Current Events > Is pirating video games "stealing"?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Anteaterking posted...

But something like digging through someone's trash isn't theft

I'd say it's debatable as to whether or not your entitles to said trash. Regardless, that is a moot point since both scenarios are different. With trash, those are items people knowingly/willingly discarded. Someone made the decision to revoke their ownership. When a company stops production of a game, they are not revoking ownership thus the game still belongs to them

---

bnui posted...

You are taking a product without paying. Its not being gifted, you didnt receive it as some kind of reward nor did you earn it.

Duh

Id pay them if i could for those old games and do when I can.
---

Leanaunfurled posted...

Depends on context, I think. If it's an old-ass game that you otherwise can't play for whatever variety of reasons, it isn't. If it's a newer game you can easily obtain and you're sure you'd like it but you pirate it anyway, it is stealing.

^THIS.
I don't think there is anything wrong with an old game which has zero chance of showing up on a modern virtual console type service (EXAMPLE: 16-bit era video games based on a cartoon, toy, or comic where the I.P is currently in permanent legal limbo due to an endless legal dispute between multiple business partners (or being held hostage by whoever owns the legal rights) and there is zero chance of a re-release of the video game, like Exo-Squad, Mighty Max, Dick Tracy, Cadillacs & Dinosaurs, etc, etc).
HOWEVER...
If it's a game that is out currently in stores (EXAMPLE: Super Mario Odyssey, Death Stranding, Gears 5, etc) then it is stealing since those are games currently out now that are widely available.
---

It is, but there isn't always a clear-cut victim.

---

The only time it's actually stealing is if you steal an actual hard copy. Downloading a game is not theft, by simple definition of what theft is. There is no loss on the part of anyone.
---

Of course it is. What a silly question

---

Same thing with old tv shows. Some things can only be watched online now. Is watching an old TV show on YouTube theft?
---

Bass_X0 posted...

Same thing with old tv shows. Some things can only be watched online now. Is watching an old TV show on YouTube theft?

Not exactly a strong argument when corporations that own IPs, and even those that don't, are routinely claiming videos on copyright issues.

---

ledbowman posted...

Of course it is. What a silly question

You make a game. I download a copy of it off a torrent tracker. What have I stolen from you? You have everything you had before I downloaded that .rar. You've incurred no loss.
---

SailorGoon posted...

I'd say it's debatable as to whether or not your entitles to said trash. Regardless, that is a moot point since both scenarios are different. With trash, those are items people knowingly/willingly discarded. Someone made the decision to revoke their ownership. When a company stops production of a game, they are not revoking ownership thus the game still belongs to them

Entitled isn't really a fitting word to use here. No one who is dumpster diving (let's just say for simplicity that they aren't trespassing) has any more claim to the trash than anyone else, but they become the "owners" once they take something away.

As long as we're going to use the argument that digital items have "value" even though they can be replicated indefinitely (which is completely reasonable), I think it's also reasonable to consider pirating "abandonware" as being the equivalent of dumpster diving.

This is different from ownership of the IP to be clear. Owning a physical good still doesn't give me unlimited rights when it comes to that product. Similarly, we shouldn't conflate ownership of a digital download and intellectual property contained in that download.
---

"I wasn't going to buy it anyways" You were never going to play it so why play it then?
---

Fuparulez posted...

You make a game. I download a copy of it off a torrent tracker. What have I stolen from you? You have everything you had before I downloaded that .rar. You've incurred no loss.

You still are in possession of something that you do not rightfully own. You are not entitled to that product/ownership

---

What if it's a download only game? You can't buy a physical copy from it would you still consider it stealing?
---

El Mexicano Texano posted...

"I wasn't going to buy it anyways" You were never going to play it so why play it then?

This is hilarious to me

"I had no desire to ever spend my own money on it, but I will commit theft to possess it and potentially face tens of thousands of dollars in fines and legal fees if I were ever caught"

---

Anteaterking posted...

Entitled isn't really a fitting word to use here. No one who is dumpster diving (let's just say for simplicity that they aren't trespassing) has any more claim to the trash than anyone else, but they become the "owners" once they take something away.

As long as we're going to use the argument that digital items have "value" even though they can be replicated indefinitely (which is completely reasonable), I think it's also reasonable to consider pirating "abandonware" as being the equivalent of dumpster diving.

This is different from ownership of the IP to be clear. Owning a physical good still doesn't give me unlimited rights when it comes to that product. Similarly, we shouldn't conflate ownership of a digital download and intellectual property contained in that download.

It's not the equivalent since again: these publishers aren't revoking their rights/ownership. It is not akin to dumpster diving. If anything it's closer to what I referenced: grave robbing.

You do not own or have any rights to whatever it is your pirating in any degree. It does not belong to you and you are not entitled to it. Tangible or not.

---

SailorGoon posted...

Fuparulez posted...

You make a game. I download a copy of it off a torrent tracker. What have I stolen from you? You have everything you had before I downloaded that .rar. You've incurred no loss.

You still are in possession of something that you do not rightfully own. You are not entitled to that product/ownership

That is true. But you haven't lost anything, and that's a key component of theft. If you have a piece of original artwork and I take a picture of it and print it out and put it on my wall, I am not entitled to that product. But you haven't lost anything. I haven't stolen anything from you.
---

All that proves is that the only thing you can argue is semantics. If you are in possession of somethingthat does not belong to you and you know it does not belong to you yet keep it anyways, what does that make you? To me, that sure sounds like a thief.

At the end of the day these things do not belong to you. You are not entitled to possession or use.


---

Fuparulez posted...

But you haven't lost anything, and that's a key component of theft.

It's really sad that people continue to argue this point after being embarrassed and proven wrong on the internet for 10+ years

---

SailorGoon posted...

All that proves is that the only thing you can argue is semantics. If you are in possession of somethingthat does not belong to you and you know it does not belong to you yet keep it anyways, what does that make you? To me, that sure sounds like a thief.

At the end of the day these things do not belong to you. You are not entitled to possession or use.

The onus is on the providers, not the consumers.
---

If it is, remind me to do so more often.

---

SailorGoon posted...

At the end of the day these things do not belong to you. You are not entitled to possession or use.

Why not? Obviously the law is on your side because that's the kind of society we live in, but without referencing the law can you give good reasons why we're not entitled to these things?

SailorGoon posted...

It's not the equivalent since again: these publishers aren't revoking their rights/ownership. It is not akin to dumpster diving. If anything it's closer to what I referenced: grave robbing.

You do not own or have any rights to whatever it is your pirating in any degree. It does not belong to you and you are not entitled to it. Tangible or not.

You've essentially just restated your opinion. Pre-digital era (and even still now), publishers frequently disposed of excess physical copies of cartridges/cd-roms when they decided they were no longer going to be selling them. If you went dumpster diving sans trespassing for one of those cartridges, you would now own a copy of the game, but that would not revoke the rights/ownership of the publisher to that intellectual property.

The comparison to grave robbing is ridiculous. Robbing a grave is more akin to robbing a home. Things in graves aren't "abandoned" there, they're put in that grave for an express purpose with intent to stay there. Abandoning your software isn't the same thing, it's much closer to shipping your trash that you see no more value to.
---

Bass_X0 posted...

The onus is on the providers, not the consumers.

Nah man. I'm sorry, I don't care if you pirate or not but the fact remains: you are not entitled to every game on the market

It doesn't matter if that game isnt in production anymore. Halting production and distribution was a decision made by the publishers. If they want you to play their game then they will make it available. Otherwise you are not entitled to it. You are no more deserving than those who paid for it.

With that being said, again I don't care what you do. It's not like I've never downloaded and emulator and some ROMS. I am not above criticism. I find the severity of the action to usually be little or non-existant. However, I will not dance around the facts.

---

SailorGoon posted...

Nah man. I'm sorry, I don't care if you pirate or not but the fact remains: you are not entitled to every game on the market

It doesn't matter if that game isnt in production anymore. Halting production and distribution was a decision made by the publishers. If they want you to play their game then they will make it available. Otherwise you are not entitled to it. You are no more deserving than those who paid for it.

With that being said, again I don't care what you do. It's not like I've never downloaded and emulator and some ROMS. I am not above criticism. I find the severity of the action to usually be little or non-existant. However, I will not dance around the facts.

But they're not facts, they're just your opinions and it's disingenuous to repeatedly claim they are facts.

https://i.imgur.com/ZgOdLLI.jpg

p-m posted...

But they're not facts, they're just your opinions and it's disingenuous to repeatedly claim they are facts.

It is not an opinion for me to say that you do not legally own a copy of a game you illegally downloaded lmao. You are not entitled to play whatever game you want.

---

Leanaunfurled posted...

Depends on context, I think. If it's an old-ass game that you otherwise can't play for whatever variety of reasons, it isn't. If it's a newer game you can easily obtain and you're sure you'd like it but you pirate it anyway, it is stealing.

---

SailorGoon posted...

It is not an opinion for me to say that you do not legally own a copy of a game you illegally downloaded lmao. You are not entitled to play whatever game you want.

Legality has nothing to do with what's right and wrong, I'm not disputing that the law exists. I'm saying the law is immoral and piracy is justified. As human beings we're all entitled to all works of art, whether the law agrees or not is a different matter. No one who is pro piracy believes they're not breaking the law, that really isn't the point.

Anteaterking posted...

You've essentially just restated your opinion. Pre-digital era (and even still now), publishers frequently disposed of excess physical copies of cartridges/cd-roms when they decided they were no longer going to be selling them. If you went dumpster diving sans trespassing for one of those cartridges, you would now own a copy of the game, but that would not revoke the rights/ownership of the publisher to that intellectual property.

The comparison to grave robbing is ridiculous. Robbing a grave is more akin to robbing a home. Things in graves aren't "abandoned" there, they're put in that grave for an express purpose with intent to stay there. Abandoning your software isn't the same thing, it's much closer to shipping your trash that you see no more value to.

Yes. I clarified my point because there's really nothing else to say on the matter. If a publisher wants you to have a game they will sell it. Or they will put it up to be legally downloaded for free, but they don't do these things. Halting a games production and distribution is conscious decision.

The dumpster diving scenario only makes sense if you're dumpster diving. That's a highly specific example considering there is a major difference between discarding something and halting production/distribution.

You do not own nor are you entitled to ownership, rights, or use of game unless you have legally purchased copy of the game. I understand if I sound repetitive, but that's only because this is a lot more black and white than others try to make it seem. There's only so much one can objectively say on the matter.

---

Only if you keep it longer than 24 hours.

---

Yeah, it's intellectual property. Could argue it's not as bad as property property though
---

p-m posted...

Legality has nothing to do with what's right and wrong, I'm not disputing that the law exists. I'm saying the law is immoral and piracy is justified. As human beings we're all entitled to all works of art, whether the law agrees or not is a different matter. No one who is pro piracy believes they're not breaking the law, that really isn't the point.

I'm not talking about what's right, wrong, justified, etc. Nor will I. I already said I'm not exempt from the action so it's not my place to judge. I'm just saying that there's no denying that if you pirate a game, you are in possession of a game that does not belong to you. You are in fact not entitled to every work of art produced and distributed. Who gets to consume is up to the artist. Whether that's right or wrong is neither here nor there. That's not what this discussion is about.

I'm not talking about the morality. Fuck, you can cite Robin Hood for all I care. Is what he's doing good? Yeah, sure. Is he still a thief? Yeah, so what.

---

If they weren't going to buy the game anyway then I don't really see what the real harm is

So maybe to solve the pirating issue, you can sign an affidavit that says you weren't going to buy the game anyway and then you can download it for free.

Another thing about demonizing piracy as this often acts as a "gateway drug" into further crimes like fraud and identity theft...they figure hey I got away with this so why not keep going on into more brazen things. If we come up with some way like the above to deal with it we might prevent future criminals.

---

I laugh aloud at people who get mad at pirates. Get a fuckin life.
---

REMercsChamp posted...

So maybe to solve the pirating issue, you can sign an affidavit that says you weren't going to buy the game anyway and then you can download it for free.

I just... what...
---

Nacen posted...

I just... what...

Yeah yeah - laugh it up. People were saying the same thing about weed here in Canada only a few years ago. Now you can go into a store, sign something that says it's only for personal use in limited quantities and boom you have your weed.

---

I'm lost. I didn't know there was a common morality debate revolving around if we're entitled to something for free if it's a work of art. Huh?

I am surprised the lost sales crowd don't attack used games since that is objectively a lost sale. The person is willing to spend money for the game and instead of giving it to the company they get it cheaper from someone else. If every used sale had instead been a purchase from the company itself that would be a very large amount of revenue.

---

Leanaunfurled posted...

I'm lost. I didn't know there was a common morality debate revolving around if we're entitled to something for free if it's a work of art. Huh?

Even though I said I'm not going to get into it, here's my take lol:

In regards to downloading a game I want to play, but otherwise have no means of accessing, I don't see it as a right or wrong kind of thing. To me, doing so is wrong but it is not wrong enough so as that I cared to not do it. In the grand scheme of things there are much worse things to do. I too will say things like "I'm not physically taking anything" "They aren't losing anything" "No loss of opportunity since it's not even available to purchase". However I do not say these things thinking it makes my actions the right thing to do. I just think it makes my actions less wrong lol.

However, I am clearly biased so there is that.

---

ITT: gamers should take things for free if its not currently available. the creators of the material have no say in whether or not something is allowed to be sold.

Theres no legal back ups. Thats an illegal copy of your legal copy.
---

Also very simple explanation of why IP isn't a real thing. It's obviously just a bunch of laws designed to allow corporations to extract profit (not creators, the vast majority of creators have no rights to their creations). But so many people start believing it is actually property. But let's stop and think about if property worked like IP. Imagine my car was stolen last night but when I woke up a completely identical car was there and I could still use it. Theft happened but should it bother me? It hasn't caused me any harm.

Or imagine an apple tree that make unlimited apples. Any time you grab one it is instantly replaced. But the owner of the field the tree is in wants to create scarcity so you have to buy apples from him and he controls how many can be picked. If some people steal those apples he wouldn't lose anything, they're unlimited in number and have no real value, it's all artificial. And that's how IP works. I actually would rather we move to a patronage/crowd funding system for media, because the current system is bad for everyone.

---

The mental hoops people have to put themselves through...
---

Hmm, yes and no.

Its about sales and losing out on sales.

Downloading a ROM of Pokemon Sword is rightfully illegal. Its a new game. Downloading a ROM of Fire Red does not take any sales away as Nintendo isnt selling Fire Red right now.
---

Fam_Fam posted...

ITT: gamers should take things for free if its not currently available. the creators of the material have no say in whether or not something is allowed to be sold.

How is downloading a ROM of a game not rereleased any different to buying the same game on cartridge used?

Of course that doesnt apply to used cars and appliances though. Those arent digital products.
---

Bass_X0 posted...

How is downloading a ROM of a game not rereleased any different to buying the same game on cartridge used?

Well for one, that cartridge is likely a legally purchased copy. The difference is that you now legally own it lol.

---

SailorGoon posted...

Bass_X0 posted...

How is downloading a ROM of a game not rereleased any different to buying the same game on cartridge used?

Well for one, that cartridge is likely a legally purchased copy. The difference is that you now legally own it lol.

The owner doesnt see any money either way.
---

Paragraphs of excuses and rationalizations for stealing lol

---

Bass_X0 posted...

The owner doesnt see any money either way.

Yes, but they did at some point for that individual copy. And again, that doesn't change legality of the situation.

---

Yes, it's the theft of an intellectual property. The only possible semantic argument is that you're really trafficking in stolen goods rather than involved in the theft itself, not unlike somebody who knowingly receives stolen goods, although the initial act of piracy in itself is still theft regardless. More so, the very practice is named after a kind of theft.

ssjevot posted...

Imagine my car was stolen last night but when I woke up a completely identical car was there and I could still use it. Theft happened but should it bother me? It hasn't caused me any harm.

In other words: "If I steal a car and then return it, I haven't committed a crime." The cops disagree, though.
---