Reviews:
 ·Sprint Mobile Br..
| In Theory... If you owned a business and people were stealing your merchandise wouldn't you try and find ways to stop people from stealing it... What I see in this is not that people w/o internet connections won't buy it but people that would have otherwise stole it will end up buying it... |
|
|
|
TheGhostPremium
join:2003-01-03
Lake Forest, IL | said by bobjohnson:If you owned a business and people were stealing your merchandise wouldn't you try and find ways to stop people from stealing it... What I see in this is not that people w/o internet connections won't buy it but people that would have otherwise stole it will end up buying it... The issue is, most of the people that "stole" the game will not buy it, they will move on to something else they can steal, until someone comes out with a hack, which usually happens anyway. All they are really doing is driving away customers.
I have moved away from PC games for my kids, they are just too difficult to deal with, insert this CD, swap to this CD, phone home now, etc. It is just not worth it. They use the PCs for education and internet and play games on the WII or PS2. I have a box full of younger kid games that we purchased over the years, probably >$2000 if you say $10/game, but we have not purchased anything in the past 3 years. The last was a Harry Potter game that had a stupid disk check. Luckily, a patch was available to stop that, with kids, CDs can be broken easily.
Maybe, legistlatures could force game companies to replace broken/scratched CDs for free and put money into a fund to reimburse consumers if they decided to drop support. Let's push some of the cost back on them and then it might not be so cost effective. |
|
approval from:
dadkins 
| reply to bobjohnson
said by bobjohnson:people that would have otherwise stole it will end up buying it... This is the fallacy. Most people who can't pirate a copy will NOT buy it. If they can't pirate, they simpy do without.
This is the fallacy of the "pirating is costing us XXX dollars" argument. The companies first of all pull a figure out of the air. Seriously, they have NO WAY to know/track how many "pirated" copies exist. I could say 17,523 birds flew over my house last year. Who can prove me wrong? Nobody. But in fact, it may have been only 11 birds that actually flew over my house last year.
So the publishers start with a number they make up. Then, they wrongly imply that every pirated copy (again a number they made up out of thin air) was a lost sale. Yet there is NO correlation between pirated copies and lost sales. Most people who do grab a pirated copy would have never purchased it in the first place.
The corporations use these bogus figures to encourage the legal system to go after the "pirates". I'm not condoning pirating of copyrighted material. But I'm tired of all the specious arguments they use trying to convinve everybody how harmful those pirates are to their business model.
1. There is no loss of physical property that deprives someone else the ownership of said physical property (as would be the case if you stole a radio)
2. The copies that are created in most cases do NOT create a loss of wealth for the business because the people who grab the copy would have never bought it in the first place.
Its morally and legally wrong to copy software, but the agruments used against it are fallacious. |
|
 dadkinsCan you do Blu?Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA
kudos:18 | said by MiMeMo :said by bobjohnson:people that would have otherwise stole it will end up buying it... This is the fallacy. Most people who can't pirate a copy will NOT buy it. If they can't pirate, they simpy do without. This is the fallacy of the "pirating is costing us XXX dollars" argument. The companies first of all pull a figure out of the air. Seriously, they have NO WAY to know/track how many "pirated" copies exist. I could say 17,523 birds flew over my house last year. Who can prove me wrong? Nobody. But in fact, it may have been only 11 birds that actually flew over my house last year. So the publishers start with a number they make up. Then, they wrongly imply that every pirated copy (again a number they made up out of thin air) was a lost sale. Yet there is NO correlation between pirated copies and lost sales. Most people who do grab a pirated copy would have never purchased it in the first place. The corporations use these bogus figures to encourage the legal system to go after the "pirates". I'm not condoning pirating of copyrighted material. But I'm tired of all the specious arguments they use trying to convinve everybody how harmful those pirates are to their business model. 1. There is no loss of physical property that deprives someone else the ownership of said physical property (as would be the case if you stole a radio) 2. The copies that are created in most cases do NOT create a loss of wealth for the business because the people who grab the copy would have never bought it in the first place. Its morally and legally wrong to copy software, but the agruments used against it are fallacious. Hey Hey Hey!
There is no need for common sense to be posted in this frontpage news comment section! 
This news assures that I will never purchase these games. Period!
Some real Fart Smellers... er uh, Smart Fellers there at EA, huh?
--
Think outside the Fox... Opera |
|
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
| I do agree with all those who say that it's not the smartest thing to do, but I also see that the companies are trying to fix what they see as a problem.. I also think that the people that are saying EA (or anyone else) that is adding "safeguards" to their products is a bad thing were in their position, would be doing the same thing |
|
