I'm okay with obtaining a game through non-traditional channels when I'm unable to play it by any other (reasonable) means.
So, when your wants and desires are greater than your ability to fairly obtain what you want?
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: vudu on July 08, 2010, 06:07:58 PM
In the case of Mother 3, learning Japanese is not reasonable.
In the case of the original Mother, purchasing the only-known English prototype cartridge is not reasonable.
Purchasing a game on Virtual Console is reasonable. Buying a used SNES cartridge on eBay is reasonable.
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: UncleBob on July 08, 2010, 06:16:55 PM
Why is learning Japanese not reasonable? It seems to me that there's more than a couple of Japanese people who know how to read it.
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: Mop it up on July 08, 2010, 06:31:10 PM
I really think that the answer is far more complicated than the simple question being asked, but I'll stick with a basic answer.
Stealing is never okay. Even in the few times I've done so, I never thought it was okay. I just figured I wasn't hurting anyone, so it didn't bother me so much. There is also a question if downloading a ROM is stealing. Some say it isn't, because since it isn't a physical object, the victim still has the game. But it is still taking something that doesn't belong to oneself. Either way, it feels wrong to me, so I don't do it.
Now, I know that this topic was formed because of Mother 3 winning the RetroActive poll. Nintendo clearly has no plans to release the game here in North America, so I don't think any harm is being done by downloading a ROM. There is no lost sale there, nothing taken from the victim. It isn't something I will do myself, but I can't say I'm bothered if other people do.
The only pirated game I have is a reproduction NES cartridge of Earthbound. It was never released here, and even with VC, it is still looking like it never will be. Though I got it several years ago, back when Wii was Revolution and the VC wasn't even a concept. I probably wouldn't have gotten it today. If it ever does come to VC, I will happily pay $5-$6 for it.
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: Morari on July 08, 2010, 08:03:58 PM
It's okay to steal if you're Robin Hood. Hell, most people don't seem to mind the government stealing from them every day either.
However, ROMs are not stealing. Stealing requires that you deprive someone else of property. You wouldn't steal a car, would you? I know I wouldn't. But I'm willing to bet that you'd drive a Porsche around if you could perfectly replicate one with a few mouse clicks, all without harming or detracting from anyone else.
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: UncleBob on July 08, 2010, 08:06:15 PM
It's okay to steal if you're Robin Hood. Hell, most people don't seem to mind the government stealing from them every day either.
However, ROMs are not stealing. Stealing requires that you deprive someone else of property. You wouldn't steal a car, would you? I know I wouldn't. But I'm willing to bet that you'd drive a Porsche around if you could perfectly replicate one with a few mouse clicks, all without harming or detracting from anyone else.
I'd like to say that I used the word "steal" because that's the word vudu used in his original post. ;)
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: vudu on July 08, 2010, 08:08:53 PM
Obviously, I was referring the statement I made, therefore you get banned.
It's okay if I respond to THIS statement though... right? :P
And all of a sudden my score goes down. Go figure.
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: TJ Spyke on July 08, 2010, 09:54:03 PM
Stealing is never OK. I might be willing to play a pirated game that was never released commercially (for example, there were dozens and maybe hundreds of Atari 2600 ROMs that were never released as games for one reason or another).
Morari, it may not technically be theft to obtain ROMs, but it IS copyright infringement (and thus it IS illegal). BTW, I can guess what your political views are based on your comments, but we can't actually discuss those views here.
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: Morari on July 08, 2010, 10:51:25 PM
Stealing is never okay, per say. It is sometimes necessary though. A starving man, with no other options, may opt to steal a loaf of bread instead of dying. Obviously someone is deprived a loaf of bread, which makes said theft morally wrong and possibly damaging toward another person's well-being. However, I'd hardly blame someone that is in such a situation. There are many scenarios where theft, while not justifiable, can easily be necessary to some.
You're quite right though, ROMs do fall under copyright infringement, which is against the law. It's not on the same level as theft however. It seems that copyright laws do more to harm consumers than they do to protect creators nowadays. Individually created ROMs should clearly fall under fair-use, for archival and format shifting purposes if nothing else.
I seriously doubt that you could even begin to guess at my political views. Private message me if you care to try. :P
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: UncleBob on July 08, 2010, 11:01:05 PM
Individually created ROMs should clearly fall under fair-use, for archival and format shifting purposes if nothing else.
Anyone who wants to import a copy and rip their ROM is free to do it. In fact, I think I even said something about that in the other thread.
But that's not what's going on.
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: KDR_11k on July 09, 2010, 01:16:44 AM
Theft is only somewhat acceptable if you're starving and cannot afford any food, my country used to have a law allowing you to steal food in that case and eat it in the store, they abolished that though.
Or are you talking about something else?
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: Pale on July 09, 2010, 10:20:18 AM
It's okay to steal if you're Robin Hood. Hell, most people don't seem to mind the government stealing from them every day either.
However, ROMs are not stealing. Stealing requires that you deprive someone else of property. You wouldn't steal a car, would you? I know I wouldn't. But I'm willing to bet that you'd drive a Porsche around if you could perfectly replicate one with a few mouse clicks, all without harming or detracting from anyone else.
This is one of the stupidest things I have ever read.
And so vudu doesn't ban me. I'm referring to his opinion of the word steal and am ignoring his government comment.
Now, just in case someone needs me to clarify why it's stupid, here I go.
Morari, you are rationalizing blatant theft by twisting a definition. Protip. You have NEVER purchased an actual game. You have ALWAYS purchased the reasonable right to enjoy a particular game.
When you bought Super Mario World for the SNES, you did not buy intellectual property involved in the game. You bought the rights to enjoy someone else's intellectual property on your SNES.
Therefore, when you contribute to the distribution of said intellectual property in a way that results in the original IP owner not seeing any money for a net-new "enjoyment license" you are STEALING FROM THEM.
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: Sarail on July 09, 2010, 10:34:51 AM
If I could, Pale, I'd give you Karma points right now. :) Thanks!
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: Sundoulos on July 09, 2010, 10:37:26 AM
However, ROMs are not stealing. Stealing requires that you deprive someone else of property. You wouldn't steal a car, would you? I know I wouldn't. But I'm willing to bet that you'd drive a Porsche around if you could perfectly replicate one with a few mouse clicks, all without harming or detracting from anyone else.
My company writes contracted software that isn't easily available for consumption by the general public. If someone manages to take the code, we're not losing anything physical, but we're still being denied compensation for our work. It still also devalues it to the original purchaser.
I'll admit used to play ROMs of old Japanese games back in my college days (and when dinosaurs roamed the earth), before anything like the Virtual Console or remakes on the DS were available...especially to play games like Mother, Final Fantasy III, as well as Dragon Quest IV - VI, which I frankly just assumed would never be available to US audiences. Now, given that I played those in recent history, do you think that by playing the ROMs of these games made me more or less likely to purchase legal copies of those games? In the case of DQ, I did purchase IV and V remakes on DS, but it did diminish my enjoyment of the games. Generally speaking, though, playing old ROMs on my computer made it less likely that I would want to buy them on the Virtual Console, outside of a few "must-have" games.
The same holds true for illegally copying movies, music, etc. If I copy it, there's not much chance I'll feel like legally buying it later.
In the case of Mother 3, you can ostensibly get an import copy to download the ROM if you want to go to the trouble, but, as others have posited, how likely is it that most people will do that?
Also, taking the other side of the argument, there's something else I've been wondering about lately. I no longer have most of my old consoles or games, and one of the reasons I originally finally purchased my Wii was because I liked the option to obtain these old games on Virtual Console. I've probably dumped a few hundred dollars into VC purchases. Now, I was disappointed when I learned that these games would not be tied to a user account; Nintendo still has them tied to a local console. I'm a little upset about this; I can tell you that it's unlikely that I'll be inclined to buy them yet again on a future console or handheld. I'm not saying that I'll get into ROM downloading again, but I can tell you the prospect would probably tempt me and a number of other people.
Legally, I suppose there's no real question that Nintendo has the right to charge you to for using their intellectual property on each machine; however, how many of us will be really be willing to really purchase the same games again in the future? At what point do you think Nintendo will see diminishing returns on their old games? Do you think that they'll ever change their current policy?
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: KDR_11k on July 09, 2010, 10:59:39 AM
It's okay to steal if you're Robin Hood. Hell, most people don't seem to mind the government stealing from them every day either.
However, ROMs are not stealing. Stealing requires that you deprive someone else of property. You wouldn't steal a car, would you? I know I wouldn't. But I'm willing to bet that you'd drive a Porsche around if you could perfectly replicate one with a few mouse clicks, all without harming or detracting from anyone else.
This is one of the stupidest things I have ever read.
And so vudu doesn't ban me. I'm referring to his opinion of the word steal and am ignoring his government comment.
Now, just in case someone needs me to clarify why it's stupid, here I go.
Morari, you are rationalizing blatant theft by twisting a definition. Protip. You have NEVER purchased an actual game. You have ALWAYS purchased the reasonable right to enjoy a particular game.
When you bought Super Mario World for the SNES, you did not buy intellectual property involved in the game. You bought the rights to enjoy someone else's intellectual property on your SNES.
That is legal sophistry used to confuse people into accepting all kinds of bullshit restrictions on their games purchases like not being able to resell PC games. What you buy is a physical copy and as with anything you own you have the inherent right to use it (and contrary to the bullshit the BSA/ESA will tell you that includes the right to install it if that's necessary to run it, the law was specifically designed to allow regular sales contracts to handle software purchases and EULAs are just a bullshit measure to confuse people and exploit the fact that they can require you to click next on that screen if you want to use that software you bought and can't return). Copying it is against copyright law (but not theft, that's a different law and when you mean copyright infringement then effing say so, the penalties are completely different) but your rights to the cartridge you got from the store are the same as with any other physical purchase. Also note that you cannot legally reproduce most of the technical goods you buy since they'll be covered by various IP, from trademarks to patents.
As for the Mother 3 discussion, I don't know about you guys but if I were to order that from Play-Asia the moment the poll ends it'd arrive maybe a week after the Retroactive feature has already run.
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: Morari on July 09, 2010, 11:17:43 AM
It's okay to steal if you're Robin Hood. Hell, most people don't seem to mind the government stealing from them every day either.
However, ROMs are not stealing. Stealing requires that you deprive someone else of property. You wouldn't steal a car, would you? I know I wouldn't. But I'm willing to bet that you'd drive a Porsche around if you could perfectly replicate one with a few mouse clicks, all without harming or detracting from anyone else.
This is one of the stupidest things I have ever read.
Riiight. So you wouldn't be driving a top-of-the-line car if it were freely replicated at no-one's expense? See, that's the kind of dumb analogies pro-copyright people bring up. Copy infringement does not equate to theft. Physical goods are not present, and thus are never taken from anyone. There is an unlimited amount of digital goods to be had however, with not cost involved in producing them other than the initial development.
I'm not trying to rationalize theft, or even copyright infringement. I'm merely using a classic example of the copyright cartels to make people like you actually think for once. The idea that I'm merely renting a game is disgusting. When you've walked into a store and purchased something, you own it. You may not own the IP or the source code, but that disc and its contents are now yours. I should be able to make as many backups of it as I want, since the developer would never replace a broken disc in the future. Furthermore, I should be able to rip the game and get it running on whatever other system I can. Of course if I had those freedoms, then developers wouldn't be able to resell the same game on every system for decades... like Nintendo does.
This is all about limiting the rights and the fun that consumers have with their product. Even on the PC side, we see ungodly draconian DRM, dedicates servers stripped from titles, and environments that are all-but-impossible to mod and customize. Games aren't mean to be long-term fun anymore. They're just a quick cash grab... disposable products. That's why developers want to do away with the used market even more than piracy. In many ways, developers see them as the same thing. After all, they're not making money off of either, so clearly buying a used game is just as bad as pirating it, right?
More specifically in the case of Mother 3. Unless you live in Japan where it has been released, I say download the hell out of it. It's not your fault that Nintendo has overlooked an entire market because of greed. You shouldn't be required to jump through hoops just to get a product. Besides, I'd be surprised if most developers didn't think importing was against their EULA. :P
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: Pale on July 09, 2010, 11:58:26 AM
It's like talking to a wall.
Your car analogy is flawed. Let's fix it.
Let's say, for example, that a car company, we'll use Bugatti, puts $100 million into researching and designing their latest super car. Then they predict that they will sell roughly 5 thousand of their vehicles. That means they have to make at least $20,000 more than the cost of manufacturing on each car just to make up their R&D costs. Keep in mind here that the entire point of making these goods is to make a profit, as that is how people live their lives.
In your world, manufacturing costs would disappear after the first car was built and everyone would get a free Veyron after that. When would they ever make up their R&D costs? How does this not hurt anyone?
People who make video games (or write music, write books, create movies) are using their minds and skills to create something the vast majority of the world can't make on their own. In your world, the moment these works are created, they should be free for mass consumption. So what do the brains behind the process get for their sweat, stress, and risk? Nothing? Solely because once their work is done it's infinitely reproducible.
Have you ever truly created anything Morari? I just don't know what to say anymore.
Now: to KDR. There is nothing in what I said that is openly attacking someone's right to resell a used game. That is the legitimate TRANSFER of one's purchased right to the software. Not a duplication. Duplication is where the issue comes into play.
Overall, if all we are going to do is argue over the use of the word "theft", I have better things to do with my time.
However, if you are going to claim that duplicating someone's IP without their permission is somehow "less terrible" than how you define theft, we have a problem.
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: Morari on July 09, 2010, 12:20:48 PM
Pale, the car analogy isn't mine. The MPAA owns that one. It's a pro-copyright example that doesn't make sense precisely because it is about physical goods. It's like comparing apples and oranges. Frankly, you and anyone else would be a complete and utter liar if you said "No, I wouldn't replicate a new car or house for free". You continue to put words in my mouth, assuming that I advocate nothing but piracy. However, what you seemingly fail to realize is that there is a definitive difference between downloading piece of software and walking into the store and stealing a physical copy.
Now Pale, to quench your curiosity... Yes, I have created plenty. In fact, I make my living as an artist of various mediums. To add onto that, my primary hobby is film making. Because I am a true artist that actually creates things anew, I believe that my work should be spread, shared, and enjoyed. Unless I am contracted for a specific job by a specific client, everything I do is available for free on my website. You can purchase a physical copy (whether it be DVDs or poster prints) and have it in that form if you choose. A lot of people that enjoy my work make purchases so that they can show their support. I acknowledge this by providing otherwise unimportant incentives, whether it be higher-resolution art or DVD extras. Art should be free for the masses. The problem is that we probably haven't even been talking about at throughout this. We've been talking about commercial products. Rehashed video games and cliche Hollywood sequels. That's not art, it's a product.
Maybe the real problem is that individuals don't often possess the rights to a creation nowadays, but instead are held by corporations. Copyrights seem to linger on indefinitely instead of entering into the public domain as they're supposed to. This does nothing but stifle creativity, as now no one can make derivative works because copyright ensures that it's more profitable for a creation to have one limited release and then be locked away from everyone for eternity. Copyright, as it exists today, is nothing but governments pandering to corporations. It's not something that should be supported. It's something that should be evaluated and refined so that it can truly encourage and protect creativity.
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: Pale on July 09, 2010, 12:27:53 PM
If you want to distribute your works to the masses, that is your right.
However, that decision is up to the creator/owner of a piece. Just because you have an ideal that art should be free, doesn't give you the right to force that ideal on others by taking/distributing their work.
I personally feel that any piece of intellectual work is a commodity that should be monetized. People deserve to profit from their good works. If I were to see one of your films and I truly enjoyed it enough, I would want to give you some sort of compensation for your effort.
So, I apologize for my harsh words before, but I still hold that it is not your right to make blanket statements and actions on other work based solely on how you feel about your own.
Is Picasso less of an artist to you because he demanded payment for his works and actually made a living off them? Maybe.
But to me, his work should stand on its own and it's great that he was able to derive a living off of it.
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: Plugabugz on July 09, 2010, 12:37:58 PM
When does the copyright on games expire?
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: TJ Spyke on July 09, 2010, 12:46:39 PM
I can't speak for other countries, but in the US it is the same as anything else that can be copyrighted (music, movies, TV shows, etc.). The standard now is 95 years after publication or 120 years after creation, whichever is shorter. That means that Super Mario Bros., for example, will not be in the public domain in the US until 2081. In Japan, it's 70 years. So it will be in the public domain in Japan in 2055.
If Disney has its way though, that may not happen. Disney was the main company behind the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998, which increased the copyright period from 75 years to 95 years.
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: Caliban on July 09, 2010, 12:47:09 PM
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: Ian Sane on July 09, 2010, 02:20:13 PM
Stealing is acceptable in a case of a life or death. That's the old "stealing bread to feed your starving family" example. I also consider it acceptable to steal back something that someone already stole from you. I occasionally meet people who tell me that if someone stole something of mine and I broke into his house and took it back, that I'm "no better than he is" which I think is stupid. You're not stealing in that case because it's YOUR property. Are policer officers confiscating stolen goods and returning them to their owners stealing?
But you're not going to win me over on piracy. Now I think that videogame companies are full of **** when they list their annual "losses" due to piracy and make the assumption that everyone who pirated their game would have bought it. I also think that copying files is certainly not as serious as stealing a physical item. The law can nail guys for widely distributing pirated materail and certainly should charge them for selling it but just a few copied files should be a slap on the wrist and the forced deletion of the files.
If you own a copy of the game I don't think it's wrong to pirate a copy. Let's say you own a SNES game but your SNES breaks so you play emulated copies of the games you already legalled obtained on your PC. That's not stealing. That's nothing. You already bought the games.
And on that note if Mother 3 is not available in English then I would say the right thing to do is to buy a copy of the Japanese game and then play the English hacked ROM. Then you have not stolen the game but just obtained an English language version of the game you paid for.
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: Stogi on July 09, 2010, 03:08:40 PM
When is it ok?
When a monkey does it for you.
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: ThePerm on July 09, 2010, 06:10:05 PM
In reality if anyone had the power to make goods appear out of thin air, than you would be a douchebag not to let people do it. Thats the difference between reality and virtual reality. Copyright among software is a virtual reality. Not in the typical sense, but in the we can make stuff appear out of thin air and charge for it.. Certain countries tax on virtual money(WOW, second life), which is essentially taxing real money for monopoly money. The reason for this is some gullible person will buy fake money for real money. Real paper money is itself a virtual money as are the chips in a casino, originally meant to represent gold or silver, now only representing the flow of credit.
The only thing that keeps you from walking into a Wal-mart and taking a tv is something that is essentially not real. Its just an intangible construct of society. The only things people need to survive are food, water, and shelter.
Hopefully, fusion reactors will be successful and not destroy the earth, in which case, you could essentially build something out of thin air.
Title: Re: When is it okay to "steal"?
Post by: Chozo Ghost on July 10, 2010, 01:22:54 AM
If someone borrows 20 dollars and then never repays it, but then one day you find a 20 dollar bill laying on their table.... I guess it would probably be okay to steal it under that circumstance, but it might not even be stealing considering how its the repayment of a debt.
