Java-Gaming.org    
Featured games (79)
games approved by the League of Dukes
Games in Showcase (477)
Games in Android Showcase (106)
games submitted by our members
Games in WIP (533)
games currently in development
News: Read the Java Gaming Resources, or peek at the official Java tutorials
 
    Home     Help   Search   Login   Register   
Pages: 1 [2] 3
  ignore  |  Print  
  Java .class files safe?  (Read 13386 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Offline zingbat

Senior Member




Java games rock!


« Reply #30 - Posted 2006-08-06 13:46:33 »

That would depend on how much piracy would take away from your potential profit. Its so easy to pirate anything (just do a torrent search).
Offline Evil-Devil

Senior Member


Medals: 2


Fir Tree Master


« Reply #31 - Posted 2006-08-08 12:57:48 »

Or just remove the hash check, as that has to be client side as well.

(or if you sent the hash to the server, just send the hash of the unmodified client)
On Client SIde there can be as many cheat/hack tools as the user want. I would not care. Only mp games are really important.
For the hashcheck, how to send another hashvalue when the package access is locked? I thought as long i have a link to a file it can not be changed by third applications. The filesystem will prevent that behavior. Am I wrong with that?
Offline Markus_Persson

JGO Wizard


Medals: 14
Projects: 19


Mojang Specifications


« Reply #32 - Posted 2006-08-08 13:33:32 »

Am I wrong with that?

Yes.

Here's a dead simple way of doing it:
1) Decompile the classes
2) Search for "java.io" or "javax.nio" to find all places that use the network
3) Refactor method and variable names to best guesses from there using Eclipse or another ide with good refactoring support. Repeat until the code starts to make sense.
4) Find the place that checks the hash, copy the code to a new project, and run it on the original files.
5) Modify the code in any way you want (infinite ammo, double running speed, whatever)
6) Modify the hash-sending part to send the hash of the original files
7) Huh
Cool Profit!

All you need is knowledge of the tools, and some patience.
There is no way to enforce client-side security. Seriously.

In Wurm Online, we obfuscate the classes and try to keep things safe, but we still consider the client hostile. It's much easier to write relatively good security if you assume the client is hacked.
If it wasn't for other factors (macroing, automapping), we would probably open source the client, to REALLY enforce this policy.

Play Minecraft!
Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!
Legends of Yore - The Casual Retro Roguelike
Offline Breakfast

Senior Member




for great justice!


« Reply #33 - Posted 2006-08-08 15:10:34 »

Someone who is going to download a crack of your game, that person wasn't going to buy it anyways.

If you publish a book, some people might decide to shoplift a copy. If you stopped them shoplifting, they wouldn't buy the book. Some people just want something for nothing- maybe the internet is worse for this than the high street, but the principles apply.

Not a world of point worrying about it really.
Offline Riven
« League of Dukes »

JGO Overlord


Medals: 743
Projects: 4
Exp: 16 years


Hand over your head.


« Reply #34 - Posted 2006-08-08 19:38:08 »

Quite some people want the experience. If there is an easy -illegal- way, they might take advantage of it. If it takes too long and they hear people say what a great game it is, they will be tempted to buy it anyway.

This is ofcourse a small group, but even a few percent more sales might make a real difference.

Hi, appreciate more people! Σ ♥ = ¾
Learn how to award medals... and work your way up the social rankings
Offline beowulf03809

Junior Member




We live for the code, we die for the code


« Reply #35 - Posted 2006-08-08 21:20:12 »

Someone who is going to download a crack of your game, that person wasn't going to buy it anyways.

This is obviously a minority view, but  I...uh...have heard of people...that view hacks as a chance to "try out" a game.  At the cost of many modern games  ( $30 - $50 ) these people don't want to waste the little bit of fun-money in the budget on something that turns out to not be fun.  You can't trust reviews of a game any more than you can trust reviews of a movie or book.  Taste is just too subjective. 

Demo versions of games often don't give a good example of the true experience.  Maybe enough to justify an interrest but often not enough to say "this is what I want to spend my money on."  If this...uh...friend...has enough interrest from a demo or review they may try to find a downloadable version.  If that still holds attention after a couple days of play then a copy is purchased.  If it turns out that the demo was the best part ( like the previews are often the best part of a movie ) then the copy can be deleted and no money lost.  Some older games did a good job of inceasing the value by making a sharable version that gave you one part of the experience ( such as Command & Conquer and Warcraft II ) but you had to pay for the rest.  That worked very well. 

Similar with music albums ( the one or two good songs on the radio usually don't justify the cost of an otherwise poor album ).

As long as cost of such items is at the level it is there will be people that do not feel justified spending their hard-earned cash on the chance.  Not trying to justify theft, just pointing out that there is a small percentage of "theives" that do still return to the store w/ their cash if the value is there. 
Offline Markus_Persson

JGO Wizard


Medals: 14
Projects: 19


Mojang Specifications


« Reply #36 - Posted 2006-08-09 09:28:48 »

That's not theft, that's copyright infringement. Not only is there a possible distinction morally, there's a clear distinction legally.

Theft = the person you steal from loses the item and can't sell it to someone else.
Copyright infringement = the person you copy from loses nothing. ("removing potential profit" isn't a crime, btw. If it was, it'd be illegal to tell your friends a movie you saw was bad)

Play Minecraft!
Offline Evil-Devil

Senior Member


Medals: 2


Fir Tree Master


« Reply #37 - Posted 2006-08-09 12:34:44 »

Demo versions of games often don't give a good example of the true experience.  Maybe enough to justify an interrest but often not enough to say "this is what I want to spend my money on." 
Yea, best example for this is UnrealTOurnament 2003 (in most ppl opinion). The UT2K3 demo was great. But the game itself leaks of gameplay and qualility maps. Most ppl bought it anyway. Or started with a illegal copy of it. Or other said: "UT2003 was just the demo for UT2004" Wink
Offline Raghar

Junior Member




Ue ni taete 'ru hitomi ni kono mi wa dou utsuru


« Reply #38 - Posted 2006-08-10 15:18:20 »

That's not theft, that's copyright infringement. Not only is there a possible distinction morally, there's a clear distinction legally.

Theft = the person you steal from loses the item and can't sell it to someone else.
Copyright infringement = the person you copy from loses nothing. ("removing potential profit" isn't a crime, btw. If it was, it'd be illegal to tell your friends a movie you saw was bad)

It's correct.

Strange how many people (sometimes even policemen) has problem to grasp this simple concept. It has probably something with majority of people are encouraged in only for profit type of thinking.
Offline Badmi

Senior Newbie




Java games rock!


« Reply #39 - Posted 2006-08-13 16:21:47 »

That's not theft, that's copyright infringement. Not only is there a possible distinction morally, there's a clear distinction legally.

Theft = the person you steal from loses the item and can't sell it to someone else.
Copyright infringement = the person you copy from loses nothing. ("removing potential profit" isn't a crime, btw. If it was, it'd be illegal to tell your friends a movie you saw was bad)

It's correct.

Strange how many people (sometimes even policemen) has problem to grasp this simple concept. It has probably something with majority of people are encouraged in only for profit type of thinking.

I am clear on what you are saying: Are you claiming that there is nothing wrong with Copyright infringement ?
Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!
Legends of Yore - The Casual Retro Roguelike
Offline aldacron

Senior Member


Medals: 9
Exp: 16 years


Java games rock!


« Reply #40 - Posted 2006-08-13 17:58:44 »

It's correct.

Strange how many people (sometimes even policemen) has problem to grasp this simple concept. It has probably something with majority of people are encouraged in only for profit type of thinking.

Regardless, copyright infringement is still a crime whether you call it theft or not. It is punishable by up to 5 years in prison and/or up to a $250,000 fine. Ultimately, it still causes loss in one form or another for the copyright holder. Strange how some people have a hard time grasping that concept.
Offline Ask_Hjorth_Larsen

Junior Member




Java games rock!


« Reply #41 - Posted 2006-08-13 18:33:34 »

Quote
I am clear on what you are saying: Are you claiming that there is nothing wrong with Copyright infringement ?

I think it's pretty obvious that he isn't.
Offline Markus_Persson

JGO Wizard


Medals: 14
Projects: 19


Mojang Specifications


« Reply #42 - Posted 2006-08-13 18:36:33 »

Regardless, copyright infringement is still a crime whether you call it theft or not.
[...]
Ultimately, it still causes loss in one form or another for the copyright holder.

It does not remove any money from the copyright holder, but in some cases it can result in the copyright holder getting less income.
However, THIS IN ITSELF IS NOT A CRIME! Never has been and hopefully never will be.
If it was a crime to cause someone to get less income, it'd be a crime to tell your friends some random movie sucks donkey ass as well, as that potentially cases the movie maker to make less money.

(loss of potential income != loss of money. there's a HUUGE difference.)

RIAA, MPAA and their assorted goons are trying the best to blur the lines here, and sadly it seems to be working.

Disclaimer: I'm not against copyrights. I'm for them! I just find the current trend of equating piracy with THEFT (a MUCH worse crime, imnsho) very scary.

Play Minecraft!
Offline Martin Strand

Junior Member





« Reply #43 - Posted 2006-08-13 19:11:20 »

RIAA, MPAA and their assorted goons are trying the best to blur the lines here, and sadly it seems to be working.

Disclaimer: I'm not against copyrights. I'm for them! I just find the current trend of equating piracy with THEFT (a MUCH worse crime, imnsho) very scary.

Yeah, terminology such as "piracy" (= rapists and murderers) and "intellectual property" (= something you can lose) encourages a weird view on the distribution of software.
But piracy is not a simple problem - right now it's actually easier (not only cheaper) for me to grab software on mininova than go get it in the store. Hopefully, more and more projects will be able to charge the customer for the service they provide (such as WoW or battle.net) rather than the actual software.
Offline aldacron

Senior Member


Medals: 9
Exp: 16 years


Java games rock!


« Reply #44 - Posted 2006-08-14 07:29:24 »

It does not remove any money from the copyright holder, but in some cases it can result in the copyright holder getting less income.
However, THIS IN ITSELF IS NOT A CRIME! Never has been and hopefully never will be.
If it was a crime to cause someone to get less income, it'd be a crime to tell your friends some random movie sucks donkey ass as well, as that potentially cases the movie maker to make less money.

You're missing the point: copyright infringement *is* a crime. If you are copying and distributing copyrighted material without the consent of the author, then you are infringing on the copyright. The legitmacy of terms like 'theft' and 'piracy' in debates like this is an issue of semantics. The only thing that really matters is the legal terminology. While piracy is not *legally* theft, it is *morally* equivalent -- that's why people use the terms interchangeably in casual discussions.

And I reached that conclusion on my own without the help of the RIAA  Smiley
Offline Markus_Persson

JGO Wizard


Medals: 14
Projects: 19


Mojang Specifications


« Reply #45 - Posted 2006-08-14 09:28:24 »

While piracy is not *legally* theft, it is *morally* equivalent -- that's why people use the terms interchangeably in casual discussions.

*bzzt!*

There's a huge difference between taking a physical item from someone and making a copy of something someone doesn't want you to copy, legally, morally, and by definition. It's just simply not the same thing at all!

Just because both are illegal and "wrong", doesn't mean they're the same thing. Arson and fraud are illegal and "wrong" as well, but you don't see people running around on messageboards, shouting "fraud is arson! and I'm not just saying that because the Anti-fraud Agency of America said so!"

Play Minecraft!
Offline aldacron

Senior Member


Medals: 9
Exp: 16 years


Java games rock!


« Reply #46 - Posted 2006-08-14 14:49:30 »

There's a huge difference between taking a physical item from someone and making a copy of something someone doesn't want you to copy, legally, morally, and by definition. It's just simply not the same thing at all!

Well, piracy *is* theft in my eyes. If someone is copying my game and distributing it without my consent, they are stealing something from me. I understand that nothing is being physically taken, but I still see it as stealing because pirates are copying it without paying for it. I'm not the only one who feels that way. Your arson and fraud example is cute, but it's one of those off-the-wall examples that has no bearing on the discussion at hand. I think we can all agree that arson and fraud are two vastly different crimes. Whether you agree with it or not, a number people see piracy and theft to be closely enough related as to be no different.
Offline Ask_Hjorth_Larsen

Junior Member




Java games rock!


« Reply #47 - Posted 2006-08-14 14:54:10 »

Quote
While piracy is not *legally* theft, it is *morally* equivalent

So if you sell a game, you would be just as unhappy if a particular person happened to make one illegal copy of it as you would be if someone stole your wallet? Maybe the price of your product is slightly higher than the cash content of your wallet. Blimey. Those pirates should be locked up. They are the WORST.
Offline Markus_Persson

JGO Wizard


Medals: 14
Projects: 19


Mojang Specifications


« Reply #48 - Posted 2006-08-14 19:20:33 »

I'm not the only one who feels that way.

This is exactly the problem.
As a wise man once said, and I'm afraid I'm paraphrasing a bit as I don't remember the exact quote: "truth is not a democracy, you can't VOTE on the sex of a rabbit".

If people were to say "pirates are as bad as thieves", I wouldn't argue about it. I can accept that. But saying "pirates are thieves" is just *wrong*.
Copyright infringement, regardless of what it is in your eyes, simply is NOT the same thing as theft.
If you painted a picture, and theft and piracy really were the same thing as you claim, then having someone take a photograph of it and hang a print up on his wall would be just as bad as if he took the painting from you.

Play Minecraft!
Offline aldacron

Senior Member


Medals: 9
Exp: 16 years


Java games rock!


« Reply #49 - Posted 2006-08-15 06:41:26 »

So if you sell a game, you would be just as unhappy if a particular person happened to make one illegal copy of it as you would be if someone stole your wallet?

Making the copy is not the problem. Making it available for distribution -- that's the problem. I don't mind that Joe Hardcore Pirate copies my game and plays it for free because he's an anti-copyright hippie, or because he thinks games are 'cultural information' and should be free, or even because he's a scumbag and just doesn't want to pay for anything. Well, I do mind, but there's nothing I can do about it. What hurts me and every other indie out there when Joe Hardcore Pirate puts his free copy of the game up on an ftp server somewhere. It's going to fall into the hands people who may have bought the game had it not been available for free.

Right now, we can still make a living even with the piracy going on. But piracy isn't diminishing, is it? If anything, it's growing. As long as people can get away with it, why should they pay? Ten years from now, will it still be possible to put out a commercial downloadable game and not be in direct competition with pirates distributing your game en masse for free? 
Offline aldacron

Senior Member


Medals: 9
Exp: 16 years


Java games rock!


« Reply #50 - Posted 2006-08-15 06:59:04 »

If people were to say "pirates are as bad as thieves", I wouldn't argue about it. I can accept that. But saying "pirates are thieves" is just *wrong*.

Okay, pirates are as bad as thieves.

Quote
Copyright infringement, regardless of what it is in your eyes, simply is NOT the same thing as theft.
If you painted a picture, and theft and piracy really were the same thing as you claim, then having someone take a photograph of it and hang a print up on his wall would be just as bad as if he took the painting from you.

Another irrelevant analogy. A picture of a painting is not a replication of a painting.

I think what the issue boils down to is that the digital world and the physical world are two very different places. It is currently not possible (with our current understanding of the universe) to duplicate a physical item atom for atom on a whim. By contrast,  digital data cannot be 'removed', aka stolen. You can copy data from one medium to another and then delete the original, but you can't physically steal it. That's why any real world analogy fails.

Just as I think the patent system needs to be overhauled to reflect the state of our times (i.e. software patents need to be reconsidered and handled differently from traditional patents, if at all), I also think we need to redefine certain terminology for the digital world. It's happening anyway. Just as you can 'surf' the web now,  'theft' and 'stealing' are being associated with digital piracy. Language does evolve that way. Whether or not the legal system does remains to be seen.
Offline Markus_Persson

JGO Wizard


Medals: 14
Projects: 19


Mojang Specifications


« Reply #51 - Posted 2006-08-15 08:29:14 »

Another irrelevant analogy. A picture of a painting is not a replication of a painting.

So videotaping a movie in a movie theater and putting the video on the internet isn't the same thing as copying a dvd, in your opinion? The first is copyright infringement, and the second is theft? Somehow?

Play Minecraft!
Offline Matzon

JGO Knight


Medals: 19
Projects: 1


I'm gonna wring your pants!


« Reply #52 - Posted 2006-08-15 08:43:30 »

Another irrelevant analogy. A picture of a painting is not a replication of a painting.
So videotaping a movie in a movie theater and putting the video on the internet isn't the same thing as copying a dvd, in your opinion? The first is copyright infringement, and the second is theft? Somehow?

imo it isn't *exactly* the same, in that recording stuff is basically an analog copy and copying a DVD is a digital copy.
Taking a picture of a painting isn't copying the picture, rather making a poster of it Smiley.
However I do agree with Markus. There is a great deal of difference between stealing and copyright infringement. You can say that you morally equate the two, but the court still handles it as two different things.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowling_v._United_States:
Quote
It follows that interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The Copyright Act even employs a separate term of art to define one who misappropriates a copyright: "`Anyone who violates any of the exclusive rights of the copyright owner,' that is, anyone who trespasses into his exclusive domain by using or authorizing the use of the copyrighted work in one of the five ways set forth in the statute, `is an infringer of the copyright.' [17 U.S.C.] 501(a)." Sony Corp., supra, at 433.

The infringer of a copyright does not assume physical control over the copyright nor wholly deprive its owner of its use. Infringement implicates a more complex set of property interests than does run-of-the-mill theft, conversion, or fraud.

Offline Markus_Persson

JGO Wizard


Medals: 14
Projects: 19


Mojang Specifications


« Reply #53 - Posted 2006-08-15 09:22:32 »

I realize the analogies are flawed, by the way.. it's difficult to point out the difference between theft and piracy without examples, and as aldacron says, you can't really "steal" software.

Anyway, I realize I'm coming off as a bit of a jerk here, so I'll just drop it now. Wink

Play Minecraft!
Offline PavelJ

Senior Newbie





« Reply #54 - Posted 2006-08-15 12:31:47 »

Anyway, I realize I'm coming off as a bit of a jerk here, so I'll just drop it now. Wink
no, i think you just put it right!
by the way, i never understood, why it's copyright infringement to copy a game or dvd from a friend, while copying a music cd from a friend is fair use (at least here in germany), but only if it is not copyprotected. there should be more fair use rights when it comes to private copying, even over filesharing networks. p2p networks are basicly the radiostations of today and you put your favourite songs on tape. the only problem are the copyright laws of yesterday, that limit the cultural benefits of today's technology to everyone.
Offline swpalmer

JGO Coder




Where's the Kaboom?


« Reply #55 - Posted 2006-08-16 02:32:10 »

Shall we get started on "stealing" satellite signals?  Grin

Offline aldacron

Senior Member


Medals: 9
Exp: 16 years


Java games rock!


« Reply #56 - Posted 2006-08-16 03:46:28 »

So why does no one object to using the term 'piracy' to refer to the copying of copyrighted materials?

Quote from: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
pi·ra·cy
n. pl. pi·ra·cies

   1.
         1. Robbery committed at sea.
         2. A similar act of robbery, as the hijacking of an airplane.
   2. The unauthorized use or reproduction of copyrighted or patented material: software piracy.
   3. The operation of an unlicensed, illegal radio or television station.


The definitions #2 and #3 have been part of English verancular for some time now, whereas once only the first definition applied. Was there a point where people argued that copying digital data is not piracy because it's not something that usually occurs on the high seas? If copying digitial data cannot be viewed as theft, then why is it associated with a word which traditionally is a form of robbery  (a word which is further a form of theft)?

My whole point in this discussion, since it seems I haven't made it clear, is that it doesn't matter what the legal definition of theft is. People will often use existing vocabulary to apply to new situations. To me, software piracy invokes the same emotions as theft, so it is only natural to say "software pirates are theives". I understand clearly that this is not the case in any court of law, nor by any stretch of  legal terminology. But this is not a court of law, I am not a lawyer, and I don't need to adhere to the legal definitions of the vocabulary I use in casual conversation. When I say that software piracy is theft, it is meant to express my state of mind. Saying "software piracy is copyright infringement" does not express the same emotion. That's one of the reasons the usage of vocabulary words grow to encompass new situations and dictionaries expand from version to version - we can't express ourselves as clearly with words we make up, words people don't know, or words that do not effectively convey our meaning.

Any arguments against the casual usage of 'theft' to refer to software piracy are just pedantic. In casual conversation, it just doesn't matter. I could say 'software pirates are bastards',  and someone could argue, correctly I'm sure, that the vast majority of software pirates actually were not born out of wedlock. 
Offline Markus_Persson

JGO Wizard


Medals: 14
Projects: 19


Mojang Specifications


« Reply #57 - Posted 2006-08-16 09:44:35 »

When people say "piracy is theft", they don't just mean that as a clever casual analogy, they either intentionally try to blur the lines, or seriously consider the two to be the same, and try to convince others of the same thing.
You know this, I know this.

Quick example:

In your latest post, you falsely claim to only use it as a casual analogy:
To me, software piracy invokes the same emotions as theft, so it is only natural to say "software pirates are theives".

However, a few posts down:
Quote from: aldacron
Well, piracy *is* theft in my eyes. If someone is copying my game and distributing it without my consent, they are stealing something from me.


I disagree (strongly) with that later statement of yours, yet somehow this turned into me not liking casual analogies?

Play Minecraft!
Offline blahblahblahh

JGO Coder


Medals: 1


http://t-machine.org


« Reply #58 - Posted 2006-08-16 10:52:57 »

So why does no one object to using the term 'piracy' to refer to the copying of copyrighted materials?

Most people didn't used to care, "not my problem" - and those who did care wanted to be cool. Having a "pirate" radio station was so much cooler than having an "unoffiicial" one.

There's a huge difference between taking a physical item from someone and making a copy of something someone doesn't want you to copy, legally, morally, and by definition. It's just simply not the same thing at all!

Well, piracy *is* theft in my eyes. If someone is copying my game and distributing it without my consent, they are stealing something from me. I understand that nothing is being physically taken, but I still see it as stealing because pirates are copying it without paying for it.

I think the bigger problem here is that the majority of people are finally waking up and smelling the roses.

With the surge of ipods and mp3 players, "ordinary" people have come face to face with the reality that copyright (and most of IP law) is a load of crap, based upon core ideas and original laws that often nowadays are either so nonsensical most people would laugh at them (go look at the origins of patents, for instance) or largely inapplicable in a democratic service-driven capitalist society (most of the western world).

Feel free to ignore most of that Smiley, but the one bit I care about is that last phrase - it's the core problem that most people have with patents, for instance: it really isn't possible to morally defend the concept of a patent, of "owning" an idea, in a modern world driven by invention. The patent comes from a time when almost no-one invented anything, and the number of patents was tiny - it simply doesn't work on an industrial scale.

Likewise, the majority of people these days have major issues with the concept of copyright, it's just that they're only gradually discovering the issues and arguments and counter-arguments that until recently were the preserve of lawyers, corporations, and artists who'd been ripped off.

IMHO, copyright is due for reform in the not-too-distant future. In the 21st century where not only does it cost *nothing* to make a copy but the original also costs almost nothing beyond the original invention/inspiration to produce (compared to inventing e.g. machinery in the industrial age, which required lots of labour, hand-drawings, and manual prototyping), the idea of copyright WILL change. You own the original, but I doubt you will continue to have as much rights over the copies as you do now (and, lets note, even the original copyright doens't let you, the author, "own" the copies: you merely have some special rights over them, they remain *someone else's* property - and you get some rights taken away from you, e.g. you have to allow copyright libraries free copies, etc).

Not that I'm making any guesses on what copyright will morph into, mind you. But laws change all the time as society changes, and copyright is no different.

malloc will be first against the wall when the revolution comes...
Offline aldacron

Senior Member


Medals: 9
Exp: 16 years


Java games rock!


« Reply #59 - Posted 2006-08-16 13:18:38 »

When people say "piracy is theft", they don't just mean that as a clever casual analogy, they either intentionally try to blur the lines, or seriously consider the two to be the same, and try to convince others of the same thing.
You know this, I know this.

Sure, some people may actually be ignorant enough of the law, or may actually believe it to be true. But blanket statements like that never are true. I understand the difference and I'm sure there are many others who do as well.

Quote
In your latest post, you falsely claim to only use it as a casual analogy:
To me, software piracy invokes the same emotions as theft, so it is only natural to say "software pirates are theives".

However, a few posts down:
Quote from: aldacron
Well, piracy *is* theft in my eyes. If someone is copying my game and distributing it without my consent, they are stealing something from me.

There's nothing false about my claim. Both statements are the same. They both reflect that, to me, piracy is theft. The latter says "piracy *is* theft in my eyes". I added the "my eyes" bit to it to make it clear that it is my opinion, a reflection of how I feel about the matter. Even had I not added the 'my eyes', my intent still would not have changed.

Quote
I disagree (strongly) with that later statement of yours, yet somehow this turned into me not liking casual analogies?

I'm not attacking you or accusing you of anything. I'm trying to point out that we are viewing this discussion from two different perspectives. You are talking from the position that copyright infringement is *literally* not theft. This is true and I do not dispute it. I am talking from the position that copyright infringement *figuratively* is theft. This is true only to those who believe it to be.
Pages: 1 [2] 3
  ignore  |  Print  
 
 
You cannot reply to this message, because it is very, very old.

 

Add your game by posting it in the WIP section,
or publish it in Showcase.

The first screenshot will be displayed as a thumbnail.

pw (24 views)
2014-07-24 01:59:36

Riven (24 views)
2014-07-23 21:16:32

Riven (18 views)
2014-07-23 21:07:15

Riven (21 views)
2014-07-23 20:56:16

ctomni231 (50 views)
2014-07-18 06:55:21

Zero Volt (45 views)
2014-07-17 23:47:54

danieldean (36 views)
2014-07-17 23:41:23

MustardPeter (39 views)
2014-07-16 23:30:00

Cero (55 views)
2014-07-16 00:42:17

Riven (55 views)
2014-07-14 18:02:53
HotSpot Options
by dleskov
2014-07-08 03:59:08

Java and Game Development Tutorials
by SwordsMiner
2014-06-14 00:58:24

Java and Game Development Tutorials
by SwordsMiner
2014-06-14 00:47:22

How do I start Java Game Development?
by ra4king
2014-05-17 11:13:37

HotSpot Options
by Roquen
2014-05-15 09:59:54

HotSpot Options
by Roquen
2014-05-06 15:03:10

Escape Analysis
by Roquen
2014-04-29 22:16:43

Experimental Toys
by Roquen
2014-04-28 13:24:22
java-gaming.org is not responsible for the content posted by its members, including references to external websites, and other references that may or may not have a relation with our primarily gaming and game production oriented community. inquiries and complaints can be sent via email to the info‑account of the company managing the website of java‑gaming.org
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Managed by Enhanced Four Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!