WotC may have sent the Pinkertons to a magic leakers home. Update: WotC confirms it and has a response.

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

That article just isn't correct.

"Punishment" certainly has some deterrence value. In other words, once you move away from the purely Kantian idea of moral desert to the utilitarian model, you find plenty of studies showing there is some value in deterrence.

The argument is over the signal- briefly ...

1. For deterrence to work, it has to be certain, and it has to be reasonably quick. In other words, the less likely you are to get caught, and the more attenuated the punishment from the act, the less effective the deterrence.

2. It has to be calibrated. For example, Finland is better at deterring speeding because they calculate speeding tickets based on income, and because they utilize more automated systems. America? Not so much.

3. People are not great at differentiating punishments- so there is various empirical studies showing that beyond a certain amount, additional "punishment" doesn't have much effect at deterrence. People might be rational, but the difference between a 15 year and a 35 year jail sentence (to use arbitrary examples) just doesn't register.

4. Finally, it has to be clear. If you don't have a reasonable knowledge of what the punishment is likely to be, then there is little deterrent effect.

All that said, no one can credibly argue that punishment doesn't have deterrent effect. If you don't believe the literature, just look at any society where the law has broken down.

For all the people who came out of the woodwork during the Great IP Debate of 2023, this is what it looks like when one has actually attended law school.

 

[overgeeked]

Humans are stupid. We do things because we are used to doing it the same way. Progress and change takes a long time and a lot of effort. When you have half your population actively fighting that progress, it takes longer. So basically, the human species will die before we manage to figure out how to be civil to each other.

Absolutely.

Not a well thought out plan, is it?

Perhaps. But it's still better than WotC's plan.

You've completely missed the point.

Not at all.

What would you do if you were the person at WoTC that had to deal with this YouTuber?

Already said what I'd do. 1. Do not go after or harass your customers.

Your job is to get the merchandise back.

No, it's not. The job is to not give the company an easily avoided black eye...a few months after the company gave itself an easily avoided black eye.

How would you go about it, so this guy's wife doesn't cry early in the morning.

Don't go after your customers. Simple as. There's nothing bad that will happen if this guy posts a thousand videos spoiling all the cards a few weeks early. This is a non-issue. It's not classified state secrets or troop movements in a war zone. They're toys. That were accidentally released early. This literally happens all the time and isn't a big deal.

Would you just not do anything about it? Just let it go? Great, WoTC fired some guy for being nice.

You make so many wild assumptions. Not overreacting to this is now a fireable offense to you? Weird.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

My understanding is that MTG cards and other items like this are generally released to distribution a week ahead of time, in order to avoid this type of problem. So the issue would have come from farther upstream.

He said he received it on Friday, April 21. That's three weeks ahead of time.

Yeah, the universe of possible suspects is relatively small.

 

[Cadence]

That article just isn't correct.

"Punishment" certainly has some deterrence value. In other words, once you move away from the purely Kantian idea of moral desert to the utilitarian model, you find plenty of studies showing there is some value in deterrence.

The argument is over the signal- briefly ...

1. For deterrence to work, it has to be certain, and it has to be reasonably quick. In other words, the less likely you are to get caught, and the more attenuated the punishment from the act, the less effective the deterrence.

2. It has to be calibrated. For example, Finland is better at deterring speeding because they calculate speeding tickets based on income, and because they utilize more automated systems. America? Not so much.

3. People are not great at differentiating punishments- so there is various empirical studies showing that beyond a certain amount, additional "punishment" doesn't have much effect at deterrence. People might be rational, but the difference between a 15 year and a 35 year jail sentence (to use arbitrary examples) just doesn't register.

4. Finally, it has to be clear. If you don't have a reasonable knowledge of what the punishment is likely to be, then there is little deterrent effect.

All that said, no one can credibly argue that punishment doesn't have deterrent effect. If you don't believe the literature, just look at any society where the law has broken down.

Similar to

https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/247350.pdf

(1) Certainty of being caught is a vastly more powerful deterrent than the punishment.
(2) Sending an individual convicted of a crime to prison isn't av very effective way to deter crime.
(3) Police deter crime by increasing the perception that criminals will be caught and punished.
(4) Increasing the severity of punishment does little to deter crime.
(5) There is no proof that the death penalty deters crime.

I wonder which crimes are deterred by higher socio-economic-status and economic equality. I'm guessing MtG card spoiling isn't one of them.

 

[MGibster]

GW recently had someone receive a new model before it had been announced, and reacted by putting out a release that said, "Sometimes things appear out of the Warp at unexpected and unplanned times: anyway, new Dante! GET HYPED!" Seems an infinitely preferable way of dealing with this kind of situation.

I thought about GW. I'm of a mind that the vast majority of GW "leaks" are deliberate on their part. They happen so frequently and with such regularity that it must be part of their marketing strategy.

 

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

But there is rarely a financial relationship between companies and the media that report on them. They just rotate exclusives (and use the carrot of more exclusives as a way to attempt to influence their behavior).

In general, sure, but is it the same for YouTubers? They get a lot of their income from advertising and sponsorship, which are based on viewership and subscribers.

"Someone scooped me" is part of the biz.

But shouldn't we take into consideration the manner in which the "scoop" was achieved? Just for argument's sake, let's assume that these card boxes were definitely stolen. A rogue group of anti-WoTC ninjas broke into WoTC manufacturing plants and stole these boxes. They then contacted this YouTuber and offered him the boxes, explaining they stole the goods, so they have to sell at a discount. He knowingly buys the boxes and then puts out the content. Should we ignore the crime? Again, not saying this guy bought stolen goods in the actual incident. Just using this as an example.

 

[AnotherGuy]

I suspect, this would have been better received if the private investigator rocked up in a red flashy sports car, wore shorts, a Hawain shirt and sunglasses, bore a bushy mustache and had curly hair. But that's just supposition on my part.

 

[ersatzphil]

I thought about GW. I'm of a mind that the vast majority of GW "leaks" are deliberate on their part. They happen so frequently and with such regularity that it must be part of their marketing strategy.

I mean, entirely possible. At the same time, when I type 'games workshop' into Google, it offers to autocomplete to 'games workshop warehouse issues'. Plenty of global supply chains are still borked, hobby stuff included.

 

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

Already said what I'd do. 1. Do not go after or harass your customers.

Not doing something is not doing something. What action would you take?

No, it's not. The job is to not give the company an easily avoided black eye...a few months after the company gave itself an easily avoided black eye.

I'm going to assume there are several jobs with a variety of responsibilities available at WoTC.

Don't go after your customers. Simple as. There's nothing bad that will happen if this guy posts a thousand videos spoiling all the cards a few weeks early. This is a non-issue. It's not classified state secrets or troop movements in a war zone. They're toys. That were accidentally released early. This literally happens all the time and isn't a big deal.

You may not consider it a big deal, but a company that has spent money on marketing will.

You make so many wild assumptions. Not overreacting to this is now a fireable offense to you? Weird.

It's weird to get fired for not doing your job? What's a non-weird reason to get fired for?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

In general, sure, but is it the same for YouTubers? They get a lot of their income from advertising and sponsorship, which are based on viewership and subscribers.

Also how most US journalism outfits make their money. YouTubers have managed to reinvent an already existing business model.

But shouldn't we take into consideration the manner in which the "scoop" was achieved?

No?

I get that some folks, maybe including you, feel moral outrage at this leak, but at the end of the day, this is the kind of thing that happens when you are part of the mediasphere, broadly speaking. Whether your competitor beat you because they out-hustled you; called in favors; obtained a leaked, lost or stolen product (remember Gizmodo and the iPhone prototype? I'm sure everyone at Engadget sure does), at the end of the day, you got beat.

But, just like on days where you didn't get beat, you need to start working on the next bit of content. Being upset about it is a waste of time.