Interview CDProjekt explains their anti-piracy measures

[Gord]

First of all, this fine is not imposed by the court, in fact it appears to be an offer of settlement. However, as an offer of settlement, it is absurdly high (in fact the amount makes this nothing but a money-grubbing attempt by a desperate company) and a sensible approach for anyone getting caught would be to combat it in court. Even pleading guilty to charges, meaning you'd have to pay the court imposed fine + court costs would likely result in a lower total amount.

There is zero chance that the fines would be a deterrent to pirates. Any computer literate person knows how to use proxies when needed and there goes the reliability of any IP detection method.

Originally the idea behind it was to offer a simple way to stop (usually economic) damages to someone (usually a company) due to obvious violations of the law without having to go to court.
An lawyer would send one of those letters with the fine supposed to cover expenses and/or damages and the recipient would have to stop the violation or risk a lawsuit.

However, over the recent years, the focus has shifted from the removal of an infringement towards monetary compensations (of the lawyers and entertainment industry).

Changing the law in a way that the first letter would have to be free of charge (or only include a minor fine) in case of private individuals, therefore consisting only of the demand to cease the transgression, would quite effectively stop this form of abuse, I think.

The only risk I see here is a flood of cases about copyright infringement at the courts, if lawyers and industry try to make up for the loss of income.

 

[hiver]

The point is this will never work as deterrent or a way to stop piracy.

It cant be used in every country. Even if people who pay this shit stop pirating there are millions more who will continue. And new ones come into the ring all the time.
Torrents are not the only way to pirate something.
People will start using measures to hide their IPs.

etc. etc...

The fact is that the line how this is an anti-piracy tactic is a PR lie.

 

[Wunderpurps]

The point is this will never work as deterrent or a way to stop piracy.

It cant be used in every country. Even if people who pay this shit stop pirating there are millions more who will continue. And new ones come into the ring all the time.
Torrents are not the only way to pirate something.
People will start using measures to hide their IPs.

etc. etc...

The fact is that the line how this is an anti-piracy tactic is a PR lie.

Hiding your IP just sets it to someone else, also logged and tracked, meaning they will be accused instead and proxies will disappear quickly when that happens.

Germania is the imperial province of the Europeon Hegemony. The whole point of the EU is to bring uniform laws to allow the facilitation of easy transaction of business. Meaning that the laws of Germany eventually become the laws of all the members.

So if you can get away with this in Germany and pass something like SOPA in US it's game over. You will have piracy from shithole countries like melcar lives in but they don't take pesos on paypal and they don't have credit cards in Georgia so they really don't give a shit.

 

[Turjan]

You say this bolded part as if there were some kind of intrinsic and objective measure for which punishment fits which crime. There is no such thing. This is always a matter of consent (obviously not total consent, but you get the drift). The deterrent factor plays a role in numerous forms of punishment, and it's a given that a deterrent is supposed to be seen as an excessive price for a law violation, otherwise it's mot a deterrent.

The appropriate amount is usually determined by law. Comparing different types of offense by the damage inflicted and using common sense is a guideline for legislators (and judges who are given certain leeway when punishment is issued). Corporations, such as the Polish maker of bad action adventures, are not and should not be in position to determine the punishment, and particularly they should not invoke deterrence factor as that goes far beyond the scope of their authority. Now, a court of law would in this case (given that it's proven) award CDP actual damage + legal costs. What you are talking about are punitive damages, and, according to Wikipedia, they would not apply in cases such as this one, especially in front of the European court:
[snip]

First off, to make this completely clear, even if I have already stated this twice upthread, we are in complete agreement about not letting private entitites play accusers and judges. That is something that has to stop. The points about punitive damages werre also interesting to read, as I live in the US, where punitive damages are used excessively. However, I don't have the feeling that the EU follows the guidelines you quoted, either.

Second, yes, appropriate amounts are determined by law, after discussions among lawmakers. Ideally, they ask judges and experts in the field, and in the case of copyright law they obviously followed the advice from experts in the field (corporate lobbyists). There is always lots of leeway in punishment. Small thefts ae usually punished more harshly than large white collar crimes, just to give an example. That seems to be widely accepted, but this is also the problem with punishing file sharers. The public in general is completely okay with that, which is the main problem with changing laws here.

It's also a trade-off. I guess what you see as proper punishment might work in an internet that has something similar like near total control and censorship. In principle, a system of reliance on a few somewhat excessive punishments as warning to others instead of total control seems at least to keep the door to a relatively free internet open. Not that I give the latter much of a chance, but we can at least hope.

There is no total control in legal system. Not every violation of law gets revealed and processed, let alone punished. Should we start handing out out capital punishment for petty crime then?

Of course not. Your chances of getting caught with petty crime are still relatively high, if you do it more than a few times. I'm just arguing that the push from the copyright holders goes in two alternative directions: total internet control and/or high fines with deterrence factor. If I was forced to choose between those two for some reason, I would choose the latter.

 

[St. Toxic]

Fines are for faggots. Either put the pirates in jail or execute them on the spot.

 

[DraQ]

If you know, beforehand, that your rape will be disproportionally large, and commited the act nevertheless, why the buthurt? You got what you were asking for.

So, I guess, wymyn shouldn't be walking outside without burkas and strong guiding arms of their men?

You say this bolded part as if there were some kind of intrinsic and objective measure for which punishment fits which crime. There is no such thing.

There is comparison with other crimes with known damage and their respective kinds of punishment.

It's easily to notice which ones jut out of the curve.

As much as I find the law situation in Germany an abomination (there was just again a case of a senior citizen without computer being sentenced for downloading a hooligan film), small fines only make sense if every single instance of online piracy gets actually persecuted. The lawmakers seemed to favor less cases with higher fines as deterrent.

Which is plain fucking psychopathic and retarded, as Janjentina has rightly noticed:

There is no total control in legal system. Not every violation of law gets revealed and processed, let alone punished. Should we start handing out out capital punishment for petty crime then?

If the crime has pathetically low detectability, does it mean that the severity of punishment should be ramped up indiscriminately? If catching someone littering was way hard, would it be good idea to administer capital punishment to the few you caught?

On average it would be the same, but an average person has half a dick, one boob and doesn't exist, while you'd be killing real people for fucking littering.

Not only that, such a deterrent is ineffective. People don't do their risk/reward calculations by summing outcomes times probabilities. If they did, not a single person would ever buy a lottery ticket, people wouldn't behave like braindead morons while driving on the road and so on.

Similarly, capital punishment doesn't seem to work as deterrent for violent criminals if they have decent chance of getting scot free.

If the threat of getting caught is negligible, the activity is desirable, common and socially acceptable the negative outcome is pretty much discounted right away with little regard for how much it might hurt.
Then you have a large percentage of pirates in the society and are effectively hitting random members of the society really hard. It's no longer executing the law, but inflicting heavy damages on random people. It doesn't do anything to evoke society's sympathy towards your cause, isn't helping the respect for the law, isn't an effective scare and generally doesn't work apart from hurting random people and pissing everyone off.

It doesn't work and if you continue you're either a moron or are only interested in shaking down random people for cash and not actually stopping anything or deterring anything. Both situations are deeply pathological.

 

[Wunderpurps]

If the crime has pathetically low detectability, does it mean that the severity of punishment should be ramped up indiscriminately? If catching someone littering was way hard, would it be good idea to administer capital punishment to the few you caught?

I don't know where you live but litering is 1000 dollar fine or more in the kwa, and I don't see anyone screaming BUT I PICKED UP THE PAPER I DON'T DESERVE THE FINE HOW CAN PEOPLE HAVE SUCH AN OVERREACTING SENTENCE. IF I JUST PICK UP THE PAPER THAT'S PUNISHMENT ENOUGH.

But you are paying for the enforcement, and that's exactly what happens here too. It costs at least 100 bucks to have a cop pull you over probably more, and takes thema way from other things they could be doing.

 

[St. Toxic]

If they have more important things to do, they should fucking do them. If there's a bank-robbery in progress and a cop has to fine me for littering, I shouldn't have to pay 10 million dollars because that's the cost of letting the bank-robbers get away, should I?

 

[Mozgoëbstvo]

Let this thread die. Please. It has suffered long enough.

 

[Havoc]

I don't care. They lost a customer.

 

[el Supremo]

If you know, beforehand, that your rape will be disproportionally large, and commited the act nevertheless, why the buthurt? You got what you were asking for.

So, I guess, wymyn shouldn't be walking outside without burkas and strong guiding arms of their men?

.

And from where this came from?
Anyway, if it was up to me to decide wymyn would not be allowed wearing anything more then thongs. And only good looking wymyn would be allowed.
M:

 

[el Supremo]

Do you eat dinner at the restaurant, then decide if it was good enough to be worth paying for?

Where do you live where you have to pay up front? All the restaurants I've been at, you pay after finishing your meal. Why? Because if it tasted like total shit, and you can tell by what's left on the plate, then nobody is going to force you to pay for it. They'll probably even apologize. If we could get that from rpg devs...

What? Do you live in the hipotetical communist paradise? And what stops people from claiming that meal was not worth paying? I would, every time. I'd accept an appology every day. From my experience, if you refuse to pay, they'll just lock the doors till the Police comes. If it is elegant establishment, I mean. In some tatty pub, waiter and barkeeper togather will beat the shit out of you, while other costumers are cheering up.

 

[St. Toxic]

What? Do you live in the hipotetical communist paradise?

Yeah, that's right. Only in a "communist paradise" can you actually expect to get what you pay for, right?

And what stops people from claiming that meal was not worth paying?

Well, if there's nothing left on the plate it's hard to claim that it tasted like shit, unless you mean it in a good way. If you ate 1/5 or 1/4 that's more reasonable and you can ask to have it taken back. Have you ever seen the fly-in-the-soup gag? In my experience, if you get served food with an insect unintentionally in it, you're not obligated to pay.

I would, every time. I'd accept an appology every day.

You wouldn't be doing a whole lot of eating, but you'd get quite a number of apologies. They'd also learn to recognize you, especially if your claims were always fabricated and have you thrown out eventually.

From my experience, if you refuse to pay, they'll just lock the doors till the Police comes. If it is elegant establishment, I mean. In some tatty pub, waiter and barkeeper togather will beat the shit out of you, while other costumers are cheering up.

See, and I supposedly live in a "middle-eastern shithole".

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Let this thread die. Please. It has suffered long enough.

Can't bear to see the true face of CD Projekt, potatobro?

 

[el Supremo]

What? Do you live in the hipotetical communist paradise?

Yeah, that's right. Only in a "communist paradise" can you actually expect to get what you pay for, right?

Only in the hypothetical communist paradise people are not greedy bastards.

I would, every time. I'd accept an appology every day.

You wouldn't be doing a whole lot of eating, but you'd get quite a number of apologies. They'd also learn to recognize you, especially if your claims were always fabricated and have you thrown out eventually.

Now, don't you see the analogy with software piracy?

From my experience, if you refuse to pay, they'll just lock the doors till the Police comes. If it is elegant establishment, I mean. In some tatty pub, waiter and barkeeper togather will beat the shit out of you, while other costumers are cheering up.

See, and I supposedly live in a "middle-eastern shithole".

huh?

 

[Mozgoëbstvo]

Don't call me a potato ever again.

And no, I think CDProjekt's move was retarded. I simply meant this whole discussion is just as retarded and should be buried.

And I repeat, I am NOT a potatolander, or a bro to potatoes. Let that be clear... bro.

 

[St. Toxic]

Only in the hypothetical communist paradise people are not greedy bastards.

Being able to trick someone into paying for shit normally wouldn't pay off, as people are supposed to flee your establishment, but the analogy fails somehow when it comes to games -- some people are happy to be tricked by the same company over and over again.

You wouldn't be doing a whole lot of eating, but you'd get quite a number of apologies. They'd also learn to recognize you, especially if your claims were always fabricated and have you thrown out eventually.

Now, don't you see the analogy with software piracy?

The question was whether or not we should pay for games we didn't like, as in the case of restaurants. The answer is no, at least as far as restaurants are concerned. Piracy doesn't compare to mere dishonesty in an already established contract between customer and provider -- if we actually had the right to pirate games and then pay upon completion, then you could say that there was an analogy.

From my experience, if you refuse to pay, they'll just lock the doors till the Police comes. If it is elegant establishment, I mean. In some tatty pub, waiter and barkeeper togather will beat the shit out of you, while other costumers are cheering up.

See, and I supposedly live in a "middle-eastern shithole".

huh?

Where do you live that you can get arrested / beaten and humiliated for getting served bad food at a restaurant? Come to Yemen, my friend, where they know how to treat people with respect.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

And I repeat, I am NOT a potatolander, or a bro to potatoes. Let that be clear... bro.

Location: Sitting in the Hall of Heroes, between Dražen Petrović and Radivoj Korać

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poland-Serbia_relations

 

[Mozgoëbstvo]

Not Serbian. But "close enough", as you would say. And saying potato is close to Serbia is like saying America is close to Canada.

Ideo-culturally, Serbia is much closer to Orthodox nationalism like Russians.

While Potato is, as a catho-latinic slavic country, in a pope-cocksucking contest with Croatia (which is, BTW, my land).

Glad teaching you some geopolitics.

 

[BLOBERT]

BRO CANADA MIGHT AS WELL BE A STATE

 

[Mozgoëbstvo]

BLOBERT CANADA IS QUITE NOTHING LIKE THE USA THEY SHARE BORDERS AND LANGUAGE BUT AVERAGE MENTALITY IS QUITE DIFFERENT

UNLESS YOUR JUST TROLLING IN WHICH CASE ITS FINE


AND I KNOW ITS WEIRD BUT I CAN ONLY REPLY TO YOU IN YOUR OWN FASHION BRO

 

[BLOBERT]

BRO DO YOU KNOW MUCH ABOUT AMERICA OR CANADA??!!

LOLOLOL BRO WAIT YOU ARE TROLLING!!11

 

[Mozgoëbstvo]

I AM NOT ANYWAY MERRY CHRISTMAS MY DEAREST BLOBERT

HO HO HO

 

[Wunderpurps]

BLOBERT CANADA IS QUITE NOTHING LIKE THE USA THEY SHARE BORDERS AND LANGUAGE BUT AVERAGE MENTALITY IS QUITE DIFFERENT

UNLESS YOUR JUST TROLLING IN WHICH CASE ITS FINE


AND I KNOW ITS WEIRD BUT I CAN ONLY REPLY TO YOU IN YOUR OWN FASHION BRO

They talk like minnesotans, put on airs like New Englanders and have the entitlement of Californians. They are just like Americans

 

[BLOBERT]

BROS FOR THOSE WHO ARE NOT AWARE THE LEGAL DRINKING AGE IN CANADA IS 19 VS 21 IN THE US

BROS I WAS IN WINDSOR MORE WEEKENDS THEN I WAS AT HOME BROS DONT LET PRETENTIOUS POTATO PEOPLE TELL YOU DIFFERENT CANADA AND US HAVE MORE IN COMMON THEN THEY DONT

BROS LOOLOLOL IT IS COOL TO SEE FOREIGNERS THAT ARE JUST AS UNINTELLIGENT AS THE STEREOTYPE OF THE IGNORANT AMERICAN BROS IMAGINE EUROPE WAS ONE BIG COUNTRY WELL DIFFIERENT PARTS OF AMERICA CAN BE ALMOST AS DIFFERENT

BROS LOLLOLOLLOL COME TO DETROIT THE DIVIDING LINE BETWEEN WHERE BLACK PEOPLE AND WHITE PEOPLE LIVE IS MORE APPARENT THEN A POTATO CHECKPOINT WITH A FEW BROS WITH AKS