illegal downloading of games is there some wiggle room?

Do you really need someone else's approval and opinions on whether to do something or not? Or is it 'cause you want people to sympathise with you and justify your actions, so that you'll feel you're not wrong? If you are feeling like doing it, just do it. Don't try to excuse yourself to others with what is often silly excuses.

There is no wiggle room since its illegal anyway. Doesn't mean its wrong to pirate anyway. It's a rare thing that piracy even causes a lost sale so the last option is just false anyway.

Never pirated something and I never will but I don't see "wiggle room" unless they are demo's, shareware, alpha's, beta's and things like that, released through official channels.

There's HECK of a wiggle room.

1. Pretty much everywhere in the world except maybe in dumbistan (aka Trumpistan...) where people have little right and are too stupid to care, here is exactly what the mercantile, commercial and intellectual propriety laws have stated for centuries to this day: when you buy a product, for exemple if you're buying a car, iphone or blu-ray, and the car has a failing motor, the iphone has no OS or the there is nothing on the blu-ray then it has no value as an object right? You're not buying the content either, otherwise you could copy the design of the motor, the OS or the film on the blu-ray and reappropriate or distribute it, which is illegal right? What you are essentially buying (which has great value) is a an unlimited licence of access and use to a "copy" of what you are buying: a unit of a working car, iphone or blu-ray that you "own" an unlimited access to and freedom of use for yourself.

2. But by extension this means several things: if either your access or use is compromised by a failure of motor, a buggy OS or a scratched blu-ray then you have absolutely every right to create, patch or repair/replace a copy of it by another for your own use. Also because you own this copy, with money you own by working meaning you're exchanging it with things you own in return, you have every right to lend it, give it, throw it or resell it, it being THIS working copy you own, more specifically the licence of access and use. Then because in families and especially marriage, we consider that couple have a shared patrimony and their children have a right to it, everything you buy can be equally accessed and used (the debate is as to wether this applies to copy) by your family. And finally we consider that research, information and education purposes justify the copy for no monetary interest (which in every case, is theft).

3. Research, information and education is exactly were the debate happens: These 3 factors are crucial national politic, economic and social issues are they are vastly responsible for the given development, production and wealth/GDP outcome a country will get in mid-long terms, but how far and how wide can we consider that the purpose is education, information or research? This question is not relevant anymore since the limitations were pretty much defined by tacite consumerist, social and cultural dogmas, but now we're facing another opposite questions that applies equally as the first one: how expensive, restricted and inaccessible can we let culture, information or knowledge become before this becomes a problem or even a threat to national issues of education, development, information, research and production?

The answer is buried deep in history, economics and politics...but in simple terms: when legal offer is so relevant and affordable that people turn-away from piracy and rather go towards legal offer, there can be the opposite situation when legal offer becomes so irrelevant and inaccessible that there needs to be a new way of piracy.

Addendum: Also, piracy is and has always been a "promotional" tool, in music, in software, in cinema or in gaming. For lack of a better economic model or offer, Photoshop is the most famous exemple of how letting generations of youth and students crack-it turned over in huge growing adoption, sale and monopoly of Photoshop. The reverse is equally true for software that stayed hidden behind anti-crack schemes and ended lagging behind competitors pushed by wide legal/pirated adoption. As a matter of fact I know people working both in music and cinema who use "controlled pirated leaks" to promote products of which they don't see big revenue or enough promotion, to turn-it into wider single, blu-ray, concert or advertising money.

Of course we all know that in the end it's a matter of right offer and price, which was no problem things were digital as prices were naturally gradually falling in prices as it got older, thus reaching more and more pockets. Pay-what-you-want is an idea, subscription another, or game-as-a-service: for exemple GTA V is lagging in sale but still selling strong, hence it's still at it's based full-price with pseudo-sales, but how much can it last until millions of people who would have bought it won't instead of if the game was suddenly cut to 12$ which would mean they would probably lift more copies up that the two last years...

I used to download games A LOT when I was younger. And then I stopped. It's not that I forgot how to do it, I just don't want to. There's a game I want very much and I enter all the giveaways etc. I could download it, but it's not THAT important to me, I guess.

I still download movies and TV series, though. I would be willing to pay a normal price to watch TV shows, but lots and lots of people tend to forget sometimes we download things because they are not available in our regions. Not everybody lives in the US. For example, I can watch Asian series online legally for a price, and I pay, I don't pirate those. Also, the way the movie industry cries like a toddler because of imaginary lost revenue makes me be even less sorry when I download movies now and then. Cinema is laughably overpriced and most movies lately are sh*t, just overhyped, so I usually end up saying "thank God I didn't pay to see this turd". Games are a different industry and I treat it differently.

Also: there are countries that don't have YT etc access, so people can't see gameplay. And not everybody can buy games on Steam or Origin that have trial periods. I'm not offering an excuse to people who pirate, I'm just saying people are too used to their own way of living and judge without thinking. There are kids that their only getaway is a pirated copy of a game. I won't judge them, there are worse people out there.

Is it a necessity to play a game/ watch a movie? No. Is our society built on necessity? No.

tl;dr Yes, it's wrong, and you are the sole judge of how much it bothers your conscience. But, if you volunteer 1 hour to your local shelter for every pirated game hour you play, you're good for my lowly standards.

Legally there is no "wiggle room" except if you are from one of the few countries where piracy is not illegal.

Morally your mileage may vary so only you can answer. The same is true for many other things such as drinking underage, using drugs, not following traffic rules, etc...

Philosophically there's a lot more to be said about copyright, patents, ownership, etc. For example:

• should economic interests be more important than the free distribution of culture, science, and education? Read about Aaron Swartz and JSTOR
• should you be able to make money out of somehing you created (or acquired the rights to) for the author's life +75 years? Read about the Mickey Mouse protection act (officially called Copyright Term Extension Act)
• should you be allowed keep a patent just to keep others from using your invention, without using it yourself?

There are points to be said about both sides but it is a very complex issue.

In today's climate (for lack of a better word) where publishers are trying their damndest to see what they can get away with, and false advertising, and paid reviews, etc etc. I find there is wiggle room.

That's all I'll say because I'm not in the mood to type an essay for once.

You can play steam games in offline mode and then hour count won't work. If you don't like it after that refund it.

No I hate people that pirate games. You are stealing people's intellectual property, time, wages and you don't need to play it. Gaming is a hobby, it's not food, water, clothing or shelter. It's a game. If you can't afford it then it's bullshit. You are clearly in a home, with a computer, internet and electricity...

Yeah sure I rarely buy games at full price but I bloody pay for them whether it's a bundle (that goes to charity also) or in a sale. But that money goes into hard working creators of my main hobby. So fuck pirates. You are the reason why microtransactions etc are prevalent

The only wiggle room I can see happening is if you're a broke ass who wanna play game so badly so you pirate the game because you don't have any income.
But if you're making income every other month like every other average assholes yet still chooses to pirate video games, well

View attached image.

I never have nor ever will pirate a game, for me there is no wiggle room. And there is no need to do so INHO, because I can buy, win, or trade for games and there are more than enough games that I can forgo illegaly downloading abandonware, games not sold here and such.
If you find something that in your eyes justifies doing so that's your choice.

great conversation and opinions so far.
I actually wanted to add another option as i admit i downloaded diablo to play it on my pc. Diablo 1 i have game could not get it to install so i downloaded a copy that someone edited and it installed along with a big update patch. I already own the game and i downloaded a copy that was User edited not Company edited to play on windows 7.

Also How do you guys feel about downloading a game that was never released here? I have downloaded games that were not translated in English by the company but where translated by people. I feel that is fine as there was no other option other then maybe learning a new language. But still they dont always install correctly.

Allright, lets do this.

Lets go to the cinema, watch a third, half or 2 thirds of a movie then leave deciding 'you know, i had enought... not really worth my money'.

Im not saying we have good solutions- the lack of demos is a problem. But even this reasoning is flawed- many games aren't 60-80 hours aaa blockbusters nor shouldn't be. Quite frankly 2 hours of a 8 hour game is already more then enought/too much and way too much of a smaller game.

Years ago i had similar reasoning and i did buy many games after playing then by other means, but it was much later since my conscience hit me and i started buying a bunch that i didn't liked 'that much'...
...they weren't stellar titles. They aren't remembered, too well rated, heck some are low rated- still i had fun and i did play for a good while and some even to the end (while some good games i still have to beat). Lesser they were/are i consumed then, had my share, and was entertained in some way even if flawed- fgs, i kept playing for some reason didn't i? If they were really bad i would have ditched then in what... half a hour? less then 2 certainly... like steam refund.

Seriously, this is reverse logic. You're trying to justify your ansiety to get your hands on a game before dishing the cash or your uncertainty, its either one of the two cases.

Reviews/videos + 2 hours refund its enougth. Reviews can warm you of any caveats ahead beforehand 'it will slow to a crawl, grind, gets too dificullt, too short, this, that, whatever' - the 2 hour you get the feel, the performance, the experience.

Truth is its a game design job to Hook the player- a games hook needing more then 2 hours to start is flawed. If in 2 hours you're not hooked its their fault or not a game for you. That simple.

PS:
In before 'rpgs, dark souls, etc' - hooking, getting the feel and knowing if you want a game is far different then mastering or understanding.
It doesnt take long to get that dark souls is die, repeat and 'oh, it is about skill, patience, if i get just... oh i did it oh fuuu-'. Really they do that from the start.

When it comes to games, I haven't pirated since I joined Steam, mainly because the games I won here on SG keep me busy, so I don't really have time to do it, but I do think about doing it very often, especially with some amazing games that are on my wishlist and that I would love to play but can't afford. I do pirate music and TV shows/movies a lot though.

And yeah, it's wrong and illegal, but I don't care. Life's too short and I'll probably never make enough money in my lifetime to legitimately buy everything that I consume online. And I don't think it matters that much for the big names anyway, it's not like $20 from me is gonna make a difference in the millions of dollars they have. I do try to support small names and my favorite ones whenever I can though.

I'll just add my piece even if it has already been said by others. Illegal downloading, or pirating, or whatever, is wrong & bad & etc.. I don't find it very tasteful to try & seem like some sort of hero when pirating because of external controversy or whatever. Just don't be cocky about it & it's fine. We all do things that aren't exactly morally or even legally sound (Smoking, jaywalking,etc.), so it's not like pirating a game is some deep evil.

That said, sometimes "illegal" downloading is the only choice, like how others have discussed abandonware. I can't fault someone for "illegally" downloading stuff like that. it's similar with emulation too. As it becomes more & more expensive to own & play old games (Some of which don't have any Wii virtual store emulation or anything), emulation increases in being the only option to play said games for whatever reason.

But of course, Games are not a necessity. Which funnily enough I feel could be used to argue in favor of pirating. But either way, I'll just take the simple route & say "Yes" to wiggle room.

Arr!

View attached image.

I don't pirate any kind of software, including games, because as a programmer I understand the work put into developing one. Other media though..

Illegal downloads doesn't exist in my country. Only illegal distribution(providing torrent/download links/etc.).
Therefore: If I want a game I just download it. If I feel the company deserve credit for it I buy it from a source I know the company will get the most from w/o paying to much for it.

The only video games I would pirate are ROMs for old games that I can't get, or mobile/console games, where the emulator experience is much better than the actual handheld one. That includes translation patches, visual improvements, ROMhacks, etc.
I am not saying it's moral or legal, and if I could get that experience paying for the games, I would. It's a matter of not having a way to access that content.
For example playing PSx/PsP games on an emulator makes them look considerably better than on a PSP, and there are many that would cost upwards of $80 to even get, and many only in Japanese.

I miss the old times where you had demos and shareware to try the games beforehand

Depends on the country you're in. In some countries it's entirely legal to download media, including games and movies.

But does it matter if you play the game for just 2h or for 20h? I would say that it's very unlikely that any countries have a law like that.

Abandonware is by the way also just as illegal as pirating new games. Is it more morally justified? Well, that's something that we can debate until the cows come home.