[EMIRELADERO]

Is it really true that piracy hurts game developers? All I've seen is evidence for the contrary[1]

As for your end statement, I believe having root access, or just the same level of control over the individual device as the manufacturer does after the sale, is a matter of consumer rights/protections ripe for legislation, not about "features".

[1] https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/09/eu-study-finds-piracy...

[jonny_eh]

> 45-percent error margin that makes the results less than statistically significant

Did you even read the link?

[thrdbndndn]

I totally get that piracy may not necessarily hurt dev in term of income. But I feel a few other things always seem to be left out in the discussion about this topic.

1) it is totally unfair for the honest buyers if other people can get it for free in an "illegal" way.

2) The IP holders may simply don't want people to get there work for free, irrespective of the fact "they are not going to buy it anyway!". I've seen lots of indie artists express such opinion.

Ultimately, I don't think that's something bystanders have a say. You (general you, not "you" you) can't force your "rational analysis on economy of privacy" on the IP holders. Large game companies obviously almost only care about the profit, so you may assume they think that way. But that can't be applied to everyone.

[EMIRELADERO]

> 1) it is totally unfair for the honest buyers if other people can get it for free in an "illegal" way.

I have never, ever seen anyone make that argument. How would that even work? "I paid fof this Smart TV. Then I heard about a massive shoplifting operation that took place on the store I bought it from. Damn! Why did I have to pay when those thiefs got many for free!". Doesn't hold up.

> 2) The IP holders may simply don't want people to get there work for free, irrespective of the fact "they are not going to buy it anyway!". I've seen lots of indie artists express such opinion.

What would the motivation for not wanting them to get it for free be, then? Unless you don't want people to get your works in the first place. If you do, I don't see how piracy might make you angry without the "concern over potentially lost sales" element.

[thrdbndndn]

>I have never, ever seen anyone make that argument

Well, now you see one, I am making it.

Your analogy with tangible goods doesn't work. Shoplifting, or stealing, could be a felony and is heavily frown upon morally. The risk of getting caught up is much higher, and the consequence is more serious.

I won't be angry about "thieves getting them for free" despite I paid for the TV, because I knew they will end up in jails eventually, if not already.

Piracy, while theoretically illegal, is almost never punished. It realistically has no risk. So there are a lot more people doing that than shoplifting. And yes, I feel salty when I paid full price for X game while someone is getting it free.

>What would the motivation for not wanting them to get it for free be, then? Unless you don't want people to get your works in the first place.

I only want my paid customers to get it, whoever doesn't pay doesn't deserve to get it. Pretty simple. I don't find it's hard to understand. Go ask any artist live with Patreon money how they feel about it.

[EMIRELADERO]

> Your analogy with tangible goods doesn't work. Shoplifting, or stealing, could be a felony and is heavily frown upon morally. The risk of getting caught up is much higher, and the consequence is more serious.

> I won't be angry about "thieves getting them for free" despite I paid for the TV, because I knew they will end up in jails eventually, if not already.

So whether you get angry about it or not depends solely on the thieves getting punished, not on the act itself? Seems like a very narrow way to view it.

> And yes, I feel salty when I paid full price for X game while someone is getting it free.

Why? That has no effect on how you enjoy the game. Why would you get salty about that, considering it doesn't affect you in any way? Especially since you said yourself earlier that piracy doesn't "necessarily hurt dev in term of income", so you wouldn't even worry about the dev(s) not making any more games because of piracy.

What's the damage for you then?

[thrdbndndn]

They same reason I hate about human right violation practice, despite it doesn't affect my in anyway (some even benefit me, like slavery labor).

(No, I'm not saying they are the "same thing" or the same level of seriousness. Just to demonstrate I can hate things that doesn't affect me negatively.)

[EMIRELADERO]

That's kind of a circular argument, isn't it?

"Piracy is bad" -> Why? "(One reason is) People get angry that others are getting their paid stuff for free" -> Why would they get angry? -> "Because piracy is bad" -> Why?

etc.

[pdntspa]

We need to get past this idea that IP holders have any say over their work once it is in the hands of the public. Information wants to be free!

[numpad0]

From the Berne Convention, Article 6bis, Moral Rights:

> (1) Independently of the author's economic rights, and even after the transfer of the said rights, the author shall have the right to claim authorship of the work and to object to any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, the said work, which would be prejudicial to his honor or reputation.

Ref: https://wipolex.wipo.int/en/text/283698

[selfhoster11]

Yes, because the Berne convention is a beacon of moral virtue to be respected in all possible ways.

[google234123]

You did pay for when you bought the smart TV. Some percentage of the price is there to deal with insurance for shoplifting or return or warranty fraud.

If you live in a society that tolerates more fraud or crime you will pay more.

[numpad0]

This feel familiar to me, I think this is the thinking used mainly by music and video DRM implementers. An arcane one, in the sense that it is not consistent with modern liberal capitalism, that it argues the society as a whole and equalities/fairnesses within absolutely prioritizes over economical profits.