Unpack the tenuous and complex tensions between game pirates and games companies.

According to Coleman and Dyer-Witheford Game Pirates can be categorized as follows:

Black Market Centers:

·      Businesses that produce high volumes of copied games for sale and profit. They run factories in “Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin America” (Coleman and Dyer-Witheford 2007 p.938) that are professional and sophisticated and mimic the business model of legitimate games producers but within a criminal syndicate.

Warez Groups:

·      Peer to peer file sharing. Warez groups believe that once they have purchased a game that they own it and have a “right to redistribute it” (Coleman and Dyer-Witheford 2007 p. 938) to other games lovers. They see laws that prevent redistribution as part of a “greedy corporate order” and therefore “gift” games to others within the group without seeking financial reward. The Warez economy works on sharing games and payment comes in the form of “thrill of technological accomplishment” (Coleman and Dyer-Witheford 2007 p. 938) and a good reputation within the group.

Other:

·      People making the odd copy of a game, sharing them in small groups, businesses copying the odd game to restock their shelves, and games lovers uploading out of production “retro” games online – keeping them in existence which in some ways can be seen to support the gaming industry through the dissemination of gaming culture (Coleman and Dyer-Witheford 2007 p. 940).

In the eyes of copyright law all three types of piracy are seen as equal in severity and no distinction is made between them despite their vast differences. As Coleman and Dyer-Witheford point out, the games industry was founded on the back of hackers who shared, improved and redistributed games for the fun of it. This was not an illegal activity until big business commodified games, turning their originating producers into criminals (Coleman and Dyer-Witheford 2007 p. 937).

Further tensions arise within the gaming community when the games industry seeks to recoup their financial losses due to piracy by increasing the sales price of their games, effectively punishing their law-abiding customers while black market groups continue to copy. Furthermore the addition of “anti-coping” technology to games software aimed at reducing piracy has, in the past, reduced the quality of the product – resulting in law suits for the gaming industry (Coleman and Dyer-Witheford 2007 p. 940) and again punishing the customer base rather than the black market criminal. 

Coleman, S., and N. Dyer-Witheford. 2007. Playing on the digital commons: collectivities, capital and contestation in videogame culture. Media Culture Society 29:  Sage publications. http://mcs.sagepub.com/content/29/6/934 (accessed 26/10/11).