Disappointed D&D Insider Customer

[Ryujin]

That's simply not the case. It's a violation of exclusive rights, not the removal of property.

You can't ever remove intellectual property. Here's a helpful video:

YouTube - Copying Is Not Theft - Best!

That strikes me as the sort of sophistry used by those who steal and use the IP of others

*EDIT* Would you prefer the term "unjustly enriched"?

 

[nnms]

That strikes me as the sort of sophistry used by those who steal and use the IP of others

So no one, since you can't steal intellectual property?

Copyright violations are exclusive rights violations, and are covered by a completely different set of laws than theft in every single jurisdiction on the planet.

That's right-- every jurisdiction on the planet.

The only sophistry is equating copyright violators with thieves. That's just not the law-- anywhere.

 

[renau1g]

Can we call IP violaters murderers then? It makes as much sense as calling them thieves...

 

[Sunseeker]

I seriously doubt that locking things down further will solve anything. WotC's software or hardware engineers will likely lose an arms race to the hordes of pirates out there.

Neither has it stopped priating of any other piece of software. Yet that software continues to add more and more locks to it. Just because it doesn't work doesn't mean companies still aren't going to do it.

Almost every piece of software ever made has been cracked. Multiple 'secure' hardware devices have also been cracked: Xbox, PS3, iPhone, you name it and there are likely ways of breaking the device's security.

Of course there are. Yet all of these companies continue to lock down their products. Does this really surprise you?

As I said before, the only way I can see to truly defeat piracy is to come up with a better product than what the pirates offer.

• Timeliness could be a factor: Faster updates from the source (WotC) when compared to piracy (scanning rulebooks, OCR, updating with errata, when WotC has a head start).
  
• A reasonable price could be a factor: No physical book means no printing and distribution costs. Low price + legal is more attractive than free + hassle + illegal.
  
• Innovative, hard to steal features could be a factor: Sharing characters/ story ideas / whatever through a community based web site and matching service for games for instance.

All of these things are better than what pirates could offer, and so the pirate's product looks worse.

The pirate's product still has one feature the company will never provide. And that is a free cost. No matter how awesome you make something, it's hard to top something that's 90% as good, but free.

I like the idea of a e-book for D&D books, since I have so many. It might offset the price of the device, even, if the resulting e-books were lower in cost than the printed ones. Ultimately I would rather use something that can work directly on my PC / Laptop, though. I never know what I may want to do with my D&D book contents and having them on the PC means I have future flexibility you can't get with a proprietary device. Maybe like copying and pasting sections into my own DM notes for an upcoming session.

I suggested an e-book because it can be self-contained, and thus, prevent piracy, as opposed to some kind of software for a computer system.

Newsflash. Copying is not stealing. It might be copyright infringement, but it will never, ever be stealing. Wise up.

Ah, the old "I'm not really taking anything from anyone, so it's OK" argument. Yeah, I know that copying and stealing aren't the same. But you're reading this far too literally. You're not stealing the product, of course, that you are copying. What you are stealing is profit. Every person who copies and does not buy, reduces the profit WotC takes in. You are effectivly preventing money from going to them. Which isn't stealing persay, but close enough for the legal system.

Not that I expect a more sensible move from WotC, but the way to earn money in a digital economy is not in DRM and tighter security. But some people will always choose the stick over the carrot.

The gaming market is unfortunately small enough as to not be able to wield a bigger stick.

 

[renau1g]

You're not stealing the product, of course, that you are copying. What you are stealing is profit. Every person who copies and does not buy, reduces the profit WotC takes in. You are effectivly preventing money from going to them. Which isn't stealing persay, but close enough for the legal system.

Not necessarily. YOu are only stealing profits if you would've purchased said item at the retail price. If your were not going to buy it but instead for it from the pirate sites, then perhaps so, but if you weren't then no, you aren't stealing profits. Also, it's not close enough to the legal system to take action, else the legal system would take action. They have not put anyone in prison for downloading illegal music.

 

[whearp]

So now we are arguing semantics to avoid the point that acquiring something in a capitalist economy by any means not sanctioned by the owner of the property is wrong, and that WotC has every right to protect their profits by distributing materials in such a way that at least makes it more difficult or less desirable to unlawfully acquire them?

 

[renau1g]

I'm not saying it's not wrong, it just isn't a jailable crime. Any IP holder should protect their rights, and people should respect them. I purchase my DDI sub and respect/support their property when it would be just as easy to get it for free. I also pay for the whole year rather than 1 month twice a year.

 

[evilref]

I'm not saying it's not wrong, it just isn't a jailable crime. Any IP holder should protect their rights, and people should respect them. I purchase my DDI sub and respect/support their property when it would be just as easy to get it for free. I also pay for the whole year rather than 1 month twice a year.

Err, yes you can be jailed for copyright offences. Copying and selling of a rights holder's IP has been punished with jail many times.

Likewise wholesale distribution of such has seen jail terms handed out in courts.

Bob who distributes it because he's getting it via a torrent, he's not going to go to jail.

Jim who has 500 gig of music and movies and has uploaded torrents to 200 sites, setting up his own site specifically to distribute <blah>. Yeah, if he's in a decent jurisdiction, he's going to jail.

 

[Umbran]

It seems to me that "it isn't theft" is hardly a ringing endorsement of copyright infringement.

Failing to be one specific crime doesn't make it ethically, morally, or legally right.

If you want to be pedantic, in a court of law copyright infringement is not theft - quite true. But, if you want to really be pedantic, we are not in a court of law, and the court's definitions need not apply to our opinions on the rightness of the action.

I think we should thus skip all the pedantry - address the underlying ethics, or just let it go and go have a nice weekend.

 

[evilref]

Putting this in context:

I've worked in publishing for <damn i'm old>

There are many freelance writers who post in these forums

There are many editors, layout artists and artists who post in these forums

There are many publishers who post in these forums

Even if only one single sale from each copied book that still adds up to tens of thousands of dollars lost from the industry.

Why get into semantics on whether it's theft or not (quite apart from the fact English is a living language and copyright theft is becoming the standard usage over time)? Some of the comments in the past couple of pages have been bordering towards blaming the publishers or rights holders because of wanting to actually put out their creative endeavours and make a profit from it.

Seriously?