I can't quite put my finger on it...but suddenly everything TD says seems about 10 times wiser than usual.
The reason I know he's a pirate is because he posts quite frequently, under the same moniker, on one of the most active tabletop filesharing websites. In fact, and this probably will strike close to home for a number of people, damador was the individual running the project to remove Paizo's protection from their Pathfinder products so that they could be posted for filesharing.
There is absolutely no way to consider this guy anything but guilty. I'm not going to provide a link to the website in question, nor quote his posts from there, as both would be a breach of CoC, so you're just going to have to trust me on this one. damador was a pretty significant figure in the tabletop pirating community and it is absolutely unsurprising that he is being sued over it.
If you're referring to the Chaos Wasteland/Enlightning pages (I don't think I'm breaking any rules by naming these sites, they're mentioned in the ENWorld discussion too and a quick google search will find them too - incidentally, they're German based sites, not Polish ones), then there seem to be doubts about whether it's the same guy. He certainly denies it (he could be lying, but he could also be telling the truth).
If you have been sitting on this knowledge, assuming that you are right about your allegations, I assume that you have notified the proper people long ago, right?Again, yes, there does seem to be a "player" on the pirate scene called damador, but so far I haven't seen any evidence that it's the same guy as the bloke from Poland.
Same as there are plenty of people out there calling themselves GentleGiant. Doesn't mean that they're all me (although they might be... you never know ;-)).
EDIT:
Damn, the messageboards are unavailable for a short period of time and I go to buy a couple of cinnamon buns (mmmm... cinnamon buns), only to find Bill Dunn pouncing on this too.
I'd still like to know where you got this info Scott, so if you won't post it here feel free to send it directly to me at: gentlegiantdk at gmail dot com.
Then you'd have someone else to back you up in case it's actually true.
Depends on how nitpicky you want to be. Theoretically, I could convince someone who has a legit PDF of a 4e product to let me "use" a page from it. Of course, that would require me to find some one with a legit PDF...
That makes me wonder if I could "give," say, my 4E PHB PDF to someone as long as I deleted all of my copies. I don't think I'd have an ethical problem with doing so, but I wonder whether it would be illegal...
Though I *would* have a problem in the case of Paizo PDFs I got for free as part of a subscription, because to me those are "tied" to the physical copy in the sense that they were meant as a convenience for the owner of the book, not to allow two people to access the content when only one paid. On the other hand, if I gave away the book and sent the only copy of the PDF with it, I would be morally OK with that. But again, I don't know what the legal implications would be.
For me it's a simple matter of respect for the folks who work hard making the content that I love. Isn't it really that simple?
Did somebody call for smurfy humor?
Did somebody call for smurfy humor?
Let slip the smurfs of war.
So I get a little suspicious of people who not only are quick to try to denigrate vasts swaths of people with a guilty brush but who also seem to have an intimate acquaintance with people who are in fact guilty of these very things.
You'd love the cute little article in the latest Scientific American ("Dark Energy" on the cover) on how cheaters are quite vociferous in denouncing other cheaters, usually more so than non-cheaters.
For me it's a simple matter of respect for the folks who work hard making the content that I love. Isn't it really that simple?
It should be. And it is for me.
But what if you didn't respect the folks that make the content you love? Wouldn't it be easier to "steal" from them by pirating PDFs?
EDIT: Or even content you need, if we slip into software piracy.
|
So I get a little suspicious of people who not only are quick to try to denigrate vasts swaths of people with a guilty brush but who also seem to have an intimate acquaintance with people who are in fact guilty of these very things.You'd love the cute little article in the latest Scientific American ("Dark Energy" on the cover) on how cheaters are quite vociferous in denouncing other cheaters, usually more so than non-cheaters.
Yeah, I've found that to be true. My students will run into class shouting, "Mr. Fryer, sos and so didn't do her homework." Then I ask where their homework is, they haven't done it either.
|
So I get a little suspicious of people who not only are quick to try to denigrate vasts swaths of people with a guilty brush but who also seem to have an intimate acquaintance with people who are in fact guilty of these very things.You'd love the cute little article in the latest Scientific American ("Dark Energy" on the cover) on how cheaters are quite vociferous in denouncing other cheaters, usually more so than non-cheaters.
Perhaps a guilty conscious weighs heavily, like the Tell-tale heart?
If you're referring to the Chaos Wasteland/Enlightning pages (I don't think I'm breaking any rules by naming these sites, they're mentioned in the ENWorld discussion too and a quick google search will find them too - incidentally, they're German based sites, not Polish ones), then there seem to be doubts about whether it's the same guy. He certainly denies it (he could be lying, but he could also be telling the truth).
He is lying when he denies it. A quick examination of the CW forums ought to clear that right up.
If you have been sitting on this knowledge, assuming that you are right about your allegations, I assume that you have notified the proper people long ago, right?
Absolutely not.
Again, yes, there does seem to be a "player" on the pirate scene called damador, but so far I haven't seen any evidence that it's the same guy as the bloke from Poland.
I don't know what evidence you could want beyond a) sharing a moniker, b) both being significant tabletop pirate figures, and c) indicating that he will be posting an open letter to the community on the CW boards before doing so on the ENWorld boards.
Again, there is not a doubt in my mind that damador is damador. I've given you my reasons, but if you want to see for yourself you'll need to register at CW.
|
|
For me it's a simple matter of respect for the folks who work hard making the content that I love. Isn't it really that simple?It should be. And it is for me.
But what if you didn't respect the folks that make the content you love? Wouldn't it be easier to "steal" from them by pirating PDFs?
EDIT: Or even content you need, if we slip into software piracy.
That's assuming that the person stealing understands their action and/or its consequences. Sometimes "stealing" looks a lot like "free" to the ignorant or less educated.
Not trying to condone it, just saying that this is sometimes the truth.
We're smurfs (mighty smurfs!)
We're smurfs in tights...
We roam around the interweb
looking for fights.
We're smurfs,
we're smurfs in tights (tight tights)
We're butch
But what if you didn't respect the folks that make the content you love? Wouldn't it be easier to "steal" from them by pirating PDFs?
Yes, I suppose it would be easier, but I think that even then empathy and self respect would conspire to constrain my behavior.
For example, I don't have a great deal of respect for many pop musicians (don't get me started on the RIAA), and I have to admit that there are some .mp3s on my hard drive that I don't legally own. I've probably listened to them once (and will never listen to them again). One of these days I'll delete them. On the other hand, I buy the music I enjoy, because behaving honorably is important to my self-image.
I still think that, moral issues aside, a huge practical reason not to pirate is to keep the people producing the material in business!
If you're referring to the Chaos Wasteland/Enlightning pages (I don't think I'm breaking any rules by naming these sites, they're mentioned in the ENWorld discussion too and a quick google search will find them too - incidentally, they're German based sites, not Polish ones), then there seem to be doubts about whether it's the same guy. He certainly denies it (he could be lying, but he could also be telling the truth).He is lying when he denies it. A quick examination of the CW forums ought to clear that right up.
If you have been sitting on this knowledge, assuming that you are right about your allegations, I assume that you have notified the proper people long ago, right?Absolutely not.
Again, yes, there does seem to be a "player" on the pirate scene called damador, but so far I haven't seen any evidence that it's the same guy as the bloke from Poland.I don't know what evidence you could want beyond a) sharing a moniker, b) both being significant tabletop pirate figures, and c) indicating that he will be posting an open letter to the community on the CW boards before doing so on the ENWorld boards.
Again, there is not a doubt in my mind that damador is damador. I've given you my reasons, but if you want to see for yourself you'll need to register at CW.
I just registered there and it does indeed seem like the two are one and the same.
With that somewhat clearer, you are indeed right that he seems to be rather heavily into the filesharing scene.My apologies if my comments have seem too dubious, but I have seen a lot of cases of people being wrongly accused or at least branded even without substantive evidence.
One thing that I do wonder about, though. You seem very adamant about how wrong this damador is, yet you say you haven't acted upon the knowledge you apparently have had for some time now. Those two facts seem contradictory to me.
If you're referring to the Chaos Wasteland/Enlightning pages (I don't think I'm breaking any rules by naming these sites, they're mentioned in the ENWorld discussion too and a quick google search will find them too - incidentally, they're German based sites, not Polish ones), then there seem to be doubts about whether it's the same guy. He certainly denies it (he could be lying, but he could also be telling the truth).He is lying when he denies it. A quick examination of the CW forums ought to clear that right up.
If you have been sitting on this knowledge, assuming that you are right about your allegations, I assume that you have notified the proper people long ago, right?Absolutely not.
Again, yes, there does seem to be a "player" on the pirate scene called damador, but so far I haven't seen any evidence that it's the same guy as the bloke from Poland.I don't know what evidence you could want beyond a) sharing a moniker, b) both being significant tabletop pirate figures, and c) indicating that he will be posting an open letter to the community on the CW boards before doing so on the ENWorld boards.
Again, there is not a doubt in my mind that damador is damador. I've given you my reasons, but if you want to see for yourself you'll need to register at CW.
I just registered there and it does indeed seem like the two are one and the same.
With that somewhat clearer, you are indeed right that he seems to be rather heavily into the filesharing scene.
My apologies if my comments have seem too dubious, but I have seen a lot of cases of people being wrongly accused or at least branded even without substantive evidence.One thing that I do wonder about, though. You seem very adamant about how wrong this damador is, yet you say you haven't acted upon the knowledge you apparently have had for some time now. Those two facts seem contradictory to me.
I don't believe I've inadvertently used terms like "wrong" to describe damador's actions. I'm not willing to pass moral judgment on such a morally gray topic, and if I've done so it was unintentional.
What I did say is that he is clearly guilty of unlawful distribution of copyrighted material.
As for my not acting on this information, I have reasons - not the least of which is that the same moral gradient I mentioned above precludes me from playing a part in condemning someone to a law whose justice is tenuous.
One thing that I do wonder about, though. You seem very adamant about how wrong this damador is, yet you say you haven't acted upon the knowledge you apparently have had for some time now. Those two facts seem contradictory to me.
Perhaps because acting upon knowledge like that tends to result in ineffective, knee jerk reactions? Like, say...yanking all PDFs without warning? :P
I don't believe I've inadvertently used terms like "wrong" to describe damador's actions. I'm not willing to pass moral judgment on such a morally gray topic, and if I've done so it was unintentional.What I did say is that he is clearly guilty of unlawful distribution of copyrighted material.
As for my not acting on this information, I have reasons - not the least of which is that the same moral gradient I mentioned above precludes me from playing a part in condemning someone to a law whose justice is tenuous.
You are absolutely right, you did pretty much only specify that he was guilty of unlawful distribution. Maybe I read a resentment into it for being one of the de facto reasons why the lawsuit is progressing and thusly why WotC claims they have to pull all pdfs.
|
|
As for my not acting on this information, I have reasons - not the least of which is that the same moral gradient I mentioned above precludes me from playing a part in condemning someone to a law whose justice is tenuous.
However, by my observation, you have been more than willing to condemn others for piracy and to say that most people who are complaining about this issue are just mad because their supply has dried up and they are jonesing for pirated pdfs. The adimacy with which you are willing to condemn pirates for their actions on one hand, yet say that the law is dubious at best on the other is absolutely facinating. Smurf on dude and be excellent to each other.
|
That's assuming that the person stealing understands their action and/or its consequences. Sometimes "stealing" looks a lot like "free" to the ignorant or less educated.
This leads to the oft quoted, "Ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it." In our legal system, not knowing the law is an invalid defense.
-Skeld
However, by my observation, you have been more than willing to condemn others for piracy and to say that most people who are complaining about this issue are just mad because their supply has dried up and they are jonesing for pirated pdfs. The adimacy with which you are willing to condemn pirates for their actions on one hand, yet say that the law is dubious at best on the other is absolutely facinating. Smurf on dude and be excellent to each other.As for my not acting on this information, I have reasons - not the least of which is that the same moral gradient I mentioned above precludes me from playing a part in condemning someone to a law whose justice is tenuous.
What in the name of Orcus is going on? The avatar didn't change.
However, by my observation, you have been more than willing to condemn others for piracy and to say that most people who are complaining about this issue are just mad because their supply has dried up and they are jonesing for pirated pdfs.As for my not acting on this information, I have reasons - not the least of which is that the same moral gradient I mentioned above precludes me from playing a part in condemning someone to a law whose justice is tenuous.
I have not said this. Maybe you are confusing me with someone else, or perhaps you have misread what I've said.
The adimacy with which you are willing to condemn pirates for their actions on one hand, yet say that the law is dubious at best on the other is absolutely facinating. Smurf on dude and be excellent to each other.
Again, "condemn" is not the correct word here. At no point have I said that this pirate activity is super wrong and that all pirates should be punished under the law for it. It is, however, generally poor treatment of a company and its products and represents one of the most serious contemporary moral-legal issues of our time.
Now, regardless, there is a lot more arguing going on aimed at particular posters here rather than at their posts. We should change that.
It's a smurf now.
Hey, Scott looks smurftastic!
What in the name of Orcus is going on? The avatar didn't change.However, by my observation, you have been more than willing to condemn others for piracy and to say that most people who are complaining about this issue are just mad because their supply has dried up and they are jonesing for pirated pdfs. The adimacy with which you are willing to condemn pirates for their actions on one hand, yet say that the law is dubious at best on the other is absolutely facinating. Smurf on dude and be excellent to each other.As for my not acting on this information, I have reasons - not the least of which is that the same moral gradient I mentioned above precludes me from playing a part in condemning someone to a law whose justice is tenuous.
Immunity to polymorph?
|
|
If the pirate poster talking about removing watermarks is what you were referring to, I would imagine it would be a very, very bad idea to post a link to their forums here.
Not asking for direct references in this case, but just making a general observation.
On the internet a single Devil's Advocates seems to almost always be armed with more knowledge than hundreds of other posters combined.
The RPG community is small, and the odds that dozens or hundreds of other posters haven't come across the same information in their own time just seems to be odd; to me.
|
|
However, by my observation, you have been more than willing to condemn others for piracy and to say that most people who are complaining about this issue are just mad because their supply has dried up and they are jonesing for pirated pdfs.As for my not acting on this information, I have reasons - not the least of which is that the same moral gradient I mentioned above precludes me from playing a part in condemning someone to a law whose justice is tenuous.
I have not said this. Maybe you are confusing me with someone else, or perhaps you have misread what I've said.
Many of them don't have a legitimate gripe. Many more have an illegitimate gripe- many of the people complaining about this are those who actively pirate books.
Granted I did take some artistic liscence with your statement, but you did say that a lot of the people complaining were actively pirating. And by saying that their gripe if they were pirating books was illegitimate, you implied that you came down on the side of people who believe that pirates should be punished. Perhaps you can see how people might be confused? Smurf out.
smurph?
I still think that, moral issues aside, a huge practical reason not to pirate is to keep the people producing the material in business!
Bugleyman, it is clear you are a good person, and that I couldn't turn you into a pirate if I wanted to. Thankfully, I am not trying.
But people have to stop assuming pirates act, think, and behave like they do.
That's assuming that the person stealing understands their action and/or its consequences. Sometimes "stealing" looks a lot like "free" to the ignorant or less educated.This leads to the oft quoted, "Ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it." In our legal system, not knowing the law is an invalid defense.
-Skeld
To be fair, Dom C wasn't trying to defend anyone. Like me, s/he was just trying to educate people on the motivations of pirates.
If the pirate poster talking about removing watermarks is what you were referring to, I would imagine it would be a very, very bad idea to post a link to their forums here.Not asking for direct references in this case, but just making a general observation.
On the internet a single Devil's Advocates seems to almost always be armed with more knowledge than hundreds of other posters combined.
The RPG community is small, and the odds that dozens or hundreds of other posters haven't come across the same information in their own time just seems to be odd; to me.
It happens, sometimes.
Granted I did take some artistic liscence with your statement, but you did say that a lot of the people complaining were actively pirating. And by saying that their gripe if they were pirating books was illegitimate, you implied that you came down on the side of people who believe that pirates should be punished. Perhaps you can see how people might be confused? Smurf out.
I see where the confusion lies. While I don't think that their complaints are legitimate - since their illegal actions arguably led to this decision in the first place - I don't necessarily believe that they deserve punishment. This isn't a black or white thing. I think that they should learn to deal with the situation without blowing up over something that, one could argue, is their fault.
On the internet a single Devil's Advocates seems to almost always be armed with more knowledge than hundreds of other posters combined.
I KNOW ALL!
Bugleyman, it is clear you are a good person, and that I couldn't turn you into a pirate if I wanted too. Thankfully, I am not trying.
Thank you for saying so, but I assure you I can be just as petty and self-centered as the next guy/gal, just not about this particular issue.
We all have our days. :)
But people have to stop assuming pirates act, think, and behave like they do.
Good point.
|
|
For those of you just joining us, let me see if I can boil it down for you. Wizards of the Coast exercised their contract power and asked third party distributers to stop selling pdf copies of their products and to suspend access to those pdfs that had already been purchased, because of concerns over internet piracy. This made people upset because they had lost access to a product and service that they had payed for. Basically, two camps have arisen. One believes that WoTC actions were justified in light of the loss of revenue they were suffuring. The other camp's basic argument is that this will just encourage people who would otherwise legally download such items to resort to piracy.
Add to the mix the recent revelation that the prohabition has been extended to such pdfs as the old Marvel Super Hero game, that is not only not being sold but was being freely distributed with Wizard's blessing, and some people are justifably skeptical as to Wizard's motives. Does this sum it up.
The other camp's basic argument is that this will just encourage people who would otherwise legally download such items to resort to piracy.
Are you saying that some posters are suggesting that there will be people that "because their supply has dried up" that "they are [now] jonesing for pirated pdfs."?
|
|
Some terms keep drifting into the conversation like guilt and punishment, and impliedly, crime...
In a civil action, isn't the party at fault found liable, not guilty?
Also, doesn't the party at fault simply compensate the plaintiff for any damages the might have suffered? They aren't 'punished' for their actions unless punitive damages are awarded.
The other camp's basic argument is that this will just encourage people who would otherwise legally download such items to resort to piracy.Are you saying that some posters are suggesting that there will be people that "because their supply has dried up" that "they are [now] jonesing for pirated pdfs."?
It is more like "they will now consider pirated PDFs, when they wouldn't before."
For those of you just joining us, let me see if I can boil it down for you. Wizards of the Coast exercised their contract power and asked third party distributers to stop selling pdf copies of their products and to suspend access to those pdfs that had already been purchased, because of concerns over internet piracy. This made people upset because they had lost access to a product and service that they had payed for. Basically, two camps have arisen. One believes that WoTC actions were justified in light of the loss of revenue they were suffuring. The other camp's basic argument is that this will just encourage people who would otherwise legally download such items to resort to piracy.
Add to the mix the recent revelation that the prohabition has been extended to such pdfs as the old Marvel Super Hero game, that is not only not being sold but was being freely distributed with Wizard's blessing, and some people are justifably skeptical as to Wizard's motives. Does this sum it up.
There are also those who feel that, even though WotC may have been justified to pull PDF distribution to all their IP and legally within their rights to do so, the action might be inappropriate to the offense (it won't do much to stop pirating and will eliminate a revenue source for WotC) and the way it was handled was extremely poor from a public relations standpoint.
Because you purchased these books from a distributer other than Wizards of the Coast, we have confiscated them. If you ever wish to see them again you will place all of your 3.5 and third party materials on your lawn and burn them in a bonfire. Please make sure to have marshmallows for the team which will be returning your books.I guess I have to write them off now. ;-)
ROFL!
I nearly choked on my water when I read that...
In a civil action, isn't the party at fault found liable, not guilty?
Yes, though it's possible for this to be punished as a matter of criminal law as well.
You're right, though. In this case, we're dealing with civil suits and nothing more.
Also, doesn't the party at fault simply compensate the plaintiff for any damages the might have suffered? They aren't 'punished' for their actions unless punitive damages are awarded.
WotC is seeking some punitive damages, I believe.
|
For those of you just joining us, let me see if I can boil it down for you. Wizards of the Coast exercised their contract power and asked third party distributers to stop selling pdf copies of their products and to suspend access to those pdfs that had already been purchased, because of concerns over internet piracy. This made people upset because they had lost access to a product and service that they had payed for. Basically, two camps have arisen. One believes that WoTC actions were justified in light of the loss of revenue they were suffuring. The other camp's basic argument is that this will just encourage people who would otherwise legally download such items to resort to piracy.
Add to the mix the recent revelation that the prohabition has been extended to such pdfs as the old Marvel Super Hero game, that is not only not being sold but was being freely distributed with Wizard's blessing, and some people are justifably skeptical as to Wizard's motives. Does this sum it up.
*raises hand* Ooooh, ooooooh! The answer is 'C'.
|
|
That's assuming that the person stealing understands their action and/or its consequences. Sometimes "stealing" looks a lot like "free" to the ignorant or less educated.This leads to the oft quoted, "Ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it." In our legal system, not knowing the law is an invalid defense.
-Skeld
Your note, while 100% true in American Law, has nothing to do with what I was talking about.
If you go back and look at what I had quoted from Bugleyman, you'll see I was referring to his point that the harm you do to the company producing the product by stealing the PDF should be enough reason not to steal. I agree with that sentiment.
My point is that everyone who steals something doesn't know or realize they are hurting anyone by doing it. Also, just because you use a P2P software doesn't mean you're a thief, either. There are plenty of legal PDFs available to download as well. Mix that confusion with ignorance and laws can be (inadvertently) broken.
Now, to comment on your note: Does that make it any more or less legal in the American justice system? No, and I'm not sure it should. I'm not a Lawyer or a Judge.
However something should be said for making a difference between the guy who thought it was a promotion or checking it out before he purchased the product from the ones who never buy anything and go to lengths to make illegal products available to thousands of others.
There's something in the American Legal system known as the difference between the Letter of the law and the Spirit of the law. More general reference to that is here.
Totally unrelated, but I find it ironic that the Wiki article on it talks about Rules Lawyering. :)
|
|
In a civil action, isn't the party at fault found liable, not guilty?Yes, though it's possible for this to be punished as a matter of criminal law as well.
You're right, though. In this case, we're dealing with civil suits and nothing more.
Also, doesn't the party at fault simply compensate the plaintiff for any damages the might have suffered? They aren't 'punished' for their actions unless punitive damages are awarded.WotC is seeking some punitive damages, I believe.
I have to read those filings after exams. I'm really interested in how they expect to have a court in washington to accept jurisdiction for infringement that occurred in Poland. He doesn't exactly have a substantial connection to that state.
I have to read those filings after exams. I'm really interested in how they expect to have a court in washington to accept jurisdiction for infringement that occurred in Poland. He doesn't exactly have a substantial connection to that state.In a civil action, isn't the party at fault found liable, not guilty?Yes, though it's possible for this to be punished as a matter of criminal law as well.
You're right, though. In this case, we're dealing with civil suits and nothing more.
Also, doesn't the party at fault simply compensate the plaintiff for any damages the might have suffered? They aren't 'punished' for their actions unless punitive damages are awarded.WotC is seeking some punitive damages, I believe.
As I understand it, part of the agreement you accept when you purchase the PDFs provides for settlement of disputes regardless of appropriate jurisdiction. I haven't actually looked at the agreement, so this is off word-of-mouth, but it strikes me as reasonable.
I have an urge to let my inner smurf run rampant.
The all-or-nothing approach to the problem on WotC's still puzzles me a bit, though -- for example, as has been pointed out, even free downloads were taken down.
Odd.
|
|
As I understand it, part of the agreement you accept when you purchase the PDFs provides for settlement of disputes regardless of appropriate jurisdiction. I haven't actually looked at the agreement, so this is off word-of-mouth, but it strikes me as reasonable.I have to read those filings after exams. I'm really interested in how they expect to have a court in washington to accept jurisdiction for infringement that occurred in Poland. He doesn't exactly have a substantial connection to that state.In a civil action, isn't the party at fault found liable, not guilty?Yes, though it's possible for this to be punished as a matter of criminal law as well.
You're right, though. In this case, we're dealing with civil suits and nothing more.
Also, doesn't the party at fault simply compensate the plaintiff for any damages the might have suffered? They aren't 'punished' for their actions unless punitive damages are awarded.WotC is seeking some punitive damages, I believe.
I can't find any terms of sale on the RPGnow website. I just walked through a 2 dollar purchase of a pdf and didn't spot any either (didn't finish the payment).
Even if RPGnow had terms of sale, that would be a contract he had with RPGnow, not WOTC.