Piracy isn’t wrong.

Home Forums A haunted junk yard Piracy isn’t wrong.

  • This topic has 289 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 7 months ago by Anonymous.
Viewing 46 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #410543
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Piracy isn’t wrong.

      Intellectual property is.

      All of human creation is based on previous creation. Drawing arbitrary lines around how ideas can be used serves no-one except for media conglomerates. The only times at which IP law ever seemed reasonable was during the time where it was only enforceable against other corporate bodies. The advent of the internet and the shift of focus towards enforcement against individual private citizens has highlighted enormous contradictions in its application.

      > b-but without IP law there would be no incentive to create
      IP law does not protect or nurture any human incentive to create. The human drive to create is innate and unkillable, as evidenced by the huge amount of IP-law-breaking creations. IP law serves only to incentivize corporate investment in pooping out the same garbage over and over based on knowledge of a guaranteed return on investment due to name recognition.

      > b-but piracy hurts sales
      literally every time this has been studied it has been found to be false. Piracy does not hurt sales, people who pirate something are in no way "potential customers." They represent an almost completely distinct group.

      > b-but preservation isn’t our job, it’s the company’s
      preservation is literally exclusively the domain of us, the public. Companies not only do not have any incentive to preserve non-profitable works and are in fact incentivized against it, whereas the entire foundation of culture is based upon preservation and sharing of our creation. It’s the entire point behind the Public Domain, which has consistently been eroded by corporate interests in service of profit-seeking.

      It is literally (in the actual, literal meaning of the word "literally") your moral, ethical duty to pirate.

    • #410544
      Anonymous
      Guest

      I’m not reading any of that. I will simply refuse to pirate anything and discourage others from doing so.

      • #410545
        Anonymous
        Guest

        that’s fine, thankfully piracy is its own encouragement and literal decades of campaigns against it have done nothing to dissuade people.

        • #410546
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Of course it is, because people think they like getting things for free. They like it even more when they think they’re "getting away with" something they shouldn’t be doing.
          I’m simply concerned with people being properly paid for the things they worked hard to create, protected against criminals that would steal from them.

          • #410547
            Anonymous
            Guest

            same.
            luckily for all of us, piracy has been shown not to negatively affect these things.

          • #410548
            Anonymous
            Guest

            corporations arent entitled to sales, a pirate wouldve never purchased the product in the first place, therefore not being a customer in the first place.

            • #410652
              Anonymous
              Guest

              Well then their access to the product doesn’t matter. If they’re unable to steal it, then nothing is harmed or lost.

          • #410562
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Worry not, you can rest assured nobody’s being properly paid whether you pirate or not, the real talents behind your media are almost universally undercut.

            • #410573
              Anonymous
              Guest

              based

            • #410638
              Anonymous
              Guest

              *DING DING DING*

              YOUR WINNER, AND STILL Ganker CHAMPION……….. PIRATECHAAAAAAAAAD

          • #410598
            Anonymous
            Guest

            then worry about shady publishers pocketing most of the money from sales, not pirates who barely make a dent on their profits, if at all

          • #410671
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >They like it even more when they think they’re "getting away with" something they shouldn’t be doing.
            No? Unless you’re a burger perhaps

            • #410811
              Anonymous
              Guest

              Yes, only the American is heinous enough to take advantage of things they know is illegal or can get them in trouble. Definitely no other place on Eart harbors people with any intent to break any law

          • #410728
            Anonymous
            Guest

            I’m not even a pirate fag, I even get limitd run games but.
            >I’m simply concerned with people being properly paid for the things they worked hard to create, protected against criminals that would steal from them.
            >Gives money to big corporations.
            >???

      • #410565
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Based. FPBP

      • #410568
        Anonymous
        Guest

        If only someone would discourage you from taking HRT pills

        • #410723
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Keku

      • #410674
        Anonymous
        Guest

        good goy

      • #410707
        Anonymous
        Guest

        FPBP and fuck pirate diverse folk.

        • #410720
          Anonymous
          Guest

          don’t pirate
          take the vaxx
          eat the bugs
          respect the pronouns
          remove gas
          ban meat
          fall in line

    • #410549
      Anonymous
      Guest

      You can’t force people to pay for something they don’t want to. And copying files isn’t hurting the other end in any way. So anti-piracy laws are just arbitrarily bending logic in order to get away with a potential increase in revenue.

      It’s already been proven that people are going to buy your game if they think it’s worth it. Companies just want to squeeze their customer’s last pennies. A practice that in my opinion sounds more like what an actual pirate would do.

    • #410550
      Anonymous
      Guest

      If there was no intellectual property then big corporations would still use it in their favor.

      Someone small (Ex. an Indie Developer) would make an original concept/IP that’s legitimately fun and exciting, and then some mega corporation with billions of dollars would pump out some soulless game based on it and throw millions into advertising it. Then the vast number of retarded normies would believe that the mega corporation made the original concept and the small developer is the one ripping off the idea. They’d do that constantly and essentially own all intellectual property through popularity.

      Would it prevent you from playing those original works or from them being made? No, but it’d be incredibly infuriating when popularity is what pushes things onto people through search engines or social media. It’d be incredibly difficult to find or even talk about the original works compared to the megacorporation rip offs that would get shoved in your face constantly.

      • #410552
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Someone small (Ex. an Indie Developer) would make an original concept/IP that’s legitimately fun and exciting, and then some mega corporation with billions of dollars would pump out some soulless game based on it and throw millions into advertising it.
        this is not how that problem would manifest itself, however.
        you’re thinking of this problem in terms set by how we’ve organised ourselves under the current system (one which revolves around distinct IP’s being the identifiers for products)

        This would necessarily not be the case in a system where IP was not the defining aspect of a piece of media, anon. You would simply pay more attention to the creator than to the name of the game itself.

      • #410553
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >If there was no intellectual property then big corporations would still use it in their favor.
        yes, so the question is simply "is IP law as we have it the best tool to fight the issue you describe?"

        the answer is, equally simply, no.

      • #410602
        Anonymous
        Guest

        that still happens since most independent artists, game developers, writers, and the like don’t have the money to burn in legal fees

      • #410721
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Companies have tried to replicate success since the begining of time. No matter the shilling they never get it right.

    • #410551
      Anonymous
      Guest
      • #410613
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Bros…

      • #410848
        Anonymous
        Guest

        The corporatisation of the internet has been insidious, pervasive and terrifyingly effective.

    • #410554
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >IP law does not protect or nurture any human incentive to create
      spoken like an ignorant commie
      why would i bother creating Sonic if i can’t profit from it?
      >b-b-buh you should make vidya as a hobby, not to earn shekkels!
      hobbyist devs make the bulk of the broken unfunny shovelware on steam, anything with even a slightly little bit of quality in it was made by someone trying to make a buck

      sure, IP laws are fucking broken giving massive corporations like Disney the right to ban hammer kindergartens who pain Mikey on their walls, and they keep loggying to extend the time in which their IP hit popular domain

      but if people can’t profit from their creations, nor ensure that at least one generation of their descendants can reap the fruits of their parent’s labor, then all those with the mind and the will to create will go away to do so in a place that allows them to profit from it

      >The human drive to create is innate and unkillable
      perhaps, but putting food on the table is more important, and if people can’t do so by their "unkillable drive to create", they will dedicate their time to mopping floors, peeling potatoes, scrubbing toilets or anything that gives them bread at the end of the day, instead of dedicating their time to perfecting their "unkillable drive to create"

      but don’t believe me
      ask anyone who has lived under soviet boots if they or anyone else they knew had ever felt compelled to do even slightly more than the bare minimum necessary,

      • #410556
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >why would i bother creating Sonic if i can’t profit from it?
        this already happens every day
        but here’s a fun thought experiment: even using a single piece of IP, there’s been enormous changes in the laws "protecting" it between its inception versus the laws today.

        is your argument "IP laws as they currently exist are the only way to ensure that a ‘Sonic’ can be made?"
        if so, this is objectively and immediately false. Sonic was not created under todays IP laws.

        is your argument instead "IP laws as they existed at the time of Sonic’s creation are the only way to ensure that a ‘Sonic’ can be made?"
        if so, because of changes in IP law, we are already living in a world where you have no incentive to create Sonic.

        • #410559
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >laws change
          point taken, but the OP was not calling for a reform of IP law to wrestle control away from megacorporations, he was arguing in favor of abolishing IP laws altogether
          that’s like cutting off a whole hand because the tip of a finger got infected

          • #410570
            Anonymous
            Guest

            I think that while OP’s proposed change is way more drastic, the idea that without IP law people wouldn’t create is already disproven by the wealth of culture and creation available to us from a time before IP law of any kind.

            And the way I see it with regards to your analogy of the finger, IP law is less an infection and more of a cancer. The solution is, in fact, to cut it off. It has been spreading and expanding like a tumor since its inception.

            • #410600
              Anonymous
              Guest

              the fact that people can live off their art is the reason why many artist spend their free time perfecting their craft
              you say there have been plenty of works of art created before IP laws, but back then the means to easily replicate an IP using a machine did not exist either so the could be only one Mosart and only one Miguel Angel, and they were paid for their craft

              furthermore, most of those works you speak of were all created by people who did not have to worry about money, now a days you can have someone from a poor family dedicating himself 24/7 to become a better fiction writer because he can make a living out of it

              but if you want the greatest example of the good IP laws can bring you need look no further than old Merica, for centuries nobody invented jack shit, but the moment IP laws were created almost all of the modern world was invented in one fucking generation, sure, there were garden gnomes like Edison stealing all the credit for other people’s work, but IP laws created a gold rush of invention that feed the flames of creation among men like a barrel of petrol can fuel a fire

      • #410560
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >he requires time-limited, government-granted monopolies on ideas in order to generate wealth
        who’s the real commie here

        • #410578
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >generate wealth
          we are not talking about an expendable consumer product like an apple or a shoe, we are talking about entertainment media that can be plagiarized by talentless hacks
          if i invent Tetris and want to sell it, i will sell it in a place where the law will guaranty me that no low effort rip off will get away with stealing my idea
          Take Walt Disney (the man, not his company) as an example of the worst and best of IP law
          his first character was stolen by garden gnomelywood and he was left dirt poor because of it, so he made his second character (Mickey) somewhere away from garden gnomelywood where he could keep the rights and build an empire upon that character, and with that empire he propelled the art of animation further forward than anyone else had before, all because he was allowed to profit from his creation without low effort copycats stealing his potential customers

          Government over reach if shit, but without a government, you have corporate overreach

      • #410731
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >hobbyist devs make the bulk of the broken unfunny shovelware on steam
        Zoom zoom. Steam is what killed the indie scene, is when people realised their shitty art projects could make them billionaries, before it was common to see people just making things for fun.

      • #410847
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >why would i bother creating Sonic if i can’t profit from it?
        The hell are you talking about?
        If you create Sonic the IP, you can still profit from Sonic the Product.
        It’s just that there are now 5 companies and 10 fan communities all creating content based on your character, you included. And all of them can profit from it. True competition. The public wins.

    • #410557
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Intellectual property is theft. What I do with my hard drive is my business. You can’t claim some sort of in-absentia control over the arrangement of the filings on those platters. You can’t own data.

    • #410563
      Anonymous
      Guest

      based kropotkin reader

    • #410566
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Truth

    • #410569
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >*hits blunt* you can’t, like, own an idea, maaaaaaaaaan

      • #410572
        Anonymous
        Guest

        this but actually unironically

        • #410582
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Okay, so if you create a game I can shamelessly rip it off and not pay you a dime, right?

          • #410584
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Yes.

            • #410589
              Anonymous
              Guest

              And you’d be okay with someone else profiting off your ideas and not paying you?

              • #410599
                Anonymous
                Guest

                I mean everyone would rip off of everyone so it doesn’t really matter does it?

              • #410601
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >my idea
                >implying I didn’t just rip someone off for it
                lmao get real retard

              • #410853
                Anonymous
                Guest

                That is kind of what working for a company already is so yes.

    • #410571
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Do pirates actually believe they’re not hurting sales by what they’re doing? Like, this isn’t a meme? Just admit you people want stuff for free.

      • #410574
        Anonymous
        Guest

        a better question is "do pirates actually care whether or not they’re hurting sales by doing what they do?"
        and in my case the answer is a resounding "No!"

        • #410581
          Anonymous
          Guest

          That’s an obvious answer to a retarded question

      • #410575
        Anonymous
        Guest

        It’s not my duty to prop up your sales numbers.

      • #410576
        Anonymous
        Guest

        if I pirate a game, its because I won’t buy it to begin with. how is that hurting sales?

        • #410588
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >How’s that hurting sales
          I won’t buy X to begin with because I planned to pirate X from the beginning.
          Easiest hypothetical in the world

          • #410593
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Either I pirate the game I don’t think deserves my money or I don’t pirate it and still don’t play it. Ubisoft games for the past 10 years have fit this bill 100%

            • #410615
              Anonymous
              Guest

              I don’t fucking care what you think deserves your money or not. That has nothing to do with the point I made. Which to reiterate, between two identical products, people will choose the free option over the $60.00 because it saves them money. It’s that simple.

              Although, I wonder what kind of factors may go in to your assessment of what "deserves" your money or not? I’d wager that it’s a $60.00 difference.

              • #410644
                Anonymous
                Guest

                I have no problem spending money on video games. 100 steam points for every dollar you spend since the points shop started.

                I buy a lot of video games but I refuse to pay for shit that shoves a political narrative down my throat and games that are a franchise of asset flips with 10 hours of gameplay and artificial gameplay extenders like gear score and tacked on RPG mechanics where they don’t belong. these same games are the ones that’ll have in game micro transactions to skip the grind. This means most AAA games in the past 5-10 years. I don’t pirate much these days since I’m an adult with disposable income but if I were to, I’d pirate games that are designed to be a timesink with time sink mitigating microtransactions. woke rhetoric in games is a hard pass 100% of the time

                I wouldn’t even mind paying upwards of $60 if the product is good enough.

                • #410658
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  based time and intelligence respecter

                • #410665
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  Based.

                  but all too many people who say
                  >I refuse to pay for shit that shoves a political narrative down my throat
                  are also incredibly bad at spotting political narratives being shoved down their throat.

                  • #410668
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    then it should speak volumes when a game is so ham fisted in its delivery that it turns retards away

      • #410577
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Pirates are literal diverse folk. They break the law just because they can and they only care about their own gratification.

        • #410579
          Anonymous
          Guest

          I care about undermining the garden gnome and his poisonous influence on my nation’s legal system.

          • #410587
            Anonymous
            Guest

            If you can afford a game, and you choose to pirate it anyway, you’re the garden gnome. That’s a garden gnome move. Trying to get something for free when you can afford to buy it is exactly what a garden gnome does.

            Laws are a spook
            next you’re going to tell me taxation is fine because ‘the government gives us like roads and shit (that they also tax you for using LOL)’

            Just because you think the law is stupid, doesn’t mean it doesn’t apply to you. If I think the law forbidding murder is stupid, does that mean I won’t go to prison for committing murder?

            • #410590
              Anonymous
              Guest

              I mean it literally doesn’t
              Piracy is illegal and I’ve been pirating for decades and I’ve never been stopped and likely never will.
              Maybe you should just get better at murder?

            • #410591
              Anonymous
              Guest

              Sharing has been a human right since the dawn of time. Only a garden gnome would think to tread all over something that sacred for profit.

              • #410594
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >Sharing has been a human right

                Oh, okay, then I’m going to make hundreds of copies of your house key and share them with the local homeless population. Oh, you have a problem with that? What are you, a garden gnome? It’s my right to share your stuff with people!

                • #410597
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >Oh, okay, then I’m going to make hundreds of copies of your house key and share them with the local homeless population
                  Retarded analogy. You should be making copies of my house, not the key.

                  • #410603
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    A key is something that can actually be copied, idiot. So the analogy works. If you have to resort to an outlandish fantasy scenario, you have already lost the argument.

                    • #410607
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      I only have one house. Letting a bunch of strangers into it is stealing, since they aren’t getting their own via duplication.

                      • #410611
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        It’s not stealing, anon, it’s sharing. And sharing is a human right.

                      • #410614
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        If you want to have an actual conversation instead of being brazenly disingenuous let me know, otherwise I’m done.

                      • #410617
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >corpos giving you ownership
                        they sell you a LICENSE
                        you own NOTHING

                      • #410619
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        It’s not voluntary on the IP’s owner’s part.

                        If you don’t give a fuck about their ownership of the IP, why should I give a fuck about your ownership of your house? You get what you give, bitch. Don’t get mad at me for throwing your own words back in your face.

                      • #410623
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >corpos giving you ownership
                        they sell you a LICENSE
                        you own NOTHING

                        They got their money, so they don’t have a say anymore. There’s nothing more gnomish than selling a product for profit but then say "oh no this is still mine!" whenever that’s not advantageous for you anymore.

                      • #410629
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >I bought a can of Coca-Cola, this means I am now allowed to use Coca-Cola’s recipe to make my own Coca-Cola at home

                        Uh, no, that’s not how it works. You’re a retard.

                      • #410631
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        If you can reverse engineer it from the liquid in the bottle you bought, that should be fair game.

                      • #410635
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >that should be fair game.

                        But it isn’t.

                      • #410637
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Legally. Morally it is and always will be.

                      • #410648
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        The thing is morality is objective. Someone might think that killing the poor is morally just. Does that mean they’re right? Someone might think burning video game store to the ground is morally just because they think vidya are corrupting the youth. Are they right?

                        But the law is supposed to be objective. If you have a problem with, say, a rich man getting away with numerous crimes via bribery, how can you say your own intent to break the law is justified? The rich criminal bribes his way out of punishment because he thinks the law is stupid and shouldn’t apply to him. He thinks he’s in the right. Or he just doesn’t care, and wants to commit crimes just because he can. Sound familiar?

                      • #410650
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >Morality is subjective

                      • #410651
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Morality IS objective, but a lot of these issues you fix by homogenizing society. Diversity causes more than half of those issues you describe where people disagree on what is right.

                      • #410657
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Thinking you need to control everything in this universe in order to work is a sign of low self-esteem

                      • #410662
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        What a retarded take. This is literally why national borders exist in the first place. Borders are the consequence of homogenization.

                      • #410687
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        yeah sure, because nations don’t need to use literal guns that kill to enforce their borders even work kek

                      • #410659
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        I meant to say morality is subjective. Sorry. My fault for not proofreading.

                        My point is that the law exists for a reason. Because "I’m morally in the right, so I’m allowed to do this" is a dangerous line of thinking.

                        It’s the line of thinking that leads to doing horrible things "for the greater good". It’s the line of thinking that leads to dictators.

                        You think Hitler thought he was the bad guy? You think Stalin thought that? Or Nixon? Or fuck it, Trump?

                      • #410664
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >My point is that the law exists for a reason.
                        The law exists because a group of people decided that "WE’RE morally in the right, so WE’VE decided that we’re allowed to do this within the limits established by these lines on this map."

                      • #410670
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        We would have gone extinct without the law. Without some form of stability, it’s might makes right, survival of the fittest, that shit, and before you say that’s a good thing, really think about the implications.

                        And ask yourself how long you’d really last in such a world.

                      • #410675
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >it’s might makes right, survival of the fittest
                        It’s already like that though

                      • #410677
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        If might makes right, doesn’t that make pirates right since they constantly get away with it?

                      • #410678
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        The law has no power. The law is just words. It’s human commitment to the validity of the law that gives it power; it’s mutual respect for social order.

                        Mutual respect is a human behavior that predates the law and will outlast it on the longest timescales.

                      • #410679
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >And ask yourself how long you’d really last in such a world.
                        We already live in that world though. You’re universalizing the concept of law, when the system of laws is actually more a decentralized network of jurisdictions, with each jurisdiction backed by – you guessed it – might, force, "the fittest", "that shit".

                      • #410681
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        it would be 100% a better alternative to the current society of coddling the infirm and collectively playing into the mental illnesses of people that wouldn’t survive a life of real hardship.

                        humans trend towards society on an instinctual level. within that society, social contracts are formed to ensure the safety of those within the group. might making right doesn’t mean the alpha male kills everything and rapes all the women. it means being strong enough do what has to be done to protect your pack and see them thrive, which in turn either strengthens or culls the weakest link.

                      • #410683
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Might already makes right in today’s world. They just dress it up in pretty lies so you don’t notice.

                      • #410686
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        It really doesn’t, though. And it basically never has.

                      • #410656
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        The rich only bribe so the laws that are useful for them get passed. Once their will is law, like in the case of IP, they can just use normal legal channels. Morality may or may not be objective but the law is not a reflection of morality. Even in a best case scenario the law exists for social order, which is entirely different from indiscriminate justice.

                      • #410661
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Yeah, they think the law shouldn’t apply when it’s convenient.

                        Like pirates do. If someone committed a crime against you, you’d want them to go to prison, wouldn’t you? But piracy is a crime, and if the cops showed up at your door or you got a notice from your ISP or what the fuck ever, you wouldn’t be happy, right?

                      • #410666
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        police are a fraternal order of the freemasons. dont talk to them.

                      • #410672
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        I fucking knew you were a bunch of schizos. Fuck it, I’m out, I’m not arguing with crazy people. We’ll continue this discussion after you take your meds.

                      • #410667
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Apples and oranges. They make the law with their money, in order to convert all the world into more money for themselves at our expense. The very law you are telling my I’m obligated to obey.

                      • #410711
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >this mfer really thinks the law is absolutely pure and incorruptible
                        my god

                      • #410647
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >I bought a can of Coca-Cola, this means I am now allowed to use Coca-Cola’s recipe to make my own Coca-Cola at home

                        Uh, no, that’s not how it works. You’re a retard.

                        you are free to experiment and see if you find a recipe with similar taste, you are free to cook the exact same recipe if you know it, if you find a different recipe with the same taste, you can get an IP out of it and profit from your discovery
                        (i wouldn’t know what would happen if the recipe you discovered through experimentation turned out to be the exact Coca Cola recipe due to a strange coincidence)
                        what you CAN’T do is sell Coca-Cola without the IP holder’s permission
                        whether it says Coca-Cola in the can but has a different recipe (actually this may be false advertising) or it has a completely different name but the same recipe as Coca Cola

                      • #410630
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        IP laws should stay. Idiots like this should pay. I will play for free. Simple as.

                      • #410632
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        And I will let hobos live in your house for free.

                      • #410633
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        The fun part is my post is a statement of reality which will happen whether you like it or not. Yours is just vengeful wishes that will never manifest.

                      • #410634
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Just kill the hobos. Bam, end of shitty analogy

                      • #410639
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        How dare you. Sharing is a human right. That means you are obligated to let those hobos live in your house. Besides, you’re just a rich fatcat with a big house all to yourself, it’s not a big deal if they trash the place, you can just buy new stuff. They can’t. How dare you step on the little people, you greedy poopyhole?

                      • #410641
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        I can feel the seethe in every post this anon makes, it’s delicious.

                      • #410654
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        You don’t even know how rights work. Rights can’t be a thing you’re forced to do, they’re a thing you can’t be stopped from doing

                      • #410673
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >It’s not voluntary on the IP’s owner’s part
                        It doesn’t have to be. It’s my computer, my hard drive, my internet connection, my electricity. The guy who claims to “own the idea” has as much validity in his claim as I would have in telling you to stop breathing because the air is mine. His imaginary claim of control over something abstract does not trump my real claim of control over the physical shit in my possession.

            • #410743
              Anonymous
              Guest

              anon, in this world it’s garden gnome or be garden gnomeed
              one needs a total cultural and societal revolution to change that fact
              russia has a massive piracy culture for 2 reasons: nobody wanted to pay for bourgeoi "property rights" rights during the wild nineties; and because the distrust remaining towards government/employers/oligarchs from soviet times remains to this day, so regular person feels 0 remorse for taking office supplies or pirating shit
              burgers actually have remarkably civil (read: cucked) attitude towards copyright and such, no doubt drilled into the populace by (((right holders)))

        • #410580
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Laws are a spook
          next you’re going to tell me taxation is fine because ‘the government gives us like roads and shit (that they also tax you for using LOL)’

        • #410585
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >mmmmm oh yes corporate daddy, keep fucking my ass and taking my money no matter how many times you scam me and make a fool out of me

      • #410586
        Anonymous
        Guest
      • #410618
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >the PS2 was among the best selling consoles ever
        >due to this, devs flocked to the PS2 in droves giving it one of the greatest game libraries of all time, this only helped the PS2 to sell even more
        >it was among the best selling consoles in third world shitholes like Africa and Latin America
        >both places that have never seen an original copy of any kind of software
        >the PS2 sold as much as it did because it was the easiest console to pirate games for
        >as had done the PS1 before and Sega Genesis before that
        >nobody in any of these places could ever afford to pay 60 bucks for every game, but they could all save money for a couple of months to pay3 300 bucks up front and never again
        >these massively large fan base that was created by nothing but pirated game copies now does free advertising for all of them, create content, keep the IP alive and buy merch such as clothes and toys
        i can’t say for sure that Piracy isn’t all that harmful to devs but to claim it has no benefits is out right false
        nothing sells a console like making it easy for pirates to crack

      • #410624
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Do pirates actually believe they’re not hurting sales by what they’re doing?
        the EU commissioned a study into the effect of piracy on sales of digitally distributed goods, then suppressed it when they got the results
        I wonder why

      • #410719
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >NOOOOOOO YOU CAN’T HURT THE HECKEN CORPORINOS THEY ARE BASED AND COOL

        • #410725
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Are you going to sit here and imply that if a corporation loses money, they’re not gonna drop that burden onto their employees until it’s equalized? I’m not even a "piracy has zero impact" tard but how little life experience do you have to have to where this belief comes about?

          • #410742
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >um you can’t do that or the BASED CORPORINOS will ruin the lives of it’s workers and it will your fault not the BASED CORPORINOS

            • #410753
              Anonymous
              Guest

              Don’t answer, but when is the last time you had a discussion with someone that wasn’t with wojaks and misrepresenting greentext? Answer that for yourself, and then acknowledge that you’re moving the goalpost. It does hurt the creators, whether you like it or not.

            • #410765
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >no argument
              >only wojaks
              I’d say opinion discarded, but you didn’t even mention any opinion at all.

      • #410777
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Some people weren’t gonna buy it anyway but piracy steals some sales of course. Without intellect property law, art projects would be crowdfunded before they’re made. Which is a win for everybody.

      • #410839
        Anonymous
        Guest

        People with no disposable income can’t really buy luxuries and most pirates are just broke bitches. Obviously poor people pirating shit has no effect on sales. If someone can afford to spend $100 on games in a year and they do so and then they pirate games worth an additional $100 on top of that it’s not honest to say the industry lost $100 in sales because that extra $100 never existed in the first place.

      • #410846
        Anonymous
        Guest

        The higher the price on something, the fewer people buy it. Lowering the price generally improves the number of sales, but that doesn’t mean that at $0.00 everyone is going to “buy”. If the price for a product never lowers to the point where a specific person was going to buy and that person pirates instead, is it still a lost sale?

    • #410595
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Based. IP should be abolished.

    • #410604
      Anonymous
      Guest

      IP laws exist.
      IP laws have never stopped me from pirating.
      Therefore IP laws don’t exist for me, they only exist for big corporations to bully small business.
      But the whole discussion about
      >Without IP laws the Artists wouldn’t get paid!
      is retarded since IP laws don’t really exist for consumers anyway

      • #410608
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >IP laws don’t really exist for consumers anyway
        Largely correct, however IP laws exist more for you today than they did 20 years ago, anon, and that defines a purposeful trend.

        Restrictions on using the internet for unfettered sharing and distribution are growing as part of a decades long project. It’s something that needs to be stopped, and in order to do so IP law itself must be attacked.

    • #410616
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Ideally, all games should be free but made by commission

    • #410620
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >the absolute amount of cope that piratefags have to resort to

      • #410622
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >/vt/roon
        Opinion thoroughly discarded.

        • #410627
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >implying I stated an opinion
          Hallucinations are a sign of a mental illness, anon. I suggest you visit a local psychiatrist.

      • #410628
        Anonymous
        Guest

        does it differ in any way from the cope necessary for anti-piracy?

        […]

        • #410643
          Anonymous
          Guest

          No.
          What, did you expect me to say yes? Both are pathetic.

      • #410640
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Paypig keeps paying for shit products that keep sinking in quality
        Lmao

        • #410841
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Come on, without piracy, it’s obvious that games would get better and better, because the publishers would be able to erase the old games from existence and there would be nothing to compare to, so they would be able to claim it is better

    • #410642
      Anonymous
      Guest

      IP is fine as long as non-commercial derivatives can be created that are required to attribute to the original creator. Basically the CC-BY-NC license should be how IP works. So anybody could create a Sonic fangame, but they are legally required to not profit from it, and they are also legally required to attribute the Sonic IP to Sega.

      • #410653
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >>IP is fine as long as non-commercial derivatives can be created that are required to attribute to the original creator. Basically the CC-BY-NC license should be how IP works.
        this is a workable compromise, however it is de facto not attainable under current aggressive expansion of IP law in the exact opposite direction. This is why abolishing it is still necessary.

    • #410646
      Anonymous
      Guest

      already know that

      nothing will change.

      • #410655
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Everything is always changing. The static nature of our lives and/or systems is an illusion created from living within them.

        If you believe something, share it. That’s what makes it real.

        • #410660
          Anonymous
          Guest

          did you really just respond to me with "the universe is in constant flux" regarding copygarden gnome? lol mate, lol.

          just believe hard enough and mugen smash can be technically legal lmao, are you real? last time I believed hard enough a virus spread across the entire planet only it was all bullshit.

          • #410712
            Anonymous
            Guest

            what
            no
            I mean that laws, specifically, are simply ideological constructs that rely on a popular societal agreement to be enforced and upheld.
            Laws, specifically, are in a constant state of flux wrt how they are enforced and upheld.

            If you believe something about how shit should be
            literally sharing that thought is itself a transformative act

        • #410663
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >money isn’t real, maaaaaaaaaan, rent’s just an illusion, maaaaaaaaaan
          >NO WAIT DON’T KICK ME OUT, ALL MY STUFF IS HERE!

          • #410706
            Anonymous
            Guest

            are you high right now anon

    • #410649
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Reminder that emulation is not only sharing games, but in cases like World of Warcraft private servers or Pokemon it is quite literally providing an outlet to IMPROVE them over the neutered versions being offered to the public.

    • #410669
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >But think about da developers
      lmao learn to actually code and get a real job.

    • #410676
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Piracy is morally wrong because you get to enjoy a product without compensating its creator for the time they spent creating it.

      • #410680
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Piracy is morally right since I’m not obligated to give anyone anything if another consenting party has a better offer, like if they put their copy on a tracker somewhere.

        • #410685
          Anonymous
          Guest

          It doesn’t matter who supplies you with the copy, ya dingus. If the creator did not use their time creating the product, it would not exist at all.

          • #410691
            Anonymous
            Guest

            That’s on them.

            It really doesn’t, though. And it basically never has.

            If you look at who wins and who loses in life it’s nothing more than survival of the fittest. The only people who bootlick like this are ones with a personal stake in the law.

            • #410698
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >If you look at who wins and who loses in life it’s nothing more than survival of the fittest.
              Bill Gates is alive and still has all his money, even though the world is full of people who could rip him to pieces. If might makes right that situation would not be.

              • #410700
                Anonymous
                Guest

                There is more kinds of might than just brute force. Bill is smart enough to have sidestepped everything that might have killed him, and I’m sure there’s plenty.

                • #410709
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >There is more kinds of might than just brute force
                  Bill Gates can’t outsmart a 9mm to the temple.

                  The reason he’s alive is because none of the people capable of killing him actually want to do it. Ask yourself why that would be.

                  • #410710
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    he’s clearly outsmarted every situation that would lead to a 9mm to the temple so your point is moot

                    • #410741
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      Bill Gates also hasn’t been annihilated by an asteroid impact; does that mean he “outsmarted all the asteroids” you dumb melanoid monkey?

                      Just because something bad hasn’t happened to you does not mean you can take credit for preventing it.

                      • #410744
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        I’m sure there would be plenty of people that would profit from his death.

                      • #410748
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        And yet, none of them have bothered to kill him. So I ask again: WHY would that be, if “might makes right”?

                      • #410747
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        yet your point gets validated if something bad does happen. this seems like a strawman

                      • #410755
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        My point is Bill Gates is alive because he lives in a society that will not condone the act of killing him to take his money. It will punish the killers, it will not respect their claim of ownership of his wealth. These barriers increase the cost and reduce the reward of killing him such that people don’t do it.

                        Ergo, might does not “make right”. Social consensus makes right.

                      • #410757
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Just like it punished the killers of Hillary’s testifiers?

                      • #410759
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        You just literally described social consensus as might. Social consensus IS a form of might.

                      • #410771
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Social consensus is the opposite of might makes right. You’re just defining the word “might” so broadly that you can point to literally anything and say “yeah but that’s just A FORM of might”.

                      • #410787
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        What the hell do you think a fucking army is? Do you seriously think that might makes right means you have to be a Superman that does it all yourself? How autistic are you that you don’t understand that power is projected through numbers, and to project that power, you need the numbers to agree with you?

                      • #410802
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        If that’s true (and it is), it’s the agreement that produces the power. The power lies in the army, not the general. And it doesn’t lie in any one person in the army, but in their combined effort. No one person can “out-might” the mass of the people.

                        “Might makes right” implies that the strong make the rules, but they don’t. The rules are what everyone agrees to, the strong can’t compel them. And “authority” and “charisma” and whatever other abstractions you want to call “might” don’t even work, since otherwise we could ask why the President never declares himself king for life and orders the army (which he is in charge of) to kill everyone who contests his claim.

                      • #410762
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        might isn’t a direct equation to strength. influence and status, to sway their standing within a group is undeniably might. you’re misconstruing might makes right with a mad max dystopian fantasy, which real life has literally never been.

                      • #410810
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        there are multiple ways to classify power, expanding on

                        might isn’t a direct equation to strength. influence and status, to sway their standing within a group is undeniably might. you’re misconstruing might makes right with a mad max dystopian fantasy, which real life has literally never been.

                        literal physical/military strength is what you refer to as might, and the implicit threat of violence is the quickest way to gain power
                        there is authority, usually regarding a certain subject, it’s how people will respect the takes of an acclaimed historian, but not a random passerby
                        then there is power that comes from traditions and society: a president is not necessary the most capable or most powerful man, but by law he’s the guy in charge

                      • #410822
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        That’s a cop-out. That’s saying that “might makes right, because any other thing that you say is a more important source of moral authority is also a thing called might, since ‘might’ is anything that is a source of moral authority”.

                        If we define the phrase “might makes right” broadly enough to be tautological, then it doesn’t have any validity in the argument.

                      • #410833
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        i specificly classified "power" which is what bill gates holds, but i’m not really part of your whole argument
                        anf still i’d say "might makes right" because in the face of overwhelming violence authority and tradition will crumble

            • #410703
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >That’s on them

              So, in other words, piracy is showing a middle finger to the concept of reciprocation, which is one of the cornerstones of morality.

              • #410714
                Anonymous
                Guest

                When your reciprocity involved illegalizing the act of sharing products you’ve paid for, yeah fuck you people.

                • #410729
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  The thing with sharing data is that you can copy it. Do you think a restaurant would allow you to share their dishes if you could just copy a plate for your entire table, while still only paying for one? Of course they wouldn’t, so why do you expect the creators of digital entertainment to allow it?

                  • #410733
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    > Do you think a restaurant would allow you to share their dishes if you could just copy a plate for your entire table
                    That’s the thing though, they got their money so they should be out of the equation. Besides that, if an act is acceptable for n number of people it is acceptable for n+1. You can’t draw some arbitrary line without invoking the paradox of the heap.

                    • #410734
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      >if an act is acceptable for n number of people it is acceptable for n+1
                      n + 1 is superspreading though, shitlord.

                    • #410745
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      They got their money for one plate. You can argue that the copied dishes are not theirs, but in that case they can argue back that the sale of the dish did not include the right to copy it.

                      • #410750
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        They did get their money for one plate, and that plate is now mine to do with as I please.

                      • #410754
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Only if that was part of the deal.

                  • #410740
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    because you actually can unlike irl
                    when will people understand that virtual doesn’t equate tangible?
                    god this place is truly filled with zoomer newfags sucking corporate dicks

                    • #410751
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      And non-tangible does not mean that it does not deserve to be protected.

                      • #410756
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >this level of retardation again
                        if you could copy anything in real life you wouldn’t be complaining like that

                      • #410763
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        If the act of copying disrespects the work that was put into creating what is being copied (like freely distributing it without that being the creator’s call), it will always be wrong.

                      • #410820
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        I approve of piracy as a form of punishment like review bombing. Scummy publishers like 2K that go after modders and those that patent game mechanics (Bandai, WB games) deserve both of those things.
                        These companies are incredibly aggressive about controlling what is done with every single copy of the software they’re distributing at the expense of the consumer.
                        It’s why we have games like Destiny 2 that remove more content than they add, and no one can complain because "you only bought a license to play the game, you’re not entitled to any of its content but rather what the devs intend you to play".

                        Continuously rewarding these publishers with money is encouraging their shitty practices, and otherwise taking sales away from them or review bombing them actually works to make them change their habits.

                      • #410825
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >Punishment

                        This is what I do not get. If the developer/publisher does something you do not like, why do you not simply ignore their product and instead support those that practice business in ways you approve of? What is this Batman larp?

                      • #410827
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Voting with your wallet works for future products they’re working on, not current ones. Obviously I’m not getting, or pirating, Destiny 3. But Destiny 2 is a product I already bought.

                      • #410831
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Can you even pirate live service games, and how exactly does that help the devs make it better? Review bombing somewhat works because that provides information on what people think is wrong with the game, but silent piracy conveys no message, other than a vague "something is wrong".

                      • #410838
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        yes replace piracy with review bombing. I do not condone review bombing a game you don’t own obviously. Piracy is more passive but it definitely gets noticed because publishers actually track torrent downloads and can issue a warning to you ISP. Ubisoft actually threw a tantrum over it for one of their AC games.

                      • #410836
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        agreed, this is one way to gatekeep the community from corporate poopyholes

                        >Punishment

                        This is what I do not get. If the developer/publisher does something you do not like, why do you not simply ignore their product and instead support those that practice business in ways you approve of? What is this Batman larp?

                        I suppose you’re against boycotting certain companies that practice monopolies as well? Since you hoped by ignoring the problem it will just go away.

      • #410689
        Anonymous
        Guest

        so it’s morally right for them to make games that are not full then add it bit by bit with shitty dlc or hide things behind a paywall? They deserve it

        • #410697
          Anonymous
          Guest

          If you do not like their business practices, you are free to vote with your wallet. But you are not entitled to the product for free.

          • #410701
            Anonymous
            Guest

            oh gee, that argument
            well, what if every one of them are doing it?
            no amount of """""voting"""""" will help you then

            • #410724
              Anonymous
              Guest

              If they are all doing it and still making profit enough to continue doing it, that means most people are ok with said practices.

              • #410736
                Anonymous
                Guest

                if they would mandate putting a rod up everyone’s ass, would you be okay with too, you fucking NPC?

                • #410738
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  start your own country
                  borders work

                  • #410760
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    I would do that, then I would invade your country and raze it to the ground

                    • #410764
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      Sounds good to me. Your honesty is refreshing.

        • #410761
          Anonymous
          Guest

          …have you not considered not playing such a game?

      • #410718
        Anonymous
        Guest

        in that case my conscience is clean because almost none of the money for the purchase of an original product goes to the creators, in fact, the bulk of it goes to the Marketing bloat, the HR cunts or the garden gnome CEO who always tries to garden gnome the consumer out of one more shekkel

        • #410735
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Even if only a single cent makes it to the dev, that is money you are denying them while enjoying the fruits of their labor.

    • #410682
      Anonymous
      Guest
    • #410684
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >make infinite copies of paid software
      >aaaah no you can’t the company owning the IP is bleeding money because of you
      >make infinite copies of food irl
      >aaaaah no you can’t farmer are bleeding money because of you
      >but world hunger is solved and no one has to worry about earning money to eat ever again

      • #410688
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >with farmers and food labs out of a job nobody ever invents new food that tastes better
        >with software developers out of a job you’re stuck with copies of indieshit

        • #410693
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >nobody has any need for money because everything is free
          >somehow nobody will do useful work even though there’s no reason not to, and every reason to, because no money

          • #410708
            Anonymous
            Guest

            There is literally a labor shortage going on right now because people are not being paid enough. You vastly underestimate how much most people just want to be lazy and coast. Abolishing money won’t lead to the shiny sexy secular Star Trek utopia you’re hoping for, it’ll just lead to collapse because very few people actually want to work for free when they could just sit at home and get everything for free.

            Not everybody is an autistic white guy that wants to invent stuff just for the sake of inventing cool stuff. The vast proportion of humanity is lazy diverse folk that just want gibs.

            • #410713
              Anonymous
              Guest

              Any source on that claim about most people being lazy? Because that’s a pretty crappy look at society.

              • #410716
                Anonymous
                Guest

                he’s projecting hard

              • #410722
                Anonymous
                Guest

                It’s a honest look. Again, based on current events. Labor shortage and people preferring to be on unemployment collecting gibs than going to work for minimum wage. It’s the path of least resistance and it’s based in logic. Why work when you can just do nothing and still have stuff? Money motivates people because money is the physical embodiment of the concept that those who don’t work don’t get to eat.

                • #410732
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >work soul crushing job the whole day every day
                  >barely enough money to scrape by
                  >don’t work at all
                  >get the same money
                  what would (You) do anon, I’m interest.
                  just because people have standards now and know any better than last century doesn’t mean they are lazy

                • #410789
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  There is literally a labor shortage going on right now because people are not being paid enough. You vastly underestimate how much most people just want to be lazy and coast. Abolishing money won’t lead to the shiny sexy secular Star Trek utopia you’re hoping for, it’ll just lead to collapse because very few people actually want to work for free when they could just sit at home and get everything for free.

                  Not everybody is an autistic white guy that wants to invent stuff just for the sake of inventing cool stuff. The vast proportion of humanity is lazy diverse folk that just want gibs.

                  abolishing money isn’t feasible (unlike abolishing copyright) because then we’ll just get back to barter, but that’s besides the point
                  creative endeavors are different from daily grind for survival, and while i don’t think neetdom is good for a man’s soul, i think wageslavery is worse
                  the logic is simple: do nothing vs break your back for daddy amazon for the same benefit, how is picking the path of least resistance bad for the individual?
                  america has a million problems so LMAO HIGHER MIN WAGE won’t solve it all, but labour shortage is a meme unless you bought into the golden bull run and think you can completely prevent economic decline

                  • #410805
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >because then we’ll just get back to barter
                    Barter doesn’t predate money, and the people who think so out themselves as not understanding the foundations of economics or having enough of a grasp of behavioral psychology to make meaningful claims about what would happen in the absence of money

                    • #410829
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      alright anon-who-knows-behavioral-psychology, tell me how people traded before money
                      did they not use their natural resources, such as hides or honey?
                      absence of money does indeed lead to barter, as demonstrated by the times soviet union fucked with peasants by preventing trade (they resorted to bartering among themselves and black market) or when factories paid workers with produce instead of cash

                      • #410834
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >tell me how people traded before money
                        Credit. Credit leads to money, rather than the reverse. People just kept note of who owed who. That’s why the earliest forms of “money” were sticks with notches cut in them and stuff like that; they weren’t media of exchange or value, they were debt records.

                        The idea of “money”, of some sort of fungible token of intrinsic value, arose with nations, especially ones with standing armies. Because credit-based economies require trust; you need to know the people who you are giving to, and know they will stay around, because otherwise you have no way of expecting recompense down the line. States created coinage, paid it to soldiers, then demanded it back in taxes, to create a demand for it within credit economies, so that traveling armies could be fed and supplied anywhere in the kingdom/empire.

                        In the absence of money, society would look like it does NOW, because basically nobody uses money, everything is already done with credit. When was the last time you handled cash? The currency is meaningless, it’s just information, just numbers on a ledger, and in the “absence” of it people aren’t gonna hand each other chickens or beaver pelts, they’re just gonna start a new ledger.

                      • #410850
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        pretty interesting, i was thinking of early states, which came to be from nothing, and would require basic barter before establishing a currency or even a credit system, as food, wood and rocks are the only things that small tribes can offer to the big foreign army
                        cities along trade routes would also not exclusively employ credit but just barter for trust reasons
                        talking about a nature of currency is complicated shit, but my point was that when it comes down to starving, people will barter

                      • #410863
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Yeah but my point is people only barter in the absence of trust. Most human exchange is not immediately mutual, because it’s impractical. The Adam-Smith-ian argument goes that money superceded barter because of this inefficiency, but the actual anthropological evidence suggests that people simply used credit from the start and didn’t bother with tokens of exchange until later.

                        If you’re interested in the subject I highly recommend “Debt” by David Graeber, it’s very interesting to see the origins of economy laid out by an anthropologist using the best evidence of what actually happened in human history when economies formed, rather than by an 18th-century philosopher using abstract reasoning to make asspull declarations (which have somehow become a foundational myth of the discipline of economics despite being wholly unsubstantiated by any historical evidence whatsoever)

              • #410768
                Anonymous
                Guest

                you could ask yourself why is it commie countries that always implode regardless of whether there is or isn’t any external pressure, or why commie countries are the ones most infamous for cutting so many corners that if you ask for a cube they’ll give you a sphere

                why spend half a decade learning neural surgery if you can earn just as much working as a cashier
                we all work because we must, and we all would avoid it if we could
                >inb4 nu-hu im dedicated, i’d still work hard!
                you will have to work the share of all those who do not want to work and you would still be earning just as much as the rest
                >t. i live under a commie sympathizing government

                • #410785
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  There’s a difference between WORK and creativity. Nobody wants to work, everyone wants to be creative. Creativity doesn’t require incentive. The reason for attempting to ensure monetary incentive to creativity is not because “without it, nobody will bother”, it’s because we want talented, creative people to be able to spend their time doing that INSTEAD of working. If working is no longer needed, everyone is a creator. That’s the fucking dream of human civilization.

                  • #410813
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    >There’s a difference between WORK and creativity. Nobody wants to work, everyone wants to be creative.
                    have you never created anything or simply no knowing about people that produce media? It’s actual, real work grinding out the creative process day in day out. Successful artists got luck but they also churn out insane output as well. There’s also a ton of labor people will do because they want to. Hell, I’d do my old retirement home delivery route once a week if I was just compensated gas because I liked helping nurses and retirees.

                • #410808
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  You said a lot of things and none of them answered that request for a source. If I ask for a source on any of these new claims, am I gonna get a response that actually provides them, or are you gonna respond with more unverified claims? If it’s the latter I’ll just stop now and say "you win" instead of wasting my time.

            • #410715
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >labor shortage in vidya
              fucking kek imagine actually believing this

        • #410695
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >nobody ever invents new food that tastes better
          anon…

    • #410690
      Anonymous
      Guest

      IP laws are the reason the industrial revolution happened. Once it was profitable to actually think and invent for a living, people did just that. In a world where IP laws didn’t exist, no one would spend the time and money on research when it’d be cheaper to just steal someone else’s idea. The end result would be a game of chicken where no one takes the first step and then nothing gets done. You can even see this today. Countries with weak IP laws produce fewer new inventions than countries with strong IP laws, even accounting for differences in populations.

      • #410694
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >accounting for differences in populations.
        You talking about N?

        • #410699
          Anonymous
          Guest

          USA and China. China has four times as many people as the US, yet produces a fraction of new discoveries and inventions despite being basically as well funded as the US is at this point.

          • #410702
            Anonymous
            Guest

            China also lives under a system of government that has spent years systematically murdering, imprisoning, or chasing out all of the original thinkers and creative minds in its gene pool because that’s what its politics required. It shouldn’t be surprising that the whole country is an ant farm, they made absolutely sure it would be.

    • #410692
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Since you chose to make your conclusion using three inflammatory points, I will do the same.

      1) Creative endeavors will never be profitable in a vacuum. No millionaires were made from pursuing the fine arts without nepotism or pure luck. Information is infinitely more useful both to society and the "IP" system is just what happens when capitalism intersects with the market of ideas. Not everyone is working for Viacom, the little guy can benefit from copyright law just as easily as a big corporation, you just don’t see this happening.

      2) No matter if piracy impacts sales or not it still affects the way games are produced. This is why the shareware model was shelved, in addition to self-publishing through forums. Think about how many indie developers wouldn’t have had to resort to pooping up Steam if they could rely on distributing files through e-mail without fear it would just be uploaded on some server and kept afloat by literally one guy.

      3) "Game preservation" is the most gnomish way to say you pirate. Outside of autists playing translated Sega Saturn games on optical drive emulators, just say you play games illegally. You want to say this isn’t about morality or ethics, stop trying to appeal to the pathos.

    • #410696
      Anonymous
      Guest

      extremely based, anon

    • #410704
      Anonymous
      Guest

      I agree with the gist of this, but I don’t think it’s fair to completely remove ownership of an IP because it can lead to misrepresentation of a brand by third parties in an act of sabotage, games and platforms becoming even MORE locked down as a means of slowing/stopping pirates and competition from blatantly copying shit, and I believe IP law helps the originator of the IP earn money from the work they put into it, which I believe is perfectly fair.
      I think the ultimate problem is how LONG an IP is protected. Companies like Disney keep getting these deadlines extended every time Mickey Mouse is about to enter the public domain, and ownership is ridiculously longer than it should be.
      Most of a products’ sales are in its initial sales period. I believe IP law protecting the IP for the duration of the initial sales period is a fair compromise to ensure that the creator(s) can profit off of their effort, while also allowing IPs to enter the public domain within a reasonable time.

    • #410705
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Remember those cases where companies destroyed the original sources of media or neglected preservation like in that fire of universal studios?

    • #410717
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Intellectual property is a symptom of a bigger disease, you’re barking at the wrong tree here.

      • #410726
        Anonymous
        Guest

        bark at all trees

        • #410737
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Nah, if you wanna fix shit you gotta fix it the right way instead of half assing things.
          Intellectual property in itself is something created to fix a productive and economic system that would be even worse without it, removing IP would fix nothing for either creators or consumers, it would be a placebo at best.

    • #410727
      Anonymous
      Guest

      honestly I’m a bit surprised that this board of NEETs don’t understand the psychology of NEETdom.

    • #410739
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >mfw just filled up my phone with a bunch of ds roms, drastic for free, and a shitton of free apks including minecraft and terraria
      >this makes retards seethe
      Lol. Lmao

    • #410746
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >commies are among sonicfags
      Color me surprised

      • #410749
        Anonymous
        Guest

        lmfao this fucking game

      • #410752
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Radical Capitalists like Rothbard wanted IP abolished too.
        No one likes IP laws except corporate cocksuckers.

    • #410758
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >pirate game
      >I like it
      >take short position on game company
      >pirate 50 million copies to bankrupt the company
      >use my earnings to personally recompense every person who had a creative role in its production
      Is there any reason not to do this?

      • #410766
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >no buyfag or bootlicker has ever refuted this argument
        eternally btfo’s by their own logic

    • #410770
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >Intellectual property is
      we aren’t in a UBI fantasyland. If a photographer gets a great picture their livelihood is at stake if they can’t sell it. But others will profit off it without the actual producer of the art getting compensated at all. Parasites like kimdotcom do nothing but charge people for hosting content other people stole.

    • #410773
      Anonymous
      Guest

      IP Law and its extensions might be the single most damaging thing to our culture.

    • #410783
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >everytime the subject of music dmca strikes comes up people in the comments harp on the evils of capitalism

      • #410791
        Anonymous
        Guest

        almost like the two are inseparable, really make you thonk

      • #410818
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >defending the absolute state of music industry
        i guess you mean that it’s "not real capitalism", but music licensing is the worst and anybody with a brain should actively undermine it at every opportunity

    • #410797
      Anonymous
      Guest
      • #410803
        Anonymous
        Guest

        “in an insane world, a sane man must appear insane.”

    • #410799
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >serves no-one except for media conglomerates
      Shit, when did I become a media conglomerate

      • #410807
        Anonymous
        Guest

        The only argument against copyright supporting the little guy is always some bullshit like supposedly not being able to afford to take it to court against a big company (despite this having been done successfully by literal nobodies who got handsome payouts).

        • #410823
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Now that you’ve said that, yeah I realize there’s a metric shitton of irony by pairing that statement with a Sonic image, given that Ken Penders completely fucked over Sega with his copyright bullshit. It lends credence to the idea that copyright bullshit can really fuck over a good thing, but hey, at least we can all do it.

          • #410845
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >Ken Penders
            >The case was dismissed without prejudice September 26, 2011, then again in February 2012, after the case had been refiled four days after it was originally dismissed, despite warnings from Judge Otis Wright who dismissed the case both times. In October 2013, the CA 9th Appellate Court upheld Judge Wright’s initial ruling.[14][15][16]
            But yeah, he totally owned the big guys, bros.

            • #410877
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >he had to look Ken Penders up
              >posts barely half the story anyways
              lol

    • #410801
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >piracy doesnt hurt sames becuase they were never potentiwl customers to begin with
      This is such a disingenuous argument. If piracy didnt exist the frame of mind of a pirate may be different, asking him "would you pay money for this product" would I wager yield many more yes votes if the ability to acquire it for free through pirscy was off the table. Because how many people would say yes to paying for something when they can easily get it free? There are way too many opprotunistic people to all be self aware enough to answer accuratley.

    • #410812
      Anonymous
      Guest

      A world without IP laws would work if you nuked all the Chinese and Indians first.

    • #410816
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Im probably going to pirate darkest dungeon 2 for the first year because it’s going to have EGS exclusivity, but depending on how big of a pain in the dick pirating each subsequent update is I may end up just buying it twice like an omegagoy.

    • #410843
      Anonymous
      Guest

      thank you hedgehog the sonic

    • #410852
      Anonymous
      Guest

      What will happen in 2024 when rubber hose mickey becomes public domain? Could you make a game with him in it?

      • #410855
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Could you make a game with him in it?
        Yeah, but you will likely unable to advertise him being in it.

      • #410857
        Anonymous
        Guest

        china is going to be all over it with their bug hands

      • #410861
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >Could you make a game with him in it?
        Yeah, but you will likely unable to advertise him being in it.

        You cannot also do anything with the character that was already done with him while it had copyright.
        >The court’s ruling in the case specifies that all the elements contained in Conan Doyle’s stories published before 1923 have passed into the public domain and are no more protected by copyright. In particular, the characters of Holmes and Watson are no more subject to copyright, but only the elements of the characters based on the stories published before 1923.
        >The court mentioned explicitly that all story elements and events from the lives of the characters contained in the stories published after 1923 are still under the protection of copyright.
        >In particular, the court stated clearly that copyright protects such story elements as:
        >>Dr. Watson’s having a second wife,
        >>the description of the sports achievements of Dr. Watson in his youth,
        >>the circumstances related to Sherlock Holmes’s leaving the detective agency.
        >https://medium.com/@CopyrightedDreams/the-case-of-dr-watsons-secret-wife-3feccad80c47

        • #410874
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >you can’t say a fictional character has a second wife
          >why?
          >because you just can’t

      • #410865
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Yes, but you’d have to be really strict about adhering to Steamboat Willie and the other cartoons released in 1928. If Mickey so much as puts on a wizard cap you’ll be sued to oblivion.

      • #410867
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Copyright periods will extend. As I recall, every existing extension of the duration of copyright has passed in just such a way as to prevent something owned by Disney from entering the public domain.

        • #410871
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Not him. I don’t think it will happen. Things have been entering the public domain for three years in a row already. Disney will limit themselves to use trademarks (that cannot expire), and the industry is starving for new material to adapt. The music industry in fact supported an act that enables music recordings to enter the public domain.

    • #410870
      Anonymous
      Guest
      • #410880
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Ganker is edgy /r/gaming, aka redditors who migrated here and brought all the soja with them

    • #410873
      Anonymous
      Guest

      gotta go fast

    • #410876
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >spend thousands of hours and dollars creating innovative product
      >china/garden gnomes steal the design and steal all the sales because of their bugman/goyim slave factories
      >innovator can’t afford to innovate anymore
      IP law is a necessity, Chang. Reform is necessary thanks to Disney and (((friends))), but completely abolishing the concept of IP is retarded.

    • #410882
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Piracy isn’t wrong but intellectual property has many good reasons to exist. While I think it’s fine that people copy and distribute games and software, credit still needs to be attributed to the creator. The problem is when people abuse this, not the intellectual property itself, but when people falsely use copyright to stunt creative works of others that may be similar or even something like a completely false guilty until proven innocent DMCA claim. It’s not wrong to give credit where credit is due but the process where only the rich can defend themselves and people who simply steal ideas and don’t give credit are issues that don’t seem seem to have any sort of solution as greed and jealousy are human nature.

    • #410884
      Anonymous
      Guest

      This post is incredibly based, but your use of the propaganda phrase "intellectual property" is very misguided and ultimately harms your message. You’re speaking about copyright.
      https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html

Viewing 46 reply threads
  • The forum ‘A haunted junk yard’ is closed to new topics and replies.