This thread is giving me a headache....

False alternative anyone? I choose DRM-free and low prices. Like we already have on GOG, you know.

We don't have that many games on GOG, you know?

I'm sure it was already mentioned, but the PC Gamer article in question is utterly stupid in that it once again somehow manages to link DRM-free with pro-piracy, or at least being lenient towards it. They act suprised that a company, who've decided to offer their games DRM-free, would mind it that their DRM-free games are pirated. I've seen that same sentiment sometimes here (ie. some people asking whether it is ok to share GOG games freely around, as they don't have any DRM trying to stop it; no, just because you can do something, does not mean it is ok to do it, duh!), and I don't know what is needed to get the message through to the thick skulls of people like the one who wrote the article. Maybe a nailgun?

So once again:

Anti-DRM does not automatically mean the same as pro-piracy.

Wow, it must be awesome to live in Finland, if your laws concerning the internet are that simple that you never need to prove your innocence if you didn't do it and you can solve legal disputes as easily and cheap over there and get to freely insult the accusers on top of it! ;)

Yes, we indeedy have a legal system where the ones accusing me have to prove that I've done something wrong. And we also have a god-given right to tell the accusers go fjuck themselves, if they are clearly accusing us for nothing.

Is it quite normal in your neck of woods for people, who did nothing wrong, getting sued and sentenced for cybercrimes they didn't do? Then your legal system sucks the big one.

Nobody obliged anyone to get the game without paying for it. You have to be responsible for your actions.

Consumer friendly? I'd say customer friendly. But we are not talking about customers here, are we?

In any case, it's a possibility, because as far as I know, it's up to you to prove that you didn't do it when someone says they've got your IP tracked. As I understood it, the benefit of the doubt only applies with Penal Law, not Civil Law. And going to court is exhausting and can get expensive. So yes the system sucks, because it leaves loopholes for disreputable law firms to make profit of these very same scare tactics that CDP benefitted from, threatening people to take the case to Court with doubtful chances of proving your innocence.

And that's probably why the letters were sent in Germany and not in Finland.
And I bet you never bothered to try and understand it either and just assumed that it only affected people who were proven to have pirated the game, as CDP claimed in their own interest.

But the matter isn't as simple as some make it out to be. It's not about punishing pirates but about abusing loopholes in the German law system at the risk of hurting innocents.

Just because the victims may have been pirates, doesn't make CDP's actions any less reprehensible. They could have chosen to go after these (alleged) pirates in a more reasonable way, instead of issuing threats and trying to extort large sums of money.

So you think they should have done the same thing, just requesting less money?

Or do you think they should have done something else?

That was exactly how it was. But then it was decided that the IP was no longer a valid way to identify a person. A day later CDP had their "change of heart".
They should have demanded no money. As the money demanded
was simply a made up figure. They had a completely valid claim saying

"Make it happen that your IP is no longer seeding our game". And then, only then, they could be threatening fines.

That is proper code of conduct.

But the whole reason behind this isn't to get damages or anything, but to run a campaign with scare tactics intimidating parents to restrict their children PC access.

Yes they should have approached pirates with the lowest threat possible, but ultimately demanding also a fine of reasonable height. This way they also would have the deterrent effect but make themselves much less vulnerable.

I personally would vote that the law would demand ever increasing fines in case of repetitive action. So the first pirated games seem to come cheap, but if you do it several times they'll start fining you so badly, you wish you would have bought them. Piracy would come to extinction for sure.

If on the other side the chance to get caught is 0%, then we just have to live with piracy. Then it will never go away.

And to provide a source of income for one specific law firm. ;)

One of the things that I'm really, really curious about is how the contact between CDP and this law firm came to pass. These lawyers are known scoundrels (this is probably one of the things that you are reluctant to tell due to your involvement in the legal system, but I don't think there's really any reasonable doubt about what these guys are). They have been exploiting a loophole in the German law, and preying on P2P users, for years before the Witcher 2 incident. The fact that the majority of their victims were _probably_ pirates does not justify their draconian conduct. And if CDP really _knew_ whom they'd partnered with, then this would indeed cast considerable doubt on CDP's conduct as well.

I'm not so sure about this though.

CDP is a small company, and probably not very well-versed in the peculiarities of foreign law systems. The law firm _does_ look respectable on first glance, after all they do also business for a couple of well-known German publishers. And the law firm is very interested in convincing companies like CDP that they should partner up and extort money from pirates, because a good deal of this money goes straight into the pockets of the law firm.

Anyway, my point is: I'm giving CDP the benefit of the doubt that they may not have been totally aware of what they were doing. It seems that they have learned from their mistake, even though they are obviously trying to downplay the magnitude of it. The future will tell if they really have. :)

What's the name of this law firm?

Depending what would you call small.

CDP Red (only being a part of CDP) made around 72 mln PLN (around 18 mln EUR) revenue in first half of 2012. It's of course not including costs, but it gives you an idea about "small".

CDPR made around 112 mln PLN (26 mln EUR) revenue in first 3 quarters of 2011, while 8 mln EUR was pure income.

Maybe compared to EA it is small :P