You know the funny thing...

[coliss]

As for myself, I intend on not downloading files here, but I'm also making a note of sites that are doing things that I don't condone (Rose comes to mind) and I will not ever pass money their way again, if I have in the past.

Intend? Really, no one's going to bite you. :lol:

[Randomness]

There's always the stance of "Two wrongs don't make a right."

What about three?

1. Paysites charging more than just to cover bandwidth costs (not illegal, I suppose).
2. People sharing files they have rightfully purchased from a paysite for free so that they're not 'stealing money' from the people they initially received the file(s) from (also not illegal, I suppose).
3. Paysites sharing personal information such as phone numbers, email addresses, homes addresses, names etc. with third parties in a bitter rage (may very well be illegal).

Would anyone care to add anything else to the list?

[DelMita]

My opinion of the matter is that the blame falls on EA's shoulders and since they are turning a blind eye to everything and "letting the community hash it out".  By not taking a stance means that no one is right and no one is wrong.

Since it is clear that EA owns all copyrights and they aren't one of the ones on Pescado's list off official complaintants means that they don't have a problem with him either.  I know for a fact that they know about this site.  

EA chooses no stance because either way they go they will have an uproar that ultimately hurts the overall sales of their game.  The trith of the matter is they are a corporation full of corporate greed and only about the bottom line.

I will say that comparing filesharing of Sims 2 game content to software piracy is comparing apples to oranges.  Making custom content is not that huge of a production.  In my opinion, paysite owners have gotten greedy and if they are treating custom content creation as a source of income they really should get a real job.  

I have no issue with a site owner that offers content and has a paypal button for "thanks".  It's the one with the exclusive pay per items and memberships that chap most people's asses including mine.

[Sherry]

I think it would be nice to hear some of the stories from others about how their sites or yahoo groups have been shut down by paysites and how they exactly went about doing it. I think it would be good for people to see just how nasty they can get. Would surely stop the ethics arguments from coming through. Well, ok not stop them but could knock them down a bit.

Mostly it doesn't take much at all, save a few paysite owners to contact a domain or yahoo.  You can fight about it all you want but, once places see *copyright infrigement* most are not willing to listen to both sides of the story, it's not worth the risk to them. *Most* places don't think hosting filesharing is worth a) the risk or b) the effort of sorting through and answering the overflow of paysite owner complaints when you are technically not gaining too much or any profit from them.   Which is why SIH bough a server for the SFV, didn't want to have to deal with the site closing and having to start from scratch.

Basically look at what Slice sent in his complaint here.   They are used to shutting down sites without much effort or involvement, and with no proof whatsoever of copyright.  

That said paysite owners really only get nasty to sites they can't close down, and I don't think I am exaggerating when we use rosesims and birgit as an example now, was like the blackbook was for us.

You don't even need to look at filesharing to see how 'nasty' paysite owners can get.  Look at places like the roundtable that had sprung up in the sims past.  You can truly see what people behave like when money is on the line.

[avic]

Intend? Really, no one's going to bite you. :lol:

:lol:  Perhaps a poor choice of words, but, well.  That is what I will do.

There's always the stance of "Two wrongs don't make a right."

What about three?

1. Paysites charging more than just to cover bandwidth costs (not illegal, I suppose).
2. People sharing files they have rightfully purchased from a paysite for free so that they're not 'stealing money' from the people they initially received the file(s) from (also not illegal, I suppose).
3. Paysites sharing personal information such as phone numbers, email addresses, homes addresses, names etc. with third parties in a bitter rage (may very well be illegal).

Would anyone care to add anything else to the list?

1.  Part of the American dream.  If you make something that others want and are willing to pay for, shouldn't you make money?  Obviously they aren't charging more than the market will bear, or people wouldn't be paying the rates.
2.  Depends.  Should a creator be able to say how and where their creations are posted, and under what terms?  We can probably argue about that one until the cows come home.
3.  Not only wrong, but actually got me pretty torqued, and I plan on sending a note to PayPal detailing just how unhappy I am about it.

EA chooses no stance because either way they go they will have an uproar that ultimately hurts the overall sales of their game.  The trith of the matter is they are a corporation full of corporate greed and only about the bottom line.

I will say that comparing filesharing of Sims 2 game content to software piracy is comparing apples to oranges.  Making custom content is not that huge of a production.  In my opinion, paysite owners have gotten greedy and if they are treating custom content creation as a source of income they really should get a real job.  

I think you're pretty right on this one, DelMita.  EA doesn't want to step in the middle of this because no matter which way they rule they're going to piss someone off.  Custom content is good for them, and good for business, but siding with either party on this is not a good business/political move for them.

As for the filesharing:software piracy, I'm also willing to concede this point.  And I did start this thread from an anti-piracy point of view, but I think it's a lot deeper than this.  Custom Content is not a living for most of the creators, or maybe it is, but regardless, it's on the same shaky footing as gold farming in MMO's.  As such, it's not on the same level as software piracy.  However, it does still beg the question of what a creator's rights should be.  I tend to lean towards they can attach any stipulations or charges they want to their content.  If I don't like it, I don't have to pay for it.  Both things are part of what this country was built upon - capitalism.

[avic]

You don't even need to look at filesharing to see how 'nasty' paysite owners can get.  Look at places like the roundtable that had sprung up in the sims past.  You can truly see what people behave like when money is on the line.

Personally, I'd like to see a stickied thread listing the sites that have done something nasty (and I don't count bitching, whining or sending a cease and desist letter as being nasty) posted along with a brief synopsis of what they did.  I WOULD consider what Rose did to be high on the list, and also I believe it was Lackey that said someone had threatened BlueSoup's family.  

I don't know if that's possible, but it would be helpful for people like me who don't plan to grab files from here but will boycott sites/creators that are being heinous.

[jesserocket]

If I don't like it, I don't have to pay for it.  Both things are part of what this country was built upon - capitalism.

Somewhat OT from me, THIS country is Malaysia () and the country I'm personally currently sitting in was not built on capitalism.

That is all.

[avic]

If I don't like it, I don't have to pay for it.  Both things are part of what this country was built upon - capitalism.

Somewhat OT from me, THIS country is Malaysia () and the country I'm currently sitting in was not built on capitalism.

That is all.

Ah, true.  BUT, most of the people posting here are probably American.  And what WAS Malaysia built upon, anyway? ;-)

[Plum]

I like this thread.  It didn't get all evil like all the other ones do.

1.  Part of the American dream.  If you make something that others want and are willing to pay for, shouldn't you make money?  Obviously they aren't charging more than the market will bear, or people wouldn't be paying the rates.

They can, and are.  But because the items they're making aren't really theirs, they're also up for grabs.  Kind of.  I'm sure you've already realized how fuzzy this part gets.

2.  Depends.  Should a creator be able to say how and where their creations are posted, and under what terms?  We can probably argue about that one until the cows come home.

They have.  EA [read: the creators of the stuff these people are basing their work on] says we can share their items up the wazoo.  The CC creators can alter the product to make it look however they choose, but the product is EA's.

3.  Not only wrong, but actually got me pretty torqued, and I plan on sending a note to PayPal detailing just how unhappy I am about it.

I'd pay to see all the complaints PayPal is getting over this.  So many people have said they're going to complain.   :lol:

Sorry, I didn't mean to interject myself right in the middle of your debate.  I'm just bored.  Feel free to ignore me.

[jesserocket]

If I don't like it, I don't have to pay for it.  Both things are part of what this country was built upon - capitalism.

Somewhat OT from me, THIS country is Malaysia () and the country I'm currently sitting in was not built on capitalism.

That is all.

Ah, true.  BUT, most of the people posting here are probably American.  And what WAS Malaysia built upon, anyway? ;-)

I'm gonna guess piracy. As I've mentioned a few times around the place, I first ever got into The Sims when my grandfather brought me back a pirated copy of TS1 from Malaysia cos he knew I played SimCity constantly....

[Lackey]

We must also look at the fact that most of the creators are in fact using pirated software to make the objects that they are selling but not selling because they cant. THe word stealing really needs to be stopped. If you purchase a new movie from Walmart and your mother wants to watch it, do you let her? If you do, Is it stealing? I mean let's face the company that made it never intended for your mother to watch it for free. Before you argue to much, if the movie leaves your home and goes to another home than it is sharing something that the company intended for each household to pay for. Every single file here was paid for by someone. That someone chose to share it. We share things every single day in this world that at least one person had to pay for and the other did not. Anyone that states they have never shared anything to save someone else money, I would have to call a liar. So why so much difference here. Why should we care what the paysites owners think? I dont get it. If you think they are not making a ton of money you are seriously not paying attention. Glam sims has over 5000 members, she said so herself. How many do you think pay a sub? Times that by the cost of her sub. That is a lot of money a month. We are not here to change the world. We are here to offer things to those that can not afford it. I dont know if anyone does or has ever subbed to Glams sims, but if you have, send her an email and complain about something. You might be real surprised by the return email and the rude comments she makes in it. Even so far as to tell you that she has a tone of members and doesnt need your money anyway.

[Sherry]

1.  Part of the American dream.  If you make something that others want and are willing to pay for, shouldn't you make money?  Obviously they aren't charging more than the market will bear, or people wouldn't be paying the rates....

....I tend to lean towards they can attach any stipulations or charges they want to their content.  If I don't like it, I don't have to pay for it.  Both things are part of what this country was built upon - capitalism.

You say it like capitalism is a good thing.  It's not always, look at Walmart as a prime example.

Also just because they *can* sell it, and I use can loosely because it's only due to EA's lack on involvement they have been allowed to continue, doesn't mean they should.

I guess if someone *wants* to pay for files they should be allowed to.  If someone doesn't want to, I think they have just as much a right to obtain them, as the only person breaking anysort of conditions in all this mess is usually paysite owner to begin with.

[Plum]

Wal Mart isn't pure capitalism; their low prices are supplimented by too many subsidies.

EDIT:  I don't know why I even bothered to mention that.  Continue ignoring me kplzthx.

[HotNWet]

whats sfv? is like another pirate site? what does it stand for?

[jesserocket]

Sims File Vault. It's a very nice site, with somewhat different sharing policies to here.