The Reason Most Pirates Don't Go Legit

Some of the BS excuses people use to justify pirating just boggles my mind. I think over the years we have heard just about every excuse possible and to be quite honest, they are BS. No matter what the industry does to at least try to get people to pay they will just pirate because the can. It's as simple as that really, because they can.

On another note, when did it become O.K. to openly admit to pirating on [H]?
 
03grandam said:
Some of the BS excuses people use to justify pirating just boggles my mind. I think over the years we have heard just about every excuse possible and to be quite honest, they are BS. No matter what the industry does to at least try to get people to pay they will just pirate because the can. It's as simple as that really, because they can.

On another note, when did it become O.K. to openly admit to pirating on [H]?
Click to expand...

Steam fixed game pirating. Some people still do it, I'm sure, but most people I know that did now just go on Steam sales, a "$60" game for under 10 bucks? Hell yes.
 
Vicinity said:
Steam fixed game pirating. Some people still do it, I'm sure, but most people I know that did now just go on Steam sales, a "$60" game for under 10 bucks? Hell yes.
Click to expand...

Many of the games that I have played and videos that I have watched are simply not worth the asking price, to me. Some are not even worth my time. For example, each of the Call of Duty & Battlefield SP games are worth my time (takes a couple of days each) but I would never pay any more than $5 each. With another example: All of The Elder Scroll & Fallout 3 games are easily worth the price (possibly not the DLC’s though). Most of the Assassin’s Creed games are worth the price too – some parts not worth the time though. Not many others though.
 
03grandam said:
Some of the BS excuses people use to justify pirating just boggles my mind. I think over the years we have heard just about every excuse possible and to be quite honest, they are BS. No matter what the industry does to at least try to get people to pay they will just pirate because the can. It's as simple as that really, because they can.

On another note, when did it become O.K. to openly admit to pirating on [H]?
Click to expand...

Because most people these days realize the bullshit the movie publishers are trying to push on people. Every other industry but the movie industry has realized the potential of making money using the internet. It is 2012 and the movie industry has yet to do so.

Good to see the communists are coming out of the cracks. Fuck capitalism. If a business can't adapt to the market let's allow them to abuse our judicial branch and legislative branch to sue people instead.
 
Vicinity said:
Steam fixed game pirating. Some people still do it, I'm sure, but most people I know that did now just go on Steam sales, a "$60" game for under 10 bucks? Hell yes.
Click to expand...

The changes to online music distribution the past few years have fixed the widescale music pirating as well. The quality of service provided by downloading through iTunes means most people don't bother downloading shitty MP3's anymore.

For $10 per album, or $1 per song you get a 256kbps .MP4, DRM free, and lifetime free redownloads from the iTunes store on any device.

Same goes for Steam and PC games as you mentioned.
 
I love the excuse about the quality of the movies. I've watched some of those supposedly really high quality blu-rays and then I watched DirecTv HD channels and barely notice a difference. Then again I don't sit 2 inches from my TV saying "Oh shit look at that pixel over at the edge of the screen, looks like shit man!", instead I sit on my couch and enjoy the movie and am amazed by the good quality.

I wonder if these same people are the ones claiming they can hear sounds under 20Hz.
 
Mchart said:
Because most people these days realize the bullshit the movie publishers are trying to push on people. Every other industry but the movie industry has realized the potential of making money using the internet. It is 2012 and the movie industry has yet to do so.

Good to see the communists are coming out of the cracks. Fuck capitalism. If a business can't adapt to the market let's allow them to abuse our judicial branch and legislative branch to sue people instead.
Click to expand...
So instead of just not buying/watching it lets all just d/l it for free, that will show them :rolleyes:.

I'm also far from a commie, I just believe in paying for what i want and not just putting my hands into the cookie jar when I know I'm not suppose to, just because it's there for the taking ;).
 
03grandam said:
So instead of just not buying/watching it lets all just d/l it for free, that will show them :rolleyes:.

I'm also far from a commie, I just believe in paying for what i want and not just putting my hands into the cookie jar when I know I'm not suppose to, just because it's there for the taking ;).
Click to expand...

Yes, it will show them.

They are loosing profit because they aren't making the sale.

Economics 101
 
xIronCrossx said:
I love the excuse about the quality of the movies. I've watched some of those supposedly really high quality blu-rays and then I watched DirecTv HD channels and barely notice a difference. Then again I don't sit 2 inches from my TV saying "Oh shit look at that pixel over at the edge of the screen, looks like shit man!", instead I sit on my couch and enjoy the movie and am amazed by the good quality.

I wonder if these same people are the ones claiming they can hear sounds under 20Hz.
Click to expand...

Nope, don't invest much in audio equipment for obvious reasons.

If you can't notice the difference between a bluray and the 'hd' content provided by legal online services your TV must be shit, or you can't see.

I'm not talking about HD channels provided by Cable/Sat.

We are talking about services provided on the internet.
 
Mchart said:
None of this matters. Like you said, people are pirating.

As you may be aware from this thread alone - Most of us would stop pirating TV/Movies if a pay-for service was offered that gave an acceptable level of service.

I refuse to pay $30-$50 for a bluray for a movie i'll watch once. I don't like going to the store anymore as it is. I have 100Mbps internet. If these publishers weren't idiots they would setup a service that offered me bluray rips off a server that would max out my 12MBps connection.

In fact, if they did do this I would be willing to pay $30 for it.

The bottom line is that there is a substantial and untapped market of people waiting for the movie business to get with the times. The PC Game industry did it, and look how much money they are making now. The Music industry has mostly done it. Again, look at how much money they are making. The Movie/TV industry hasn't done it and they are the ones loosing out on a shitload of profit.

I don't try to justify my theft of movies/TV. I know i'm stealing. The point is that i'm TELLING YOU WHY. Further, i'm SCREAMING at the top of my lungs with ways that could be implemented to take my money!
Click to expand...

But you are trying to justifying it--you're saying why it's okay for you to do it--because you're not getting the options for delivery of the content by the creator/record label/publisher, etc. That's a justification. Acknowledging that you know it's considered theft doesn't change or excuse the fact that it's wrong.

So paying $30 for a bluray rip streaming is a fair price, but paying $30 for a physical copy is not? If that's what you're saying, then you're contradicting yourself. And you don't have to go to a physical store to buy physical copies of content--there are so many online marketplaces to satisfy pretty much anything anyone wants to buy.

You give examples of how other industries have changed to digital distribution of content (which I agree is the natural progression)--but guess what? The illegal distribution/acquisition in these areas hasn't changed with the migration from physical to digital distribution. Because people will always try to acquire something for free if they can. It has nothing to do with the value of content. Sure, maybe someone would say "well, if the latest COD game were $15 as opposed to $60 on release, I'd buy it," but that doesn't change the fact that a massive number of people were perfectly happy to accomplish record purchases/profits for said game and DO think it's worth it (note--I do not, but I acknowledge that I'm not everyone, and everyone's not me). All that means is your view value is different from someone else's. But it doesn't entitle you to content for free.

The hypocrisy of it all pisses me off--you want cheaper content, but you feel the prices are unfair to actually pay for what you want now. If the general public agreed with you, wouldn't you think that sales of content would go down? But it hasn't. What that means is you're cheap relative to most others buying content. Cheapness doesn't entitle you to having something that you can't afford or don't want to pay for.

There's no logical way to rationalize it. If people truly feel content is not worth it, then they ought not buy or illegally acquire it, and make a real statement against it. If at the same time people are paying for the content, then all it means is that your idea of value is different, but it also means that there's no reason for the industry to change their ways with so many people behind it throwing their money at them.
 
Mchart said:
Yes, it will show them.

They are loosing profit because they aren't making the sale.

Economics 101
Click to expand...
justify, justify, justify. You stated earlier in the thread how you won't pay $30 for a physical copy but you will pay it for a bluray rip? Does that really make sense to you?

Why not be a responsible adult and just go without if your not wiling to pay for it? Oh yea I forgot about the excuse "because I can" routine when it comes to pirating, lol.
 
This is not about justification.

The real point is that a company like Steam made it not worth while to pirate games, they are easy and quick to get digitally for a good price.


The large movie companies go out of their way to stop companies like Netflix from distributing and streaming movies. They feel they can not make as much money and they worry they can not pound you with as many commercials.

Eventually their needs to be more services that let me subscribe to only the shows or channels I want, online so I can stream it anytime I want and not force me to watch 10 minutes of commercials for every 20 minutes of show.

The system fore TV right now is broken. The technology exists to do it so much better, but they do not want to use it because it means they cant make as much profit, not that they can not make a profit, just that they can not make as much or so they think.


Breaking the law is never okay and I do not feel its justified, but I understand the reason and its much easier to change that behavior by making things work a better way than to run around trying to put a stop to it.

And to the people trying to compare this to robbing a bank, think about this.

If the job market in a country got so bad that people started stealing money from banks, from houses from each other, what is easier, arresting them all, trying to put stronger security everywhere, or changing policy to create jobs?

Use some common sense, the best way to change a given behavior is take away the incentive of doing so. This method is never 100% which is why we have laws and penalties, but its gets the majority and that is what matters.
 
teh_chem said:
The hypocrisy of it all pisses me off--you want cheaper content, but you feel the prices are unfair to actually pay for what you want now. If the general public agreed with you, wouldn't you think that sales of content would go down? But it hasn't. What that means is you're cheap relative to most others buying content. Cheapness doesn't entitle you to having something that you can't afford or don't want to pay for.

There's no logical way to rationalize it. If people truly feel content is not worth it, then they ought not buy or illegally acquire it, and make a real statement against it. If at the same time people are paying for the content, then all it means is that your idea of value is different, but it also means that there's no reason for the industry to change their ways with so many people behind it throwing their money at them.
Click to expand...

So if sales aren't down, then why are these companies worried about piracy at all?
From your post there it sounds like there's a few crazy cheapass pirates out there that won't pay for anything no matter what, and everyone else is happy shelling out their entire pay check to go see a movie once a month.

The fact of the matter is just the opposite though. Prices are ridiculous, and people aren't willing to throw their money at movies/music/games when they have an alternative.

The internet/tech revolution never did bring prices for the consumer down, just reduced production costs and raised corporate profits. Corporations have no morals, no ethics, no accountability to anyone besides their share holders at the next quarterly meeting. Then they expect their customers to "do the right thing and pay up whatever we ask", as opposed to say getting it for free and pocketing the savings...because that's exactly what their corporation would do if given half a chance. The hypocrisy of it all pisses me off.
 
03grandam said:
Why not be a responsible adult and just go without if your not wiling to pay for it?
Click to expand...

Agree. Pirates don't agree with the corporations practices, but people who pay don't with pirates practices.
Bad Corporations and pirates are in the same boat of theives.
 
03grandam said:
justify, justify, justify. You stated earlier in the thread how you won't pay $30 for a physical copy but you will pay it for a bluray rip? Does that really make sense to you?

Why not be a responsible adult and just go without if your not wiling to pay for it? Oh yea I forgot about the excuse "because I can" routine when it comes to pirating, lol.
Click to expand...

Yes, it does make sense to me and thousands of other consumers being shafted right now.

Now I know why the Movie industry hasn't changed. Because people like you are running the publishing companies and instead of thinking about new ways to offer their content, and listening to their customers - They just say fuck off.
 
teh_chem said:
But you are trying to justifying it--you're saying why it's okay for you to do it--because you're not getting the options for delivery of the content by the creator/record label/publisher, etc. That's a justification. Acknowledging that you know it's considered theft doesn't change or excuse the fact that it's wrong.

So paying $30 for a bluray rip streaming is a fair price, but paying $30 for a physical copy is not? If that's what you're saying, then you're contradicting yourself. And you don't have to go to a physical store to buy physical copies of content--there are so many online marketplaces to satisfy pretty much anything anyone wants to buy.

You give examples of how other industries have changed to digital distribution of content (which I agree is the natural progression)--but guess what? The illegal distribution/acquisition in these areas hasn't changed with the migration from physical to digital distribution. Because people will always try to acquire something for free if they can. It has nothing to do with the value of content. Sure, maybe someone would say "well, if the latest COD game were $15 as opposed to $60 on release, I'd buy it," but that doesn't change the fact that a massive number of people were perfectly happy to accomplish record purchases/profits for said game and DO think it's worth it (note--I do not, but I acknowledge that I'm not everyone, and everyone's not me). All that means is your view value is different from someone else's. But it doesn't entitle you to content for free.

The hypocrisy of it all pisses me off--you want cheaper content, but you feel the prices are unfair to actually pay for what you want now. If the general public agreed with you, wouldn't you think that sales of content would go down? But it hasn't. What that means is you're cheap relative to most others buying content. Cheapness doesn't entitle you to having something that you can't afford or don't want to pay for.

There's no logical way to rationalize it. If people truly feel content is not worth it, then they ought not buy or illegally acquire it, and make a real statement against it. If at the same time people are paying for the content, then all it means is that your idea of value is different, but it also means that there's no reason for the industry to change their ways with so many people behind it throwing their money at them.
Click to expand...

Cool.

So in the meantime tens (If not hundreds) of thousands of potential consumers will continue to pirate movies because the Movie industry is not offering the content in a fashion that attract these customers. No amount of belittling me, tell me that i'm wrong, or telling me that i'm stealing (I allready know this as you've discovered) is going to change shit.

In the end they are loosing out on millions of dollars of profit because they won't offer the content in a fashion that would attract customers.

Gotta love it. Because you don't see a need for what people in my position want, you automatically write it off.

Now I know why the irrelevant and ancient distribution methods of the movie industry continue to ramble on.
 
And by the way, regardless if I pirate the media or not - I'm 'making a statement' about it. (As you ineptly call it) Either way i'm not paying them any money. You'd think that would send them a clear message to change offer new distribution methods.

I guess not.

By the way, I love how you posit that if the general public agreed with me the sales would go down.

HINT - THEY ARE. THATS WHY WE ARE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION.

Christ.
 
Also, I must be missing out on something.

Where exactly is this legal online distribution service offering bluray downloads? I'd love a link, because i'd use said service immediatly.

If what you actually meant is that I need to order a disk from a store online and wait for it to come in the mail; You've again missed out on why a substantial segment of potential consumers are not purchasing for their consumption.
 
Mchart said:
If this is what you honestly beleive then you really are clueless as to how 'good' iTunes service currently is.
Click to expand...
It wasn't a commentary on the quality of iTunes' service. It was meant to illustrate that you can purchase legally and bypass all the annoyances common to DVDs and Blu-rays. By "getting with the times", you can be a legitimate customer and bypass FBI warnings and adverts.
 
wonderfield said:
It wasn't a commentary on the quality of iTunes' service. It was meant to illustrate that you can purchase legally and bypass all the annoyances common to DVDs and Blu-rays. By "getting with the times", you can be a legitimate customer and bypass FBI warnings and adverts.
Click to expand...

If the movie I want to watch is offered in HD on iTunes I typically do use it.

I've allready outlined why I typically can't use it though. The biggest factor being that a substantial majority of the movies are simply not on iTunes. It's hard to support a service like this when the movie isn't even on there.
 
Mchart said:
Nope, don't invest much in audio equipment for obvious reasons.

If you can't notice the difference between a bluray and the 'hd' content provided by legal online services your TV must be shit, or you can't see.

I'm not talking about HD channels provided by Cable/Sat.

We are talking about services provided on the internet.
Click to expand...

Yes my TV is shit because it all looks perfectly clear to me. Sorry I am a normal person who doesn't analyze every pixel of his TV to make sure they look perfect from 2 inches away. I also don't need 25.1+15 sound to hear perfectly clear what is going on and enjoy a movie.

You are asking for something that 99% doesn't care for and would force all of us to pay way more so you can get your amazing quality that most people can't even tell the difference from.
 
Sovereign said:
Piracy is at least partially a symptom of market failure. Witness "TakeMyMoneyHBO," iTunes, Steam and Amazon MP3. People will pay for digital media, but the producer cannot (or should not) choose how or when the content is consumed (beyond "Buy your digital goods here").

Steam drives many pirates to go legit with its convenience, sale prices and the feeling that Valve is in it for the customers, not to make a quick buck. Some believe the two are mutually exclusive, but they really aren't. As Valve responded to EA's criticism--if we weren't making money doing this, we wouldn't do it. And if publishers didn't make money, they would have fled our platform.
Click to expand...

That's certainly true about steam. I've bought a few games over the years (very few) but the overwhelming majority haven't been legit. But in the last week steam's summer sale has really sucked me in. I've bought like 20 games (most of which i've already pirated and finished) which is at least double the amount of games i've bought previous to this. The convenience, cloud storage etc. It's a fantastic service.
 
YOU PEOPLE (and, I don't just mean the African Americans) who think piracy is just about FREE are wrong. Take TV:

I have cable TV. I already pay to legally watch every show I want to watch, and I watch them with ads... but not when or where I want. A DVR is a halfway solution (to which the media companies object, anyway). Hulu is a halfway solution because so many shows aren't on it, and they've gone overboard on commercials, and the streaming quality could be better.

Downloading TV shows is a complete solution, aside from it being illegal.

Instead of complaining about piracy, the media companies should stop trying to be so greedy... and come out with a complete solution.
 
DeathPrincess said:
They are too busy mid life crisising. :p
Click to expand...

tell me about it.. what's the point of it all anyway.. my hair line is receding <sigh..>.. i have a beautiful long blond hair.. i wouldn't mind death but watch myself slowly turn into a friggin corpse? fuck it all man, i wouldn't care if a billion fucking people died in a freak accident, but my hair? c'mon, not my hair man, life sucks.
 
xIronCrossx said:
Yes my TV is shit because it all looks perfectly clear to me. Sorry I am a normal person who doesn't analyze every pixel of his TV to make sure they look perfect from 2 inches away.
Click to expand...

Yet you will spend thousands every year or two on upgrading that video card and CPU for the next great game, the one that's so overpriced you can't pay $60 for...
 
xIronCrossx said:
Yes my TV is shit because it all looks perfectly clear to me. Sorry I am a normal person who doesn't analyze every pixel of his TV to make sure they look perfect from 2 inches away. I also don't need 25.1+15 sound to hear perfectly clear what is going on and enjoy a movie.

You are asking for something that 99% doesn't care for and would force all of us to pay way more so you can get your amazing quality that most people can't even tell the difference from.
Click to expand...

99% of consumers with HDTV's don't care about having Bluray quality?

What?

Seriously?

This is why many people buy Bluray's and/or download bluray rips.

Force you to pay? Huh? People who want to download bluray quality media from the internet will be the ones paying if the media publishers would offer the service.

We don't live in a communist dictatorship. You don't have to purchase streaming bluray quality media from the internet (When it becomes available) if you don't want to.
 
pankkake said:
I buy CDs (and digital music if the price is right). Only non-RIAA and DRM-free stuff. I buy way more music and books (the physical kind) than average users.
Yet I never paid for a movie or TV series for the last ten years.

I *pay* for piracy. I've donated time and money to pirate communities, uploaded stuff myself, paid for servers with a lot of bandwidth.

You have to be an idiot to believe it's about getting things for free.
Click to expand...
and your a idiot to not know its free and stealing, but almost everyone on here do it it.
 
BBA said:
If you do not agree, prove it wrong.
Click to expand...

Prove what wrong? That everything not that doesn't conform to the Tea Party's "ideology" is automatically a communist dictatorship? Or that we are in a communist dictatorship? :p
 
wonderfield said:
The idea of personal property rights is as an arbitrary a construct as the idea of copyright. They're both constructs we as a society have seen fit to create, define and adhere to. You do believe in personal property rights, I'm guessing?
Click to expand...
Personal property rights are present in animal societes, pretty much every human society, yes intellectual "property" is very recent has was never enforced by individuals.
I guess the word in English is "Natural law", others will probably explain it better than me.

Create something of value and then tell me if you feel the same way about copyright.
Click to expand...
This is so, so low, even for you.
I actually make a living from things that are usually copyrighted, but not thanks to copyright.
I'm just not a entitled crybaby.
 
grilledcheese said:
and your a idiot to not know its free and stealing, but almost everyone on here do it it.
Click to expand...
Come on, you're working against yourself here. Theft can't be defined with intellectual "property", unless you actually remove the data from the original authors. This is the number one reason it fails as a "right".
 
pankkake said:
Personal property rights are present in animal societes...
Click to expand...
There's no such thing as "personal property rights" in any animal society I'm aware of. Animals may and tend to possess certain things (like, say, meat) and they'll fight to protect those things from others, but that's the only notion personal property any animal comprehends.

pankkake said:
yes intellectual "property" is very recent has was never enforced by individuals.
Click to expand...
I don't know what this sentence means, so I don't know how to respond to it.

pankkake said:
I actually make a living from things that are usually copyrighted, but not thanks to copyright.
Click to expand...
Would I be correct in assuming that you dedicate all your works to the public domain then? If you have considerable disinterest in copyright, it would stand to reason that all your intellectual properties are public domain-dedicated.
 
wonderfield said:
There's no such thing as "personal property rights" in any animal society I'm aware of. Animals may and tend to possess certain things (like, say, meat) and they'll fight to protect those things from others, but that's the only notion personal property any animal comprehends.
Click to expand...
This is where our property rights *come from*. They are pretty much universal and clearly defined.
Intellectual property rights are always defined by a state, with serious differences between countries, and are made to please whiny entitled corporatists. It never, ever was developed as a spontaneous thing.

I don't know what this sentence means, so I don't know how to respond to it.
Click to expand...
yet instead of yes.


Would I be correct in assuming that you dedicate all your works to the public domain then? If you have considerable disinterest in copyright, it would stand to reason that all your intellectual properties are public domain-dedicated.
Click to expand...
Public domain does not really exist in a legal sense (you seem to ignore pretty much anything about the laws related to intellectual "property" you like so much...), but similar licenses are used, yes.
Do note that public domain and copyright do not mean everything has to be publicly available. We just don't use copyright.
Pretty much like the real innovators don't use patents.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top