Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

September 24, 2008 -

Every gamer's favorite academic, Dr. Henry Jenkins of M.I.T., is reported by Inquirer.net as saying that piracy performs a balancing function of sorts between the competing interests of consumers and digital media content owners.

Prof. Jenkins spoke at the recent Games Convention Asia in Singapore. From Inquirer.net's report:

Jenkins... noted that piracy is a contentious issue but defends it as a necessity for consumers who have no access to many materials that would have been otherwise made available to them...

 

He sees piracy in two ways: that it is the only way for developing markets to get access to materials and another is that it is a rebellious method for consumers against high prices of original material. To balance, this, Jenkins said that both producers and consumers would have to reach a "moral economy" where the system of belief is that transactions are fair... Jenkins believed that users, if given the proper access point for content they want, will buy original instead of resorting to piracy...

 

"The younger generation of executives understands the digital age more than their older counterparts. The question now is: how much influence do these younger guys have over the older guys so they could change their strategy? Once they solve that, the rest will be easier."

Via: Asian Journal Online


Comments

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

As usual, Proffessor Jenkins is my hero.

 

Please, simply charge consumers the amount they think they should pay instead of forcing them to pay full price. Oh, that costs too much? Slash development costs, remove extraneous features no one cares about.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

"Slash development costs, remove extraneous features no one cares about."

Yeah, like the game, and the game company.  Libertarianism sounds great in theory, but in practice it turns into the worst form of despotism anyone can imagine.  Think Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome meets Colonel Kurtz's empire in Apocalypse Now.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

"...the system of belief is that transactions are fair..."

Yes!  Right now, every game, crappy ones and great ones, are $60.  When 90% of the games on the market fall into the first category, people are hesitant to spend full price on a game. 

Of course, I just rent the game instead of stealing it, but that's just me.  And now game demos are so pervasive, you don't even need to rent.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

YES!  YES!

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

"Jenkins... noted that piracy is a contentious issue but defends it as a necessity for consumers who have no access to many materials that would have been otherwise made available to them..."

This is nonsense. Accessing materials without paying for them is known as theft. If you can't, or won't, pay for something, you shouldn't be allowed to have it.

"He sees piracy in two ways: that it is the only way for developing markets to get access to materials"

Markets where noone pays for anything? What the basis for this claim? What new markets have come from piracy? 

"and another is that it is a rebellious method for consumers against high prices of original material."

Businesses are in this to make money. If the consumer had their way, all businesses would be selling at a loss. Everyone would go broke. In any case, theft is not an acceptable method of protest. This is like protesting high food prices by stealing everything in the produce section.

"To balance, this, Jenkins said that both producers and consumers would have to reach a "moral economy" where the system of belief is that transactions are fair..."

This "moral economy" is what led to the harsh DRM measures now. This belief is nonsense.

"Jenkins believed that users, if given the proper access point for content they want, will buy original instead of resorting to piracy..."

Maybe, but you need evidence to back this up. A scientist should know this.

"The younger generation of executives understands the digital age more than their older counterparts. The question now is: how much influence do these younger guys have over the older guys so they could change their strategy? Once they solve that, the rest will be easier."

As much influence as their positions allow. There's nothing to "solve" there.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

If a company is trying to cheat its customers by making them pay full price for what is essentially a rental, theft is warranted.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

If EA were charging $10 to $15 for their Spore rental, no one would mind the three install limit.  But that's not what they're doing.  They're charging $60 for it, which is the same amount that other companies charge for games that are not rentals.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

Accessing materials without paying for them is known as theft.

NO it is not. Accessing materials without paying for them AND DENYING THEM TO OTHERS is theft.

This is copyright infringement.

 

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

This is nonsense. Accessing materials without paying for them is known as theft. If you can't, or won't, pay for something, you shouldn't be allowed to have it.

There are some parts of the world where the game is not accessible and to import the game is against the laws of that country, in this case obtaining it online isnt really a big deal, especially if it isnt even sold online as a download from a site you can buy it from.  That is that companies problem, and it happens every day.

Markets where no one pays for anything? What the basis for this claim? What new markets have come from piracy? 

Even when music was offered for free online by artists, people donated money to them on the site to pay them for the music.   People pay even if something is free because they do understand what it takes to make thing.  Though you will have some idiots that dont understand this, and some that listen and say it is crap and never give money either, that is their choice.  Either way, that is a system that can work, and has been proven to be able to work, and without having to deal with a publisher, many of these groups end up making more money.

Businesses are in this to make money. If the consumer had their way, all businesses would be selling at a loss. Everyone would go broke. In any case, theft is not an acceptable method of protest. This is like protesting high food prices by stealing everything in the produce section.

No, customers just want to get what they pay for, and the game industry is no longer providing that in many cases.  Barbie's new adventures 2009 isnt work $60, ever.  Well, maybe if it makes a virtual woman appear to do laundry and cook meals, then it would be work $20,000 for me.  I invested money into EverQuest because it was a good game, and it was a lot of fun.  If they would have offered it for free monthly instead, that would have been great too, but that monthly fee was my limit on what I was willing to pay for what I got out of it per month.

Xbox live is worth the money and actually worth at least double that much, but since they are willing to charge what they do, great.  Consumers are willing to pay money, but only when they are not getting cheated.  I have seen $5 games I would pay $40 for just because they are such great games.  While there are $60 games out there that are not even worth $20, Spore with DRM being worth $10, without $30.

This "moral economy" is what led to the harsh DRM measures now. This belief is nonsense.

No, greedy corporate executives is what lead us to this measure today where DRM doesnt even prevent piracy, it only prevent resale and trading games with friends.

Maybe, but you need evidence to back this up. A scientist should know this.

The free music online for donations pretty much proves this point.  People will make it up to the company if the company treats them well.  The massive number of people who downloaded it online that is outside of normal statistics of a game of this caliber is proof of them just being upset, the loss in sales is added proof that consumers are mad.    Without the DRM games like Sims 2 sold like normal for their times, while Spore sold horridly because of the fact of the DRM.  Consumers will pay if they are not getting screwed.

As much influence as their positions allow. There's nothing to "solve" there.

The thing to solve is the fact that consumers are treated like pirates, pirates are getting away with pirating still, and the consumers also cant resale their game or trade it with friends due to the DRM.  So cutting down on how much they screw the customer is the problem that needs to be solves, because these greedy a-holes just want to make money, so they are doing immoral things to do so.

-----

This is staying at the bottom of every new post I make until GameSpot reports on Spore's DRM, EA's apology, how gamers have reacted, AND the Class Action Suit against EA over Spore's DRM.  You can forge your own opinion on if they are in bed with EA since they don't publish dirty news about them, try to swing news to make EA look pretty, or keep it neutral and fact based instead of doing their job to inform the gamers.

http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/09/15/former-egm-editor-dishes-sorry-st...

 

Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

1. Theft is theft. You avoided that, I noticed.

2. Music and games is apples to oranges. It takes far more money to make a game than a music album.

3. Businesses have to turn a profit. If they don't, they go broke. Prices are set, first and foremost, but how much money it took to make the product. Your arguement ignores this fact. Your arguement is ridiculous to start with though. The amount that you value a game at is irrelevant. You can't set a price by what one person is willing to pay, because, again, you'd go broke.

4. Greed makes a nice scapegoat, but it's worthless as an arguement. Game companies want to make money. Piracy is people stealing their stuff, thus stealing their money. So, they take anti-piracy measures. If piracy continues, they take harsher measures. If companies don't make money, they go broke, and you get no product to pirate. If companies get no profit, they have no incentive to continue to do what they do. Money makes the world go round.

5. Again, apples to oranges. What happens in music does not relate to what happens to games because an album is $10 to $15 dollars, while a game is $50 to $60. Also, none of these pirates have donated to either the creator or the producer of the games they've pirated. If they would have been willing to pay for the product at a different price, why didn't they pirate and donate? 

6. As your post shows, the consumers harbor and sympathize with pirates. The companies know this, so they don't trust their customers. So, they treat their custormers like pirates, because they can't tell which ones are pirates and which ones aren't, and they have no reason to trust any of them. You've only managed to see this from the consumer side. Try looking at it from the producer's side.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

1. Yes, theft if theft. I don't think anybody is denying that the people who pirated Spore stole the game.

2. The point is that you can make money by giving something away and allowing for donations. Do you know that it wouldn't work with games? No. Maybe someone should try it. If they make a decent game, I'm willing to donate $20-$30 for it. Sure they'd make less money per person, but you would have a lot more people trying it out, and if enough of those people donate a decent amount, you make money. It could work.

3. I just proved you wrong in point 2. I'd pay for a quality, free game. Radiohead proved you wrong by releasing their album for free online and turnig a profit. Yes, games cost more to make than albums, but people know that and would value them more highly. Pay-by-value would hold companies accountable to creating excellent games. It would be a leap of faith, but I think a good game could make money this way.

4. How many people do you really think steal games regularly? Obviously it can't be a really significant number because if it were game companies would be out of business. Face it, you'll always have some people who simply won't pay for games, and you'll always have honest people who pay for their games. Since you'll never get rid of the pirates--the Internet gives them too much freedom to ever get rid of them--you have to try to hook the honest buyers. Does DRM stop piracy? No. DRM may slow pirates down, but since it's inevitably cracked sooner or later, they can just wait to play the game until they can get it for free. Does DRM gain more legitimate buyers? No. Why would it? If anything, DRM pushes legitimate customers away. Many people say they either pirated or simply didn't buy Spore because of the DRM. The DRM didn't slow pirates down at all. EA lost just as many sales to the regular pirates as they would have without DRM. But they also lost many legitimate sales either to piracy or boycott. They lost all-around.

5. How the heck are pirates supposed to donate? Are they going to send letters to EA with $10 saying "Hi, I pirated your game. Here's the $10 I think it's worth"? They're pirates. The chronic pirates steal games because they don't want to pay for them, not because of some principal about game values. In the case of Spore, people pirated as a form of protest. They didn't pirate because they thought the game wasn't worth $60; they pirated because they didn't want EA renting them a game and installing potentially harmful software on their machines. Why would they pay EA as part of their protest?

6. Consumers harbor and sympathize with pirates? Do you expect them to sympathize with the game company? Yeah, let's all go and give EA a pat on the back for treating us like criminals when we buy their game legitimately! Why would I sympathize with someone who mistreats me? And I think the responses here shows that many people don't sympathize with the pirates. I know I don't. I think what they did was wrong, but it makes an excellent illustration of the problems with DRM. I'm not defending their actions; I'm only trying to show what kind of message this should send to the game companies.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

Hey, Number 2 sounds an aweful lot like Shareware, which is how Doom became so popular.

E. Zachary Knight
http://www.editorialgames.com
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

5. Again, apples to oranges. What happens in music does not relate to what happens to games because an album is $10 to $15 dollars, while a game is $50 to $60.

www.kingdomofloathing.com/ is a perfect example here. MMORPG with no subscription fees, maintenance and development are paid by donations and sale of merchandise. People will pay for a good product, but when you get a worse game experience when you pay for it than when you pirate it, obviously more people will pirate it. It's common sense, no?

 

6. As your post shows, the consumers harbor and sympathize with pirates. The companies know this, so they don't trust their customers. So, they treat their custormers like pirates, because they can't tell which ones are pirates and which ones aren't, and they have no reason to trust any of them. You've only managed to see this from the consumer side. Try looking at it from the producer's side.

Well maybe, just maybe, paranoia, criminalization of your target audience and ever more draconian DRMs are not going to solve the pirate problem. I don't know about you, but when I pay for a game I don't want to be treated like a criminal, I don't want to have to circumvent DRMs just so I can play the game and I don't want shadowy little programs threatening the stability of my system to be installed without my knowledge or consent.

Of course piracy is wrong, but there will always be certain people who simply will not pay for what they want. Publishers can either try to rub out that element with full force, driving consumers away in droves, or they can find ways to minimize the amount of people who pirate and encourage people to pay for what they play (elaborate manuals/boxes, not charging more than the game is worth, not treating your consumers like dirty rotten scoundrels).

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

Yes, Piracy is theft. Piracy is not a form of civil disobedience.

The Spore situation brought out two forms of protest. One, the boycot. Many people such as myself just chose to not buy Spore. If accompanied by some kind of letter or petition, gets the point accross very well. Consider the many blog posts the accompanying letters.

The second was rampant piracy. Many people felt that their voice would be better heard, proving to EA that DRM will not stop Piracy. So they pirated the game. Not the wisest of choices. This is the equivelent to throwing red paint on fur coats. It causes a lot of damage and outrage, but companies still make fur coats.

As it stands, the only real way to force businesses to change their business model is for customers to boycott. If a company is not making any money because people are not buying the product, the ywill change their product. If companies are not making money because people are stealing their product, the ywill do what they can to stop the thieves. Thus DRM. That is why the pirate protest does not work. EA sees the spike in piracy and most likely will up the DRM.

AS for greed, that has a little to do with this. EA is a publicly traded company. As such, they have a responsibility to produce a return on investment to the shareholders. If there is no RoI, the investors pull out and EA loses lots of money. Much more than if a bunch of people stopped buying a game. So part of their plan to brin that RoI, is to fight piracy through DRM. Now EA also has a responsibility toward their customer, but since that and the responsibility to the investor rarely cross, they have to set priorities. So they decide which of those two groups to put first. Which one will bring a higher RoI to EA. EA has decided that the investor is more important, because the loss to profit ration is higher with them.

Now as for the music analogy, I think yo umissed the point. He was refering to the Radiohead project. They released their album for a "set your own price" experiment. They have yet to reveal any statistics, but it appears to be a success. From any research done, it seems that the number of people who payed and who didn't were pretty even, but the people who did pay, rarely paid less than $5.

You may not realize this, but every person in the world puts a value on the products they purchase. If you don't think that something is worth the asking price, first you try to negotiate either a lower price, or add ons to increase the value. If that is not possible, you don't buy it. You look for a similar item that matches the value to price that you desire. I do agree that just because your value for the product is much lower than the asking price, that does not give you the right to steal it. It never does. There are also people who have unrealistic expectation in value to price. These people are literally impossible to please.

The object of a free market is to find a proper balance between the concumer's perceived value and the manufacturer's price. When both are aligned so that the customer finds the value matches the price and the manufacturer makes a profit, you have a healthy market. But such a market cannot exist when theft is proliferant.

E. Zachary Knight
http://www.editorialgames.com
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
MySpace Page: http://www.myspace.com/okceca
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1325674091

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

Remember, kids.  You have every right to steal anything you want- stick it to the man and make it a better world!

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

hes definatley right. ive said it before, i will say it again: if there were a place on the internet, to download movies and music for a minimal amount, people would be all over it. there would have to be no drm of course. but selling a movie at a few bucks online is much cheaper than manufacturing a costly, and ultimately outdated, dvd. cds have been outdated for years. the only thing that needs to happen is the companies need to realize this. itunes is the start of this revolution, but in the end, cant perform the whole function. also, nobody likes steve jobs.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

I <3 Steve Jobs

I use my mac whenever I want to feel like my computer doesn't hate me.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

The thing is, the DRM doesn't stop piracy at all, or else it wouldnt have been hacked so easily and fast and put on torrent sites.  It stops people from sharing games with friends, and as someone else here said, it stops the resale market companies like EB, GameStop, Ebay, and so on.

It is dirty business no matter how you look at it.

---

This is staying at the bottom of every new post I make until GameSpot reports on Spore's DRM, EA's apologie, how gamers have reacted, AND the Class Action Suit against EA over Spore's DRM.  You can forge your own opinion on if they are in bed with EA since they don't publish dirty news about them, try to swing news to make EA look pretty, or keep it nutural and fact based instead of doing their job to inform the gamers.

http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/09/15/former-egm-editor-dishes-sorry-st...

Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

The fact that DRM stops you from reselling is what really bothers me, and I don't even resell games often. I don't like that EA (or whatever other company) thinks that they can control what I do with something I've purchased. If I buy a car, house, computer, or anything else, I'm allowed to do whatever the heck I want with it. I can use it, pack it in a box, toss it off a cliff, or resell it. I should be able to do whatever I want with my games aside from sharing them with the world via bittorrent.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejAaOV8hQQw&feature=related

I would guess that EA say this youtube video and realized that they were getting screwed by EB and GameStop.

---

This is staying at the bottom of every new post I make until GameSpot reports on Spore's DRM, EA's apologie, how gamers have reacted, AND the Class Action Suit against EA over Spore's DRM.  You can forge your own opinion on if they are in bed with EA since they don't publish dirty news about them, try to swing news to make EA look pretty, or keep it nutural and fact based instead of doing their job to inform the gamers.

http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/09/15/former-egm-editor-dishes-sorry-st...

Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

I find something a bit wrong with what he is saying. He says that piracy is a controller for the industry, since when has stealing been a good thing for an economy? Before I go on I classify piracy as stealing because the person who is pirateing is takeing for free the time and effort it took to make the software. If prices are too high aren't things supposed to be boycotted instead of being stolen? If you say that piracy is a good method for equalizing the industry does that make piracy appropriate? I will agree that not everything is fair in the prices or companies, but the answer is not to take what you want, but to boycott if you feel something should change, because most companies will not change as well if they are afraid of pirates, some may even go deeper into the problem.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

I agree with you that piracy is wrong, but it does send a more effective message than simply boycotting. If people simply don't buy a game, the company probably figures that they just don't want the game unless they receive numerous letters explaining the boycott. Piracy, on the other hand, is harder to ignore because the company knows people want to play the game but refuse for some reason to pay for it. You always have some pirating because some people will never pay for games, but when the numbers reach ridiculous points like with Spore, it sends a message to the company that something is making consumers prefer piracy over purchasing.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

What are talking about? When companies see people pirate their stuff, they think that the individuals in question would be paying for the product without if the free version weren't available. Piracy sends the message "People are stealing your stuff", not "I'm protesting your descisions". Boycotts are far more effective protest because they come with the unsaid promise that sales will go up in the boycotter's demands are met. Piracy has no such balance to it.

Or, another version: When has anybody changed anything for the better because people pirated their stuff? The only thing I've ever seen come from piracy is harsher and harsher anti-piracy measures.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

Boycotts only work if you can get petitions and large numbers of indignant letters together. Do you really think that most people are going to take the time to write a letter? And do you think even half the letters that are sent will be legible and respectful? You'd probably get a bunch of letters saying "Ur DRM sux ***. F U!" Of course some people will send respectful and thought-out letters, but the disrespectful ones will be what the company remembers, and you still have the problem of people not writing the letters in the first place. An online petition wouldn't be any better because, let's face it, online petitions are jokes. You would need a real, physical petition that shows that all these people really did sign this instead of a few people angry people with a bunch of aliases. How are you going to get an actual petition spread all over the globe? Post them on the Internet and hope that a bunch of people run across it and print it out to get people in their area to sign? If you could get copies of a physical petition all over the globe, how are you going to get people to sign it? Are you going to sit outside Gamestop and hope that someone angry about DRM comes along? This isn't like a political petition where you can set it at a polling station and have thousands of interested people in one place to sign it. Your boycott sounds very noble on paper, but it would be a joke if you actually tried to make it happen.

I don't condone piracy, but I think watching your company lose millions of dollars to an unprecedented number of illegal downloads has to make you wonder what's making all these people download the game. You'd have to be very disillusioned to convince yourself that they're all just pirates. Of course, lawsuits are the most effective method of getting a company's ear, and now that we have a lawsuit against EA's DRM, we may see some changes in the system.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

We have websites and lobbying groups on our side. The gaming community is one of the most well-connected in the world. It isn't hard to get them to sign a petition or to get them to complain: they do it all the time. They aren't always respectful, but they'll tell you how they feel.

And the game companies, when confronted with piracy, will think, as I said before: "Those bastard consumers just hate having to pay for our shit. If only those pirated copies weren't available, we'd make more money."

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

You still have to admit that pirating on the scale of Spore sends a message. EA cannot be so ignorant as to think that all those people were simply pirates. It's not a great solution, but it sends a message. Think of it as civil disobedience. People do something illegal in protest of an unfair practice. It may not be as noble as lobbying and petitioning, but sometimes you have to do something shocking to get attention. A bunch of signatures can send a message, but a huge number of illegal downloads has more kick and sends a bigger message. It's still illegal, but if the game company can consider for a minute that these people might be pirating for a reason, the message is very strong. You just have to trust that the company is smart enough to get past "Those damn pirates!" to "Why are all these people pirating?" If a bunch of people on the Internet can figure it out, I'm sure a bunch of marketing, PR, and programming experts can too.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

He makes some good points, as do the previous posters with the "moral objection piracy" many are doing with Spore.
It'll be interesting to see if the Industry will actually pick something up from this.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

Right or wrong and for better or worse, piracy is a form of protest, and can occasionally be effective.  I don't think that very many people pirate games because they prefer it to buying, all else equal; folks pirate as a form of civil disobedience in protest of high prices, low quality, and DRM.  Many of us who don't pirate still take part in an even older form of protest—not buying the game.  Unfortunately, simply not buying doesn't send much of a message.  I think games-abstinence can be compared to not voting while piracy could be compared to voting for a third-party candidate; one is impossible to differentiate from apathy, but the other indicates (at least in the abstract) a pent-up demand for fundimental change.  If a game debuts to few sales, a publisher may think the game is just a dud, but if it debuts to low sales and an army of piracy and Amazon star-bombing, that might send the message that demand exists for something very similar to, but not exactly what's being offered.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

That's a fairly interesting statement by him. Can Piracy be a catalyst of change in the industry for the better?

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

Yes, the change that piracy has been and will continue to be is the movement of the gaming industry away from the PC towards consoles.

Unlike the music industry, the establishment gaming industry has long had a way to deal with piracy, simply by abandoning the PC.

And now with the emergence of XBox Live, WiiWare, and PSN games, independent game developers can - and are - moving in the same direction (case-in-point: The Behemoth).

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

That's a fallacy. You forget Steam tends to offer a lot of independent studios games for sale as well.


-------------------------------------------------- I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer


Well, in Spores case, I see a significant amount of the piracy there being done out of protest rather than any desire to actually not pay for it

-------------------------------------------------- I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

Exactly, and that is a huge part of the checks and balances this world naturally developes. 

Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls

Re: Henry Jenkins: Piracy is the Great Equalizer

Food for thought. Expecting an anti- and pro-piracy flame war in 3.....2.....


-------------------------------------------------- I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.
 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Should 'Hatred' have been removed from Steam Greenlight?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
PHX Corp@Adam802 We'll break out the popcorn in June12/19/2014 - 9:23pm
ZippyDSMleeMaskedPixelante: I'm itching to start it too but I will wait till the patch goes live. >>12/19/2014 - 7:52pm
Adam802Leland Yee and Jackson get trial date: http://sfbay.ca/2014/12/18/leland-yee-keith-jackson-get-trial-date/12/19/2014 - 5:24pm
MaskedPixelanteNevermind. Turns out when they said "the patch is now live", they meant "it's still in beta".12/19/2014 - 5:07pm
MaskedPixelanteSo I bought Dark Souls PC, and it's forcing me to log into GFWL. Did I miss something?12/19/2014 - 5:00pm
Matthew Wilsonhttp://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/republicans-may-have-plan-to-save-internet-providers-from-utility-rules/ this is intreasting. congress may put net nutrality in to law to avoid title 2 classification12/19/2014 - 2:45pm
Matthew Wilsonhttp://www.polygon.com/2014/12/19/7421953/bullshit-cards-against-humanity-donated-250k-sunlight-foundation I have to admit I like the choice o organization. congrats to CAH.12/19/2014 - 1:51pm
E. Zachary KnightIf you are downloading a copy in order to bypass the DRM, then you are legally in the wrong. Ethically, if you bought the game, it doesn't matter where you download it in the future.12/19/2014 - 12:06pm
InfophileEZK: Certainly better that way, though not foolproof. Makes me think though: does it count as piracy if you download a game you already paid for, just not from the place you paid for it at? Ethically, I'd say no, but legally, probably yes.12/19/2014 - 11:20am
ZippyDSMleeAnd I still spent 200$ in the last month on steam/GOG stuff sales get me nearly every time ><12/19/2014 - 10:55am
ZippyDSMleeMaskedPixelante:And this is why I'm a one legged bandit.12/19/2014 - 10:51am
ZippyDSMleeE. Zachary Knight: I buy what I can as long as I can get cracks for it...then again it I could have gotton Lords of the Fallen for 30 with DLC I would have ><12/19/2014 - 10:50am
MaskedPixelantehttp://www.joystiq.com/2014/12/19/marvel-vs-capcom-origins-leaving-online-storefronts-soon/ Speaking of "last chance to buy", Marvel vs. Capcom Origins is getting delisted from all major storefronts. Behold the wonders of the all digital future.12/19/2014 - 9:59am
MaskedPixelanteSeriously, the so-called "Last Chance" sale was up to 80% off, while this one time only return sale goes for a flat 85% off with a 90% off upgrade if you buy the whole catalogue.12/19/2014 - 9:37am
E. Zachary KnightInfophile, Tha is why I buy only DRM-free games.12/19/2014 - 9:37am
MaskedPixelanteNordic is back on GOG for one weekend only. And at 85% off no less, which is kind of a slap in the face to people who paid more during the "NORDIC IS LEAVING FOREVER BUY NOW OR FOREVER HOLD YOUR PEACE" sale, but whatever...12/19/2014 - 9:28am
InfophileRe PHX's link: This is one of the reasons the digital revolution isn't all it's cracked up to be. There's also the flip side where Sony can block access to games you've bought if they ban your account for unrelated reasons. All power is theirs.12/19/2014 - 8:52am
MaskedPixelantehttp://uplay.ubi.com/#!/en-US/events/uplay-15-days You can win FREE GAMES FOR A YEAR! Unfortunately, they're Ubisoft games.12/18/2014 - 6:29pm
Papa MidnightAh, so it was downtime. I've been seeing post appear in my RSS feed, but I was unable to access GamePolitics today across several ISPs.12/18/2014 - 6:06pm
james_fudgeSorry for the downtime today, folks.12/18/2014 - 5:54pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician