iPhone Game Saw 95% Piracy Rate on Day 1

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

FunYun

Distinguished
Sep 15, 2006
10
0
18,560
0
[citation][nom]Anon783[/nom]Stealing is stealing. When you don't pay for a game, you're stealing the development effort that went in to it, and you have no right to enjoy the game. Whether you were going to buy it or not is absolutely irrelevant. If I were to steal a Ferrari, which I would have otherwise had no intention of buying, I would have stolen the parts, labor and distribution that went into its construction, all of which essentially devolve to human effort. If I steal a game, while much smaller in scale, the logical similarity is absolutely identical - I'm stealing the effort from someone that chose to share that effort in exchange for money.You have no right to physical assets, and you have no right against someones development efforts.That being said, 95% seems a bit severe and I suspect that this isn't quite accurate.[/citation]

The development is paid for by those who buy the game. If someone who truly never intends on buying the game pirates it, then there is no loss. They were never part of the return on investment in the first place.

With software, there is no 'material cost' only the effort put into making it. Whether one person buys said software, or 1 million people do, it will still cost whatever it did to make. That will never change.

Look at it backwards. If it took $1mil to make a program, and 1mil people bought that program for $1, then what is everyone else paying for?
 

flaminggerbil

Distinguished
Oct 15, 2009
150
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]FunYun[/nom]The development is paid for by those who buy the game. If someone who truly never intends on buying the game pirates it, then there is no loss. They were never part of the return on investment in the first place.With software, there is no 'material cost' only the effort put into making it. Whether one person buys said software, or 1 million people do, it will still cost whatever it did to make. That will never change.Look at it backwards. If it took $1mil to make a program, and 1mil people bought that program for $1, then what is everyone else paying for?[/citation]
Profit?! You know, that stuff which causes businesses to thrive and develope? Seriously, it's not rocket science here.

No matter what you say, by definition it is stealing. Whether or not you try to justify it with weak excuses is up to you, but either way, it's no different from walking into a dvd store and sticking one in your pocket.
 

-unknown-

Distinguished
Apr 9, 2009
81
0
18,580
0
[citation][nom]FlamingGerbil[/nom]...Seriously, it's not rocket science here.No matter what you say, by definition it is stealing. Whether or not you try to justify it with weak excuses is up to you, but either way, it's no different from walking into a dvd store and sticking one in your pocket.[/citation]
People people, really, can you just read up on fallacies and present a decent argument.

Piracy is NOT stealing. Is it wrong? You decide, its based on your morals which differs from person to person. If you feel its wrong, that's great, push for your beliefs but don't confuse the issue.

If I 'copy' money and make $20 bills, nobody accuses me of 'stealing', they accuse me of 'counter-fitting'. Right or wrong, you decide but realize that the acts are not the same, similar, but NOT the same.
 
G

Guest

Guest
If you borrow a book from the library and copy it then you just comitted theift even though you were never going to buy it. That is the law and if they had an easy way to prove who did it, you would be found guilty.
 

flaminggerbil

Distinguished
Oct 15, 2009
150
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]-unknown-[/nom]People people, really, can you just read up on fallacies and present a decent argument.Piracy is NOT stealing. Is it wrong? You decide, its based on your morals which differs from person to person. If you feel its wrong, that's great, push for your beliefs but don't confuse the issue.If I 'copy' money and make $20 bills, nobody accuses me of 'stealing', they accuse me of 'counter-fitting'. Right or wrong, you decide but realize that the acts are not the same, similar, but NOT the same.[/citation]

You complain about the lack of a valid argument yet spout rubbish.

"In criminal law, theft is the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely-given consent." It's a very simple definition, no? The software belongs to the publisher, you pay for a license (thus giving you the consent to use it). Now please tell me which part of that makes no sense when tied to the act of thievery.

Why did you even bring counterfitting into this? The entire point of making fake notes/products is to defraud, which is in an entirely different zone. You seem to be drawing some kind of comparison by bringing that up but what it was seems to have been lost in the complete lack of relevance to the subject.
 

-unknown-

Distinguished
Apr 9, 2009
81
0
18,580
0
[citation][nom]chrocell[/nom]If you borrow a book from the library and copy it then you just comitted theift even though you were never going to buy it. That is the law and if they had an easy way to prove who did it, you would be found guilty.[/citation]
I'm not sure how to reply to a blatant example of what theft isn't. If you copied the book and returned it, the library isn't looking for a 'stolen' copy.
 

-unknown-

Distinguished
Apr 9, 2009
81
0
18,580
0
[citation][nom]FlamingGerbil[/nom]You complain about the lack of a valid argument yet spout rubbish.[/citation]
Hey, if I include any fallacies in my arguments, I welcome you to point them out. People keep making "Irrelevant Thesis" arguments (specifically "Red Herring") by trying to justify Piracy is wrong because theft is wrong, all the while, piracy and theft are never connected.

[citation][nom]FlamingGerbil[/nom]
"In criminal law, theft is the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely-given consent." It's a very simple definition, no? The software belongs to the publisher, you pay for a license (thus giving you the consent to use it). Now please tell me which part of that makes no sense when tied to the act of thievery.[/citation]
Gladly.

If you have noticed lately, there is a high level of controversy revolving around the question of what you are paying for when buying software (ie. refer to the licensing article from a few weeks back, don't have a link, sorry), there seems to be quite an amount of confusion as to whether someone is paying for a license or a product. At the end of the day, its neither here nor there though because when people are prosecuted for piracy-related charges, they are charged for copyright infringement, not theft. Going back to the whole argument that they are not the same thing, even in law.


[citation][nom]FlamingGerbil[/nom]
Why did you even bring counterfitting into this? The entire point of making fake notes/products is to defraud, which is in an entirely different zone. You seem to be drawing some kind of comparison by bringing that up but what it was seems to have been lost in the complete lack of relevance to the subject.[/citation]
Actually, counter-fitting is very much relevant to piracy. The whole issue with counter-fitting is making a copy of something you have no authority to do, just like piracy. That's where the whole 'copyright infringement' part of the act comes in (and isn't akin to theft), you are charged for reproducing a work that you don't have the right to. The difference between the two is that whoever is stuck with a 'copy' is actually incurring a financial loss, where as none is experienced in copyright infringement. (Sales are compromised yes but there is no financial loss...development costs are considered sunk costs so trying to tie those to financial loss would not be accurate)

Ultimately, people are trying to argue the morality of piracy by tying it to theft, just to be able to make an easy argument. You can still argue that's its wrong while not making the erroneous connection is what I'm saying.
 
G

Guest

Guest
[citation][nom]Zoonie[/nom]I'm so fed up with people comparing physical stealing with digital piracy. It's not the same thing.Many of those who pirate either can't afford or just wouldn't buy the software anyway, thus they aren't potential buyers. And no, this can't be compared to physical stealing, because digital copies do not decrease in quantity like physical material does. I'm not trying to say piracy is good, but it's nowhere near physical stealing. Developers need to stop being greedy and be happy with the revenue their software makes, because it normally makes up more than double the cost of development. And this coming from an old dev himself.[/citation]

Anyone who thinks that there is a 200% profit margin on software is on some serious drugs. Maybe you could achieve that if you are paying yourself $3.00 an hour. Then you’d be better of working fast food. People also never consider R&D. Most normal companies will have a 25% success rate in software sales. That means that 1 in 4 developed games/apps will turn a decent profit. So, the profit from that one needs to cover the dev costs of all four. The #12 iPhone app Pocket God sold 500,000 copies. That’s $380,000 after Apple’s cut. 4 Developers x 60 hours per week x 6 months is $52 per hour. How many times do you think you can repeat that? If they only sold 100,000 copies, that’s $12 an hour.

Digital Piracy is Stealing. It is equivalent to physical stealing. Pirates are stealing the property of someone else. It is called 'Intellectual Property' and, just like physical property, the owner has the right to set their own price. Just because it is easier to steal intellectual property doesn't mean that it is not stealing.

I am stunned by the arrogance of pirates who think they have a RIGHT to someone's software because they WANT it. You are not entitled to anything. For the simple minded pirates, let's equate it to movies. You can't see a movie in a theater without paying because you WANT to. If you sneak into a theater, they will call the police. Later, you can BUY it on DVD. You can RENT it from Netflix. Or, if you are crying poor, you can wait and see it on T.V. in a year or two for when an advertiser is PAYING for your free viewing of it by purchasing a commercial. Or, lastly, you can borrow it from a library after someone PAID for it and then DONATED it.

You can't get into a concert FREE because you WANT to. You can listen to it on the radio for free later when an advertiser is PAYING for your free listening by purchasing a commercial.

You can't get into Six Flags FREE because you WANT to. You can watch the videos of your friends who SAVED their money and PAID to get in.

How would the conversation go if you were face to face with the developer instead of hiding on the Internet and stealing?
You: I want your game!
Developer: OK. That will be $7.oo please.
You: No. Give it to me. I WANT it. I deserve it. Other people bought it already. Give it to me.
Developer: Four of us worked 60 hours a week for the last 6 months. I can't give it away. I have two kids, two car payments and a mortgage. We've released other free games. However, this one costs $7.00.
You: I don't want the free one. I WANT that one and I'm going to take (STEAL) it no matter what you say.

You can't walk into an employer and tell them how much they are going to pay you. They will laugh at you. You can't tell someone how much they should sell a product or service for. You only have two options, pay the stated price, or do without. In a thief's world the third option is to STEAL it. You have a RIGHT to NOTHING but sitting and twiddling your thumbs.

Trying to obfuscate the truth to make yourself feel better doesn't change the truth. 'Physical Property' vs 'Intellectual Property'. Leave off the description of the kind of 'property' and see if your arguments will work. Walk up to a Judge, District Attorney, Police Officer and say 'I took someone's property and didn't pay them for it.' Now try your arguments 'It's not stealing because I wouldn't have bought it anyway' or 'They already sold a lot of them and they are greedy so it is not stealing'. See how well that works for you. Since you can't afford the $7.00 for an app, I guess you won't be able to afford bail either. Taking $7.00 has a name too. It's called Petty-THEFT.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M Streaming Video & TVs 4
I Streaming Video & TVs 2
R Streaming Video & TVs 0
A Streaming Video & TVs 1
R Streaming Video & TVs 0
B Streaming Video & TVs 1
R Streaming Video & TVs 1
N Streaming Video & TVs 2
B Streaming Video & TVs 1
P Streaming Video & TVs 1
V Streaming Video & TVs 1
T Streaming Video & TVs 4
D Streaming Video & TVs 1
K Streaming Video & TVs 3
B Streaming Video & TVs 1
R Streaming Video & TVs 1
J Streaming Video & TVs 1
L Streaming Video & TVs 1
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 66
G Streaming Video & TVs 0

ASK THE COMMUNITY