orcishgamer: The fundamental reason you even see this quandary is that you've already prematurely rejected all the middle grounds that have both been suggested and proven to work in at least some instances.
So I rejected the middle ground by.... asking you what it was. Um... OK?
In fact, at the end of the day, doing absolutely nothing and concentrating on your core business and fans seems to work fabulously for many companies.
That depends what you mean. If you make it and make it well, that doesn't mean you weren't wronged.
So doing nothing is indeed your middle ground?
Your problem seems to be that you fundamentally feel some sort of horrible wrong is being committed and you want, well, I don't even know what to call it besides vengeance.
Reimbursement is not vengeance. It's called doing what you were supposed to do in the first place.
Even $5 or $10 titles are often pirated. Isn't it sad to you how greedy some people are that they benefit from someone else's work and they can't be bothered to support that artist at such a reasonable price? Software is a cheap luxury good. If they can't afford it, then why are they spending hours using it?
This doesn't necessarily apply to people who have no access to obtain it, though.
It's not even a rational vengeance as it seems to be of the variety that hurts the alleged victim, in fact probably as much or more as the alleged crime ever did.
I never said I support these specific sizes of fines or these specific measures over and above better alternatives. However you have not provided any alternative.
You don't like any of the answers that seem to work,
Which are?
so you pretend that they don't exist.
"They"? That's plural my friend. Do nothing is singular.
Yet they do and people are successfully making games, movies, music, books, paintings, etc. Not only that but many of those industries are growing by leaps and bounds every, single year. I have yet to be convinced that there's any great social ill that requires any solution whatsoever at this point. The evidence (real evidence, not cherry picked anecdotes) just doesn't seem to support it.
I don't see the issue as doing well vs. not doing well. You can be harmed even if you are doing well. Surely you would not dispute that?
DarrkPhoenix: And aside from being utterly ineffective at stopping piracy or increasing sales (note these are two different things), such heavy-handed tactics destroy one of the few things that's actually effective in convincing people to buy: goodwill. Companies that establish a rapport with their potential customers and foster an atmosphere of goodwill have a much easier time of convincing those potential customers to become real customers. Pissing away that goodwill by getting behind heavy-handed legal tactics and engaging in rhetoric to try to scare people is one of the worst things a company can do.
Where is the goodwill on the other side, pray tell? It's kinda tough to have goodwill about people that are ripping you off.
I like the fact that GOG offers DRM-free titles, great support and lots of good will themselves. So I support them. But even if they didn't, that doesn't mean I should go out and torrent their games, right?
(OK, obviously GOG is not a developer, but same point holds.)
Aside from fostering goodwill, the other thing that as been quite effective in decreasing piracy and increasing sales has been making easy, affordable alternatives to piracy available. iTunes, Amazon mp3, Spotify, etc, have all been tremendously effective in re-acquiring customers for the music industry, and Netflix and Redbox have been similarly effective for movies.
That's working really well for your 65 year old mother and her circle of friends, huh?