I'm trying to get a grip on what you're trying to tell me.

Can you change your mind about whether or not something is wrong?

Can you do something wrong and then regret it later?
"If you fail you have options.... try again or get a different job."

"It's hard enough supporting myself. I could care less about most other people"

So in other words, if it was you, you wouldn't do it. But for others, they should. Is that the position you're holding here? Are you the same guy that was lecturing me on hypocrisy?

1. You can change your moral stance on whether something is morally wrong. That's basically what you're doing when you do something then stop doing it later, no matter what the reason behind that change.

2. I never said I wouldn't do it. Just that if others do it and fail that's their problem to deal with. I actually did make some small games years back, btw. They were so-so.

1. You can say it's wrong....to you. And that it's illegal. That's about it.

I usually hate when people say something is morally wrong as if everyone holds that belief. Yes some things are universally wrong but not everything. I dislike more that people say something is (morally) wrong as if it's fact and not their opinion than them saying it.

2. I never said I wanted to force people to do these things. Not being mean but stop putting words in my mouth. ;)

I said if they DO do it though, of their own free will, and fail then it's not my concern.

Nope. I have never stolen anything from anyone, at least not since I was old enough to know better (around year after birth, give or take). It isn't the way I was brought up. We might all be human beings, however this doesn't excuse us from making incorrect choices. People are imperfect, thus prone to making mistakes; dishonesty isn't a mistake, it is a choice someone makes.

What IS true about human beings is that they will choose the option that is best for them, limited only by their personal ethics. Thus, if artists, writers, programmers, or any other sort of creator can't get compensated to their preference, they will get a new, probably less creative, job that they CAN get compensated for. That is where the argument linked in the OP falls apart, as many arguments do; it fails to consider secondary effects such as people finding other, more gainful, employment.

Sorry to be off topic but I just found it amusing that Krypsyn's forum-title is "Dread Pirate" and he posts against piracy in a topic on piracy LOL
I agree with his point about human beings though

Oh, hahaha, totally forgot I even set that. I haven't checked it in nearly 3 years (not since I created the account). It is a reference to one of my favorite movies, "The Princess Bride". :P

EDIT: Silly reply code not liking the quotes....

So which Dread Pirate Roberts did you take the name from? :)

Zomgosh, movie spoilers for a 15+ year old movie ahead! :P

Inigo Montoya. He just looks the part of a pirate more than Wesley. He actually sort of looks like Hook (Dustin Hoffman), sans the mustache, from the movie of the same name.

Anyway, enough with the off-topic from me. ;)

If this article was supposed to change my mind about piracy, it failed miserably.

I also love that movie

Back on topic - some of those great free games made by people in their spare time are made by people hoping to break into the industry [citation needed] ( :P )
And I imagine there'd be less if there were no industry to inspire them. (Or less money in the industry due to lack of business interest)

The big business side allows for multiple developers to work on a project with some in modelling, animation, voice acting, level design, etc . Small indie developers have less resources in that regard (as has been mentioned above). I like my good games to have a nicely polished finish - not that graphics/sound/fx can polish a turd but if the game is good then it's nice to have both. There are also good and bad free games both with and without the polish.
(Then I'm easy to please - nice graphics doesn't mean HD-photorealism - I still think the original Eye Of the Beholder has nice graphics ... crappy animation but nice graphics).

And since most pirates pirate regardless of big-business v. small indie developer that's a moot point. The OP-linked article basically said that. So we're down to 'is piracy harmful'? I have to disagree with the article that 'it's ok because it costs nothing to reproduce the bits'. It may have been speculation to develop a game and then ask for money from those who enjoy it but without that money coming back we don't get another game from them.

I would be happier if more of my money went straight to the developers than to the publishers but then I'd also be happy if they'd never cancelled Firefly - doesn't mean I'll get it in the world of business.

When counting the cost of piracy we can't just add up the number of pirated copies and then multiply by the RRP. - they're not all lost sales (not that that makes it ok to pirate something, just keeping the money in perspective) So how can we evaluate the actual cost? (genuine question, not seen any info on it - any studies done?)

Not that I think all pirates are evil - though I have less time for the ones who put it up on a site and charge for the downloads than for the 12-year old who copies a couple of games with his mates.

I think I need more caffeine - this reads as a very disjointed post...
In a perfect world we'd have no need for money and piracy wouldn't exist ... and there'd be doughnuts with the jam filling and sugar on top that didn't make a mess as you ate them.

you dont feel you are a pirate because you listen music for free? You are a bloody pirate, everything else is just in details. :D ( youtube-not pirate, in PC-pirate, at friends house-both pirates possibly, radio-not pirate, borrowed cd? - pirate) its just a matter of acusation...

Great idea. I love your way of thinking. :)

Most every law applies some exceptions for children, simply because children have yet to learn. We are not flawless to begin with, but repeating an error and not learning from it is a different story. Most people who posted here said they were guilty of copyright infringement as child, not as full mature grown up. I (and the law ;)) consider that a vast difference.
When I was young, I was involved in a little fight with another guy. Now I would condemn that violence.

Create a company, get investors and get going! ;)
There's nothing to stop you.

Funny enough, Wishbone (whom you replied to) mentioned he does NOT want the commercial advertisement part, so that is of no concern.

Youtube pays a general fee nowadays. It's actually tricky to spot something illegal (music wise) there as of right now (and know that it is illegal).
A borrowed CD is perfectly legal with most copyright law as is radio, since they again pay for that.
I'm not sure though about the 'in PC and friends house' point. Mind to elaborate what you were trying to describe here?

No need to tax everything. The free marked would work as it always has for physical goods and services. It'd be a taxlike-based international artificial system of funding to replace the current copyright-based international artificial system of funding.

The idea has a huge number of problems to be sure, but so does copyright. I'd really like to see these sort of ideas taken more seriosly. If copyright is really the best way to handle all this, I'd like to at least hear some convincing arguments for it.