Click Spungo's name, then click "view public profile" then read what is says beneath "friends". That about sums it up. Oh, and love how people are "dear", how lovely of you.
Evidently a lot better than you understand the word "take". Still, you can easily smash my argument here, so I'll set you up with an open goal. Name me three people who've ever been charged in a court of law with the crime of "petty theft" or the crime of "grand theft" over a case of IP piracy. Take all the time you need.
I'm rather touched by how much time you spend reflexively posting abuse almost any time I comment on anything. But, y'know, if you ever feel like a change of pace, feel free to try contributing to the debate instead.
I'm gonna take Hodapp's advice and ignore you now, but again, all anyone needs to do is just look at your posts. You reveal yourself in those posts better than anyone here can.
Yeah, thought that "contributing to the debate" thing would be a bit of a reach for you. Nice to see the mods as impartial as ever, though.
It's hard to be impartial when your standard "debate" tactic amounts to taking as inflammatory and contrary of a stance as possible in any argument you can find, then reporting any post that disagrees with you.
I love that posting the simple legal facts is "inflammatory and contrary" if you're me, and abusive posts are banned here, except if they're aimed at me. Don't worry, though, I'm a big boy and I can live with the hypocrisy and double standards. So, where were we on the debate? Oh yeah - waiting for the name of anyone who's ever been prosecuted for theft over a case of piracy.
Spungo, the fact is that the basic common sense definition of "stealing" is taking something that does not belong to you. So saying that we're labeling it "by the name of a random crime" is hogwash. One could state that piracy is murder, but the definition of murder is killing another person with malice. One can say "piracy is murder" in the same way one can say "this weather is murder" - that is, using it as metaphor for something arduous rather than referring to the actual crime of murder. Piracy is rape? One could use it figuratively, I suppose, but in this case it does not refer to the actual crime of rape in terms of common sense definition. Now, you'll state that one cannot "steal" a non-physical thing. That is what piracy advocates and their apologists always seem to do. But, there too they present a not-so-well thought out argument. After all, it is commonly accepted that, say, plagiarism is the "theft of an idea" (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Plagarism). There we see that intangibles can, in fact, be stolen. But with digital piracy, or pirating of copyrighted works, we have an actual good, a product, that is gotten by illegitimate means. That it violates the copyright holders rights over the work (the right to copy and distribute said work, or leverage it for benefit) is without question - I doubt even you would argue against the idea. What you feel is up to question, however, is the validity of stating that it is "theft", that procuring a copy of said work without payment in return, or copying and redistributing it is not "stealing", but, again, I go to the common sense definition of the phrase ("taking something that does not belong to you"). At heart, it is stealing when you get down to it. Except the "idiots" in most cases are those that hold rights over the work, whether they be the original creators of the work, or the grantee of the copyright. And what they're stating, and as I and others have shown, is that anyone with an iota of understanding of the business of selling a product, even those on the periphery (such as marketing) understand that circumventing the usual channels of an exchange of payment for goods to satisfy an interest in a product constitutes a loss any way you slice it. That some are now stating that it may turn out to be a gain if worked to one's advantage is looking for a silver lining in a very dark cloud.
So now we're basing the rightness or wrongness of the idea on the basis of what the court's say? But, but I thought the apologists don't think what the law says matters as concerns the "morality" of things. Again, I'll point you to: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Plagarism Now, why am I bringing this up? This is about copyright infringement, right, not plagiarism. Well, let's look at that definition again, shall we: So, it's accepted that plagiarism is "theft" of a sort, but the courts do not prosecute matters criminally, but as civil cases. So, you see, Spungo, one can, in fact, be a thief without actually being prosecuted criminally. As such, your attempt to corner anyone here on the "lack" of evidence vis a vis someone taken to court for IP piracy and charged with "theft" and use that as "proof" of the idea that IP piracy is not theft doesn't really stand up to scrutiny. Again, one can be labeled a theft, and accused of theft of a sort and not be charged criminally. And as the example of plagiarism is tied to copyright violations, and therefore IP rights...well, you can see where I'm going with this.
Ah well, if some anonymous guy on the internet says so, it must be true. That source notes: I beg your pardon? Most of the people shrieking about it on places like this are clueless nerds who've never owned the intellectual rights to anything in their lives. If you actually ask people who work in the games industry, you tend to get a rather different answer. I'll post some links later to illustrate that point.
After all the negative crap you posted in the Canabalt thread, what do expect? It's obvious that you don't give two sh*ts about anything but starting arguments here, and God forbid, you actually make some friends. Honestly man, you dug your own grave here when you kept bitching about the price of Canabalt. If you don't want to buy a game (for whatever reason) then don't, but continually complaining about the price just made you sound even cheaper, no matter how many different ways you worded your argument. Then to make matters worse, you repeatedly kept trying to prove your point about how it was destined to fail because it was a game with a simple concept that wasn't priced at $0.99, even after you were basically proven wrong on the subject. As long as you're a member here, you're entitled to express your opinion on any subject related to a particular thread, as long as it's within the rules. But in the case of Canabalt, you should have let that go a long time ago. That, in my opinion, is why you have no credibility left on TA.
Um, for people who are supposed to be unbiased to be unbiased, rather than being unfair to posters whose opinions they disagree with? I don't want idiots for friends. If anyone cares to engage in the debate in a manner suggesting an IQ over 60, they'll find me perfectly civil and pleasant. Whatev, dude. You think a game is worth more in its market than I do. Big whoop, give yourself a medal for being the hero of all the developers. Now, about those people who've been prosecuted for theft over cases of piracy...
We could use the same argument with you, Spungo. It cuts both ways. Yes, I saw that. However it does not refute my point. The commonly accepted definition of plagiarism is theft of an idea or work. It is not a legal term, but it has been used in court (that line you skipped alluded to that, btw). It is covered by copyright law, and so is tried as a civil case, but that does not negate that the basic idea is theft of a sort. So, again, one can be labeled a "thief" and not actually be charged with theft itself. Fine. Go do that. And I'll pull up how many authors, who were the original folk protected by copyright law, btw, to cut right through the idea that those who create works don't see it as theft of a sort.
Meanwhile, some actual real research conducted by a real developer on the subject, based on genuine figures: http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=17350
They can see it any way they like. I can see a horse with a javelin stuck in its skull as a unicorn if I like, but it don't make it so. And just by the by, I'm an author, both of written work and of videogames. (Released one this week, as it happens.) Don't tell me what I think, it's rather impolite.
sorry spungo but piracy/copyright infringement is theft and it is a crime punishable by up to five years in prison or an unlimited fine or both. i guess whoever wrote that article never read the giant FBI warning on just about every single dvd or vhs movie.
Wow, guess that "ignoring" thing isn't working out too well for you. Let's take a look at your link, then: So not to "petty theft", or "grand theft", or any other kind of theft, then. Have another go.
It's a crime (in the US, and I know this will come as a shock to you but that isn't the whole world), but it's not theft. Feel free to prove me wrong by citing someone charged WITH THEFT over a case of piracy.
