Piracy Cripples iOS Game in Less than a Week

ericrwalker said:

Oh lord, you took a copy of it. smh

Click to expand...

BaldiMac said:

Of course you are taking something. You are taking the copy.

Click to expand...

And you said I was splitting hairs? Why do I get the feeling I'm just being trolled here :/

Since the developer never owned the copy you "took", we're in the same boat - you're just using a play on words, something which you said made me look stupid? To try a more philosophical approach, imagine somebody took your car, but it was still there.

bma said:

And you said I was splitting hairs? Why do I get the feeling I'm just being trolled here :/

Since the developer never owned the copy you "took", we're in the same boat - you're just using a play on words, something which you said made me look stupid? To try a more philosophical approach, imagine somebody took your car, but it was still there.

Click to expand...

Maybe because it takes one to know one? There is no point continuing with you. Thanks for your input.

EvilMole said:

I don't give a crap about the definitions of whether "piracy" is "theft". Those are the inane witterings of people seeking to justify what they do, when they know it's wrong.

Click to expand...

I don't pirate, and my example was to show how I've dealt with it, and adapted my business model to make the most of it.

chrono1081 said:

Like I said, I don't care what "definition" you come up with, taking something you didn't pay for is theft. Its been that way for thousands of years and its not going to change because some law in your country says its not quite the same thing.

Click to expand...

Actually copyright law is fairly new in historical times. It pretty much didn't exist before Gutenberg, and even then was only occasionally granted by the king to a few printer buddies.

Lots of people like you believe silly things and make false accusations. Only what's written in the law books actually applies. Go read some.

bma said:

And you said I was splitting hairs? Why do I get the feeling I'm just being trolled here :/

Since the developer never owned the copy you "took", we're in the same boat - you're just using a play on words, something which you said made me look stupid? To try a more philosophical approach, imagine somebody took your car, but it was still there.

Click to expand...

Again, you are just arguing semantics. The developer's rights to their property (app) specifically include the exclusive right to create copies. Depriving someone of their property rights with a dishonest intent is theft as defined through common law.

Read the law that you quoted. It specifically includes intangible property.
http://sixthformlaw.info/06_misc/statutes/16_theft_act_1968.htm

ncaissie said:

1) I have yet to see an app show me the cost of an in app purchase. For example I had to go to the app in the app store and look at the most popular inapp purchases to find out that the Atari games cost $9.99 to buy all the games. (Just got an iCade cab.)



2) I have been an application and web application developer (Java and .Net for over 13 years. I am a member of the iOS development group. I am in the beginning of the Stanford Developing Apps for iOS.

Click to expand...

Let me know if that Stanford prof fixed his lecture on retain/release, if he still teaches that stuff now that we have ARC.

The iCade app will tell you when you try to buy it.

Go into an any app with IAP. Click to buy something. Anything.
It'll show a window titled "Confirm Your In-App Purchase" "Do you want to buy one Pile of Gems for $4.99?"

This is done for all IAP. It's a system dialog, not something the app developers have to put in.

mrsir2009 said:

Then why don't you go down to the store, shoplift a pair of headphones, then if you like them go back and pay for them, or if you don't chuck them out?

Click to expand...

Terrible argument, because you can't return a game that you've paid for and tried out.

phr0ze said:

And there is the real culprit. Seriously how did they think a 1 time payment of $5 was going to cover this bandwidth month after month.

Either they realised the serious flaw in the pricing model and blamed it on pirates or they never intended users really play it and were hoping for the 'gym membership' effect.

If all the users were legit and there were no pirates, I doubt an extra $5 from 7000 users ($3500) would have covered enough to run month after month.

Not saying I favor the pirates, I'm just saying they were going to fail anyways.

Click to expand...

Indeed, $5 isn't much. I haven't played this game, but I'd venture to guess they hoped to do the same sort of thing that the Smurfs game or Clash of Clans or whatever is doing:

Bank on the fact that some people are really competitive and would pay for in app purchases to get ahead. And use these to fund everything.
Those who don't pay arn't just there to leech, they're in the game to drive the competitive people to buy more widgets.

Or in the Smurfs case, make tons of money off kids who swipe(in both terms) their parents credit cards.

When you've got a ton of people and income, piracy would help.
When you're a small developer, pirates make your overhead run you into the ground before you can get a profitable user base.

http://deconstructoroffun.blogspot.com/2012/09/clash-of-clans-winning-formula.html
http://www.insidemobileapps.com/201...e-to-play-titles-grossing-15m-a-month-on-ios/

BaldiMac said:

Again, you are just arguing semantics. The developer's rights to their property (app) specifically include the exclusive right to create copies. Depriving someone of their property rights with a dishonest intent is theft as defined through common law.

Read the law that you quoted. It specifically includes intangible property.
http://sixthformlaw.info/06_misc/statutes/16_theft_act_1968.htm

Click to expand...

I have read the page you linked (I don't quote things without reading through them first). And whilst I agree piracy is wrong, it's also just as wrong to apply a blanket statement of "theft".

My interpretation of that law, from re-reading the page you linked:

Theft: dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it; and ‘thief’ and ‘steal’ shall be construed accordingly

Property: includes money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property.

So yes, in theory, theft of intangible property is possible. However, what we need to consider is exactly what the intangible is, and how piracy relates to the definition of theft. With computer software - what is the intangible property? Well, for the purpose of this debate, I'll consider it to be a) the app itself, b) the rights to distribute the app, c) the right to sell the app and d) all other rights to the app (whilst it overlaps, it allows us to explain b/c in more depth).

Now, say I downloaded a copy of the app. The definition of theft is that we are depriving the other party of something. So how does that relate back to our intangible property:

a) The developer still owns the app itself. Nothing deprived.
b) The developer still has the rights to distribute the app. Nothing deprived.
d) The developer still has all other rights to the app. Nothing deprived.

I've specifically left c out. Because, whilst the developer has received no renumeration for me downloading the app, they still have the rights to sell the app and collect payment - therefore nothing has been deprived rights-wise.

Again, this is just my interpretation and I hope I've explained my reasoning. All of this boils down to trying to apply old laws to new issues and whilst I agree piracy is wrong, I also agree it's wrong to classify it as something it's not. And again, this just covers the UK, I'm not really well read up on US law.

Jo Bot said:

I don't see what the problem is here.

1) Change the client/server method signatures.
2) Push out update to iTunes.

Click to expand...

So what will prevent a pirate from publishing the new IPA? The problem is one that honestly can't be fixed because I support this. The app and the developer has no way of knowing who purchased their app because Apple protects all user information from the apps. The only change which would be big is to make the app free and then in-app purchase for the online portion. This would be a big re-write.

BaldiMac said:

Again, you are just arguing semantics.

Click to expand...

And if you've ever been in court, you will know that semantics and picking the correct law to apply is very important. Trying to accuse someone who burns your house down with rape instead of arson in court will likely land both of you in jail.

jinnj said:

So what will prevent a pirate from publishing the new IPA? The problem is one that honestly can't be fixed because I support this. The app and the developer has no way of knowing who purchased their app because Apple protects all user information from the apps. The only change which would be big is to make the app free and then in-app purchase for the online portion. This would be a big re-write.

Click to expand...

Even that wouldn't really help, since I believe it's possible to crack IAP too.

hchung said:

Let me know if that Stanford prof fixed his lecture on retain/release, if he still teaches that stuff now that we have ARC.

The iCade app will tell you when you try to buy it.

Go into an any app with IAP. Click to buy something. Anything.
It'll show a window titled "Confirm Your In-App Purchase" "Do you want to buy one Pile of Gems for $4.99?"

This is done for all IAP. It's a system dialog, not something the app developers have to put in.

Click to expand...

The web is full of valuable information for free. I’m done replying to your comments.
Let’s agree to disagree.

bma said:

My interpretation of that law, from re-reading the page you linked:

Theft: dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it; and ‘thief’ and ‘steal’ shall be construed accordingly

Property: includes money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property.

So yes, in theory, theft of intangible property is possible. However, what we need to consider is exactly what the intangible is, and how piracy relates to the definition of theft. With computer software - what is the intangible property? Well, for the purpose of this debate, I'll consider it to be a) the app itself, b) the rights to distribute the app, c) the right to sell the app and d) all other rights to the app (whilst it overlaps, it allows us to explain b/c in more depth).

Now, say I downloaded a copy of the app. The definition of theft is that we are depriving the other party of something. So how does that relate back to our intangible property:

a) The developer still owns the app itself. Nothing deprived.
b) The developer still has the rights to distribute the app. Nothing deprived.
d) The developer still has all other rights to the app. Nothing deprived.

I've specifically left c out. Because, whilst the developer has received no renumeration for me downloading the app, they still have the rights to sell the app and collect payment - therefore nothing has been deprived rights-wise.

Again, this is just my interpretation and I hope I've explained my reasoning. All of this boils down to trying to apply old laws to new issues and whilst I agree piracy is wrong, I also agree it's wrong to classify it as something it's not. And again, this just covers the UK, I'm not really well read up on US law.

Click to expand...

That may be your interpretation, but it's wrong. Your interpretation ignores the law and the facts that contradict your point. You intentionally limited the property rights to ones that you felt you could defend. And you ignored the specific right that I claimed had been deprived.

Most obviously, copyright law grants the developer exclusive rights to duplication and distribution of their app. It should be pretty clear how piracy interferes with these rights.

So yes, in theory, theft of intangible property is possible.

Click to expand...

Not in theory. In statute.

bma said:

Even that wouldn't really help, since I believe it's possible to crack IAP too.

Click to expand...

But the in-app purchase system it will check to see if a bill of goods exists for it before allowing the app to download it. Now I don't keep up with the latest hacks but I would believe it is difficult to provide the .ipa with all of it's downloaded add-ons.

firewood said:

And if you've ever been in court, you will know that semantics and picking the correct law to apply is very important. Trying to accuse someone who burns your house down with rape instead of arson in court will likely land both of you in jail.

Click to expand...

And if I were in court, I would be quoting a specific statute. I wouldn't accuse them of "theft". The term encompasses many different crimes and actions.

But I'm not in court. And the definition of the word theft as it has evolved through common law over hundreds of years is inclusive of actions such as piracy.

bma, what do you think the word "copyright" means? Take a close look at it.

Copyright is about the right to copy/distribute. If you own the copyright or have assigned it to a third party like Apple, that entity is the only one allowed to legally "copy" and distribute those copies to other people.

When you pirate something, you are either distributing copies of something that you have no "right" to distribute or are receiving illegal copies which is basically the same as receiving stolen goods. Since the sharing party did not enter into any agreement with the copyright holder, they are not breaking any agreement. They are however, stealing the value of the "right" to copy the item in question and the recipient is knowingly receiving stolen property.

The sharer is stealing the value of the goods and the downloader is knowingly obtaining stolen property.

anomie said:

Really? Then thieving is a good thing.

Click to expand...

Two things I know are true:

Good people sometimes use rationalization to justify doing bad things, such as stealing other peoples' property.

Bad people just have no conscience, and don't really care whether their actions hurt people unfairly.

Which one are you?

bma said:

The amount of people on their high horse in this thread is ridiculous.

It's NOT theft. It's software piracy. There's a difference.

To those using the headphone's analogy - try using something more relevant. Say I go to an art dealer, see a painting I like, and take a photograph of it. I then have it printed, and hung on my wall. No, it's probably not fair, but the original owner hasn't lost anything (unless you count a potential sale).

It's been proven many times that piracy actually increases sales in most industries - server based games, like this, however are possibly the one exception to the rule due to the relatively high cost of running servers. To all of those stuck on their high horses - have you never downloaded an MP3, or ripped a song off of youtube, only to discover you really like the band - and then go out and buy their CD, or (even better for the band) gone to see them live?

I suggest you read this - it's a really good editorial about Piracy, and some of the reasons people do it. http://www.neowin.net/news/editorial-how-piracy-changed-my-life

Click to expand...

eh? u serious??
it IS a theft. doesnt matter how people want to twist it. this especially hurt small developers who are just building up a business.

notjustjay said:

But this very article that you are commenting on is indicating that this is simply not true. It may have been, at one point, but now when apps connect to servers and contribute to server load and bandwidth, then it DOES cause a loss of income in the form of additional ongoing expenses that haven't been paid for.

Click to expand...

This is a difference case since it is an online game ... but the developer could have easily added in a log in mechanism to prevent such piracy.

----------

Kaibelf said:

Parking your car isn't a physical good. Neither is cleaning your house. Or doing your taxes. Or babysitting your kids. People still pay for these things. Why? Because you don't deserve things for free, no matter how self-absorbed and entitled you want to act.

Click to expand...

Parking a stop takes up a physical resource.

Cleaning your house, you need to be physically there, same with baby sitting. It's not like you can replicate ad infinitum a baby sitter/cleaner yet.

H2SO4 said:

The ONLY person you can blame for stealing something is the thief.

Click to expand...

The number of people you point blame at has little effect on helping solve the problem. You can leave your new car unlocked with the keys in the ignition in the bad part of town over the weekend, and blame somebody for you ending up with no wheels; or you can park your car in safer locations, take the keys, and buy insurance. Which do you do?

The more savvy developers (including some of the bigger iOS game companies) assume the existence of some percentage of broken OS devices, with more than half of those devices "somehow" getting apps installed without benefit of paying, and plan their business accordingly (occasionally to even take profitable advantage of this extra "installed base").

ZacNicholson said:

i pirate games, and if i like them i'll buy them. if i dont i delete the game.

Click to expand...

That is what the free demo version is for.

thasan said:

eh? u serious??
it IS a theft. doesnt matter how people want to twist it. this especially hurt small developers who are just building up a business.

Click to expand...

Rape and arson would also hurt small developers who are trying to build up a business. But that doesn't make either of those crimes the same as theft. Highly illegal in many/most jurisdictions? Yes. Theft? No.

This "discussion" went to **** real fast, didn't it?!

phr0ze said:

Like your avatar?

Click to expand...

Nice try but these were available on Valves website for download. All kinds of icons, wallpapers, even ringtones. They also fall under "fair use" since I am not making money off of it.

Stealing games however does not fall under fair use as they are something that is charged for.

firewood said:

Actually copyright law is fairly new in historical times. It pretty much didn't exist before Gutenberg, and even then was only occasionally granted by the king to a few printer buddies.

Lots of people like you believe silly things and make false accusations. Only what's written in the law books actually applies. Go read some.

Click to expand...

Re-read what I wrote. I'm talking about theft. Stealing something without paying for it. Its been around for thousands of years. Back in ancient times (and even some places today) they cut peoples hands off for it.