It's kind of funny that we are in an era where entitlement has become such a huge topic in politics, yet so many of you feel like they are entitled to access digital content the way you want it.......

You can't have it both way, entitlement is bad or good, but it can't be both depending on whether it suits you or not...

As for the usual argument of people saying they wouldn't be buying the thing they pirate, it's a bs one on a grander economic scale. Basically you have millions of people spending thousands of hours per year using pirated content, if they didn't have access to that content, that is billion hours of entertainment that would have to be occupied otherwise, which would generate a revenue for someone ( maybe not the company whose product got pirated, but someone else in the end would benefit economically from it..)

I agree with you 100%. I don't believe in anti-piracy laws. Like I said, it's a property rights thing, and should be a civil matter. Treated exactly the same as your neighbour's dog breaking your fence, or something (as what recently happened back at home for me... although my parents never did anything about it).

And, yes, piracy is a force of economics (most things are...), which is what I meant by companies not taking the right course of action. Viacom made a decision to block all of their online content from working outside of the US, for example. So, if I want to do watch Colbert Report of Daily Show, I have no choice but to commit piracy (through illegal streams). This is the most absurd thing I've ever heard, and Viacom would stand to make a lot of money if they just put all their content online for everybody, with commercials. But I also say that it's entirely their decision to make. I think, eventually, Viacom will come around (and they would come around a lot quicker if Congress saw piracy in the same manner as we do).

Loving the vote distribution.

As an ex-pirate, I felt that when it came down to the core, you are receiving something for free illegally, and there can be no justification for breaking the law. So I stopped.

I don't condemn those who do pirate and I certainly believe that laws in regards to piracy shouldn't be so inflexible and rigid, but it is still legally and morally wrong and giving those who pay for their entertainment a disadvantage.

Until business models improve and catch up to technology in the modern age then I think there are certain times when pirating is fine. Larger companies need to realise that digital distribution is a global model and that restrictions based on geographical region is just going to fuel piracy in this modern era of global networks.

Then there's things like DRM which make the pirated versions the superior one (*cough* Ubisoft *cough*). Basically laws and businesses need to adapt to the new tech faster than they are currently if they want to make a serious dent in piracy rates.

So what is the harm in downloading it anyways? Did Nintendo lose money because I downloaded Xenoblade for my US Wii and Soma Bringer for my DSLite R4?

That's the tricky question of it. Would you have imported it if the piracy alternative were unavailable?

Though i must say what i acquire by these means is similar to your idea. I personally only pirate when the item is prohibitively difficult to even find legitimately. Three series have i ever torrented, SWAT Kats in 2008, Megas XLR also in 08, and Queen's Blade in 2010. SWAT Kats is currently only available on DVD through special order to Warner Bros and that only started in late 2010, Megas has never been rereleased anywhere, and Queen's Blade took about a year to come overseas in legitimate form.

And i ask; if it's so easy for pirates to do it, why aren't the companies doing it themselves and making some money? Especially in cases of older or more obscure series like SK and Megas, or of very niche series like Queen's Blade. And so often these pirates do all this for free (that is, not only free for consumers, but none of the crackers/translators/scanners/encoders are getting paid either), so imagine how much better it all could be if someone, with help from the actual rights-holder and the incentive of a paying job, could do all this.

What is moral and what is not is always fuzzy. You can try to justify it.
Piracy is infact illegal. And so is marijuana (I don't smoke it, however I don't think it should be illegal). What you judge to be right or wrong. Is only up to you.

I try to look at it in a more simple way. Each person has their values. The law, like your conscience is a factor in your decision. You are in fact breaking the law if you pirate there is no grey area here. Right and Wrong is never cut clear. Everyone says big business is bad. But without big business you might not even be able to get the thing you are stealing. Without record labels for artists you might have not ever have heard their music (They were never forced to sign a record deal you know).

If you pirate there could be consequences. The possibility of SOPA even appearing as a bill is one of those consequences. Big business is only doing SOPA because it would benefit them. People pirate because it benefits them.

Someone lost money.

Because if you had not gotten those games for free chances are you would have purchased other games instead.( or maybe you would have spent the 20 hours or so you spent playing Xenoblade just sitting on your bum but that is unlikely).

When entertainment products can be gotten for free it reduces the market for every entertainment company, be it the one you pirated or one of it's competitor.

The attempted explanation of piracy not being stealing is a huge fail. It's like saying shoplifting isn't stealing because you aren't stealing from an individual person and the company can just make more of the items you stole...

Anyway piracy is never justifiable. Its crazy that people can convince themselves that since they would have never bought the item they were going to pirate its perfectly okay to pirate it. So does that mean I can steal all the rolexes, ferraris, and dildos I ever see because I was never planning to buy them anyway... The thing is when you pirate, the company loses a potential customer, you! And if your one of the people that pirates things, and buys them if you enjoy them, that still isn't justified. You can try a demo of the game, or rent it, or if neither is an option, take a risk and buy it if you want to. You can't just steal it and then maybe pay the person later on when you are positive that you are satisfied with the product.

Yes DRM is probably one of the most annoying things ever invented. Yes it is lame that you don't actually own a lot of the products you buy. But the thing is, you can fight those policies by JUST NOT BUYING THE PRODUCT, instead of stealing it. Whats the difference you may ask? Businesses keep track of how often their products are being pirated and use that information as justification to keep including these invasive features to attempt to reduce piracy. If piracy couldn't be blamed for poor sales, then companies would actually focus on making a better and more convinient product instead of focusing on preventing piracy with drm which must be more successful than you may think. If companies have been spending millions of dollars over the past two decades improving drm, then obviously it is somewhat helping. Remember businesses never do things for the lulz... They would only continue the policy if it is helping them in one way or another. And the only way people can show them that drm is worthless or that not giving you full ownership of the porduct you buy is a sham, is by neither buying NOR pirating those products.