Making games is expensive too. The legal fees would only be relevant if they were found guilty, otherwise they can make the plaintiffs pay the legal fees when the charges are dismissed.

That may be the case in Cambodia (I really have no Idea) but civil courts of many countries don't operate that way.

Also, it's not a "reasonable doubt" model. A judge who is old and confused by all the jibber jabber of technology makes a decision based on what he or she often knows nothing about (they don't even break for deliberation.)

Oh jeez not another 'you cheated on me GOG' story.

It's also the case in the UK.


edit: also this article is hilarious!
"Despite this critique, CD Projekt continues to pursue BitTorrent users in Germany, probably because it earns them good money."

Yeah, because 1000 euros will definitely cover their legal fees! Good money indeed!

And they announced it MONTHS before release. They said they will pursue pirates this way.

And they never said they're cool with piracy. They've said they don't want to punish legal buyers with DRM. Totally different thing.

Admittedly I'm not very familiar with the legal system of any country, but I've some experience with being wrongly accused (which is why I find suggestions like those unnerving). To me, as it is presented this sounds (and I'm not saying it's true or that the source is reliable) like a situation where the defendants are put into a position where they have to prove their innocence, and to my understanding it's actually the job of the accuser to prove the guilt. Even if you can prove your innocence, it's a bother to do so (if it was just something like a short phone call, no one would need to pay; it actually takes time and effort, and isn't necessarily easy at all).

As for my own opinion about the matter, I'm not going to believe the source without further proof. I was just commenting on why I think people might get upset.

They are probably going after seeds only (those with 100% game file uploading to others) based on IP addresses. Let's just hope they try to make sure which computer had the particular IP address at this time, and I'm cool with it.

Pursuing pirates this way is a very good thing. If some of them will literally PAY, I would be delighted.
Yeah, cause it hurts so much to ignore the threats if you're innocent.

Tsk tsk.

Gold medal overreaction - don't bust a (blue) vein, Cheese.

It's not the case in Cambodia. The concept of intellectual property barely exists here, and you can spend a decade in jail without actually even being charged with a crime, which makes accusations a little more serious.

I was referring to the model CDP is alleged to be using, not the court system. They are offering out of court settlements to people. This is me, if you read it, you'll note that I've worked closely with someone who has spent years being the subject of supposedly unfair legal proceedings by "A judge who is old and confused by all the jibber jabber of technology" as you put it, yet I happen to completely agree with the legal rulings against him.

By this definition, Canada is uncivilized. The losing party is often responsible for court costs but that is not to be confused with legal fees. That is, of course, an oversimplification. Reimbursement can be hidden within punitive damages or some such. Still, that is the exception, not the rule.

Canada is uncivilized by any definition.

Cheese, I'm not quite sure what to say. I think you've misrepresented both GOG, CDPR, and their respective stances towards piracy. 1) CDPR said explicitly they were going to do this during The WItcher 2 announcement. 2) This is CDPR's action, not GOG's. 3) Neither CDPR nor GOG said they were 'cool' with piracy. Though I will grant you this is pushing their "fine-line" position to the limit.

Is this method of going after pirates necessarily good? No. Indeed in the U.S., the RIAA and others have used intimidation tactics like this to get money from clearly innocent people who don't even know how to put basic security on their WIFI let alone what a torrent what was (hint on how their IP came up). On the other hand, we don't know what measures CDPR have taken and that site hardly seems like the most unbiased, nor does it provide any information to support their claims that innocent people have been caught up in this. Further, going after seeders, if you can find them, know it is them, while taking steps to reduce innocent people being accused (unfortunately no system will be 100% accurate in this regard) is the best way, in my mind, to combat piracy rather than DRM systems. Going after your average downloader in such a way may not be terribly productive, but going after seeders, again if you can find them, is. Anyway that's my take. Hopefully innocent people are not getting wrapped up in this as the article alleges.

Anyway, I hope you cool down and we see you again. I've enjoyed conversing with you on the forums in the past.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcYppAs6ZdI

Unfortunately that's not what's happened in the US. Law firms representing RIAA and MPAA have used intimidation tactics and threat of how much legal representation would cost to scare innocent people into paying. This is especially true when they've gone after older people. It may be a cliche, but they really have gone after and successfully gotten money from grandmas who barely understand how to turn their computer on, much less pirate. Hopefully the law firm representing CDPR in Europe is not using such tactics (or even better if the situation in Europe is as you say and such that such tactics are hard or impossible). This way indeed innocent people would be easily able to fight this without much cost to themselves in either time or money.

<clear throat>Hitler.

There, the thread is now complete. :P

Back to gaming for me! :)