PDFS--Of the WotC Court Case

Nonetheless, infringing is not theft... it is infringing, just as posting Hamlet on Gutenberg would be infringement in the imaginary and unlikely circumstances I put forth above.
The reason you guys are getting pushback is because reasonable statements like yours appear to be the first in a long chain of argumentation that seems to go like-

1. Its not theft, its infringement. That is totally different.
2. Blah blah blah
3. Blah
4. More blah
5. Steal underpants
6. ...
7. WOOKIES! On ENDOR! That doesn't make any SENSE!
8. Therefore its ok to download copyrighted stuff we haven't bought, or at least its wrong to criticize people who do.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Question, since I didn't read the court documents:
How do they know the accused actually put these items up on P2P themselves?
How can they prove that someone didn't hack their PC and take the files, or a friend using that PC, considering how many folks' WIFI networks aren't secured, PCs that are shared, and how many folk's computers are riddled with malware?
Or that the security system has itself been broken..rather neat way to cover your tracks by putting Santa Claus or some poor schlub as the actual ID, eh? :p

That would be an affirmative defense that the defendant would need to prove once the plaintiff made their prima facie case. In other words, if the plaintiff has to demonstrate it is more likely than not that the defendant did it (by showing that it was his .pdf that was posted) and if the defendant wants to claim that someone else did it, then it is up to him to produce evidence that would back up that claim.
 

I think a lot of people are just plain pissed off that downloading a pirated copy of WHATEVER is so easy.

Then again, there's nothing to stop me from going into a book store (particularly bigger ones that encourage you to sit down and read), flip through a rules book and transcribe what I want from it into a notebook. No one would look at me twice, and no one would care that I'm doing it to bring additional materials to my game.

Try it. I have a feeling that in most book stores you'd get kicked off the premises pretty quickly.
 

Again, there is a difference between piracy and identity theft.

When someone pirates your goods, your name is still on them. They are still spreading your works. What you are suggesting is drastically different from that.

Not really. The right to control how your work is distributed (i.e. the right you have to prevent others from appropriating your work as their own by asserting their authoriship of it) stems from copyright. The fact that you can make a fuss when someone removes your name from your work and puts their own on it is part and parcel of copyright.

Just because you think one is cool and the other isn't doesn't make them different.
 

You're right, that's an extremely faulty example, since stealing a DVD deprives them of the use of it (to actually sell). If you want an analogy, it would be someone downloading a DVD rip of the movie, and then going to Best Buy the next day and buying it.

The problem with that analogy is that it's really hard to see what the negative impact on anyone is if you did this aside from annoying people who just don't like the fact that you did, on principle.

Your neighbor has a bare dirt back yard. For your own convenience, you often cut through his back yard even though he does not want you to do this. Have you harmed him or not?

Suppose to keep you out he erects a fence around his property, with a pair of gates allowing traverse, through which he only allows people who pay him a fee to enter. Has he wronged you?
 
Last edited:

Then again, there's nothing to stop me from going into a book store (particularly bigger ones that encourage you to sit down and read), flip through a rules book and transcribe what I want from it into a notebook.

Try it. I have a feeling that in most book stores you'd get kicked off the premises pretty quickly.

Barnes & Nobles won't. Many of their stores have a whole cafe section just so people can sit, read their books, and drink their (overpriced) coffee.

I've seen several people doing just this: a book on one side, a notebook on the other. I assume they're generally doing research for schoolwork, though, since I don't recall ever seeing an RPG book being used.

None of them got kicked out, quickly or otherwise.

Cheers, -- N
 

Generally speaking, Le owes WotC $100,000. WotC is responsible for collecting that money. For example, they could foreclose on any property owned by the debtor, garnish his bank account or garnish his wages. WotC could decide to cut the guy a break and write off the debt.

Le represented to the Court that he is 19 years old, unemployed and a student. It seems unlikely that WotC will recover much of the judgment against him.

In a typical jurisdiction, WotC will have 20 years to collect on the judgment. Le could earn quite a bit of money. I wouldn't be surprised if WotC attmpted to garnish all his future earnings for the full time period, or entered into a payment agreement that accomplishes substantially the same thing.
 

Barnes & Nobles won't. Many of their stores have a whole cafe section just so people can sit, read their books, and drink their (overpriced) coffee.

Hence, most. As in, not all.

However, if you sat down and started copying verbatim a book, I think even Barnes & Noble would have problems with that.
 


Barnes & Nobles won't. Many of their stores have a whole cafe section just so people can sit, read their books, and drink their (overpriced) coffee.

I've seen several people doing just this: a book on one side, a notebook on the other. I assume they're generally doing research for schoolwork, though, since I don't recall ever seeing an RPG book being used.

None of them got kicked out, quickly or otherwise.

Cheers, -- N

Yep, I've done it. The research part with the notebook, that is. Haven't been kicked out yet ;p
 

Remove ads

Top