For the third time, WHY is it unfair? You keep asserting it but don't tell me why. Says the guy who refuses to tell me why it's unfair.

Ok, because the posts are coming very fast, GOG forum formatting sucks and I saw nothing important to reply to.

What specifically would you like me to reply to?

I don't have a problem with you, GameRager. However, you have, I believe, admitted to piracy yourself. Haven't you? If so then, realistically, if you think it's not a big deal, I'm going to be able to change your mind.

1. I already explained why.....because extortion is just PLAIN UNFAIR. ;)

2. The huge reply I made at post 65. I think I made some good points to yours and wondered why you didn't reply to them is all. Sometimes I notice(not saying you are btw) some people only reply to bits they feel they can rally a good counterpoint against and as such they skip alot of what people say to them to support their own points more.
Why should that matter? Heck, most of the goggers who post here have pirated in the past or continue to do so in other forms of media or for moral/semi-legal reasons(to strip out DRM) until today.

BTW that whole reply you just made is another lowball tactic some use to prop up their points in an argument(The whole "I can't convince you because you ARE one of the ones you're talking about and are possibly biased/etc so I gave you the win...later, bye, etc."). I sure hope you're not trying to employ those words as such. :\

For me extortion is WRONG regardless of who it is applied to, full stop, no matter the reason it is used. Just to clarify in case I didn't earlier.

Here is the situation.

Party I: Creates content. Requests payment.

Party II: Take it. Does not pay.

And Party I is in the wrong for seeking penalties? Really?

I mean all your talk about "oh, they're still people. Just because they have a different moral code, they shouldn't be treated unfairly" fails for the simple reason that CDPR can say, "We have our own moral code that says sending these letters is the right thing to do."

So what, no one can say anything that another does is "wrong", but you can say CDPR's "extortion" is "wrong"? Doesn't make any sense. Posts are moving very fast and GOG formatting sucks. Also, some things are just not worth replying to. I don't know what you're driving at. Stopping shoplifters doesn't stop bank robbers, so why bother stopping shoplifters? I do know that. The reason I say that is because pirates like to hide behind these arguments as justifications. This time, they are exposed because they have no justification besides being greedy and not respecting someone else's hard work. But I doubt that they work for free, do they? Because punishing piracy does make SOME pirates stop.

Because failing to punish it (and again, by punish, we mean monetary compensation) will stop SOME people from beginning to pirate. There aren't many incentives that a pirate won't just go ahead and steal anyway. If it's "free" through illicit means, yes, some people will still choose to buy it. I know that, you know that... point is? I agree. But apparently, it's not nearly enough. It's not as if a few hundred copies went around that way... it was much more than that.
I mean, I'm not going to sit around and debate the legitimacy of murder with Ted Bundy. What's the point?

So I have some obligation to confront every single person about every single thing I find distasteful? Give me a break.

I *CAN* continue to discuss it with you, in the hopes that others will change their mind. But if you are dug in on the idea, I'm not going to change your mind.

I think the deception here lies in the fact that people who are pro-piracy to begin with are acting like their objections have to do with something other than their intention to continue pirating and their desire not to suffer any consequences for their CHOSEN behaviors. To YOU.

But those of us who like extortion are "people" too! So who are you to judge, just because our moral code doesn't match yours?
____________________________________________________________________

BTW, weird thing about this whole discussion is that I'm against the laws that allow CDPR to do such things... but what I'm even more against is pirates... I have no pity for it.

I think they should publish people's names when they find out who does it so we can socially ostracize all of you. :)

And your argument is utter bullshit too - comparing robbing a bank using guns and endangering people's lives with downloading a game where no-one would even KNOW it happened unless they were snooping? Are you SERIOUS? After 20 years of piracy talks, I don't get why people STILL make these completely ridiculous analogies which are so horrible it personally offends my intelligence.

Or the awesome, "Would you steal a car from a car dealership?" analogies.

1. No party one is not in the wrong as long as they do it in a fair way. Extorting is not a fair way imo.

1.b. No it doesn't fail......all humans deserve the same basic level of humane treatment in all aspects of their life, regardless of what they do in their life(Basic right to healthcare, fair legal process, etc). If CDPR did say or think that then it's their own moral code & that of those that follow it, but it is still universally morally wrong to extort people regardless of how they feel about the matter.

1.c. You mistook what I wrote. You are free to say or think something is morally wrong if you want.....Saying or thinking something is morally wrong and something being universally considered by many to be morally wrong are two different things however. Some consider piracy morally ok in some cases while others do not. Most people do agree that extorting people is wrong however, full stop, and I agree with this as well.

2. Ok then...not a problem.

3. The question was loaded in that it seemed written/formulated in a way to evoke a certain(Possibly emotional or irrational) response & seemed like you were asking the wrong question to be asking on that matter on purpose to evoke said response.

And again another loaded question.......I dunno if you are doing it on purpose to support your argument or don't notice it, but you are doing it alot.....asking me questions that seemed written to provoke a certain advantageous response, etc.

I already wrote above that we should try other methods to stop shoplifters as they work better and the ones being used work less and/or are immoral(in the case of the threat letters). I never said we should stop fighting piracy(shoplifters)....so why ask me a question as if I had said that?

4. Yes but the methods either don't work to a great degree(making them nearly superfluous) or are a pain against paying customers.


DRM pains only the paying customer as it can be cracked easily, while customers suffer. And threat letters as sent currently are extortion and just universally morally wrong & AGAIN as with DRM they don't catch the big fish or most pirates, making them also near to superfluous.

As such the best methods so far seem to be incentivising a legal purchase through DRM free gaming and the addition of extras, which have shown to work. It may not punish people as much as you'd like them to be, but it makes the most financial sense and gets more to buy legally and less to pirate(which is what most of us want am I right?).

5. Some will steal anyway but as I said(and you seem to be ignoring as it doesn't support you case) it DOES work as shown by TW2 piracy ratios compared to other titles. TW2 was pirated factors less than other titles so it shows it does work to catch flies with honey than with vinegar. As for the few who pirate anyway why care about them if you can convert many or most pirates into customers? To just punish them because they must be punished? Sorry but that doesn't make any sense other than to show your bias towards punishing pirates for being pirates/doing something you dislike rather than actually trying to convert them to paying customers.

6. I think you get my point, you just act purposefully dense and ask loaded questions to support your side of the argument. I've provided several clear and concise points here I think, while you keep playing the fool.

To answer though, in case you really didn't get it, the "Point" is that you can't stop ALL crime so why try? It is not even feasible to attempt such a herculean feat......so why not try to stop the crime you can(or prevent it if possible) and minimize the damage done/make the world as best as you can?

7. You seem to ignore the fact that it was DRM free(and easily torrented) yet more people chose to buy it anyways. This proves that going after pirates with the current methods doesn't work and that these methods do work & supports my argument I would think.

8. Not all pirates are that way....please stop generalizing. My point that some will buy after trying and that not all buy to rip people off to counter your generalization earlier that they do still stands.

1. Because I am no less worthy of debating an issue just because I have an interest in that issue? And also because some meaningful dialog can be exchanged possibly between us and others here?

2. No but if you are going to debate someone you shouldn't pick up your ball and head for home when the debate doesn't go your way or your points get called into question.

3. I was mainly trying to show the errors in your line of thinking, not trying to change your mind.

4. Not everyone who is against this is pro-piracy. If you want to debate properly learn not to generalize so much.

5. As I said there's a bigg difference between something that is universally accepted as wrong(stuff like murder/rape/extortion/etc.) and something one considers morally wrong or right. As a society we usually try to uphold laws against things that are considered universally morally wrong as such things are usually just plain wrong to begin with......this isn't so usually(something being wrong or right technically) with things only a few or some consider morally wrong or right.

6. This is one of the main exceptions I had to what you wrote earlier. People are people, and if we think(in general, as a people) that something is wrong when done against person or group then it's wrong no matter who such actions are levied against.

YOU WOULDN'T DOWNLOAD A CAR

What, no reply to my page long post? :P

TOO LATE! ALREADY DID! MUHAHAHAHA!

http://www.xmdr.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/car-insurance-policy.jpg

So, whatever happened to that guy with the Layton avatar from the last thread about this, who said he was going to backup his games in case GOG decided to do something to his account, and would proceed to trash talk CDPR and GOG on his big website?

I made spelling/quoting mistakes.....reply is above.
This is what I was/am trying to illustrate in part to Stoic........good verbiage my friend. :)
Because that's all they have and without it and the law behind them then most of their position would crumble?
Bwahahaahaha......must now download hot sexy girlfriend for front seat driving, yes?

Ok, your opinion. Since you think piracy is a moral good, you assume that as a premise. But if I do not adhere to that premise, then this it not extortion but rather recovery.

I would hold to the following principle: people deserve to be compensated for their hard work by those who 1) CHOOSE to use it and 2) know that the creator requests compensation.

What do you call someone who does not compensate someone else for the work that they choose to benefit from, despite explicit requests to do so? You have declared some of my posts to be fallacious. In some cases, you may be right to do so.

That said, you figure a guy like that could see an argumentum ad populum when he posts one.

But to follow the fallacious logic, do you not think that piracy is "considered by many" to be morally wrong? Because it is. More ad populum, but alright, "most people" ALSO believe that a party has the right to seek legal recourse when their creative works are being used without permission. And, I dare say, "most people" would not consider that to be extortion but rather a valid recovery. You may not like the analogy, but you need to do more than simply declaring it a loaded question and moving on...

We are using different definitions of the word 'fight.' To me, 'fight' means 'confront, thwart, attack', to you, it sounds more like 'surrender.' Seeking recovery from pirates is a pain to paying customers? Come on.

Unless I'm reading a different question than you are, I don't see where I endorsed DRM. I'm here on GOG, you should know that I don't like DRM. However, pirates certainly haven't helped paying customers avoid it. Ok, we can keep going back and forth with this. You apparently believe it is alright to use the works of others against their permission and not compensate them for their work. Since I do not believe that, I do not lose a wink of sleep when pirates are 'extorted.'

Yes, ultimately, I'm against it, but it's not as if the pirates aren't bringing it on themselves by doing something wrong on their own time.

Around and around we go... Those are two separate things.

DRM Free: DRM free does win back a small portion of pirates because let's face it, DRM is a hassle. So, some will pirate to avoid it. However, as you again admit, DRM free is not a perfect solution.

Extras: Who cares? Pirates will just take those anyway. Why would that encourage one to buy the product? The only way I see that working is online-only, which is nearly as bad as DRM, IMO at least. The two are not mutually exclusive. CDPR has employed both tactics. They probably would have continued to, if not for the non-pirating community that sympathizes with piracy and all the pro-piracy media. Speaking of fallacies: correlation =/ causation.

Plus, in case you don't remember, CDPR came out *BEFORE* TW2 was released and *explicitly* stated that they would put tremendous effort into pursuing pirates of TW2. So what do you make of that? Because it's still wrong.

Because you can convert even more pirates into customers by making them accountable for their actions.

Because you can convert even more pirates into customers by preventing them from becoming pirates in the first place. If people realize that they are going to be held accountable for their actions, then some start acting like it.

Otherwise, what's the motivation *not* to pirate? How does "Hey, we're DRM-free!" convince those who do not care about DRM? It doesn't. Both can be done. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Pirates should be "punished" for the same reason shoplifters are. Because punishing them makes some of them surrender and start giving fair compensation for what they use. Ad hominem now. Because you CAN stop some? I mean, come on... I'm the one playing the fool? We can't stop all theft either, but do we try? Yes, because we CAN stop some. We can't stop all murder, but do we try? Yes, because we CAN stop some.

Why should we stop doing things just because we can't do them perfectly? With that line of thinking, CDPR should just abandon DRM-free as a method to stop piracy, also. Why bother with DRM-free when it won't convert ALL of the pirates? Indeed, and up until recently CDPR had an innovative strategy in the business that involved a two-pronged approach: generous to our customers, strong against those who download without permission.

Their policy worked, as evidenced by the numbers. How much of that was due to one approach or the other? Who knows? But we do know that strategy worked.

Being tough on piracy and generous to one's customers are not mutually exclusive ideas. The evidence that they're not mutually exclusive is CDPR's approach thusfar: TW2 sales vs.piracy rate. I don't ignore that. It proves that CDPR's two strategies worked. Both, together... worked. Why do you highlight one and ignore the other? Some.

For the record, I have as much faith in them as in any business. :D

GR, sorry I wasn't clearer earlier. You want me to respond to every letter you write, man, it's kinda tedious. The biggest problem with us having this discussion right now is that, due to your pro-piracy stance, we're trying to have two different discussions at once: the letters AND piracy in general.

What we believe about piracy in general will certainly affect our opinions about the letters, and I think that's what we need to resolve first. So after this post, I will only engage you on the moral nature of piracy until we can resolve that issue first.

Continued: As stated, I will continue for the benefit of others. (If they should find it such.) With all due respect, besides your labeling my posts to be loaded questions or your assertion that you are winning, I do not believe I am "losing" anything here.

The reason that I mentioned that is that sometimes it can be pointless. Much of our conversation has indeed been pointless, as we have been spinning in circles. Do you not see that? Spinning... spinning...

I disagree with your claim that this IS extortion to begin with.

Extortion: when a person unlawfully obtains either money, property or services from a person(s), entity, or institution, through coercion.

Point 1: It is not unlawful.

Point 2: It is not forcible taking but forcible recovery for an act committed by a guilty party who brought it upon himself/herself.

Therefore, by definition, it is not extortion.

Here's extortion: you're sitting around, minding your own business and I come up to you and say "You better have $100 for me by Tuesday, this time... or I'll kill you."

"Why?"

"Because I said so."

Here's something that's not extortion: "You better have $100 for me or I'll take you to court and attempt to get it that way.'

"Why?"

"Because you used our property without permission. We have evidence to this effect and believe it will stand up in a court of law."

See the difference? Yes. People are people.

If you really want to play the whole, "most people believe X" business (which I do not think is the way we should approach this or anything else), then here goes:

It is wrong to use someone else's work when you have been denied permission to do so. We call this by many names: trespassing, burglary and hey, even drumroll please... extortion.

We do not call taking one to court for these crimes "extortion."

It is a recovery. In all of these cases, someone has been damaged. The pirate is not the damaged party, his victim is. So no, it's not extortion when you forcibly obtain compensation for an illegally accessed item.