Welcome to Omgili,
Omgili ( Oh My God I Love It ;) is a search engine for discussions. With Omgili you can find answers and solutions, debates, discussions, personal experiences, opinions and more... To learn more about Omgili click here.
This is a complete preview of the discussion as it was indexed by Omgili crawlers. Use this preview if the original discussion is unavailable.
Click here to view the original discussion.
[http://forums.indiegamer.com/showthread.php?t=14...]
Click here to search for discussions with Omgili discussions search engine.
 |
Developers demand £7.5m damages from file-sharers... - Indiegamer Developer Discussion Boards
Sorry if this has been posted already
Did any of you see these news articles regarding the games industry suing for £7.5m in damages from file-sharers:
-http://www.developmag.com/news/30373...m-file-sharers
-http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news...aying-Hardball
Peter Moore's reaction: Quote: : "People put a lot of blood, sweat and tears into their content and deserve to be paid for it.
It's absolutely wrong, it is stealing," -Full article http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news...iracy-Lawsuits
Any thoughts, good idea or bad idea, scared, worried etc...
|
|
Personally I think this has a lot to do with "value".
I will not pay $25 for some crappy band's CD becuase I like one song.
I will find a copy of that one song whichever way suits me best.
I have no problems paying $2 for that one song but only if I can do anything I want with it.
Likewise I refuse to pay $39.99 for some crappy video game that I know was sold mostly on hype, is full of mainly just eye candy, and will be collecting dust on my shelf after 2 hours of play.
I will want to see a demo at least to determine if the game is worth buying.
Games that don't provide useful demos are asking to be cracked.
Likewise I refuse to pay $25.99 for a DVD of an average movie.
Rent and burn etc.
I 100% agree people should be paid for the work they do.
I do not think anyone should take or get stuff for free.
BUT
There is a huge gap between the value you get when you spend your money.
Again with references to the music industry, you can act like Metallica and make everyone hate you becuase you initiate lawsuits and badmouth the people that made you famous, or you can act like some of the new pioneers (NIN I think was one) where they are using innovation in this "new age" and are paying attention to what the people want.
Things like:
- All your songs are free to download and use as you please.
But, they are limited in quality
- Pay money, and get limited edition collectibale media and packaging (that any actual fan will want and pay for)
As a wise cat trainer once said to me, "if you don't like your cat scratching up your couch, give her a better choice".
That's all us "consumers" are looking for regarding all of this is a better choice.
Make it easy, give us value and respect us as consumers.
Don't try to rape and pillage on every release that you know isn't worth the sticker price.
As demonstrated, people will jump on the alternative as soon as it becomes available.
|
|
I agree with Moore.
History has shown that increasing the severity of punishment does not have much impact on crime rate.
Making an example of a few pirates will do more harm in terms of PR than it will do good in terms of reducing piracy.
|
|
Bbjones, what does your post have to do with a forum of people who ARE selling games with demos and are NOT charging $40 for them?
Did you sign up for the wrong forum?
If you want to be cheered for cracking games that 'deserve' it, I think you're in the wrong place.
Note - this does not mean that I disagree with your viewpoint.
Only that I don't see what the point is of posting it in the WAY you posted it, in the location you posted it.
Who is 'us' and 'them' in your post?
Who are you talking to?
As for how I feel about the lawsuits?
I don't like it. Going after individuals only enhances pirates' feelings of being unfairly prosecuted.
I want to see the industry going after people who SELL pirated goods and websites that exist for the sole purpose of distributing pirated goods.
I don't want to try and extract millions of dollars out of the people running those sites, they don't have millions of dollars to take, generally, and it makes us look like bad guys.
I just want someone with a big stick to shut them DOWN.
Chasing one unlucky individual and leaving the big targets alone doesn't accomplish much.
|
|
Quote: :
Likewise I refuse to pay $39.99 for some crappy video game that I know was sold mostly on hype, is full of mainly just eye candy, and will be collecting dust on my shelf after 2 hours of play.
well don't then.
I refuse to pay £50k for a porsche.
So I drive a different car.
|
|
|
Hear hear Cliff. For he knows the Value of Things.
Now where's my fuckin' slice of the £7.5m.
Cas
|
|
I dunno, maybe they have a point.
Perhaps the wallet is the one thing people take notice of these days.
If you'll indulge me an apparently tangential comparison, look at the environment.
Tell people that the planet will be destroyed in a few decades, and they don't raise an eyebrow.
Tell them that their children will face some kind of nightmarish future, and they don't even put down their orange juice.
Tell them that it's going to mean taxes going up and they're out in the garden fitting wind turbines to the shed before you can say "Al Gore".
We've tried stopping them filesharing, can't do it.
We've tried educating them, they're not interested.
We've tried preaching to them, they don't care.
Maybe if they all get a bill for £300, they'll suddenly sit up and take notice.
|
|
Quote: : We've tried stopping them filesharing, can't do it.
We've tried educating them, they're not interested.
We've tried preaching to them, they don't care.
Maybe if they all get a bill for £300, they'll suddenly sit up and take notice.
That's the thing, though.
If they ALL get a bill for £300, they'll take notice.
If you just hit a dozen people at random with a £20,000 or £200,000 lawsuit, it will do more harm than good because a) everyone will still assume it won't happen to them, and b) it will make it easier for the pirates to cast you as the bad guy, ruining an innocent person over one measly piece of software...
And consequently, themselves as Robin Hood for standing up to you.
Historical evidence, as I said, shows that increased punishments are not an effective deterrent, if the chance of getting caught remains small.
What is effective is if the chance of getting caught is high enough that it seems like a realistic possibility to the perpetrator.
Akin to, say, getting a parking or speeding ticket.
Given the effort involved in locating a pirate and gathering enough evidence to make a case, that's just not feasible.
|
|
Quote: : It began with Isabela Barwinska, an unemployed mother of two unlucky enough to find herself made an example for others.
She was ordered yesterday to pay Topware nearly $30,000 for downloading Dream Pinball 3D from a file-sharing site, and following that decision a lawyer for Topware said, "This is the first of many.
It was always intended that there would be a lot more."
Thats the spirit.
Sue unemployed mothers 1000 times what you could charge for an original license.
This will make an example for everyone.
And while you're at it, make some threats so people will be afraid of you and buy your games next time.
|
|
Quote: : That's the thing, though.
If they ALL get a bill for £300, they'll take notice.
If you just hit a dozen people at random with a £20,000 or £200,000 lawsuit, it will do more harm than good because a) everyone will still assume it won't happen to them, and b) it will make it easier for the pirates to cast you as the bad guy, ruining an innocent person over one measly piece of software...
And consequently, themselves as Robin Hood for standing up to you.
That's the point of it though, isn't it?
The £20,000 lawsuit gets it in the news because £300 letters don't sound impressive to the media.
So then everyone hears about the £300 letters, and how many of them are being sent out.
Trust me, pirates don't need any help painting themselves as Robin Hood and everyone else as the Sherriff of Nottingham.
They'll do that with or without any assistance.
You likely won't stop the studenty "look at me, I can spell micro$oft with a dollar sign", "I'm such a rebel" types anyway.
If you want to get anywhere, you're only ever trying to stop the less-hardcore majority of pirates.
Adult pirates, parents of pirates, people like that.
To them, £300 is a lot more important than looking like a rebel to impress a bunch of 13-year-olds you've never met.
If you can drive people off filesharing applications and make sure that piracy is happening on secure FTP servers again, tucked away where Joe Public can't get at it and doesn't even know about it, you'll have taken a big chunk out of the piracy that actually hurts.
|
|
Quote: : Sector Thats the spirit.
Sue unemployed mothers 1000 times what you could charge for an original license.
I'm sick of people defending pirates like they did in the music case with that jammie woman, because they are 'unemployed mothers'.
I don't care if you are a blind war-veteran who lost a leg at Stalingrad, who has cancer and lost their puppy last week in a terrorist attack...
That's NOT how the law works.
Either you prosecute someone or you don't.
This should be based on the evidence, and the crime, NOT the circumstances of the person who did it.
Since when do 'unemployed mothers' get to ignore the law more than anyone else?
I'm not saying this prosecution was proportionate or a good idea at all, but the reasons it might be a bad idea are nothing to do with the employment status, gender or the number of kids of the defendant, so lets stop trotting them out.
I was unemployed for 8 months once.
I didn't realise I could ignore laws back then.
|
|
I think that game publishers should sue search engines for providing such an easy access to warez/torrent links.
Think about it.
What is the first step someone does when wants a pirate copy?
They search for "gamename crack".
What if was returning EMPTY result?
Next step, banning sites by IP.
90% of casual piracy would be defeated and done nobody harm.
No unemployed mom with life ruined.
I now see that I am in the wrong market.
I should move into politics.
|
|
It's too late to change it.
There's no escape from stupid rapidshare and file sharing networks.
Viral education of customers could improve things and rise sales of few involved out there - that's called marketing, doesn't matter that original intention sounds rebelish as it doesn't resolve stuff globally.
I found a right set of allegories to explain what is happening out there and what you can't avoid, unless you'l manage to get decent biz deals (e.g.
Retail, steam, etc) or sell indie spirit for exclusivities.
1) Indie games are about independence from money.
And the second one: judging from the state of indie games from indiegames.com, not from indiegamer:
2) Indies are trying to sell apples in an apple garden.
Just my few pennies...
|
|
|
I wonder why no-one's thought to charge for data uploading?
Solve the spam crisis as well at a stroke.
Cas
|
|
Quote: : I'm sick of people defending pirates like they did in the music case with that jammie woman, because they are 'unemployed mothers'.
I don't care if you are a blind war-veteran who lost a leg at Stalingrad, who has cancer and lost their puppy last week in a terrorist attack...
That's NOT how the law works.
Either you prosecute someone or you don't.
This should be based on the evidence, and the crime, NOT the circumstances of the person who did it.
Since when do 'unemployed mothers' get to ignore the law more than anyone else?
I'm not saying this prosecution was proportionate or a good idea at all, but the reasons it might be a bad idea are nothing to do with the employment status, gender or the number of kids of the defendant, so lets stop trotting them out.
I was unemployed for 8 months once.
I didn't realise I could ignore laws back then.
Morally, I agree, to an extent.
Although I think judges should hand out punishment based on the circumstances under which the crime was committed (e.g.
Punish a rich brat shoplifting for fun more harshly than a poor kid shoplifting because his mom spends her welfare check on booze instead of feeding him), I do agree that a crime should be punished in some way, regardless of who committed it.
However, the important thing here is not whether it's legally or morally right to do this, but whether it's a smart thing to do with regards to stopping piracy.
I still think that good PR is the best way to do that - you reaching out to pirates, for instance, was a great idea - and bankrupting unemployed mothers is definitely bad PR.
|
|
Agree - terrible PR.
Pick your pariahs carefully!
Cas
|
|
Quote: : Sector Thats the spirit.
Sue unemployed mothers 1000 times what you could charge for an original license.
This will make an example for everyone.
And while you're at it, make some threats so people will be afraid of you and buy your games next time.
Yeah, really good point.
Unemployed mothers should be exempt from the law.
|
|
|
I don't see anything right in a law that says* that someone has to pay 1000x times a price if (s)he gets an unauthorized copy of some software.
(*=actually i don't see such a law anywhere, where is this law you mention?)
|
|
Jayzus - that is beyond reason.
Way, way too much money.
Honestly, I think it's fair to expend effort and to charge extra because of that effort, but nailing someone's mom to the tune of 30k is really, really overkill.
The message it sends is the same one that killed the music industry.
The music industry thought it would be okay to sue the crap out of people for pirating music.
The result is that the mainstream music industry became so unpopular and hated overnight that people started supporting and demanding more indie artists.
The music industry proper is now losing money hand over fist, while stand-alone artists pursuing the creation of their own studios and distribution methods are gaining.
Popular opinion is extremely important, and laying massive punishments on pirates is more damaging in the long run than simply making new distribution methods, business models, or even just *ignoring* the problem.
This is not good news.
|
|
I thought the majority of this was court costs.
I think the message is, that if you are caught red handed and are as guilty as hell, for gowrons sake plead guilty.
I have no sympathy with people who are guilty as hell and pretend innocence, or don't even show up to a court case.
They get what they deserve.
I got fined for parking without the right ticket recently.
It clearly stated it would be £40 or £80 if I didn't pay in 14 days, If I ignored it completely, ultimately I'd end up in court, and probably pay hundreds of pounds, if not thousands.
Because I am clearly not a total idiot, I paid the £40.
Court fees are charged to people who treat the law with contempt, and rightly so, because this is what incentivises sane people to sit up and listen when they are accused of something.
|
|
Quote: : The music industry thought it would be okay to sue the crap out of people for pirating music.
The result is that the mainstream music industry became so unpopular and hated overnight that people started supporting and demanding more indie artists.
The music industry proper is now losing money hand over fist, while stand-alone artists pursuing the creation of their own studios and distribution methods are gaining.
That's some nice idea - piracy punishing the bad ones (record majors) and supporting the good ones (indie bands).
Unfortunately it's a myth.
In fact indie music labels are worse off than big mainstream corps.
They are going down like flies while big record companies manage to survive somehow through sheer marketing and distribution power.
|
|
Yes good point. Anyone got any actual EVIDENCE to show that people pirating give a damn whether the content is produced by an indie or a major label / publisher?
My experience is also the opposite.
It's not exactly hard to find out if something is made by a mega-crop or a struggling indie.
99.9% of pirates do not investigate it though.
|
|
Quote: : The music industry thought it would be okay to sue the crap out of people for pirating music.
The result is that the mainstream music industry became so unpopular and hated overnight that people started supporting and demanding more indie artists.
And theres me thinking it was because they use to charge half the price of an album for a single, or because most of the time you only wanted several singles off the album in the first place or the perhaps the overall poor/copy-cat quality of the music?
Quote: : Yes good point.
Anyone got any actual EVIDENCE to show that people pirating give a damn whether the content is produced by an indie or a major label / publisher?
My experience is also the opposite.
It's not exactly hard to find out if something is made by a mega-crop or a struggling indie.
99.9% of pirates do not investigate it though.
Yeah, I'd like to see some evidence too, because if it's true, us indie game developers have it really bad.
I don't know why people keep making out pirates are doing it for the welfare of the public/poor, I don't remember Robin Hood having google ads while distributing his stole/pirated goods
|
|
Quote: : Because I am clearly not a total idiot, I paid the £40.
Court fees are charged to people who treat the law with contempt, and rightly so, because this is what incentivises sane people to sit up and listen when they are accused of something.
This is true.
Unfortunately, the threat of court costs is also used as a bullying tactic, both by big corporations and municipalities.
My municipality, anyway.
I got a ticket for about $100 a few years ago for putting my garbage out on the wrong day.
Thing is, they only sent me the ticket SIX MONTHS after the supposed infraction, so there was no way I could know if I'd even done it or not.
I was pretty sure I hadn't done any such thing;
I was living in a triplex, and my guess is that there was garbage left out front and they simply issued to the ticket to one tenant at random (or all of us, for all I know).
If the ticket had been for something in the past two weeks, which I knew damn well I didn't do, I'd have pled not guilty, and it probably wouldn't have even seen court, since they obviously couldn't have evidence of me doing something I didn't do.
However, the chance that I was forgetting about something I did do six months prior, and that they had found and kept something with my name and address in the trash was too great.
I had to plead guilty and pay the fine.
It was clearly a conscious act on their part to leave such a delay (probably the maximum allowed by the law) between the infraction and the ticket, precisely to reduce the number of not-guilty pleas for such a hard-to-prove infraction.
And of course, everyone knows that big corporations love to send threatening letters to everyone they can, since they can afford court costs and you can't.
|
|
Well, maybe the band metaphor/simile isn't a good example.
But by and large, when bands/artists discovered that they were making most of their dime from concerts, they dropped prices, offered free downloads, and I believe that there's even an organization dedicated to marketing them for commercials etc.
The record industry is getting record low sales(no pun intended) if Rolling Stone is to be believed, and I think they can probably keep track of the phenomenon better than me.
The sales have decreased over the past three - four years.
I don't think that the approach of suing individuals is a good one, because it looks heavy handed and vindictive.
I do think that the idea of suing providers that list illicit information and links is a possibility - Napster certainly got shut down for it some years ago, before it's re-incarnation as a legitimate site.
The SIIA approach is to send cease-and-desist notifications, and they then contact ISPs to shut down the site if action is not taken within 14 days.
I like the approach, but I think 14 days is much, much too long.
The ESA has a prosecute mindset, which may not be helpful in the long run when applied to individuals.
Backlash like that which occurred(is occurring) in the music industry is a definite and real possibility.
Neither of these organizations list the details required to sign up for them.
|
|
|
|