Law of the Game on Joystiq: Of Pirates and Prostitutes

by Mark Methenitis { Apr 30th 2008 at 7:00PM }

Each week Mark Methenitis contributes Law of the Game on Joystiq, a column on legal issues as they relate to video games:

From cheating to piracy, game security has become a major issue. In fact, the most recent Computer Law & Security Report features a piece by Steven Davis, author of PlayNoEvil, and W. Joseph Price about the state of security in the gaming industry. Their verdict was less than reassuring if you're a player or developer. Sure enough, just a few weeks after the report was issued, Grand Theft Auto IV was leaked prior to release. So what is a developer to do? What about the video game community?

To start, a "pirate" is someone who illegally reproduces or distributes something that is protected by an intellectual property right. In simple legal terms, that person is infringing on the rights of the copyright, patent, or trademark owner. While any intellectual property can theoretically be "pirated," I'm only talking about items that can be copyrighted. And before anyone points this out, yes, this is what groups such as the RIAA have taken pretty extreme steps to combat. Of course, the music industry and game industry are two different beasts.

But that doesn't change the irony of the situation: The game industry, which is entirely built on intellectual property, has generally had a far more relaxed attitude about piracy. And for the game industry, the sale of intellectual property is all there is. Musicians have live concerts, music videos, and licensing into other media as sources of revenue. Even movies have theater showings and TV licensing. If you are a game developer, the only source of income is selling copies of the game, unless you've sold in-game ad space or you're a subscription based game.

And therein lies the dilemma. It's "cool" to be more laid back about piracy, but if you're a developer, you have to weigh your public image against your paycheck. It's a similar issue with leaks. You're an internet hero if you leak an early copy of something online. But if that something is also your source of income, you're risking that people will not buy the product that they can get for free. While some leaks are simply publicity stunts, the ones that are genuinely stolen are a serious problem.

So, I ask again, what is a developer to do? For leaks, developers need to have clear rules that are both known in the company and in employment contracts. During the various stages of development, before copyright attaches to a "final product," a combination of trade secret and non-disclosure agreements are your only real defense. A trade secret is generally defined as "information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program device, method, technique, or process, that: (i) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from no being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use, and (ii) is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy." Given that trade secrets are protected at the state level, there is some variation in the practical mechanics of trade secret law, but in general, a trade secret is only as strong as its value and the measures taken to protect it. Value is pretty evident for in-development code and other elements of the game. It's the measures taken to protect the trade secret that are completely up to the developer. Without going into too much detail, the more steps taken, from building security to network security, the more likely something will be protected in court as a trade secret.

Once a product is copyrighted and in the marketplace, combating pirates is a matter of locating the pirates and using the various international copyright laws to protect your rights. This is, of course, easier said than done as laws worldwide vary substantially and tracking pirates is not always a simple task. Thankfully, to date the game industry has generally taken what I consider to be the more logical approach to tracking those who distribute the material rather than the RIAA's approach of going after the end user.

And what about consumers? The simple answer is just: Show some restraint. I know everyone was dying to get their hands on GTA IV. And I'm hoping most people who chose to download a pirated version of the game were also in line buying a copy. In the grand scheme of things, though, what benefit did those people gain by being able to play the game a few days early? For most, the limit was bragging rights, and while that has some value, it isn't worth much. For a few who were trying to write their own independent FAQs or guides without being affiliated with one of the companies who were actually sent review copies, there is some competitive advantage in having the first content.

I'm sure the vast majority of you are playing legal copies of your games, and I'm likely preaching to the choir. But I would hope that the few of you who do choose to pirate games consider what's been said here and reevaluate your evil ways. Anyway, enough, shouldn't we all be getting back to our legally purchased copies of GTA IV?

Mark Methenitis is the Editor in Chief of the Law of the Game blog, which discusses legal issues in video games. Mr. Methenitis is also a licensed attorney in the state of Texas with The Vernon Law Group, PLLC and a member of the Texas Bar Assoc., American Bar Assoc., and the International Game Developers Assoc. Opinions expressed in this column are his own. Reach him at: lawofthegame [AAT] gmail [DAWT] com.

The content of this blog article is not legal advice. It only constitutes commentary on legal issues, and is for educational and informational purposes only. Reading this blog, replying to its posts, or any other interaction on this site does not create an attorney-client privilege between you and the author. The opinions expressed on this site are not the opinions of AOL LLC., Weblogs, Inc., Joystiq.com, or The Vernon Law Group, PLLC. As with any legal issue that may confront you in a particular situation, you should always consult a qualified attorney familiar with the laws in your state.

Tags: columns, copyright, joystiqfeatures, law, law-of-the-game, piracy, security

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

F1 @ Apr 30th 2008 4:36PM

YAARRGH!!!

JoSav @ Apr 30th 2008 7:37PM

Do what you want cause a pirate is free , you are a pirate , yargh argh p-i-r-a-t-e being a pirate is what i want to be , do what you want cause a pirate is free , you are a pirate!

http://gprime.net/flash.php/youareapirate

Will @ Apr 30th 2008 4:39PM

It's actually sort of interesting to see how low humans can get when you start removing boundaries. In real life, walking along the street, most of us are good, wholesome citizens for a number of reasons including the law.

Then you add..
1. Ease.
2. Anonymity.
3. Unenforceable Laws.

And then even your local pastor (the good kind, not the child-touching kind) is downloading music to put on his iPod.

Could you imagine if we were able to steal from Best Buy with the same degrees of anonymity and lack of danger?

..Could you imagine if we could murder one another, again with the same boundaries removed?

People are scary.

Jansperus @ Apr 30th 2008 7:36PM

It's one thing I've learned from the Internet: people, without boundaries or consequences, are ugly. It reminds me of that Seinfeld episode where Seinfeld's girlfriend always walked around the apartment naked and it wasn't as AWESOME as one would think.

chispito @ Apr 30th 2008 11:08PM

While I agree that it's easier for people to justify pirating music and software so long as it's easy and the threat of being caught is low, and while I agree it is generally wrong...

Copyright infringement is different than theft, no matter what the RIAA and MPAA say, and I believe most people understand this and take this into account when making moral decisions.

Will @ Apr 30th 2008 11:17PM

Is it so different, Chispito? I could spend money trying to build widgets to sell at my store, or I could spend money trying to develop software to sell on my website. The only difference is one is physical and harder to steal.

Granted, I'm being hypocritical by saying that because I, myself, am a pirate.

Curtis the Claw:XBL - supapaypamawio @ Apr 30th 2008 4:42PM

One benefit that wasn't mentioned was that the people who pirate get to play it for free.

sabinh @ Apr 30th 2008 4:47PM

The columnist fails to see the greatest irony yet, perhaps deliberately, that a product that makes a game out of flaunting the law through theft, vice and murder is being stolen on the internet. His argument would have been much sounder and saner had he included that remark. To which I ask the question. If a game has "Grand Theft" in the title, can we blame anyone for stealing it?

D dogg @ Apr 30th 2008 5:09PM

You're a god damn idiot. Because of that "irony" it makes it OK to pirate it?

If a game has "Grand Theft" in the title, can we blame anyone for stealing it?

If you watched the movie Shooter and have a rifle, should we blame you for shooting people while atop a building?? Absolutely. You're a f*****g idiot dude, seriously. Take your supposed "wit" and shove it up your ass.

You're also the same idiot who'll post "I don't understand why they blame video games for real life violence, don't people understand it's just a game!?".

S_T_F_U Sabinh

sabinh @ Apr 30th 2008 5:31PM

You're so caught up in defending the disputed link between playing games and action that you miss the whole point of the post. I'm surprised at your anger. I still contend, you can't make a game that makes stealing such fun and then be surprised when people steal your game.

Taking one example and expanding it to another is very interesting. Murder and petty theft are quite different things. I'd submit that the barrier to entry to one is much higher than the other. Whereas I might steal a game from a website after fantasizing about it in my video game, I certainly wouldn't equate the risk of being caught by IP police with the thought of ending a human life.

Of course your way out of proportion response to my post kind of lets me know where you stand on disproportionate reactions. There is medicine for that kind of ailment, you know.

D dogg @ Apr 30th 2008 6:33PM

"Of course your way out of proportion response to my post kind of lets me know where you stand on disproportionate reactions. There is medicine for that kind of ailment, you know."

Oh please, save me your melodramatic, holier than though, "this gamer has clearly gone off the deep end" condescending attitude / rebuttal. I'm sorry, are we going to stoop to the degrees of right vs. wrong rather than just black and white, right vs. wrong?

Anything is debatable on the internet. Get off your self appointed pedastal and acknowldege that what you said was, "Because the game is about stealing, murder and drugs you can't expect people who want to play the game to not steal it".

C'mon!! I like driving cars and driving them fast but I don't think I'd drive insanely fast to go pick up my next copy of Need for Speed... simply because it's ironic.

Seriously Sabinh, just stop. I'm not going to post after this but it doesn't take a rocket scientist (or even above average intelligence) to understand the point you made in the original post.

PIRATING / STEALING GAMES IS WRONG; IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT GAME IT IS.

Pudge @ Apr 30th 2008 5:13PM

What about gamers that would never buy your product in the first place? You're not losing any money, and you might gain a customer, as if they actually enjoy the game and want to take it online they have to buy the game or risk bans.

I truly do appreciate the game industry for being this way, and it's the way media like movies and music should be. Even after being leaked, GTA will still be the best selling game this year, so whats a few hundred copies lost to piracy in the long run?

Jansperus @ Apr 30th 2008 7:33PM

That's such ridiculous logic: "Oh, they'd never buy it anyway, so they should get to play it for free." If they had no intention of buying it, then why are they playing it?
It reminds me of the old Napster days: "Oh, Metallica sucks and I have no intention of ever buying their CDs, so what will I do? I will download them off Napster!"
People are just looking for ways to rationalize it. It's like the nimrods who go: "Grand Theft Auto is about breaking the law, so that makes it okay to pirate the game!"
Have some balls and just admit you want it for free and don't want to pay for it. I have a little more respect for those pirates rather than the sissified ones who try to actually justify their actions (or even make them sound righteous).

Pudge @ Apr 30th 2008 9:27PM

I'm not trying to rationalize piracy, I'm just saying that if someone would never pay money for a certain game/movie/music/etc. then the makers aren't losing money from the piracy. I never would of played half the SNES/GBA games I've played if it wasn't for emulators, and I have made purchases (Advance Wars DS/Fire Emblem) that never would have happened if not for demoing these games on an emulator first. GTA4 on the other hand actually deterred me from purchasing the game, but that's another matter entirely.

It's really the case of something that sucks at $60, but free, you can actually enjoy it knowing you didn't waste so much money on it. No one wants to pay $60 for games like Army of Two or Kane & Lynch, but just playing the first few lvls can be fun if there is no sacrifice involved. And if the game WAS worth $60, I would go rectify my error immediately.

Call me what you will, but Piracy is here to stay until every game and CD comes out on Steam.

MasterOfMagic @ May 1st 2008 9:06AM

"It's really the case of something that sucks at $60, but free, you can actually enjoy it knowing you didn't waste so much money on it."

If that's the case, if something doesn't suck, wouldn't it not suck even more if it were free?

How would you feel if you made a game for almost five years, put your heart and soul into it, sunk money into it to pay the salaries and benefits of the other people playing it, are now in debt because you've done so, and tried to sell the game for $60 knowing that's what it takes for you to break even and make some profit and some snotty-nosed "I'm too cool to spend my parents money on this" brat tells you that "he wouldn't have bought it anyway GIMMIE!"? I'll bet you wouldn't be so happy about it.

Don't give me that line of BS about "I just want people to play my game". If that were the case, you would have released the game for free and set up a PayPal donation link. You wouldn't have people's ability to play it conditioned on paying for it, and in that case, you're right, the developer would have no right (morally or legally) to complain that people were playing his game for free.

However, when a company puts out a software product at a price-point, you have five legal options:
1) Purchase the software at this price point. This indicates acceptance of the price point and an implicit endorsement of this price point as representing an equal or lesser value compared to the game.
2) Wait to purchase the software used from somebody. This is only legal if they are no longer in possession of a copy (as would be the case 80%-90% of the time with console video games). You generally get this for a lower price point. The company that put out the game has already made their money. You are rejecting their price point, denying them an additional sale, and sending the message that you think their current price point represents a greater value than the value of the game.

3) Rent the game. Blockbuster gets the money, you pay less, but you still have to pay, and you send the same signal as in 2 while also depriving the video game company a sale.

4) Wait for the price to come down. This sends an implicit message to the company that their price point is too high.

5) Play a friend's copy. Again, only legal if they don't have a copy of the game while you're playing. You are denying the company a sale and getting the value of the game, but the copy you are playing has already been paid for.

Notice that in 5, you don't pay for the game and you get the value of it. This is the route to go if you "weren't going to buy something anyway". Find a friend with similar tastes in video games, buy a game that you want, and then when you're done beating it, let him borrow the game you beat while you borrow the game that you want. That way, everybody wins and you don't look like a self-centered jerk.

In the above, denying the company a sale is not bad because it doesn't infringe on their exclusive right to make copies. It is a necessary part in any market system, and if it occurs enough, causes corrective action by the company putting out the software. As long as they're making money at their current price point and they don't feel that they can make more money or make the same amount of money at a lower price point, they will keep their price point the same. If enough people don't buy, they will see that a lower price point would improve their sales and change it.

Denying a sale to the company by infringing on their copyright, however, is wrong ethically and legally. We can argue that copyright is bad or that copyright needs to be changed, and I would agree with some of that, but as the law stands right now, it is illegal to infringe on it, both civilly and, in some cases if it's done on a large scale, criminally. I've heard the argument that this is "civil disobedience", and I have to say that it's laughable at best. If you were breaking the Church of England's copyright on the Bible or Saudi Arabia's copyright on the Koran or Diebold's copyright and trade secret status on internal memos on election rigging, then I would tend to agree with you, but we're talking about a video game here.

Pudge @ May 1st 2008 11:50AM

I plan to go into the video game industry as a profession, and I am going to take that BS stance that I'm not in it for the money. I want to make video games that people enjoy, I don't care how rich it makes me.

I know it's illegal, but you yourself said it. There is a strong argument against copyright law, and that's about all I have to say.

Pudge @ May 1st 2008 11:55AM

Oh and another thing. Unless you're just starting out making your first game independently, there is no way a game company is going to go into debt because of piracy, and most indie game companies do offer just a paypal link for their games. Nobody bought Psychonauts, and Double Fine is going ahead with that Jack Black rocker game right?

R* is not going to go into debt because even a few thousand people didn't buy GTA4. EA isn't going to go into debt for not selling a thousand copies of Army of Two. So that scenario you proposed is ridiculous.

Phinehas @ May 1st 2008 1:17PM

@Pudge

"I plan to go into the video game industry as a profession, and I am going to take that BS stance that I'm not in it for the money. I want to make video games that people enjoy, I don't care how rich it makes me."

So you are going to be independent then? Right off the bat? With no prior industry experience? Good luck with that!

If not, then please include the above statement in your cover letter when you send out your resume. It will be a great help in weeding through the many applications game developers receive.

Incidentally, I'm not in it for the money either. I'm just doing what I love. But if I didn't get paid, I couldn't afford to keep doing it. And if my employer doesn't get paid, they can't pay me. Pirating takes money out of my employer's coffers, and that stuff has a tendency to roll downhill.

Pudge @ May 1st 2008 2:01PM

Listen, until I start my own company, if I ever do, of course I'm going to play the game with the higher-ups. But that doesn't mean I have to care if a game I work on gets pirated. I really wont, as that person will be enjoying my work, and spreading the word about how great it is.

As the credits of early MST3K say, I very much believe that people should "keep circulating the tapes"

JakubK666 (Ninja Defence Force) @ Apr 30th 2008 5:48PM

Speaking of which, it's not STEALING per se.

I am(or in this case I'm not) paying for the data stored on the disc...and such it's an intellectual property.Thus it's actually a Copyright Infringement...doesn't sound as dramatic, huh?

Still, as long as I'm not making a profit(be selling copies on disc etc.) they can't arrest me.It's a civil matter so they COULD sue me, although they never will because in the long run, they'd waste a lot more money.

PS:Not trying to defend piracy(I buy my games...well most of them), but I thought I could clear things up a little bit.

LaughingTarget @ Apr 30th 2008 8:01PM

Labor is a resource. Data may seem free to you as it costs you nothing to copy but the creation took time and resources.

If we break down any good or service and trace all costs back to the raw material source, nearly all the cost is in the labor. It takes people to pull the material from the ground. More labor refines the product, more labor shapes it into components and then more then assembled it into the working product. Under the free software logic, human labor is worthless and thus every product in out store is free since all the associated costs are labor at one point or another.

Piracy is theft, no way around it. Pirates steal the efforts, be they GTA4 quality or Two Worlds crap. Piracy isn't special and does not deserve leniency because it us easy.

chispito @ Apr 30th 2008 11:24PM

No, piracy is not theft.

You can hem and haw about it all you want, but legally and logically you're 100% incorrect. I wish piracy weren't a problem, but using faulty logic and emotional arguments is disengenuous (like the RIAA and MPAA--as if downloading a movie is going to somehow put the Key Grip's kids out on the street).

MasterOfMagic @ May 1st 2008 9:21AM

@chispito: "I wish piracy weren't a problem, but using faulty logic and emotional arguments is disengenuous (like the RIAA and MPAA--as if downloading a movie is going to somehow put the Key Grip's kids out on the street)."

No, but it might deter them from making another game.

Piracy is theft. I'm sorry that you can't accept that. It's not theft at gunpoint, like holding up a liquor store. It's more like taking a pack of gum from the supermarket theft. You are receiving the benefit (though being entertained) of someone's work without paying for it when the people that put in the work explicitly asked to be paid for it as a condition of enjoying their work.

If they felt as you did, that a few lost sales here or there weren't a big deal, then you think they would have mentioned this in their blog, in a press release for the game, or in an interview somewhere. If they wanted people to have the benefit of their work without paying for it, they would have released the game for free and set up a donation system where you could reward them for what you think the value of their efforts was.

"You can hem and haw about it all you want, but legally and logically you're 100% incorrect."

Legally: You are depriving a company of their legal right to control who makes copies of their game, for what price they will be sold for, and how many copies will be made. Doesn't sound as sexy as theft, but what if I put it this way: I make a copy of your vital financial information (name, address, social, mom's maiden name, your ATM PIN, bank account numbers, credit card numbers, the magstripe on your credit card, and so forth). It's just data, and you still have access to it, so nobody is deprived of anything in my copying of it. I then set up a bunch of accounts in your name and charge up expensive and possibly embarrassing items. You get stuck with the bill. You've lost the right to control who gets to use your credit, what your credit has been used for, and how to allocate your money as you're on the hook for these purchases by default. Would that be theft?

Logically: You are receiving something that costs money without paying for it and without authorization of the owner. That is the definition of theft.

If you're going to argue that piracy is not theft, the least you could do is make your argument consistent and thoughtful.

Simes @ May 1st 2008 9:44AM

@MasterOfMagic:
"Doesn't sound as sexy as theft, but what if I put it this way: [...] Would that be theft?"

No, it would be fraud. Aside from the fact that buying stuff with other people's money is an entirely different act than copying bits.

"If you're going to argue that piracy is not theft, the least you could do is make your argument consistent and thoughtful."

Ah, irony.

Here's the thing: I agree that people should buy games instead of downloading them. Weak analogies don't exactly advance the argument much, though.

People should buy games because they should support the creative people who make things which they enjoy. The same reason why you should buy the music that you like and the movies that you like and the books that you like.

Phinehas @ May 1st 2008 1:41PM

The legal definition isn't unimportant, but I think it is a bit beside the point--a bit of a red herring. Because the fact of the matter is that, anyway you slice it, piracy is NOT a victimless crime.

There are several self-serving justifications one might appeal to.

1. It only hurts a company that is making too much money off of poor gamers like me anyway.
2. Obviously the developer is still in business, so my piracy didn't really hurt anyone.
3. Though I pirate, lots of other people don't, so the company still makes money on its game.
4. The game was over-priced.
5. Etc. etc. etc.

These are *convenient* excuses, but they don't hold up against any sort of close examination.

A company is made up of people, many of whom are struggling to get along just like you are. Real people like designers, artists, and programmers get laid off because of piracy. With reduced profits, the developer has to lay them off in order to stay in business.

That there are gamers out there with a conscience who pay for their games is a great thing for these companies, but it doesn't change the fact that you (the pirate) are a blood-sucking leech on the entire process.

And other gamers have to pay $60 for the game in part precisely because pirates tend to drive down profits, meaning that the games that do get sold need to help recoup the losses. Next time you buy a game for $60, be sure to thank pirates for the privilege.

In the end, I don't really care about all the legal crap. I see people struggling to make a living as game developers get laid off, and that's plenty to convince me that pirating is wrong.

Pirating leaves behind victims. Companies suffer. Game developers suffer. And in the end, gamers suffer, since in a world without pirating, better games could be made. Don't be part of the problem. Be part of the solution. Buy games and support both developers and gamers everywhere.

Moofree @ Apr 30th 2008 7:11PM

I'm going limp I'm going limp!
Say it!

Kujel @ Apr 30th 2008 7:24PM

I buy all my console games but usually pirate PC games (I don't like the PC platform and piracy is a way to discourage it), on the odd occasion I pirate a PC game that is near impossible to get now but mostly just to kill the PC platform (in a gaming sense).

Jansperus @ Apr 30th 2008 7:38PM

LOL. That actually is a common pirate mentality. I never understood it: "Oh, I hate this thing, so I'm going to pirate it and waste my life with it!" It'd be like me, who hates hentai, deciding that the best way to destroy hentai would be to download as much of it as possible and watch it all repeatedly.

Kujel @ Apr 30th 2008 8:09PM

I don't download it as much as possible, just games that really should be on console, so basically any good ideas that a less then brilliant Dev built for PC. I almost never play/buy PC games anymore, nearly all my gaming is on 360, Wii, and DS these days. None of which I've ever pirated games for, they are for a platform I feel deserves my hard earned money.

DangerMouse @ Apr 30th 2008 8:13PM

Who are you kidding? You'd be doing the same thing on consoles if it was as easy as it is on the PC.

Kujel @ Apr 30th 2008 11:05PM

No actually, I only pirate to discourage Devs from wasting time on PC, I love console gaming and don't pirate console games, just ask my co-workers; they've on multiple occasions heard me talk about this very subject. I could have long ago moded my 360, Wii, and DS but didn't because I support console gaming and really dislike PC gaming. PCs are good for work but consoles are best for gaming!!!

Alex @ May 1st 2008 12:03AM

Kujel:

Who the hell do you think you're kidding? If you don't want to support the PC games industry with your hard earned money, ignoring the existence of PC titles is enough. But pirating PC titles and of course playing them (don't tell me you just download them for the sake of download statistics, then delete them...) is just hypocritical. Besides, outside of narrow-minded fanboyism, I can't imagine what could upset you so much about this platform.

Kujel @ May 1st 2008 12:22AM

Alex 1st I rarely finish any PC games, 2nd I spent nearly 20 years fighting with PCs and am sick and fucking tired of it.
If I'm going to bother getting a game I most likely will never finish (or quite possibly not even be able to play at all) I sure as hell don't want to pay for it. Still I don't pirate many games all that much because PC controls suck shit. Hell this may surprise you but I'm totally against pirating console games and give console pirates shit for it. If you were to look at my massive game collection far more are legit and not one console game of mine is a bootleg, even the 2 games I have for my BS1 (I don't really like Sony products, my X gave it to me when she upgraded to a BS2) are legit because they are console games and I wont pirate console games.

Evangel @ May 1st 2008 5:08AM

Please, please stop spreading your idiocy.

If you don't like PC games, don't buy them, don't acknowledge them. You don't like the PC platform because you've had bad experiences with it, I happen to love it because some of those bad experiences you've had with it are my favourites. I love finding out new things to do with my computer (Rule 34 this shit), I love messing around with it, I love breaking it because I know that fixing it is a whole new adventure (and because I ghosted my hard drive with a clean install so it's next to no work for me).

The rest of your argument is just opinion. I can't stand a controller yet a keyboard and mouse are natural for me. I love RTS games (even though I'm not very good at em) and you just could not get that level of control on a console. Space sims are another genre I love, a joystick would be wonderful but there aren't enough out for me to justify buying one (although, if Beyond the Red Line is any good and I spend time playing it, I might get one) but a keyboard and mouse work for me. There simply aren't enough buttons on a controller for me. I like my WASD controls, you like your thumbstick controls. Which one is better?

None, neither of those are superior to the other. It's all about personal preference.

/rant

Esse @ Apr 30th 2008 7:25PM

Then the video game industry better learn from the RIAA and not fuck its consumers. I'm still waiting for these damn games to fall below $60. There's no reason we should be pay that kind of money for a game. If the RIAA kept its promise when they switched from cassette to CD (cassettes were ~ $7 at the time (1988) and they said when CDs came out, they would be cheaper), people wouldn't have pirated as much. These cocksuckers had us paying damn near $20 for a CD..something that's cheaper to manufacture than cassettes. So Microsoft, Sony and game developers listen up, lower these fucking prices or I too will mod my 360 and start ripping these games. Just be fair...that's all. Don't abuse the people that feed you.

Evan @ Apr 30th 2008 7:44PM

There's always been game piracy, but it is much worst now than it used to be... Before high-speed internet, someone might buy a game and share it with two or three friends, just like music where two or three friends would dub their friend's latest audio cassette. So, they were at least making sales to 1/3rd of the number of people playing their game or listening to their album. But the internet allows one person can buy a game and share it with thousands of strangers. That has changed everything!

chispito @ Apr 30th 2008 11:34PM

Ha ha, good one. The Internet allows for the only viable forms of copy protection. Software that came on magnetic media was the most piratable that software has ever been.

tipatat @ Apr 30th 2008 7:55PM

It is ironic that a game based around stealing property gets stolen. In fact, if they want to be really topical and want to parody today's society, the next version of grand theft atuo should be a game where you can pirate software and media and they should call it...

http://www.grandtheftwarez.com

Ben Serwa @ May 1st 2008 12:41AM

It's not irony! Please look up the definition of irony.

poke50uk @ Apr 30th 2008 8:15PM

4 words - nintendo uk release dates

ssbb
JP January 31, 2008
USA March 9, 2008
EU June 27, 2008

Earthbound in UK = NEVER

True.. for a few days extra its not worth it... but you can see why europeans want to pirate from time to time!

Game deveolpers get hardly anything.. £6 from a £49.99 release... its the producers such as EA that rake it in.. and rules like Sonys "have to burn a fresh copy of the game to test it - but only allowed to on a Sony Playstation DVDr" making it rape expensive

Retail do take alot!

and still- at least its not $90 for a new release like it is here!!

then theres the games that just peeve me off.. I paid £27 for Beautiful Katamari and only got half a game! keeping all the levels back for DLC ¬_¬

Purple Haze @ Apr 30th 2008 9:00PM

I bought Audiosurf about 10 minutes before reading this article after being given a pirated version from my friend. In this case I wouldn't of bought it without playing it first and having the pirated copy allowed me to do that, and its only 10 dollars so why wouldn't I buy it. Now I'm gonna try convince my friend who pirated peggle (after playing the free trial) to buy the game.

ColossalHat @ Apr 30th 2008 9:05PM

The thing is, while piracy is indeed a large issue, it's not cutting into profits as much as developers say/believe it is. My reasoning is this, while some people will always pirate, some will also always buy legitmate copies of the game. Case in point, I bought a copy of Diablo 2 just last October after having given my old copy away back about five years ago (due to having a terribly wimpy computer with a dial up connection).

Pudge @ Apr 30th 2008 9:28PM

exactly my point from above. Good Show.

SilverChaos @ Apr 30th 2008 9:11PM

I see no prostitutes here

hvnlysoldr @ Apr 30th 2008 9:41PM

I'm just glad the companies aren't going after the eye patch companies.

JangoGod @ Apr 30th 2008 10:31PM

Well, this is why other countries like to do micro payments :)

And now EA is doing the same thing. Some think its because they're greedy, but its because people pirate.

I find Battlefield: Heroes funny how they make this one of their points...

Ben Serwa @ May 1st 2008 12:42AM

Piracy is not an excuse to rip off legitimate paying customers.

Michael C. Sherrin @ May 1st 2008 10:11AM

I enjoy these law columns, but this one doesn't seem to argue why piracy is wrong, just that it is and we shouldn't do it. To say that game developers can only make money from game sales is admitting game developers lack the ability to innovate when new technology or competition emerges. Game developers can explore new business models like ad-based games, subscriptions, sponsorships, etc.

Additionally, every pirated copy of a game is not a lost sale, like music, movie, and software companies assume. Much of the pirated copies of copyrighted content might never have turned into sales and never will. And of course, there is potential for promotion and publicity through piracy - even GTA IV got lots of publicity just from the fact it was available to download.

The truth is piracy is here to stay because it's so cheap and easy, not because it's right or wrong. Copyright holders need to look at Bittorrent and P2P as a competitor that they must innovate against and become a better business for it.

*******

Michael C. Sherrin
http://www.prodigeek.com/