Current Events > "Not being able to locate a copy doesn't then entitle you to piracy."

(+) Yeah! (+)

I don't think anyone's entitled to anything just because the original creator isn't officially selling the thing. You can always consume some other product that's officially supported. But I couldn't care less if someone pirates a thing for whatever reason, companies can get fucked (support indie devs tho)

I think everyone's entitled to pirate whatever they'd like.

So whats the justification pirate recently released products?

sauceje posted...

I don't think anyone's entitled to anything just because the original creator isn't officially selling the thing. You can always consume some other product that's officially supported. But I couldn't care less if someone pirates a thing for whatever reason, companies can get fucked (support indie devs tho)

I do. Especially for TV that was broadcast for free on the airwaves. You literally just transmitted your product out to everyone for free. If Im paying for it after you sent it to my house for free then thats a courtesy Im extending to you. People should have every right to record and share anything you just blanketly beamed across the country to anyone with a receiver.

Piracy is dope imo

I recall blank VHS tapes being available for purchase in virtually any retail establishment that sold electronics. That's how much U.S. law genuinely cares about entertainment piracy (it doesn't).

If something isn't available for purchase, and it's available through various other means, there's little reason not to have at it. No one's coming for individuals if they can't be arsed to deter distributors. Lol trying to convince others to feel bad about it.

Even with those "only if it's unavailable" guidelines, it feels like pirates specifically go for stuff that's out of print, instead of supporting currently active creators. Then when the current products eventually go out of print, suddenly the pirates with "morals" become interested in it.

That's not any different than just pirating everything, just doing it in a way that mitigates legal consequences.

The only reason those games aren't public domain right now is because Disney spent billions buying politicians to change copyright law to 95 fucking years.

The way I see it, as long as something is NOT available in some way from a legitimate first party source, then its up for grabs by whatever other method you can obtain it.

Id love to give companies my money but sometimes they make it so darn difficult.

I'm just going to put out my personal beliefs for everyone to see when it comes to games alone. I don't think you should be pirating things that are less than 10 years old. Try your best to support the developers, but if games are a bit too expensive, wait for them to go on sale.

That said, and I've been very vocal about this in the past. There comes a time when games in general should be free market. At the current moment I think it should be Playstation 3 and prior, but that's just my personal opinion on it. Some titles become either ridiculously expensive to obtain, are in extremely limited supply, aren't translated for other markets, or are just not reproduced for modern consoles.

If you want to support companies porting content to newer consoles, then by all means toss them a few bucks. But games those games should never be full price unless a massive overhaul was done to it. Case in point, Octopath traveler a couple years ago was ported to Steam at full price, which was far too expensive.

At the same time, I don't think companies like Nintendo should be able to take down rom sites, but at the same time those rom sites shouldn't be able to make a profit off of those games, outside of a general service fee to obtain the roms and keep the server maintained. To go along with that, any game on those sites shouldn't be able to be used for self promotion. Ergo, no one gets any money from it.

I would love for a website to be around similar to the DOS archive, but for console/portable video games.

It doesn't make it legal, no. But it does make it more understandable if someone break the law a wee bit.

I havent read the whole thread yet. I think it depends on why you cant find a copy. If the stores are just sold out, then you wait for a copy. If they dont make it anymore, then I think its fine Only because you arent taking money away from the company that made it

Ivany2008 posted...

I'm just going to put out my personal beliefs for everyone to see when it comes to games alone. I don't think you should be pirating things that are less than 10 years old. Try your best to support the developers, but if games are a bit too expensive, wait for them to go on sale.

That said, and I've been very vocal about this in the past. There comes a time when games in general should be free market. At the current moment I think it should be Playstation 3 and prior, but that's just my personal opinion on it. Some titles become either ridiculously expensive to obtain, are in extremely limited supply, aren't translated for other markets, or are just not reproduced for modern consoles.

If you want to support companies porting content to newer consoles, then by all means toss them a few bucks. But games those games should never be full price unless a massive overhaul was done to it. Case in point, Octopath traveler a couple years ago was ported to Steam at full price, which was far too expensive.

At the same time, I don't think companies like Nintendo should be able to take down rom sites, but at the same time those rom sites shouldn't be able to make a profit off of those games, outside of a general service fee to obtain the roms and keep the server maintained. To go along with that, any game on those sites shouldn't be able to be used for self promotion. Ergo, no one gets any money from it.

I would love for a website to be around similar to the DOS archive, but for console/portable video games.

Maybe one day rom sites and game companies can work together. The game company gets their slice of the profit for a game they didn't feel was important enough to try and sell themselves. This of course would require rom sites to charge a fee

Sufferedphoneix posted...

Maybe one day rom sites and game companies can work together. The game company gets their slice of the profit for a game they didn't feel was important enough to try and sell themselves. This of course would require rom sites to charge a fee

I'm fine with paying a fee for a service. That's reasonable, I'm in the pc field so I understand that servers cost money to run. I think the issue we run into is that there are games out there that are created by now defunct companies.

The most pirated games are literally the most popular.

VandorLee posted...

The most pirated games are literally the most popular.

Yeah. We know that. But companies feel differently

sauceje posted...

I don't think anyone's entitled to anything just because the original creator isn't officially selling the thing. You can always consume some other product that's officially supported. But I couldn't care less if someone pirates a thing for whatever reason, companies can get fucked (support indie devs tho)

If its not officially supported, whats your problem with someone getting it unofficially?

Kloe_Rinz posted...

If its not officially supported, whats your problem with someone getting it unofficially?

The law is the same regardless of the availability of the product. It's not, "you can't copy this because it's for sale elsewhere" it's "you can't copy this".

There was no statement of moral judgement, just one that you're not entitled. I'm also not entitled to ROMhacks of Super Mario World, a game I've owned on multiple consoles, but obviously I couldn't care less.

Piracy equals preservation, so I'll never be against piracy regardless of the legality of it.

The only context I really care about is whether or not you can afford it in the first place. No money is lost downloading something that you could never buy anyway. If you can afford, and choose to pirate, that's fucked.

The only issue I take from it is the justified stance pirates try to take.

Whats the difference between piracy and buying used?

Baha05 posted...

The only issue I take from it is the justified stance pirates try to take.

I pirated my Ethics textbook and I'll do it again.

seriously, I legit pirate every textbook I can

Flauros posted...

Whats the difference between piracy and buying used?

Buying used you are buying an official product that was already in most cases previously bought from somewhere so the money for it was already claimed. Piracy you are illegally downloading a version of a game that may or may not be able to be purchased as of recently or long since stopped being produced.

The big take away os simply from piracy the is a moral issue with it that tends to see people using all sorts of reasons to justify it where as a used game the reasons tend to boil sown to maybe two or three reasons? And one tends to be more petty.

Flauros posted...

Whats the difference between piracy and buying used?

IMO there might be a difference if you're asking for support but since a lot of times companies don't want to support people buying their products used there really is no functional difference.

Buying used is great in theory, but sometimes there are just not enough copies of certain games out there in the wild. And those that are out there are extremely pricy thanks to inflation and scarcity.

You wouldn't download a PlayStation

Some NFT people tried to mint digital versions of real Magic the Gathering cards, and seriously tried to use the "you can download these if you own the physical version..." that emulation enthusiasts incorrectly say to justify the legality.

The whole thing was pretty unhinged and hilarious

Nope. If I can't buy something, then yarr it is.

You don't understand, it's the morally preferable route to instead buy from companies like Piko Interactive that purchase the rights to obscure old games, stick their name all over it, and pack their store page full of lies when they sell it

Is the game available in a way that would allow the company that made said game earn money? If so, please buy it that way instead of pirating.

Is the game no longer made/sold in any way that would earn that company any money? Pirate away, because the two options you have, buying used/third party and pirating don't earn the company any money and paying exorbitant prices for some games is....no thank you.

Example, Yoshi's Woolly World (both Wii U and 3DS) are still purchasable digitally (as far as I know anyway,) so pirating it isn't really defendable. Paper Mario The Thousand Year Door is not available digitally and the physical copies you can buy do not lead to money for either Nintendo or Intelligent Systems and cost way more than they really should be, I don't see a problem with pirating.

Basically if a game is available for purchase in a way that gives the devs money, buy it. If not, pirate it. That said, not owning the system that the games are sold on does NOT give you the right to pirate.

Gwynevere posted...

You don't understand, it's the morally preferable route to instead buy from companies like Piko Interactive that purchase the rights to obscure old games, stick their name all over it, and pack their store page full of lies when they sell it

If they bought the rights putting their name on it it something they get to do..also what lies?

Agreed but i pirate anyways because idgaf. I only got in trouble one time for pirating and it was just a warning from my isp at the time xd

I have no problems with piracy at all, especially for games people have legitimately owned in the past, though if you really like a game then you should give money to the creator and buy it for real afterwards or donate or something

I don't give a fuck about piracy. Oh no someone millionaire isn't getting paid *yawn*

Hoodroar posted...

The law is the same regardless of the availability of the product. It's not, "you can't copy this because it's for sale elsewhere" it's "you can't copy this".

There was no statement of moral judgement, just one that you're not entitled. I'm also not entitled to ROMhacks of Super Mario World, a game I've owned on multiple consoles, but obviously I couldn't care less.

I mean obviously piracy is illegal, thats very clear cut and not up for debate. But its very rare, almost never actually morally/ethically wrong to pirate. Basically the only exception to this is pirating indie games or games of struggling developers who put their heart and soul into their games (I.e. platinum). And just because someone isnt vaguely entitled to something doesnt meant they arent allowed to do it (in this case ethically)

Very few things can "entitle" a person to a non-essential entertainment product.

But if it's out of print then all bets are off.

If it ever does get released then I'll support it. I bought the Mother/Earthbound ports on Wii U. I've bought Super Sentai DVDs when they get an official subtitled release. And if Bandai ever gets its head out of its ass I'll buy an official port of Digimon World 1.

Until then, though.... >_>

Scotty_Rogers posted...

I don't give a fuck about piracy. Oh no someone millionaire isn't getting paid *yawn*

You're not hardcore, stop trying.

I do own a copy.

I pirate every Nintendo game even though I can easily afford them all. #CheapskateLife

Not what Activision support told me.

i do not care either way, i will pirate

depends how much they want for the copy

As far as I'm concerned, if you don't keep your product readily accessible and buyable, you don't get to complain when people stop paying you for it.

People taking the product and then trying to sell the same thing themselves though, that's another story.

Ivany2008 posted...

I'm fine with paying a fee for a service. That's reasonable, I'm in the pc field so I understand that servers cost money to run. I think the issue we run into is that there are games out there that are created by now defunct companies.

I feel if the company literally doesn't exist anymore then pirating it should be fine.

30RegularUser posted...

If they bought the rights putting their name on it it something they get to do..also what lies?

They claimed the Glover PC port was going to be "completely redone" from source code. What was sold was a couple of emulators and an N64 ROM/PS1 iso. They removed that claim from the store page once people realized what they were buying and it started being brought up in the steam reviews

Definitely a good faith company worthy of defending

It seems a lot of parents are absolute failures.

Blade_Trinity posted...

It seems a lot of parents are absolute failures.

How do you know? There's not like, a poll option that tells us how many people are simps for corporations because their parents raised them wrong.