You are correct that businesses which don't cater to their customers will suffer the natural consequences brought about by market economics, but that doesn't give people a right to steal from companies.  Two different issues here.

Well, here's my answer: Nobody actually physically loses anything when the developing world gets to have their fun with it. If I told you aliens from space have been pirating all our (humans') media the entire time, should we be upset? The fact is, they weren't even potential customers, so why cry over it?

I've pirated my share and I'm not about to try and justify it, but I think there are situations where it isn't so bad. All the arguments surrounding this is based on the premise that our current economic system is fair, when I don't think it is. It's okay keeping hard working people from enjoying certain entertainment just because they were born in a third world country? Hell, I myself have probably been enjoying life a bit too much considering my contribution to society. There are people who are lucky enough to inherit tons of money from their family, is that fair?

Now, I don't think piracy is a good thing, but until there is a way for developing countries to get stuff reasonably affordable, there will be a legitimate argument for it. When you say China would be a better place to satisfy your gaming needs, you're missing the point. We aren't talking about people with western/developed salaries here - we're talking about Chinese people and the money they are able to spend. If there are wealthy people in China, they have no excuse for pirating stuff.

Like i said i at do partly understand it in developing countries, but when you are paying 60 cents for a copy of a game, or windows or whatever you like, that is more than leveling the playing field.  I'm on a Chinese salary and i could buy the whole Wii collection on the average monthly salary here (and i'm in poor China). 

Look, are there worse kinds of evil in the world, sure, but who can blame software companies for trying to stop it because there is no way they can ever compete with 60 cents per game.

Mendicate Bias said:

ChichiriMuyo and c0rd both made the points I wanted to make.

1. The people who pirate, especially in 3rd world countries were never going to buy the product in the first place.

I of course love this excuse.  "Because I could never afford it, it should just be given to me."  I think I should be given a Ferrarri because I'd never be able to afford one in my life.  Yeah, thats the ticket.

2. Digital theft is not the same as physical because the original owner is not losing anything from the digital copying of the product.

Oh yes, and this too.  Ok then, everyone in life that is not able to afford something, should be able to have it as long as it is digital.  Lets encourage people to be able to not earn what they want.  Let there be nothing for people to aspire to try and earn in life.  Let them use their time on stolen software as opposed to being productive and working towards being able to earn what they have.  Yeah, those that can't afford things should stay in a situation that they can't and cost those that earn their keep by increasing what they pay, because as weird as it is, developers and publishers need to earn money for a living.

If companies cared about pirating in 3rd world countries then they should bring the prices of their products down to a reasonable level for their consumers. When a new game costs the same as the fathers weekly salary then you can bet pirating is going to occur.

I frankly don't care if a 8 year old kid is having fun playing a pirated copy of spore in an internet cafe somewhere in Bagdhad, it doesn't effect anyone. The creators of the game would never have seen a penny from this kid because he cant afford the game at full retail price. As long as he's not physicaly hurting the owners then why not let him have his fun.

Oh yeah, and lets especially teach the young kids that they get whatever they want and don't have to work for it.  We all need a generation of people who don't work towards making their life, or life in general, better. All because they were taught they don't have to, they can have what they want without working for it. 

Some of you need to stop looking at things in black and white and realise there are shades of gray.

Well, to put it in perspective, let me break it down like this -

A publisher who has paid a development team to make a game will not give the developer a penny more until their investment is recouped and a certain profit point is made.

If the game only recoups the publisher costs, but doesn't make it to the profit point, the developer gets no more money.

The developer then has to do research and development with whatever money they have remaining in their company account, create a demo, pitch a game to the publisher to go through the routine all over again.

If the publisher doesn't make enough money to cover their investment costs, they consider the game a failure. Enough of these failures from a developer will make them not want to work with that developer any longer.

If there are no publishers for the developer to acquire money from for a new game, the development company dies.

If development teams die like this, the amount of new games available become fewer.

So by buying new games, you are supporting the gaming industry and future games.

If you pirate games, you are part of the disease that is killing off studios.

Remember, 2 wrongs do not make a right, and just because other people are doing it doesn't mean that its okay for you too.

It'd be funny to have people caught pirating given to the developers of the game they pirated. Would make for some realistic textures for blood and entrails.

I find the passionate hate many u.s games seem to hold against piracy quite perplexing. For one I think almost all of you have pirated one thing or another in your life whether it be music or even a photograph. But when it comes to vg piracy many of you get your panties in a bunch. We are talking multi million, in cases billion dollar coorporations here. If the game only makes 50 instead of 70 million in revenue is that really such an evil thing? Afterall I don't think the CEO's of these companies are begging for money on street corners and having a difficult time making ends meet. Is it really such a question of morale integrity when talking about a few extra bucks filthy rich multinationals maybe losing out on, or does everyone here happen to be a part of that upper 5% corporate elite?