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

[Clint_L]

In your hypothetical, the bike was stolen property whether specifically mentioned as such or not. It doesn't matter whether they bought it or not from a 3rd party, it is stolen property.

No, it was not. Read it again. I did not specify how it came to be in my neighbour's possession. This was quite intentional as I just explained. And as I pointed out earlier, property does not have to be stolen for you to not have rights to it - maybe I lost the bike, and have been looking for it, someone else found it and stuck it in their garage, then sold it to a neighbour.

So I'm not going to debate what my hypothetical is - if you want to make my hypothetical into your hypothetical, have at it.

Here's another real life analogy: Amazon ships you the wrong item by mistake, and instead of a bag of taco spice, you get a widescreen TV. What a mix-up! Did you steal it? No! Does this mean that you now own the TV? No! You don't. You should return it, though not at your cost. If they send someone to pick it up and you refuse...well now you are getting into trouble.

The point is, this dude has zero rights to the magic cards, whichever version of his story you accept. Hasbro has assumed the most generous interpretation of his story, and went above and beyond by reimbursing him (in product) for money that he paid to someone else, not them.

 

[jasper]

This isn't the way to plug a leak.

Honestly, no one should work for a company that goes for armed thugs rather than, say, image files with hidden watermarks.

Pinkertons have been known to plug leakers. Evil gin.

 

[Clint_L]

Also, can we ease up on private investigators all being jack-booted thugs, including everyone who works for Pinkertons?

I work at a school. You know what we do before we hire anyone to work with our kids (or even let them volunteer with our kids)? Investigate them. Through investigators who know what they are doing and do so legally. We check their criminal records and sometimes social media, job history, etc.. If we didn't, we would be hideously liable.

My best friend is a partner at Canada's largest law firm. They work with investigators all the time. They would be seriously incompetent if they didn't. And they choose reputable companies, yes like these, so that they know investigations and related services (like tracking down missing IP!) will be conducted legally and professionally. Because that is extremely important to law firms.

 

[Gradine]

"Hasbro hired ex-Pinkertons and regularly employees Pinkertons this is normal." is not the slam dunk defense I think some of you think it is.

I mean, in some ways, yeah, it kind of is, actually. This is such a "business as usual" event that Hasbro/WotC had no reason to even stop and think about the potential PR consequences of it.

But like... that's still not great, right? Pinkertons and their ilk are still...engaging in really awful behavior. I've seen a few people try to be like "actually Pinkertons are great guys now they saved Lincoln you know" but like... I'd like to think that reasonable people can agree that the Pinkerton Detective Agency is not a paragon of moral virtue. They trade on their terrible, horrific history for clout and still engage in the same activities that earned them that reputation in the first place. That they can still claim to "color inside the lines", a dubious claim at best but let's take it at face value, that's even more damning of the lines and the people who drew them in the first place than it does about them.

And that's the big picture issue here, isn't it? "Standard Operating Procedure" in American business, legal or not, common or not, is extremely naughty-worded up. American capitalism remains and frankly has always been an absolute horror show, and the commonality of its practices is not an excuse for the human misery it generates.

It also means that this isn't a unique "Oh WotC, you're at it again!" issue that I think many of us initially imagined it as (and as the popular narrative is still spreading); it's a "oh the business of business is treating customers as horrifically as you think you can get away with" thing. Which is waaaaay beyond the scope of this forum, for better or worse (probably better, honestly).

So what is within the scope of this thread? Demanding better of the companies that cater to us would be a start. Wizards of the Coast has tried, repeatedly, to make "We're better than that" a part of their corporate image. I don't think it's at all outside the scope of reason for fans of that company (or at the very least, the products it sells) to insist on holding them to that image, and making their displeasure known when they fail to live up to it.

 

[CommodoreKong]

No, it was not. Read it again. I did not specify how it came to be in my neighbour's possession. This was quite intentional as I just explained. And as I pointed out earlier, property does not have to be stolen for you to not have rights to it - maybe I lost the bike, and have been looking for it, someone else found it and stuck it in their garage, then sold it to a neighbour.

So I'm not going to debate what my hypothetical is - if you want to make my hypothetical into your hypothetical, have at it.

Here's another real life analogy: Amazon ships you the wrong item by mistake, and instead of a bag of taco spice, you get a widescreen TV. What a mix-up! Did you steal it? No! Does this mean that you now own the TV? No! You don't. You should return it, though not at your cost. If they send someone to pick it up and you refuse...well now you are getting into trouble.

The point is, this dude has zero rights to the magic cards, whichever version of his story you accept. Hasbro has assumed the most generous interpretation of his story, and went above and beyond by reimbursing him (in product) for money that he paid to someone else, not them.

Actually in the US if Amazon accidentally sent you a TV that you never ordered you would own it. As per the FTC it's considered a gift and you legally don't have to return it. There is info about it on the FTC's website:

What To Do if You’re Billed for Things You Never Got, or You Get Unordered Products

Billed for products you never ordered, or for products you ordered but never got? Federal laws protect you. Here's what to do.

consumer.ftc.gov

If this was legally purchased by the Youtuber from a distributor who legally purchased the product from WotC and the distributor sent him the wrong product he is legally entitled to keep it. It doesn't matter that the set was not supposed to release for a few weeks. That's an issue between the distributor and Wizards of the Coast. This Youtuber didn't sign anything with WotC saying he wouldn't purchase the product early.

If this Youtuber received this by having a distributor accidentally send him the wrong set and he is not under any sort of NDA with Wizards (which I don't believe he was based on what I've read and the size of his channel) he owns the product and is fully within his rights to open up the boxes on Youtube.

 

[ersatzphil]

Here's another real life analogy: Amazon ships you the wrong item by mistake, and instead of a bag of taco spice, you get a widescreen TV. What a mix-up! Did you steal it? No! Does this mean that you now own the TV? No! You don't. You should return it, though not at your cost. If they send someone to pick it up and you refuse...well now you are getting into trouble.

Actually in the US if Amazon accidentally sent you a TV that you never ordered you would own it. As per the FTC it's considered a gift and you legally don't have to return it. There is info about it on the FTC's website:

In @Clint_L 's defense, what he describes is true in Canadian law:

Mail Order - Entire Collection | Canadian Consumer Handbook

Mail order—including catalogues, magazine offers and bill inserts—is another way that consumers can buy things. Ordering Keep a record of the name,

www.consumerhandbook.ca

But, as you say, the person in question is in America.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Actually in the US if Amazon accidentally sent you a TV that you never ordered you would own it. As per the FTC it's considered a gift and you legally don't have to return it. There is info about it on the FTC's website:

What To Do if You’re Billed for Things You Never Got, or You Get Unordered Products

Billed for products you never ordered, or for products you ordered but never got? Federal laws protect you. Here's what to do.

consumer.ftc.gov

If this was legally purchased by the Youtuber from a distributor who legally purchased the product from WotC and the distributor sent him the wrong product he is legally entitled to keep it. It doesn't matter that the set was not supposed to release for a few weeks. That's an issue between the distributor and Wizards of the Coast. This Youtuber didn't sign anything with WotC saying he wouldn't purchase the product early.

If this Youtuber received this by having a distributor accidentally send him the wrong set and he is not under any sort of NDA with Wizards (which I don't believe he was based on what I've read and the size of his channel) he owns the product and is fully within his rights to open up the boxes on Youtube.

Actually, I covered this earlier and this isn't correct. The FTC is explaining what to do because of the increase in scams. This is nothing more than an extrapolation of the general principle regarding gifts.

This DOES NOT APPLY to other situations. For example, if you get shipped something with the wrong name. Or if you ordered a Taco Bell sauce and were given a flat-screen TV by mistake. Or any other number of situation when the person sending the item did not mean to provide you something for free.

Moreover, this does not protect you from any other laws regarding the merchandise.

PLEASE, IF YOU ONLY TAKE ONE THING FROM ALL OF THIS, IT'S THIS- DO NOT, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, ORGANIZE YOUR LIFE OR RELY ON THINGS FROM THE INTERNET YOU DON'T FULLY UNDERSTAND.

This is a weird concept for many, but the law usually (if not always) follows general equitable principles. The idea that someone would send you something unsolicited (a gift) and demand payment for it ... seems wrong because it is wrong. The idea that you knowingly profit from the mistakes of others? Also seems wrong because it is wrong.

 

[Ryujin]

Actually, I covered this earlier and this isn't correct. The FTC is explaining what to do because of the increase in scams. This is nothing more than an extrapolation of the general principle regarding gifts.

This DOES NOT APPLY to other situations. For example, if you get shipped something with the wrong name. Or if you ordered a Taco Bell sauce and were given a flat-screen TV by mistake. Or any other number of situation when the person sending the item did not mean to provide you something for free.

Moreover, this does not protect you from any other laws regarding the merchandise.

PLEASE, IF YOU ONLY TAKE ONE THING FROM ALL OF THIS, IT'S THIS- DO NOT, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, ORGANIZE YOUR LIFE OR RELY ON THINGS FROM THE INTERNET YOU DON'T FULLY UNDERSTAND.

This is a weird concept for many, but the law usually (if not always) follows general equitable principles. The idea that someone would send you something unsolicited (a gift) and demand payment for it ... seems wrong because it is wrong. The idea that you knowingly profit from the mistakes of others? Also seems wrong because it is wrong.

Very true. If nothing else, check applicable case law in your area. Because of differences between legal definitions and dictionary definitions of terms, for instance, the 'simple text' that you are reading might have completely different meanings than you think.

(In Canada) - A good example of this would be the old photocopier toner scam. There were entire companies based on the concept of calling up businesses, inquiring as to what model(s) of photocopier you had, then sending you box-loads of unsolicited toner cartridges. Later on you would receive a bill, in the mail, demanding payment for the toner. The bills would very frequently be paid, because Accounts Payable would see that the product was actually received. This law is used to enable victims of the scam to deny payment, for product they never ordered.

 

[Guest 7031328]

No, it was not. Read it again. I did not specify how it came to be in my neighbour's possession. This was quite intentional as I just explained. And as I pointed out earlier, property does not have to be stolen for you to not have rights to it - maybe I lost the bike, and have been looking for it, someone else found it and stuck it in their garage, then sold it to a neighbour.

So I'm not going to debate what my hypothetical is - if you want to make my hypothetical into your hypothetical, have at it.

Okay, so I think I see why communication is breaking down between us here and why there is such a big misunderstanding. Your hypothetical scenario doesn't make sense at all to me as you're explaining here. I can't imagine a person coming across a bike out in the open and thinking that it magically came from nowhere and does not have an owner, so you can just take the bike and not have the thought even cross your mind that it is being stolen. Even the way you're explaining it makes it sound like a stolen object, even if the person taking it is convincing themselves the bike came from nowhere.

I also inferred from your own words since you mentioned using the police to get back that property that a belief of theft was at play, but that largely hinged on my understanding that I can't imagine someone just coming across a bike and thinking they can just take it. I'm honestly trying here and just can't really get on board with your hypothetical, so we'll leave that alone.

I don't believe there is a legal obligation on the recipients part in the case of the cards, but I'm not going to be gung-ho on that because I'm not 100% and am not about to act like I'm an authority on the matter.

The main disconnect appears to continue to be with the idea that the Pinkertons are not an issue (they very much are), much less that sending them for incorrectly sent trading cards is in any way an appropriate response. I'm not sure that is a topic we're going to be able to find common ground on.

 

[Cadence]

Actually in the US if Amazon accidentally sent you a TV that you never ordered you would own it. As per the FTC it's considered a gift and you legally don't have to return it. There is info about it on the FTC's website:

What To Do if You’re Billed for Things You Never Got, or You Get Unordered Products

Billed for products you never ordered, or for products you ordered but never got? Federal laws protect you. Here's what to do.

consumer.ftc.gov

I would argue, legality aside, that it seems bad to me for someone to keep something expensive accidentally sent to them , without first seeing if the company would painlessly have a way to send it back. For all the small things I've gotten by mistake, Amazon has said just keep them. If they tried to make it non-easy to return, I wouldn't make the effort then. And if it's clearly a chance to hook me into something as a scam, then I'm doing whatever I want with it (which feels like what the law was designed for - like the toner scam mentioned above).

"Oh yeah, I did get an urn from a mortuary addressed to me that said Grandma. Full of dirt or something, so I dumped it out in the toilet and use it as an ashtray now. Law says it's mine, don't be a whiner."

If this was legally purchased by the Youtuber from a distributor who legally purchased the product from WotC and the distributor sent him the wrong product he is legally entitled to keep it. It doesn't matter that the set was not supposed to release for a few weeks. That's an issue between the distributor and Wizards of the Coast. This Youtuber didn't sign anything with WotC saying he wouldn't purchase the product early..

I find it odd to think people only have a duty to consider others if they signed something. Maybe I'm the odd one doing things like bringing back the extra bag of groceries the bagger put in my cart by accident, pointing out if they missed ringing something in, and giving back whatever extra change they gave to me. Even if it's at a big store and not a mom and pop one.

If this Youtuber received this by having a distributor accidentally send him the wrong set and he is not under any sort of NDA with Wizards (which I don't believe he was based on what I've read and the size of his channel) he owns the product and is fully within his rights to open up the boxes on Youtube.

Is there something in copyright law that lets you share others artwork online by default? (Can I open a new book and show all the pages one at a time?).