Which is moraly (not legaly) worse? Secondhand _ Pirating _ Renting_Lending

[vlad321]

Akvod said:

vlad321 said:

Akvod said:

vlad321 said:

S.T.A.G.E. said:
You must hate Ebay and Amazon.com, don't you Vlad?

I only hate people who bitch about piracy yet they go and buy used games.

If you don't hate Ebay and Amazon then you're a hypocrite.

Oh shit, what am I doing in a thread that I said I was done in. O.o

As for the bag of chips thing I mentioned earlier. The chips have elements of IP with the formula used to create the chip, the bag's name and logos, etc.

 

Look, with your philosophy, you are currently denying the trade of ANYTHING related to IP, which is nearly everything in this mass production based market.

I'm actually pro-piracy, jsut playing devil's advocate here.

 

The chips have no IP since the IP isn't the intrinsic value of them. The value is the calories in them.

Also I'm pro-piracy since having copyright at this day and age is just obsoleete lot of BS and only people who can't get themselves out of the obsolete business models complain about it. That however still doesn't mean that used game market pulls the same BS that piracy pulls on the developer.

Chips do have IP. Ever hear Dr. Pepper, Coca Cola, or KFC boasting about their formulas? What do you think of medicines then? O.o You don't think that they have IP contained within them? The fucking ingredients used to make them? They're both same exact things, physical results of IP, just like video games.

It's just that we cannot PRODUCE or REPLICATE them ourselves. The right belongs to the producers who have the IP rights. We are within our rights, because of private property rights, to give, sell, exchange, etc our property. It's just that we don't have the right to produce the product ourselves >.<

It's not good. And you also want to support piracy? O.o

Listen, I can kinda see where you're going. IP rights was intended to allow producers to recoup the research in their IP, and that used game sales seem to backfire agains that. However, it was only an intention. The law never actually said that IP is breached if the developers don't get money. It's breached if someone uses the IP to produce the product on their own.

And I believe that private property rights easily trumps over producers getting money. Again, we would live in absolute anarchy without private property, ditto to intellectual property rights.

Ok how do I explain this with your chips...

If you ate the WHOLE bag, magically refilled it, and gave it to someone else to eat  all of the chips and charging them for it. That's the equivalent of used sales. Why? The value of chips is the food, so you use up all of the value and then someone else does so without them paying the producers. Same with video games, the value is in the expereince, which you finish then pass off to someone else. Basically 2 people have used the "value" of the game and the devs only saw only one payment.

In case of a picture/drawing, the value is in the aesthetic it provides in your house. The equivalent would indeed be a forgery, where another person also reaps the benefits of the "value" without paying the person who's creation it is.

@STAGE

That's the 360 no the software on it.