It's called "ethics". Putting the current disaster aside for a moment, if you honestly don't understand that there is more to consider in life than price and quality, I doubt that someone here can explain it to you.
I would say that I do have ethics. I would also say that while the decision to discontinue .pdf distribution is questionable in its effectiveness, it is not exactly something that strikes me as having much of an ethical component. To me, this is no different than having a neighbor who one day puts up a fence. Up until that day, maybe they did not mind the neighbor kids playing in their yard. The local kids may not like the fence, but it really is not their yard to begin with.
A quick run down of my position on the issue of .pdf distribution.
- Wizards was stupid to let other companies sell .pdf's of their stuff in the first place.
- Wizards should have come up with some sort of copy protection system instead of letting raw .pdf files be sold at all
-- That copy protection system should allow for legitimate customers to use the content from any computer they own, to replace lost copies, and to 'own' a copy on their own HD.
- Discontinuing .pdf distribution was within their rights. Given the intent of their digital initiative, this was kind of inevitable in my mind.
-- Wizards really should provide something to customers of the affected sites that had deals that let them access the content at well to make up for screwing them.
--- However, I do not think Wizards is really under any formal obligation to do so. Everyone has a right to be an
, even if it is undesireable.
- Taking the actions of a multi-million dollar company personally at any level is really just dumb.
I am convinced that Wizards has acted within their rights here. I am not entirely convinced that wizards has any ethical obligation to the customers of other companies, but I do think they ought to make a meaningful gesture to accomodate those adversely affected. But I do think that much of the noise being made stinks of the same kind of hippocracy of people who complain about Walmarts business practices, call them evil, but still shop there. Or to use another example, it is like a vegitarian who refuses to eat meat on ethical grounds, but will still pay extra for an all leather interior for their car. THe opinion does not really carry that much weight.
On the subject of my ethics, based on my ethical stance against hippocracy, Wizards actions do not affect me enough to make me rethink being a customer, so I wont complain here. Considering that I also believe that Wizards are within their rights here, the only questions to my mind with D&D are still about Price, Quality, and product availability.
If this is truly that strong an ethical issue for you, then I will accept that as your answer, but disagree with it. I am just wondering exactly what ethical boundary it is that so many people think they crossed here.
END COMMUNICATION
