Ail said:
Kasz216 said:
Ail said:
Kasz216 said:
JamaicameCRAZY said:
Kasz216 said:
So, your trusting an Entertainment lobbying group...
over scientific studies conducted by goverment agencies.
Do you know the ESA's methods for studying the effects of piracy? It ain't scientific.
It's called "Lets see how many downloads something has, then multiply times $60 bucks.
Also, no, the common economic belief about software piracy is... "It causes no negative of positive effect.".
Or at least that's the belief among... people who study economics... aka economists.
I would suggest reading a book or two about software priacy and the actual effect it has on stuff. People who think it has a heavy negative effet are the same people who think gamestop are killing the Industry, when the truth is, a healthy used market INCREASES new sales.
Corporate Lobbyists like the ESA say both hurt new software sales and produce studies anyone who's taken a single research class can point out the faults of... because they know they can use that poltical clout to get concessions... to do things like limit the amount of times you can install software and find ways to force gamestop to pay the companies for the games they sell used.
|
You just added the 3rd link but if you read the links i posted you would see that it doesnt just include the esa it includes developers of games that know how many pirated versions of games people are using and tell you what it has done heres more for you too.
http://www.gamefront.com/thq-ceo-blames-piracy-for-close-of-titan-quest-developer/
Alan wake is another example its been pirated 1.1 million times according to one site and i dont think it has sold that much and i am sure it came very close on the chopping block. More for you.
Homebrew doesn't seem like a big problem on the DS, but Nintendo claims to have lost almost $975 million worldwide among its publishers and developers due to piracy in 2007. Who knew?
Also just because they represent micro sony and possibly ninty doesnt mean the problems are not real. Also show me where it says that they just go to torrent sites and multiply by 60$.
|
Show me where it doesn't say that? Oh right, you can't... because unlike every other study, they don't release any of their methods and simply say "this is the loss!"
Alan Wake being pirated 1.1 million doesn't mean... anything... at all. Because you can't prove those were lost sales. Which is exactly the point. You have to study the actual effects, not just count "Oh this was pirated 1.1 million times so that's 66 million dollars lost!
Actual studies say... no measurable effect/can't tell.
Actual experts say... no measurable effect/can't tell.
Lobbying groups say... big effects, give our companies money and special rights.
So again, if you want to take the opinion of lobbying groups and interested parties over the opinion of non biased researchers... sure go ahead.
Don't present it as fact though... your no better then people who listen to their pastors over scientists.
|
I think it goes both way.
You can't prove they were lost sales.
You can't prove they weren't either....
|
And yet, the scientific proof is on "not lost sales."
Until the research goes the other way...
I'm going with the way the research is leaning.
It's not stonecold proof... it can't be proved without a doubt. (few things in science and life actually can)
However, it's the best proof we have and the way proof is leaning.
It's like asking someone about the origin of the universe.
There is one scientific leading theory... and if you believe in another theory... it's probably personal prefrence.
To say it's definitly harming the industry is a ludicrius opinion.
To say unbiased studies mostly show it isn't harming the industry, or at best nobody can tell... is a fact.
I wouldn't say it isn't positivly hurting the industry yet, but the research leans that way, and you definitly couldn't prove it in a court of law, with research leaning that way....
and it's on the accusor to prove the accused is guilty. You could sue someone for piracy, because that's a crime, but to sue someone for second hand enabling piracy, you need to prove it's harmful. Which you can't meet the burden of proof of in a courtroom... since well, the opposite is the most widely agreed opon.
|
By the way I just checked your 3 links.
You have 2 on comics, one on music, I thought this thread was about software......
The market of software and the one of comics and music are widely different in one key area :
- time to consume the product...
And I know you are fond of the fact that supposedly when given the choice of between buying a product and getting it for free customers would rather pay a fee except there's one key issue you always forget to mention.
This only applies when you have the same choice for every product/service you purchase.
Turns out that there are a lot of products you can't get for free ( car, house, food, electronic,...).
In that case the same adage doesn't apply anymore....
Because paying for that product you could get for free implies limiting your purchases of those others products you can not get for free...
That is the huge advantage people see in piracy, they don't have to restrain their others hobbies/purchases for their gaming hobbies...
If they could not obtain that gaming product for free, a lot of people would probably just not get it, but others would probably decide to restrict their others hobbies or go one less time to the restaurant or the movies to afford same game.
In the end it's a wash for the overall economy. But I'm pretty sure that in terms of economics it matters for the developers and publishers whether you spend your money on their games or on movie tickets and restaurants...
|
