nordlead said:
Ignore the dumb analogies We as consumers have the right to sell property we buy. It doesn't matter if it is IP or physical (like a car). If you want to argue otherwise, then you should be arguing that selling paintings after they leave the original authors hands should be outlawed as it is the same exact situation. Everyone would laugh at you forever if you tried, but this is what you are trying to do. However, no one would laugh at you if you said people shouldn't be able to scan & print said painting. Publishers (& pirates who want to justify their actions) are just butt hurt that they can't control their content after they sell a copy of it. The benefit to the user is lost when the copy is sold. If you want to go back to the memory pitch, then I shouldn't be able to sell my car which is used purely for a pleasure cruise and returns me where I started from. A person who buys used contributes to the economy (videogame in this instance) which allows the person who sold the game to buy a new game giving more profits to publishers. No copies of the "art" are produced without the authors consent (and profit). If you want to think about it this way, the first guy pays the retailer cut, the second guy pays the publishers cut, the 3rd guy pays the delivery guys cut, and the 4th guy pays the material costs all for the first guy who can actually afford the to buy the original copy. The cycle of buying new/used continues forever. We see similar ecosystems with cars and other products. Rich people buy new cars and sell them to poor people. The money taken from the poor people is used to buy another new car and the cycle continues. While it is easier for someone to drop out of the video game ecosystem than the car ecosystem there are more than enough people that it will continue. The pirate, he pays nothing. Ever. He doesn't support anyone in buying new software. He doesn't support anyone in any way. The pirate makes a copy of the "art" and enjoys it for himself while contributing nothing. So, if you want to continue to argue that the person who buys used is as bad as the pirate, then go right ahead, but you are out right wrong. Besides, why should we be arguing for anything besides consumer rights? That's right. it is a way to justify the actions of those who do pirate software. Next up, we argue that pirating software isn't immoral. |
You are again failing to comprehend, and you even brought up the utterly stupid analogy of a car.
Paintings are also physical objects, since their value is their presence, physical presence. When you sell you no longer have their value. As you pointed it out, making a copy of their value and then selling it is stealing that painting. I am amazed that you can prove me right yourself, as with your painting example, yet still manage to contradict yourself a few sentences later. As I sugested you can make a far better (but still not good enough) argument if you used books.
As for your thoroughly terrible analogy with a car. The car didn't provide you with the experience. Nature/god/fairies/whatever you believe did. Once you sell your car you can still have that same exact experience with another car, or with a helicopter or on a plane, or whatever. However you CANNOT use that same car, the one you jsut sold, to get to your vacation spot again. That is the only value of a car, the ability to transport you places. Arguing otherwise is, frankly, pretty stupid. Since you cant use the car that you sold to get back to the spot, and the buyer can, you have effectively transfered the car's value to the new owner. You no longer possess that car's value.
As I said, use books, you will be able to make a much better argument with that.
Now as to your economy argument. It entirely hinges upon the fact that you will have more money to buy more things with. Right off the bat your problem is that you view the value of a game as the disc itself, when the actual value of a game (movie, and music too) is your enjoyment and experience of it. You make copies of that value when you resell it, you are basically pirating right there. In piracy you make a copy of the product and its value, when you resell you do the same. It's the EXACT. SAME. THING.
Then your whole point is that reselling lets people buy more because they have more money. Same is true of piracy, in fact even moreso. You keep your entire money to spend on other games, the same game's merchandise, events, etc. etc. Music pirates consistently spend more money on music overall than non-pirates, I'm sure the same is true of games as well.
I won't argue further because as I already pointed out above, making analogies between the value of physical and IP objects is just outright stupid.
Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."
HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374
Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420
gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835
