# My name is "Defendant Radzikowski"



## Damador (Apr 9, 2009)

As my topic was removed from WOTC post board i post it also here. Please read it before judging. I ma a long time part of friendly wizards community - many kno and use D&D ruletracker for 3 and 4 edition that was make by me ( and few other in case of 3.x version) 


Hi my name is Chris Radzikowski 27 male Poland 

This is open letter to the community and its explanation how the thing work in big world.

I'am long time player - started played when i was 14 for a long time i run community of RPG players. 50+ persons that play D&D, Nwod, Exalted and other great settings regullary and encouraged new members to join.
Iam also a long time MTG player. We run small non profit club where we play every weekend and try to enjoy RPG's as general. Most of our players are young ppl under 18.
I own and legally acquired almost 600 various books (including whole line of Forgotten realms that was my favorite setting - until 4th edition). In recent times when dollar in poland grow from 2.1 PLN to 3.3 PLN some of our players thinking about leaving RPG's which cost too much. We don't have serious retailer in poland and dead tree books cost alot more that printed on back covers (some shops sells it at price even 180 PLN per book - 55 $ ). I decided to buy electronic copies and borrow it inside the club the same goes with many e-magazines. Up to now i was sure that i know my players well. Anyway borrowing books for personal use between family, friends or other close ppl is legal in Poland and whole EU.

6th april i read about shutting down PDF business over Drivethrough network. Later i discovered announcement about "8 criminals that try to make lost millions profit from Hasbro". Today i visited enworld and saw 3 pdf - i was shocked when i saw myself as one of the Defendant. 

According to papers CV 460 RSM I was sued with 3 UNKNOWN ppl for providing the books on the Scribdt.com website - i was sued for what? 

Even WOTC dont know - they put to many "or" in the papers.

II 6. - show my person for that iam citizen of Poland - that right 
just below in points 7-9 i see 3 unknown ppl that got book that i purchased and post it over net - I and WOTC dont even know who did it. 
Yes i bought the all titles from the DT and borrowed it (according to my country law) to club members just as the libraries do.

According to logic - how can i be responsible for the act of the others? 
I can legally borrow the car/money/bike etc but cant be sure how the borrower use it. If they make a car accident and kill innoncent ppl i cant be responsible for this. The same situation is with PDF. I borrowed the files in good faith that club members will learn something new and can enjoy more from the new material. Nothing was wrong until 3 unknown to me (and WOTC) person post the book over the website. Until today i didnt even know that such website exist. 

As you can see iam member of that community since 2003 - i am quite active in electronic media and E-marekt. Some of my thoughts was written in the topic about closing PDF sale. 
Speaking about piracy - some members in topic noticed that it was done a long time before, some saw that piracy actually help (and it could be true).

Latest acts of removing pdfs from sale - and in fact revoking deals that allowed 3rd paries to sell the books also act to the final customers. For now in my country iam owner of the illegal pdf-books (because deal allowing DT for selling it to me was canceled). I and all other lost the right to purchased pdf just because of the act of WOTC. The same is for all users ( in EU and 99 % sure that in whole world) 

I was punished for legit act of borrowing the legally aquired book for the legal reason. Other 3 JD defendants was sued for clearly illegal things ( in my country too ) but i wasn't aware of that action and don't permitted that in my group. That stand against the point 43. That what i did was done outside of the US and clearly in the EU law permit. 

Also publishing my last name is violation of law about personal data. In Poland You can't publish my full name until iam charged guilty. 

As we can see law is strange - it depend on when you are and what you are - i don't commit any crime in US law - i dont post any books to the scribd.com website. Please find the 3 JD's iam curious too who did this. 

I dont know if the action you made was right from the marketing point of view. Many see that act only encourage real pirates to act harder and faster. 

Forgive my english - this is not my native language - comments mostly welcomed

Now iam not amazed why RIAA dropped suing 80+ years old ppl or kids

SECOND POST 

I wonder why they use US court not one in my country. If iam guilty according to my country law - i will not appeal or so. 

there is many ppl that do similar things - borrow,share for common use. This is method that allow "seduce" others into buing the products.

I worked few months as the Warhammer representative - my job was to encourage new players to join and buy new products. 
I did the same with rpg - many of my players in fact bought at least the miniatures. Still cant be sure how the books flew over the net and what real damaged it did. I dont see any numbers of view/downloads ( like in other 2 ) 
what if the books wasnt downloaded/viewed at all ? or if that wast even true >? 

they sued me for acts of 3 unknown ppl that made yet unknown damage by downloading yet unknown pdfs .... 

according to one of the attachements - they demand over 75 k $ for "yet unknown" proofs ....


----------



## jensun (Apr 9, 2009)

Ibtl


----------



## Damador (Apr 9, 2009)

jensun said:


> Ibtl




why lock - oppen letter from me for others - its a kind of warning what is copyright and what isnt copyright. it also put me in responsibility for the acts of 3 unknown ppl that done yet unknown damage. 

I hardly belive that its true - other 2 cases have clear named defendants pointing who put the file and where. Its a criminal act in every normal country. 
Buut in my case there is too much "yet unknown" damagaes 

What if they dont find JD's ? how they caught other 2 and cant find remaining 3 ?


----------



## JohnRTroy (Apr 9, 2009)

I strongly suggest if you are who you say you are, to not speak about the case and get an attorney.  Even if they can't prosecute you because you are in a foreign country, your statements could be used against you in the court proceedings.


----------



## Nightchilde-2 (Apr 9, 2009)

The moral of the story is...Don't illegally share files. It's pretty much as simple as that.  Whether you had control over what the 3 unknowns did or not, it was still you that shared the files (illegally).

Also, IBTL.


----------



## DaveMage (Apr 9, 2009)

JohnRTroy said:


> I strongly suggest if you are who you say you are, to not speak about the case and get an attorney.  Even if they can't prosecute you because you are in a foreign country, your statements could be used against you in the court proceedings.





Yes, this.

Once the case has concluded (and presuming the settlement does not include a condition preventing you discussing it), please come back and discuss the process you went through.


----------



## roguerouge (Apr 9, 2009)

Well, I gotta give you props for writing. Welcome to the community. I'm fairly sure this is going to be... an emotional thread.



Damador said:


> As my topic was removed from WOTC post board i post it also here. Please read it before judging. I ma a long time part of friendly wizards community - many kno and use D&D ruletracker for 3 and 4 edition that was make by me ( and few other in case of 3.x version)




Done. And, also, that's really unfortunate that the WotC forum mods did that. I think this could be an excellent opportunity for dialogue.

My responses below are going to take what you have to say at face value, with the caveat that you don't have oodles of credibility right now. 



Damador said:


> Hi my name is Chris Radzikowski 27 male Poland ...
> 
> We run small non profit club where we play every weekend and try to enjoy RPG's as general. Most of our players are young ppl under 18. ...
> 
> ...




I'd be shocked and appalled if the US outlawed sharing too.



Damador said:


> i was shocked when i saw myself as one of the Defendant.
> 
> Yes i bought the all titles from the DT and borrowed it (according to my country law) to club members just as the libraries do.




Libraries may buy the books at a different rate than an ordinary consumer. 



Damador said:


> Also publishing my last name is violation of law about personal data. In Poland You can't publish my full name until iam charged guilty.




There's a much greater freedom of the press law in the US than in the EU. We only protect minors from the release of such information.



Damador said:


> I borrowed the files in good faith that club members will learn something new and can enjoy more from the new material. Nothing was wrong until 3 unknown to me (and WOTC) person post the book over the website. Until today i didnt even know that such website exist.




If true, you should probably report these persons to the authorities in your jurisdiction. Like, right now. That would increase the credibility of your story and would be the right thing to do as well. There's no reason you should pay 75000 bucks for the acts of another. Even telling the police in your district about your group and letting them investigate would be a good thing.

But, before you do any of that, you'll want to talk to a lawyer. Trust me: it's worth the expense. You definitely want to look into your liability for this other person's actions. 

I hope you're telling the truth. And, if you're not, I hope you learned your very expensive lesson.


----------



## D'karr (Apr 9, 2009)

JohnRTroy said:


> I strongly suggest if you are who you say you are, to not speak about the case and get an attorney.  Even if they can't prosecute you because you are in a foreign country, your statements could be used against you in the court proceedings.




Absolutely do this.  You do not want to be the sole person out there without representation.  The house of cards is already falling around you.  Your best recourse is to be quiet and figure a way to bring all those points up with an attorney.


----------



## edbonny (Apr 9, 2009)

- Re-read the purchase agreement when you bought your PDF. You likely signed away your rights to local laws and agreed to handle disputes in US court or US arbitration. Such provisions are standard with online purchases and they are enforceable.
- Get a lawyer, preferably one familiar with cases like this.
- Stop posting about this case anywhere (with every word you type, you are only damaging your defense).
- In commercial matters, your country may have an agreement with the US to accept the authority of a US court especially if you signed away your local rights.


----------



## Maggan (Apr 9, 2009)

JohnRTroy said:


> I strongly suggest if you are who you say you are, to not speak about the case and get an attorney.  Even if they can't prosecute you because you are in a foreign country, your statements could be used against you in the court proceedings.




I'm quoting this again to give it emphasis. 

You should not be speaking about this on a public message board. Odds are you will make things even worse for yourself.



			
				roguerouge said:
			
		

> And, also, that's really unfortunate that the WotC forum mods did that. I think this could be an excellent opportunity for dialogue.




I think it would be a catastrophe for WotC to get involved in a public "dialogue" concerning an active case in which they are suing other people.

Both sides should keep their discussions under wraps, and they should involve lawyers. Not fans on messageboards.

/M


----------



## roguerouge (Apr 9, 2009)

And by report these persons, I mean that RPG group. You should tell your lawyer about the fact that you shared something with the group and give him the names of everyone in the group. If they're your friends, they should understand why you have to do that now and blame the people who betrayed their trust... which was not you. 

If you're telling the truth and showed things to people you thought you knew, you're guilty of failing a sense motive check, not 75K worth of copyright infringement. The jackass who took your file and shared it with the world is. He's not your friend: he let you run the risk for his bad faith.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 9, 2009)

Who are you trying to convince?  A public messageboard isn't really the right place to mount your legal defence, and WotC's lawyers cerainly aren't going to engage in legal debate with you here.  

I'd get yourself a lawyer, ask him to prepare your defence, and submit it to the court at the appropriate time.  But you will probably harm your defence by making posts like this, especially since you have now _publically_ admitted to giving your friends copies of the PDFs.


----------



## roguerouge (Apr 9, 2009)

And by report these persons, I mean that RPG group. You should tell your lawyer about the fact that you shared something with the group and give him the names of everyone in the group. If they're your friends, they should understand why you have to do that now and blame the people who betrayed their trust... which was not you. 

If you're telling the truth and showed things to people you thought you knew, you're guilty of failing a sense motive check, not 75K worth of copyright infringement. The jackass who took your file and shared it with the world is. He's not your friend: he let you run the risk for his bad faith.


----------



## xechnao (Apr 9, 2009)

Maggan said:


> Both sides should keep their discussions under wraps, and they should involve lawyers. Not fans on messageboards.
> 
> /M




Why should they?


----------



## Maggan (Apr 9, 2009)

xechnao said:


> Why should they?




Please see several other posts in this thread for various answers to that question.

/M


----------



## Damador (Apr 9, 2009)

bad things is i cant afford any lawyer - especially that know US law and have experience in similar case. 

As i wrote before the whole case wont show up unless 3 JD's actions 

most of my players are under 18 - their parents wont allow them to make any testimony especially vs US - also as they are under 18 they cant make legal testiomony. 


The point is that even if i commited crime i did it not in US territory (same case is for the guy from philipines)


----------



## crazy_cat (Apr 9, 2009)

Morrus said:


> ...especially since you have now _publically_ admitted to giving your friends copies of the PDFs.



I don't think mentioning that the reason you did this is because the books were expensive - and basically your friends didn't want to pay the cover price for them will have helped you very much either. 

Listen to the advice being given. Don't say anything else, and get a lawyer.


----------



## roguerouge (Apr 9, 2009)

Maggan said:


> I think it would be a catastrophe for WotC to get involved in a public "dialogue" concerning an active case in which they are suing other people.
> /M




You're probably right. I was thinking more along the lines of discussion than legal implication at that point in my posting. You'll note that "get a lawyer" was, at least, one of my recommendations.


----------



## filthgrinder (Apr 9, 2009)

Please, please, please, please stop posting at once. Get some legal advice from an actual in real life attorney who has experience in this types of cases. Discussion pending lawsuit is NEVER a good idea, no matter how right you are.

Second, this is a civil lawsuit, not a criminal lawsuit, which is why your name was released.

Third, please double check all the agreements you entered into when buying the PDFs. 

Fourth, TALK TO AN ATTORNEY.

WoTC deleted the post because they are a division of HASBRO, a publicaly traded company. As most such companies they have the strict policy to NOT discuss pending legal cases. Besides, this is serious business, and should be handled with talks direct with them and their legal departments. Fans on a message board are not who you should be consulting with right now.


----------



## Nikosandros (Apr 9, 2009)

roguerouge said:


> There's a much greater freedom of the press law in the US than in the EU. We only protect minors from the release of such information.




In Italy, part of the EU, it's the same. Releasing such information is allowed except in the case of minors.


----------



## xechnao (Apr 9, 2009)

Maggan said:


> Please see several other posts in this thread for various answers to that question.
> 
> /M




I see some advice to this guy to not talk on public because it will hurt its interests regarding what they expect the other side to do assuming they will act by standard procedure .

OTOH you said that both sides should act by standard procedure: akin we should do what the current system says and not think about making efforts to procedures against this, akin to "status quo" should reign.

It is definately not the same thing.


----------



## avin (Apr 9, 2009)

Assuming OP is the sued guy and not just somebody messing around... it's Internet, you know...


----------



## Charwoman Gene (Apr 9, 2009)

Way to ruin it for the rest of us.


----------



## Nightchilde-2 (Apr 9, 2009)

avin said:


> Assuming OP is the sued guy and not just somebody messing around... it's Internet, you know...




Killjoy.


----------



## crazy_cat (Apr 9, 2009)

avin said:


> Assuming OP is the sued guy and not just somebody messing around... it's Internet, you know...



This is an outrageous statement! Are you trying to imply that some things written on the interweb might not be true?


----------



## Maggan (Apr 9, 2009)

xechnao said:


> OTOH you said that both sides should act by standard procedure: akin we should do what the current system says and not think about making efforts to procedures against this, akin to "status quo" should reign.
> 
> It is definately not the same thing.




So your advice is for them to duke it out in public? IMO that is specacularily bad advice. Each to his own, though.

Only other explanation I can see for your question is a very strict reading of the word "should", where you make an interpretaion from that word as to my general stance on the current system paradigm and as a general comment on life in general.

When all I meant was "you should do this, because that is, in this situation the best thing for you to do. And WotC should do this, because in the current situation, and the current system and generally how these things play out, it is the best thing to do".

But I thought that wouldn't be necessary, as I thought, and think, that my meaning was clear as crystal.

/M


----------



## xechnao (Apr 9, 2009)

filthgrinder said:


> Besides, this is serious business, and should be handled with talks direct with them and their legal departments. Fans on a message board are not who you should be consulting with right now.




Customer fans of a company are serious business. PR is serious business too. Consultation is one thing, acting with the public is another. As I said the public is serious business.

Of course our duty is to issue warnings about his possible exposure he may not be aware of and you are doing very well to warn him.


----------



## avin (Apr 9, 2009)

crazy_cat said:
			
		

> This is an outrageous statement! Are you trying to imply that some things written on the interweb might not be true?




I read that on Internet! Must be true!


----------



## xechnao (Apr 9, 2009)

Maggan said:


> But I thought that wouldn't be necessary, as I thought, and think, that my meaning was clear as crystal.
> 
> /M




Ok, sorry for the misunderstanding.


----------



## Sammael (Apr 9, 2009)

Would Poland extradite you to the US if you refused to show up for the trial? Since this is a civil case, I very much doubt it. I'm prety sure that WotC would have to start a litigation in Poland if they want to receive an enforcable penalty. 

Whatever you do, consult a lawyer. Legal advice may not be cheap, but it's a lot cheaper than the possible consequences.


----------



## pedr (Apr 9, 2009)

There can be no extradition in a civil case. This is an entirely private matter between WotC and the defendants - the states concerned have no interest except as arbiters of the law and (where possible) enforcers of the judgment, which could only be an award of a sum of money in damages and/or an injunction prohibiting further violation. There is no _requirement_ to show up for a trial, as far as I know - though failure to do so probably means you don't get to defend against the suit.

I know nothing about cross-jurisdictional civil claims - but it seems as if WotC have not yet made all of the defendants formally aware of the suits. I don't know at which point this could be a problem: the defendants have a right to know they are being sued, and to enter a defence.

How this could potentially interact with differences between Washington/US law and Polish law isn't clear to me - but I'd be very surprised if there was an automatic method of enforcing civil judgments made by US courts in Poland. It may be that, so long as the foreign defendants have no assets in the USA, they are effectively judgment-proof.


----------



## S'mon (Apr 9, 2009)

Good luck Mr Radzikowski.

I teach copyright in the UK.  My general advice to you would be to seek some pro bono advice on your situation, perhaps from a student University law centre in Poland.  You need to find out what the situation is in Polish law.  You are not likely to get useful advice from American commenters here (including US lawyers) because US law is very different and generally a lot harsher when it comes to (a) treatment of copyright infringement and (b) treatment of individual citizens vs corporations.


----------



## Cadfan (Apr 9, 2009)

Stop talking!

Get a lawyer!

Argh.  I kind of want to discuss what you wrote, but if doing so induces you to keep talking, then its like selling you cyanide tablets and I don't want that on my conscience.


----------



## Arivendel (Apr 9, 2009)

Ah WotC suing again, brings me back to the time a couple of years back against Daron Rutter also known as Rancored Elf who got sued due to MtG info he got hold of.

If memory serves WotC moves for immediate motion on cases like this so the faster you get a lawyer and respond to things the better, ask for a deal most likely if you give up your group WotC will not continue to press charges on you.

But hey this being the internet means you are just as likely to be Radzikowski as i am of being Osmena (and i live in the Philippines...not saying im Osmena just that its just as plausible for me to claim being so )


----------



## Primal (Apr 9, 2009)

Hmmm... what if a patron borrowed a book from a public library and scanned it? What if he *stole* it? Would the library be held responsible if there would be several patrons who might have done this, but the exact scanning date (and, therefore, the patron responsible for doing so) could not be determined? Let's assume that the only thing we could say for sure is that this particular pirated copy is/was owned by a public library -- what happens, and who's held responsible for it?


----------



## DaveMage (Apr 9, 2009)

Sammael said:


> Whatever you do, consult a lawyer. Legal advice may not be cheap, but it's a lot cheaper than the possible consequences.





This sounds like a job for Mistwell!!!!


----------



## Piratecat (Apr 9, 2009)

avin said:


> Assuming OP is the sued guy and not just somebody messing around... it's Internet, you know...



No, he's posting from Warsaw. I'm pretty sure this is legit.

I'll echo the others. *Don't talk about this on the internet* and get a lawyer; if you can't afford one, look into whether there are any pro bono (free) public lawyers in Warsaw you can talk to. This is not a minor annoyance, and you won't be able to ignore it and hope it goes away. You need to know what your rights are.


----------



## pedr (Apr 9, 2009)

Primal said:


> Hmmm... what if a patron borrowed a book from a public library and scanned it? What if he *stole* it? Would the library be held responsible if there would be several patrons who might have done this, but the exact scanning date (and, therefore, the patron responsible for doing so) could not be determined? Let's assume that the only thing we could say for sure is that this particular pirated copy is/was owned by a public library -- what happens, and who's held responsible for it?



Well, it's perhaps foolish to speculate on how the law works in this thread but ...

The OP's comparison with lending a physical item is inappropriate, at least under the bits of UK and US copyright law I know. In your example, the library's actions are entirely legal and appropriate - as would an individual lending a physical book to another person.

However copyright is exactly that: the right to make a copy. It is very hard to consider a way in which someone can 'lend' a pdf to someone else without making a copy of it, at the very least onto temporary media. That act of making a copy is (at least arguably) going beyond the rights to the intellectual property given when the pdf was purchased. So both the person 'lending' and the person 'borrowing' are (technically) in breach of the copyright of the rights-owner.


----------



## Brown Jenkin (Apr 9, 2009)

For everyone who says don't talk, please remember that there is no gag order and that publicly talking is allowed. There have been plenty of cases where trial in the court of public opinion has been more powerful than trial by the courts. The RIAA has problems in part because the grandmas and 12 year olds have come out and spoken publicly. The RIAA has droped several suits because the publicity of sueing an 80 year old grandmother is not worth it.


----------



## Imperialus (Apr 9, 2009)

I guess if there is a lesson from this it is "Make sure you know who you 'loan' your PDF's to so you can punch them in the nose when they upload it onto the internet and land you in a legal mess."

S'mon makes a good point too.  I'm sure if you printed out a copy of the legal stuff and took it down to the University of Warsaw's law school they'd be happy to offer better advice to you than a bunch of random doods on the internet.  See if you can get a professor interested in the case.  After all these copyright law cases since the RIAA debacle have gotten a lot of attention.


----------



## JPL (Apr 9, 2009)

Mods, please lock this thread before this kid says something to make his situation worse.  

Damador, here's the only free legal advice this lawyer is going to offer:

1.  In U.S. courts, the fact that someone is under 18 does not make their testimony inadmissible.

2.  Assume that every word about this you post on the Internet is going to be entered into evidence.

3.  Stop posting about this on the Internet and go talk to a lawyer who knows a little about U.S. copyright law.  Don't stop making phone calls until you find one who will give you a free informal consultation (if that's all you can afford).


----------



## roguerouge (Apr 9, 2009)

He's 27. He's not a kid.


----------



## Chaos Disciple (Apr 9, 2009)

Damador said:


> they sued me for acts of 3 unknown ppl that made yet unknown damage by downloading yet unknown pdfs ....
> 
> according to one of the attachements - they demand over 75 k $ for "yet unknown" proofs ....




I recommend you contact the Electronic Frontier Foundation.


----------



## JPL (Apr 9, 2009)

Brown Jenkin said:


> For everyone who says don't talk, please remember that there is no gag order and that publicly talking is allowed. There have been plenty of cases where trial in the court of public opinion has been more powerful than trial by the courts. The RIAA has problems in part because the grandmas and 12 year olds have come out and spoken publicly. The RIAA has droped several suits because the publicity of sueing an 80 year old grandmother is not worth it.




The fact that some nerds on Enworld might think that a fellow nerd should be allowed to hand around PDFs freely is not news to anyone at Hasbro.  The defendant is neither a 12 year old nor a grandma.  He may in fact be the average Joe Gamer, and therefore just the guy you sue to make an example to other Joe Gamers.

While it is a possibility that Internet rants are going to trigger a surge of nerd rage and WotC will drop the case in shame, it is a near-certainty that Habro's lawyers will run a simple Google search to see if defendant has said anything about this online.  

Even if they don't, he will be asked during written discovery if he has made any statements about the underlying occurrences.  So either he can lie about it or he can disclose the statements.  And the more he posts, the more likely he'll say something that creates trouble down the line.

Get off the web, man, and get a lawyer.


----------



## Gorrstagg (Apr 9, 2009)

I'm terribly curious, based on what he mentioned, (Please don't respond Damaran).

If he loaned the file out to someone to use, ala loaning your book to a friend. And say he did it via a flashdrive, with the files on there, ala a bookbag full of books. And he didn't keep any copies beyond say a legally allowed archival copy.

But when he loaned out his "Books" via pdf to said friends, and he didn't keep a copy? And then someone used that stuff?

Is he still liable if say it were uploaded by some unknown third party. 

Heck remove the idea of an archival copy and assume he just used a flashdrive essentially as portable book.

How can he be responsible for this situation? From a legal stand point. Especially if he's doing it for a non-profit club.

(Please Damaran don't respond in here. Talk to a lawyer.)


----------



## Stoat (Apr 9, 2009)

xechnao said:


> I see some advice to this guy to not talk on public because it will hurt its interests regarding what they expect the other side to do assuming they will act by standard procedure .




Off the top of my head, I can think of four reasons why no party to a pending civil lawsuit should discuss the details of the case in public.

1.  Any party's public statement is admissible in court.  In an attempt to justify or explain himself, a defendant could inadvertently admit liability.  Ex. "Yes, I hit the plaintiff in the head with a bottle, but only because I was drunk and he was cheating at cards." 

2.  A party might inadvertently reveal his legal strategy to the other side.  It is a fact of life that there is some element of gamesmanship to litigation.  A litigant probably does not always want their opponent to know how they plan to proceed in the lawsuit.

3.  Every time a party speaks, he risks contradicting himself.  Even if the person is telling the truth, any contradiction could be interpreted as a lie by the Judge or Jury.

4. Some cases can be amicably resolved through a settlement.  Statistically, most cases settle.  Settlement is often more advantageous that proceeding to trial.  A party who speaks improvidently or out of emotion may anger the other side, hurting the chances of a favorable settlement.

Please note:  I AM NOT PROVIDING ANYBODY WITH ANY KIND OF LEGAL ADVICE.  I am just offering a few off-the-cuff, common sense observations.  Anyone faced with a lawsuit should hire their own attorney.  Only a fool would take legal advice from the internet.


----------



## JPL (Apr 9, 2009)

roguerouge said:


> He's 27. He's not a kid.




Kids whine when they get into trouble.  Grownups shut up and get a lawyer.


----------



## Piratecat (Apr 9, 2009)

Whether his actions are good or bad, I think we can do without the insults.


----------



## Daniel D. Fox (Apr 9, 2009)

WotC is out of their mind if they believe that a civil suit in the United States is going to get any traction within Poland.

Just my two cents.


----------



## pedr (Apr 9, 2009)

Yes... the comments of lawyers in this thread rightly concerned that the OP should seek legal advice and stop posting about this are perfectly appropriate... but if the OP is unconcerned by this law-suit, never intending to come anywhere near the jurisdiction of the US federal courts, it's perhaps less pressing advice than it would be if the OP were in the USA.


----------



## Obryn (Apr 9, 2009)

I'll just echo the above.  I know you want your case heard in the court of public opinion, but I don't know that your post in any way exonerates you.  I'd get a lawyer who can advise you on the best way to proceed.  He'll probably tell you to make a list of everyone who might have 'borrowed' your PDF - so I'd get to work on that ASAP.

-O


----------



## Odhanan (Apr 9, 2009)

JohnRTroy said:


> I strongly suggest if you are who you say you are, to not speak about the case and get an attorney.  Even if they can't prosecute you because you are in a foreign country, your statements could be used against you in the court proceedings.




*THIS. 

If you are who you say you are, stop writing about this case on message boards whatsoever. 

Get an attorney. Get legal advice. 

Posting on message boards in this instance is a form of self-publication. The information you provide here could be used against you.*

I strongly urge you to get advice from a lawyer.


----------



## Obryn (Apr 9, 2009)

pedr said:


> Yes... the comments of lawyers in this thread rightly concerned that the OP should seek legal advice and stop posting about this are perfectly appropriate... but if the OP is unconcerned by this law-suit, never intending to come anywhere near the jurisdiction of the US federal courts, it's perhaps less pressing advice than it would be if the OP were in the USA.



Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

-O


----------



## Obryn (Apr 9, 2009)

double post.

you may return to your regularly scheduled thread.


----------



## Stoat (Apr 9, 2009)

JPL said:


> While it is a possibility that Internet rants are going to trigger a surge of nerd rage and WotC will drop the case in shame, it is a near-certainty that Habro's lawyers will run a simple Google search to see if defendant has said anything about this online.




WotC's lawyers don't even have to run a google search.  Multiple WotC employees post here regularly.  It is beyond doubt that they have already taken note of this thread.


----------



## S'mon (Apr 9, 2009)

Moniker said:


> WotC is out of their mind if they believe that a civil suit in the United States is going to get any traction within Poland.
> 
> Just my two cents.




I expect they intend to either extract money/apologies/etc from the respondent, or more likely get a judgement in default in a friendly US court.  With no commercial distribution it doesn't seem like any US judgement would conceivably be enforceable in a Polish court, and I'm sure WoTC have no intention of going to Poland.  

It would still be worth seeking advice on the situation in Polish law, though.


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 9, 2009)

If I were the OP, I wouldn't worry too much, being in Poland. Europe is not the USA, things work quite differently over here. 

But hey, don't take my word for it, ask a lawyer


----------



## Brown Jenkin (Apr 9, 2009)

JPL said:


> Even if they don't, he will be asked during written discovery if he has made any statements about the underlying occurrences.  So either he can lie about it or he can disclose the statements.  And the more he posts, the more likely he'll say something that creates trouble down the line.
> 
> Get off the web, man, and get a lawyer.




What written discovery? The defendant is in Poland. US Courts can't extradite someone for discovery in a civil case. Unless the defendant chooses to fight this in the US Courts the case will be decided in WotC favor for non-appearance. WotC is then obligated to refile in Poland in order to collect its judgment. He may want to contact a lawyer about the possibility of this and what to do, but there will be no discovery unless he chooses to come to the US and fight.


----------



## Odhanan (Apr 9, 2009)

Jack99 said:


> If I were the OP, I wouldn't worry too much, being in Poland. Europe is not the USA, things work quite differently over here.



I am no lawyer but studied law in France. There, internet postings, emails and such are considered published material and are considered admissible evidence in courts. I strongly suspect this is also the case in Poland. 

Since we both aren't lawyers, I strongly suggest to the defendant in this case to stop his postings on the web about this case altogether and get legal advice immediately.


----------



## Eldragon (Apr 9, 2009)

Here is a very useful guide to the US legal system:

Removed by admin. This is not the place for an off-topic quasi-political screed that has nothing to do with D&D.


----------



## Chris Knapp (Apr 9, 2009)

_Removed by Admin, as it was off-topic and replied to the previous post that I just removed. ~ PCat_


----------



## Korgoth (Apr 9, 2009)

Hmm. "WOTC invasion of Poland due to communications sabotage." Well, if you're east of the River Bug you'll probably be fine. 

All joking aside: get a lawyer, Polish dude.


----------



## pedr (Apr 9, 2009)

Eldragon said:


> Here is a very useful guide to the US legal system:<snip>



This may or may not be true.

It is utterly inapplicable to this situation, which is a _private_ dispute over property rights between two parties. 

No criminal allegations have been made, no prosecution is threatened, and the police have no involvement whatsoever.


----------



## Janx (Apr 9, 2009)

I am not a lawyer.  Here's my non-legal advice:

talk to a lawyer

stop posting about the case.  Every "fact" you post is a fact that can be used against you.

If it's illegal for them to post your name regarding this suit, posting your name in a thread about this suit probably gives consent, which hurts your protection.

Look into proving that you didn't (or disproving that you did) post your PDF for sharing.  If they can't prove you did it, it will weaken their case.  Your lawyer should be talking about this. Sharing the file with your group weakens your case.  Your lawyer will figure what's going on.


----------



## Eldragon (Apr 9, 2009)

Wow. clearly my cynical skewering of the US legal system was taken too seriously. from now on I will stick to lampooning the legal system of dead civilizations.


----------



## avin (Apr 9, 2009)

S'mon looks right. US law is not like some other countries law and, while I think you're going to have trouble, I doubt you will face more than your country law allows.


----------



## Vicente (Apr 9, 2009)

I add my vote to the "get a lawyer" option. Each country is a different world regarding this subject: for example in Spain sharing a physical or digital product is totally legal as long as there's no profit involved.


----------



## Damador (Apr 9, 2009)

thx for everyone reply as avin said in my country i will face no sideffects borrowing anything to anyone and will not get responsible for acts of others. ( Especially if the others are unknown ... ) 

I just dont want to sit down and shut up - i dont feel guilty and suspect that the 3 cases was just for pupropse WOTC want to break some agreements with online publishing pdf parties. They claimed that files i bought were earlier over the net - they can emailed me or contact much earlier (DT had my full details even including home phone number IIRC). They acted the same day as the new retailer rules comes into play... end of conspiracy theory 

ill inform You about any progress and thx for current information you provide


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 9, 2009)

Odhanan said:


> I am no lawyer but studied law in France. There, internet postings, emails and such are considered published material and are considered admissible evidence in courts. I strongly suspect this is also the case in Poland.
> 
> Since we both aren't lawyers, I strongly suggest to the defendant in this case to stop his postings on the web about this case altogether and get legal advice immediately.




Considering I am somewhat familiar with french law, I have to agree with you. However, my comment was based on his location, not his actions.


----------



## Shadowsong666 (Apr 9, 2009)

Damador said:


> thx for everyone reply as avin said in my country i will face no sideffects borrowing anything to anyone and will not get responsible for acts of others. ( Especially if the others are unknown ... )
> 
> I just dont want to sit down and shut up - i dont feel guilty and suspect that the 3 cases was just for pupropse WOTC want to break some agreements with online publishing pdf parties. They claimed that files i bought were earlier over the net - they can emailed me or contact much earlier (DT had my full details even including home phone number IIRC). They acted the same day as the new retailer rules comes into play... end of conspiracy theory
> 
> ill inform You about any progress and thx for current information you provide




Hi Damador,

i think i have slighty different view on all that than others (maybe).

Well, i live in the EU too (germany). As long as WotC isn't sending anything legal to my home in my language i just have to do nothing. After i get such a letter, i would call my "law insurance" company that i need a lawyer because some company is saying i did things i didn't do (in your case). Make up a meeting, discuss that and get on. If the case isn't going to be handled in germany under german law i wouldn't give a crap what is going on in the US (as long as i know i would loose the case there because its illegal under US law or i simply don't want to visit the US because i am happy where i live).

So if you get anything official from wotc relax. After that - take the necessary steps to defend yourself against WotC's assumptions.

But please, don't post anything regarding your view of the things on the internet. After the case started, do what you think is right and your lawyer tells you you may do - why not?

So relax, game on and enjoy life for now.


----------



## Henrix (Apr 9, 2009)

edbonny said:


> - Re-read the purchase agreement when you bought your PDF. You likely signed away your rights to local laws and agreed to handle disputes in US court or US arbitration. Such provisions are standard with online purchases and they are enforceable.





Except that in most civilized countries you cannot sign away rights to laws.

Software companies, and others, often want us to think so, but they are in error.
You cannot sell yourself into slavery, for instance. No matter how you formulate the contract.

In Sweden, which is what I'm familiar with (though IANAL), Swedish law allows you to sell software secondhand, no matter what the EULA says - you own the stuff you've bought, and can do as you want with it.

You can sell it, loan it to a friend, whatever. As long as that is the only copy - if the program is installed on your computer, or if you have another copy of it, then it's illegal copying.

So, if the OP had been in Sweden he could have let a friend borrow the pdf - if he did not keep a copy.
Of course, if he could not trust the guy completely not to make a copy, or share it on the interwebs, it's evidently very unwise.
(And I suppose that he'd have to prove in court that somebody else did it and not he, which seems difficult.)


----------



## billd91 (Apr 9, 2009)

Eldragon said:


> Wow. clearly my cynical skewering of the US legal system was taken too seriously. from now on I will stick to lampooning the legal system of dead civilizations.




A defense lawyer friend of mine, interestingly enough, would agree with a number of your points. And he would use those points to underscore the advice people here have been giving Defendant Radzikowski - filter any and all statements through legal counsel whenever in legal hot water, criminal or civil. The defendant's rights depend on doing so, whether guilty or not.

The international dimension here just adds to the complexity, raising the need even higher.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Apr 9, 2009)

Piratecat said:


> No, he's posting from Warsaw. I'm pretty sure this is legit.



Even if it is him, do you suppose that there's a high probability that anything said here will be admissible as evidence against him, considering that it would be very difficult to prove that it is, in fact, the accused who wrote the OP?

Not saying he shouldn't shut his trap if he wants to avoid damaging his case, but it's just a thought.


----------



## mlund (Apr 9, 2009)

I'm not a lawyer. You're not a lawyer. So just lawyer up already.

Your case, in all likelihood, will not be governed by the same law the would settle local disputes. Your country has treaties and international agreements with regards to these kinds of disputes that probably have supremacy over your country's general rights regarding IP. Even if your domestic laws protect you from prosecution locally you may be prosecuted in abstentia abroad and suffer consequences when traveling outside your own country, purchases products from outside your country, or securing services from outside your country. *Never* presume immunity from consequences.

So get a lawyer and be quiet until together you've gathered the facts and figured out which laws have precedence governing your case.

Trying to make your case publicly is not in your best interests. Sympathy on the Internet isn't going to determine your innocence or guilt in court. Your exposure on the Internet *can* however, arm your adversaries in court. It can also make you a more public target, and thus make any judgment against you that much more valuable.

- Marty Lund


----------



## aboyd (Apr 9, 2009)

Am I allowed to be amused by this?  A defendant is so insistent on defending himself that he publicly implicates himself.  Even after being told that he's hurting his own case, he's still posting.

Does it violate the forum rules for me to pop some popcorn and watch this thread like a soap opera?


----------



## twwtww (Apr 9, 2009)

Post removed by Admin. Unsurprisingly, political comments get you suspended. See ya.


----------



## Shadowsong666 (Apr 9, 2009)

mlund said:


> ...
> 
> Even if your domestic laws protect you from prosecution locally you may be prosecuted in abstentia abroad and suffer consequences when traveling outside your own country
> 
> ...




i think thats right. 

but sorry, i just think getting sued in a foreign country in abstentia (as long as i don't visit that country and stay lets say in the EU) is just funny. 

_the phone rings..._
_"You sir, have been sentenced to 3 years in jail if you ever enter our turf."
"oh my, that really makes me shiver mighty court. want a cake?"_

But if there is any way you can solve that matter and prove that you are innocent thats the best way to go (as long as you can afford going to court in another country).


----------



## crazy_cat (Apr 9, 2009)

Henrix said:


> So, if the OP had been in Sweden he could have let a friend borrow the pdf - if he did not keep a copy.
> Of course, if he could not trust the guy completely not to make a copy, or share it on the interwebs, it's evidently very unwise.
> (And I suppose that he'd have to prove in court that somebody else did it and not he, which seems difficult.)




I suspect however (although I've no evidence to back this up, but I believe this is what will likely have happened) that the OP bought one copy of the PDF, and then made a copy of it and shared this with friends, gaming buddies, and club members as they couldn't afford the new books as they are very expensive in Poland (as explained in the initial post). 

Each of them I expect made and kept a copy and then passed the original PDF on if it was on a flash drive or CD, but it might also have simply been e-mailed to them all straight away or hosted on a private server for them all to download; this is what we  (and WOTC) don't know.

The fact one of them then posted the file on the internet as well is just the icing on the cake in this case and is what made it visible to WOTC - the file was (assuming I'm right) already being pirated by all of these various 'local' users.

As I said in my first post - best advice currently is stop posting and consult a lawyer.


----------



## NerfedWizard (Apr 9, 2009)

Moniker said:


> WotC is out of their mind if they believe that a civil suit in the United States is going to get any traction within Poland.
> 
> Just my two cents.






S'mon said:


> With no commercial distribution it doesn't seem like any US judgement would conceivably be enforceable in a Polish court, and I'm sure WoTC have no intention of going to Poland.




I don't know why people seem to assume that a US judgment would not be enforceable in Poland. Would it be? - I don't know. I'm not a Polish lawyer. But I would NOT be surprised if it is enforceable, and I would NOT be surprised if WotC could use that judgment to make the OP bankrupt, seize his assets, take money directly out of his wages, get an order for the sale of any property that he owns, etc. Can they do any of those things? I don't know. It presumably depends on Polish law, and on US law as well.

The bottom line is that the OP, if he is who he says he is, needs to get legal advice urgently. Advice on the enforceability of US judgments in Poland can only really be had from a Polish lawyer. You may well be able to get some free "pro bono" advice from a Polish lawyer or (if you can't get a lawyer) from a law student. Advice on defending or settling the US action means you will also need a US lawyer - again, think about getting free "pro bono" advice from a US lawyer or (if you can't get a lawyer) from a law student. Advice on the lawfulness of your actions may depend on Polish law or perhaps on US law. Of course WotC may need to serve you with the papers first, but that may only require posting the papers to your home address or may require delivering them via the Polish court system; some jurisdictions may allow orders for substituted service for instance if you are evading service (so service could be effected by advert in a newspaper). In some jurisdictions it may even be possible to serve documents by e-mail!

The above is all speculative and absolutely must not be treated as advice. I am absolutely not in a position to provide advice on this case.

However, I can say this:- GET LEGAL ADVICE ON POLISH AND US LAW. Your legal advisers will be able to tell you whether the best thing for you to do is to fight the case, ignore the case, negotiate and settle the case, consider the options available to you under Polish insolvency law or something else. I absolutely cannot advise you on any of those things.


----------



## Bleoberis De Ganis (Apr 9, 2009)

It is against the law to resell dvds, cds, books, etc.

Tell them you were reselling the PDF.

When the prosecute you for reselling, it will set a presidence whereby all second hand shops and other shops that resell dvds, cds and computer games will be prosecuted causing the complete collapse of capitalism.

Be strong Comrade.

(BTW, Don't take this post seriously, but only because it wont work, not because it isn't plausible.)


----------



## Shadowsong666 (Apr 9, 2009)

crazy_cat said:


> The fact one of them then posted the file on the internet as well is just the icing on the cake in this case and is what made it visible to WOTC - the file was (assuming I'm right) already being pirated by all of these various 'local' users.




But funny to mention that copying a cd, file, game isn't illegal in germany as long as no copy protection prohibits it. I can easily share all my pdf files with my friends and am legal afaik. We have a law that explicitly allows private copies. So if someone does anything illegal with the stuff i gave him he is doing it and needs to be sued and not me. Illegal like sharing it with the world over torrent or anything like that.
So if i game with lets see 8 friends i can give everyone a copy and they can keep it without buying it. The only thing they may not do is share it with others. Show - yes - share - not.

Somehow i think our laws differ much in certain social points.


----------



## Caerin (Apr 9, 2009)

Primal said:


> Hmmm... what if a patron borrowed a book from a public library and scanned it? What if he *stole* it? Would the library be held responsible if there would be several patrons who might have done this, but the exact scanning date (and, therefore, the patron responsible for doing so) could not be determined? Let's assume that the only thing we could say for sure is that this particular pirated copy is/was owned by a public library -- what happens, and who's held responsible for it?




The library is not liable for actions done by library users under US law (which I am the most familiar with). However, this is partly because Libraries and Archives have their own exemption- Title 17: Section 108, Limitations on exclusive rights: Reproduction by libraries and archives. They have to meet certain criteria and take some actions to be protected by that statute. 

This person, assuming what he writes is correct, is not in a good situation. If his interpretation of Polish law is accurate, then he could legally share his copy in the manner that he described absent contractual obligations (which would also be covered by Polish law). 

However, the actions of the person who further shared the materials on scribd are actionable beyond Poland. It's that person, though, that should be on trial rather than this individual. However, it's his name on the documents, so he'll need to use that in a defense.


----------



## Obryn (Apr 9, 2009)

Guys, really.  Copyright does not magically disappear once you hop across an ocean.  This is not the Dukes of Hazzard, and you are not on a moonshine run.

Poland is a signatory to the Berne Convention, and everything that implies.



> The Berne Convention requires its signatories to recognize the copyright of works of authors from other signatory countries (known as members of the Berne Union) in the same way it recognises the copyright of its own nationals. For example, French copyright law applies to anything published or performed in France, regardless of where it was originally created.




As most everyone has been saying, your best course of action is to stop digging your hole deeper and just retain an attorney.  Do not believe the people who are telling you that copyright law magically disappears when you cross a political border - they really have no idea what they're talking about.

-O


----------



## Caerin (Apr 9, 2009)

Obryn said:


> Guys, really.  Copyright does not magically disappear once you hop across an ocean.  This is not the Dukes of Hazzard, and you are not on a moonshine run.
> 
> Poland is a signatory to the Berne Convention, and everything that implies.
> 
> ...




I'm not certain that's what people were saying. The way that Berne, and just about every other copyright treaty works, is that they provide guidelines that need to be enacted domestically. Generally, these guidelines offer guaranteed minimums of protection. Part of the convention is reciprocal- like the example you quoted, any potentially infringing action is under the jurisdiction of the member country. In France, US works are protected just as French works are protected. In Poland, US works are protected just as Polish works are protected. This also applies to legal limitations- for example, libraries can lend British works under the US doctrine of first sale in the US, even though British libraries follow different law in the UK and must take additional steps to lend books.

So, in Poland, *if* his initial action was legal under a Polish private use exemption, then it was legal. The problem then comes with the additional distribution on the Internet. Not only is that very likely illegal under Polish law, it means the action *also* took place in the US jurisdiction, making it actionable in the US. This is a bit of an oversimplification, but it means that the person infringing is also liable in the US as well.


----------



## Obryn (Apr 9, 2009)

Thanks for the clarification.   I'm happy to confess I'm far from an expert in this sort of thing.

And yes, I'm sure that WotC will need to take some sort of action in Poland as well.  As far as I know, though, the U.S. suit is a prerequisite for any other actions.

The wheels of justice might move a bit slower across political boundaries, but they still move.

-O


----------



## JPL (Apr 9, 2009)

Brown Jenkin said:


> What written discovery? The defendant is in Poland. US Courts can't extradite someone for discovery in a civil case. Unless the defendant chooses to fight this in the US Courts the case will be decided in WotC favor for non-appearance. WotC is then obligated to refile in Poland in order to collect its judgment. He may want to contact a lawyer about the possibility of this and what to do, but there will be no discovery unless he chooses to come to the US and fight.




Brown Jenkin, Mr. Radzikowski might talk to that lawyer and he might give the exact same advice.  Still seems like a good idea to talk to that lawyer before he posts about this case.

For all I know, his lawyer might agree with every word you say, and even encourage Defendant to go online and tell his story and stoke the fiery flames of nerd rage.  In which case, what's the harm in waiting?


----------



## darrell I (Apr 9, 2009)

Bleoberis De Ganis said:


> It is against the law to resell dvds, cds, books, etc.




No, no it isn't, certainly not in the UK at least...

I'll be charitable and say that you may be confusing yourself with the legal text in the front of books which says; "The sale of this book without its cover has not been approved by the publisher." Which is basically there to stop it being resold without the author and publisher's names.


----------



## Obryn (Apr 9, 2009)

darrell I said:


> I'll be charitable and say that you may be confusing yourself with the legal text in the front of books which says; "The sale of this book without its cover has not been approved by the publisher." Which is basically there to stop it being resold without the author and publisher's names.



That's not why that blurb is there.

When a store wishes to let a publisher know that a book or magazine has not been sold, rather than send the whole book back, they just send the front cover.  (Shipping back the entire book is economically unfeasible.)  The book is reported as unsold & destroyed, and the store receives some reimbursement.

Unethical bookstores might try to sell a book that they have also reported as unsold and destroyed.  The blurb lets them (and you) know that this is illegal.

-O


----------



## jursamaj (Apr 9, 2009)

Obryn said:


> That's not why that blurb is there.
> 
> When a store wishes to let a publisher know that a book or magazine has not been sold, rather than send the whole book back, they just send the front cover.  (Shipping back the entire book is economically unfeasible.)  The book is reported as unsold & destroyed, and the store receives some reimbursement.
> 
> ...




It took me so long to get registered that you beat me to this answer.

Incidentally, this system is why books cost about twice what they ought to.  It's also why print-on-demand boutiques could be competitive.

Mostly it's not the *stores* that try to sell stripped books, but unethical employees and/or trash searchers.  

As for the thread, after some 90 posts, aren't people getting tired of saying "shut up and get a lawyer"?  If he hasn't yet, one more post saying it isn't going to convince him.

(BTW, he has at least decided to shut up on ENWorld.)


----------



## avin (Apr 9, 2009)

Obryn said:


> As most everyone has been saying, your best course of action is to stop digging your hole deeper and just retain an attorney.  Do not believe the people who are telling you that copyright law magically disappears when you cross a political border - they really have no idea what they're talking about.




Well, that wasn't my case I said he's probably in some trouble. But I can say for sure that no international law can prevail over brazilian law, for example, creating some sanction that exists on US but does not exist on Brasil.


----------



## ProfessorCirno (Apr 9, 2009)

So first they attack a minor in the Philippines, and now they're going after some guy in Poland?  And NONE of the defendants have been notified of the court case, either.

Did WotC even look at the court case before they lunged foward?

...Also, isn't it *illegal* to name a minor in court case papers?


----------



## JohnRTroy (Apr 10, 2009)

ProfessorCirno said:


> So first they attack a minor in the Philippines, and now they're going after some guy in Poland?  And NONE of the defendants have been notified of the court case, either.
> 
> Did WotC even look at the court case before they lunged foward?
> 
> ...Also, isn't it *illegal* to name a minor in court case papers?




Court cases work like this.  You file first at the court, and then a process server attempts to send official notification to the defendants.  The filing at the court happens first.  You worry about getting in touch with them before the actual trial, not before things are filed.  You have to file first before contacting them.  Here's the first step of a lawsuit from Wikipedia



> A lawsuit begins when a complaint is filed with the court. This complaint will state that one or more plaintiffs is seeking damages or equitable relief from one or more stated defendants, and will identify the legal and factual bases for doing so. The clerk of a court signs a summons, which is then served by the plaintiff upon the defendant, together with a copy of the complaint. This service notifies the defendants that they are being sued and that they have a specific time limit to file a response. By providing a copy of the complaint, the service also notifies the defendants of the nature of the claims. Once the defendants are served with the summons and complaint, they have a time limit to file an answer identifying their defenses to the plaintiff's claims, including any challenges to the court's jurisdiction, and any counterclaims they wish to assert against the plaintiff.





I think it's only illegal to name a minor in criminal cases, not civil cases.  And I think for Criminal, in the US, it varies by state and district (and likely the crime).


----------



## aboyd (Apr 10, 2009)

avin said:


> I can say for sure that no international law can prevail over brazilian law, for example, creating some sanction that exists on US but does not exist on Brasil.



Except that Brazil signed the Berne Convention, which means that they specifically _have_ created a "Brazilian law" to agree to honor copyright rulings from other countries.


----------



## Enerla (Apr 10, 2009)

Obryn said:


> Guys, really. Copyright does not magically disappear once you hop across an ocean. This is not the Dukes of Hazzard, and you are not on a moonshine run.
> 
> Poland is a signatory to the Berne Convention, and everything that implies.




Recognizing copyright and having he same laws or letting US law apply in poland is very different. Poland, Hungary, etc recognizes the copyright, but says licencing for personal copies are authorized by a representative of copyright holder assigned by the state, this representation is mandatory.

THEN these agencies print small holographic labels to put on devices you can use to reproduce books, and also on supplies for printers, etc. for a fee (it can be huge fee) to authorize personal copies made. 

The fee is paid even if you use a printer to print invoices for a company, you pay it when you print your own photos, etc. so the money is quite significant and it covers the licence fees.

Part of this money is sent to USA to an agency to distribute between publishers there.

This is how the system works.

Fair use - which is recognized by international copyright agreements - is another thing he can explore.

If he can show that the game can only be played in a suggested medium, in the normal way (not all people buying all the books, including modules) it is played and WOTC is markets that, he can claim the copying that is "required" for such normal use of the product should be covered by the permissions, since wotc sold the product for its use, saying otherwise later isn't enforcable.

If you sell directly to poland such limits from poland or any other european country should be obeyed by international treaties. And it is strong reasoning, since if they don't allow any copying (even if they are required), how the print optimized books work? How can you open the file (copy it to your RAM), etc?

By making the product work this way if you use it for its (advertised) purpose that is: the copyright owner giving permission through his actions taken while designing the product and offering it this way (and advertising it this way).

So far in Hungary many music publishers tried to sue major dc hubs, torrent sites, claiming that p2p is distribution, but the court always said: no it is personal copying and people pay a licence fee through central authority to permit such copying, so nothing illegal happened.

(With software you can only make backup copy, no centralized licensing for that... sadly)

Did it make us not recognizing copyright? No. 
But it did make the copy a licenced and authorized copy.

Why? Because when 

Circumventing a copy protection scheme, modifying the copyrighted work, etc. is a different story, etc.

I think the key concern here isn't only abour piracy. I don't play D&D 4e, nor 3e, so for me it isn't that interesting. But people who do play, want to attract new players and for this they offer demo groups.

Thanks to competition from online vendors (amazon for example) many stores and clubs where that was possible were closed, and wizards is switching its attention to online medium.

In an online demo group of the full game where only the DM has the rulebook you can't avoid sending parts of copyrighted material required to play the game.

Why? The game, and the current tools, current electronic versions are designed this way. 

PDF is great. But most people can't extract the few pages the demo players need for the game. It is part of the design of the products, and it is one of the key problems.

With your DRM free copy, you could have a 2nd copy with a very restrictive drm (with timed licences acquired on opening) for using the book with friends or in demo groups in online play. Without this 2nd, protected copy, your only chance is to send them the watermarked unprotected copy.

Simply: Wizards is a huge organization, and people who made this decision probably doesn't play the game, so didn't knew these problems, they made bad decisions, and now suing minors.

I am not only concerned about these people, but I am concerned, that with this no more people will be willing to demo games online, noone will run games online, if they have to share files (show handouts) with players, etc. so the move is destructive and not only for the 8 defendants.


----------



## Shadowsong666 (Apr 10, 2009)

aboyd said:


> Except that Brazil signed the Berne Convention, which means that they specifically _have_ created a "Brazilian law" to agree to honor *copyright rulings* from other countries.




sorry, but i think you get it wrong. I am no lawyer and may be mistaken, but as i understood the berne convention it simply tells that things under copyright in other countries get handled as if they had copyright in your own country. There is no way that a US court can sentence me to 3million dollars and that a german court would simply say "ok". Afaik it gets handled under the nations own laws.


----------



## Sabathius42 (Apr 10, 2009)

/sarcasm=on

Did anyone mention to the OP that he might want to consult a lawyer????

/sarcasm=off

DS


----------



## Blue Sky (Apr 10, 2009)

Huh.  I find it funny that the "innocent sharer" not just shares pdf's with friends, but also a screen name.  A guy with the exact same screen name runs Chaos Wasteland, a bittorrent tracker that offers hundreds of pdfs from D&D, Shadowrun, and WoD, amongst others.

But that's just a coincidence, right?


----------



## ProfessorCirno (Apr 10, 2009)

Blue Sky said:


> Huh.  I find it funny that the "innocent sharer" not just shares pdf's with friends, but also a screen name.  A guy with the exact same screen name runs Chaos Wasteland, a bittorrent tracker that offers hundreds of pdfs from D&D, Shadowrun, and WoD, amongst others.
> 
> But that's just a coincidence, right?




For what it's worth, there's a lot of Professor Cirnos out there who arn't me.


----------



## arscott (Apr 10, 2009)

Enerla said:


> Circumventing a copy protection scheme, modifying the copyrighted work, etc. is a different story, etc.



The visible watermark identifying the defendant as the PDF's purchaser was removed from the file.  Surely that counts.


----------



## Piratecat (Apr 10, 2009)

Huh. I ran across this site. It's a 2004 site profile listing his user name, his real name, and his favorite files being bittorrent software.


----------



## Enerla (Apr 10, 2009)

Piratecat said:


> You'd think so, wouldn't you? But under the category of "Boy, posting here wasn't a great idea," I submit this site that I found simply by googling his user name and "Poland". When your site summary lists your user name, your real name, and your favorite files being bittorrent software, it's hard for me to feel much sympathy for your protestations of innocence. Heh.




I am not the defendant here, but I would show how your thinking is a bit unfair.

Lets see: When I buy an empty DVD, there is a hologram attached that say, I paid a licence fee to legally copy movies, music, etc. to it, since licencing music is done this way. When I needed a memory card for my camera, almost half of the price went to music industry, since I bought permission to copy music and movies. And this fee is attached to the storage devices we use for backups (at work) etc, since this way everyone in hungary is covered for copying for personal use.

The centralized licecing agency sends the money to publishers and foreign agencies so the authors can get their money. 

Am I allowed to insist: that if I, or anyone else who pays these fees want to use the rights we paid for and use a bittorrent site to geta movie BUT people who don't pay for shouldn't take the work of others for free? (If I wouldn't consider these stuff as a waste of perfectly good disc space / bw)

And that the later is THEIR responsibility.

To make things complex, there is a reprography fee too, which is paid with all scanners, printers, supplies, etc. to give you permission to make personal copies of books (including ebooks) with any technology. Yes, even the printers that is never used for any books, and yes, for any not for profit copying by individuals.

Is it fair, if I say: I want to use this right, but expect that people who don't pay a cent (it should be sent to copyright owner) for such fees don't take books for free?

And to make things even more complex: if people need a demo group online and the books are shared so they can try to game they play that should be ok in my definition (imaking such copies is a good use of reprography fee), but it isn't good way to show support, help financing the future, so if you can spend money on RPG books you should even if you can have legal copies? 

And that if I like a game I can walk to the store and buy it, since we don't pay a licence fee on anything that gives us an option to copy software (except for the backup copy).

I think if I would name a bittorrent client software, a bittorrent tracker software, etc. as my favorites these ideals wouldn't change.

Even if I would like 4e, would like it enough to run demo games, and this would get my copy in wrong hands (outside of people who pay a reprography fee) and many of them would be s and wouldn't want to buy books the ideals would be same. The laws would be same as well.

I think the laws are similar in most countries that had communism for some decades, since they are in essence old laws and there this "government appointed representative should licence all copyrighted works and sell their cut to copyright owner" approach was common. I heard some US based universities want something similar, since it is better for all. 

But I think Poland is similar here. And if you look aafter Damador, he ran a lot of demo games, because he supports his hobby. 

And when music industry started sueing people there, even major DC++ hubs were seen the court deciding, that is just personal copies made and shared, and covered by the fees you pay for (publishers said it wasn't copying but distributing, and this is why they thought it is illegal). Why would people from such countries be against filesharing? What should stop them from doing it?

BUT if you don't pay this fee and copy anything, then you are a criminal.

Visible watermarks aren't a "copy protection mechanism" if they have personally identifiable information, and you can delete it and you can request others to delete it. And if you give it to others they can try to protect you before uploading to anything public.

And often torrent, etc. sites have communities that can give you advice, lets you discuss stuff, even if you don't dl or ul anything. Why? Since if invites aren't that easy to get people don't want to lose their accounts (it isn't easy to make a new one) so it is easier to find intelligent conversation about a few topics on a few such sites.

What damador claimed? That in poland he pays a fee, and wotc and other publishers could claim their cut, that should allow him to make copies of books and share with friends and in polish communities, he did that, so he did nothing wrong. 

The whole piracy issue is nasty, since in countries where you have to pay a lot of money for permission to copy music, books, videos, etc. people will do it, because if they pay for this privilegie (and it cannot be limited in contracts) they want to use it.

But once they put it up on a filesharing site for people who can copy it, people who don't pay for this permission will download it too, but they can't control this, and it would be hard to catch the people who "forgot to pay". 

I hope, one day these differences will vanish, everyone will pay for a permission to copy, but people will still buy originals (like they do here) for collecting, supporting their favorites, because that helps to define their identity, because printed copies or services make it worth, etc. and both authors and end users will find it an excellent deal.


----------



## pawsplay (Apr 10, 2009)

Blue Sky said:


> Huh.  I find it funny that the "innocent sharer" not just shares pdf's with friends, but also a screen name.  A guy with the exact same screen name runs Chaos Wasteland, a bittorrent tracker that offers hundreds of pdfs from D&D, Shadowrun, and WoD, amongst others.
> 
> But that's just a coincidence, right?




Of course, Damodar is also the name of a bad guy in the D&D live action movie, which would make it a less amazing coincidence.


----------



## Damador (Apr 10, 2009)

Piratecat said:


> Huh. I ran across this site. It's a 2004 site profile listing his user name, his real name, and his favorite files being bittorrent software.




wow - it list any file that you downloaded earlier, sometimes you need to use torrent just like i did yesterday to get form Company of Heroes - Updates latest patch for COH ToV as they switch to BT distribution for patches. Do you use opera? - if yes you also have BT software onboard. I use linux at work and BT soft is a must have in that OS. P2P distribution isn't only for sharing copyright material. 

Did it prove anything ? 


pawsplay- Damodar =/= damador ... also googled some persons that first name is damador.


----------



## DracoSuave (Apr 10, 2009)

Damador said:


> II 6. - show my person for that iam citizen of Poland - that right
> just below in points 7-9 i see 3 unknown ppl that got book that i purchased and post it over net - I and WOTC dont even know who did it.
> Yes i bought the all titles from the DT and borrowed it (according to my country law) to club members just as the libraries do.




While I'm not an expert in Copyright Law in your country, there is a clause called 'Fair Use.'  This gives the holder of Copyrighted material the ability and right to copy parts of the material for uses that are considered proper and right.

So, for example, copying character sheets is Fair Use.  In fact, copying powers from the book to slip into cardstock for yourself and friends is Fair Use.  There is nothing illegal about this.  Lending your computer to a friend with the PDF on it is also fair use.

However, taking said PDF and distributing copies to those who do not own it is not generally fair use.  You're not lending copies out, you're simply making copies.  Mentioning the financial situation (I can't afford it) doesn't mitigate that.  D&D books are not considered essential items, and are luxuries at best.  

The original company doesn't need to prove that you're making a profit, that's a misconception.  They merely need to determine if your actions had caused them damages.  Had the distribution remained within your group, probably not;  it's easy to prove that many groups get by with one copy of their books perchased, and that by that logic, you are not costing them a dime.  No cost, no damages, no civil case.

However, one of those copies found its way onto a distribution site.  It doesn't matter if you're the one who put them up there or not.  You made copies that were not considered Fair Use, and in doing so, one of those copies were then copied many times over, and those are copies that translate directly into lost sales for them.  They can prove damages in this case: lost money.


----------



## S'mon (Apr 10, 2009)

NerfedWizard said:


> I don't know why people seem to assume that a US judgment would not be enforceable in Poland. Would it be? - I don't know. I'm not a Polish lawyer. But I would NOT be surprised if it is enforceable, and I would NOT be surprised if WotC could use that judgment to make the OP bankrupt, seize his assets, take money directly out of his wages, get an order for the sale of any property that he owns, etc. Can they do any of those things? I don't know. It presumably depends on Polish law, and on US law as well.




It does not depend on US law.  Poland is not a territory of the USA.

I teach law in the UK, including international commercial law.

First point:  This is a civil case, not a criminal case.  There is no possibility of extradition.  

Second point:  For a Polish court to enforce a US civil judgement, AFAIK the same damages would have to have been available in a Polish civil court.  Since US copyright law is now vastly more punitive than that of other developed-world jurisdictions, this seems very unlikely.  But the OP should consult a Polish legal expert on his position in Polish law.


----------



## S'mon (Apr 10, 2009)

Shadowsong666 said:


> Somehow i think our laws differ much in certain social points.




This is the point that US posters seem to be missing.  Poland may be US-friendly but it's not a US-controlled state, it has the rule of law, and Polish courts are there to protect the people of Poland, not to enforce predatory US laws.


----------



## Damador (Apr 10, 2009)

Blue Sky said:


> Huh.  I find it funny that the "innocent sharer" not just shares pdf's with friends, but also a screen name.  A guy with the exact same screen name runs Chaos Wasteland, a bittorrent tracker that offers hundreds of pdfs from D&D, Shadowrun, and WoD, amongst others.
> 
> But that's just a coincidence, right?




dont get me wrong but its not my site, do research before next shot

Enlightning.de - En Lightning is a german webhost service and BT tracker 

Ogl±da profil this is polish community 1095 posts i run some play by post games etc ... 

not every nickname damador over net is mine

i got tired about other ppl that easy accuse another 

how could toy explain - one day there is a big "piracy" event - some claims that they lost alot of money because illegal actions etc. Just 2 days after there is announcement that "pirated" product has been "sold out". That ist direct effect of previous happen (its not enough time to affect the sale) 

As i wrote b4 there is many small prvate communities that in fact earn money FOR hasbro (as the WOTC is part of it). They promote and advertise game for free - put own money and effort just to lure new players.


----------



## S'mon (Apr 10, 2009)

Caerin said:


> So, in Poland, *if* his initial action was legal under a Polish private use exemption, then it was legal. The problem then comes with the additional distribution on the Internet. Not only is that very likely illegal under Polish law, it means the action *also* took place in the US jurisdiction, making it actionable in the US. This is a bit of an oversimplification, but it means that the person infringing is also liable in the US as well.




That's right - the Berne convention (which I did my PhD on!) requires national treatment of copyright works.  This means that US-published works are protected in Poland under Polish law to the same extent Polish works are.  It does *not* mean that US law applies to US works!!


----------



## S'mon (Apr 10, 2009)

aboyd said:


> Except that Brazil signed the Berne Convention, which means that they specifically _have_ created a "Brazilian law" to agree to honor copyright rulings from other countries.




Uh, no.


----------



## S'mon (Apr 10, 2009)

Shadowsong666 said:


> sorry, but i think you get it wrong. I am no lawyer and may be mistaken, but as i understood the berne convention it simply tells that things under copyright in other countries get handled as if they had copyright in your own country. There is no way that a US court can sentence me to 3million dollars and that a german court would simply say "ok". Afaik it gets handled under the nations own laws.




That is correct.


----------



## DracoSuave (Apr 10, 2009)

S'mon said:


> This is the point that US posters seem to be missing.  Poland may be US-friendly but it's not a US-controlled state, it has the rule of law, and Polish courts are there to protect the people of Poland, not to enforce predatory US laws.




Once your copy mysteriously ends up on scribd.com without the permission of the copyright holder, it's hardly 'predatory' to sue if people are using that copy rather than the copies you have every right to sell and control.

That's the part people gloss over, it's not that his copies were distributed to friends (which is negligible in terms of damages) but rather, that they ended up being distributed online.  The fact he intended for his friends or not is not relevant at that point--he copied files he did not have permission to copy and the result lead them onto scribd.com.

*Fair use definately ends at scribd.com* and you'll have a hell of a time proving otherwise in -any- court.

Civil cases are based on preponderance of evidence, meaning that which ever side has a more likely case wins.  All Hasbro has to do is prove that his copy was on scribd.com and that he willfully copied them to distribute and that, as they say, is that.


That said, some jurisdictions have different rules.  For example, Canada you can download copies from distribution sites provided you hold a legal original copy  (Fair Use includes digital copies for personal use).  You, however, cannot upload copies to illegal users.


----------



## S'mon (Apr 10, 2009)

Tort law has a concept called "remoteness of harm" or "remoteness of damage" which especially limits liability for economic loss.  I expect Polish law has such a concept.

Edit: Re "predatory" - I was thinking particularly of damages though, and how damages for tort in the US are commonly punitive rather than a measure of actual loss.


----------



## DracoSuave (Apr 10, 2009)

True enough, but the 'remoteness' in this case is -at most- one generation.  More importantly, once Hasbro establishes that he did make illegal copies, and his illegal copies were being distributed, it's up to him to prove that remoteness exists in the first place, something he might not be able to do.  The fact that he is -aware- of the distribution makes it difficult to prove he is not complicit or that he is, in fact, remote.  He might have to prove he took steps to put a stop to it.


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 10, 2009)

S'mon said:


> Tort law has a concept called "remoteness of harm" or "remoteness of damage" which especially limits liability for economic loss.  I expect Polish law has such a concept.
> 
> Edit: Re "predatory" - I was thinking particularly of damages though, and how damages for tort in the US are commonly punitive rather than a measure of actual loss.




I agree.

In my country, US tort/punitive laws are ridiculed at our law schools. From what I know, this is pretty much consensus in the EU (at least in all countries I have travelled/contact with), so no, no court in Europe will probably even consider whatever amount a US court comes up with.


----------



## S'mon (Apr 10, 2009)

DracoSuave said:


> More importantly, once Hasbro establishes that he did make illegal copies




According to him, he did not make illegal copies under Polish law, which is the relevant law.


----------



## DracoSuave (Apr 10, 2009)

According to him he distributed those copies to other people, which is not the same as making copies for personal use.

A fine distinction.


----------



## Alnag (Apr 10, 2009)

US often mistakes its internal law for international one. The guy is from Poland. Whatever he sign doesn't matter if it is in contradiction with the the law in his country.

If you would sign you want to be killed and someone killed you, it would be murder anyway.

So the only question here is what Polish law said. Which I am not quite sure.


----------



## Maggan (Apr 10, 2009)

Enerla said:


> I am not the defendant here, but I would show how your thinking is a bit unfair.




I think it is important that we all make a distinction between "being fair" and "having your case tried in a court".

Maybe I'm too crass after being through disputes over agreements and having spoken to lawyers about those things, but "fairness" doesn't enter into the picture.

WotC won't look at the defendant "fairly". They'll look at it in a way that supports their argument. It is up to the defendand to best present his views on the matter.

/M


----------



## JPL (Apr 10, 2009)

Piratecat said:


> Huh. I ran across this site. It's a 2004 site profile listing his user name, his real name, and his favorite files being bittorrent software.





It's a double-edged sword, this Intraweb.


----------



## Shadowsong666 (Apr 10, 2009)

DracoSuave said:


> According to him he distributed those copies to other people, which is not the same as making copies for personal use.
> 
> A fine distinction.




Question is: Is sharing files with your friends (copying them and distributing them) allowed in poland or not? As he said, it is. 
As long as he considers these people part of his social culture circle called "friends" it may be ok. In germany there is some kind of limit to how many people you can give out a private copy. So sharing mp3 files in a disco club with everyone isn't really legal here as wouldn't be such a thing as publishing copyright material on scribd.com.

well, i think damador shouldn't talk about it on the web. Hopefully. 

Regarding betanews: You don't put software on that list. The website does that when you download stuff. So having some software on that list doesn't prove that these are my "favorite files" i use. Just that these are the files i downloaded there... afair

I don't think someone would want to know which kind of software i downloaded in many years.

Regarding this case i just had a look at the Pirate Bay trial and it was really funny to see how american lawyers started bringing new evidence to the court like pulling out a bunny from there hats and just failing at the "Uhhhh new evidence" effect because of not knowing the laws of the country. I hope wotc prepares wiser than the movie industry. ^^


----------



## grickherder (Apr 10, 2009)

Shadowsong666 said:


> Regarding betanews: You don't put software on that list. The website does that when you download stuff. So having some software on that list doesn't prove that these are my "favorite files" i use. Just that these are the files i downloaded there... afair




And also torrent software isn't just for pirating.  Yesterday I downloaded a copy of Linux that was delivered by a torrent file.  I had to go get a copy of utorrent.

I must be guilty!


----------



## Enerla (Apr 10, 2009)

I think the whole problem is simple, and it can justify wizards stopping selling PDF products.

Lets see: There are countries where you can make copies of the pdf, and it is perfectly legal, it is perfectly legal if your copies are sent to the people you run demo groups for, and if you make it available in such communities.

But nothing can stop other people taking that copy and posting it on major P2P sites.

For the first part: Wizards can decide they can see how much money they got from reprography fees, can decide ok, it isn't a problem, since most people there still buys the game, and a higher percentage of players buy books there than in brick and mortar clubs, so good for everyone.

For the secound part: How to find the uploader? At this point the file is distributed to masses who doesn't want to pay for it, and it is bad, sets a bad example, and people there don't pay a reprography fee, etc.

I think it is hard to see any scenario where WOTC can get some decision made in US courts enforced in poland about this, and if US courts recoginze they should use polish laws to judge it (it is possible for them, to do so, right?) or decide WOTC should contact a polish court (this is even more possible) WOTC doesn't get anything...

Except...

They posted a good reason for:

Ditching rpgnow, dtrpg. less competition when they will sell stuff with DDI, better deals.
No more 3E and 3.5E sales, so those supplements and Pathfinder RPG won't be an alternative to 4E, and if there are many players who want to keep 3E trying to force them to 4E seems to be a way to sell more 4E products later.


----------



## JPL (Apr 10, 2009)

Jack99 said:


> I agree.
> 
> In my country, US tort/punitive laws are ridiculed at our law schools.




In my country, PDF downloads YOU!


----------



## Blue Sky (Apr 10, 2009)

Damador said:


> dont get me wrong but its not my site, do research before next shot




Fair enough, I apologize.


----------



## Piratecat (Apr 10, 2009)

grickherder said:


> And also torrent software isn't just for pirating.  Yesterday I downloaded a copy of Linux that was delivered by a torrent file.  I had to go get a copy of utorrent.



Also fair enough. There are certainly some excellent reasons to have torrenting software. I went and edited my original snarky post once I considered it. Really, either way, it's not my job to judge.


----------



## Alnag (Apr 10, 2009)

pedr said:


> That act of making a copy is (at least arguably) going beyond the rights to the intellectual property given when the pdf was purchased. So both the person 'lending' and the person 'borrowing' are (technically) in breach of the copyright of the rights-owner.




This is really arguable. If I copy my PDF from hard drive of my old computer to my new computer I've made a copy. So am I breaching copyright of the rights-owner? If yes, than we are all screwed!

If no... than I can legally copy the PDF file in question to flashdrive. Than borrow the flashdrive to someone. Who can than read the file. Is borrowing the flashdrive illegal? Hardly. Is letting someone read the file illegal? In which case? If he is reading it on our computer? Or from our flashdrive on his computer? Etc.

If all is still all right and we borrow the flashdrive to someone. Can he copy the file in question from the flashdrive to his hard drive? Maybe not. But can we be made responsible for such actions? I guess no.

_Information wants to be free. It can't be caged. You can try... but you can't win. It is the principle of the world._


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Apr 10, 2009)

ProfessorCirno said:


> For what it's worth, there's a lot of Professor Cirnos out there who arn't me.




I had to change my name from Dr. Awkward because the ENWorld system confused me with dr awkward after they switched to ENWorld 2.

I could decide to call myself Al Gore, but that doesn't mean I'll get paid to hit the lecture circuit and talk about the weather.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Apr 10, 2009)

Piratecat said:


> Huh. I ran across this site. It's a 2004 site profile listing his user name, his real name, and his favorite files being bittorrent software.




And this means...what?...exactly?  All the software on there is legal.  I myself have µtorrent installed.  What exactly are you implying here?


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Apr 10, 2009)

Shadowsong666 said:


> Regarding this case i just had a look at the Pirate Bay trial and it was really funny to see how american lawyers started bringing new evidence to the court like pulling out a bunny from there hats and just failing at the "Uhhhh new evidence" effect because of not knowing the laws of the country. I hope wotc prepares wiser than the movie industry. ^^




A bit off topic, but I have to point out that those weren't American lawyers.  They were Swedish lawyers in the employ of the IFPI, which is Europe's RIAA.  They had to have known that bringing new evidence after discovery had concluded would not be permitted by the judge.  But they did it anyway, for reasons that remain obscure.


----------



## Silenttimo (Apr 10, 2009)

This all story is really complex.

When there was nothing "virtual", I could lend a book, a video-tape, music-tape, CD, RPG book to anyone close (friend, family), and this was not illegal UNLESS I would lend those items and being paid for it, or had to pay to borrow those items.
The same was for borrowing something from a friend.

The thing is, when I had lent something to (or borrowed from) a friend, ONLY ONE of us could watch / read / listen.

But even with the internet, if you were to lend such an item, you can not be sure that the book won't be xeroxed or scanned, the CD, tape, DVD won't be copied, and then, put on emule, torrent, etc...

The thing, with pdf, is that you could imagine having bought a .pdf (or a VOD, or a mp3) product and lend it (lending a copy), and you could still have accesse to your own file.
But if you have legally bought it. Do we have to consider it a crime ?

I would say that if you lend a pdf to ONE person at a time (and if you are sure the previous one has erased the file), it is no crime.
But how can you be sure ?

Have you never heard of someone everyone trusted to be dishonnest after all (Madoff could be an example at a large scale, but there are so many such "little"examples) ?
Have you never heard of family stories when, the parents gone, relationships between brothers and sisters went awry about the money left ?

So, could you swear, about someone you know very very well, that if he'd ever do something you consider impossible for him to do and dishonest according to your own values, you'd immediately kill yourself ?

I think that the thing that this person should not have done is sharing with several persons (including under 18) a pdf.
However, I guess that nobody could blame if for lending his pdf to ONE person and printing his pdf so that others could also read the book of rules.

There are also 2 things I really think :
- RPG is a bit of a "bourgeois" hobby : you need money to buy books, minis, dice (and so on) that could be wasted elsewhere if you are very short on money (I can borrow a book at a public library, but I can not play if I don't find at least 1-2 persons around the table that have the core rule books). I guess it needs to be clear : there are poor people playing RPG, but you do not find lots of RPGers in Africa, most of small central America states, lots of asian countries, and even in Europe or North America, most of the people playing come from an above average social & money family (not all, but most) ;
- there is a kind of hypocrisis around here : I would like everyone criticizing this polish guy SWEARING (upon his holy texts and family) that he/she has NEVER downloaded afile (movie, music or book...) AND never copied a file (DVD, CD, mp3, ..., that were lent and not bought previously) AND has NEVER used an illegal pdf/mp3/video/music file.

I consider myself as an honest person : 
- We have (wife & I) lots of books (RPG or not, D&D RPG being ODD, D&D, AD&D 1 & 2, D&D 3.0, 3.5 and D&D 4E, TSR/WOTC or other publisher), CD's, DVD's, 
- We have NEVER downloaded illegal material (be it music, movie or book) since we do not like that, and I like to collect "solid" stuff,
- We own more than 250 RPG adventures / box / books / other various material and maybe more than that (second hand or new) [technically I do own them since she doesn't play], more than 600 "bought" CD's and maybe more than that (likewise) , more than 700 DVD's and maybe more than that (likewise) and more than 300 various art books / pocket books / comics (mostly "european" comic books) and maybe more than that (likewise),
- HOWEVER : I know that we own about 12-15 copied CD's (I guess about 2% of all our CD's, anyway that is illegal ; no copied DVD's though ; at least 8-10 of those copied CD's would be bought by us if we could find them at a reasonnable price though), I know that I do own a CD-rom with about 6-7 adventures from a publisher that were bought by someone else but he copied them for me since I could not find them (but I am still looking to BUY them if I find them for a reasonnable price).

So, even being honest (I guess, and my friends consider me as an honest man), having bought so much items & products, I could not swear being TOTALLY on the "good" side of the fence between legal/illegal.

OK, now for something completely different (sorry to leave the trail) :

Think about this (regarding CD's and DVD's) : you buy an item, you are told it is a great product, you then happen to know this product won't last more than 8-10-12 years (nobody can really tell).
I feel that if in several years, I had to buy everything again, this would be dishonest from the entertainment major companies, even stealing my money : I know people who have 30-40 years old vynil discs, I own books that are 80-90 years old, and now, I am told nothing will last more than a decade ?
Moreover, maybe there won't be any player capable of reading my DVD's ?

If I chose to download every movie I have on DVD, (and only those) because I paid for them and I want to still be able to watch them in a few years, would I be a pirat, a stealer, dishonest ?

If I chose not to, but found that my DVD's are "dead" in 5 years, what would you think ?

Who is stealing in that case ?


----------



## JPL (Apr 10, 2009)

Silenttimo said:


> - there is a kind of hypocrisis around here : I would like everyone criticizing this polish guy SWEARING (upon his holy texts and family) that he/she has NEVER downloaded afile (movie, music or book...) AND never copied a file (DVD, CD, mp3, ..., that were lent and not bought previously) AND has NEVER used an illegal pdf/mp3/video/music file.




I'm not sure anyone is criticizing the defendant's alleged actions from a moral standpoint.  Rather, there's a good amount of discussion from a legal standpoint, and some pragmatic advice about what to do when you find yourself dealing with a lawsuit (i.e., talk to a lawyer instead of trying to win your case on Enworld).


----------



## Vocenoctum (Apr 10, 2009)

Shadowsong666 said:


> Question is: Is sharing files with your friends (copying them and distributing them) allowed in poland or not? As he said, it is.



I'm not sure if that's true. He said on page 1 that
"I decided to buy electronic copies and borrow it inside the club the same goes with many e-magazines. Up to now i was sure that i know my players well. Anyway borrowing books for personal use between family, friends or other close ppl is legal in Poland and whole EU."

He doesn't draw a distinction between pdf's and paper books, does Polish law?

The comparison isn't to lending a paper book to someone, the comparison is to taking your paper book, photo copying it for 3+ others and giving them copies. Is THAT legal under Polish law?

Heck if I know, but it just seems like the original poster makes some big assumptions and presents them as facts.

Either way, I doubt he'll have a real penalty, since they'd need to bring the case there, just pointing out that we don't know for sure.


----------



## Taralan (Apr 10, 2009)

*Private International Law*

For those interested in these matters, the interplay between US and Polish jurisdiction in a case like that is much more complicated than what has been mentioned in previous posts and is determined by a fascinating part of the law called private international law. 

In a case like this, assuming that WotC does sue in the US, the answer will depend on both US private international law and then Polish Private International Law.

At first, according to the US law, the US court will decide whether it considers it has jurisdiction or not on the matter and which law it will apply (a US court could apply Polish law for example or vice-versa). This will depend on things like the presence or not of an election of forum and election of law clause in the PDF purchase contract, on where according to US law an internet copyright infringement is located (in the country where the file is uploaded or where it is illegally downloaded ?) etc. 

Assuming the US court takes jurisdiction, nobody will force the defendant to appear (this is a civil matter not criminal), but if he fails to do so, he takes the risk of an ex parte judgment. 

If the defendant has assets in the US, then the matter would end there since WoTC could seize these assets in the US if they obtain a favourable judgment. 

If not, then WotC needs to enforce this US judgment in Poland and then this starts an entirely new process which can vary greatly depending on Polish private international law and its leniency or not about the enforcement of foreign judgment, baring the existence of a particular treaty between US and Poland (or EU). Usually, these laws will not allow the enforcement of a foreign judgment which goes against Polish public order (which may be the case if the acts of copying are legal in Poland for example) or if the US award is based on what is called "Loi de Police" i.e. laws that are in nature more of public policy than true civil matters according to the view of Polish law and a Polish court. This is the case of tax laws for example which are very rarely enforceable in foreign jurisdiction and Penal awards based on a local law, such as copyright violation are often susceptible to this line of attack as well and may not be enforceable except for the actual damages caused rather than a statutory amount. It all depends on the exact Polish laws and jurisprudence. 

All of this to say that it can get quite complicated and that is why WoTC will likely seek a settlement since its goal is likely more to make an example than to recoup any real money and also why the OP, once and if he really his served with the suit, should seek local legal advice....

Hope this was not too boring for you guys ;-)


----------



## Nikosandros (Apr 10, 2009)

Taralan said:


> Hope this was not too boring for you guys ;-)



I personally find this kind of explanations very interesting.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Apr 10, 2009)

Agreed.  This has been a very educational thread.


----------



## ProfessorCirno (Apr 10, 2009)

JPL said:


> I'm not sure anyone is criticizing the defendant's alleged actions from a moral standpoint.  Rather, there's a good amount of discussion from a legal standpoint, and some pragmatic advice about what to do when you find yourself dealing with a lawsuit (i.e., talk to a lawyer instead of trying to win your case on Enworld).




Are we on the same forums? 

There's been countless people on this and the other threads trying to beat people with the morals stick.  Meanwhile, I'm scratching my head and trying to remember if the same thing happened when _cd burners_ came out.  Surely those heralded the end of the music industry...?

Or VHS tapes.  Good god man, anyone can take your tape and _recopy it onto another!_  Why even bother having video rental stores - or hell, why bother having videos *at all?!*


----------



## JPL (Apr 10, 2009)

ProfessorCirno said:


> Are we on the same forums?




I don't know . . . maybe I'm just skimming the stuff that seems unimportant.

Whether or not any of us agree with copyright laws, there are such things.

Whether or not it's fair that Mr. Radzikowski is getting sued, for the time being, he's getting sued.  

Maybe he's done nothing morally wrong, maybe he's done nothing legally wrong . . . for the time being, he's a defendant.

I'm gonna bow out of this thread . . . Rad, one last time:  don't talk about this to anyone but a lawyer.


----------



## avin (Apr 10, 2009)

Piratecat said:


> Also fair enough. There are certainly some excellent reasons to have torrenting software. I went and edited my original snarky post once I considered it. Really, either way, it's not my job to judge.




I think World of Warcraft is using a special Torrent client for downloading its patches.


----------



## fissionessence (Apr 10, 2009)

avin said:


> I think World of Warcraft is using a special Torrent client for downloading its patches.




Yep. And if it's going slow (because their software doesn't play well with firewalls and routers; and it just generally isn't seeded well), you can use 'regular' torrent sites to get the same PERFECTLY-LEGAL files.

It's also reasonably frequent for artists to make their work available for free through torrent channels. For example, local musicians who want to get the word out will post up their own albums, and I have several adventures from a D&D 4E player who posted the modules he wrote up onto torrents.

~


----------



## Michael Dean (Apr 10, 2009)

Alnag said:


> US often mistakes its internal law for international one.




That's a nice broad slam on the US, and also incorrect.  In fact, recent Supreme Court decisions make me believe some of our misguided Justices are mistaking international law for US law, but I digress.


Mostly from this thread (and others) I see non-lawyers making broad pronouncements of the law in which they really don't know what they're talking about.  

The posts from people saying that it's a complicated process of first obtaining jurisdiction over the defendant, then getting a judgment, and then trying to see if it has any effect through Polish law are the closest to being correct.  

But I don't think that's WOTC's endgame here, anyway.  More likely there are strategic considerations involved on their part that probably play a bigger role than actually getting, and collecting on, a judgment.  This could be a shot-across-the-bow move by WOTC, for example, with them firing on the first people they were able to determine had uploaded based on the watermarks.  Whether that's viable or not is certainly questionable and open for debate, but WOTC certainly doesn't think they are going to collect millions from a few individuals in Poland or the Phillipines.


----------



## Enerla (Apr 10, 2009)

Michael Dean said:


> But I don't think that's WOTC's endgame here, anyway. More likely there are strategic considerations involved on their part that probably play a bigger role than actually getting, and collecting on, a judgment. This could be a shot-across-the-bow move by WOTC, for example, with them firing on the first people they were able to determine had uploaded based on the watermarks. Whether that's viable or not is certainly questionable and open for debate, but WOTC certainly doesn't think they are going to collect millions from a few individuals in Poland or the Phillipines.




We both see that this move isn't about lost sales, if it would be, they would still sell OOP material as PDFs, they simply doesn't want to sell PDFs. And I can't even blame them for this. 

Why? 

They see even if 4th edition is considered a success and is sold to some new players, several old players don't like it, and if we see 3.5E crowd getting books (endless supply) and many will buy Pathfinder RPG that is bad. Also PDF sales on RPGNow / DTRPG and D&D Insider based content distribution can be direct competitors of each other.

If this will be aproblem in near future, then any high profile pdf getting pirated is a good excuse for it. If they just speak about piracy that is there for ages, that isn't strong enough. If they sue pirates they can point to... Now that is better.


----------



## qstor (Apr 11, 2009)

Chaos Disciple said:


> I recommend you contact the Electronic Frontier Foundation.





IIRC they mostly deal with online free speech cases. The Constitution doesn't give you a free pass to pirate copyrighted material thats NOT Fair use. But I don't do intellectual property work.

Mike
let another lawyer. Lets start a new in the nongaming board for all the lawyers lol


----------



## Michael Dean (Apr 11, 2009)

qstor said:


> Mike
> let another lawyer. Lets start a new in the nongaming board for all the lawyers lol




Ha ha!  I only needed to dip my little toe in the internet law pool once to know I should stay in the shallow end.  It's like the wild wild west in that area right now and probably will be for some time, especially with copyright and intellectual property.  The law is not a very surgically precise tool in a field where the technology is outdated in months rather than years; it simply can't keep up.


----------



## w_earle_wheeler (Apr 11, 2009)

I advise everyone in this thread to read Franz Kafka's The Trial before making any further comments.


----------



## Twowolves (Apr 11, 2009)

w_earle_wheeler said:


> I advise everyone in this thread to read Franz Kafka's The Trial before making any further comments.





Why? Did this guy shoot someone once, then pause before shooting him 5 more times? Or did he just not cry at his mothers funeral?


----------



## DracoSuave (Apr 11, 2009)

ProfessorCirno said:


> Are we on the same forums?
> 
> There's been countless people on this and the other threads trying to beat people with the morals stick.  Meanwhile, I'm scratching my head and trying to remember if the same thing happened when _cd burners_ came out.  Surely those heralded the end of the music industry...?
> 
> Or VHS tapes.  Good god man, anyone can take your tape and _recopy it onto another!_  Why even bother having video rental stores - or hell, why bother having videos *at all?!*




There is a very big difference between copying something you own so you can enjoy it in the manner you desire, and copying something to distribute to other people so they don't have to legally own it.

It's like the difference between owning a gun so you can go to firing practices and hunt deer, and owning a gun so you can shoot people in the head who call you names.  It's not the 'owning the gun' that's the issue at stake, it's what you do with it.

Copying isn't the issue, it's distribution that is.  And let's not kid ourselves, you don't 'lend out' files.  You can lend out console games, because they have a physical media that is only in one place at a time.  When you copy a file from point A to point B, you're no longer 'lending,' especially considering there's little likelihood you'll be getting that copy back.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Apr 11, 2009)

DracoSuave said:


> Copying isn't the issue, it's distribution that is.  And let's not kid ourselves, you don't 'lend out' files.  You can lend out console games, because they have a physical media that is only in one place at a time.  When you copy a file from point A to point B, you're no longer 'lending,' especially considering there's little likelihood you'll be getting that copy back.




I'm led to believe that in the U.S., if a friend of yours lends you a CD, and you make a copy of that CD, you're in violation of the law.  The CD is copyrighted, and by duplicating it you're violating that copyright.

Now, that's not the case where I live.  We pay a levy on all our blank media that covers exactly that sort of use.  The money goes to the recording industry, and we retain the right to make mix tapes for our friends.

So the question of whether you can "lend out" data is really a question of which country you happen to reside within.  If it is legal to pass around media to close friends and family where this guy lives, then it's legal.  If he did that, and one of his friends then stuck the file on the internet, then his friend is in violation of the law, and not this guy.

We do not know whether it is legal to distribute media in the way he describes.  That means we do not know that it is illegal.  We'll have to wait for an expert in Polish copyright law to come on and inform us.  So there's no sense pontificating about how there's a difference between lending a book and lending an e-book _if you don't know what the pertaining laws are_.


----------



## Choronzon (Apr 11, 2009)

You admitted to copying a pdf for a few friends.  That's all you've done, and stick to that story.  Still illegal, but it's not going to be a big deal.  If WOTC wants to try and prove that you yourself distributed the files to thousands of other people, let the burden of proof be on them.


----------



## DracoSuave (Apr 11, 2009)

If that country you live in is Canada, then you have the legal right to make copies for your own use.  The levy covers that.  You don't then have the right to distribute to non-owners.  The levy does not cover that.  You can acquire and copy media you own, you can't distribute to people who don't.


----------



## Storm Raven (Apr 11, 2009)

Twowolves said:


> Why? Did this guy shoot someone once, then pause before shooting him 5 more times? Or did he just not cry at his mothers funeral?




No, that's _The Stranger_ by Camus.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Apr 11, 2009)

DracoSuave said:


> If that country you live in is Canada, then you have the legal right to make copies for your own use.  The levy covers that.  You don't then have the right to distribute to non-owners.  The levy does not cover that.  You can acquire and copy media you own, you can't distribute to people who don't.




The law doesn't cover distribution of copied materials.  But it does cover personal copies of borrowed materials, which is why I framed my example in the way I did.  You can borrow a CD from a friend and make a copy of it legally.  Also, you can make personal recordings from the radio.  In fact, the court has ruled (twice, I think) that these "black cassette laws" cover filesharing of audio files, because when a file is shared, the sharer isn't making a copy of the file and sending it to people.  Rather, he's allowing other people to read his file and make their own copies.

Which is all beside the point.  If it's legal to make copies of media for your family and friends in Poland, then it's legal as long as you are in Poland when you do it.


----------



## Korgoth (Apr 11, 2009)

w_earle_wheeler said:


> I advise everyone in this thread to read Franz Kafka's The Trial before making any further comments.




First tell me what it's about.


----------



## smug (Apr 11, 2009)

Michael Dean said:


> But I don't think that's WOTC's endgame here, anyway.  More likely there are strategic considerations involved on their part that probably play a bigger role than actually getting, and collecting on, a judgment.  This could be a shot-across-the-bow move by WOTC, for example, with them firing on the first people they were able to determine had uploaded based on the watermarks.  Whether that's viable or not is certainly questionable and open for debate, but WOTC certainly doesn't think they are going to collect millions from a few individuals in Poland or the Phillipines.




If the outcome is that they can't get any joy from suing, say, Polish sharers, then what? Refuse to sell pdfs to people in those countries? Given that Poland is an EU nation, does that leave them open to sanction from the EU in terms of their operations there (might they end up unable to sell pdfs into all of the EU? I have no idea about the applicable EU laws).


----------



## S'mon (Apr 11, 2009)

Michael Dean said:


> That's a nice broad slam on the US, and also incorrect.




We're slamming on posters here who think US copyright law is automatically enforceable on a man in Poland.  As you know, that is incorrect.

US Supreme Court justices defer to 'international law' when it fits their own prejudices, but that's a different issue.


----------



## Mirtek (Apr 11, 2009)

Moniker said:


> WotC is out of their mind if they believe that a civil suit in the United States is going to get any traction within Poland.
> 
> Just my two cents.



Well, if he has signed, upon buying the PDFs at DT, that the court of jurisdiction is the USA there are likely agreements between Poland and the USA to enforce such jugdments.

However I wonder about the justification for sueing in the USA against pirates who never ever bought a legal copie in the first place. They definately signed no contract that the court of jurisdiction will be in the USA.


----------



## S'mon (Apr 11, 2009)

Mirtek said:


> Well, if he has signed, upon buying the PDFs at DT, that the court of jurisdiction is the USA there are likely agreements between Poland and the USA to enforce such jugdments.




Nope - Poland is an EU member, EU law has strong protections against such terms in consumer contracts.  You have to sue consumers for breach of consumer contract in their home jurisdiction.

Edit: Of course a US court may pay no attention to EU/Polish law, but the Polish court will pay no attention to the US court.

Edit2:  In the EU, it basically doesn't matter what terms the company puts in its e-download contract; the court has to apply the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations and disregard any terms that imbalance rights/liabilities in favour of the company.


----------



## Cergorach (Apr 11, 2009)

Might I interject that the poster who claims to be the 'defendant' doesn't have to be him, I can easily use a server (legally) from Warschau to post comments on ENworld, that means that pretty much any idiot could do it ;-) There are individuals on the internet that like to make posts that make 'waves' in the community, very recently ENworld has suffered from such a 'prank'. For the initial post to be considered evidence, it needs to be connected to the actual 'defendant', that isn't going to happen unless ENworld is going to provide the IP address to WotC/Hasbro. I do believe that the ENworld servers are located in the US, so some sort of legal demand could be made (either to the owners of ENworld or the hosters of ENworld) for the posters IP address. RPGnow/DTRPG probably already has the 'defendant's' IP address when he bought the products. He currently might have another, a Polish ISP might need to be contacted for that, I don't know how easily Polish ISPs give out their clients IP addresses...

For all we know this is the actual 'defendant', it might be a kid looking for some attention, it might even be someone affiliated with WotC/Hasbro or it's legal team (I'm not making some claim here, it's just not an impossibility). I would like to caution against making more of this, then that it actually is.

I would also like to point out that while the 'defendant' claims to have lent the pdfs to friends (which might or might not be legal under Polish laws), those might not have shared the files on the internet. Hacking is a favorite pastime of a certain subculture, so the files might have been 'stolen' before being shared on the internet. Another option might be that the suppliers where hacked and an illegal copy was obtained that way (RPGnow was hacked in 2007 and customer information was obtained). I know from experience that I had access to certain DTRPG pdfs before they where released (although I did pay for them before downloading, DTRPG has fixed that issue), so it's not beyond the possibility of reason copies where obtained from the suppliers. I'm curious if WotC can make the direct connection that the actual files the 'defendant' downloaded are the same as the ones being spread. As far as I know, RPGNOW/DTRPG generate the file once when you buy it and then stores it on the servers to be downloaded again. An external party could access the files and bypass the log function. Not only the 'defendant' had access to the files, also the employees of the supplier, the suppliers hoster, and the backup service they might use. Then we have the possibility of the watermark being manipulated by an evil minded third party, data can be manipulated...


----------



## Dilandau Kale (Apr 11, 2009)

Just thought I would chime in and add some things that Scott Betts over on the Paizo forums had to say.

"The reason I know he's a pirate is because he posts quite frequently, _under the same moniker_, on one of the most active tabletop filesharing websites. In fact, and this probably will strike close to home for a number of people, damador was the individual running the project to remove Paizo's protection from their Pathfinder products so that they could be posted for filesharing.  There is absolutely _no_ way to consider this guy anything but guilty. I'm not going to provide a link to the website in question, nor quote his posts from there, as both would be a breach of CoC, so you're just going to have to trust me on this one. damador was a pretty significant figure in the tabletop pirating community and it is absolutely unsurprising that he is being sued over it."


paizo.com - Paizo / Messageboards / paizo.com / Website Feedback / WotC halts PDF sales

Whether It's true or not I cant say


----------



## Sakai (Apr 11, 2009)

There is an other side of the coin. WotC claims that a pdf product, legally puchesed by you is on file sharing sites. they will have to prove, the act is done by you.  That is illegal in USA. On the other hand they have distributed your full name, which is illegal in Poland. Whay don't you take the same action on your side of the border and sue them for leaking your full name.  It is probably easier for you to prove your case. You might end up facing a penalty in USA and WotC facing a penalty in Poland. You may be safe as long as you do not step on US soil, where as abondoning Poland or EU markets might not be that easy for WotC.


----------



## Enerla (Apr 11, 2009)

Choronzon said:


> You admitted to copying a pdf for a few friends. That's all you've done, and stick to that story. Still illegal, but it's not going to be a big deal. If WOTC wants to try and prove that you yourself distributed the files to thousands of other people, let the burden of proof be on them.




But that isn't the thing he done.

1st: He is born in Poland
2nd: He lives in Pland
3rd: He pays reprography fees in Poland
4th: With that payment he pays for a permission to copy books (for himself or friends) if no profit is involved
5th: He uses this right to copy the PDF
6th: He runs demo groups to promote D&D...
7th: And he insists that if he pays for a permission to copy books (and give copies to friends) he gets what he pays for. And if contracts cannot legally restrict his rights to do so, then he insists he have done nothing wrong.


----------



## Enerla (Apr 12, 2009)

Dilandau Kale said:


> Just thought I would chime in and add some things that Scott Betts over on the Paizo forums had to say.




Lets see: The same filesharing forum and the incident of same nickname was metioned on this forum too. With people explaining how others get to use the same nicknames. 

If you think you made a quite unique name, and use it for your character in a popular MMORPG (say wow) chances are high that there will be another player using the very same name. If you are lucky, it is on another server. But the moment you "borrow" a name, the chances will be adjusted.

I think the same is true for irc nicks, forum nicks, etc.

But _even if he would run that place_, from some forums I see people who ran high profile dc++ sites, and know even that doesn't make them guilty. Even if I hate such dc++ sites, when the court said they done nothing illegal, nor his users, since you pay a fee for such copying.

To make them guilty you need to see: They done filesharing in a country where it is illegal.

As you know, in democracies you either use your rights directly or you use representatives, any given democracy can decide when can you use your rights directly and when you have to use representatives.

If in a country licencing for not for profit copying for certain uses must be done by a law appointed representatives (and authors supposedly get money that way) and he /by buying some equipment/ paid for a valid licence to copy that ebook (that can involve p2p sites in some countries) then it is hard to call him guilty. Even if he shares files with friends. Even if he would share them on a P2P site. Even if he would also own the P2P site.

If you buy a car and you take it home from the dealership, you aren't a thief either. You pay for something and get it.

BUT it is up to Wizards if they decide: if half of the world can legally copy books and PDFs, then it is a bad bussiness decision to offer a PDF they can copy easily. Make them scan, OCR, it will slow them down, and give Wizards time for good initial sales and can result in a situation that is better for them.


----------



## Twowolves (Apr 12, 2009)

Storm Raven said:


> No, that's _The Stranger_ by Camus.




Oh yeah, right. So, did he instead wake up as a giant bug? That's a funny referrence, but ok sure.


----------



## Revinor (Apr 12, 2009)

Twowolves said:


> Oh yeah, right. So, did he instead wake up as a giant bug? That's a funny referrence, but ok sure.




Now it is Bruno Schulz's book I think, still not Kafka.


----------



## Twowolves (Apr 12, 2009)

Revinor said:


> Now it is Bruno Schulz's book I think, still not Kafka.




No, it's Franz Kafka.

Hence the "  " in my post.

It's been a looooong time since Philosophy 101, but it ain't been THAT long.


----------



## Starfox (Apr 14, 2009)

pedr said:


> However copyright is exactly that: the right to make a copy. It is very hard to consider a way in which someone can 'lend' a pdf to someone else without making a copy of it, at the very least onto temporary media. That act of making a copy is (at least arguably) going beyond the rights to the intellectual property given when the pdf was purchased. So both the person 'lending' and the person 'borrowing' are (technically) in breach of the copyright of the rights-owner.




Which is of course why we need the Pirate Party.


----------



## Cadfan (Apr 15, 2009)

For what its worth, saying that you didn't do anything wrong isn't enough.  Lawsuits don't stop just because the defendant says he didn't do it.  This guy says his friends did it.  Ok.  Its not like the judge never heard that before.  Its not like saying that is some perfect shield.  The decision maker might not believe him.  The "friends" he blames might blame him back.  Who knows.

As for the publishing of the name thing... I don't know anything about Polish law.  but I do know enough to recognize the likely shape of my lack of knowledge.  US courts require that you name who you are suing, because, you know, how else are you going to sue them?  And then once named, that information is public record, because we don't have secret trials.  I'd be extremely surprised if Poland considers it a crime to publish the name of the person you're suing.  They might have law that kind of sounds like that... maybe.  

I'd be really interested if someone could provide a link to a description or translation of this law.  If nothing else, its so different from US law that I'd be interested in reading about it.


----------



## Shadowsong666 (Apr 15, 2009)

Cadfan said:


> For what its worth, saying that you didn't do anything wrong isn't enough.  Lawsuits don't stop just because the defendant says he didn't do it.  This guy says his friends did it.  Ok.  Its not like the judge never heard that before.  Its not like saying that is some perfect shield.  The decision maker might not believe him.  The "friends" he blames might blame him back.  Who knows.




If there are more then him who could have done the uploading and they are known and they don't get the information who has uploaded the file he won't suffer anything imho. It's still _*in dubio pro reo*_ in most civilized parts of the world, right? If they get the uploaders IP that may help solve the case in a quick way if its traceable. So lets wait and find out if he gets anything from WotC or not.


----------



## Cadfan (Apr 15, 2009)

Shadowsong666 said:


> If there are more then him who could have done the uploading and they are known and they don't get the information who has uploaded the file he won't suffer anything imho. It's still _*in dubio pro reo*_ in most civilized parts of the world, right? If they get the uploaders IP that may help solve the case in a quick way if its traceable. So lets wait and find out if he gets anything from WotC or not.



You're thinking of the rules for a criminal trial.  This is civil.  Presumption of innocence isn't relevant.  Instead its usually about a standard that in plain english boils down to "more likely than not."

Not that I know the rules in Poland, of course.  But they're probably similar: its a rule that is really, really useful in dealing with civil matters and avoiding status quo biases and all sorts of other technical stuff not worth getting into.


----------



## Shadowsong666 (Apr 15, 2009)

Cadfan said:


> You're thinking of the rules for a criminal trial.  This is civil.  Presumption of innocence isn't relevant.  Instead its usually about a standard that in plain english boils down to "more likely than not."
> 
> Not that I know the rules in Poland, of course.  But they're probably similar: its a rule that is really, really useful in dealing with civil matters and avoiding status quo biases and all sorts of other technical stuff not worth getting into.




Hm, ok i get that. 
I was just assuming/guessing that he and lets say 7 of his friends had the file and no one is going to tell that he uploaded it or don't know who did it. If thats the case, without a trace, how to get right guy?


----------



## Cadfan (Apr 15, 2009)

Shadowsong666 said:


> Hm, ok i get that.
> I was just assuming/guessing that he and lets say 7 of his friends had the file and no one is going to tell that he uploaded it or don't know who did it. If thats the case, without a trace, how to get right guy?



Put them under oath, one by one, alone.  Scare each one into thinking that he's absolutely screwed if he doesn't pin the blame on someone else.


----------



## Shadowsong666 (Apr 15, 2009)

Cadfan said:


> Put them under oath, one by one, alone.  Scare each one into thinking that he's absolutely screwed if he doesn't pin the blame on someone else.




Thats more of getting "someone" instead of "the right one". 
But b2topic. 
I'm curiously awaiting a response from radzikowski as soon as he gets some official stuff just to know how the case is progressing so far. Personally, i just don't think it will become that big of a deal but you never know.


----------



## Stoat (Apr 15, 2009)

Cadfan said:


> Put them under oath, one by one, alone.  Scare each one into thinking that he's absolutely screwed if he doesn't pin the blame on someone else.




That's where I'd start.  

You can also subpoena documents, records and whatnot from third parties.  Somebody's ISP may have useful info.  



Shadowsong666 said:


> Thats more of getting "someone" instead of "the right one".
> But b2topic.
> I'm curiously awaiting a response from radzikowski as soon as he gets some official stuff just to know how the case is progressing so far. Personally, i just don't think it will become that big of a deal but you never know.




American court documents are generally public records, and U.S. federal documents are available on-line through a kinda-public system called PACER (that's where the .pdf's of WotC's three Complaints came from).  I'll imagine we'll hear more about the case in 30-60 days depending on when the defendants are served.

As noted above, it would be the height of foolishness for Radzikowski to continue posting here.


----------



## NerfedWizard (Apr 16, 2009)

S'mon said:


> It does not depend on US law. Poland is not a territory of the USA.
> ...
> Second point: For a Polish court to enforce a US civil judgement, AFAIK the same damages would have to have been available in a Polish civil court. Since US copyright law is now vastly more punitive than that of other developed-world jurisdictions, this seems very unlikely. But the OP should consult a Polish legal expert on his position in Polish law.




I didn't say that it depended on the substantive US law of copyright on a self-standing basis under the law of tort/delict. But aspects of US law will presumably be involved - e.g. perhaps procedural law on service abroad. If contractual terms are involved, there might be a choice of law clause. And of course presumably US private international law in relation to the application by the forum of (presumably Polish) law in relation to substantive copyright questions, although that would at first glance appear to be likely to be trite/trivial in itself. Is it not also true that in limited circumstances and in particular in the absence of evidence of the substantive foreign law, courts in some jurisdictions will simply proceed as if the foreign law were the same as their own?

Your "Second point" is interesting. Are you assuming that the US court would be prepared to apply the US measure of damages rather than the Polish measure? That strikes me as surprising, although I don't know the answer to that. Assuming that the US court applies the Polish measure, ex hypothesi the "Second point" will be irrelevant. But I don't know whether the US court would apply the US measure of damages, the Polish measure of damages or a funny mixture of the two. As for the substantive correctness of the view that the same damages would have to be available under Polish domestic law in order for the US judgment to be enforceable there, that seems to me to be a question of Polish private international law as previous posters have indicated. To the extent that US law can be clearly shown to be penal, it sounds like an interesting argument. It would come as a surprise to me, though, if no damages whatsoever could be enforced in Poland - with the caveat that I have no knowledge of native (as opposed to EU) Polish private international law. This infringement seems to me to involve very substantial losses and purely on a compensatory basis it could be that very substantial sums could possibly be awarded if the case is established to the satisfaction of the court and if the losses are proven. Having said that, I am not in the least familiar with the actual evidence, so I cannot reach a fully informed view on this point in relation to the facts of this case.

Again, my contribution to this debate is highly speculative and should not be relied upon in any way shape or form (!) - I am not willing or qualified to assume responsibility for advising on this case.


----------



## Stoat (Apr 16, 2009)

In very, very, very general terms, a foreign litigant in an American federal court does not have an absolute right to have his case judged under foreign law.  At a minimum, the foreign litigant must give some reasonable notice to the court that he intends to raise issues of foreign law. (Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 44.1).  I am not at all familiar with any aspect of copyright law, but I know from experience that a foreign litigant in a run of the mill contract or tort case can lose the right to apply foreign law in an American court.

I am not, by any means, providing legal advice to anyone, anywhere.


----------

