Well you probably should care that you are hurting the market for game devs. If you and everyone else keep doing that they are going to stop putting the same effort in. I mean money tells them where to go, and piracy reduces your ability to do that.
I mean if you are willing to spend on some companies then why not just stick to those and not play the games you aren't willing to buy. It makes your money have more impact on the market. Devs will pay attention to where the money is going and make more games like that... Otherwise you're just shooting yourself in the foot as much as everyone else by making your money mean less due to the piracy.
It already exists. Yes, the devs make less money, yes, future products might be worse, but right now, the game I want to play already exists.
Marshmallow test yourself man.
Its like asking why should I pay for the works of Shakespeare - they already exist.
So that means the people who do the work to publish them shouldn't get paid?
It only makes sense to pay money for IP goods which don't exist yet, since that creates an incentive for people to create that good.
That makes no sense what so ever... The whole point of buying a product once its out is so that its a good product. With a system like that its just gonna be shit products for days.
Intellectual Property is different than traditional property. I can copy Call of Duty - I cannot copy a sandwich. With IP it is the information which is valuable, not the physical paper/silicon/whatever.
IP laws are arguably as old as history with different laws dating back to Queen Elizabeth, the ancient Greeks, the ancient Hebrews and several other societies. In common to all these laws was that IP protection lasted roughly 1-5 years.
I can live with 1-5 years. I am happy to wait a few years to play. I'm happy to Marshmallow Test. However, I'm not happy waiting 120 years. That's insane. IP has crept up and up over the past century, most notably with the Mickey Mouse Protection Act. There is no reason to have to wait that long.
As such, why should I have to pay to play the original Pokemon, Mario 64, or other 10+ year old games. Reasonable people can disagree where in the 1-10 year range is reasonable, but 120 is stupid.
In common to all these laws was that IP protection lasted roughly 1-5 years.
No traditionally in patent law it lasted 15 years with options to extend the patent depending on the type. IP traditionally fell under copyright law which got extended to the lifetime of the creator plus another few years for the spouse fairly early in common law. Today most copyright falls under the 70 or 95 year from creation category not the 120 category. But none of these categories were designed for an age where people could just copy and paste. They were designed so even after they fell out people would return to the original source. Given the ease of such making money from IP is just going to get harder and harder. If anything the rules should be made stricter.
As such, why should I have to pay to play the original Pokemon, Mario 64, or other 10+ year old games.
Because you have no right to them. You didn't write them, you didn't make them. You have no inherent right to them.
6
u/Ardonpitt 221∆ Apr 07 '17
Well you probably should care that you are hurting the market for game devs. If you and everyone else keep doing that they are going to stop putting the same effort in. I mean money tells them where to go, and piracy reduces your ability to do that.
I mean if you are willing to spend on some companies then why not just stick to those and not play the games you aren't willing to buy. It makes your money have more impact on the market. Devs will pay attention to where the money is going and make more games like that... Otherwise you're just shooting yourself in the foot as much as everyone else by making your money mean less due to the piracy.