Piracy, How much money is being lost, and what percent of them would have bought it?

[Mancora]

There have been a fair amount of threads touching on piracy lately. Though looking back i cant say whats been talked about or even really settled on as they seem to bounce all over every subject.

As this thread is titled blah how much money is lost from piracy, lets keep it to that. No legal arguments, and no word definition arguments please. I mean stuff like whether it is stealing, theft, piracy, warez, or copyright infringment, thats already been beaten to a bloody pulp in other threads and will only serve to get this thread OT.


I found a few sources for the money lost, but not much of a critique on that. The critique's are important because its the main without it there is no counter point, there is only one group talking at the table. And its understandable to me that someone would want to pass on the blame and increase the estimated amount of pirates, and not do adjustments for the much hard to messure amount of people that would not have bought it in the first place so they can create a bigger threat and as such get more funding for this.

The one i found didnt offer much except some numbers he pulled out of his ***, is there anyway we can get a better estimation of the number of pirates that didnt really "pirate?"



Group: Piracy Costs Software Industry $29 Billion This is software in general, and on a worldwide basis. Interestingly according to this china has a massive amount of piracy at around %95, and the US is at 22%.

The study was done by researchers at IDC for the Business Software Alliance, which includes Microsoft, Apple, Borland, Sybase, Symantec and Veritas. IDC researchers looked at business applications, operating systems, consumer software and local market software. IDC used its own worldwide data for software and hardware shipments and conducted more than 5,600 interviews in 15 countries.

...

The United States was both the best and the worst when it came to piracy, according to the study. By percentage, the United States led all countries with a low piracy rate of 22 percent. But due to the size of the U.S. software market compared to all other countries, dollar losses in the United States were the highest of any country at $6.5 billion.

The worst offenders by piracy rate were China (92 percent, $3.8 billion), Vietnam (92 percent, $41 million) and Ukraine (91 percent, $92 million). Authors of the BSA report expressed deep concern about piracy rates in the Asia/Pacific (53 percent, $7.5 billion)




News Article: Piracy Costs U.S. Game Industry Serious Money
News Date: 02/16/2002
Source: Reuters Estimated 30% piracy rate on games.

According to the ISDA...In 2001, piracy as a whole cost the United States $1.9 billion. (Yes, that's billion, with a B.) That's an amazing 30% of sales lost to illegally reproduced games...



Editorial: The State Of Game Piracy Today
I could make a safe assumption and say 75% of the people that pirate games are those that just couldn’t afford the game, not because they didn’t want to spend money they already had.

Note, the two different studies were done in different years, by different groups.

edit:i changed around my 3rd paragraph some.

[talldude]

Originally posted by Mancora

Editorial: The State Of Game Piracy Today
I could make a safe assumption and say 75% of the people that pirate games are those that just couldn’t afford the game, not because they didn’t want to spend money they already had.

I've lived in asia...in Thailand and Japan specifically. I can say for a fact that in Thailand it's much harder to find a legal copy of a game/program than a pirated one. In Japan it's the other way around.

Also that "safe assumption" is just pure BS. If you can afford a computer, you can afford to buy the games you want for it. It's just a matter of what you're willing to give up/do to get those games. People pirate games because it's so damn easy. Not having to pay for it is the motivation, of course, not denying that...but not having money to buy the game is bogus.

[Colossus]

I agree, people DONT pirate because they cannot afford that program/game/movie/music/etc.. They do it because its so damn easy.

They ASSUME that since I cannot afford it anyway, It is okay for me to steal the game. Its not like they were going to get my money anyway. :rolleyes:

If you want that game so badly to play, you will find a way to afford it or WAIT until you can afford it. Even if it ends up in the bargin bin.

I do believe piracy is a large market. Not some small avenue that some people believe. I dont believe every **** and tom are pirating, but I do feel its a large portion.

[MrDigital]

Originally posted by Mancora
News Article: Piracy Costs U.S. Game Industry Serious Money
News Date: 02/16/2002
Source: Reuters Estimated 30% piracy rate on games.

According to the ISDA...In 2001, piracy as a whole cost the United States $1.9 billion. (Yes, that's billion, with a B.) That's an amazing 30% of sales lost to illegally reproduced games...

This sounds like the most honest numbers I've ever seen. 30% is a good estimate actually.

-MrD

[Mancora]

Originally posted by talldude
I've lived in asia...in Thailand and Japan specifically. I can say for a fact that in Thailand it's much harder to find a legal copy of a game/program than a pirated one. In Japan it's the other way around.

Also that "safe assumption" is just pure BS. If you can afford a computer, you can afford to buy the games you want for it. It's just a matter of what you're willing to give up/do to get those games. People pirate games because it's so damn easy. Not having to pay for it is the motivation, of course, not denying that...but not having money to buy the game is bogus.

Just to point out, you may have noticed it, you may not, i dont agree with him, "he one i found didnt offer much except some numbers he pulled out of his ***"

I agree, people DONT pirate because they cannot afford that program/game/movie/music/etc.. They do it because its so damn easy.

They ASSUME that since I cannot afford it anyway, It is okay for me to steal the game. Its not like they were going to get my money anyway. :rolleyes:

If we can id like to stay away from wether its right or wrong and just focus on the cost impact, it'd be so easy for this thread to wander off on that subject.


I have to say that just because it is possible for them to purchase it doesnt mean every game is a lost sale. To give some analogies: I can cut off my finger to win a prize, but i wont. I can study for 4 hours a day and get straight A's doesnt mean i will. (i sure as heck wont)

And of course there is the example of people too young to purchase stuff, in the quote im talking about software in general, but its not too much of a leap to find a parent that wouldnt pay for a $50 game, and that the kid doesnt have $50.

Originally posted by Mancora
...example of a 12 year old that has downloaded Maya, & lightwave. That prices to over $6,000 i believe, would that 12 year old have spent that much? No. Did the companies loose any money by the kid taking it? No.

[talldude]

Originally posted by Mancora
Just to point out, you may have noticed it, you may not, i dont agree with him, "he one i found didnt offer much except some numbers he pulled out of his ***"

And of course there is the example of people too young to purchase stuff, in the quote im talking about software in general, but its not too much of a leap to find a parent that wouldnt pay for a $50 game, and that the kid doesnt have $50.

I did notice that you didn't agree with him.

I was just expressing my own opinion on the matter, then elaborating on it since you didn't really provide any analysis of the statement save for the numbers being pulled out of an ***.

And about kids being too young to purchase the stuff anyways: So, since I'm in college and I don't have $50,000 to drop on a car, it's ok for me to take it anyways? I'll elaborate more later, gotta go run now.

[Colossus]

If you dont want me to go off into that section, then fine. But it is quite relevant to the topic at hand...

I can also kill someone but I wont... Anyone can do anything they want but their morals or feelings will hold them back from doing it. Because they know its either right/wrong.

But I do believe 30% is a decent amount and probably around the accurate amount of people who pirate. It can be something small as a music CD to every game they own on PC/XBOX/PS2/PS/etc...

Maybe GC had a good idea to use a unstandard media/size so it cannot be easily duplicated.

But I do believe that the piracy that is going on does impact the artists/programmer/companys...

I would like to counter point that just because that kid wants a game doesnt mean he should get that game. Such as a 13 year old wanting to play Doom 3 or something else quite violent.

If they do not have the funds and/or the parental units do not want to buy it for them. They have no right to just download it and play.

[Mancora]

"If you dont want me to go off into that section, then fine. But it is quite relevant to the topic at hand..." There have been other threads that have beaten that topic to the brink of death, wether its ok to break the law or not, wether its right or wrong.

My fear is that if this turns into something about right or wrong, this thread will turn into an unrecognizable mass with the initial idea being ignored for ever more. I seriously thought hard about making another thread for this exact topic so this one wouldnt go off into the winderness.

This(cost of piracy) is an issue that has not been discussed much, and its something that keeps popping up its head.




talldude,

Dang, im explaining myself wrong.

Say i pirated Myst 4 (i think thats out, i saw a joke on penny arcade about it) and played it somewhat. Now jump back in time before i downloaded Myst 4, if i did not have the option of pirating it, would i have still bought it? Hell no. Since i would never have bought it to begin with it is not a "lost sale". No money would have been gained if the option of piracy did not exist.
[and no i did not download myst 4, thats just an example]

[Colossus]

Originally posted by Mancora
Say i pirated Myst 4 (i think thats out, i saw a joke on penny arcade about it) and played it somewhat. Now jump back in time before i downloaded Myst 4, if i did not have the option of pirating it, would i have still bought it? Hell no. Since i would never have bought it to begin with it is not a "lost sale". No money would have been gained if the option of piracy did not exist.
[and no i did not download myst 4, thats just an example]

But if you were walking down a store and a candy bar you never had before was sitting there and nobody around. Why not just open it and eat it. You werent going to buy it....

It doesnt really matter if you were/werent going to buy the item. You are still using something that you are not entitled to use.

I can look at it in different ways. You shouldnt benefit from something (playing a game) if you never paid for it. (assuming its not freeware/shareware/GPL/etc)...

Such as Windows XP and Office, Well I cannot afford office and I would of used OpenOffice, so its ok that I had download Office. (examples )...

I just dont agree with that example, Since I didnt like Halo; its ok that I download Halo 2 because I had no intentions of buying it. Since I didnt like the original.

And Myst IV is out, do they have a DEMO or something available? If you had no intentions of buying it, then you can look at the screenshots and demo if any.

[Mancora]

Originally posted by Colossus
But if you were walking down a store and a candy bar you never had before was sitting there and nobody around. Why not just open it and eat it. You werent going to buy it....

Theres a flaw with your analogy, piracy is akin to finding a candy bar on the street. If you take away that option of finding the candy bar on the street (danm street cleaners! ) and the store was right next to you, would you have purchased that candy bar? (if it was jelly beans im totaly for it)

"It doesnt really matter if you were/werent going to buy the item. You are still using something that you are not entitled to use.

I can look at it in different ways. You shouldnt benefit from something (playing a game) if you never paid for it. (assuming its not freeware/shareware/GPL/etc)..."

These arguments apply and i agree are mostly valid.. in the moral arena. Being entitled to something or not, or benefitting from something or not does not effect the bottem line for a company, which is their income.

[Colossus]

Well yeah the candy bar/store thing was a little bad...

SO... Lets say you are walking in a parkling lot and there is a bag of cash from Brinks security on the floor. But no Armed truck around. Do you take the cash? Or call it in?

Its all morals, somepeople morals are relaxed (murder) while others are just slightly flawed (pirates). I am not just saying a pirate is someone who uploads the warez, but as someone who downloads it too.

Its not just the large corporations that are being effected, but the smaller people who might develop some small but useful application.

But someone downloaded the application and searched for the crack instead of paying the $10.00 paypal registration or whatever. So its not always the large coporations that are being effected. But the Joe Blow off the street who loves to program, and had something useful.

[Mancora]

Warez is getting something for free. If piracy is not an option, you have to go into a store an purchase it.

Thats not at all like finding a bag of money and deciding to hand it in or not, this is almost the same as your last analogy, except you increased the price tag.

Colossus I think you are going to have a very hard time finding a moral argument that applies to a financial based question.

[MrDigital]

Originally posted by Mancora
Warez is getting something for free. If piracy is not an option, you have to go into a store an purchase it.

Thats not at all like finding a bag of money and deciding to hand it in or not, this is almost the same as your last analogy, except you increased the price tag.

Finding a bag of money is getting something for free too. His analogy is spot on.

You're stealing either way. You're either stealing a game from a company or you're stealing a bag of money from a bank.

The price tag increases but it's still theft.

-MrD

[Colossus]

LOL, but this time it was readly available and not require taking it out of a store...

But to go on what someone else said, if I cannot afford a Porsche, gives me the right to steal one from the lot?

Yes the means of how the item is obtained is different.. But the outcome is still the same, which is owning something you have no right to own.

But just because you can not afford it doesnt give you the moral right to just download it and play. If you had no interest in it, then you would of never wasted your time to download, media to burn it, and drive space to install it onto.

So that is not a valid argument

[rhettro]

Mancora,

I don't think you will find a good answer for your question. Most content providers will count every pirated game, movie, song as a lost sale. You and I both know that a lot of what is pirated wouldn't be purchased because of the reasons you mention. But there really isn't a good way to measure the ratio of what would and would not be purchased. It's interesting in some ways to consider the bounds of how piracy effects business. It would be better for Microsoft for someone to be using a pirated version of Windows than for them to be using Linux, because that person is still within Microsoft's system of influnence, and are more likely to purchase (or pirate?) other software that runs on Microsoft software. This keeps Microsoft's user base high and keeps the system relavent to the market. This is not to say that piracy is bennificial to Microsoft, just better than having people seek alternatives. Concerning the moral issue in regards to games, there are so many free demos availible to people, there is no excuse for pirating games.