I also have my doubts about how prevalent downloading without paying is. I believe a lot of it is people buying a defective product and then downloading the working alternative. I just read in another thread that CDProjekt stated that the DRM-free version of The Witcher 2
(the one that would have been easiest to copy) wasn't the one being torrented. The retail version was. Could be 1 million people didn't want DRM with something they paid for and so just downloaded the version without it.
First of all DRM was removed almost right after release. Second thing, if someone would want to remove DRM from his retail copy then he could download only crack. No need for downloading over 10GB of data just for it if you already have discs. So you argument is invalid.
Oh please. My argument is invalid? It's a hypothetical. You showed no evidence to make it invalid. It's no more invalid than anything you've posted so far. I agree that it would be silly to download a full game if you only needed a cracked .exe that was a few kilobytes big. I don't know that for sure though. I've never downloaded a full cracked game. The most I've ever done is download a no-cd .exe for a retail purchase. I've read before from other users who would know that sometimes it is not possible to download a cracked .exe so sometimes the only way to get the working game is to download the whole game.
Fun fact. Two best selling games for PC of last year are:
Battlefield that have almost the most hated DRM: Origin
Skyrim that have DRM (Steam) and heavy regional locks.
Does DRM or regional locks hurt sales? I don't think so. People that use them as excuse for pirating games don't buy games anyway.
I can play both of those games on a console and get the same experience with the vanilla game. How about those lost sales? Those should count. Something I have been thinking on lately is how many of my friends play on consoles now. I don't know a single real life friend that plays PC games anymore. They never were into PC games as much as I used to be, but most of them would buy PC games every now and then. Now I play consoles too for the newer titles. The PC games I play currently are either older games or indie games.
What would cause this? I don't know about my friends and family that used to play PC games every once in a while, but for me, it was DRM. Could be that if people pay for something, they want to own it. They don't want a useless disk with DRM on it.
I think it's pretty obvious that regional locks can cause lost sales too. That doesn't mean that a game still won't sell well where it's allowed, like you say, but it is still causing lost sales.
Wouldn't you be ashamed to go out and drive a car which design you have actually copied without permission of the author?
Where did you get the design, specifications and technical details? I guess you stole them...
(The other option is that you somehow acquired real Ferrari Testarossa 1984 and made analyses on your own, of course assuming that you have knowledge, tools and time - but all this would cost probably more than the new Ferrari itself! )
I'll answer your question first. Honestly, no I wouldn't be ashamed. If I could do this, I would also customize it in a way so it would be the best fit for me and represented me in some way. Ferrari would get my business for having a stellar reputation for things like using higher quality material than I can use, for putting together a car that doesn't break down, for having more efficient equipment so they can make a car more cheaply than I can, or for having other services that I want. They could also get my business because I don't want to print a car, maybe because I don't know how or because I just don't want to take the time unless it pays off.
I'll address your second question later.
But I would say that, instead of all this discussion, try to imagine that _you_ have created something and defined how you want people to use it, how you want to make money from it and so on. It's natural that you have right to do this. But somehow you wake up another day just to discover that you are actually surrounded by a band of smart-asses who copy your ideas, modify them and won't pay you a single penny. Moreover, they will even say that they have right to this, because "you are treating them in unfair way".
If I own the rivalrous and tangible property, sure. I cannot define how I want other people to use their own property though. That's the main thing I wanted to point out with my post that you replied to. No one is stealing anything, they are using their own property to make a copy. If IP is anything, it is a restriction on personal property rights. Basically, I think of it as much the same thing as mercantilism.
It all sounds a lot like the right to make up restrictions if it makes money
. If people want to make money, adjust your business model.
Yes, piracy is not stealing property, but it is about stealing ideas.
So we can agree that piracy is not at all like stealing property at least. It would be most beneficial if people would stop comparing it to piracy in these kinds of debates. If people want to argue about stealing ideas, that would be an improvement.
I still don't agree with you about stealing ideas though. How does someone steal an idea? I agree with Thomas Jefferson
. I won't say that these monopolies have never been used for good, but, generally speaking, they cause more harm than good.