Call of Duty: Black Ops named 2010's most pirated PC game

Thats actually why I bowed out.

Well, most of these clowns are the type of people that would take the ham bone back to the supermarket for their money back, using "this tasted lousy", as an excuse.

:haha::haha: Lea and I were in an TimberLodge SteakHouse in Mpls and watched a lady snarf what had to be a 22oz Porterhouse (minus two bites) and then insist that It be comped as it (and I quote) "entirely inedible".

All of that buy your games. Good for you. Now im going to get a case of bear and a pizza, plus fill my car with gas on the $70 i saved not buying COD. And still got to play the game.

Super! Bully for you! Don't forget to take the pizza box back and ask for a refund. Tell them you didn't like it.

Hell yeah! do a runoff on the gas as well, make a night out of screwing as many people who earn their money as possible. Its obviously a quality you find attractive about yourself.

Should you get tired of troll sitting, check your mail.

We seem to have once agin stepped into the murky realm of IP theft.
Group 1 (Hi Tom) is going to proclaim that IP is a basic underpinning of a free market economy. IP theft, patent and copyright infringements all serve to weaken and dilute the strongest democracies. Although presumeably this weakening would need to take into account the increasing uptake of labour required to write, implement and enforce DRM
Group 1 would probably also assert that theft, regardless of item, cannot be condoned and that "once a thief always a thief".
How this tallies quite with the fact that there is little or no empirical proof that these thefts weaken the the businesses where the thefts occur. Has wholesale music downloading made the music business somehow less rewarding as a career choice (is Metallica less of a financial juggernaut than Led Zeppelin ever were because of lost revenue through filesharing?). Will CoD 8:MW3/Non-modern warfare: The Somme be shelved because of poor sales and pirating ?

Note the number of people(even in this thread) who state that they would download to try and pay to play. This is same inbuilt morality that causes people to tip for service even if they will never again revisit the area/person, or not to litter in an area they are just passing through, or any other aspect of the social norm.

Group 2 is going to proclaim that an individuals ownership of a product gives them licence to do with it as they see fit. Not entirely true since a myriad of similar situations would have the same proclaimers up in arms. Imagine going to get a spare house and car key cut. The keycutter could fairly easily whip off a few copies from their own supply of blanks and conceivably sell the resultant keys for $100 each as scrap brass. What happens next is of no concern to the keycutter any more than it is for someone explaining how to torrent a game, burn a DVD or subvert SecuROM.

Therein lies the rub. Viewing piracy, IP theft and copyright infringement as a two sided argument is a classic case of a false dilemma . Attempting to apply an overarching legal, moral and technical catchall for every eventuality is impossible- not least because some people will always steal, not every "theft" leads to revenue loss and for all the cases where an individual fleeces a company, you also have many instances where a company exploit the IP/copyright laws ( see multinational pharmacology, patent ambush and general oligopolistic practices (music and film distribution, cable/satellite tv etc.)

Rosie O'Donnell'ed

Mary Kate Olsen'ed

Amy Winehouse'ed

There is a certain point at which the "sword of righteousness " falls into the hands of the downloaders. Try hitting up Amazon.com for any version of the old X-Wing game. Some clown has a copy he'd be willing to part with for a hundred bucks of so. It's hard to take anybody's claim of copyright seriously for product that is no longer in print. As to "oligopolies", I have two words for you, "Redbox".

Pharmaceutical patent is the most abused proprietary issue on the planet, bar none

As to the rest of it, the companies are just inclined to stick it to the imbeciles who don't realize they can't live without in. Just stop buying it, the price will come down. The power of the supply and demand dynamic lies principally with the consumer. Problem is, they're used to indulging themselves beyond reason, and they're also too stupid to know it.

Look. All of these collegiate responses hold little more validity than the morons who muster up the two and three word brags about stealing the game.
"IT"S STEALING PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!"
Let's skip the freakish business models and the ridiculously boorish Humanitarian assessments and just say what it is.
THEFT.
Just because you bought it does not give you the right to make it available, even at no profit to yourself, to thousands of others.Irregardless of the games quality.
The length of the game, the quality of the game play, The depth of the multiplayer involvement. All of these excuses are simply subterfuge to hide what is really happening..
If I give my cousin my Beatles CD to listen to that's one thing. But if I put my Beatles CD on a torrent site for thousands to download, it's a completely different story isn't it?.
There is simply no way to justify going to a torrent site, and downloading a complete game, or movie, or song, and trying to justify it as anything other than theft.
Stealing.
Not Paying for it.
Getting it for free.
Pirating.
Stealing.

Yes, you are correct. But by advocating the universal rights of ownership, I'm also objectively addressing those, who perceive the sharing of property, as an evil effort to somehow steal money from the creators.

Sharing, just like selling, are rights I believe come along from legally obtaining an item. If companies create laws and regulations to impede these natural actions, because it hinders a possible percent of income, then its clear that behind all their statistical and fairly convincing theories, it all comes down to greediness.

Bravo, captain. You really are honoring the last six letters of your username. I'm not 100% sure that comment was directed at my comment, but to be sure: I was not talking about intellectual property, nor I was creating any arbitrary definition. I was talking about ownership.


Like red1776 pointed out, I advocate the legal controls that are intrinsically granted to us after we legally obtain an item. I'm in no way saying that "no physical property has been stolen," I am merely pointing out the creation of DRM, Copy protection (this is game-related article, is it not?), and other types of regulations created to monopolize how we should or shouldn't use our legally obtained property, is simply strategically created bullshit.

I'm against pirating. Stealing a game, cracking it, and giving it away to the masses is not sharing, that's plain piracy.

Let's do some simple math.
A company creates and then releases a game.
They sell it for $60.00 a copy.
They sell close to a billion dollars worth of copies.
Out of these sales, let's say 200 purchasers (or losers, as in this argument) put their copies on a Torrent site.
The game then gets downloaded close to 4.3 million times without the purchase aspect.
That's 4.3 million times $60.00 that the company will never realize.
I think that's upwards of two hundred and sixty million dollars of lost revenue. I believe that actually would make a difference in the bottom line of a companies profit margin. Call me crazy,
but who are you to say they've made enough?, or too much?. What kind of pinko communist propaganda are you peddling here?. "They won't miss it", or "they don't deserve it",
That's not for you to say is it?.
The truth here is that you need to grow up and I truly believe it gets no more complicated than that.
Nothing in life is for free. That's a hard fact.
Grow up children

You think that this isn't a topic that is already being debated, and that some interested parties wouldn't like to see the resell market abolished?

Anyway, you've managed to pad the post I'm replying to with so much "pirated" material, it surely does appear impressive in its original form. Without the extra material, it's more or less,meh, not so much..

That depends on where you set the "sharing" bar. Let's assume you bought a copy of "Avatar", then invited a few friends (an even dozen, for the sake of argument),over for a couple of beers and a movie. That's what I would define as "sharing". However, if you burned a dozen copies for these dozen "friends", who more than likely would burn a dozen copies for their, "friends", then that's what I would define as serial theft. Pretty much on the order of a pyramid scheme, which BTW, are illegal also. And, a little grade school math provides us with the answer that there are now 145 copies of "Avatar", with only one original being purchased.

We agree on the greed part, we differ on the perpetrators of said greed. A reasonable conclusion is that both parties are greedy, not simply either one.

BTW, if you're the one that always gets stiffed for buying the original, and your friends are the ones who benefit, then it's fair to say that your friends are leeches, and you should find some new ones.

We used to call a "social dynamic" like this, "a**hole buddies", but sorry to report, it makes the one who actually bought the game the a**hole, and the other 12 who got it for free are the "buddies".

Well, why do you think the last six letters of my user name are cranky, because I'm the nicest person you'll ever want to meet? That's just patently stupid. What's also patently stupid, is the incessant way that users at this forum feel compelled to repeat the same observation over and over, ad naseum! Actually, I am a pretty nice guy, since I've forewarned you as to what's coming, both with my user name, and with my signature. I mean really, it's not like I snuck up on any of you, now is it?

I had briefly considered, "captainarticulate" as a user name, and then discarded the idea. After all, there are very few here the would acknowledge something like, "wow, you really lived up to the last 9 letters of name that time". So. cranky it is, and cranky it stays, for the benefit of the unwashed illiterate that inhabit this place.

So let me see if my age addled brain can wrap itself around your rather advanced conceptualization. So then..."I'm against pirating. Stealing a game, cracking it, and giving it away to the masses is not sharing, that's plain piracy"......But, buying a game, copying it and then giving it away to all your friends is not stealing, but rather, "sharing". Gotcha. It all makes sense now, unfortunately, just not to me.

Epilogue: This is another conundrum brought on by human nature. We're a delusional bunch, that walks around thinking that they've been "created in God's own image". The movie mogul and the pirate pray to the same god, each thinking the God is on their side, because they're following the cause of righteousness. Just another silly crusade. You've read about them haven't you? The truth is we're a crap species, avaricious, predatory, and possessing a character that doesn't really allow other creatures the dignity of their own lives. Homo Sapiens", the worst infestation that has ever drawn breath on the planet.

I hope this helps. Oh, and before I forget, "Happy New Year".

It is very easy to justify downloading a torrent of a complete game, or movie or song, when you have every legal right to do so. In the USA any individual that legitimately obtained any of those products, has every legal right to create or obtain a backup of that product. In other countries, such as Canada, they can legally download music without prior purchase.

Sometimes things are a little more complicated than black & white.

I stand corrected, I asked my brother again and he told me 3 hours on easy mode.
And yes he needs to get out more, but he can't afford that after spending all his allowance to buy the game.

This is just great. Those of us who went to the store, lined up and paid for that shiny Black Ops retail box only to find a buggy FPS retread with 3-year graphics and a constant need to patch over Steam. We bang our heads against the wall, curse Activision and post our gripes and rants on every internet gaming forum that we can find. There is this other group of gamers with bootleg copies of Black Ops. They also go through the same ritual as we do. Their experience being worse since they can't even update their games and in addition to their gripes and rants, they also fill the forums with all sorts of philosophical and social arguments to justify their possession of such copies. And there is Activision, laughing all the way to the bank with billions of dollars in sales and promising a new COD title in 2011.
And finally, this year 2011, we do this ritual all over again for COD: Space Marines (?). I think I'm going to look up my old copy of Doom 3 and have fun in advance

1. Illegal downloading is theft.

No. Its copyright infringement. To be theft, you would have to take the only copy of COD that Activision has and keep them from from their property. Also, copyright infringement cases are settled in civil court, not criminal court.

2. Illegal downloading is putting companies out of business.

No. Activision, Electronic Arts, Ubi Soft, and many other are still going strong and making profit despite illegal downloading. Some companies have even gotten busted using illegal downloading to boost their place in the market and profits (EMI).

3. Developers are starving because of illegal downloading.

This is just too ridiculous to argue. Development teams get paid during the development of a game. I seriously doubt a programmer would wait 2 to 3 years to get paid.

4. I'm sticking it to "the man" when I illegally download.

No. Since a "copy" is being downloaded, this has no effect on a company's current profit. If they sold 10 copies of Game X and you illegally download one copy, they still have made the money from those 10 copies. All that has been accomplished is that you process a copy you did not buy.

5. Games, music, etc. are too expensive.

A company has the right to charge what they want just like the consumers have the right to not buy it at that price..simple as that. Want it at a cheaper price, develop patience and wait for the price to drop.

6.COD was illegally downloaded 4.2 million times.

I have no doubt that it was downloaded quite a bit, but was someone counting each one? Each side, pro and con, can and does skew the numbers to make their point. There are a lot of variables here such as were the majority of the downloads from countries where the product was not available? Would the numbers be lower if it had been available. These numbers come from all over the world. 4.2 million illegal downloads would be pretty small considering China has over 1 billion people its self.

It's hard to pay for things in life. All you can do is just bite your lip, and get on with it basicly. This bloody piracy argument could go on till the cows come home (literally).

What i like about the whole thing is....If everybody thought piracy was right, piracy wouldn't exist.

LOL! 2hrs isnt long play time..... Stop trollin please.........

Copyright infringement is theft, and is a descriptive term applied to it, outlining the mechanism by which that theft has occurred.

Herewith some light reading from Cornell University Law School; http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_0000231

Please note that Title 18 USC, deals solely with the prosecution and penalty of criminal matters.

In fairness to your point of view, the "DMCA" is titled under Title 17 USC, a civil statute. But, it is intended to add scope to the existing criminal statutes, which don't fully cover the emerging possibilities for digital copyright infringement. Plus, it is international in scope, and its existence as a criminal statute in this form, would evolve into issues regarding extradition.

Oh heck, here's Title 17 USC in PDF; http://www.copyright.gov/title17/ In Appendix F, you can see how it connects to Title 18, as would be necessary, since the FBI is tasked with its enforcement.

Always remember, if you are arrested and incarcerated, the involved jurisdiction is charged with the cost your care. If a criminal matter is approached from the civil axis, then they can take all your property, and put you out on the street, where you're responsible for your care.

Oh, and here's another fun fact. "Miranda" doesn't attach itself to a civil case. In other words, "if you cannot afford a lawyer, one will NOT be provided for you".

A quick question about the "Q & A" format of your original post. Was that used as a device to circumvent response, or rather more emblematic of a personality disorder? Definitely reminiscent of one talking to himself in public. In either case, it certainly failed to lend any credence to your opinion.