PDFS--Of the WotC Court Case

[N0Man]

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.

I understand you completely, it's just that when studies have been done on these subjects, they often really don't support many of the arguments made.

I buy books from WotC because I like their products, I think they are worth buying, and I want to do my fair share in keeping the company profitable and alive. I personally believe that any person who can afford to buy from WotC, claims to like the product, and chooses to pirate instead is a selfish shmuck, but that's just my opinion.

I'm just sharing my experience, and just for the fact that *I* exist, with the habits that I've already described, means that obviously the rule that a pirated copy = a lost sale is not true, and I find it a pretty unlikely possibility that I'm the only person who falls into such a category. How much it's not true is a matter of complete conjecture, but my gut feeling is that the loss is vastly overestimated, but it's impossible to prove or disprove.

I certainly concede that not everyone is like me... because I would haven't of put the files online for everyone else to get in the first place. Just for that fact, there obviously aren't like me.

 

[Thanee]

So, they really thought there was just the visible watermark in the PDFs?

How naive!

Bye
Thanee

 

[Cadfan]

Question, since I didn't read the court documents:
How do they know the accused actually put these items up on P2P themselves?
How can they prove that someone didn't hack their PC and take the files, or a friend using that PC, considering how many folks' WIFI networks aren't secured, PCs that are shared, and how many folk's computers are riddled with malware?
Or that the security system has itself been broken..rather neat way to cover your tracks by putting Santa Claus or some poor schlub as the actual ID, eh?

I know civil cases require less proof than criminal, but the burden of proof etc...ya know?

The problem here is that the burden proof isn't philosphical certainty, its whether people believe your alternate explanation. Basically, to advance those arguments the defendants would have to walk into the courtroom, tell the judge or jury that they didn't upload the documents, that someone must have stolen them from their computers and uploaded them, and then the judge or jury would have to believe them as opposed to believing the alternate hypothesis- that they did it.

Imagine this- I say you stole a hundred bucks from my wallet. You say you didn't. The only evidence is my testimony, and yours. I can't even prove I had the hundred bucks before hand, except by my statement saying that I did.

That's enough evidence to get you criminally convicted, beyond a reasonable doubt, and put in jail. If a jury believes me and not you, of course. And if they don't believe me, well, you can steal my hundred dollars and nothing happens to you.

That may seem shocking, but... its been the basis of the legal system as long as its existed. Most crimes just haven't got proof that would hold up to scientific or philosophical rigor. Instead we rely on a jury to listen to everything, and just sort of figure things out as best they can.

And the concept that copyright cases can hit ordinary Joe Bloes harder than criminal fines...is outrageous.

Criminal fines tend to be very small in comparison to civil damages. Monetary fines aren't really the point of the criminal system, which is more about loss of freedom as punishment. Its just how the system is built- civil costs you money, criminal costs you time.

 

[Imban]

So, they really thought there was just the visible watermark in the PDFs?

How naive!

The new watermark was implemented in December 2008.
The old one contained an invisible component as well.

I would categorize this as "a successful sting operation" far more than "oh those dumbasses thinking it was that easy."

(snip everything you said)

Look, it's at the very least not polite to declare on a message board frequented by some of a game's creators that you're looting their stuff for free. If you think the creator deserves contempt - and I freely give it to anyone who tries to remove previously available content from all circulation permanently - then go ahead, I guess, but realize it for what it is.

(Like ff6shadow and his deciding to delete all his 4e stuff forever. I kept putting off spitefully reposting all of it in his thread and then WotC's forums exploded, but again, it's not something you say in public about someone you approve of.)

Basically, to advance those arguments the defendants would have to walk into the courtroom, tell the judge or jury that they didn't upload the documents, that someone must have stolen them from their computers and uploaded them, and then the judge or jury would have to believe them as opposed to believing the alternate hypothesis- that they did it.

The funny thing about this is that according to the documents, one of the defendants is attempting precisely this defense. I figure it'll be approximately as likely to succeed as in any other copyright case (i.e. not at all) because it seems to me, bearing in mind that I'm not a lawyer, that it's rooted in a fundamental misconception of the differences between civil and criminal trials. Civil trials only require the preponderance of the evidence, while criminal trials require a higher standard of proof.

For example, if you're absolutely sure one of two people committed a murder, but there's always going to be uncertainty as to which one, our criminal system basically mandates that they both go free. On the other hand, in a civil trial it'd be relatively easy to convince people that whichever one seemed somewhat more likely had the "preponderance of the evidence" against him and thus you could sue for damages. Also see the OJ Simpson trial, where the government failed to prove that he committed murder beyond a reasonable doubt, but it was successfully proven that it was likely that he caused a wrongful death.

Point is, "but there's at least a CHANCE it could have been my evil twin!" can't get you out of copyright infringement.

 

[jgerman]

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.

It's not just unknown, the argument can be made that it's unknowable.

However, there is one aspect of this whole fiasco that is certain: The only thing that absolutely, 100%, resulted in lost sales for WotC was the removal of the PDFs for purchase.

 

[jgerman]

Look, it's at the very least not polite to declare on a message board frequented by some of a game's creators that you're looting their stuff for free. If you think the creator deserves contempt - and I freely give it to anyone who tries to remove previously available content from all circulation permanently - then go ahead, I guess, but realize it for what it is.

I'd say it's very polite. He's providing valuable market information for free

Copyright infringement in the digital age is a reality, it's not going to change, it's time the rules change.

This whole endeavor by WotC is a complete failure as well as being irrational. They're not going to recover the money they spent to sue, they've generated ill-will in the community, they haven't stopped infringement, and they started losing sales the instant they took down the legal pdfs.

This is a net loss for WotC and if I was a shareholder I'd be pissed.

 

[Baron Opal]

However, there is one aspect of this whole fiasco that is certain: The only thing that absolutely, 100%, resulted in lost sales for WotC was the removal of the PDFs for purchase.

No. They had documentation from one of the torrent sites as to the number of downloads of the PHB 2. It was over twice the number of reported sales of the book. There are many torrent sites.

That's 100% indicative of lost sales from pirating. And by no small amount, either. How much has been lost is certainly debatable.

 

[JohnRTroy]

I think if I was on a jury I'd be skeptical of "somebody else did it", unless they can back it up with better proof.

If somebody wanted to prove legitimate computer compromises, there are ways to go about doing it. Get the ISP involved--have the lawyers get records looking for activity. See if the person was the victim of identity theft, or a credit fraud. Get receipts from a computer repair person who had to clean up a virus or breach and have it stated on the receipt. If the breach was on a work or corporate computer get IT involved. And if I knew I'd been hacked, I would probably contact every person I bought an electronic copy from and tell them of a possible breach, so that they would help me fight it.

If somebody was going to personally get revenge as a hacker there would be a lot worse ways than stealing a person's PDFs and putting them on-line, so I see the scenario as possible but highly improbable.

Copyright infringement in the digital age is a reality, it's not going to change, it's time the rules change.

Such as maybe having trusted computer ids, better security, and better DRM that does not cause computer problems and has enough safeguards for the consumer? See, that argument can work both ways. I honestly think we're going end up having more restrictions and anonymity will become a thing of the past. All we really need is one massive cyberattack that defrauds millions (or is a true terrorist attack on critical systems) of people to do it.

Personally, I wish we had that system so we could do something like have personal violations like traffic tickets--you get caught, automatic $1000 fine or something like that. You want to fight it, it's like a traffic ticket from an automated camera--you vs. the ISP cop or something like that. Most people don't challenge traffic tickets. In this scenario, the proceeds in part go to the publisher who was defrauded. If it was like that, you'd see a lot more people not bother, much like there are people who speed and double-park but the risk of getting caught is higher and most people will obey the law. I'm kind of hoping in 10-20 years it will actually be like that.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

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.

OK, well with movies, and music, and novels that may be a big quastion, how can you even pretend to ask it about an RPG?

every pirate I know plays the game...most do not own the books they use legaly...I will use the guy from my LFR game as an example:

if he lost and could not replace his pirated books and programs...he would be forced to buy atleast some of them...or steal them another way...becuse we do not update at the table. He enjoys playing, he loves options, and how do you make characters with out books???

Ok lets take this step further, if guy A has draconomicon as pirated only, maybe he would or would not have bought it...but if you play the game for long there are vooks you NEED, and if you pirated them you are stealing...no ifs and or buts...



by the way, every pirate I know of also is better off with money then I am...I am a completest, I want every book...I have not bought one since divine power came out...becuse I am broke. Mean wile the guy from the example above has no family (Aka wife kids) owns his car, lives in a house with no morgage payment, and make 80,000 a year...he CAN afford the books but he thinks it is funny not to pay for things...

 

[Mark Hope]

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.

Hence the "if" at the start of the post. Whatever. You're clearly happy being a thief, so you're a lost cause. A shame you weren't raised to be a person of honour instead. Your family must be so very proud.