Jimquisition: When Piracy Becomes Theft

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT
 

Stickfigure:
From a non-legal standpoint, I'm not certain what makes people so insistent that piracy not be called theft. From the perspective of someone who is not prosecuting or defending anyone in a legal battlefield, the sentiment is still the same. You take something that is being offered one specific way by a developer, tell them that you know better than them when it comes to how their work is distributed, and then create a scenario where they receive no recompense for their work. While the specifics don't necessarily fall in line with theft, the spirit of harming someone else financially for one's own personal benefit is still fairly similar.

Really guys, you're not in court, and while you can perhaps defend certain acts of piracy, things like this can't be gussied up by changing the word.

Terminology is important even if you aren't in a courtroom.

Crono1973:

Kwil:
When did theft come to mean that somebody lost something?

You go in and add a bunch of zeros to your bank balance, then buy a bunch of games on debit.
The bank didn't lose anything, no physical object was transferred, the store got paid. Are we going to argue there was no theft there.

Theft has been widely understood, since basically the dawn of history, of someone taking something that doesn't belong to them.

That the other person no longer had it was simply a side-effect of physical reality, but was never the point of theft.

Not until pirates started thinking, "How do I justify my douche-baggery?" anyway.

You need to re-examine your example. How did the bank lose nothing AND the store get paid?

I've bolded the part you need to read.

Crono1973:
Sorry No, Indie devs are not special and copyright infringement doesn't become theft when it involves an Indie developer.

In fact, I place a lower value on Indie games because most are ugly, simplistic and repetitive. I don't pirate them though, I watch them on YouTube and decide to skip them. I guess this show was required though, given the anti-piracy stance of the escapist.

BTW, when I hear people talk about castrating and torturing people (I guess only males are pirates), I assume they are not to be taken seriously.

Clearly no open mind here... not only did he reference that people cracked a downloadable bundle that is for charity... that alone is nothing but pure dickery. And on top of that he said "cock and balls or vagina" not only are you 100% wrong... you are just plain stupid. I garuntee alot of people love indie games because they are new innovative and really surprise you for their prices... it's much better than AAA games charging 60 bucks for a ducking re release... (see battlefield modern warfare... the list goes on) so anything that promotes these new game developers we should all be 100% behind because thats the future of the gaming industry. BTW if you didn't read this far then you are truly a hypocrite and proved me right.

SonOfVoorhees:
I dont care what any of you do. Download whatever you for free, i really dont care. Just dont make out its a moral crusade against capitalism or against big business. You just want it for free - i can understand that. Not all the bullshit reasons you all give for it.

I think you're not as smart as you think you are. People have a variety of reasons for most everything they do. Grow up a little and learn that not everyone has the same motivations as you do.

Meh, at the end of the day piracy/copyright infringement/whatever you want to call it is simply douchebaggery of people who take shit for free just because they can. And I honestly can't find any justification in anyone who is a gamer and says they can't afford games; sorry but you somehow can afford a console/tv or a gaming pc but can't afford to buy a game? Bull. You just don't want to allocate your resources to games, why sacrifice that starbuck's coffee you get every day to pay for a game when you can have the game for free and the starbuck's coffee?

Lono Shrugged:
Ohhhh After Effects.

SOMEONE'S rolling in money

or they y'know pirated it...

Dont worry, Adobe wants the average consumer to pirate their software, the more people know how to work with their stuff the more companies will buy the licenses to use it since all their workers only know how to work with Adobe stuff.

Gabriel O'Brien:

Crono1973:
Sorry No, Indie devs are not special and copyright infringement doesn't become theft when it involves an Indie developer.

In fact, I place a lower value on Indie games because most are ugly, simplistic and repetitive. I don't pirate them though, I watch them on YouTube and decide to skip them. I guess this show was required though, given the anti-piracy stance of the escapist.

BTW, when I hear people talk about castrating and torturing people (I guess only males are pirates), I assume they are not to be taken seriously.

Clearly no open mind here... not only did he reference that people cracked a downloadable bundle that is for charity... that alone is nothing but pure dickery. And on top of that he said "cock and balls or vagina" not only are you 100% wrong... you are just plain stupid. I garuntee alot of people love indie games because they are new innovative and really surprise you for their prices... it's much better than AAA games charging 60 bucks for a ducking re release... (see battlefield modern warfare... the list goes on) so anything that promotes these new game developers we should all be 100% behind because thats the future of the gaming industry. BTW if you didn't read this far then you are truly a hypocrite and proved me right.

Tip: Don't call me stupid and then misspell guarantee two words later.

Anyway, I know that many people like Indie games but then I never said that my opinion applied to everyone. You'll notice this part:

I place a lower value on Indie games

I never said everyone, I said I.

Why the fuck do I have to enter captcha for every post????

FelixG:

SonOfVoorhees:

Crono1973:
If I steal your bike, then you lose a bike. That's theft.
If you copy one of your games, you lose nothing. See the difference?

Erm that bike wasnt for sale so its theft. A game is for sale, legally. So what is that? Also a difference between a friend letting another friend copy a game and the internet to download for free. Big different.

Ok, you make a picture to sell. Ten people walk in, photocopy it and walk out. Is that theft, after all you still got the original copy. Just admit you dont want to pay for stuff.

Actually its not.

Otherwise there would be no pictures of paintings ect on the internet

I doubt I will be charged with theft for this

or

This

LOL. Again that means nothing. How can you compare works of art to someone selling something for money? That is hilarious and what I expect. Them pictures are public materials, games are not. They are property owned and illegally taken and copied and then others copy them. Yes you are just using a service by others but still you are pirating a game. Same like buying a game down the pub....its still cheap bit you know its stolen. If you didnt buy it in a legal fashion then is theft, regardless of whatever reason you give.

This is why shit like SOPA and DRM around today.

Urgh, people still trying to argue that piracy is not theft again?

Definitions are pointless, they were created before the digital era even began. Yes, it's not physically stealing a product, but you are stealing a service. It's like going into a massage parlor and leaving before you pay a check. If that's not called theft, then it should be. I don't care about technicalities, you are a criminal if you play games you didn't pay for (I make exceptions for games that are far out of print or from developers that don't exist anymore, those titles need to stay alive regardless of ethics).

Just cut it out with the justifications. If you hate a developer then don't even play the damn game, have a backbone for gods sake.

Those people who pirate have no one to blame than themselves if the internet gets taken over by the government or corporations. Those guys are looking for any reason to do it, and you're all not helping. I'll know who to blame when we turn into China.

josemlopes:

Lono Shrugged:
Ohhhh After Effects.

SOMEONE'S rolling in money

or they y'know pirated it...

Dont worry, Adobe wants the average consumer to pirate their software, the more people know how to work with their stuff the more companies will buy the licenses to use it since all their workers only know how to work with Adobe stuff.

This is also why Microsoft offers Student Editions for Office for much lower prices. Companies get college grads who know Office and companies in turn invest in Office.

I'd love to have Jim as our all powerful and omnipresent leader of the world. God bless him.

Really, there's no other word to describe these assholes, I mean, I don't advocate piracy in absolutely any sense, but it's simply not the same to pirate, say, Anno 2070 to circumvent it's shitty DRM (3 machine activation limit that's hardware bound, meaning that if you change one single thing from your PC, be it a ram stick, video card, CPU, etc., you need to reactivate the fucking game) to download an Indie Bundle that you can buy for 1 fucking cent (or 30 cents if you use Google Checkout). That's just the shittiest thing one person can do.

GeorgW:
Love the new intro/outro.
I've been saying it since the first video, those bastards that pirated HiB deserve whatever they get. It's mind-boggling how cheap/evil they are.

Ziggy:
humbel indie bundle: DON'T PAY ONE CENT. they will lose money

What if I have 20 friends, and I like 5 of those friends more of the others, so I buy 15 $.01 bundles (and always make sure it goes to humble bundle) and 5 $20 bundles? I would love for them to add that option, it makes me feel so bad every time I see that "Need money for food" picture >.<
But yeah, you're right, don't pay $.01, they deserve more.

No no no, that is the WORST thing you could do, if you wanted to do it properly you would buy one bundle for $100.15 and give out the download links to your friends.

Each time you push that .01 "donation" you are actively COSTING the humble folks money, because Paypal charges more than that for the transactions

Draxyle:
Urgh, people still trying to argue that piracy is not theft again?

Definitions are pointless, they were created before the digital era even began. Yes, it's not physically stealing a product, but you are stealing a service. It's like going into a massage parlor and leaving before you pay a check. If that's not called theft, then it should be. I don't care about technicalities, you are a criminal if you play games you didn't pay for (I make exceptions for games that are far out of print or from developers that don't exist anymore, those titles need to stay alive regardless of ethics).

Just cut it out with the justifications. If you hate a developer then don't even play the damn game, have a backbone for gods sake.

Wish i wrote what you wrote. Its perfect. Thefts will come up with reasons why its ok. Like a burglar will rob you and say its because he is feeding his kids. It is what it is no matter how its dressed up.

SonOfVoorhees:

FelixG:

SonOfVoorhees:

Erm that bike wasnt for sale so its theft. A game is for sale, legally. So what is that? Also a difference between a friend letting another friend copy a game and the internet to download for free. Big different.

Ok, you make a picture to sell. Ten people walk in, photocopy it and walk out. Is that theft, after all you still got the original copy. Just admit you dont want to pay for stuff.

Actually its not.

Otherwise there would be no pictures of paintings ect on the internet

I doubt I will be charged with theft for this

or

This

LOL. Again that means nothing. How can you compare works of art to someone selling something for money? That is hilarious and what I expect. Them pictures are public materials, games are not. They are property owned and illegally taken and copied and then others copy them. Yes you are just using a service by others but still you are pirating a game. Same like buying a game down the pub....its still cheap bit you know its stolen. If you didnt buy it in a legal fashion then is theft, regardless of whatever reason you give.

This is why shit like SOPA and DRM around today.

You mean your own argument with the picture means nothing? I am glad you agree with me, it was your own fault for using it in the first place. I am glad you have learned something.

Kwil:

Crono1973:

Kwil:
When did theft come to mean that somebody lost something?

You go in and add a bunch of zeros to your bank balance, then buy a bunch of games on debit.
The bank didn't lose anything, no physical object was transferred, the store got paid. Are we going to argue there was no theft there.

Theft has been widely understood, since basically the dawn of history, of someone taking something that doesn't belong to them.

That the other person no longer had it was simply a side-effect of physical reality, but was never the point of theft.

Not until pirates started thinking, "How do I justify my douche-baggery?" anyway.

You need to re-examine your example. How did the bank lose nothing AND the store get paid?

I've bolded the part you need to read.

Try to follow along. I will type slowly.

If you go add a bunch of zeros to your bank account balance and then go shopping, one of two things happen:

- Bank pays for the stuff you bought, bank loses money.
- Bank refuses to pay, store loses merchandise.

Either way, it's theft because someone loses something.

FelixG:

Azuaron:

FelixG:
I liked the original intro myself...

Yeah, same here.

FelixG:
I do agree with this though, fuck the big companies, but the indis shouldnt have to deal with that, I may never play it but I am gona go buy that serious sam game just because it had an awesome commercial and I respect the dev.

(You specific) die in a fire. I (specific) don't care WHO puts out the whatever, they (specific) need money to make the games/movies/books/whatever you (general) want, and you (general) are a pedophile burglar if you (general) don't give it to them (specific) simply because they (specific) are "big". If they (specific) are DRMing the Hell out of it or not making it available conveniently, then we (general) get into a gray area, but if they (specific) are putting out a DRM-free, non-region locked, easily available product, you (general) better (wo-)man up and pay the company (specific).

I actually buy all my games and ignore those with horrible DRM and what not, but good job violating the terms of service by calling me names!

Though I do agree, HBO are kinda douchebags, I resent having to get cable just to watch that damn show.

To be clear, while I did tell you, specifically, to die in a fire (a heartfelt command, not a threat; you may rest easy in your anonymity), the rest of my use of "you" (including when I used the insult "pedophile burglar") was meant as the general "you" that applies to anyone reading my comment who held a certain belief, including, but not limited to, you (specific) if you hold the stated belief. Like, if I said, "You're a pedophile burglar if you steal Baldur's Gate discs from babies with sickle cell anemia." That may or may not apply to you (specific), and I'm certainly not limiting the insult to just you (specific) regardless of its specific applicability.

Or like when you (specific) say "fuck the big companies," you don't actually mean to command readers of your comment to rape people who work for big companies, you instead want the implied meaning of the phrase to be understood.

I have updated the quoted portion of my comment to make explicit what was previously implied.

That being said, considering the topic of this video and Jim's use of (and imploring commands for the use of) "pedophile burglar", even if I did call you (specifically) a pedophile burglar I don't think it would violate the Escapist's TOS given the context.

Crono1973:
Terminology is important even if you aren't in a courtroom.

Perhaps, but language (at least english) is generally a fluid concept that is given to redefinition over time. e.g. "Hacker" no longer simply implies a technology enthusiast, but can also imply someone who uses that enthusiasm with malicious intent, provided proper context is given. "Fag" can be a cigarette, or it can be a pejorative.

Contextually, most people can separate the theft involved in knocking over a bank with the "theft" of taking art and media without permission and distributing it without compensation. There's moral ambiguity to it, perhaps; but the same could be said about stealing bread to feed one's family (to use an extreme example). But the use of the word outside of an intent to charge seems like an overly sensitive topic when the spirit of the act is fairly similar. "Theft" doesn't define intent or cause, it simply describes the act in a way that allows others to understand. So why raise a fuss?

Draxyle:
Urgh, people still trying to argue that piracy is not theft again?

Definitions are pointless, they were created before the digital era even began. Yes, it's not physically stealing a product, but you are stealing a service. It's like going into a massage parlor and leaving before you pay a check. If that's not called theft, then it should be. I don't care about technicalities, you are a criminal if you play games you didn't pay for (I make exceptions for games that are far out of print or from developers that don't exist anymore, those titles need to stay alive regardless of ethics).

Just cut it out with the justifications. If you hate a developer then don't even play the damn game, have a backbone for gods sake.

Those people who pirate have no one to blame than themselves if the internet gets taken over by the government or corporations. Those guys are looking for any reason to do it, and you're all not helping. I'll know who to blame when we turn into China.

LOL @

Definitions are pointless

Great argument.

FelixG:
You mean your own argument with the picture means nothing? I am glad you agree with me, it was your own fault for using it in the first place. I am glad you have learned something.

Sigh, i really regret answering you because some people dont lesson, or dont care. There are those pictures in public, you can use them, like some movies are free for people to use. No copyright...any one can watch and change them. Computer games are owned, are copyrighted. If you didnt buy it legally then your a pirate.

Maybe your stupid or maybe you just come up with reasons to combat your morals....like Jim did. I really hope you make a music CD or direct a movie and everyone pirates the crap out of it. An when your sitting in your basement wondering why your a failure you will know its because all those people didnt pay to see what you created.

Draxyle:
Urgh, people still trying to argue that piracy is not theft again?

They always will.

What irritates me is that it's fundamentally an argument over semantics. You've got the one side arguing that copyright infringement is not theft based on the "legal" definitions of the terms involved, i.e. if you get caught pirating movies you will be charged with copyright infringement, not theft.

And then you've got the other side arguing that under the broader definition of theft (ie, taking something that doesn't belong to you), it works just fine, thanks. Sure, you're not gonna be charged with theft if they catch you pirating.

But, let's be honest: you're still stealing shit.

Jim seems to be picking his morality the same way I pick my favorite color. He just takes the ones that feel right.

Of course, if someone chooses a different color than me, I don't advocate that they be punished. I don't declare my choice of color to be the true measure of right and wrong.

No; that's what principles are for. Determine what's right and what's wrong and apply those judgements consistently.

Thank you Jim for saying that pirates are nothing more than cheap skates with no excuse who just want things for free.

You are not some Robin Hood figure out fighting the man.
You are taking a product and using it for free.

Theft is theft no matter what grand spin you try and place on it.
Even if a company is a dick like EA you dont have any right to play their games for free at all.

SonOfVoorhees:

Acrisius:
For example, pedophilia and burglary are both crimes, but pedophilia is much more shameful than burglary.

An shame has what to do with anything? lol. Stop coming up with idiotic reasons. Theft is theft, whether the person is rich or poor - thats how the law sees it. Look at the shame amount is just guilt and morals....not law.

Good for you! :)

I'll make a note of that.

Stickfigure:

Crono1973:
Terminology is important even if you aren't in a courtroom.

Perhaps, but language (at least english) is generally a fluid concept that is given to redefinition over time. e.g. "Hacker" no longer simply implies a technology enthusiast, but can also imply someone who uses that enthusiasm with malicious intent, provided proper context is given. "Fag" can be a cigarette, or it can be a pejorative.

Contextually, most people can separate the theft involved in knocking over a bank with the "theft" of taking art and media without permission and distributing it without compensation. There's moral ambiguity to it, perhaps; but the same could be said about stealing bread to feed one's family (to use an extreme example). But the use of the word outside of an intent to charge seems like an overly sensitive topic when the spirit of the act is fairly similar. "Theft" doesn't define intent or cause, it simply describes the act in a way that allows others to understand. So why raise a fuss?

Hacker has always meant the same, even when it was a Hollywood favorite. Fag has a different definition in different countries so let's not pretend it's interchangeable. If you are in the US, fag doesn't mean cigarette.

Stealing bread is still theft, it's just more justified than holding up a bank at gunpoint and shooting a clerk. Theft is theft and copyright infringement is copyright infringement. If they were the same then they would both have the same terminology. Terminology is so important, I don't think many people realize just how powerful words are. Take the word "rape", that word has more power than "forcible sex".

Im ending this argument cos its semantics. Its like saying its ok to rape a prostitute but not someones mother. The crime is still bad but some think some victims are less than others.

Theft is theft regardless of all the sematics and reasons. Whether its a copy or a physical thing. You don't own it, you didn't buy it so it isn't yours legally. I know they just want free stuff, and i agree with them, free stuff is awesome. Just worthless arguing about things that no one will ever agree on.

To add to the complex issue there are developers who wouldn't be able to make AA or AAA games without a big publisher who will own the copyright to that work.

You may say to change copyright to prevent those contracts but that might lead to publishers taking less risk and thus less developers who get funding from big publishers.

Crono1973:

You can't pirate an ice cream sandwich, you can steal one and that's theft. Pirating software is not theft, it's copyright infringement.

For those who are confused about copyright infringement vs theft. Copyright Infringment means that only certain entities have the RIGHT to make COPIES of something, usually the publisher. Others who do it are infringing on the copyright as they are not legally allowed to make copies (outside of a legal backup). No matter how people try to twist it, it just isn't the same as walking into Wal Mart and stuffing a 360 game into your pants.

I didn't disagree with you at all, in case you missed the part of my post where I was saying that it doesn't change the argument here. I simply happen to agree with the main point of the video: people that pirate cheap-ass, consumer friendly indie games, games that often cost the same as an ice cream sandwich and doesn't require you to install bullshit software in order to "eat" it (hence the somewhat flawed analogy), are bigger assholes than people who pirate expensive-ass, DRM-laden games.

SonOfVoorhees:
Im ending this argument cos its semantics. Its like saying its ok to rape a prostitute but not someones mother. The crime is still bad but some think some victims are less than others.

Theft is theft regardless of all the sematics and reasons. Whether its a copy or a physical thing. You don't own it, you didn't buy it so it isn't yours legally. I know they just want free stuff, and i agree with them, free stuff is awesome. Just worthless arguing about things that no one will ever agree on.

I disagree and I want to continue arguing because there's a 4% chance one of us will change our stance.

josemlopes:

Lono Shrugged:
Ohhhh After Effects.

SOMEONE'S rolling in money

or they y'know pirated it...

Dont worry, Adobe wants the average consumer to pirate their software, the more people know how to work with their stuff the more companies will buy the licenses to use it since all their workers only know how to work with Adobe stuff.

Unless the company itself pirates the stuff. Which happens more often than people think. But you are right.

Crono1973:

Kwil:

Crono1973:

You need to re-examine your example. How did the bank lose nothing AND the store get paid?

I've bolded the part you need to read.

Try to follow along. I will type slowly.

If you go add a bunch of zeros to your bank account balance and then go shopping, one of two things happen:

- Bank pays for the stuff you bought, bank loses money.
- Bank refuses to pay, store loses merchandise.

Either way, it's theft because someone loses something.

LOL, Christ, try getting a basic understanding of how banks work and what money is before attempting to be condescending. You'll still suck at it, but at least it won't be outright laughable.

Big hint: Money these days is primarily represented by data, and most of the money in our economy doesn't actually exist.. it's just one bank saying to another, we've got this much value. When you pay by debit, bits on one side of the transaction are decreased, bits on the other are increased. No "money" is transferred.

When you add bits to your account, no "money" is trasnferred. Nobody's losing anything. Just like piracy. If anything, the bank is *gaining* money, because according to their records, they now have more of these infinitely copiable bits to lend out.

Kwil:

Crono1973:

Kwil:

I've bolded the part you need to read.

Try to follow along. I will type slowly.

If you go add a bunch of zeros to your bank account balance and then go shopping, one of two things happen:

- Bank pays for the stuff you bought, bank loses money.
- Bank refuses to pay, store loses merchandise.

Either way, it's theft because someone loses something.

LOL, Christ, try getting a basic understanding of how banks work and what money is before attempting to be condescending. You'll still suck at it, but at least it won't be outright laughable.

Big hint: Money these days is primarily represented by data, and most of the money in our economy doesn't actually exist.. it's just one bank saying to another, we've got this much value. When you pay by debit, bits on one side of the transaction are decreased, bits on the other are increased. No "money" is transferred.

When you add bits to your account, no "money" is trasnferred. Nobody's losing anything. Just like piracy. If anything, the bank is *gaining* money, because according to their records, they now have more of these infinitely copiable bits to lend out.

Whatever, I doubt that anyone can just add zeros as they see fit and then go shopping and no one will lose anything. If that's your argument then what is stopping you from doing that?

Sorry Jim, but to me, pedophile burglar sounds like someone who seeks out and steals from pedophiles.

Raesvelg:
What irritates me is that it's fundamentally an argument over semantics.

Yes. We have two separate issues here. Some people who advocate against copying will call it 'stealing' in order to strengthen the impact of their point.

Others, however, believe that copying and stealing are equivalent in every way, and it's impossible to consistently advocate for one without advocating for the other.

The latter is totally bizarre, and flat out wrong, and needs to be vigorously opposed. Using the word 'stealing' for both doesn't make them equivalent.

The former, however, is also intellectually dishonest. Sometimes it seems like the word 'theft' is being systematically undermined so that the ignorant or stupid can be tricked into conflating the two distinct meanings together in their mind.

Can we just agree that copyright infringement is copyright infringement?

Does it so desperately need a new title?

We're people who can operate computers, we don't need single syllable words to define things.

It's copyright infringement and it's bad.

It's also, as Jim says, far worse when you're doing it the select few people who are actually trying to drag the industry kicking and screaming into the 21st century, by selling their stuff in a sensible, non paranoid, unlocked and easy to buy and enjoy way.

I do however agree that not everyone who's torrented an indie bundle is evil tho, I'm sure many people made the payment then torrented it to save on server costs for the guys. It's just a shame that "Pay what you want (but come on guys, throw us a few bucks so it doesn't end up losing us money in paypal fees and server costs)" isn't a more catchy title, but really, if you can't pull together a dollar a title in a bundle, you're being kinda tight.

I've been pleasantly surprised to read of the success of Louis CK's recent experiment with internet sales. Instead of going thru a massive corporation to get the DVD made, promote it nationally, pay for massive displays in stores, banners on sites, etc, he just organised the show himself, got it filmed, and had a site set up to sell the download for a lousy 5.

He made more from every 5 sale than he would have got from $20 dvds, and recently he passed sales of a million bucks. Sure it's getting pirated, but I think anyone who did that and enjoyed it, and has a glimmer of a soul, would then throw him the five bucks for being entertaining.

In short, whatever you do, there's always going to be cunts who take it for free. (A shorter term than paedophile burglar, too!)

What I suggest is, have some reasonable measures in place, but when it comes down to it, is it worth punishing the legitimate and the honest to mildly annoy the minority of shitty people who you won't get anything from without taking to court anyway.

On the flip side, the more you make it easy to both enjoy and pay money for the entertainment you offer, the more people who are on the fence about piracy will come down on your side and hand over the bucks.

I hate to repeat something over and over, but Steam. Easy, convenient, cheap, reliable, mild DRM that doesn't get in the way, and no filling out page long forms, just click and it's already downloading. Also part of the reason Amazon and many other web stores succeed, it's EASY to hand over your money, and then you just get what you want with no strings.

Crono1973:

Whatever, I doubt that anyone can just add zeros as they see fit and then go shopping and no one will lose anything. If that's your argument then what is stopping you from doing that?

Me personally? That I'm honest. I know, that might be hard for you to understand the concept, but there it is.
In general? Excellent hacking protection, essentially, working DRM.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here