Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Riley Pizt

Real Name Riley Pizt   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname None given.
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Jun 4, 2004, 07:30
Total Comments 2565 (Senior)
User ID 21035
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Older >


News Comments > Piracy versus PC Gaming
232. Re: Mar 10, 2007, 20:58 Riley Pizt
 
And Timmy gets a foul tip! Oh no wait, he's running to third!
You have obviously been beaned way too many times in the head. I'd suggest that you try wearing a batting helmet for once, but at this point it is way too late for that to matter.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Piracy versus PC Gaming
230. Re: Mar 10, 2007, 20:49 Riley Pizt
 
Keep swinging, Timmy!
There's no need to swing. You can't even pitch the ball anywhere near the plate let alone over it. I'd send you down to Little League, but you are not even good enough for that level.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Piracy versus PC Gaming
228. Re: Mar 10, 2007, 20:30 Riley Pizt
 
The game is not free. Just because you can aquire it illegally without paying does not make it free. Strike one!
Actually it is you who struck out because you totally missed the meaning of the term free in the context in which I used it. The game is free to the downloader, i.e. he is not remitting payment for it. Sure he is not acquiring the game legally, but I did not contend that he is.

And that blanket statement
It is not a blanket statement. If you are going to try to imitate the terms I have used against you in the past, you need to learn what those terms actually mean. The statement applies specifically to the situation I described, i.e. a downloader acquiring an unauthorized copy of a three-year-old game which commonly sells for a nominal price such as $10. Someone who is acquiring an unauthorized copy of a game which is that old and that inexpensive to buy simply would not buy the game at any price. The people are acquiring it simply because it is available to them for download for free. If it were not available for download they would simply download something else. They would not purchase the game, and therefore it is not a lost sale.

Yeah, I couldn't break into one house and steal so I'll break into the one next door.
That is exactly the attitude in play. They do not download as a substitute to purchasing a specific item. They download just to download something for free. That is why there is no lost sale in that circumstance.

What exactly is your point.
LOL! Well at least now you admit that you can't understand what you read. Admitting you have a problem is normally the first step to solving it, but you are simply a lost cause.

And denying that there is no negative impact is even more ludicrous.
While I am not saying that there is absolutely no negative impact, even if I were, it wouldn't be more ludicrous because having no negative impact is much closer to the truth than it having a huge impact. To put it in simple terms even you should be able to understand, if the game industry were to say that unauthorized use of its products cost it 50% in lost revenue per year, I were to say it cost it no lost revenue, and the actual impact were only 1% in lost revenue, my claim would be much closer to the truth that the exaggerated claim of the game industry, i.e. 1 is closer to being 0 than being 50.

...kids...
By the way I find it hilarious that you claim to be an adult and yet read, write, and reason so poorly. If you truely are an adult, whoever provided your education owes you a big refund because they did not deliver one.

This comment was edited on Mar 10, 21:05.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Piracy versus PC Gaming
223. Re: No subject Mar 10, 2007, 19:56 Riley Pizt
 
Riley, you are a smart person, surely you can refute his points without the name calling eh?
Well I am simply returning the favor of the "moron" epithet in his post. Plus, my use of it is the accurate one. :D.

This comment was edited on Mar 10, 19:59.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Piracy versus PC Gaming
221. Re: Mar 10, 2007, 19:49 Riley Pizt
 
One could argue that but one wouldn't be reasonable. The game is free when the company that owns the rights (not you) says it is free. Moron.
Once again you proved yourself to be a moron who simply cannot understand what he reads. Now go back and read my post again very slowly this time and think about it.

I'll even give you a hint since you badly need it. Where I wrote "free to download" I mean "free of cost to the downloader" not legally free since I have already labeled the download as as "unauthorized copy."

This comment was edited on Mar 10, 19:59.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Piracy versus PC Gaming
219. Re: Mar 10, 2007, 19:01 Riley Pizt
 
But still thousands of people are currently pirating the game, 3 years after its release. What does this say about a pirate's mentality?
It says that these people who are downloading Doom 3 simply will not buy the game under any circumstances. They are only acquiring it because it is free. There is simply no lost sale here. One could reasonably argue that someone who downloads an unauthorized copy of a recently released $50 game might purchase the game at a lower price point (and therefore be a lost sale at that price), but anyone who is downloading a $10 game that is three years old is simply doing so because the game is free and available for download. If that particular game were not available, they would simply go download some other freely available game. Blaming this activity for the financial failures in the game industry especially on a large scale is ludicrous.

This comment was edited on Mar 10, 20:01.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Piracy versus PC Gaming
132. Re: No subject Mar 10, 2007, 06:37 Riley Pizt
 
my experience is that pirates take *every* game. They don't bother tos ee who the developer is, or even try the demo first. They just see it, and they take it.
Which basically proves the point that these people would never buy your product and likely don't even play the games. The game for them is the downloading.

As for the house thing, we are avoiding the minor issue of the hosue costing 10,000 times as much aren't we?
I avoided it because quite frankly your claim is ludicrous. I personally know of no one who bought his house so cavalierly or hastily as you describe.

Do you get a full demo of an apple before you buy it?
No, but I can get a refund from the store if I don't like it. I've returned food to stores before for refund when I was disatisfied with it. The same return policy should be available for video games. If developers and publishers expect consumers to respect their rights, then they first need to respect consumers' rights.

This comment was edited on Mar 10, 06:38.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Piracy versus PC Gaming
130. Re: Sure Todd Mar 10, 2007, 06:32 Riley Pizt
 
If I could find a way to get my weeks groceries for free, I'd do it. And I'd probably kid myself I wouldn't have bought them otherwise.
LOL! You have to be kidding. Do you seriously believe that video games are a necessity like groceries? People who download unauthorized copies of video games do it simply because they can do it for free. If that ability disappeared tomorrow do you honestly believe that they would then buy the hundreds or thousands of games they would have downloaded had they been free? I bet only a fraction of the games that are downloaded are ever even played. Sure, they might buy a few but the economic impact is going to be relatively minor and certainly no where near what game publishers and developers would like to believe.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Piracy versus PC Gaming
128. Re: No subject Mar 10, 2007, 06:21 Riley Pizt
 
the best way to buy a house is to live in it for twenty years first. How much of a demo do you get with a product that takes you twenty five years to pay for?
Normally a few hours at most.
Cliff, your home buying analogy is specious. Home buyers in the U.S. have laws which protect them from misrepresentation, fraud, and even dissatisfaction in some cases with their home purchases. There are no such laws protecting consumers when it comes to software purchases including video games. In addition most EULA's are crafted in such a way to absolve developers and publishers of any responsibility for their software and provide consumers with no recourse in the case of dissatisfaction with their purchases. In addition no retail stores will accept returns on opened software for refund so consumers have no recourse for compensation if they are dissatisfied with their purchases.

Before video game publishers and developers complain about about unauthorized use of their products, they should first stop taking their customers for granted and treating them like criminals, stand behind their products, and offer a fair return policy instead of hiding behind their EULA's. When you treat your customers with disdain, you shouldn't be surprised when some of them return the favor.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Piracy versus PC Gaming
75. Re: Sure Todd Mar 10, 2007, 00:07 Riley Pizt
 
The problem is that they are too arrogant to admit that a lot of what gets released is considered by many to be not worth the price of admission.
Amen. The problem is simply that developers spend so many long hours per day and so many months or years working on the same game that they don't want to believe or at least admit it when their game is not well received by the public. So unauthorized use is the scapegoat. There simply aren't enough consumers willing to buy all of the games that get released on the market, and the developers and publishers don't help matters with their sales and pricing practices.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Piracy versus PC Gaming
70. Re: Am i a bad person? Mar 9, 2007, 23:51 Riley Pizt
 
Why is it that the actual dollar amount lost is of significance in deciding whether piracy is acceptable or not.
Because it affects the bottom line. If it costs as much or more to try to stop the problem than it does to accept the loss, then it is foolish to waste resources on it instead of devoting that time and money to the actual business and products. A certain amount of loss is simply a cost of doing business.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Piracy versus PC Gaming
68. Re: Am i a bad person? Mar 9, 2007, 23:47 Riley Pizt
 
Of the thousands and thousands of illegally "shared" games/songs/applications/etc it is safe to say that a significant percentage of those people doing the sharing would have otherwise paid for these products.
It is actually more likely that the percentage who would pay is relatively miniscule because if the downloaders were actually willing and able to pay the asking price, they would be doing it. Anyone will take something if it is free. The notion that someone would have paid for dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of songs, movies, or games simply because they had downloaded them for free is ludicrous. If file sharing did not exist, would these downloaders have purchased ANY of the things they had downloaded? Sure, it is likely unless they were pretty impoverished. However, would it be a significant quantity? Most likely not since they could not afford it or would not otherwise spend the money on it.

The bottom line is that even if copyright infringement via file sharing disappeared tomorrow, there still wouldn't be enough sales revenue to keep all of these companies which claim that such infringement is killing their business afloat.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Piracy versus PC Gaming
60. Re: No subject Mar 9, 2007, 23:21 Riley Pizt
 
And he has the balls to blame it ALL on piracy???
You didn't really expect him to point the finger at himself and his fellow developers did you?

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Piracy versus PC Gaming
17. No subject Mar 9, 2007, 20:59 Riley Pizt
 
Currently, hes dealing with the fact that someone out there has an unauthorized copy of Enemy Territory Quake Wars.
This caught my eye from the Next Generation article. Since unauthoirzed downloads are supposed to be so prevalent, has anyone played this unauthorized copy of Quake Wars, and if so, is the game any good?

This comment was edited on Mar 9, 21:00.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Piracy versus PC Gaming
14. Re: No subject Mar 9, 2007, 20:36 Riley Pizt
 
Piracy is absolutely no problem at all.
Unauthorized use can't be the financial problem he claims because if most of the market were getting their games for free, no one would bother buying all of those console games.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
20. Re: No subject Mar 9, 2007, 20:27 Riley Pizt
 
TROLL FIGHT OF THE CENTURY

RILEY 'STEAM' PITZ
v.
REPEAT OFFENDER
That's Riley "STEAMed" Pizt, and I want a piece of the take.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
19. Re: riaa Mar 9, 2007, 20:25 Riley Pizt
 
Riley, you fucking dumbass. Considering this conversation is directly related to the news topic that this thread goes with, it's crystal clear to everyone but you that what is being discussed is copywrite infringement as it applies in this situation.
That is NOT what my initial post in this thread is about. It is about Repeat Offender's hypocrisy. He chose to ignorantly reply to my post so my replies address his comments in that context not the overall notion of whether copyright infringement occurs in peer-to-peer file sharing.

These universities aren't news organizations, nor is what they are doing in any way covered by fair use.
These universities also aren't committing copyright infringement. Some of their students simply are accused of it. My point to him is that his blanket generalizations about copyright and fair use are wrong.

If you weren't such a dipshit you could read peoples posts in the context of what they are posting about.
If you weren't such a dipshit, you would understand my posts as they are written not as what you want them to say to make yourself feel correct. Repeat Offender was replying to my initial post not me to his so I set the subject not him.

you seem to have some mental problem with not being able to understand what context means, which is a very important part of communication.
You obviously have a mental problem with impairs your ability to understand what you read. Again Repeat Offender was responding to my initial post. If he had read and understood it correctly, he would not have so ignorantly replied to it.

It's ironic that you would also be slamming the media within the same posts for exactly what you are doing.
You just proved that you don't understand what you read. I am NOT slamming the news media. I am slamming media organizations such as the R.I.A.A and the M.P.A.A who intentionally mischaracterize copyright infringement as theft and piracy as a propaganda tactic so that it is morally equated with those heinous crimes in the minds of the general public.

I hate the reference to copywrite infringement as stealing/theft also, but it's semantics.
It's NOT simply semantics. It is calculated propaganda designed to create a moral equivalency between a heinous crime such as actual piracy and copyright infringement. The purpose is to so demonize it that harsh laws against infringement are passed to protect the media companies' profit margins. Of course even legitimate consumers suffer because oppressive laws such as the DMCA result. This robs them of their fair use rights, and companies also wrongfully use the law against each other to quash legitimate competition.

This comment was edited on Mar 9, 20:53.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Piracy versus PC Gaming
7. No subject Mar 9, 2007, 20:03 Riley Pizt
 
"Piracy has pushed id as being multiplatform."
That is simply ludicrous. What has pushed id and every other developer into embracing consoles is the sheer numbers of console owners. Console game sales dwarf PC game sales simply because that is the platform where far more consumers want to play their games. If most consumers were getting their games from unauthorized copies and downloads for their PC's no one would be buying all of these consoles and games for them.

This comment was edited on Mar 9, 20:05.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
13. Re: riaa Mar 9, 2007, 16:18 Riley Pizt
 
You site examples that clearly don't apply to the argument athand.
They apply directly to the quotes I cite. My points would be obvious even to you if you would actually read them and understand what you read.

neither was I when I said fair use does not allow for mass distribution of copyrighted material.
You made no such distinction in your post and from it and your other erroneous assumptions, I doubt you knew you were wrong before I pointed it out. My point to you is that your simple, sweeping generalizations about copyright law and copyright infringement are not only incorrect, but dangerous because they lead to the passage of draconian laws such as the DMCA by similarly gullible politicians who don't consider all of the negative repercussions of their actions in their haste to protect the media companies from the huge fallacious losses to copyright infringement.

Does copyright infringement occur in peer-to-peer file sharing over the Internet? Sure it does, but call it and treat it like what it actually is which is neither theft nor piracy.


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
11. Re: riaa Mar 9, 2007, 15:56 Riley Pizt
 
You didn't explain to me that all these fair use individuals were reporters and librarians. I guess you were right all along. No one is breaking the law.
Wow, you are really obtuse. The purpose of that portion of my reply was to clearly demonstrate that your blanket generalization that fair use doesn't allow distributing copyrighted material to thousands of non-paying individuals is clearly incorrect despite what you have been indoctrinated to believe.

As I said, grow up.
Actually I have, and obviously I didn't grow up to be a gullible moron like you.

This comment was edited on Mar 9, 15:59.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
2565 Comments. 129 pages. Viewing page 9.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo