The Death of D. (Was Tango vs Phobos)

[downs]

Koroskin Denis wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:14:32 +0400, bobef <bobef at nosmap-abv.bg> wrote:
> 
>> Robert Fraser Wrote:
>>> Yigal Chripun Wrote:
>>>
>>> > Robert Fraser wrote:
>>> >  > I've had very mixed feelings about all this. One one hand, the
>>> letter
>>> > of the
>>> > > law may be questionably constitutional. But millions of dollars
>>> every day are
>>> > > lost because people (including myself occasionally...) steal
>>> copyrighted
>>> > > material. Honestly, I think there should be much stricter
>>> penalties for
>>> > > things like internet piracy, because it's simply so widespread
>>> and damaging.
>>> >
>>> > Of course you have the right to have your own opinion (that's also in
>>> > the constitution) but all of the above is bullshit. (sorry for the
>>> > language).
>>> >
>>> > stealing only applies to physical things like chairs and cars. that
>>> > whole metaphor of information as physical entities is wrong.
>>> > you sure can infringe someone's copyrights but you cannot steal
>>> anything
>>> > since there's nothing to steal.
>>>
>>> Some philosopher said that all philosophical debates were inherently
>>> linguistic ones that stemmed from not having the words to represent the
>>> concepts being spoken about. We're using different definitions of
>>> "steal,"
>>> but the concept is clear -- it's taking something you don't have the
>>> right
>>> to have taken without paying for, and the debate is over whether you do
>>> or should have that right.
>>>
>> This discussion is, of course, pointless but since I read it I may
>> also comment :) I wan to support Yigal Chripun. So you say stealing is
>> "taking something". But information (and software) is not something.
>> It is not something you can take. I "pirate" something and I have my
>> copy and you have yours. Nothing have been taken all are happy. This
>> is actually a good thing. Too bad food doesn't work this way. The
>> problem is greed. It has nothing to do with stealing.
>>
>>> I think what a lot of these arguments boil down to is people trying to
>>> justify taking stuff without paying for it. Plain and simple. I do on
>>> occasion
>>> download videos (these days only anime fansubs).  And I don't feel bad
>>> about it. But I do know it's stealing. Downloading a $10 CD is really
>>> no better than shoplifting a $10 CD, because the people who worked to
>>> bring that CD into existence are not being paid for it.
>>
>> It is not the same as shoplifting as you are not depriving anyone from
>> anything. So you are not stealing anything. It is moral (and that is
>> relative) to pay for the author's work, but only if you like it. When
>> you buy a CD with 14 shitty songs because you are exposed to
>> advertising of one good one, why don't you pay 1/15 of the price? This
>> is more stealing than "pirating" because you are actually mislead to
>> buy something that you would normally not buy because it sucks.
>>
>> I have had similar discussions but how can you explain my mother who
>> works for 150$ a month (and she needs to eat pay bills, etc with
>> these) that she has to pay MS 500$ for their software that is what?
>> Pixels? Bytes? What?
>>
>> Anyway. In my opinion it comes down to greed cause no one is stealing
>> anything. Just some people are not willing to share although they are
>> not losing anything. And to lose something you must own it. So you
>> can't lose a million dollars of sales because you haven't sold
>> anything in the first place. If authors were more conscious (less
>> greedy) they would share because if the users were more conscious
>> (less living in a society where everyone wants to *make you* pay for
>> something) they would show gratitude by paying.
>>
>> Regards,
>> bobef
> 
> Can't stand away of the topic.
> 
> My company was making PSP game and it leaks to the pirate bay two weeks
> before official release. Isn't it a stealing?

Nope.

> Did my company give
> someone a permission to redistribute its software?

Nope, but I don't see how that changes the terminology.

> Yes, you can't buy
> the game officially for a time being, but so can't others. Is it an
> excuse for you? There is an agreement between us and a publisher, they
> have a schedule and can't put a game in a wrong timeline. It's a
> bussiness, some marketing needs to be done, hard copies be made and
> transfered all over the world etc.
> 
> A game was something we were working on for more that half a year, lots
> of effort were put in it. Do we deserve a payment and respect?
> 

Nope. That's the free market - you "deserve" nothing implicitly.

> In fact, a game was downloaded about 500.000 times before it got to the
> shelves. And about a 100.000 copies were sold _in total_. We got no
> profit just because everything out there are so poor and can't afford a
> licensed copy. What the hell you were thinking about before buying a
> handheld? An answer is - you are just too greedy and don't respect
> others efforts. Shame on you.

How did this become about us?

> 
> As a result we don't make PSP games anymore and you don't get any games
> from us. And from lots of other developers, too. You harm not only
> yourself, but many of the other fair people who _do_ pay for their
> entertainment.

Again, when did this become personal?

> 
> My old good PSOne has the following text upon loading many of the games
> - I remember it word-by-word:
> "Piracy harms consumers as well as legitimate developers, publishers and
> retailers." So true.

Note that they used the word "Piracy". Not "Stealing".

I wish you'd remember that more.