Witcher 2 devs claim 100% accurate pirate identifaction -PCGamer

[Corporate Thug]

People, this is not a government deciding whether or not $1200 is an appropriate punishment/fine for piracy. We can debate that all day long, but it's not what is happening here. This has nothing to do with criminal law, or "crime" in any way.

This is a private company threatening to sue people if they don't pay their demands. It's simple extortion, and it's bad business as evidenced by the RIAA debacle.

From http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100713/17400810200.shtml :

"As for how successful the lawsuits have been for those big record labels? So successful that EMI threatened to leave both the RIAA and IFPI if it didn't back away from these lawsuits. So successful that Sony execs referred to the lawsuits as a "money pit" that have cost the industry millions without bringing back anything near that much in settlement fees.

The fact that lots of people paid up to settle extortion-like fees didn't stop people from using file sharing networks to access unauthorized materials. It didn't get more people to buy. It didn't help the bottom line. It hasn't helped the record labels sell more product. It certainly hasn't helped the big labels stay in business. Hell, it hasn't even helped the RIAA. Towards the end of the legal campaign, the RIAA ended up having massive layoffs of its own staff. And, let's not even get into discussing what the average music fan thinks of the RIAA and the big labels these days... "


It's also important to note that only a very few of the RIAA lawsuits ever made their way to court, and the precedent that those cases set is based on completely different technology (kazaa-style file sharing vs. bitTorrent) so there is no guarantee that they will win if they do decide to sue. One thing is for sure, even if they do it will cost them a lot more to see the case through to completion and handle the inevitable counter suits for privacy and extortion violations than they could ever hope to recover. Again, look at the RIAA ...

If I ever get a letter like this I'll write a very simple response along the lines of "I did not pirate your game" and blow it off. I hope everyone else does too.

are you forgetting how much it will cost you to see the case through to completion?

 

[GaiaHunter]

are you forgetting how much it will cost you to see the case through to completion?

That is why it is seen as an extortion - they are trying to make you pay what they demand because it is more expensive going to court.

Thing is they not going to take millions to courts, so the chances of you actually having to pay something is still low although not 0.

 

[exar333]

That is why it is seen as an extortion - they are trying to make you pay what they demand because it is more expensive going to court.

Thing is they not going to take millions to courts, so the chances of you actually having to pay something is still low although not 0.

Do you also see civil lawsuits as 'extortion'. Don't forget court costs hit BOTH sides. If you steal something, and you are not guilty, tell them so and defend yourself in court. If you ARE guilty, you have the option to pay and settle (quietly) or defend in court and potentially pay extra fees/costs. Extortion indicates you have no choice, that is rediculous in this case.

I see no issue with this type of action.

 

[Specop 007]

Breaking the law and the wanting the law to protect you?

LOL

Silly americans...

Breaking the law?? Prove it. In America we have this thing called "Innocent until proven guilty". Its what makes us one of the most enviable countries in the world. Sorry you so jealous.

 

[Corporate Thug]

That is why it is seen as an extortion - they are trying to make you pay what they demand because it is more expensive going to court.

Thing is they not going to take millions to courts, so the chances of you actually having to pay something is still low although not 0.

Then wouldn't any prelawsuit demand be extortion by your definition? Example: person is hit by car, hires attorney, attorney sends driver a letter demanding payment for medical bills + pain and suffering. So this is extortion?

Also, I can foresee companies taking individuals to court for three reasons (1) they have deeper pockets to they can withstand the cost of litigation; (2) they want to "set an example;" and (3) they can recover their fees if they are the prevailing party most of the time. How likely is it? I'm not sure. Those are the kinds of decisions made the company.

 

[Beev]

Until they make it impossible I will not stop pirating when I want to. I haven't done it in forever, but the moral bs means nothing to me, especially when it's for a company like EA or something. Said companies can do what they will to prevent it, and if they are successful I will meh and move on.

Breaking the law?? Prove it. In America we have this thing called "Innocent until proven guilty". Its what makes us one of the most enviable countries in the world. Sorry you so jealous.

Double edged sword for sure, though.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Breaking the law?? Prove it. In America we have this thing called "Innocent until proven guilty". Its what makes us one of the most enviable countries in the world. Sorry you so jealous.

ugh, too much law and order? these aren't intended to be criminal cases.

 

[Ross Ridge]

Breaking the law?? Prove it. In America we have this thing called "Innocent until proven guilty". Its what makes us one of the most enviable countries in the world. Sorry you so jealous.

Like Corporate Thug suggested that only applies in criminal trials. In the United States, in civil matters like these there's no presumption of innocence or guilt and instead are decided on the balance of probabilities.

Just be glad that minor copyright infrigement isn't a crime in the US. It wouldn't hard to prove these pirates are guilty in a criminal court. Having an IP address on record as illegally downloading a game would be enough to get a search warrant. That would get more than enough evidence to convict someone beyond a resonable doubt. Given how many games, movies and songs most pirates have downloaded and the preference in the US for mandatory minimum sentences to be served consecutively, it would add to up to a life sentence for many pirates if what they were doing was actually a crime.

 

[Specop 007]

ugh, too much law and order? these aren't intended to be criminal cases.

Nope, I dont even own a tv.

I cant make wild assed claims and get awards from it. Burden of proof exists in both criminal and civil cases. Sure in a civil case it may not be de facto "Innocent until proven guilty" but you do have a discovery process which is required to support the claims being made by the plaintiff. If the devs show up in court and say "Well, we saw this subnet range download our software so we picked that guy as the most likely suspect by rolling dice" the judge will laugh the case right the fuck out of the court room.

Which means the idea of innocent until proven guilty still holds merit in a civil case, even if it is not as clearly defined as it would be in a criminal case.

Maybe you should law and order?

 

[Ross Ridge]

Which means the idea of innocent until proven guilty still holds merit in a civil case, even if it is not as clearly defined as it would be in a criminal case.

No, it's clearly defined in civil cases, they're decided on the balance of probabilities. Civil cases don't decide innocence or guilt, so "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply. All you have to do is convince a jury that it's more likely than not that the person who the IP address was assigned to was the pirate. Or even just that the person should've known that his Internet connection was being used to pirate games.

 

[GaiaHunter]

Do you also see civil lawsuits as 'extortion'. Don't forget court costs hit BOTH sides. If you steal something, and you are not guilty, tell them so and defend yourself in court. If you ARE guilty, you have the option to pay and settle (quietly) or defend in court and potentially pay extra fees/costs. Extortion indicates you have no choice, that is rediculous in this case.

I see no issue with this type of action.

I didn't say it was extortion, I said it is seen as extortion.

Secondly they could go directly to the court complain and third we know they won't take thousands of people into the courts with this, especially because the court would refuse the large majority of them.

Fifth at the time they sent the letter their legal fees are closer to 0 than €1000.

They could say "Pay us the €50 of the game you downloaded and did not pay for it. Otherwise we see you in court where we will ask a much higher price and you will have legal fees".

Then wouldn't any prelawsuit demand be extortion by your definition? Example: person is hit by car, hires attorney, attorney sends driver a letter demanding payment for medical bills + pain and suffering. So this is extortion?

Where I live insurance companies take care of that.

 

[Ross Ridge]

Oh, and the MPAA and RIAA have won massive statutory damage awards for copyright infringment by sucessfully tracking down movie and music pirates using their IP adressess, so I don't why anyone would think CD Projekt wouldn't prevail in court as well.

 

[Specop 007]

No, it's clearly defined in civil cases, they're decided on the balance of probabilities. Civil cases don't decide innocence or guilt, so "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply. All you have to do is convince a jury that it's more likely than not that the person who the IP address was assigned to was the pirate. Or even just that the person should've known that his Internet connection was being used to pirate games.

Ergo....Innocent until proven guilty. I have to have some level of proof in order to get a favorable verdict. I cant just show up and point a finger and say "He stole from me!" and win.

The fact is to deny the idea of "innocent until proven guilty" in civil cases is to degrade into a argument of semantics and ignore the driving principles of ANY case in the court of law, which is proof of the claim set forth against the defendant. Whether it be a finding of "guilty" or a finding of judgement is, well, semantics.

Of course maybe things have changed and now the plaintiff does not require burden of proof. RIAA will be most happy to hear this I'm sure.

 

[Nebor]

Maybe you should law and order?

IIRC Corporate Thug is a lawyer.

 

[nyker96]

personally I don't buy too many game when they debute, partly don't got the cash, partly I like games that got fully tested and patched. Mostly like Gold edition or GOTY edition games that has all the patches+DLCs etc. They are not so expensive when it's a game that's like 2-3 years old. So I think for most who doesn't have the cash to buy can just play a game slightly delayed, it's actually a better experience. I bought COH the entire package all 3 games for like 10 on steam. It's just best game ever. Also got most games I love for under 10 bucks.

The witcher enhanced edition is only 2.5 on steam now, might buy that but truthfully i got more games from last year's steam sale than I can play. I think people pirate because they want the latest game, if you can wait a bit, most games drop to like 5-10 bucks anyone can buy them.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Nope, I dont even own a tv.

I cant make wild assed claims and get awards from it. Burden of proof exists in both criminal and civil cases. Sure in a civil case it may not be de facto "Innocent until proven guilty" but you do have a discovery process which is required to support the claims being made by the plaintiff. If the devs show up in court and say "Well, we saw this subnet range download our software so we picked that guy as the most likely suspect by rolling dice" the judge will laugh the case right the fuck out of the court room.

Which means the idea of innocent until proven guilty still holds merit in a civil case, even if it is not as clearly defined as it would be in a criminal case.

Maybe you should law and order?

Putting your classifications aside, as a practical matter, most lawyers will tell you that the discovery process is the most costly aspect of litigation. It seems rather obvious that a corporation can shell out the costs versus the average joe -- if they want to.

 

[Corporate Thug]

I didn't say it was extortion, I said it is seen as extortion.

Secondly they could go directly to the court complain and third we know they won't take thousands of people into the courts with this, especially because the court would refuse the large majority of them.

Fifth at the time they sent the letter their legal fees are closer to 0 than €1000.

They could say "Pay us the €50 of the game you downloaded and did not pay for it. Otherwise we see you in court where we will ask a much higher price and you will have legal fees".



Where I live insurance companies take care of that.

That's great, do they take of the piracy demands as well? My point is that in almost every case, there is some form of "give me X or I'm filing a lawsuit" demand...this case is no different.

 

[Corporate Thug]

personally I don't buy too many game when they debute, partly don't got the cash, partly I like games that got fully tested and patched. Mostly like Gold edition or GOTY edition games that has all the patches+DLCs etc. They are not so expensive when it's a game that's like 2-3 years old. So I think for most who doesn't have the cash to buy can just play a game slightly delayed, it's actually a better experience. I bought COH the entire package all 3 games for like 10 on steam. It's just best game ever. Also got most games I love for under 10 bucks.

The witcher enhanced edition is only 2.5 on steam now, might buy that but truthfully i got more games from last year's steam sale than I can play. I think people pirate because they want the latest game, if you can wait a bit, most games drop to like 5-10 bucks anyone can buy them.

same here. I find two things rather remarkable (1) games prices haven't really gone up over the years (I remember my dad buying Donkey Kong Land II for me for $70 upon release) and (2) game prices (for the most part) drop like a rock, esp. on PC. Give it a few months and you can get practically any game for half of the release price.

 

[LumbergTech]

same here. I find two things rather remarkable (1) games prices haven't really gone up over the years (I remember my dad buying Donkey Kong Land II for me for $70 upon release) and (2) game prices (for the most part) drop like a rock, esp. on PC. Give it a few months and you can get practically any game for half of the release price.

the price was already high for games (i know this is debatable), so they really dont have room to get any more expensive...$100 (in todays dollars) games will never become mainstream

 

[Rifter]

I dont see the issue. If they can prove you stole the game then pay the price. Sure its higher than one copy but most pirates will burn copies for people and could easaly have distributed 10-20 copies or more.

I have zero sympaty for pirates.

If you cant do the time dont do the crime.

 

[Corporate Thug]

the price was already high for games (i know this is debatable), so they really dont have room to get any more expensive...$100 (in todays dollars) games will never become mainstream

What I don't understand is how they can maintain the same prices as when I was a kid (unless my memory is foggy). For example, how/where do they pass on the costs of the increased salary of the programmers/developers?

 

[Rebel_L]

What I don't understand is how they can maintain the same prices as when I was a kid (unless my memory is foggy). For example, how/where do they pass on the costs of the increased salary of the programmers/developers?

The markets are far larger now than they used to be, how many people 20 years ago had a computer compared to now? Even console's are more common now. When I was a little kid console's were around but not everyone had one, now almost everyone has one and lots of folks have multiple consoles in the house.

 

[88MVP]

This sounds more like a form of blackmail or extortion to me. I won't claim pirating games is morally or legally right, but sending a threatening letter demanding money sounds like a crime too.

This is how literally every lawsuit ever starts. It's called a demand letter. Some statutes actually require one of these threatening demand letters be sent as a prerequisite to filing the suit with a court.

 

[88MVP]

I wonder what the magnitude of the penalty is for shoplifting the same game.

That's a great question, at least as a thought experiment.

An interesting difference with someone shoplifting a hard copy from a B&M store is that the content creator has already been paid for that copy.

The disparity in fines seems reasonable when you consider that far more people are willing to pirate vs. shoplift because it's of the relative ease and anonymity of the former. Fines for piracy would need to be much higher (and handed out at a much higher rate) to achieve the same deterrence level that we see with shoplifting. Shoplifting still happens, but far fewer people do it and repeat offenders are usually caught eventually.

 

[Ross Ridge]

Ergo....Innocent until proven guilty. I have to have some level of proof in order to get a favorable verdict. I cant just show up and point a finger and say "He stole from me!" and win.

The fact is to deny the idea of "innocent until proven guilty" in civil cases is to degrade into a argument of semantics and ignore the driving principles of ANY case in the court of law, which is proof of the claim set forth against the defendant. Whether it be a finding of "guilty" or a finding of judgement is, well, semantics.

Uh, no, you're the one trying to play semantic games here. Like I said, there's no determination of innocence or guilt in a civil trial. The "idea" of innocent until proven guilty requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and that level of proof isn't required in civil trials.