Piracy poll trifecta complete.

[Bucket]

There is EXACTLY ONE reason DRM exists, and that is piracy. Its actual effectiveness is a moot argument; one causes the other, simple as that. Furthermore, I can't imagine many circumstances that would bring about an end to DRM - but the end of piracy would be a start. Cynicism aside, there is no other option MORE likely to end DRM. The "two wrongs" argument is similarly inadequate as, unlike developers, people who download warez don't actually have anything to lose by breaking the cycle.

So, given these truths...

[Da Werecat]

But what if DRM causes piracy???

Bucket said:

The "two wrongs" argument is similarly inadequate as, unlike developers, people who download warez don't actually have anything to lose by breaking the cycle.

Except free shit.

[j4rio]

I've never bought a single game and wouldn't have bothered to do so even if pirated stuff didn't exist in the first place. Just because I can't get a thing for free anymore doesn't mean I'll be forced to buy it.

[berd]

wow it sure would be nice if piracy stopped existing wouldn't it

[Bucket]

j4rio said:

Just because I can't get a thing for free anymore doesn't mean I'll be forced to buy it.

And if you don't feel entitled to your free software, more power to you. If one disagrees with the seller over the value of something, one walks away empty-handed. One doesn't get to re-negotiate at a whim. We call that theft - and that falls within the legal definition as such, despite what equivocating internet scholars try to tell you.

[Mithran Denizen]

Wait, so all other issues aside, bartering = theft now? That post doesn't make much sense.

I sell products and services to plenty of people who do disagree with me on their value. If they all walked away empty-handed rather than renegotiate (I'm always willing to budge), I'd have near zero referrals and basically less than a quarter of the business I do.

Theft is totally separate.

[Captain Ventris]

Mithran Denizen said:

Wait, so all other issues aside, bartering = theft now? That post doesn't make much sense.

I sell products and services to plenty of people who do disagree with me on their value. If they all walked away empty-handed rather than renegotiate (I'm always willing to budge), I'd have near zero referrals and basically less than a quarter of the business I do.

Theft is totally separate.

You, as the seller, agree that the monetary value of your product can be variable. You permitted negotiation and came to an agreement. There was no renegotiating on a whim, it was part of the initial deal as initiated by you, the seller. No seller is required to negotiate.

[Clonehunter]

You could argue that DRM/Piracy is like Prohibition/Speakeasies. Speakeasies dried up after prohibition ended, as all that did was cause people to break the law ind roves whether that meant illegal bars or Capone-esque gangs. However, once prohibition ended, the number one way to get alcohol was still to buy it, just from a legal source. Once it was readily available, moonshiners had no reason to really continue.

With digital media the "moonshiners" don't really lose out on the business. They can still go on and help piracy flourish. Do the anonymity of the Internet, many people will still just continue to pirate even if something like Steam just got rid of the DRM policies. In fact, piracy could potentially skyrocket when some titles become DRM-free for the first time. Why bother buying at all?

It just boils down to people who would actually go back to buying games in support of a DRM-free system, and those who will abuse it regardless. In fact, I don't think the numbers would change. Pirates would simultaneously rise and fall depending on the titles and the methods. It's a different era. People are different. If this was Cyberpunk 2020 and we all had to "net in" to access the web, you could probably expect Cyber Gangs going around and literally fry the competition brain-dead in the same manner capos ousted each other with Thompsons and sawed-offs.

[Mithran Denizen]

Captain Ventris said:

You, as the seller, agree that the monetary value of your product can be variable. You permitted negotiation and came to an agreement. There was no renegotiating on a whim, it was part of the initial deal as initiated by you, the seller. No seller is required to negotiate.

But the word '(re)negotiate' by definition indicates that it is a communicative process, i.e. with the involvement and consent of the seller. Piracy is not a renegotiation, and neither is theft.

And I have indeed renegotiated for people 'on a whim', after already agreeing on price. Whether because of qualms about the finished work, or merely changed circumstances in the period between the initial agreement and the actual completion.

[YukiHerz]

I voted that i want free shit because that doesn't mean i actually pirated it, gotta take the free offers when they pop up.

For me, piracy is "ok" if either the game is not available anymore, it isn't available in your region and there's now way to import it(though this is pretty unlikely to happen) or you just can't buy shit from your country, i.e. the dollar being too high compared to your local money.

For long now Steam and other gaming platforms allow me to buy in my local money at fair prices, i'm of those that doesn't mind DRM as long as it isn't bullshit restrictive, like Origins, now i do have an Origin account and some games but i barely use it, i don't think the removal of DRM would stop piracy, for the same reason Clonehunter stated, the lack of DRM would make the job of the pirates even easier, or simply put, they'd be outputting links to games through adf.ly/similar even faster, and probably a lot more people would favor them because why pay for something if there's no caveats with the pirated versions anymore?

[Krispy]

You left out the two most relevant options:

(*) WTF is DRM and why do I care?

(*) Impse

[Bucket]

Mithran Denizen said:

But the word '(re)negotiate' by definition indicates that it is a communicative process,

It can be implied within context but communication is not integral to the definition as you say. When you don't agree to the price but decide you should still have the product, you make a unilateral decision to alter the terms - a renegotiation. Of course, I'm only describing the mechanics of theft which should be elementary. The legal definition of theft is another discussion.

I don't mince words.

[Jaxxoon R]

YOU WOULDN'T STEAL A CAR

USED GAMES ARE MURDER

[Pedro VC]

Don't buy shit with DRM, if it uses DRM torrent it instead. Simple.

[Mithran Denizen]

Bucket said:

It can be implied within context but communication is not integral to the definition as you say. When you don't agree to the price but decide you should still have the product, you make a unilateral decision to alter the terms - a renegotiation. Of course, I'm only describing the mechanics of theft which should be elementary. The legal definition of theft is another discussion.

Perhaps we're just miscommunicating. I am genuinely interested in your preferred definition of 'negotiate' then, one that does not require active involvement of multiple parties.

Unilateral negotiation seems to be an oxymoron at best. There's already a better word for that: a 'decision'. Which is what theft and piracy are.

I don't mince words.

Um, okay? You just kind of hack at them clumsily with a dull blade like the rest of us, then?

[Aliotroph?]

Bucket said:

There is EXACTLY ONE reason DRM exists, and that is piracy.

False. The other reason DRM exists is so greedy bastards can tell you when and how you can use their products.

[T_Silverwolf]

The majority of kids (talking the 5-30 crowd) want free stuff because finances are an issue.

The majority of execs in corporations producing high dollar (8 figure plus) content want to protect their investment and see a profit.

Some people just want free shit regardless of age and situation, and some corporate execs (Movie/Music industry, I'm looking at you) want all the money they can snatch.

This is the problem with subjective morality; it muddies waters. As a content producer myself, I'd be pretty upset if I knew people were stealing the things I put time and effort into ONLY IF I wasn't making enough to support myself with the necessities like food, water and shelter.

Corporations don't have that problem.

Most of my games are paid for, most of my music is paid for (paid directly to the band/content producer and not the studio) and ultimately most of my computer stuff is open source stuff which I donate to when I'm able to do so. I go out of my way to avoid DRM and refuse with a vehement disgust to supply any company with information or access to my machine or the media that is consumed on it. I don't care if they were offering life narration by Wayne June and oral sex by whomever I so chose for that day.

Corporations are psychopathic and should be treated as such; is what you're going to give up worth what they offer in exchange/return? Chances are pretty god damned good it isn't. Especially when there are alternatives to procuring it.

[Tosi]

Buy the DRM-infected product, download the crack, apply it, and enjoy your DRM-free experience.
It's still illegal, but you'll feel better about yourself.

[Da Werecat]

Doesn't really matter why DRM exists. Piracy is still a wronger wrong, therefore DRM is justified.

[LkMax]

You forgot one option: "This thread is a shitty disguised apology to DRM using piracy as excuse and blaming the consumer with clearly biased options". Oh, I see, it would be too long for the poll. Carry on.

It's clear DRM doesn't stop piracy, only slow it, so in the end it only affects legitimate users and in some extreme cases it limits game longevity (as in, the time the game will be playable).

[Bucket]

Mithran Denizen said:

Perhaps we're just miscommunicating. I am genuinely interested in your preferred definition of 'negotiate' then, one that does not require active involvement of multiple parties.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/negotiate?s=t
You'll notice the word has quite a few definitions, only SOME of which necessarily involve other parties.

Aliotroph? said:

False. The other reason DRM exists is so greedy bastards can tell you when and how you can use their products.

Putting a price tag on your own blood, sweat, and tears = greed.
I see. Thanks for your input.

[dew]

Nice propaganda, Trump 2016.

[Doomkid]

All I'm saying is, from what I hear, the reality is that DRM sometimes just prevents piracy and that's fine, but sometimes it causes loads of frustration for the end user, prevents the product from being used more fully, and loads of other things ranging from inconveniences to full blown breakages in functionality. It depends on the product and the developer but yeah, to pretend some high-profile devs haven't used it in questionable/ineffective ways is very one sided.

[berd]

The more I read discussions about piracy, the more it seems to me like a moot point. The modern age of technology has made piracy an inevitability. There's details to be read into, but the reality is, if you can't make the connection that you should ultimately buy the vast majority of what you pirate (with exception depending on the circumstance) then you should probably rethink things.

That said, there are terrible ideologues at both sides of the issue that refuse to read into any nuance or uncertainty, so if you feel hesitant to make a judgement, then I don't blame you.

[Avoozl]

I was going to buy The Witcher 3 since it was DRM free but I haven't yet done so since I'm waiting for a possible complete edition so I don't have to buy the DLC separately, I refuse to pirate it.

[AndrewB]

Content producers can suck it. I will pirate anything, anywhere, any time. I have engaged in no such agreement with any developer to avoid downloading their content. It's impossible to breach a contract that doesn't exist.

[Obsidian]

/me pirates AndrewB's liver.

[fraggle]

Andrew of the family Bassett said:

Content producers can suck it. I will pirate anything, anywhere, any time. I have engaged in no such agreement with any developer to avoid downloading their content. It's impossible to breach a contract that doesn't exist.

Careful, if it's maritime law you're talking about, I'd imagine that piracy is probably a pretty serious issue.

[Linguica]

AndrewB said:

I have engaged in no such agreement with any developer to avoid downloading their content. It's impossible to breach a contract that doesn't exist.

PROTIP: Crimes Exist

[Bucket]

If only more people would openly admit to being a throbbing parasite on society as AndrewB has! I applaud your brave and unapologetic degenerateness.