The issue is they are going after fans which is the same mistake T$R made in the 90s. No one wants Pinkerton agents showing up at their house, and if that happens and you discover they were sent by a company you buy games from, you and others are going to be upset. This should be alarming to people. If it's normal in the industry, that too should be alarming. Companies shouldn't have this kind of power in a democracy plain and simple. But doubly so for the game industry
What "power" are you referring to? The power to get their products, which were misappropriated (maybe not stolen, but acquired under circumstances which should not have occurred) by others?
So out of curiosity, what would you propose that would be acceptable to both sides? On one side we have WoTC, who does not want people getting merchandise before it is available and wants to ensure that others in the future don't do what this YouTuber did. On the other side, we have a guy who may have accidentally gotten merchandise he shouldn't have, but would like to not be threatened and intimidated by a large and financially capable corporation.
What would it look like for you? What would the process be? What would you do if you were in charge at WoTC? And i'm going to pre-emptively state that saying, "I don't know," isn't a good answer. Because "I don't know" leads to this type of incident. I'm willing to bet that the guy who was in charge of getting this situation handled probably had no idea who Pinkerton was or the reputation they had. So how woud you handle it?
Oh yes, how dare someone complain about society when they live in society and aren't flawless human beings that never need to make compromises. The Pinkertons have a negative reputation for things they continue to do,
Would it have made a difference if it was a different company with a cleaner record?
and if you want to be separated from the past things they did, maybe don't buy their company and keep the branding.
My guess is the branding was part of what attracted the buyers. Some people find the things Pinkertons has done to be attracious. I'd agree. They have a terrible reputation. They've done some horrific things. They've also got a reputation as the oldest security and investigative firm. I'm willing to bet they paid a hefty amount to say they have the oldest security and investigation firm.
Hasbro sent them after a guy who's entire schtick is being an online presence, they had to have known the bad press that would result from using them.
So what are their options? Let people take their products by whatever manner or whatever means they believe is appropriate? How about all the other
YouTubers who were going to release their own unboxing videos and have been working with WoTC, following the rules set up? Let's assume this YouTuber got these card completely by mistake. No chance of anything nefarious happening. Should that be enough to allow him to do something the rest of the YouTubers who have taken the time to form a relationship with WoTC should just think of as, yeah it happens. They don't have that option. They can't just go an break contracts they have with WoTC and forego the set embargo dates. They lose money too. This affects more than just some YouTuber who got lucky and got boxes of unreleased merchandise.
I don't understand why some people are defending WoTC. (or at least claiming their actions and choices were no big deal)
Wasn't the OGL fiasco a wake up call?...
Those are two different incidents with two completely different set of circumstances. Are WoTC and parent company Hasbro greedy? Yes, of course. Absurdly greedy. I wouldn't put it passed them to try and figure out some other underhanded way of squeezing even more money out of its customers. That doesn't mean everything they do is wrong, though. In this case, while you may not like a particular company hired to retrieve their products, you should try to view the incident from an unbiased point of view. At the end of the day, the YouTuber should not have had those cards. He should not have revealed them until after the embargo date.
When you hire a detective agency, you are spying.
Not always. I mean, they first have to figure out who to "spy" on. That's the investigative part. Someething happened. Someone did it. Who did it? We don't know, so we need to find out using what public information is available to give us leads.
Might that result in more in depth investigation of someone, and potentially "spying"? Sure, but you have to get there first. It's not automatic.
Someone could be doing wrong but this is still a violation of privacy.
How so? He had it on a YouTube channel where he broadcast it for anyone to see. The whole purpose was to get viewers. Now if later on there comes some proof that they somehow managed to get into his accounts without consent or anyone knowing and looked at other information regarding the YouTuber, sure, that could be a violation of privacy.
Me running around with my weiner in my hand and broadcasting it on youtube on a public channel, should not result in in you having an accusation of violating my privacy because you watched the entire video.
Abd it is a level of power normal people don’t have the same access to because it’s expensive. WOTC can afford to spy on you through PI’s all the time. But you can’t do the same to them unless you are Bill Gates. Like I said, if there was a crime, they can report it, they can file a lawsuit. But there are reasons this kind of action, especially by a game company, makes people extremely uneasy
Sending the Pinkertons stinks. It’s rotten. Blaming the victim is also bad imho.
But who is the victim? The company who had their products misappropriated and somehow given to someone who should not have had access to them, or the guy who somehow got these cards? How about we just don't use labels such a "victim" without having a clear picture of what that would look like in this particular situation.
So, everything you've posted in this thread is gross, but this in particular bears correction -- this quote from the Engadget article sloppily references a larger part of the Polygon article that doesn't even refer to this incident:
From what I've seen, oldschoolmtg has received no offer of restitution and made no statement regarding his viewership.
It frankly doesn't matter whether these people are actually stealing these cards or what logo the thugs have on their lapel pins; sending muscle to the address of a private citizen for the purposes of intimidation is wrong, and shouldn't be condoned, supported, or apologized for.
Wait, are you proposing that even if crimes were committed, and the property was stolen, the aggrieved party should have no method of retrieving their property? I get that everyone wants to make it seem as if the Pinkerton employees showed up and busted this guy's door down, dragged him out of his home and threatened to break his legs if he
At no point has this YouTuber said he was roughed up. I'm willing to bet he probably didn't know what Pinkerton was until he googled it. I'm sure being told you can be looking at potential jail time for stolen property isn't the most calming thing, but it seems it was pretty unclear how he got the cards. Hell, he even says in his video that he isn't sure what happened for him to get those boxes.
But seriously, it wasn't some incident where he was roughed up. Stern language? Probably... and just to err on the side of caution, let's go with, yes, they spoke to him sternly. I'm pretty sure that isn't the same as being bullied, harassed, or intimidated. Did he find it intimidating? Most likely, but truthful statements such as you can be looking at jail time for stolen goods can be intimidating without the person making them having the intent to intimidate.
But some of us are second-generation descendants of Pennsylvanian coal miners and don't have to "Google" why seeing Pinkerton in the news is alarming. Again, to my knowledge, not even Amazon or Google has them shaking people down.
Not that I want to get into that discussion, but you must have missed all the union busting fun Amazon has been engaging in.
