• 🏆 Texturing Contest #33 is OPEN! Contestants must re-texture a SD unit model found in-game (Warcraft 3 Classic), recreating the unit into a peaceful NPC version. 🔗Click here to enter!
  • ✅ Time to vote for the top 3 models! The POLL for Hive's 6th HD Modeling Contest: Mechanical is now open! 📅 Poll close on July 16, 2024! 🔗 Cast your vote now!
  • ✅ The POLL for Hive's Texturing Contest #33 is OPEN! Vote for the TOP 3 SKINS! 🔗Click here to cast your vote!

Bill S.978 Will SHUT DOWN THE INTERNET and Streams EVERYWHERE

Status
Not open for further replies.
Level 5
Joined
Jul 26, 2010
Messages
95
Bad news

BREAKING NEWS EVERYONE MUST SEE THIS! . A bill is currently up for approval in congress that if passed, will prohibit all forms of video gameplay being published on youtube, and doing so, will be illegal. Watch this video for more details: watch?v=hytigOSjJxc&feature=fe******edu . It is not my video, but everyone MUST watch this. This would be a catastrophe in the online HiveWorkSHop community

"Games like Minecraft and CoD got famous from youtube from gameplay and montages I hope developers realize this."

"Come On People, Like - Favorite This Video!! This guy is willing to help out our gaming community. Youtube is like 75% gaming (not real statistics but you no what i mean) and without our games on here life is going to be boring as shit and you all know it. Get this video out there!!"

"If this bill passes then your not going to be seeing many game play, trailers, anything video game related on youtube. Its going to make it illegal and if you upload something without written permission, then your facing 5 years in the jail "

"Actually it will, canadians and other english speaking countries use the American version of youtube, and the law WILL affect all of youtube, even parts in other countries (meaning other languages), so they can't narrow it down to just theirs, they are forced to fuck with others, meaning they should just stop."

"Everyone complains about the fact it kills gaming on youtube, My biggest complaint is this, the US may have created the internet, but they never claimed ownership, nobody did. They shouldn't be allowed to make laws that have to do with things they don't own! And they shouldn't be allowed to make laws that affect people in other countries! This law is going to affect people in every other country, and a country's laws are only supposed to affect its citizens! America, stop fucking with others!"

VIDEO by TheGunnShop

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2lP1yuJgfM&feature=topvideos_mf
 
Last edited:
Level 14
Joined
Apr 21, 2007
Messages
1,465
Finally! That bill should have been approved ages ago. If you can charge a mother for murder because she miscarried it only seems logical that video gameplay should be banned.

On a serious note, this bill will never get passed, and even if it does it most certainly won't be a catastrophe for the Hive workshop. I doubt more than 5% of w3 developers actually create thorough gameplay videos of their projects.

Quite whining and blowing the whole thing out of proportion. I doubt many people even watch streams of tournaments, unless they are looking to better their gaming skills. The only time I watch gameplay videos is if the trailer didn't show any and I am considering buying the game. Not to mention the fact that piracy is illegal and yet you can find more sites for pirated software and videos than you can for original software and videos.

I'm actually annoyed at how important you think this is. It's not. Are you actually suggesting that the internet only consists of gameplay videos? Now I hope the bill gets passed.
 

Red

Red

Level 26
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
156
Honestly, I don't see anything wrong with this bill being passed. That shit about the world coming to an end is kinda funny, but you know its a lie so we won't discuss it.

Anyway, back to the real matter at hand, if this would eliminate annoying fps gameplay commentators and hordes of drunken Koreans screaming over 'professional' starcraft gamers - that's fine by me.

Hive wouldn't be affected by this at all as Hive has nothing to do with videos, so there goes that argument.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is... This is irrelevant. You're an attention @. Go * yourself.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Level 18
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
1,411
Is there a link to a full version of this bill somewhere?

I feel like there are a lot of different assumptions on the effect this bill would have if it would get approved and how it would affect countries outside of America (or servers owned by American companies set outside of America). Also I'm a bit confused by that all youtube videos seem to be about recordings of gameplay (in which case I wonder if a company like Blizzard could just give permission to all its customers to post otherwise illegal recordings), but to my understanding that would only be a part of the affected content.
 

fladdermasken

Off-Topic Moderator
Level 39
Joined
Dec 27, 2006
Messages
3,688
@ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hytigOSjJxc

Pfft, he practically stopped bringing new ideas to the table after a couple of minutes, this could easily have been in the 5 minute ballpark so people wouldn't have to spend 10 straight minutes listening to reiterations and redundancy waiting for a witty conclusion which he never really got around to.

Cool beard though. And absolutely loving the hate t-shirt.
Basically, what I'm trying to say is... This is irrelevant. You're an attention @. Go * yourself.
Yeah, pretty much this. *wipes nose*
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Level 17
Joined
Nov 11, 2010
Messages
1,974
People are only concerned because they won't get paid anymore to play video games, and they'll have to do something realistic for income - and if this gets rid of all those annoying commentators and live streams who just love to milk YouTube with their shitty videos then hell I approve.
Sure you may lose glitches, walkthroughs and what-not but if you really need to watch them then there are other means of finding ways, it is the internet after all.

ALSO: You do realize there are OTHER VIDEOS other than gaming videos, right?

Basically, what I'm trying to say is... This is irrelevant. You're an attention @. Go * yourself.

:D Agreed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The first thing that crossed my mind was the face of that old *er that kept decrying like, every game. Except mass effect, because video game violence doesn't harm kids minds if you're killing aliens and robots!

His name escapes me, and yet I know he may be involved in some way.


But luckily, I'm Canadian. When you're all under your new oppressive regime, remind me to start up TotallyNotAFascistAssociateTube.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Level 7
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
210
I'm surprised so many people reacted so violently (and arrogantly) against the OP.

Assuming the OP's claim are a legit, and going with Billy_the_Cat it'd be better to link something that allowed us to actually read the bill, but operating under these assumptions nonetheless. The gaming community would take a huge hit, regardless of your opinion, upwards of 10k+ people tune in every single time a high profile sc2 professional starts streaming (IdrA, iNcontrol, HuK, all come to mind). Not to mention Blizzard flat out told the map making community "Don't worry, just promote your map with a youtube video and it will take off."

What about all the gaming conventions like G4 that can't go up on youtube anymore? All of the gaming-oriented networks like Gamebreaker.tv (and my personal favorite 15MOG)?

The point of the matter is that Rift got it right when they said gaming is as much about sharing as it is about experience. When you do stuff in a game you like to share it with others if you can, this bill attacks a fundamental way that the majority of the people go about doing that.

And as for CMarket, good job stopping yourself before you said something vulgar and on called for like Red_Shift.

Just my 2 cents.
 
Level 14
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Messages
1,449
Just a wild guess, I think the Bill was made to stop people from uploading episode series, or a whole movie into many parts on YT. And games also have cinematic cut-scenes, so they thought they should add games aswell, without paying any attention to the details and the industry of gaming.

I, for sure doubt that there will be any problems related to sc2 vods/streams of competitive tournament. However I think that mostly the single-player oriented games will suffer from this bill.

Game reviews will still exist, in the form of articles. Call all this a premonition. Though considering the current feedback, I think the bill will be changed to something more specific and less dangerous to the videogame industry.
 
Level 22
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
3,971
I doubt more than 5% of w3 developers actually create thorough gameplay videos of their projects. I doubt many people even watch streams of tournaments, unless they are looking to better their gaming skills.

Here is the deal for tournament streams as someone (me) who is into following esports. The best way to learn is from Replays because you can see and repeat build orders, a lot better way than from Streams. The thing is some tournament staff decide to act GODlike, and decide it is so special and shouldn't be reachable - to see Pro players' builds. So some like GSL, TLS decide they won't release replays ever, instead Streams. Yes but we are talking about YouTube here right? So GSL streams and others are on GomTV site and similar. So what im saying is, if you have replays it won't be a loss at all to never watch streams AND since other sites will continue - even if you like streams more there is no reason to worry. So lol! Forget about problems with streams - everyone who is not clueless knows the sites to watch them, YouTube - * it.

How it would affect other gameplay videos, well, as a Person who never cared, not big deal for me but was still nice to see the Story of Mortal Kombat DA, D, Armageddon, 9, as I watched it all on YouTube and never wanted to engage myself with these games being into SC2. So yes in such cases it would hurt to not have those anymore still not that much for me.

Oh and @Tleno Let's play - SUX. Just noobs and nerds trying 500+ games from Nintendo to latest games - Better be real players specialized at playing a certain game and showing skill whether it would be RTS, Mortal Kombat or another - much better than those Let's Play morons.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Level 15
Joined
Sep 3, 2006
Messages
1,738
Mmm, I'd like to point a lot of lets players don't make a * ton of cash off of lets playing. In fact, the really entertaining ones (NintendoCapriSun, KoopaKungFu, Chuggaconroy) talk frequently about how they have trouble doing lets plays in the first place because they don't have money or are busy with school and their own lives.

Second, e-sports tournaments are still a big deal. About 20,000 people watched the Zoatac stream I was watching (for the last finals) and I know most e-sports are big. One of the last scene tournaments, DreamHack, had almost 900,000 unique people watching League of Legends at some point or another. Websites like TeamLiquid.net, which is basically the HOME of Starcraft II easily gets over 100,000 hits a day for their streams.

My point is, esports isn't dying. There are still a lot of fans who want to watch. Lets players don't get paid 6 figures to lets play (most don't even make 5). The whole process of streaming a live tournament or playing through a video game and commentating it doesn't hurt anyone. If anything, a lets player showcasing a video game would help sales, due to the fact that they're spreading the game around.

Also, the fun of video games isn't watching other people, it's playing it yourself. The idea of streaming e-sports and doing lets games is to get other people interested and have other people buy the games and try to participate. I don't see the problem with this and it's not like these gamers (both professional and lets players) are causing any serious harm.

@Imtor, afaik, uploading replays to specific parsers (like DemonReps for example) would also be illegal.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Level 7
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
252
You guys heard about the bill for banning violent video games to people of under 18 years right? It didnt get passed. So ask yourself this, if that didnt get passed, why would this? Congress would see how rediculous it is and most definately would not approve of it. Quit freaking out.
 
Level 10
Joined
Jan 5, 2007
Messages
283
Unless I'm horribly mistaken, this is the bill: http://thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.978:

However, looking at this part of it:
[...]
`(2) shall be imprisoned not more than 5 years, fined in the amount set forth in this title, or both, if--
`(A) the offense consists of 10 or more public performances by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copyrighted works; and
`(B)(i) the total retail value of the performances, or the total economic value of such public performances to the infringer or to the copyright owner, would exceed $2,500; or
`(ii) the total fair market value of licenses to offer performances of those works would exceed $5,000;'; and
[...]

So on the one hand this bothers me, because it only applies to big groups or companies who would be losing revenue over this and thus the implied copyright of all works of art, be they displayed freely or not is still not protected from theft, and on the other hand, unless I'm again mistaken, it only applies when there would be significant financial loss to or infringement of a license of a copyright holder, meaning the copyright holder would have to claim against the infringer, and I would assume must have proof that the broadcast of this would have had a negative financial impact to their business.

I am wondering how you'd go about proving that it has lost you as much money. Surely you can't assume a direct correlation between views and lost revenue.

That said, it does seem a bit of @ move. I myself would prefer a bill that would help defend the copyright of lesser, or less financially significant works. Because as it is, if I say, upload a painting I did, I have unconditional copyright; It's my work, and copyright applies automatically. However, in practice, if someone steals it, claims it for there own, there's nothing I can do to stop it. The costs of challenging it would far outweigh any potential profits I would get from it being taken down.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Level 22
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
3,971
@Imtor, afaik, uploading replays to specific parsers (like DemonReps for example) would also be illegal.

All replay sites have their own version of a parser. If that happened, well now that would be dumb. Like I said, I dont watch streams but I know the names Day[9], Artosis,/Tastosis?, wouldn't that hurt it big time? Some can't live without their streams. Also isn't the whole racket only for videos on YouTube, not every site (at least OP sounded like that).

Now I have to agree this bill seems retarded and someone had personal interest to offer it but like some said, maybe it's too early to shout at it, maybe it won't get passed.
 
Level 15
Joined
Sep 3, 2006
Messages
1,738
All replay sites have their own version of a parser. If that happened, well now that would be dumb. Like I said, I dont watch streams but I know the names Day[9], Artosis,/Tastosis?, wouldn't that hurt it big time? Some can't live without their streams. Also isn't the whole racket only for videos on YouTube, not every site (at least OP sounded like that).

Now I have to agree this bill seems retarded and someone had personal interest to offer it but like some said, maybe it's too early to shout at it, maybe it won't get passed.

I thought it was the transfer of anything copyrighted. I guess replays are a little different though so you're actually probably right. I think it does extend beyond YouTube.

@commoe, we're just discussing it. No need to act like your ass is being touched by the Pit Lord
 
Level 12
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
850
It's funny how only people that stand to loose some form of revenue from this are freaking out. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but could a company not just add to their TOS that you ARE allowed to upload in game footage and leave it at that?

I also fail to see why people think the government would even bother going after video game footage anyway. There's probably millions of them floating around on youtube alone, and god knows how many being hosted at other sites. It just would not be practical without having thousands of people looking all over the place to find it.
 

Rui

Rui

Level 41
Joined
Jan 7, 2005
Messages
7,550
I'm not commenting yet because what we've seen here is a video, an interpretation of what's written there, and not what the bill states exactly. I'm not saying his interpretation isn't correct, though.
Anyway, about «can't Blizzard write in their ToS that game footage is allowed», I believe that's similar to saying that «Law X or article X of the law does not apply to us», which is obviously not allowed.
On another hand, I do have noticed that there are certain shows uploaded entirely on YouTube, I've seen only anime ones, but I assume it causes prejudice.

P.S. -- Yayoi, refrain from off-topic commentaries, please.
~Post deleted
 
Level 31
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
1,711
1. Well first of all, the bill is never going to be passed in it's current form. This much is clear. And if it was, it would soon be annulled due to a massive public outcry. It's really just a misconception of the people in charge. Basically, there isn't anyone in washington who knows anything about video games. But, that is easily fixed.

2. Second of all, (in response to DSG) youtube is an American company. And, being as that is where the damage would be the worst, its something to consider. It would mean the death of machinima, g4, and smaller people like tobygames. It would also seriously hurt ign, gamespot, gamespy, and rooster teeth, etc. Worst case scenario, the industry goes to a license system. Where, only licensed companies can put out reviews, walkthroughs, playthroughs, etc. But, that won't happen.

3. Third of all, even if the bill was passed, normal gameplay video uploaders likely wouldn't be touched. There is simply too large a mass of videos and other video game related content. Saying the bill will "shut down the internet" is retarded. It will just make it less useful to media production and consumers.

4. Fourth of all, the bill is only being considered because of the real valid issue of show/movie streaming. All legal action against uploaders would likely just be directed at people uploading video of movies and shows. (Which is a good thing.) They just need to amend the bill to fix the wording.

5. Fifth of all, if the bill somehow got through in it's current form AND there was no public outcry, youtube would lobby like no one's FUCKING business to get it out of the way. As it's a huge portion of their profits at stake.

6. And finally, in response to red shift, no it would have a much larger effect. The most damning, being the fact that we wouldn't be able to really judge a game before we buy it anymore, other then text based reviews. You won't be able to look up gameplay videos from average joes to see how it really plays. Which leads to different, more sinister, marketing strategies by gaming companies. Which, in turn, means worse games. You'd lose a TON of community based game improvements. So, no, this bill WOULD be a horrible horrible thing. But, it won't happen, and it's easily fixable.
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 64
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
27,233
2. Second of all, (in response to DSG) youtube is an American company. And, being as that is where the damage would be the worst, its something to consider. It would mean the death of machinima, g4, and smaller people like tobygames. It would also seriously hurt ign, gamespot, gamespy, and rooster teeth, etc. Worst case scenario, the industry goes to a license system. Where, only licensed companies can put out reviews, walkthroughs, playthroughs, etc. But, that won't happen.

You forget the "in the U.S.A." part. Nothing stops them doing that in most of the world. Youtube can still hold and distribute videos of games, just they would have to store them in data centres outside the US and block US people from watching them. It would only be a crime in the US, not in the UK for example so nothing stops google's UK branch from supplying such conent to everyone else execpt the US.

5. Fifth of all, if the bill somehow got through in it's current form AND there was no public outcry, youtube would lobby like no one's FUCKING business to get it out of the way. As it's a huge portion of their profits at stake.
If such movies in America make up a large amount of their profits (which I doubt as youtube mostly hosts privatly made content like people talking retarded crap aka the link the tc showed). Business in the rest of the world would not be effected at all.

And finally, in response to red shift, no it would have a much larger effect. The most damning, being the fact that we wouldn't be able to really judge a game before we buy it anymore, other then text based reviews. You won't be able to look up gameplay videos from average joes to see how it really plays. Which leads to different, more sinister, marketing strategies by gaming companies. Which, in turn, means worse games. You'd lose a TON of community based game improvements. So, no, this bill WOULD be a horrible horrible thing. But, it won't happen, and it's easily fixable.
If you live in the U.S.A. yes. Anywhere else, nothing will change at all.

The U.S.A. does not rule the world, it has less than 1/6th of the people. Infact only about 1/5 - 1/4 of the people in the world even support it. Soon it will not even be the most powerful and profitable country in the world.
 
Level 31
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
1,711
And you forget that google will never invest in anything outside the US storage wise. It's not going to make THAT much of an impact on them. If youtube was still an independent entity that would be the case. But it's not. All major content will probably remain under american law for the next few years.

I know you want to turn this into another "USA IS CRAP" discussion, but that isn't relevant at the moment as everything internet related is connected in a very intense fashion. (Aka the internet.) It would hit everyone pretty hard. Plus, the vast majority of credible video game review and playthrough services are all American. (Machinima, ign, g4, etc.)

EDIT: Come to think of it, we may be missunderstanding each other here. I'm not saying that people outside he US will have any legal ramification imposed on them. I'm just saying the industry would be hit world wide.
 
Last edited:

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 64
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
27,233
And you forget that google will never invest in anything outside the US storage wise.
Yeh, for bulk storage. However to keep internet traffic under control they mirror content to local servers around the world. They might change that to if such a law is inacted that they bulk storage off to Asia much like Yahoo now is.

You can not honestly think that everything everyone watches here in the UK is streamed through the cross oceanic fiberoptic cables do you? 1 Copy is streamed to a local server, where it gets cached until it is nolonger being recalled (out of storage and is the lowest piority).

Plus, the vast majority of credible video game review and playthrough services are all American. (Machinima, ign, g4, etc.)
Unfortunatly, the ones you have listed are not creditable anymore. Time and time again people have spotted them reviewing games higher than they should due to hype and calling really good games crap. They probably rate basing on who bribes them the most. Example? Well Zelda 3D scored lower than its orignal for the N64, which just makes no damn sense seeing as it is improved in almost every way. I have played the orignal 64 version, the gc version and the 3DS version and I can tell you that the 3DS version is by far the best version of the game made.

If such a law was inacted, it would be a matter of days before new video streaming sites outside the US spring up which do permit such content. Again, this is only for the U.S.A. and even places like Canada do not have to stand for it.
 
Level 31
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
1,711
As for the industry, allow me to rephrase. Credible companies like machinima would die, and other companies not so credible yet still valid for news feed purposes like g4 and ign would be seriously crippled. Not to mention, the death of a gagillion American game players who just make videos. (Seananners, tobygames, etc) And ofc other countries would gear up and create their own variants. It still won't be as potent as the already developed companies like machinima. And, as much as you hate America (atleast, from what I've seen you say in chat) and all its inhabitants, a large portion of the community is infact American. Loss of community numbers effects everyone. As does loss of developed companies in the industry. The industry as it is, is very new and fresh. And with this developing industry being in baby stages, comes fragility. Also, you have to factor in the loss of profits from American video game developers due to the lack of advertisement from community in America. You'd end up with less, or worse games. It's not like everyone else would just be void of any ripple effects whatsoever. That's silly.

And this is not to say it would be different if say, I dunno, the uk lost all video game streaming abilities. Well on second though, lol, not the uk. Maybe Germany or Sweden. (Countries with large stakes in the gaming industry.) It would effect everyone else as well.

No one is saying America is some super nation dominating everything everywhere. That's a stupid thing to assume. The problem is that the gaming industry is almost entirely community based. And, when you kill off a major part of the community, everyone suffers. It just HAPPENS to be happening in the US.

Also, on a side note, with the death of these companies comes the loss of tons of jobs. Which in turn, effects the industry hugely.

Ofc, none of this matters, as it will never be passed.

EDIT: Forgot to address storage.

That doesn't matter. You still wouldn't get any American made game related videos. (Which is a large portion of sed videos.) Because, they'd all be forced to stop making them. Your ability to watch sed videos is not what's in question. The existence of the videos is.
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 64
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
27,233
You seem to be forgetting that this only applies to video game companies that do not give permission for videos to be uploaded. Games like Team Fortress 2 have given special tools even to make youtube videos so will obviously let youtube show your conent. Most games like SC2 and WoW will allso be the same. Only smaller companies might forget to, but even they may learn if it really does effect them as much as you say.

You should read the whole damn sujested amendment. They specifally add terms like without permission or unauthorized.

What dies does effect though...
1. Playing music in public (even through headphones that are loud) is illegalwithout liscence. Only if you are the only person who can hear the music is it legal under normal purschase liscence. Torrenting music is mega illegal. Making a music stream on youtube without valid liscence is mega illegal.
2. Showing movies outside the liscence purchesed is illegal. Torrenting movies is mega illegal.
3. Videoing a concert is illegal as you do not have a liscence to store that data.

All of this might still be under the effect of the fair usage terms of purchase, so in some cases public displays might be allowed.
 

Deleted member 177737

D

Deleted member 177737

You seem to be forgetting that this only applies to video game companies that do not give permission for videos to be uploaded. Games like Team Fortress 2 have given special tools even to make youtube videos so will obviously let youtube show your conent. Most games like SC2 and WoW will allso be the same. Only smaller companies might forget to, but even they may learn if it really does effect them as much as you say.

You should read the whole damn sujested amendment. They specifally add terms like without permission or unauthorized.

What dies does effect though...
1. Playing music in public (even through headphones that are loud) is illegalwithout liscence. Only if you are the only person who can hear the music is it legal under normal purschase liscence. Torrenting music is mega illegal. Making a music stream on youtube without valid liscence is mega illegal.
2. Showing movies outside the liscence purchesed is illegal. Torrenting movies is mega illegal.
3. Videoing a concert is illegal as you do not have a liscence to store that data.

All of this might still be under the effect of the fair usage terms of purchase, so in some cases public displays might be allowed.

Those things may be "mega illegal" but the government doesn't do much to stop the people who do.
 
Level 31
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
1,711
I am exclusively referring to the video game industry, as that's all I really care about.

Also, there aren't enough games with that feature. Future games may implement it, but its meaningless in the scope of things, as it only allows basic gameplay videos. The vast majority of videos are edited works with voice over or review related subject matter.

And, yes I've read the thing many a time. Business will still get hit. It wouldn't be so bad if it was a more developed industry.
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 64
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
27,233
Do remember that the people in buisness encouraging these laws are abstracted several layers away from how the buisness actually works. The U.S.A. is notorious for this as some bosses physically follow their courses they learnt at "college" resulting in them making completly abstract decisions which are not suited at all for the environment they are dealing with (such as trying to force everyone to sign under their terms which is not a good idea if you deal with utility companies but works fine for selling home appliences).

Ofcourse, you get such people worldwide as even the E.U. has been forced to consider some such laws but generally they get encountered by less friction as they discuise them better (probably because most buisness leaders go to Universities).

You must however remember that all of them worldwide are extreemly amoral. All of them care about only 1 thing, how they can steal more of your money from you in a way you can not oppose.

Thus you could get gaming companies supporting some crackdown on liberal freedom even if it eventually hurts them (as they just can not see "outside the box").
Example being the multiple attempts at stopping piracy, which the game compines are convinced will bring them more money. The reality is however the people who pirate the game will just not play the games and infact fewer people will buy the game as some of the "pirates" do endup going legit and purchasing the software.

I myself pirated WC3 to test it out (and to play it in English) but as soon as I was in the U.K. I purchesed legit copies of it and the expansion. Without having played a pirate version at first, I may never have decided to purchase a legit copy and so Blizzard would have lost out.
 

Rui

Rui

Level 41
Joined
Jan 7, 2005
Messages
7,550
(...)
I myself pirated WC3 to test it out (and to play it in English) but as soon as I was in the U.K. I purchesed legit copies of it and the expansion. Without having played a pirate version at first, I may never have decided to purchase a legit copy and so Blizzard would have lost out.
Same case here -- I also had a pirated copy of Reign of Chaos before I bought an original.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top