I never lost faith. Their 'extortion' was no different than harsh fines levied for illegally using public transit or punitive damages filed against a burglar.

I respect this decision, but they shouldn't have gotten involved in any of this in the first place. In my view this whole affair has done some irreparable damage to the reputation of CD Projekt. I'm certainly not an enthusiastic supporter of theirs any more.

Exactly.

1. You're missing the point; it's about offering a quick and easy option as an alternative to going directly to court - which they have every right to do. Just like you and everybody else have the right to file a civil lawsuit against anyone you please.

a) They don't have to be as this is not necessary in order to file a lawsuit against someone.

b) Even if I own the game I'm not allowed to pirate it. Pirating isn't the same as playing an illegal copy - it's about sharing (you don't even have to install it yourself) a copy with others. Hence, even if you've bought the game (it just hasn't arrived yet), they have every right to drag you to court.

c) I won't argue that some judges are techno-illiterate, but it's pretty clear that most people have no clue about courts either, so it's no wonder one can get baffled by some rulings. I believe it's mainly because people think a judge has the freedom to be lenient the way the offended has; e.g. CDPR dropping the fine against one pirate that had also bought the game - the judge couldn't have done the same as that would be against the laws. Further, people simply aren't aware of how many laws they break and/or don't see it as breaking laws. Even using a trainer on a legally bought game is illegal according to the EULA - I have no idea of how that would turn out in a court, but the developer would actually have a case - which baffles me too on a "human level", although it makes sense(?) in a legal context.

The only viable alternative to sending out those letters is to take uspected filesharers directly to court. How is that any better? I really don't get why people can get so upset when given a better alternative - its existence does not make the original alternative void.

2. Actually, in Germany it is that simple. Whoever "owns" the IP (e.g. the landlord) is responsible for everything that IP is used for. Yes, it's a law I hope never will be passed where I live, but it is a law there where thses letters were sent out. If you can document that said IP shared your property illegally, then the owner of the IP will be held responsible, regardless of it being fair or not - it's the law.

However, CDPR didn't use what the German legislation served them on a silver platter. Instead of going directly to court - where they'd most likely win because of this law - they contacted the person first, making sure that it was correct, even excusing one person that wouldn't had a chance to prove his "innocence" (he was guilty) in court. There's a lot of guess-work in this case, but that's a fact that shows that CDPR did not assume that accuracy of the method reflected the particular kind of pirates they were after.

Fairytales about MAC adresses? Yes, I know MAC addresses can be changed and even spoofed (wouldn't be much of a point in this context, though), but I also know that less than 1% actually does this on a regular basis. As far as I can tell, you'd have to change your MAC several times during the download of TW2 for it to have any effect. The inconvenience of it alone would be enough for people to rather take their chances in the big legal letter lottery.

3. There's a lot of crap talk, yes, but to me it's more crap coming from the pro-piracy side of it. On one hand you expect CDPR to waive any and all legal rights they have to defend their property if you think it could potentially hurt someone, and on the other hand you reserve the "right" to willfully and knowingly contribute to spreading their property illegally because you yourself don't find it morally objectionable.

I have no problems understanding that you and everyone else may disagree strongly with laws and how things work in the legal system, but please, direct your anger and resentment there, rather than at CDPR for using small part of it (and in a very decent way, in my opinion).

What people seem to forget is that you have no guarantees in life that you won't get into legal problems undeserving - that's how it is, whether you like it or not. Believing anything else is naïve to put it mildly. The only thing we can hope for is that those filing against us are decent people. From what is known about this case, CDPR are definitely decent about it.

I just want to add: It doesn't matter if it was right or wrong. From a business perspective it was very foolish. The bad PR they have gotten will (I'm guessing) hurt their profits far more then the money they will gain from the lawsuits. I think some of those people who pirate games all the time probably decided to buy The Witcher 2 leagally because of the companies DRM Freeness attitude. Now, I doubt many of them will again. Even if CDPR was completely in the right, and only went for "proved beyond a doubt" pirates, it doesn't matter to many in the public (because, afterall, how can this be proved to the masses? Most people learned long ago that others lie to get what they want. Distrust is a fact of life..). Their rep is tarnished, sad, but true. Maybe time will heal it, in time for their next big release who knows...People have short memories.
What was I saying? Oh yes, I like hotdogs.

post to follow as the post is too long

could someone post a bump so I can post my reply?

Bump

Reply to above post:

1. Yes it is my opinion on that issue but extortion in general is considered wrong by many people.

2. First off, you yourself assume I think all piracy is a moral good. Also no, I am pretty sure treating all humans decently is a universally right thing to do.

And call it what you want, if done in the way it was being done it is extortion. If done right then I would agree it was recovery of a sort, but it wasn't done that way in this case.

2.b. I agree on that.

2.c. Not necessary to the discussion, but I will answer: we all know that would be a copyright infringer if done with digital goods and IP, and a thief if done against physical goods.

3. I declared them to be fallacious because they were and I noticed them as being such. I never said I was a debating scholar. There are times when I mess up in wording how I feel on an issue or make a mistake and if I do then I apologize and retract or rewrite the bit I messed up on as needed.

3.b. What does asking that have to do with the conversation? Regardless of whether I think piracy is morally wrong or right or it is universally morally wrong or right doesn't change the fact that extortion is extortion is.......and how many view it as being wrong.

4. I agree with the first bit, not so much as to the second.

5. It's because you use alot of bad analogies and loaded questions seemingly in a way to direct the argument more in your favor. If I see a question or analogy as bad or loaded why answer it and promote such bad debating behavior?

And the whole surrender thing.......you seem(as I said earlier) to be sadly more focused on punishing people rather than solving the problem if you can't see the logic in my "fight flies with honey rather than vinegar" solution to piracy above and also the successes made so far on that front by CDPR themselves in fighting piracy.

You can fight a perceived ill in the world with methods other than direct offensive measures you know.

6. You misread me again. I said DRM is a pain to paying customers & doesn't stop piracy while the threat letters don't stop piracy(but aren't really a pain to paying customers.).

6.b. I was using DRM to illustrate methods that don't stop piracy and which to me seem inane to enact, while backing up my point that these threat letters are a waste of time besides being extortion on some level.

7. I never said that......stop putting words in my mouth please.

I said that it is wrong to use such tactics as extortion letters to solve piracy for various reasons. How you could equate that with me supporting people ripping off ip creators is beyond me. (Again are you being purposefully dense or just trying to avoid posting valid counterpoints to my arguments?)

If CDPR would have done this is a more moral/fair fashion I would be all for it....but they didn't so I was against it. Again being against one method of fighting piracy doesn't make one pro-piracy or against companies fighting piracy at all.

8. I know this. I merely showed two things that can be used to combat piracy in a good contructive way.

8.B. Um, because some will(and do) see that as a reason to stop pirating and it does convert some pirates along with DRM free gaming?

9. More generalizations.....again not everyone who was against this is for piracy. Some dislike bad legal methods used on anyone. Is this that hard to comprehend?

10. Saying the great success of TW2 and it's lesser piracy ratio is more because of that is just as probable as my theory until you look at other gaming companies using the same tactics(saying they will sue/etc) and how they were being pirated way more than TW2 was.

11. Again, sadly it seems you focus more on punishing the "vile" pirates because you see them as wrong rather than focusing on what is more important: Getting people to stop pirating in a meaningful & major way & getting them to stop period, regardless if someone is punished or not.

11.b. What about those that wouldn't have or couldn't buy the game anyways? Even if you stop people from pirating they won't buy a game if they most likely won't buy the game anyways just because they've been stopped. And no matter what you do to discourage them(short of death penalty maybe) some won't stop so why bother trying with such a lost cause(the portion of pirate who would pirate regardless of things like DRM free gaming and low prices I mean.)?

12. This is why you conbimne DRM free with other incentive to catch as many as you can.

13. No both shouldn't be done because the more offensive methods don't work(as has been shown) and thus using them makes no sense other than for those who want to see a scapegoat "caught" to feel better that justice has been done.

As for making them surrender...what about new pirates to the scene and those who don't balk regradless of the punishments handed out? As I said before if the methods used don't work then they should be switched for methods that DO work. Remember this isn't just about the mathods we think they should use but also those which benefit the gaming community as a whole and make the most difference in the company's eyes. So far it has been shown that DRM/Threat letters make less of a difference and don't really benefit the gaming community as a whole while the methods used by CDPR to sell TW2(EXTRAS/NO DRM) have.

14. Yes, but my other points still stand.

15. Yes but we stop those other crimes using the best methods that are available, not the worst ones. So far drm and threat letters don't seem to be working, so why not use better methods? This is especially important from a corporate/fianancial sense.....you use the methods which can do the most good for your company, not the ones that don't.

16. I never said we should drop using all methods unless they work perfectly, just that they should drop ones with very poor rates of success.

And also they won't drop the no-drm policy because it converts many MORE of the pirates than other methods.

17. And I sided with them until I found out HOW they were defending against pirates in the case of these letters being handed out & the underhandness of using this method. I don't care if they're tough against pirates as long as they go about it in a fair way.

17.B. Again, imo it was more due to the good things they did to sell the game as other companies have threatened downloaders with court time and their games were downloaded much more than TW2 was. I agree that a two pronged approach can be a good thing and a moral one if done right.

18. It seemed you did by the way you seemed to ignore that fact when posting other facts to support your own side/words.

19. As I said twice above......because other gaming companies have threatened pirates with litigation en masse before or fought against their downloaders more agreesively than even CDPR in this case and had higher piracy numbers, so I thus believe it was the good things they did to combat piracy that had the more noticeable effect in this case.

20. In the future then could you please not generalize(if by accident or on purpose) when speaking about pirates/piracy? That's all I ask.
It's less about CDPR doing it all and rather the method used(the letters), and possibly some innocents being caught up in the dragnet(others have proven here how CDPR was using one of the older methods of IP tracking and not a new 100% foolproof method as they claimed earlier) & paying to avoid court even if they are innocent(yes some will do this) that people take issue with.

Actually, no. The burglar comparison is, of course, pure BS.

Yet the one for using illegal public transit is suprisingly spot on (maybe not so much in Germay, as it is for the most part publicly founded). And people doing that don't get fined by a lawyer the first time they are cought in the way CDP was procceding. Those people (and I would say the same goes for most countries) get a better and fairer treatment than those who received those letters. And, of course the fine is less than 10% of what CDP (or the law firm) demanded.

On of these days I will look up that sociological study that explains why people have such a problem with pirates ...

GameRager: All of this other conversation is a load of nonsense. Let's get down to the real issue that you seem to be having trouble with.

Do you typically compensate people for the services that they render for you?

If so, why do you make an exception for software developers?


edit: typo

One of the issues I had was the amount being asked for in the letters, among other things. I don't get why CDPR(If they felt they had to go this route) didn't just use a cheap lawyer/service/program to get the IPs of infringers and then send out the letters themselves to save costs.

Or you could just ask...

That isn't what i'm having trouble with, I have explained that to you several times btw so I don't get why you say it's what I have issue with....unless you're trying to debase my side of the argument. And if you are then you need to start debating me better if you want me to continue taking you seriously here(this thread I mean and on this topic).

I said above I typically do endorse people for the services they render to me......although I don't see how that pertains to the issue at hand here of whether CDPR was right or wrong in this case.

And I didn't make exception for software developers. Again with putting words in my mouth. Are you really not getting what i've written or are you being dense on purpose so you can debase my side of the argument and make yourself look better? I dunno for certain but I hope not.

I said some of the methods CDPR used here/in this instance are wrong, not that they shouldn't defend their IP at all, that companies shouldn't combat in some ways against piracy, etc......so please don't keep labeling me that way. It isn't polite or civil, and doesn't pertain to the topic at hand much.
Like he could get an on-topic, emotionally neutral reply if he tried. :|

That's sort of the point, anyone who knows how ISPs and the internet works knows it's utter bullshit to maintain that you can positively identify a wide swath of people in this manner. If CDPR had a special closet of computers at all ISPs and was logging and parsing all traffic themselves I'd believe they might be mostly accurate but frankly they don't and there's no fucking way, even with vetting that they were all that accurate.

The basic function of these letters works just like a plea bargain, you take the deal, which you don't want, because the punishment if you fight and lose is orders and orders of magnitude worse. That's absolutely the reason that plea bargains are immoral and the reason civilized countries disallow them entirely in criminal matters. It simply doesn't matter if you're innocent, there's extenuating circumstances, etc. You don't risk some battles. You've demonstrated why in your posts, you naively assume because someone got one of these letters that they MUST have done something wrong and cannot possibly be innocent or they never ever would have gotten one.

You realize the punishment for stealing a retail copy of TW2 paled in comparison to downloading a copy and yet you see nothing wrong with the remedy. Why is it so much worse than stealing? Up to 128,000 USD fine for copyright infringement and up to a 250 USD fine for theft (of equivalently priced items).

And: "Because you used our property without permission. We have evidence to this effect and believe it will stand up in a court of law." Do you even know what copyright covers? It covers making another copy (usually for transfer to another party). You don't need a copyright holder's permission to use their product or I assure you public libraries and a whole host of other activities and institutions would cease to exist.

"It is wrong to use someone else's work when you have been denied permission to do so."
No it's not. See above.

"We call this by many names: trespassing, burglary and hey, even drumroll please... extortion. " No, we actually don't, those are different. They all mean something specific and none of them mean "using without permission".

"We do not call taking one to court for these crimes "extortion." " No, but threatening someone with taking them to court, when you have unequal access to resources, for their life savings unless they give up their lunch money right now and without a fight smacks of coercion and I find it immoral. Others agree. If you're hung up on the term "extortion", you're right, it doesn't fit that legal definition, however it is immoral and makes you seem like an asshole to a lot people, not something you want when you're trying to claim the moral high ground on an issue.

Because when you're screaming, "that asshole is stealing from me!" and people look at you and you're acting like an asshole too, most people seriously wonder why they should give a fuck.
Actually they were way higher than any fines I could find for using public transit without paying.