Or, and hear me out… you could stop treating entertainment as a right. Stealing food and necessities? I’ll help you carry your prize. But stealing entertainment isn’t a flex. You aren’t helping to drive cost down, and every person that does it is just another reason for companies to put Denuvo in their games. You aren’t “owed” entertainment. Don’t steal it. Find something else to do. Get an old console and a shit ton of games for next to nothing and simultaneously help out the second hand game economy.
What it comes down to is the price of modern entertainment isn’t just $60 for the game. It’s that plus all of the extra bullshit you have to do. If you don’t want to pay that, fine, no one is forcing you to buy the games, and you don’t need them to survive. Your silent protest against the gaming industry isn’t some valiant effort to rob from the rich and give to the poor. It’s theft. Call it that. You aren’t fucking batman; you are a person who steals entertainment because you have to have the latest thing. You aren’t fighting capitalism, you are part of it, and you are making it worse for everyone else.
Which is my point. I pay for games. If they have Denuvo slowing them down, it isn’t because I paid for it, it’s because other people stole it, or have stolen in the past. The anti-theft software doesn’t exist because there are no thieves. I do my best to avoid Denuvo games on principal, but it’s hard to play a AA game or higher without it. There are a lot of people to blame for it, but it wouldn’t be there at all if not for thieves.
Is there anyone left that actually cracks denuvo? I’ve only heard about Denuvo games getting bypassed due to denuvo-less copies of the main exe file getting leaked.
piracy isn’t stealing. it would be stealing if people were able to literally take ownership of a company’s game.
if one person wants to buy a game, but doesn’t have enough money, or the game is too expensive, pirating it doesn’t make a difference, since they wouldn’t buy it anyway. it’s very rare for a person who would actually buy a game to pirate it, so the difference is minuscule.
edit: i forgot to say, if after pirating someone likes the game enough, they are likely to actually buy it once they have enough money.
It is theft, and th people that say it isn’t are making excuses so they feel better. You can grow your own food, you know? And it keeps growing back. But if you walk into a grocery store and walk out without paying, you are stealing. If you walk onto a farmers land and keep taking food from their crops without paying, it is stealing.
You make two very different arguments that highlight my reason for calling out theft. The first is that the person steals because companies don’t allow us to own anything. That almost holds water, until you understand that entertainment isn’t a necessity, and so stealing it is a wholly selfish act.
However, that brings us to your second point: people pirate because they can’t afford it. You contradict yourself. Who is the “pirate”? The one who steals in under misguided idea that some things cannot be owned, or the one that steals because they can’t afford it?
At the end of the day, you are being advertised to, and you feel that you have to have the latest thing because the advertising is working, and so you steal when you can’t afford. You are a part of the system that you fight against with your mantra of “nothing can be owned.” Stop.
i “made” two arguments, apparently… when did i talk about the “nothing can be owned” stuff? all i said was that piracy isn’t stealing and that most people doing piracy aren’t affecting the market at all, since they wouldn’t have bought the game anyway.
also, please look up the definition of software piracy, as it seems you don’t know what it means.
stealing is taking the property of another person. i was talking about how piracy isn’t stealing, because you’re not taking the property of anyone.
if friend A makes and shares a song they made with friend B, and friend B copies it and sends it to me without A’s permission, that is not stealing, because neither of us are taking friend A’s property. friend A still owns the song, just like the company still owns the game.
“not owning games” is a completely different subject.
While digital piracy does not constitute theft in the strict sense defined under common law—namely, the unauthorized taking and carrying away of tangible personal property with intent to permanently deprive the owner thereof—it nonetheless constitutes a violation of exclusive rights granted to copyright holders under Title 17 of the United States Code.
Specifically, piracy infringes upon the copyright owner’s exclusive rights to reproduce, distribute, and publicly display or perform their work. The fact that no physical object is removed is immaterial; copyright law protects the expression of ideas, not just their physical embodiments. As such, piracy is more accurately classified as a form of copyright infringement—a civil and, in some cases, criminal offense—not as theft per se, but as an analogous wrong with measurable economic harm.
Moreover, jurisprudence has recognized that infringement can result in lost profits, market harm, and unjust enrichment, all of which are actionable. While piracy may lack the zero-sum quality of theft, it undermines the incentive structure copyright law is designed to uphold—namely, the right of creators to control and profit from their original works.
I don’t know what to tell you. Want to know more? Go read about Dowling v United States from 1985. That should help you understand how its still a kind of theft.
>“While digital piracy does not constitute theft in the strict sense defined under common law”
>“That should help you understand how its still a kind of theft.”
it’s not theft, but it is? i know it’s a crime, but not all crimes are theft. unless you want to define all crimes as theft.
is murder a kind of theft, because you’re taking someone’s life? is kidnapping a kind theft, because you’re taking a person?
it’s not theft. it’s a different crime. just like pterosaurs and dinosaurs are different groups of animals.
I’m not here to get pedantic with a person who doesn’t capitalize the first letter of their sentences. It’s a crime. It’s theft adjacent. This concludes my TED Talk.
This article points to a research that concludes that piracy is really not an issue for those companies though.
It think that piracy is actually a great way to give everyone access to culture that shouldn’t be gatekept by their financial situation. Imagine a world where pirating music is shun today. Nobody cares now, we all listen to free music online without paying. Not to mention that piracy is pretty much the only sureway to make sure some medias (including games) are preserved. If you want to make sure that your favorite games don’t become lost medias in the future you should consider the good sides of piracy because those companies don’t care about it; they just want you to buy the next thing.
So if piracy is not affecting those companies revenues and if it gives access to culture to everyone and even help preserving media why the hell shoul we lose our minds over it? Sounds like a good thing to me.
Now, selling a game that cannot be owned and that can be revoked at anytime or a game that can change its TOS on a whim is much scummy imo.
If you don’t want people to pirate your game, price them fairly and allow you customers to own a copy and offer an easy to use service.
In any cases, I won’t shed a single tear if someome pirate a game especially a AAA game.
This article points to a research that concludes that piracy is really not an issue for those companies though.
And yet we still have anti-theft measures on most games. The anti-theft measures aren’t there because there were never any thieves. They are there because theives provide a scapegoat to publishers to blame low revenue on. Regardless of whether or not it is actually happening, the net results are the same because the lie is there. Pirating or stealing games may not have a real effect, or may even be a positive one, but it doesn’t matter because there is still a negative outcome when companies increase the price of their games and force anti-consumer launchers and anti-theft DRM into games.
Imagine a world where pirating music is shun today. Nobody cares now, we all listen to free music online without paying.
Maybe you and your friends do, but a lot of people pay for music streaming services with give an admittedly mediocre amount of revenue to the artists. The idea that we should steal “culture” and make it free to everyone is ludicrous. People still have to eat. All of the time and effort that goes into making a game or a record has an expected return, and that return is a paycheck.
Now, selling a game that cannot be owned and that can be revoked at anytime or a game that can change its TOS on a whim is much scummy imo.
If you don’t want people to pirate your game, price them fairly and allow you customers to own a copy and offer an easy to use service.
That is why there are pro-consumer groups working to make sure that bullshit like what happens today doesn’t continue in the future. The EU and UK have very strong pro-consumer policies that protect the buyer instead of the seller. Change is happening, but it doesn’t make it easier when there is the ever present scapegoat of, “we do this because people steal.”
every person that does it is just another reason for companies to put Denuvo in their games.
If you want more, it’s also a rally cry for execs to bring up at board meetings about why their latest game didn’t sell well. It’s why Nintendo can brick your Switch 2 from orbit if they detect pirated software (which will surely lead to false positives).
They could also choose not to. Also, I have never heard of any game not selling well due to piracy. It just leads to producers not earning quite as much money as they could theoretically (though it is debatable if pirating people really would buy the game instead of just refraining completely).
Whether or not it is what actually happens, it’s what they tell their shareholders, which is enough to make them resort to anti-consumer practices like third party launchers and anti-theft software.
Or, and hear me out… you could stop treating entertainment as a right. Stealing food and necessities? I’ll help you carry your prize. But stealing entertainment isn’t a flex. You aren’t helping to drive cost down, and every person that does it is just another reason for companies to put Denuvo in their games. You aren’t “owed” entertainment. Don’t steal it. Find something else to do. Get an old console and a shit ton of games for next to nothing and simultaneously help out the second hand game economy.
What it comes down to is the price of modern entertainment isn’t just $60 for the game. It’s that plus all of the extra bullshit you have to do. If you don’t want to pay that, fine, no one is forcing you to buy the games, and you don’t need them to survive. Your silent protest against the gaming industry isn’t some valiant effort to rob from the rich and give to the poor. It’s theft. Call it that. You aren’t fucking batman; you are a person who steals entertainment because you have to have the latest thing. You aren’t fighting capitalism, you are part of it, and you are making it worse for everyone else.
Downvotes are to the left.
Nice try. The downvotes are actually on the right.
Denuvo doesn’t even stop games from being torrented. They still get cracked.
It’s a just a nuisance for paying users and degraded performamce.
Which is my point. I pay for games. If they have Denuvo slowing them down, it isn’t because I paid for it, it’s because other people stole it, or have stolen in the past. The anti-theft software doesn’t exist because there are no thieves. I do my best to avoid Denuvo games on principal, but it’s hard to play a AA game or higher without it. There are a lot of people to blame for it, but it wouldn’t be there at all if not for thieves.
Is there anyone left that actually cracks denuvo? I’ve only heard about Denuvo games getting bypassed due to denuvo-less copies of the main exe file getting leaked.
They’re to the right actually.
I shouldn’t do what I enjoy because you said so? 🤡
+1
You are not to decide what we do, only suggest.
If you enjoy stealing, then that’s something you should talk to a professional about.
piracy isn’t stealing. it would be stealing if people were able to literally take ownership of a company’s game.
if one person wants to buy a game, but doesn’t have enough money, or the game is too expensive, pirating it doesn’t make a difference, since they wouldn’t buy it anyway. it’s very rare for a person who would actually buy a game to pirate it, so the difference is minuscule.
edit: i forgot to say, if after pirating someone likes the game enough, they are likely to actually buy it once they have enough money.
It is theft, and th people that say it isn’t are making excuses so they feel better. You can grow your own food, you know? And it keeps growing back. But if you walk into a grocery store and walk out without paying, you are stealing. If you walk onto a farmers land and keep taking food from their crops without paying, it is stealing.
You make two very different arguments that highlight my reason for calling out theft. The first is that the person steals because companies don’t allow us to own anything. That almost holds water, until you understand that entertainment isn’t a necessity, and so stealing it is a wholly selfish act.
However, that brings us to your second point: people pirate because they can’t afford it. You contradict yourself. Who is the “pirate”? The one who steals in under misguided idea that some things cannot be owned, or the one that steals because they can’t afford it?
At the end of the day, you are being advertised to, and you feel that you have to have the latest thing because the advertising is working, and so you steal when you can’t afford. You are a part of the system that you fight against with your mantra of “nothing can be owned.” Stop.
i “made” two arguments, apparently… when did i talk about the “nothing can be owned” stuff? all i said was that piracy isn’t stealing and that most people doing piracy aren’t affecting the market at all, since they wouldn’t have bought the game anyway.
also, please look up the definition of software piracy, as it seems you don’t know what it means.
Line one. That’s when you mentioned it. Literally right there in your words.
stealing is taking the property of another person. i was talking about how piracy isn’t stealing, because you’re not taking the property of anyone.
if friend A makes and shares a song they made with friend B, and friend B copies it and sends it to me without A’s permission, that is not stealing, because neither of us are taking friend A’s property. friend A still owns the song, just like the company still owns the game.
“not owning games” is a completely different subject.
While digital piracy does not constitute theft in the strict sense defined under common law—namely, the unauthorized taking and carrying away of tangible personal property with intent to permanently deprive the owner thereof—it nonetheless constitutes a violation of exclusive rights granted to copyright holders under Title 17 of the United States Code.
Specifically, piracy infringes upon the copyright owner’s exclusive rights to reproduce, distribute, and publicly display or perform their work. The fact that no physical object is removed is immaterial; copyright law protects the expression of ideas, not just their physical embodiments. As such, piracy is more accurately classified as a form of copyright infringement—a civil and, in some cases, criminal offense—not as theft per se, but as an analogous wrong with measurable economic harm.
Moreover, jurisprudence has recognized that infringement can result in lost profits, market harm, and unjust enrichment, all of which are actionable. While piracy may lack the zero-sum quality of theft, it undermines the incentive structure copyright law is designed to uphold—namely, the right of creators to control and profit from their original works.
I don’t know what to tell you. Want to know more? Go read about Dowling v United States from 1985. That should help you understand how its still a kind of theft.
>“While digital piracy does not constitute theft in the strict sense defined under common law” >“That should help you understand how its still a kind of theft.”
it’s not theft, but it is? i know it’s a crime, but not all crimes are theft. unless you want to define all crimes as theft.
is murder a kind of theft, because you’re taking someone’s life? is kidnapping a kind theft, because you’re taking a person?
it’s not theft. it’s a different crime. just like pterosaurs and dinosaurs are different groups of animals.
I’m not here to get pedantic with a person who doesn’t capitalize the first letter of their sentences. It’s a crime. It’s theft adjacent. This concludes my TED Talk.
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/09/eu-study-finds-piracy-doesnt-hurt-game-sales-may-actually-help/
This article points to a research that concludes that piracy is really not an issue for those companies though.
It think that piracy is actually a great way to give everyone access to culture that shouldn’t be gatekept by their financial situation. Imagine a world where pirating music is shun today. Nobody cares now, we all listen to free music online without paying. Not to mention that piracy is pretty much the only sureway to make sure some medias (including games) are preserved. If you want to make sure that your favorite games don’t become lost medias in the future you should consider the good sides of piracy because those companies don’t care about it; they just want you to buy the next thing.
So if piracy is not affecting those companies revenues and if it gives access to culture to everyone and even help preserving media why the hell shoul we lose our minds over it? Sounds like a good thing to me.
Now, selling a game that cannot be owned and that can be revoked at anytime or a game that can change its TOS on a whim is much scummy imo.
If you don’t want people to pirate your game, price them fairly and allow you customers to own a copy and offer an easy to use service.
In any cases, I won’t shed a single tear if someome pirate a game especially a AAA game.
And yet we still have anti-theft measures on most games. The anti-theft measures aren’t there because there were never any thieves. They are there because theives provide a scapegoat to publishers to blame low revenue on. Regardless of whether or not it is actually happening, the net results are the same because the lie is there. Pirating or stealing games may not have a real effect, or may even be a positive one, but it doesn’t matter because there is still a negative outcome when companies increase the price of their games and force anti-consumer launchers and anti-theft DRM into games.
Maybe you and your friends do, but a lot of people pay for music streaming services with give an admittedly mediocre amount of revenue to the artists. The idea that we should steal “culture” and make it free to everyone is ludicrous. People still have to eat. All of the time and effort that goes into making a game or a record has an expected return, and that return is a paycheck.
That is why there are pro-consumer groups working to make sure that bullshit like what happens today doesn’t continue in the future. The EU and UK have very strong pro-consumer policies that protect the buyer instead of the seller. Change is happening, but it doesn’t make it easier when there is the ever present scapegoat of, “we do this because people steal.”
How is torrenting “making it worse for everyone else”?
If you want more, it’s also a rally cry for execs to bring up at board meetings about why their latest game didn’t sell well. It’s why Nintendo can brick your Switch 2 from orbit if they detect pirated software (which will surely lead to false positives).
Of course… its the consumers fault companies are increasingly anti-consumer friendly.
That’s what they tell their shareholders.
They could also choose not to. Also, I have never heard of any game not selling well due to piracy. It just leads to producers not earning quite as much money as they could theoretically (though it is debatable if pirating people really would buy the game instead of just refraining completely).
Whether or not it is what actually happens, it’s what they tell their shareholders, which is enough to make them resort to anti-consumer practices like third party launchers and anti-theft software.
Yeah, but nowardays you paid for the product with your data.