# The Witcher 2 Contains Secret Sauce To 'Catch 100% Of Pirates'



## qubit (Dec 17, 2011)

Yes, really - 100% of those pesky "pirates" will be brought to book! The game's studio, CD Projekt RED (CDP Red) isn't letting on how it's doing so, either, claiming it's a "trade secret" and not giving out the name of the external company that's implementing the anti-piracy technology, claiming that to do so would damage their business. Seriously. The problem with identifying a dodgy copy of something is that the main info they have to track them down, are the IP addresses of the suspect. This has been shown many times over now, _not_ to be a reliable tracker of who's doing what. At the most, it will pinpoint the account holder that it relates to, in some cases. However, this outfit reckons they've nailed this dealbreaking problem once and for all - and without any evidence on how they go about it. Snake oil, perhaps? The Polish company have therefore been sending out legal notices to thousands of suspects in Germany, chosen because this country has some of the strictest copyright laws in Europe. Presumably, they must be leaning on the ISPs to hand over customers' physical street addresses, although this isn't made clear, but read on for how this might be accomplished. In an email to PC Gamer, CDP Red VP Michael Nowakowski made the following statement:



 




> We're addressing only 100% confirmed piracy causes that are 100% possible to prove. We are not worried about tracking the wrong people. As this is the trade secret of the company working on this, I cannot share it. However, we investigated the subject before we decided on this move, and we aware of some past complications (the famous Davenport case). The method used here is targeting only 100% confirmed piracy cases. No innocent person was targeted with the letter so far. At least we have not received any information as of now which would indicate something like that.


Notice how the Davenport case is "famous" rather than "infamous" - they actually went down in flames over their extortion tactics. Also notice how they covered themselves by saying "At least we have not received any information as of now which would indicate something like that." So, they _could_ be targeting the innocent after all, they just haven't heard about it. Nice.

So, there appears to be two options to how this tracking technology works:

1 There is no technology and this is just smoke and mirrors (with a dash of snake oil) designed to extort marks into coughing up money to make CD Projekt go away

2 They really do have some "tracking technology" in their games. Now, what could this be? Well, as they're not telling us, it's only right and proper to be highly suspicious of what it actually does and to put it in the same class as common criminal malware. This is because the only logical way that they can track the individual in any semi-reliable manner, is to _lift personal information off their computer._ Let's speculate on how this could be achieved. It would include stuff such as email logins, bank logins, Facebook logins, network traffic sniffing to read the contents of highly personal and confidential messages and any other login where personal information such as a name and address might be kept. You name it, they might be doing it. This kind of activity is of course highly illegal everywhere, so no wonder they'd want to keep quiet about it. It makes traditional draconian DRM schemes such as SecuROM and the like seem like a walk in the park by comparison, doesn't it?

So, do you _really_ want to install software that does some or all of this on your computer, just to play a lousy video game? Obviously, that's a resounding *NO!*

Regardless of how they track down suspects, this exercise is extortion with a legal veneer, pure and simple. This is because there haven't been any _independent_ studies showing that "piracy" reduces profits and makes companies go to the wall - they have all been big media industry sponsored. However, there are several independent studies that show it does nothing, or actually enhances sales by indirect means, such as reputation spread by word of mouth. Of course, the powerful media cartels based in America, are able to buy government reps all over the world to make them pass corrupt laws as if all this "piracy" really was hurting them - three strikes, PROTECT IP & SOPA are just three examples. Consider the blockbusting sales here and here of Modern Warfare 3 recently. This will be the most "pirated" game of all, yet it still outsold all of Hollywood put together...

There is of course, one sure fire and _legal_ way to beat a company that tries such dirty tricks: the boycott. Don't buy their products and don't pirate them, then laugh as you watch them go under (all the while still blaming alleged "piracy", of course). I personally wholeheartedly recommend this course of action. Once again www.techdirt.com is recommended as the site to go to, as they expose abuses like this daily.

*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Drone (Dec 17, 2011)

I don't condone piracy but I also hate dirty tricks with tracking and all that crap. I also hate when someone says "we're 100% sure" and all that bullcrap.


----------



## erocker (Dec 17, 2011)

Good editorial. Nope, that's a resounding *YES* for me. This is the way it should be implemented and face it, if it is just "smoke and mirrors" the courts will just throw this right out and it will die. Kudos to CD Projekt RED for doing it the right way.


----------



## heky (Dec 17, 2011)

erocker said:


> Nope, that's a resounding *YES* for me. This is the way it should be implemented and face it, if it is just "smoke and mirrors" the courts will just throw this right out and it will die. Kudos to CD Projekt RED for doing it the right way.



Nope, that`s a resounding *NO* for me. This is NOT the way it should be done. Dont i have the right to try something, before i fork out my hard earned money for it? And where is my right of privacy, if you agree with the rights of copyright?


----------



## erocker (Dec 17, 2011)

heky said:


> Dont i have the right to try something, before i fork out my hard earned money for it? And where is my right of privacy



No, you don't have the right to try something first unless it is given and you lose that small bit of privacy when you tick yes on the EULA.


----------



## bogie (Dec 17, 2011)

Surely what they are doing is spyware/malware and against the law in many countries?

If it does go to court they will have to reveal thier methods & legality of methods. :shadedshu

Look at what happened to Sony's rootkits on CD's. Big lawsuit and a lot of backtracking by Sony to wriggle out of all the negative publicity.

I'm not sure that this is a good idea by CD Projekt RED. 

If they sent me a letter I would laugh at it! 

btw, I have not pirated their crappy buggy game anyway.


----------



## Kreij (Dec 17, 2011)

There is a way to know 100% of the time if a game is not a valid (purchased) copy.
Each valid copy of the game could "phone home" with a unique identifier and the IP address of where it is located and then stored in a database.
If this unique ID shows up more than once, you KNOW a copy has been made.

The thing I am wondering is how you can know, with 100% accuracy, which is the bootleg copy.
"First location to register the ID" would not give you 100% accuracy (although it would probably be pretty close as I think most people would buy, install, copy).

I don't care what CDP does, I want to know how (the coding details).


----------



## LAN_deRf_HA (Dec 17, 2011)

erocker said:


> Good editorial. Nope, that's a resounding *YES* for me. This is the way it should be implemented and face it, if it is just "smoke and mirrors" the courts will just throw this right out and it will die. Kudos to CD Projekt RED for doing it the right way.



Then you haven't given this the proper thought. This isn't just IP tracking. Their verification is on their end, not the ISP's, meaning some sort of illegal data mining is involved. I wonder if they'll be required to reveal their method in court or if they just take the person's pc. That would have the proof but skirt the issue of how they got it before hand.


----------



## W1zzard (Dec 17, 2011)

if they access and submit any personal information it's illegal in most countries. could even be interpreted as hacking if you assume that the operating system's process separation and non-admin users are ways to protect sensitive data.

if you agreed to it in the TOS it may be legal, it's not clear whether it's possible to waive away a right to privacy.


----------



## qubit (Dec 17, 2011)

W1zzard said:


> if you agreed to it in the TOS it may be legal, it's not clear whether it's possible to waive away a right to privacy.



Now _there's_ a grey area. I'll bet this varies from country. It would come under the illegal or unreasonable contracts section of any country's laws.

EDIT: this is the obvious question to ask: it's one thing to lift lots of personal details if the user has "agreed" to it by blindly clicking yes to the agreement - which may or may not be legal to subject them to. However, our "pirate" has not agreed to this, making such dodgy techniques definitely illegal, regardless of whether the "pirate" is doing something illegal or not themselves. It's the sort of reason why vigilantes are frowned upon and people are expected to let the police and the law take care of the crimes. Which they often don't...


----------



## garyinhere (Dec 17, 2011)

erocker said:


> Good editorial. Nope, that's a resounding *YES* for me. This is the way it should be implemented and face it, if it is just "smoke and mirrors" the courts will just throw this right out and it will die. Kudos to CD Projekt RED for doing it the right way.



I agree that qbit doesn't speak for all of us and this is more of an editorial... otherwise charges they planned to bring against someone would've been mentioned imo... No charges because nothing illegal is happening... torrenting is not stealing or illegal!


----------



## Athlonite (Dec 17, 2011)

I give it a week before it's hacked and rendered useless


----------



## Zakin (Dec 17, 2011)

Out of curiosity, I wonder if they plan to bring in the probably fifty percent of their actual sales that probably pirated the game because not being able to try the game before hand in this modern day is suicide with console ports and just badly coded games in general.


----------



## Halk (Dec 17, 2011)

Either they're accessing other data on the PC it's installed on to find information - in that case it's incredibly bad malware, illegal, immoral and beneath contempt... 

Or they're just making it up. 

They're making it up.


----------



## garyinhere (Dec 17, 2011)

Wtf is this thread so dead, I thought i'd be entertained for at least a few hours or till bann but no, nobody wants to post for some fking reason... Pirating is cool, it does nothing but make the market and big business legit. Look at the music industry now... No napster would've meant no itunes. FKING POST


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 17, 2011)

My problem with this is the hipocracy from CD Projekt.  They run Good Old Games which is a DRM free service.  The very first patch for Witcher 2 also removes the DRM (theoretically, apparently).  And now they're saying they deployed a decietful DRM in the Witcher 2 and are taking people to court with whatever information they gained from it.  The hipocracy, lies, and deceit pisses me off to no end.  I'm not buying anything from CD Projekt ever again (including GoG).  I don't care if it was only on the German SKU, you don't treat your customers like criminals and you don't lie to them, period.  Even EA doesn't stoop that low.


----------



## qubit (Dec 17, 2011)

FordGT90Concept said:


> My problem with this is the hipocracy from CD Projekt.  They run Good Old Games which is a DRM free service.  The very first patch for Witcher 2 also removes the DRM (theoretically, apparently).  And now they're saying they deployed a decietful DRM in the Witcher 2 and are taking people to court with whatever information they gained from it.  The hipocracy, lies, and deceit pisses me off to no end.  I'm not buying anything from CD Projekt ever again (including GoG).  I don't care if it was only on the German SKU, you don't treat your customers like criminals and you don't lie to them, period.  Even EA doesn't stoop that low.



Damn straight! This hypocrisy is disgusting. Unfortunately, I spotted the PC Gamer article a little too late to start making significant changes to my article, but it's a really important point. Thanks for bringing it up.


----------



## Kreij (Dec 17, 2011)

Interesting post Ford.
It seems that there is a semantical difference between what people view as DRM.
One could say that DRM prevents you from playing a game when you do not meet the requirements of what the publisher views as a valid copy (CD/DVD check, constant internet connection, etc.)
If the software allows you to use what you have, but just reports that it's illegal it is not infringing upon you ability to use the software (although there may be consequences for doing so).

It's kind of like speed limits in the US. There is nothing to prevent you from going 100mph (DRM), but if you get caught you get fined. Perhaps a poor analogy, but you know what I mean.


----------



## Batou1986 (Dec 17, 2011)

Here's my issue with the whole piracy thing, if you don't release a demo so I can see if your $60 pile of crap actually works and is playable im not buying.

With that said three people I know bought the Witcher 2 after watching me play it, I only actually bought it last week. 
The way i see it that -1 +3 +1 roughly $200 in sales from a pirated copy $150 of which they would have never got without that copy.
The whole piracy is killing the industry is a crock.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 17, 2011)

hahahaah! stupid pirates! throw them all in jail!


----------



## garyinhere (Dec 17, 2011)

Easy Rhino said:


> hahahaah! stupid pirates! throw them all in jail!



You jelly


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 17, 2011)

I contain a secret sauce that causes 100% of hookers to take my money.


----------



## qubit (Dec 17, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> I contain a secret sauce that causes 100% of hookers to take my money.


----------



## Kreij (Dec 17, 2011)

Batou1986 said:


> Here's my issue with the whole piracy thing, if you don't release a demo so I can see if your $60 pile of crap actually works and is playable im not buying.
> 
> With that said three people I know bought the Witcher 2 after watching me play it, I only actually bought it last week.
> The way i see it that -1 +3 +1 roughly $200 in sales from a pirated copy $150 of which they would have never got without that copy.
> The whole piracy is killing the industry is a crock.



I agree with you in general Batou, but for some games it's not easy to just create some kind of "crippled" demo. You still need to supply all the code, art assets, audio and everything that makes the game play, and then inject code to cripple it (time played, locations etc.).
For certain games it's not so bad as you release the demo with limited maps, or levels, but with open world RPGs it's not that simple, and just easy for someone who know what they are doing to hack out the restirictions and get the full game as it is to crack the DRM.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 17, 2011)

Kreij said:


> Interesting post Ford.
> It seems that there is a semantical difference between what people view as DRM.
> One could say that DRM prevents you from playing a game when you do not meet the requirements of what the publisher views as a valid copy (CD/DVD check, constant internet connection, etc.)
> If the software allows you to use what you have, but just reports that it's illegal it is not infringing upon you ability to use the software (although there may be consequences for doing so).
> ...


The end goal is the same: sue someone for copyright infringement.  Just because their DRM is reactive instead of proactive doesn't exclude it from being DRM.  If you put lipstick on a pig, it is still a pig.


----------



## Kreij (Dec 17, 2011)

FordGT90Concept said:


> The end goal is the same: sue someone for copyright infringement.  Just because their DRM is reactive instead of proactive doesn't exclude it from being DRM.  If you put lipstick on a pig, it is still a pig.



But copyright infringement is illegal. What other course of action would you recommend they take to protect their product and their intellectual property?


----------



## reverze (Dec 17, 2011)

they seud many people in germany for around 1000 euros for downloading the witcher, what a dickhead move..... not to mention how much support and sales the witcher got for having claimed not to have a DRM and good after release support.

All that support and potential money is going down the drain now, along with any repuation they had. the only ones happy about this are the people who bought the game and love to see people suffer who didnt have to spend money on it.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 17, 2011)

reverze said:


> they seud many people in germany for around 1000 euros for downloading the witcher, what a dickhead move..... not to mention how much support and sales the witcher got for having claimed not to have a DRM and good after release support.
> 
> All that support and potential money is going down the drain now, along with any repuation they had. the only ones happy about this are the people who bought the game and love to see people suffer who didnt have to spend money on it.



So you feel you should be entitled to steal without repercussions if you don't have the money to buy something?

I'm sorry, but the world doesn't operate that way.


----------



## catnipkiller (Dec 17, 2011)

It feels like game makers spend more and more time and money trying to stop people from torenting there games and spending less on the game it self. But thats just me.


----------



## garyinhere (Dec 17, 2011)

catnipkiller said:


> It feels like game makers spend more and more time and money trying to stop people from torenting there games and spending less on the game it self. But thats just me.



The games don't suck because of money wasted on DRM... even most good games are guided and impossible to die in. The games are dumbed down because idiots are playing them.


----------



## digibucc (Dec 17, 2011)

Kreij said:


> But copyright infringement is illegal. What other course of action would you recommend they take to protect their product and their intellectual property?



exactly. it is not DRM, as it is not an access control method. as you said, you can play all you want but there may be IRL consequences. that's not DRM.
taking them at their word i would say awesome! it sounds foolproof! 100% accuracy in detection, doesn't affect legitimate players, and protects their investment, deservedly.

i do have an inclination to question how they can be sure it's so accurate. i would like to know what company they are using. i want to give them the benefit of the doubt, but the whole announcement is just a little too... shady for me.
still, i won't boycott them. i'll just wait for specifics. we'll find out what it is, who the company is, how it works and all that soon enough. i actually buy all of my games and so would like to see a solution that doesn't affect me become mainstream.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 17, 2011)

Kreij said:


> But copyright infringement is illegal. What other course of action would you recommend they take to protect their product and their intellectual property?


Pursue those that literally violate copyright law by creating, distibuting, and selling physical copies of software (prevelant in China).  Like forged books and works of art, people that buy those copies think they're legitimate but they're not.  This is a serious issue with movies.


----------



## garyinhere (Dec 17, 2011)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Pursue those that literally violate copyright law by creating, distibuting, and selling physical copies of software (prevelant in China).  Like forged books and works of art, people that buy those copies think they're legitimate but they're not.  This is a serious issue with movies.



Not unless you've borrowed said movie from a friend. That's what I used to do / still do / and will keep doing because it is legal. Whether it's a physical or digital copy.


----------



## purecain (Dec 17, 2011)

i wont be supporting this company if they continue down this road....

we've already covered this subject across the net... 

at the end of the day, those that can afford to buy the game...buy it... 

those that have no money to purchase ANY game may have to make do with an uploaded copy... 

the company doesnt lose out here.... poor people have no money to waste on a computer game...

their too busy paying their mortgage and keeping their family fed and watered...

this is just a rich company trying to get more from less... suck me off !!! project red


----------



## Kreij (Dec 17, 2011)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Pursue those that literally violate copyright law by creating, distibuting, and selling physical copies of software (prevelant in China).  Like forged books and works of art, people that buy those copies think they're legitimate but they're not.  This is a serious issue with movies.



They do that, Ford, but with the advent of wide spread, high-speed internet there is little need to own a physical copy any more.

You write fantastic utilities and have been making them available for free. Thank you.
Let's say you decided that you wanted to go commercial and make a living from your work.
You figure that if you sell 5000 copies at $10 each you can make $50K a year (a reasonable income).
Instead, 50 people buy your utility and 4950 people pirate it, so you only make $500.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't want to put my heart and soul into an application and end up eating catfood for the rest of my life.


----------



## garyinhere (Dec 17, 2011)

Kreij said:


> You write fantastic utilities and have been making them available for free. Thank you.
> Let's say you decided that you wanted to go commercial and make a living from your work.
> You figure that if you sell 5000 copies at $10 each you can make $50K a year (a reasonable income).
> Instead, 50 people buy your utility and 4950 people pirate it, so you only make $500.



Your reasoning would suggest that the owner of the media should be able to predict their future capital and be able to sue based on that? What if the media sucks and 10 people bought it and via word of mouth told others not too and then you have some that will stumble on it via torrent sites, try it, then delete it... Speculative markets are bad imo


----------



## MilkyWay (Dec 17, 2011)

Upwards of 4.5 million players pirated The Witcher 2 and only 1 million bought it. Speculative or not they have a right to protect their intellectual properties. The courts will decide in the end.

People dont bother pirating shit games. It was only £20 on preorder for the premium edition, hardly a massive price for such a good game.


----------



## erocker (Dec 17, 2011)

reverze said:


> they seud many people in germany for around 1000 euros for downloading the witcher, what a dickhead move.....



I would think it would be more fair if they sued each individual for the retail price of the game + legal fees.


----------



## Kreij (Dec 17, 2011)

garyinhere said:


> Your reasoning would suggest that the owner of the media should be able to predict their future capital and be able to sue based on that? What if the media sucks and 10 people bought it and via word of mouth told others not too and then you have some that will stumble on it via torrent sites, try it, then delete it... Speculative markets are bad imo



You make a very valid point, Gary.
But with market research and even minor demographic surveys you can at least get a feel for how your product is perceived, even though that may not directly relate to sales numbers.
When a new product is bound for the market, those kinds of numbers are all you have to try and estimate what you need to do to make it happen.
Releasing a demo can be an invaluable tool, but is not always an accurate gage of what will happen. Creating a demo means you walk a fine line between giving too much (demo is good don't need full version) and not enough (demo is too crippled not going to buy).

There is no simple solution and I honestly think that many of the game devs and publishers are trying just about anything they can think of. You will notice that a lot of the MMOs are going to a "Freemium" model. This is easiest described as an MMO demo. The players who become real fans will stay and buy into the game (through whatever revenue stream you are trying to generate).

You also see the "Idie Bundles". This does not make an indie developer diddly, but it gets their game and name out. This is a crap shoot for them in terms of any viable revenue.

In my opinion, what game companies need to do is a "shifting revenue" model. There is no reason that a company has to stick with a single method of generating income over the life of a product. You see this a lot in the movie industry (Theater release -> DVD -> Netflix -> general OTA viewing). As one model starts to decline, create a new one and keep your product as relevant as you can, for as long as you can.

Okay this really diverged from DRM to market analysis, but oh well. lol

As always, just my opinion.


----------



## reverze (Dec 17, 2011)

just wait tilla family member of yours get a letter in the mail to pay 1000 euros for downloading a game. But of course you need to respond "oh he/she deserves it" so you dont look weak. All that for copying a game.


----------



## Kreij (Dec 17, 2011)

erocker said:


> I would think it would be more fair if they sued each individual for the retail price of the game + legal fees.



$50 for the game and $950 for legal fees. Lawyers are crazy expensive. 



reverze said:


> just wait tilla family member of yours get a letter in the mail to pay 1000 euros for downloading a game. But of course you need to respond "oh he/she deserves it" so you dont look weak. All that for copying a game.



Maybe, just maybe, if we let our family members know that it's wrong to steal someone else's work they would never see that day, or that letter. A bit idealistic, but hey, that's me.


----------



## Black Hades (Dec 17, 2011)

I approve of this approach, fair retaliation against piracy.
I always buy the games that I like, I pirate those that have no replay value. Still I approve of CDProjeckt's sneak attack presuming no additional info is being harvested/abused.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 17, 2011)

Kreij said:


> Instead, 50 people buy your utility and 4950 people pirate it, so you only make $500.


I can't prove those 4950 pirated it and even if I could, only those 50 are customers.  I have to make the other 4950 _want_ to buy it if I want their business.  And maybe I can't.  In which case, I see it as charitable.  It doesn't mean they wouldn't buy it if they could, they just can't.  My objective as a developer/publisher is to remove as many barriers to purchase as reasonably possible (multiple languages, stores that deal with many currencies, support in multiple languages, etc.).  Where the cards fall is where they fall.

The only thing I take issue with is someone else making a profit off of my work without my consent.  They are literally stealing money from me.  It should be easy to figure out how much they stole and get the name of the individual(s) responsible and take them to court.


----------



## garyinhere (Dec 17, 2011)

Kreij said:


> In my opinion, what game companies need to do is a "shifting revenue" model. There is no reason that a company has to stick with a single method of generating income over the life of a product. You see this a lot in the movie industry (Theater release -> DVD -> Netflix -> general OTA viewing). As one model starts to decline, create a new one and keep your product as relevant as you can, for as long as you can.



My point wasn't necessarily market analysis but played a role in what I'm trying to say. When I use the term media I refer to Movies/Games/Music but not software. The music industry was corrupt and napster made it more legit. Their are high paid lobbyist keeping any innovation or improvements to the movie industries distributing methods for fear of bankrupting a few theaters and rental companies. A time will come when you can choose to watch a new release at a theater, in your home via computer, or in your home via renting all at the same time. Instead of waiting for the theater release, then the rental release, then the web release. This is being blocked. A new movie was coming out recently and they were going to offer it simultaneously for paid download but the theater's said they would not carry the movie if they did that. Corruption. Any form of this won't go to the Supreme court because it's not illegal. Maybe money is lost due to the sharing but nothing is stolen. Loss of money is purely a civil issue. This is why there is a big push for all of the "monitoring the webs" bills that are trying to get pushed through. How can TimeWarner tell my ISP to shut me down? There is no right answer for any of it and no budging from the Corporate guys so it will end like the Music industry imo. Cheap music faster. Gaming is a little different though. If you don't like the DRM the answer is don't buy the game. Simple. Games are way under priced as it is. I remember buying SNES games for $60 USD and prices have not changed.


----------



## Kreij (Dec 17, 2011)

garyinhere said:


> A new movie was coming out recently and they were going to offer it simultaneously for paid download but the theater's said they would not carry the movie if they did that. Corruption.



Corruption or self-preservation? How would you feel about this if you were a theater owner and knew eveyone could get it the same day in their homes on their now dirt cheap giant flat-screen televisions? 
Why would anyone come to your theater (and buy your overpriced popcorn and soft drinks)?


----------



## reverze (Dec 17, 2011)

Kreij said:


> $50 for the game and $950 for legal fees. Lawyers are crazy expensive.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe, just maybe, if we let our family members know that it's wrong to steal someone else's work they would never see that day, or that letter. A bit idealistic, but hey, that's me.



they copied, didnt steal.


----------



## pr0n Inspector (Dec 17, 2011)

purecain said:


> i wont be supporting this company if they continue down this road....
> 
> we've already covered this subject across the net...
> 
> ...



People with no free money should not be able to enjoy luxuries such as video games for free just because they want to. It's one of the  incentives that make people work harder and get a bettre job. Take a walk in the park instead. Life is not incomplete without Fus Ro Dah.


----------



## JustaTinkerer (Dec 17, 2011)

*Guess this is my final entry.*

NM wrong bit lol


----------



## Mistral (Dec 18, 2011)

Let me start by saying that the Witcher 2 is a freaking awesome game, probably my favourite adventure/RPG of the year.

As for how they are tracking people, my bet would be on the Arena minigame that got introduced with one of the many free-content adding patches. If you have a pirated copy, give the minigame a try and afterwards think about the way it works. Post back if you think I'm correct.


----------



## burtram (Dec 18, 2011)

All this does for me, is tell me not to buy the game until it's stupid cheap on steam, like I did for the first game (got it for like, $5 or less). Assuming I even care to bother...


----------



## qubit (Dec 18, 2011)

Mistral said:


> Let me start by saying that the Witcher 2 is a freaking awesome game, probably my favourite adventure/RPG of the year.
> 
> As for how they are tracking people, my bet would be on the Arena minigame that got introduced with one of the many free-content adding patches. If you have a pirated copy, give the minigame a try and afterwards think about the way it works. Post back if you think I'm correct.



I don't have the game and don't intend on getting it (doesn't appeal to me, regardless of the company's policies) and I'd be interested to know in what way this minigame gives things away. Feel free to reply in PM if you don't want to answer this one in public - your info will stay confidential with me.


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 18, 2011)

Piracy will always be an issue.  But I am not convinced that making a game un-piratable will boost sales.  Just because someone can't pirate a game doesnt mean they will buy it.

But putting shitty DRM on a product will almost always guarantee a loss in sales, especially once its exposed on the web.  Then again, maybe there is something I dont know and there is rampant piracy in europe.

Either way I am not buying this game.


----------



## digibucc (Dec 18, 2011)

sorry phan but that's ridiculous imo. how is it shitty drm if it doesn't affect legitimate buyers? say what you want about the methods but until we know more, i think you are being irrational. and let's be honest, the game came out 7 months ago - if you were GOING to buy it, chances are you would have.

that doesn't mean you would NEVER have bought it, but simply that it was up to chance. if the price went down, if you had money, if you caught a sale, etc. I really don't see this hurting their bottom line like... at all.


----------



## 3volvedcombat (Dec 18, 2011)

Good that they are catching the pirates for there bad doing. 

If anybody says they need to try it before you buy it, your *mistaken* 

There are more reviews on blockbuster game titles then their are with gaming enthusiast technology.
You read all the reviews, wait for some you-tube video's, do a little Google searching and figure out all the information you need to make *A Decision*

Ludicrous Bullshit for the "Download and play then buy" Bullshit. It does not work unless your dealing with drugs or big ticket items supervised by professionals. 

PC games get very cheap, Even a poor man can rustle up enough money to buy a 20-30$ title. 

Argument about feeding children and keeping a lively hood fly's out the WINDOW. Why? They should not be concentrating nor being involved in a video game that is expensive, because if they are, their priority needs to change. There are cheaper/affordable enjoyable titles of the same statue. 

It no big deal. 

This is no DRM, I does not affect a user who has bought the title legally, It will not affect the game-play in any way, It will not affect anybody that is a loyal person about getting a product. No other way to argue about it.


----------



## Nyte (Dec 18, 2011)

This is a very poorly written opinionated news posting.

I work in the tech industry with very close ties to gaming companies and I assure you, piracy DOES eat into the bottom-line.  Maybe not in extreme examples like MW3, but indy developers get hit the hardest.

So rather then be all liberal and hippie-like by "rebelling" against authority, how about you just submit to harmless monitoring where the gathered information will be used for the greater good.  Contrary to hippie/conspiracy/liberal beliefs, them gathering whatever information they have on you will NOT be sold off or used in negative ways.  Instead of me proving that statement right, I'd like you to prove me wrong.

You might as well throw away your credit cards, your cellphones, your TV, and basically all electronic devices.  Because while you still cower within your tech bubble (except for gaming), YOU are STILL being monitored.  Can't handle that?  Go move to your own island where you can make up your own laws where you become your own authority.


----------



## Nyte (Dec 18, 2011)

reverze said:


> they copied, didnt steal.



How would you feel if I copied your school paper that you worked 50 hours on?  Takes me 1 hour to copy it and then I go party and get laid while you are resting after all that work.

WHY is it ALWAYS the EUROPEANS that are AGAINST anti-PIRACY??? WHY???


----------



## qubit (Dec 18, 2011)

Nyte said:


> This is a very poorly written opinionated news posting.



In _your_ opinion, of course.  Don't worry, I didn't take any offense. 



Nyte said:


> I work in the tech industry with very close ties to gaming companies and I assure you, piracy DOES eat into the bottom-line. *Maybe not in extreme examples like MW3*, but indy developers get hit the hardest.



MW3 broke all sales records and blew away Hollywood as a money-making machine. Don't tell me that sales "OMG would have been even better!!" without "piracy".  If piracy was such a problem, then everyone would be getting their dodgy copy and Activision wouldn't have any sales.

Oh and reverze is right. Copying is _not_ stealing. It's an _infringement_, as the original owner still has their copy. Big difference.

Finally, you may want to merge your two posts into one, as the forum rules don't allow for double posts.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

note to self: pirate next witcher 2 dlc > laugh mechanically > stop laughing after finding out I wasted 10 min of my time downloading some re-textured and retooled model  masquerading as new content > proceed to delete either game and play something else 

I don't accept  ANY governments written laws regarding the internet  

the internet shall always follow the 3 r's
no rights
no rules 
no regulation 
.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 18, 2011)

all pirates should die in a fire. yarggg! raise the mast and fetch the boys, matey! swab the poop deck!!!! yarg!!! 

i mean seriously, go die already you fools.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

Easy Rhino said:


> all pirates should die in a fire. yarggg! raise the mast and fetch the boys, matey! swab the poop deck!!!! yarg!!!
> 
> i mean seriously, go die already you fools.



ill think of you the next time I pirate something AVAST YE HADTYS WE BE GOING DOWN THEN WE GOING DOWN FIGHTHING
the seas of change are unforgiving big content and giant software publishers are being replaced / forced out and there is no stopping it 
resist they will win in the end we will 
 gg


----------



## AsRock (Dec 18, 2011)

Drone said:


> I don't condone piracy but I also hate dirty tricks with tracking and all that crap. I also hate when someone says "we're 100% sure" and all that bullcrap.



Neither do i and i don't see a dirty trick in fact they should of kept their mouths shut about it because of people with your opinions.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

AsRock said:


> Neither do i and i don't see a dirty trick in fact they should of kept their mouths shut about it because of people with your opinions.


for the sake of just because I have the time ill attempt to recite the pre-writen reply from a self admitted pirate ..... not that it will change anything ...
you use the word "condone' like "sharing" or as called by the people that claim to be righteously driven  call it "piracy". is wrong 
people have been _sharing_ for just as long as copyrights and the selling of goods for monetary gain have existed  and people will always buy what they feel is worth there cash even if there are "free" alternatives or non-legal alternatives this is a FACT 

if you could magically control all the traffic in the world and 'stop' the sharing of games and music  and movies you would NOT see a sudden jump in sales what would be very likely is that there would be little change for the first few months followed by a slow decline  and eventually down to sub 1990's revenue.
simply because the consumers "exposure' to said products would be even more limited  you CAN NOT FORCE SOMEONE TO BUY SOMETHING Simply by removing ANY other alternatives its not possible MANY people have tried over the century and with little to no success.
even if said person _wants_ said product if they don't have the money for it IT will not be bought PERIOD How ever if it could be found for free or created by ones self ... it will still exist .... and most of the time when you drive someone to find "another way" the end result is the _best way_
examples
RADIO
TV 
the internet
???????


----------



## reverze (Dec 18, 2011)

Nyte said:


> How would you feel if I copied your school paper that you worked 50 hours on?  Takes me 1 hour to copy it and then I go party and get laid while you are resting after all that work.
> 
> WHY is it ALWAYS the EUROPEANS that are AGAINST anti-PIRACY??? WHY???



thanks for confirming its copying, not stealing


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

Nyte said:


> How would you feel if I copied your school paper that you worked 50 hours on?  Takes me 1 hour to copy it and then I go party and get laid while you are resting after all that work.
> 
> WHY is it ALWAYS the EUROPEANS that are AGAINST anti-PIRACY??? WHY???



I would't much care very poor example you got there ......


----------



## Kreij (Dec 18, 2011)

reverze said:


> thanks for confirming its copying, not stealing



So if I hack into a few servers and get all your personal data like name, address, credit card info, social security numbers, family members, etc. and "copy" your identity for my own perosnal use it's all okay because it's not "identity theft" it's just "identity copying"?


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

Kreij said:


> So if I hack into a few servers and get all your personal data like name, address, credit card info, social security numbers, family members, etc. and "copy" your identity for my own perosnal use it's all okay because it's not "identity theft" it's just "identity copying"?



valid argument wrong subject to use it on 
that would be "stealing" because the original would be damaged or lost


----------



## erocker (Dec 18, 2011)

reverze said:


> thanks for confirming its copying, not stealing



Copying is stealing. It's not very hard to understand.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> Copying is stealing. It's not very hard to understand.



wrong on so many levels its not worth the effort to re:explain it


----------



## erocker (Dec 18, 2011)

OneMoar said:


> wrong on so many levels its not worth the effort to re:explain it



I'll just say that any effort in which you try to re:explain it is wrong.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> I'll just say that any effort in which you try to re:explain it is wrong.



since you have yet to explain your pov while I explained mine I am going to write you off and ignorant of the subject matter


----------



## Kreij (Dec 18, 2011)

OneMoar said:


> valid argument wrong subject to use it on
> that would be "stealing" because the original would be damaged or lost



Not necessarily. I could use your identity in a manner that would cause you no loss or damage. In this case it would be considered fraud, but the point is still valid.
If you copy something that someone never inteded for you to do so, or exppected payment for the use of their work, there is no justification for it.


----------



## erocker (Dec 18, 2011)

OneMoar said:


> since you have yet to explain your pov while I explained mine I am going to write you off and ignorant of the subject matter



Your thoughts on my thoughts on the matter of are no consequence or concern to me.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> Your thoughts on my thoughts on the matter of are no consequence or concern to me.



and neither are yours so I guss we are at a impasse O well



Kreij said:


> Not necessarily. I could use your identity in a manner that would cause you no loss or damage. In this case it would be considered fraud, but the point is still valid.
> If you copy something that someone never inteded for you to do so, or exppected payment for the use of their work, there is no justification for it.


and if I had no intention of paying for it anyway ???? what then ... I ask you
there is the problem with the whole argument  just because I GOT it for free does not mean I was ever willing to buy it
in short of COPYING it would have never been bought and said person would had never been paid in the first place so if I decide to make my own beer does that mean I am accountable for anheuser busch's lost sale  ?


----------



## Maelstrom (Dec 18, 2011)

qubit said:


> Oh and reverze is right. Copying is _not_ stealing. It's an _infringement_, as the original owner still has their copy. Big difference.



Outside of lawmaking, why the hell does it even matter? In the situation we're discussing, someone is still obtaining a product for free by circumventing the system. That is illegal and I hope these pirates get caught.

Also (not directed to you qubit), I love when people are like "people are always going to pirate so what's the point of trying to stop it?", so does that mean we shouldn't do anything? With that attitude, lets get rid of all laws because people are still going to murder, steal, etc. Yes, wouldn't that be great? 

*Note: I'm not up for extreme DRM that hurts legit consumers more than pirates, but there's got to be someway to attempt to stop pirate without hurting paying consumers.*


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 18, 2011)

OneMoar said:


> ill think of you the next time I pirate something AVAST YE HADTYS WE BE GOING DOWN THEN WE GOING DOWN FIGHTHING
> the seas of change are unforgiving big content and giant software publishers are being replaced / forced out and there is no stopping it
> resist they will win in the end we will
> gg



you do realize if everyone believed what you did then there would be no video games? have fun playing with your small pecker then...


----------



## digibucc (Dec 18, 2011)

Kreij said:


> So if I hack into a few servers and get all your personal data like name, address, credit card info, social security numbers, family members, etc. and "copy" your identity for my own perosnal use it's all okay because it's not "identity theft" it's just "identity copying"?



it's not the fact that the information was copied, but how it is used that makes it theft. the initial action in itself, though illegal as it infringes on another's rights, is not actually theft. the illegality is in how you obtain the information and what you do with it. ie stealing trash/hacking and buying crap/opening credit accounts.



erocker said:


> Copying is stealing. It's not very hard to understand.



do we need the picture ?






don't get me wrong, i don't pirate. i support companies i appreciate and if anything am guilty of supporting companies i shouldn't have. but that doesn't mean it's as simple as "pirates are thieves. period."  sure it's wrong, but the effect is debatable and the extent to which devs/pubs go to prevent it borders on unreasonable.imo.

and i personally don't believe for a minute that there is a hard line correlation between piracy and sales, and i believe that devs would like to see the pc as restricted as consoles, and if we let them go each step further without any of us speaking up, they will get their way.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

Easy Rhino said:


> you do realize if everyone believed what you did then there would be no video games? have fun playing with your small pecker then...



as much as some people would like to make you believe otherwise that would never be the case
for every one person not willing to buy something there is always someone that would
lets take a hypothetical walk for a moment 
say everyone one in the entire world stopped buying games music software whatever ? would that put a stop to the creation of said items no 
time and time again the above has happened for one reason or another and time and time again art and music and written language have thrived anyway  but for the sake of this stroll down hypothetical lane lets say EA and blizzard stopped producing games because there was no profit in it ?  would the medium simply die or would it evolve into something else ?


----------



## SirMango (Dec 18, 2011)

There's a huge thread about this on GOG.com's forums if anyone is up for a good and long read.

http://www.gog.com/en/forum/general/cd_projekt_red_goes_after_file_sharers_riaa_mpaa_style/page1


----------



## erocker (Dec 18, 2011)

digibucc said:


> it's not the fact that the information was copied, but how it is used that makes it theft. the initial action in itself, though illegal as it infringes on another's rights, is not actually theft. the illegality is in how you obtain the information and what you do with it. ie stealing trash/hacking and buying crap/opening credit accounts.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No, I don't need a picture. This picture reflects my thinking on this:


----------



## Kreij (Dec 18, 2011)

Ahhh ... a piracy thread on the weekend at TPU and one started by a great article posted by our infamous Qubit.

Life really doesn't get any better than this. 
If eveyone keeps it civil, I don't think we'll get taken down.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> No, I don't need a picture. This picture reflects my thinking on this:
> 
> http://i403.photobucket.com/albums/pp112/erocker414/piracy-is-not-theftcopy.jpg



if you are not going to be contributory to the thread then you do not need to be posting here 
I don't care who you are
one of the things that disgust me are people that repeat there opinions over and over and over without thinking logically or bothering to explain there thought process


----------



## erocker (Dec 18, 2011)

OneMoar said:


> if you are not going to be contributory to the thread then you do not need to be posting here
> I don't care who you are



Because I have a differing opinon that you don't agree with? No, I will be posting here. I hope you are disgusted, theft disgusts me.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> Because I have a differing opinon that you don't agree with? No, I will be posting here. I hope you are disgusted, theft disgusts me.



no because you are spaming over and over and over piracy is bad piracy is evil pirates should be burnt at the stake AND NOT explain  WHY you believe this is so with such conviction  
maby its because you feel its simply not worth the effort ? but then again why post at all
OR maby its because you are worried me might drag you into a long discussion at the end of witch you end up questioning your original position
threads like this have a tendency to make people sit and think ... something I do enjoy from time to time ....


----------



## Kreij (Dec 18, 2011)

It's really a bad example to equate the theft of a physical object with the theft of a virtual one.
True you are not "stealing" the original, but you are depriving someone of the right to gain monetary compensation for their work.

We will offically stop calling it "stealing" and hence forth call it "purposeful monetary compensation deprivation". Which is still wrong.


----------



## qubit (Dec 18, 2011)

Maelstrom said:


> Outside of lawmaking, why the hell does it even matter? In the situation we're discussing, someone is still obtaining a product for free by circumventing the system. That is illegal and I hope these pirates get caught.



Oh, it matters all right, because it's assumed that copying the game/movie/song/whatever is "stealing" that intangible product and that therefore the creator has lost money. It frankly isn't stealing, it's copying since the creator still has their product and it's not true that it automatically leads to lost sales. That's the big lie that big content foist on us to push for draconian totallitarian control of the internet and our lives, all in order to keep their f* obsolete business models alive. Man I hate the bastards for this.  It's indeed illegal to make these copies, but look at who drew up these laws in the first place. It's always powerful interests manipulating politicians into screwing over the litle guy.



Maelstrom said:


> Also (not directed to you qubit), I love when people are like "people are always going to pirate so what's the point of trying to stop it?", so does that mean we shouldn't do anything? With that attitude, lets get rid of all laws because people are still going to murder, steal, etc. Yes, wouldn't that be great?
> 
> *Note: I'm not up for extreme DRM that hurts legit consumers more than pirates, but there's got to be someway to attempt to stop pirate without hurting paying consumers.*



As Valve's Gabe Newell (Half-life, Portal, Steam etc) said a while back "Pirates are underserved customers". He's got a point. There are quite a few reasons for copying, but the fact is that people will still buy your product even if lots of people copy it. A really good example are the DRM-free songs on iTunes. There's no toy "Fairplay" [sic] DRM on there any more to stop you sticking it on The Pirate Bay (it's only a search engine that _links_ remember, another big difference) yet the market is vibrant and healthy. AFAIK sales actually increased after music went DRM-free - a rather inconvenient fact staring Big Media in the face that they don't like to acknowledge. So, WTF is all this BS with three strikes, SOPA and the rest of it that they're foisting on us? It's all about total control of the internet, nothing more, nothing less. Just another form of oppression that must be faught and stopped. Shit, I should be a freedom fighter, lol.


----------



## pantherx12 (Dec 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> Copying is stealing. It's not very hard to understand.



I can appreciate that perhaps morally you feel they are on the same level.

But the same?

Not by dictionary definitions or legal definitions.

That's why when you copy something in an illegal way you don't get arrested for theft.


"True you are not "stealing" the original, but you are depriving someone of the right to gain monetary compensation for their work."

Ahh, I guess this is why people have such varied opinions on this, for example if I had intellectual property and someone simply used it/ copied it even though I could make money from it, I wouldn;t be fussed.

I would be fussed if they made money from my hard work though.

Private use though, why would I care? Honestly to me it would not make sense too, hell how would I even know someone was using it if they only copied it?


----------



## digibucc (Dec 18, 2011)

and here is the obligatory dictionary quote:


> Definition of THEFT
> 
> 1
> a : the act of stealing; specifically : the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it



i get your point erocker, but i am very specific about language. it's a bad thing, it's wrong, it hurts the creator - i agree. but it is not _THEFT_. it's a very specific term with a specific meaning. the stigma that goes with it is the only reason you or anyone else wants to associate it with piracy. well it's unnecessary. piracy is bad, theft is bad. they are not the same thing.




OneMoar said:


> threads like this have a tendency to make people sit and think ... something I do enjoy from time to time ....


no they don't. threads like this give us all a chance to repeat our POV and feel righteously correct in our views. no one questions themselves though, ever.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 18, 2011)

In my opinion, this boils down to taking something for nothing. I don't see any moral difference between pirating a game and taking something from the shelf on a store. I am far from the richest person here, and there are more games I want to play than I can list, but I don't feel entitled to take copies just because they are there.


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

qubit said:


> "Pirates are underserved customers". He's got a point.



Agreed. I'm only willing to buy, in cash, games at $15 MAX. They rarely do so however. Or if they do, they're already 4 years old.


----------



## pantherx12 (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> In my opinion, this boils down to taking something for nothing. I don't see any moral difference between pirating a game and taking something from the shelf on a store. I am far from the richest person here, and there are more games I want to play than I can list, but I don't feel entitled to take copies just because they are there.



I don't see a moral difference between rape and murder and yet I can clearly tell they are different things 

Sorry for the extreme example but I am honestly and shocked that people let their morals group things.


----------



## erocker (Dec 18, 2011)

OneMoar said:


> no because you are spaming over and over and over piracy is bad piracy is evil pirates should be burnt at the stake AND NOT explain  WHY you believe this is so with such conviction
> maby its because you feel its simply not worth the effort ? but then again why post at all
> OR maby its because you are worried me might drag you into a long discussion at the end of witch you end up questioning your original position
> threads like this have a tendency to make people sit and think ... something I do enjoy from time to time ....



I've listended to more BS on this subject possibly before you learned to read. I'll give you this post:

I have a product be it digital or otherwise. I sell the product for a fee to make a means. The product would not exist if it were not for me, I own the product. Taking this product for any reason or means withot paying the fee for the product that I own is theft. You do not deserve my product, you didn't make my product, you are stealing my product. If I have software that I made and own, when you purchase my software you now own the software but are prohibited in selling or giving my software to anyone else under the thing callled a "terms of service" which any original owner of something would clearly have. Pirating is theft. 

Argue with me all you want. I'll have something to back up my claims. It will go on forever, and that's why I usually post in these threads "half assed" as you would call it. I'm pretty firm in my stance here, there is always a grey area, but I'm not talking abouut grey areas as a majority of the issue is clear cut.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 18, 2011)

digibucc said:


> and here is the obligatory dictionary quote:
> 
> 
> i get your point erocker, but i am very specific about language. it's a bad thing, it's wrong, it hurts the creator - i agree. but it is not _THEFT_. it's a very specific term with a specific meaning. the stigma that goes with it is the only reason you or anyone else wants to associate it with piracy. well it's unnecessary. piracy is bad, theft is bad. they are not the same thing.
> ...



How well do you think that argument would hold up in court if you got busted? I personally don't see it holding up too well.



pantherx12 said:


> I don't see a moral difference between rape and murder and yet I can clearly tell they are different things
> 
> Sorry for the extreme example but I am honestly and shocked that people let their morals group things.



And I'm surprised that people don't have any. Off topic, but I believe both rape and murder should be punishable by death. I'm sure you don't agree with me there either.


----------



## pantherx12 (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> How well do you think that argument would hold up in court if you got busted? I personally don't see it holding up too well.



It would hold up perfectly, hence people being charged for copyright and not for theft 

At the end of the day, I think this all comes down to misuse of language.

Theft like others have said is a very specific thing.


----------



## digibucc (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> How well do you think that argument would hold up in court if you got busted? I personally don't see it holding up too well.



what are you talking about?

a)i don't pirate.
b)i said piracy is bad, it's just not theft.
c)i'd be in trouble, for copyright infringement. for piracy, but not for larceny or theft. because it is not theft.




pantherx12 said:


> It would hold up perfectly, hence people being charged for copyright and not for theft



great minds huh  beat me by seconds!!!




Damn_Smooth said:


> And I'm surprised that people don't have any. Off topic, but I believe both rape and murder should be punishable by death. I'm sure you don't agree with me there either.


the fact that our stance on the use of language makes you think you have any knowledge of where we stand morally or ethically makes me think less of you as a person.


----------



## garyinhere (Dec 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> I've listended to more BS on this subject possibly before you learned to read. I'll give you this post:
> 
> I have a product be it digital or otherwise. I sell the product for a fee to make a means. The product would not exist if it were not for me, I own the product. Taking this product for any reason or means withot paying the fee for the product that I own is theft. You do not deserve my product, you didn't make my product, you are stealing my product. If I have software that I made and own, when you purchase my software you now own the software but are prohibited in selling or giving my software to anyone else under the thing callled a "terms of service" which any original owner of something would clearly have. Pirating is theft.
> 
> Argue with me all you want. I'll have something to back up my claims. It will go on forever, and that's why I usually post in these threads "half assed" as you would call it. I'm pretty firm in my stance here, there is always a grey area, but I'm not talking abouut grey areas as a majority of the issue is clear cut.



If it's theft why is it legal?


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> If I have software that I made and own, when you purchase my software you now own the software but are prohibited in selling or giving my software to anyone else under the thing callled a "terms of service" which any original owner of something would clearly have. Pirating is theft.



That's with YOUR software example. Almost all games right now just gives you "access" to the software. So technically you can't "steal" access.


----------



## erocker (Dec 18, 2011)

dictionary said:
			
		

> the act of stealing; specifically : the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it



Okay, let's look at this definition. If the personal property is the ownned digital work of the creator, made to generate money, the theif is depriving the owner of that income thus, stealing.


----------



## garyinhere (Dec 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> Okay, let's look at this definition. If the personal property is the ownned digital work of the creator, made to generate money, the theif is depriving the owner of that income thus, stealing.



You mean assumed income... who decides what this number should be?


----------



## pantherx12 (Dec 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> Okay, let's look at this definition. If the personal property is the ownned digital work of the creator, made to generate money, the theif is depriving the owner of that income thus, stealing.



Unfortunately that is not the case though, if someone pirates your theoretical software do you think they would of been a customer if they didn't pirate it?

Short answer is no  If people couldn't pirate something they wanted, they would go with out.



It is not like taking a physical object where you can no longer sell said object and thus lost a sale, even if a billion people pirate your software you can still sell just as many.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

that would only apply if you could prove If one had the INTENTION to pay for said object
IE "purposeful" 
there is 'content' I would never buy because its either 
a: costs to much for the amount of use I would get out of it
b: does not interest me enough for me to take a risk and buy it without knowing exactly what it is 
but: given the ability to download a copy and run it and see if it is something I might enjoy or use of course I will take the _low risk_ option and this is where the second part of the counter piracy argument usually rears its ugly head I have downloaded said software or game and I liked it does this mean I would buy now that I got my use out of it ??? 
well thats something one needs to decided based on there own moral code ...
if I really enjoy a bit of software I buy it ... 

this would be a totally different subject matter if I was allowed to return a game I didn't like ( in most cases you can return a dvd or a music disk ) but as for software and games no not so and so this little viscous circled started WAAAAAAAAAAAAY back in the day when people where swapping programs with disks and sharing software and games before the advent of Cdkeys and such 
and the cdkeys and such are the the very reason why we are not allowed to return goods we ( the consumer)  feel are not of sufficient  quality or of use


----------



## Kreij (Dec 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> Okay, let's look at this definition. If the personal property is the ownned digital work of the creator, made to generate money, the theif is depriving the owner of that income thus, stealing.



Hey ... that's what I said in post #84. Are you stealing my lines?


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> Okay, let's look at this definition. If the personal property is the ownned digital work of the creator, made to generate money, the theif (sic) is depriving the owner of that income thus, stealing.



So now income is predetermined already...? 

You sound like the RIAA now, where they have claimed that because of Limewire they lost their "potential" income which is 6x the total amount of money in the whole world.


----------



## erocker (Dec 18, 2011)

garyinhere said:


> If it's theft why is it legal?



Because of people with different opinions. I'm no lawyer... Maybe that's why I loathe these discussions.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 18, 2011)

digibucc said:


> what are you talking about?
> 
> a)i don't pirate.
> b)i said piracy is bad, it's just not theft.
> ...



Your opinions of me don't concern me in the least. Copyright infringement is basically another term for theft. Is it legal to pirate games? Is it not punishable by law? I know that I can't convince you not to pirate them, but on the other hand, you will not convince me to be ok with it. I don't know why people think they should be able to take things that they didn't earn. I guess that's just me.


----------



## garyinhere (Dec 18, 2011)

I torrent... except for affordable non overpriced software and games... those are the only two things i don't torrent.

How many of you paid the artist or the photographer royalties to use your avatars... Enough said


----------



## Kreij (Dec 18, 2011)

Someday before I die, I would like to get all the TPU'ers together in a hall we rented out exclusivley (with open bar of course) to discuss piracy.
I just can't think of anything that would be more entertaining and a once in a lifetime event.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> Okay, let's look at this definition. If the personal property is the ownned digital work of the creator, made to generate money, the theif is depriving the owner of that income thus, stealing.



again ill quote my own post here 
if I make my own beer that tastes as good as budwiser and all my friends drink my beer and not bud-wiser does that make me a thief ? 
if I "copy" the process of beer making from a tv show I on the history channel about anheuser busch does that make me infringement on anheuser Busch's copy rights ? what if one of my friends has never had a anheuser busch products and after tasting mine decides he will buy a case of Budweiser for his next party ? what then
copy != loss 
cut and paste = loss


----------



## digibucc (Dec 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> Okay, let's look at this definition. If the personal property is the ownned digital work of the creator, made to generate money, the theif is depriving the owner of that income thus, stealing.



the act of stealing; specifically : the felonious *taking *and *removing *of personal property with *intent to deprive the rightful owner of it*

you are not being deprived of your property. you are _possibly_ being deprived of monetary gain said property _may _afford you, but that is not definite and can not be assumed. and even if they could they are not stealing the money itself, and so it's not theft.

i'm not trying to lessen it's impact here. it's bad. maybe there's not a good enough word for it, but it very specifically is not theft.


----------



## Maelstrom (Dec 18, 2011)

qubit said:


> Oh, it matters all right, because it's assumed that copying the game/movie/song/whatever is "stealing" that intangible product and that therefore the creator has lost money. It frankly isn't stealing, it's copying since the creator still has their product and it's not true that it automatically leads to lost sales. That's the big lie that big content foist on us to push for draconian totallitarian control of the internet and our lives, all in order to keep their f* obsolete business models alive. Man I hate the bastards for this.  *It's indeed illegal to make these copies, but look at who drew up these laws in the first place. It's always powerful interests manipulating politicians into screwing over the litle guy*.


While I hate draconian DRM almost as much as you, I have no problem with the bold part (well not the manipulation and screwing us over, but the idea that it is illegal ). And I see you're trying to get at, but ultimately whatever you call it, pirates are still obtaining a product that in a perfect system they wouldn't be able to get without purchasing it or knowing someone in person who has it. Even if they were never going to buy it, that doesn't give them the pass to do whatever they want.




qubit said:


> As Valve's Gabe Newell (Half-life, Portal, Steam etc) said a while back "Pirates are underserved customers". He's got a point. There are quite a few reasons for copying, but the fact is that people will still buy your product even if lots of people copy it. A really good example are the DRM-free songs on iTunes. There's no toy "Fairplay" [sic] DRM on there any more to stop you sticking it on The Pirate Bay (it's only a search engine that _links_ remember, another big difference) yet the market is vibrant and healthy. AFAIK sales actually increased after music went DRM-free - a rather inconvenient fact staring Big Media in the face that they don't like to acknowledge. So, WTF is all this BS with three strikes, SOPA and the rest of it that they're foisting on us? It's all about total control of the internet, nothing more, nothing less. Just another form of oppression that must be faught and stopped. Shit, I should be a freedom fighter, lol.



You make a good point, and one that I agree with to an extent, but I will not acknowledge the idea to just give up on trying to stop rampant pirates (the type who will always pirate no matter what). They don't deserve the product and they should be punished for bypassing the system.


----------



## digibucc (Dec 18, 2011)

OneMoar said:


> again ill quote my own post here
> *a)*if I make my own beer that tastes as good as budwiser and all my friends drink my beer and not bud-wiser does that make me a thief ?
> *b)*if I "copy" the process of beer making from a tv show I on the history channel about anheuser busch does that make me infringement on anheuser Busch's copy rights ?
> *c)*what if one of my friends has never had a anheuser busch products and after tasting mine decides he will buy a case of Budweiser for his next party ? what then



a)no
b)yes
c)budweiser gets a sale, and you still broke the law.

it's really very simple. the ethics of it can all be argued, but if your intent is to get one over, you're in the wrong. if your intent is simply to make the best brew possible, you wouldn't be copying their brew anyway so no worries


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

Based on the very few information I did get before, at least one of the "scene" groups for games is based in Eastern Europe. So I guess the only way for them to stop is if the United States (or the West in general) invades Eastern Europe.


----------



## erocker (Dec 18, 2011)

OneMoar said:


> again ill quote my own post here
> if I make my own beer that tastes as good as budwiser and all my friends drink my beer and not bud-wiser does that make me a thief ?
> if I "copy" the process of beer making from a tv show I on the history channel about anheuser busch does that make me infringement on anheuser Busch's copy rights ? what if one of my friends has never had a anheuser busch products and after tasting mine decides he will buy a case of Budweiser for his next party ? what then



These kind of beer companies don't let their recipe out nor do they condone selling their or your "copy" beer under their name. Of course you can homebrew a beer that tastes like Bud and give it or sell it to your friends.

So the theft part:

Stealing Budweisers name
Stealing their recipe

Everythnig else is legit. You (hopefully) bought/made the equipment, ingredients and put the work into making your beer that tastes like Budweiser. It would be legitmate.


----------



## garyinhere (Dec 18, 2011)

OneMoar said:


> again ill quote my own post here
> if I make my own beer that tastes as good as budwiser and all my friends drink my beer and not bud-wiser does that make me a thief ?
> if I "copy" the process of beer making from a tv show I on the history channel about anheuser busch does that make me infringement on anheuser Busch's copy rights ? what if one of my friends has never had a anheuser busch products and after tasting mine decides he will buy a case of Budweiser for his next party ? what then
> copy != loss
> cut and paste = loss





erocker said:


> These kind of beer companies don't let their recipe out nor do they condone selling their or your "copy" beer under their name. Of course you can homebrew a beer that tastes like Bud and give it or sell it to your friends.
> 
> So the theft part:
> 
> ...



Don't sweat him. His curfew is about to hit and his mom will make him go to bed kid prob only tasted beer when he was at the Sanduski camp learning how to handle balls.


----------



## pantherx12 (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> Copyright infringement is basically another term for theft. Is it legal to pirate games? Is it not punishable by law?




No it is not, it isn't at all. 

Yes they both involve having something that you should not, but that does not make them the same. This is precisely why they have different terms.

Also pirating games is a Gray area they downloading of the content it's self a lot of the time is not considered a crime in it's self.

Hell there is countries that is NEVER considered illegal  

It's the distribution that is illegal as well as profiting from the copied software/art.


----------



## erocker (Dec 18, 2011)

digibucc said:


> the act of stealing; specifically : the felonious *taking *and *removing *of personal property with *intent to deprive the rightful owner of it*
> 
> you are not being deprived of your property. you are _possibly_ being deprived of monetary gain said property _may _afford you, but that is not definite and can not be assumed. and even if they could they are not stealing the money itself, and so it's not theft.
> 
> i'm not trying to lessen it's impact here. it's bad. maybe there's not a good enough word for it, but it very specifically is not theft.



Again, I'm no lawyer but in the definition of property we find this:



> something to which a person or business has a legal title



Developers have legal titles to digital software. Taking it is theft.


----------



## qubit (Dec 18, 2011)

Maelstrom said:


> While I hate draconian DRM almost as much as you, I have no problem with the bold part (well not the manipulation and screwing us over, but the idea that it is illegal ). And I see you're trying to get at, but ultimately whatever you call it, pirates are still obtaining a product that in a perfect system they wouldn't be able to get without purchasing it or knowing someone in person who has it. Even if they were never going to buy it, that doesn't give them the pass to do whatever they want.



Yes, in other words, the _morality_ of copying is questionable - I agree, it's certainly iffy (but can have its justifications) and I forgot to make that point.  Of course, Big Media can't make any money or pass any laws on a morality argument, so they invent bogus loss figures to justify their actions.



Maelstrom said:


> You make a good point, and one that I agree with to an extent, but I will not acknowledge the idea to just give up on trying to stop rampant pirates (the type who will always pirate no matter what). They don't deserve the product and they should be punished for bypassing the system.



Completely stopping it shouldn't be the ultimate goal. Offering customers a better product by going legit is the way to go, which would reduce it markedly. Once again, all those DRM-free songs selling well on iTunes are a terribly inconvenient truth to Big Music.

Again, www.techdirt.com says all this stuff much better than I can.


----------



## pantherx12 (Dec 18, 2011)

By the way folks, move to Canada or The Netherlands where you can download music freely so long as you don't sell it.

I imagine the same applies to other digital files but I will look into it.


----------



## digibucc (Dec 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> Again, I'm no lawyer but in the definition of property we find this:
> 
> 
> 
> Developers have legal titles to digital software. Taking it is theft.



right but as i bolded, the removal with intent to deprive the rightful owner. it's not removed. they are not deprived of the title. they own it, and still possess it. nothing was technically stolen.

i realize i am being very technical, but that's who i am. i think ethically they are very similar, though in my mind it takes more scumbaggery to be willing to physically remove an item from a store or home. for each individual, if they never would have bought the item, them having a copy does not hurt anyone. it really doesn't. think about it logically - they wouldn't have bought it, they didn't stop anyone else from buying it, the developer likely wouldn't even know in most cases.

 that doesn't make it ok, but it is ethically very different from physically removing someone's property from their store home or person, etc.


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> Developers have legal titles to digital software. Taking it is theft.



It has more to do with claiming it as yours though. Skidrow, Reloaded, Razor1911 never claims they own the games.


Anyway, it's interesting at least that for example, according to the Crysis 2 EULA, all the user gets is "access" to the software. So the discs you get are only giving you access to the software...so if you copy it, you copy "access", and not the software itself. If you follow the wordings of the EULA they themselves made. And therefore you can't be accused of copyright infringement because "access to software" is not by itself copyrightable. To circumvent that, they essentially have to void the EULA so that the discs revert to being the "software" themselves. lol


----------



## Kreij (Dec 18, 2011)

Digi makes a good point. This does not fall under the definition of theft.
Let's look at the definition of "Stealing"


> 1. To take (the property of another) without right or permission.



Carry on.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 18, 2011)

pantherx12 said:


> No it is not, it isn't at all.
> 
> Yes they both involve having something that you should not, but that does not make them the same. This is precisely why they have different terms.
> 
> ...



So you honestly think that you're not effecting anything by taking a copy of a game that you didn't pay anything for? Why don't they just pass them out for free then?


----------



## erocker (Dec 18, 2011)

digibucc said:


> right but as i bolded, the removal with intent to deprive the rightful owner. it's not removed. they are not deprived of the title. they own it, and still possess it. nothing was technically stolen.
> 
> i realize i am being very technical, but that's who i am. i think ethically they are very similar, though in my mind it takes more scumbaggery to be willing to physically remove an item from a store or home. for each individual, if they never would have bought the item, them having a copy does not hurt anyone. it really doesn't that doesn't make it ok, but it is ethically very different from physically removing someones property from their store home or person, etc.



The thing is, the title is worthless with no financial worth. Stealing/distributing it deprives the owner of its full worth and depriving the owner of the property.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

digibucc said:


> the act of stealing; specifically : the felonious *taking *and *removing *of personal property with *intent to deprive the rightful owner of it*
> 
> you are not being deprived of your property. you are _possibly_ being deprived of monetary gain said property _may _afford you, but that is not definite and can not be assumed. and even if they could they are not stealing the money itself, and so it's not theft.
> 
> i'm not trying to lessen it's impact here. it's bad. maybe there's not a good enough word for it, but it very specifically is not theft.



agree 
example A: lets say I would like to attend a ball game 
a scalper walks up and says hey you look like a cool dude ill cut you a deal
now said tickets have already been payed for the stadium and team already got there compensation. is it theft if I buy said tickets 

example b: I want to have the latest episode of my favorite tv show on my pc that I didn't get to watch because I was not home
so I download it ? am I a thief ? no I am not I pay my cable bill had I been home I would have watched it anyway so am I a Thief for downloading something I would have enjoyed anyway had I been home ? what if I buy the whole series on dvd at a later date what then ?  

example c: there is this new game out all I know about it is what he reviewer and youtube tells me but I am still on the fence I download it I find it entertaining  but not worth the 60 dollar asking price I complete the game and delete it a few months later I see it marked down to 45 bucks wanting to replay it I purchase it  am I a thief ?


----------



## pantherx12 (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> So you honestly think that you're not effecting anything by taking a copy of a game that you didn't pay anything for? Why don't they just pass them out for free then?



No I don't think it's affecting anyone at all.

Like I said if people could not monitor what was happening regarding file downloading etc how would people even know?

Piracy is the very definition of a victimless crime.



By the by @ Erocker in the UK property is defined as "A thing or things belonging to someone; possessions collectively."


And a "thing" is defined as a material object.



So again perhaps this all boils down to language.


----------



## digibucc (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> So you honestly think that you're not effecting anything by taking a copy of a game that you didn't pay anything for? Why don't they just pass them out for free then?



explain to me the effect then?

if jack was never going to buy mw3. ever. 
but he got a copy for free, how did that effect anything?

*buy          | don't buy    | pirate*
spend $60     | save $60     |save $60
play game      | don't game  |play game

it's really very simple.  now yes there are pirates that otherwise would have bought a game, but there are very definitely those that never would. how are they affecting anyone?




erocker said:


> The thing is, the title is worthless with no financial worth. Stealing/distributing it deprives the owner of its full worth and depriving the owner of the property.


distribution of copyrighted content is different. but obtaining a copy in and of itself, if you never would have bought it, is not removing anything from the rightful owner. it's still wrong. it's only right that they are compensated for their work - but it is very different from stealing $60 from their wallet. it's not as if one pirated copy stops EVERYONE from buying it.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> The thing is, the title is worthless with no financial worth. Stealing/distributing it deprives the owner of its full worth and depriving the owner of the property.


even if the people that acquire it had no intention of ever buying it ? 
you can not say you own something that someone has not given you ..
IE my money
you can not be deprived of something that "I" never intended to be yours in the first place


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 18, 2011)

pantherx12 said:


> No I don't think it's affecting anyone at all.
> 
> Like I said if people could not monitor what was happening regarding file downloading etc how would people even know?
> 
> Piracy is the very definition of a victimless crime.



So the millions of dollars that game companies are losing from you and people like you wouldn't have been used to make better games? And you wonder why we're stuck in a world full of console ports.


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> So you honestly think that you're not effecting anything by taking a copy of a game that you didn't pay anything for?



Nothing is affected. Because person A with a copy of the game but will not buy it is the same as person B without a copy of the game and will not buy it, to the eyes of the "I WANT SOME INCOME!" people.



Damn_Smooth said:


> Why don't they just pass them out for free then?



Because they are "I WANT SOME INCOME!" people.


This is a case where the laws of supply and demand are being heavily manipulated. First the stipulated $60 release price, most of which goes to the publishers and not the developers, and then in cases of Steam the forced usage of non-cash forms of transactions, and in cases where there are no official Steam presence, the forced "pretending I'm American" situation, assuming a fictitious identity and forced to use an US$ account.

Additionally, in the case of retail over here at least, absence of discounts. Because they are essentially a monopoly.




Damn_Smooth said:


> So the millions of dollars that game companies are losing from you and people like you wouldn't have been used to make better games? And you wonder why we're stuck in a world full of console ports.



Their losses are because of the publishers. The "losses due to piracy" are actually publishers' money now, and not the developers. Developers only have a miniscule portion from sales. In exchange the publisher already gave them a fixed, lump sum amount of money prior to release.


----------



## Maelstrom (Dec 18, 2011)

OneMoar said:


> agree
> example A: lets say I would like to attend a ball game
> a scalper walks up and says hey you look like a cool dude ill cut you a deal
> now said tickets have already been payed for the stadium and team already got there compensation. is it theft if I buy said tickets
> ...



Example A is a bad one. Since they are physical objects, there are a limited amount. However, with digital content you aren't limited, and I could give everyone who has internet access to said content. I agree with you though that it is not theft.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 18, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> Nothing is affected. Because person A with a copy of the game but will not buy it is the same as person B without a copy of the game and will not buy it, to the eyes of the "I WANT SOME INCOME!" people.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Read the post above yours, you are effecting a lot more than you think.


----------



## digibucc (Dec 18, 2011)

Maelstrom said:


> Example A is a bad one. Since they are physical objects, there are a limited amount. However, with digital content you aren't limited, and I could give everyone who has internet access to said content.



to explain further: a scalper with more money buys more tickets to scalp, lowering the number of available tickets for legitimate buyers.




Damn_Smooth said:


> Read the post above yours, you are effecting a lot more than you think.


you have yet to explain why getting a copy of something you would never have paid for affects anything other than how you spend your free time.

yes some would have bought, but many still do. any person that would have bought it but decided to pirate is definitely affecting the bottom line, but those that never would have are not.


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> Read the post above yours, you are effecting a lot more than you think.



My post has been edited to respond to that.


----------



## pantherx12 (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> So the millions of dollars that game companies are losing from you and people like you wouldn't have been used to make better games? And you wonder why we're stuck in a world full of console ports.



Okay, explain to me just how is it that the games company are loosing money.

Loosing money would imply they already had it.



You also assume that the people who have pirated the game were going to buy the game.

Like I said somewhere else if a person cannot pirate something they go with out.

For example I have a friend that only pirates movies, you know what happens when he can't find a good download?

He doesn't bother watching it, he doesn't go to the shop and buy it.


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

Here's something relevant to what I want to say:
http://www.lar.net/?p=14


----------



## erocker (Dec 18, 2011)

OneMoar said:


> agree
> example A: lets say I would like to attend a ball game
> a scalper walks up and says hey you look like a cool dude ill cut you a deal
> now said tickets have already been payed for the stadium and team already got there compensation. is it theft if I buy said tickets



Good example and I agree that it is not theft here. Tickets have been paid for, the stadium cannot charge to fill those seats again. There is no theft.



			
				OneMoar said:
			
		

> example b: I want to have the latest episode of my favorite tv show on my pc that I didn't get to watch because I was not home
> so I download it ? am I a thief ? no I am not I pay my cable bill had I been home I would have watched it anyway so am I a Thief for downloading something I would have enjoyed anyway had I been home ? what if I buy the whole series on dvd at a later date what then ?



With just about every television network replaying their shows on the internet, I don't see how this could possibly be theft.



			
				OneMoar said:
			
		

> example c: there is this new game out all I know about it is what he reviewer and youtube tells me but I am still on the fence I download it I find it entertaining  but not worth the 60 dollar asking price I complete the game and delete it a few months later I see it marked down to 45 bucks wanting to replay it I purchase it  am I a thief ?



What you may purchase in the future is irrelevant just like everything else that doesn't exist. Just because you read a review doesn't give you the entitlement to steal the game without paying for it. If you agree with the reviewer and are on the fence about it, wait for the inevitable price drop to happen, then buy it. 
Why don't I go into one of those "Rent a Center" places and steal a TV? I'll enjoy it for a while, then I'll sneak the TV back into the store one evening. Later on I'll go rent the TV when they are having a sale. Stealing is stealing.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 18, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> My post has been edited to respond to that.



The publishers would give them a lot more money and concentrate on PC gaming a lot more if people weren't pirating. It's funny, almost every major publisher has said that, but it's falling on deaf ears. How about we all just quit paying and see how many games we get? Pretty sure the console ports will dry up then too.


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> The publishers would give them a lot more money and concentrate on PC gaming a lot more if people weren't pirating. It's funny, almost every major publisher has said that, but it's falling on deaf ears. How about we all just quit paying and see how many games we get? Pretty sure the console ports will dry up then too.



Again, see my previous post. The developers are still getting shafted regardless of piracy.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 18, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> Again, see my previous post. The developers are still getting shafted regardless of piracy.



And piracy is shafting us.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> So the millions of dollars that game companies are losing from you and people like you wouldn't have been used to make better games? And you wonder why we're stuck in a world full of console ports.



again you are implying they are losing something that never existed in the first place 
its a vicious circle > people download said game > some people don't buy said game some do anyway > idiot share holders blame piracy for poor sales > > fails to understand that the game may simply be not any good > tells studio not to bother developing a pc version; repeat -1 
the solution is NOT to stop piracy but to educate people on the WHY and the REASON 
and it does NOT cost millions to to the "developers" to properly port a game developers don't make all that much you rarely see the developers complying about pirating the people you do see complain are the greedy and or ignorant investors and or publisher


----------



## Maelstrom (Dec 18, 2011)

qubit said:


> Yes, in other words, the _morality_ of copying is questionable - I agree, it's certainly iffy (but can have its justifications) and I forgot to make that point.  Of course, Big Media can't make any money or pass any laws on a morality argument, so they invent bogus loss figures to justify their actions.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I completely agree, companies need to make products actually worth buying. However, as I've said before, I have no problem with companies trying to protect their investments (to an extent mind you). Though I feel the idea of bypassing our economic system shouldn't just be a moral issue (talking larger scale than just pirating here). However, I am having trouble articulating my point, so I just leave it at that .


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> Here's something relevant to what I want to say:
> http://www.lar.net/?p=14



And there is apparently an additional post about this:
http://www.lar.net/?p=48


----------



## digibucc (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> The publishers would give them a lot more money and concentrate on PC gaming a lot more if people weren't pirating.



and the fact that false assumptions and faulty logic drive those mentalities mean nothing to you? the fact that they are holding hostage game development for people whose money they likely never would have gotten in the first place, is ok with you?

consoles sell more. not because of piracy, because they are simple. if you think devs are going to choose to spend more money and make less profit just because an immeasurable, oft-inflated, mostly meaningless number has gone down... you're wrong


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 18, 2011)

OneMoar said:


> again you are implying they are losing something that never existed in the first place
> its a vicious circle > people download said game > some people don't buy said game some do anyway > idiot share holders blame piracy for poor sales > > fails to understand that the game may simply be not any good > tells studio not to bother developing a pc version; repeat -1
> the solution is NOT to stop piracy but to educate people on the WHY and the REASON
> and it does NOT cost millions to to the "developers" to properly port a game developers don't make all that much you rarely see the developers complying about pirating the people you do see complain are the greedy and or ignorant investors and or publisher



I'm not implying anything. I'm stating the fact that if publishers were making more off of PC gaming, they would concentrate on it more. Another fact, they would be making a lot more money if people like you weren't pirating.



digibucc said:


> and the fact that false assumptions and faulty logic drive those mentalities mean nothing to you? the fact that they are holding hostage game development for people whose money they likely never would have gotten in the first place, is ok with you?
> 
> consoles sell more. not because of piracy, because they are simple. if you think devs are going to choose to spend more money and make less profit just because an immeasurable, oft-inflated, mostly meaningless number has gone down... you're wrong



Look around you. Do you see them slacking off on console development where piracy is way less rampant? Everybody owns a PC, I'm not buying that simplicity crap. It is just as easy to throw a disc in my CD drive and wait for it to install as it is in my PS3.


----------



## pantherx12 (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> The publishers would give them a lot more money and concentrate on PC gaming a lot more if people weren't pirating. It's funny, almost every major publisher has said that, but it's falling on deaf ears. How about we all just quit paying and see how many games we get? Pretty sure the console ports will dry up then too.



But it's very easy to pirate console games as well, for example got an xbox 360?

Buy a specific type of dvd and burn the game iso you just download to disc and voila!

You can play it .

( By the by, I don't own an xbox and never had so don't throw an accusation at me )


Edit : "Another fact, they would be making a lot more money if people like you weren't"

Ahh as well as mixing up piracy and theft you also seem to be confusing fact with assumption!

In fact you make two assumptions in that statement XD


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> And piracy is shafting us.



Ever since the "gaming market" emerged in the late 70s-early 80s, piracy of games are already there. So you're saying that throughout its entire existence piracy have been "shafting" the gaming market? This is in a sense that saying "shafting" means there is a more than 50% negative effect to the market.

Your reasoning would be akin to the reasoning of clothing/bag companies with regards to Chinese counterfeits.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

Maelstrom said:


> I completely agree, companies need to make products actually worth buying. However, as I've said before, I have no problem with companies trying to protect their investments (to an extent mind you). Though I feel the idea of bypassing our economic system shouldn't just be a moral issue (talking larger scale than just pirating here). However, I am having trouble articulating my point, so I just leave it at that .



YES
you start giving me games and software that are useful and enjoyable for a reasonable price though steam or some other downloadable method 
AND the ablity to get a refund should I not like it 
and ill be happy buy the latest version of 
Call of the battlefield: 3 on its release day
if you want me to trust you you are going to need to trust me first


----------



## Kreij (Dec 18, 2011)

OneMoar said:


> AND the ablity to get a refund should I no like it



That is a key factor in this whole discussion.


----------



## digibucc (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> Another fact, they would be making a lot more money if people like you weren't pirating.



that is absolutely NOT a fact. what is it you don't get? if they would never have bought the game, the companies would never have made more money should they choose not to pirate. you are absolutely wrong, and completely disregarding that fact. at least recognize this point, please.


----------



## JustaTinkerer (Dec 18, 2011)

Im so on the fence about this its unreal.
I was a pirate like 1000's of others.

If I couldn't get a copy of what I was after I done without.

A couple of years later and I make ok cash and the pirating seems a far of memory.
As a pirate I cost no one anything but as a consumer I feel robbed at some of the games I have bought.

Sure I pirated COD4, couldn't play it online so bought the full thing (more than once now).

Its a tough call as theft is theft at the end of the day but I will never berate the pirates.
Could be worse and folk with nothing to do will be robbing your house.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

Kreij said:


> That is a key factor in this whole discussion.



YES FOR THE LOVE OF GOD YES 
someone finally gets it


----------



## digibucc (Dec 18, 2011)

that's the problem. so many people want to bring it down to piracy=theft, when there is so much more to it than that. if you want to thump your chest, sure that's fine - but if you actually care about the situation you have to recognize that simply saying pirates are thieves is not a solution.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 18, 2011)

digibucc said:


> that is absolutely NOT a fact. what is it you don't get? if they would never have bought the game, the companies would never have made more money should they choose not to pirate. you are absolutely wrong, and completely disregarding that fact. at least recognize this point, please.



What is it you don't get? You're saying that if you paid your $50 that they wouldn't have $50 more. If piracy wasn't an option, you would quit gaming? Have fun with that, but I don't buy it for a second.


----------



## Kreij (Dec 18, 2011)

OneMoar said:


> YES FOR THE LOVE OF GOD YES
> someone finally gets it



Well why didn't you post that sooner? We could have avoided all this repetitive bullshit and bitched about the non-existant refund policy on games.


----------



## JustaTinkerer (Dec 18, 2011)

Kreij said:


> Well why didn't you post that sooner? We could have avoided all this repetitive bullshit and bitched about the non-existant refund policy on games.



+1 fantastic


----------



## digibucc (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> What is it you don't get? You're saying that if you paid your $50 that they wouldn't have $50 more. If piracy wasn't an option, you would quit gaming? Have fun with that, but I don't buy it for a second.



have you bothered to even read the posts you are responding to?

i do not pirate. steamcalculator:





> Found 240 Games with a value of
> $4136.61 USD



and that's just steam. not counting origin, d2d, impulse, and retail - as well as console games. i am not discussing the ethics of piracy, i am discussing the specifics of it's effects, and you are being disingenuous.

it's very simple, and you are obviously choosing to ignore the point: if someone would never have bought that individual game, pirating it does not equal a lost sale.


----------



## pantherx12 (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> What is it you don't get? You're saying that if you paid your $50 that they wouldn't have $50 more. If piracy wasn't an option, you would quit gaming? Have fun with that, but I don't buy it for a second.



I go months and months without new games, I get them as occasional treats when money is good and I've got the time to play them.

You make it sound like games are an essential part of life.

Most people can go without


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 18, 2011)

digibucc said:


> have you bothered to even read the posts you are responding to?
> 
> i do not pirate. steamcalculator:
> 
> ...



If piracy wasn't an option, that person would more than likely have bought the game. That's how we did it in the old days and game sales were great.


----------



## JustaTinkerer (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> If piracy wasn't an option, that person would more than likely have bought the game. That's how we did it in the old days and game sales were great.



Nope wrong, if piracy wasn't an option I would have gone without.

Food and other such was a little more important, most pirates are skint, hence would not have got the game anyway and spent there time doing, perhaps, some other nefarious acts


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> If piracy wasn't an option, that person who can afford the game would more than likely have bought the game. That's how we did it in the old days and game sales were great.



Fixed.


----------



## digibucc (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> If piracy wasn't an option, that person would more than likely have bought the game.



i would really love to know how you came to that conclusion. where is your data? because i for one am MUCH less likely to get something if it's not free. it's not like i had to get it either way, and just chose the free one. i never would have chosen to get it were it not free. hypothetically.
that person more than likely would buy fewer games. regardless, these are our opinions, they are not based on any kind of fact so for you to act as if they are is as i said, disingenuous.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

Kreij said:


> Well why didn't you post that sooner? We could have avoided all this repetitive bullshit and bitched about the non-existant refund policy on games.



I did check a few posts back ......


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 18, 2011)

JustaTinkerer said:


> Nope wrong, if piracy wasn't an option I would have gone without.
> 
> Food and other such was a little more important, most pirates are skint, hence would not have got the game anyway and spent there time doing, perhaps, some other nefarious acts





entropy13 said:


> Fixed.



There are so many games I want that I am going without that it's not even funny. But to assume that everybody who's pirating a game is doing it because of a lack of funds is preposterous.


----------



## pantherx12 (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> There are so many games I want that I am going without that it's not even funny. But to assume that everybody who's pirating a game is doing it because of a lack of funds is preposterous.



Some people simply find it hard to justify spending what money they do have on games.

So they either go without or pirate.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 18, 2011)

digibucc said:


> i would really love to know how you came to that conclusion. where is your data? because i for one am MUCH less likely to get something if it's not free. it's not like i had to get it either way, and just chose the free one. i never would have chosen to get it were it not free. hypothetically.that person more than likely would buy fewer games. regardless, these are our opinions, they are not based on any kind of fact so for you to act as if they are is as i said, disingenuous.



I'm basing my "opinion" off of history, when PC gaming was actually supported. Where are yours coming from?


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 18, 2011)

lol stupid pirates!!! burn ya thieving mateys!!!!1


----------



## JustaTinkerer (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> There are so many games I want that I am going without that it's not even funny. But to assume that everybody who's pirating a game is doing it because of a lack of funds is preposterous.


Show me where I said everybody?

I dont have MW3, skyrim, rage (for pc) 3 years ago I would have had them pirated as I could not buy them, now I can afford 2 games a month I will buy.

Pirates dont harm the sales, pirates mostly would just never buy.

This is going in circles.....im dizzy


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 18, 2011)

JustaTinkerer said:


> Show me where I said everybody?
> 
> I dont have MW3, skyrim, rage (for pc) 3 years ago I would have had them pirated as I could not buy them, now I can afford 2 games a month I will buy.
> 
> Pirates dont harm the sales, pirates mostly would just never buy.



Then why were sales so much better before piracy became a trend? 

You're getting dizzy? I have a shitload of people on my ass.


----------



## Kreij (Dec 18, 2011)

OneMoar said:


> I did check a few posts back ......



I believe you. My internet connection is crap and it's really tough to keep up with the posts in a hot thread.

I think that taking (or copying) something not intended to be yours is wrong, but that is an ethical discussion.

I truly believe that if people had the ability to get a reasonable refund on a game they did not like, they would be more likely to purchase it first as opposed to pirating it.
This of course, opens a whole 'nother can of worms about people buying then copying and then returning, but we really need to start somewhere to make the whole mess of purchasing computer/console games a little more palatable to all parties involved.


----------



## pantherx12 (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> I'm basing my "opinion" off of history, when PC gaming was actually supported. Where are yours coming from?



You realise the time your referring to piracy was pretty popular right?

Floppy discs and then cds would simply be copied and given to friends.


Hell people pirated Atari ST games and that's not even a  proper pc! 


"Then why were sales so much better before piracy became a trend?

Because of consoles : /


----------



## JustaTinkerer (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> Then why were sales so much better before piracy became a trend?



yeah sales where so much better back in the day, lol

http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/2...3-reaches-1-billion-in-sales-in-just-16-days/


Jeez I recorded ZX spectrum games on tape.....pirates are worse now?


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> But to assume that everybody who's pirating a game is doing it because of a lack of funds is preposterous.



Over here at least, it's not preposterous. Retail is a monopoly (so people like me who saves up some money still gets shafted because of the utter lack of sale prices), and to use Steam you have to pretend you're American (typically what is done) and have a US$ account (which would make it even less likely for most of the population over here to get to Steam).


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 18, 2011)

pantherx12 said:


> You realise the time your referring to piracy was pretty popular right?
> 
> Floppy discs and then cds would simply be copied and given to friends.
> 
> ...



It existed, but it was nowhere near as popular as it is today.


----------



## Maelstrom (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> It existed, but it was nowhere near as popular as it is today.



Also much easier with the internet now (don't have to actually know the people to get the stuff).


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 18, 2011)

if you don't pay for the game you play then you are a pirate. go die in a fire.


----------



## pantherx12 (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> It existed, but it was nowhere near as popular as it is today.



PCs were less popular then as well 


Something like ten pcs are sold per second at the moment, how many were sold a second back then?



Proportionately levels have stayed around the same, if not less people pirate proportionately now then they did then. Even though it's easier to do now : ]


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 18, 2011)

JustaTinkerer said:


> yeah sales where so much better back in the day, lol
> 
> http://www.thehollywoodgossip.com/2...3-reaches-1-billion-in-sales-in-just-16-days/
> 
> ...



Your link just reaffirms my argument. Do you think a high percentage of those sales came from PC? Really? Anyways I'm done with this. You 4 can defend pirating all you want, we're still getting shafted. Have fun, love ya all, I'm out.


----------



## digibucc (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> I'm basing my "opinion" off of history, when PC gaming was actually supported. Where are yours coming from?



you mean before there were consoles that are comparable to pcs, right? more has happened in the last 20 years than piracy - and if you think bbs' and local communities didn't pirate on floppy disks... you're wrong again.

consoles have done more to kill desktop pc gaming than piracy EVER could. they are simple, easy, profit machines. publishers will never choose to support pc when the profit on consoles is so large, and that's despite piracy on consoles and imo very little if anything to do with piracy on pc. that is a scapegoat.

you are basing your opinion off of how you choose to interpret what portion of history you saw, not exactly what i would call a reliable source. mine are opinions, readily admitted. you purport your opinions as facts, when they aren't even very well formed opinions 

regardless, i'm done. i've had my fun in this piracy thread so .. later


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 18, 2011)

thieves have no place in a civil society!!


----------



## digibucc (Dec 18, 2011)

Easy Rhino said:


> thieves have no place in a civil society!!



murderilize em! hang em by their testiclees!1


----------



## Maelstrom (Dec 18, 2011)

digibucc said:


> murderilize em! hang em by their testiclees!1



New word!!!!!  So going to use that in the future.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 18, 2011)

that's right! looters and moochers! hang them up those bastards! pay for things, don't steal them!!! nooobsss!11111


----------



## JustaTinkerer (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> It existed, but it was nowhere near as popular as it is today.



Ok look at in these concepts:

100 folk in 1988 had a console or computer able to play games. 3% pirated.

So 3 folk

100,000 folk in 2011 have a  console or computer able to play games. 3% pirated

3000 folk

The % is the same, the numbers are vastly different.

Even if the % has went up its the digital age dude information is easy to come by.
The point stands many pirates, like I was, cant afford games so would not buy them.


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

Easy Rhino said:


> that's right! looters and moochers! hang them up those bastards! pay for things, don't steal them!!! nooobsss!11111



I'd need to cut off your horns first though.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

Kreij said:


> I believe you. My internet connection is crap and it's really tough to keep up with the posts in a hot thread.
> 
> I think that taking (or copying) something not intended to be yours is wrong, but that is an ethical discussion.
> 
> ...



yes but the second point I keep trying to make is that even if party A: started the trend of pirating and in response party b: decides to put forth less effort in porting games better or making the experience better  so party a: pirates even more loop -1
the point being is that party A: does not need to pay for anything party a: pays party b:'s bills if party a: is unhappy with party B: service that does not give party b: the right to make there service worse: ... its still the lieablity of party b: to ensure that there product is worth what they ask for it and that it will work as described 
if that makes any sense to anyone I must really be getting good at this


----------



## Kreij (Dec 18, 2011)

DS said:
			
		

> It existed, but it was nowhere near as popular as it is today.



Sure it was. I had a card in my computer some 20 years ago that would defeat almost every copy protection scheme on the market. The difference is the ability to distribute (via the interwebz) has changed the landscape dramatically. we used to have to have access to very private day-one site that were all modem based.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 18, 2011)

thieves!!!! go die in a fire!!!!!


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

Easy Rhino said:


> thieves have no place in a civil society!!



quit trolling you know better


----------



## JustaTinkerer (Dec 18, 2011)

Easy Rhino said:


> thieves!!!! go die in a fire!!!!!


You are a mod aren't you?

Wouldn't say but that's the 3rd post you have made that's just trolling.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 18, 2011)

you're a troll. dont make this personal or get points!!! oh noes i didn't!!!!!!! thieves be bad you trolling thieving whore!!!


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

Kreij said:


> Sure it was. I had a card in my computer some 20 years ago that would defeat almost every copy protection scheme on the market. The difference is the ability to distribute (via the interwebz) has changed the landscape dramatically. we used to have to have access to very private day-one site that were all modem based.



The Anti-piracy jingle still sucks though. "Don't Copy That Floppy!"


----------



## JustaTinkerer (Dec 18, 2011)

Easy Rhino said:


> you're a troll. dont make this personal or get points!!! oh noes i didn't!!!!!!! thieves be bad you trolling thieving whore!!!



Mate, reported. I dont need this from a mod.


----------



## pantherx12 (Dec 18, 2011)

JustaTinkerer said:


> Ok look at in these concepts:
> 
> 100 folk in 1988 had a console or computer able to play games. 3% pirated.
> 
> ...



Great stuff man similar to what I was trying to say on the last post.

People never seem to take the figures into account with these things.

Their are over a billion computers in the world today!

So of course the numbers are going to seem higher today, but proportionately I doubt there is all that much of a difference.


----------



## Kreij (Dec 18, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> The Anti-piracy jingle still sucks though. "Don't Copy That Floppy!"



Yeah, it was hysterical.
I have to give them credit though, some of the old anti-copying schemes were a lot more inventive (and effetive) than what we have today.


----------



## AsRock (Dec 18, 2011)

OneMoar said:


> for the sake of just because I have the time ill attempt to recite the pre-writen reply from a self admitted pirate ..... not that it will change anything ...
> you use the word "condone' like "sharing" or as called by the people that claim to be righteously driven  call it "piracy". is wrong
> people have been _sharing_ for just as long as copyrights and the selling of goods for monetary gain have existed  and people will always buy what they feel is worth there cash even if there are "free" alternatives or non-legal alternatives this is a FACT
> 
> ...



Use what ever excuse, one thing i have learned is a theif will always have a excuse to make him or her self feel better about ripping company's \ people off.

If it's payware  pay for it or not bother with it in the 1st place..  Did you steal all your computer parts too ?.  i guess it be right for me to come knocking steal your computer too.


Theft is theft plain and simple.


----------



## Volkszorn88 (Dec 18, 2011)

I 100% support this. 

How would you feel if all your hard work/time/effort/resources/creativity was stolen by some twat who's too cheap to purchase a $50 game, but has no problem spending 700 bucks on a HD6990/GTX590...etc

It's not fair and all these Developers/publishers have every rite to do what they think is necessary to protect their product. 

Anyone who thinks otherwise that there's nothing wrong with piracy, well just forward me your address so I can come over and steal all your crap. There's no difference. 

I've been PC gaming for years and it bothers me to see pc gamers who mock console players, then go whine and complain how every game now is a console port or start a petition because a publisher decided not to bring a certain game to pc.

Well why do you think??!?!?! You keep robbing them and then expect to be treated like a God afterwards? Super hypocrisy to the max.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 18, 2011)

u mad, bros?


----------



## Zakin (Dec 18, 2011)

Really funny topic, on the subject of sales though with such things that Damn_Smooth brought up. You should really take a look at the incredible piracy rate that the 360 has run up, the only real reason that the console sales are so much higher is because they dwarf how many people game on PC. As well as PC gamers just plain are more picky, at least I know I am.


----------



## pantherx12 (Dec 18, 2011)

AsRock said:


> Use what ever excuse, one thing i have learned is a theif will always have a excuse to make him or her self feel better about ripping company's \ people off.
> 
> If it's payware  pay for it or not bother with it in the 1st place..  Did you steal all your computer parts too ?.  i guess it be right for me to come knocking steal your computer too.
> 
> ...





If you took his computer he'd be pissed, if you came round and copied his computer I'm sure he wouldn't give a shit.

( which is what piracy is)



Any-whom I'm off to bed, thanks for the interesting discussion chaps and for most people remaining polite and civil about their differences.


----------



## DonInKansas (Dec 18, 2011)

Zakin said:


> Out of curiosity, I wonder if they plan to bring in the probably fifty percent of their actual sales that probably pirated the game because not being able to try the game before hand in this modern day is suicide with console ports and just badly coded games in general.



Reference please.


----------



## Kreij (Dec 18, 2011)

Can we shift the topic a little?
We've disucssed piracy to no end in a bajiliion threads, but we never really all tossed in our thoughts about refunds or returns.

If I buy something (physical) that I don't like or does not meet my expectations I can usually return it.
That's a little difficult with virtual items as they could have been copied before return.
What do you think would be a fair return policy for both the buyers and sellers in this case?


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 18, 2011)

would it be ethical to sneek into a movie theater without paying because you don't know what to expect. and only pay based on whether it met your expectations? of course not. pirates, burn in a fire.


----------



## reverze (Dec 18, 2011)

right or wrong, they will lose money over this. alot of people bought the game cause it was good , well supported, and no DRM in the end. Thats why they made these huge profits.

These lawsuits wont scare anyone outside the USA. And alot of goodwil will be lost.
Remember Ubisoft with their uncracked superstrong DRM? As they said themselves, piracy was annihalited for those games. But they had to remove it not so long ago cause they actually lost alot of money on all those games with the DRM no matter the quality of those games.


----------



## qubit (Dec 18, 2011)

Kreij said:


> Can we shift the topic a little?
> We've disucssed piracy to no end in a bajiliion threads, but we never really all tossed in our thoughts about refunds or returns.
> 
> *If I buy something (physical) that I don't like or does not meet my expectations I can usually return it.
> ...



I think with something like Steam which has account-based DRM, they should certainly offer refunds - perhaps with a 3 or 7 day cooling off period, after which you can't claim a refund. They should also allow unrestricted trading between members, otherwise they are denying people's first sale rights.

I'm pretty sure that one or two other platforms out there support this (the refunds at least) although I can't remember the specifics off the top of my head.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 18, 2011)

apparently not paying for something and bitching about it has become a "right." the end of society. go die in a fire.


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

Kreij said:


> Can we shift the topic a little?
> We've disucssed piracy to no end in a bajiliion threads, but we never really all tossed in our thoughts about refunds or returns.
> 
> If I buy something (physical) that I don't like or does not meet my expectations I can usually return it.
> ...



Remove 3rd party, reduce release date prices to $10-$15, make the prevailing prices (after 6 months I guess) be in the $5-$10 range. Likelihood of wanting refunds are reduced because the prices they were bought in the first place were reduced.



Easy Rhino said:


> apparently not paying for something and bitching about it has become a "right." the end of society. go die in a fire.



That by itself cannot be the end of society. It could be even argued that such developments are just changes in society. 

It's more likely "the end of society as Easy Rhino sees society as."


----------



## Kreij (Dec 18, 2011)

qubit said:


> I think with something like Steam which has account-based DRM, they should certainly offer refunds - perhaps with a 3 or 7 day cooling off period, after which you can't claim a refund. They should also allow unrestricted trading between members, otherwise they are denying people's first sale rights.
> 
> I'm pretty sure that one or two other platforms out there support this (the refunds at least) although I can't remember the specifics off the top of my head.



This may work for something like Steam, where they can track the hours you've played to see if yoiu were really just "testing the waters", but what about retail purchases that do not use Steamworks as their DRM?

There is also the issue that some games, though quite good, do not contain a lot of hours of content. What is a fair measure of "trying to see if you like it"?


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 18, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> Remove 3rd party, reduce release date prices to $10-$15, make the prevailing prices (after 6 months I guess) be in the $5-$10 range. Likelihood of wanting refunds are reduced because the prices they were bought in the first place were reduced.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



yes, that's right. society can exist when legal theft exists. seriously now.....


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

Easy Rhino said:


> yes, that's right. society can exist when legal theft exists. seriously now.....



Society is shaped by the norms adopted by its members. Also, society as a whole can also impose norms upon its individuals. Norms does not need "legality" per se, although technically speaking "rule of law" is a norm by itself. 

Although "law" is a norm of society, that does not necessarily mean that it is superior to other norms already simply by the fact of it being a "lawful" norm. Slavery was a norm as well, for example.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 18, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> Society is shaped by the norms adopted by its members. Also, society as a whole can also impose norms upon its individuals. Norms does not need "legality" per se, although technically speaking "rule of law" is a norm by itself.
> 
> Although "law" is a norm of society, that does not necessarily mean that it is superior to other norms already simply by the fact of it being a "lawful" norm. Slavery was a norm as well, for example.



that is irrelevant. if legal theft exists then society cannot function. history shows this to be true over the course of 3000 years. maybe they don't teach this in high school anymore.


----------



## reverze (Dec 18, 2011)

the thing is with muisc games and movies is that it costs a set amount of money to produce. And then it ( lets cut out the internet for a second ) is/was sold a piece of plastic with a couple million holes punched in it. They sell you something worth in its physical form around 10-15 cents for 60 dollars / euros if its a game.

That is a massive .... profit or ripoff depending how you see it. it costs millions no doubt to produce games these days but in the end they sell you "air", and when you download you copy the dots in plastic on someone elses PC that come to you through fiber optic impulses and are set in the same order on your harddrive with magnetic impulses.....

Its a copy, legal or illegal set aside. If you have been brought up in a world without copyright and never been brainwashed with the whole "omg piracy is stealing!" then its very difficult to have moral objection to copy data of any kind, and to justify anyone who ever did that to pay 1000 euros for every copy they made without explicit permission of the "owner" who was the first to punch holes in plastic in a certain order.........

food for thought


----------



## DannibusX (Dec 18, 2011)

I'm just going to leave this here...

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=141423


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 18, 2011)

reverze said:


> the thing is with muisc games and movies is that it costs a set amount of money to produce. And then it ( lets cut out the internet for a second ) is/was sold a piece of plastic with a couple million holes punched in it. They sell you something worth in its physical form around 10-15 cents for 60 dollars / euros if its a game.
> 
> That is a massive .... profit or ripoff depending how you see it. it costs millions no doubt to produce games these days but in the end they sell you "air", and when you download you copy the dots in plastic on someone elses PC that come to you through fiber optic impulses and are set in the same order on your harddrive with magnetic impulses.....
> 
> ...



that is childish logic. based on your logic you would have a software developer sell one copy for $100,000 and 10,000 copies for $10. obviously supply and demand does not work like that. do better!


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

Easy Rhino said:


> that is irrelevant. if legal theft exists then society as we know it right now, and as we have seen it in its other, previous forms, cannot function.



Fixed. 



Easy Rhino said:


> history shows this to be true over the course of 3000 years.



How about over the course of 10,000 years? 

Regardless, since we are talking about society, and a "norm", the only certain way we could ever know what would really happen is to...know what would really happen in the future...by getting to that future.

Pre-historic society is significantly less "developed" when looked at by modern viewers, but since there is the absence of the norms of "legality" and "theft" as we know them right now today, it doesn't necessarily mean that society then ceased to function. They just functioned differently.

No concept of theft since among communities property is communal, and inter-community interaction was quite rare until the end of the last Ice Age.

Even in our pre-colonial period for example, because each barangay are communal, meaning everything is owned by the community, the concept of "theft" as we know it today simply does not exist. And if another barangay "steals" property of one barangay, it is not "theft" but an "act of war." Datus (communal leaders) are appointed by barangay elders by virtue of their capability of defending the barangay, not by virtue of having the most property, the most influence among the people, etc.


----------



## reverze (Dec 18, 2011)

Easy Rhino said:


> that is childish logic. based on your logic you would have a software developer sell one copy for $100,000 and 10,000 copies for $10. obviously supply and demand does not work like that. do better!



i am not argueing about price, i am argueing about one of the basics of economy which is added value which doesnt go for music /  game / movies.


----------



## Frick (Dec 18, 2011)

I year ago this thread would not have existed. All it does is making the forums worse.


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

Frick said:


> I year ago this thread would not have existed. All it does is making the forums worse.



Technically you're right since this was started in March 3, 2011.


----------



## Kreij (Dec 18, 2011)

If you feel that changes at TPU need to be discussed, please make a thread in the Comments and Fedback section, not in the thread itself.
Please do not use the "What's wrong with the forums" thread as that is not its purpose.
Start a new one.

Just a tip from yer ol' Uncle Kreij.


----------



## Frick (Dec 18, 2011)

pantherx12 said:


> If you took his computer he'd be pissed, if you came round and copied his computer I'm sure he wouldn't give a shit.
> 
> ( which is what piracy is)



If I designed and built the computer myself hells yes I would get pissed. Likewise with a painting. Lets say you have an exhibition with your works on display and someone came in and copied your works in every small detail. He didn't take a photo, he copied it. I'd get mad as heck.



Kreij said:


> If you feel that changes at TPU need to be discussed, please make a thread in the Comments and Fedback section, not in the thread itself.
> Please do not use the "What's wrong with the forums" thread as that is not its purpose.
> Start a new one.
> 
> Just a tip from yer ol' Uncle Kreij.



I'll just make a pirate thread instead. It's obviously OK.


----------



## saeoh (Dec 18, 2011)

Easy Rhino said:


> would it be ethical to sneek into a movie theater without paying because you don't know what to expect. and only pay based on whether it met your expectations? of course not. pirates, burn in a fire.



Well, here, we can get full refund of a movie within 30min 



Kreij said:


> If I buy something (physical) that I don't like or does not meet my expectations I can usually return it.
> That's a little difficult with virtual items as they could have been copied before return.
> What do you think would be a fair return policy for both the buyers and sellers in this case?


Either good demos(have to give same performance as full game) or refund within certain time frame (like 3-4hours or next day morning)


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

Frick said:


> If I designed and built the computer myself hells yes I would get pissed. Likewise with a painting. Lets say you have an exhibition with your works on display and someone came in and copied your works in every small detail. He didn't take a photo, he copied it. I'd get mad as heck.



Well, ever since painting began, "imitation painting" began too. IIRC Time had an article talking about the "imitation painting" industry of China.


----------



## qubit (Dec 18, 2011)

Kreij said:


> This may work for something like Steam, where they can track the hours you've played to see if yoiu were really just "testing the waters", but what about retail purchases that do not use Steamworks as their DRM?


Indeed, that's why I specified an account-based distribution service. Otherwise, I'm not sure what the answer is - this is the proverbial grey area and obviously some people would abuse it.



Kreij said:


> There is also the issue that some games, though quite good, do not contain a lot of hours of content. What is a fair measure of "trying to see if you like it"?



I guess this isn't so hard to figure out. A couple of examples.

For a single player game with a linear story line such as Half-Life 2* it will be split into chapters or sections. The developer will know how much they want to allow the game to be played and could allow only the first two or three chapters/sections to be played while allowing a refund. When this point is reached, an alert could pop up warning that progress beyond this point will forfeit the refund. Also, a time-out of say, two weeks would be reasonable in which to decide.

For games that just have a deathmatch mode perhaps, like the Unreal Tournament series, perhaps they could be time limited and/or limited to certain maps and game modes.

There's lots of variables and possibilities that could be adjusted here and these are just two possibilities.

The descriptions above sound very much like demo games, don't they - and they are. I think we all remember a while back when the big games houses said they would stop doing demos, because it was "very expensive" to make them. What BS. They're just greedy and don't want their games to be scrutinized before purchase, in case people realize what a crock their buying into. No, what should happen, is the return of free demos, like we used to get. If one can have a decent free demo, then it becomes reasonable not to allow refunds. One modern game that does have a demo mode is Bulletstorm - and more power to the developer.

*Ancient example lol, but it's my favourite linear shooter of all time.


----------



## Kreij (Dec 18, 2011)

@Frick : I know you hate everything. I've know it for years. 
If you have a gripe, speak up in the right place and please tell people to do the same.
You're Frick, you will always be Frick, but your OUR Frick and I would really not feel comfortable if I did not think there was a Gremlin under the bridge every time I walked over the stream.

Carry on.


----------



## Frick (Dec 18, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> Well, ever since painting began, "imitation painting" began too. IIRC Time had an article talking about the "imitation painting" industry of China.



Totally true, but I'm not sure I would be ok with that. It's the same with software really.

Anyway, screw it.


----------



## qubit (Dec 18, 2011)

Frick said:


> I year ago this thread would not have existed. *All it does is making the forums worse.*



Not at all. Remember, I have written a hard-hitting news story about real events happening in the real world. Would you really rather be kept in the dark about it? Would you really want to buy this game, being ignorant of any potential spying of your personal data that these clowns may be doing to you, all to serve their own interests only? You'd be stupid to want to. Yeah, I directly called for a boycott over this in the story and I'm proud of it.

So, what about the websites I used as my sources - are they also wrong for publishing such a story? What about all the other websites that covered it all over the internet? Should TPU be too timid to cover such a controversial subject just to keep the forums sickly sweet, "happy" - and boring? Or should TPU grow a pair and cover these issues? Of course it should and I know that a lot of people on TPU agree with my viewpoint, too. 

So quit yer whingin' and enjoy the news stories and the forums that hang off them.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Dec 18, 2011)

reverze said:


> i am not argueing about price, i am argueing about one of the basics of economy which is added value which doesnt go for music /  game / movies.



value based on demand, not on supply. if an artist thinks that only 1 copy will sell because 10,000 will be stolen then that artist will sell their work for 100,000. basic economics. sheesh, kids these days.


----------



## INSTG8R (Dec 18, 2011)

I didn't go thru the whole thread but I have pretty much every AAA title out this year and paid for them all. This title I "tried" first(and even the few titles I have "tried" this year I ended up purchasing) But this one I am glad I didn't buy it. I was bored after the tutorial and promptly deleted it... Come at me CD Projekt!
 Not my kind of game and maybe for other folks it may be good but IMO CERTAINLY not a game to be making this kind of big deal out of.


----------



## OneMoar (Dec 18, 2011)

im pulling outta this one my head hurts ....


----------



## bostonbuddy (Dec 18, 2011)

just crack it and run it not connected to the internet, then destroy that computer. profit.


----------



## HossHuge (Dec 18, 2011)

If the companies would create products that worked right they would stop a lot of piracy.

Example,  how many games have you bought that you had jump through hoops to get to run or had never run at all.

Last week I picked up Dirt3.  It took me two days of googling to get it to launch.  Codemasters knows of the problem but has done nothing at all to fix it.

Today I bought  a X-box live points card so I could play a DLC that you can only get through them and when I enter the number it says it's not valid.  WTF!!

Every time I try to do things the right way, I run into problems.

If people want to play pirated games, go ahead.


----------



## pantherx12 (Dec 18, 2011)

Frick said:


> If I designed and built the computer myself hells yes I would get pissed. Likewise with a painting. Lets say you have an exhibition with your works on display and someone came in and copied your works in every small detail. He didn't take a photo, he copied it. I'd get mad as heck.



Really?

Honestly that surprises me, if someone copied my custom designed machine I would be flattered.

As long as they didn't sell my design I would be more than a 100% cool with it.

Profiting from someone else skill/knowledge = a douche thing to do.

Utilising someone elses skill/knowledge for your own benefit = Naturally Human thing to do.


Seriously if humans didn't copy other humans who had good ideas then we'd never be a successful species.


I can just imagine the first cave man to make fire from scratch huddling in by his self hiding away his discovery from other people and I laugh to myself XD

" NO ONE CAN HAVE MY PRECIOUS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"


----------



## INSTG8R (Dec 18, 2011)

HossHuge said:


> If the companies would create products that worked right they would stop a lot of piracy.
> 
> Example,  how many games have you bought that you had jump through hoops to get to run or had never run at all.
> 
> ...



hehe I went thru the exact hoops with the Xbox points cards as well trying to get the DiRT 3 DLC(My GFWL account is set to the UK and I live in Norway so can't use a credit card). Don't try to redeem it thru GFWL do it thru their website.


----------



## Mussels (Dec 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> So you feel you should be entitled to steal without repercussions if you don't have the money to buy something?
> 
> I'm sorry, but the world doesn't operate that way.



sorry to quote a post from early in the thread, but this stood out to me.



what they're doing is more like an undercover cop selling you weed and then arresting you for it. just because you broke the law, doesn't mean they can get arrest you if THEY didn't follow the law in the first place.

if they did illegal data mining to get the information from you, be it IP addresses or anything else, then they broke the law to 'catch' you, and the information they gathered is invalid.



garyinhere said:


> Not unless you've borrowed said movie from a friend. That's what I used to do / still do / and will keep doing because it is legal. Whether it's a physical or digital copy.



except thats been made illegal to, or at least been attempted to. i just cant remember the exact details on it.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Dec 18, 2011)

Mussels said:


> sorry to quote a post from early in the thread, but this stood out to me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't agree with entrapment any more than I agree with pirating. Now weed on the other hand...


----------



## HossHuge (Dec 18, 2011)

INSTG8R said:


> hehe I went thru the exact hoops with the Xbox points cards as well trying to get the DiRT 3 DLC(My GFWL account is set to the UK and I live in Norway so can't use a credit card). Don't try to redeem it thru GFWL do it thru their website.



My account is set to Canada and I live in Taiwan now.  Funny thing is, different places I go to on GFWL and on the website will change my location.  Sometimes it says the US and sometimes Taiwan.

I tried entering it through the website and it still doesn't work.  I sent them an e-mail.

I am so pissed off right now.  I just found out about the DLC for Bioshock 2 and I so want to play it......


----------



## INSTG8R (Dec 18, 2011)

HossHuge said:


> My account is set to Canada and I live in Taiwan now.  Funny thing is, different places I go to on GFWL and on the website will change my location.  Sometimes it says the US and sometimes Taiwan.
> 
> I tried entering it through the website and it still doesn't work.  I sent them an e-mail.
> 
> I am so pissed off right now.  I just found out about the DLC for Bioshock 2 and I so want to play it......




Actually I called them and asked if I could switch my country and they told me it was not possible.(New account or nothing) So yeah I feel you because I am in the same boat. But I managed to redeem my cards on the website just fine then it showed up fine in GFWL in game so I could buy the DLC

(Sorry for the derail but this is sorta related that legitimate purchases are more hassle)


----------



## pr0n Inspector (Dec 18, 2011)

long thread, didn't read.

I just want to say, that the ability to effortlessly and perfectly reproduce copies of digital data at almost zero cost means it cannot be treated like property of the old. The data itself, of course, is owned by the creators, not you, who merely paid for a cheap end-user license. There is no analogy for this, unless we can effortlessly and perfectly copy a Toyota at almost no cost.

My solution? Everything digital are sold through online stores *only*, embedded with unique identifiers, with *verified* user accounts managed by a (few) central organization(s).
Go on, put your tin-foil hat on and curse me.


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

pr0n Inspector said:


> My solution? Everything digital are sold through online stores *only*, embedded with unique identifiers, with *verified* user accounts managed by a (few) central organization(s).



Would only truly work in the 3rd World if ISPs finally improves speeds and their services, and if the "online stores" accept cash.


----------



## pr0n Inspector (Dec 18, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> Would only truly work in the 3rd World if ISPs finally improves speeds and their services, and if the "online stores" accept cash.



My answer for that is politically highly incorrect so I will just shut up.
It won't happen anytime soon though, too many people have the misguided idea that they own the thing after paying only 60 dollars.


----------



## Yukikaze (Dec 18, 2011)

Mussels said:


> if they did illegal data mining to get the information from you, be it IP addresses or anything else, then they broke the law to 'catch' you, and the information they gathered is invalid.



That is actually reliant on the specific jurisdictions. Over here, for example, illegally collected evidence is still admissible in court. The collector of said illegal evidence is himself exposed to the wrath of the law, but the evidence collected stands, nonetheless.

I am pretty sure we're not the only place on earth with that in our laws.


----------



## AsRock (Dec 18, 2011)

pantherx12 said:


> If you took his computer he'd be pissed, if you came round and copied his computer I'm sure he wouldn't give a shit.
> 
> ( which is what piracy is)
> 
> ...



No a bunch of other company's would be after me if i copied his computer as they would be under threat of going bankrupt..  Remember people do that too so does it make it right ?.


----------



## WhiteLotus (Dec 18, 2011)

I am rather shocked at a great deal of comments in this thread and is the main reason why I no longer bother to visit threads and/or comment. 

Where this "it's my right to try something before I buy it" attitude came from I have no idea. Do you know what they used to be called...?

Demo's. 

They are your right to try it and then decide whether you want to buy it. Now as I am aware there aren't many demo's being released any more then what the gaming population SHOULD be doing is harassing the developers to release a demo. Not outright playing the game they did not pay for and then saying "oh this is crap, I've completed it, but seeing as I am a c*nt, I'm not going to pay for it". You have been entertained by a medium that you are not paying for when you should be paying for it. It's like going to the cinema and not paying for it because you in all your infinite wisdom think it is unworthy. 

I for one am a great supporter of CD Projekt Red and I hope that they succeed in what they are doing. You people make me sick.



INSTG8R said:


> I didn't go thru the whole thread but I have pretty much every AAA title out this year and paid for them all. This title I "tried" first(and even the few titles I have "tried" this year I ended up purchasing) But this one I am glad I didn't buy it. I was bored after the tutorial and promptly deleted it... Come at me CD Projekt!
> Not my kind of game and maybe for other folks it may be good but IMO CERTAINLY not a game to be making this kind of big deal out of.



If you had any sense you would have seen that this game is called "The Witcher 2". The "2" indicates that it is the second game, thus there being a first. If you wanted an indication as to what it might have been like you would have picked up the first one for next to nothing in the bargain bins as it was going for around $5 at the time of number 2's release. That would have given you every indication about the story, the controls, and what the world of the Witcher is about. But instead you decided to fuck the very people that worked hard to provide you with an entertainment source and not pay for it. It does not matter that you "only got to the tutorial" you still should have paid for it. If you are that lazy, or that cheap to pay for the game then you should give up your right to play any game. You are an insolent fool, who quite frankly should revise your attitude. The game was around $30 on release, and if you couldn't afford it then, then you should have waited all of a month before it went down to $20-25.

Downloading a game on the pre tense that "it's my right to try it before I buy it" is never excusable. That's like going into McDonald's and taking a chunk out of a burger and walking out without paying because you didn't like it.


----------



## Mussels (Dec 18, 2011)

WhiteLotus said:


> If you had any sense you would have seen that this game is called "The Witcher 2". The "2" indicates that it is the second game, thus there being a first. If you wanted an indication as to what it might have been like you would have picked up the first one for next to nothing in the bargain bins as it was going for around $5 at the time of number 2's release. That would have given you every indication about the story, the controls, and what the world of the Witcher is about.



short of buying new call of duty games (and i use 'new' loosely), that is exactly the problem. try playing dragon age origins, then dragon age 2. almost nothing in common.

you simply cannot judge a game by its predecessors - jesus, go compare supreme commander 1 and 2, for example. apart from the genre and a few names, they're nothing alike.


----------



## WhiteLotus (Dec 18, 2011)

Mussels said:


> short of buying new call of duty games (and i use 'new' loosely), that is exactly the problem. try playing dragon age origins, then dragon age 2. almost nothing in common.
> 
> you simply cannot judge a game by its predecessors - jesus, go compare supreme commander 1 and 2, for example. apart from the genre and a few names, they're nothing alike.



So because of that you think it's okay to "try before I buy" games?

Read a fucking review, watch the youtube videos, talk to other people who have bought it. There are PLENTY of outlets that will tell you all about the game, reviews, previews, players comments, videos; all of which are perfectly legal sources to find out more about the game.

The "try before I buy" excuse is null and void.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 18, 2011)

I'm just saying I would show up to the court case with a copy of the game and tell them to bite me...EULA is not law. If I own a copy I own a copy it doesn't matter what version is installed. I did not redistribute the copy therefor all that is violated is the EULA and I could care less.


----------



## DannibusX (Dec 18, 2011)




----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

WhiteLotus said:


> So because of that you think it's okay to "try before I buy" games?
> 
> Read a fucking review, watch the youtube videos, talk to other people who have bought it. There are PLENTY of outlets that will tell you all about the game, reviews, previews, players comments, videos; all of which are perfectly legal sources to find out more about the game.
> 
> The "try before I buy" excuse is null and void.



"I try, I buy", emphasis on "I". So unless the review was made by someone that thinks and plays just like me, the youtube videos were recorded someone that thinks and plays just like me, the other people I talk to think and play just like me, that's the only time it would be "null and void."

Hell even "reviewers' scores" and "user scores" from Metacritic can vary wildly. 

Check MW3's ratings.



> Critic Reviews
> 
> Positive: 17 out of 23
> Mixed: 6 out of 23
> Negative: 0





> User Reviews
> 
> Positive: 369 out of 1839
> Mixed: 76 out of 1839
> Negative: 1,394


----------



## WhiteLotus (Dec 18, 2011)

cdawall said:


> I'm just saying I would show up to the court case with a copy of the game and tell them to bite me...EULA is not law. If I own a copy I own a copy it doesn't matter what version is installed. I did not redistribute the copy therefor all that is violated is the EULA and I could care less.



First of all it's "could not care less" saying that you "could care less" is saying that you could... well care less. 

Second, if you tick the EULA and it says that you agree to the terms and conditions, then if you break those terms, you are breaking the contract to which you agreed to. They have every right to take you to brown town. If you, just like everyone else who does, just tick it so you can move on to the next step then you are shit outta luck because ignorance is not an excuse.



entropy13 said:


> "I try, I buy", emphasis on "I". So unless the review was made by someone that thinks and plays just like me, the youtube videos were recorded someone that thinks and plays just like me, the other people I talk to think and play just like me, that's the only time it would be "null and void."
> 
> Hell even "reviewers' scores" and "user scores" from Metacritic can vary wildly.
> 
> Check MW3's ratings.



Then use your common sense and make a judgement call. You decide whether you buy it based on the available information to you. If sales are going down then there should only every be two excuses for it;
1) the game is shit and no reviewer positively spoke about it, and 
2) the developers/publishers did not advertise the game well enough to get peoples interests.

There should be no 3) because of piracy.


----------



## Yukikaze (Dec 18, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> "I try, I buy", emphasis on "I". So unless the review was made by myself, the youtube videos were recorded by myself, the other people I talk to think like me (or thinks similarly), that's the only time it would be "null and void."
> 
> Hell even "reviewers scores" and "user scores" from Metacritic can vary wildly.
> 
> Check MW3's ratings.



Yes, but where is it written that because you think you're entitled to "I try, I buy" you are allowed to break the law? I am not getting into the "Copied Game != Lost Sale" argument (which is actually something I agree with to an extent), I just do not get the rage over people being slapped for breaking a law.

Is the law wrong? It might well be. But that's not the issue here in any case. You should be railing against your politicians, then, and not against CDP.

If CDP have not done anything which is illegal to collect this information, then whoever infringed upon their copyright is only getting what he has had coming. Tough luck.

If they have broken a law in collecting this evidence, then they will be punished for it, no doubt.


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 18, 2011)

And the Witcher was never cheap (although it did get "cheaper", at around ~$30) over here because retail-wise it's a monopoly (only one game store chain in the whole country), and using Steam means all the hoopla of having a US$ credit card (or any currency usable in Steam) and being shafted by unfavorable exchange rates because of your country's economy and weak currency and having to assume another identity in Steam.


----------



## pr0n Inspector (Dec 18, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> And the Witcher was never cheap (although it did get "cheaper", at around ~$30) over here because retail-wise it's a monopoly (only one game store chain in the whole country), and using Steam means all the hoopla of having a US$ credit card (or any currency usable in Steam) and being shafted by unfavorable exchange rates because of your country's economy and weak currency and having to assume another identity in Steam.



then don't buy it. it's a game. you don't have to have it. and you're certainly not entitled to have it.


----------



## mod2max (Dec 18, 2011)

*How many units will sell? Hmmmmm*

You can almost smell the violation of human rights and the invasion of privacy here...

We all know this the only real way any company can catch so called "pirates" because everything any company has ever tried has been sledgehammered, within days in fact.

Now, I don't believe sending the ‘men in black’ round to people’s front doors is the right way to tackle this, but this company clearly does. What companies should be doing is lowering the price of their games, and stopping pirates at the same time! That way everyone wins, but will that happen… NO!

For anyone who has even an iota of common sense will know that these companies will never lower the price of their games, NEVER! The prices will only go up, as the working class are screwed for even more money.


----------



## INSTG8R (Dec 18, 2011)

WhiteLotus said:


> If you had any sense you would have seen that this game is called "The Witcher 2". The "2" indicates that it is the second game, thus there being a first. If you wanted an indication as to what it might have been like you would have picked up the first one for next to nothing in the bargain bins as it was going for around $5 at the time of number 2's release. That would have given you every indication about the story, the controls, and what the world of the Witcher is about. But instead you decided to fuck the very people that worked hard to provide you with an entertainment source and not pay for it. It does not matter that you "only got to the tutorial" you still should have paid for it. If you are that lazy, or that cheap to pay for the game then you should give up your right to play any game. You are an insolent fool, who quite frankly should revise your attitude. The game was around $30 on release, and if you couldn't afford it then, then you should have waited all of a month before it went down to $20-25.
> 
> Downloading a game on the pre tense that "it's my right to try it before I buy it" is never excusable. That's like going into McDonald's and taking a chunk out of a burger and walking out without paying because you didn't like it.



I have spent hundreds if not a $1000 dollar on games this year so your high and mightiness doesn't sway me at all. There is not ONE game on my HDD's that is not paid for. I certainly don't feel any regret or remorse for checking out one game without paying for it. Frankly seeing how CD Projekt is handling this I feel even less inclined to care. I don't make a habit to download games I make a habit of paying for them. So keep your personal attacks to yourself


----------



## .:{KC}:. (Dec 18, 2011)

athlonite said:


> i give it a week before it's hacked and rendered useless



+ ?


----------



## akashkoppa (Dec 18, 2011)

hi guys i am new here. i registered just to reply to this "factually wrong" post. 
first of all let me say that the "technology" that this blog is bashing is not owned by CD projekt but by the legal company that has been hired by them and it is not something that has been sneakily installed on our computers by CD projekt. what they are saying is the legal company has some tech that can track the downloaders of witcher 2 torrents from torrent sites.

if CD projekt had installed something nasty then that would need constant internet connection but witcher 2 is DRM free. they even took the effort to remove DRM from non GOG  copies. this post is factually wrong and should be considered as such


----------



## qubit (Dec 18, 2011)

mod2max said:


> *You can almost smell the violation of human rights and the invasion of privacy here...*
> 
> We all know this the only real way any company can catch so called "pirates" because everything any company has ever tried has been sledgehammered, within days in fact.
> 
> ...


Yeah, got it. +1


----------



## olstyle (Dec 18, 2011)

I have not read every comment, so it might have been said before:

*This article is not in any way a news article! *
It's a onesided comment of *qubit* about what he himself thinks is bad about the way cd project has chosen to deal with piracy.
You can offer your opinion in an additional post or even in an editorial if you like to, but please don't call this a news post because it just isn't.
There is nothing objective about this post and it doesn't deal with facts but with assumptions by the author.


----------



## WhiteLotus (Dec 18, 2011)

INSTG8R said:


> I have spent hundreds if not a $1000 dollar on games this year so your high and mightiness doesn't sway me at all. There is not ONE game on my HDD's that is not paid for. I certainly don't feel any regret or remorse for checking out one game without paying for it. Frankly seeing how CD Projekt is handling this I feel even less inclined to care. I don't make a habit to download games I make a habit of paying for them. So keep your personal attacks to yourself



If you spent that much on games, why did you not buy this one? What's $1035 compared to $1000?

Or are all your other games "try before you buy" too?


----------



## qubit (Dec 18, 2011)

olstyle said:


> I have not read every comment, so it might have been said before:
> 
> *This article is not in any way a news article! *
> It's a onesided comment of *qubit* about what he himself thinks is bad about the way cd project has chosen to deal with piracy.
> ...



It certainly is a news post and I reported on some dodgy behaviour by this company - have a go at them for pulling this shit on their customers, not me for reporting it and giving some analysis on this situation. 

Anyway, there's a comments section which I subscribe to, so comments like this need to go there, please.


----------



## INSTG8R (Dec 18, 2011)

WhiteLotus said:


> If you spent that much on games, why did you not buy this one? What's $1035 compared to $1000?
> 
> Or are all your other games "try before you buy" too?



Nope I can count on one hand the amount of games I "tried" this year(3 to be exact). The Witcher 2 just happened to be one of them and the only one I never bought.


----------



## qubit (Dec 18, 2011)

INSTG8R said:


> Nope I can count on one hand the amount of games I "tried" this year(3 to be exact). The Witcher 2 just happened to be one of them and the only one I never bought.



I'll bet it would have pissed you off to buy a game you didn't enjoy, too? Yeah, companies should release demos like they used to, to help people decide. Reviews and YouTube only go so far and you have to _physically play it_ to properly tell.

How anyone can suggest that someone who's spent $1000 on games such as yourself is a "pirate" is beyond me.

-----------------------------

I'm gonna get flamed for this, aren't I?


----------



## WhiteLotus (Dec 18, 2011)

INSTG8R said:


> Nope I can count on one hand the amount of games I "tried" this year(3 to be exact). The Witcher 2 just happened to be one of them and the only one I never bought.



Then again, why not pay for it? What's $1000 compared to $1035?



qubit said:


> I'll bet it would have pissed you off to buy a game you didn't enjoy, too? Yeah, companies should release demos like they used to, to help people decide. Reviews and YouTube only go so far and you have to _physically play it_ to properly tell.
> 
> How anyone can suggest that someone who's spent $1000 on games such as yourself is a "pirate" is beyond me.
> 
> ...



:shadedshu

So someone who spends more money than the normal person on games is allowed to break the law for their own gain? 


Right....


----------



## Yukikaze (Dec 18, 2011)

qubit said:


> I'll bet it would have pissed you off to buy a game you didn't enjoy, too? Yeah, companies should release demos like they used to, to help people decide. Reviews and YouTube only go so far and you have to _physically play it_ to properly tell.
> 
> How anyone can suggest that someone who's spent $1000 on games such as yourself is a "pirate" is beyond me.
> 
> ...



You're not entitled to trying anything before you buy it. 

You got a problem with the current model? Vote with your feet (go and pester your local political representatives), your voice (vote for those who support copyright law change) and your wallet (do not buy a game if the company does not provide an adequate demo).

Downloading an illegal copy is copyright infringement as our laws (in most places, at least, it seems) are currently written. So it does not matter whether he has purchased 1,000 USD worth of games, or has not spent a single dime: He is a "pirate". 

End of story.


----------



## qubit (Dec 18, 2011)

@Yukikaze

Indeed, there's a lot of games I don't buy because I'm not sure of them and I never download a dodgy copy of anything. I also bought Crysis 2 on Steam a while back, which came with undisclosed DRM and I forced Valve to refund me on that POS. Note that the POS refers to the DRM, not the game, which I really liked, so it proves that I stuck to my principles here.

Note that you can't get Crysis 2 on Steam any more, because of politics between Valve and EA.


----------



## INSTG8R (Dec 18, 2011)

qubit said:


> I'll bet it would have pissed you off to buy a game you didn't enjoy, too? Yeah, companies should release demos like they used to, to help people decide. Reviews and YouTube only go so far and you have to _physically play it_ to properly tell.
> 
> How anyone can suggest that someone who's spent $1000 on games such as yourself is a "pirate" is beyond me.
> 
> ...



OH I have bought more than a few stinkers this year. So yeah I get a little buy happy sometimes.

I am a bit of a "Steam Junkie"

http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197976809289


----------



## Yukikaze (Dec 18, 2011)

qubit said:


> @Yukikaze
> 
> Indeed, there's a lot of games I don't buy because I'm not sure of them and I never download a dodgy copy of anything. I also bought Crysis 2 on Steam a while back, which came with undisclosed DRM and I forced Valve to refund me on that POS. Note that the POS refers to the DRM, not the game, which I really liked, so it proves that I stuck to my principles here.
> 
> Note that you can't get Crysis 2 on Steam any more, because of politics between Valve and EA.



That's great. We all have our principles and I definitely respect the people who hold to theirs. 

However, my post was directed at the statement:
"How anyone can suggest that someone who's spent $1000 on games such as yourself is a "pirate" is beyond me."

You have not addressed the criticism I've directed at that statement. Cheers!


----------



## qubit (Dec 18, 2011)

INSTG8R said:


> OH I have bought more than a few stinkers this year. So yeah I get a little buy happy sometimes.
> 
> I am a bit of a "Steam Junkie"
> 
> http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197976809289



OMG we understand each other! I've got so many games I'll probably never get round to playing, lol.


----------



## Yukikaze (Dec 18, 2011)

qubit said:


> OMG we understand each other! I've got so many games I'll probably never get round to playing, lol.



Took me a while to stop gobbling up Steam sales as well. I own a ton of games I'll never even install, much less play


----------



## olstyle (Dec 18, 2011)

qubit said:


> I reported on some dodgy behaviour by this company -


That would have been the news post.


> pulling this shit on their customers


That's the personal opinion part which belongs in an extra post.


> have a go at them


Maybe I will some day. But only when I get proof of missbehaviour and not based on your personal assumptions.


> Anyway, there's a comments section which I subscribe to, so comments like this need to go there, please.


If you point me the way to "there", I might do that .


----------



## qubit (Dec 18, 2011)

Yukikaze said:


> That's great. We all have our principles and I definitely respect the people who hold to theirs.
> 
> However, my post was directed at the statement:
> "How anyone can suggest that someone who's spent $1000 on games such as yourself is a "pirate" is beyond me."
> ...



The point is that INSTG8R has spent so much money on games that you can hardly accuse him of being a "pirate" because he downloaded a few games that he wasn't too sure about. Why should he have to spend all that money on them, just to realize that he doesn't like them? It boils down to my previous argument that the games companies should release a demo for every game to allow someone to make an informed decision, not hope to hook them with an untried product, which they may well not like. That's just f* greedy.

In my case with Crysis 2, if I'd been able to try a demo first, I would have noticed that it had that Solidshield or whateveritwas DRM and decided not to buy. As it was, it about a month of hassle and waiting to get my refund. That's not the way to treat your customers.

So yeah, if the games companies can play dirty tricks like this, then so can their potential customers.


----------



## Yukikaze (Dec 18, 2011)

qubit said:


> The point is that INSTG8R has spent so much money on games that you can hardly accuse him of being a "pirate" because he downloaded a few games that he wasn't too sure about. Why should he have to spend all that money on them, just to realize that he doesn't like them?



Assuming someone downloads a few games that he is not sure about, he is a "pirate". There is no more to that part, simply because it is a statement of a fact, rather than opinion. The person doing that commits copyright infringement as per the definition of the law.

He doesn't *have* to spend all that money on them, he is free to exercise his choice and *not buy a game* if he is not sure about it. Computer games are not the only sphere of life where we have to make the choice between buying something or avoiding it because we are not sure about whether it is worth the price of admission. I see no reason why it should be any different.

Don't get me wrong: I agree with the need for demos and I agree with the fact that games are overpriced (I rarely if ever buy a game at launch: I buy them when they are on sale a year down the line. Other games I simply ignore). However, this does not place a so-called "pirate" on the high moral ground if he uses these (or similar) reasons to justify dodging the purchase in the first place. It does quite the opposite.


----------



## etayorius (Dec 18, 2011)

They are soo Trolling, there is no application in the background sending info through the internet, and if they are... i can see a juicy way to sue them for installing Spyware into my PC without my knowledge.


----------



## qubit (Dec 18, 2011)

olstyle said:


> If you point me the way to "there", I might do that .



No problem.  Here, there's two places:

Our news, your views

What's wrong with our forums?


----------



## pantherx12 (Dec 18, 2011)

AsRock said:


> No a bunch of other company's would be after me if i copied his computer as they would be under threat of going bankrupt..  Remember people do that too so does it make it right ?.



You realise if everything could be copied their would be no need for a monetary system right?


----------



## TheGuruStud (Dec 18, 2011)

LOL. This an act (or purely press release) of desperation. They don't know to manage a business and are resorting to threats. I know a giant entity that does the same thing and never has anyone else's interests in mind (govt).

Let them try this. It will be hilarious. Not only can they not afford the legal fees to sue everyone, they will be getting sued for it in the process.

Also, you can't get a name from someone's IP whose mac isn't registered to them  
Best of luck to these bozos.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Dec 18, 2011)

betya the code still will be hacked


----------



## badtaylorx (Dec 18, 2011)

sounds like the op has some pirated games to me....


----------



## qubit (Dec 18, 2011)

badtaylorx said:


> sounds like the op has some pirated games to me....



I do not. You shouldn't go making accusations like that.


----------



## digibucc (Dec 18, 2011)

don't you know Q, people only need .6 posts in order to know everything about you. if it seems they are wrong you are just being dishonest. rule #44 of the internet.


----------



## Blacklash (Dec 19, 2011)

If there is nothing wrong with pirating games why do the folks defending it get upset when someone suggests they may engage in the activity? 

I don't expect people that do pirate games to get on their rooftops and scream, "I pirate software!" On the other hand, I don't expect people who aggressively support such things to be outraged or indignant if people suspect them of pirating.

If I was vehemently arguing on a forum for the legalization weed, I wouldn't be surprised if people suspected that I blaze. If it could bring me trouble, I simply wouldn't confirm or deny.


----------



## digibucc (Dec 19, 2011)

Blacklash said:


> If there is nothing wrong with pirating games why do the folks defending it get upset when someone suggests they may engage in the activity?



it's amazing how many times it can be said and people still don't even want to recognize the argument. just because you disagree with the way publishers are handling the issue doesn't mean you are a pirate. just because you recognize that the word steal doesn't apply to situations where nothing is actually physically removed, doesn't mean you are a pirate. just because you don't fall in line and eat the lies doesn't mean you are a pirate.

it is entirely possible to recognize the lies, price gouging, and general disdain for customers that the game industry contains - while at the same time refraining from illegally downloading software. And when you assume we are pirates ourselves, from your base argument you are personally calling us thieves. do you really expect us to not become upset with that ? *not to mention there is simply no need to make assumptions about someones personal character, just because they disagree with you. if you can't add anything more than that to the discussion, imho you don't really deserve to be a part of it*


----------



## Wile E (Dec 19, 2011)

This news story is not true. Reread the PCGamer source.

There is no mention of tracking software being installed anywhere. The are monitoring piracy sites, and using that to catch people in some manner.


----------



## Blacklash (Dec 19, 2011)

I did not say people who defend pirating are pirates.

I said it's not >surprising< that some may suspect others of it if they vigorously defend such a position.

I support gay rights however I'm straight. I don't become indignant if people accuse me of being gay. Why? I don't find being gay morally objectionable.


----------



## digibucc (Dec 19, 2011)

Blacklash said:


> I support gay rights however I'm straight. I don't become indignant if people accuse me of being gay. Why? I don't find being gay morally objectionable.



I don't "support" piracy. i don't know who on here actually does, save maybe for newt  - and he's been silent here. replace every instance of "are a pirate" with "support piracy" (in my last post) and maybe it'll be clearer.

Also - you are not (i don't think) currently in a discussion ABOUT homosexuality. no one is calling you gay in order to personally disparage you in an attempt to evade the fact that they have nothing to add, or can't logically respond to an argument. it's bad enough when people assume knowledge and use insults out of ignorance - when it's a deliberate attempt to derail and defame... yeah that's a little annoying


----------



## qubit (Dec 19, 2011)

Wile E said:


> This news story is not true. Reread the PCGamer source.
> 
> There is no mention of tracking software being installed anywhere. The are monitoring piracy sites, and using that to catch people in some manner.



Yes, they're using those torrent sites as a starting point. However, as has been mentioned in the PC Gamer article and widely shown elsewhere, accurately targeting individuals using this method is next to impossible. Then, as they are being all cagey about revealing their methods or which company they're using, I speculated on how they could be achieving this alleged "100%" success rate, which sounds highly dubious to myself and the authors of the source articles - and I clearly stated that it was speculation in my story. The fact is that short on spying on users by lifting their details off their PCs you just can't identify them with any accuracy.

Yes, they should come clean on what methods they're using and I don't buy the argument that it would compromise their ability to catch people. If their methods are really so legal and benign, then they shouldn't have a problem discussing them.


----------



## Wile E (Dec 19, 2011)

I don't disagree they should come clean. But it shouldn't be assumed that it's software that gets installed on our computer, and your aticle takes a heavy bias in that direction, with no real facts to base it on.

Then the part about how them tracking down suspected pirates is extortion is also something I strongly disagree with. They have a right to protect their intellectual property. It doesn't matter what effect piracy has on the issue, it's taking something you were not authorized to take, and is therefore illegal. The monetary ramifications on the gaming industry are irrelevant.


----------



## digibucc (Dec 19, 2011)

Wile E said:


> Then the part about how them tracking down suspected pirates is extortion is also something I strongly disagree with.



that's something a us judge has agreed with. tracking down actual pirates is obviously fine - but when you just send letters that demand $1000 or you will be brought to court - and people who definitely, 100% did not pirate get caught in that net - and not just caught, but they were aimed for -then it is extortion, and that's what the us judge and i believe qubit were referring to - not to speak for either.


----------



## Wile E (Dec 19, 2011)

digibucc said:


> that's something a us judge has agreed with. tracking down actual pirates is obviously fine - but when you just send letters that demand $1000 or you will be brought to court - and people who definitely, 100% did not pirate get caught in that net - and not just caught, but they were aimed for -then it is extortion, and that's what the us judge and i believe qubit were referring to - not to speak for either.



Still can't assume it's extortion when we don't know how much compensation they are demanding. The judge only agreed that unnaturally inflated amounts are extortion, not legitimate amounts.


----------



## qubit (Dec 19, 2011)

Wile E said:


> I don't disagree they should come clean. But it shouldn't be assumed that it's software that gets installed on our computer, and your aticle takes a heavy bias in that direction, with no real facts to base it on.



Well, I did say it was speculation.  But it's very reasonable and plausible speculation. If you have a better suggestion of how they can do this without spyware, I'd be interested to hear it.



Wile E said:


> Then the part about how them tracking down suspected pirates is extortion is also something I strongly disagree with. They have a right to protect their intellectual property. It doesn't matter what effect piracy has on the issue, it's taking something you were not authorized to take, and is therefore illegal. The monetary ramifications on the gaming industry are irrelevant.



Yes, it's extortion. Demanding money/compensation from someone without actually demonstrating any losses from their actions is extortion. This is regardless of the legality or morality of the target's initial action (the alleged piracy here). It's particularly out of order and extortionate when you have some big corporation going after an individual whom they know damned well doesn't have the resources (ie money) to fight back. Regardless of their guilt or innocence, they're just gonna pay up, because they are forced to and these big companies totally rely on that. In fact, they CD Projekt actually admitted that none of the cases had actually reached court. And I can tell you that's the way they want it to stay, lest their little extortion scams get scrutinized to closely, like happened in England. Davenport Lyons & ACS Law the two scam artists who tried this scam on people got destroyed by the courts in the end, didn't they?


----------



## Wile E (Dec 19, 2011)

It is not reasonable or plausible to speculate it's something installed on our computers when the sources you used for this editorial make no mention of anything being installed. There are no facts to back your speculation.

It's not extortion if they have valid claims against the subject, and the amount demanded is not exorbitant. If they have proof a person pirated it, they have a valid claim. You simply do not have enough facts on this issue to be able to label it extortion.


----------



## qubit (Dec 19, 2011)

Wile E said:


> It is not reasonable or plausible to speculate it's something installed on our computers when the sources you used for this editorial make no mention of anything being installed. There are no facts to back your speculation.



The sources don't have to say it. It's just a bit of deductive reasoning from the facts in the source stories. Seriously, how do you think they can identify individuals with such accuracy without doing this?



Wile E said:


> It's not extortion if they have valid claims against the subject, and the amount demanded is not exorbitant. If they have proof a person pirated it, they have a valid claim. You simply do not have enough facts on this issue to be able to label it extortion.



Claiming _any_ amount without proving damages is extortion. I don't care whether the law legally allow them to do so or not, in my book, it's extortion. For every other crime on the planet, the plaintiff has to show some kind of loss - except for bloody copyright.  This is some kind of hallowed ground where they can just claim without showing any kind of losses. What kind of BS is this? :shadedshu And my point about big corps just squeezing the little guy regardless of guilt is still valid - you've not addressed this.


----------



## Wile E (Dec 19, 2011)

qubit said:


> The sources don't have to say it. It's just a bit of deductive reasoning from the facts in the source stories. Seriously, how do you think they can identify individuals with such accuracy without doing this?
> 
> 
> 
> Claiming _any_ amount without proving damages is extortion. I don't care whether the law legally allow them to do so or not, in my book, it's extortion. For every other crime on the planet, the plaintiff has to show some kind of loss - except for bloody copyright.  This is some kind of hallowed ground where they can just claim without showing any kind of losses. What kind of BS is this? :shadedshu And my point about big corps just squeezing the little guy regardless of guilt is still valid - you've not addressed this.



They are only claiming accuracy. They have provided no proof. Again, no facts to back the theory at all. It's not a reasonable assumption in the slightest with so few facts.

If you have a copy of the game that was not obtained legitimately, you need to pay the retail value for that game, plus any costs associated with them having to take legal action. If you do not want to obtain the game legitimately, you don't get to have it, period. It's pretty cut and dry to me. There is no gray area. This is not extortion if all they are asking is for the cost of the game plus any legitimate legal fees. That is 100% reasonable.


----------



## Frick (Dec 19, 2011)

qubit said:


> I don't care whether the law legally allow them to do so or not, in my book, it's extortion.



This is one of the main issues have with your entire argument. Why would you be above the law?


----------



## digibucc (Dec 19, 2011)

Frick said:


> This is one of the main issues have with your entire argument. Why would you be above the law?



he never said he was above it, he said that's how he viewed it. if you blindly obey the law with no thought to morality or ethics ... that's something i have an issue with. do you know how complicated the law is? how many things are illegal? i would bet that you do something illegal every day without even noticing it.

if the law were set by hitler or pol pot, does it have as much weight then? well then who are YOU to decide whose laws are worth following and whose aren't? we don't have that right?




badtaylorx said:


> but your staunch defense of software pirating certainly makes it sound that way....


he's not defending piracy - i don't think anyone here actually is. he is defending the innocent people who get snared in the extortion trap. i don't get why it is so hard to separate the two. there is more to the argument than they are pirates, pirates = thieves, end of story. the publishers actions DO matter, regardless of what caused them. the have repercussions and to just shift that blame to "pirates" is simply an attempt to scapegoat, though a good one at that.


----------



## badtaylorx (Dec 19, 2011)

qubit said:


> I do not. You shouldn't go making accusations like that.




but your staunch defense of software pirating certainly makes it sound that way....

btw...an accusation would start out "you are"

not "sounds like"




digibucc said:


> don't you know Q, people only need .6 posts in order to know everything about you. if it seems they are wrong you are just being dishonest. rule #44 of the internet.



common sense is all we need here...

anybody know the difference between a brown-noser and an a$s kisser???

depth perception


----------



## Legacy-ZA (Dec 20, 2011)

Pffft, there is already a problem that I can see with this thing, it tracks your IP address? Ooooooo brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, I am sure you got them running scared now...
All they will have to do is; Open Firewall, block all incoming/outgoing traffic / Remove LAN cable / switch off router... good luck "tracking" that IP /rolls eyes


----------



## Mussels (Dec 20, 2011)

Legacy-ZA said:


> Pffft, there is already a problem that I can see with this thing, it tracks your IP address? Ooooooo brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, I am sure you got them running scared now...
> All they will have to do is; Open Firewall, block all incoming/outgoing traffic / Remove LAN cable / switch off router... good luck "tracking" that IP /rolls eyes



they're still talking about when you download the game in the first place via torrents, not about software in the game itself.


despite the theories about software being used to track you, all the comments from the sourcem materials sound like they're just checking IP's from the torrents again.


----------



## Legacy-ZA (Dec 20, 2011)

Mussels said:


> they're still talking about when you download the game in the first place via torrents, not about software in the game itself.
> 
> 
> despite the theories about software being used to track you, all the comments from the sourcem materials sound like they're just checking IP's from the torrents again.



What you say is true.  

But (there is always a but isn't there? ) I wouldn't get my hopes up too much, I am sure there will be pirate that will create some sort of "3rd party tool" that will block their eyes, they always seem to find away around the system.


----------



## Mussels (Dec 20, 2011)

Legacy-ZA said:


> What you say is true.
> 
> But (there is always a but isn't there? ) I wouldn't get my hopes up too much, I am sure there will be pirate that will create some sort of "3rd party tool" that will block their eyes, they always seem to find away around the system.



seedbox or someome elses internet. its why IP tracking is so crap.

one person can download it and share it to 50 other people or 5,000 so the IP addresses really are worthless.


----------



## Legacy-ZA (Dec 20, 2011)

Mussels said:


> seedbox or someome elses internet. its why IP tracking is so crap.
> 
> one person can download it and share it to 50 other people or 5,000 so the IP addresses really are worthless.



I concur.


----------



## qubit (Dec 20, 2011)

badtaylorx said:


> but your staunch defense of software pirating certainly makes it sound that way....
> 
> btw...an accusation would start out "you are"
> 
> not "sounds like"



I'm not "staunchly defending piracy".  I'm against underhand methods to try and track people down for it, as I've explained very clearly in the article and in posts in this thread. Or put another way, just because someone may or may not be committing an illegal act against you, doesn't give you the right to engage in illegal acts yourself to get to them. That's basic law and order.

btw, no I don't see this whole "piracy" issue as such a big problem, as I've said. That doesn't change anything, either. 

Finally, an accusation can made any way one likes and yours was a semi-veiled and not very subtle one, so don't BS me that you weren't.


----------



## digibucc (Dec 20, 2011)

Legacy-ZA said:


> I concur.



Damnit! Why didn't I concur !?


----------



## badtaylorx (Dec 20, 2011)

qubit said:


> I'm not "staunchly defending piracy".  I'm against underhand methods to try and track people down for it, as I've explained very clearly in the article and in posts in this thread. Or put another way, just because someone may or may not be committing an illegal act against you, doesn't give you the right to engage in illegal acts yourself to get to them. That's basic law and order.
> 
> btw, no I don't see this whole "piracy" issue as such a big problem, as I've said. That doesn't change anything, either.
> 
> Finally, an accusation can made any way one likes and yours was a semi-veiled and not very subtle one, so don't BS me that you weren't.



hmmm...now is that hypocritical sarcasm or sarcastic hypocrisy???


----------



## happita (Dec 20, 2011)

At least their not dumb enough to let people KNOW PUBLICLY how they will identify pirates. That is the only way it won't get leaked and they actually have a chance of persecuting these thieves


----------



## Blacklash (Dec 21, 2011)

digibucc said:


> I don't "support" piracy. i don't know who on here actually does, save maybe for newt  - and he's been silent here. replace every instance of "are a pirate" with "support piracy" (in my last post) and maybe it'll be clearer.
> 
> Also - you are not (i don't think) currently in a discussion ABOUT homosexuality. no one is calling you gay in order to personally disparage you in an attempt to evade the fact that they have nothing to add, or can't logically respond to an argument. it's bad enough when people assume knowledge and use insults out of ignorance - when it's a deliberate attempt to derail and defame... yeah that's a little annoying



Damn, I was not suggesting anyone on this forum is calling me gay.

I was illustrating by hypothetical example how some people may make flawed assumptions about others based on the positions they choose to take.

Yes, it's unfair and annoying that _some_ people make flawed assumptions about others based on the positions they choose to take and if you're surprised by it you've a poor understanding of human nature.

Right or wrong, that's the way it is.

I've certainly never suggested everyone who is upset with CD Projekt RED on this issue is a pirate or supports pirating.

If you truly believe in something, defend it and stop worrying about what other people may think of you.

Peace and Merry Christmas


----------



## EnergyFX (Dec 21, 2011)

Funny, I legally purchase all my games... and this story somehow doesn't ruffle my feathers.

One can't help but deduce that all you ruffled feathers must be worried about something. 

Whatever concern I have over their methods of information gathering is entirely overshadowed by my hopes that they catch and convict (or sue) as many pirates as absolutely possible.  I hope every game, movie, song, software eventually has this "secret sauce" in its coding.  Stop fucking stealing!


----------



## digibucc (Dec 21, 2011)

you totally confused my reply. you asked why i would get upset at being called a pirate if at the same time i am defending piracy. my entire post was an answer to that question. the part you quoted included.


Blacklash said:


> Damn, I was not suggesting anyone on this forum is calling me gay.
> I was illustrating by hypothetical example how some people may make flawed assumptions about others based on the positions they choose to take.


i recognize that, i was pointing out how your example was not accurate by extending that example. this is a different situation than you had described.


Blacklash said:


> Yes, it's unfair and annoying that _some_ people make flawed assumptions about others based on the positions they choose to take and if you're surprised by it you've a poor understanding of human nature.
> 
> Right or wrong, that's the way it is.


it doesn't need to surprise you to annoy you. and it's not like i really made a big deal out of it, the biggest effect was your response to it! you asked why i got defensive, i explained. i don't need a life lesson... thank you though 


Blacklash said:


> I've certainly never suggested everyone who is upset with CD Projekt RED on this issue is a pirate or supports pirating.
> 
> If you truly believe in something, defend it and stop worrying about what other people may think of you.


it's not about what people think, it's about how they act. again, my point is this was a discussion, if all you can add to it are insults you have no place. that wasn't directed AT you, it was simply the answer to the question you asked.





Blacklash said:


> Peace and Merry Christmas


happy holidays


----------



## EnergyFX (Dec 21, 2011)

garyinhere said:


> Not unless you've borrowed said movie from a friend. That's what I used to do / still do / and will keep doing because it is legal. Whether it's a physical or digital copy.



Not necessarialy... perhaps you only bought permission.  Perhaps you "own" nothing, you are simply authorized to use.  If the company deems this "authorization" non-transferable then those are the rules you agree to by accepting the EULA.

Not saying that is or isn't the case here, but I think a lot of people need to shift their thinking from "owning" something to simply having "permission" to use it (provided that is what you agreed to in the EULA).

For example, I buy a car.  I sell you "permission" to use my car for $1000.  The car is still mine, I own it... but now you have permission to use it.  No where does than mean your uncle has permission to use the car, or your friends, or your kids, or anyone.  I sold YOU permission and if that is what you and I agreed to (EULA) then that is how I expect it to be.


----------



## digibucc (Dec 21, 2011)

right but EULAs can be challenged. if it really were a case of simply letting your uncle or friend borrow and play the game, and no one other than you 2 were involved, and you didn't use it at all while they had it - i doubt any judge will sentence against you.

just because they put it in their EULA's doesn't make it law. yes you were supposed to read it but unreasonable is unreasonable, and even if you are "in the wrong" the sentence would be nil. it's just that's never the case, and actual piracy is almost always involved.


----------



## Mussels (Dec 22, 2011)

EnergyFX said:


> Funny, I legally purchase all my games... and this story somehow doesn't ruffle my feathers.
> 
> One can't help but deduce that all you ruffled feathers must be worried about something.
> 
> Whatever concern I have over their methods of information gathering is entirely overshadowed by my hopes that they catch and convict (or sue) as many pirates as absolutely possible.  I hope every game, movie, song, software eventually has this "secret sauce" in its coding.  Stop fucking stealing!



i've lived in a house with 8 people, and the net was under my name.

so if they went to hunt down that one pirate, guess who got the blame?


this whole argument of "everyone who disagrees is a pirate" is just stupid. grow up and get off your moral high horse.


----------



## qubit (Dec 22, 2011)

Mussels said:


> this whole argument of "everyone who disagrees is a pirate" is just stupid. grow up and get off your moral high horse.



Yup, agree with your whole post and I hate that dumb accusation too.

It's the same fallacy as that old chestnut about privacy where if you're innocent you've got nothing to hide. That's wrong in a good 10 different ways at least.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 22, 2011)

happita said:


> At least their not dumb enough to let people KNOW PUBLICLY how they will identify pirates. That is the only way it won't get leaked and they actually have a chance of persecuting these thieves


Uh, if they don't let you know, it could be considered espionage which is illegal in most nations without a search warrant.  That fact alone means that most of these cases that end up in court will be thrown out because the evidence presented was obtained through illegal means.  They know that as well as the next lawyer so their objective is quite clearly _extortion_.  Send menacing letters claiming to have proof you violated copyright and demand a fine with the threat of trial if you fail to pay up.  In short, CD Projekt has stooped to the same level as the MPAA and RIAA--they're all thugs looking to make a quick buck off of those that can't afford a lawyer.


----------



## qubit (Dec 22, 2011)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Uh, if they don't let you know, it could be considered espionage which is illegal in most nations without a search warrant.  That fact alone means that most of these cases that end up in court will be thrown out because the evidence presented was obtained through illegal means.  They know that as well as the next lawyer so their objective is quite clearly _extortion_.  Send menacing letters claiming to have proof you violated copyright and demand a fine with the threat of trial if you fail to pay up.  In short, CD Projekt has stooped to the same level as the MPAA and RIAA--they're all thugs looking to make a quick buck off of those that can't afford a lawyer.



_Exactly._ It's nothing but an illegal extortion racket. So beautifully put.


----------



## Wile E (Dec 23, 2011)

qubit said:


> _Exactly._ It's nothing but an illegal extortion racket. So beautifully put.



While I agree with some of his points, if they do have real proof of illegal activity (I somehow doubt that part tho), and they are not asking for exorbitant amounts, it's still not extortion. An offer to settle out of court is not extortion. If you are innocent you take it to court and counter sue for costs.


----------



## qubit (Dec 23, 2011)

Wile E said:


> While I agree with some of his points, if they do have real proof of illegal activity (I somehow doubt that part tho), and they are not asking for exorbitant amounts, it's still not extortion. An offer to settle out of court is not extortion. If you are innocent you take it to court and counter sue for costs.



Well, I respectfully disagree, for the various reasons I explained in the article and previous posts on here.


----------



## Wile E (Dec 23, 2011)

So, you would prefer them to jump straight to full blown lawsuit?


----------



## qubit (Dec 23, 2011)

Wile E said:


> So, you would prefer them to jump straight to full blown lawsuit?



What gives you that idea? I've said from the start that they shouldn't be going after people at all. I've explained my viewpoint in detail in the news article and forum posts, so I'm not gonna be drawn into it here.


----------



## Wile E (Dec 23, 2011)

Oh, so they should just let people download the game as much as they want? 

Sorry, but that's asinine. If you didn't obtain it legitimately, you have no right to have it, period. There is no justification for piracy, period. It is not a gray area at all. Totally black and white.

Now, the gray area comes in the ways piracy are combated. Root kits and other such tactics that compromise a computer's security are a no-no. But if they did come up with a reliable way to catch people without resorting to that, or things like it, then they have every right to go after the people that obtained the game illegally.


----------



## qubit (Dec 23, 2011)

I did say I wasn't gonna be drawn into it...


----------



## Wile E (Dec 23, 2011)

Regardless, I just don't see the validity of your argument at all.


----------



## ViperXTR (Dec 23, 2011)

*pops some corn*
butter? sour cream and onion? chees? hmm...


----------



## entropy13 (Dec 24, 2011)

http://torrentfreak.com/the-witcher...witch-hunt-with-bogus-accuracy-claims-111224/


----------



## qubit (Dec 24, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> http://torrentfreak.com/the-witcher...witch-hunt-with-bogus-accuracy-claims-111224/



Brilliant.  I've not had a chance to read it (hard at work on the best tech of 2011 article) but this sounds like it's worthy of a follow up article.


----------



## Frick (Dec 24, 2011)

qubit said:


> Brilliant.  I've not had a chance to read it (hard at work on the best tech of 2011 article) but this sounds like it's worthy of a follow up article.



Naaah, it's the same stuff as you did with no actual information about anything, only speculation.


----------



## qubit (Dec 24, 2011)

Frick said:


> Naaah, it's the same stuff as you did with no actual information about anything, only speculation.



Frick talks rubbish again.


----------



## Frick (Dec 24, 2011)

qubit said:


> Frick talks rubbish again.



Well it is ungrounded. They say they want money from people that have not downloaded the game and have no single source to back it up other than it usually happens in other cases.


----------



## Athlonite (Dec 24, 2011)

notice sofar it's only Germany that's been hit with these letters I don't think they could get away with it in any other country without disclosing how it's being done 

whether it be DRM or IP traking or some spybot/trojen in the game itself


----------



## qubit (Dec 24, 2011)

Frick said:


> Well it is ungrounded. They say they want money from people that have not downloaded the game and have no single source to back it up other than it usually happens in other cases.



Look you, I'm busy with my 2011 tech article!  It's a really big one and it takes a lot of time and effort to write.  Damn, I need to eat dinner at some point... Why is writing for TPU so compelling? 



Athlonite said:


> notice sofar it's only Germany that's been hit with these letters I don't think they could get away with it in any other country without disclosing how it's being done
> 
> whether it be DRM or IP traking or some spybot/trojen in the game itself



Yup, you're right. I can imagine a place like Spain, where they have much saner copyright laws would take a dim view of this.


----------



## Wile E (Dec 25, 2011)

I figured it wasn't any form of software installed on our computers.


----------



## qubit (Dec 25, 2011)

Wile E said:


> I figured it wasn't any form of software installed on our computers.



Ok, I'll bite, so how do they do it? Make it good and convincing. This one I've gotta see.


----------



## Frick (Dec 25, 2011)

qubit said:


> Ok, I'll bite, so how do they do it? Make it good and convincing. This one I've gotta see.



I think he used the phrase as "I knew they didn't do it like that" rather than "I figured out how they do it". But yeah it kinda came out of the blue.

It's still impossible to say anything about it without more information.


----------



## Wile E (Dec 26, 2011)

I was referring to the torrentfreak link. It said innocent people are getting letters. That tells me they are just tracking IPs again, and that no super secret spyware is involved.

AKA: They are absolutely full of shit when they claim 100% accuracy.


----------



## Frick (Dec 26, 2011)

Wile E said:


> I was referring to the torrentfreak link. It said innocent people are getting letters. That tells me they are just tracking IPs again, and that no super secret spyware is involved.
> 
> AKA: They are absolutely full of shit when they claim 100% accuracy.



It said innocent people might get letters.


----------



## Wile E (Dec 26, 2011)

Then I misread it, and we are back to where we started.

I still say it's IP tracking. Makes more sense.


----------



## OOZMAN (Dec 26, 2011)

Haven't read the whole thread, just illegally downloaded this game. So I'm going to jail?


----------



## Frick (Dec 26, 2011)

OOZMAN said:


> Haven't read the whole thread, just illegally downloaded this game. So I'm going to jail?



Appeantly you didn't read the first post either.


----------



## Athlonite (Dec 26, 2011)

OOZMAN said:


> Haven't read the whole thread, just illegally downloaded this game. So I'm going to jail?



No your not, you'll just get a nice little scam letter asking you to pay some bogus bill or get taken to court 

if I were you I'd ask for the proof and how they came by it 

then come here and tell all of us so we know and the pointless back and forth can finally be put to rest


----------



## Frick (Dec 26, 2011)

Yeah it's totally a scam if he/she did download it illegaly. I never pay speed tickets either, it's all a scam man.


----------



## Athlonite (Dec 26, 2011)

it is if they can't or wont provide the proof that lead them to accusing you 

at least with a speeding ticket you can get proof it was you which is provided on request


----------



## Wile E (Dec 27, 2011)

Athlonite said:


> it is if they can't or wont provide the proof that lead them to accusing you
> 
> at least with a speeding ticket you can get proof it was you which is provided on request



But what if they do provide proof?


----------



## qubit (Dec 27, 2011)

Wile E said:


> But what if they do provide proof?



That would be interesting. In the meantime they're blowing hot air.


----------



## Wile E (Dec 27, 2011)

I think so too. But it is a possibility, regardless of how slim.

What then?


----------



## qubit (Dec 27, 2011)

Let's cross that bridge when we come to it.


----------



## xenocide (Dec 27, 2011)

They already admitted they were back to IP Tracking.  They just claim to be doing it "more effectively" than others, which still isn't true.  RPS had a pretty amazing article explaining the whole situation.  CD Projekt have nobody to blame but themselves if their game didn't sell well.  Skyrim is a similar genre, and had no problems making money on the PC platform.


----------



## Wile E (Dec 27, 2011)

It's more fun to cross it now.


----------



## OOZMAN (Dec 27, 2011)

Frick said:


> Appeantly you didn't read the first post either.



Ahhhh.. I did.. 

Don't quite understand the point you're trying to get across.


----------



## EnergyFX (Dec 29, 2011)

Mussels said:


> i've lived in a house with 8 people, and the net was under my name.
> 
> so if they went to hunt down that one pirate, guess who got the blame?
> 
> ...



Then you would be a victim of who you choose to associate with.  If you aren't the pirate then I would hope you would be able to defend yourself out of it... really I do.  But if it's your network then it is also your responsibility to lay down some rules.

I never said "everyone who disagrees must be a pirate".  That is actually quite a stretch from my words.  I said one can't help but deduce that people getting so upset over this seem to be worried about something.  Disagreeing is one thing.  Getting all riled up is very different.  Saying "everyone who disagrees must be a pirate" would be a stupid generalization.

And you telling me to grow up is probably the most immature comment I've ever heard from you (and a moderator no less?  wtf?) :shadedshu  I've actually had quite a bit of respect for you up until now.  As far as this matter is concerned, a 'grown up' is one that knows stealing is illegal and wrong.  A 'responsible grown up' is one that not only knows stealing is illegal and wrong but also takes measures to ensure such activities aren't performed on a network he is ultimately responsible for.

As for my moral high horse... nope, I'll sit here and exercise my right to spew opinion no different than you, the OP, and numerous others sit on your morally questionable (insert creature of choice here) and spew your opinion in opposition. 

Disclaimer:  I toe the line of hipocracy here.  I used to download all sorts of crap.  I guess I 'grew up' one day and decided to stop being a douchebag pirate.


----------

