| Akvod said: Lending Developper sees no money after the first sale. Second hand market (ebay and such): (doesn't affect PC as much, because of activation codes etc) Developper sees no money after the first sale. Pirating : (affects consoles less because of the need of mod chips or know how (psp)) Developper sees no money. Renting : (doesn't affect PC as much, because of activation codes etc) Developper sees no money after the first sale Second hand shops : Developper sees no money after the first sale
... is this the only thing that really matters? Why are we obligated to give developers the money if the situation doesn't require it? We have property rights, they have intellectual property rights. We can give our property out physically, but we can't steal their IP by replicating, and pirating. Developers seeing no money is not a immoral thing... stealing from a shop isn't immoral because the shop owner didn't get any money, but because you violated his right to property... If developers not seeing any money is the defining factor of an action being immoral or not, what do we think of when we see a game developer giving out his game for free? The developer sees no money. Since property rights didn't matter in many of the examples, I believe it shouldn't matter in this case, and the developer has commited, a sacrilidge, and he shall pay for it with his life!
|
Well, even if it were, the OP is wrong on several levels. Everything but Pirating gives devs more money.
