Pirate Roleplay thread

[Ragnar]

Well, most people will buy it becose game will be good, but my problem is the name of the game. If you change so much, then its not diablo anymore. It would be OK if they created a new game, not a sequel to diablo.
Anyway if you must play the game, dont buy it, wait for craced version. Believe me, it will be available, youl maybe need to wait for little longer, but sooner or later, they crack it. Il not buy it, but wait for craced version, like i did with SC2 (now there is also a LAN option available :) ).

[Void(null)]

Anyway if you must play the game, dont buy it, wait for craced version. Believe me, it will be available, youl maybe need to wait for little longer, but sooner or later, they crack it. Il not buy it, but wait for craced version, like i did with SC2 (now there is also a LAN option available :) ).

The cracked version where I can't play online in ladder or sell loot to idiots for real cash?

I'll pass thanks, but good luck with that. It only took them what, 2... 3 months to Crack Assassins Creed 2?

By the time you get to play it, I will probably be bored with it and made my money back.

[OneEyeRed]

Well, most people will buy it becose game will be good, but my problem is the name of the game. If you change so much, then its not diablo anymore. It would be OK if they created a new game, not a sequel to diablo.
Anyway if you must play the game, dont buy it, wait for craced version. Believe me, it will be available, youl maybe need to wait for little longer, but sooner or later, they crack it. Il not buy it, but wait for craced version, like i did with SC2 (now there is also a LAN option available :) ).

So you blatantly state that you steal and your proud of it? Seriously man, either buy the game or don't play it but there is no excuse whatsoever for stealing. A thief is a thief is a thief....

[Void(null)]

So you blatantly state that you steal and your proud of it? Seriously man, either buy the game or don't play it but there is no excuse whatsoever for stealing. A thief is a thief is a thief....

Not in Diablo 3.

Just Witch Doctor, Barbarian, Wizard, Monk, Demon Hunter.

[shawnmck]

Not in Diablo 3.

Just Witch Doctor, Barbarian, Wizard, Monk, Demon Hunter.

^ I see what you did there. Lol

BTW
I have never hacked or pirated anything in my life, but in all honesty, I can't seem to be even remotely concerned or have any sympathy for Blizzard, because in my opinion they are the ones who are offending.
It's like that one jerk who has bought a new car and in order to prevent it from getting any dents, hogs up four parking spaces in a parking lot. All it does is piss people off and makes them an even bigger target.

All I feel like doing is cheering hackers & pirates on in this case.
Sorry if that offends anyone here, but it is the way I feel because of the way Blizzard is choosing to alienate those of us with bad Internet connectivity, or no connectivity at all.
I hope Diablo 3 gets hacked within a week. But it won't be by me, cause I have no idea how to do it. But I will cheer those that do on in this case.
"Viva la Revolucion" :mad:

[OneEyeRed]

^ I see what you did there. Lol

BTW
I have never hacked or pirated anything in my life, but in all honesty, I can't seem to be even remotely concerned or have any sympathy for Blizzard, because in my opinion they are the ones who are offending.
It's like that one jerk who has bought a new car and in order to prevent it from getting any dents, hogs up four parking spaces in a parking lot. All it does is piss people off and makes them an even bigger target.

All I feel like doing is cheering hackers & pirates on in this case.
Sorry if that offends anyone here, but it is the way I feel because of the way Blizzard is choosing to alienate those of us with bad Internet connectivity, or no connectivity at all.
I hope Diablo 3 gets hacked within a week. But it won't be by me, cause I have no idea how to do it. But I will cheer those that do on in this case.
"Viva la Revolucion" :mad:

Wow, I am amazed honestly. Condone stealing like your entitled to it because you don't like what someone is doing WITH THEIR product. Med and everyone here are you getting this? You guys are unbelievable and there is absolutely no excuse for stealing. If you don't like what they are doing simply don't purchase their product. Your one of those guys who walks past a car like that and keys it up too aren't you? Yea, it annoys me but I am also not going to destroy someone's vehicle because they come off as arrogant or puffed up.

All I can say is if you guys are okay with stealing this then you are okay with stealing anything including the money out of your own mother's purse. Thief's are like liars, they don't change colors unless they are deeply convicted to do so in humble earnestness. Being boastful and proud about stealing is just plain sad man and you guys really should be ashamed of yourselves.

[Malpheas]

Don't pass judgement too quickly, Red.

I'm curious to see if there is a substantial drop for Diablo sales because of any of this.

[Renevent]

I feel somewhat the same about pirating as you OneEyeRed...if you don't like a product don't buy it...you are not entitled to it though. Vote with your wallet and even write Blizzard a letter or something, pirating a game is not a constructive way to 'protest' a game in my opinion. It's an entirely selfish act.

With that said your post is a bit rough and it's not necessary to go there...I'm sure shawnmck and the others don't steal from their mom's purses or key people's cars. I know lots of people that pirate that are otherwise upstanding citizens.

[OneEyeRed]

I feel somewhat the same about pirating as you OneEyeRed...if you don't like a product don't buy it...you are not entitled to it though. Vote with your wallet and even write Blizzard a letter or something, pirating a game is not a constructive way to 'protest' a game in my opinion. It's an entirely selfish act.

With that said your post is a bit rough and it's not necessary to go there...I'm sure shawnmck and the others don't steal from their mom's purses or key people's cars. I know lots of people that pirate that are otherwise upstanding citizens.

Sorry but I don't get how one is an uptstanding citizen and steals. No offense, but please explain this to me because that statement is baffling. Either your a thief or your not. There is no grey scale ex: I am an occasional thief or I only steal "certain" things. The issue is clearly black and white; you steal or you don't steal.

[Void(null)]

There is no grey scale ex: I am an occasional thief or I only steal "certain" things. The issue is clearly black and white; you steal or you don't steal.

Only in Texas.

Murder... very gray area with lots of wiggle room... there is even manslaughter which is simply not your fault or was within your right, or heck the state will even do it and call it justice.

But theft... that's black and white.

[Renevent]

Sorry but I don't get how one is an uptstanding citizen and steals. No offense, but please explain this to me because that statement is baffling. Either your a thief or your not. There is no grey scale ex: I am an occasional thief or I only steal "certain" things. The issue is clearly black and white; you steal or you don't steal.

It's kinda the same with speeding...most people speed yet we are not all criminals are we? Viewing from a black and white perspective I guess we all are, aren't we? There's so many laws that it's absolutely impossible not to ever break a single one.

So that's the basis...and I'll give you an example. My friend Brian is a former SPC in the 82nd Airborne, served his country, is now a family man with a wife and kids, great job, and is a really nice guy. He does pirate movies though, and yeah I don't think it's right. But label him so harshly and act like this is the type of person that steals from their Mom and keys people's cars is silly...that's not who he is.

Life is like that...and nobody is perfect.

[OneEyeRed]

It's kinda the same with speeding...most people speed yet we are not all criminals are we? Viewing from a black and white perspective I guess we all are, aren't we? There's so many laws that it's absolutely impossible not to ever break a single one.

So that's the basis...and I'll give you an example. My friend Brian is a former SPC in the 82nd Airborne, served his country, is now a family man with a wife and kids, great job, and is a really nice guy. He does pirate movies though, and yeah I don't think it's right. But label him so harshly and act like this is the type of person that steals from their Mom and keys people's cars is silly...that's not who he is.

Life is like that...and nobody is perfect.

I never said anyone is perfect least of all me. I also gave a harsh example but I am just amazed at how several of you actually condone it. I never expected it from this community of all places. Furthermore, now its trying to be rationalized and how did Capital Punishment and me being from Texas have to do with stealing? I guess if its convenient then twist it anyway you like to feel more comfortable about it. As far as me, regardless of my spiritual beliefs, have always, and will always, despise liars and thief's. And yes, they do go hand in hand.

I'll say no more and crawl back under my rock and you all can go about feeling elated that your okay with your moral misconduct.

[Renevent]

Damn...and I thought I was the harshest voice against piracy on these forums lol :D

[eisprinzessin]

Just view such posts as reactions due to disappointment - right now there is nothing to pirate. It's not commendable though ...

[Void(null)]

I'll say no more and crawl back under my rock and you all can go about feeling elated that your okay with your moral misconduct.

Morals? What are those?

Pics or it didn't happen.

[shawnmck]

So, I am a "thief" now because I am of the opinion that Blizzard is screwing some people over, so likewise I hope they get screwed over....even though it will not be me who is doing it ?
That is a bit harsh.

And I don't take offense to it either, because I don't see how I am "stealing" anything. Nor would I "steal" anything from my mother's purse. In fact I am the opposite. When I find money I try to give it back. Once at the grocery store I found $20 on the floor. I never thought to keep it, but immediately turned it in to the Manager in hope that someone would claim it. I've been given excess change by store clerks by mistake & immediately returned it.
But if my behavior is so harsh to you that it makes you feel like referring to me as a "thief", then so be it. I can take it.

The reason why I can't sympathize with Blizzard on this is because of what my opinion of Justice is. Blizzard is willing to alienate a sizable number of customers in the attempt to make more money. Even if D3 does get hacked or pirated, how will that ultimately affect their bottom line? WoW is full of hacks & cheats, yet Blizzard still makes Billions every year off of WoW.
I'm sorry if my lack of compassion for such a company offends you so.

But allow me to delve further into what I mean by my idea of "Justice".
Is it justice to put a murderer to death, even though the act of doing so is in itself illegal?
If that jerk who likes to take up four parking spots gets his car keyed (not by me), then I can still sleep at night because that jerk likewise was inconsiderate to other motorists and didn't care how his/her actions were going to affect others.
I am of the belief that what goes around, comes around.

A Developer like Iron Lore or Crate I am fully against any kind of hacking or pirating, because they make every attempt to satisfy the demands of all their gaming customers.
Blizzard on the other hand isn't, and is more motivated by greed, so by their own action I feel that if the same is done to them then so be it.
After all, Blizzard is going to take a cut out of RMHA, they are still charging $60 bucks for a game that requires constant On-line, and lets be honest, they will not really be harmed by a little piracy. At the end of the day the company will rake in a ridiculous amount of money, while Devs like Crate (& other small Developers) get the crumbs that are left over.
So NO, I have absolutely ZERO compassion for Blizzard.

If that makes me an inconsiderate "Jerk", then so be it. I will take it as a compliment in this case.
But a "thief" I am not.
But like I mentioned, I am not offended. It's all good here on the Grim Dawn forums.
Even though we disagree, I feel like we are one big family.
So I welcome the honest criticism.
:)

[Void(null)]

If that makes me an inconsiderate "Jerk", then so be it. I will take it as a compliment in this case.
But a "thief" I am not.

Ooooh! ooooh! Ooooh!

That's just what a thief who is a liar would say!


:D

I really shouldn't be having so much fun with this, but damn is it funny.

[shawnmck]

Ooooh! ooooh! Ooooh!

That's just what a thief who is a liar would say!


:D

I really shouldn't be having so much fun with this, but damn is it funny.

That made me laugh out loud.
:D

[Ragnar]

I must tell you, that a lot of people outh there dont have money to buy games. 50$ is a lot if he gets salary of 200 or 300$. Also they would never buy the game even if there where no pirates, becose they can't afford to buy every good game thats out. That is my case also.
I buy only games that i like, so i support them with money becose i wont them to continu with there good work, especially small teams that try very hard to make something.
So the thing is if you don't like how they are making some games, dont buy it, but if you must play, then use pirated game. That way you get to play the game, but you don't approve the way they are developing the game.

[Malpheas]

Well, I get where you're coming from Ragnar. In this case it isn't about available money to buy games with. It is about a simple boycott of a greedy developing company and their business ethics vs. small pleasures of gamers.

[hooby]

Pirating is not stealing.

Pirating is pirating, which is not better or less questionable than stealing. It is just as bad. But stealing it is not.

An example:

Walk into a Shop and take a Nike-Shirt and walk out without paying. You are stealing.

Walk onto some market in some eastern country and buy a Nike-Shirt (that you know is fake) for a price you can consider almost free. You are NOT stealing.

Yes, Nike looses money and sales because of this. But not every sold fake shirt equals one lost sale for Nike. Except for that loss of earning, Nike makes no direct loss from the fake-shirt sale. The fakes didn't cost them anything to produce, because they didn't make them. Still they pay all the marketing, and the design costs and all the brand management - which contributes a lot more to the price of a Nike shirt than the actual materials used.

Those fakes still are illegal, morally wrong, and bad for Nike.

But knowingly buying such a fake shirt is not the same thing, as walking out of a store without paying for it. Those two things are different!

I know the movie industry as well as game publishers spend many millions of dollars on marketing campaigns, that use all sorts of psychological tricks and suggestions, to make people believe that pirating and stealing are the same thing - but they are not.

They both are wrong, they both are illegal, you shouldn't do any of them, and if you do, you should be ashamed of it, and at least be silent about it.

But they are not the same thing.

[Ragnar]

Pirating is not stealing.

Pirating is pirating, which is not better or less questionable than stealing. It is just as bad. But stealing it is not.

An example:

Walk into a Shop and take a Nike-Shirt and walk out without paying. You are stealing.

Walk onto some market in some eastern country and buy a Nike-Shirt (that you know is fake) for a price you can consider almost free. You are NOT stealing.

Yes, Nike looses money and sales because of this. But not every sold fake shirt equals one lost sale for Nike. Except for that loss of earning, Nike makes no direct loss from the fake-shirt sale. The fakes didn't cost them anything to produce, because they didn't make them. Still they pay all the marketing, and the design costs and all the brand management - which contributes a lot more to the price of a Nike shirt than the actual materials used.

Those fakes still are illegal, morally wrong, and bad for Nike.

But knowingly buying such a fake shirt is not the same thing, as walking out of a store without paying for it. Those two things are different!

I know the movie industry as well as game publishers spend many millions of dollars on marketing campaigns, that use all sorts of psychological tricks and suggestions, to make people believe that pirating and stealing are the same thing - but they are not.

They both are wrong, they both are illegal, you shouldn't do any of them, and if you do, you should be ashamed of it, and at least be silent about it.

But they are not the same thing.

I must say that you are wrong, because most people that use pirated software can not afford to buy legaly.

By using pirated software developers don't lose a thing, because people wouldnt buy the software even if there were no pirets ( they would never be potential customers). Normaly, im talking about people like me, that dont have the money for it. Im not proud about it, but you need to understand that not all have the luxure of buying games for 50$.



Trust me, if i had the money, i wsould buy original softwer, like most of people. And the pirated softwer will not be anymore if people had finiculy meens to buy them.

[Renevent]

That's baloney...maybe pirates don't have enough money to buy all the stuff they pirate, but they certainly could afford to buy a game or two more here and there.

Back in the day people saved up and purchased the stuff the really wanted...and they had to skip out on the stuff they didn't prioritize. Today people just pirate the stuff they can't afford or simply don't want to pay for. They make excuses as well as to why they shouldn't have to pay for something...like calling it crap and pretending it wasn't up to their standards. Of course that's after they've already played (and probably enjoyed) the game.

The reality is if you weren't able to pirate all these games, you probably would be able to save up a few more bucks and buy a few more games.

[Scryer]

Is pirating stealing? Yes.

The argument you made is a case of special pleading. You’re basically saying it’s alright for you to steal (pirate) software because you could not afford to buy the software to begin with. Yet, it’s somehow wrong for someone who could afford the software who also steals that same software (pirates it).

It’s like saying that it’s okay to steal bread if you can’t afford it, but it’s not okay to steal bread if you otherwise could afford it.

I think software is one of those things that need to evolve though. Right now it is virtually impossible to make a game ‘uncrack-able’ or music, or movies, or books for that matter.

Ultimately what businesses need to do is look for better business models that supports all kinds of payers, not only those that can absolutely afford their products, but others that can afford some of it, or others that can’t afford any of it.

This is something that will hopefully happen, unless they figure out ways to make pirating obsolete, which isn’t likely to happen.

[Ragnar]

Is pirating stealing? Yes.

The argument you made is a case of special pleading. You’re basically saying it’s alright for you to steal (pirate) software because you could not afford to buy the software to begin with. Yet, it’s somehow wrong for someone who could afford the software who also steals that same software (pirates it).

It’s like saying that it’s okay to steal bread if you can’t afford it, but it’s not okay to steal bread if you otherwise could afford it.

I think software is one of those things that need to evolve though. Right now it is virtually impossible to make a game ‘uncrack-able’ or music, or movies, or books for that matter.

Ultimately what businesses need to do is look for better business models that supports all kinds of payers, not only those that can absolutely afford their products, but others that can afford some of it, or others that can’t afford any of it.

This is something that will hopefully happen, unless they figure out ways to make pirating obsolete, which isn’t likely to happen.

The breed is not the same thing as software.
If you steal breed, they lose money. If you use pirated software, they don't lose money, the only thing that they can lose is the customer that would buy the game. But if you would not buy the game (becose you dont have the money for it, so you will never be there customer) , and you use pirated software, they lose nothing. The thing is if you don't have money for breed, but you copy the breed, so there are 2 breeds, so you can eat it, do they lose a thing?

Also i'm saying, that people should buy games that they like, and suport them so they can make more of them .

[Scryer]

Maybe I should have used the word "book." If a book is copied and someone steals the copy, is that a lost sells? yes, in fact it is.

The same is true if you could copy bread, as there would be necessary resources going into the copied bread that someone is now stealing.

When you pirate software you're stealing someone’s ideas and work. It doesn't matter if it's a copy or even if you couldn't have originally afforded it.

However, with the ability to copy things comes the ability to market the product differently and ultimately that is what should happen.

Stealing a copy is really no different than stealing a genuine artifact. In either case it's a lost sells, it doesn't matter how many copies you could make, even if you have an unlimited supply, it's still work that deserves compensation because resources are still used to create the copies.


Gone for a day and we're already talking about pirates? Yarr, must've missed something. Anyway, sorry to cut this subject off, but this thread is about the announcement of Diablo 3's Auction House, not about wooden pegs, parrots and scurvy. So, if you want to continue talk about piracy, please create another subject. Otherwise, I'll do it for you and move all the pirate-related posts there.

Argh mate’y, it'll be a fortnight 'fore I can convince this'n.

[matthewfarmery]

its interesting that the topic has gone down this road, I not sure if this kind of talk is really allowed on public forums, I know a few forums that will instantly lock threads if there is any mention of piracy

my take is, demos aren't always a good indication of what a game could be like, there been a few cases where review sites who have posted bad reviews of a game and the reviewer gets fired, so some review sites then can's be trusted giving a good honest review, even if the game sucks badly, but if there is a powerful publisher involved, then the review might not be honest.

so how can you really find out if a game is good or not? its getting as bad with films, films now are getting worse and worse, and cinsima ticket prices are pretty expensive (then of course if you have a family and end up paying huge amounts of money for food and drink) only to find out the film was shit

in many ways games are similar, games are getting shorter, they remain full price titles for only a few hours worth of play time, which equals not good value for money

the BBC said that people are downloading films now more then they ever did in the past, but as films are getting worse, (The Smurfs) and lets not forgest there is a film based on battleship (no I'm not kidding) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1440129/

it really makes you wonder what Hollywood are up too when they dredge up many franchises, but are many of these films worth buying? no, my last film I watched with a friend was Avatar, and to be honest I was less impressed by that film, a complete and utter waste of money

I think games are in the same boat, COD, and other games that just not worth getting anymore, publishers are killing games, so I only support indie titles now, unless its a game I really want, then I will buy it, but many games I don't think are worth buying, DNF, I played a bit of that at a friends house, and wasn't impressed, I personally think, if publishers want my money, they should make better games, Blizzard will not get any more of my money and I will not pirate D3, nor will I buy it, I rather boycott the game then play it. So many good studios have fallen, so many good game titles have been changed or messed up. the future lies on the indie road, smaller price tag per game, (usually) but at least this way, it sends a clear message to publishers, they need to get their act together and again if they want my money, they have to fund and help make better games, as the quality of games at the moment is falling,

anyway that is my view, and yes, if publishers are ripping off cusomters with full priced titles that have content removed and then sold for DLC, then the game should be cheaper, I also think that should apply to D3, as you only get half of the game, so why pay full price for half of the game? (as the logic and enemy AI is stored on the Bnet servers (something I just recently realised) so why are they charging full price for it? and that goes for the COD series as well, same engine, pretty much the same gamplay, and again full price, so games are becoming rip offs,

but anyway I will leave it there, apart from I will happily support indie companies, not publisher held titles for this reason

but back on D3, I don't believe in blizzard anymore, they lost my money and my support, enough said

[wyldmage]

That's baloney...maybe pirates don't have enough money to buy all the stuff they pirate, but they certainly could afford to buy a game or two more here and there.

Back in the day people saved up and purchased the stuff the really wanted...and they had to skip out on the stuff they didn't prioritize. Today people just pirate the stuff they can't afford or simply don't want to pay for. They make excuses as well as to why they shouldn't have to pay for something...like calling it crap and pretending it wasn't up to their standards. Of course that's after they've already played (and probably enjoyed) the game.

The reality is if you weren't able to pirate all these games, you probably would be able to save up a few more bucks and buy a few more games.

I have to disagree here. I use "piracy" to try-before-I-buy.
Generally if a game is good enough to still have my interest after 4-5 hours (or has gotten good reviews from friends), I'll just flat out buy it.
But if I snag a game off the internet, fire it up, and within an hour or two am bored (or wishing I was playing another game), I can be very glad I didn't spend money on it.
That happened to me with Harbinger. Had to burn a physical copy. Physical copy was laying in the trash can, snapped in half less than 2 hours later.

That said, I agree that piracy and theft are different. Yes, Piracy can cost a company theoretical dollars. Theft costs a company real dollars.
If I take a class at my college with my study group, I have several options for text book buying. I can buy a hard copy. I can buy an e-book. I can share books. Or I can go bookless. Nothing involving pirating here. Generally speaking, if it's a class I'm taking with the group of guys I went through classes with, we would pick up 2 books (for 5 people), and just pass them around. We saved 60% of our money by doing so.
When the college began offering e-books, and piracy of them started taking off, we ended up downloading a copy of the book as well that sat on the computer network and anyone could use if they didn't feel like tracking down who had the physical book last.
The publisher, school, and writer lost zero dollars by us doing this. We were not going to buy another physical book if the pirated copy wasn't available.

But this gets into economics (my major).
When you consume a product, they value of purchasing another of that product goes down. Imagine going to Burger King. They've got a burger for $1. And you like it. So you buy one. But you're still hungry, so you buy a 2nd. Then a 3rd. Okay, you're starting to get full now. But that burger is still $1. Why don't you buy a 4th? Because you might have been willing to pay $1.50 for the first one (you were HUNGRY), but now you'd only get another if it was $.50. And if it was and you bought it, you wouldn't buy another (to take home for later) unless it was even cheaper.
So back to books. We weren't going to buy more books because the value of purchasing a book had dropped below the price they were selling at. If they gave us a "buy 2 get 1 50% off" option, maybe we'd get 3 books (probably still not though).
But what matters is that given the options available to us, we were 100% not going to purchase a 3rd book. And even with pirated books available, we still purchased the same number of hard copies.
So there was zero loss of money from anyone in the production/retail chain.

The thing is, it was still piracy. But because there was no actual loss incurred, it couldn't be theft except according to the anti-piracy propaganda.

The best comparison I've seen:

If your city has 2 acres of park property, and some p (his girlfriend really likes your lawn), is it theft? He wasn't going to BUY it. And if he didn't take it from your park, he would have just taken it from somewhere else.
Relevance: The blade of grass is a game. If the guy doesn't pirate your game, he'll just find his entertainment elsewhere (quite possibly just by hanging out with friends).
Now, if 20,000 punks were to *each* take a blade of grass from you, you'd be awfully pissed. All the people (from your city) that want to enjoy the park (and pay their taxes to do so) have a park without any grass left.

Companies want you to believe that pirating a game is a direct theft against the game developer. If one person pirates a game, then a week later recommends it to his friends and himself plus 2 of them buy it, is this bad?
If someone pirates a game but doesn't buy it (he's a cheapskate), but recommends it to 4 friends, 3 of whom buy the game, is this bad?

If someone pirates a game, hates it and gets rid of it, did he deserve to spend $40-$60 for 1 hour of finding out the game stinks?
If someone pirates a game *in order to have more fun* because the DRM on the retail released game impairs enjoyment of the game, who is to blame?

TL;DR
I buy games I like.
Some people use piracy to steal.
Piracy isn't theft, but is typically equally bad.
Lots of examples.
Zombie Nyancat will steal your brain and eat it.

P.S. RMAH on Diablo 3 is a smart move, and actually made me more interested in the game (but only considering the always-online aspect). However, I have a lot of other reasons why it doesnt appeal to me. It's becoming a fully instanced MMO, something I have no interest in playing.

[mamba]

I must say that you are wrong, because most people that use pirated software can not afford to buy legaly.

I don't believe this for a second. Yes, there may be a few people who cannot afford it, but >95% of them could.

Heck, if you can afford a PC, you can afford the software. Anything else is a matter of you choosing to pirate it.

Yes, a pirated copy does not equate to a lost sale, but that is mostly because you are not that interested in the game so given the choice of not playing versus buying and playing you would choose the former. Piracy does not force you to choose.

[Ragnar]

I don't believe this for a second. Yes, there may be a few people who cannot afford it, but >95% of them could.

Heck, if you can afford a PC, you can afford the software. Anything else is a matter of you choosing to pirate it.

Yes, a pirated copy does not equate to a lost sale, but that is mostly because you are not that interested in the game so given the choice of not playing versus buying and playing you would choose the former. Piracy does not force you to choose.


I wish you, that you never be in my position by financial status, and have the problems that most of us have that use pirated software. Do you understand that i need to give 25 to 30 % of my income to buy 1 game that cost 50$. Trust me, if i had the money to buy games, i would. For computer i need to save money for 5 to 6 years so i can buy somthing for 400 to 500$. I can afored to buy maybe 2 games per year, and i do buy games that i realy like. But mostly small games, or older ones, that dont cost that much.

The problem with piracy can be solved only by lowering the cost of games, or by increasing the economic position of people, so they can afford it.

[Void(null)]

Hands up who has never made a mixed tape, recorded a TV show or a song off the radio?

Come on, I expect to see a hell of a lot of hands.

[mamba]

I wish you, that you never be in my position by financial status, and have the problems that most of us have that use pirated software. Do you understand that i need to give 25 to 30 % of my income to buy 1 game that cost 50$. Trust me, if i had the money to buy games, i would. For computer i need to save money for 5 to 6 years so i can buy somthing for 400 to 500$. I can afored to buy maybe 2 games per year, and i do buy games that i realy like. But mostly small games, or older ones, that dont cost that much.

Ok, so you fall into the <5% I left for people who really cannot afford it, but claiming that only people who cannot afford it pirate is clearly not true.

The problem with piracy can be solved only by lowering the cost of games, or by increasing the economic position of people, so they can afford it.

I doubt that, games that cost $5 - 10 also get pirated, so do CDs and movies.

[mamba]

Hands up who has never made a mixed tape, recorded a TV show or a song off the radio?

Come on, I expect to see a hell of a lot of hands.

You do realize that all of these are legal activities, unlike piracy ?

For the record, I am not equating piracy to stealing and am the first one to point out that a pirated copy does not equate to a lost sale (as the companies always pretend), but equating it to legal activities does not accurately represent it either.

To me there is exactly one scenario in which piracy is justified, to try a game in order to decide whether to purchase it and then either purchasing it if you like it or stop playing if you don't. Any other scenario is piracy (again, which is not the same as stealing).

[Void(null)]

You do realize that all of these are legal activities, unlike piracy ?



No. No they are not.

Bootlegging is not legal in any way shape or form.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixtape

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_shifting

Time shifting is legal. You are allowed by law 28 days to view your recorded content and destroy it. However it is illegal in the US to record a TV show or a movie for someone else, to keep the content for more than 28 days or to try and sell that content.

Have a movie you recorded from TV or a favorite episode of House you never recorded over? Ever recorded a show for your Dad? Welcome to the world of being criminal scum. In fact, welcome to being the exact same criminal scum that software pirates are.

Now no one has ever been prosecuted in the US for recording something off the TV or radio and going beyond that 28 day limit... but that makes it no less illegal.

Have a Mixed CD in your car? A cop would be well within their rights to rip you out of the car and put you up for charges of bootlegging... You filthy pirating scumbag... However this just doesnt happen because it has become a part of our culture.

[mamba]

No. No they are not.

hehe, might be a matter of the country you are in ;)

So I read up a bit on the sites you linked to (and will only refer to the parts applying to the US)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_music_ripping

"The doctrine of fair use should make it legal to record songs from the radio for private use."

It's 'should' because so far there was no court ruling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixtape

"An important distinction between homemade mixes and retail compilations of pop music is that the latter generally obtain permissions for the use of copyrighted songs, while the former do not. As a result, mixtapes, such as those produced and sold by club DJs in the 1970s, are illegal. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_shifting

"The legality of time-shifting programming in the United States was proven by the landmark court case of Universal Studios versus Sony Corporation (Sony v. Universal, or the "Betamax case")[1]. In 1979, Universal sued Sony, claiming its timed recording capability amounted to "copyright infringement". Sony argued that the advent of its Betamax video recorder in 1976 did not violate the copyright of the owners of shows which the device recorded. A district court found that noncommercial home use recording was considered fair use and ruled in favor of Sony. "

The case then went to the next higher court that reversed it and the next higher which agreed with the first ruling again.

So all three cases you cited fall under 'fair use', despite what you said in the rest of your post (the mixtape does not really talk about me copying songs I own on CD / vinyl onto a tape, but if it is legal for TV / radio to record, I would expect the same in this case). The DJ mixtapes do not because they usually remix the songs / add their own bits to them - but then we were not talking about those to begin with.

Time shifting is legal. You are allowed by law 28 days to view your recorded content and destroy it. However it is illegal in the US to record a TV show or a movie for someone else, to keep the content for more than 28 days or to try and sell that content.

That certainly does not come from the link you provided. The rest of your post also must take its information from other sources than the one you linked to... not saying that wikipedia is always accurate, but you provided the links and what you claim is not mentioned in them.

[Void(null)]

You do know that in MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd. Sony VS Betamax was reversed. Right?

This is why there has been such a huge crackdown on fileshareing since 2005.

Also "Fair use" does not mean what it seems you think it means.

Fair use must meet the following:


the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
the nature of the copyrighted work;
the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.


There is the audio recording at home act which covers radio and follows a very strict set of guide lines up to and including what types of devices you can and cannot use to record, but that again does not cover making a mixed tape or cd which if for anything other than personal use is bootlegging. Besides the AHRA is more to protect the people whom make such devices, not the users.

You can try and justify your actions all you like. Hell in Korea and China Piracy is perfectly legal so that must make it perfectly acceptable. Its not a matter of the act, its a matter of legality. Right?

So if say... Piracy and killing babies were both made perfectly legal tomorrow then we should all go out and do it!

Something being legal does not automatically make it right. Likewise something being Illegal does not automatically make it wrong.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bc/Home_taping_is_killing_music.png


Don't copy that floppy! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up863eQKGUI)

You wouldn't steal a car! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmZm8vNHBSU)

You wouldn't steal a baby! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPEeaxI0OPU&feature=related)

[mamba]

You do know that in MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd. Sony VS Betamax was reversed. Right?

This is why there has been such a huge crackdown on fileshareing since 2005.

Now that you mentioned it, I looked up that case, and no, the Betamax was not reversed in it, it was upheld (at least the way I understand what I just read).

"We hold that one who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties."

"The majority of the Justices would have either expanded or contracted the Sony Betamax doctrine, however the Court as a whole has not chosen to reexamine the Betamax precedent in the decision, being split into three equal groups. Thus the Betamax ruling was reviewed only as necessary to properly detail the issues involved in this case. Instead, a new and - as several critics have contended - ambiguous test has been developed to determine whether the software in question is not protected by the Sony ruling. Briefly stated, it has to be shown that the distributors of the program have advertised and/or otherwise induced its use for copyright infringement; if this intent can be shown, additional contributory aspects may be relevant."

The Sony case still stands, they clarified that 'devices' which do not have a strong non-copyright-infringing use, are in violation of copyright however.

In fact the ruling specifically mentions what they call the 'Sony safe harbor' and says had Grokster implemented means that try to prevent illegal use, it would have been protected by that safe harbor.

So yes, comparing filesharing to pirating is ok, comparing mixtapes, taping of radio or TV are not. As you will note, both piracy and filesharing also are prosecuted, the others are not.

So there is a legal and practical distinction between piracy and filesharing versus recording radio and TV. The first are illegal and prosecuted, the second are not illegal and therefore not prosecuted.

Also "Fair use" does not mean what it seems you think it means.

This is fair use in commercial context. I am not a lawyer, but the links provided said that recording radio / TV for private use was covered by fair use.

There is the audio recording at home act which covers radio and follows a very strict set of guide lines up to and including what types of devices you can and cannot use to record, but that again does not cover making a mixed tape or cd which if for anything other than personal use is bootlegging. Besides the AHRA is more to protect the people whom make such devices, not the users.

Wasn't that what we were talking about though, private use ?

You can try and justify your actions all you like. Hell in Korea and China Piracy is perfectly legal so that must make it perfectly acceptable. Its not a matter of the act, its a matter of legality. Right?

What actions am I defending, exactly ?

So if say... Piracy and killing babies were both made perfectly legal tomorrow then we should all go out and do it!

If they are legal it is up to you what you do, you are not required to do everything the law allows. But if both are legal, you will not be prosecuted for either.

Something being legal does not automatically make it right. Likewise something being Illegal does not automatically make it wrong.

I completely agree, there are a lot of stupid laws out there

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bc/Home_taping_is_killing_music.png

Yeah, and recently game publishers equate selling a used game to stealing, as they get no revenue from it. So what, everyone can make stupid comparisons, that does not mean they are right or that you have to agree with them.

Your other links were about piracy again... so irrelevant to this discussion

[Void(null)]

Yeah, and recently game publishers equate selling a used game to stealing, as they get no revenue from it. So what, everyone can make stupid comparisons, that does not mean they are right or that you have to agree with them.

Your other links were about piracy again... so irrelevant to this discussion

But used game sales are stealing. You are aiding companies like Gamestop to steal money from good, honest hard working companies like EA and Activision who make a massive investment into each product and need as much of a return as they can. For each and every used game sale, you may as well just steal the developers food off their plate while they are trying to eat.

Would now be a good time to mention that my Father used to sell bootlegged copies of A Clockwork Orange and other banned movies in the UK on the side of the road in Camden market and I as a little boy would watch out for the cops? He had the whole thing set up so that he could simply nudge the stall and cause the entire contents to spill into a suitcase in case we had to pack up and run in a hurry.

This was how we put food on the table.

[Renevent]

Used game sales are legal, but beyond that I think the argument would be that at least in the case with used games sales someone had to buy that copy. So if gamestop sells millions of used games a year, there had to be at least that number of original purchases.

Piracy, on the other hand, is a tiny hand full of people cracking it and the game gets distributed to millions of their "closest friends".

[Ragnar]

Ok, so you fall into the <5% I left for people who really cannot afford it, but claiming that only people who cannot afford it pirate is clearly not true.



I doubt that, games that cost $5 - 10 also get pirated, so do CDs and movies.

I don't know where you live, but i would surely love to live there, because you don't know in what world you are, and that 5% can't afford to buy games is a really wrong statement. If you thing that there is 95% of people, that have computers, and can afford to buy games, you are in under a great delusion.

If games where only 5 to 10$, be shure that there would be much less people pirating. Why would they bother finding cracks, other stupid programs, virtual servers, not able to play online and etc, and not have a full pleasure of playing the game, when they can afford to pay for it.
Pirated will always be, but at much lower rate than today, trust me.

[Void(null)]

Used game sales are legal, but beyond that I think the argument would be that at least in the case with used games sales someone had to buy that copy. So if gamestop sells millions of used games a year, there had to be at least that number of original purchases.


Well with Piracy... someone had to buy a copy.

[Renevent]

Free is still less than < $10

Why pay anything for a game when you can just get it free? And if you think $5 - $10 games don't get pirated either well that's wrong too.

Well with Piracy... someone had to buy a copy.

Actually no, a lot of pirated copies come from stolen games from warehouses (that's how they are leaked before the game even releases). But even in the cases where a few people did buy it in order to distribute/crack/ect the ratio at which it's pirated is far greater than in the case of used game sales. Like a million to one instead of probably 5 to 1 or something relatively small in comparision.

[Void(null)]

Actually no, a lot of pirated copies come from stolen games from warehouses (that's how they are leaked before the game even releases).

It actually depends on what it is. The brand new AAA title that's been cracked and dumped onto the net weeks before release... yeah, those have been stolen from some warehouse.

However a lot of times cracker groups are left waiting until someone buys a copy before they crack it, and most new uploads of old games are simply someone sharing a ripped game they already own with crack from gamecopyworld or some other site.

Its actually really, really hard to find someone who not only has access to games before release, but is willing to dip their hands into the pool repeatedly and often as that is a sure fire way to get caught, so they will generally reserve this for the "must have" big hype titles. For everything else, someone has to buy a copy which is why every game is not cracked and up on torrent sites before its even released or immediately on release day. The more popular it is, the sooner it will be bought, cracked then distributed.

If you use standard DRM and it takes 2-3 weeks for your game to be cracked thats probably a good sign you should be worried. Not because your game is now being pirated, but because not enough people want to play it for it to be worth the crackers time. If people don't even want it for free, you have a serious problem on your hands.

But even in the cases where a few people did buy it in order to distribute/crack/ect the ratio at which it's pirated is far greater than in the case of used game sales. Like a million to one instead of probably 5 to 1 or something relatively small in comparison.

That's like saying "I only killed 5 people... I didn't commit genocide or anything. Why you mad?"

If the argument is truly about "lost sales" then Gamestop is no different than Reloaded. It doesn't matter if its 1 lost sale or 100,000 lost sales. Its still a lost sale. Gamestop are just doing it legally.

[Ragnar]

Free is still less than < $10

Why pay anything for a game when you can just get it free? And if you think $5 - $10 games don't get pirated either well that's wrong too.



Actually no, a lot of pirated copies come from stolen games from warehouses (that's how they are leaked before the game even releases). But even in the cases where a few people did buy it in order to distribute/crack/ect the ratio at which it's pirated is far greater than in the case of used game sales. Like a million to one instead of probably 5 to 1 or something relatively small in comparision.

Try reading my post carefully ( its not a long one:)). I didn't said that there would not be pirated games, they always will be, but if the games are cheap, then there would be much less cracked games out there that people download.

You can get it free, but its not same as if you buy it, because you can't play online, or use some other features that game has, because it's cracked. You need to wait for pirated game sometimes a 3 monts to a year. Thats why most people will buy it. Not all, but most.

[Renevent]

That's like saying "I only killed 5 people... I didn't commit genocide or anything. Why you mad?"

If the argument is truly about "lost sales" then Gamestop is no different than Reloaded. It doesn't matter if its 1 lost sale or 100,000 lost sales. Its still a lost sale. Gamestop are just doing it legally.

Well yeah...there is a huge difference between a murder and genocide, just like there's a difference between stealing $5 and stealing someone's car.

Neither are right, but there's a plain difference. If Gamestop just started wholesale copying of game discs and selling them cheap I believe the industry (and the law) would act much different to that action as well.

[Renevent]

Try reading my post carefully ( its not a long one:)). I didn't said that there would not be pirated games, they always will be, but if the games are cheap, then there would be much less cracked games out there that people download.

You can get it free, but its not same as if you buy it, because you can't play online, or use some other features that game has, because it's cracked. You need to wait for pirated game sometimes a 3 monts to a year. Thats why most people will buy it. Not all, but most.

I did read it, and my comments addressed your posts fine.

And to you comment that "most people" will buy it...most games on the PC have a 50%-90% piracy rate. Most people are not buying games...most people are downloading them.

No I agree sales and discounts are a fantastic way to increase revenue...this is something all other areas of retail have known for ages. It doesn't always make sense though, especially for bug budget games.

A game with a triple A budget (let's say 20 million) would have to sell like 2.5 million copies just to break even (including Steam's or other DD services 30% distribution fee). In order for the game to be profitable it would have to get like 4 million sales...that's an extremely tall order for most PC games. At $5 it would be impossible in most cases to recover their money. Whereas at $50, they can sell a little under a million and do very well.

I think a good indication is Valve...they know exactly the price points to sell at yet they still release at around $50 for their major games. There's a reason for that.

[hooby]

Back when I started studying, I was completely broke.

My parents couldn't afford to pay me much more than what my room did cost and a monthly train ticket, so I could come home regularly (to raid the fridge and take some food back with me).

During the first months I had so little money, I couldn't afford the books I needed for studying, and most of my meals consisted of mostly rice or noodles, with only a little topping - just to have a little taste on the rice/noodles.

Then I managed to get a stipend - the state considered me indigent and so I got enough money to stay afloat without needing to take money from my parents. I even got reactive payment for those first few months! From that money I bought a second-hand office computer - since I needed one for studying. I got a good deal - some company was upgrading to newer models and threw out their old stuff for very cheap.
Well, being an office pc that thing had a really crappy Matrox graphics card inside - so many new games wouldn't even run on lowest settings, but some games (including D2) ran quite well.

I guess I was pretty poor back then, but so where some other students I knew, and I didn't really feel it. I was finally away from home, had my own life and unprecedented freedom. And there were tons of nice girls around the students dorm... I had a great time - even without any money.

So obviously I couldn't afford buying new games. But they wouldn't run on my pc anyways. I bought D2 brandnew - and it was a major investement that really hurt my budget. Since it was 2D and didn't need 3D-Hardware, it could play it just fine on my Matrox card.

So yeah, I did pirate some other games back then. But I'm not so sure it was solely a money thing. Yes, there was no Steam back then, there was no summer sale, and stores didn't lower their prices as much as nowadays. It was almost impossible to buy anything at lower than half of it's original price. But the real reason to pirate games was just the ease with which you could get them. You didn't need to download them or crack them or anything. They were openly traded in the dormitory, and everyone was engaged in it. I'd just buy a few blank CD's, bring them over to some colleagues room, and he'd burn me whatever I wanted (I couldn't afford my own burner...).

I have to add that I did not work during my first summer break. I was behind the plan, and learned through all of summer, to be able to repeat all the tests I failed at the end of summer, so I would be able to keep my stipend. That's why I still had no money during my second year.

The next summer I took on a job. I worked in the inventory of a hardware store. Work was hard, dirty and pay was low - still I earned enough money to then be able to buy my games, instead of pirating them.

Since computer games really are a pure luxury - nothing you need for live at all - and since it's so easy nowadays to get older games very, very cheap (I have a long list of really good games I bought for €5 or less on Steam), I don't think the argument "I have to pirate because I'm poor" holds up. With the only exception being people from countries where the average pay is much lower, but computer game prices are not.

I believe that's a real failure of the publishers, not adjusting their prices to the economy of the country they are being sold in.
I believe no publishers has the right to complain about piracy in countries, where the sell games at prices which equal the average monthly salary.

I think games should be cheaper in general.
If you think about it, the industries calculations are pretty odd. They calculate that every pirated game equals one lost sale. How stupid is that?

If someone buys one game a month spending $60, and pirates 4 other games a month - would that someone really be able to afford spending $300 a month buying all five games - if there was no piracy?
I bet someone would not be able to do that. I bet Mr. Someone would play only one game a month if there was no piracy, and still spend $60.
Or they would buy two games for $30.

Many big AAA titles have a marketing budget that is as big as the development budget - so the total cost of making and selling the game could be nearly cut in half, if there was no paid marketing campaign.
So why not give up on TV-ads, posters, pre-rendered teasers and trailers, bombastic E3 booths and all that other stuff? They still would get coverage by the gaming press, they still could release gameplay-videos showing the real game (instead of rendered cinematics), they'd still have fan pages and fan-driven wikis doing a great job at no-cost marketing.
And they could sell their game for $30! Wouldn't that be better marketing in itself, than a $100 million ad campaign?

I assure you, if every game sold for $30 new, games would sell twice as much copies, and piracy would be much less of an issue.

[Ragnar]

...With the only exception being people from countries where the average pay is much lower, but computer game prices are not.

I believe that's a real failure of the publishers, not adjusting their prices to the economy of the country they are being sold in.
I believe no publishers has the right to complain about piracy in countries, where the sell games at prices which equal the average monthly salary.

I think games should be cheaper in general.

I assure you, if every game sold for $30 new, games would sell twice as much copies, and piracy would be much less of an issue.

I totally agree with you.

[Stefouch]

Keep in mind, it's not because a game is pirated, that if piracy did not exist the game would have many more units sold.

Probably a few, but not as high as the total quantity of units pirated.

Lots of people download the game just to test because that's easy and people are curious. Or because they know that the game would never worth 60€. But if piracy did not exist (utopia), I'm not so sure that people would like to test a game for 60€/test.

And I have seen some people downloading illegaly a game, love it, and then purchased it ! (but it's quite rare)

[Void(null)]

Keep in mind, it's not because a game is pirated, that if piracy did not exist the game would have many more units sold.

Probably a few, but not as high as the total quantity of units pirated.

Lots of people download the game just to test because that's easy and people are curious. Or because they know that the game would never worth 60€. But if piracy did not exist (utopia), I'm not so sure that people would like to test a game for 60€/test.

And I have seen some people downloading illegaly a game, love it, and then purchased it ! (but it's quite rare)

I think when GamersGate's Play4Free launches will will see a dramatic decrease in Piracy for this very reason.

[Overlord]

I'm not trying to defend piracy or anything, but keep in mind that without it many people wouldn't be able to play anything.

I know it's stealing, and stealing is bad, but what can you do if you don't have a choice?

For example, in my country games cost up to half the minimum salary. So people who get paid the minimum would never spend half those hard earned money for a game, and among these folks many really love games (students and youngsters).

Now if games were priced according to quality, the money spent would be worth it. But paying 60 bucks for a POS game is just a big NO in my book.

[mamba]

I don't know where you live, but i would surely love to live there, because you don't know in what world you are, and that 5% can't afford to buy games is a really wrong statement. If you thing that there is 95% of people, that have computers, and can afford to buy games, you are in under a great delusion.

I say that 95% of those who do have computers can afford to buy games if they really wanted to, not that 95% of all people can afford computers and games.

Granted, there are countries where this is not true, but in western Europe and the US, this is the case.

If games where only 5 to 10$, be shure that there would be much less people pirating. Why would they bother finding cracks, other stupid programs, virtual servers, not able to play online and etc, and not have a full pleasure of playing the game, when they can afford to pay for it.
Pirated will always be, but at much lower rate than today, trust me.

Actually I don't as there is no indication of that. A CD costs somewhere between $10 and $15, they get copied like crazy too. Now you can argue that you do not need a crack for that, but I doubt that needing one is actually an inconvenience, usually they come with the game download anyway.

[Void(null)]

I say that 95% of those who do have computers can afford to buy games if they really wanted to, not that 95% of all people can afford computers and games.

Granted, there are countries where this is not true, but in western Europe and the US, this is the case.


Countries where this is not true... everywhere else.

[mamba]

Countries where this is not true... everywhere else.

Not debating that, there is a reason I did not list any others ;)

Well, Canada and Australia also qualify for the list in my book :D

No idea where Ragnar is from, but since he is wondering where people can afford it, I listed them

[Skellt]

The only games i have pirated myself are old games that cannot be bought anymore, or versions of a game i already own which do not work anymore or that i wan another language... Back when there was only one language with the game

Also usually with older games patches are not up to date with all versions, but with english they are so yeah..

Oh and my father pirated when we were too poor to buy all the games

[Ragnar]

I say that 95% of those who do have computers can afford to buy games if they really wanted to, not that 95% of all people can afford computers and games.

Well, i didn't write it good, so you misunderstand me. I'm not very good at english.
I wanted to say that for all the people on world that have computer, 95% can afored to buy games is not thru.

Granted, there are countries where this is not true, but in western Europe and the US, this is the case.

This is true for those countries, but US and eu is not a whole world, it's not even a half:).

Actually I don't as there is no indication of that. A CD costs somewhere between $10 and $15, they get copied like crazy too. Now you can argue that you do not need a crack for that, but I doubt that needing one is actually an inconvenience, usually they come with the game download anyway.

I didn't understand this statement very good, so i can't coment it. Oh, crap if my my english teacher would see me now, she would kick my ass:).

Anyway i wonder, are there pirates in US, and in what rate?

[hooby]

I can bring up a very interesting study for this. This actually was part of the curriculum at university - so it's not one of those fake studies, but scientifically accepted subject matter.

The study took place in a large company, which had two canteens. One on ground level, where all the common workers went to eat - and a separate one on third floor, where all the management staff could eat.
The wages in that company where slightly below average, so the common workers did not earn much, but enough to pay their rents. The managers and higher-ups earned rather well - of course.

They told everyone that in order to cut costs, they'd try to work the canteens without any cashiers. There would be no more lining up, and the cost savings would be given to the workers in the form of reduced meal prices. Instead of all the equipment and personal you normally need for payment, they only put up signs, how much each meal costs - and they set up a basket where you could throw your money in. They said if it didn't work out, they'd go back to the old model, which means they'd have to raise prices again.

Nobody knew that this was a study - not even the higher ups, except for the boss of the company.

Every meal and every drink given away was measured, and the end of each month the money from the baskets was compared to the amount everyone knew that should be there.

After half a year they took in the results.

The ground level canteen was only missing some small bucks. Most of the money was there, almost every single meal was accounted for. Amount of meals, and type of meals did not change - everything was like before.

At the third floor canteen more than two thirds of all consumptions where unpaid - the money that was actually there was less than a third of the amount that should have been there. Also the type of meals consummated changed. While before the study all kinds of meals where sold equally well, during the study the third floor canteen sold an exceptionally high amount of their most expensive meals. They also had to give away considerably more meals than before.

This clearly shows that the amount of stealing has absolutely nothing to do with amount of money you earn. Those well-earning guys from the management floor did not care about others - they knew if they stole prices would go up again, and everyone would have to suffer the consequences, but they didn't care - instead they tried to make as much personal short term gain as they could. They cared only about themselves, and not about the group as a whole.

Those lowly workers on the ground floor on the other hand, they wished the prices to stay low - for the gain of everyone. They cared more about what profits the group as a whole the most - than about their personal gain.

This is only one study of many, and there have been tons of scientific proofs that show that wealthier people are more likely to steal and cheat others for their personal gain, while poorer people tend to think more about what's best for all involved, and care not to exploit others.

Edit: I should add that there is a certain limit - if poverty goes below that limit (and people become desperate), that statement above does not hold true any longer. The poorest of the poor are of course the most likely to steal - which in that case only is trying to survive. We are talking about stealing food here - not luxury articles.

[Tenka]

I may or may not pirate a heap of music and games then buy the stuff I like. I bought TQ twice, but I haven't bought Diablo/D2 in 10 years, mostly because it is available in a 6 cubic foot "battle chest" for 1/2 a dozen 10 year old CD's and charges by box volume.

[Ragnar]

I can bring up a very interesting study for this. This actually was part of the curriculum at university - so it's not one of those fake studies, but scientifically accepted subject matter....
...Edit: I should add that there is a certain limit - if poverty goes below that limit (and people become desperate), that statement above does not hold true any longer. The poorest of the poor are of course the most likely to steal - which in that case only is trying to survive. We are talking about stealing food here - not luxury articles.

Very interesting study, but then following the logic of it, that means that US has most pirated games out there because they are one of the strongest economies, and average salary of people is high there.