WotC puts a stop to online sales of PDFs

[Storm Raven]

No it's not, it's infringement. If I make a copy, they still have their copy, so I didn't take it. One can argue I cheated them out of the money I would have gave them, but one would have to prove that I would have paid to begin with.

No, one wouldn't. Not under the current copyright laws. That's what statutory damages are for.

 

[Beginning of the End]

There are stupid attorneys, man. Some states have shockingly low standards for SBE applications (frex, in California, some correspondence courses or local apprenticeships meet the requirement of 'law school' as I recall). That said, I'm certain you're right in this case

You'd have to be pretty bloody stupid to say, "The best way to show that you're protecting your IP is to stop selling your IP."

First, you'd have to confuse trademarks with copyright. (Which, if you're a copyright lawyer, would be mind-bogglingly stupid.)

Then you'd have to advise someone that the best way to show that you're defending your use of the trademark is to stop using the trademark. (Which is actually a pretty brilliant way to lose a trademark, not protect it.)

 

[pawsplay]

Mainly, axing your own sale of PDFs would just weaken the argument that sharing of the PDFs dilutes your financial interests in the IP. No sales, nothing to dilute!

 

[jdrakeh]

Moot stuff.

I said that I was certain he was right. Brother. Some people just want to argue.

 

[Orius]

I guess the main thing I'd like to know from Charles or anyone else from WotC is what the piracy of new 4e print products has to do with the availability of OOP D&D products. Why take these down, too? That makes no sense and seems to be more of an incitement towards piracy than a move to prevent it.

As some people have already stated, it may be related to this court case they're pursuing. Taking down everything is probably the easiest option for them to take, it might be harder for them to just remove 4e stuff and leave older stuff up. Especially if the case goes before a jury that's not going to know the difference (and I'd say very avid D&D players probably wouldn't make the jury pool anyway, they wouldn't be considered objective enough or whatever).

This also may be the reason WotC isn't saying much on the matter either; the terms of the case may forbid it. If so though, they should mention it ASA legally P.

I can't believe WotC could make a mistake of this magnitude. Every other PR fiasco has happened on a Friday giving us a whole weekend for wild speculation and chest thumping pledges of being for or against WotC. Who dropped the ball and hit the switch on a Monday? I'm sure heads will roll over this.

I'd disagree. Making a decision like this at the end of the week and letting the fanbase spew and fume and cook up conspiracy theories all weekend is probably worse than doing it on a Monday, when they have the option of trying to mollify angry customers over the week.

And get your tin foil hats one they have closed down the thread on WotC boards now...Wizards Community - View Single Post - WotC halts sales/downloads from rpgnow.com

Old news, as the thread was reopened (and it was closed for the same reason this one was), but I got a chuckle out of the WizO's avatar.

 

[Roman]

You know, I keep on hearing things referred to as "the last straw."

I don't buy it.

That is your prerogative, but do you really believe people would be this angry if this was the first action by WotC to which they objected? A few would, perhaps, but I still think for many this was merely the last straw that got them angry and not some sort of isolated incident.

There have been way too many "last straws" for me to believe it. I think a lot of those claiming this was the last straw have had previous last straws, and that there will be more last straws after this one.

I am not sure what you are getting at. Obviously, for different people there are different last straws. There are also different last straws for different levels of reaction in the same person. For example, my personal last straw for not giving WotC the benefit of the doubt came about a month or two ago with the endless GSL delays. I began to entertain the possibility that malice (deliberately butchering the 3PP market) rather than incompetence were the cause - quite possibly that is not the case, but I began to consider it as a possibility rather than auto-assuming that WotC's intentions were clean and taking their statements at face value as I have more or less done hitherto. By the same token, for many people this fiasco seems to be the last straw before becoming angry at WotC. Some might even stop buying products, and others will not despite being angry. Different last straws for different levels of reaction and for different people and all that...

Which is fine - I just think a statement like "I WILL NEVER SUPPORT THIS COMPANY EVER AGAIN BECAUSE OF THIS ACTION!" is (usually) the internet version of a politely-worded complaint letter, just with extra froth because there's barely any barrier between thought and publication.

Only a few people have said something to that effect and they might well follow through for all we know, but again, the numbers of people who have said something like that are not large. There is a difference between expressing anger, as many have done, and actually expressing a desire for boycott.

That said, dismissing the power of the internet to organize consumers for a boycott and an anti-company campaign is not prudent. From personal experience, I was engaged in the anti-EA boycott because of draconian DRM they imposed on their games. It took about 6 months to a year (depending on when you start counting), but EA is now backing off the draconian DRM scheme, but only after the public relations fiasco has cost it 10s of millions of dollars in lost sales in its own admission. EA deserves credit for rectifying its mistake, but it has lost many sales and much goodwill by trying to last out the boycott. This was an internet-based campaign and I am not saying that WotC is about to suffer something like that - I am just using it to illustrate that internet-based customer anger can have an impact on the bottom line of a huge gaming company (EA is surely much bigger than WotC).

The EA case actually bears a sad parallel to the current WotC case. In both cases, the companies argued that they are fighting piracy with their moves. In both cases, their real motivations were more suspect. In EA's case, a likely alternate motivation was destroying second-hand sales through draconian DRM mechanisms and in WotCs case it may be some sort of weirdly veiled attempt to bring all of its electronic products into a service-based model (perhaps based on the DDI). In the case of EA, the DDRM proved completely ineffectual in fighting piracy and Spore (the poster-child DDRM-infested game) became the most pirated game in history. WotC's move will prove similarly ineffectual.

Let us hope WotC wisens up to the stupidity of its decision faster than EA did and reverses it as quickly as possible.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

As some people have already stated, it may be related to this court case they're pursuing.

How? (I'm not looking for legal terms of art, here. I'm just curious as to how people think the pulling of PDFs could be related to legal action. People keep saying it "may be related," but the only explanations offered as to why it "may be related" have been flatly incorrect.)

This also may be the reason WotC isn't saying much on the matter either; the terms of the case may forbid it.

"Terms of the case"? Can you explain what you mean here? (Again, not looking for specific legal jargon; just an explanation of what you mean, because, as a lawyer, I honestly have no idea what you've got in mind.)

 

[Mephistopheles]

I can't believe WotC could make a mistake of this magnitude. Every other PR fiasco has happened on a Friday giving us a whole weekend for wild speculation and chest thumping pledges of being for or against WotC. Who dropped the ball and hit the switch on a Monday? I'm sure heads will roll over this.

I'd disagree. Making a decision like this at the end of the week and letting the fanbase spew and fume and cook up conspiracy theories all weekend is probably worse than doing it on a Monday, when they have the option of trying to mollify angry customers over the week.

I think you may have a faulty power coupling in your sarcasm detector.

 

[amethal]

I said that I was certain he was right. Brother. Some people just want to argue.

No they don't!

 

[CharlesRyan]

Hi, all--

Before I write anything else, I want to reiterate that I'm not a WotC employee. Aside from a little more context, I don't have any more info about what's going on than anyone else.

But here's what my context tells me:

Back in about 2004 or 2005 I launched the first PDF sales of current-edition product. We were very concerned about piracy at the time--it already existed even before we put out the first PDF, and it certainly occurred once we started selling PDFs. I'm sure it occurred over the five years since. If there's one thing I know for sure, it's that piracy is not suddenly a surprise to WotC.

So why would WotC suddenly make a policy about-face, and launch a major (for WotC, at least) and probably very expensive legal offensive?

Here's what I think: It's because something has changed. WotC isn't doing this because they've suddenly become aware of everyday, run-of-the-mill piracy. They're doing it because the amount, or nature, of the piracy has sifted substantially in recent months. Maybe this new piracy already threatens their business, or maybe it's trending sharply in that direction. Whatever the case, it's beyond the routine.

So why did they cut off all PDFs, and without warning? I don't know, but I suspect it's no accident. It's probably a tactical move related to the legal offensive. Here's something else I know for sure: Scott had to know there would be PR fallout for this approach (though I don't think anyone could have predicted the depth of vitriol). He chose to pay that price, so it must have been pretty important to the success of the legal action.

Again, this is my speculation. Slightly informed speculation, maybe, but still pure speculation and nothing else. Like everyone else, I'm waiting to see what happens next.

(Hi, Sean!)