DonationCoder.com Forum

Main Area and Open Discussion => Living Room => Topic started by: zridling on February 25, 2010, 09:42 AM

Title: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: zridling on February 25, 2010, 09:42 AM: Yes, this whole thing really punishes the honest guy. <Insert cursing here>

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: KynloStephen66515 on February 25, 2010, 09:47 AM: Hahaha, thats awesome, and also very very true, and pretty much the only reason I download some films :P
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: mrainey on February 25, 2010, 09:53 AM: Not so funny when you see your applications pirated.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: KynloStephen66515 on February 25, 2010, 09:59 AM: Not so funny when you see your applications pirated.
-mrainey (February 25, 2010, 09:53 AM)

This is about movies, but I do understand your point. I also never said I DONT buy the DVDs, I just download them cause I hate having to hunt through my collection just to put it in my computer, and it saves A LOT of time copying the DVD (if it even allows you to) then converting to AVI to save space.

Technically not pirating, due to the fact I own the original work anyway. Its along the same lines as downloading a no-cd or modified EXE so you don't need the CD/DVD for software/games, due to risk of scratching the disc, or playing that many games it just gets annoying locating discs.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: Eóin on February 25, 2010, 10:00 AM: This just supports one of the long standing arguments why ordinary people pirate- even without taking price into consideration the pirates still offer a better product. As long as that continues to be the case I'll have little sympathy for the victims.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: zridling on February 25, 2010, 10:05 AM: Btw, I found that unsourced photo here:
http://i.imgur.com/GxzeV.jpg
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: RedPillow on February 25, 2010, 01:33 PM: That is so true :D
It`s even easier to convert the pirated videos for example: PSP use.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: f0dder on February 25, 2010, 01:34 PM: Illustration isn't entirely correct - pirated DVDs usually include menus, and sometimes the FBI warnings are kept as well - probably for the laughs.

It is pretty damn sad that legitimate users get the shaft... for audio CDs, you often can't (reliably) rip to a digital computer format. For applications and games you're often treated as a thief if you go legitimate, with ridiculous lock-downs and restrictions (can't have process explorer running? limited number of activations? have to be connected to the internet, even if playing a single-player game, and you get booted out without save if you lose your internet connection? et cetera).

If you pirate stuff, it's download-install-run... and in the case of games, sometimes at better performance, because you don't have a crap layer of obfuscated DRM code running in a VM.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: RedPillow on February 25, 2010, 01:35 PM: You can also copy and paste CD-keys on pirated ones xD
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: Carol Haynes on February 25, 2010, 01:48 PM: The best illustration of this was the UK release of Charlie Wilson's War - there was a 10 minute film about UNICEF before the menu appeared (along with all the other crap mentioned above). Not only was the film unskippable but you couldn't fast forward it or even stop it (apart from ejecting the disk) - plus if you press title menu it played again before the menu!!! This was so irritating the only solution was to look for a ripped copy so that you can actually watch the film you bought without having to cook a four course meal, eat it, spend the eveing in the local pub getting pissed just to avoid the crap. Maybe the DVD designer was just saying get a life - in which case he is probably correct.

Don't get me wrong I think UNICEF is a great organisation but it had absolutely nothing to do with the film whatsoever.

The thing I love about UK releases are the hilarious 'Don't be a pirate' clips that come up. They are set in Hades with a red faced torturer and they blame video piracy for everything from the worldwide economic collapse, teenage pregnancy and drug abuse to funding terrorism.

I'm pretty sure terrorism would mange on their own without worrying about pirating Home Simpson DVDs! DOH!
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: nosh on February 25, 2010, 01:59 PM: It'll be interesting to see how the Assassin's Creed II release with its cloud-based DRM plays out. There was some loose talk about a DDoS being planned at 4chan but I wouldn't be too surprised if the shit really does hit the fan. *fingers crossed*

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/things_you_should_boycott_assassin%E2%80%99s_creed_ii_and_its_god_awful_drm
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: wraith808 on February 25, 2010, 02:57 PM: Not so funny when you see your applications pirated.
-mrainey (February 25, 2010, 09:53 AM)

But if you watch out for your paying customer and keep him happy, and ignore the non-paying customer, you can be almost guaranteed that you are minimalizing the amount of sales that you are losing.

A really good example for me is the gaming DRM market. TAGES, SecurROM, and now UbiSoft's newest DRM scheme has lost them at least a few customers- I know friends who have always bought games that have either pirated or just not bought the games because of their heavy-handed approach. I hated even the lock to DVD stuff that was a replica of the lock to CD days, and it affected my buying. That's a direct relevance to their bottom line. I'd argue that DRM has made piracy *more* of a problem instead of less. By their inconvenience, they have brought awareness of piracy to the forefront- and awareness that people don't have to put up with the DRM if they just d/l a bittorrent client or limewire. If they had been satisfied with a minimal DRM scheme that's not an annoyance, but just made it so that the normal user would have to go out and get technical knowledge to have to bypass it, I would almost guarantee that they would have *less* problems now- not more. But the genie's out of the bottle, and heavy-handed tactics aren't going to put it back in.

There have been some killer games out that have had equally killer DRM schemes and though I've wanted them, the DRM has kept me away. That *never* happened in the old days- which tells you that at least in my case (though I'm sure there are other examples of it) their DRM-heavy approach is leading them in the wrong direction fiscally.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: wraith808 on February 25, 2010, 03:00 PM: The best illustration of this was the UK release of Charlie Wilson's War - there was a 10 minute film about UNICEF before the menu appeared (along with all the other crap mentioned above). Not only was the film unskippable but you couldn't fast forward it or even stop it (apart from ejecting the disk) - plus if you press title menu it played again before the menu!!! This was so irritating the only solution was to look for a ripped copy so that you can actually watch the film you bought without having to cook a four course meal, eat it, spend the eveing in the local pub getting pissed just to avoid the crap. Maybe the DVD designer was just saying get a life - in which case he is probably correct.
-Carol Haynes (February 25, 2010, 01:48 PM)

I had the same problem recently with a release of some film- I finally got around to trying to watch it, and wanted to watch the end of the movie because I had already seen it and only had a few minutes before I went to bed. 30 minutes later I *still* hadn't managed to get to the movie. >:(
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: Kamel on February 25, 2010, 03:14 PM: Piracy and theft are facts of life. There are proper ways of handling them and improper ways. This picture simply outlines the fact that a stolen product is actually superior to a purchased one. This doesn't make sense, and that's the operative thing here.

I don't support people going around and stealing things, but I (even more so) don't support the use of DRM or other crippling software to try and prevent something from being stolen (which is not preventing anything)
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: Deozaan on February 25, 2010, 05:06 PM: Another classic illustration on DRM and how piracy is the "better" option.

(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/steal_this_comic.png)
xkcd.org (http://xkcd.com/488/)
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: f0dder on February 25, 2010, 05:29 PM: I don't know what the proper solution is for single player games, for games that have mostly online appeal... drop DRM and simply rely on the server-side verified serial. If people choose to haxor the exe and use private servers, let them do it... but don't fsck your legitimate customers.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: wraith808 on February 25, 2010, 07:20 PM: <snip />
...but don't fsck your legitimate customers.
-f0dder (February 25, 2010, 05:29 PM)

QFE!
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: J-Mac on February 25, 2010, 10:44 PM: Not so funny when you see your applications pirated.
-mrainey (February 25, 2010, 09:53 AM)

Well, though you don’t have that problem from me - and I am definitely software-poor; the money I've spent on software that is no longer even installed would feed some third-world countries! - I can say that it certainly does not help to make things as difficult as possible for your paying customers while the pirates are easily and happily able to do what they want without a bit of difficulty.

Jim
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: wraith808 on March 07, 2010, 10:32 PM: Classic! Ubisoft's DRM servers went down- making AC2 unplayable for many *paying* customers!

http://bit.ly/bNSXE5
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: RedPillow on March 08, 2010, 01:00 AM: It`s really sad, when Ubisoft announced that internet-connection must be on all the time when playing even singleplayer!
For pirates, it doesn`r really change anything - the protection will be cracked in hours.
For buyers thou, what if they don`t have internet-connection or it happends to lag-out @ Final-Boss?

Lawl, just think about checking your ping when playing Assassin`s Creed - so you wont lag out and quit without saving your game to the server :D
That would pretty much suck.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: f0dder on March 08, 2010, 01:40 AM: Lawl, just think about checking your ping when playing Assassin`s Creed - so you wont lag out and quit without saving your game to the server :D
-RedPillow (March 08, 2010, 01:00 AM)
Saves are still stored locally - you can put them "in the cloud" as well, but saves being cloud-only i FUD.

That still doesn't change my stance on protections like that being inherently evil & only hurting legitimate customers.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: Deozaan on March 08, 2010, 02:08 AM: So I just watched a movie on Blu-Ray the other day, and the image in the first post here went through my head. The thing I don't understand is, before getting to the main menu of the movie, there was an advertisement about how awesome Blu-Ray is compared to DVD... on the Blu-Ray disc!

Thankfully most of the previews were skippable, but it really is crap having to go through all that junk just to watch a movie you've already bought.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: nosh on March 08, 2010, 02:20 AM: Classic! Ubisoft's DRM servers went down- making AC2 unplayable for many *paying* customers!

It's hard to foresee every little problem when you have your eye on the money.

[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: RedPillow on March 08, 2010, 02:21 AM: "You wouldn`t download a car!"

- Fuck you!, I would if I could!

:Thmbsup:
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: lanux128 on March 08, 2010, 02:33 AM: Ubisoft's new DRM system..

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkTZTzsYoZs
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: RedPillow on March 08, 2010, 02:39 AM: Classic! Ubisoft's DRM servers went down- making AC2 unplayable for many *paying* customers!

It's hard to foresee every little problem when you have your eye on the money.
(see attachment in previous post (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=21888.msg197705#msg197705))
-nosh (March 08, 2010, 02:20 AM)

Yeah, maybe they develop a system, which requires every ubisoft game installed inorder to play the newes ones - with internet online in singleplayer + monthly pays and online savegames, added with addon which calculates how long user has been playing and if > 1½ hours its automatic ban for every ubisoft game -- in addition with brand new feature: if you insert wrong CD-key (accidents count too) your C-drive will be formatted and owerwritten by crap which cannot be removed.

THAT`L TEACH EM!
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: wraith808 on March 08, 2010, 12:02 PM: UbiSoft lied about DRM Servers - http://bit.ly/aKEbCg
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: f0dder on March 08, 2010, 12:06 PM: UbiSoft lied about DRM Servers - http://bit.ly/aKEbCg
-wraith808 (March 08, 2010, 12:02 PM)
Yup - and before anybody else posts anything about that event in this thread, take it here (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=22007.0;topicseen) instead :)
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: scancode on March 08, 2010, 12:23 PM: "You wouldn`t download a car!"

- Fuck you!, I would if I could!

:Thmbsup:
-RedPillow (March 08, 2010, 02:21 AM)

And keygen the gas, and just download another one if you crash that one... After all, donwnloading only makes a copy ;)
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: CheckUserFirst on March 10, 2010, 11:25 AM: Actually I used to "pirate" my legally bought DVDs when my kids were younger because they were complaining about all the boring text before the movie started :)

(In fact since there are no RULES how to build menus for DVDs, they couldn't even get past some of the menus...)
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: KynloStephen66515 on March 10, 2010, 11:35 AM: Actually I used to "pirate" my legally bought DVDs
-CheckUserFirst (March 10, 2010, 11:25 AM)

I still do, and my PC games as well, mainly because I like to have a digital copy on my computer, but I own DVD versions for a few reasons:

1: Piracy is against the law, but there are no laws about having an illegal version of a game when you own a legit copy, so long as the legit copy the same version as the copy you have downloaded.

2: I don't want to, now, or ever, go fully digital with my game and DVD purchases. I would much rather have a huge collection of Games/DVD's/CD's that friends and family can browse through at their leisure if they wish to borrow something. Also, not wanting to go digital is also about having a hard copy of the game, and its contents (Booklet, Instruction Manual etc...) because I feel this brings 'owning it' more to life.

3. Going fully digital stops my ability to be able to just install a game at my leisure, play it, and uninstall, without ever having to go online. Some people are on limited connections (I am on mobile broadband with only allows me 500mb of data transfer a day) and that stops us from downloading games at 4-8GB each.

4. I don't like companies such as steam, who offer single-player, offline only games, yet FORCE you to be online while playing. They also (I don't know about the latest version of steam, I now refuse to ever own it again) punish you for losing internet connection. What I mean by this, is, if you unexpectedly lose your connection for any reason, while steam is in ONLINE mode, you CANNOT get to your games. You have to be ONLINE to turn the damn thing to OFFLINE.

I could go on, but I think I would just be ranting if I did! 8)
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: JavaJones on March 10, 2010, 01:21 PM: Uh, I don't think Steam really works that way. At least not the last time I used it (admittedly a year or so ago). Ubisoft's new games on the other hand are exactly like that. One would assume the big fuss about Ubi's new practices wouldn't have been such a big deal had Steam been doing that all along.

- Oshyan
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: wraith808 on March 10, 2010, 01:34 PM: 4. I don't like companies such as steam, who offer single-player, offline only games, yet FORCE you to be online while playing. They also (I don't know about the latest version of steam, I now refuse to ever own it again) punish you for losing internet connection. What I mean by this, is, if you unexpectedly lose your connection for any reason, while steam is in ONLINE mode, you CANNOT get to your games. You have to be ONLINE to turn the damn thing to OFFLINE.
-Stephen66515 (March 10, 2010, 11:35 AM)

This isn't true. As long as the game was not in the middle of updating when you lost your connection, you can always go offline. If it's in the middle of downloading, you don't have the information downloaded to allow offline use.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: zridling on March 11, 2010, 10:45 PM: Score one for the good guys in Europe:
European Parliament votes 663-13 against ACTA
http://www.euractiv.com/en/health/meps-defy-commission-internet-piracy-agreement-news-326215

Just FYI: Obama supports ACTA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting_Trade_Agreement) (boo! dude, boo! The US is its main pusher.)
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: Carol Haynes on March 12, 2010, 12:14 PM: ACTA seems quite lenient compared to current UK legislation and government ideas. Currently it is illegal to attempt to circumvent copy protection. So in theory even thinking "I wonder how ...?" could set the thought police on you for an offence! Add to that the current proposal for one strike and your off the internet and ACTA seems almost rational!
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: wraith808 on March 12, 2010, 12:41 PM: Interesting OpEd article on the UbiSoft debacle - http://bit.ly/clZtRB
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: f0dder on March 13, 2010, 07:53 AM: Interesting OpEd article on the UbiSoft debacle - http://bit.ly/clZtRB
-wraith808 (March 12, 2010, 12:41 PM)
Why do you use bit.ly instead of direct links? please stop it.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: scancode on March 13, 2010, 09:16 AM: Interesting OpEd article on the UbiSoft debacle - http://bit.ly/clZtRB
-wraith808 (March 12, 2010, 12:41 PM)
Why do you use bit.ly instead of direct links? please stop it.
-f0dder (March 13, 2010, 07:53 AM)

Maybe he got it from twitter?
Damn tinyurls :P
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: wraith808 on March 13, 2010, 10:13 AM: Interesting OpEd article on the UbiSoft debacle - http://bit.ly/clZtRB
-wraith808 (March 12, 2010, 12:41 PM)
Why do you use bit.ly instead of direct links? please stop it.
-f0dder (March 13, 2010, 07:53 AM)

Why stop it? What's the big deal? As scancode said, I got it because I post to here and twitter and my blog... it makes it easier. So what's your argument against, and I'll consider it.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: f0dder on March 13, 2010, 10:31 AM: Interesting OpEd article on the UbiSoft debacle - http://bit.ly/clZtRB
-wraith808 (March 12, 2010, 12:41 PM)
Why do you use bit.ly instead of direct links? please stop it.
-f0dder (March 13, 2010, 07:53 AM)
Why stop it? What's the big deal? As scancode said, I got it because I post to here and twitter and my blog... it makes it easier. So what's your argument against, and I'll consider it.
-wraith808 (March 13, 2010, 10:13 AM)
It makes sense on twitter and in print magazines, but anywhere else?

There's two parts:
1) bit.ly could be down (temporarily or permanently) - perhaps not likely, but could happen.
2) it sucks not being able to see the target URL on mouseover (and no, I don't want browser extensions to do that - and they won't help wrt. #1 anyway).
3) consider the possibility of the service being hacked and introducing drive-by malware.

Obviously I trust your shortened links to be clean and referer-free, but when unknown people post using shorteners, I always wonder what are they trying to hide?

I believe those to be good reasons against URL shorteners - are there any reasons for them, excluding twitter & magazines?
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: wraith808 on March 13, 2010, 10:53 AM: I think there are:
1. I know what URLs I've posted and have a record of them. This helps me not to post the same thing over again, and be able to go back to the reference for something that I've posted earlier more easily.
2. There are several developer tools that I've been experimenting with for posting from bit.ly automatically to other places (and they've been experimenting with them too- they already have an interface to gmail, facebook, and pop in addition to twitter). I have various groups of people that I interact with over different mediums (including print), and to be able to post all at once rather than from each individually is a great timesaver.
3. I'm already using it for twitter, so not to have a different URL to use for different mediums helps also.

I've thought about creating my own url shortening service (http://lifehacker.com/5335216/make-your-own-url-shortening-service) to address issues 1 & 3 ... maybe I should take that approach (though using bit.ly is so easy...)
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: Innuendo on March 13, 2010, 11:35 AM: The use of bit.ly links aside, I don't see the need for an OpEd article detailing anything regarding UbiSoft.

UbiSoft regularly lies to their customers. UbiSoft has always regularly lied to their customers. And chances are UbiSoft will always regularly lie to their customers.

They have always wanted to be the next Electronic Arts and have blatantly copied all of Electronic Arts's business practices, both the good and the bad.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: wraith808 on March 13, 2010, 11:57 AM: Well, the article was articulating something I said earlier- about the rock and a hard place this sort of DRM puts gamers in. You either deny yourself the enjoyment of what is most likely a very good game- invariably doing nothing other than hurting yourself or contributing to the lower sales of the game which they will blame on the PC market dying rather than their DRM system. Or you buy it, and support their decision to use DRM.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: J-Mac on March 13, 2010, 12:35 PM: Interesting OpEd article on the UbiSoft debacle - http://bit.ly/clZtRB
-wraith808 (March 12, 2010, 12:41 PM)
Why do you use bit.ly instead of direct links? please stop it.
-f0dder (March 13, 2010, 07:53 AM)

I don’t even try to change other people's behavior; not my job! However I just use a Greasemonkey (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/748) script TinyURL Decoder (http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/40582). It automagically changes all the shortened URLs I see to full links. Easier for me that way!

Thanks!

Jim
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: RedPillow on March 14, 2010, 04:18 PM: I really hate people who continuoysly talk about how wrong piracy is, how sad it is for the artist, how much you suck if you download illegally - its annoying!
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: J-Mac on March 14, 2010, 09:30 PM: I really hate people who continuoysly talk about how wrong piracy is, how sad it is for the artist, how much you suck if you download illegally - its annoying!
-RedPillow (March 14, 2010, 04:18 PM)

Well, some find the opposite annoying. We're just an annoying bunch of peeps, aren't we? :P

Jim
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: RedPillow on March 16, 2010, 04:08 AM: I really hate people who continuoysly talk about how wrong piracy is, how sad it is for the artist, how much you suck if you download illegally - its annoying!
-RedPillow (March 14, 2010, 04:18 PM)

Well, some find the opposite annoying. We're just an annoying bunch of peeps, aren't we? :P

Jim
-J-Mac (March 14, 2010, 09:30 PM)

But you can`t really do anything about a guy, who has been using pirate-bay and stuff for 3- and god knows how many years - they just don`t care
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: Eóin on March 16, 2010, 06:17 AM: Is it so wrong to tell someone who just doesn't care that they suck?
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: RedPillow on March 16, 2010, 07:22 AM: Ubisoft`s site got hacked by crack-team Skidrow today.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: y0himba on March 16, 2010, 07:23 AM: I say bah on the whole thing. None of the reasons put forth thus far are any reason whatsoever to pirate or steal. I just think of what my kids would say if they saw me doing that kind of stuff, or how I would reply when they asked where I got that game or movie.

I agree that the companies and blah blah are doing it wrong, but that doesn't mean I need to also. My pirating of copyrighted works is not going to fix the problem, it just makes me as low as the uncaring, money-mongering morons that the low life pirates try to use as an excuse.

There is no excuse or justification to pirating someone's work.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: wraith808 on March 16, 2010, 10:08 AM: There is no excuse or justification to pirating someone's work.
-y0himba (March 16, 2010, 07:23 AM)

QFE. And your thoughts pretty much mirror my own. I thought it very telling when someone in another thread on DC was very skeptical that all of the music on my computer was purchased in one form or another. It's not that hard not to pirate- just decide not to do it and don't. For any reason or no reason. Two wrongs has *never* made anything right.

But everyone has to realize that for themselves- or not. No matter how much you tell someone, no matter how much protection that you put in, no matter how many PSAs you annoy your paying customers with, pirates will pirate, because it's a state of mind that *none* of that will change.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: J-Mac on March 16, 2010, 11:06 AM: Agreed. I don’t have anything on my machines that isn't either licensed or free/donationware. I don’t harass those who do; I just don’t do it myself. I used to have to go over to my brother's house and clean up his computer about every three months because he is the opposite: he doesn’t have anything on his box that IS licensed. And he never updates whatever AV I install for him. I don’t even bother anymore; got tired of it. There are those who could never afford the stuff otherwise, and there are those who just don’t feel like paying for anything. Se la vie - I am not able to change that and so I don’t even try.

The only music I have here that wasn’t purchased is about 30-40 tracks that I downloaded from the original Napster -before they were sued and declared to be non-legal. And all of those were clips I wanted for slideshows that weren't commercially available otherwise, though some are available now. I was just brought up differently I guess and it hasn’t worn off. And at my age I don’t think it will now! :P

Doesn’t make me special; it's just the way I am. To each...

Thanks!

Jim
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: zridling on July 30, 2010, 05:39 AM: New website on how to fight ACTA:
http://www.anti-acta.com/mos/Frontpage/Itemid,1/

"ACTA has several features that raise significant potential concerns for consumers privacy and civil liberties, for innovation and the free flow of information on the Internet, legitimate commerce, and for developing countries ability to choose policy options that best suit their domestic priorities and level of economic development."
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: Deozaan on March 12, 2011, 03:59 AM: Arise, thread, arise! (Necro thread revival!)

Another example of why it's better to pirate when DRM is concerned:

When it comes to EA games, you really should watch what you say.

That's what one BioWare forum-goer learned after possibly being banned by asking BioWare, an EA studio, "Have you sold your souls to the EA devil?" The comment resulted in a temporary 72 hour ban, but more importantly meant that the user couldn't play a brand-new copy of Dragon Age II during that time.
-http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/03/forum-user-gets-banned-loses-access-to-dragon-age-ii.ars
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: Renegade on March 12, 2011, 05:05 AM: Arise, thread, arise! (Necro thread revival!)

Another example of why it's better to pirate when DRM is concerned:

When it comes to EA games, you really should watch what you say.

That's what one BioWare forum-goer learned after possibly being banned by asking BioWare, an EA studio, "Have you sold your souls to the EA devil?" The comment resulted in a temporary 72 hour ban, but more importantly meant that the user couldn't play a brand-new copy of Dragon Age II during that time.
-http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/03/forum-user-gets-banned-loses-access-to-dragon-age-ii.ars
-Deozaan (March 12, 2011, 03:59 AM)

Update: We just received word from EA's Andrew Wong that the situation was actually an error. "Unfortunately, there was an error in the system that accidentally suspended a user's entire account," he told Ars. "Immediately upon learning of the glitch, EA took steps to restore the user's macro account and apologized for the inconvenience."

Hmmm... Maybe. Not sure if I believe that or not, but whatever. Could be true. Could be back-peddling.

Still, what happened there happens regularly elsewhere.

In one game that I paid for, I complained and then been banned with in-game punishments. I got pretty pissed at that and turned it into a game to screw with them while I was banned. What was really fun was letting them know that they'd broken some laws and could face prosecution (which was true, but I'd never pursue it).

In another game that I paid for, there was an extended service outage. After a while (and a fair amount of booze), I wrote in to support with an extremely blunt email about their incompetence. I received a snarly letter back. As far as I'm concerned, if you're the one dropping the ball, you should brace yourself to get what you deserve -- lambasted for your incompetence. Ahem... Who's the one that f***ed up?

Getting banned, ignored, or marginalized is common in the game industry.

But you can't really pirate an online service. (In one sense anyways.)
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: Deozaan on March 12, 2011, 01:38 PM: But you can't really pirate an online service. (In one sense anyways.)
-Renegade (March 12, 2011, 05:05 AM)

True, but in this case I don't think Dragon Age 2 is an online game. AFAIK it just uses the internet for DRM purposes.
Title: Re: Pirate vs. Paying Customer illustrated
Post by: Renegade on March 12, 2011, 06:15 PM: But you can't really pirate an online service. (In one sense anyways.)
-Renegade (March 12, 2011, 05:05 AM)

True, but in this case I don't think Dragon Age 2 is an online game. AFAIK it just uses the internet for DRM purposes.
-Deozaan (March 12, 2011, 01:38 PM)

Ugh! That's fugly.

The original post is so right. If you want games/music/movies that work properly... Sigh...