Original post by CrystalParadigm Piracy is stealing. By legalizing piracy, the problem is not solved, it is simply not recognized. Yes, it's that simple.
Yawn.
Piracy is illegal by definition. Piracy will never be legal. But copying a game without paying the developers is only 'theft' if the developers are meant to be paid when somebody gets a copy of their game. Under a system in which the developers are not meant to be paid when somebody gets a copy of their game, copying a game without paying the developers wouldn't be 'theft'.
Original post by CrystalParadigm Piracy is stealing. By legalizing piracy, the problem is not solved, it is simply not recognized. Yes, it's that simple.
James R. DiGiovanna (dba Crystal Paradigm)
Simple and wrong.
Piracy is not stealing. Piracy is copyright infringement.
Just like I don't buy a game. I "license" it. If I steal your TV. You now cannot watch TV. If I pirate your game, you can still play it just as easily.
Wrong again. Copyright Infringement by definition is theft of Intellectual Property Rights. For instance, Aqua Invasion is protected by Registered Copyright in the United States of America. If you copy it without permission, you are stealing my intellectual property, and I can sue you for the retail price of the game, and any revenue that was lost due to the distribution of the illegal copies.
Once more, in simple terms: If you copy a game that you don't have permission to copy, you are stealing. Theft is a crime. Therefore, Piracy is a crime of theft.
Legalizing Piracy would effectually be equivalent to legalizing theft.
If someone copies your game, what do you do? You sue them.
Because it's copyright infringement [a civil matter] and not theft [a criminal matter]. Nothing is taken from you. You've lost nothing. Someone else simply gained from your creation without giving you your rightful due.
Copyright is considered Intellectual Property. Copyright Infringement is in fact theft and is also a criminal matter. Just because Intellectual Property is not physical property does not mean that ownership does not apply.
Hmm... so someone doing lowly garbage collecting should make equal pay as a doctor? Even though the doctor went through much more training and preparation for his job.
People that have studied their entire life don't exactly always become millionaires and thats the thing about Capitalism. You take risks and in risks you can lose or win. Those that win can enjoy it and even the ones that lose don't always lose out. They have had experience taking a risk and it looks good on a resume. If you ran a company that fell through maybe someone will hire you as a manager.
When i said the dying in the ditch thing i was refering to people that take advantage of our government.
You didn't read the whole thing. By quoting only part of it, you manipulate your point to illustrate what is untrue.
If you willfully infringe on a copyright, it is considered theft of intellectual property and you will be prosecuted as a criminal. Piracy is a crime punishable by law. The owner of the copyright may also sue for damages in civil litigation.
The way you define licensing is also misleading. When you "purchase" a book, you are not purchasing rights to copy that book, you are purchasing the right to own a copy of that book to read or resell. When you purchase a game, you are purchasing a right to own a copy of that game to use, or resell if the End User License Agreement allows this. It is still a purchase, regardless of how you word it.
Last year, the US Federal Government arrested and sentenced over 3000 distributers of crackz and warez. A young woman in national news was recently arrested and sentenced for distributing .mp3 files via file-sharing.
