Jump to content


Photo

Software Piracy


  • Please log in to reply
1831 replies to this topic

#61 Lody

Lody

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 240 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 02 March 2010 - 09:51 PM

you do know that it doesnt affect economy.
the assumption is people who cant afford the program pirate it.
and that whether there's a pirated version or not doesn't change the fact that those people won't but the product.
so the money earnt for that product is the same. the sales are the same. no change in economy.
  • 0

#62 linx137520

linx137520

    Graphics Designer

  • New Member
  • 1284 posts

Posted 02 March 2010 - 09:55 PM

people who cant afford the program pirate it.

Honestly, whats to say that they cannot save up for this software over time? I'm sure a lot of those people could save up for the software eventually. Somehow this thread went from talking about GM being open sourced to an arguement about why pirating is wrong or right.
  • 0

#63 e_barroga

e_barroga

    ES Studios Leader

  • GMC Member
  • 2449 posts

Posted 02 March 2010 - 09:56 PM

and that whether there's a pirated version or not doesn't change the fact that those people won't but the product.

Based on what assumption?
  • 0

#64 IsmAvatar

IsmAvatar

    Good Samaritan

  • GMC Member
  • 2411 posts
  • Version:GM8

Posted 02 March 2010 - 10:07 PM

Edit: I don't think you understand economics


A lot of people here don't understand economics. I just didn't feel like mentioning it because the topic was giving me enough lols as it was.

The biggest issue I see repeatedly discussed here is the concept of potential profit, as if someone has a right to their potential profit. For example, if I tell my friends "Don't buy products from company X, because I've had bad experiences with them", then I'm guilty of stealing their potential profit, because they are now down a couple customers. If I hold your arm for a couple seconds, whereas it's conceivable that during that time, you could have been using that arm to make a substantial amount of money, I am stealing your potential profit.
This, and many other concepts, are what makes Intellectual Property by grounds of Potential Profit stand on shaky and essentially unsustainable grounds.

I also lol'd at the few people who were talking about companies that aren't able to make up for the cost of production, as though that company has some kind of right to production reimbursement. Because it's totally against the law for a company to go under...

I also almost cry every time I see someone make a boolean statement like "That you pirate software indicates that you want it, so you would go out and buy it if you weren't pirating it.". Value is not boolean, it is cardinal. I value Office software at $10 - meaning that I'm willing to pay no more than $10 for office software, however I do want office software. MS Office costs $100, so I will not buy it. Then OoO comes along and it costs $0, so I will 'buy' that.
Now let's suppose that I don't value office software. $0 for OoO, but I still don't 'buy' it. Now let's suppose that I value office software at $200. MS Office costs $100, so I might buy it. Unless OoO is available at the same time for $0, in which case I'd probably go for OoO. There is no way to represent these three scenarios using a boolean theory of value. I value diamonds, but you don't see me going out and buying any in the near future. This is because value is cardinal, not boolean.


Then there's this golden nugget:

IF YOU SHOPLIFT MULTIPLE TIMES OF THE SAME ITEM FROM A STORE, IT'S COMPELTELY DIFFERENT FROM PIRATING THE SAME ITEM MULTIPLE TIMES?

.


If you want a truly good economic understanding of intellectual property, then take the Scarcity approach.
http://mises.org/jou...15_2/15_2_1.pdf
From the point of view of Scarcity, we can establish rights in all kinds of property (like a store), but intellectual property falls apart, because my obtaining a copy of an idea does not detract from your ability to enjoy the original. This doesn't necessarily prevent a profit from being made from intellectual creations, however. For example, I am an open source developer, and I am paid handsomely to be so. This is my motivation to create certain softwares. Other softwares are purely creations of my heart, LateralGM being a good example.


Good, now we've sufficiently represented every possible theory of intellectual property, from the mundane to the obscure to the obscene to the plain old ignorant. Now can we please get back on topic? How does any of this have to do with Game Maker going Open Source?

Edited by IsmAvatar, 04 March 2010 - 10:30 PM.

  • 0

#65 Samscam

Samscam

    Retired GMC Reviewer

  • GMC Member
  • 648 posts

Posted 02 March 2010 - 10:07 PM

True, but I'm still waiting for your argument on why people would use pirated software other than the fact that they can't/wont pay for it.

I am pretty sure you don't need anyone to spoon feed the information on this thread for you.

Pirating software because trying to purchase it is hard is bunch of bull****.

You keep failing to give a good argument on why I have it on the wrong end... So you think that people pirate software... just because they can pirate software?

If those people don't work, and they are good photographers/photo-editors, and they want to start making a living out of that hobby, they will probably use a pirated version of PS to do so.

Then get a job like everyone else so you can buy it. Use your brain, how does one get money to purchase equipment one would need to make a living?

If you wan't to open a bakery or a candy shop, the bank will probably lend you the money, but when you want to start editing photos and try to make a living out of that, I'm quite sure that there isn't a single bank that will give you the loan.
Btw: I said "those people", no reason to use "you" in your answer.

What I'm trying to make clear is that the economic consequences of pirating aren't that bad at all.

Here's a quote I recently read somewhere:

I will simply say this. I stole Photoshop, got a job using Photoshop, then work bought me Photoshop.

Thats +1 sale for adobe because of pirating.

Microsoft doesn't want you to pirate their software, but if you must choose between illegally installing Windows or a competitor's operating system, Microsoft would prefer that you choose them. While the company obviously won't endorse the illegal use of software, it does believe that piracy can result in profit.

http://arstechnica.c...e-microsoft.ars

"Piracy helped the young generation discover computers. It set off the development of the IT industry in Romania," flaunted the Romanian president.

http://apcmag.com/th...g_us_pirate.htm

I'm still not saying pirating is good, but you shouldn't say that it is the most evil thing one can do.
  • 0

#66 Archamond

Archamond

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 202 posts

Posted 02 March 2010 - 10:10 PM


This is how I see it:
Pirating:
Product price: €15,00
Sales: 1500
Income: €22.500,00
Users: 2000

No pirating:
Product price: €15,00
Sales: 1500
Income: €22.500,00
Users: 1500

Less people using the software, but the income stays the same.


Pirating:
Product Price: 15.00
Sales: 1500
Income: 22,500
Users: 2000

No Pirating:
Product Price: 15.00
Sales: 2000
Income: 30,000
Users: 2000

Samscam's prediction is far more accurate. You can't assume that people who are pirating software would simply buy it if there is no piracy.



Then it is simple. You either buy the products you think are worth it or you don't. You don't steal it. Obviously it has a decent amount of worth if it makes you result to stealing it. Who's fault is it really for Sports Interactive's games requiring up to 3 patches to work correctly? Greedy business leaders or the programmers? They could either ignore the bugs and be happy with the money you used to buy their product or they could spend money to fix the problem.

Well, there are millions buying their products and there are more and more bugs every year. Something is wrong there obviously. And even if I wanted to buy it, I can't. There is no store in my city(which have 2m population btw) which sells their products. And I simply don't want to download it from Steam or something like that. I want to hold dvd case in my hands and to put it on the shelf. But they don't want to give me that option.

So companies make an effort to expand globally and this is the attitude of the "millions of people around the world" that they are making an attempt to serve. Perhaps they shouldn't bother if all they are going to do is steal it anyways.

If there weren't any thieves in existence perhaps getting your product would be easier.

You can't call people who use pirated software thieves. How can you steal something that doesn't exists? It is much more comparable with free bus ride, or something like that. Is it criminal act? No. Is it right thing to do? No. Is person doing it thief? No.
There is HUGE difference between losing sales(stealing from the shop) or using potential sales(downloading cracked software). Potential sales might not happen even if there is no cracks. And it probably wouldn't.


How, in any way, does this entitle you to their product? If you don't like it, or can't pay for it, or whatever, you don't get it. That does not justify piracy for the same reason not being able to afford it does not justify piracy. You're still trying to rationalize something that is unethical.

This is just idiotic.

It is not idiotic. What if I want to buy their product but they just don't let me? What if I, for example, don't have internet and want to buy it in a local shop. And they don't supply it there. Nor anywhere in the city/country. Or if they, for unknown reason, don't want to accept my credit card? And offer none alternative way of electrical payment?

And there are other nations and cultures outside United States. Just because people saying to you for your entire life that being happy bunny for huge corporations is only ethical thing to do, it isn't necessarily only truth on this world.

@IsmAvatar nice to see someone on same wavelength about potential sales with me and explaining that in detail to ones who claim that understand economy.

Edited by Archamond, 02 March 2010 - 10:13 PM.

  • 0

#67 e_barroga

e_barroga

    ES Studios Leader

  • GMC Member
  • 2449 posts

Posted 02 March 2010 - 10:12 PM

It is much more comparable with free bus ride, or something like that. Is it criminal act? No. Is it right thing to do? No. Is person doing it thief? No

Evading bus fare is a criminal offense. I am pretty sure I've seen such notice several times while riding the bus.

Just because people saying to you for your entire life that being happy bunny for huge corporations is only ethical thing to do, it isn't necessarily only truth on this world.

That isn't the point trying to be made.

What if I, for example, don't have internet and want to buy it in a local shop. And they don't supply it there. Nor anywhere in the city/country. Or if they, for unknown reason, don't want to accept my credit card? And offer none alternative way of electrical payment?

Gee I wonder why that is.

IsmAvatar, like you said: "not boolean". When you have X pirates pirating X copies it doesn't mean that they all wouldn't consider purchasing a legal copy if there was no way to pirate. For this reason, there exists potential profit. Out of X pirates there are potentially Y number of people who would consider actually purchasing a legal copy. More profit means more investment, which means more jobs, which means more people with money to spend, which becomes cyclical.

IsmAvatar nice to see someone on same wavelength about potential sales with me and explaining that in detail to ones who claim that understand economy.


Edited by e_barroga, 02 March 2010 - 10:28 PM.

  • 0

#68 superjoebob

superjoebob

    YM2612

  • New Member
  • 1515 posts

Posted 02 March 2010 - 10:19 PM

Alright, it's obvious this thread is waaaay off topic now. Getting something that costs money without paying for it is stealing. There's no good or bad argument to be had for stealing. Stealing is illegal. So everybody please, shut up about how you pirate everything and should be in jail and lets either close this thread or get back on topic.

Edited by superjoebob, 02 March 2010 - 10:21 PM.

  • 0

#69 WMCD

WMCD

    Spritist

  • GMC Member
  • 1418 posts
  • Version:GM5

Posted 02 March 2010 - 10:23 PM

...
You can't call people who use pirated software thieves. How can you steal something that doesn't exists? It is much more comparable with free bus ride, or something like that. Is it criminal act? No. Is it right thing to do? No. Is person doing it thief? No.
There is HUGE difference between losing sales(stealing from the shop) or using potential sales(downloading cracked software). Potential sales might not happen even if there is no cracks. And it probably wouldn't.


Just because it is an intangible product does not mean it isnt a product. Semantics is all it is.

And yes, people have been punished for pirating; remember when they started cracking down on illegally-downloaded music at the turn of the century?

How, in any way, does this entitle you to their product? If you don't like it, or can't pay for it, or whatever, you don't get it. That does not justify piracy for the same reason not being able to afford it does not justify piracy. You're still trying to rationalize something that is unethical.

This is just idiotic.

It is not idiotic. What if I want to buy their product but they just don't let me? What if I, for example, don't have internet and want to buy it in a local shop. And they don't supply it there. Nor anywhere in the city/country. Or if they, for unknown reason, don't want to accept my credit card? And offer none alternative way of electrical payment?


Then you're screwed; software isn't a necessity for everyday life, so in no way are you entitled to steal it. (And how would you pirate it if you had no internet access? B-) )


Yeah, this topic has gotten very off-topic, but it was a timebomb from the start; did nobody else see this discussion coming?

Edited by WMCD, 02 March 2010 - 10:27 PM.

  • 0

#70 onpon4

onpon4

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 1175 posts
  • Version:GM8

Posted 02 March 2010 - 10:35 PM

Really the only reason people serve people on this planet is because they expect to be compensated. It is either that or conquest.


Whoa, whoa, whoa, no. No. People do things not just for the money. Sure, greed exists, but the entire world doesn't revolve around being compensated.

Besides the many free, open source software out there, a massive principle of socialism exists in an average household. You don't feed your children because you hope to be compensated (if you do, you don't have a good relationship with them). You feed your children because you want them to eat.

Granted, in business, everyone is trying to get green pieces of paper with pictures of dead people on them, but that is not the ONLY reason.

Also, let me throw in my two cents: If someone isn't going to buy Photoshop anyway, he's probably going to choose one of two things: Either pirate it, or download an alternative like GIMP. Either way, Photoshop will make NOTHING from him. But if Photoshop is pirated, the guy will become familiar with Photoshop and may purchase it legally later. But if he downloads GIMP, he will learn to prefer GIMP and will probably never even consider trying Photoshop again. See how Adobe can benefit from piracy? I'm not saying that piracy is good, but it's not as bad as some of you are making it out to be.
  • 0

#71 e_barroga

e_barroga

    ES Studios Leader

  • GMC Member
  • 2449 posts

Posted 02 March 2010 - 10:40 PM

Really the only reason people serve people on this planet is because they expect to be compensated. It is either that or conquest.


Whoa, whoa, whoa, no. No. People do things not just for the money. Sure, greed exists, but the entire world doesn't revolve around being compensated.

Besides the many free, open source software out there, a massive principle of socialism exists in an average household. You don't feed your children because you hope to be compensated (if you do, you don't have a good relationship with them). You feed your children because you want them to eat.


But it revolves around one concept: survival. Reproduction maintains human's existence. Obviously there isn't enough to go around for the entire world, which is why we need compensation.

But if he downloads GIMP, he will learn to prefer GIMP and will probably never even consider trying Photoshop again. See how Adobe can benefit from piracy? I'm not saying that piracy is good, but it's not as bad as some of you are making it out to be.

Try before you buy, like free trial right? That's just an excuse.
  • 0

#72 petenka

petenka

    The Chosen One

  • New Member
  • 911 posts

Posted 02 March 2010 - 10:58 PM

I hold no opinion.

Edited by petenka, 03 March 2010 - 10:07 PM.

  • 0

#73 Desert Dog

Desert Dog

    GMC Member

  • Retired Staff
  • 6409 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 02 March 2010 - 11:21 PM

You can't assume that people who are pirating software would simply buy it if there is no piracy.


This statement is correct.
However, you can't assume that they wouldn't.. after all, why did they pirate it in the first place? Simply saying 'because they had no money' isn't enough. Your arguement can't be clearly refuted, simply because of lack of 'facts'.

I notice a lot of opinions being thrown about, and the argument is starting to degrade into 'that's your opinion/assumption'.

So here's a tidbit of information for the pack to get there teeth into... interpret it how you will. B-)

First off, just a re-reference to what I mentioned before, about 90% of the people pirating the full version of World of Goo. Source:
http://kotaku.com/50...lls-are-pirated

Now, Amanda fitch wrote a little 'guide' to selling games, which can be found here:
http://forums.indieg...ead.php?t=17891

More importantly, the bit where she says based on her own experience selling games on her website

Most newbs start out by having a demo and a full version of their game. If you do this expect to loose 70% of your sales. I don’t know why sales are so bad, but I can only tell you that it happens over and over again.

Why would the sales go down so much? Unless, people who use to pirate them, now have to pay, and are doing so. But feel free to interpret that how you will.

Later on in the topic, she notes the source of that 'assumption':

My website. I've helped a lot of indies, and one thing is certain, devs who switch to the 1 hour model make loads more sales on my site. Obviously, my test poll is small, but when I watch a dev go from selling 6 games per month on my site to 400, it's difficult not to notice.


For me, this is pretty conclusive that a lot of people who pirate, don't just do it simply because they 'don't have money'. Simply saying so is naive.
(Also, the difference between 6 and 400 sales a month is the difference between working at Burger King, or working full-time game devving. Yes, for these indie's every sale counts for a lot.)

However, I'm posting all this, so you guys can reach your own conclusions, and in the best case, learn something new.

Edited by Desert Dog, 02 March 2010 - 11:23 PM.

  • 0

#74 FredFredrickson

FredFredrickson

    Artist

  • Global Moderators
  • 9208 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 02 March 2010 - 11:38 PM

This is what I hate about the pirate attitude. Everyone's always trying to rationalize an activity that is unethical and wrong.

If a company don't bother to make paying their product from my(or any other) country comfortable, then pirating their software is both ethical and right from my point of view. If they don't want to be good company and care about me, why should I give a **** about them?

Thus, I only pay for software as support to developer, if I feel they deserve me bothering with payment. Like Paradox Entertainment or Mark Overmars for example. Their products and effort are just worth all the money they want. On the other hand, likes of Sports Interactive whose games need up to 3 patches to work correctly simply don't.

Small percentage of people on this world is actually able to sit comfortably in their chair and use their credit cards to pay all over the world, or to be precise, all over the USA/parts of Europe. I do have money to pay for software but I can't do that comfortably. And there are millions of people around the world with same attitude. You just can't look at entire world and base opinions through US eyes.

I wasn't looking at the situation purely from a U.S. perspective. I was looking at it from an ethical point of view. Piracy isn't justified just because you don't feel comfortable using your credit card somewhere; it doesn't entitle you to things for free no matter where you live, no matter who you are, and no matter what your means consist of.

For me, this is pretty conclusive that a lot of people who pirate, don't just do it simply because they 'don't have money'. Simply saying so is naive.

The thing is, if you make something available for free which is not normally free, people are going to take advantage of it. Stats or not, it's just human nature.
  • 0

#75 hpapillon

hpapillon

    GMC Member

  • Retired Staff
  • 3019 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 02 March 2010 - 11:56 PM

Why would the sales go down so much? Unless, people who use to pirate them, now have to pay, and are doing so. But feel free to interpret that how you will.


.... actually, IF her numbers were accurate on a larger scale, it would prove that piracy vastly increases sales. B-) Those DRMed games she sells are cracked and on the pirate sites instantly. Demo/full doesn't get pirated.

(Well, it does, but only when someone's willing to pay the money and then give away the game. This generally takes weeks or months.)

However, other people have very different experiences with demo/full vs DRM as far as sales figures go.
  • 0

#76 Hach-Que

Hach-Que

    RoketGames Admin

  • New Member
  • 1490 posts

Posted 02 March 2010 - 11:59 PM

Also, let me throw in my two cents: If someone isn't going to buy Photoshop anyway, he's probably going to choose one of two things: Either pirate it, or download an alternative like GIMP. Either way, Photoshop will make NOTHING from him. But if Photoshop is pirated, the guy will become familiar with Photoshop and may purchase it legally later. But if he downloads GIMP, he will learn to prefer GIMP and will probably never even consider trying Photoshop again. See how Adobe can benefit from piracy? I'm not saying that piracy is good, but it's not as bad as some of you are making it out to be.


Let's say you are right on that point - isn't it up to Adobe to determine whether or not this kind of activity is allowed? I mean, if they saw pirating as a positive contribution to their business, do you think that it would still be illegal (for their software), or do you think that they'd let people who can't afford it have it for free, legally?

Clearly, they don't.

Clearly, it's not up to the end user to determine the terms on which they use the software - that's why the company writes the contents of the EULA, not you.

The sense of entitlement around here is ridiculous - if you can't pay for something, you go without. It's pretty simple. You don't see me stealing TVs simply because I can't afford them do you? *

* The argument that the company loses no profit from pirating has already been found to be false in post #111, so don't use that argument to rebut.
  • 0

#77 superjoebob

superjoebob

    YM2612

  • New Member
  • 1515 posts

Posted 03 March 2010 - 12:03 AM

Could we at least rename the thread to "Software Piracy - Why stealing is OK" or something? I don't think this thread advertises what it delivers anymore.

But, it ain't gonna end, until everyone flames about their every opinion, and attacks everyone else's, or a mod closes it.

I agree, topics of this nature never make any headway. Everyone who pirates is gonna defend pirating, and anyone who pirates and isn't proud of it is going to attack the people defending pirating. It's an endless loop of stupidity.

Edited by superjoebob, 03 March 2010 - 12:07 AM.

  • 0

#78 onpon4

onpon4

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 1175 posts
  • Version:GM8

Posted 03 March 2010 - 12:33 AM

Let's say you are right on that point - isn't it up to Adobe to determine whether or not this kind of activity is allowed? I mean, if they saw pirating as a positive contribution to their business, do you think that it would still be illegal (for their software), or do you think that they'd let people who can't afford it have it for free, legally?

Clearly, they don't.

Clearly, it's not up to the end user to determine the terms on which they use the software - that's why the company writes the contents of the EULA, not you.


If that were the case, literally no one would buy it. Piracy being illegal drives people to buy it legitimately.

The sense of entitlement around here is ridiculous - if you can't pay for something, you go without. It's pretty simple. You don't see me stealing TVs simply because I can't afford them do you? *

* The argument that the company loses no profit from pirating has already been found to be false in post #111, so don't use that argument to rebut.


You could use Photoshop to make money, then later you will be more likely to download a legal copy when a new version comes out. TV's are a bad analogy because, aside from selling them, you can't make money with them.

Of course, all this discussion on piracy has nothing to do with open source and should be a separate topic. In open source, "piracy" would be failing to follow the license when redistributing it (i.e. failing to give credit). And of course, that type of "piracy" is looked down on much more than proprietary software piracy, so anyone doing it gets a nice jab in the face.

Edited by jaychant, 03 March 2010 - 12:41 AM.

  • 0

#79 Hach-Que

Hach-Que

    RoketGames Admin

  • New Member
  • 1490 posts

Posted 03 March 2010 - 12:47 AM

The sense of entitlement around here is ridiculous - if you can't pay for something, you go without. It's pretty simple. You don't see me stealing TVs simply because I can't afford them do you? *

* The argument that the company loses no profit from pirating has already been found to be false in post #111, so don't use that argument to rebut.


You could use Photoshop to make money, then later you will be more likely to download a legal copy when a new version comes out. TV's are a bad analogy because, aside from selling them, you can't make money with them.


It's completely irrelevant whether or not you can generate revenue from a product. It doesn't make any difference. You aren't entitled to use the software in the first place.

Go mow some lawns if you really want a piece of software - you don't just go and take it.
  • 0

#80 onpon4

onpon4

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 1175 posts
  • Version:GM8

Posted 03 March 2010 - 01:06 AM

It's completely irrelevant whether or not you can generate revenue from a product. It doesn't make any difference. You aren't entitled to use the software in the first place.

Go mow some lawns if you really want a piece of software - you don't just go and take it.


I'm not saying you are. I'm saying that someone pirating Photoshop is more likely to benefit Adobe than that same guy using GIMP (or some other alternative) instead. Can you please stop making assumptions?

This stupid argument started with a misunderstanding of what makerofthegames said, a stupid little thing that a bunch of others got nitpicky about (though it really started with some users suggesting that making GM open source would cause it to be "stolen" by noobs without credit). Really, I'm disappointed. I look back at my history of acting like an absolute troll, and now I see people who should be more mature than me acting like children and making false assumptions about everything.

Come on, people, grow up. You're arguing over nothing. Just because someone doesn't say that "piracy is evil and it's never right blah blah blah" doesn't mean he supports piracy. I never said I supported piracy, I just emphasized the point that piracy is more beneficial to the developers than using other alternatives.

And I reiterate this (for the third time): All of this discussion has NOTHING to do with open source, much less an open source GM, and yet it's taken up as many pages as the legitimate discussion at hand.

Edited by jaychant, 03 March 2010 - 02:17 AM.

  • 0

#81 DZiW

DZiW

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 728 posts

Posted 03 March 2010 - 01:24 AM

Everybody is enjoying pirating or just talking 'bout it? Right)

1) Name a commercial software which is NOT hacked (has no crack/ patch/ keygen etc);
2) Name any open source software which is hacked.
Sorry guys, but many of you are just bubbling offtopic nonsense.

I think Mark can gather a team of clever coders (instead of 'wrappers) and make rather stagnant GM more proficient. He shouldn't make it open source because too many 'improvers' will clone it to death... Unfortunately - to GM's death. On the other hand, if Mark maintains the main site and approves new amendments before new official version release then it may prove to be pretty viable approach.

Frankly speaking, I don't buy that he can't cope with it himself.
Cheers

Edited by DZiW, 03 March 2010 - 01:26 AM.

  • 0

#82 Recreate

Recreate

    Furry

  • GMC Member
  • 2969 posts
  • Version:GM8

Posted 03 March 2010 - 02:02 AM

Alright, it's obvious this thread is waaaay off topic now. Getting something that costs money without paying for it is stealing. There's no good or bad argument to be had for stealing. Stealing is illegal. So everybody please, shut up about how you pirate everything and should be in jail and lets either close this thread or get back on topic.

This is the ****ing gmc!
Noone here listens to posts like this...
Both you and I want this offtopic *****ing about piracy to end...
But, it ain't gonna end, until everyone flames about their every opinion, and attacks everyone else's, or a mod closes it.


I lol'd. Hmm. Venting at the gmc eh. Heh. B-)
  • 0

#83 Hach-Que

Hach-Que

    RoketGames Admin

  • New Member
  • 1490 posts

Posted 03 March 2010 - 02:21 AM

It's completely irrelevant whether or not you can generate revenue from a product. It doesn't make any difference. You aren't entitled to use the software in the first place.

Go mow some lawns if you really want a piece of software - you don't just go and take it.


I'm not saying you are. I'm saying that someone pirating Photoshop is more likely to benefit Adobe than that same guy using GIMP (or some other alternative) instead. Can you please stop making assumptions?

This stupid argument started with a misunderstanding of what makerofthegames said, a stupid little thing that a bunch of others got nitpicky about (though it really started with some users suggesting that making GM would cause it to be "stolen" by noobs without credit). Really, I'm disappointed. I look back at my history of acting like an absolute troll, and now I see people who should be more mature than me acting like children and making false assumptions about everything.

Come on, people, grow up. You're arguing over nothing. Just because someone doesn't say that "piracy is evil and it's never right blah blah blah" doesn't mean he supports piracy. I never said I supported piracy, I just emphasized the point that piracy is more beneficial to the developers than using other alternatives.

If you want to argue that businesses benefit from piracy, I'm more than happy to tell you that you are completely and utterly wrong. Don't try and drag the issue away simply because you can't back up your statements.

The assumption that people who have pirated software will buy it is incorrect. You want to know how many people who have used the "try before you buy" method to justify pirating, actually end up purchasing the software?

0.43%

Less than half a percent of people who pirate software end up making a legitmate purchase (these statistics apply to the App Store, one where legitimately purchasing an application is far easier than say, over the internet from Adobe).

The interesting point which these statistics make, and this is the important part which addresses your argument, is that the Lite or Demo versions of applications had a conversion rate of 7.4%. So clearly providing a demo version to their customers is far more beneficial than someone pirating it, and of course, as pointed out in post #111 (which I presume you didn't read), piracy does in fact have a negative impact on profits.

Therefore, we can establish that piracy is not more beneficial to Adobe than someone using the GIMP and certainly not more beneficial than someone downloading the trial version like they should.

Edited by Hach-Que, 03 March 2010 - 02:23 AM.

  • 0

#84 onpon4

onpon4

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 1175 posts
  • Version:GM8

Posted 03 March 2010 - 02:43 AM

It's completely irrelevant whether or not you can generate revenue from a product. It doesn't make any difference. You aren't entitled to use the software in the first place.

Go mow some lawns if you really want a piece of software - you don't just go and take it.


I'm not saying you are. I'm saying that someone pirating Photoshop is more likely to benefit Adobe than that same guy using GIMP (or some other alternative) instead. Can you please stop making assumptions?

This stupid argument started with a misunderstanding of what makerofthegames said, a stupid little thing that a bunch of others got nitpicky about (though it really started with some users suggesting that making GM would cause it to be "stolen" by noobs without credit). Really, I'm disappointed. I look back at my history of acting like an absolute troll, and now I see people who should be more mature than me acting like children and making false assumptions about everything.

Come on, people, grow up. You're arguing over nothing. Just because someone doesn't say that "piracy is evil and it's never right blah blah blah" doesn't mean he supports piracy. I never said I supported piracy, I just emphasized the point that piracy is more beneficial to the developers than using other alternatives.

If you want to argue that businesses benefit from piracy, I'm more than happy to tell you that you are completely and utterly wrong. Don't try and drag the issue away simply because you can't back up your statements.

The assumption that people who have pirated software will buy it is incorrect. You want to know how many people who have used the "try before you buy" method to justify pirating, actually end up purchasing the software?

0.43%

Less than half a percent of people who pirate software end up making a legitmate purchase (these statistics apply to the App Store, one where legitimately purchasing an application is far easier than say, over the internet from Adobe).

The interesting point which these statistics make, and this is the important part which addresses your argument, is that the Lite or Demo versions of applications had a conversion rate of 7.4%. So clearly providing a demo version to their customers is far more beneficial than someone pirating it, and of course, as pointed out in post #111 (which I presume you didn't read), piracy does in fact have a negative impact on profits.

Therefore, we can establish that piracy is not more beneficial to Adobe than someone using the GIMP and certainly not more beneficial than someone downloading the trial version like they should.


I'm not making a prediction. I'm making a comparison. A guy using a pirated Photoshop is more likely to buy a later version of Photoshop than that same guy used to GIMP. If you're used to the free software, you're not going to buy the paid-for software. I'll tell you right now that I would never consider purchasing Microsoft Office, because I'm used to OpenOffice.org and it works just fine (if not better). I never said that piracy will help them more than offering a trial version. Please stop reading between the lines. This isn't a poem, this is a teenager making a post about software piracy.

And furthermore, the reason I don't like this conversation is because IT'S NOT ON TOPIC. I'm not the only one, either. Seriously, this has NOTHING to do with open source and you're mostly just spitting nonsense.

Edited by jaychant, 03 March 2010 - 02:44 AM.

  • 0

#85 Desert Dog

Desert Dog

    GMC Member

  • Retired Staff
  • 6409 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 03 March 2010 - 03:06 AM

Why would the sales go down so much? Unless, people who use to pirate them, now have to pay, and are doing so. But feel free to interpret that how you will.


.... actually, IF her numbers were accurate on a larger scale, it would prove that piracy vastly increases sales. :P Those DRMed games she sells are cracked and on the pirate sites instantly. Demo/full doesn't get pirated.

(Well, it does, but only when someone's willing to pay the money and then give away the game. This generally takes weeks or months.)

However, other people have very different experiences with demo/full vs DRM as far as sales figures go.


But in turn, World of Goo had the demo/full, didn't they? Yet they were pirated at 90%. B-)
(Maybe some people are scared away by the sound of a 'cracked' DRM full version, as opposed to the harmless 'uploaded full version'.)

The effect of DRM is really confusing(for me!), so I think I'll just go with your last statement. ;) I'm a fan of the demo/full sales model myself, it's a pity that for some games like WoG it seems to turn a little sour, and when you read about other games thriving on DRM, one can't help but feel that DRM must do something to avert piracy.

Seriously, this has NOTHING to do with open source and you're mostly just spitting nonsense.

When someone goes to the trouble of replying to your post, and answering your points, please don't get 'nasty' and make out he's 'spitting nonsense'. If your really concerned about going off topic.. don't reply to that 'nonsense'. There's nothing here to get all het up about, k? ;)

Edited by Desert Dog, 03 March 2010 - 03:11 AM.

  • 0

#86 Hach-Que

Hach-Que

    RoketGames Admin

  • New Member
  • 1490 posts

Posted 03 March 2010 - 03:23 AM

...

I'm not making a prediction. I'm making a comparison. A guy using a pirated Photoshop is more likely to buy a later version of Photoshop than that same guy used to GIMP. If you're used to the free software, you're not going to buy the paid-for software. I'll tell you right now that I would never consider purchasing Microsoft Office, because I'm used to OpenOffice.org and it works just fine (if not better). I never said that piracy will help them more than offering a trial version. Please stop reading between the lines. This isn't a poem, this is a teenager making a post about software piracy.

And furthermore, the reason I don't like this conversation is because IT'S NOT ON TOPIC. I'm not the only one, either. Seriously, this has NOTHING to do with open source and you're mostly just spitting nonsense.

You are attempting to justify piracy, at least for other people, because it "helps" the businesses. I don't know how much more evidence I need to show you to the contrary, or if you're even listening at all.

I have proved your point incorrect in post #111 and the above posts and yet you still stand by your opinion. That to me gives the impression that you are not only trying to justify piracy for others, but also yourself as well.

But of course, we all know that you have no evidence to back up your points or you wouldn't be trying to shift the discussion away from piracy as quickly as possible. How about we let the moderators decide when something is off-topic, huh?

Edited by Hach-Que, 03 March 2010 - 03:24 AM.

  • 0

#87 onpon4

onpon4

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 1175 posts
  • Version:GM8

Posted 03 March 2010 - 03:32 AM

...

I'm not making a prediction. I'm making a comparison. A guy using a pirated Photoshop is more likely to buy a later version of Photoshop than that same guy used to GIMP. If you're used to the free software, you're not going to buy the paid-for software. I'll tell you right now that I would never consider purchasing Microsoft Office, because I'm used to OpenOffice.org and it works just fine (if not better). I never said that piracy will help them more than offering a trial version. Please stop reading between the lines. This isn't a poem, this is a teenager making a post about software piracy.

And furthermore, the reason I don't like this conversation is because IT'S NOT ON TOPIC. I'm not the only one, either. Seriously, this has NOTHING to do with open source and you're mostly just spitting nonsense.

You are attempting to justify piracy, at least for other people, because it "helps" the businesses. I don't know how much more evidence I need to show you to the contrary, or if you're even listening at all.

I have proved your point incorrect in post #111 and the above posts and yet you still stand by your opinion. That to me gives the impression that you are not only trying to justify piracy for others, but also yourself as well.

But of course, we all know that you have no evidence to back up your points or you wouldn't be trying to shift the discussion away from piracy as quickly as possible. How about we let the moderators decide when something is off-topic, huh?


The way I see it, one of three things needs to happen:
1. This off-topic discussion needs to stop
2. This off-topic discussion needs to be moved to another topic
3. This topic needs to be closed

I am not attempting to defend piracy. I'm not saying that it helps business. I'm just saying that it would be more helpful, for example, to Adobe for a poor guy who just can't afford Photoshop to pirate Photoshop, than it would be for that same poor guy to download GIMP. If the guy COULDN'T BUY IT IN THE FIRST PLACE, setting himself up as a possible future customer to Adobe would be much more helpful to Adobe than setting himself up as a lifetime user of GIMP.
  • 0

#88 epicCreations

epicCreations

    Cool As Ace

  • New Member
  • 1241 posts

Posted 03 March 2010 - 03:59 AM

I am not attempting to defend piracy. I'm not saying that it helps business. I'm just saying that it would be more helpful, for example, to Adobe for a poor guy who just can't afford Photoshop to pirate Photoshop, than it would be for that same poor guy to download GIMP. If the guy COULDN'T BUY IT IN THE FIRST PLACE, setting himself up as a possible future customer to Adobe would be much more helpful to Adobe than setting himself up as a lifetime user of GIMP.


Then you are saying it helps business. At least, in your opinion, more than using an alternative.
Tell me, if this "poor guy" decides to pirate photoshop, and then makes money (enough to buy photoshop), what makes you think he would switch from the already pirated and free version to a legit version? You might think that a newer version would, but that is wrong, as there would most likely be a pirate for that one as well!
  • 0

#89 NakedPaulToast

NakedPaulToast

    GM Studio/Mac/Win

  • GMC Member
  • 7940 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 03 March 2010 - 03:59 AM

The way I see it, one of three things needs to happen:
1. This off-topic discussion needs to stop
2. This off-topic discussion needs to be moved to another topic
3. This topic needs to be closed

I am not attempting to defend piracy. I'm not saying that it helps business. I'm just saying that it would be more helpful, for example, to Adobe for a poor guy who just can't afford Photoshop to pirate Photoshop, than it would be for that same poor guy to download GIMP. If the guy COULDN'T BUY IT IN THE FIRST PLACE, setting himself up as a possible future customer to Adobe would be much more helpful to Adobe than setting himself up as a lifetime user of GIMP.


Why do you insist that everybody else stop the off-topic discussion, while at the same time insist on getting your off-topic opinion heard?
  • 0

#90 Frederick

Frederick

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 374 posts

Posted 03 March 2010 - 04:03 AM

An open source commercial product like Game Maker sounds like an awful idea to me. O_O I can just visualize the mayhem...
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users