a second before you wrote that?
Yea, sure did, 1.5 seconds, like always :).
In the end, saying the assault is fundamentally different (from the murder) because there's less death involved is an incredibly slippery slope and muddies the issue significantly.
Now can you see?
No, but if instead you said attempted murder (or assault with intent to kill) instead of assault then I'd agree with it, because I think fundamentally attempted murder and murder are the same, and how much damage was done may be important in determing punishment, but not wether or not it’s right or wrong. Again, in terms of the law’s punishment for software piracy, I do not think it should be equivalent to larceny, but at the same time people shouldn’t be given a license to think that it’s not stealing because of that. It’s still stealing, it’s still wrong, and promoting the idea that it’s a victimless crime (thus not a just law) because there’s no physical aspect is just silly.
You're stealing the media AND the medium.
The point was not what you're walking out of the store with, the point was what you were stealing. The fact is that you could care less about the CD, it's just something you have to have to get the media. It has no value to you, nor does it have value to the store or publisher, beyond possible replacement costs. Using it as a reason why the two crimes are fundamentally different is, IMO, a copout. Either way, it’s taking the path of least resistance so you can get what you want, at the expense of those that created it, and definitely taking what is not yours in the process. Again, nobody steals a CD for the CD. With the hopes that online distribution of all electronic media becomes more prevalent, I'm really hating the idea that many consumers can convince themselves that it's not stealing because there's no physicality.

[Fungii]

For those of you who feel copyright infringement is as bad as theft, I would like to illustrate why I feel it is a bit more complicated than that, using a real world example.

I subscribe to a premium movie channel and I have a tuner card that I can use to record programs. If a movie is coming out on the movie channel on a Friday and I download it on the Monday earlier in the week, is that as bad as theft? How about the day before it comes out? What if I download the movie the same day it's out on TV? Some would say downloading it is wrong and recording it is fair use and yet they both result in the same movie on my hard drive. What if the movie runs its course and goes off the air. I meant to watch it but never did, so I download it. I could have recorded it to watch later while it was still being aired, so is downloading it later really piracy? If you can't tell the difference between the downloaded file and the file I would have got by recording it, why should it matter?

Anyway, in regards to the Blu-Ray DRM...

"The consumer experience is paramount," Setos added. "If you turn off or otherwise revoke the working player, it's not a good thing."

Yeah, no shit. If that happens with even one disc, especially early in the rollout, they can kiss this format goodbye. Can you imagine if thousands of players suddenly stop working because of a faulty disc? Lotta pissed off customers, class action suits etc...

[my first post :) ]

[Furious Wang]

I'm assuming you meant intellectual, but I'm really appreciating you putting me in my place.

Thank you for affirming my statement.

in·tel·lect ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ntl-kt)
n.
1.
a.The ability to learn and reason; the capacity for knowledge and understanding.
b.The ability to think abstractly or profoundly. See Synonyms at mind.

2.A person of great intellectual ability.

It was amusing perusing your retort. Unfortunately,
***THE GAME IS OVER***
so there is no need to reply further.

[RMan]

2.A person of great intellectual ability.
Ohh, this is the first thing you've said worthy of conceit, I was unaware of this less popular use of the word.
***THE GAME IS OVER***
so there is no need to reply further.
Yea, I thought so for some time, yet you continued :).

[RMan]

For those of you who feel copyright infringement is as bad as theft, I would like to illustrate why I feel it is a bit more complicated than that, using a real world example.
Welcome. While certainly this is an example of technical piracy that's not too bad, and because of the extenuating circumstances I wouldn't say that was bad. But that’s not really a reason why piracy in whole is not as bad. For instance, if there was a wal-mart that closed down, and was about to be demolished and I went in and took all the shelving beforehand, technically that’d be larceny and possibly trespassing, even though I may be actually saving them money on cleanup. Neither the case you mentioned or the one I mentioned would likely result in prosecution, or even people judging the act that harshly, but that’s because they know the extenuating circumstances and can judge based on it.

For instance, I recently downloaded Warcraft 3 from a pirate site, but only because I’d bought the expansion, and couldn’t find my CD for the original game. I wasn’t about to go buy the game+expansion edition (which was the only way I could get the original game) because that’d mean I’d bought both games twice. Anyway, I’m not sure if that was illegal, maybe not, but I’m sure few people would consider it wrong.

[bapenguin]

pretty good discussion guys.

[Fungii]

Hey Rman, I'm glad you agree. Sometimes we're technically commiting 'piracy', yet by any measure in the 'real world', nobody would think twice about it. Such as your case of the missing WC3 cd or maybe loaning a DVD to a friend. I just wish the MPAA et al would cool the rhetoric and stop trying to convince us that any piracy is the end of modern civilization.

"Our announcement last Friday that we would be in fact publishing on Blu-Ray disc best was a result of content protection, and no other issues," Setos added, including the potential cost of replicating the discs.

The fact that Fox cares more about "content protection" than anything else says a lot. Most industries focus on "customer satisfaction" when introducing new products, it's good to know the entertainment industry gives this idea such a low priority. :eek:

[RMan]

I just wish the MPAA et al would cool the rhetoric and stop trying to convince us that any piracy is the end of modern civilization.
Yea, although I'm clearly anti-piracy, but the recording industry really got phenomenally stupid with it years back (gonna jump subject slightly). I still think it’s funny that they not only tried to fight what had to be a clearly losing battle, but did so against a new delivery medium that they could profit from. They got all riled up about the money they were losing and ignored the money they could make on online distribution, failing to see that the rampant piracy was due to the delivery medium being wildly superior for many consumers. The thing that really makes it funny is that it hadn’t been that long since the recording industry went through almost the same thing, when they were against cassettes because people copied their friend’s records. Although some people clearly did and money was lost there, far more money was made by the new markets opened up by cassettes (primarily the mobile market). I read that this year online music sales accounted for 6% of music profits, up from 2% the previous year. Although this number may not seem that big, in terms of how long it’s been available, and how much they have to fight against the piracy market that’s pretty good. I think if they’d have given the online deliverable option years ago instead of fighting it, music piracy and much of the “piracy is ok” mindset would have been eliminated.

But in response to your post, I think many go with the “piracy is totally evil” approach because it’s cut and dry, and sometimes that’s necessary to make a point. For instance, if I said “Say no to drugs”, it’s a fairly strong and mostly obvious message, but if I said “Say no to drugs, except over the counter drugs used in accordance to the instructions on the packaging”, although it’s technically more accurate, much of the “punch” is clearly lost, and all but the most daft are legitimately confused by the “say no to drugs” line.

[H.Bogard]

NO flame, mate, but theoretically, if everyone in your country would quit pirating, then the develpers like Sony and Microsoft would open distribution to your country. The reason they stay out of regions like china, for instance, is because piracy is so rampant that they realize they could not make a profit in those conditions.

Wrong, there are raids everyday on piracy stores here , they ARE doing everything to stop it, yet they just wont do the obvious thing to stop it which is to distribute locally

DarkWarrior : I totally agree, stopping piracy isnt going to make them make any more money than they do already, if people cant find it for free they just wont buy it. Everyone`s wasting their time.

[Mrbunchypants]

sorry Rman but Walmart does not work that way... most itmes in wallmart are theres they buy it off the company that makes it. if they don't sell them all they can't send them back. i know cuz i use to work for them. to prove this go to walmart in the winter and ask for some summer items, or go in the summer and ask for Xmas item. by what you telling everyone is that they should always have some. but they don't... if an item doesnot sell they trash it to make room for new items. It's all in there profit and loss statment.

Companys have to understand that untill you release you items in every reagon at the same time there will be piracy. eg sonys psp makeing it to europe well befor it release date. But that drives up the cost and if the product fails then you have alot of time and money lost. so they do it the markiting way of building up your profits.

[RMan]

sorry Rman but Walmart does not work that way... most itmes in wallmart are theres they buy it off the company that makes it.
I was referring to software in retail stores in general, and I know in Gamestop, Bestbuy, and other retail stores they can send back software, and although I’m not 100% sure about wal-mart, I’m betting it’s the same way (there’s no law stating they have to handle all items the same way).