Well, I have a copy at my house and one of my LFGS's has a copy in stock. However, that is just local. I have no idea what the big stores are doing.Weren't those all pulped? Where did you find a copy still being sold?Since I can't really speak with my wallet any more than I am (I haven't bought anything WotC produces since last January, and now can't even legally buy the only thing left they offer that I might have considered) I did something that was perhaps a little bit childish. I went to my local Barnes & Noble and Borders stores on my lunch break, opened up their copies of Book of Erotic Fantasy to the dildos page and left them sitting right next to the 4e material. I hope lots of parents see it and make the association WotC so feared when the book came out.HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
Thank you for this post. :)
There's been one on the shelves in our local Border's for months. Just sitting there. I live in the Bible Belt, so maybe people are embarrassed to actually buy something like that, except at the Adult Stores by the freeway that cater to trucker-types.
Several people earlier in the thread commented that if you know where to look, and I assume most pirates do, the stuff is still there.How much longer that remains true is up in the air. As I mentioned above, the defendant in question was a significant contributor to a noteworthy hub of RPG pirating activity.As someone who works in technology, and in particular spend a great part of it studying Peer to Peer networks for work related purposes, I just have to say you're 100% false in believing that arresting any one of these individuals will affect the ease with which the material is obtained by those interested.
My guess is that any one of these shared files has anywhere from hundreds to thousands of peers and seeds on the torrent sites - and those are just public, I wouldn't even hazard a guess at the private.
They may have arrested the original source of the first instance of leaked material, but they'd have to arrest and confiscate hundreds or thousands of computers to remove it from the net.
The RIAA and the MPAA with the financial backing of dozens of studios and the power of the DMCA, the US and other legal jurisdictions hasn't done it ... I highly doubt WotC will.
You're right, I should have phrased it more clearly.
What I meant was that how much longer this pattern of piracy continues is up in the air. Yes, currently released products are not suddenly going to disappear from p2p networks. It would be ludicrous to think otherwise. But removing those primarily responsible for this pirate activity in the first place will a) give some serious pause to others who are thinking about putting themselves at risk of prosecution by providing pirated PDFs, and b) remove a number of the individuals who care enough to do the work required to share these PDFs anonymously. There are not terribly many people out there who are willing to take on that responsibility. We're not talking about the latest movies or popular music albums. We're talking about D&D books. The "leadership" of this particular subgroup of pirates is necessarily limited.
Actually Scott, those people who are actively pirating aren't complaining,Yes, they are.
because they are still getting the stuff they want.This has nothing to do with it. It's not that the pirates actually feel injured by this (though a notable few are). It's that they just enjoy railing against WotC for a decision that they consider dumb on intellectual grounds. Remember, my entire point is that a lot of the people complaining about this decision aren't affected by it.
On a notable tangent, however, one of the most involved pirates spent quite a while posting (and complaining about this decision) in the thread over on WotC's boards (for whatever reason, he decided to use the same moniker on WotC's boards and ENWorld as he does elsewhere). I suspected that he himself might be a defendant named in the piracy cases, and yesterday it was made clear that he was. He represents the top of the chain, however, not your average end-user pirate.
Two things:
First, I'd ask you to be a bit more careful in your wording Scott. Most of your posts easily read as if you're talking about most people here on the Paizo boards being pirates. I don't think that's what you really mean. If you're only referring to people from elsewhere on the internet, please make sure you're communicating that sentiment.
Fair enough. You're absolutely right, I'm not implying anything of the sort for this particular community (though I'm cogently aware that demand for pirated Pathfinder material exists).
Removal of the out-of-print books baffles me, though. Even from a totally neutral standpoint, it would seem that since these books are NOT in print any longer, PDFs are the ONLY way they are generating revenue on these properties.
Stopping the sale of these OOP PDFs is therefore not protecting an existing revenue source, as in the case of the in-print books. They are either making money on the sales of the PDFs, or they make NO money from these properties. So, selling the PDFs with piracy going on appears to me to be more profitable than not selling them even if it stops piracy.
Even selling 1 copy a month of the PDFs of the out-of-print books would be a gain for WotC that they would not otherwise have. So why on Earth yank the pre-4e books, since there's no print copy to compete with any more?
I'm not accusing them of anything here -- it's just that I fail to see the logic.
Here's my completely speculative theory on why this is the case. Any portion, or all of it, may turn out to be completely incorrect.
WotC had contractual agreements with PDF distributors to sell their product catalog. WotC terminated those contracts because they needed to remove their 4th Edition catalog for the reasons you suggest. Because these contracts were terminated, all materials covered by them had to be removed. The fact that out-of-print material was removed as well is a side effect of this situation.
Instead of developing a new contract that would allow the distributors to continue selling out-of-print material, WotC decided to investigate methods by which they could more closely control their entire digital catalog, possibly by implementing an in-house service of some sort. Until they make a decision on this matter, they're being cautious about re-establishing any contracts with distributors.
What you're saying about the business sense of selling out-of-print material is absolutely correct: it is practically a zero-risk decision for them to offer out-of-print material digitally, for a price. It is, in fact, so clear of a money-making opportunity that I can't imagine them not restoring that service once they decide which road to take as far as digital distribution goes.
The fact that this decision depends on a long-term plan that has not been finalized is, I think, one of the reasons the gaming community is currently so mystified by the decision. What people keep asking for is an explanation of what Wizards is planning on doing as far as digital distribution goes, and I don't think they can provide an answer to that yet.
There are a lot of people skeptical about the effectiveness of choosing to combat piracy in this way (myself included), but it strikes me that they may come up with a solution that does actually reduce piracy. Imagine, for instance, that their digital subscription service is expanded to offer complete reference to all supplements the subscriber owns (or perhaps even without ownership). In addition, imagine if subscribers had unfettered access to all digitally offered out-of-print material, as part of the subscription service (a kind of old-school bonus). If WotC's goal is to increase subscriptions, this will undoubtedly contribute to that goal and, in the process, decrease pirate activity (since those who want rules material can simply pay for a subscription that also includes a wide array of useful bonus features that are unavailable on peer-to-peer channels).
How feasible does this sound?
*L* ok sorry but that was actually kinda funny.
Which was what was intended.
Scott, that does sound feasable. It might be very likely. OTOH, the pulling of ALL the PDFs might have been a "foolish" knee jerk reaction that was not thought out at all. ~shrugs~ We all make mistakes every so often. Sometimes they are very bad ones.
Scott, you just crystalized exactly what I have been trying to say for about the last 45 minutes. Thank you!
As someone who has worked for WotC in the past, I can say this: they rarely ever make a snap decision and often spend weeks talking about these decisions. Sometimes they make decisions which have unforseen consequences, and sometimes the fallout has been pretty bad. Wizards of the Coast spends a lot of time carefully weighing options before they execute the one they finally decide upon.
Fair enough. You're absolutely right, I'm not implying anything of the sort for this particular community (though I'm cogently aware that demand for pirated Pathfinder material exists).
Mr. Betts, you are an erudite poster, and I thank you for attempting to retract the implication from your earlier posts. However, whether intentioned or not, you seem to be a master of the left-handed compliment, saying one thing while vaguely implying another ... and the above statement appears to me to be a prime example.
You state you are not implying we are pirates, but also state an awareness of demand for pirated Pathfinder material, which, since we of these boards are the people that love and want Pathfinder material, implies we may be the ones seeking these pirated materials.
Now, I realize that this may not have been your intention, but nearly all the posts you have made so far on this thread have contained these sort of left-handed compliments, and I know that they make my blood boil, and I have always done my best to stay out of any flamewars or trollish activities. But is it any wonder that people react in a negative manner to your statements?
My mother taught me the old adage if you cannot say something nice, don't say anything at all. Years of writing groups and classes taught me that if there is a criticism to be made, make it in as positive a manner as you can, and make sure you have something you can praise as well as critique. All I ask is that, in making your points, please attempt to refrain from such misleading statements that can be taken as sly insults if you truly want to be heard.
Thank you.
I can't imagine how Wizards thinks anyone would really trust them to provide access to *purchased* PDFs via server-based delivery terms...maybe subscription access that ends when the subscription does, but not long-term access to which Wizards holds the keys. I know *I* didn't trust them to really deliver on DDi...and I trust them even less now. IMHO, server-based access won't serve the desires of at least some customers - to own the products on a long-term basis, independent of whether Wizards can manage to keep its service running.
M
WotC had contractual agreements with PDF distributors to sell their product catalog. WotC terminated those contracts because they needed to remove their 4th Edition catalog for the reasons you suggest. Because these contracts were terminated, all materials covered by them had to be removed. The fact that out-of-print material was removed as well is a side effect of this situation.
That makes a heap load of sense, and was a perspective I never considered. I didn't think about the "all or nothing" contract, because I simply assumed had WotC requested the pulling of 4e PDFs, all vendors would comply willingly.
It still doesn't make the action sensible to me, but it seems less insane now.
Thank you for the illumination.
Imagine, for instance, that their digital subscription service is expanded to offer complete reference to all supplements the subscriber owns (or perhaps even without ownership). In addition, imagine if subscribers had unfettered access to all digitally offered out-of-print material, as part of the subscription service (a kind of old-school bonus). If WotC's goal is to increase subscriptions, this will undoubtedly contribute to that goal and, in the process, decrease pirate activity (since those who want rules material can simply pay for a subscription that also includes a wide array of useful bonus features that are unavailable on peer-to-peer channels).
How feasible does this sound?
I don't think it sounds feasible.
Given the choice of illegal copy on their hard drives, versus a copy on WotC servers that WotC holds control over - that has to be paid for, even with added bells and whistles - people currently pirating PDFs will choose to continue pirating.
The only thing this might stop are those that wouldn't normally pirate that are considering doing so now.
I'm sorry to say, WotC could have destroyed any real chance of reducing piracy with this move...
Hey I got an odd question...
If I have a hard cover of a product and I scan and turn it into a pdf, have I broken any laws provided I do not distribute the pdf to anyone?
And if that is legal...the implication is that if I own it in one format, I am entitled to have it in any format, provided I don't distribute it.
So if all that is true...once I buy a hard cover of their product...doesn't it follow that I would not be committing a crime by downloading a "pirated" pdf from the interwebs?
Just putting it out there and hoping someone with copyright law info can illuminate me...us...whoever...
The only thing this might stop are those that wouldn't normally pirate that are considering doing so now.
That would still make it a good idea. :)
Fair enough. You're absolutely right, I'm not implying anything of the sort for this particular community (though I'm cogently aware that demand for pirated Pathfinder material exists).Mr. Betts, you are an erudite poster, and I thank you for attempting to retract the implication from your earlier posts. However, whether intentioned or not, you seem to be a master of the left-handed compliment, saying one thing while vaguely implying another ... and the above statement appears to me to be a prime example.
You state you are not implying we are pirates, but also state an awareness of demand for pirated Pathfinder material, which, since we of these boards are the people that love and want Pathfinder material, implies we may be the ones seeking these pirated materials.
Now, I realize that this may not have been your intention, but nearly all the posts you have made so far on this thread have contained these sort of left-handed compliments, and I know that they make my blood boil, and I have always done my best to stay out of any flamewars or trollish activities. But is it any wonder that people react in a negative manner to your statements?
My mother taught me the old adage if you cannot say something nice, don't say anything at all. Years of writing groups and classes taught me that if there is a criticism to be made, make it in as positive a manner as you can, and make sure you have something you can praise as well as critique. All I ask is that, in making your points, please attempt to refrain from such misleading statements that can be taken as sly insults if you truly want to be heard.
Thank you.
My statement wasn't "misleading" in the slightest. You are reading intent into it that doesn't exist. I write enough that I am usually pretty aware of how my words will be received, and the clarification I wrote was intended only to explain that piracy probably doesn't run rampant in this community, but that it does exist within the Pathfinder fan base. If you find that somehow insulting, I'm afraid it's something you're going to have to deal with - it's the truth. There is probably no subgroup within the D&D community that is immune from this. I don't think anyone here should operate under the delusion that the Paizo fan base is somehow collectively "above" piracy any more than the next group.
If I have a hard cover of a product and I scan and turn it into a pdf, have I broken any laws provided I do not distribute the pdf to anyone?
Letter of the law?
Yes, you have.
Spirit of the law?
No, you haven't.
As was pointed out earlier, Fair Use is a minefield of legality. The only constant is that if you make copies for yourself, and yourself alone, that you can't be detected (yet) and you can't be prosecuted (again, yet).
The only thing this might stop are those that wouldn't normally pirate that are considering doing so now.That would still make it a good idea. :)
Absolutely.
But it wouldn't be necessary had WotC taken a different tact.
Hey I got an odd question...
If I have a hard cover of a product and I scan and turn it into a pdf, have I broken any laws provided I do not distribute the pdf to anyone?
This is legal, currently. It has been accepted in past case law that backups for personal use are legal. As far as I am aware, no case law has come into existence since then that alters this legal perception.
And if that is legal...the implication is that if I own it in one format, I am entitled to have it in any format, provided I don't distribute it.
This is a legal gray area. While you may be able to argue that you are allowed to own the product you own in any format (though I wager that particular argument will be unsuccessful, since technically the PDF and book are not the same product, which means you don't actually own it in any format except the one you originally purchased), the method by which you obtained the copy was the result of illegal activity - unlawful distribution. This is illegal for the same reason that any knowing reception and possession of stolen goods is illegal; the fact that you already own a copy of a similar product does not change the fact that what you received was provided through illegal means.
Removal of the out-of-print books baffles me, though. Even from a totally neutral standpoint, it would seem that since these books are NOT in print any longer, PDFs are the ONLY way they are generating revenue on these properties.
Stopping the sale of these OOP PDFs is therefore not protecting an existing revenue source, as in the case of the in-print books. They are either making money on the sales of the PDFs, or they make NO money from these properties. So, selling the PDFs with piracy going on appears to me to be more profitable than not selling them even if it stops piracy.
Even selling 1 copy a month of the PDFs of the out-of-print books would be a gain for WotC that they would not otherwise have. So why on Earth yank the pre-4e books, since there's no print copy to compete with any more?
I'm not accusing them of anything here -- it's just that I fail to see the logic.
Here's my completely speculative theory on why this is the case. Any portion, or all of it, may turn out to be completely incorrect.
WotC had contractual agreements with PDF distributors to sell their product catalog. WotC terminated those contracts because they needed to remove their 4th Edition catalog for the reasons you suggest. Because these contracts were terminated, all materials covered by them had to be removed. The fact that out-of-print material was removed as well is a side effect of this situation.
Instead of developing a new contract that would allow the distributors to continue selling out-of-print material, WotC decided to investigate methods by which they could more closely control their entire digital catalog, possibly by implementing an in-house service of some sort. Until they make a decision on this matter, they're being cautious about re-establishing any contracts with distributors.
What you're saying about the business sense of selling out-of-print material is absolutely correct: it is practically a zero-risk decision for them to offer out-of-print material...
That does cast a new light, but rewriting the contract or writing a new contract to replace the old one could not have been to hard.
I guess it is also possible they underestimated the number of players still using the older editions. I for one have no idea how many people still play/would play 2nd edition if they could find a group.
Hey I got an odd question...
If I have a hard cover of a product and I scan and turn it into a pdf, have I broken any laws provided I do not distribute the pdf to anyone?
This is legal, currently. It has been accepted in past case law that backups for personal use are legal. As far as I am aware, no case law has come into existence since then that alters this legal perception.
And if that is legal...the implication is that if I own it in one format, I am entitled to have it in any format, provided I don't distribute it.This is a legal gray area. While you may be able to argue that you are allowed to own the product you own in any format (though I wager that particular argument will be unsuccessful, since technically the PDF and book are not the same product, which means you don't actually own it in any format), the method by which you obtained the copy was the result of illegal activity - unlawful distribution. This is illegal for the same reason that any knowing reception and possession of stolen goods is illegal; the fact that you already own a copy of a similar product does not change the fact that was you received was stolen.
So then basically, I'd be safe provided I can prove that I have the software necessary to create the scanned PDF copy of the hard cover. My problem is I am way too lazy to actually pirate anything myself...well maybe it isn't a problem...my salvation is that I am too lazy to actually pirate anything myself. Which is why I have actually purchased all the pdfs I do have.
My anger in all this is that they are releasing a product that I want and I want it in pdf format because I despise lugging around a library of books with me. So the only way I can get it, short of scanning and creating my own pdf or literally pulling it up on their compendium and cut and pasting myself silly...is to pirate it.
Now I can't be the only person who is in the situation. I want to give them my money for a pdf copy, but they won't even give me that option. How in the HADES is that a smart business move?? And how does their action not actually lead to pirating by people who would otherwise gladly have paid them for the product??
It almost seems to me, that if the argument is that the pdf and the book are separate entities and the pdf is not for sale on the market, how can you be held liable for possessing something that doesn't exist for sale?
I don't know this all seems like they've gotten themselves into wierder legal waters than they would have been in had they left the legal avenue of ownership open and simply stepped up their legal action against those who were breaking the law.
In any case, I can't see how anyone can argue that this move isn't a PR debacle for them.
That does cast a new light, but rewriting the contract or writing a new contract to replace the old one could not have been to hard.
I guess it is also possible they underestimated the number of players still using the older editions. I for one have no idea how many people still play/would play 2nd edition if they could find a group.
Ok so this begs the speculation (conspiracy theory) that access to OOP material hasn't been restored yet because they don't want to encourage anyone to play anything other than their current edition.
I'm not saying that's the case and as a rule I disbelive anything that smells like a conspiracy theory, but there is room in their behavior to suggest this is the case.
WotC had contractual agreements with PDF distributors to sell their product catalog. WotC terminated those contracts because they needed to remove their 4th Edition catalog for the reasons you suggest. Because these contracts were terminated, all materials covered by them had to be removed. The fact that out-of-print material was removed as well is a side effect of this situation.That makes a heap load of sense, and was a perspective I never considered. I didn't think about the "all or nothing" contract, because I simply assumed had WotC requested the pulling of 4e PDFs, all vendors would comply willingly.
It still doesn't make the action sensible to me, but it seems less insane now.
Thank you for the illumination.
Although that doesn't really apply to the termination of Paizo's contract as all they had were the older products. If this were the reason, then they would not have needed to tell Paizo to remove them.
*
I don't really care for different speculation or excuses for why they have done it. If they really felt it was necessary currently to give more information, then they would have given it. For every possible good reason one could give for doing this, another could give a possible bad reason for doing it. I would rather deal with the information I've seen, which isn't a lot, and just go with that, then revise as new information is released.
The given reason for pulling the PDFs has been piracy, I certainly believe that is among the worst reasons for doing this at this point. And that pretty much sums up my reaction at this point. As I said, I will adjust if more information is released, but with the little given, this is all I have.
Although that doesn't really apply to the termination of Paizo's contract as all they had were the older products. If this were the reason, then they would not have needed to tell Paizo to remove them.WotC had contractual agreements with PDF distributors to sell their product catalog. WotC terminated those contracts because they needed to remove their 4th Edition catalog for the reasons you suggest. Because these contracts were terminated, all materials covered by them had to be removed. The fact that out-of-print material was removed as well is a side effect of this situation.That makes a heap load of sense, and was a perspective I never considered. I didn't think about the "all or nothing" contract, because I simply assumed had WotC requested the pulling of 4e PDFs, all vendors would comply willingly.
It still doesn't make the action sensible to me, but it seems less insane now.
Thank you for the illumination.
It may have been a "fairness" thing - when it became clear that the termination of the contracts with RPGNow and DriveThruRPG would prevent them from continuing to sell out-of-print material, WotC may have decided that it would be best if that material was removed from all other PDF distributors so that they wouldn't take heat from certain distributors for "favoring" others. I imagine that if I were RPGNow or DTRPG and I found out that I couldn't sell older PDFs while Paizo was still allowed to, I'd be even more upset than I already was.
Again, utter speculation on my part.
Here's my completely speculative theory on why this is the case. Any portion, or all of it, may turn out to be completely incorrect.
WotC had contractual agreements with PDF distributors to sell their product catalog. WotC terminated those contracts because they needed to remove their 4th Edition catalog for the reasons you suggest. Because these contracts were terminated, all materials covered by them had to be removed. The fact that out-of-print material was removed as well is a side effect of this situation.
Instead of developing a new contract that would allow the distributors to continue selling out-of-print material, WotC decided to investigate methods by which they could more closely control their entire digital catalog, possibly by implementing an in-house service of some sort. Until they make a decision on this matter, they're being cautious about re-establishing any contracts with distributors.
Sure, that's possible. But, why not say something about it?
As others have stated, what would it have cost WotC to release a press statement, for a large gain in customer good will? You know, PR stuff: "...regret any inconvenience our decision may cause...need to protect our current product line from piracy...we are working on a solution to restore access to PDF copies of out of print material..." Instead, we get (effectively) no-notice cease and desist orders directly to PDF sellers and fatuous comments about how they really didn't inconvenience their customers because the 4e print copies are still being sold.
Personally, I have no emotional investment in their decision. I already have pretty much all the OOP TSR/WotC material I want (mostly hardcopy) and prefer physical to electronic, anyway. I still think that the way WotC handled this was dumb.
So then basically, I'd be safe provided I can prove that I have the software necessary to create the scanned PDF copy of the hard cover.
Not necessarily. First, many pirated PDFs are not simply scanned copies of books; they are naturally digital products. There is no way you would be able to claim that you created that PDF if you were using one of those. In addition, there may still be certain digital markers on PDFs of scanned material that would show that you didn't personally create them. And finally, in a worst-case scenario, if you claim that you personally created the scanned-document PDF you possess, and other identical PDFs are found floating around the internet, you might end up being looked at as the possible originator of the copied material.
Sure, that's possible. But, why not say something about it?
As others have stated, what would have have cost WotC to release a press statement? You know, PR stuff: "...regret any inconvenience our decision may cause...need to protect our current product line from piracy...we are working on a solution to restore access to out of print material..."
Actually, there have been statements from WotC's PR Manager that essentially say exactly that:
"What we did is we terminated our contracts. When we terminated the contracts, the files come down. The reason? The severe increase of piracy of the products."
"We are actively exploring other avenues for digital distribution."
"We didn't do this lightly, and we understand our fans enjoy that format."
It didn't come out as a press release (and it probably should have), but they have said the things you were wondering about.
It may have been a "fairness" thing - when it became clear that the termination of the contracts with RPGNow and DriveThruRPG would prevent them from continuing to sell out-of-print material, WotC may have decided that it would be best if that material was removed from all other PDF distributors so that they wouldn't take heat from certain distributors for "favoring" others. I imagine that if I were RPGNow or DTRPG and I found out that I couldn't sell older PDFs while Paizo was still allowed to, I'd be even more upset than I already was.
Again, utter speculation on my part.
Possible, but at the speed the PDFs were removed, my first thought isn't of their fairness to the separate companies. Although it did certainly cross my mind as a possible reason.
As well, it still doesn't jive for me with asking for the deletion of Paizo's copies of the files. If this were something that could or would be resolved with a new set of contracts, that would seem to be an extreme measure to take. Again, it is possible, but I still find it unlikely given the data.
That does cast a new light, but rewriting the contract or writing a new contract to replace the old one could not have been to hard.
I guess it is also possible they underestimated the number of players still using the older editions. I for one have no idea how many people still play/would play 2nd edition if they could find a group.
Ok so this begs the speculation (conspiracy theory) that access to OOP material hasn't been restored yet because they don't want to encourage anyone to play anything other than their current edition.
I'm not saying that's the case and as a rule I disbelive anything that smells like a conspiracy theory, but there is room in their behavior to suggest this is the case.
Well having to choose between 4th ed and nothing I will play nothing or find another system.
Playing 4th ed is like being with an abusive spouse. Sometimes it is better to be alone.I might try to relearn Rifts eventually.
How much longer that remains true is up in the air.
Depending on retention, up to 280 days. Unless someone reposts it.
Or are you simply talking about financially affected? Because you certainly aren't financially affected by posters complaints/libel/rumormongering about 4e, and yet you feel justified in complaining about it. Does that make your position more important than everyone elses?
And all that aside, no one has to be personally affected to have a right complaining about it.
It's another tactic by wizards and their fanboys: Divide and conquer. Try to convince people that they should ignore it unless it hits them directly, and you can keep hitting minorities without the majority doing anything about it. Trying to encourage, and capitalise, on other people's egoism, that's what it is. Disgusting, it's what it is.
Now, there is a compelling reason for the person who released the original masters to do so again.
For the next book. Not for PHB2. Or any Planescape material. Or all the other stuff that has been yanked.
Even if they were trying to be clever with this and trying to lure out the guy who distributes masters*, all this other crap was unnecessary.
*and boy, if they are, they are so failing - they make a big deal out of the lawsuits, they go and make it perfectly clear that there are ways to mark a file that isn't easily discovered... This tips off everyone that isn't stupid enough to have been caught the first time around, and they either don't do it, or find ways to cleanse their pdfs. Take out all visible marks and look around in the net on ways to spot the other kind and how to counter them. I know I have some Ideas right now, and I wasn't even thinking hard about it. Someone in publishing is bound to know what he's doing.
All this assumes, of course, that it's not someone from within the company, who knows the measures taken and can circumvent them.
It didn't come out as a press release (and it probably should have), but they have said the things you were wondering about.
For whatever reason, people have a tendency to view advance statements/official press releases in a different light than responses after the fact. Usually, people are more willing to accept/forgive companies who tell their customers what they're going to do ahead of time; the same statements, released in response to negative reactions from a surprise move, are often considered "spin" or damage control.
No matter their intentions, WotC blundered the PR aspect of this. Then again, this isn't the first time. I think Peruhain may be onto something in the Divorced from Reality thread: The current WotC CEO is a transfer from Hasbro and may not understand the differences between RPGs and more traditional games (composition of the customer base, etc.).
It's another tactic by wizards and their fanboys: Divide and conquer. Try to convince people that they should ignore it unless it hits them directly, and you can keep hitting minorities without the majority doing anything about it. Trying to encourage, and capitalise, on other people's egoism, that's what it is. Disgusting, it's what it is.
Oh, for crying out loud. Take this nonsense elsewhere. If you want a discussion, do so without the hyperbole and without the intent-twisting.
It didn't come out as a press release (and it probably should have), but they have said the things you were wondering about.For whatever reason, people have a tendency to view advance statements/official press releases in a different light than responses after the fact. Usually, people are more willing to accept/forgive companies who tell their customers what they're going to do ahead of time; the same statements, released in response to negative reactions from a surprise move, are often considered "spin" or damage control.
No matter their intentions, WotC blundered the PR aspect of this. Then again, this isn't the first time. I think Peruhain may be onto something in the Divorced from Reality thread: The current WotC CEO is a transfer from Hasbro and may not understand the differences between RPGs and more traditional games (composition of the customer base, etc.).
While I can certainly understand that, those aware of this can just take a rational view of the situation: what we're seeing is simply the result of the corporate structure inherent in Hasbro. It doesn't affect the quality of WotC's games, since they're still completely in control of their own development, and deciding to boycott WotC over this ultimately accomplishes nothing but harming the guys putting out a solid product, who are actually part of the D&D fanbase. I bet the WotC guys aren't any happier than most of you that the PDFs had to get pulled.
The contract idead doesn't convince me one bit. It won't stop piracy at all, because once the files have been available for even a single day, they can be distributed.
All it does is encourage piracy, since it's the only way to get those PDFs now.
And even if they, for some weird reason, couldn't stop distributing new books without taking away access to older ones (which I doubt), it would have been weird indeed to include access to existing PDFs. Remember, Paizo already said that in cases where sale of PDFs was stopped in the past, they were always allowed to keep making them available to people who have already paid. Only wizards didn't grant us that courtesy.
And let's just assume that water flows uphill, pertetual motion is possible, and wizards had to forbid access to all PDFs, they still could have given us more time to react, especially for those who need to (re-)download stuff they have already bought.
I might be willing to consider scenarios that are less likely than me winning the lottery, but not for wizards. It's far, far more likely that they just don't care. It fits their MO ever since they have killed Dragon and Dungeon.
Well having to choose between 4th ed and nothing I will play nothing or find another system.
Excellent choice, sir.
May I suggest D&D Third Edition or its successor, Pathfinder RPG? Or look into some World of Darkness Stuff.
In fact, you could give Exalted a try. You can get the PDF of the core rules for free, so al you have to lose if you don't like it is some time and some bandwidth.
True20 is also on sale as a PDF right now. Maybe a mostly class-less (only three generic classes) version of D&D Third Edition might be what you want.
I've also enjoyed reading/playing Legend of the Five Rings, Monte Cook's World of Darkness (The d20 Version with a kickass new take on the World of Darkness), Call of Cthulhu, and Firefly.
It fits their MO ever since they have killed Dragon and Dungeon.
Is that what this is about, KaeYoss? WotC moving their magazines to an online format? You consider this an "uncaring" decision, and it's characterizing your take on all of WotC's actions since then?
Oh, for crying out loud. Take this nonsense elsewhere.
No chance. I won't be told to shut up and leave just because I haven't lost money personally. This will not be talked away this easily. wizards is showing disregard towards customers, and has done so repeatedly in the past, and we won't let it go uncommented.
It doesn't affect the quality of WotC's games, since they're still completely in control of their own development, and deciding to boycott WotC over this ultimately accomplishes nothing but harming the guys putting out a solid product, who are actually part of the D&D fanbase. I bet the WotC guys aren't any happier than most of you that the PDFs had to get pulled.
I don't consider them part of the D&D fanbase. 4e isn't D&D for me, except in name. It bears no resemblance to the game known as D&D.
And trying to get us to buy this stuff by trying to get us to care about those poor developers? Not a chance. We're not boycotting developers. We're boycotting wizards of the coast. wizards of the coast made this decision, and they will get less money out of it.
There is no way to boycott those who have made this decision without boycotting the developers (the only thing I can think of is waiting for them on the parking lot with a weapon, but that's hardly advisable), so it's tough luck for developers - just as it's tough luck for those who never distributed this stuff illegally and are punished nonetheless.
Plus, it's not entirely a boycott. It's total loss of faith in the company. How can anyone buy something from a company that he just cannot trust? They might decide that it's time for 5e next weak and stop all support of 4e - and this time, they can stop all support, which they weren't able to do with 3e.
No, it's highly inadvisable to buy from wizards of the coast, for so many reasons, and they just cannot be talked away.
No matter their intentions, WotC blundered the PR aspect of this. Then again, this isn't the first time. I think Peruhain may be onto something in the Divorced from Reality thread: The current WotC CEO is a transfer from Hasbro and may not understand the differences between RPGs and more traditional games (composition of the customer base, etc.).While I can certainly understand that, those aware of this can just take a rational view of the situation: what we're seeing is simply the result of the corporate structure inherent in Hasbro. It doesn't affect the quality of WotC's games, since they're still completely in control of their own development, and deciding to boycott WotC over this ultimately accomplishes nothing but harming the guys putting out a solid product, who are actually part of the D&D fanbase. I bet the WotC guys aren't any happier than most of you that the PDFs had to get pulled.
No, the rational view is to make clear early that corporate mishandling is threatening a good product. That way, hopefully, the problems resulting from the corporate structure get resolved before the death of the product line (or something equally drastic, like what's happening to GM and Chrysler right now).
Is that what this is about, KaeYoss? WotC moving their magazines to an online format? You consider this an "uncaring" decision, and it's characterizing your take on all of WotC's actions since then?
I take exception to your allegations that I'm only still pissed at the magazines' discontinuation.
I can't be bothered to list all the crap they pulled off. It's widely known.
The magazines were just the first in a series of big blunders. No, come to think of it, it started earlier. Some of the stuff they did with DDM was pretty bad.
Speaking of "moving the magazines to an online format". They were saying back then "it's the only logical choice" or something like that.
And now they're pulling all PDFs. They don't know what they want.
|
Scott,
As you've avoided this earlier: If you aren't affected directly by this thread, why are you telling everyone else they shouldn't comment unless they've been directly affected. You aren't directly affected, so you shouldn't be allowed to comment. Only people at WotC and those who've paid for stuff should comment, according to you.
As for intent twisting, you've been doing that yourself. You claim most people who don't like this are pirates, then retract saying you didn't mean anyone here (in which case why bother saying it?). You then claim that people are just gnashing their teeth because they hate wizard for other reasons (which is possibly true), but provide no evidence. You tell other people they've got no evidence for WotC doing this to protect their brand (which is true) but have provided no evidence to back up your own statements. Either play by your own rules or stop telling everyone else to play by them.
Now, I personally, am not affected by this. I can't boycott WotC as they aren't producing anything I'm interested in anyway. I wasn't buying the PDFs of older editions as I already have hard-copy and am concentrating my spending on my current campaign edition. And yet, I still have an opinion that this was a boneheaded thing to do in the way it was done, i.e. no notice, no advance communication with fans, and reasons that don't make complete sense. I just haven't commented as everyone else was saying what I wanted to, so +1 wouldn't contribute. But you're hypocritical haranguing of everyone and telling them they're not allowed to post their opinion is starting to get on my nerves.
WotC is either malicious, or inept. And the Devs have obviously no say in anything or they'd have been able to tell the decison makers that this was a stupid idea.
So, there is no real reason to trust WotC right now.
No, the rational view is to make clear early that corporate mishandling is threatening a good product. That way, hopefully, the problems resulting from the corporate structure get resolved before the death of the product line (or something equally drastic, like what's happening to GM and Chrysler right now).No matter their intentions, WotC blundered the PR aspect of this. Then again, this isn't the first time. I think Peruhain may be onto something in the Divorced from Reality thread: The current WotC CEO is a transfer from Hasbro and may not understand the differences between RPGs and more traditional games (composition of the customer base, etc.).While I can certainly understand that, those aware of this can just take a rational view of the situation: what we're seeing is simply the result of the corporate structure inherent in Hasbro. It doesn't affect the quality of WotC's games, since they're still completely in control of their own development, and deciding to boycott WotC over this ultimately accomplishes nothing but harming the guys putting out a solid product, who are actually part of the D&D fanbase. I bet the WotC guys aren't any happier than most of you that the PDFs had to get pulled.
Something tells me there aint gonna be a bailout of Hasbro or WotC, but it would ROCK if the pres could order their CEOs fired!
Wishful thinking...
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Well having to choose between 4th ed and nothing I will play nothing or find another system.
Playing 4th ed is like being with an abusive spouse. Sometimes it is better to be alone.I might try to relearn Rifts eventually.
Having had one of those, and having learned rifts, I'd say you're better off DLing Pathfinder.
Rifts is more like the spouce with the never ending honey-do list. Not to mention once you figure her out, she changes her mind in another rule book ;-)
Come and see the corporate structure inherent in Hasbro. Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
Bloody consumer!
Rifts is more like the spouce with the never ending honey-do list. Not to mention once you figure her out, she changes her mind in another rule book ;-)
I see. Since we're talking spouses and roleplaying game systems, how would you describe
World of Darkness (any version, or any game using it)
and
Call of Cthulhu?
I see. Since we're talking spouses and roleplaying game systems, how would you describeWorld of Darkness (any version, or any game using it)
That's the spouse that has a theater degree and is always nudging you to either go to a local theater production, or they want to act in a local theater production. Oh, and they are having an affair with the director of said production.
and Call of Cthulhu?
That's the spouse who is so neurotic that they call you when you are on a business trip to make sure you haven't died in a car crash or have gone to a strip club five dozen times. By the time you come back from your business trip this spouse will have convinced themselves that you cheated on them, and will have locked themselves in the bathroom crying about your impending divorce.
Welcome to the Paizo boards, Titanium Dragon.
Apologies to Paizo for breaking any CoC by re-posting TD's comments here.
Peace,
tfad
That's the spouse who is so neurotic that they call you when you are on a business trip to make sure you haven't died in a car crash or have gone to a strip club five dozen times. By the time you come back from your business trip this spouse will have convinced themselves that you cheated on them, and will have locked themselves in the bathroom crying about your impending divorce.
Hm... I was thinking Rose from Two and Half Men: Staple your shoes to the floor, glue your testes to your thighs, terrorise your girlfriends, spy on you, sneak into your house and lay down next to you in bed....
Of course, she's not a spouse, but a stalker. Which tells us that you never stop playing CoC! NEVER!
|
...but that it does exist within the Pathfinder fan base. If you find that somehow insulting, I'm afraid it's something you're going to have to deal with - it's the truth.
Suggesting something is "running rampant" is suggesting widespread activity. This is a rather small fanbase.
Consider, in the future, saying, "I've discovered cases of piracy among the Pathfinder fanbase."
Unless, of course, you believe it is running rampant.... and in that case, I'd love to know how you arrived at this information.
Sincerely,
Jason
PS... without facts, this is unsubstantiated and thus, speculation. Never confuse truth with speculation.
Here is a link to his post on Enworld. http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/254035-my-name-defendan t-radzikowski.html<snip>
Second, I'd be very interested in reading the posts. The posts by the guy you say is now one of the defendants in the lawsuit and I would love if you could point me in the direction of those posts. I hope this doesn't violate Vic's caution about not talking about people on other messageboards.
Thanks for providing the link.
After reading this, and assuming it's the truth, I have a hard time figuring out how Scott got to the conclusion that this guy is some kind of hardened pirate and apparent overlord in a major piracy "organization" (exaggeration helps prove the point).On a notable tangent, however, one of the most involved pirates spent quite a while posting (and complaining about this decision) in the thread over on WotC's boards (for whatever reason, he decided to use the same moniker on WotC's boards and ENWorld as he does elsewhere). I suspected that he himself might be a defendant named in the piracy cases, and yesterday it was made clear that he was. He represents the top of the chain, however, not your average end-user pirate.
Seriously, Scott, you have absolutely no evidence, that I can see, to call this guy "one of the most involved pirates" (unless you're referring to the fact that he's a named defendant in the lawsuit) nor that he "He represents the top of the chain, however, not your average end-user pirate."
It seems that you have already convicted this guy in your mind, even though none of us have any evidence to support that conclusion.You might be right, he might be what you're accusing him of, but he might also be completely innocent (except of trusting the wrong people).
|
|
And, in case it matters to those Marvel fans out there, it also includes the website that had all the oop Marvel Super Hero game pdfs available for free with permission from WOTC [http://www.classicmarvel.com./] It's gone.
Perfectly within their rights, of course. Just sucky, as with the rest.
Which have nothing to do with pirating 4E, which blows a big hole into their defenses.