Nintendo, Sony, EA, and Microsoft have all come out in support of SOPA, or the Stop Online Piracy Act. If you haven’t heard of SOPA, it’s essentially a bill that aims to curb piracy by allowing the US government to censor sites with any links that they deem questionable via a number of methods.

Those four companies aren’t the only ones behind the bill, however. The entire ESA has thrown its weight behind SOPA, which includes 34 members – most of which are fairly large gaming studios. It’s disappointing to see an industry that thrives on creativity supporting a piece of legislation that will cripple freedom of speech. While we all can understand why the big guns want to stop piracy, this is clearly not the way to go about it.

It’s not all bad news, though. Valve, Activision-Blizzard, CD Projekt, and Bethesda are all notably missing from the list. While that doesn’t mean that they oppose the bill, it does give us a little bit of hope for the time being.

http://geek.pikimal.com/2011/11/18/nintendo-sony-throw-support-behind-censorship-bill/

since i never crack games or movies it's good for me in one case. that would mean more money for the companies because people have to buy then instead of clicking the downlaod button. maybe ea willl get in the black then and don't have to fire like 500 more employees.

if it would only affect those things i wouldn't have a problem. no music videos on youtube? i could live with that as well i don't really need them only the music and i buy all music i really like.

but i have a feeling this will work not as good a s i hope and that this would be one more step to a world in many movies like equilibrium shown.

forget gaming what about my porn?? will it be affected ?

companies only make money nowadays with big blockbusters but i really wish to see everything except blockbusters lol. ok i like games like halo or so...

many companies don't even make money just look at ea over the last years they burn money even with firing employees and selling fifas like shit.

i don't like censorship as well like if they try to say me i can't play or see this or that because it's not good for my mind or shit like that, but it's not censorship for me if they stop me to download their developements for free if they don't wish to let me get it for free or if i can't see britney spears anymore on youtube if she or her companies doesn't want that. it's their good right to let only people see her dancing with a cow on a  milk farm if we pay for that or if we have to see advertisment then. it's no censoreship for me if i can't take a car i like in my neighbourhood do drive along the coast.

yeah i know that's something different because a digital download isn't a physical one but it's still a loss for them if i don't buy it because of this oportunity. music branche shrank 50% over the last years even with the whole world growing and countries like eastern european growing as hell economically.

We have to nip this in the bud now. This bill is an absolute bad, and will not increase revenue that anyone receives, and will instead kill jobs. A lot of websites will go out of business if this becomes law, a lot of foreign websites will lose tons of ad revenue, and the gains made will be miniscule. Pirates do not become paying customers

so this is how liberty dies, with thunderous applause

Rubbish, you have no proof what people will do if they can't pirate something. It's wrong to assume they'll all go out and pay for games (or anything else), but it's just as wrong to assume they'll give up entirely.

More accurate to say that if pirates do become paying customers, that it becomes a wash economically. You don't generate money from nothing, and its not like these people who might be consuming certain intellectual properties are sitting on the money that they would be spending, but it is generally acknowledged in economics that a good deal of piracy comes from customers who you are priced too high to access in the first place.

The alternate point is that companies could choose to meet such people in the middle through lower-cost (e.g. ad-supported), but they choose instead to whine to governments and continue to play their games of junk economics

Read HappySquirrel's comment on it in the thread i made, he states it more clearly

i support the bill, agree with Seece, and this sensors nothing when your stealing.

No, anti anti piracy people bend the argument anyway they can to justify it. Music and Dvd's I find hard to believe priced out of many people's price range, least of all the majority, I flat out don't believe that. For games there is used and renting, which is better than pirating. At the the of the day that excuse is whack.

In terms of generating money, you're right, middle to majority of people only have a certain amount to spend and if they are forced to buy a movie insted of pirating, then they have to give something else up (not ALL, there are people with a lot of disposable cash left over at the end of the month, and they pirate not because they can't afford the product, but because they can.)

However, this is why the games, movies and the music industry people are pushing these piracy laws, and making the government listen, because for that middle/majority of people that would sacrafice spending elsewhere to buy a movie of game, you're assuming they're sacraficing something of the same, wheras it could be a takeaway, or clothes, or something else entirely irrlevent to whoever is fighting for this.