did you pirate skyrim?

MrSparkle said:

While I am unsure if you are playing devils advocate or not, your reasoning seems absurdly one sided. You argue against piracy and for the big publishers, but who is looking out for the consumer?

Click to expand...

We're talking about a recreational luxury item. You make it sound as if we're talking about some evil oil cartel putting the squeeze on consumers by gouging them at the pump. Outside of fraud, it has always been the province of the consumers to look out for themselves in this kind of market by voting with their wallets.

MrSparkle said:

...but I do understand how more and more people are being driven torwards it.....

Click to expand...

So do I. I even posted to that effect earlier in this thread, and that I think the current mode of thought by IP owners in digital asset industries on combating piracy is the wrong way to go, but at the end of the day it's simply an argument to advocate constructive change. It's not a persuasive argument in defense of piracy. The proper thing to do if you find the market conditions for PC games to be so objectionable is to abstain from purchasing it. It's not food, or shelter, or a vital medication. It's a video game.

Dagmar said:

We're talking about a recreational luxury item. You make it sound as if we're talking about some evil oil cartel putting the squeeze on consumers by gouging them at the pump.

Click to expand...

Indeed I did. My arguement sounds much more convincing when I exaggerate in that manner. A perfectly valid debate tactic .

Dagmar said:

it has always been the province of the consumers to look out for themselves in this kind of market by voting with their wallets.

Click to expand...

That's my point, consumers are looking out for themselves... by pirating, and publishers are in no small part encouraging it by treating PC gamers as second class citizens.

Dagmar said:

The proper thing to do if you find the market conditions for PC games to be so objectionable is to abstain from purchasing it. It's not food, or shelter, or a vital medication. It's a video game.

Click to expand...

If only it were that easy; have you seen the sales numbers for Modern Warefare 3 or Battlefield 3? The masses will pay for it whilst none the wiser that they're shelling out more than their console counterparts. Usually Steam comes out with some sort of deal a few weeks after release that brings prices down to the more reasonable $50.

Dagmar said:

And yet you felt the need to mention it.

1. You continue to ignore the fact that it's not about putting a company out of business. Piracy hurts people. It hurts the businesses and they pass the hurt on to their consumers and their employees. It's not the victimless crime that people who pirate pretend it to be.
2. Piracy may not put Bethesda out of business, but it can put smaller companies out of business.

This irrelevant and morally and intellectually barren argument was already addressed and dismissed in several other posts. If you can't grasp the concept that using something that doesn't belong to you is wrong then repeating it again is pointless.

Click to expand...

Alright fine, it's clear that we're not going to agree. You think pirating is stealing, I think it's a perfectly fine way for people to get their enjoyment from a game but still be able to use their money for more important things. It is however a very pointless thing to argue about.

Why can't we be friends, why can't we be friends...

The way I see it, people who pirate are not gonna buy it anyway, so if pirating didn't exist, then they just wouldn't get it. So in a way pirating is like free publicity, because the person who pirates wont buy the game, but all his friends might. I have a business myself too and I give out my products sometimes for publicity, so I'm technically loosing money. By pirating, Bethesda isn't loosing any money, they're just not gaining any from that particular person.

Esteban Araya said:

The way I see it, people who pirate are not gonna buy it anyway, so if pirating didn't exist, then they just wouldn't get it.

Click to expand...

Reality simply doesn't comport with this assertion. Of all the studies done on the impacts of pirating, not a single one of them supports the notion that all or even most people who pirate product would never buy the product if the option to pirate it didn't exist. All one needs to do is look at what happened to sales in the music industry to realize that many people who would have otherwise purchased product stopped doing so when the option to pirate music via the internet became available. While there are without a doubt people that pirate product that would not otherwise purchase it, it is also without a doubt that there are people who pirate product that genuinely represent a lost sale.

Dagmar said:

Reality simply doesn't comport with this assertion. Of all the studies done on the impacts of pirating, not a single one of them supports the notion that all or even most people who pirate product would never buy the product if the option to pirate it didn't exist. All one needs to do is look at what happened to sales in the music industry to realize that many people who would have otherwise purchased product stopped doing so when the option to pirate music via the internet became available. While there are without a doubt people that pirate product that would not otherwise purchase it, it is also without a doubt that there are people who pirate product that genuinely represent a lost sale.

Click to expand...

On the contrary, pirates are more likely to purchase entertainment products.
Movie Industry Buries Study Results That Pirates Buy More DVDs Than Average
Swiss Government Says Piracy Is Not Harmful
Gabe Newel: Publishers Push Gamers To Piracy But Valve Is Not Affected
In fact, most of the so-called "studies" are sponsored by the Music Industry or Hollywood and are incredibly biased; or if the study's findings do not coincide with the entertainment industry's point of view, it is merly kept on the hush-hush.

I have to agree with Dagmar on this. I've stopped buying CDs, well, because it's easier and free to download illegally from the internet. I'd have to really like a band to go and purchase their album/CD. And when I do, it's hardly ever over 10 dollars. I remember when CDs would easily start out at 20 dollars, now at the most, I'll see one at like 15 dollars, and it usually has extra stuff.

There's a vast amount of arguments for both sides. But, regardless of how you sugar coat it, stealing is stealing. I fully admit that me downloading music from Youtube is totally illegal. I have a friend who will occasionally burn me movies. Once again, illegal.

Go ahead and pirate Skyrim and various other games all you want, I'm not gonna tell you what to do, as I'm guilty of it in other media outlets. However, don't try to rationalize your illegal activities. The law doesn't bend just for you.

MrSparkle said:

Movie Industry Buries Study Results That Pirates Buy More DVDs Than Average

Click to expand...

This article cites to no actual authority. Anyone can write an article like that and it could be a complete work of fiction. Whoever wrote that blog entry doesn't even have the integrity to claim authorship. Conspiracy theories that make vague references to unverifiable sources aren't particularly persuasive but this does illustrate how easy it is to perpetuate fiction as truth through those who are easily guiled.

MrSparkle said:

Swiss Government Says Piracy Is Not Harmful

Click to expand...

All this blog scribble does is mention an alleged study, grab snippets of information from it in paraphrases which could be misleading, and draws conclusions that the alleged study may not even ultimately support. Since the blogger refuses to post any identifying information so we can find the study ourselves (if it even exits) we'll never know. It's a very common blogging practice often employed by bloggers with a transparent agenda

MrSparkle said:

Gabe Newel: Publishers Push Gamers To Piracy But Valve Is Not Affected

Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure why you posted this one since it supports the argument that pirated product can represent a lost sale.

The fact remains that from 1999 to 2007 the music recording industry saw a decline in sales from $14.6 billion in 1999 to $10.4 billion in 2007 and this coincides with the advent of the illegal downloading of music.

You're right, that is just a website I go to frequently for gaming related news. Maybe this TIME article is more credible for you?

http://techland.time.com/2011/07/21/study-saying-piracy-actually-helps-sell-movies-suppressed/
Graeme McMillan, a reporter at TIME wrote the article.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2397173,00.asp
This goes into more detail on the Swiss governments decisions not to incorporate more stringent piracy laws and further goes into detail on the studies the Swiss have conducted on the affects of piracy on the entertainment industry.

The last article just further supports the idea that game publishers are enticing piracy through poor business practices... and that is from a founder of Valve.


As far as the music industry is concerned, well thats another huge can of worms that I'm not sure I want to open... I've already ended up writing way more than I prefer too ^^;

To me, it's not about what piracy can and can not do. Not whether it hurts or helps. It's about what the law dictates. And the law dictates, in my country, that it's illegal. And while, I don't perform this illegal action with games, I do with music and movies. And I openly admit I'm breaking the law. My issue is with the folks who won't admit the same when they illegally download a game.

MrSparkle said:

Maybe this TIME article is more credible for you?

http://techland.time.com/2011/07/21/study-saying-piracy-actually-helps-sell-movies-suppressed/
Graeme McMillan, a reporter at TIME wrote the article.

Click to expand...

Not really. Graeme McMillan is not a reporter at Time. He's a freelance blogger for Time's Techland blog. He doesn't provide any verifiable source either. All he's doing is parroting and perpetuating the same story which you can probably find all over the internet yet you can't find the actual study itself. This is unfortunately endemic of the quality (or more appropriately lack thereof) of journalism that permeates the blogosphere. Sometimes it becomes truly lolable when the blogosphere is hoodwinked by what turns out to be a hoax admitted by the original source and this blog article changes quite literally nothing. How about posting the actual study? After all if it's real and so infamous it has to exist somewhere or perhaps it doesn't because the secret Illuminati that controls the industry and controls the entire internet suppressed it.

MrSparkle said:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2397173,00.asp
This goes into more detail on the Swiss governments decisions not to incorporate more stringent piracy laws and further goes into detail on the studies the Swiss have conducted on the affects of piracy on the entertainment industry.

Click to expand...

And it clearly states that some creators pointed to a decline in sales. One of the conclusions of the report was simply that Swiss citizens that downloaded ultimately ended up spending money somewhere in the entertainment retail industry. It says nothing about them buying the actual product they downloaded. Finally, if out of 22 of the studies examined by the Swiss government, 5 showed a positive impact on sales and 3 showed no correlation, take a wild guess what the other 14 studies showed.

MrSparkle said:

The last article just further supports the idea that game publishers are enticing piracy through poor business practices... and that is from a founder of Valve.

Click to expand...

It does so by implying that game publishers with harsher DRM policies than Valve lose sales to piracy because of their DRM policies while Valve does not. That supports the argument that piracy hurts sales.

"From the earliest days at Apple, I realized that we thrived when we created intellectual property. If people copied or stole our software, we'd be out of business. If it weren't protected, there'd be no incentive for us to make new software or product designs. If protection of intellectual property begins to disappear, creative companies will disappear or never get started. But there's a simpler reason: It's wrong to steal. It hurts other people. And it hurts your character." - Steve Jobs

Dagmar said:

Not really. Graeme McMillan is not a reporter at Time. He's a freelance blogger for Time's Techland blog. He doesn't provide any verifiable source either. All he's doing is parroting and perpetuating the same story which you can probably find all over the internet yet you can't find the actual study itself. This is unfortunately endemic of the quality (or more appropriately lack thereof) of journalism that permeates the blogosphere. Sometimes it becomes truly lolable when the blogosphere is hoodwinked by what turns out to be a hoax admitted by the original source and this blog article changes quite literally nothing. How about posting the actual study? After all if it's real and so infamous it has to exist somewhere or perhaps it doesn't because the secret Illuminati that controls the industry and controls the entire internet suppressed it.

Click to expand...

First off, I don't think calling TIME's technical section of their hard news website a "blog" is accurate.

Second, I see no "lack" of quality in the article. There are times in journalism where one cannot reveal a source without causing harm to the source itself, and this is one such case.

It is unfortunate that he cannot provide the name of the informant without said informant losing his or her job at their research firm. The article clearly states that:

As the mysterious client holds the rights to the study and chose to lock it away, the livelihood of whomever blabbed is at stake if their identity were to be revealed.

Considering TIME has no vested interest in the proliferation of piracy, I see no reason why you would cast such doubt on the validity of the article. Honestly, it feels like you're grasping at straws here, but please try not to take anything I write personally; I like having lively debates with educated individuals.

Dagmar said:

Finally, if out of 22 of the studies examined by the Swiss government, 5 showed a positive impact on sales and 3 showed no correlation, take a wild guess what the other 14 studies showed.

Click to expand...

And yet the Swiss government sided with the consumer stating that "you have to adapt to the changing consumer behavior," a lesson the entertainment industry here in the States should follow.
The decline in revenues over time can be attributed to an innumerable amount of factors, just as the fact that others in the entertainment industry had stable revenue incomes, despite the overwhelming amount of Swiss that engage in "piracy."

Dagmar said:

It does so by implying that game publishers with harsher DRM policies than Valve lose sales to piracy because of their DRM policies while Valve does not. That supports the argument that piracy hurts sales.

Click to expand...

I can see how it can be interpreted that way, but it could also mean that game publishers these days are getting so paranoid about piracy, that they are essentially ruining the entertainment experience (i.e. Ubisoft) through oppressive measures that cause the very trend they are fighting against.

Okay, enough of that for tonight. Time to play some good old legal Counter-Strike .

seems this is gonna run an run, however piracy is bad m'kay

Piracy is wrong. But we all do it sometime. People do wrong things.
BUT TO ILLEGAL DOWNLOAD SKYRIM IS A SIN!!! YOU WILL BURN IN THE FIRES OF ALDUIN AND THEY WILL LAUGH AT YOU IN SOVNGARDE!!!
If you can't afford the game you are not entitled to own it. Save money for it if you wan't it. I worked for the game and I can play it with a good conscience.

Alright now I am just trolling But I do think that people that download any games should be shamed!
Companies put down years on making these games just to let stupid people put them up on the internet for free download. But this is just my opinion. No offense

MrSparkle said:

That's my point, consumers are looking out for themselves... by pirating, and publishers are in no small part encouraging it by treating PC gamers as second class citizens.

Click to expand...

they are looking out for themselves i the exact way a theif does, seriously, I could go kill a man right now because I THINK he may insult me in the future, but that doesn't make it right.

the problem with EVERY SINGLE ARTICLE you have posted is that there is no credible source other than a supposed contact who is unknown, this could be made up, it could be biased, it could be purposly missleading.

they refuse to show people the results of their testing, that can only mean so many things, they might not exist, the test showed that there was nothing wrong with piracy and they don't want you to know it, (but that makes no sense because than why would they care? if piracy is having a no to positive effect than why wouldn't you release the information and encourage more of it?) or the test showed that it was an issue and they don't want that information released (also doesn't make sense if it PROVES that piracy is as big an issue as they claim why wouldn't they publish it, it would make the process of legal protection that much faster). so basically it makes no logical sense for such a test to remain secret, because it can only have posative ramifications for the industry.

also, most testing (not gonna source it because I have never seen a single test in this specific area that hasn't drawn this conclusion in some way, regardless of whether they are pro/no piracy inclined, and I CBF finding ALL of them) has shown that people that pirate things often spend more than average money ELSEWHERE in the industry, this is more likely due to being more interested in the entertainment industry than most people rather than because piracy magically makes them spend money, also, what are you gonna pirate, the multibillion dollar corporations game that has piracy protection up the wazzu and you know exactly what it is and how it plays, or the dingy little indie game that is practically unprotected and you're not even sure you'll like it? if you purchased the first and pirated the second (most likely option) than you have effectively negatively harmed the industry, if you purchased the second and pirated the first (unlikely because it's usually more trouble than it's worth and most people don't want to risk money on an indie game) than you have had nearly no negative effects on the market, if you pirated both than you're a poor idiot who should stop playing games and get a job (or at least go on welfare).

in the end it's stealing, sure in some cases it's not having an effect because the people pirating it wouldn't have bought it anyway because there are no physical properties being stolen (digital games and media rely on payments for the time put into creating the thing, not the materials used in it's construction, because code is free) and in others they pirated something that they either end up buying later or they pirated it from a company that isn't heavily effected by it, but a lot of the time there are victims, if you pirate from a smaller developer (even if they have a multi-billion doller publisher, remember, you pirate something published by EA and you're not just taking profits from them, you're taking profits from the already tiny chunk of change the actual creators get at the end) or you pirate in such a way that it raises prices (starbucks have had to raise some of their prices to account for the amount of people that ordered drinks then sent them back because they changed their mind/ ordered the wrong thing, same applies to piracy, people pirate something they ptherwise would have bought and it cuts out of the projected profits that they used to figure expenditures), than you are having a negative effect on the industry that you supposedly like so much.

So I don't care what argument you make, you haven't cited any credible source (and none of the articles you linked have either) and at the core of the thing it is stealing, and unless you are absolutely and truthfully in a position to say that you wouldn't have bought it anyway (not because you wouldn't wanted to have or you thought it was too expensive, I mean you literally have no money and no income to put towards it now or in 50 years time) than doing it is wrong and has a negative effect on the industry, and if the industry goes under (any further than it already has, I'm sure you have no idea how bad a state the industry is in financially) than you can kiss games goodbye, nobody new will be able to move in and nobody currently in control will want to continue.

TL;DR: don't do it unless you have a bloody good reason.

Panthera Tigris said:

True that is stealing, but it's a different thing. When I downloaded Skyrim, installed and when I started at beginning it says Betsheda Softworks.

Which means it's registered trademark and I can't claim that's my work so I don't have any rights to sell it as my own. In case I would download the game and make many copies of it and than sell it that would be much closer to your example. So selling the game you don't own and download the game it's a big difference.

Click to expand...

Yes, it's the difference between stealing something for your own pleasure and stealing several things to sell on. I'm not sure what your point is. It's still theft.

MrSparkle said:

First off, I don't think calling TIME's technical section of their hard news website a "blog" is accurate..

Click to expand...

Call it whatever you want but it still relies solely on a single unverified and unknown alleged source and is illustrative of a complete absence of journalistic standards that merits it no more credibility than a personal blog.

MrSparkle said:

Honestly, it feels like you're grasping at straws here

Click to expand...

Pointing out the logical fallacy of appealing to misleading "authority" isn't grasping at straws and, coming from a person relying on a quasi-fictitious conspiracy theory "deep throat" source in an effort to support his arguments, that's a truly lolable comment.

MrSparkle said:

And yet the Swiss government sided with the consumer stating that "you have to adapt to the changing consumer behavior," a lesson the entertainment industry here in the States should follow.

Click to expand...

And yet this is completely irrelevant to the point that piracy causes losses in sales. You admit to correlation but speculate about causation without any evidence or knowledge to support that speculation.

MrSparkle said:

I can see how it can be interpreted that way...

Click to expand...

The author titled it "Publishers Push Gamers to Piracy" and then talks about a drop in sales.

The fact remains you haven't provided a single source that either actually supports the claim that piracy doesn't lead to a loss in sales or is credible.

One could argue the shades of gray to no end. The bottom line is that it is illegal. If you pirated and are unclear on the issues/shades of gray, there is a number you can call at the FBI 202-324-3000. I'm sure they will contemplate and discuss all of this :-)

My mother works at a local college as a reference librarian. Several months ago they had two very serious issues. Within the span of 2 months legal reps from NBC swarmed the college and prosecuted several students who were using the college internet to illegally pirate shows online. Around two months later the FBI came in and arrested several students for pirating games and other software. They were arrested and expelled from the University, forever changing their lives. I'm pretty sure these agents did not sit down with these students and debate the "shades of gray". They have not returned. My guess is they probably are stuck at their homes with ankle bracelets or now flipping burgers at a fast food chain.

One example of quasi intellectual property that affected me: I own a business. When I was living in the mid-west, I had a webmaster and another "expert" in my field working for me. I then moved to open a store-front in another state. They foolishly decided to continue running the business under my Federal EIN number, state tax ID's and under the many industry membership endorsements I have. It did not work out well for them. It hurt my business and really ticked me off. So, I got my lawyer on it and they got into a lot of trouble, to say the least. They are now broke and banned from my industry.

piracy is bad mkay?