P4: Gritty Reboot Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 It is kind of odd that they'd do that... I know as Dean mentioned that they had already warned torrenters of this possibility, but the blanket mailing of IP address subscribers is a poor and unfair tactic in my opinion. I mean, mailing for their $40 or $50 is one thing, but 911 euro for one game? Crazy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 I suddenly feel less inclined to buy games from GOG. Why? Piracy is illegal. They offer a DRM-free option. You have no excuses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Wow! I wasn't even speaking about pirating things. How is the legality of piracy relevant to me no longer wishing to do business with CD Project / GOG.com? I feel less inclined to do business with people who are in the business of threatening to sue people who may or may not have downloaded their game. Christ, with how many cases there's been of people who haven't downloaded stuff getting these letters, even the most ardent anti-piracy guy should be angry about this stuff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Assuming they're even going to go forward with those people. You're getting upset over the idea of something. Not anything actually happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 "CD Projekt hired a law firm and torrent monitoring company to track those who illegally downloaded and shared the game, and has been sending them hefty cash settlement proposals." I don't see how this is something which is not happening? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuchikoma Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 I'm not sure I'm really against it in concept... except the tactic as P4 said. They are probably coming at it from the goal of recouping piracy losses, and they can't catch every pirate, so they'd pull more than just the game cost from the ones they catch to try to get at least some of their projected losses back. I would imagine a loss like that could be afforded by almost any income bracket if they could pay it over time, but even someone who's pretty well off would hate to lose that amount. I've argued it is hard to prove the harm in piracy and that if it's not done as an alternative to purchasing, it is morally grey. I even considered downloading this one to see what it was like. Nonetheless, they seem to be playing by the rules, and a reasonable case can be made for what they're asking. Now, they're taking matters into their own hands to avoid a ton of legal fees, but I think the way they're approaching this could make them look like anything from thugs to scammers when they accuse the wrong people. I wonder if anyone will cave to the letter and pay to avoid trouble, not specifically knowing them, but having used BitTorrent before. No one's going to like your brand if you're those guys who go around trying to randomly intimidate people into paying them huge settlements. So they really need to be careful with who they go after, even if it means losing a few pirates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Christ, with how many cases there's been of people who haven't downloaded stuff getting these letters, even the most ardent anti-piracy guy should be angry about this stuff You rang? I am in fact, totally against this crap. If you can prove that the person has an illegal copy of your game (which is not a back up), then fine, take them to court and get your money. Scumbags like ACS:Law http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12253746 are no different to the parasites that call you up about "your recent accident" and "your mis-sold ppi". They are easily as bad, if not worse than the pirates they claim to be chasing. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Nonetheless, they seem to be playing by the rules, and a reasonable case can be made for what they're asking. I don't see how asking for €911 ($1219) for a single game is reasonable at all. Just because they won't get everyone doesn't suddenly make the remaining people responsible for extra damages. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorgi Duke of Frisbee Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 I'm done supporting CD Projekt and GOG. This kind of behavior is disgusting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 On one hand they did provide a pro-consumer experience. On the other hand the "let's randomly send out letters n hope we catch the right people" form of law enforcement is rather shitty. However as I bought the game and have enjoyed the "pro consumer experience" I'm still up with GoG n CD projekt. If you're gonna stop buying games from publishers because they do the whole "see what sticks" stuff you're going to have an extremely thin selection of things to buy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorgi Duke of Frisbee Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 As much as I hate to admit it, you're probably right... Damn it! Why do even the best companies have to be so shitty about certain things? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Nonetheless, they seem to be playing by the rules, and a reasonable case can be made for what they're asking. I don't see how asking for €911 ($1219) for a single game is reasonable at all. Just because they won't get everyone doesn't suddenly make the remaining people responsible for extra damages. That's probably to cover damages and legal fees. Corrupt lawyers who like to make a living by scamming innocent people don't exactly come cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 True, I'm used to the American system where you can almost never recover attorney's fees from the other side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thursday Next Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Really? The general rule in the UK is that the loser pays. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Yeah, the general rule here is that everyone pays their own attorneys, unless one side is just being completely, obviously, and undeniably unreasonable and thus unfairly causing the other to rack up fees. So like if I go to court and get a court order that you have to do such and such you do not have to pay my attorneys fees. If, however, after the court issues that order you still just flat refuse to do the such and such, so I have to go back to court again to get an order for the sheriff to make you do it, then you have to pay my fees for the second trip to court because you should have just obeyed the order. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 On one hand they did provide a pro-consumer experience. On the other hand the "let's randomly send out letters n hope we catch the right people" form of law enforcement is rather shitty. However as I bought the game and have enjoyed the "pro consumer experience" I'm still up with GoG n CD projekt. If you're gonna stop buying games from publishers because they do the whole "see what sticks" stuff you're going to have an extremely thin selection of things to buy. Well seeing as how there are ways to get the games without supporting the developers, it's not really a huge pain to avoid supporting this shit =) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuchikoma Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Nonetheless, they seem to be playing by the rules, and a reasonable case can be made for what they're asking. I don't see how asking for €911 ($1219) for a single game is reasonable at all. Just because they won't get everyone doesn't suddenly make the remaining people responsible for extra damages. It's infinitely simple to avoid the fee though. Simply don't take their stuff without payment. While pirates are free to download what they wish, companies are free - or even obligated - to defend their product with what means they can. Also, what's the point in asking for retail price from pirates? So they can pirate all they like and if they happen to lose the enforcement lottery, they have to pay what they would have paid honestly? That doesn't make sense - then everyone may as well pirate first and just pay if they get caught. This amount is a punishment, but it's far more reasonable than recording or movie industry groups asking for $100,000+ from people and basically bankrupting them. This is like "HEY. You want to pirate our game? There are consequences - just like we said at the start." But again, their scattershot approach is the real problem. You never want to drag innocent bystanders into this. Not classy. Not cool. Even possibly a scam in itself. I don't think I'd be up in arms over it if it actually went exactly as planned. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Nonetheless, they seem to be playing by the rules, and a reasonable case can be made for what they're asking. I don't see how asking for €911 ($1219) for a single game is reasonable at all. Just because they won't get everyone doesn't suddenly make the remaining people responsible for extra damages. It's infinitely simple to avoid the fee though. Simply don't take their stuff without payment. While pirates are free to download what they wish, companies are free - or even obligated - to defend their product with what means they can. Also, what's the point in asking for retail price from pirates? So they can pirate all they like and if they happen to lose the enforcement lottery, they have to pay what they would have paid honestly? That doesn't make sense - then everyone may as well pirate first and just pay if they get caught. This amount is a punishment, but it's far more reasonable than recording or movie industry groups asking for $100,000+ from people and basically bankrupting them. This is like "HEY. You want to pirate our game? There are consequences - just like we said at the start." That's not how civil damages work though: they're not for punishment, they're simply for recouping actual losses suffered as a result of the conduct. Punitive damages are reserved for extremely egregious conduct, like when someone knows that a product they're selling is defective and will likely kill thousands of people but they sell it anyway. I agree that it's less unreasonable that the music and movie industry behave, but that's like saying a red-hot poker is less hot than a nuclear reactor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post deanb Posted December 9, 2011 Popular Post Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 On one hand they did provide a pro-consumer experience. On the other hand the "let's randomly send out letters n hope we catch the right people" form of law enforcement is rather shitty. However as I bought the game and have enjoyed the "pro consumer experience" I'm still up with GoG n CD projekt. If you're gonna stop buying games from publishers because they do the whole "see what sticks" stuff you're going to have an extremely thin selection of things to buy. Well seeing as how there are ways to get the games without supporting the developers, it's not really a huge pain to avoid supporting this shit =) They provided a solid game, a reasonable price, excellent extras, DRM free, good patches, all the DLC no matter where you bought it from, good kb/m and 360 pad support, great visuals, etc etc. Apart from a demo they ticked pretty much every single box. And then you go and use the fact they're suing pirates (and potentially a few bystanders too) as an excuse to pirate the game so as to "avoid supporting this shit"? 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 Excuse? No. Not an excuse. I wasn't just sitting here looking for the smallest bit of excuse not to pay for their game. I liked Witcher 2 and seeing as how I have a small bit of spare cash, I was planning to pick it up in the christmas sale. I won't do that now. I feel that if any dev is doing shit you feel is wrong, then it's perfectly fine not to support them, and if you don't already support them, I don't care wether you pirate their game or not. I don't feel the least bit bad for not supporting companies that are involved in what is essentially blackmail. In fact, I'd feel bad supporting them. Personally, I think these pay up or else schemes are far more wrong than the traditional DRM measures they are replacing. Also, I think there's more important things to support than good games. I love gaming, but I feel that "we made a good game!" doesn't excuse shit like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuchikoma Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 That's not how civil damages work though: they're not for punishment, they're simply for recouping actual losses suffered as a result of the conduct. Punitive damages are reserved for extremely egregious conduct, like when someone knows that a product they're selling is defective and will likely kill thousands of people but they sell it anyway. I agree that it's less unreasonable that the music and movie industry behave, but that's like saying a red-hot poker is less hot than a nuclear reactor. These aren't civil suits though - they're requests for settlements from one private party to another. If they actually sued the pirates, I'd imagine they'd go after a LOT more. This is possibly the most restraint I've ever seen in a piracy case, not counting companies like Mojang who just go *shrug* "It happens. I'd rather you paid us though..." Besides, I already made the case for recovering losses. So ignore the punitive element if you wish - but asking the game's price in settlement fees is about as useful as leaving your home's front door open with a note that says "please don't take anything. I'll be back in a couple hours." A red-hot poker... yes... because people who can buy current enough computers to run Witcher 2 and broadband to download it will surely be scarred for life paying about a grand for software they haven't paid anything for yet. I'd be upset if a suit like this caught me - but I can't make a case that I couldn't pay it, and I couldn't say I was just exercising my rights as a consumer, because I don't live in a place that assumes you have the right to take paid IP for free. It would probably cost me more to hire a lawyer, fight them in court, and probably lose. It may cost more even if I won. And when you consider what it cost to hire guys to track the downloads, draft notices and serve the ISP with them, and prepare for the odd legal battle, this may be as little as they could charge while still being profitable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted December 9, 2011 Report Share Posted December 9, 2011 These aren't civil suits though - they're requests for settlements from one private party to another. What do you think a settlement offer is? It's an offer to settle any civil claims one might have. Just because they haven't actually filed suit doesn't mean the systems for determining damages are irrelevant. A red-hot poker... yes... because people who can buy current enough computers to run Witcher 2 and broadband to download it will surely be scarred for life paying about a grand for software they haven't paid anything for yet. You're reading too much into my analogy. I actually tried to find one that wouldn't carry any unintended implications, but I guess I failed. Try this one: It's like saying that someone throwing a bucket of water on you doesn't get you as wet as if they sprayed a fire hose at you. You're still wet. It would probably cost me more to hire a lawyer, fight them in court, and probably lose. It may cost more even if I won. Exactly, that's what makes this extortionate and bad. And when you consider what it cost to hire guys to track the downloads, draft notices and serve the ISP with them, and prepare for the odd legal battle, this may be as little as they could charge while still being profitable. This goes back to the attorney's fees thing, and how I'm used to the US system where for the most part you can't get them. In the US all of this is irrelevant, all that matters is what damages you incurred as a result of the other party's actions before you ever talked to a lawyer. Which would be the $50 or whatever profit you would have made had they actually bought the game. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted December 10, 2011 Report Share Posted December 10, 2011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyber Rat Posted December 10, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 10, 2011 If you think a dev or publisher is doing something, you'll do most damage by not investing any money or time in their game. UbiDRM bothering you? Don't even play Ubi games then. I think I only played AC1 for an hour until I said "screw it" and just never resorted to buying or playing any Ubisoft game save for Heroes VI (which I had for review). Saying you don't support a dev but still play their game by pirating it is stupid and helps the dev/publisher more than ignoring their game entirely. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Posted December 10, 2011 Report Share Posted December 10, 2011 Explain to me the logic where simply the act of playing a game will support a developer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.