Guys, really. Copyright does not magically disappear once you hop across an ocean. This is not the Dukes of Hazzard, and you are not on a moonshine run.
Poland is a signatory to the
Berne Convention, and everything that implies.
Recognizing copyright and having he same laws or letting US law apply in poland is very different. Poland, Hungary, etc recognizes the copyright, but says licencing for personal copies are authorized by a representative of copyright holder assigned by the state, this representation is mandatory.
THEN these agencies print small holographic labels to put on devices you can use to reproduce books, and also on supplies for printers, etc. for a fee (it can be huge fee) to authorize personal copies made.
The fee is paid even if you use a printer to print invoices for a company, you pay it when you print your own photos, etc. so the money is quite significant and it covers the licence fees.
Part of this money is sent to USA to an agency to distribute between publishers there.
This is how the system works.
Fair use - which is recognized by international copyright agreements - is another thing he can explore.
If he can show that the game can only be played in a suggested medium, in the normal way (not all people buying all the books, including modules) it is played and WOTC is markets that, he can claim the copying that is "required" for such normal use of the product should be covered by the permissions, since wotc sold the product for its use, saying otherwise later isn't enforcable.
If you sell directly to poland such limits from poland or any other european country should be obeyed by international treaties. And it is strong reasoning, since if they don't allow any copying (even if they are required), how the print optimized books work? How can you open the file (copy it to your RAM), etc?
By making the product work this way if you use it for its (advertised) purpose that is: the copyright owner giving permission through his actions taken while designing the product and offering it this way (and advertising it this way).
So far in Hungary many music publishers tried to sue major dc hubs, torrent sites, claiming that p2p is distribution, but the court always said: no it is personal copying and people pay a licence fee through central authority to permit such copying, so nothing illegal happened.
(With software you can only make backup copy, no centralized licensing for that... sadly)
Did it make us not recognizing copyright? No.
But it did make the copy a licenced and authorized copy.
Why? Because when
Circumventing a copy protection scheme, modifying the copyrighted work, etc. is a different story, etc.
I think the key concern here isn't only abour piracy. I don't play D&D 4e, nor 3e, so for me it isn't that interesting. But people who do play, want to attract new players and for this they offer demo groups.
Thanks to competition from online vendors (amazon for example) many stores and clubs where that was possible were closed, and wizards is switching its attention to online medium.
In an online demo group of the full game where only the DM has the rulebook you can't avoid sending parts of copyrighted material required to play the game.
Why? The game, and the current tools, current electronic versions are designed this way.
PDF is great. But most people can't extract the few pages the demo players need for the game. It is part of the design of the products, and it is one of the key problems.
With your DRM free copy, you could have a 2nd copy with a very restrictive drm (with timed licences acquired on opening) for using the book with friends or in demo groups in online play. Without this 2nd, protected copy, your only chance is to send them the watermarked unprotected copy.
Simply: Wizards is a huge organization, and people who made this decision probably doesn't play the game, so didn't knew these problems, they made bad decisions, and now suing minors.
I am not only concerned about these people, but I am concerned, that with this no more people will be willing to demo games online, noone will run games online, if they have to share files (show handouts) with players, etc. so the move is destructive and not only for the 8 defendants.
