Pirating Factorio

[ssilk]

if someone really wants to help them out and attract attention then GREAT. Do that. But doing it by piracy is not the way to go about it.

Hm. I think it's an idea to try it. As tonberrytoby said: It is immune…. But trying means not posing with it, because nobody knows, what could happen then.

I mean it's hard for a pirater not to say "see, I'm doing this, isn't it fine, I'm so good?..."
And for someone, who stands outside the next question is "And what did the developers say to that? Are you not feeling, that this is wrong?"

Those unanswered questions are the problem, not the pirating itself.

[malokin]

You guys should note that Factorio is effectively immune to piracy.
Because it is literally impossible to pirate the full version of Factorio at the current time. It doesn't exist.
And once it is done, it will already have been paid for by the preorders.
Also note that historically, before the introduction of modern copyright, artist being payed in advance was more or less the norm.

DONT ANYBODY LISTEN TO THIS PSYCHOPATH, HE'S GONNA RUIN THE WHOLE WORLD WITH HIS CRAZY IDEAS, HE IS JUST TOTALLY MAKING IT UP AS HE GOES ALONG, NO NEED TO LOOK AT THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN, CONTINUE BUYING MUSIC ON ITUNES UNTIL YOU FILL THE WHOLE IPOD RIGHT UP.

[ssilk]

@malokin:
With respect to you person an in a very calm mode a simple example and a question:

If some good friend gives you photos from his holidays, and says "Look, isn't it nice?" then - with your logic - you put the photos into the internet. And when he asks you, what that should be you answered: "You gave me the photos and I could do with it what I want." And then he says "Oh, but it wasn't intended to put it on the internet", then you say "Yes, but it's my right to make that, because information is free". After a week he calls you: "My wife is now very upset, because we wanted to show our photos on our grillparty next week and now they saw it already. We canceled the party, sorry, but it's was your fault."

Are you willing to take the only logical consequences and then not longer put others photos on the internet?

[Nova]

Can't we just ban him? Would make all things so much easier. Sorry, I didn't think so on the beginning, but this starts to get ridiculous.

[TGS]

Maybe you're right, that pirating it will bring more users. But maybe not. You can't be sure! You can't. And that is in my opinion the point: You can't be sure, that your doing is right.

i am right about this. Indie bands dont get the luxury of selling their music. They have to let it be free, ESPECIALLY at the beginning in order to generate enough buzz to become discovered or just to even get steady gigs and stay fed. Indie game development is NO DIFFERENT.

Right would be to bring it out and just shut up and and see. And not to "Yeah, I made it, I'm great!". This is the point, where me and I think also most of the others get pissed.

I already did see the system begin to fall apart, and I told you about the grand archive, and you know it does exist already in a primitive form, and it is becoming fuller and fuller and it isnt destroying the whole world's economy the way TGS wants to believe.

Now give me one good reason why a thing that isnt a tangible good should be sold exactly the same way as a tangible good.

You know, for someone who makes negative comments about someone 'assuming' things and putting words in your mouth, you seem to be assuming a lot yourself. Please stop. You've been making incorrect statements about me, my beliefs and my opinions and what I think pretty much every post you make.

if someone really wants to help them out and attract attention then GREAT. Do that. But doing it by piracy is not the way to go about it.

Hm. I think it's an idea to try it. As tonberrytoby said: It is immune…. But trying means not posing with it, because nobody knows, what could happen then.

I mean it's hard for a pirater not to say "see, I'm doing this, isn't it fine, I'm so good?..."
And for someone, who stands outside the next question is "And what did the developers say to that? Are you not feeling, that this is wrong?"

Those unanswered questions are the problem, not the pirating itself.

I agree completely. Which is exactly why I have engaged in this discussion further. I had already put malokin on ignore and avoided the topic, but I went back and read some of the additional posts which brought up interesting points and discovered that it had simmered down and could continue in a mature fashion so I jumped back in. I think the discussion needs to be had, so the developers and the community can think about it in greater depth. Both for this game and any future developments in the digital age.

The problem isn't piracy, the problem is the attitude. As I have stated time and time again. Specifically attitudes like that of malokin that fall into an extreme. This new world is changing everything. Both for the good and the not so good. I don't believe it is anyone's best interest to simply accept the views malokin has posed, nor do I think that they should accept the views of the old concepts of ownership and possession and all of the subsets that fall within it. New ones need to be defined. Personally I don't agree in ownership by possession in any form. Be it tangible or digital. And no that does not make me "old" it does not make me "outdated" and it certainly does not align me to any political, commercial, corporate or dominate entity.

Incase I haven't made it clear enough. In my opinion piracy is not moral or immoral. Piracy is just a word to describe a behaviour, it has a negative connotation from its previous 'old' meaning. I think the attitude that is displayed of pure contempt for those who believe that there is still merit and value in taking some aspects of the current economical system of transaction IS immoral. I don't judge people based on their beliefs. But I think most will judge people based on their attitude and behaviour. This is my issue. The piracy is simply the catalyst that is creating the behaviour.

[malokin]

Hm. I think it's an idea to try it. As tonberrytoby said: It is immune…. But trying means not posing with it, because nobody knows, what could happen then.

Nobody know what the future will hold sure, but EVERYONE knows what the past was like. The devil you dont know might actually be better that the devil you know if the money from the devil you know isnt so hot. And you all keep making the mistake that it has to be one way or the other. DO BOTH. As a developer, Sell the game for money, AND release it as a torrent before the pirates do. (hopefully with adverts inside for guaranteed $$$) I can't believe you guys prefer a system you KNOW is failing, for a system that sounds like its just crazy enough to work.

I mean it's hard for a pirater not to say "see, I'm doing this, isn't it fine, I'm so good?..."
And for someone, who stands outside the next question is "And what did the developers say to that? Are you not feeling, that this is wrong?"

No, we don't think it is wrong. We think it is really really right and helpful what we are doing. YOU are the one who thinks it is wrong and that pirates just want to "steal" because they want to "have".

Those unanswered questions are the problem, not the pirating itself.[/quote]
But your just ignoring people's answers to those questions, and you wont explain why you feel like going down with a slowly sinking ship, rather than trying this nice ship over here that appears to be floating nicely. Please explain that to me.

[3LollipopZ]

Against common sense I'm still in here...
Serious questions, when a creation takes place who should dictate what happens with that creation? Shouldn't the creator?
If shared for money or for free, does the onus of responsibility change?
Does the very act of sharing or creation itself give someone other than the creator the 'right'(s) to change what the creator has dictated?

I, although a hypocrite, believe a worker deserves his wages.
A consumer, during purchase or trade, willing signs over their rights to the sellers terms & conditions.
An agreement, contract, or covenant is entered into during the transaction, which can be, and should be, enforced by covenant parties.

In regards to the digital world, at what point does ones rights change? At what point does that covenant become worthless?
Is it at the copying of bits and bytes.... or the transaction itself?

I now pay for the privilege to play Factorio. I willingly signed over my rights to the Terms of Service. The same ToS that I agreed for Factorio staff not to sell my personal details, not to do what they wish with my credit card, not to keylog my machine with updates, not to program malicious code into updates. Rights that I happily paid for.

[malokin]

@malokin:
With respect to you person an in a very calm mode a simple example and a question:

If some good friend gives you photos from his holidays, and says "Look, isn't it nice?" then - with your logic - you put the photos into the internet. And when he asks you, what that should be you answered: "You gave me the photos and I could do with it what I want." And then he says "Oh, but it wasn't intended to put it on the internet", then you say "Yes, but it's my right to make that, because information is free". After a week he calls you: "My wife is now very upset, because we wanted to show our photos on our grillparty next week and now they saw it already. We canceled the party, sorry, but it's was your fault."

Are you willing to take the only logical consequences and then not longer put others photos on the internet?

Now really, Do you really think that a person's personal photos are the same as a peice of music, a movie, or a video game??
Do you really think I am trying to create a giant archive of all the family photos of every human being in the world??
Your not making an apples to apples comparison, you are making a false equivalency.

[TGS]

@malokin:
With respect to you person an in a very calm mode a simple example and a question:

If some good friend gives you photos from his holidays, and says "Look, isn't it nice?" then - with your logic - you put the photos into the internet. And when he asks you, what that should be you answered: "You gave me the photos and I could do with it what I want." And then he says "Oh, but it wasn't intended to put it on the internet", then you say "Yes, but it's my right to make that, because information is free". After a week he calls you: "My wife is now very upset, because we wanted to show our photos on our grillparty next week and now they saw it already. We canceled the party, sorry, but it's was your fault."

Are you willing to take the only logical consequences and then not longer put others photos on the internet?

Now really, Do you really think that a person's personal photos are the same as a peice of music, a movie, or a video game??
Do you really think I am trying to create a giant archive of all the family photos of every human being in the world??
Your not making an apples to apples comparison, you are making a false equivalency.

Actually that is a very apt comparison. It is digital yes? It is media yes? You are now creating 'rules' to define in your mind what is and is not 'fair game'.

[ssilk]

@Nova: Hm. I don't know.

Sometimes - when he shouts around like above - I think yes.

But on the other hand I think his ideas are not bad, sometimes brilliant (it brings the games forward) and some of his thought about copyright etc. brought me to change some of my opinions. And I think I like him as person, because he has some really crazy, refreshing style.

I would say, it depends, because this forum is good enough to hold out a little bit longer (the best forum ever!).
If then the situation doesn't change: Ok.

[malokin]

Can't we just ban him? Would make all things so much easier. Sorry, I didn't think so on the beginning, but this starts to get ridiculous.

Here's You:
"He just keeps sticking up for himself and his position, this is getting ridiculous!"

Can't we just ban people who ask cant we just ban someone when they finally have their logical arguments refuted. Really intellectually dishonest to censor people. If you dont like what is going on in this thread for the love of god, get out. This is thread where your free to voice your opinion if you want, and not be involved if you want.
I'm not warring this point all over the forums, I am simply responding to EVERY POST that is made against me or piracy here in this thread, go somewhere else and talk about not piracy if you want, or stay here and talk about piracy, either way, I will keep responding FOREVEEEEEEEEEEEER in this thread

[ssilk]

@malokin:
With respect to you person an in a very calm mode a simple example and a question:

If some good friend gives you photos from his holidays, and says "Look, isn't it nice?" then - with your logic - you put the photos into the internet. And when he asks you, what that should be you answered: "You gave me the photos and I could do with it what I want." And then he says "Oh, but it wasn't intended to put it on the internet", then you say "Yes, but it's my right to make that, because information is free". After a week he calls you: "My wife is now very upset, because we wanted to show our photos on our grillparty next week and now they saw it already. We canceled the party, sorry, but it's was your fault."

Are you willing to take the only logical consequences and then not longer put others photos on the internet?

Now really, Do you really think that a person's personal photos are the same as a peice of music, a movie, or a video game??
Do you really think I am trying to create a giant archive of all the family photos of every human being in the world??
Your not making an apples to apples comparison, you are making a false equivalency.

Ok, replace the photos with my music: If I send you some of my music, would you put it also on the internet (because you found it so cool? )

[malokin]

Holy shit, in a see of constantly repeating the same points, the opposition party presents something new for me to respond to.

Against common sense I'm still in here...
Serious questions, when a creation takes place who should dictate what happens with that creation? Shouldn't the creator?

A real philosophical question, Does mother TRULY know whats best for me? I think we all know the answer to that question. If she doesnt, does that mean I can ignore her? If she does, should I be free to make my own mistakes anyway?
The assumption that a creator owns his works outside of any physical copy he keeps for himself is a dogma i will truly never understand.

If shared for money or for free, does the onus of responsibility change?
Does the very act of sharing or creation itself give someone other than the creator the 'right'(s) to change what the creator has dictated?

Yes, the ability to change something, the curiosity of what could be made of this thing if the creator was not holding his customers back is reason enough to explore this. We shouldnt have to wait until the author is dead and his copyright expired to see if we can improve mankind by tweaking these works. A whole lifetime that man could of had one more possible piece to any of the puzzles man is constantly turning up. Maybe redesigning that scalpel a little will save lives, too bad the scalpel company has copyright and doesnt want anyone to try anything with their product.

I, although a hypocrite, believe a worker deserves his wages.
A consumer, during purchase or trade, willing signs over their rights to the sellers terms & conditions.

And i think terms and conditions are a load of crap, you shouldnt be able to tell a person what to do with the thing you sold them after they walk away from you. If you REALLY wanted to control what happened, then you shouldnt sell it, you open yourself up to the risk they will modify it, and with digital media, it isnt even a risk, but a guarantee your conditions will be ignored.

An agreement, contract, or covenant is entered into during the transaction, which can be, and should be, enforced by covenant parties.

Good luck with that "enforcement" thing. I really hope that doesnt turn out to be a huge waste of time for ya.

In regards to the digital world, at what point does ones rights change? At what point does that covenant become worthless?

The covenant was worthless even before the parties made it, thats wich cannot be promised in earnest, should not be promised at all, this is the defintion of being "unreasonable" It is Unreasonable for an artist to assume he can maintain that level of control over what he has made if he seels it, if you have to ask why, you really arnt thinking too hard a bout it. or you havnt been reading this thread.

I now pay for the privilege to play Factorio. I willingly signed over my rights to the Terms of Service. The same ToS that I agreed for Factorio staff not to sell my personal details, not to do what they wish with my credit card, not to keylog my machine with updates, not to program malicious code into updates. Rights that I happily paid for.

I protected myself from all of those possibilities despite the terms of service, if i got screwed by the devs, I would deserve it for unreasonably assuming it was safe to use my credit card on the internet, or that I didnt need antivirus, etc etc. It isnt that safe, things like that happen all the time, thats why I'm EXPECTED to protect myself, or not complain about it when I get screwed over. I''m sorry we live in a world like that, but fool you once, shame on me, fool you several million-billion times, and I think you have created a good basis for why the terms of service are not a reasonable thing to have respect for.

[malokin]

@Nova: Hm. I don't know.

Sometimes - when he shouts around like above - I think yes.

But on the other hand I think his ideas are not bad, sometimes brilliant (it brings the games forward) and some of his thought about copyright etc. brought me to change some of my opinions. And I think I like him as person, because he has some really crazy, refreshing style.

I would say, it depends, because this forum is good enough to hold out a little bit longer (the best forum ever!).
If then the situation doesn't change: Ok.

I dont need your pity, PISTOLS AT DAWN!!

[Banala]

I dont need your pity, PISTOLS AT DAWN!!

I think reactions like this will just put the FBI(/whatever equivalent where you're from) at your door in the middle of the night

[ssilk]

@Nova: Hm. I don't know.

Sometimes - when he shouts around like above - I think yes.

But on the other hand I think his ideas are not bad, sometimes brilliant (it brings the games forward) and some of his thought about copyright etc. brought me to change some of my opinions. And I think I like him as person, because he has some really crazy, refreshing style.

I would say, it depends, because this forum is good enough to hold out a little bit longer (the best forum ever!).
If then the situation doesn't change: Ok.

I dont need your pity, PISTOLS AT DAWN!!

It's not pity, it's pure selfishness. I think your opinion is good for this forum and for this game. But hard at the edges. With danger of deep fall.
EDIT: Pistols, ok, but I can shoot first?

[malokin]

[quote=ssilk]Ok, replace the photos with my music: If I send you some of my music, would you put it also on the internet (because you found it so cool? )[/quote]

Yeah, you accepted that you yourself might be leaking it when you sent it to me. Without some really extenuating circumstances, there isnt any reason why we both dont own your music file after the transaction.

It is more important that all of humanity gets a copy of all music inside of the one giant music archive with all the other music of humanity than it is for you to continue to control that music you created. (just my opinion) If you want the reasonable expectation that you can control where your music goes, keep it to yourself, or only show it to people you are convinced wouldnt share it or be careless enough to let it slip out.

Even if you music sucks balls I am honor bound to bring it before the world via the archives. If someone ever benefits from it, or even if they dont, its worth having a copy. The reasons are unknown, it is simply hard to deny that a giant archive of artistic works is an improvement on what we once had in the public library system. The library of books is what I am trying to create, except instead of books, it is everything else. If libraries ruined the entire book industry, i wouldnt care, I would still continue to collect those books, and let any man who wanted to read those books. Shouldnt have published the damn thing if it was such a BIG secret.

[malokin]

I dont need your pity, PISTOLS AT DAWN!!

I think reactions like this will just put the FBI(/whatever equivalent where you're from) at your door in the middle of the night

If I got vanned, (busted by federal agents), then I would deserve it, it is unreasonable for a person like me to think they can say these things and break the local countries laws so often without first using several technologies to protect myself.
I'm a ghost.

[TGS]

The assumption that a creator owns his works outside of any physical copy he keeps for himself is a dogma i will truly never understand.

This pretty much sums up this entire thread. Thank you malokin for finally getting to the point. Something I tried to get out of you over and over and over that you finally got to. You do not understand. Probably by choice. It isn't like you lack the capacity to understand, you simply choose not to.

You act like we are all in the wrong, and that you have to fight this crusade yet it isn't us that have the problem. I'm not going to say it is you that has the problem either. But there is a basic fundamental principal that if someone creates something, tangible or digital that they have rights of ownership over it. You don't understand that. Which is fine, that's cool. Glad we finally got to the bottom of it.

[malokin]

I dont need your pity, PISTOLS AT DAWN!!

I think reactions like this will just put the FBI(/whatever equivalent where you're from) at your door in the middle of the night

also: i like how you seem to have taken this as a serious death threat.
You have no humor, or you purposely misunderstand me.