PDFS--Of the WotC Court Case

[malraux]

Well, he said he was a college student and both parents were unemployed. Let's not assume his plea and the decision suddenly means he'll have to pay the entire $100,000.00. I think it's up to WoTC to decide that.

Plus I think WoTC is less likely to care about the money so much as the agreement of his to never violate copyright again. The "permanent injunction" is useful for several reasons.

Regarding lawyers, that is an expensive proposition. I think a good defense could cost in the upper 5 or low six figures.

Out of question, would a bankruptcy void the settlement? If he has no way to pay the money back, then it really doesn't matter how much the settlement is for.

 

[JohnRTroy]

Out of question, would a bankruptcy void the settlement? If he has no way to pay the money back, then it really doesn't matter how much the settlement is for.

I honestly don't know. This is something for a lawyer--I assume bankruptcy would only allow so much protection, otherwise rich people might use that as an excuse as well as poor to get out of a court order.

I think it's up to WoTC--note that WoTC was not asking for legal fees. I wish I knew more about infringement--I think it's up to WoTC to decide when to collect, with the court being involved only if the defendant refuses to pay. But then again, I think a lawyer has to correct me.

 

[kenmarable]

I don't know the laws on this sort of things (and I think it varies by state anyway), but I'm sure it'll be a matter of garnishing his wages until it's paid off.

And figuring the legal fees could easily climb into that region, I don't think it's insane to settle for something that high. In fact, I admire him for claiming responsibility unlike the other person who isn't even responding.

Lastly, legal documents can be humorous. I like the "The Plaintiff acknowledges that the Defendant is not an infant nor incompetent." I understand the legal reasons for that statement, but I can't help reading it like an apology for a poorly worded email. I almost expected to see "The Plaintiff acknowledges that the Defendant is neither an ignoramus nor has his head, or any other portion of his body hereto, inserted up his posterior. Furthermore, it is acknowledged that the Defendant's mother cannot be 'had' for a 'dime' or any other financial amount."

 

[Voadam]

Well, he said he was a college student and both parents were unemployed. Let's not assume his plea and the decision suddenly means he'll have to pay the entire $100,000.00. I think it's up to WoTC to decide that.

Plus I think WoTC is less likely to care about the money so much as the agreement of his to never violate copyright again. The "permanent injunction" is useful for several reasons.

No, I think the injunction is practically worthless. He agrees not to infringe, it only becomes relevant if he does it again. He's just one guy. Its not like there are only seven pirates in the world and all it takes is a legal adventure path to knock them off one by one around the globe to eliminate the issue of pirated books.

I don't think they care if they won't get anything from him personally, they wanted the precedent and statement of getting that judgment. They want to say that infringing = big money damages and they will go after people who copy their stuff with heavy legal action.

 

[N0Man]

Let me be upfront and say that I'm not here to defend piracy as an absolute. It certainly can cause damage, and I think that a measure of concern over it is valid, but I think a lot of it is an overreaction.

I am going to confess that I have pirated copies of almost every 4E book in PDF format. I also want to make the claim, that I have not caused any loss of money, at all, from WotC.

How is this possible?

Simple. First, I downloaded books to evaluate them. Yes, it was illegal, but my purpose of doing so was basically to browse through the book to evaluate the book before I bought them (sometimes before they were even in my local stores). Technically, I could have drove across town, wasted time and gas, and done the same thing in the store. In the end though, WotC has been making books for 4E that I've been pleased with, so I end up buying them anyway. Since I purchased them, in the end there was no victim, except maybe the local gas station, who didn't get my business.

Also, some of the downloads were after I bought a hardcopy, and I wanted to be able to quickly search through them at the game table (through the miracle of "Find"). Many things are on DDI, but not all of them, so a digital can be useful in keeping the speed of a game going (especially given the poor quality of the Index of many of the books).

Finally, I also have file versions of many Dungeon Tiles sets. I also have purchased many from stores. The reason for this is that may sets were underproduced, time-limited and are hard or impossible to find. So yes, I've committed piracy here, but I've also sent *numerous* e-mails, and have made multiple pleas on both these boards and on the Gleemax boards for WotC to re-release or reprint some of these sets, especially those they commonly reference in current materials.

My point is that not everyone who has pirated copies of materials is making the company lose money. I've bought books after seeing them pirated, and I've pirated copies once I bought them, and I've pirated materials that I've tried to buy in stores but have been unable to, and have digital access to the majority of the content anyway as a subscriber to DDI, so even more money from me to WotC.

So, though I've pirated hundreds of dollars in materials, I have not caused WotC any loss at all.

I am not going to pretend to represent the majority of people who have pirated these books, but merely pointing out that I fall into at least one of the scenarios that the claims of loss are completely off the mark.

I would go as far as to say that the vast majority of people who pirate the materials fall into the following categories:

• People who have or will purchase the materials anyway.
• People who would not purchase the materials anyway, even if it weren't available illegally.
• People who pirate it *only* because it's free, but have little to no use from the product, and wouldn't even have interest in it if it weren't available illegally.
• People who would like to buy the materials, but really can't afford to... (but they often will try to at a later time)

If I had to hazard a guess, based on my personal experience from myself and the many other people who I've known who've commited in some form of piracy, I would say that the number of pirates out there that pirate a product instead of buying, when they were willing and able to buy it if piracy wasn't an option, is maybe 10% of the pirates.

Anyway, I'm not trying to say piracy is right, but it often doesn't hurt nearly as much as some think.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

If I had to hazard a guess, based on my personal experience from myself and the many other people who I've known who've commited in some form of piracy, I would say that the number of pirates out there that pirate a product instead of buying, when they were willing and able to buy it if piracy wasn't an option, is maybe 10% of the pirates.

Anyway, I'm not trying to say piracy is right, but it often doesn't hurt nearly as much as some think.

I disagree in my experiance most people who pirate do hurt...infact I know 2 guys who own no 4e products legaly, is not now nor ever been a DDI memeber...yet both have every dragon, dungeon, and book...event he reverasnt (But not the psion yet) and a two month old character builder...

I assumed they were in the minority, and that some did really mean no harm...but 10% is way too low...way too low

 

[kenmarable]

Anyway, I'm not trying to say piracy is right, but it often doesn't hurt nearly as much as some think.

Yep, given the nature of the problem, I'm not sure a clear scientific study could be made, and in lieu of clear facts, just how much digital piracy hurts actual sales will be debated in circles.

It's common sense that in a lawsuit WotC will argue the worst case scenario and that every view and download was a potential lost sale. It's pretty safe to assume that no, not every single one is a lost sale. However, the other extreme of "all piracy is actually good because it acts like a preview for people to actually buy the books" is also pretty safe to assume is false, especially for a very well known market leader like WotC or even the "everyone who downloaded it would never have bought it anyway" is probably not 100% true - not to mention contradictory to the previous view of illegal PDFs being good previews.

However, as to which end of that 3 pointed spectrum the truth lies (downloads = lost sales, downloads = increased sales, downloads = irrelevant) is utterly unknown to anyone, and probably varies a whole freakin lot between companies and even products at a single company.

So, yeah, it's doubtful that the harm is as bad as WotC argues (although, again, it's sensible in a lawsuit for them to argue worst case scenario and the judge to balance the two sides) but it's also doubtful no harm occured. But all anyone has are guesses as to how harmful it really is. Which is a shame, because some actual facts would be nice in these sorts of discussions, but with so much variation and such difficulty in accurately tracking these things, we'll be stuck with anecdotal evidence and competing philosophical agendas for a very long time.

 

[Mark Hope]

...So, though I've pirated hundreds of dollars in materials, I have not caused WotC any loss at all...

If you pirated these books using torrents or a p2p service like Emule, you may well have caused WotC loss. If you downloaded those books in that way, the program you used will almost certainly have made them (in whole or in part) available to other pirates. Can you be so sure that these other pirates then went on to buy the books concerned, or were merely obtaining digital copies of books they already owned? I think not. In such a case, you gave WotC's IP away to other pirates.

 

[N0Man]

I disagree in my experiance most people who pirate do hurt...infact I know 2 guys who own no 4e products legaly, is not now nor ever been a DDI memeber...yet both have every dragon, dungeon, and book...event he reverasnt (But not the psion yet) and a two month old character builder...

I assumed they were in the minority, and that some did really mean no harm...but 10% is way too low...way too low

Ok, but do you think they would have actually bought all of those if piracy wasn't an option?

Would they have bought all of them?

Would they have bought even half of those things?

You should ask them sometime, "hypothetically, if all those pirated books and magazines you have were to disappear due to a hard drive crash, and hypothetically, pirated copies all dried up and weren't available anymore, which of those books would you and could you actually buy?" If they were to even buy 20% of them, I'd be surprised.

I'm not trying to suggest that it's never a loss, I'm merely arguing that a pirated copy isn't universally a loss. Often, the arguments regarding the damage inflicted on copyright owners is completely is derived from some fantastical scenario that every person who pirates would have bought the product if it weren't available illegally.

This is an absurd and unrealistic assumption that is not grounded in reality at all.

People will take things just because they can, if it's "free", regardless of whether they would buy it, whether they still will buy it, sometimes whether or not they even like it!

 

[N0Man]

If you pirated these books using torrents or a p2p service like Emule, you may well have caused WotC loss. If you downloaded those books in that way, the program you used will almost certainly have made them (in whole or in part) available to other pirates.

That would be a valid point, if I were to have got them from P2P and shared them, rather than a direct download. Everything isn't about P2P you know.