Community

Absolutely. The supposed point of suing pirates is to deter those that would be the originators of the files. You can then combine this with DRM/Watermarking and the like to increase the difficulty in someone uploading it.

I think its as simple as this: DRM more intrusive than a CD key is too intrusive, and it isn't likely to be any more effective.

I think ultimately your goal should be not to entirely prevent piracy (an impossible one) but instead to make it more difficult to choose to casually pirate materials.

If you have to go through shady sites to find what you're looking for, you discourage a lot of piracy, and if you make it so people don't just send a copy of their game to their buddy, you discourage a lot of piracy.

3) WoTC ordered the PDFs to be pulled, and the companies had something explicit in their contracts that prevented future downloads to pre-paid customers.

This is a subset of 1.

4) WotC ordered the PDFs to be pulled, and the companies had something in their contracts to enforce future downloads to pre-paid customers but were pressured not to enforce them.

This is a subset of 2.

So, no. I already covered both of these possibilities.

Sort of like how Bush stated clearly that we went into Iraq after WMDs. Then he stated clearly that we went into Iraq to remove Hussein. Then he stated clearly that it was to fight Al Queda.

Comparing someone to Bush is borderline flaming.

Moreover, what reason does Steve have for saying what he is? That'd be like Saddam saying "Yes, we did the wrong thing, we had a chemical weapons program, please invade us."

Polaris wrote:

I will make my thoughts on this very simple:

Yes, RPGNow and others were at fault for promising multiple downloads when they weren't absolutely guaranteed they could deliver.

Indeed

Polaris wrote:

However, nobody (or at least almost nobody) saw this sort of across-the-board, punitive action by Wotc against it's PDF fans and retailers...and yes that's exactly what it is.

Almost true. Regardless of how you feel, WotC's decision to stop PDF sells had nothing to do with it's paying customers. Does it effect them, yes. Was it intended as a slap in the face to them, no. Are some people self-absorbed enough to believe it is a personal affront, sadly...

Polaris wrote:

Legal or not, Wotc is making no friends with this move and frankly I don't think their business practices bear up under any kind of scrutiny on this.

That's all.

-Polaris

Wait and see, that's all we can do, yes?

eMouse wrote:

I was just reading through the more technical discussions about DRM and watermarking, and I thought I'd point out a reminder that the human component is always the most unreliable in security. Whether it's someone in the print chain that leaks the printer's PDF, or a dummied up purchase using a false ID and someone else's credit card. Why bother finding and stripping out a watermark if you can just give bad information to begin with?

My background in security comes from a 2-season course in 'Burn Notice'. :D

Absolutely! In fact the better your security, the more difficult it is for legitamate users to work. The more difficult it is for people to work, the more and more they will actively bypass and even sabotage your security with no malicious intent whatsoever simply to work more effeciently and easier.

This phenomena is will known within OpSec in the DoD. Security always involves this sort of compromise. Data piracy is no different in that regard.

-Polaris