It is *not* harmless. People usually create intellectual property expecting that people will pay for access to it - many people's very existence is based on model, especially these days when creators of IP have the technical means to directly sell their stuff without a middle man and it seems to be generally accepted that that's the order of things, that there's people living of creative work (and you yourself acknowledge that whenever you actually buy a game). Anyway, what you don't seem to get is that there's a direct connection between units sold and the reward for the work put into intellectual property while by now, thanks to digital distribution, there is a perfectly direct connection. And even with a middle man like a publisher who only paid a developer to create a game and keeps the actual revenue "to himself" - the sales of the games created by said developer will determine whether the publisher will further back the developer or dissolve the team and maybe even fire everyone in it. So potentially piracy may directly cost the creative working guys their jobs even if they work for a big publisher. And I'm writing these things assuming that you don't consider harm done only to a publisher itself something bad - because you apparently don't. In your universe a publisher is just something like an insurance company, an entity supposed to take hits - but that's not the case. Publishers use money made of sold games to finance the development of new games and they (normally) don't get compensation for pirated units of their games. So whether there is a publisher involved or not, piracy can and often does directly harm the people you claim to sympathize with. And believe it or not, many developers LIKE their publishers, they enjoy the support they get from the publisher they work for. It's not like they generally support harm done to the big guy who pays them.

Okay, what other arguments could you use to back the idea that piracy is harmless? Oh yeah, the assumption that pirates wouldn't have bought the games anyway, a common claim that can't be backed at all and I think you also used in this thread - you say "I wouldn't have bought that game anyway", I say "I know a bunch of people who have bought games because they couldn't crack them". You can't prove what someone would have done if... this argument is simply invalid. By the way - in my pirate days as a teen, when kids would share burned discs during recess, I *have* obtained a game or two legally because cracks wouldn't work as did some of my friends. Heck, I had a few friends who *only* bought games they couldn't crack like a few Starforce titles and online shooters. That makes just a few cases, not enough to proof that generally pirates would buy games if they couldn't get them illegally, but unlike some worthless "wouldn't even if" argument this one is actually a logical statement with *some* value.

What else renders something "harmless"? Oh yeah, that the harm done is so small that the party harmed doesn't even notice it. Another crappy argument because it requires the piracy to remain small. Do pirates follow some honor code? Do they check how the ratio between units sold/pirated is before determining whether they can download a game so they are perfectly sure that the people who made a game can pay their rents? Do they acknowledge that only a certain number of pirates can exist so that piracy remains harmless? Have you earned yourself some privilege that makes you one of the chosen ones who are allowed to pirate games while keeping things harmless? And others acknowledge that privilege? No. And if too many people decide to pirate a game instead of buying it the people involved in its creation may end up with no job and no money. "There's too few assholes like me" is a crappy argument.

And if having games with no DRM is really "just a preference" while you acknowledge the value of the work people put into making games and other creative stuff you will buy these games without hesitation and then apply a crack.

And....It's not just *my* opinion on DRM, it's like the opinion of every publisher on the face of the planet. I'm just pointing out, that your opinion is irrelevant, and holds no weight anywhere. Just saying.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority

How so? The sole reason Intellectual Property exists is to grant the creator a reward for his creation. By choosing NOT to pay for this creation you're going against what Intellectual Property stands for.

Crossmando has shown he doesn't really understand this shit well enough to debate him, so I would stop bothering.

I understand what my view on DRM is irrelevant in the broader interest, that's the difference. I will pirate a game with DRM simply because I can, and there's nothing to stop me. It's a personal choice based on the fact that I don't want DRM on my computer.

You and others, on the other hand, live in a delusional world if you think your views on PD are relevant. So? I do think world governments have a better idea of these things than some random people on the internet. If you want to list your educational qualifications and experience which make you an authority on Public Domain and thus make your opinion worth considering, please do so. Otherwise I will defer to those who know what the hell they're talking about.

It's not contradictory because: Although I respect Intellectual Property, my dislike of DRM is stronger and overrides that concern.

Nope, it exists for the owner/creator to legally own the intellectual property, ie the content of the game, it's characters/code/writing/assets. Getting paid for it is secondary. I think the main use of IP is the artist/owner being able to protect themselves from plagiarists and copycats.

And as I said above, I simply view the evil of DRM to be greater than the good of Intellectual property.

And yet he went on about public domains and games being free. The people running RPS seem to just want to create publicity and this is just another "social justice" "crusade" (for the lack of a better term for their zealous demeanor).

They have a better chance of being right than some random morons on the internet without the education, qualifications or experience, not to mention without the democratic mandate of being elected. You think governments are wrong, but you've yet to provide evidence why your view has any merit. I do not care about those business opportunities, if they are made possible by exploiting and ruining old great IP's by people who had nothing to do with the original games, and aren't made with the expressed permission, authorization or licensing of the original creators/owners of the IP.

No one should ever have the right to find a great old game, and because it's now suddenly "public domain" make a sequel for it, even if they've never played that game or understand it.

I think it is better for old classic IP's to remain dead, but rest in peace. So they can't be dug up by money-grubbing hacks looking to rape the corpse of a classic game for some quick money. Again, I simply view the evil of DRM to be overriding of the good of Intellectual Property. People can have multiple views, and those views can have degrees of importance. If you are too moronic to understand this, I can't help you.

Which is, of course, a completely different issue from GOG and making these games run. For all we know, GOG could be more successful than ever while selling these games that are in public domain, tweaked to run on modern operating systems, providing support.

Seriously, that's something I will probably not understand, ever. How does a sequel destroy the original? I love Deus Ex 1, didn't like Deus Ex 2 at all. So I just ignore it and play the first one 15 times. DX 2 being bad didn't make the first one turn bad. I can somehow relate when the sequel is part of a stated series, such as Mass Effect, because you're messing with the storyline propper. But when something has a conclusive ending, and then a shit sequel is done, the original work is still great regardless.

King Arthur. And , [url=http://www.dealspwn.com/writer/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/ka-2-banner-540x309.jpg]another Arthur, , and [url=http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01943/swordinstone_1943271i.jpg]more. , [url=http://images.tvrage.com/shows/33/32370.jpg]dracula, , and [url=http://www.gog.com/game/dracula_trilogy]dracula. , [url=http://www.mobygames.com/images/shots/l/537654-cthulhu-saves-the-world-windows-screenshot-the-great-cthulhu.jpg]Chtulhu, and (WTF) Chtulhu.

You enjoy the ones you enjoy and ignore the rest. What is the problem? Does any of these derivatives destroy the original's value?

Edit: One of the links was broken

Dude, governments have no fucking clue what DRM or IP means, they just do what their spondors tell them to do. You have a better chance of EA being right about DRM. Why is this analogy so hard for to understand?

See, that's why I called you a leftie,anti-capitalist, communist troublemaker.

They are just as likely to be exploited by the original creators who wer eunder contract or whatever back then and can do it much better than the current rightsholders. As a videogamer you must be very familiar with this situation. But being the dumbass you are, you love it.

That is the whole point of PD, dumbass.

So you are saying you are against PD, because PD shouldn't be. Thanks for your input.

No it is not, the more the merrier.

Is this supposed to make any sense or be relevant? Or are you still trying to defend your hypocrisy?

And there is nothing stopping crappy fanfics to be made by "hacks" and whatever other terms you defamed these creative people right now, in fact it happens alot, just without any contribution to the economy, which brings us back to you being a commie.

You are projecting.

Maybe not random people, but us, yes. You can bet your sweet little ass that most politicians won't even know wtf public domain software is.

Oh so that is not contradictory, it is just contradictory. How do you make this stuff happen in your mind without a meltdown occuring?

Ok so lets get this straight, you think piracy is ok, because companies don't care about getting paid as much as they love creating cool stuff and retain the IP for it forever. Cocaine is a hell of a drug.

Lol wut? I don't claim governments are all experts but at least in the West they do consult experts in their respective fields before drafting laws, they release consultation papers for public discussion. Governments have to take into consideration all the affected people when they draft a law or a change in an existing law. So because I think Public Domain is a socialist-like policy, that makes me some kind of ultra-capitalist? There's nothing in between? I'm for respecting intellectual property, as in the "canon" and "lore" of literary works. Bad games will always get made, it's unavoidable. Being against PD is more about damage control, so you don't get a whole deluge of lore/canon-breaking derivative works if they became PD which aren't respectful to the original work and to the original author's wishes, ie a Public Domain-fueled cashgrab. Think of it like this, if only one company owns an IP, then only one company can potentially screw it up. And there's still nothing stopping dedicated fans from making non-profit unofficial games in the game's universe, if they contact the rights holder about it they could probably avoid a takedown. Yes, that is the point, so people can work derivative works without the actual creator/owner having a say. It's downright evil. These works do not belong to "the public" and they never should. They belong to their creators. I'm against PD because PD it would become a crutch for talentless, uncreative cretins with no imagination, who want to live by parasitically taking from others work. The same way developers make "Lovecraftian" games which are nothing like the type of stories Lovecraft wrote, but they do it to gain an instant "brand" to sell a product, no matter the damage of reputation they do to the original works. ie games like "Eldritch" and "Cthulhu Saves the World", which might as well be taking a piss on Lovecraft's grave. I would rather nothing at all than a huge pile of manure. You continually bring up some old post I made on a different subject (DRM), you keep doing it, and I'll keep refuting that it has any bearing on this discussion (Public Domain). You keep grasping at the straws of some strong anti-DRM posts I made (on GOG.com no less, I've of a mind you tell you to fuck off this site entirely for questing my anti-DRM views, for whatever reason at all).

Dream on, but this is typical for you lefty idealists.

What, I called you the opposite of a capitalist, because you want to stifle business opportunities. If you respect the canon, you should be for public domain, as it's often the original creators benefitting from it, as I explained to you below.

See and this kind of business stifling environment is exactly what PD tries to avoid. Btw..I don't share your pessimism about "breaking canon". Companies do that all the time to their own shit. Why is it such a big deal to you.

It's the free market, baby.

How do they do any damage? Cthulhu saves the world is awesome. It makes me want to get the original. Besides, you said good works might emerge as well. So I am not sure why you always only mention these evil talentless hacks on which your whole argument seems to rest.

No problem, just don't buy it.

Yes I will, because it is hilarious to see you try to defend it.

As based on all the time you have spent playing Eldrich :-P

It's called 'parody'. Look it up :-P

People can make fan-fics now, but they aren't official, they aren't official sequels or spin-offs, and they can't be profited from. No I'm living in reality. Huge generalization. And as I said earlier governments have access to advice and information by experts they can call on. It isn't contradictory. It's just a personal choice I made that I don't want DRM'd games installed on my computer. I also think Intellectual Property is very important and creators should have ownership rights over their creations, at least for their lifetimes or in the case of a company as long as the company is around.

And yeah, I'll generally pirate a game if it has Securom/Starforce or something on it, though I do buy games on Steam if I want them badly enough (like the recent Might & Magic X which has UPlay as well as Steam). I don't think it's contradictory because: I purchased every game I pirate, if a DRM-free version appears I'll buy it and remove the pirated version off my HDD. There's different people in companies of course, the designers and the like obviously love creating cool stuff that they feel like they "own", for managers or producers they still have to keep on eye on money situation. More personal attacks.

Eldrich is good, actually. I quite enjoyed it. It is recommended.

If Crosmando's problem is that we get more games like this, then all I can say is "bring it on!" :)