“It’s not theft, guys. ... That’s not my opinion, that’s a ruling from the Supreme Court. You may infer from their name that, at least in the USA, they are the highest court in the land.”

And so their conclusions are unquestionable and can never be challenged? That explains why slavery is still legal. LOL

“ruled that copyright infringement is not theft”

It is properly recognized as a category of theft. It is the disposing of the effort of another absent the consent of that other. Embezzlement, fraud, and copyright violation all are different categories of this same violation: theft.

“most people realize sharing copies of something someone else bought shouldn’t be illegal” because apparently these people think slavery shouldn’t be illegal. One shouldn’t have to get permission of another to dictate how their life and effort are to be disposed of.

In other words, you argument is that some people -…

“Piracy is a way to determine if a game is worth buying or not, same as it would be if I borrowed a physical or digital copy of the game from someone I knew personally who already owned it.”

If the personly you personally knew who already owned it did not give you PERMISSION to “borrow” a copy of the game, then THAT is…

“When you pirate, you are sharing a copy of a game already obtained legally.”

You are given their effort under the explicit conditions that you will not copy that effort, let alone give it to others. BY violating that contract, the initial copy of the game is NOT owned legally. So much for THAT claim.

And yes, that…

“If no sale is being made, nothing is being stolen”

LOL. If a person’s effort doesn’t sell, then taking that effort and disposing of it in contradiction to their express permission is not stealing their effort! That’s because you are the owner of their effort, NOT them. You can’t steal what YOU already own. They are…

“I’m saying that, as a consumer, I am perfectly allowed to complain and not buy games”

Except that’s NOT what you are doing. You are using the complaint to justify theft - of taking the effort of others in contradiction to their consent. It’s like saying you’re allowed to complain if a woman doesn’t want to have sex…

“I took a copy of an object bought by someone else.”

Did you acquire the effort of other people with their permission - or without it? Without it. Since the life of others is NOT yours to dispose of as YOU see fit - ie they are NOT your property - you have NO right to it whatsoever EXCEPT with their EXPRESS permission.

W…

“It isn’t stealing”

“I am entitled to the money I earn and deciding how to spend it. And part of that transaction is deciding, quite vehemently, to not buy videogames heavily invested in DLC.”

Yes. You are entitled to the money you earn and deciding whether or not to buy something with it. What you are NOT entitled to is the videogame you…

“It’s ludicrous on a pure “I can pay 100$ to do an insane amount of things elsewhere that aren’t gaming,” basis”

Of course the idea that one should not take a game if one doesn’t think it worth what the creator seeks for it in trade? Apparently some people view ‘trade’ as just a suggestion. And if you don’t like a price, then its the creator’s fault for the theft! LOL

Reporting on a story doesn’t require commmitting the same crime as the thief. This is no different that sites posting ‘The Fappening’ photos. As the rational news outlets demonstrated, it was quite possible to report that story without publishing the stolen photos and thus violating their owner’s right to those photos…

“if you want an independent games press that covers stories we think are interesting and/or important — even if developers and publishers don’t want those stories getting out — welcome to Kotaku!”

“You read the article too, so I guess your guilty too”

LOL. Thank you for the straw man - ie the demonstration that you either don’t GET the -actual- argument put to you, or you DO get it but would rather attack a lie you create rather than face having to attack the -actual- argument.

Given your resort to a lengthy ad…

The impotence of empty ad homs is always amusing. Thanks for your flaccid demonstration. :)

And now you add to the ad homs YOU posted. Interesting how those defending criminality are the one’s without rational arguments. The reason? There are NO rational arguments FOR criminality. That leaves them ONLY with things like ad homs - ie logical fallacies. :)

“Informing the public about a rape is not scheduling the victim for a followup session with all of the readers.”

And more ad homs. Consistency in irrationality is not a virtue. But then, neither is advocating criminal behavior as “journalism”. :)

Sm1ley has NO rational response to the argument made against him, so he resorts to logical fallacies (ad homs). What a surprise.