A Philosophical Discussion about Illicit and Used Software

Wed Dec 01, 2004 10:05 am by Codename

Over the past two weeks or so (and before then as well) there have been numerous discussions here about the evils of software privacy. They got me thinking, though, that buying a used copy of a game from a legitimate source or via a legitimate source is, in a few fundamental respects, not different. As I see it there are two problems with piracy.

1. The developer gets no money from you.
2. It deflates sales figures and undermines the developers successes.

If you look at it that way, buying a used copy is no different; in fact, it may even be worse. As far as I can tell a reseller of merchandise is under no obligation to give any of the profits to the original manufacturer. Think about it, if you buy a used car, the vendor does not have to share the money with anyone. It's the same with games. If you were to buy a used copy of Freelancer from EB or on Ebay (or whatever) none of that money would go to Microsoft or Digital Anvil. The sale would not, to the best of my knowledge, count towards the total number of units sold because it isn't a new unit being sold. So both of the problems of piracy are still there. Furthermore, you are allowing another organization to profit from the hard work of whoever made the game in the first place. That doesn't make much sense to me. Perhaps I'm simply mistaken about something but, in a way, piracy seems to be a better choice if you don't want to pay full price for a new game.

NB: I am NOT advocating piracy. This is just something to think about.

Locs edit: title changed

Edit 2: Changed the title again. It's kind of clunky but I can't think of a better one. Oh well.

Edited by - Locutus on 12/1/2004 12:20:39 PM

Edited by - Codename on 12/1/2004 7:20:36 PM

Wed Dec 01, 2004 10:28 am by Indy11

Buying used follows the following logic:

Ownership of license to use software is transferred from original owner, through second reseller, to new owner.

Pirated however, means:

Stolen license to use software is sold to buyer who is witting or unwitting in the purchase of stolen software.

So there is a big difference.

Wed Dec 01, 2004 10:38 am by Argh

Uh... well, if the game was pirated, then the developer never got paid even for the FIRST time it was bought.

I think that's the primary moral difference there- with piracy, the developer will never get paid. Not even the tiny sliver that's left over after everybody else gets their cuts... the publisher, the distributors, the retailers.

FL was a game I gladly paid for. I can't say that about a lot of games. I played the demo, and shelled out full price ($50, US) for it, when it was pretty new (which I almost never, ever do- I'll wait a year with most games, even big titles like HL2, rather than paying full price). I didn't know anything about TLR, modding or anything else about the game, except that it was the first Privateer/Escape Velocity clone I'd played in ages that didn't suck. I'm glad I did, and I'm glad the game sold enough copies that M$ thought it would be worth their money to support TLR.

Now that FL is cheap (Amazon price: $15.85, US)... there simply isn't any excuse to pirate it. Recently, a member of TLR (I'm not going to name names, but it's a newbie) told another member of TLR to get Freelancer via Kazaa. I think that's unconscionable... there's simply no valid excuse when the game's priced so low, especially considering the mega-man-hours of gameplay added by mods. There are very few other games out there with this much mod content available, period- Total Annihilation (where I came from), Half-Life, and Neverwinter Nights are the only other serious contenders. Really.

Wed Dec 01, 2004 10:52 am by druid

hmmm! this sounds terribly like the kind of argument i come out with just to annoy people.

at least with the buy new sell used system, on the sale of the first unit the ownership of the goods is legitimately passed on to the person who later chooses to resell. on making the initial purchase the new buyer is agreeing to the copyrights and other terms. it is not their right to copy but they can resell. when they do resell they sell only a single authentic item for which the developer has already recieved market price whatever else may happen. to legitimately trade in used merchandise where the producer has recived its price for every single unit is fair, with piracy the producer recieves only the price of one copy.

i left my pc while writing a reply and got back to find indy and argh had done it for me with much more eloquence---sheesh!
"My sig is in the post but the man in the shop promised I will find it witty and topical when it arrives."

Edited by - Druid on 12/1/2004 10:57:05 AM

Wed Dec 01, 2004 10:57 am by Codename

Eeeeh. I sort of wanted to stay away from legal considerations. Just because the law is one way doesn't mean it ought to be that way. I'm more concerned with the moral argument against piracy - mainly because the legal one is pretty toothless, I'm not worried about getting caught (and that's what law is all about) - which seems based on the two facts I gave in my first post. Of course if you belive that it's simply wrong to break the law regardless of whether or not the law is right/rational/just then I suppose you have reason enough (though you'll probably run into other problems elsewhere). Also, if you support the idea that it's all about proper ownership of the license then it would be okay to get a pirated copy if you had bought the game already and, for whatever reason, it ceased to work. Presumably the legitimate license from the game that you bought is still valid. (There's probably a legal argument against that as well but I figured I'd throw the perspective out anyway.)

Uh... well, if the game was pirated, then the developer never got paid even for the FIRST time it was bought.

Not necessarily. I mean, you need to have the game to pirate it and the easiest way to get it is to go out and buy it.

And again, let me stress that I don't think piracy is right. I think its wrong. I'm just trying to figure out where that intuition comes from and if it's entirely valid.

Wed Dec 01, 2004 11:04 am by druid

what if you see that law is wrong so you chose to ignore it. then i come across a law i disagree with and decide to ignore it. at the worst anarchy? yes some laws are patently wrong and in those cases a revolt may even occur. but if we elect to accept to live in society we have to take it warts n' all.

morality? is there one morality or are our beliefs on what is right and wrong just a societal as our laws? do we have an innate sense that thef is wrong or do we enforce that law for our own self protection from that same theft?

Wed Dec 01, 2004 11:11 am by Indy11

Theft is not just a legal issue it is a moral issue.

Morally, the software maker has determined that he will sell his software to others. He cannot control whether those who buy from him then sell it again but the commercial bargain he has made is that he at least enjoys the proceeds of the first sale.

With piracy, the software maker's product is first stolen from him and then
sold to others for the sole benefit of the thief. For that stolen item then to be resold to others makes it no less a matter of thievery than the first time.

Wed Dec 01, 2004 11:26 am by Codename

"but if we ... live in society we have to take it warts n' all."

I disagree. If you live in a democratic society it is your responsibility to at the very least speak out if you think that something is wrong. Otherwise what's the point of having a voice?

"morality? is there one morality ... ?"

Yes. It's called the Golden Rule. (No, not the one from Aladdin!) I suppose I could then use that to show the moral wrongness of piracy. If someone were to ask me "How would you like it if someone went out and stole a copy of the game that you worked for months/years on?" I'd probably have a negative response. Contrast that to the respnse I would have to someone buying a used copy. I wouldn't necessarily be happy but I also would not morally judge the buyer as being wrong. I still get the feeling that I'm missing something though because that view doesn't explain where the feelings come from.

I suppose I should also clarify what I mean by "piracy". I'm not talking about buying a pirated game; that's just dumb - if you're going to spend money then by all means give it to the developer. I'm referring more to the file-sharing kind of piracy a la Kazaa and BitTorrent.

Wed Dec 01, 2004 12:07 pm by H.Q. Victor

I have no problem buying used. The game was paid for, the maker got his money. The buyer redeamed some of his money in saleing, I saved a little in buying. No theft at all.

I buy CD's all the time and rip them to my hard drive then mix and match the music I want to hear and burn a CD. It is mine, I paid for it, and I give it to no one.

If I backed up a game, but wanted to sell the game, I would then be obligated to destroy the back up, as I no longer owned the original.

Wed Dec 01, 2004 12:12 pm by Indy11

In selling used, you can only resell the same thing once at a time.

With KaZaa, etc., you are reselling or giving away the same item more than once at a time. You've "pirated" multiple copies from one legitimate copy. So it is still theft, or multiple thefts, in so far as any download after the very first one is concerned and, the copy still resident on Kazaa, after that first download, it too becomes a pirated copy.

Edited by - Indy11 on 12/1/2004 12:13:01 PM

Wed Dec 01, 2004 12:20 pm by Locutov

@Codename,

Not to give you an old tap on the fingers in a mommy style, but:

Just because the law is one way doesn't mean it ought to be that way.

but kinda speaking, the law is still the law, and we all have to abide to it, so if you'd please refrain from making this kind of comments in near future, Id be most hapy, and so would the site staff, OK??

further on, the title of this thread, its a wanted sign for clicks so ill change it a bit to let it seem more neutral, aside from that, this thread is OK with me, if you have any issues with the title I chose, would you please first take the liberty of contacting me?? Im sure well work it out together.

Thank you.

__________________________________________________________
Oh, dear, How sad, Never mind!!-Battery Sergeant Major Williams

Locutus
Moderator for The Lancers Reactor
E-mail: [email protected]
MSN: same
Click here for the FAQ.
The forum search function is right here.

Thu Dec 02, 2004 3:16 am by druid

i like the way we have renamed this thread

D

@ codename, i agree that in a democracy we have the right to question, vote down or even revolt against unjust laws, frequent as the latter are. we do not have the right to break them at random when they happen not to suit our whim. i don't like the fact that i'm not allowed fleece my customers for all they are worth, but there are laws to protect consumers from benig ripped off. i would rather not pay income tax but i do. i dont like that in my country the law can say what time i have to leave a drinking establishment althought i do like that you cannot, by law, smoke in one. i obey these laws because i accept that if i am to live in a democratic society i must accept the laws i dislike if i expect the protection of other laws.

as for morality's golden rule, i would sincerely love to believe in some innate sense of humanity. the problem is that there is nearly always an exception or at least a not so black and white case. is murder justified if you are defending your home and family? is theft justified if a starving war refugee takes food from a hostile invading army? there are also far too many cases of inhumanity the world over to give me much confidence in it.

do we have an innate sense of right and wrong or is the maxim do unto others as you would have done unto you really a case of if you don't want to suffer injustice than don't perpitrate it ?

Thu Dec 02, 2004 4:13 am by The Shroud (lurking)

i like to buy the new ones they may cost more but it is garunteed the copy will have no defects

Thu Dec 02, 2004 4:49 am by bret bretonian

I will always buy new and take it back if its bad and get full refund. If its an old game that i really want and it has stopped shipping, then i will buy a used copy if i can get my hands on it.

Thu Dec 02, 2004 8:00 am by Codename

Well, I can't argue with the pragmatism of Bret and TMC. I would like to think that there is more of a moral imperative here, though. It seems to me this thread may be some proof from my "Synthetic Emotivism" thesis.

@ Druid - Believe me, I'm not advocating some sort of convenience theory when it comes to law. Rather I'm concerned with laws being moral or immoral (like those prohibiting interracial relationships or permitting slavery). If a law is moral but inconveient then there is no reason to disobey.

Important Message

You are browsing the archived Lancers Reactor forums. You cannot register or login.
The content may be outdated and links may not be functional.

To get the latest in Freelancer news, mods, modding and downloads, go to
The-Starport