Denuvo DRM's rushed implementation in Sonic Mania is reportedly causing rapid performance breakdowns, according to celebrated game cracker, Voksi

[mr moose]

7 hours ago, huilun02 said:

Piracy isn't as rampant today as the industry believes. Its the likes of Denuvo's marketing team brainwashing them corporate heads in the dev/publishing company with scare tactics. People who only care about the $ and know jack all about whats actually going on, on the ground. 

Too bad we have no actual figures on piracy.  We know it exists and that's about it.

[Belgarathian]

The only good way to implement DRM is to have good online features or on-going additional content & support so that purchasing the game is worth it. 

[LAwLz]

On 2018-07-21 at 12:15 PM, mr moose said:

Too bad we have no actual figures on piracy.  We know it exists and that's about it.

It's also too bad that research of the subject is generally funded by organisations who WANT piracy to have a negative effect, so when reports find that there is no robust argument to be made that piracy is harmful, they bury the research.

 

But it is also worth keeping in mind that DRM is not jut about preventing a loss of sales.

Like the author of the HTML5 specifications Hixie said, DRM is about controlling manufactures and customers.

 

[mr moose]

22 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

It's also too bad that research of the subject is generally funded by organisations who WANT piracy to have a negative effect, so when reports find that there is no robust argument to be made that piracy is harmful, they bury the research.

 

But it is also worth keeping in mind that DRM is not jut about preventing a loss of sales.

Like the author of the HTML5 specifications Hixie said, DRM is about controlling manufactures and customers.

 

I think this idea that research gets buried is a little to conspiratorial.  There has been plenty of research published in favor of and against piracy by the numbers.  You see that is the exact problem for every report we find that says it's harmless there is another just as legitimate that says it's not.  And I firmly believe that the reason for this lies in the complexity of the digital age and surveying across multi cultural societies.

 

[LAwLz]

9 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I think this idea that research gets buried is a little to conspiratorial. 

Dude, are you for real?

https://gizmodo.com/the-eu-suppressed-a-300-page-study-that-found-piracy-do-1818629537

 

9 minutes ago, mr moose said:

There has been plenty of research published in favor of and against piracy by the numbers.

Such as?

[mr moose]

8 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Dude, are you for real?

https://gizmodo.com/the-eu-suppressed-a-300-page-study-that-found-piracy-do-1818629537

 

Such as?

https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2017/05/11/music-piracy-looks-like-2017/

https://techpolicyinstitute.org/2016/02/02/the-truth-about-piracy/

 

[LAwLz]

4 minutes ago, mr moose said:

https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2017/05/11/music-piracy-looks-like-2017/

What are you trying to prove with that link exactly?

Because it makes no claims whatsoever that piracy is harmful. It just assumes it is and then talks about where people get music from.

 

Saying "people pirate music" is not the same as saying "music piracy is harmful".

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

What are you trying to prove with that link exactly?

Because it makes no claims whatsoever that piracy is harmful. It just assumes it is and then talks about where people get music from.

 

Saying "people pirate music" is not the same as saying "music piracy is harmful".

They reference Muso and a youtube commissioned study .  But whether you like what they have to say or not is irrelevant, the point was it is easy to find published studies. There are plenty out there.  

 

Here's one that disagrees:

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167624516000068

 

 I am literally just doing a google search, there are plenty out there.

[LAwLz]

19 minutes ago, mr moose said:

They reference Muso and a youtube commissioned study .  But whether you like what they have to say or not is irrelevant, the point was it is easy to find published studies. There are plenty out there.  

It's not that I like or don't like the study.

The study you linked is talking about a completely different thing.

 

The study I linked is about the effects of piracy, and so does the sciencedirect paper you linked just now.

The Youtube commissioned study just goes "piracy happens" without drawing any conclusion or even looking into if piracy has a negative or positive effect on sales.

 

So far 2 papers which states that they did not find any evidence that piracy has a negative effect on sales has been linked, and one which says piracy is happening but does not comment on the effects it may have.

None of the papers posted has reached the conclusion that piracy has a negative effect on sales (or revenue/profits).

 

 

Like I said,

27 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Saying "people pirate music" is not the same as saying "music piracy is harmful".

 

 

What I want are studies about the effects piracy has on revenue and profits of companies/organisations/individuals. Not whether or not piracy is happening or how widespread it is, because that is fairly irrelevant.

Those studies are fairly hard to find from what I've seen.

[mr moose]

5 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

It's not that I like or don't like the study.

The study you linked is talking about a completely different thing.

 

The study I linked is about the effects of piracy, and so does the sciencedirect paper you linked just now.

The Youtube commissioned study just goes "piracy happens" without drawing any conclusion or even looking into if piracy has a negative or positive effect on sales.

 

So far 2 papers which states that they did not find any evidence that piracy has a negative effect on sales has been linked, and one which says piracy is happening but does not comment on the effects it may have.

None of the papers posted has reached the conclusion that piracy has a negative effect on sales (or revenue/profits).

 

 

Like I said,

 

 

What I want are studies about the effects piracy has on revenue and profits of companies/organisations/individuals. Not whether or not piracy is happening or how widespread it is, because that is fairly irrelevant.

Those studies are fairly hard to find from what I've seen.

IO'm not too sure where you are trying to go with this, I said we have no actual figures on piracy, All I meant was for every study you find that says it effects revenue there is another study that says it doesn't, for every study that pins it as being harmful and other study says it doesn't.   I can find plenty of studies to support my case, I am sure I could find plenty that support yours (whatever it is).  But that is not the point, the point is to claim it has/has not any effects harmful or otherwise is to claim with little consensus on the issue.

[LAwLz]

16 minutes ago, mr moose said:

IO'm not too sure where you are trying to go with this, I said we have no actual figures on piracy, All I meant was for every study you find that says it effects revenue there is another study that says it doesn't, for every study that pins it as being harmful and other study says it doesn't.   I can find plenty of studies to support my case, I am sure I could find plenty that support yours (whatever it is).  But that is not the point, the point is to claim it has/has not any effects harmful or otherwise is to claim with little consensus on the issue.

I have the position that there is next to no evidence that piracy is actually harmful to the industry.

That studies which seem to indicate that piracy isn't harmful are deliberately being buried by the industry because they want it to be true, even though it isn't true. Why? Not sure. Possibly so that they can keep pushing DRM which doesn't protect them from piracy, but does give them control over paying customers.

 

You said that there are plenty of research published that in favor of and against piracy. I assume you mean research which both says piracy is harmful to the industry, and not harmful to the industry (in terms of revenue and profits), correct?

So for example one research paper might say because of piracy, the industry makes more money. While another research paper says piracy is causing the industry to lose a lot of money.

That is what you meant, correct?

 

I see that you have edited your post to include another source. I'll look at that later.

In any case, when I made your post there were only three links posted.

One from the EU which found little to no evidence that piracy harms sales (the one I linked).

One link which just stated that a lot of people download songs through Youtube, but made no comment on if the piracy has a negative effect on music sales (irrelevant link to this conversation).

Another link (posted by you) which states that they did not find any evidence that piracy harms sales.

 

I am not sure which part you don't understand.

 

Also, my point was that it seems like research which comes to the conclusion that "piracy is not harmful" is buried because it does not fit the narrative of the people who set out to do the research. Of course it is impossible to say if that is the case, because we don't know how much research has been kept hidden for not aligning with the predefined conclusion, but we have at least one example of it, and it would make sense that massive and powerful companies and organisations who push for DRM wouldn't want that research to surface.

[mr moose]

On 7/23/2018 at 7:31 PM, LAwLz said:

I have the position that there is next to no evidence that piracy is actually harmful to the industry.

That studies which seem to indicate that piracy isn't harmful are deliberately being buried by the industry because they want it to be true, even though it isn't true. Why? Not sure. Possibly so that they can keep pushing DRM which doesn't protect them from piracy, but does give them control over paying customers.

 

You said that there are plenty of research published that in favor of and against piracy. I assume you mean research which both says piracy is harmful to the industry, and not harmful to the industry (in terms of revenue and profits), correct?

So for example one research paper might say because of piracy, the industry makes more money. While another research paper says piracy is causing the industry to lose a lot of money.

That is what you meant, correct?

 

I see that you have edited your post to include another source. I'll look at that later.

In any case, when I made your post there were only three links posted.

One from the EU which found little to no evidence that piracy harms sales (the one I linked).

One link which just stated that a lot of people download songs through Youtube, but made no comment on if the piracy has a negative effect on music sales (irrelevant link to this conversation).

Another link (posted by you) which states that they did not find any evidence that piracy harms sales.

 

I am not sure which part you don't understand.

 

Also, my point was that it seems like research which comes to the conclusion that "piracy is not harmful" is buried because it does not fit the narrative of the people who set out to do the research. Of course it is impossible to say if that is the case, because we don't know how much research has been kept hidden for not aligning with the predefined conclusion, but we have at least one example of it, and it would make sense that massive and powerful companies and organisations who push for DRM wouldn't want that research to surface.

 

I have no doubt some might have been dropped or not published due to findings being misaligned with the researchers intent, however given there are so many that are published I refuse to believe that is a widespread condition you must factor into your agenda.