PDFS--Of the WotC Court Case

[ProfessorCirno]

Yes.

But at what point?

I understand that the last one IS file sharing, plain and simple, even if it was unintended file sharing at that degree. But what about all the others?

 

[jgbrowning]

As a small publisher, I too recently found my work on scribd.

As did I. I sent a notice a few days ago and they removed it. Our book had been downloaded over 250 times and viewed over 1200 (if I'm remembering properly), which is just about as many downloads as we've sold as PDF. And Scribd is only one site. It made me post at my livejournal - Sometimes I don't like our fans. For every illegal copy of one of our products floating around the web, there is a "fan" who put it there. That's depressing.

joe b.

 

[jgbrowning]

But at what point?

The instant you create a copy of the product that doesn't fall under fair use you've committed copyright infringment. It's not "piracy", it's copyright infringement. If you make a copy that is not under fair use, you've infringed.

A general rule of thumb is that the instant that the copyrighted material is in more than a single place at a single time, and in which all the copies are not only in your personal possession is probably the instant where infringement occurs.

joe b.

 

[Grazzt]

As did I. I sent a notice a few days ago and they removed it. Our book had been downloaded over 250 times and viewed over 1200 (if I'm remembering properly), which is just about as many downloads as we've sold as PDF. And Scribd is only one site. It made me post at my livejournal - Sometimes I don't like our fans. For every illegal copy of one of our products floating around the web, there is a "fan" who put it there. That's depressing.

joe b.

Havent checked Scribd, but I remember seeing a lot of our Necromancer Games stuff floating around the torrent sites and newsgroups. (Bill and I found 'em several years ago)

 

[jgbrowning]

Havent checked Scribd, but I remember seeing a lot of our Necromancer Games stuff floating around the torrent sites and newsgroups. (Bill and I found 'em several years ago)

You should probably check. They make you jump through hoops to remove the material, but they do remove it.

I stumbled upon it after reading about JK Rowling's issue with the site.

joe b.

 

[CapnZapp]

Yes.

I am sorry, but you must make a choice:

Either accept that sharing of digital files are one of the most inherently valuable aspects of the new technology, as well as the fact that the people you call "pirates" 1) haven't actually stolen anything and 2) most probably you have several friends and acquaintances which will face jail time or economic ruin if you get your wish.

Or, to get what you want, we either need to turn back the clock to the times where sharing information was cumbersome and slow, or we need to accept draconic levels of privacy invasions where everything you do on the Internet is closely monitored and where you no longer are in control of your computer and your browser.



Of course, there is a third option:

Say no to orwellian police states where nine year old kids are sued for millions for sharing their favorite books with others. Accept the wondrous new abilities to share and disseminate information created by new technology. Create new business models that embrace these new capabilities. Cut out middle men (like music record labels). Get your customers to pay you directly. Earn more money than in your wildest dreams.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

That's easily said, but evidently not easily done.

I hate the idea of restricting a product through artificial measures so it does less than it could. But I also want to have the product in the first place, and if these measures are the only thing people can come up with to ensure they still earn enough money to create more products... I am unhappy, but I'd rather take that than nothing at all.

Maybe subscription services are the way to go. Or maybe they are not, since investing in the software system behind is no less expensive than creating the products you sell...

 

[Silverblade The Ench]

This silliness is why I said elsewhere that it's not theft, it cannot be theft, it's unauthorized copying.
It's a huge difference.
if you can pay for a digital item, you should, if you can't...well tough, you are not stealing a real item.

See, in the real world, it's finite.
3000 books are real objects, they take real wood and ink to make, this world we live on is finite. That is the basis of THEFT, taking real things. and with violence or menaces, it's robbery.
But you could send 1 billion copies of them on pdf to everyone on Earth...which is impossible for real items. Thus, it's copying, not theft. If it's theft, then how come I can give a billion copies of them away? Why shouldn't a perosn who cannot afford a copy, have one? Money is finite, copies are not.

Stop confusing copying with theft, it's wrong and a dirty tactic by the "controllers" (and I don't mean 4th ed, lol)
Our 19th century legal ideas and grubby corporations don't want to grow up and realize this is the 21st century.

And note, I'm an artist, I know folks can copy my stuff, too bloody bad, big deal! compared to robbery at knifepoint, which I have experience of, it's nothing like the same!!

of course people should be paid for their work..within limits. IP and Copyright, as they are currently, are major, dangerous nooses around our necks :/
We desperately need free flowing information and entertainment.
Why?
Free laptops could stop more wars than bombs and be a lot cheaper.
Ignorance is the root of much of the world's woes.
etc etc

Selling pdfs of the D&D books, including current ones, at $1 to 5 a pop, rather than the dumb prices they want for the recent items, would net a lot more money and good will.
You'll always get folk copying, tough, too bad!

Wanna tear yer eyes out so you don't see bad stuff, hm?
Remove your pituitary gland so you don't get "naughty" thoughts?
Stuff happens, long as it isn't really bad, tough, get over it.
I'd rather have copying than a police state.
Jeesh.

See what happened ot the record industry when they started suing folk, why Metallica realized legal action made things worse for them...

and here's a thought for ya all...
imagine all the signals flying out of wi fis and other systems.
So, we're broadcasting all our data into space.
Do you really think our copyright means jack squat to the Aliens who may pick it up in centuries to come, eh? Or even out distance ancestors who may pick the signals up as they fly to the star safter we've probably reduced this Earth to a dead mess.
Get real, we've broadcasted our data to space, our notions of controlling data are insane

Adding a note on pdfs that they were made by a real person, maybe with pictures of the writers etc, would do a lot more good than this legal lunacy which has only caused more ill will.
Why? make folk realize that *people* make content, and should be respected, and thus paid, when you are able to!
People have no respect for faceless corporations.

I love D&D, I buy D&D stuff, I'm happy to support the hobby I love os much. I respect the D&D designers and creators out there, I do not respect WOTC, and I do not believe in the damnable copyright mania.

I have copies of thousands of books and works of art...in my head. Nobody has any right or claim on those. Same damn thing. Accept this and move on.

 

[JohnRTroy]

Am I a nasty, dirty pirate?

Counterfeiting and piracy are drastically different things. You should know not to try and compare them. I see your strawman, and refuse it.

What I see as the straw man is the people parrotting "you can't stop piracy no matter how hard you try". Well, that can be applied to everything. Counterfeiting, like piracy, causes financial damage, it's just the government and citizens are the victims rather than a corporation or individual. Digital Piracy is the only crime I see where people want the victims to "ignore it".

If you believe you have the right to share a book amongst people, there are ways to do it ethically that mimic the old ways.

Let them view your screen, or a big monitor or projector. A physical book can only occupy a certain amount of space. Or, give them access to your computer via VNC or something that allows viewing but not copying when you're in the same location (over a LAN). But don't copy. That's the key thing. If you truly want to lend a person your book, delete your copy on your disk, and accept that (a) the person might never give it back, same as a book and (b) the person could upload it, putting you at risk.

Or, to get what you want, we either need to turn back the clock to the times where sharing information was cumbersome and slow, or we need to accept draconic levels of privacy invasions where everything you do on the Internet is closely monitored and where you no longer are in control of your computer and your browser.

Say no to orwellian police states where nine year old kids are sued for millions for sharing their favorite books with others. Accept the wondrous new abilities to share and disseminate information created by new technology. Create new business models that embrace these new capabilities. Cut out middle men (like music record labels). Get your customers to pay you directly. Earn more money than in your wildest dreams.

Privacy is going to be hard to come by in the new age, especially with people twittering and blogging and making public statements.

Your last statement is flawed. Economic realities take over. Sharing is no good if it drives the business you patronize out. It's easy to say "create new business models" when it's not your job on the line. The so-called "long tail" is not very lucrative, unless you are a huge aggregator. I think the current recession is going to be a wake up call. You're already seeing people change their models--newspapers want to start getting people to pay for content again.

As for the minor argument, I was a minor too - before file sharing and the internet - I saved my hard earned money (working at Dairy Queen, allowance, odd jobs, etc.) to get the D&D books I loved. It is called learning responsibility and managing your priorities. After all, I did not get all the books I wanted.

Exactly, nobody is learning to "do without". Entertainment is much higher on the scale of the "hierarchy of needs". I'm afraid those who endorse piracy are not learning to do without or sacrifice. There are many legal ways of getting entertainment if you are not wealthy.

That's easily said, but evidently not easily done.

I hate the idea of restricting a product through artificial measures so it does less than it could. But I also want to have the product in the first place, and if these measures are the only thing people can come up with to ensure they still earn enough money to create more products... I am unhappy, but I'd rather take that than nothing at all.

Maybe subscription services are the way to go. Or maybe they are not, since investing in the software system behind is no less expensive than creating the products you sell...

I dislike DRM myself, but like locks, they are there to keep the honest people honest. Taking away locks would not be a good thing.

That's what I like about Watermarking. Wizards was able to find the idiots who posted the items and hopefully punish them.

I've become a little cynical--but I think there are two components to enforcing laws. Fear, and Guilt/Ethics. The former is more important than the latter. Some people might be tempted to smoke pot or patronize a prostitute or go over the speed limit based on their own moral standards, but they have enough fear to not do it because if they get caught, it would mean very bad things.

What I'd like to see is the criminalization of piracy and/or some sort of tort reform on it. You make it a crime, and if piracy is detected the state gives the person a ticket. There's a maximum penalty of say, $5000.00, and perhaps some mild jail time (30-90 days). You make it like traffic tickets so you get it as soon as its detected. Most people will pay the fees, and it teaches the young people quickly not to do it, because the parents will be BS and take Internet privileges away, and everybody is mostly scared of going to jail.

This would also reduce the torts--since then companies would be able to save their lawsuits for the biggest and boldest offenders. If you took away the discrepancy of people suing for millions of dollars in damages against the 15 year old, and replaced it with the system above, I think most people would accept it.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

What I see as the straw man is the people parrotting "you can't stop piracy no matter how hard you try". Well, that can be applied to everything. Counterfeiting, like piracy, causes financial damage, it's just the government and citizens are the victims rather than a corporation or individual. Digital Piracy is the only crime I see where people want the victims to "ignore it".

I'm sorry you feel that way. Nonetheless, piracy is not the same as counterfeiting. It's simply not comparable. And again, I refuse to lower to your strawman.

As for the victims, HI! I work with academia. Every time I or anyone I work with write anything at all we can fully expect it to be spread widely anywhere in the world for absolutely free. And you know what? All of us. All of us. Wouldn't have it any other way.