My name is "Defendant Radzikowski"

[Enerla]

Just thought I would chime in and add some things that Scott Betts over on the Paizo forums had to say.

Lets see: The same filesharing forum and the incident of same nickname was metioned on this forum too. With people explaining how others get to use the same nicknames.

If you think you made a quite unique name, and use it for your character in a popular MMORPG (say wow) chances are high that there will be another player using the very same name. If you are lucky, it is on another server. But the moment you "borrow" a name, the chances will be adjusted.

I think the same is true for irc nicks, forum nicks, etc.

But even if he would run that place, from some forums I see people who ran high profile dc++ sites, and know even that doesn't make them guilty. Even if I hate such dc++ sites, when the court said they done nothing illegal, nor his users, since you pay a fee for such copying.

To make them guilty you need to see: They done filesharing in a country where it is illegal.

As you know, in democracies you either use your rights directly or you use representatives, any given democracy can decide when can you use your rights directly and when you have to use representatives.

If in a country licencing for not for profit copying for certain uses must be done by a law appointed representatives (and authors supposedly get money that way) and he /by buying some equipment/ paid for a valid licence to copy that ebook (that can involve p2p sites in some countries) then it is hard to call him guilty. Even if he shares files with friends. Even if he would share them on a P2P site. Even if he would also own the P2P site.

If you buy a car and you take it home from the dealership, you aren't a thief either. You pay for something and get it.

BUT it is up to Wizards if they decide: if half of the world can legally copy books and PDFs, then it is a bad bussiness decision to offer a PDF they can copy easily. Make them scan, OCR, it will slow them down, and give Wizards time for good initial sales and can result in a situation that is better for them.

 

[Twowolves]

No, that's The Stranger by Camus.

Oh yeah, right. So, did he instead wake up as a giant bug? That's a funny referrence, but ok sure.

 

[Revinor]

Oh yeah, right. So, did he instead wake up as a giant bug? That's a funny referrence, but ok sure.

Now it is Bruno Schulz's book I think, still not Kafka.

 

[Twowolves]

Now it is Bruno Schulz's book I think, still not Kafka.

No, it's Franz Kafka.

Hence the " " in my post.

It's been a looooong time since Philosophy 101, but it ain't been THAT long.

 

[Starfox]

However copyright is exactly that: the right to make a copy. It is very hard to consider a way in which someone can 'lend' a pdf to someone else without making a copy of it, at the very least onto temporary media. That act of making a copy is (at least arguably) going beyond the rights to the intellectual property given when the pdf was purchased. So both the person 'lending' and the person 'borrowing' are (technically) in breach of the copyright of the rights-owner.

Which is of course why we need the Pirate Party.

 

[Cadfan]

For what its worth, saying that you didn't do anything wrong isn't enough. Lawsuits don't stop just because the defendant says he didn't do it. This guy says his friends did it. Ok. Its not like the judge never heard that before. Its not like saying that is some perfect shield. The decision maker might not believe him. The "friends" he blames might blame him back. Who knows.

As for the publishing of the name thing... I don't know anything about Polish law. but I do know enough to recognize the likely shape of my lack of knowledge. US courts require that you name who you are suing, because, you know, how else are you going to sue them? And then once named, that information is public record, because we don't have secret trials. I'd be extremely surprised if Poland considers it a crime to publish the name of the person you're suing. They might have law that kind of sounds like that... maybe.

I'd be really interested if someone could provide a link to a description or translation of this law. If nothing else, its so different from US law that I'd be interested in reading about it.

 

[Shadowsong666]

For what its worth, saying that you didn't do anything wrong isn't enough. Lawsuits don't stop just because the defendant says he didn't do it. This guy says his friends did it. Ok. Its not like the judge never heard that before. Its not like saying that is some perfect shield. The decision maker might not believe him. The "friends" he blames might blame him back. Who knows.

If there are more then him who could have done the uploading and they are known and they don't get the information who has uploaded the file he won't suffer anything imho. It's still in dubio pro reo in most civilized parts of the world, right? If they get the uploaders IP that may help solve the case in a quick way if its traceable. So lets wait and find out if he gets anything from WotC or not.

 

[Cadfan]

If there are more then him who could have done the uploading and they are known and they don't get the information who has uploaded the file he won't suffer anything imho. It's still in dubio pro reo in most civilized parts of the world, right? If they get the uploaders IP that may help solve the case in a quick way if its traceable. So lets wait and find out if he gets anything from WotC or not.

You're thinking of the rules for a criminal trial. This is civil. Presumption of innocence isn't relevant. Instead its usually about a standard that in plain english boils down to "more likely than not."

Not that I know the rules in Poland, of course. But they're probably similar: its a rule that is really, really useful in dealing with civil matters and avoiding status quo biases and all sorts of other technical stuff not worth getting into.

 

[Shadowsong666]

You're thinking of the rules for a criminal trial. This is civil. Presumption of innocence isn't relevant. Instead its usually about a standard that in plain english boils down to "more likely than not."

Not that I know the rules in Poland, of course. But they're probably similar: its a rule that is really, really useful in dealing with civil matters and avoiding status quo biases and all sorts of other technical stuff not worth getting into.

Hm, ok i get that.
I was just assuming/guessing that he and lets say 7 of his friends had the file and no one is going to tell that he uploaded it or don't know who did it. If thats the case, without a trace, how to get right guy?

 

[Cadfan]

Hm, ok i get that.
I was just assuming/guessing that he and lets say 7 of his friends had the file and no one is going to tell that he uploaded it or don't know who did it. If thats the case, without a trace, how to get right guy?

Put them under oath, one by one, alone. Scare each one into thinking that he's absolutely screwed if he doesn't pin the blame on someone else.