Author Topic: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million  (Read 13014 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline BlackNMild2k1

  • Animal Crossing Hustler
  • Score: 408
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #25 on: February 09, 2010, 09:44:27 PM »
^ that's exactly why I agree with companies going after the source of the leak and not so much the downloaders themselves.

Yes, downloading stuff is bad if that's how you got around buying a legit copy, but 70%-90% of downloaders would have just rather done without something than go out and buy it anyway.
The real problem is the people putting up for download. Those are the people that are violating copyrights and numerous other things that may be against the law. If you go after individuals, you will forever be at war and never out of court.

Offline Chozo Ghost

  • I do want the Wii U to fail.
  • Score: -431
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #26 on: February 09, 2010, 09:54:42 PM »
No, they couldn't have. That's why they settled out of court. That's why all copyright infringement cases settle our of court. To say that this guy caused $1.5 million in damages is asinine. He could have stolen an entire shipment of the game from Wal-Mart and got off easier. Copyright infringement cases are ridiculous.

I don't understand why you think his punishment is severe. He isn't going to spend 1 day in prison. Geez, you are acting like he got the death penalty. All he has to do is pay a fine. Odds are he won't be able to pay it and that will be  the end of that.
is your sanity...

Offline BlackNMild2k1

  • Animal Crossing Hustler
  • Score: 408
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #27 on: February 09, 2010, 10:25:19 PM »
Chances are he'll have payments taken out of every check for the rest of his natural life.
I hope he gets a good paying job.

Offline that Baby guy

  • He's a real Ei-Ei-Poo!
  • Score: 343
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #28 on: February 09, 2010, 10:35:01 PM »
Maybe he'll be a chicken farmer.  I hear demand is rising.

Offline Morari

  • 46 DC EA D3 17 FE 45 D8 09 23 EB 97 E4 95 64 10 D4 CD B2 C2
  • Score: -7237
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #29 on: February 10, 2010, 12:43:05 AM »
Nintendo, and other entertainment creators, should be more proactive in their anti-piracy practices. Make good games (with no DRM!) and charge a fair price for them. New Super Mario Bros. Wii is a great game, but it's not worth $50.
10 million people disagree with you.

Just because something is popular does not make it right. Most people (10 million being a drop in the bucket, after all) are completely uninformed, unthinking, consumer drones. One needs to only look at some of the comments throughout this thread to see that.

Quote
Quote
Most games aren't worth $50 and that's why piracy is so high.
Piracy is so high because it's so easy. 

That's entirely subjective. The common gamers (common Wii owner especially) has no idea that such piracy even exists, let alone how to do it. Besides, there's a huge element of "time vs. cost" to take into account when copying games. A lot of people would be willing to simply pay for the product simply to make sure it "just works".

Quote
Quote
These games are marketed towards age groups that do not have jobs and do not have money.
If we're talking about young adult males, they have more disposable income than other demographics as they don't have to support dependents or pay mortgages or save for retirement.  They're also more likely to know how to pirate.

No, we're talking about Nintendo's target audiences; children. Most twelve to fifteen year olds do not have jobs and cannot purchase videogames themselves. Mommy and daddy are only going to purchase so many games for them. Looking back at my previous point, what these kids do have an abundance of is time. The time it takes to download and implement a games is worth it to them, because they cannot meet the $50 toll.

Quote
Quote
They're people that usually can't purchase the game anyway. If developers began charging $20 for games, I guarantee that they'd see a huge boost in sales, and probably even make more of a profit than by selling fewer units for more money like they do now.
If that was the case, then they'd already be doing that.  They do have financial analysts, you know.  Otherwise they wouldn't have any shareholders.

EDIT: Let's try your $20 idea.

At $50 NSMBWii has generated $500 million in revenue (10 million copies sold, assuming $50 US is the average earned per copy sold).  At $20 the game would have to sell 25 million copies to just match overall revenue.  It would have to sell even more to match marginal profit if we consider the cost of producing an extra 15 million copies.  I don't think this is very probable...

Perhaps we should rethink what a marginal profit would be. NSMBW didn't take very much at all to produce. It's ridiculously simple and has very little in the way of visual assets. If developers can't make a profit off of a $20 game then they're doing something wrong. Hollywood spends a ton more making lame blockbuster movies, yet the theater tickets only cost $5 and the DVD release sits around $20. Or how about a new novel? You can go purchase a brand new hardcover novel for $35. It's going to give you a longer-lasting amount of entertainment, and has actual, material costs involved in its manufacturing.

Quote
Regardless, even at a more affordable price, the majority of people who pirate games are still going to choose the free option.  If one has no issue with pirating (ethically), there's still no incentive to pay (other than tangible benefits like artwork or a manual).

Those people will pirate the game regardless. The game could be $1 and they would still take it for free. Those people are not lost sales, and should not be treated as such. Developers should stop wasting time and money on developing DRM schemes to hinder non-customers. They should instead be focused on making the experience as fun as possible for their actual customers. It's a greedy, ass-backwards way of looking one's install base. How much more profitable do you think NSMBW could have been had Nintendo not created and implemented new copyright protection for it? How much money and time do you think they could have saved had they not been hunting down and ruining the lives of people that were not doing anything at all to harm their product? This is copyright infringement we're talking about, not theft. No product was stolen and no units were lost. Potential loss does not equate to $1.5 million. Of course, you probably feel vindicated every time the RIAA sues the life savings out of someone's grandmother for downloading a single MP3.
"This post has been censored for your protection."

                                --Bureau of Internet Morality

Offline that Baby guy

  • He's a real Ei-Ei-Poo!
  • Score: 343
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #30 on: February 10, 2010, 12:58:05 AM »
Today I saw someone post, saying one of their friends was too cheap to pirate one game to DVD, and wanted to merge several games to one disc to save cash.

I nearly cried.

Edit:  I do second that time and money are wasted on complex DRM schemes.  While I think the initial platform can be as difficult to crack as the company wants, firmware updates for any cracked platform get broken through in just a few days, if not only a few hours, and cause general problems for all users.  It's a waste of Nintendo's time to pursue making back-ups incompatible via firmware, and I think this type of action is much more effective.

Offline Ymeegod

  • Score: -16
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #31 on: February 10, 2010, 01:08:44 AM »
24 years old and lives at home working parttime at the docks?  Why did he even settle for 1.5million anyhow?  If it went to courts he would have ended up at $25-50k because he wasn't charging or selling a product.  All he did was upload it to the internet--which isn't an actual crime, the crime is the people downloading the product. 

I'm against privating myself and find the whole it's not worth $50 a joke.  You can always RENT games and that's legal :).


Offline KDR_11k

  • boring person
  • Score: 28
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #32 on: February 10, 2010, 03:21:32 AM »
All he did was upload it to the internet--which isn't an actual crime, the crime is the people downloading the product. 

Actually it's the other way around, copyright infringement is uploading (broadcasting a copyrighted work without permission from the copyright holder), downloading is not even illegal in some countries where uploading is.

Offline Chozo Ghost

  • I do want the Wii U to fail.
  • Score: -431
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #33 on: February 10, 2010, 12:40:29 PM »
Just because something is popular does not make it right.

Yeah it does, its called "supply and demand".

And furthermore, it is Nintendo's property so whether they charge $50, $5, or even $500 for it that's their right because they own it. People don't have to buy it, but no matter what they do not have a right to pirate it. Piracy is theft and it goes against pretty much any religious and moral code there is.
is your sanity...

Offline Chozo Ghost

  • I do want the Wii U to fail.
  • Score: -431
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #34 on: February 10, 2010, 12:52:44 PM »
Those people will pirate the game regardless. The game could be $1 and they would still take it for free. Those people are not lost sales, and should not be treated as such. Developers should stop wasting time and money on developing DRM schemes to hinder non-customers. They should instead be focused on making the experience as fun as possible for their actual customers. It's a greedy, ass-backwards way of looking one's install base. How much more profitable do you think NSMBW could have been had Nintendo not created and implemented new copyright protection for it? How much money and time do you think they could have saved had they not been hunting down and ruining the lives of people that were not doing anything at all to harm their product? This is copyright infringement we're talking about, not theft. No product was stolen and no units were lost. Potential loss does not equate to $1.5 million. Of course, you probably feel vindicated every time the RIAA sues the life savings out of someone's grandmother for downloading a single MP3.

Maybe there will always be those who pirate no matter what. However, if you remove DRM you will invite more people to pirate, and as these people pirate they'll tell their friends and it will spiral out of control. Can companies like Nintendo stop piracy completely? No. But they should still fight it tooth and nail anyway because they can at least minimize it if they can't stomp it out completely.

And furthermore, whether its lost sales or not, I don't want pirates getting for free what honest consumers like me have to pay for. I don't care if they would never have bought the game anyway or that it isn't losing sales for Nintendo. Either way it still pisses me off that they are getting something for free that legally must be purchased. So whenever one of these pirates gets taken to court for it I rejoice. Maybe there are still thousands of more pirates out there that keep getting away with it, but every one Nintendo nails is a victory as far as I'm concerned and the other pirates will have trouble sleeping at night worrying that they might be next. Well good, because I don't like them or what they do. They sicken me and piss me off.
is your sanity...

Offline Morari

  • 46 DC EA D3 17 FE 45 D8 09 23 EB 97 E4 95 64 10 D4 CD B2 C2
  • Score: -7237
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #35 on: February 10, 2010, 01:42:28 PM »
And furthermore, it is Nintendo's property so whether they charge $50, $5, or even $500 for it that's their right because they own it. People don't have to buy it, but no matter what they do not have a right to pirate it. Piracy is theft and it goes against pretty much any religious and moral code there is.

It most certainly is Nintendo's decision. However, that doesn't mean that it is a justified price. Simply having the power to do something does not make you right in actually doing it. Furthermore, software piracy is not theft. Don't let the media conglomerates brainwash you into thinking that downloading a copy of a game is on the same level as swiping a physical product from the store, because it's not. Sadly, the courts tend to cave into the media companies and actually punish people in excess of what they would had they merely stolen a copy from the store. It sounds to me that you're just a jealous little kid that doesn't like seeing other people having the things you can't afford.

Oh, and piracy goes against religious teachings? Are you serious?! What a pitiful fallback. I'd be careful saying stuff like that, as it may just be against the coveted forum rules.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2010, 01:48:07 PM by Morari »
"This post has been censored for your protection."

                                --Bureau of Internet Morality

Offline Chozo Ghost

  • I do want the Wii U to fail.
  • Score: -431
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #36 on: February 10, 2010, 03:03:51 PM »
It sounds to me that you're just a jealous little kid that doesn't like seeing other people having the things you can't afford.

What?? I'm the one buying the games! The "jealous little kids" would have to be the pirates.

It sounds to me from your defense of pirates and piracy that you must be one yourself. If you actually bought games you would be as pissed off about piracy as I am, but since you're not it must mean you aren't buying games because why else would you be okay with other people getting for free what honest people have to pay for?

So it must be that you are the "jealous little kid" because you advocate pirating the games your parents won't buy for you. I'm an adult and can afford to buy my own games so this isn't an issue for me, but apparently it is for you.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2010, 03:06:01 PM by Chozo Ghost »
is your sanity...

Offline TJ Spyke

  • Ass
  • Score: -1350
    • View Profile
    • Spyke Shop
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #37 on: February 10, 2010, 03:53:41 PM »
Furthermore, software piracy is not theft. Don't let the media conglomerates brainwash you into thinking that downloading a copy of a game is on the same level as swiping a physical product from the store, because it's not.

Bullshit. That is just crap that pirates and people who support piracy claim.

As for courts, the punishment is different. Stealing a physical item will get you jail time (plus maybe a fine), stealing a digital item will just get you a fine. This guy is like a  store that is selling stolen items.

The religious factor comes into play here too as most religions preach that stealing is wrong, and piracy IS the same as stealing.

I have to agree with Choze, you sound like you pirate games yourself. All of your arguments are the same that pirates make, plus you keep defending pirates and saying people who pay the MSRP of games (especially one of the best games of 2009, New Super Mario Bros. Will, IS worth $50) are basically idiots because they don't just steal the game.
Help out a poor college student, buy video games and Blu-ray Discs at: http://astore.amazon.com/spyke-20

Offline vudu

  • You'd probably all be better off if I really were dead.
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: -19
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #38 on: February 10, 2010, 04:07:52 PM »
Just chiming in to ask everyone to remember to keep the conversation civil.  Also, please keep religion out of this discussion.
Why must all things be so bright? Why can things not appear only in hues of brown! I am so serious about this! Dull colors are the future! The next generation! I will never accept a world with such bright colors! It is far too childish! I will rage against your cheery palette with my last breath!

Offline UltimatePartyBear

  • Voice of Reason
  • Score: 35
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #39 on: February 10, 2010, 04:09:40 PM »
Furthermore, software piracy is not theft. Don't let the media conglomerates brainwash you into thinking that downloading a copy of a game is on the same level as swiping a physical product from the store, because it's not.

Bullshit. That is just crap that pirates and people who support piracy claim.

Also grammarians.  For example, I can say piracy isn't theft without condoning it or even finding it less than totally reprehensible.  Piracy is not theft, nor is piracy murder, nor is murder theft, nor is murder jaywalking, nor is jaywalking piracy. 

Of course, this pet peeve of mine is completely separate from your flame war, so carry on.

Offline Urkel

  • Reggie Fart-Aime
  • Score: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #40 on: February 10, 2010, 05:27:51 PM »
This guy got off easy. He could've ended up with a good old-fashioned Reggie punting instead.
"ROFS? Rolling on the floor... starving?"- Phoenix Wright

Offline Morari

  • 46 DC EA D3 17 FE 45 D8 09 23 EB 97 E4 95 64 10 D4 CD B2 C2
  • Score: -7237
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #41 on: February 10, 2010, 05:44:43 PM »
This isn't going to get us anywhere. When people are unable to even see the different between theft and copyright infringement, you know you're not dealing with the sane. You need serious mental help and a lesson in law if you truly believe that it should be common place for someone to be fined $1.5 million for downloading a game, a movie, or a song.

I have not condoned piracy. I have not berated it. I have merely mentioned that the commonly witnessed punishment for copyright infringement (not theft!) is unjust and unfairly in favor of the media cartels. There are numerous things that could be done to truly curb piracy, but these companies opt instead to distort the law, waste tons of development money on copyright protection schemes, and generally annoying their real customer base by charging high prices and treating them just the same as they treat the pirates.

If such copyright infringement equated to lost sales, the entire industry would have tanked a decade ago. The same is true for the movie and music industry as well. Circus courts like this are merely spectacles of old corporations that can't keep up with the times. Instead of giving their customers what they want, they're going to go after non-customer in an attempt to halt their own stagnation. Not only is this unfair to the real customer (who has to put up with unjustified prices and intrusive DRM) but it also sets a dangerous precedent in a variety of law cases.
"This post has been censored for your protection."

                                --Bureau of Internet Morality

Offline EasyCure

  • wiggle wiggle wiggle wiggle wiggle, yeah!
  • Score: 75
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #42 on: February 10, 2010, 06:27:19 PM »
There are numerous things that could be done to truly curb piracy...

But none of the things you mentioned would ever curb piracy. Ever.
February 07, 2003, 02:35:52 PM
EASYCURE: I remember thinking(don't ask me why) this was a blond haired, blue eyed, chiseled athlete. Like he looked like Seigfried before he became Nightmare.

Offline BlackNMild2k1

  • Animal Crossing Hustler
  • Score: 408
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #43 on: February 10, 2010, 06:47:25 PM »
This isn't going to get us anywhere. When people are unable to even see the different between theft and copyright infringement, you know you're not dealing with the sane. You need serious mental help and a lesson in law if you truly believe that it should be common place for someone to be fined $1.5 million for downloading a game, a movie, or a song.

WRONG. He was being fined 1.5Million for get an early copy of the game and uploading it on the internet for others to download for free instead of buying.

Quote
I have not condoned piracy. I have not berated it. I have merely mentioned that the commonly witnessed punishment for copyright infringement (not theft!) is unjust and unfairly in favor of the media cartels. There are numerous things that could be done to truly curb piracy, but these companies opt instead to distort the law, waste tons of development money on copyright protection schemes, and generally annoying their real customer base by charging high prices and treating them just the same as they treat the pirates.

If such copyright infringement equated to lost sales, the entire industry would have tanked a decade ago. The same is true for the movie and music industry as well. Circus courts like this are merely spectacles of old corporations that can't keep up with the times. Instead of giving their customers what they want, they're going to go after non-customer in an attempt to halt their own stagnation. Not only is this unfair to the real customer (who has to put up with unjustified prices and intrusive DRM) but it also sets a dangerous precedent in a variety of law cases.

and just so you know, video games and other such products are not your right. They are a privilege bestowed upon you by the people that spent million/billions of dollars and 100's/1000's of man hours to allow you to enjoy it. They set the price they feel is worth of the time and effort that went into the product. If you don't feel the price is justified, then don't support the product with your money, but that doesn't give you the right to bypass the company that put the R&D, Manufacturing and marketing behind a product and just give it away for free.

I think there are lots of things that are over priced, but it's my choice to ignore it since it is not a necessity in my life. If I really need whatever it is they are offering and feel that I deserve that product at a much smaller price, then I can either find a competing product or invent one of my own.

I'm not gonna sit here and pretend that I (or friends)have never downloaded/streamed something off of the internet for free that was probably on sale somewhere, but you need to get off your "piracy isn't theft" high horse when all you have are your own selfish interest at heart.

You think NMBWii is overpriced? then fine, don't buy it. or go buy it used. or talk a friend into buying it so you can play it too or go halves on it with a friend, but to say "**** You Nintendo, I took your game, that you spent 1.5yrs creating, made using a brand that you've spent 25+ years building and billions of $$$ marketing, and just gave it away for free because I think it should have only cost $35!!". Then Nintendo has every right to suit up their lawyers and say "No, **** You! $1.5 Million in potential loss of sales".

It's foolish to think that even if the price was $15 lower that the same cheap skates out there would just say "why pay for it if I can get it for free", then go right to the internet and keep doing what they are doing.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2010, 07:31:08 PM by BlackNMild2k1 »

Offline Chozo Ghost

  • I do want the Wii U to fail.
  • Score: -431
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #44 on: February 10, 2010, 07:34:10 PM »
This isn't going to get us anywhere.

Did you really think arguing that Nintendo should back off and let piracy go unchecked, or arguing that NSMB isn't worth $50 and therefore should be pirated was going to get anywhere on a site which is dedicated to Nintendo fans? Maybe on a Sony or MS forum they would be tolerant of pirating of Nintendo games just to be done out of spite and so Nintendo doesn't make money, but on this site people actually like Nintendo so why did you think anyone would ever agree with you that "NSMB is crap" or that pirating it is acceptable?
is your sanity...

Offline Guitar Smasher

  • Score: 14
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #45 on: February 10, 2010, 08:23:59 PM »
Most of these comments have already been responded to by fellow members, but they were directed to me so I'd like to get my thoughts in.  I have a sense that Morari enjoys trying to belittle us, so I will take a stand.
Just because something is popular does not make it right. Most people (10 million being a drop in the bucket, after all) are completely uninformed, unthinking, consumer drones. One needs to only look at some of the comments throughout this thread to see that.
I can't tell if you're anti-industry or anti-consumer.  Your comments suggest both.  Either way your attitude seems to be pro-piracy and for this you should be ashamed.

Nintendo is right to charge $50.  10 million people agree.  If they didn't, they would not have handed over their money.  Don't call them stupid - one would consider you stupid for thinking you know how everybody should spend their money.  You aren't better than these 'drones', no matter how lowly you consider them.

Nintendo isn't a monopoly, so don't question the desires of the market.

Quote
That's entirely subjective. The common gamers (common Wii owner especially) has no idea that such piracy even exists, let alone how to do it. Besides, there's a huge element of "time vs. cost" to take into account when copying games. A lot of people would be willing to simply pay for the product simply to make sure it "just works".
Now come on, it's obvious that piracy levels are a function of ease.  Are you suggesting that piracy would be as high even if all copies disappeared from the internet?  I think record stores would have to disagree with you.  Even after they reduced their prices, few were buying (and this was before iTunes).

Quote
No, we're talking about Nintendo's target audiences; children. Most twelve to fifteen year olds do not have jobs and cannot purchase videogames themselves. Mommy and daddy are only going to purchase so many games for them. Looking back at my previous point, what these kids do have an abundance of is time. The time it takes to download and implement a games is worth it to them, because they cannot meet the $50 toll.
As an aside, I'd like to posit that NSMBWii wasn't targeted towards 12-15 year olds.  They haven't played 2D mario before and wouldn't have much interest (overall).  It was targeted to older gamers who remember the 2D games (and were asking for more).

Quote
Perhaps we should rethink what a marginal profit would be. NSMBW didn't take very much at all to produce. It's ridiculously simple and has very little in the way of visual assets.
If it was so simple, why didn't another developer do it beforehand?  Why did it take Nintendo 20 years to realize the revenue-generating potential of such a cheap game?  Wasn't the industry calling Nintendo crazy for planning to charge $50, which the market would not be willing to pay?  Yes, once the game was committed to, relatively little investment was needed.  This is Nintendo's reward for coming up with the idea.  It's the game of business.  Without it, companies wouldn't be making your video games.  If they think they can make more profit working on something else, that's where they'll move.
Quote
If developers can't make a profit off of a $20 game then they're doing something wrong. Hollywood spends a ton more making lame blockbuster movies, yet the theater tickets only cost $5 and the DVD release sits around $20. Or how about a new novel? You can go purchase a brand new hardcover novel for $35. It's going to give you a longer-lasting amount of entertainment, and has actual, material costs involved in its manufacturing.
I didn't even mention shipping costs (which are significant), but don't deny that marginal costs matter.  Yes, it may be less than other products, but I assure you all video game producers are aware of them.

Length of entertainment is not so much important as quality of entertainment.  Yes I might be entertained by a book for hours upon hours, but I'm willing to spend much more at an amusement park because the quality of entertainment is greater.  This relates back to the cost of development.  I know NSMBWii cost little to develop, but this concerns me not.  Output (quality of entertainment) is what I pay for, and in this case 10 million people judged that this condition was satisfied.  Your argument, on the other hand, suggests that people are more concerned with the number of pages in a book (material value) than what's written on them.

Quote
Those people will pirate the game regardless. The game could be $1 and they would still take it for free. Those people are not lost sales, and should not be treated as such. Developers should stop wasting time and money on developing DRM schemes to hinder non-customers. They should instead be focused on making the experience as fun as possible for their actual customers. It's a greedy, ass-backwards way of looking one's install base. How much more profitable do you think NSMBW could have been had Nintendo not created and implemented new copyright protection for it? How much money and time do you think they could have saved had they not been hunting down and ruining the lives of people that were not doing anything at all to harm their product? This is copyright infringement we're talking about, not theft. No product was stolen and no units were lost. Potential loss does not equate to $1.5 million. Of course, you probably feel vindicated every time the RIAA sues the life savings out of someone's grandmother for downloading a single MP3.
Did you read the article?  They sued the uploader - the source of piracy.  If there's drugs in your neighborhood, you go after the dealers, not the users.  Same principle applies.

For someone who claims to be familiar with the law, it's silly for you to deny the illegality of software piracy.  Maybe there isn't any physical theft, but it's still criminal.  If it wasn't criminal, why wouldn't the uploader challenge in court?

Offline Morari

  • 46 DC EA D3 17 FE 45 D8 09 23 EB 97 E4 95 64 10 D4 CD B2 C2
  • Score: -7237
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #46 on: February 10, 2010, 08:27:13 PM »
Chozo Ghost, I never said NSMBW is crap. I rather liked it. It wasn't worth $50 however, simply due to its length and the actual effort that went into making it. That simply illuminates a problem you have. You are unwilling to truly listen to and comprehend what others say. You skim over and take away from it what you want, because you opinion is unchanging. That's pretty typical of a consumer drone. You'd fight to defend the very construct that abuses you.

That aside, the main and initial point was that copyright law is broken (fact) and that stiff fines such as these should not go unchecked, as they are simply inane sacrifices presented to certain lobbyists. That isn't exclusive to Nintendo by any means, and in some ways is even truer for Microsoft in particular. Anyone with half a brain would be greatly concerned that corporations have so much say and influence over the world's governments. Do you truly believe that they are acting in the best interest of the consumer?

You feel personally wronged by pirates because you are a fanboy, who now feels as if his copy of the game is worthless because someone else acquired it for free. That's sad, and a real testament to just how these corporations gets away with what they do. I wonder if you feel that people who buy used copies of games should be sent to court as well? After all, they're essentially acquiring a piece of software without in any way compensating the original creator. Maybe one day you'll have a $1.5 million fine thrown at you because you ripped a CD in order to listen to it on your MP3 player. It's that kind of avalanche that allowing these shill trials to continue creates.

This has nothing to do with advocating piracy. It has nothing to do with getting software for free. It does however have everything to do with maintaining personal freedoms. Of course, I guess I'll go to Hell because of my opinions. After all, copyright infringement is a sin and goes against every religion ever invented. That's alright though, I don't think I'll mind my predestined eternity if I get to spend it with the likes of Robin Hood.
"This post has been censored for your protection."

                                --Bureau of Internet Morality

Offline Morari

  • 46 DC EA D3 17 FE 45 D8 09 23 EB 97 E4 95 64 10 D4 CD B2 C2
  • Score: -7237
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #47 on: February 10, 2010, 08:36:05 PM »
If it wasn't criminal, why wouldn't the uploader challenge in court?

I never said that is wasn't criminal. It is copyright infringement, which is clearly documented as an illegal activity. It is not theft and it did not cause Nintendo $1.5 million worth of damages. They man most likely refused to challenge it for the same reason that no one has ever stood in judgment with the RIAA. These corporations have untold amounts of money just sitting around to blow on lawyers. They're willing to drag the case out for years, waiting for you to back down and settle. They know that they'd never get their way, so they use scare tactics to bully people into settling out of court. This man probably could have gotten off with far less, but ultimately would have spent a lot more battling it out for years and years. It's a broken system that is created specifically to favor the corporations at every turn of the way.
"This post has been censored for your protection."

                                --Bureau of Internet Morality

Offline King Bowser Koopa

  • NWR Staff
  • Score: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #48 on: February 10, 2010, 08:40:39 PM »
I can see it now. Nintendo using this sophisticated forensics of theirs to read all these posts by morons condoning piracy of their IPs, and dishing out fines for conspiracy or intent to pirate.
Just to add my two cents, here in Australia, where this happened, this game retails for $99.95 AUD, which at the moment is roughly $90 USD. And yet, the game is STILL selling out of stores like hotcakes. The reason games are so expensive here? Official reports say that they bump up the price on games (and DVDs, CDs, the list goes on) because the public doesn't care about price. There have been no official complaints about the high price of media in Australia, raising or lowering the cost has no effect on sales, so the industry feels free to put whatever RRP they see fit. A 360 game suddenly costs $110 here simply because it has two discs? That's potential lost revenue for the competitors so they follow suit - and the buyers don't mind. If they want a game, they'll buy it.

That's not to say we're all idiots and throw our money away without thinking, people will flock to discount sales and shop around to get the best price. A lot of stores have an introductory sale with $20 off for the first week of a new game's release.
Just adding a little fuel for thought on this "price has nothing to do with piracy" topic.
Andrew Brown - NWR Australia Correspondent

Offline Guitar Smasher

  • Score: 14
    • View Profile
Re: Mario Pirate Settles For 1.5 Million
« Reply #49 on: February 10, 2010, 08:41:00 PM »
Forget the amount settled, was it right for Nintendo to go after this man (the source of piracy)?