jefequeso: I'm not really thinking of it from a "how things should be" point of view... more like a "how things WILL be" point of view. As an indie developer, I'm perfectly fine with trusting my players to pay me if they think my stuff is good (although that hasn't exactly worked out well so far). I think most indie developers will be fine with it. But publishers don't think that way. And with good reason, since they're dealing in potentially millions of dollars lost or gained. They'll see the increase in consumer power as a bad thing. And when publishers get scared, they stop funding things. And sure, I'm as happy as anyone to see a decrease in multi million dollar blockbusters like Call of Duty flooding the market. But any developer that isn't inde will be harmed. Not just the big ones. In fact, arguably it could result in an INCREASE of generic "play it safe" games.

And then, after a few years have passed, people will get jaded and they'll stop giving money to the remaining indie developers as well. As a whole, people do not do very well at this sort of thing. You get enough consumers saying "oh, well it's only $5. They won't miss it," or "I really can't afford to pay for this, so I won't," and pretty soon nobody is getting money for their work. In other words, complete industry collapse.

This is a pretty extreme case, granted, but I think that it's worth thinking about.

SimonG: The "freeriding the train" example by Fenix is probably the best we have until now.

orcishgamer: You know, I decided I just don't give a fuck, I don't want to argue this anymore. People who disagree with me can just go watch In Time again, they just might be the rich guy in that show, but most likely they're Cillian Murphy's character, some person fighting for the "system" because they pre-suppose it's superior based on basically nothing other than "I've always done it this way!" which just begs the question, "Why?"

His character name was Raymond.

So to anyone who disagrees with me, "Shut up, Raymond!"

Yep, grouchy, getting a beer.

orcishgamer: Yep, grouchy, getting a beer.

stoicsentry: Whenever someone pegs content producers as the Galactic Empire of Copyright, the phrase "first world problems" pops into mind.

stoicsentry: Whenever someone pegs content producers as the Galactic Empire of Copyright, the phrase "first world problems" pops into mind.

anjohl: There's only a problem if you are a content provider relying on selling laser-read media discs as a sole income stream.

irawesome: Pirating would be scarce if we had economic boom everywhere if the governments would elect the right people.

DarrkPhoenix: Many people in this thread seem to be completely missing the pragmatism at the center of the linked open letter. Discussions about whether piracy is "justified", whether various groups are too entitled, whether piracy is harmful, etc, are all academic. These discussions are ultimately a refusal to acknowledge reality, and instead just complain that the world isn't as some people think it should be. This accomplishes nothing.

The reality is that the balance of power has undergone a large shift from content producers to content consumers. When people want a piece of content these days they will be able to get it in the format they want. They will be able to get it when the want. They will be able to get it with a level of convenience they find reasonable. They will be able to get it at a price that they find reasonable. Pretty much every one of these things is a given. The only thing up in the air is whether the content producer gets paid as a result of the person acquiring the content under these conditions, and the answer to that question is largely dependent on how the content producer decides to try to profit off their content.

The reality is that people can get just about any content they want for free, whenever they want, in a fairly convenient manner. That so many people still pay for content is a testament to the fact that most people believe that content producers should receive some kind of compensation for their work, and that there's a desire to provide compensation in exchange for content that people find valuable. However, it should be noted that this desire is not without limits. Ask for too much compensation, introduce too much inconvenience or too many restrictions, and that desire quickly disappears in many people.

This is the reality that content producers need to recognize and deal with, and if they do recognize and adapt to it there's actually lots of money to be made. However, refusing to acknowledge and adapt to reality, and instead trying to roll back the clock to before the balance of power shifted from content producers to content consumers, is utterly unproductive, and in many cases counterproductive.

DarrkPhoenix: snip