|
3 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2010 - 11:03AM
#101
|
Date Joined:
Mar 17, 2001
|
I don't see why I shouldn't expect that attitude from a company. Can you explain why you think we shouldn't?
We only can expect others to be perfect if we are perfect ourselves. I doubt that any person posting on these boards can make that claim and be right.
Ceterum censeo scrinium puniceum esse delendam
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2010 - 11:04AM
#102
|
Date Joined:
May 16, 2006
|
Actually, the itunes experience woudl seem to show that (B) is more important. No DRM anymore.
Nah, itunes is a poor example. Apple removing DRM was due to market competition (largely amazon as I recall) rather than anything specific to the customer base.
Most DRM is ridiculously badly handled. However, physical books have a fundamental type od DRM (well RM anyway) in them... Only the person holding the book can use it. And thats what publishers are really striving for - they don't want a digital version of a product to give you freer usage of their product than the paper version does.
Now, once someone produces a solid DRM solution that allows the same freedom (I can use anywhere, and can loan my book to someone during which time I can't use it) then come ask me to use your DRM. 
However, the CB being online isn't DRM in the same way - its more license enforcement. A book or a CD you can loan someone, but you never had that right with the CB. Just because people could do it trivially, didn't mean it was 'allowed'.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2010 - 11:07AM
#103
|
Date Joined:
Aug 24, 2005
|
I don't think perfection is what I'm asking for. I'm asking for an open mind about piracy. At the very least, I the policy makers to base their policy on fact, and not media hype, or the unfounded claims of someone with a vested interest in deceiving you.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2010 - 11:08AM
#104
|
Date Joined:
Mar 17, 2001
|
I don't think perfection is what I'm asking for. I'm asking for an open mind about piracy. At the very least, I the policy makers to base their policy on fact, and not media hype, or the unfounded claims of someone with a vested interest in deceiving you.
Googling for CB and finding a Torrent before WotC is a fact. It may be interpreted in the wrong manner, but it is a fact.
Ceterum censeo scrinium puniceum esse delendam
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2010 - 11:09AM
#105
|
Date Joined:
Aug 24, 2005
|
physical books have a fundamental type od DRM (well RM anyway) in them... And thats what publishers are really striving for - they don't want a digital version of a product to give you freer usage of their product than the paper version does.
This type of thinking infurates me beyond reason. I really shouldn't get as upset over this as I do. Technology has opened up a vast array of possibilities, and some publishers are desperately clinging to their old business models, because they are too afraid to try to adapt to the times. I can't wait until the dinosaurs die.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2010 - 11:10AM
#106
|
Date Joined:
Aug 24, 2005
|
I don't think perfection is what I'm asking for. I'm asking for an open mind about piracy. At the very least, I the policy makers to base their policy on fact, and not media hype, or the unfounded claims of someone with a vested interest in deceiving you.
Googling for CB and finding a Torrent before WotC is a fact. It may be interpreted in the wrong manner, but it is a fact.
Good point. The interpretation of facts is a very important step in the decision making process. No argument there.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2010 - 11:30AM
#107
|
Date Joined:
Jan 25, 2009
|
I don't think perfection is what I'm asking for. I'm asking for an open mind about piracy. At the very least, I the policy makers to base their policy on fact, and not media hype, or the unfounded claims of someone with a vested interest in deceiving you.
Googling for CB and finding a Torrent before WotC is a fact. It may be interpreted in the wrong manner, but it is a fact.
Hmm... when I google "character builder" the top 2 results are from WotC's site and none of the results in the first page are torrents. It's possible that was different at some point, but the problem he describes certainly does not currently exist (the problem being the google results, I'm sure that there are torrents out there, there's torrents for anything).
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2010 - 11:32AM
#108
|
Date Joined:
Aug 24, 2005
|
he probably was using 'google' in place of the generic term 'search'. Similar to how people use 'Kleenex' instead of tissue.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2010 - 11:35AM
#109
|
Date Joined:
May 13, 2008
|
googling d&d character builder download results in the first 3 being wizards.com. Now, WotC may have emailed google to fix the problem, which would be a good business move to protect their IP.  edited at AL's request :P
I_Roll_20s @twitter. Not always SFW.
I may prefer 4e, but I will play and enjoy almost any edition, and indeed almost any table top RPG, with my friends. Down with Edition Wars. Shut up and roll your dice. :P
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2010 - 11:35AM
#110
|
Date Joined:
Aug 18, 2007
|
The 'piracy' thing is likely just the talking point they landed on. Pirates steal stuff, and stealing's bad. But I think the 1-month-every-six subscribers were just as much of a driving force, if not more. (*)
I am not saying that those people stole anything, or cheated, or are Bad People. The system was set up to allow customers to do that. But obviously that's not good for WotC, they want to encourage long-term subscriptions. And they've got plenty of data to tell them what percentage of subscribers were doing one month subscriptions, how many of those were repeat customers, etc.
Combine a desire to get more long-term subscribers, hard data on the current subscription patterns, and some good evidence of outright piracy, and putting the rules engine online looks like a good solution.
Now, WotC doesn't want to badmouth those customers -- they were customers, after all. So they focus on piracy in their talking points.
(*: I also think there were a lot of technical reasons to go this way. What we've seen so far is our side of the system. I'm reasonably sure that there are big changes on the back end, which hopefully will make everything easier to update.)
|
|
|
