Is Piracy Ethical?

[cabfe]

That reminds me of Notch (creator of Minecraft) basically saying it's OK to pirate his game IF you can't afford it.

But he continues like this:

"If you still like it when you can afford it in the future, buy it then. Also don't forget to feel bad."

 

[??????]

Another point to consider is that the reason people charge for their art (or whatever) is because they have spent [x] amount of time to create it. Yes people seeing it and enjoying it is good, but it would hardly give the creator motivation to continue making such items.

Example,

If everyone pirated GTA 1-4, GTA 5 would not have been ANYWHERE near as good.

At the end of the day, people charge because it helps to further their work (in one way or another). By prating something, you are basically stating 'yea its good, but not that good' and if it wasnt 'good' why would you want it to start with..

you could also use a similar example with scripts...

If you made a commercial game using my scripts and didnt pay for them, even though I freely distribute them for non commercial use, is that wrong ?

I am giving the item away. I am trusting you to be honest and inform me of your commercial project and in turn provide some form of recompense for using my work.

It is people with opinions such as yours, that have deterred me from releasing ALOT of scripts in the past months..

Why should I work hard to create something for someone else to steal and 'claim as their own' in one way or another?

 

[Mon Dez]

This is my intake on piracy:

It's essentially illegal no way you can put it. Sure I've heard reasons that some people pirate games to play a *trial version* before buying the real thing, but what if they are satisfied having the cracked version? What then? It's not ethical and it causes developers and publishers to lose money hence why companies like Microsoft *shudders* and Blizzard tried creating an online system where the games can be verified to be the real deal or be targeted for used games.

My stance on pirating is that it's essentially wrong and it causes an effect to where companies create these stupid idiotic online systems where you are forced to be online in order to use the product. I despise restrictions and piracy causes it whether or not greed is in the equation with these companies and I don't blame them because the developers slaved creating the games/programs on a pay basis and people are just stealing the profit that the developers should have had rights to. It brings up to this to the piraters: Who gave YOU the right to steal what was earned by the hard working man?

Sure some companies don't deserve the profit, but what about the other developers? Piracy equals future restrictions, I don't like it and it is unethical in any form.

Then again I place pirating on the same stance when it comes to used games and both are equally bad for the gaming industry because it's a lose to lose stance.

 

[Cyreides]

 

I'm not talking about just me though, imagine if everybody stole it instead of buying it. Yeah it would be nice knowing people are playing your product, but it would also be irritating that you're not getting what you feel you deserve for it.

It would be irritating, yes, but then you'd have to stop and think about why no one bought it.

And it would still end up being for those same reasons I listed above, and as a result, would still not matter because there was still no money regardless.

 

If you made a commercial game using my scripts and didnt pay for them, even though I freely distribute them for non commercial use, is that wrong ?

Yes, but that is because that is actually harmful and cheating you out of money. And I'm not advocating for that kind of thing, that is wrong. You're literally claiming to have made something you did not and making money off of it without the original makers permission. But that's also not piracy per say.

 

[??????]

Yes, but that is because that is actually harmful and cheating you out of money. And I'm not advocating for that kind of thing, that is wrong. You're literally claiming to have made something you did not and making money off of it without the original makers permission. But that's also not piracy per say.

Pirating is also cheating someone out of money. The underlying principle is the exact same.

By pirating, as previously stated, the value of the item can decrease due to it being more common. the developers can lose mass amounts of money (even go bust).

And in turn, the only people that miss out are the honest people who would pay for the rights to play the game / use the script / share the art etc..

They are also affected due to the company resorting to 'alternative' measures of ensuring their games/products are safe.

 

[Aceri]

 


It would be irritating, yes, but then you'd have to stop and think about why no one bought it.

And it would still end up being for those same reasons I listed above, and as a result, would still not matter because there was still no money regardless.

 


Yes, but that is because that is actually harmful and cheating you out of money. And I'm not advocating for that kind of thing, that is wrong. You're literally claiming to have made something you did not and making money off of it without the original makers permission. But that's also not piracy per say.

Just break it down to the core fundamentals. Pretend there was nothing wrong with the game, everything on your end was perfect, just nobody was willing to spend money on an RM game so they pirated it. That's all that time you've wasted when you could of been at a real job making money.

 

[Cyreides]

Just break it down to the core fundamentals. Pretend there was nothing wrong with the game, everything on your end was perfect, just nobody was willing to spend money on an RM game so they pirated it. That's all that time you've wasted when you could of been at a real job making money.

What you're saying is that they never had the intention of paying for it, and that means I never would have seen money from them. So if they go out and pirate it anyways, why do I care? They weren't going to pay me anyways, so it's irrelevant.

 

Pirating is also cheating someone out of money

How when it's not causing harm?

 

By pirating, as previously stated, the value of the item can decrease due to it being more common.

No, because there is no "rarity" with digital items. They're infinite by default and don't have real tangible value because of it. They only have personal value to each person who may use it, and that doesn't decrease just because people pirate it lol.

the developers can lose mass amounts of money (even go bust).

Couple of things with this.

The first being that the people who pirate either don't have the money to buy whatever it is that they're going to pirate, or they just have no intention of paying for it for ____ reason. Either way, the developer was going to see a whopping $0 from them no matter if they pirate the game or simply just don't buy it. So to say they cost them to lose money is dumb. They never had their money to lose in the first place and blaming them is just a convenient scapegoat to ignore the real problems and the real reason that developers go bust (bad marketing/going way over budget/bad games).

 

[Touchfuzzy]

Pirating isn't ethical.


I don't really get angry at pirating though. Its just not something that I can get my ire up about. I do get a little perturbed though at people who try to justify it as moral.


No, you aren't pirating stuff for some kind of moral or ethical reason, you are doing it because you want something you can't have. Look if you were stealing food to feed yourself or your children, I can understand. But there is almost zero that you can pirate that is an actual necessity. You are pirating (and I personally don't consider it stealing, its a definition thing, not a moral weight thing) luxury items that you want that you can't or won't pay for. Admit its not the right thing to do and move on.


I do things that aren't the right thing to do in life, too. But I'll admit that they aren't. I don't need delusions to make myself feel better about it.


(Now, what the EFFECT of piracy is, is an entirely different argument on whether its ethical or not, and would require a much more nuanced investigation).

 

[Cyreides]

Just because you have things you don't or can't pay for doesn't mean having them is wrong though. The whole idea that pirating is morally bad comes from equating it to stealing, but it does not cause those same problems and is not the same thing. So to call it morally wrong in spite of that is just pointless judging. It's not anymore wrong or right than anything else that doesn't cause anyone harm. It's just there.

 

[Touchfuzzy]

Just because you have things you don't or can't pay for doesn't mean having them is wrong though. The whole idea that pirating is morally bad comes from equating it to stealing, but it does not cause those same problems and is not the same thing. So to call it morally wrong in spite of that is just pointless judging. It's not anymore wrong or right than anything else that doesn't cause anyone harm. It's just there.

Taking someone else's work and using it without their permission is taking advantage of them. If it was a commercial endeavor, and you pirated it, you have in fact, used the item without their permission.

There are only two ways your concept of the right and wrong works

1. If you believe no person should have control over their own work.
2. If you believe that it is for the greater good to infringe upon their rights to their work. (Such as to save a life, feed someone, etc.) And even here it gets a bit tricky.

So now that you've destroyed the concept that people have control over their own works, inventors are gone. Medical research is gone. Remember, patents don't exist! Violating a patent is using something without their permission, and you have stated that people should not have control of their works. No one has a reason to innovate, or create, because a big company can just take their ideas and duplicate them on a scale they are incapable of competing with.

I'm not a man who believes in absolute good or absolute evil, but I can think of almost no situation where having something you pirated will work towards the greater good. They aren't necessities. They are luxuries. People do not have an entitlement to luxuries.

(I can think of one situation where I would not judge piracy as wrong, and that is in education. Not that I think people who create books for education should not be paid, but the way University does required books, its a closed system of payment, and I could see someone poor enough needing to pirate to raise himself up better. And while I don't think its the RIGHT thing to do, I would have trouble judging someone who did it as doing the wrong thing).

 

[Cyreides]

I've explicitly stated I don't think making money off of something that you did not create is okay because it causes harm, so why are we back to this again?

 

[Touchfuzzy]

I've explicitly stated I don't think making money off of something that you did not create is okay because it causes harm, so why are we back to this again?

Because your definition of right and wrong ignores a person's right to dictate the distribution of his work.

And declaring that people should have access to luxury items that they can't or won't pay for is just entitlement at its finest. I should have this! WHY, Why should you have it? What gives you the right to tell the creator of a work that you deserve what he made, despite his wishes, just because you want it?

 

[Cyreides]

Because your definition of right and wrong ignores a person's right to dictate the distribution of his work.

And declaring that people should have access to luxury items that they can't or won't pay for is just entitlement at its finest. I should have this! WHY, Why should you have it? What gives you the right to tell the creator of a work that you deserve what he made, despite his wishes, just because you want it?

I'm not "declaring" anything. The simple fact of the matter is people have access no matter what and there's nothing wrong with using it if it causes no harm. Simple as that.

 

[Touchfuzzy]

I'm not "declaring" anything. The simple fact of the matter is people have access no matter what and there's nothing wrong with using it if it causes no harm. Simple as that.

You are harming someone. You are taking the work of someone and using it despite them not wanting you to. They have that right. The thing they created is THEIRS. Whether or not there is easy access to illegal versions on the internet is irrelevant.

If my neighbor left his door unlocked, and I went in when he wasn't home, would I be doing nothing wrong? I wouldn't be causing harm. I'll read a few of his books maybe. Watch some TV. Maybe he pays for better cable than me, might have a few extra channels. Remember, I don't take anything from him. I make no money off of it. I didn't damage anything he owned. Maybe I'll leave a couple of dollars to cover the miniscule power that I used to watch TV. Or should he have control over the things he owns, and be able to deny me the rights to use it without his permission?

 

[Mon Dez]

I'm not "declaring" anything. The simple fact of the matter is people have access no matter what and there's nothing wrong with using it if it causes no harm. Simple as that.

Oh ho...you have no idea what harm can be caused to the the person/people who developed the program. Developers need money and of course bills and quotas need to be met. If the idea that it's okay for people to have it for "free" because they have access to it is opinionated and that it causes no damage is not having any idea what it does to the person who created it. 

Frankly, it can cause some psychological damage, but that's just me. 

It depends, if you are a starving developer would YOU like it if people were not paying for the hard work you created for the public. How would developers and coders feed themselves if everyone decided to just pirate their software? 

How would YOU feed yourself if you didn't get paid upon the hours and hours of work that YOU did? Sorry, but it's narrow minded to think such a thing.

 

[Cyreides]

Oh ho...you have no idea what harm can be caused to the the person/people who developed the program. Developers need money and of course bills and quotas need to be met.

People that pirate don't have the money to give or have reasons not to give it. Those developers were never getting money from them in the first place so saying this over and over means nothing at all and changes nothing.

It simply is not harmful.

And I swear, if you guys could just stop taking what I say and then running to the utmost ridiculous extremes with it and making a bunch of false equivalencies, that'd just be fantastic. Then maybe one of you could actually give a real reason for why it's apparently so awful.

 

[Mon Dez]

The developers do get money, if the revenue doesn't come in then they don't get paid by the head corporation. It's simple business 101, you do not get paid for your work if the product isn't selling. The worst case scenario is that the company can downsize due to the revenue not coming in so it does cause damage. If things don't get better in the sales of the product then the company can get shut down. Adobe, Microsoft, and other software companies rely on the revenue that comes in and that is what keeps them up. If the revenue stops flowing then the company cannot hold the means to pay its workers hence downsizing.

There are developers that create software themselves aka self-publishing and they need the revenue to pay for their daily life so if their product is pirated then it's the same with how companies work, they don't get paid for the software they slaved over.

 

[Cyreides]

That damage is not from pirates though. Which is what you don't seem to understand.

 

[Touchfuzzy]

I've said the real reason repeatedly, but you ignore it:
 

People have the rights to control how the things they created are distributed (which includes the right to contract away those rights, such as when working for a corporation, who then owns the rights to determine how it is distributed). When you pirate something, you violate that person's rights.

You have yet to give a single reason why you should be allowed to violate this right.

Even if you are correct, and no money is lost, you are STILL violating the wishes of the owner of the property.

So let's try again: Is trespassing unethical? I didn't harm anyone. All I did was ignore someone's right to dictate how their property is used.

 

[Mon Dez]

Pirates are part of the problem, I did not overall mean they are the entirety of the problem. Bad business depends on the consumer and pirating can create an effect of bad revenue. Windows 8 was a terrible OS and people of course did pirate the software, but it didn't affect the overall sales because Microsoft is a huge company and businesses/people buy their software.

A self-developer with barely any income and solely depends on the income of the consumer needs every single penny he gets to pay his daily expenses and because he/she isn't affiliated with a major corporation can lose that profit through piracy. The developer, as Touchfuzzy stated:

People have the rights to control how the things they created are distributed (which includes the right to contract away those rights, such as when working for a corporation, who then owns the rights to determine how it is distributed). When you pirate something, you violate that person's rights.

If the self-developer doesn't get the revenue then their rights and daily life style is violated.