Copyright Infringement and Theft page 2

79 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by beauval:

And still all I see is your humble opinion – no links to facts and figures, no links to reports, not even a link to a self-interested pundit with a point of view to sell. Just your opinion. It’s worthless without support. Stop wasting my time with this rubbish.

Yet you were the one who posted something that assumes all piracy is a lost sale. You’re so cute. :)

 
Flag Post

You know what’s “cute”?

The “hey it’s just data not a real thing!” crowd acting like the illegal download/copy of material doesn’t negatively impact someone.

Hey, cute guy; you know what’s cute? Your assumption that downloading and copying protected material won’t fuck up the stuff you like.
You know, like video games. Software packages. Various other products that take a lot of development and work to get right.

But hey, if there was no money in it, I’m sure people would be willing to NOT make a living supplying people like you with entertainment for…well, for nothing.
Sure. They’d be standing in line to create content and games that made them zero dollars, ever.

Yeah.
Tell me again how the realistic world view is “cute”.
It’s cute when you act morally superior.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by softest_voice:

You know what’s “cute”?

The “hey it’s just data not a real thing!” crowd acting like the illegal download/copy of material doesn’t negatively impact someone.

Hey, cute guy; you know what’s cute? Your assumption that downloading and copying protected material won’t fuck up the stuff you like.
You know, like video games. Software packages. Various other products that take a lot of development and work to get right.

But hey, if there was no money in it, I’m sure people would be willing to NOT make a living supplying people like you with entertainment for…well, for nothing.
Sure. They’d be standing in line to create content and games that made them zero dollars, ever.

Yeah.
Tell me again how the realistic world view is “cute”.
It’s cute when you act morally superior.

You honestly think that every single download is a lost sale? Tell me how if somebody who never intended on buying the product is a lost sale if they download it.

 
Flag Post

You’re being pedantic. I’ll agree that every download isn’t a lost sale, but it isn’t as if people don’t download in place of buying. There is some loss to these companies from downloading. You’re basically saying “this figure isn’t 100% accurate, therefore I can ignore your point.”

Provide your own data. That’s what he’s been asking for.

 
Flag Post

Tell me how a company/manufacturer/programmer is supposed to support itself/himself/herself if everyone just assumes their product can be stolen without consequence.

Please, tell me how taking a product that’s not being offered for free, against the will of the creator, is helping the one that created it.

Furthermore, tell me what happens to the industry as a whole once investors (you know, the ones that fund all that R&D?) realize the software/game/music/etc model has become unprofitable, due to the ease and nonchalance of theft.

EDIT:
PS, I work in commercial photography, and commercial/film production.
I live and die by copyright. ie, the shoots that I do myself, and those that I work on, are based on licensing.
The entire industry.
So, yeah…tell me again how no one suffers when the “freegans” come along and say “HEY, man…it’s like, art…it should be for everybody!”

 
Flag Post

Kegfarms, do you want people to take a test before they are allowed to download something illegally to determine whether they would have bought it or not?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Ketsy:

You’re being pedantic. I’ll agree that every download isn’t a lost sale, but it isn’t as if people don’t download in place of buying. There is some loss to these companies from downloading. You’re basically saying “this figure isn’t 100% accurate, therefore I can ignore your point.”

Provide your own data. That’s what he’s been asking for.

I never once said that all pirates wouldn’t have bought the product. The issue is all monetary values that are mentioned are complete bullshit because most people wouldn’t have bought the products in the first place. Just look at Photoshop. It is really expensive and one of the most pirated pieces of software ever created. The people who hurt the companies are the people that would have bought the product but pirated it instead.

Originally posted by softest_voice:

Tell me how a company/manufacturer/programmer is supposed to support itself/himself/herself if everyone just assumes their product can be stolen without consequence.

Please, tell me how taking a product that’s not being offered for free, against the will of the creator, is helping the one that created it.

Furthermore, tell me what happens to the industry as a whole once investors (you know, the ones that fund all that R&D?) realize the software/game/music/etc model has become unprofitable, due to the ease and nonchalance of theft.

EDIT:
PS, I work in commercial photography, and commercial/film production.
I live and die by copyright. ie, the shoots that I do myself, and those that I work on, are based on licensing.
The entire industry.
So, yeah…tell me again how no one suffers when the “freegans” come along and say “HEY, man…it’s like, art…it should be for everybody!”

Pirated. Get it right please. Theft and copyright infringement are two completely different things. In both of your posts you have ignored the fact that not every download is an actual lost sale. You are also assuming that piracy actually hurts industries. The only way for any company to actually be hurt by a pirate is if the person chose to download something instead of buying it when they wanted to buy it.

Originally posted by EPR89:

Kegfarms, do you want people to take a test before they are allowed to download something illegally to determine whether they would have bought it or not?

That would be quite funny if it were possible. Would be interesting to pull off. There’s a fansub group that actually did something like that. They made a poll asking about piracy.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Kegfarms:

I never once said that all pirates wouldn’t have bought the product. The issue is all monetary values that are mentioned are complete bullshit because most people wouldn’t have bought the products in the first place.

I don’t know about the other people here, but I just about had it.
Show us some data that shows that most pirates wouldn’t have bought the product. After all, this is everything you base your argument on.

I really like that Photoshop example you brought in here. Especially since it seems to go directly against everything you argued before. If you get Photoshop, you probably want a powerful image editor. There are many free ones online. There is no need to pirate Photoshop unless you really want it. It is very likely that a pirated copy of Photoshop is a lost sale.

 
Flag Post

Oh, EPR…you silly, silly man.
You’re using facts to argue against an idea that relies on unbased postulation as its sole source.
The “they probably wouldn’t have bought it anyway duh!” defense is the basis of the freegan movement.

Or something. I don’t even know anymore.
These clowns come up with more and more creative ways to justify stealing every day.

It’s funny. I spoke out against SOPA/PIPA here in the States, because the way the government wanted to implement internet protections of IP was, frankly, dimwitted and Draconian.
I believe in those protections, though. I, and many of the people I know, make a living via IP and licensing.
So I call out those that say “HEY it’s not really stealing cuz it’s not like I have a physical thing!” for their bullshit.

At the same time, i agree that industry monoliths like music recording companies need to be reworked, and need to understand that the model has changed.

I guess what I’m drunkenly rambling on about is this; there needs to be compromise.
But you can’t compromise with someone that refuses to admit what they’re doing is wrong.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Kegfarms:

I never once said that all pirates wouldn’t have bought the product. The issue is all monetary values that are mentioned are complete bullshit because most people wouldn’t have bought the products in the first place. Just look at Photoshop. It is really expensive and one of the most pirated pieces of software ever created.

Those two pieces of data are linked, you know. It is pirated so much because it is so ludicrously expensive. That said, it is also ludicrously powerful, so the two balance out.

I’ve pirated that program before, Photoshop CS4. It was an absolute nightmare to install, and sluggish as all hell as it had so many features jammed in. It wasn’t worth the upgrade, so I deleted the software. However, it was fully functional (if slow) and if I’d wished to, I could have kept using it indefinitely. If it was not for my personal moral core, there was nothing stopping me from using it in my work, and not paying Adobe a cent. Where then, is the need to pay them $600 going to come from? Why pay for software I already have complete access to?

As it was, I have an unusual moral core. I know its unusual, because most people look at me strangely when I describe it to them. I uninstalled the software, and stuck in the older version of Photoshop (6) which I paid for. Much, much faster, and powerful enough for anything I’m going to use it for. More importantly, I can live with myself, knowing I’ve given the developers of software I use frequently, due payment for the tool they provided.

I’m old-school. If a tool is ideal for the purpose I’m putting it to, and I’m using that tool as part of a money-making endeavor, it seems better to treat others in business as I would wish to be treated myself, and pay them for services rendered. Particularly when I’m using those services to pay my own bills.

You have a different philosophy I realise, but mine is just how I am. It would be hypocritical of me to take all my base resources for free, when I expect to be paid for my own work. I cannot live with that hypocracy, whereas you can.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by EPR89:
Originally posted by Kegfarms:

I never once said that all pirates wouldn’t have bought the product. The issue is all monetary values that are mentioned are complete bullshit because most people wouldn’t have bought the products in the first place.

I don’t know about the other people here, but I just about had it.
Show us some data that shows that most pirates wouldn’t have bought the product. After all, this is everything you base your argument on.

I really like that Photoshop example you brought in here. Especially since it seems to go directly against everything you argued before. If you get Photoshop, you probably want a powerful image editor. There are many free ones online. There is no need to pirate Photoshop unless you really want it. It is very likely that a pirated copy of Photoshop is a lost sale.

Photoshop is the best image editing program. It is absolutely ridiculous to say that it is very likely a lost sale. People would rather have the best program compared to a free one.

Originally posted by softest_voice:

Oh, EPR…you silly, silly man.
You’re using facts to argue against an idea that relies on unbased postulation as its sole source.
The “they probably wouldn’t have bought it anyway duh!” defense is the basis of the freegan movement.

Or something. I don’t even know anymore.
These clowns come up with more and more creative ways to justify stealing every day.

It’s funny. I spoke out against SOPA/PIPA here in the States, because the way the government wanted to implement internet protections of IP was, frankly, dimwitted and Draconian.
I believe in those protections, though. I, and many of the people I know, make a living via IP and licensing.
So I call out those that say “HEY it’s not really stealing cuz it’s not like I have a physical thing!” for their bullshit.

At the same time, i agree that industry monoliths like music recording companies need to be reworked, and need to understand that the model has changed.

I guess what I’m drunkenly rambling on about is this; there needs to be compromise.
But you can’t compromise with someone that refuses to admit what they’re doing is wrong.

I find it funny how you claimed to have “called me out on my bullshit” when I have said that that copyright infringement and theft are different yet never responded to it. Honestly its really sad how many people do not know the different between copying something and taking something. I love yet again how you ignored the lost sale argument. Its pathetic to ignore an argument just because you don’t like it.

Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by Kegfarms:

I never once said that all pirates wouldn’t have bought the product. The issue is all monetary values that are mentioned are complete bullshit because most people wouldn’t have bought the products in the first place. Just look at Photoshop. It is really expensive and one of the most pirated pieces of software ever created.

Those two pieces of data are linked, you know. It is pirated so much because it is so ludicrously expensive. That said, it is also ludicrously powerful, so the two balance out.

I’ve pirated that program before, Photoshop CS4. It was an absolute nightmare to install, and sluggish as all hell as it had so many features jammed in. It wasn’t worth the upgrade, so I deleted the software. However, it was fully functional (if slow) and if I’d wished to, I could have kept using it indefinitely. If it was not for my personal moral core, there was nothing stopping me from using it in my work, and not paying Adobe a cent. Where then, is the need to pay them $600 going to come from? Why pay for software I already have complete access to?

As it was, I have an unusual moral core. I know its unusual, because most people look at me strangely when I describe it to them. I uninstalled the software, and stuck in the older version of Photoshop (6) which I paid for. Much, much faster, and powerful enough for anything I’m going to use it for. More importantly, I can live with myself, knowing I’ve given the developers of software I use frequently, due payment for the tool they provided.

I’m old-school. If a tool is ideal for the purpose I’m putting it to, and I’m using that tool as part of a money-making endeavor, it seems better to treat others in business as I would wish to be treated myself, and pay them for services rendered. Particularly when I’m using those services to pay my own bills.

You have a different philosophy I realise, but mine is just how I am. It would be hypocritical of me to take all my base resources for free, when I expect to be paid for my own work. I cannot live with that hypocracy, whereas you can.

I find it funny how you called me a hypocrite. I never said I pirated Photoshop and you can use Photoshop for non-commercial things.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Kegfarms:

I find it funny how you called me a hypocrite. I never said I pirated Photoshop and you can use Photoshop for non-commercial things.

You still have to pay for your use. You can use a car for non-commercial things, so why not steal one from a dealership? They’ve still got hundreds of identical copies, and its not as if you’re making money from it, right?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by Kegfarms:

I find it funny how you called me a hypocrite. I never said I pirated Photoshop and you can use Photoshop for non-commercial things.

You still have to pay for your use. You can use a car for non-commercial things, so why not steal one from a dealership? They’ve still got hundreds of identical copies, and its not as if you’re making money from it, right?

You don’t have to pay if you don’t want to. That is why pirates exist. You’re now failing with your analogies because you tried to compare a physical object with a non physical object. You’re also comparing something that is actual theft to making a copy of something.

 
Flag Post

Why does it being physical matter? They have an endless number of copies available to them from the manufacturer. You’re just taking a copy, right? They still have the original car, the prototype. All you’ve taken is a copy.

As you say, you’re not going to make money with it, so its not worth paying for it. Just hotwire and go. They can replace it with another copy, easily enough. You wouldn’t have purchased the car anyway. So what if you drive everywhere in your copy for ten or fifteen years.

It should be legal, right?


As an ancedote, I’ve downloaded two films via torrent this week. Total Recall (the 2012 remake), and Extracted. Total Recall was ghastly, and it has already left my harddrive for the endless expanses of the bit bucket. Extracted on the other hand, I now have no choice but to buy. Why? Because it was useful to me. It contained concepts and ideas that I can explore further, work out the practicality of.

If I’m getting use from a product, then I buy it. I pay for it because I’m using it. Same as you pay for a car, because you use it, rely on it. Taking a test-drive is one thing – analogous to a torrent. But if its exactly what you were looking for, you buy it.

Pay for the service being given, plus encourage them to keep on making the things.

 
Flag Post

Arguing that piracy is okay as long as you wouldn’t have bought the product is like arguing that drunk driving is okay as long as you don’t hit anything.

 
Flag Post
Its pathetic to ignore an argument just because you don’t like it.

yawn

Do you have any other mood besides whiny? The fans want to know.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Jantonaitis:
Do you have any other mood besides whiny? The fans want to know.

They’re trying to argue that it is their right to take and keep any commercial product they like, just because they cannot touch it. Whiny is about the only way they can express themselves in this context.

As I believe it was you who said before, Janton, it is a rediculous position of ‘poor me, pity me’ substanceless repression that could only come out of a westernised lifestyle of priviledge and plenty.

Getting everything for free, and refusing to pay others for their work is such an interesting position to defend, after all. It is a hardpoint in the middle of an open space, completely lacking in fortifications, with lavish cover for every angle of attack against it.

You have to have guts to hold such a position, and everyone knows this, because we’ll soon see them spread all over the floor.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Kegfarms:
Originally posted by EPR89:
Originally posted by Kegfarms:

I never once said that all pirates wouldn’t have bought the product. The issue is all monetary values that are mentioned are complete bullshit because most people wouldn’t have bought the products in the first place.

I don’t know about the other people here, but I just about had it.
Show us some data that shows that most pirates wouldn’t have bought the product. After all, this is everything you base your argument on.

I really like that Photoshop example you brought in here. Especially since it seems to go directly against everything you argued before. If you get Photoshop, you probably want a powerful image editor. There are many free ones online. There is no need to pirate Photoshop unless you really want it. It is very likely that a pirated copy of Photoshop is a lost sale.

Photoshop is the best image editing program. It is absolutely ridiculous to say that it is very likely a lost sale. People would rather have the best program compared to a free one.

So they want Photoshop. They really want it. They don’t want anything else. But they don’t want to pay for it.
Explain to me how this is not a lost sale.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by EPR89:

So they want Photoshop. They really want it. They don’t want anything else. But they don’t want to pay for it.
Explain to me how this is not a lost sale.

Wanting something and actually being able to pay for it are two different things. But this is naturally just a conditional excuse/exception.
True is A. that sales are being lost and that many of those enabling this process do so commercially, that means following an interest to earn money during the process of copying and illegal distribution. It is B also true that most of those downloading or otherwise acquiring illegally distributed immaterial products generally don´t give a damn about A.

On the other-hand Kegfarms is correct when he says that illegally acquiring and using a copy is not the same as stealing. But this just because its legally termed as the possession of property obtained by crime(in this case the crime generally being illegal distribution/manufacture).

 
Flag Post

Kegfarms, let’s assume that I did to you what urban legend would have us believe has been done to lots of Americans – let’s say I sold you Tower bridge for $100 million. (It’s actually owned by a trust operated by the City of London Corporation.) Technically I would not have committed a theft, nevertheless I could be charged with fraud and deception. But according to your logic, that is an entirely different thing. The fact that my bank account would be considerably healthier at the expense of yours would be no grounds for you to complain that I had stolen your money. Furthermore, if the transaction was made the modern way, all that would have happened is that a scrap of digital information was moved from your bank account to mine, so no harm would have been done at all.

It’s complete nonsense of course, but this is where your arguement leads us. You’re taking two slightly different legal concepts and pretending that they are totally unrelated. Which they aren’t.

If you are still unconvinced, just send me a whisper, and I’ll line up some great deals for you. St. Paul’s Cathedral would look pretty good in your home town, or if that’s too big how about the Great Fire of London Monument – it was originally designed as a telescope, so you’d be getting two for the price of one. Or if you prefer something more modern, how about The Shard or The Gherkin? Just tell me what you fancy and I’ll arrange it for you.

 
Flag Post

You guys are wasting your time.
You can’t argue with someone like Kegfarms, because he’s just another freegan looking for a way to rationalize his theft.

“Oh, well it’s not for commercial use, so I shouldn’t really have to pay for it.”
…do you really need the premier image editing software, then? Couldn’t you make do with one of the many freeware editing programs out there?
Why do you NEED to have PS? And if you need it that badly, why aren’t you getting paid to do what you do?
Making poor career decisions isn’t the fault of Adobe programmers; that’s your problem.

Meh, whatever.
You’ll just keep up with the same old played out circular bullshit that the pro-piracy crowd always uses.

  • It’s not a tangible thing
  • You can’t “steal” something that’s not tangible
  • It’s just “making a copy”, not “stealing”
  • “Making a copy” isn’t “stealing”
  • rinse, repeat
 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:

Why does it being physical matter? They have an endless number of copies available to them from the manufacturer. You’re just taking a copy, right? They still have the original car, the prototype. All you’ve taken is a copy.

As you say, you’re not going to make money with it, so its not worth paying for it. Just hotwire and go. They can replace it with another copy, easily enough. You wouldn’t have purchased the car anyway. So what if you drive everywhere in your copy for ten or fifteen years.

It should be legal, right?


As an ancedote, I’ve downloaded two films via torrent this week. Total Recall (the 2012 remake), and Extracted. Total Recall was ghastly, and it has already left my harddrive for the endless expanses of the bit bucket. Extracted on the other hand, I now have no choice but to buy. Why? Because it was useful to me. It contained concepts and ideas that I can explore further, work out the practicality of.

If I’m getting use from a product, then I buy it. I pay for it because I’m using it. Same as you pay for a car, because you use it, rely on it. Taking a test-drive is one thing – analogous to a torrent. But if its exactly what you were looking for, you buy it.

Pay for the service being given, plus encourage them to keep on making the things.

You keep ignoring the fact that people can choose not to pay for things. Why it matters to make a distinction is because they are two completely different things. It would be like saying a car thief would be a murderer just because they are both types of criminals.

Originally posted by NaturalReject:

Arguing that piracy is okay as long as you wouldn’t have bought the product is like arguing that drunk driving is okay as long as you don’t hit anything.

Actually I’m not arguing that piracy is okay. I’m arguing that theft and copyright infringement are completely different and also making a distinction between a lost sale and a non lost sale.

Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

Its pathetic to ignore an argument just because you don’t like it.

yawn

Do you have any other mood besides whiny? The fans want to know.

I find it really funny how you think that I’m being whiny at all. Nice troll post though. I give it a 9/10.

Originally posted by EPR89:
Originally posted by Kegfarms:
Originally posted by EPR89:
Originally posted by Kegfarms:

I never once said that all pirates wouldn’t have bought the product. The issue is all monetary values that are mentioned are complete bullshit because most people wouldn’t have bought the products in the first place.

I don’t know about the other people here, but I just about had it.
Show us some data that shows that most pirates wouldn’t have bought the product. After all, this is everything you base your argument on.

I really like that Photoshop example you brought in here. Especially since it seems to go directly against everything you argued before. If you get Photoshop, you probably want a powerful image editor. There are many free ones online. There is no need to pirate Photoshop unless you really want it. It is very likely that a pirated copy of Photoshop is a lost sale.

Photoshop is the best image editing program. It is absolutely ridiculous to say that it is very likely a lost sale. People would rather have the best program compared to a free one.

So they want Photoshop. They really want it. They don’t want anything else. But they don’t want to pay for it.
Explain to me how this is not a lost sale.

Easy. Because they wouldn’t have paid for it in the first place it isn’t a lost sale. Say somebody likes an anime but not enough to buy it but they still watch it for free. Is that a lost sale?

Originally posted by beauval:

Kegfarms, let’s assume that I did to you what urban legend would have us believe has been done to lots of Americans – let’s say I sold you Tower bridge for $100 million. (It’s actually owned by a trust operated by the City of London Corporation.) Technically I would not have committed a theft, nevertheless I could be charged with fraud and deception. But according to your logic, that is an entirely different thing. The fact that my bank account would be considerably healthier at the expense of yours would be no grounds for you to complain that I had stolen your money. Furthermore, if the transaction was made the modern way, all that would have happened is that a scrap of digital information was moved from your bank account to mine, so no harm would have been done at all.

It’s complete nonsense of course, but this is where your arguement leads us. You’re taking two slightly different legal concepts and pretending that they are totally unrelated. Which they aren’t.

If you are still unconvinced, just send me a whisper, and I’ll line up some great deals for you. St. Paul’s Cathedral would look pretty good in your home town, or if that’s too big how about the Great Fire of London Monument – it was originally designed as a telescope, so you’d be getting two for the price of one. Or if you prefer something more modern, how about The Shard or The Gherkin? Just tell me what you fancy and I’ll arrange it for you.

Nice attempt at snark. What you said is false. Stealing and copyright infringement are completely different things. A person walks into a store and shoplifts a music album “TAKING” while somebody finds the same album online and downloads it “COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT” The major difference between the two is that the store and the RIAA lose direct profit from the shoplifter because of something that is known as shrink. The person who downloaded it is only a potential lost sale because there is a good chance that they would not have bought the album in the first place. Taking and copying are completely different things. I also gave you a homework example earlier.

Originally posted by softest_voice:

You guys are wasting your time.
You can’t argue with someone like Kegfarms, because he’s just another freegan looking for a way to rationalize his theft.

“Oh, well it’s not for commercial use, so I shouldn’t really have to pay for it.”
…do you really need the premier image editing software, then? Couldn’t you make do with one of the many freeware editing programs out there?
Why do you NEED to have PS? And if you need it that badly, why aren’t you getting paid to do what you do?
Making poor career decisions isn’t the fault of Adobe programmers; that’s your problem.

Meh, whatever.
You’ll just keep up with the same old played out circular bullshit that the pro-piracy crowd always uses.

  • It’s not a tangible thing
  • You can’t “steal” something that’s not tangible
  • It’s just “making a copy”, not “stealing”
  • “Making a copy” isn’t “stealing”
  • rinse, repeat

I love how you called it all bullshit yet you have not given one single example or tried to defend your point. You also repeatedly ignored any point that I have made in this thread.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Kegfarms:

I love how you called it all bullshit yet you have not given one single example or tried to defend your point.

Oh the irony!
You ask others to provide evidence for their claims when actually you have been the one making the claim here. You need to show that people who pirate wouldn’t have bought the product in the first place.
You also need to show how pirating something you would not have bought, but that you still use after having acquired it illegally it can be lawful.



Originally posted by Kegfarms:
Originally posted by EPR89:

So they want Photoshop. They really want it. They don’t want anything else. But they don’t want to pay for it.
Explain to me how this is not a lost sale.


Easy. Because they wouldn’t have paid for it in the first place it isn’t a lost sale. Say somebody likes an anime but not enough to buy it but they still watch it for free. Is that a lost sale?

There’s a major difference here.
There are many powerful free alternatives to Photoshop that offer many similar features. They could have just gotten one of those legally. But they decided to pirate Photoshop instead. I find it much more logical to assume that they need it for the things they want to use it for. So they would have had to buy it. But they didn’t.
Ergo: a lost sale.

 
Flag Post

Because your points are all invalid.
What you and your ilk preach is nothing more than semantic games.
You’re full of shit, your “logic” is completely circular, and the entire core of your “movement” boils down to the fact that a bunch of you just don’t want to pay for anything.

Your whole “argument”, that you can’t guarantee pirated software would have been purchased legally if it hasn’t first been stolen, is so goddamned fallacious it’s laughable.

You’re a joke.
Your ideas are a joke.
Your posts are pointless and stupid.

Does that sum it up well enough for you?

 
Flag Post

plus you just…whine. about everything. Every time I see you post, there’s nothing constructive, you’re just bitching about how someone else has maligned you. Gets really old in a hurry.