WotC may have sent the Pinkertons to a magic leakers home. Update: WotC confirms it and has a response.

[Branduil]

Putting aside the legal arguments about all this. Like, how, given their negative publicity in the last year as it relates to MtG and D&D did they think this was a good idea? That's the most astounding part. They thought this would be received...well?

On a somewhat related note it is also crazy that the pinkertons never rebranded into like, Xfinity Thugs or whatever. Generally when your reputation is terrible you change your name, in cases like Blackwater they did that like five times.

Oh, they keep the name for a reason, make no mistake. Although their name gives them a horrific reputation with most normal people, the kind of people who actually hire them want that reputation. The corporations who hire the Pinkertons want the unions and other targets to be terrified of what might happen to them.

 

[Umbran]

News outlets post leaks all the time and they don't get the pinkertons at their door making threats.

You seem to be equating information with product intended for sale. I don't think that equivalence is valid in this case.

 

[eyeheartawk]

Oh, they keep the name for a reason, make no mistake. Although their name gives them a horrific reputation with most normal people, the kind of people who actually hire them want that reputation. The corporations who hire the Pinkertons want the unions and other targets to be terrified of what might happen to them.

Right, right.

It's important to remember in situations like this that the system isn't broken it's working exactly as it's designed to do.

It's how you end up with this and Peeps.

It's supposed to be the worst version of a marshmallow.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Oh, they keep the name for a reason, make no mistake. Although their name gives them a horrific reputation with most normal people, the kind of people who actually hire them want that reputation. The corporations who hire the Pinkertons want the unions and other targets to be terrified of what might happen to them.

Or, you know, people who actually deal with corporations (and risk assessment and personal security) have a different understanding of the brand than people who are saying the THEY ARE LITERALLY MURDERERS!!!! HAVEN'T YOU PLAYED RED DEAD REDEMPTION 2!!111!!!!!!

But whatever- I'm sure you know all about the difference between Pinkerton and Black Cube without googling, and came here to discuss these things in good faith and without rancor.

 

[eyeheartawk]

You seem to be equating information with product intended for sale. I don't think that equivalence is valid in this case.

Am I?

People acquire early copies of video games that retailers accidentally break street date on all the time and post about it on the internet, both private actors and journalists. In fact, Kotaku got famously blacklisted by Bethesda for doing that. Those video game publishers have the good sense to not send thugs to your door or threaten legal action. Because that would, you know, look bad.

 

[theCourier]

Love to see people getting upset at others getting angry. You see it every time in these kind of discussions. Well, too bad. You can't control how people feel about businesses being crappy. In fact, people should be getting mad. Without them getting mad, that OGL crap would have moved forward. And they need to be informed, of course, but even with all the information that's out so far it's still valid for people to be mad about this because it's still an overreaction from WotC.

 

[Amrûnril]

However, it is also consistent with WotC not having handed the investigators a detailed script to follow. These are things someone experienced in recovering property might say independently to get the job done, if not instructed to do otherwise.

True, but I don't think employing an agency that applies these tactics by default is any better than choosing to apply them in one specific case.

Out of curiosity, do you have anything to back this up? For example, have you ever dealt with LEO or with courts to retrieve property or to impound property? How do you think this works in different jurisdictions (and feel free to distinguish going directly to LEO and getting an ex parte court order).

Because .... while private individuals might be in trouble in terms of "detain" (and again, those are his words- but that would be a false imprisonment), it is also the case that these types of agencies, like Pinkerton, recruit heavily from law enforcement and know how to color within the lines.

My only hesitation is that while the agents could have done that, usually local LEO prefers to have a court order first and will consider this a civil matter. Not always, though.

We're talking about the threat of corporate agents with no law enforcement authority and no public oversight detaining individuals (apparently including a spouse who no one has accused of anything) in their own home. If that isn't extralegal, what does that word even mean?

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

We're talking about the threat of corporate agents with no law enforcement authority and no public oversight detaining individuals (apparently including a spouse who no one has accused of anything) in their own home. If that isn't extralegal, what does that word even mean?

We don't actually know what was said, or where they said it, do we? We have a synopsis of the feeling of a person, whose story has changed several times, and who doesn't recall exactly what was said.

I will reiterate that Pinkerton is known for coloring inside the lines. I would be very surprised if they used any magic words that would lead to liability.

If you have any actual knowledge that disputes this, or actual experience dealing with this, please let us know.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Or, you know, people who actually deal with corporations (and risk assessment and personal security) have a different understanding of the brand than people who are saying the THEY ARE LITERALLY MURDERERS!!!! HAVEN'T YOU PLAYED RED DEAD REDEMPTION 2!!111!!!!!!

But whatever- I'm sure you know all about the difference between Pinkerton and Black Cube without googling, and came here to discuss these things in good faith and without rancor.

That's an interesting argument to me, @Snarf Zagyg because at a previous international law firm I worked at, we have a list of US PI organisations we could hire from, that were preferred - it was very long and covered every state - and we also had a relatively short blacklist of "do not hire" companies, and guess who was on there? Yes, the Pinkertons. Not Securitas in general, but them specifically. A reason wasn't given, but I think we can see what it might be.

I remember this because I was like "THEY STILL EXIST?!".

Am I?

People acquire early copies of video games that retailers accidentally break street date on all the time and post about it on the internet, both private actors and journalists. In fact, Kotaku got famously blacklisted by Bethesda for doing that. Those video game publishers have the good sense to not send thugs to your door or threaten legal action. Because that would, you know, look bad.

Yes and that's a great example, because people on Kotaku defended the heck out of Bethesda for doing that. Whereas this story being discussed there is... uh... not looking good for WotC. Looking at this story anywhere on social media or comments, it looks extremely bad for WotC. People aren't supportive of this.

But whatever- I'm sure you know all about the difference between Pinkerton and Black Cube without googling, and came here to discuss these things in good faith and without rancor.

LOL, you can't hire a company that uses a brand that's deeply linked to murder and mayhem, that say "armed thugs" to the average person, and then say "Why sir people are reacting unreasonably!". The only reason that brand is still used is because it's:

A) Threatening/scary.

B) Appeals to a certain kind of power-tripping executive.

I've been in meetings where people decided to hire just a normal PI and some of them were clearly getting off on it. I wouldn't even like to think how much they got off on hiring the bloody Pinkertons (rather than another branch of Securitas or a different, but equally-skilled organisation).

Or, you know, people who actually deal with corporations (and risk assessment and personal security) have a different understanding of the brand than people who are saying the THEY ARE LITERALLY MURDERERS!!!! HAVEN'T YOU PLAYED RED DEAD REDEMPTION 2!!111!!!!!!

You think the sort of people hiring them haven't played RDR2? Haven't watched documentaries? Don't know history? Because I can assure you they have/do. That's part of the illicit thrill of hiring an organisation like this, rather than using a brand that doesn't have deep historical association.

And let's be clear - this isn't something RDR2 made up - anyone who knows history at all knows how vile that brand's associations are. Yes, historically they are "literally murderers". Why retain that brand if you don't want to trade on that?

 

[Hexmage-EN]

IIRC Nintendo is also at this moment aggressively seeking out the leaker for the art book of the upcoming Zelda game.