# WotC puts a stop to online sales of PDFs



## Harr

Oh dear:



			
				RPGNow said:
			
		

> Wizards of the Coast has instructed us to suspend all sales and downloads of Wizards of the Coast titles. Unfortunately, this includes offering download access to previously purchased Wizards of the Coast titles. We are in discussions with Wizards about their decision to change their approach to digital sales of their titles and will post more information as we have it. If you would like to let Wizards know your opinion on offering D&D titles for download, we suggest the D&D Message Boards found here (linked to gleemax).




This certainly stings me as a PDF-exclusive buyer and user of D&D.

So what could this mean in the long run...? Here are my thoughts from the WotC forums:



> Very likely they're planning to start selling the PDFs online themselves so they can keep the money from online sales. So first step is to take away the permission for anybody else to sell PDFs online.
> 
> Same thing happened with all the online character generators and online D&D tools about six months before 4e was announced. And Dragon/Dungeon magazines. Remember?




_PS: I looked to see if there was already a thread on this and I couldn't find one, if there is, my apologies._


----------



## mach1.9pants

Woh, that is not good.

 I haven't got any as yet but will do soon when my eReader arrives. How can they stop you getting copies of PDFs you have already purchased????????


----------



## Jack99

Yeah, it's pretty odd, without giving a reason. Arguably you have the right to the product purchased, along with the number of downloads that are made available to you? 

Either way, I am sure someone will let us know soon enough why this has been done, or at least undo it.


----------



## MadLordOfMilk

My first thought was "stop people from getting illegal copies of PDFs," but people are bound to just scan everything anyway (they already do for things without an official PDF). The guess that they might intend to sell them themselves is a logical possibility. Another guess is that they might be changing the PDFs in some drastic way and don't want to deal with people who "just bought the un-updated one" or something. I'm not sure what to make of it.


----------



## crazy_cat

Does anybody know - Is this an across the board thing from WOTC covering all sellers of authorised PDFs of their material or is it just affecting RPGNOW?


----------



## Voadam

This sucks.

I've bought a number from RPGNow. Originally I was told I could download as many times as I wanted to forever. When they merged with DTRPG it went to 5 downloads per product and contact them if I needed more. And now apparently WotC is trying to pull the plug on old downloads. That should not be possible under the contracts rpgnow should have had with them but I don't have the specifics.

I really hope I will still be able to get old edition pdfs, there are a ton I still want to get.


----------



## Harr

What gets to me (not too much of course, but a bit) is that I've already had a couple evenings of gaming saved by RPGNow's convenient "Download it again if you need it again" feature. I haven't had to do it with any WotC book yet, but I know it's only a matter of time. And now I know that's off the table. Guess I just take better care of my folders from now on


----------



## rogueattorney

I don't see anywhere whether the old TSR stuff is effected by this.  Paizo, which also sells the old TSR stuff, doesn't have a similar statement up.

If the TSR stuff is effected by this, it'd really suck.  It's really the only .pdf's I buy and I could completely see WotC deciding not to make them available again.  (There's supposedly no market for OOP D&D products, afterall.)

If they are still available, I think I'm going to buy a parsle full of them that I've been putting off.  I've been too complacent, thinking they'll be available forever.


----------



## jdrakeh

mach1.9pants said:


> How can they stop you getting copies of PDFs you have already purchased????????




One of the two major reasons that I bought WotC/TSR stuff in PDF form was specifically because I knew that RPGNow archived my past purchases for easy retrieval in case of hardware failure on my end. If WotC is _forcing_ OBS to make those past purchases unavailable, well, _ 'em_.  

If this does come to pass, somebody up in Seattle needs to credit me for my past purchases of WotC product that still have downloads remaining. Changing an agreement after somebody purchases things might be legal but it's still a load of horse pucky. 

[Edit: As for anti-piracy issues, I think all of the WotC/TSR PDFs that I've downloaded from RPGNow (even the old scans) have an embedded watermark with _my name_ in them. This makes piracy more trouble than it's worth.]


----------



## Obryn

I'm more inclined to think it's a financial decision (as in "We'd make more money if we sold them ourselves") than it is a panicky anti-piracy decision because some executive's kid found a pirated PHB2 on 4chan.

-O


----------



## Plissken

I'm 99.9% sure it's because of PDF piracy. People can download all of WoTC's books on PDF AND Dragon and Dungeon magazines by torrent in less than 15-20 minutes. That's what....$800-$1000? I'm sure that's hurting them badly.


----------



## Harr

rogueattorney said:


> I don't see anywhere whether the old TSR stuff is effected by this.  Paizo, which also sells the old TSR stuff, doesn't have a similar statement up.
> 
> If the TSR stuff is effected by this, it'd really suck.  It's really the only .pdf's I buy and I could completely see WotC deciding not to make them available again.  (There's supposedly no market for OOP D&D products, afterall.)
> 
> If they are still available, I think I'm going to buy a parsle full of them that I've been putting off.  I've been too complacent, thinking they'll be available forever.




From the WotC forums:



			
				IanB said:
			
		

> Note that this isn't just on current 4E pdfs. I can't re-download any of my old purchased 1e/2e PDFs anymore either.




You know, by this point you'd have thought someone at WotC would have raised their hand and said something to the tune of "Guys we seriously need to work on getting a better image of ourselves out there," but no not really a big concern apparently..


----------



## tmatk

Obryn said:


> I'm more inclined to think it's a financial decision (as in "We'd make more money if we sold them ourselves") than it is a panicky anti-piracy decision because some executive's kid found a pirated PHB2 on 4chan.
> 
> -O




I bet you're right, but this move will have no effect. In fact, I bet it *increases* the amount of books that are pirated; harder to feel bad about downloading a book via bittorrent if their is no way to buy it.


----------



## Scribble

Yeah a while back I remember they had a survey and one of the questions was about interest in discounted books available for purchase on the wizards site.

I think this may be part of that. They have an online "ordering" system that can deliver electronic content. Why share the proceeds with someone else I guess? But we shall see. Perhaps Mr Rouse wil be along to quell any fears shortly?


----------



## ProfessorCirno

...So did we *not* learn anything from TSR...?


----------



## DimitriX

I think we can just add this to the list of examples of how WotC is becoming more like TSR.  It seems like every month WotC gives me another reason to dislike their company.  It's already reaching the point to where I don't really want to buy any of their products anymore.


----------



## jdrakeh

Well, after some searching, I assume that all of the hubbub has something to do with this. 



			
				WotC Press Release 03/06/09 said:
			
		

> In conjunction with the Retailer Rewards program, Wizards of the Coast will also release a new Internet Sales Policy on April 6. The new policy will have clear guidelines for online sales of Wizards’ product, and requires that retailers register with Wizards by signing an Authorized Internet Dealer Agreement.




It may be that OBS didn't want to enter into such an agreement. This reminds me a lot of the old GW tactics used to 'support' brick and mortar stores. 

Regardless of who is ultimately to blame for this catastrophic blow to  public relations, I know that _somebody_ is going to be losing a few customers over this.


----------



## Nymrohd

I don't see how this affects pirated content. People can and will scan anything (and if there are a lot of people interested on something, it is probably in the net mere hours after release). And whether they decide to sell the PDFs themselves in whatever price, I still cannot like them doing this to people who bought with a certain expectation of service. Is this affecting all online stores though or just RPGNow? Maybe there is a less obvious reason for this.


----------



## Lizard

Uhm... I just checked out Drivethru and RPGNow, and I can buy WOTC products, still.

When does this go into effect?

(I got as far as checkout, I didn't actually try to buy anything, but if you can add them to your cart, I don't see why you can't buy...)


----------



## Kzach

Plissken said:


> I'm 99.9% sure it's because of PDF piracy. People can download all of WoTC's books on PDF AND Dragon and Dungeon magazines by torrent in less than 15-20 minutes. That's what....$800-$1000? I'm sure that's hurting them badly.




Then you'd be 99.9% wrong.

I'm positive that the staff at WotC are geeky enough to realise the futility and backlash of such a gesture.


----------



## Aberzanzorax

Jeez.

It's like WotC is actively *TRYING* to hurt their public image with customers.


----------



## Cadfan

Jack99 said:


> Arguably you have the right to the product purchased, along with the number of downloads that are made available to you?





mach1.9pants said:


> Woh, that is not good.
> 
> I haven't got any as yet but will do soon when my eReader arrives. How can they stop you getting copies of PDFs you have already purchased????????





			
				jdrakeh said:
			
		

> If this does come to pass, somebody up in Seattle needs to credit me for my past purchases of WotC product that still have downloads remaining. Changing an agreement after somebody purchases things might be legal but it's still a load of horse pucky.



Disclaimer: this is based on my understanding of sales in general and statements in this thread, not any specific knowledge.  This isn't legal advice, etc, etc, etc.

Your contract is probably with RPGNOW, not WotC.  WotC probably isn't changing anything about your contract because they can't alter a contract to which they're not a party.  Most likely, RPGNOW promised you something that, in the event of a cancelation of their separate contract with WotC, they cannot honor.  They probably shouldn't have done that.

Check your contract with RPGNOW.


----------



## jdrakeh

Lizard said:


> Uhm... I just checked out Drivethru and RPGNow, and I can buy WOTC products, still.
> 
> When does this go into effect?
> 
> (I got as far as checkout, I didn't actually try to buy anything, but if you can add them to your cart, I don't see why you can't buy...)




Yeah, I tried that too. . . I didn't want to go any further, for fear that I'd be billed for stuff I couldn't actually download. I suspect that turning off the shopping cart for 900+ items may take a little time if the webmaster is out of the office. If this is related to the press release I cited above, they (OBS) may have just received the notice this afternoon.


----------



## dmccoy1693

tmatk said:


> I bet you're right, but this move will have no effect. In fact, I bet it *increases* the amount of books that are pirated; harder to feel bad about downloading a book via bittorrent if their is no way to buy it.




Exactly.  Those that download pirated stuff on the internet are not "customers" anyways.  Even if they have to buy the book from Borders, take it to work, Xerox the entire thing 5 times (once for themselves and once for every player) and then return the book, they're not going ot pay a red cent for it.  Hell I wouldn't be surprised if someone bought a scanner from Best Buy, scanned the damn thing in, and then returned the scanner and book.  

But either way, those are not "lost sales" since they never had any intention to buy them in the first place.  Lost sales include pissing off your customers by invalidating their previously bought legal downloads.  Lost customers have no other outlit but pirated copies.  If someone is pirating, shut down an account, not the entire legal avenue system.

*shakes head, rolls eyes*


----------



## Intrope

BTW, in the last ten minutes they've removed all Wizards products for all editions from the store.


----------



## Daniel D. Fox

Uniquely watermarked PDFs is the way WotC really, really needs to go with this. That way, if they wanted to identify a leaked PDF they'd know who it is.

There are a lot of watermarks out there that bury themselves within artwork and borders that are entirely undiscernable to the naked eye.


----------



## jdrakeh

Cadfan said:


> Most likely, RPGNOW promised you something that, in the event of a cancelation of their separate contract with WotC, they cannot honor.  They probably shouldn't have done that.




I'm aware of this and agree with you to some extent but the fact that  rolls downhill doesn't make WotC's decision to cancel their contract and stipulate to RPGNow that a few thousand customers be left out in the cold any easier to swallow. . . 

. . . provided, of course, that the above is what actually happened. As I mention previously, it's possible that the agreement was terminated due to RPGNow refusing to sign a new distribution agreement (or some other situation thus far obscured). 

All I know for certain is that RPGNow got out in front of this by providing at least _some_ information, while WotC has been very quiet. That doesn't build any confidence.


----------



## tmatk

Moniker said:


> Uniquely watermarked PDFs is the way WotC really, really needs to go with this. That way, if they wanted to identify a leaked PDF they'd know who it is.
> 
> There are a lot of watermarks out there that bury themselves within artwork and borders that are entirely undiscernable to the naked eye.




Sounds good in theory, but I don't think it will work in practice.

1. If it's an obnoxious watermark, like a across a whole page, people won't like it and it will sell less.

2. If it's a little thing in the corner, pirates will just cover it up in acrobat, and reexport it.

3. If it's some kind of secret, hidden mark (if thats even possible) privacy advocates will throw a hissy. This would probably happen in any event, if the watermark somehow identified you personally.


----------



## Scribble

jdrakeh said:


> Yeah, I tried that too. . . I didn't want to go any further, for fear that I'd be billed for stuff I couldn't actually download. I suspect that turning off the shopping cart for 900+ items may take a little time if the webmaster is out of the office. If this is related to the press release I cited above, they (OBS) may have just received the notice this afternoon.




Does OBS have a brick and morter shop? Seems like you need this in order to sign their internet policy.

Seems like if they don't WoTC is either planning to:

1. Sell the pdfs themself. They have the tech to do this, doesn't seem too hard to implement. (Although more work on their end.)

Based on the internet sales policy and retailer rewards stuff this now seem unlikely.

2. Offer the B&M shops that have websites the ability to sell the PDFs.

Perhaps they saw that the pdf sales going exclusively through OBS were working in opposiion to their desire to help the brick and morter stores, and want to do soemthing to help them, rather then making Drivethru a monopoly?

If they let the brick and morter stores sell the pdfs, they help foster the ability of the B&M stores to stay relevent and continue to offer what they offer to the comunity.


----------



## DaveMage

Did they post the new T&C for internet sales or did they just say in the press release that internet vendors had to use them?

Edit - nevermind, I found it.


----------



## El Mahdi

I'm willing to give WoTC the benefit of the doubt until they release a statement about what's really happening and why.  I'll avoid making any conjecture or ascribing any motives until I hear what they have to say.

But, I do have to say that whatever is happening, this *IS* yet another PR screwup by WoTC.  Have they not learned anything in the last year?  If a company wants to avoid alienating customers, and avoid all the trouble and conspiracy theories and WoTC bashing that inevitably follows, they have to get the word out *FIRST*.  This is PR 101 guys.  I don't understand how they can continually make this same mistake, over and over again, and not learn from it.

Bottom line, this should have been a release from WoTC first, explaining what they were doing and why, *BEFORE* customers heard it from RPGNow and *BEFORE* customers lost access to their downloads.  Their advertising machine has been running on all cylinders since the anouncement of 4E.  Their R&D has been kicking ass from the start (I don't prefer 4E myself, but I can't deny that they have made a hell of a game).  They however did, initially, seriously screw up their digital initiative.  But, if they have done anything worse, it's been their PR.  Their Public Relations have been nothing but amateur hour from the moment 4E was released.

800 lb. Gorrila or not, they can't continue to treat their customer/fan base this way and not expect repercussions.

I'm not saying this because I want WoTC to fail.  On the contrary, I want them to still be around, and still making D&D (in whatever edition) 40 or 50 years from now.  But if they don't start getting their house in order when it comes to PR, I don't see how they'll be able to maintain a loyal customer/fan base for that long.

I think some of the posters here are probably correct in that, at least in the short run, this action will probably cause an increase in piracy.  The sad part is, it didn't have to happen.  Communicate to your customer/fan base *BEFORE* you take such actions, and you will seriously mitigate the amount of fallout to only the standard amount that happens with any change.  Come on WoTC, this should be a no-brainer!


----------



## Keith Robinson

Paizo still seem to be selling wotc pdfs here, though only the old TSR ones, and until someone actually confirms a purchase over at paizo, we don't know if you can complete checkout.

It's a shame to have lost those from 3ed and 4ed, though WotC had (shamefully IMO) already removed the 3ed core books from sale with the release of 4ed.  Hopefully they'll return.


----------



## Umbran

dmccoy1693 said:


> Lost sales include pissing off your customers by invalidating their previously bought legal downloads.




But, that's not what is happening here.  There nothing "invalidated" about your previously bought stuff.  You paid for some data, and got that data, and still have that data.  They aren't taking it back.  Keep backups like you ought to, and you should have no problems.

Invalidating your contract with RPGNow for re-downloads is another issue.  However, it seems like RPGNow didn't actually have the right to guarantee such access to begin with.  You want to hold WotC responsible for agreements they were not party to?  You think that's _reasonable_?


----------



## Harr

jdrakeh said:


> All I know for certain is that RPGNow got out in front of this by providing at least _some_ information, while WotC has been very quiet. That doesn't build any confidence.




This more than anything else is what fascinates me about the situation. Ok, maybe WotC did the only thing it could do; maybe it took the best option it had; maybe it has something good in store eventually. But no communication, no announcement, no explanation, no warning, no indication that anything whatsoever is happening at all!

What are they _thinking??_


----------



## The Ghost

jdrakeh said:


> . . . provided, of course, that the above is what actually happened. As I mention previously, it's possible that the agreement was terminated due to RPGNow refusing to sign a new distribution agreement (or some other situation thus far obscured).




This. It seems way too coincidental that this is occurring on the day WotC's new Internet Sales Policy goes into effect. I would contact RPGNow.com directly.


----------



## Scribble

DaveMage said:


> Did they post the new T&C for internet sales or did they just say in the press release that internet vendors had to use them?




They did:

Interweb Sales Stuff


----------



## Filcher

Naive, wishful thinking, but it'd be great if they made the PDFs available to D&D Insider users.


----------



## DaveMage

Scribble said:


> They did:
> 
> Interweb Sales Stuff





That seems to discuss Magic sales, but I didn't see anything about D&D.  Weird.


----------



## DaveMage

Filcher said:


> Naive, wishful thinking, but it'd be great if they made the PDFs available to D&D Insider users.




That was the original plan (for a nominal fee).


----------



## Psion

Lizard said:


> Uhm... I just checked out Drivethru and RPGNow, and I can buy WOTC products, still.
> 
> When does this go into effect?
> 
> (I got as far as checkout, I didn't actually try to buy anything, but if you can add them to your cart, I don't see why you can't buy...)




Well, just to test, I tried to re-download a classic product, and got a "wizards has suspended all sales" message.

Yet all products still seem available for sale, and the ones in my wishlist are still there.


----------



## jdrakeh

Scribble said:


> Does OBS have a brick and morter shop?




Yes, they do, actually. Or, at the very least, Minion Development/RPGNow did prior to the merger with DriveThru to become OBS. I assume that it is still part of the company. 

That said, as I mention earlier, this sounds _far_ more like the GW push to 'help' brick and mortar stores by forcing Internet retailers to adhere to slavish, often absurd, standards in order to carry GW stock at all. 

Then, after they effectively locked out most online distributors, they turned their sights on those brick and mortar stores they were previously trying to 'help' by forcing them to adhere to the same (or similar) standards. 

That's what this _sounds_ like. It may be something entirely different but, again, all we really know is what OBS has publically stated. 

I don't know too many FLGS owners or webmasters who wouldn't love to spend a few hours alone in a locked room with a GW sales rep and a blow torch. I think that they (GW sales reps) must be some of the most reviled people in gaming. 



> Perhaps they saw that the pdf sales going exclusively through OBS were working in opposiion to their desire to help the brick and morter stores, and want to do soemthing to help them, rather then making Drivethru a monopoly?




Except that they were not going exclusively through OBS — they were (and apparently _are_) still going through Paizo. And there are other PDF distributors that they could go through, to boot. 



> If they let the brick and morter stores sell the pdfs, they help foster the ability of the B&M stores to stay relevent and continue to offer what they offer to the comunity.




_If_ this action was forced by WotC as OBS seems to suggest, I think it's far more likely that they're trying to 'help' brick and mortar stores by crippling online vendors, a plan which is both far cheaper and easier to implement (and, again, which GW has proved works to the manufacturer's advantage with regard to IP control).

Again, I think it would be great if WotC let their customers know what the hell was going on but I think that the ideal of transparency in operations over there has pretty much stalled out. 

To his credit, Rouse tells us what he can, when he can, but I get the impression that what he is allowed to say has become more and more limited in recent months. Giving a few thousand customers the bum's rush with no word from the publisher? 

That's just bad business.


----------



## Inferno!

The Kyngdoms said:


> Paizo still seem to be selling wotc pdfs here, though only the old TSR ones, and until someone actually confirms a purchase over at paizo, we don't know if you can complete checkout.




Ok boys and girls, I took the chance on your behalf and purchased a Birthright title (which was in my RPGNow wishlist) from Paizo, and it downloaded  just fine.  If there is something you desperately want, you may want to get it now.


----------



## Harr

DaveMage said:


> That was the original plan (for a nominal fee).




Maybe they're following through on that plan, now that they're farther along?

As in DDI subscribers will get the chance to buy PDFs from inside DDI (probably for the normal PDF cost though).


----------



## Psion

Hmmm... by my (admittedly brief due to dinner being on the table) reading of the internet retailer agreement, the clauses seem to be more targeted at some stuff with MTG marketing.

If true, all the D&D/pdf stuff should blow over.

Edit: Hrm. Looking again, it sounds like you must have a brick & mortar location. The economics of that might not work out for some current online retailers.


----------



## Stalker0

dmccoy1693 said:


> Exactly.  Those that download pirated stuff on the internet are not "customers" anyways.  Even if they have to buy the book from Borders, take it to work, Xerox the entire thing 5 times (once for themselves and once for every player) and then return the book, they're not going ot pay a red cent for it.




Thing is, if you make it harder to get illegal copies of a pdf on the net, more people are likely to legitimately buy them.

Its the old expression, "why buy the cow when I can get the milk for free". Well the flip side works as well, "If I like milk, and can't get the milk for free, maybe I'll buy a cow".

People get illegal pdfs because its free and easy to do. If the easy to do is taken out, then that's more incentive to just cough up some cash and get the pdf legally.


----------



## Voadam

Umbran said:


> But, that's not what is happening here.  There nothing "invalidated" about your previously bought stuff.  You paid for some data, and got that data, and still have that data.  They aren't taking it back.  Keep backups like you ought to, and you should have no problems.
> 
> Invalidating your contract with RPGNow for re-downloads is another issue.  However, it seems like RPGNow didn't actually have the right to guarantee such access to begin with.  You want to hold WotC responsible for agreements they were not party to?  You think that's _reasonable_?




We don't know if WotC negotiated a contract allowing them to pull the availability of files for redownload in contradiction of the terms that RPGNOW advertises it sells pdfs on. We do know their authorized seller of pdfs said we could redownload the WotC products and now according to the statement WotC has told them not to allow that to happen after sales have been made.

We don't know if RPGNow made claims it was not authorized to make or if WotC ordered something it does not have the legal authority to order. Even if WotC has legal authority to pull back their download sources, it is their action that takes away stuff we paid for.

You expect consumers to give WotC the benefit of the doubt and to turn the other cheek.

We paid for data and access to data. We now just have the data we downloaded but not the access to store backups that we paid for. We do not know enough to say if they are legally entitled to take away access to the store backups from their consumers. They might be. This would not entitle them to say it is not their actions that are responsible for the consumers loss or to avoid the ire their actions cause.


----------



## Cadfan

jdrakeh said:


> That said, as I mention earlier, this sounds _far_ more like the GW push to 'help' brick and mortar stores by forcing Internet retailers to adhere to slavish, often absurd, standards in order to carry GW stock at all.



Do you have any reason to think this?

I'm not saying that you're wrong, because I don't know what's going on.  But do you have any particular reason for thinking this particular scenario is occuring?


----------



## frankthedm

tmatk said:


> I bet you're right, but this move will have no effect. In fact, I bet it *increases* the amount of books that are pirated; harder to feel bad about downloading a book via bittorrent if their is no way to buy it.



100% Agree.


----------



## Dark Psion

Lizard said:


> Uhm... I just checked out Drivethru and RPGNow, and I can buy WOTC products, still.
> 
> When does this go into effect?
> 
> (I got as far as checkout, I didn't actually try to buy anything, but if you can add them to your cart, I don't see why you can't buy...)




I tried to re-download a previously purchased WotC book and you don't see anything till you try to download. 
The Download window repeats what is said on the main page.

I don't understand their thinking with pdf products. 

They never use them to support their own products.
The GSL forces 3rd party publishers to remove their old ones making torrents the ONLY version available.
And now even if they start selling them themselves, many people won't trust them since they just forced RPGNow! to break their contract with their customers.


----------



## El Mahdi

Stalker0 said:


> Thing is, if you make it harder to get illegal copies of a pdf on the net, more people are likely to legitimately buy them.
> 
> Its the old expression, "why buy the cow when I can get the milk for free". Well the flip side works as well, "If I like milk, and can't get the milk for free, maybe I'll buy a cow".
> 
> People get illegal pdfs because its free and easy to do. If the easy to do is taken out, then that's more incentive to just cough up some cash and get the pdf legally.




I believe they can make it harder for sites to offer illegal downloads, but to actually make it harder for people to find and download?  In the end, I'd highly doubt it.  Trying to stop pirating in it's entirety is probably an exercise akin to the Little Dutch Boy with his finger in the dike.

But, I do ascribe to the idea that people essentially want to do the right thing (for the most part).  If you provide a product at a reasonable price, and then pro-actively and accurately communicate with your customers, I believe that most people will buy a legitimate copy rather than pirate.

Becuase of their PR ineptness, I also believe that the majority of WoTC's problems on this front are self-inflicted.


----------



## Scribble

jdrakeh said:


> Yes, they do, actually. Or, at the very least, Minion Development/RPGNow did prior to the merger with DriveThru to become OBS. I assume that it is still part of the company.
> 
> That said, as I mention earlier, this sounds _far_ more like the GW push to 'help' brick and mortar stores by forcing Internet retailers to adhere to slavish, often absurd, standards in order to carry GW stock at all.
> 
> Then, after they effectively locked out most online distributors, they turned their sights on those brick and mortar stores they were previously trying to 'help' by forcing them to adhere to the same (or similar) standards.




Uhh... did you read their authorized online seller stuff? There aren't any slavish or absurd standards aside from pretty much always maintaining your brick and morter store.




> Except that they were not going exclusively through OBS — they were (and apparently _are_) still going through Paizo. And there are other PDF distributors that they could go through, to boot.




Yeah but the current edition stuff is well was drivethru exclusive.




> I think it's far more likely that they're trying to 'help' brick and mortar stores by crippling online vendors, a plan which is both far cheaper and easier to implement (and, again, which GW has proved works to the manufacturer's advantage with regard to IP control).




They already had that stuff in place before, (about Brick and Morter) just through the distributor. Did you read any of the retailer rewards stuff linked to the press release?


----------



## Voadam

I wish I had immediately bought the white box pdfs and 1e Manual of the Planes, two WotC pdfs not for sale on Paizo.


----------



## Cadfan

Voadam said:


> You expect consumers to give WotC the benefit of the doubt and to turn the other cheek.



You're giving RPGNow the benefit of the doubt.  In a situation where its almost guaranteed that they knew, when they promised you future downloads, that they couldn't actually guarantee that promise.

Why the hard line: 


> We do not know enough to say if they are legally entitled to take away access to the store backups from their consumers. They might be. This would not entitle them to say it is not their actions that are responsible for the consumers loss or to avoid the ire their actions cause.



for one company but not the other?  Particularly when only one of the companies has made promises to you?


----------



## Asmor

That's seriously not cool. If I'd bought any WotC PDFs from RPGNow, I'd be making a huge stink right now.

One of the main reasons I like buying from them is that you can download your PDFs later. RPGNow should have required that in any contract before allowing WotC to sell on their store, so either RPGNow was negligent on that requirement or WotC broke a contract. Either way, someone ed up, and if I was one of the consumers who had purchased any of their stuff I'd be demanding my money back.


----------



## jdrakeh

Cadfan said:


> Do you have any reason to think this?




Well, as I mentioned earlier, I don't know with any degree of certainty that this is what it happening. In a nutshell, back in the day, GW initially cut wholesalers and web-based distributors out of the commerce loop as part of a "direct to retailer" program promoted as an effort to help brick and mortar stores. This _sounds_ like what the new web distribution policy may be aimed at doing based on familiar language in the WotC press release and the RPGNow blurb.


----------



## Dark Psion

Paizo just said that people have till the end of the day to buy and/or download WotC pdfs.

paizo.com - Paizo / Messageboards / paizo.com / Website Feedback / WotC halts sales through RPGNow/DriveThruRPG


----------



## Vorput

tmatk said:


> I bet you're right, but this move will have no effect. In fact, I bet it *increases* the amount of books that are pirated; harder to feel bad about downloading a book via bittorrent if their is no way to buy it.




Sadly, I don't see how that won't be the case.  

Eugh.


----------



## Voadam

Stalker0 said:


> Thing is, if you make it harder to get illegal copies of a pdf on the net, more people are likely to legitimately buy them.
> 
> Its the old expression, "why buy the cow when I can get the milk for free". Well the flip side works as well, "If I like milk, and can't get the milk for free, maybe I'll buy a cow".
> 
> People get illegal pdfs because its free and easy to do. If the easy to do is taken out, then that's more incentive to just cough up some cash and get the pdf legally.




Huh?

This does not make it harder to get illegal copies.

At least for right now this only makes it harder to get legal copies.

For 3e and 4e stuff illegal copies are the only pdfs currently available.

For older edition stuff this cuts the number of sources of legally obtaining pdfs of them by half.


----------



## Voadam

And now Paizo as well. Crap!


----------



## Cadfan

Asmor said:


> RPGNow should have required that in any contract before allowing WotC to sell on their store, so either RPGNow was negligent on that requirement or WotC broke a contract.



Its unlikely that WotC "broke a contract."  

If Company A licenses something to Company B, and that license has an uncancellable term of lets say 5 years, and two years in A calls up B and says "your license is over, stop now," there's no reason for B to listen.  

The most coercive thing I can think of for WotC to have done is to have given an uncancellable contract, but then to come to RPGNow and say, "We know we can't make you cancel that earlier contract, but we have a new, different contract that will be very lucrative for you, and we will only give it to you if you agree to modify and cancel the earlier contract."  You know, offer something the other side will hopefully think is better, and require them to give up one agreement to get the other.

I don't have any reason to think that's happened, though.  The most likely scenario is an at will agreement terminatable at any time with notice, notice having been given, and RPGNow realizing it can't uphold promises made to customers.

Someone who's bought things from RPGNow needs to check their fine print and see if they disclaimed this sort of occurrence.


----------



## kmdietri

Are there currently any brick-and-morter stores who offer PDF's for sale and download?

I hope they get this figured out in a week 'cause I was all set to buy Arcane Power in PDF.

I got a message after I bought PHB2 online that they had messed up the prices and I had a credit towards my next purchase through RPGnow...

Gravy....


----------



## jdrakeh

Scribble said:


> Uhh... did you read their authorized online seller stuff? There aren't any slavish or absurd standards aside from pretty much always maintaining your brick and morter store.




Well, I do think that forcing an _Internet_ retailer to own a brick and mortar retail store is pretty absurd if taken at face value. I mean, it's nowhere near as draconian as the stuff that GW employed, but requiring that an Internet retailer start a _completely different business_ to carry your product via their _current business_ is Lewis Carroll absurd.



> Yeah but the current edition stuff is well was drivethru exclusive.




I did not know that. 



> They already had that stuff in place before, (about Brick and Morter) just through the distributor. Did you read any of the retailer rewards stuff linked to the press release?




Yep. And, as stated above, that stipulation seems pretty silly. I have no doubt that it's designed to cripple Internet retailers given its absurd nature. Again, it's not quite the level of micro-management that GW asserted (e.g., minimum monthly purchases, maximum discount caps, etc) but it's pretty crazy, IMO.


----------



## joethelawyer

I betcha its all related to some anti-illegal filesharing initiative.  Check this out...

Press Releases


----------



## Piratecat

Here's why. I just got this press release. It'll be on the news page before long.



> WIZARDS OF THE COAST SUES EIGHT FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
> 
> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
> 
> Contact: Tolena Thorburn
> Wizards of the Coast LLC
> 425-204-8011
> tolena.thorburn@Wizards.com.
> 
> April 6, 2009 ‹ Wizards of the Coast LLC today filed three lawsuits in US
> District Court for the Western District of Washington against eight
> individuals, including named defendants located in the United States, Poland
> and the Philippines, for copyright infringement of its recently-released
> Dungeons & Dragons® Player¹s Handbook® 2. The lawsuits allege that the
> defendants illegally distributed the Player¹s Handbook 2 via free
> file-sharing websites and that these illicit uploads resulted in a
> substantial number of lost sales and lost revenue to Wizards of the Coast.
> 
> ³Violations of our copyrights and piracy of our products hurt not only
> Wizards of the Coast¹s financial health but also the health of whole gaming
> community including retailers and players,² said Greg Leeds, President of
> Wizards of the Coast. ³We have brought these suits to stop the illegal
> activities of these defendants, and to deter future unauthorized and
> unlawful file-sharing.²
> 
> The complaint alleges, among other things, that one or more of the
> defendants purchased digital copies of Player¹s Handbook 2 and then
> illegally posted the copies onto popular file-sharing sites for free access
> and download by the general public.
> 
> About Wizards
> 
> Wizards of the Coast is the leader in entertaining the lifestyle gamer. The
> company holds an exclusive patent on trading card games (TCGs) and their
> method of play and produces the premier trading card game, MAGIC: THE
> GATHERING®, among many other trading card games and family card and board
> games. Wizards is also a leading publisher of roleplaying games, such as
> DUNGEONS & DRAGONS®, and publisher of fantasy series fiction with numerous
> New York Times best-sellers. For more information, visit the Wizards of the
> Coast website at Wizards of the Coast.
> 
> Wizards of the Coast, Dungeons & Dragons, Player¹s Handbook, and Magic: The
> Gathering are trademarks of Wizards of the Coast LLC in the U.S.A. and other
> countries. © 2009 Wizards


----------



## ShinHakkaider

It looks like theyre going to be gone from Paizo as well...

paizo.com - Paizo / Messageboards / paizo.com / Website Feedback / WotC halts sales through RPGNow/DriveThruRPG

Honestly, I'm going to check and see if there's really anything I need from an earlier edition and get it NOW.


----------



## avin

While I understand what Wotc is doing I dislike it.

Everyday Wizards is going on a more restrictive direction who, as you can see on this topic and over Paizo, is not doing well for their image.

I'm having that TSR vibe too.

Seriously, they think they can do something against piracy if all big hollywood studios can't?


----------



## joethelawyer

Piratecat said:


> Here's why. I just got this press release. It'll be on the news page before long.





Yup.  That was my link, above.  

Didn't Rouse say a few months ago that they had him chasing down pirate sites or something? And that was a reason for the delay in the GSL?  Seems to be somewhat of a priority.  And it also explains why no one got a warning.  Why let the evil pirates know that it will be harder to get pdf's of books.

Seems someone has a bug up their ass over there about pdf sales. I wonder if they will be sold as pdf's again. Someone without an ounce of sense, but who is in charge, probably asked why they were making it easier for people to pirate books by making a good pdf version that people can easily share.

It makes no sense to anyone with a clue, by which I mean ending pdf sales will probably make pirating more widespread and cut off a valuable revenue stream for WOTC,  which is why it's probably true that it's all tied to an anti-pirating initiative.


----------



## mach1.9pants

Piratecat said:


> Here's why. I just got this press release. It'll be on the news page before long.



So are some of the individuals named employees of the distributors? Otherwise why react now, we had The Rouse on these very boards talking about the PDFs that came out before the books were  released! Why has it all 'changed' 4E and other PDFs have been on the torrents forever... I am a bit confused I must say.

Anyway this sort of thing is going to loose them customers (in a righteous fury) and make more pirates (many gamers live on PDFs so they can only get now using scans on torrents)

Well done WotC, I have usually given them the benefit of the doubt but this is the worst PR thingy I have been personally involved in.


----------



## jdrakeh

Piratecat said:


> Here's why. I just got this press release. It'll be on the news page before long.




Why does that necessitate the pulling of all product from RPGNow? I mean, how could X user buying a product then reposting it elsewhere _possibly_ require the removal of all product from RPGNow? The DRM was apparently good if they could track the PDF back to a RPGNow customer, after all. There is some piece of information that hasn't yet been made public, I suspect.


----------



## Scribble

jdrakeh said:


> Well, I do think that forcing an _Internet_ retailer to own a brick and mortar retail store is pretty absurd if taken at face value. I mean, it's nowhere near as draconian as the stuff that GW employed, but requiring that an Internet retailer start a _completely different business_ to carry your product via their _current business_ is Lewis Carroll absurd.




Maybe, but my real point was it's not a change from what they've been doing since the 90s, and from what I read about their retailer support stuff, it seems kind of far from what you're implying. (I could be wrong, but I just don't see how you're getting to where you are.)




> Yep. And, as stated above, that stipulation seems pretty silly. I have no doubt that it's designed to cripple Internet retailers given its absurd nature. Again, it's not quite the level of micro-management that GW asserted (e.g., minimum monthly purchases, maximum discount caps, etc) but it's pretty crazy, IMO.




It hasn't done so since the 90s. Seems like all it is now is that you just have to sign a contract.

The rest of the stuff is basically your store getting perks if you do things klike provide a game space.

The idea was always that the places that are internet only offer such a deep discount that it causes people to move away from the Brick and Morter places, which they felt help the industry. (By providing a place to meet gamers, learn about gaming, and even game.)

Again though, you could be entirely right... I just don't see how you're coming to the conclusions you are, based on the info at hand... If that's been their plan, it seems like they've taken a LONG time to enact it.



Piratecat said:


> Here's why. I just got this press release. It'll be on the news page before long.




I'm not sure it's related, and not just things happening on the same day. What leads you to connect the two?


----------



## xechnao

jdrakeh said:


> That said, as I mention earlier, this sounds _far_ more like the GW push to 'help' brick and mortar stores by forcing Internet retailers to adhere to slavish, often absurd, standards in order to carry GW stock at all.
> 
> Then, after they effectively locked out most online distributors, they turned their sights on those brick and mortar stores they were previously trying to 'help' by forcing them to adhere to the same (or similar) standards.





Sorry to derail but I am really curious why did GW do this? What was there to gain? You mentioned something earlier about IP control but I really fail to understand what this might be about.


----------



## WhatGravitas

joethelawyer said:


> Someone without an ounce of sense, but who is in charge, probably asked why they were making it easier for people to pirate books by making a good pdf version that people can easily share.



Isn't that sort of unreasonable, considering that there other new big thing is the DDI which uses PDFs very liberally? Sounds schizophrenic.

Personally, I rather hope that that's some sort of initiative to tie it into the overall DDI scheme. Consolidating their stuff was done before - right before 4E and the DDI plans.

Because it would otherwise mean that you cannot legally get up-to-date PDFs any longer. And PDFs are neat and lightweight. 

Cheers, LT.


----------



## Starbuck_II

jdrakeh said:


> Why does that necessitate the pulling of all product from RPGNow? I mean, how could X user buying a product then reposting it elsewhere _possibly_ require the removal of all product from RPGNow? The DRM was apparently good if they could track the PDF back to a RPGNow customer, after all. There is some piece of information that hasn't yet been made public, I suspect.



Because RPGNow decided not to sign the new contract.

If they had they could still sell PDFs of WotC. 

I'd write/email, them asking them to sign so you can buy pdfs.

Edit: apparently, it is just WotC.


----------



## WotC_Trevor

Hey all. I wanted to step in and shine a mote of light on the subject. First off, this cesation of PDF sales has absolutely nothing to do with the Internet Sales Policy. I know it's the 6th of April and I can definitely see how the two would appear linked, but the truth is, this is a completely seperate matter.

Unfortunately, due to recent findings of illegal copying and online distribution (piracy) of our products, Wizards of the Coast has decided to cease the sales of online PDFs. We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content and as soon as we have any more information I'll get it to you.


----------



## PaulofCthulhu

So, if Piracy is the cited reason for the action, does that therefore mean that there will be no more legal PDF downloads of _D&D_ from this point forward?


----------



## GMSkarka

Typical short-sighted reaction from WOTC, which makes zero sense at all, when you consider the fact that the most widely-spread pirated copies of the 4e products contain printers marks -- which means that their piracy problem pre-dated any purchases.



Speaking as somebody whose entire income is largely dependent on my PDF sales, this really pisses me off.

According to my data on RPGNow and DriveThru, a large chunk of my sales come from multi-product orders which include WOTC products. Now, with WOTC making this decision, those orders won't be there, because those customers won't be there.

The last thing that I, or any other publisher or vendor on the PDF side of the industry needed right now is a massive drop in sales. Thanks, WOTC.



Seriously. Can somebody over there unplug the LawyerTron 5000?


----------



## tmatk

WotC_Trevor said:


> Hey all. I wanted to step in and add shine a mote of light on the subject. First off, this cesation of PDF sales has absolutely nothing to do with the Internet Sales Policy. I know it's the 6th of April and I can definitely see how the two would appear linked, but the truth is, this is a completely seperate matter.
> 
> Unfortunately, the truth is that due to recent findings of illegal copying and online distribution (piracy) of our products, Wizards of the Coast has decided to cease the sales of online PDFs. We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content and as soon as we have any more information I'll get it to you.





Thanks for dropping in Trevor!

I have to say, it's hard to believe you guys just noticed the piracy. Fact is, DnD books  have been pirated since, well I think forever! 

Fact 2 is, this move will not even put a pin sized dent in the problem, its just making it bigger!


----------



## kmdietri

Piracy wins... well, I mean the theories that Piracy was behind all this that is...


----------



## joethelawyer

WotC_Trevor said:


> Hey all. I wanted to step in and add shine a mote of light on the subject. First off, this cesation of PDF sales has absolutely nothing to do with the Internet Sales Policy. I know it's the 6th of April and I can definitely see how the two would appear linked, but the truth is, this is a completely seperate matter.
> 
> Unfortunately, the truth is that due to recent findings of illegal copying and online distribution (piracy) of our products, Wizards of the Coast has decided to cease the sales of online PDFs. We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content and as soon as we have any more information I'll get it to you.





Called it!!!  (along with most of you guys.    )


----------



## Voadam

Cadfan said:


> You're giving RPGNow the benefit of the doubt.  In a situation where its almost guaranteed that they knew, when they promised you future downloads, that they couldn't actually guarantee that promise.
> 
> Why the hard line:
> 
> for one company but not the other?  Particularly when only one of the companies has made promises to you?




As I said, even if RPGNow promised what it could not guarantee, WotC is taking away the redownloads that we paid for. WotC got paid by us through rpgnow for that access.

Regardless of whether rpgnow is blameless or culpatory here, WotC is taking away our access to legal pdfs we bought and that is why I am angry at WotC.

RPGNow wants to offer them to us, but they are capitulating to WotC.

WotC is taking away our stuff and doesn't want us to have it.

I don't really care what the actual contract was between them, I am more angry at the one whose goal is to take away stuff I paid them for.

WotC was not a naive supplier duped by RPGNOW into offering its products for sale. WotC is the biggest, most sophisticated entity in RPGs. WotC was fine having their stuff advertised for sale as always available up until the day they decided it was not going to be that way and got paid based on that assumption.

Giving WotC the benefit of the doubt on their contract I'm still very angry at them.


----------



## WhatGravitas

WotC_Trevor said:


> Unfortunately, the truth is that due to recent findings of illegal copying and online distribution (piracy) of our products, Wizards of the Coast has decided to cease the sales of online PDFs. We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content and as soon as we have any more information I'll get it to you.



I see. Well, crap, but thanks for stepping in and informing us. 

That's all weird... I mean, pulling the plug on past PDFs won't put the genie back into the bottle (in a way, it makes piracy the *only* way to get these PDFs and they're out there already) and the DDI is very PDF-heavy anyway, so I don't really understand the line of reasoning behind that - stopping further releases of PDFs sounds more sensible.

Cheers, LT.


----------



## mach1.9pants

WotC_Trevor said:


> Hey all. I wanted to step in and add shine a mote of light on the subject. First off, this cesation of PDF sales has absolutely nothing to do with the Internet Sales Policy. I know it's the 6th of April and I can definitely see how the two would appear linked, but the truth is, this is a completely seperate matter.
> 
> Unfortunately, the truth is that due to recent findings of illegal copying and online distribution (piracy) of our products, Wizards of the Coast has decided to cease the sales of online PDFs. We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content and as soon as we have any more information I'll get it to you.




So what happens to Dungeon and Dragon subscription PDFs? 

This is real bad news now the only way PDF users can get an electronic copy is via piracy, PDFs are soooooo useful at the table, you can't 'search' a book!


----------



## roguerouge

Preventing piracy? Are you joking? The more difficult you make it to pirate, the more you drive up demand for pirated copies. Look at the Wolverine movie, for goodness sake! Look at Ain't It Cool news! Look at Lost spoilers! People who post material online do it for the prestige in their very small community. Making it more difficult just whets pirate appetites. And, with this new-fangled thing they call the interwebs, all it takes is for one person to succeed. 

The way to fight piracy is to increase supply of legitimate, convenient, affordable and quality products so as to drive down demand for low-quality, low-feature scans.

And, yes, this is TSR all over again.


----------



## Psion

Kzach said:


> Then you'd be 99.9% wrong.
> 
> I'm positive that the staff at WotC are geeky enough to realise the futility and backlash of such a gesture.




So much for that.


----------



## PaulofCthulhu

I must admit I'm now quite glad I picked up those White Box D&D PDFs from DriveThruRPG last year when I saw them.


----------



## DaveMage

WotC_Trevor said:


> Unfortunately, the truth is that due to recent findings of illegal copying and online distribution (piracy) of our products, Wizards of the Coast has decided to cease the sales of online PDFs. We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content and as soon as we have any more information I'll get it to you.




Excellent!

We'll have a case study!

Those of you who know how to visit pirate sites can let us know if the frequency of available new WotC titles declines on illicit file sharing sites from here on out.


----------



## jdrakeh

Scribble said:


> Maybe, but my real point was it's not a change from what they've been doing since the 90s. . .




Oh, you're talking about GW!  No, they haven't implemented any new policy lately, but all of the crap policy that they implemented years ago is still in place. 

It's definitely policy designed to help brick and mortar stores by crippling online retailers, not simply by extending extra benefits to brick and mortar stores (frex, as of July 15th, 2003 they _forbade_ any online resale of their items by US distributors or retailers). 

And some of the conditions that must be met in order for GW to suppply brick and mortar stores are very, very, arbitrary (frex, your entire staff must be well-versed in GW products as determined by the GW rep).  Check the attached file for specifics.


----------



## Scribble

have to say the updated news makes me a bit unhappy. 

Stopping the sale of PDFs doesn't punish the pirates, it just makes life harder for those using the PDFs legaly.


----------



## mach1.9pants

roguerouge said:


> Preventing piracy? Are you joking? The more difficult you make it to pirate, the more you drive up demand for pirated copies. Look at the Wolverine movie, for goodness sake! Look at Ain't It Cool news! Look at Lost spoilers! People who post material online do it for the prestige in their very small community. Making it more difficult just whets pirate appetites. And, with this new-fangled thing they call the interwebs, all it takes is for one person to succeed.
> 
> The way to fight piracy is to increase supply of legitimate, convenient, affordable and quality products so as to drive down demand for low-quality, low-feature scans.
> 
> And, yes, this is TSR all over again.



Well said sir, have some XP!


----------



## joethelawyer

Lord Tirian said:


> I see. Well, crap, but thanks for stepping in and informing us.
> 
> That's all weird... I mean, pulling the plug on past PDFs won't put the genie back into the bottle (in a way, it makes piracy the *only* way to get these PDFs and they're out there already) and the DDI is very PDF-heavy anyway, so I don't really understand the line of reasoning behind that - stopping further releases of PDFs sounds more sensible.
> 
> Cheers, LT.





I just posted a poll on that question...under the humor category because I think the action they are taking and the stated reason for taking it is hilariously pathetically ridiculous.  But so typical of a big corporation mindset.  So I guess you know how I voted on it...


----------



## Voadam

WotC_Trevor said:


> Hey all. I wanted to step in and add shine a mote of light on the subject. First off, this cesation of PDF sales has absolutely nothing to do with the Internet Sales Policy. I know it's the 6th of April and I can definitely see how the two would appear linked, but the truth is, this is a completely seperate matter.
> 
> Unfortunately, the truth is that due to recent findings of illegal copying and online distribution (piracy) of our products, Wizards of the Coast has decided to cease the sales of online PDFs. We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content and as soon as we have any more information I'll get it to you.




Thanks for the info Trevor.

I'm still really angry at this action of WotC but I appreciate the information.

I was hoping it was just in prep for WotC to sell them themselves and not just a reaction to piracy. I'm very angry that WotC has chosen to take away the opportunity for me to buy legal D&D pdfs.


----------



## joethelawyer

Quote:
     					Originally Posted by *Kzach* 

 
_Then you'd be 99.9% wrong.

I'm positive that the staff at WotC are geeky enough to realise the futility and backlash of such a gesture._





Psion said:


> So much for that.





LMAO!!


----------



## Scribble

jdrakeh said:


> Oh, you're talking about GW!  No, they haven't implemented any new policy lately, but all of the crap policy that they implemented years ago is still in place.
> 
> It's definitely policy designed to help brick and mortar stores by crippling online retailers, not simply by extending extra benefits to brick and mortar stores (frex, as of July 15th, 2003 they _forbade_ any online resale of their items by US distributors or retailers).
> 
> And some of the conditions that must be met in order for GW to suppply brick and mortar stores are very, very, arbitrary (frex, your entire staff must be well-versed in GW products as determined by the GW rep).  Check the attached file for specifics.




No I was talking about Wizards. The new policy includes what was already their policy. The big difference seems to be:

1. The "proof" that they own a nrick and morter store goes directly to Wizards as opposed to through the distributors. 

2. They have to sign a document.

3. Possibly some stuff about magic the gathering (I'm not sure.)

It's the same thing they've been doing forever, linked to their retailer support stuff. Which is freebies for stores, and other stuff. (They apparenly even help you create signs, and other store info material.)


----------



## Harr

Wow, well, consider me floored. I truly believed that at this point in our day and age a company would have more sense than that... but I guess the heads-in-suits still rule the roost over the guys-who-actually-know, like they always have. Sad.


----------



## mach1.9pants

joethelawyer said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kzach*
> 
> 
> _Then you'd be 99.9% wrong.
> 
> I'm positive that the staff at WotC are geeky enough to realise the futility and backlash of such a gesture._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LMAO!!



The only thing that is funny about this fiasco!


----------



## jdrakeh

I've been a _rabid_ WotC apologetic over the past few years and thought it was _great_ when they embraced open licensing, released OOP products via  RPGNow, and so forth. They've pretty much undone _all_ of that good will in the last four or five months. While I don't hate the system, with this latest development, I have no love left for the people at the helm of this sinking ship.


----------



## roguerouge

You know, it's funny. I'm right now watching the 1998 version of Cupid on YouTube. I like it so much, I've not only become a committed fan of the current version of the show, but I'm also ready to purchase the DVD of the original series, because it whetted my appetite. Funny how free distribution on YouTube in a reduced frame and picture quality has made me want to purchase higher quality products at a premium pricing. Funny that that's how it worked with Battlestar Galactica for me too.


----------



## Koldoon

Okay wizards folks... it doesn't even take a high school degree to know that this decision was going to piss off people who legitimately purchased WotC pdfs.

So either your PR guy/gal sucks, or you don't listen to him/her, and either case... well, it doesn't speak well for your concern for your legitimate paying customers.

Count me among those who is upset.  That terse little explanation was not an explanation at all.  Piracy of Wizards products, really of all gaming products, has always been a problem, but anybody with a high school education could tell you that this heavy handed action is more likely to increase than decrease piracy.  And it will only serve to further tarnish the image of the company behind it.


----------



## Knightfall

This development reinforces my belief that physical products are better than PDF products. I'm glad I have several local used book stores that often have older edition D&D books avaiable.

Once I buy a book, it's mine forever. It may not come with an electronic index (or search function) but that's life.


----------



## Piratecat

What I find most annoying about this is that the honest people are being punished, and it's not going to slow down the dishonest people one bit.


----------



## Harr

Soon:

_"Due to increased problems with photocopying and scanning of gamebooks, WotC has decided to stop the sales and storage of all physical and/or paper-based gaming materials from stores. WotC is currently exploring other options that do not involve letting anybody else see our intellectual property for any reason at all, ever."_


----------



## avin

Dear Wotc_Trevor, that will solve NOTHING. That won't fix piracy. It's a step back in time, like Metallica vs Napster and now mp3 is legally sold on Internet.

You can't change evolution.

The best thing you have done against piracy is DDI, is Compendium, is CB, is making the books we need right there, under a monthly fee.


----------



## jdrakeh

Scribble said:


> No I was talking about Wizards. The new policy includes what was already their policy. The big difference seems to be:
> 
> 1. The "proof" that they own a nrick and morter store goes directly to Wizards as opposed to through the distributors.
> 
> 2. They have to sign a document.
> 
> 3. Possibly some stuff about magic the gathering (I'm not sure.)
> 
> It's the same thing they've been doing forever, linked to their retailer support stuff. Which is freebies for stores, and other stuff. (They apparenly even help you create signs, and other store info material.)




Ah! I see where I'm confused. As far as I know, you haven't had to own a physical brick and mortar store to order WotC books from a distributor or sell WotC PDFs (or other products) online, you only have to possess a retail _license_ (and whatever else your government requires you to obtain/file in order to sell goods). 

If you _were_ supposed to actually rent space or whatnot in order to be afforded the privelage of carrying WotC books, I'm not sure I've ever seen a wholesaler do very much to enforce that. The new document stipulates that you _must_ actually maintain a brick and mortar (i.e., physical) storefront to sell WotC products online.


----------



## joethelawyer

It just hit me what this dumbass decision is all about.  Sales are less than projected for 4e and DDI and a scapegoat is needed.  Think about it.  It makes no sense otherwise.  But if you have a boss chewing your butt off, because his boss is chewing his off, because the numbers aren't there, you need to do something, anything, to make it look like you're addressing the problem. 

Since losses due to pirating are impossible to prove, (and in fact pirating may arguably lead to more sales in the long run,) its also impossible to disprove.  So the lackey gives the idea to the boss who dutifully passes it along to his boss, and they all gain another business quarter to hope that something changes.  The lackeys and low level bosses now its all BS, but hey, they get to keep their jobs for another few months.   They make a big deal of it, send out press releases, prosecute a few people internationally in some lame attempt to strike fear into the hearts of pirates.  

And all they do is piss off their ever dwindling base of customers.  

By sales being less than projected, don't get me wrong. They can be through the roof.  But if they are less than some spreadsheet said they had to be,  based on factors not at all related to reality, heads will roll.  

Who else here has worked in a big corporate environment---come on---doesn't it make sense in a dumb corporate kinda way?


----------



## Harr

joethelawyer said:


> Who else here hs worked in a big corporate environment---come on---doesnt it make sense in a dumb corporate kinda way?




It's so weird though - take the PHB1 for example. The book is already thoroughly and completely pirated. It's on every torrent site. Everybody who wanted or wants to pirates already has or can.

So what do we do... we STOP selling the official PDF... So that people who actually WANT to pay even though they don't need to, CAN'T. So that even as the book continues to be pirated every single day all over the palce, we actually stop making ANY money at all from it by pulling it completely out of the market.

And while we're at it why don't we do the same with our entire line of legacy products which _aren't even being sold in a physical form in the first place_.

Whaaaa?


----------



## Inferno!

Hey WoTC, you want to prevent piracy?  Stop publishing books, 'cause thats the only way to prevent it !  

WoTC can and did rightfully sue those caught pirating books, but in the meantime, good job screwing over legitimate customers.


----------



## Obryn

Stalker0 said:


> Thing is, if you make it harder to get illegal copies of a pdf on the net, more people are likely to legitimately buy them.



Nope, not even remotely...  I don't think WotC has a reasonable plan to stop piracy of their books.  Back before there were legal RPG PDFs, there were illegal ones - just scanned copies, some OCR and some not.  This will do absolutely zero to stop piracy, if that's the stated goal.



WotC_Trevor said:


> Unfortunately, due to recent findings of illegal copying and online distribution (piracy) of our products, Wizards of the Coast has decided to cease the sales of online PDFs. We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content and as soon as we have any more information I'll get it to you.



Well, I got it wrong.  I was at least accepting of a financial reason, as in "We can make more selling this ourselves."  If this is the reason, it's ... kind of dumb.

It'd be like a band taking their songs off iTunes because they found their album up on Bittorrent.

-O


----------



## roguerouge

Piratecat said:


> What I find most annoying about this is that the honest people are being punished, and it's not going to slow down the dishonest people one bit.




Right on.

Combined with the lawsuit, this smacks of collective punishment. As a teacher, I've seen teachers pitch a snit and punish the class for the misbehavior of a few individuals. Do you know what that does? Promote solidarity amongst the students against the authority figure. 

(And thank you for the XP, mach1.)


----------



## I'm A Banana

WotC_Trevor said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, the truth is that due to recent findings of illegal copying and online distribution (piracy) of our products, Wizards of the Coast has decided to cease the sales of online PDFs. We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content and as soon as we have any more information I'll get it to you.




For almost any other reason, I would support this move. The PDF market for D&D books is borked, in large part because of the nasty catch-22 about pricing PDF's the same as physical books in order to not cannibalize physical book sales (and thus making the PDF purchase drastically unappealing, but suitable for a niche). 

I speak with 100% confidence when I say that this will not do what you want it to, and will have much more negative repercussions than even theoretically possible positive ones. 



			
				Piratecat said:
			
		

> What I find most annoying about this is that the honest people are being punished, and it's not going to slow down the dishonest people one bit.




That's pretty much exactly what piracy paranoia always does: screw over the folks who play by the rules, without hurting the pirates at all. 

WotC needs to seriously fire whatever suits are trying to turn back the clock from the praise-worthy openness and exploration of most of the last 10 years.

The reaction to a problem like this should be "how can we make it work?" not "it's not working for reasons XYZ and so must be stopped!"


----------



## joethelawyer

Harr said:


> It's so weird though - take the PHB1 for example. The book is already thoroughly and completely pirated. It's on every torrent site. Everybody who wanted or wants to pirates already has or can.
> 
> So what do we do... we STOP selling the official PDF... So that people who actually WANT to pay even though they don't need to, CAN'T. So that even as the book continues to be pirated every single day all over the palce, we actually stop making ANY money at all from it by pulling it completely out of the market.
> 
> And while we're at it why don't we do the same with our entire line of legacy products which _aren't even being sold in a physical form in the first place_.
> 
> Whaaaa?




Which fits my theory above.  Circling the wagons of 4e, trying to do everything they can to increase 4e sales, which are not as good as projected.  Believe it or not, there are some people who will never ever download a pirated book.  So if they have to spend 20 bucks on something RPG-wise for D&D, why give them a way NOT to spend it on 4e?


----------



## jdcash

This is the first time I have ever posted on these (or any) boards.  Besides the general urk that I am feeling after recently purchasing many 4e manuals on PDF with the expectation I could recover them later, my real issue is that I use  my nightly "game time" as a release from the stress of the day.  I look forward to reading the boards here and to all the excitement and ideas that are generated as a result.  Instead I am thinking about the money that I may have just spent under false pretenses. BOOOOOOOOO! 

I'm off to find another topic.....


----------



## ShinHakkaider

joethelawyer said:


> It just hit me what this dumbass decision is all about.  Sales are less than projected and a scapegoat is needed.  Think about it.  It makes no sense otherwise.  But if you have a boss chewing your butt off, because his boss is chewing his off, because the numbers aren't there, you need to do something, anything, to make it look like you're adressing the problem.
> 
> Since losses due to pirating are impossible to prove, (and in fact pirating may lead to more sales in the long run,) its also impossible to disprove.  So the lackey gives the idea to the boss who dutifully passes it along to his boss, and they all gain another business quarter to hope that something changes.  The lackeys and low level bosses now its all BS, but hey, they get to keep their jobs for another few months.
> 
> Who else here hs worked in a big corporate environment---come on---doesnt it make sense in a dumb corporate kinda way?





You know Joe, I'd thought the same thing. But posting something like that here at Enworld is dangerous in that the pro-4E crowd will now attack you for speculating about the sales of 4E. I mean as long as you speculate that the sales arent doing well. If you were saying that the sales are brisk and awesome then that seems to be OK here. 

Anyway I was thinking pretty much the same thing. I think that the hardcore 4E supporters are going to buy the books regardless in PDF or hard copy form.


----------



## jdrakeh

xechnao said:


> Sorry to derail but I am really curious why did GW do this? What was there to gain? You mentioned something earlier about IP control but I really fail to understand what this might be about.




Honestly? I have no idea. If you scroll up a little bit, though, I attached their policy sheet in which they try to explain it themselves.


----------



## Cadfan

Voadam said:


> As I said, even if RPGNow promised what it could not guarantee, WotC is taking away the redownloads that we paid for. WotC got paid by us through rpgnow for that access.
> 
> Regardless of whether rpgnow is blameless or culpatory here, WotC is taking away our access to legal pdfs we bought and that is why I am angry at WotC.
> 
> RPGNow wants to offer them to us, but they are capitulating to WotC.
> 
> WotC is taking away our stuff and doesn't want us to have it.



I really don't know what to say to this.

WOTC's reason to cut off pdf sales is kind of lame.  But the idea that WOTC is responsible for RPGNOW's promises of ongoing product support is tin foil hat stuff.


----------



## Obryn

ShinHakkaider said:


> You know Joe, I'd thought the same thing. But posting something like that here at Enworld is dangerous in that the pro-4E crowd will now attack you for speculating about the sales of 4E. I mean as long as you speculate that the sales arent doing well. If you were saying that the sales are brisk and awesome then that seems to be OK here.



Yes, yes, you're oppressed and ill-treated.  

Everyone should freely make all the statements they want without any good evidence to back up their position, and should never be called on them.  That sounds _awesome_!

-O


----------



## Scribble

joethelawyer said:


> Who else here has worked in a big corporate environment---come on---doesn't it make sense in a dumb corporate kinda way?




Eh... I work in a corporate environment, and I think the only part that makes sense is it's a dumb idea. (Not yours the idea of taking the pdfs off.)

More then likely it isn't lack of sales altogether, but instead:

Lack of sales of the official pdfs + an increase in pirating.

It's pobably part of soemthing that's been tracked since day 1. Maybe someone's quarterly report finally showed the pirate to official pdf ratio was in the cancel now range...

What it doesn't account for is that it's new, so obviously more people will be pirating it. (especialy if it is popular.)



			
				Jdrakeh said:
			
		

> Ah! I see where I'm confused. As far as I know, you haven't had to own a physical brick and mortar store to order WotC books from a distributor or sell WotC PDFs (or other products) online, you only have to possess a retail license (and whatever else your government requires you to obtain/file in order to sell goods).




It's been there, it's just that since it was "enforced" through the distributers and not WoTC lots of places slipepd through... Like amazon and walmart. I'm guessing the distributors didn't want to loose out on the BIG chains if they enforced the policy.

Even the send us a picture of your store requirement was there. (I a one time briefly thought about opening a store, and was doing a bunch of research about it before coming to my senses. )


----------



## ProfessorCirno

Piratecat said:


> What I find most annoying about this is that the honest people are being punished, and it's not going to slow down the dishonest people one bit.




Annoying?  That's what I find most *hilarious* about this!  To be fair, I'd find it equally hilarious no matter who makes this incredibly boneheaded decision.


----------



## joethelawyer

ShinHakkaider said:


> You know Joe, I'd thought the same thing. But posting something like that here at Enworld is dangerous in that the pro-4E crowd will now attack you for speculating about the sales of 4E. I mean as long as you speculate that the sales arent doing well. If you were saying that the sales are brisk and awesome then that seems to be OK here.
> 
> Anyway I was thinking pretty much the same thing. I think that the hardcore 4E supporters are going to buy the books regardless in PDF or hard copy form.





Yeah I thought about that--after I hit the submit button of course.  So I went back to the post you quoted and added this section in to attempt to have this not turn into an edition war...

By sales being less than projected, don't get me wrong. They can be through the roof. But if they are less than some spreadsheet said they had to be, based on factors not at all related to reality, heads will roll. 

We'll see if it works...


----------



## resistor

What really pisses me off are the "classic" products that are being pulled.

I'm a big fan of a lot of the old 2e settings, and have been slowly accumulating PDF of them on Paizo's store.  WotC doesn't sell these in hard copy, and hasn't in a very long time.

The only options are "buy the PDF" or "pirate the PDF," and now they're taking the former away...


----------



## JohnRTroy

> That's pretty much exactly what piracy paranoia always does: screw over the folks who play by the rules, without hurting the pirates at all.




I can't call it a simple case of that, for the following reasons.

First of all, did any of the honest people do anything to stop piracy?  Did you report any torrents to WoTC?  Did you try to encourage people not to do it.  Did you explain to your friends about this?  I'm sure some did, but I'm sure others didn't and even encouraged piracy, while others turned a blind eye.  And those that will now "turn to piracy" to spite WoTC don't really have, IMO, a very good grip on ethics or morality.

Secondly, this does deter pirates somewhat.  The WoTC benefit from printer proofs and Acrobat features.  Somebody would have to scan the physical book and it's likely to be an inferior copy.

And thirdly--I fully suspect ISPs and other will start being able to detect piracy.  Let's see where we are 10 years from now.  


As annoying and disappointing this is, I have a feeling that you'll be seeing more of this occuring.  Today, the AP announced they are taking steps to prevent their stories from being used without compensation--in part to protect their newspaper subscribers.

The two biggest problems with the Internet revolution were the following:  companies focused more on market share rather than how they got paid, which gave an expectation, and people like Stallman, Lessig, etc., started a memeplex that made people think that created content was worthless and should be gratis for people to use.  This has created a sort of entitlement culture in the world, as well as enforcing a somewhat naive belief that people should create "just for the art", and that any big corporation that produces content is evil, IP laws are "stupid", etc.   

I suspect the economic downturn is going to cause some harsh realities, and you can expect more companies making these unpopular decisions.


----------



## Piratecat

ShinHakkaider said:


> You know Joe, I'd thought the same thing. But posting something like that here at Enworld is dangerous in that the pro-4E crowd will now attack you for speculating about the sales of 4E. I mean as long as you speculate that the sales arent doing well. If you were saying that the sales are brisk and awesome then that seems to be OK here.



Be aware: anyone who tries to turn this into an edition war will get to go visit other sites for a while. We'll have none of that, and we'll have no personal attacks against the people who work at WotC.


----------



## WhatGravitas

joethelawyer said:


> By sales being less than projected, don't get me wrong. They can be through the roof. But if they are less than some spreadsheet said they had to be, based on factors not at all related to reality, heads will roll.



Well, the core book sales and PHB2 sales seemed pretty good, considering the reprint rates and amazon ranks (and problems).

However, I think it's very possible that they had less than expected PDF sales - meaning their e-department isn't reporting enough, hence the blame on piracy. That would also explain why they pulled the old edition products as well, because they're part of the same department.

Cheers, LT.


----------



## czak

joethelawyer said:


> Since losses due to pirating are impossible to prove, (and in fact pirating may arguably lead to more sales in the long run,) its also impossible to disprove.




Could cutting off the online sale of pdfs be an attempt to quantify / prove their damages? -- "Look m'lord, these pirates forced the plaintiff to stop doing business with these fine online merchants, which is costing us 300k a month in business?" -- "M'lord it is also my submission that the plaintiff lost the good will of many customers due to the defendants piracy, forcing them to shut down online sales"

Or are the damages all statutory down in the states?


----------



## Agamon

Piratecat said:


> What I find most annoying about this is that the honest people are being punished, and it's not going to slow down the dishonest people one bit.




Yep, first thing I thought of, too.  Reminds me of some other things we can't discuss here because it's not about business policy.  But the point is, it's silly to think this will help.


----------



## Plissken

Kzach said:


> Then you'd be 99.9% wrong.
> 
> I'm positive that the staff at WotC are geeky enough to realise the futility and backlash of such a gesture.




Looks like I'm 99.9% + .1% right.



> Posted by WoTC_Trevor:
> Hey all. I wanted to step in and add shine a mote of light on the subject.
> 
> Unfortunately, due to recent findings of illegal copying and online distribution (piracy) of our products, Wizards of the Coast has decided to cease the sales of online PDFs. We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content and as soon as we have any more information I'll get it to you.




Press Releases


----------



## xechnao

Scribble said:


> Eh... I work in a corporate environment, and I think the only part that makes sense is it's a dumb idea. (Not yours the idea of taking the pdfs off.)
> 
> More then likely it isn't lack of sales altogether, but instead:
> 
> Lack of sales of the official pdfs + an increase in pirating.
> 
> It's pobably part of soemthing that's been tracked since day 1. Maybe someone's quarterly report finally showed the pirate to official pdf ratio was in the cancel now range...
> 
> What it doesn't account for is that it's new, so obviously more people will be pirating it. (especialy if it is popular.)




But can they track piracy? Is this possible for them?


----------



## Umbran

joethelawyer said:


> It just hit me what this dumbass decision is all about.  Sales are less than projected for 4e and DDI and a scapegoat is needed.  Think about it.  It makes no sense otherwise.




Plausible? Sure.  But still entirely speculative.

"No sense otherwise?"  Um... that's a bit much.  Really, nobody speaking on this has enough data to claim they know what makes sense, and what doesn't.


----------



## JohnRTroy

I wonder if Wizards might try something with a non-intrusive form of DRM.

One positive thing they might do (and I'd encourage) is consider releasing the products on something like Steam or iTunes.  That seems pretty effective in stoping piracy of their games, supports authentication, etc.

Of course, does Steam do e-books?  I know iTunes does...


----------



## joethelawyer

Lending more proof to my theory that this is driven by not meeting corporate goals...


Hasbro to Webcast 2009 First Quarter Earnings Conference Call    PAWTUCKET, R.I.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Mar. 27, 2009--       Hasbro, Inc. (NYSE:HAS) today announced that it will webcast its first       quarter results via the Internet. The webcast will take place on Monday       April 20, 2009 at 8:30 a.m. Eastern Time, following the release of       Hasbro's financial results.     


This is the sort of thing that you do a week or two before a quarterly meeting so that you boss can tell his boss and so on all the way up the ladder that yes, there is a problem meeting revenue goals, but look what we are doing to address it. I've seen this scenario too many times in my corporate past life...


----------



## jdrakeh

JohnRTroy said:


> Did you report any torrents to WoTC?




Not torrents specifically, but I _did_ report some specific individuals and sites, yeah (as did several other ENWorlders, I'm sure). I'll be honest — I wish I hadn't done that now. The only change that I've seen as a result of my trying to do the next right thing in this instance has been the shuttering of the sole affordable, legal, point of access to old, out of print, TSR products.


----------



## mach1.9pants

JohnRTroy said:


> I wonder if Wizards might try something with a non-intrusive form of DRM.
> 
> One positive thing they might do (and I'd encourage) is consider releasing the products on something like Steam or iTunes.  That seems pretty effective in stoping piracy of their games, supports authentication, etc.
> 
> Of course, does Steam do e-books?  I know iTunes does...




AFAIK Steam doesn't; I have 70 odd games on my Steam account and haven't seen any non game stuff. 

However I am rather annoyed, I just pre-ordered a Foxit eSlick eReader which ONLY does PDFs. Now this is mainly for my degree stuff but the added bonus of DnD PDFs made a big influence on my purchasing decision. If I can't get all the books on PDF now I am going to be really p'd off!


----------



## Prism

JohnRTroy said:


> I wonder if Wizards might try something with a non-intrusive form of DRM.




DRM just doesn't work. Someone has to pay to develop it (or license it from someone) and then it gets hacked pretty much straight away. All it does is annoy the paying customer by preventing backups and copies etc making it again more likely people will pirate or avoid the product. The music industry has pretty much moved away from DRM now. One of the biggest profile stories of last year in the gaming industry was the release of Spore which had DRM built in. People avoided it en mass and it was hacked and uploaded in one day

All wizards have to do is decide if they make more or less cash by accepting pirates and selling pdfs - or not at all. The only real difference is that it takes a few days for someone to be bothered to scan the entire book, which is what happened in the 3e days. I doubt they are going to make any more sales because of that delay

Personally I find pdfs far more useful than paper books so I'm pretty annoyed by this.


----------



## roguerouge

JohnRTroy said:


> The two biggest problems with the Internet revolution were the following:  companies focused more on market share rather than how they got paid, which gave an expectation, and people like Stallman, Lessig, etc., started a memeplex that made people think that created content was worthless and should be gratis for people to use.  This has created a sort of entitlement culture in the world, as well as enforcing a somewhat naive belief that people should create "just for the art", and that any big corporation that produces content is evil, IP laws are "stupid", etc.




I don't want to derail this thread, so I'll limit myself to this observation for other readers here. As a media studies professor who teaches both sides of the file sharing issue, I can say that this poster's description of Stallman and Lessig's various arguments is not undisputed nor is their stance for a freer marketplace of ideas represented in full enough detail for an informative debate. 

Edit: Nor, for that matter, is it particularly relevant to a discussion of WotC's decision for us to have an argument about what two individuals' positions are on copyright or copyleft approaches. Those interested in learning about other options than copyright should go here: Licenses - Creative Commons


----------



## DaveMage

resistor said:


> What really pisses me off are the "classic" products that are being pulled.
> 
> I'm a big fan of a lot of the old 2e settings, and have been slowly accumulating PDF of them on Paizo's store.  WotC doesn't sell these in hard copy, and hasn't in a very long time.
> 
> The only options are "buy the PDF" or "pirate the PDF," and now they're taking the former away...




UNLESS, of course, they make them all available on the WotC website for purchase.  If WotC is opening their own .pdf store, then it makes sense.  

(Although the WotC rep who popped in earlier said the reason for it was piracy, so I guess this isn't it.)


----------



## Majoru Oakheart

Yeah, I was worried about this happening.  I was online and awake just after midnight the night before the PHB2 was going to come out.  I scanned a pirate site and saw that there was a copy of the PHB2 in PDF format 30 minutes after midnight on the release date.  I had already had my copy for being a volunteer for WOTC, so I was curious and downloaded it.

It had a watermark it.  It was purchased online and distributed the night before most people could buy it.  I check these sites on a regular basis, so I really didn't expect to see it there.  Normally it takes a good week or two for someone to buy the book who feels the need to scan it and put it online.

I've noticed 4e books have been coming out a lot quicker than the 3e books did.  This one came out especially early, but previous books were out within a week of the release date.  3e books took up to 2 months to appear online.

I'm not sure if pirates just feel there is more demand for it, it whether someone in a pirate group took a liking to 4e or whether it was due to the ease of getting PDF copies....but whatever the reason, they've been appearing quicker.  I think that the PHB2 appearing on The Pirate Bay 30 minutes into the day, probably sealed this, though.

I'm actually surprised, however.  The person who uploaded it Pirate Bay had their name stamped in the book as a watermark.  You'd figure they could catch him.  Maybe it was exactly the fact that they couldn't catch him that lead to this.


----------



## I'm A Banana

> First of all, did any of the honest people do anything to stop piracy? Did you report any torrents to WoTC? Did you try to encourage people not to do it. Did you explain to your friends about this? I'm sure some did, but I'm sure others didn't and even encouraged piracy, while others turned a blind eye. And those that will now "turn to piracy" to spite WoTC don't really have, IMO, a very good grip on ethics or morality.




Ethics and morality don't enter into it. It's economics, which is neither ethical or moral.  

I mean, I live in New York City. Should I really go send off an e-mail to Coach to let them know, hey, someone is making knock-offs of your stuff RIGHT DOWN ON CANAL STREET?!

The idea that you can stop piracy -- or even theivery -- is absurd on the face of it. Fighting a war on piracy is like fighting a war on drugs or like prohibition -- nobody really wins.

Piracy is going to happen. You can't stop it. You can mitigate it. One of the ways you mitigate it is by providing a legal alternative, especially one that is more convenient than the illegal one. The DDI and selling PDFs online were ALREADY things that were stopping it.

This smacks to me of "sacrificial lamb." It's something that WotC can get rid off without hurting a major market (I doubt PDF sales were very big), while saying "See, Bean Counters! We've been doing our part to stop the bad guys!"



> Secondly, this does deter pirates somewhat. The WoTC benefit from printer proofs and Acrobat features. Somebody would have to scan the physical book and it's likely to be an inferior copy.




If you're using a quality argument, I don't believe you truly understand what online piracy really is. No one refuses to download an illegal, free copy of something that they want just because it might be of, well, "bootleg" quality. 

People were downloading PDF's of _1e_ material in 2001. People are currently downloading re-re-recordings of Dead Kennedys concerts that were originally on shady audio from the '80s. Minor quality loss won't deter anything.



> And thirdly--I fully suspect ISPs and other will start being able to detect piracy. Let's see where we are 10 years from now.




There are massive problems with it on an ISP level. For one, they can't shut down file sharing programs in general, because there are legal uses for them (it's the VHS/Betamax argument, in a nutshell). For two, the level of invasion of privacy that would enable an ISP to be able to see and legally report on what I'm doing on my computer would enter an Orwellian minefield of Big Brother supervision that any "free citizen" would balk at. 

That ain't happenin' any time soon, and if it does, we'll have much bigger problems than pirated D&D books on our hands.



> As annoying and disappointing this is, I have a feeling that you'll be seeing more of this occuring. Today, the AP announced they are taking steps to prevent their stories from being used without compensation--in part to protect their newspaper subscribers.




For every news story the AP shuts down, 300 people twitter what's going on at 140 characters or less. The AP, like WotC, is shooting itself in the foot. 



> The two biggest problems with the Internet revolution were the following: companies focused more on market share rather than how they got paid, which gave an expectation, and people like Stallman, Lessig, etc., started a memeplex that made people think that created content was worthless and should be gratis for people to use. This has created a sort of entitlement culture in the world, as well as enforcing a somewhat naive belief that people should create "just for the art", and that any big corporation that produces content is evil, IP laws are "stupid", etc.




Piracy is to IP law as the Gutenberg Bible was to Christianity. New copying technologies invariably disrupt old ways of controlling information. But that's not really here or there. The ultimate point is that you can't stop piracy, especially not by cutting off a legal avenue of access.



> I suspect the economic downturn is going to cause some harsh realities, and you can expect more companies making these unpopular decisions.




The companies that thrive and succeed during the downturn will be the ones who innovate and grow new ways of doing things, rather than those that turtle up in their little shells. 

It's when the dinosaurs fall that mammals can thrive, after all.


----------



## Umbran

xechnao said:


> But can they track piracy? Is this possible for them?




Just this week, they got an estimate of how many copies of the Wolverine early-cut got downloaded.  I would expect they can do the same for PDFs - the number is just smaller.


----------



## El Mahdi

WotC_Trevor said:


> Hey all. I wanted to step in and shine a mote of light on the subject. First off, this cesation of PDF sales has absolutely nothing to do with the Internet Sales Policy. I know it's the 6th of April and I can definitely see how the two would appear linked, but the truth is, this is a completely seperate matter.
> 
> Unfortunately, due to recent findings of illegal copying and online distribution (piracy) of our products, Wizards of the Coast has decided to cease the sales of online PDFs. We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content and as soon as we have any more information I'll get it to you.




*You have got to be Kidding Me!*

Talk about throwing out the baby with the bathwater!

What's next, are you guys going to pull all _Dungeon_ and _Dragon Magazine_ .pdf's also?  Because those are just as easy to distribute online as any .pdf's from RPGNow and Paizo.

_*"We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content..."*_

Do you honestly expect anyone here to believe we will *EVER* see .pdf's provided in a timely manner?  If Ever?  Do you honestly expect anyone here to believe WotC will ever make this a priority?  Do you even have enough people left working there after all of the layoffs to be able to _explore other options_?

Before 4E was released we were promised .pdf's at a nominal fee if one bought a hard copy.  WoTC wasn't able to pull that off, and instead sold 4E .pdf's at near full price (actually full price since buying all three core books in .pdf cost more than what I paid for the core book collection at 4E's release).  How do you honestly expect us to believe your _*explorations*_ will bear fruit?

And your complete screw-up of the PR on this - this is the last damn straw.

We, your customers, have put up with being belittled for wanting an Adventure Path synopsis for _Scales of War_.  And then had to be content with the insulting scraps we were provided.

We, your customers, had to e-mail and post hundreds of complaints (in actuality probably more) in order to get separate art and maps provided for _Dungeon_ and _Dragon_.  Yes, they were eventually provided, but why did it have to be so begrudging - as if you were simply humoring us silly fans/customers?

We, your customers, are still waiting for the digital products that were promised to be online over 10 months ago (with some probably still as much as a year away).

We, your customers, are still angry about not having .pdf's available at a nominal fee *AS PROMISED*.

And now there are *NO* .pdf's - period!

We, your customers, are also left holding the bag for the loss of downloads that were purchased *IN GOOD FAITH* (whether part of a contract with WoTC or not, this reflects on you - how can you imagine it wouldn't?).

On top of it all, _*I don't even like 4E*_.  However, I've supported WotC, because of the hobby I love, by spending at least $200 in the last 10 months (Core Books, DDI sub, Adventurers Vault, H1-H3, etc.).

*Well not anymore!*  Apparently I need to be beat over the head a good five or six times by WotC before I realize that WoTC _*does not care about me or any other of their customers*_.

I am done with you, _Wizards of the Coast_.

I am canceling my DDI sub immediately, and will not be purchasing any of your products from here on out.  I have more than enough books and meterials to last me two lifetimes.  That didn't keep me from buying more, but I will no longer be buying from you.  That money will now go towards an ENWorld Community Supporter acount (at least until you decide that ENWorld is competing with you also and shut this down).

My threshold has been reached.  I do _*not*_ wish WotC continued success.  I do wish it a painful and messy death along the lines of TSR.

D&D will last forever.  The OGL has ensured that.  But I truly hope that WotC does not.  And I truly hope that there are many more that feel the same.  I hope that it foreshadows renewed interest in and success for OGL third party publishers (and other game systems), because if D&D is to survive it's up to them and us fans - especially as it seems obvious to me - WotC will, if they continue upon the path they are on, kill 4E and their company.

Goodbye and Good Riddance, Wizards of the Coast!


----------



## RedBeardJim

DaveMage said:


> UNLESS, of course, they make them all available on the WotC website for purchase.  If WotC is opening their own .pdf store, then it makes sense.
> 
> (Although the WotC rep who popped in earlier said the reason for it was piracy, so I guess this isn't it.)




Doing this for anti-piracy reasons wouldn't necessarily preclude them putting the old stuff back up for sale at some point.


----------



## xechnao

DaveMage said:


> UNLESS, of course, they make them all available on the WotC website for purchase.  If WotC is opening their own .pdf store, then it makes sense.
> 
> (Although the WotC rep who popped in earlier said the reason for it was piracy, so I guess this isn't it.)




Whatever reason they said this was about the ending conclusion does not change:



WotC_Trevor said:


> We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content and as soon as we have any more information I'll get it to you.






What I get out of this is an effort to transfer the PDF sales service to DDI subscribers or something like this. PDF sales is the only thing they can really account: they can't account piracy loses, I think. So why not make the most out of their sales, which is what is accounatble anyway? RPGnow must take its cut. If Wotc offers the service in house avoids this cost. It could also advertise DDI more or at least avoid advertising products of other companies through its presence in RPGnow.


----------



## Beginning of the End

WotC_Trevor said:


> Unfortunately, due to recent findings of illegal copying and online distribution (piracy) of our products, Wizards of the Coast has decided to cease the sales of online PDFs. We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content and as soon as we have any more information I'll get it to you.




Wow, you just discovered online piracy? Welcome to 1982, guys.

And you've decided that pissing off your customer base by retroactively changing the terms under which they purchased the products is a good idea?

And you've decided to remove the only legal ways to electronically purchase your products, thereby further encouraging the piracy you're trying to prevent?

And you're suggesting a DRM future for your digital products, in an era when every other media industry is moving away from DRM because they recognize it as having failed yet again?

And you're apparently unaware that every single product ever published by TSR or WotC is already available, meaning that for those extant products you're trying to shut the barn door after the horses have run away?

And even that's assuming that products won't be pirated through the simple expedience of a scanner, despite all evidence to the contrary.

I see three possibilities here:

(1) You're using piracy as a mask for pulling these licenses so that you can offer these materials through your own website.

(2) You've decided that having previous edition material commercially available in any form is "competing against yourself", so you're taking action to remove it from the market.

(3) I'm ignoring an admin's instructions about not attacking people, and will get suspended if it happens again.

_Fixed one point for you.  ~ Piratecat_


----------



## Wraith Form

El Mahdi said:


> *You have got to be Kidding Me!*
> 
> Talk about throwing out the baby with the bathwater!
> 
> What's next, are you guys going to pull all _Dungeon_ and _Dragon Magazine_ .pdf's also?  Because those are just as easy to distribute online as any .pdf's from RPGNow and Paizo.
> 
> _*"We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content..."*_
> 
> Do you honestly expect anyone here to believe we will *EVER* see .pdf's provided in a timely manner?  If Ever?  Do you honestly expect anyone here to believe WotC will ever make this a priority?  Do you even have enough people left working there after all of the layoffs to be able to _explore other options_?
> 
> Before 4E was released we were promised .pdf's at a nominal fee if one bought a hard copy.  WoTC wasn't able to pull that off, and instead sold 4E .pdf's at near full price (actually full price since buying all three core books in .pdf cost more than what I paid for the core book collection at 4E's release).  How do you honestly expect us to believe your _*explorations*_ will bear fruit?
> 
> And your complete screw-up of the PR on this - this is the last damn straw.
> 
> We, your customers, have put up with being belittled for wanting an Adventure Path synopsis for _Scales of War_.  And then had to be content with the insulting scraps we were provided.
> 
> We, your customers, had to e-mail and post hundreds of complaints (in actuality probably more) in order to get separate art and maps provided for _Dungeon_ and _Dragon_.  Yes, they were eventually provided, but why did it have to be so begrudging - as if you were simply humoring us silly fans/customers?
> 
> We, your customers, are still waiting for the digital products that were promised to be online over 10 months ago (with some probably still as much as a year away).
> 
> We, your customers, are still angry about not having .pdf's available at a nominal fee *AS PROMISED*.
> 
> And now there are *NO* .pdf's - period!
> 
> We, your customers, are also left holding the bag for the loss of downloads that were purchased *IN GOOD FAITH* (whether part of a contract with WoTC or not, this reflects on you - how can you imagine it wouldn't?).
> 
> On top of it all, _*I don't even like 4E*_.  However, I've supported WotC, because of the hobby I love, by spending at least $200 in the last 10 months (Core Books, DDI sub, Adventurers Vault, H1-H3, etc.).
> 
> *Well not anymore!*  Apparently I need to be beat over the head a good five or six times by WotC before I realize that WoTC _*does not care about me or any other of their customers*_.
> 
> I am done with you, _Wizards of the Coast_.
> 
> I am canceling my DDI sub immediately, and will not be purchasing any of your products from here on out.  I have more than enough books and meterials to last me two lifetimes.  That didn't keep me from buying more, but I will no longer be buying from you.  That money will now go towards an ENWorld Community Supporter acount (at least until you decide that ENWorld is competing with you also and shut this down).
> 
> My threshold has been reached.  I do _*not*_ wish WotC continued success.  I do wish it a painful and messy death along the lines of TSR.
> 
> D&D will last forever.  The OGL has ensured that.  But I truly hope that WotC does not.  And I truly hope that there are many more that feel the same.  I hope that it foreshadows renewed interest in and success for OGL third party publishers (and other game systems), because if D&D is to survive it's up to them and us fans - especially as it seems obvious to me - WotC will, if they continue upon the path they are on, kill 4E and their company.
> 
> Goodbye and Good Riddance, Wizards of the Coast!




I don't normally quote a full post like this, but...

...hear, hear.  

DDi subscription canceled.  D&D4 books will be shelved (or boxed & crated down to the basement) with the rest of the 3.x material.

My wife and I are 40% of our gaming group, and we're going to talk to the rest about some Savage Worlds or the like.


----------



## kenmarable

Umbran said:


> Plausible? Sure.  But still entirely speculative.
> 
> "No sense otherwise?"  Um... that's a bit much.  Really, nobody speaking on this has enough data to claim they know what makes sense, and what doesn't.



Besides, "executive management decision" and "sense" rarely go together (and this isn't directed at WotC in particular but all businesses larger than "Mom & Pop"). Corporate decision making rarely follows what makes sense to customers down the stream.

Seeing this as evidence that 4e and DDI sales are low is cherry-picking evidence. Anything that agrees with the theory is clear evidence that the theory is right, and anything that disagrees is irrelevant or not conclusive.

Yeah, as a legitimate PDF customer, I'm really annoyed at this - even to the point of probably putting my money where my mouth is and canceling my DDI subscription. But to presume this as more evidence of some pet theory of 4e sales being lousy is really stretching things and just detracts from the legitimate gripes customers have.

I'm just one customer, but I'm glad that I still enjoy and play both 4e and 3.5. Maybe tomorrow I'll cancel DDI and add a Paizo subscription instead. It's nice to have those options and have the choice to still get cool products but not support businesses that are erratic and at times boneheaded in how they treat their customers.


----------



## Shemeska

WotC is shooting themselves in the foot, yet again. They've had PR problem after PR problem, and at this point I'm no longer surprised when they pull something like this.

This is retarded. Especially for killing sales of legacy product pdfs.

Well, at least the used book market will see some benefit, since rather than buying the pdf of any given 1e/2e/3e books I wanted to snag a copy of, I'll be trying to find a used, paper copy.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane

First the OGL and now this?

Knock me over with a feather.


----------



## FATDRAGONGAMES

Just when you think the bad decisions can't possibly keep coming...


----------



## Nikosandros

jdrakeh said:


> Not torrents specifically, but I _did_ report some specific individuals and sites, yeah (as did several other ENWorlders, I'm sure). I'll be honest — I wish I hadn't done that now. The only change that I've seen as a result of my trying to do the next right thing in this instance has been the shuttering of the sole affordable, legal, point of access to old, out of print, TSR products.




Yeah... that's the most annoying thing for me. The fact that they wiped out the huge library for all the old TSR products. Somehow, I doubt that such stuff will be part of any future digital project WotC might be contemplating at the moment.

Of course, pirates will still be able to access that stuff, but honest buyers likely wont.


----------



## catsclaw227

Well, this sucks.  

I found out about this because I had PHB2 and all three of the P-series in my RPGNow shopping cart (along with other products) and now they are gone.  I am on the road right now, travelling, and I wanted to download my LEGITIMATE PDF PURCHASES to put on my laptop and read while I am on the road.  And now I can't?

I have been a WOTC apologist for a while now, and this really ticks me off.  When I buy PDFs, I buy PDFs in bulk.  What that means is that when I am shopping, I fill my cart at RPGNow with WOTC and 3PP products over the course of a month. And then I buy in one fell swoop.  This usually comes around the time the WOTC product is released each month.

You wanna help the 3PP?  Well, this just hurt them.

The torrent sites will still get the books up, there will still be pirated copies out there, and you will force legitimate pruchasers of your PDFs to find another alternative.

I use the PDFs more than I use my print copies.  I buy the print ones for the shelf and the game table 2x per month, I prepare my game with the PDFs 5x per week.

Your decision is eerily like stepping back into the fear-mongering and information control of the middle ages.  Why can't someone like me buy a PDF of a WOTC book in 2009?  This is a bonehead decision.

And now I can't go download copies of the PDF THAT I ALREADY OWN.

Bad move.  Seriously bad move.  I need a cookie.


----------



## I'm A Banana




----------



## Mistwell

I do not understand some of the outrage expressed in this thread regarding the "retroactive" canceling of your agreement with RPGnow and various other sites.

Guys, if you had an agreement with a company to continually supply those PDFs, or allow multiple downloads, or save your files in case of a crash, or whatever, THAT COMPANY WAS NOT WOTC.

WOTC didn't retroactively change anything.  Your agreement was never with WOTC.  The company that breached your agreement is the company you had the agreement with, not WOTC.  WOTC was just one of their suppliers.  If you are pissed about retroactive cut offs of your agreement, your anger should be directed at the company you had the agreement with.  They agreed to something with you (perpetual downloads) that they didn't have the ability to fulfill on, because apparently they never bought a guarantee of perpetual product supply from their supplier, or even a long-term notice clause in their contract of cancellation.  The fault for that is with the PDF distribution companies like RPGNow, not WOTC.  It's their entire business to supply PDFs, and it's them who are to blame if they failed the obtain necessary vendor agreements to do their job.


----------



## naturaltwenty

*Paizo Message*

Dear Greg,

Wizards of the Coast has notified us that we may no longer sell or distribute their PDF products. Accordingly, after April 6 at 11:59 PM Pacific time, Wizards of the Coast PDFs will no longer be available for purchase on paizo.com; after noon on April 7, you will no longer be able to download Wizards of the Coast PDFs that you have already purchased, so please make sure you have downloaded all purchased PDFs by that time.

We thank you for your patronage of paizo.com. Please check out our other downloads at paizo.com/store/downloads.

Sincerely yours,
The Paizo Customer Service Team


----------



## FireLance

This is is what WotC should do:

1. Retrain their secret gaming police into an elite ninja force. As everyone knows, ninjas and pirates are natural enemies.

2. Unleash them onto the world with instructions to seek out and destroy all pirates instead of stopping people from house-ruling their 4e games or playing previous editions.

As a side note, Piratecat may want to change his screen name to Ninjacat just to be safe.


----------



## RefinedBean

It's like they have one person over there who makes sound, reasoned decisions concerning their marketing and business strategy, and then do the opposite of what he/she says.

Next up:  White Wolf decides to copyright darkness.


----------



## Dimitri Mazieres

And, once again, it's at times like these when we should all say out loud with utmost sincerity: "Thank you, Ryan Dancey, for the OGL!"


----------



## Erik Mona

I just wanted to drop by with a friendly note to collectors reminding everyone that many classic TSR PDFs are STILL AVAILABLE for legal purchase at Paizo.com and will be until Midnight tonight, Pacific Time (about 4 more hours).

After that they will be gone forever, so if you're looking for a legal way to fill out your collection of classic TSR PDFs, there's no time like the present...

--Erik Mona
Publisher
Paizo Publishing, LLC

PS: I strongly suggest grabbing a copy of the 1983 WORLD OF GREYHAWK boxed set as well as the 1990s follow-up FROM THE ASHES. Both are excellent PDFs, and who knows when you will next be able to pick them up legally and affordably?

PPS: Our servers are SLAMMED at the moment, so you may want to practice a few zen koans and cultivate patience as you wait for your order to be processed.


----------



## Asmor

Piratecat said:


> What I find most annoying about this is that the honest people are being punished, and it's not going to slow down the dishonest people one bit.




As someone who works in the video game industry (and, thus, is likely well aware of the state of DRM), I'd expect that you're already well-acquainted with that feeling.

End of the day, the pirates will get whatever they want, and there's nothing anyone can do about it. Period. Any attempt to inconvenience the pirates is *strictly* an inconvenience to your customers.


----------



## naturaltwenty

I respectfully beg to differ.  If WotC signed the same contract that I signed (which maybe they did or maybe they didn't - WotC is definitely the one to blame)

I find it hard to believe that both OBS (RPGNow/DriveThru) and Paizo both had their contracts to end at the same time.



> 7. TERMINATION BY PUBLISHER. Publisher shall have the right to terminate this Agreement and the rights granted to OBS if OBS does not make timely payment of royalties, or if OBS violates any of its obligations under the terms of this contract. Termination shall be caused in any of the above cases or by reason of other breach or default by OBS, by Publisher giving thirty (30) days written notice of such breach to OBS. If such breach is not cured within thirty (30) days following receipt of such notice, this Agreement and all of OBS's rights hereunder shall cease and terminate and be of no further force or effect.
> 
> 8. OBS'S WARRANTIES AND INDEMNIFICATION. OBS represents and warrants that it has the right to enter into this Agreement and that it has taken all appropriate steps to obtain such rights pursuant to its by-laws and articles of incorporation. OBS further represents and warrants that it will comply with all governmental laws, rules and regulations pertaining to it in connection with the creation, manufacture, marketing, distribution and sale of the Licensed Products, and all other transactions contemplated by this Agreement. At Publisher's request, OBS will use industry leading technology to
> encrypt Products from unlawful copying, but cannot and does not represent or warrant that the third party software OBS utilizes cannot be decrypted



.





Mistwell said:


> I do not understand some of the outrage expressed in this thread regarding the "retroactive" canceling of your agreement with RPGnow and various other sites.
> 
> Guys, if you had an agreement with a company to continually supply those PDFs, or allow multiple downloads, or save your files in case of a crash, or whatever, THAT COMPANY WAS NOT WOTC.
> 
> WOTC didn't retroactively change anything.  Your agreement was never with WOTC.  The company that breached your agreement is the company you had the agreement with, not WOTC.  WOTC was just one of their suppliers.  If you are pissed about retroactive cut offs of your agreement, your anger should be directed at the company you had the agreement with.  They agreed to something with you (perpetual downloads) that they didn't have the ability to fulfill on, because apparently they never bought a guarantee of perpetual product supply from their supplier, or even a long-term notice clause in their contract of cancellation.  The fault for that is with the PDF distribution companies like RPGNow, not WOTC.  It's their entire business to supply PDFs, and it's them who are to blame if they failed the obtain necessary vendor agreements to do their job.


----------



## FATDRAGONGAMES

OK, can someone please explain to me how pulling all PDFs of previous editions helps WOTC 4E sales?

I'd love to own a piece of Paizo right about now...


----------



## Piratecat

Erik Mona said:


> PPS: Our servers are SLAMMED at the moment, so you may want to practice a few zen koans and cultivate patience as you wait for your order to be processed.



Erik, I just waited five minutes even to pull up a product page. Is there any recourse for someone who buys a pdf and who simply isn't able to download it before the deadline?


----------



## Wraith Form

Mistwell said:


> Guys, if you had an agreement with a company to continually supply those PDFs, or allow multiple downloads, or save your files in case of a crash, or whatever, THAT COMPANY WAS NOT WOTC.
> 
> ...blah blah blah...
> 
> It's their entire business to supply PDFs, and it's them who are to blame if they failed the obtain necessary vendor agreements to do their job.




You, sir, really need to read these posts a bit more thoroughly.  A quick scan around here will show you that this *most certainly was* a decision by WotC.

Thus the hatred.  Again.  Still.


----------



## Mark

Piratecat said:


> Erik, I just waited five minutes even to pull up a product page. Is there any recourse for someone who buys a pdf and who simply isn't able to download it before the deadline?





Might want to grab these while you can and while waiting for the Paizo servers to thin out a bit -

http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/154448-free-adventure-path.html


----------



## Mouseferatu

Wow. Just... Yeah. Wow.

I've got a large collection of classic TSR stuff in PDF, many of which were purchased on the spur-of-the-moment for research while writing 3E and 4E stuff.

I think, by now, everyone knows that I'm a huge fan of 4E, as both a writer and a gamer. I've rarely been critical of WotC's decisions; a few details here and there, but rarely on any given subject across the board.

But this is just the wrong reaction, pure and simple. As others have said, it's not going to deter piracy, but it's definitely removing a lot of options from legitimate customers.

My _hope_ is that WotC will decide to sell these themselves, rather than keeping them off the market entirely. But until/unless that happens, yeah, count my vote amongst those who are very disappointed.


----------



## Branduil

Pretty stupid decision. If the person making this decision is also responsible for the DDI they should have been fired a long time ago. Hopefully they'll lose their job soon.


----------



## Derro

Asmor said:


> End of the day, the pirates will get whatever they want, and there's nothing anyone can do about it. Period. Any attempt to inconvenience the pirates is *strictly* an inconvenience to your customers.




Hear here.

It just seems so arbitrary and capricious. Even if this is the first steps to WotC establishing their own on-line store the perceptions created in the community by such a grand, blundering maneuver can only alienate people. Nobody likes to be punished for something they didn't do. In this day of e-com piracy is a reality. Find some way to deal with it that doesn't screw the people who have been loyal.


----------



## Voadam

I've got four in my cart and wanted to grab six more but for the last 20 minutes or so the pages are just coming up blank.

I don't think I'll be able to get any more.


----------



## lmpjr007

FATDRAGONGAMES said:


> OK, can someone please explain to me how pulling all PDFs of previous editions helps WOTC 4E sales?
> 
> I'd love to own a piece of Paizo right about now...



This seems like another way to help strengthen Paizo position in the market.  Wow, WOTC must actually be run by monkeys.  I keep asking myself, what are they going to do next to upset their customer base?


----------



## catsclaw227

Branduil said:


> Pretty stupid decision. If the person making this decision is also responsible for the DDI they should have been fired a long time ago. Hopefully they'll lose their job soon.



This isn't fair.  DDI has been awesome, and it's far more than paid for itself already.  The DDI is the one thing good that WOTC has going for them in the digital arena.


----------



## Sir Osis of Liver

Voadam said:


> I've got four in my cart and wanted to grab six more but for the last 20 minutes or so the pages are just coming up blank.
> 
> I don't think I'll be able to get any more.




As soon as i saw 
paizo was getting shut down i went and grab 8 or so of the pdf's that i've ben waiting for the extra cash to pick up. I wouild have got more but i really could afford more right now(not that i really should have got what i did.) Anyway, i'm glad i didn't wait because now it sounds like some people might buy stuff and not be able to get it downloaded by the time the deadline hits, and seems unlikely to me that WOTC will be cool and make allowances for these technical issues.


----------



## mach1.9pants

catsclaw227 said:


> This isn't fair.  DDI has been awesome, and it's far more than paid for itself already.  The DDI is the one thing good that WOTC has going for them in the digital arena.




That is so true! The character builder is worth the subscription on its own. If there is another game system out there which has something on par to the CB and I can still get PDFs and books, please tell 'cos my loyalty to 4E has been badly damaged by this fiasco.


----------



## Glyfair

kenmarable said:


> Seeing this as evidence that 4e and DDI sales are low is cherry-picking evidence. Anything that agrees with the theory is clear evidence that the theory is right, and anything that disagrees is irrelevant or not conclusive.



I agree.  In an anger management session at work (that was part of the standard "classes" rotated through every year), one of the things they point out is to never try to be a mind reader.  When you say "they were doing this because" you are just setting yourself up to have anger issues, often when you were incorrect in your assessment.



> Yeah, as a legitimate PDF customer, I'm really annoyed at this - even to the point of probably putting my money where my mouth is and canceling my DDI subscription.



I have to admit, I hope that because of this a boycott is organized and initially costs WotC sales.  They have clearly been making a lot of decisions lately that seem to be coming from those with no interaction with the customers.  If one of these decisions *clearly* leads them to a noticeable loss of sales, maybe the customers (especially online customers) will be considered more when WotC makes such decisions, and how doing such things affects their decision.

Now, I have purchased a number of the older D&D products.  The new D&D products weren't on my radar (at least at the price points they choose).  So, this effects me very little.  However, this has degraded WotC significantly in my view.  

I will probably not stop buying D&D products right now.  However, I am definitely going to reduce the products I buy from WotC.  None of the non-D&D products I would normally buy or consider will be purchased (that's at least a couple of hundred dollars in purchases in the last year).  The ones I would consider borderline decisions are likely gone as well.  For example, the DMG2 was a likely buy, now I am going to wait and not buy it unless the reviews say it's something I feel I should have for my D&D campaign.

Still, WotC probably won't "get it" unless there is an active boycott.  By that I mean a large enough group of people stop buying products, and show up at their regular game stores (those who still have them) and let them know they have stopped buying WotC products (all or a subset) because of this decision.  I don't even know of those who this effects are even a large enough group for WotC to consider it (clearly the sales of these products weren't enough for WotC to be concerned with losing them).


----------



## joethelawyer

Erik Mona said:


> I just wanted to drop by with a friendly note to collectors reminding everyone that many classic TSR PDFs are STILL AVAILABLE for legal purchase at Paizo.com and will be until Midnight tonight, Pacific Time (about 4 more hours).
> 
> After that they will be gone forever, so if you're looking for a legal way to fill out your collection of classic TSR PDFs, there's no time like the present...
> 
> --Erik Mona
> Publisher
> Paizo Publishing, LLC
> 
> PS: I strongly suggest grabbing a copy of the 1983 WORLD OF GREYHAWK boxed set as well as the 1990s follow-up FROM THE ASHES. Both are excellent PDFs, and who knows when you will next be able to pick them up legally and affordably?
> 
> PPS: Our servers are SLAMMED at the moment, so you may want to practice a few zen koans and cultivate patience as you wait for your order to be processed.





My only hope in this whole debacle is that Paizo makes trillions of dollars tonight in .pdf sales and is able to buy all D&D material rights and licenses from WOTC and we never have to deal with a Hasbro big corporate BS again.  Imagine that?  Dungeons and Dragons under a company run by gamers again?


----------



## ProfessorCirno

The most insane thing about this, is that for this to have gone through, *multiple* people would have had to fully read this and then say "You know, I don't see how this is a bad idea.  Put it through."


----------



## Wulf Ratbane

Voadam said:


> I've got four in my cart and wanted to grab six more but for the last 20 minutes or so the pages are just coming up blank.
> 
> I don't think I'll be able to get any more.




Well, not _legally_ anyway.


----------



## zacharythefirst

I don't play 4e, so the only business I really had left with WotC was buying a couple of downloads of legacy pdf products each month.  It was a nice way to get to see things that were out of print or hard to get.

Now, I have no reason left to deal with WotC.  They've lost both my custom and my faith.  They could put their pdfs back up for sale tomorrow, and I wouldn't bite.  If they're willing to yank the rug out with no-notice, insulting, utter horsecrap like this, what's to keep them from doing it again?

These are paying customers you've done this to.  Not the ones who went and downloaded something off of a torrent--these were the people who wanted to properly pay for a product. And without so much as a warning, you cut off their access to their own purchases.  I'm sure that will really make a difference in combating piracy, right?  Giving us a week or 10 days to make arrangements vs. abruptly yanking our downloads?

I'm finished with WotC.  They may not miss my piddling little remaining purchases that much, but they won't ever see another dime from me.  I still cannot fathom how a company that only 2 years ago was fairly well-regarded in terms of customer relations could plummet so far, so fast, ending up an example for Paizo and every other would-be competitor of what not to do.  We're quits.


----------



## RefinedBean

Wulf Ratbane said:


> Well, not _legally_ anyway.




Haven't you heard?  WotC's putting a stop to all that nonsense.


----------



## joethelawyer

I hope Scott Rouse is somewhere with a big bottle of Jack.  He's gonna need it.  He must feel like the Secret Service guy who was tasked with _removing political references from message posts._ 

(Edited by admin)


----------



## Erik Mona

Piratecat said:


> Erik, I just waited five minutes even to pull up a product page. Is there any recourse for someone who buys a pdf and who simply isn't able to download it before the deadline?




Good question. According to our WotC-approved statement on the page I linked to earlier, sales of the PDFs will end at Midnight, but you can download them until noon tomorrow.

I would strongly recommend patience, because after noon tomorrow they are gone. It sucks that the servers are getting slammed right now, but it was bound to happen. I am just pleased that we are able to keep selling these at all, even if only for a few more hours. It would have been really sad to see the whole back catalog disappear with no warning whatsoever.

There is no telling when/if these great PDFs are going to reappear, so I suggest getting while the getting is good (even if a bit slow).

--Erik


----------



## mach1.9pants

RefinedBean said:


> Haven't you heard?  WotC's putting a stop to all that nonsense.



Hahahaha nice one!


----------



## Glyfair

zacharythefirst said:


> These are paying customers you've done this to.  Not the ones who went and downloaded something off of a torrent--these were the people who wanted to properly pay for a product.



To be fair, from the comments it seems the straw that broke the camels back was the people who "properly paid for the product" and then put it up in some sort of file sharing.


----------



## Samnell

Erik Mona said:


> I would strongly recommend patience, because after noon tomorrow they are gone. It sucks that the servers are getting slammed right now, but it was bound to happen. I am just pleased that we are able to keep selling these at all, even if only for a few more hours. It would have been really sad to see the whole back catalog disappear with no warning whatsoever.
> 
> There is no telling when/if these great PDFs are going to reappear, so I suggest getting while the getting is good (even if a bit slow).




I'm trying mightily, but I can't get the Proceed to Checkout click to work. I've tried three or four times now. I always get a store down or messageboards down message. 

EDIT: The order finally went through. Thank you Paizo for the chance to grab a childhood (well, teenaged) memory on very short notice.


----------



## freyar

(Seems like ENWorld has been slowed down a bit by this tonight, too!)

When I got the Paizo email, I thought about going to pick up a few of the older PDFs I'd wanted to get someday.  But I can't say that I feel like giving WotC any money right now (sorry, Paizo, I'm sure I'll buy something from you soon. ).


----------



## El Mahdi

joethelawyer said:


> I hope Scott Rouse is somewhere with a big bottle of Jack. He's gonna need it. He must feel like the Secret Service guy who was tasked with keeping President Clinton out of trouble with women.




Man, I need more XP to give out!  This is Golden!


----------



## zacharythefirst

Glyfair said:


> To be fair, from the comments it seems the straw that broke the camels back was the people who "properly paid for the product" and then put it up in some sort of file sharing.




No, there's nothing fair about it.


----------



## MerricB

Glyfair said:


> Still, WotC probably won't "get it" unless there is an active boycott.




To some extent, Wizards have provided their own boycott.  (There will be no sales of PDFs!) They're already stopping a revenue stream.

However, I think Wizards understood the problems with piracy when 4e was released. I remember illegal pdf copies of the 4E rulebooks being available several days before I even got my copies of the books on the official release day. I've seen D&D miniatures on-sale on ebay before they are even released.

The amount of illegal stealing and piracy of Wizards products is terrifying, and to expect them to do nothing about it is foolish.

This solution? Oh, I hate it. Hate it, hate it, hate it.

I'm very glad to see that they are taking legal action against some of the pirates, but this can't be all of them. And so, we lose a great resource. I hope that Wizards can get the pdfs back some day soon, but I'm pessimistic enough about the world to not expect it for a few years.

And that sucks.


----------



## Jeff Wilder

NOTE: I haven't purchased any WotC PDFs, and nor have I read the contracts on RPGNow or DriveThru RPG.  Consider this entire post a question, not a comment.

I'm a little confused by how people can lose access to additional downloads that were included when they bought a product.

If I were arguing this -- and see the disclaimer above, namely that I don't know the specific terms of the purchase agreement -- I'd argue that by purchasing _WotC Book_.pdf with the understanding that I may download it multiple times, I'm actually purchasing X copies of _WotC Book_.pdf, along with the service of the PDF distributor providing file space for those extra copies as backups.

Would this be shot down by any specific terms in the contract?

(As an aside, I think it's really, really sweet of WotC to drive customers away to other RPG companies, on what's becoming a semi-regular basis.  It shows an admirable willingness to share the RPG market.  Kudos, WotC!  Ignore these folks telling you it was a bad move ... they just don't understand your corporate altruism.)


----------



## XunValdorl of Kilsek

Im sorry but if the Music/Movie industry couldn't stop pirating what makes little peon Hasbro think they have much of a chance?? I think wizards is ran by a bunch of dumbasses who obviously don't know how to conduct business. The stupid move only makes people want to pirate more.


----------



## Urizen

I think they're cutting their nose off to spite their face.

They want to stop (or slow down) people from pirating their books, so what do they do? they stop selling PDFS at online retail outlets.

Yeah, good idea. Just throw away the money you were getting from all those sales (maybe not much comparatively, but money's money, after all) so that you can try and prevent something you never had a chance of preventing anyhow.

OH and as an extra-added bonus, you piss your customer base off in the process!

Two thumbs up, wizards.


----------



## Filcher

joethelawyer said:


> My only hope in this whole debacle is that Paizo makes trillions of dollars tonight in .pdf sales and is able to buy all D&D material rights and licenses from WOTC and we never have to deal with a Hasbro big corporate BS again.  Imagine that?  Dungeons and Dragons under a company run by gamers again?




Right. Because PDF sales through Paizo don't drive a WotC revenue stream. 

I find your argument unpersuasive, Jtlawyer.


----------



## ProfessorCirno

You know, I've thought of the part that's more insane then the multiple people agreeing with this - it's that they *gave no freaking warning whatsoever.*

Just out of the damn blue, "Oh hey, pdfs are banned after tonight."

WOW GUYS!  THANKS FOR THE HEADS UP!


----------



## Henry

It seems as if WotC is following the advice of the RIAA and TSR to the letter. Alienation of their supporters seems to be the number one priority for the past 8 months or so, despite the best efforts of people like Scott and...well, I'd say Linae, but she was let go... and Dave, but... he was let go, too... and Randy, but... 

It's just REALLY hard to support a company who is dead-set on negative PR like that.


----------



## Samnell

ProfessorCirno said:


> Just out of the damn blue, "Oh hey, pdfs are banned after tonight."
> 
> WOW GUYS!  THANKS FOR THE HEADS UP!




That's the source of about 70% of my anger. I don't like that they were pulled whatsoever, but pulled on only a few hours notice?


----------



## Treebore

I agree this is stupid. WOTC wants to punish me, and every other legal buyer of PDF's, for what pirate distributors are doing. This in absolutely no way is having any impact whatsoever on the thieves who like to illegally distribute illegal goods. If anything WOTC is increasing the demand for their product!

If governments cannot stop the flow of illegal drugs, even when they know exactly where it si coming from, how does WOTC think they are doing anything to stop pirating? All they have done is cut off legitimate and legal customers. All they are doing is taking away our legal options to have digital copies of our books.

So all WOTC is doing is screwing over their law abiding customers. All they are doing is increasing demand for illegal copies. All they are doing is being incredibly foolish and insulting to us, their legal customers.

The only sensible reason I can see for them doing this to prove how those 8 thieves definitely caused WOTC to lose revenue as a direct result of their piracy. Which is required for successful copyright lawsuits.

Still, even so I think this is an incredibly foolish and damaging move, to the point where I think they will regret doing this.


----------



## Brown Jenkin

Yes, sueing 6 people will make a difference. Just ask the RIAA, they've sued thousands and it sure has helped them.


----------



## mach1.9pants

Jeff Wilder said:


> (As an aside, I think it's really, really sweet of WotC to drive customers away to other RPG companies, on what's becoming a semi-regular basis.  It shows an admirable willingness to share the RPG market.  Kudos, WotC!  Ignore these folks telling you it was a bad move ... they just don't understand your corporate altruism.)



hahahahaaa Very Zen.


----------



## Filcher

If you're angry that you can't buy old TSR material, give WotC a month and they'll be selling to you again through the DDI. 

If you're angry that you can't download your remaining 5 PDF copies, you should be pissed that RPGnow sold you a product that they can't deliver on. 

Wizard is within its rights. RPGnow got caught with its pants down. Your bile is misdirected.


----------



## dmccoy1693

FATDRAGONGAMES said:


> Just when you think the bad decisions can't possibly keep coming...




You obviously have not spent enough time in a large corporation.  Rule 137 of working in a large corporation:  Never, EVER believe for a moment that your dumb boss can't make a dumber decision than the one he just made, because he ALWAYS can.  It can ALWAYS get worse.


----------



## XunValdorl of Kilsek

I honestly think in the end the DDI won't survive just like every other online thing Wizards has tried. They can't even get their chat rooms up and running.


----------



## joethelawyer

Quote:
     					Originally Posted by *joethelawyer* 

 
_I hope Scott Rouse is somewhere with a big bottle of Jack. He's gonna need it. He must feel like the Secret Service guy who was tasked with keeping President Clinton out of trouble with women. _





El Mahdi said:


> Man, I need more XP to give out!  This is Golden!




All XP accepted.  I'm so tired of being a second level goblin whatever-it-is.


----------



## Shemeska

Filcher said:


> If you're angry that you can't buy old TSR material, give WotC a month and they'll be selling to you again through the DDI.




Anyone think they'll try to somehow use this to promote DDI subscriptions?

That said, anyone else suspect that DDI sales aren't hitting expectations? Character visualizer, dungeon builder, and virtual game table all having had no news in months, getting on a year past when they were originally supposed to launch, and links to info on them getting removed from the DDI page?


----------



## ProfessorCirno

Filcher said:


> If you're angry that you can't buy old TSR material, give WotC a month and they'll be selling to you again through the DDI.
> 
> If you're angry that you can't download your remaining 5 PDF copies, you should be pissed that RPGnow sold you a product that they can't deliver on.
> 
> Wizard is within its rights. RPGnow got caught with its pants down. Your bile is misdirected.




Hahahahaha, what.

Seriously.

What.

I can't think of a logical answer to this OR a snappy response.  You're dead serious.  You actually think that WotC has done *nothing* wrong here.  I..am speechless.


----------



## zacharythefirst

Filcher said:


> If you're angry that you can't buy old TSR material, give WotC a month and they'll be selling to you again through the DDI.
> 
> If you're angry that you can't download your remaining 5 PDF copies, you should be pissed that RPGnow sold you a product that they can't deliver on.
> 
> Wizard is within its rights. RPGnow got caught with its pants down. Your bile is misdirected.




No, sir.  I won't be giving WotC jack-crap, and they will not be selling to me through any outlet.

I don't care what WotC's rights are, there are things from a basic level of customer courtesy and fan relations that you *do not do.*  You do not give ZERO DAYS NOTICE before cutting off already-purchased downloads.  That's their right?  OK.  Does that make it anything other a foolish, inconsiderate, thoughtless, insulting move?  No.  It also would have been their right to give us some sort of notice.  It would have been their right to work out some sort of alternative consideration for people who actually paid for their electronic product, one that retained some modicum of publisher/gamer trust.  That's not the "right" they went with, is it?

There are too many game publishers who work at giving a crap, putting out a quality product, and show basic consideration for their fans to deal with this, or even spend time defending it.  Customers and gamers deserve better, and it's out there.


----------



## Urizen

Filcher said:


> If you're angry that you can't buy old TSR material, give WotC a month and they'll be selling to you again through the DDI.
> 
> If you're angry that you can't download your remaining 5 PDF copies, you should be pissed that RPGnow sold you a product that they can't deliver on.
> 
> Wizard is within its rights. RPGnow got caught with its pants down. Your bile is misdirected.




Blah.

Did WOTC give rpgnow or Paizo ( or the customers) any warning whatsoever? No.

If I recall correctly, you have to give at least 30 days notice before you pull products from the site.

30 days is easily enough time for a customer to to download something 5 times, and I seriously doubt that OBS would  ignore the fact that one of their largest-selling clients is canceling their account and not tell customers to download the products they had purchased before it was too late.

From what I can tell, WOTC just pulled the plug, which is likely a breach of contract on their part.

I could be wrong, if I am, someone say so.


----------



## mach1.9pants

Shemeska said:


> Anyone think they'll try to somehow use this to promote DDI subscriptions?
> 
> That said, anyone else suspect that DDI sales aren't hitting expectations? Character visualizer, dungeon builder, and virtual game table all having had no news in months, getting on a year past when they were originally supposed to launch, and links to info on them getting removed from the DDI page?



Man I so un-observant I hadn't even notice their cancellation removal from the website.


----------



## Filcher

ProfessorCirno said:


> Hahahahaha, what.
> 
> Seriously.
> 
> What.
> 
> I can't think of a logical answer to this OR a snappy response.  You're dead serious.  You actually think that WotC has done *nothing* wrong here.  I..am speechless.




Respectfully submitted: 

I sell a product to Cirno. Cirno, Inc. tell its customers that they will be able to buy Filcher Paste to the end of time. 

I stop producing Filcher Paste. Cirno Inc.'s customers are pissed ... 

Because of promises I made? 

No. Because of promises Cirno Inc. made. 

But you're all pissed a Filcher Paste. 

WotC is under no obligation to keep selling their PDFs. But folks are behaving like it is their right to buy them. 

Phhhbbt. 

WotC will sell the PDFs again. But not through RPGnow, who sold what they can't deliver.


----------



## XunValdorl of Kilsek

See you in a week. ~ PCat


----------



## HeirToPendragon

Post about piracy removed. Remember, folks, advocate piracy and get a free suspension! It's not something we want here.  ~ Piratecat


----------



## freebfrost

Hahahahaha!

Glorious!

It's news like this that makes me glad that I stopped buying any WotC products once they announced 4E, and put all my gaming funds over into Paizo.  Not only did it save me a couple thousand a year, it supports a company that truly cares about its fans, and helps ensure that the legacy lives on in non-corporate setting.

And while the illegal pirated pdfs will remain on torrent sites for a long time to come, all of WotC's products are still legally available via eBay and used book stores for those looking for bargains, with the added benefit of sending no money to WotC's coffers!  That's how I rounded out the rest of my collection (4E excluded).

Best news I've heard in a while.


----------



## Filcher

XunValdorl of Kilsek said:


> What honestly is your malfunction?




I don't have a malfunction. 

But you are welcome to punch holes in my argument. This is a discussion of ideas, after all, that has nothing to do with me.


----------



## XunValdorl of Kilsek

Filcher said:


> Respectfully submitted:
> 
> I sell a product to Cirno. Cirno, Inc. tell its customers that they will be able to buy Filcher Paste to the end of time.
> 
> I stop producing Filcher Paste. Cirno Inc.'s customers are pissed ...
> 
> Because of promises I made?
> 
> No. Because of promises Cirno Inc. made.
> 
> But you're all pissed a Cirno Inc.
> 
> WotC is under no obligation to keep selling their PDFs. But folks are behaving like it is their right to buy them.
> 
> Phhhbbt.
> 
> WotC will sell the PDFs again. But not through RPGnow, who sold what they can't deliver.





   Do you not understand business?? If Wizards gives RPGNow the right to sell it's PDFs, people purchase them then they get taken away by Wizards, then thats Wizards wrong doing. Sure RPGnow should have to refund it's customers and Wizards needs to refund RPGNow, they didn't get to sell those PDF's for free.


----------



## mach1.9pants

freebfrost said:


> Hahahahaha!
> 
> Glorious!
> 
> <snip>
> 
> Best news I've heard in a while.



How nice of you to come in and laugh at other peoples misfortune.


----------



## Breschau of Livonia

I'm kinda confused. I mean I get going after pirates and all. But the hardcopy books have also shown up on filesharing sites. Meanwhile, I've made tons of WotC and TSR purchases on RPGnow without illegally sharing any. So because of crooks I can't purchase any more. To quote my favorite line to use on a car dealer - "Why won't you let me buy this car today?"


----------



## Filcher

XunValdorl of Kilsek said:


> Do you not understand business??




My suspicion is that contracts are more nuanced than you are suggesting: 



XunValdorl of Kilsek said:


> If Wizards gives RPGNow the right to sell it's PDFs, people purchase them then they get taken away by Wizards, then thats Wizards wrong doing.




No. Everyone that bought a PDF could have downloaded it. We're angry because we won't be able to downloaded it the other 4 times, as promised by RPGnow. 

I haven't seen the contract that RPGnow made with Wizards. I'll make that case that you haven't either. But I gave my money to RPGnow, who can't supply what they promised: 5 downloads of my PDF.


----------



## Cadfan

Urizen said:


> From what I can tell, WOTC just pulled the plug, which is likely a breach of contract on their part.



Contracts do not work that way.

Electronic media does not work that way.

Think it through.

I write a song, which will be sold exclusively through your online music retailer in mp3 form.  I give you a copy of the mp3, and you allow people who pay you money to download that mp3.  Then we split the money.

Lets say that our contract requires 30 days notice before cancellation.

How can I "pull the plug?"  Lets say I order you to stop selling the mp3, and I don't give you 30 days notice.  What do my words accomplish?  You still have the mp3, and the right to sell it.  What can I do?  Its not like the data is piped from my master server to your customer.  I can't turn it off like water from a faucet.  I can't sue you either since you have a valid contract.  My words are just talk.

One of the following scenarios happened.

1. WOTC didn't have a 30 day notice clause for terminating the license.  They had a much shorter period, maybe even 24 hours, which they followed.  I suspect this one as most likely.
2. WOTC did have a 30 day notice clause, and offered RPGNOW and the other retailers a new, more lucrative contract in the future if they agreed to cancel this contract now.  RPGNOW decided that breaching their contracts with their customers was the better choice, terminated their current contract, and accepted the new one.
3. WOTC did have a 30 day notice clause, and gave notice 30 days ago.  No one told the customers until today.

And I suppose, for the sake of argument, we can include:

4. No one at WOTC, Paizo, or RPGNOW has any clue what their licensing agreement says.


----------



## Alzrius

It seems clear to me that whoever is in charge of WotC right now is in fact a secret fan of Pathfinder. Why else would WotC be handing down such ridiculous decisions? Clearly, there's a secret superhero for Paizo pulling the strings. Nothing else makes any kind of sense.

That said, I echo the words of Piratecat:



			
				Piratecat said:
			
		

> What I find most annoying about this is that the honest people are being punished, and it's not going to slow down the dishonest people one bit.




Yeah, that pretty well sums it up.


----------



## Filcher

Cadfan said:


> Contracts do not work that way.
> 
> Electronic media does not work that way.
> 
> Think it through.
> 
> I write a song, which will be sold exclusively through your online music retailer in mp3 form.  I give you a copy of the mp3, and you allow people who pay you money to download that mp3.  Then we split the money.
> 
> Lets say that our contract requires 30 days notice before cancellation.
> 
> How can I "pull the plug?"  Lets say I order you to stop selling the mp3, and I don't give you 30 days notice.  What do my words accomplish?  You still have the mp3, and the right to sell it.  What can I do?  Its not like the data is piped from my master server to your customer.  I can't turn it off like water from a faucet.  I can't sue you either since you have a valid contract.  My words are just talk.
> 
> One of the following scenarios happened.
> 
> 1. WOTC didn't have a 30 day notice clause for terminating the license.  They had a much shorter period, maybe even 24 hours, which they followed.  I suspect this one as most likely.
> 2. WOTC did have a 30 day notice clause, and offered RPGNOW and the other retailers a new, more lucrative contract in the future if they agreed to cancel this contract now.  RPGNOW decided that breaching their contracts with their customers was the better choice, terminated their current contract, and accepted the new one.
> 3. WOTC did have a 30 day notice clause, and gave notice 30 days ago.  No one told the customers until today.
> 
> And I suppose, for the sake of argument, we can include:
> 
> 4. No one at WOTC, Paizo, or RPGNOW has any clue what their licensing agreement says.




I agree with the man with 3000 more posts than I have. Experience points for all!


----------



## joethelawyer

Chris Pramas just posted this on his Facebook status section...

*Green Ronin values and appreciates our PDF customers and to show it we've put True20 on sale for only $9.99. RPGNow.com - Green Ronin - True20 Adventure Roleplaying, Revised Edition*


I love it!


----------



## Beginning of the End

Cadfan said:


> One of the following scenarios happened.
> 
> 1. WOTC didn't have a 30 day notice clause for terminating the license.  They had a much shorter period, maybe even 24 hours, which they followed.  I suspect this one as most likely.
> 2. WOTC did have a 30 day notice clause, and offered RPGNOW and the other retailers a new, more lucrative contract in the future if they agreed to cancel this contract now.  RPGNOW decided that breaching their contracts with their customers was the better choice, terminated their current contract, and accepted the new one.
> 3. WOTC did have a 30 day notice clause, and gave notice 30 days ago.  No one told the customers until today.
> 
> And I suppose, for the sake of argument, we can include:
> 
> 4. No one at WOTC, Paizo, or RPGNOW has any clue what their licensing agreement says.




5. "Pull it down or we're going to sue you." "Can we afford to be sued by a major corporation? No? Okay, we're pulling it down."


----------



## Treebore

I think WOTC has forgotten that business, even big ones, survive on customer satisfaction. I think they will get reminded of this basic fact soon.


----------



## Filcher

Cadfan said:


> Contracts do not work that way.
> 
> Electronic media does not work that way.
> 
> Think it through.
> 
> I write a song, which will be sold exclusively through your online music retailer in mp3 form.  I give you a copy of the mp3, and you allow people who pay you money to download that mp3.  Then we split the money.
> 
> Lets say that our contract requires 30 days notice before cancellation.
> 
> How can I "pull the plug?"  Lets say I order you to stop selling the mp3, and I don't give you 30 days notice.  What do my words accomplish?  You still have the mp3, and the right to sell it.  What can I do?  Its not like the data is piped from my master server to your customer.  I can't turn it off like water from a faucet.  I can't sue you either since you have a valid contract.  My words are just talk.
> 
> One of the following scenarios happened.
> 
> 1. WOTC didn't have a 30 day notice clause for terminating the license.  They had a much shorter period, maybe even 24 hours, which they followed.  I suspect this one as most likely.
> 2. WOTC did have a 30 day notice clause, and offered RPGNOW and the other retailers a new, more lucrative contract in the future if they agreed to cancel this contract now.  RPGNOW decided that breaching their contracts with their customers was the better choice, terminated their current contract, and accepted the new one.
> 3. WOTC did have a 30 day notice clause, and gave notice 30 days ago.  No one told the customers until today.
> 
> And I suppose, for the sake of argument, we can include:
> 
> 4. No one at WOTC, Paizo, or RPGNOW has any clue what their licensing agreement says.




I agree with the man with 3000 more posts than I have. Experience points for all!


----------



## dmccoy1693

My final thoughts on this topic:

I financial analyst once told me that if I want to know the health of a company today, I should look at its financial records, but if I wanted to know the health of the company tomorrow, I should look at its customer service. "Because you can only p*** off your customers for so long before they go elsewhere." (Yes, that is an exact quote.)

Two years ago this month, Wizards made their first major step in failing to act like an industry leader by cancelling the Dungeon and Dragon Magazines and failing to inform the public themselves. They allowed Paizo to deliver the official announcement while they remained silent. They were unable to own up to their own actions for a solid week when they finally caved and continued the mags as electronic only publications. 

Today, in my opinion, they have taken their last act as an industry leader. Their actions over the past two years have become increasingly inexplicible. No longer can I, or anyone else I fear, look to Wizards for leadership or the new direction that role playing should go. No longer can Wizards claim to be on the cutting edge of the way products should be produced. No longer is Wizards the gold standard of the industry. Others will rise up to claim their place. May they learn what not to do.

Good-bye Wizards. May your Coast be peaceful and tranquil. I shall not visit you there.


----------



## Olaf the Stout

I think what bothers me about this decision is:


They gave less that 24 hours notice
They are getting rid of all their PDF's from all editions of D&D, not just 4E
People that already bought the electronic products will no longer have the ability to download a copy

Number 1 is just a strange decision.  I'm not quite sure what the reasoning behind the super-short notice is.  I think a lot of people would be more accepting of this decision if WotC had given even just a week's notice.  That's enough time for people to work out if there are any other PDF's that they want to buy.  It also give people a chance to make sure that they defintely have copies of PDF's they had purchased previously. Legally WotC probably didn't have to give any notice.  But I think it would have made most people a bit more accepting of the decision if they had.

Number 2 is also a head scratcher for me.  I can understand getting rid of the 4E PDF's.  I was a bit surprised that they released the core rulebooks in PDF form in the first place.  But why get rid of previous edition PDF's?  I doubt that they would be cannibalising sales of 4E products.  Sure they wouldn't be bringing in a huge income either but it keeps some goodwill with players of previous editions.  To get rid of them doesn't really do anything other that get people offside, especially since it basically makes these products unavailable now.

Number 3 wouldn't be much of an issue for me if they had given even a week's notice.  That would have given me enough time to go through my PDF's, make sure that I still had copies of all the WotC products that I had bought previously or download new copies if I didn't.  I think I still have copies of all the products I bought.  However I bought some PDF's several years ago.  I've changed computers since then so some may have got lost along the way.

Olaf the Stout


----------



## Odhanan

treebore said:


> i think wotc has forgotten that business, even big ones, survive on customer satisfaction. I think they will get reminded of this basic fact soon.



qft.


----------



## MerricB

Olaf the Stout said:


> I think what bothers me about this decision is:
> 
> 
> They gave less that 24 hours notice
> They are getting rid of all their PDF's from all editions of D&D
> People that already bought the electronic products will no longer have the ability to download a copy
> 
> Number 1 is just a strange decision.  I'm not quite sure what the reasoning behind the super-short notice is.  I think a lot of people would be more accepting of this decision if WotC had given even just a week's notice.  That's enough time for people to work out if there are any other PDF's that they want to buy.  It also give people a chance to make sure that they defintely have copies of PDF's they had purchased previously. Legally WotC probably didn't have to give any notice.  But I think it would have made most people a bit more accepting of the decision if they had.




The best reason I can imagine is so that the pirates didn't get any notice either and so didn't download one final bunch of products... but it's still not a very good reason compared to the customer anger it has caused.

Cheers!


----------



## Lonely Tylenol

WotC_Trevor said:


> Hey all. I wanted to step in and shine a mote of light on the subject. First off, this cesation of PDF sales has absolutely nothing to do with the Internet Sales Policy. I know it's the 6th of April and I can definitely see how the two would appear linked, but the truth is, this is a completely seperate matter.
> 
> Unfortunately, due to recent findings of illegal copying and online distribution (piracy) of our products, Wizards of the Coast has decided to cease the sales of online PDFs. We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content and as soon as we have any more information I'll get it to you.




Attention, customers.  Since we caught a few people passing around PDFs that we had sold them (thereby demonstrating the effectiveness of the PDF watermarking system) we have decided that you're all a bunch of crooks.  Since you guys like piracy so much, we've decided to arrange it so that the only way you can get PDFs of our products is by pirating them.  You win by getting free PDFs, and we win by losing money.  Or something.  See you on bittorrent!


----------



## Olaf the Stout

MerricB said:


> The best reason I can imagine is so that the pirates didn't get any notice either and so didn't download one final bunch of products... but it's still not a very good reason compared to the customer anger it has caused.
> 
> Cheers!




I had figured that was probably the case.  However it seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face.  I'm sure the pirates can still probably get pirated copies off of a Torrent somewhere.  So all WotC have really achieved is stopping legitimate customers from having one last chance to snap up any PDF's they wanted.

Olaf the Stout


----------



## Cadfan

Beginning of the End said:


> 5. "Pull it down or we're going to sue you." "Can we afford to be sued by a major corporation? No? Okay, we're pulling it down."



That's not how the legal system works.  Lawsuits aren't some magical thing that just happen and bankrupt people irrespective of the existence of something over which to sue.


----------



## joethelawyer

You're all missing something important here.  WOTC realized that with its actions in the past few years it managed to completely fracture and splinter the RPG community.  

This is just part of WOTC's master plan to unify once again the entire RPG community.  Every board I have been to tonight is unified in their outrage at WOTC, no matter what edition they play. 

Well done WOTC!!  What's phase 2 of the master plan I wonder?


----------



## HeirToPendragon

joethelawyer said:


> You're all missing something important here.  WOTC realized that with its actions in the past few years it managed to completely fracture and splinter the RPG community.
> 
> This is just part of WOTC's master plan to unify once again the entire RPG community.  Every board I have been to tonight is unified in their outrage at WOTC, no matter what edition they play.
> 
> Well done WOTC!!  What's phase 2 of the master plan I wonder?




They aren't sure yet, but phase 3 is profit!


----------



## mach1.9pants

MerricB said:


> The best reason I can imagine is so that the pirates didn't get any notice either and so didn't download one final bunch of products... but it's still not a very good reason compared to the customer anger it has caused.
> 
> Cheers!



Ummm what 'final bunch of products'? Everything is already out there, including stuff which has never been released on PDF.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol

DaveMage said:


> Excellent!
> 
> We'll have a case study!
> 
> Those of you who know how to visit pirate sites can let us know if the frequency of available new WotC titles declines on illicit file sharing sites from here on out.




For your reference:

Before WotC started releasing its own PDFs for sale, pirated copies of books showed up within about a month of release.

After WotC started releasing its own PDFs for sale, pirated copies of books showed up within about a month of release.

I predict that after today, pirate copies of future titles will show up within about a month of release.  Those copies will not contain watermarks that can lead to prosecution of the people who pirated them.

I'd laugh about this, if it weren't so tragic for people who don't live in places where you can buy WotC books for anything like the North American price.  I'm led to believe that a lot of ENWorlders around the world rely on PDFs just because they sell for relatively reasonable prices compared to hard copies.


----------



## MadLordOfMilk

MerricB said:


> The best reason I can imagine is so that the pirates didn't get any notice either and so didn't download one final bunch of products... but it's still not a very good reason compared to the customer anger it has caused.
> 
> Cheers!



*Everything* for 4e is already available (illegally) online. Even the starter set, the character sheets product, dungeon tiles, the DM screen, etc. Sure, the ones you can't buy are scans, but the point is that it's already out there.

Well, OK, I haven't seen the official PHB power cards anywhere (the ones in the character sheets thing are out there), but I don't think they were available for purchase as a PDF anyway


----------



## Filcher

joethelawyer said:


> This is just part of WOTC's master plan to unify once again the entire RPG community.  Every board I have been to tonight is unified in their outrage at WOTC, no matter what edition they play.




I stopped by RPG.net to check Jtlawyer's claim. The thread was just as long, but several times LESS vitriolic, FWIW. 

It seems that regardless of whatever the hell WotC does, it is our ENworld community that loses.


----------



## MerricB

MadLordOfMilk said:


> *Everything* for 4e is already available (illegally) online.




Indeed. That was the best reason I could come up with... and it wasn't a good one. 

Cheers!


----------



## joethelawyer

New Poll I just put up...

http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...u-call-out-next-week-after-tonights-mess.html


----------



## Treebore

joethelawyer said:


> Chris Pramas just posted this on his Facebook status section...
> 
> *Green Ronin values and appreciates our PDF customers and to show it we've put True20 on sale for only $9.99. RPGNow.com - Green Ronin - True20 Adventure Roleplaying, Revised Edition*
> 
> 
> I love it!




Yep, Green Ronin, Paizo, Goodman, Troll Lords, the people who do Savage Worlds, AGP, Fat Dragon, Fiery Dragon, and Malhavoc certainly know how valuable customer appreciation is to their future business.

*Sorry if I am forgetting any other good companies!


----------



## ProfessorCirno

Filcher said:


> I stopped by RPG.net to check Jtlawyer's claim. The thread was just as long, but several times LESS vitriolic, FWIW.
> 
> It seems that regardless of whatever the hell WotC does, it is our ENworld community that loses.




Hahaha, are you still going on about your "WotC is TOTALLY JUSTIFIED in screwing over their fanbase" thing there?

Look, you're the _only one_ claiming that WotC is completely in the right here.  The *only one*.  Shouldn't that be a hint?

Seriously, there's tons of people ON THIS THREAD that have defended every single other thing WotC has done.  And even they are drawing teh line here.

Stop trying to claim that the greviences are because of some bizarro "OMG I MUST HATE WIZARDS" conspiracy.  It's not only complete BS, but it cheapens and insults everyone around you.

Admin here. Stop. You're arguing AT someone instead of discussing their point, and that's a problem. This topic gets more interesting when people stop telling other people how they're supposed to behave, think or feel. ~ PCat


----------



## Hussar

Cadfan said:


> That's not how the legal system works.  Lawsuits aren't some magical thing that just happen and bankrupt people irrespective of the existence of something over which to sue.




Well, yes and no.

They certainly _could_ threaten to take them to court.  And, that threat might be enough to cow the pdf distributors into obeying.  Heck, the distributors could have threatened to sue over breach of contract and WOTC could have simply told them to go ahead with the knowledge that they could tie things up in court for years and the complainants would go bankrupt long before any settlement was reached.

I'm not saying that either scenario happened, but, it certainly could.  It really depends on whether or not the distributors wanted to burn bridges with WOTC and go public.  

All this aside, I'm usually a huge apologist for WOTC.  I know that.  However, even I'm baffled by this.  This is just out and out stupid on the face.

As a questions, could this be part of a package of moves in the face of the court cases against the pirates?  Could WOTC be collecting information, or perhaps building some sort of case against the pirates in this move.  I'm not really sure how, but, could the two be linked?

As in, WOTC says they are going to sue X for piracy.  They then pull all their pdf's as part of that suit saying that the piracy of X is the reason for the move and thus X should be responsible for the loss of revenue that they could have had from pdf's?

Hey, this is tinfoil hat time.  I have no idea.  I'm just wildly speculating.  Is this possible?


----------



## Darrin Drader

Dear Friends at WotC,

It is regrettable that the company has lost its way. It used to have such great promise. Sad.

- Darrin


----------



## MadLordOfMilk

ProfessorCirno said:


> Look, you're the _only one_ claiming that WotC is completely in the right here.  The *only one*.  Shouldn't that be a hint?



Actually, also I think Wizards is completely, absolutely, 100% within their rights to cut PDF sales. Doesn't mean I think it was the wisest business decision, but as a company they're more than justified (of course if they broke a contract, that's another story, but I'm not getting into that).


----------



## Filcher

ProfessorCirno said:


> Hahaha, are you still going on about your "WotC is TOTALLY JUSTIFIED in screwing over their fanbase" thing there?
> 
> Look, you're the _only one_ claiming that WotC is completely in the right here.  The *only one*.  Shouldn't that be a hint?
> 
> Seriously, there's tons of people ON THIS THREAD that have defended every single other thing WotC has done.  And even they are drawing teh line here.
> 
> Stop trying to claim that the greviences are because of some bizarro "OMG I MUST HATE WIZARDS" conspiracy.  It's not only complete BS, but it cheapens and insults everyone around you.




P. Cirno, I think you've misunderstood my argument. I'm not disputing *you*, I'm disputing the conclusions you are positing. Two different things, that keep us friends in the end, while permitting intelligent dialog without resorting to full caps. It's not a popularity contest.  

I maintain that, despite the backlash, Wizards was within its rights to stop selling their product. 

I maintain that, despite the misdirected bile, the PDF middlemen were wrong to offer to sell something they didn't have control over (5 copies). 

I maintain that everyone is angry at the wrong entity.


----------



## Haffrung Helleyes

*Wow*

I didn't get to my WoTC PDFS on DriveThruRPG on time , and now they're gone.  

Well, this is the last time I spend a dime on a WoTC product.  I don't have to bend over and take it in my leisure time.  And I won't.

For the first time, I'm glad WoTC let all their best game designers go, because those people can now support the systems I'll be buying.  And again, I'm very thankful for Paizo!

Ken


----------



## Mistwell

ProfessorCirno said:


> Hahaha, are you still going on about your "WotC is TOTALLY JUSTIFIED in screwing over their fanbase" thing there?
> 
> Look, you're the _only one_ claiming that WotC is completely in the right here.  The *only one*.  Shouldn't that be a hint?
> 
> Seriously, there's tons of people ON THIS THREAD that have defended every single other thing WotC has done.  And even they are drawing teh line here.
> 
> Stop trying to claim that the greviences are because of some bizarro "OMG I MUST HATE WIZARDS" conspiracy.  It's not only complete BS, but it cheapens and insults everyone around you.




WOTC is completely in the right here.

There.  Now you know two.

Also, while definitely not all, a disproportionate number of the squeaky wheels over this issue are also people who already did not like WOTC to begin with.


----------



## HeirToPendragon

Are you guys done flinging poo yet? Wizard hasn't even posted anything on it. You're going off of e-mail and blog posts.

Really? Come on people.


----------



## Filcher

Haffrung Helleyes said:


> I didn't get to my WoTC PDFS on DriveThruRPG on time , and now they're gone.
> 
> Well, this is the last time I spend a dime on a WoTC product.  I don't have to bend over and take it in my leisure time.  And I won't.
> 
> For the first time, I'm glad WoTC let all their best game designers go, because those people can now support the systems I'll be buying.  And again, I'm very thankful for Paizo!
> 
> Ken




Haffrung, 

Respectfully, it is RPGnow that owes you a refund.

RPGnow set up the conditions for the purchase, and your expectations (and mine). Their supplier had a change of mind, and RPGnow is unable to fulfill their commitment (5 copies).

If RPGnow didn't have the power to enforce the maintenance of 5 copies for download, they shouldn't have sold them to us.


----------



## Friadoc

MerricB said:


> The best reason I can imagine is so that the pirates didn't get any notice either and so didn't download one final bunch of products... but it's still not a very good reason compared to the customer anger it has caused.
> 
> Cheers!




That'd work, except that they're pirates, so they downloaded the first time and seeded the net like a prolific fertility clinic.

While I'm not one to push, outside of role-playing, a conspiracy theory, I'm fairly comfortable in looking at WotC's motivations and timing here with a curious, cynical eye, but that could be my psychology coursework talking.


----------



## Relique du Madde

Olaf the Stout said:


> They are getting rid of all their PDF's from all editions of D&D, not just 4E




Easy.  If people can't find books or pdfs of previous editions of DnD then they can't play those games.  If they want to play DnD, then they are forced to buy over priced 4e books and eventually over priced 4e pdfs from WoTC.


----------



## HeirToPendragon

Why would you ever need 5 copies of a pdf? These things are small enough to fit into e-mails. I would only ever need one download. I can understand 2 in case the first gets corrupted.


----------



## Treebore

Filcher said:


> P. Cirno, I think you've misunderstood my argument. I'm not disputing *you*, I'm disputing the conclusions you are positing. Two different things, that keep us friends in the end, while permitting intelligent dialog without resorting to full caps. It's not a popularity contest.
> 
> I maintain that, despite the backlash, Wizards was within its rights to stop selling their product.
> 
> I maintain that, despite the misdirected bile, the PDF middlemen were wrong to offer to sell something they didn't have control over (5 copies).
> 
> I maintain that everyone is angry at the wrong entity.




Business is perception. We, the customer base, perceive that it is WOTC's fault we no longer have access to PDF's we were planning on one day buying or no longer have access to additional downloads if our house burns down and destroys all our digital copies of PDF's we have already bought. I do not see how RPGNow, or Paizo, is at fault for WOTC's knee jerk and foolish action.

We perceive that WOTC is punishing us law abiding customers for the actions of a few thieves. Insinuating we are also some how guilty, since we are being punished.

So what matters is that WOTC has once again slapped a segment of their customer base in the face.

Guess what? It is our CUSTOMER GIVEN RIGHT to be angry and to quit supporting WOTC.

So I personally do not care what rights you think WOTC has, what I care about is my right to be angry and to stop supporting WOTC completely.

It seems people have forgotten that companies ultimately answers to their customers. They live and die by the happiness of their customers. I think this may have angered enough of WOTC's customers to actually get them to exercise their right to not support WOTC. Hopefully on a large enough scale to remind and reawaken WOTC to this fact, and show them how badly they have been failing at performing such an important part of business.

Hopefully it will then motivate them to get off their collective hind ends and to actively and aggressively make their customers happy.


----------



## On Puget Sound

As a past owner of a brick and mortar store (different hobby - aquarium not gaming), I applaud WOTC for shutting down PDF purchases.  Now if they could just do something about Amazon, we might be able to save at least a few places people can go to talk to, and game with, actual live humans, and also save those live humans' jobs.


----------



## jdrakeh

Filcher said:


> We're angry because we won't be able to downloaded it the other 4 times, as promised by RPGnow.




I'm sorry, but that's just pure, unadulterated, . People are angry because WotC _pulled their entire PDF catalog from circulation everywhere, indefinitely, without giving any notice whatsoever to consumers_. Not only does this punish people who purchased their PDFs legally by making such legal channels no longer available, it also does _nothing_ to significantly hinder piracy while also potentially harming other PDF publishers. 

WotC has, via their reps in these very threads, said that they're _through_ with PDFs and are now looking into alternative distribution methods. Your assertion that they'll be back selling PDFs within a week or two has no basis in any current reality. They might return to PDFs, sure but that currently isn't their plan according to what precious little their reps have revealed. How do you think that will effect the PDF market? 

One of the biggest players in PDFs just packed up their shop and went home, giving only a few hours notice. If I quit a 9 to 5 job, it's basic courtesy for me to give at _least_ two weeks notice — but WotC gets to walk out on a _huge_ business arrangement with only a few hours of notice?  This is almost certainly legal but it sure as hell isn't considerate or professional. 

WotC might not be evil but they sure as hell aren't a company that I want to give my money to anymore.


----------



## Truth Seeker

Everything that has been said, has been said.

Well, now I feel sorry some folks at a company that has tried to rebuild their 'reputation', into a good standing.

I guess no one has learnt the hard lessons from history.

A history that should not be repeated by previous stupid mistakes.


----------



## Haffrung Helleyes

Filcher said:


> Haffrung,
> 
> Respectfully, it is RPGnow that owes you a refund.
> 
> RPGnow set up the conditions for the purchase, and your expectations (and mine). Their supplier had a change of mind, and RPGnow is unable to fulfill their commitment (5 copies).
> 
> If RPGnow didn't have the power to enforce the maintenance of 5 copies for download, they shouldn't have sold them to us.





You know, you and Mistwell can keep repeating that mantra as much as you want, but It did NOT suddenly become okay to insult someone because you happen to disagree with them. ~ PCat

Have a nice day.


----------



## joethelawyer

Filcher said:


> Haffrung,
> 
> Respectfully, it is RPGnow that owes you a refund.
> 
> RPGnow set up the conditions for the purchase, and your expectations (and mine). Their supplier had a change of mind, and RPGnow is unable to fulfill their commitment (5 copies).
> 
> If RPGnow didn't have the power to enforce the maintenance of 5 copies for download, they shouldn't have sold them to us.





Perception is all that matters here man.  WOTC used up any goodwill they had over the past 2 years, so the benefit of the doubt is gone.  Not too many people blame RPGnow, because we can relate to them as a small customer screwed over by the megacorporation.  Not to get into politics too much, but look what is happening in the world today?  What's happening to the little guy?  Isn't it natural then to project all that rage upwards to the ultimate cause of the problem?


----------



## MichaelSomething

This is sort of like getting sneak atacked by a rogue during the suprise round.


----------



## HeirToPendragon

See ya. ~ PCat


----------



## I'm A Banana

joethelawyer said:
			
		

> New Poll I just put up...




Dude, all of those polls don't seem to be doing much aside from cluttering up the message board. You should probably keep most of the questions here. In this thread. Where we're already talking about it.



			
				Filcher said:
			
		

> I maintain that, despite the backlash, Wizards was within its rights to stop selling their product.
> 
> I maintain that, despite the misdirected bile, the PDF middlemen were wrong to offer to sell something they didn't have control over (5 copies).
> 
> I maintain that everyone is angry at the wrong entity.




You conclusion doesn't follow from your argument. Just because WotC had the legal right to do this doesn't mean that they don't deserve a backlash for doing it. Even if the retailers shouldn't have offered a promise they couldn't back up, WotC presumably knew, and didn't really care (and probably had it in the initial contract that they could do this at any time, similar to the language in the GSL). 

Even if the online retailers can be fairly blamed for promising something they couldn't actually control, that doesn't mean WotC gets indemnity for doing a pointless, boneheaded, scaredey-cat tactic like this offering the excuse of "piracy." 

Yeah, you can be legitimately angry at the retailers. They shouldn't have promised something they couldn't deliver. But you can ALSO be legitimately angry at WotC, and, in fact, given the reasons for the decision and the ramifications and suddenness of it, and the fact that WotC were the ones who made the decision (with the retailers just abiding by the agreements they can), WotC is certainly to blame, and, in my mind, to blame for a much more massive and idiotic move. 

I'm usually a big fan of WotC's policies, and they had shown an admirable willingness to engage the online community in a smart, levelheaded manner. This is a 180 from that. After building up the bad blood from the GSL debacle, this seems like it might be a full-fledged new direction rather than just a fluke or oversight.

Just because the retailers also screwed up doesn't mean WotC gets a free pass, or gets the heat off their backs. WotC isn't responsible for the agreements the retailers made, but they are responsible for their own behavior, and the idiot motives behind that behavior.


----------



## mach1.9pants

HeirToPendragon said:


> Why would you ever need 5 copies of a pdf? These things are small enough to fit into e-mails. I would only ever need one download. I can understand 2 in case the first gets corrupted.




Have you ever had a hard drive die? I have I would have lost everything if I hadn't made backups. However some people may not have made backups _because_ they could download it again. A guy on WotC forums had his laptop stolen today, he hadn't backed up, so now he has lost his paid for PDFs despite thinking he was backed up on RPGnow when he purchased them.


----------



## Darrin Drader

I have a suggestion.

WotC took their ball and went home. Let them.

For those of us with the means to do so, let's go to RPGNow or the ENWorld PDF store and support the publishers who are selling their PDFs by purchasing some of them.

If you don't want the small press to suffer from this, do something about it. Go spend a little money on something as a way of saying thank you for doing right by the customer.


----------



## Filcher

jdrakeh said:


> I'm sorry, but that's just pure, unadulterated, . People are angry because WotC _pulled their entire PDF catalog from circulation everywhere, indefinitely, without giving any notice whatsoever to consumers_.




Drakeh, 

WotC didn't sell you the promise of 5 PDFs. RPGnow did. 

For example: I'm a middleman who sells you a year's worth of eggs. You pay up front. My supplier's chickens die.

You come to me for eggs. I don't have any eggs. I point down the road at the chicken farm, but don't offer you your prorated money back. 

Who are you angry at? 



joethelawyer said:


> Perception is all that matters here man.  WOTC used up any goodwill they had over the past 2 years, so the benefit of the doubt is gone.




I think jtlawyer has the gist of it. Perception. Obviously, I can't convince my friends here otherwise, but I'm okay with that. We all still roll dice together at Gen Con.  



Haffrung Helleyes said:


> You know, you and Mistwell can keep repeating that mantra as much as you want, but those of us here who aren't sock puppets aren't buying it.
> 
> Have a nice day.




I think I've made a good case. You are welcome to disagree with it, but insulting me for my ideas is ... lame.

Off to the pub. For real this time. Let me know who wins the internet.


----------



## munkeywrench

Hmm...

I love playing 4e.

On principle, I only buy the pdf files.


Solutions:
1) Quit 4e
2) Switch to illicit downloads

Well, I guess WotC has lost all future revenue from me regardless.

Drink up me 'earties! Yo Ho!


----------



## chris.crouch

Lonely Tylenol said:


> For your reference:
> 
> Before WotC started releasing its own PDFs for sale, pirated copies of books showed up within about a month of release.




About a month before, for the core 3



> After WotC started releasing its own PDFs for sale, pirated copies of books showed up within about a month of release.




According to someone earlier in the thread, within a few hours of the release of the book.



> I predict that after today, pirate copies of future titles will show up within about a month of release.  Those copies will not contain watermarks that can lead to prosecution of the people who pirated them.




They'll be out within days I'd guess, but the quality of the PDF will be poorer. Probably will be a poor scan, and no OCR so no searching.



> I'd laugh about this, if it weren't so tragic for people who don't live in places where you can buy WotC books for anything like the North American price.  I'm led to believe that a lot of ENWorlders around the world rely on PDFs just because they sell for relatively reasonable prices compared to hard copies.




I'm an Aussie, and I've never been seriously tempted to buy a PDF because even here it's still cheaper to buy a hard copy from Amazon than to buy the PDFs

Chris


----------



## jdrakeh

Darrin Drader said:


> I have a suggestion.
> 
> WotC took their ball and went home. Let them.
> 
> For those of us with the means to do so, let's go to RPGNow or the ENWorld PDF store and support the publishers who are selling their PDFs by purchasing some of them.
> 
> If you don't want the small press to suffer from this, do something about it. Go spend a little money on something as a way of saying thank you for doing right by the customer.




That's a good suggestion. I'm kind of strapped for cash but I dropped by the Mythmere Games storefront over at Lulu earlier today, as well as the Goodman Games catalog over at RPGNow. I'll probably grab some Judge's Guild stuff tomorrow.


----------



## Jeff Wilder

mach1.9pants said:


> A guy on WotC forums had his laptop stolen today, he hadn't backed up, so now he has lost his paid for PDFs despite thinking he was backed up on RPGnow when he purchased them.



This is what I don't get.

He _paid for the PDF and the backups_.  This is something he has already paid for.  How can WotC take it away?

It's not like this is a physical product.  It's an electronic product that he paid for, and that RPGnow was holding for him as a backup.  How can WotC keep RPGnow from giving somebody something that he already owns?


----------



## Stereofm

I am not surprised in the least that this has happened given their past behavior. 

Hopefully, you will all keep your eyes open from now on.


----------



## Roman

Kamikaze Midget said:


> Even if the retailers shouldn't have offered a promise they couldn't back up, WotC presumably knew, and didn't really care (and probably had it in the initial contract that they could do this at any time, similar to the language in the GSL).




I agree. Even if WotC had the legal right to pull the contract without notice (and that is not completely clear), it was at the very least indirectly complicit in endorsing the promise of RPGNow by not asking them to change it. If a company makes promises about delivering your products that you know they cannot deliver on, as a responsible large company you ask them to cease and desist so that your own reputation is not damaged by association - this is standard practice for responsible corporations. 



> Even if the online retailers can be fairly blamed for promising something they couldn't actually control, that doesn't mean WotC gets indemnity for doing a pointless, boneheaded, scaredey-cat tactic like this offering the excuse of "piracy."
> 
> Yeah, you can be legitimately angry at the retailers. They shouldn't have promised something they couldn't deliver. But you can ALSO be legitimately angry at WotC, and, in fact, given the reasons for the decision and the ramifications and suddenness of it, and the fact that WotC were the ones who made the decision (with the retailers just abiding by the agreements they can), WotC is certainly to blame, and, in my mind, to blame for a much more massive and idiotic move.




Precisely my thoughts - thanks for saving me the need to type it up! I have given too much rep today already, otherwise you would clearly be a recipient.


----------



## Dumnbunny

jdrakeh said:


> Not only does this punish people who purchased their PDFs legally by making such legal channels no longer available, it also does _nothing_ to significantly hinder piracy while also potentially harming other PDF publishers.



I've had this conversation before with clients looking to protect their IP, and this is the most frustrating part. Some manager or executive discovers online piracy and demands that something be done about it, refusing to accept that doing nothing is the best option.

Withdrawing their PDFs from sales won't mean an end to piracy. Their entire catalog was available on file sharing networks before this, and so long as there's people happy to cut the spine off a book and spend a day or two feeding the pages through a scanner (bonus marks for running it through OCR software), the piracy of their books will continue uabated.

The lawsuits are even more baffling, especially considering the disatrous experiences of the RIAA. They sued tens of thousands of people and all they got for their efforts was some very expensive egg on their faces. Suing eight people is a waste of time and money.

Note that this isn't about whether or not Wizards has the legal right to do what they're doing (they do, with the possible exception of those who didn't get a chance to download the books they paid for), or even the ethical right( they do, with the definate exception mentioned above). It's that this is another attempt to assuage the fears of suits who don't understand the issues, and mistakenly insist that doing *some*thing is always better than doing nothing.


----------



## Friadoc

Filcher said:


> Haffrung,
> 
> Respectfully, it is RPGnow that owes you a refund.
> 
> RPGnow set up the conditions for the purchase, and your expectations (and mine). Their supplier had a change of mind, and RPGnow is unable to fulfill their commitment (5 copies).
> 
> If RPGnow didn't have the power to enforce the maintenance of 5 copies for download, they shouldn't have sold them to us.




You're right, in part, Filcher, in that WotC is well within their rights to decide not to sell their products in a e-format like PDF, it's their choice to enter or exit a particular market.

However, as with others, even myself, we're assuming facts not in evidence here, about what OneBookShelf/RPGNow/DriveThru and Wizards of the Coast's business relationship was and what both parties knew and/or agreed to. It is quite arguable, though, that by being aware of the copy download policy for PDFs via OBS' outlets, as well as Paizo, that their consent and acceptance of the policy was implied. Either it was implicitly accepted or else WotC was ignorant of their rights and either didn't know how to defend them or chose not to.

But, at this point, there is more assuming going on than knowing, on both sides of this, and until, if ever, we see the agreement between the two, all we're gonna see is the disagreement and objection over the course of action and regardless of who made the promise, thus who is liable for it, WotC is obviously making an Old Media mistake in a New Media world and is going to suffer for it.

Piracy is still going to happen like it did before WotC allowed PDF copies of their books, even now that they've retreated from PDFs. It ain't gonna stop a thing, except for the loyalty and patronage of some customers. Personally, I'm going with more New Media savvy folk, big and small, like Paizo, Rite Publishing, Wolfgang Baur, and so forth.

It's sad, really, because I've had a lot of positive things to say about 4e and the DDI, even run a 4e game on Sundays, but now I'm just irked. Hopefully WotC will come up with something that fixes things, before it gets a bit worse.


----------



## Belgos

munkeywrench said:


> Hmm...
> 
> I love playing 4e.
> 
> On principle, I only buy the pdf files.
> 
> 
> Solutions:
> 1) Quit 4e
> 2) Switch to illicit downloads
> 
> Well, I guess WotC has lost all future revenue from me regardless.
> 
> Drink up me 'earties! Yo Ho!





I 'lol'ed at that one. But then, I have a warped sense of humour.


----------



## joethelawyer

From an article by Chris Hedges on Truthdig...



The corporation is designed to make money without regard to human life, the social good or impact on the environment. Corporate laws impose a legal duty on corporate executives to make as much money as possible for shareholders, although many have moved on to fleece shareholders as well. In the 2003 documentary film “The Corporation”  the management guru Peter Drucker says: “If you find an executive who wants to take on social responsibilities, fire him. Fast.”


....




In short, the film, based on [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Corporation-Pathological-Pursuit-Profit-Power/dp/0743247469/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1230506220&sr=1-1"] Joel Bakan’s book [/ame] “The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power,” asserts that the corporation exhibits many of the traits found in people clinically defined as psychopaths.


Psychologist Dr. Robert Hare lists in the film psychopathic traits and ties them to the behavior of corporations:


callous unconcern for the feelings for others;
incapacity to maintain enduring relationships;
reckless disregard for the safety of others;
deceitfulness: repeated lying and conning others for profit;
incapacity to experience guilt;
failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behavior.

Interesting, isn't it?


----------



## Odhanan

I'm just glad I'm not publishing anything under 4e. After that, how a publisher can trust WotC to not yank the GSL from under their feet is just beyond me.


----------



## Firos

*Fault?*

I'd like to weigh in here because a lot of this is pretty infuriating.

WotC is making a terrible decision here; worse, this will only unduly affect those who are already honest, paying customers and consumers of WotC products.

That said, the level of fire in this thread seems out of line, or at least misdirected.

I can understand calling this decision ill-begotten, unnecessarily punitive, myopic, archaic, irrelevant, and impotent.

It makes little sense to be angry at WotC for anything other than the short notice.

One might say that WotC fails to affect any real change with this decision, but are they wrong to make it? Should we really be angry at a publisher for acting in its interests, even if it does so in a blunderingly stupid way?

Some have commented that this will only increase theft of products, which might be true, but even if that is the practical effect of WotC's decision, surely they are not to blame for that? If you try to make it so that it is harder for a thief to steal from you, and your attempts are ineffective and inspire thieves to target you even more, you are not to blame in such a case.

We have assigned far too little blame to thieves who create conditions such that companies want to take action, even ill-advised action, in an attempt to thwart their activity. It does matter that people have watched it happen, all over; the fact that we think that it is not the same as watching someone take a new t.v. from a neighbour's house, saying nothing, does not mean that it isn't the same in all but magnitude. The implication in some of the responses here shows that some think it a good thing that a company suffer loss for attempting to deal with the thieves.

Nearly as frustrating is the championing of other game companies as virtuous paragons, rather than small, somewhat parasitic corporate entities. Failing to act uselessly is not an act of courage, even if it is much more clever, and opportunistic.

I get it. Some of you had downloads that you wanted to get that you can't now. That's bad. Boo WotC.

But for the rest, why the villifying?

WotC still offers, by far, the cheapest digital access to its products of any game company. I mean, it's hard to beat DDI; the character builder alone gives access to all current rules; a one month membership gives you access to a year's worth of material. For the cost of a single game book, you could buy a DDI membership four times a year and be very up to date with 4E, if you like it.

Even Paizo's generous policy of providing free pdfs of its products requires that you subscribe longer than that (or it did when I bought it).

I guess at the end of this rambling post, I'm depressed that our apathy and carelessness has allowed a situation to get bad enough that a company whose products I like feels forced to make a ridiculous, foolish, and alienating decision. I'm upset that I can't buy products I like electronically from a company I buy most of my gaming junk from. And I can't help but be upset that there isn't more rage directed at thieves who ruin things for the rest of us. What s.


----------



## Roman

I must say that I am no longer inclined to trust WotC motives and will probably no longer take their statements at face value, even though in the past I would definitely have given them the benefit of the doubt. 

The GSL fiasco was the first to truly sow the seeds of doubt regarding WotC's motives in my mind - I saw the possibility that the delays are a deliberate liquidation of the 3PP market without actually having to come out and say that that's what WotC is doing, but this remained a lingering suspicion in the back of my mind, I was not yet ready to really assign them such a motive. 

This time round, however, I find it entirely feasible that they have decided to pull these PDF sales so they can sell them through their own store or to move entirely to a service model (say flash books - only available as long as you are subscribed and connected online [say to DDI]) and merely thought that blaming it on piracy will get a smaller negative reaction than if they just pulled it for commercial reasons. Well, if this were the case, they were clearly wrong about the reaction... 

Still, I just find the above feasible, I don't actually see into the 'minds' that make these decisions at WotC.


----------



## Roman

Odhanan said:


> I'm just glad I'm not publishing anything under 4e. After that, how a publisher can trust WotC to not yank the GSL from under their feet is just beyond me.




This is a very good point. If I were a 3PP for 4E now, I would be quaking with fear and rapidly looking to redirect my business away from the GSL to the OGL or some other open system or a system of my own.


----------



## El Mahdi

Darrin Drader said:


> I have a suggestion.
> 
> WotC took their ball and went home. Let them.
> 
> For those of us with the means to do so, let's go to RPGNow or the ENWorld PDF store and support the publishers who are selling their PDFs by purchasing some of them.
> 
> If you don't want the small press to suffer from this, do something about it. Go spend a little money on something as a way of saying thank you for doing right by the customer.




This is Wise Advice.

I would suggest, that if we really want to get through to WoTC we should do the following:

In the next couple of days, go to RPGNow.com or Paizo and purchase a pdf.  Even if it's just $1 or $2.  Everyone has stuff on their wish list.  Just pick one and give RPGNow and Paizo a hand.
Cancel your DDI subscriptions.
If you're an RPGA member, cease downloading any RPGA adventures, cancel any official RPGA events, and don't schedule any new events.  (However, you probably won't want to cancel your RPGA membership just in case WotC sees reason.  It was probably a bitch to get the membership in the first place.  No need to put yourself through undue pain.)
If you are one of the Lucky ones going to GenCon in August, go and have fun.  But, treat the WotC booth as if it's a leper colony.  Spend money on Pathfinder and Trailblazer, and let WotC drive back to Washington with a truck full of unsold product.
Make sure you vote for everybody except WotC products when it comes time for the ENNies votes.  Leave WotC wondering if anyone got the license of that truck that hit them.
If WotC insists on being this blind and stupid, and absolutely refusing to listen to their fan/customer base, then the only thing they'll listen to is hitting them in the wallet.

Light em' up boys!


----------



## S'mon

This makes me very angry, and a lot more likely to get unauthorised free downloads.  I was paying WoTC several £/go to get old Red Box D&D product off rpgnow.  I had very little interest in current D&D, it's the OOP stuff I wanted.  I feel kicked in the gut by WoTC.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol

Firos said:


> I guess at the end of this rambling post, I'm depressed that our apathy and carelessness has allowed a situation to get bad enough that a company whose products I like feels forced to make a ridiculous, foolish, and alienating decision. I'm upset that I can't buy products I like electronically from a company I buy most of my gaming junk from. And I can't help but be upset that there isn't more rage directed at thieves who ruin things for the rest of us. What s.




While we're complaining about things we have absolutely no control over, I'd like to put in my grievances concerning the snow I got today.  I plan to shake my fist angrily at the uncaring totality of nature.  That'll show it.


----------



## Fenes

roguerouge said:


> Preventing piracy? Are you joking? The more difficult you make it to pirate, the more you drive up demand for pirated copies. Look at the Wolverine movie, for goodness sake! Look at Ain't It Cool news! Look at Lost spoilers! People who post material online do it for the prestige in their very small community. Making it more difficult just whets pirate appetites. And, with this new-fangled thing they call the interwebs, all it takes is for one person to succeed.
> 
> The way to fight piracy is to increase supply of legitimate, convenient, affordable and quality products so as to drive down demand for low-quality, low-feature scans.
> 
> And, yes, this is TSR all over again.




Excellent post. This is a completely retarded move by WotC, as anyone with a little bit of experience in those matters can attest to.


----------



## jdrakeh

Filcher said:


> Drakeh,
> 
> WotC didn't sell you the promise of 5 PDFs. RPGnow did.




I'm not talking about 5 pdf downloads. Some people are angry about that, yes, but you're buidling a giant strawman by focusing on that one complaint to the exclusion of all others. That is not the _only_ reason people are angry and, in fact, I didn't even _mention_ it in the post that you responded to. Say, you're building a strawman here, too, eh? 

_*Let me recap my previous post that has absolutely nothing to do with remaining downloads at RPGNow or any other vendor*_. 

As I note above, many people are angry because WotC _pulled their entire PDF catalog from circulation everywhere, indefinitely, without giving any notice whatsoever to consumers_. In this case, people are angry because they no longer have any venue at all through which to purchase affordable, legal, electronic copies of WotC products. 

Many people are angry because they _did_ have such a venue until about six hours ago — and then *poof* it disappeared with absolutely no warning at all. Why? Because some people distributed PDFs illegally. So, rather than do something to discourage _those_ people from committing crimes, WotC shuts down all _legal_ channels of availability and does _nothing_ to significantly hinder _illegal_ channels of distribution. Well played! 

Further, as I previously noted, many people are angry because WotC has effectively yanked their endorsement of PDF publishing as whole, potentially screwing a lot of other publishers in that section of the industry _without any warning at all_. Again, if I quit a 9 to 5 job, it's basic courtesy for me to give at least two weeks notice — but WotC gets to walk out on a _huge_ business arrangement with only a few hours of notice?  Bull. 

WotC has acted with callous disregard toward both law abiding fans and toward other publishers. Sure, they have every right to protect their own interests, but the way this was handled showed that they care not one whit for anybody else, be they fans or publishers. 

_*None of this has anything at all to do with remaining downloads at RPGNow or any other vendor.*_


----------



## joethelawyer

El Mahdi said:


> This is Wise Advice.
> 
> If WotC insists on being this blind and stupid, and absolutely refusing to listen to their fan/customer base, then the only thing they'll listen to is hitting them in the wallet.
> 
> Light em' up boys!





It's unfortunate they made so much off of Paizo's sales tonight.  But the way they run things over at WOTC, they will probably use tonight's sales figures as a way to predict to the higher-ups how much money they will make with PDF sales on DDI.  Leading to more bad sales projections, more layoffs, more boneheaded moves like the one tonight, Lather-Rinse-Repeat.


----------



## Jack99

Seriously Scott, what were you guys thinking? 



El Mahdi said:


> This is Wise Advice.
> I would suggest, that if we really want to get through to WoTC we should do the following:
> 
> In the next couple of days, go to RPGNow.com or Paizo and purchase a pdf.  Even if it's just $1 or $2.  Everyone has stuff on their wish list.  Just pick one and give RPGNow and Paizo a hand.
> Cancel your DDI subscriptions.
> If you're an RPGA member, cease downloading any RPGA adventures, cancel any official RPGA events, and don't schedule any new events.  (However, you probably won't want to cancel your RPGA membership just in case WotC sees reason.  It was probably a bitch to get the membership in the first place.  No need to put yourself through undue pain.)
> If you are one of the Lucky ones going to GenCon in August, go and have fun.  But, treat the WotC booth as if it's a leper colony.  Spend money on Pathfinder and Trailblazer, and let WotC drive back to Washington with a truck full of unsold product.
> Make sure you vote for everybody except WotC products when it comes time for the ENNies votes.  Leave WotC wondering if anyone got the license of that truck that hit them.
> If WotC insists on being this blind and stupid, and absolutely refusing to listen to their fan/customer base, then the only thing they'll listen to is hitting them in the wallet.
> 
> Light em' up boys!




Easy for you (and the others who propagate this idea), since you do not even play the game WotC makes. Suggesting that we (those of us who actually play it) play and buy products for a game we enjoy less, out of spite against WotC and 4e, is frankly ridiculous. We are not 5 year old.


----------



## Fenes

Piratecat said:


> What I find most annoying about this is that the honest people are being punished, and it's not going to slow down the dishonest people one bit.




Indeed. Well, WotC lost out on money from me over this, I was about to purchase more books. Their loss.


----------



## Aus_Snow

I've got some older edition products (pre-3e - the 3e ones were *ridiculously* expensive) from DrivethruRPG / RPGNow, and was planning to buy some more, sooner or later. Also, now I can't re-download the stuff I have bought?

What the hell does that have to do with 'lost sales'. I mean, really. Get a grip. Or, be honest, more to the point.

Wow. You know? I've been more tolerant of WotC's blunderings, their arrogant decisions, crass marketing, broken promises, condescension and so forth, of late. Yes, I called them on it, in times past. But I figured, done is done, past is past, let it be.

Ugh. Now, I'm not going to 'retaliate' (besides, how could I, in fact) but. . . yeah, wow. I just had to say something here. And that's all there is to say, I think. Other than that, I've said it all before. I guess, it surely still applies, is all.


----------



## Odhanan

Jack99 said:


> Suggesting that we (those of us who actually play it) play and buy products for a game we enjoy less, out of spite against WotC and 4e, is frankly ridiculous. We are not 5 year old.



As if there weren't enough games out there to have a blast with any of them but 4e. Besides, you might call it a 5-year-old mentality while others would call it "principle". To each their own, I suppose.


----------



## Lanefan

I don't do the .pdf thing; never have, really.

But I'm still annoyed.  Why?  Because with the 0e-1e-2e era .pdf's no longer for sale, the prices on paper copies of same is probably going to skyrocket.

And dammit, I'm finally getting to GenCon this year, and one of my to-do's was to fill out my collection of old-school adventure modules while there.

Though, if this trend of bizarre decision-making continues, I think I *will* stop by the WotC booth while I'm there, and ask some serious questions; and just hope they have someone there who can give real (as opposed to corp-speak) answers.

Lan-"dilbert says it all"-efan


----------



## Samuel Leming

*The Last Straw*

OK, that's it. That's the final insult I'm willing to take from WotC. 

Before this I was willing to buy from WotC again if they produced something I actually wanted. I was even considering picking up PHB2 and MM2 depending what MM2 looked like. PHB2 filled out the classes enough that you could ban all the martial classes and run 4e as a sort of fantasy supers game.

Now I have to say that I'll not purchase another thing from WotC as long as this Greg Leeds guy is in charge. Until somebody else takes over and pulls this continuous charlie foxtrot back around WotC can just kiss the hairiest part of my ass.


----------



## Filcher

jdrakeh said:


> I'm not talking about 5 pdf downloads. Some people are angry about that, yes, but you're buidling a giant strawman by focusing on that one complaint to the exclusion of all others. That is not the _only_ reason people are angry and, in fact, I didn't even _mention_ it in the post that you responded to. Say, you're building a strawman here, too, eh?




Two thoughts. 

First, you're right about the 5 downloads. I re-read your posts and my responses weren't in line. 

Second. Strawman? My responses may have been mistaken, but don't accuse me of duplicity, please.



jdrakeh said:


> _*Let me recap my previous post that has absolutely nothing to do with remaining downloads at RPGNow or any other vendor*_.
> 
> As I note above, many people are angry because WotC _pulled their entire PDF catalog from circulation everywhere, indefinitely, without giving any notice whatsoever to consumers_. In this case, people are angry because they no longer have any venue at all through which to purchase affordable, legal, electronic copies of WotC products.




So to restate: This has provoked a passionate response because you aren't able to buy their product via PDF any longer? 

I submit that they'll soon rectify this situation, and you will be able to spend your money on WotC products digital again. 



jdrakeh said:


> Many people are angry because they _did_ have such a venue until about six hours ago — and then *poof* it disappeared with absolutely no warning at all. Why? Because some people distributed PDFs illegally. So, rather than do something to discourage _those_ people from committing crimes, WotC shuts down all _legal_ channels of availability and does _nothing_ to significantly hinder _illegal_ channels of distribution. Well played!




Agreed. This will not end piracy. 



jdrakeh said:


> Further, as I previously noted, many people are angry because WotC has effectively yanked their endorsement of PDF publishing as whole, potentially screwing a lot of other publishers in that section of the industry _without any warning at all_.




I call bullocks. The Adobe publishing will do just fine without Wizard's endorsement. You give them too much credit.


----------



## Khaalis

Personally, I just see this as yet another reminder that WotC/Hasbro is a corporation. Period. These decisions and actions, bordering on underhanded if not downright shady (due to the amount of time this was done in), were obviously put in place by the executives and lawyers at Hasbro/WotC.  It also shows me that the powers that be at Hasbro/WotC are about as competent as those running GM. All other topics aside, this is simply a bad business decision on their part. On a personal note, I hope it bites them in the proverbial .

There may be individuals involved in the D&D product that care about the consumer base, but the company as a whole doesn't. Its a business, pure and simple. They aren't in it for the love of the game or the hobby. They simply see the gaming consumer base as a target market to which they produce the lowest costing product they can manage to get people to buy for the highest price possible. Target markets are fluid. So even if they piss off a few hundred, even a few thousand people, there will always be more, NEW, customers to take their place. Why do you think they have such a HUGE marketing focus on expanding the consumer base to new people?  

Without a wide-spread, organized protest and boycott of WotC/Hasbro products that makes a big statement to their bottom line, the company won't even notice the complaints and anger voiced by we, the outspoken MINORITY. They simply don't care. Wasting a lot of time crying "foul" is only good for us to vent our frustration, but will have no impact on Wotc/Hasbro at all.

Blizzard is another perfect example of this. With millions of subscribers to WoW, they could care less if they piss of a few thousand and force them out of the game. The cyclical fluid nature of the consumer base will more than make up for any short term impact on sales. Hasbro/WotC has the same mindset.

The day of a company truly caring about their client base died in the late 60's early 70's at the latest (with rare few exceptions).

As for digital media, they will never stop pirating, no matter how hard they try. For some, this simply derives from the NEED for digital copies of books, and it is something the company has apparently yet to realize. Hasbro/WotC needs to wake up and smell the coffee. They still haven't figured out (as seen with their totally incompetent offerings at digital game support) that we now live in the technological information age. The day of purely "paper' products is a thing of the past. Most people I know who still Pen & Paper game, aren't technically P&P anymore, instead using laptops for a lot of the old "paper" sources of gaming, including and most especially being able to carry around WotC's 150 lb. worth of books (e.g. 3.5E) on a laptop. WotC/Hasbro needs to join the rest of us in the 21st Century or go the way of the dodo, just like GM is facing.

/rant off


----------



## aboyd

Filcher said:


> I stopped by RPG.net to check Jtlawyer's claim. The thread was just as long, but several times LESS vitriolic, FWIW.



Were we reading the same thread?  The one I read contained tons of f-bombs and talk about lawsuits.

It seemed _more_ vitriolic, and frankly more cathartic, too.


----------



## Samuel Leming

Urizen said:


> OH and as an extra-added bonus, you piss your customer base off in the process!
> 
> Two thumbs up, wizards.



Thumbs? I think you're using the wrong two digits...


----------



## Fenes

Aus_Snow said:


> I've got some older edition products (pre-3e - the 3e ones were *ridiculously* expensive) from DrivethruRPG / RPGNow, and was planning to buy some more, sooner or later. Also, now I can't re-download the stuff I have bought?
> 
> What the hell does that have to do with 'lost sales'. I mean, really. Get a grip. Or, be honest, more to the point.
> 
> Wow. You know? I've been more tolerant of WotC's blunderings, their arrogant decisions, crass marketing, broken promises, condescension and so forth, of late. Yes, I called them on it, in times past. But I figured, done is done, past is past, let it be.
> 
> Ugh. Now, I'm not going to 'retaliate' (besides, how could I, in fact) but. . . yeah, wow. I just had to say something here. And that's all there is to say, I think. Other than that, I've said it all before. I guess, it surely still applies, is all.




I was about to spend another 100 dollars this week on 3.5E PDFs I missed in the past. I was disappointed at first, but the more I think about it, the less disappointed I am. Obviously, WotC doesn't want my money.


----------



## pogre

Someone mentioned earlier that this was a move in advance of the next HASBRO corporate report. That is exactly what this is and the reason for the timing.

Exec report <snip> to HASBRO board
_The D&D brand has failed to achieve the hoped-for profit levels in this quarter. However, we have made a move to consolidate electronic products to in-house sales and reduce loss. This move will allow us to further consolidation to the current edition by no longer offering previous edition materials. The end-result will be higher new book sales and ddi enhancement._

Obviously, a real report would have a bit more corporate speak and would never make the overall HASBRO quarterly. However, I would bet you a memo with similar content is drafted or will be drafted for internal consumption.


----------



## jdrakeh

Dumnbunny said:


> Withdrawing their PDFs from sales won't mean an end to piracy.




As somebody else menitoned, it's like trying to close the paddock doors after the horses have already gone out to pasture. Locking up the paddock now won't do them any good _because there's nothing left in it_. 



> The lawsuits are even more baffling, especially considering the disatrous experiences of the RIAA. They sued tens of thousands of people and all they got for their efforts was some very expensive egg on their faces. Suing eight people is a waste of time and money.




Honestly? If they want to waste their money making life miserable for a few thieves, let 'em. What bothers me is they've instead decided to take the other, aforementioned, action of removing all of their PDFs from the market. This action makes life miserable for _honest_ customers and, potentially, for other publishers. It also does little, if anything, to penalize thieves. 



> It's that this is another attempt to assuage the fears of suits who don't understand the issues, and mistakenly insist that doing *some*thing is always better than doing nothing.




Well, if we don't learn from past mistakes and all that.


----------



## Odhanan

That's it. It's just past midnight, Pacific Standard. 
No more buying from Paizo. Just 12 hours of remaining downloads, if any.


----------



## El Mahdi

Jack99 said:


> Easy for you (and the others who propagate this idea), since you do not even play the game WotC makes. Suggesting that we (those of us who actually play it) play and buy products for a game we enjoy less, out of spite against WotC and 4e, is frankly ridiculous. We are not 5 year old.




Well I'm glad you cleared that up (about not being a 5 year old that is).

I pretty much assumed eveyone here is an adult that can make their own decisions.  That's why I called Darrin's post _*"Advice"*_, and my post a _*"Suggestion"*_.  Hmmmm.

But if you feel you're weak willed enough that only rage at my post can keep you from succumbing ... then I guess you just have to do what you have to do.


(But, since you seemed to miss my earlier posts, or are maybe just ignoring them; whether I play 4E or not, I've felt it had a lot of things that were worthwhile.  That's probably the reason why I've spent nearly $200 on 4E since it was released - Core books set, Adventurers Vault, H1-H3, and a DDI sub.  However, with todays actions by WotC, I feel their usefullnes to me is at an end - period.  Now for those that feel the same way as I do, my above suggestions still stand.  For those that don't, good for you.  I hope you can continue to enjoy WotC's products, and that from here on out they stop screwing you.  I doubt it, but hey, here's to hoping.)


----------



## aboyd

Filcher said:


> If RPGnow didn't have the power to enforce the maintenance of 5 copies for download, they shouldn't have sold them to us.



You know, I buy into your premise, and yet I'm _still_ upset at Wizards of the Coast.

Here's the thing.  If I am the representative of a company that sells something made by company X, and company X says, "stop selling our stuff," I am going to immediately ask for a grace period, for grandfathering support for existing purchases, etc.  _Even if those things are not contractually obligated_ I am going to ask for them anyway, out of goodwill for my customers.  If company X doesn't allow consideration for my (our) customers, or gives me a paltry few _hours_ to notify customers, then I'm going to think poorly of company X, _even if it was their right to do what they did._

I think that's important.  Customers have a right to perceive companies as they see fit.  We may not even like or agree with how some people view other companies.  But those people have that right.  And in this case, people perceive Wizards of the Coast to have handled this harshly and to the customer's detriment, and even if they are legally allowed to do it _the customer can be upset with them anyway._

What's more is that _WotC should have known this._  This is PR 101.  Bungling this is just _another_ reason to shake heads in dismay.


----------



## aboyd

HeirToPendragon said:


> Has EN World always been a colossal circle jerk or is this a recent thing?



Your argument got no traction because it was a poor argument.  Yet instead of recognizing that, your response is to insult _everyone_ that is a member of this site _and_ also the site itself?  Really?

I'm not sure what's more amazing.  Is it the "I'll bite the hand that feeds me" thing?  Or is it the "I'm going to demonstrate how to be a sore loser" thing?


----------



## Jack99

Odhanan said:


> As if there weren't enough games out there to have a blast with any of them but 4e. Besides, you might call it a 5-year-old mentality while others would call it "principle". To each their own, I suppose.




Because principles who hurt yourself (or in this case the enjoyment you get from playing D&D) are just silly and very typical of 5-year olds.

Does this PDF debacle annoy me? Hell yes, I have purchased a large number of PDFs from RPGnow, and I love having them to search through, when making adventures. But the annoyance is nowhere enough to make me stop playing 4e or even stop buying WotC's products. I will just only buy the books I guess. Unless they start selling the PDF's themselves. The 5-download thing is really not a problem, since you can just copy the PDF's and make a backup. Sucks for those with no back-up obviously.


----------



## Filcher

aboyd said:


> What's more is that _WotC should have known this._  This is PR 101.  Bungling this is just _another_ reason to shake heads in dismay.




You're right. It is just the idealist in me that wants folks to understand that WotC was the producer, not the middleman or distro. 

And if WotC doesn't manage to follow up with a timely digital answer, it will be an epic fail.

Oh --- and I'm backing up my computer tonight.


----------



## Darrin Drader

Just so that there is no question that I put my money where my mouth is, I just picked up the following PDFs:

Order Number: 1319180
Detailed Invoice: click here
Date Ordered: Tuesday April 07, 2009

1 x Monsters & Treasure of the Wilderlands 1 = $6.00

1 x THRILLING TALES - Pulp Villains: NAZIS = $5.00

1 x THRILLING TALES: Gamemaster's Guide to Pulp Adventure = $5.00

1 x THRILLING TALES - Pulp Villains: PERILS OF THE ORIENT = $6.50


----------



## Wraith Form

joethelawyer said:


> You're all missing something important here.  WOTC realized that with its actions in the past few years it managed to completely fracture and splinter the RPG community.
> 
> This is just part of WOTC's master plan to unify once again the entire RPG community.  Every board I have been to tonight is unified in their outrage at WOTC, no matter what edition they play.
> 
> Well done WOTC!!  What's phase 2 of the master plan I wonder?




Ah, yes.

Wizards of the Coast.  The Adrian Veidt of RPG publishers.


----------



## jdrakeh

Filcher said:


> Second. Strawman? My responses may have been mistaken, but don't accuse me of duplicity, please.




Responding to an argument that I didn't make is, in fact, the definition of a strawman (well, one of them, anyhow). 



> This has provoked a passionate response because you aren't able to buy their product via PDF any longer?




_Absolutely_. As a loyal customer who purchased legal copies of multiple OOP TSR supplements that could not be easily obtained elsewhere, my reward was to have that option removed entirely, indefinitely, without any warning at all for something that other people did. How do you _not_ understand that this may frustrate some people?  



> I submit that they'll soon rectify this situation, and you will be able to spend your money on WotC products digital again.




With all due respect — what do you base that prognosis? The WotC reps have _clearly_ stated in this and similar threads that they are 'looking at' other options for electronic distribution but have stated _nothing_ further than that at the current time. 

Unless you're privy to as yet unreleased insider information, you're just crossing your fingers and hoping for the best. . . from a company that just made what is arguably one of the biggest PR missteps since The Dille Trust was running the show. 



> I call bullocks. The Adobe publishing will do just fine without Wizard's endorsement. You give them too much credit.




WotC is the single largest publisher of role-playing games. Their PDF catalog was larger than that currently offered by any other publisher, as well. Their decision to indefinitely yank that catalog without giving prior notice and declare on public forums that they aren't going back to PDFs _will_ create fall out. It's not a matter of _if_ but, rather, a matter of _how much_.


----------



## Jack99

El Mahdi said:


> Well I'm glad you cleared that up (about not being a 5 year old that is).
> 
> I pretty much assumed eveyone here is an adult that can make their own decisions.  That's why I called Darrin's post _*"Advice"*_, and my post a _*"Suggestion"*_.  Hmmmm.
> 
> But if you feel you're weak willed enough that only rage at my post can keep you from succumbing ... then I guess you just have to do what you have to do.
> 
> 
> (But, since you seemed to miss my earlier posts, or are maybe just ignoring them; whether I play 4E or not, I've felt it had a lot of things that were worthwhile.  That's probably the reason why I've spent nearly $200 on 4E since it was released - Core books set, Adventurers Vault, H1-H3, and a DDI sub.  However, with todays actions by WotC, I feel their usefullnes to me is at an end - period.  Now for those that feel the same way as I do, my above suggestions still stand.  For those that don't, good for you.  I hope you can continue to enjoy WotC's products, and that from here on out they stop screwing you.  I doubt it, but hey, here's to hoping.)




Maybe my initial post came of a bit too harsh, sorry mate. My point was simply that it is easier for someone who doesn't play 4e to suggest a boycott than for someone who actually plays the game. For you, 4e books are a bonus, for someone like me, they represent something more important.

For what it is worth, I am sorry that _you_ will stop purchasing and talking (well writing) about 4e, since I always found your viewpoints interesting (someone who doesnt play 4e but still can manage to stay civil about it, and even like a lot of things about it).

Cheers


----------



## jdrakeh

Wraith Form said:


> Wizards of the Coast.  The Adrian Veidt of RPG publishers.




Now somebody _is_ giving them too much credit  Lately, they've been more like Popeye's Bluto of RPG publishers.


----------



## Darrin Drader

Jack99 said:


> My point was simply that it is easier for someone who doesn't play 4e to suggest a boycott than for someone who actually plays the game.




I may not play 4E, but I do play Castles and Crusades from time to time with my kids. Old school D&D and AD&D modules are easily compatible with that system. Fortunately I have a lot of physical products and I also bought a bunch of PDF copies of stuff I didn't have back when they were still sold through the Wizards Online Store, so I probably won't be hurting for material. Nevertheless, I find it sad that I can't go back to the well so to speak for more of the great classics that I don't already own.


----------



## Wraith Form

Firos said:


> That said, the level of fire in this thread seems out of line, or at least misdirected.
> 
> It makes little sense to be angry at WotC for anything other than the short notice.




All due respect?  Where have you been for the past several years?  Under a rock?

You obviously never bought D&D 3.0 (only go get 3.5 crammed down yer throat), _Dragon_ & _Dungeon_ (only to have them discontinued), listened to the WotC propaganda about their DDi "we'll give you a discounted PDF of D&D4 books that you purchase" or several other _interesting_ business decisions made by WotC over the past...what? 9 or 10?....years.


----------



## Roman

Jack99 said:


> Easy for you (and the others who propagate this idea), since you do not even play the game WotC makes. Suggesting that we (those of us who actually play it) play and buy products for a game we enjoy less, out of spite against WotC and 4e, is frankly ridiculous. We are not 5 year old.






Khaalis said:


> Without a wide-spread, organized protest and boycott of WotC/Hasbro products that makes a big statement to their bottom line, the company won't even notice the complaints and anger voiced by we, the outspoken MINORITY. They simply don't care. Wasting a lot of time crying "foul" is only good for us to vent our frustration, but will have no impact on Wotc/Hasbro at all.




Consumer boycotts and campaigns CAN work even if you love the products of the company. For example, I am a huge fan of BioWare computer games. Since BioWare was purchased by Electronic Arts, however, its games have included a particularly nasty version of SecuROM - a draconian digital rights management (DDRM) scheme, which included things like limited installs of the game you purchased, online activation with each install (so if the company takes down its servers in the future you won't be able to install the game) and so on. 

There was considerable outcry over this when this scheme was introduced in Mass Effect and the sales of the game on the PC (as opposed to on consoles) were probably significantly affected. The reaction was amplified when another EA game, the Spore, was released and people gave it one star reviews on Amazon and led massive outcries on websites and boycotts. Yes, we were a vocal minority (and I was pretty tame - did not engage in one star reviews and such), but a vocal minority can have a considerable impact on sales through word of mouth and although Spore still sold well and made a lot of money, EA itself has estimated that the DRM fiasco has cost it $25 million in Spore sales (and this was something like one month after its release) - that is real money. Of course, the draconian DRM scheme did not help fight piracy of Spore at all - in fact, because of its DDRM scheme Spore gained the dubious title of being the most pirated game in history. 

It has been about a year since this all started and I have certainly not purchased any EA products since then. About 10 days ago, it seems the EA has finally relented: BioWare Forums: EA DROPS Securom on its flagship game: The SIMS 3 

Note that EA is proably a far bigger fish than WotC or at least so I would guess. Alienating its customers, WotC is playing with fire. I am not saying this is the thing that will generate a massive consumer backlash, but if WotC keeps on doing things like this, a critical number of customers will eventually eventually be pushed over the threshold.


----------



## Gorrstagg

I have purchased all my 4E books as pdf's, and actually have hard copies of the core set as well. Actually that's the only hardcovers I've got.

It's 2009, and I use a laptop and a home computer, often simultaneously. I must admit I've been caught completely and totally off-guard by this move from WotC. 

My first reactions are, "Wait, why am I, a great customer, being treated as a criminal. I didn't steal any books, I didn't pirate anything. I've faithfully, bought the new books that I would use, on their release day. My name is watermarked in the bottom left hand corner. And I can avoid killing a TREE, and have a great tool to enhance my game."
"What the hell is wrong here? Wait, they are pursuiing legal action against 8 people, but somehow that affects me? Doesn't this mean that the system works, if they've tracked these people down?"

"I think 4th edition is the greatest edition of D&D to come along in the past 26 years of my gaming life, which started with D&D Red Box. And it's 2009, books are on pdf's, so we can avoid destroying forests. And I can carry one laptop with my 10 books on it. And now they want to treat me like some dirty scuzzy criminal."

My reactions have ranged the gamut, with part of me wanting a boycott to happen, until they bring back the sale of .pdf's. Because I am at heart a lover of this edition.

Which has me thinking, well this certainly was a knee-jerk reaction. Which makes me think someone is trying to justify something somewhere up in the corporate chain. Because the pirates, will still make copies and put them out there. So this action does NOTHING to stop them.

It in fact is the definition of retarded.

"n.  A slowing down or hindering of progress; a delay."

Who is driving the bus over at WotC? Seriously. So, let me see if I get this right. Remove all .pdf's of WotC materials. So revenues go down the drain, and it stops not a damn pirate. They'll get the materials, and probably get great copies because someone will go through a little bit more effort to spite WotC. And the people getting hurt are, WotC, and their loyal customer base.

Guys, this is what happens when someone rolls a 1, when making a logical skill test.

My only hope, is that WotC is going to go with Stardocks downloading scheme. Or hell just go with Stardock. 

Actually another part of me wants to find someone who is brilliantly rich who would buy D&D out from Hasbro. So we can get things fixed as it were. 

And you know what's worse, it's folks like Scott Rouse who have to put up with this crap. Him and all the dev's working on this. Them I feel for.

This is just a horrible decision, and I look forward to it being repealed or done in another method that brings it in-house to WotC. They probably looked at it as a financial decision that they could play off of on pirates to bring in the revenue stream of offering their .pdf's and getting all the profit, pure and clean.  (SKill check, Insight - DC 26, rolled a 32 - Success.)

If anything, this is probably only a sweeping change to bring in more money without any middle men. Bring it home, make the money, and up our profits in this economic downturn, and just not worry about the 20,000 loyal buyers of the electronic format. They only represented members of the book of the month club anyhow, 15,000 will come back to us when we start selling them right here at WotC.

Grrr... - I'm pissed off. I'm getting crapped on for now, and treated like a criminal because it's convenient. Well, I can say this. Shame on you WotC. And Shame on you Hasbro. This is not how an ethical business decision is made and implemented so it impacts your customers the least. You gradually phase it out. And switch over to your own store, (cause that's what your probably going to do anyhow.)

This fly by the pants crap. Has no real supporters, irregardless of your "Rights" because your within them, but damn if you don't hurt the very loyal.


----------



## Wraith Form

Jack99 said:


> My point was simply that it is easier for someone who doesn't play 4e to suggest a boycott than for someone who actually plays the game.




Until 6 hours ago I had a DDi subscription.

Until 6 hours ago my D&D4 books were on my gaming shelf instead of a cardboard storage box in my cellar.

*I have been playing and buying D&D4.*

Yet I'm boycotting them.

So it's actually pretty easy for someone who plays the game to drop their mess into the toilet & flush.


----------



## Filcher

jdrakeh said:


> Responding to an argument that I didn't make is, in fact, the definition of a strawman (well, one of them, anyhow).




It presumes malice, or intent to deceive. I have neither. 



jdrakeh said:


> _Absolutely_. As a loyal customer who purchased legal copies of multiple OOP TSR supplements that could not be easily obtained elsewhere, my reward was to have that option removed entirely, indefinitely, without any warning at all for something that other people did. How do you _not_ understand that this may frustrate some people?




I assume that people that wanted the PDFs, would have bought them. Buying item X doesn't earn right to expect it will be hosted forever. 



> With all due respect — what do you base that prognosis? The WotC reps have _clearly_ stated in this and similar threads that they are 'looking at' other options for electronic distribution but have stated _nothing_ further than that at the current time.
> 
> Unless you're privy to as yet unreleased insider information, you're just crossing your fingers and hoping for the best. . . from a company that just made what is arguably one of the biggest PR missteps since The Dille Trust was running the show.




Just my assumption, but I think it is logical.

I'm reading TSR's A3 tonight, and you and I live pretty close to one another. If Wizards doesn't host a back catalog by, say, this Gen Con, I'll mail you my copy. Not a huge win, but pride is involved. 



> WotC is the single largest publisher of role-playing games. Their PDF catalog was larger than that currently offered by any other publisher, as well. Their decision to indefinitely yank that catalog without giving prior notice and declare on public forums that they aren't going back to PDFs _will_ create fall out. It's not a matter of _if_ but, rather, a matter of _how much_.




Meh. We'll see, I suppose. Carry on.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Piratecat said:


> What I find most annoying about this is that the honest people are being punished, and it's not going to slow down the dishonest people one bit.




Yep.

It seems as if people "in charge" never get how piracy works and always pick "solutions" that hurt their customers more than the pirates.

I also think they are worrying to much. A pirated copy is not per default a lost sale, that depends on the degree of interest in the product, and the ability to afford the product. 
But I guess that leads into areas that are better not discussed on EN World.

I would hate to be in Scott Rouse shoes now - I hope he enjoys the challenge.


----------



## Darrin Drader

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> I would hate to be in Scott Rouse shoes now - I hope he enjoys the challenge.




For all we know the Rouse might have been the one to make this decision. The ones I feel sorry for are WotC Custserv, who are going to be busier than hell for at least the next two weeks dealing with tweaked customers.


----------



## aboyd

Firos said:


> The implication in some of the responses here shows that some think it a good thing that a company suffer loss for attempting to deal with the thieves.



No.  It is not fair to mis-state people's position.  I suspect that no one in this thread would say what you are suggesting.  People are upset because WotC has effectively sprayed their own audience with machine gun fire to try to catch the 50 people who sneaked into the concert.  So let's state your quote fairly.  "The implication in some of the responses here shows that some think it a good thing that a company suffer loss for inconsiderately harming their own customers in pursuit of thieves."

Especially when that harm could have been mitigated with some human decency.


----------



## Orius

joethelawyer said:


> You're all missing something important here.  WOTC realized that with its actions in the past few years it managed to completely fracture and splinter the RPG community.
> 
> This is just part of WOTC's master plan to unify once again the entire RPG community.  Every board I have been to tonight is unified in their outrage at WOTC, no matter what edition they play.
> 
> Well done WOTC!!  What's phase 2 of the master plan I wonder?




Someone do me a favor and rep him for this.  I already repped him for someone else this thread.  

I'm guessing the idiot behind this PR fiasco is up at Hasbro, and doesn't really know much about what happens with the D&D brand besides how much money it pulls in or doesn't.

They can legally ask other online websites to pull their products without warning, and it sucks for those people who were allowed to get multiple downloads and now can't.  Unfortunately, that happens with the market.  They can even legally pull the stuff from their own website.

It's a bad move though, because it annoys the hell out of the customer base.  Maybe Hasbro's marketing is big enough to weather whatever losses they take from this, but that's old thinking.  The Internet these days plays havok with that sort of thinking, because opinions and rumors can travel faster across it than anything in history.  So while WotC and Hasbro's execs are sleeping and maybe not thinking much over this, you've got firestorms brewing and percolating here, RPG.net, on WotC's servers and who knows how many other message boards, blogs, and what not.  That means more damage control that's going to need to be done in the long run.  

I feel sorry for Scott.  He or someone else in the company is going to end up having to face the anger of the online gaming community and fall on his sword for the moron who thought this would be a good idea.  I'm sure some of the people working on the D&D brand at WotC know how TSR angered gamers over stuff like this 15 years ago, and maybe they even warned a bone-headed executive who wasn't interested in listening.

The biggest concern I have is the future of the old edition products.  It sucks if the stuff going away for good because WotC doesn't want it competing with 4e, though maybe that's a sign that customers don't want it.  If those customers aren't buying any 4e products though, WotC could still potentially make money selling them the older stuff that they do like.  Not just disgruntled fans who only want old stuff, newer fans who are curious about the game's past and evolution, and so on.  I liked that the older edition PDFs were offered for sale before, because if I want to pick up an older product I could never find, or I'm just simply curious, I didn't have to rely on eBay, where some of that stuff sells for insane prices. 

These days companies who provide entertainment need to think outside the box.  The models of cracking down on piracy in the hopes you'll actually make more money while irritating the hell out of customers don't work.  I find this approach to be interesting though, even though it applies to old movies: Warner Brothers Fights DVD Decline With Old Movies And A New Model - Media Money with Julia Boorstin - CNBC.com Don't know if that approach would even work with D&D stuff, or if it will even work for it's intended purpose, but I'm glad to see at least one megacorp is at least _trying_ to think creatively.

This will probably cause a short-term piracy spike from people pissed about it.  They'll do it out of spite or because they think they're hurting "The Man" or some such.  And some of that piracy will be towards 4e stuff, the sales of which WotC is trying to bolster in the first place.


----------



## Aus_Snow

Darrin Drader said:


> For all we know the Rouse might have been the one to make this decision. The ones I feel sorry for are WotC Custserv, who are going to be busier than hell for at least the next two weeks dealing with tweaked customers.



Indeed, yes. By gawsh, I'm glad to be out of tech support hell (hell being the _default_, IOW even not at times like this), on a related note. And yeah, I know a really nice lady - who I certainly wouldn't think of as being particularly vulnerable or weak-willed - who had a (minor) frickin' _breakdown_ because of being the equivalent of CustServ at a really bad time for a certain telco. Horrible work, at times, and I salute the fortitude of those who withstand it when it's bad, and wear it well. Kudos.


----------



## WhatGravitas

Wraith Form said:


> Ah, yes.
> 
> Wizards of the Coast.  The Adrian Veidt of RPG publishers.



I _wish_, I _wish_!

Cheers, LT.


----------



## Samuel Leming

Gorrstagg said:


> Who is driving the bus over at WotC? Seriously.



Greg Leeds.

He's been there close to a year.


----------



## Plane Sailing

HeirToPendragon said:


> Good to know that mob mentality is all that matters, eh?
> 
> Has EN World always been a colossal circle jerk or is this a recent thing?




Bye-bye


----------



## wedgeski

If Wizards want to pull third-party distributors from the loop and set up their own OOP PDF outlet (which is almost certainly going to happen), that's fine. Pulling the rug with no notice was *stupid and uncool*, but that doesn't make Filcher et al *wrong*. Those of you guys who really are pissed that your 4 downloads have just disappeared into thin air, and are not just using that as a lightning rod to spit into this thread, should be emailing and boycotting your *vendor*. (Go and ask Apple for a repeat download after you lose an album you bought off iTunes, and see what they say.)

Every time something like this blows up on ENW there is one guaranteed constant that always pushes me towards forgiveness for Wizards gaming sins, and that is the unutterable smugness of many of the posters here. I just hope that anyone browsing ENW to see if our community is one worth joining doesn't judge us by threads like this.


----------



## Jack99

Wraith Form said:


> Until 6 hours ago I had a DDi subscription.
> 
> Until 6 hours ago my D&D4 books were on my gaming shelf instead of a cardboard storage box in my cellar.
> 
> *I have been playing and buying D&D4.*
> 
> Yet I'm boycotting them.
> 
> So it's actually pretty easy for someone who plays the game to drop their mess into the toilet & flush.




Why exactly? I mean, which part of this mess made you stop playing the game that (I assume) you are playing with 4-5 other people?


----------



## aboyd

wedgeski said:


> Go and ask Apple for a repeat download after you lose an album you bought off iTunes, and see what they say.



They said, "OK."  So I was grateful and kept using them to buy more.

Hmm.  Maybe a lesson could be learned there.


----------



## Jan van Leyden

;4742980 said:
			
		

> Just out of the damn blue, "Oh hey, pdfs are banned after tonight."
> 
> WOW GUYS! THANKS FOR THE HEADS UP!






Samnell said:


> That's the source of about 70% of my anger. I don't like that they were pulled whatsoever, but pulled on only a few hours notice?




And that's the thing I really don't understand. Terminating a contract without prior notice? Wouldn't that mean a serious breach?

While I trust OBS and Paizo that they really dind't have prior notice, this leaves several questions unanswered...


----------



## Fenes

wedgeski said:


> Every time something like this blows up on ENW there is one guaranteed constant that always pushes me towards forgiveness for Wizards gaming sins, and that is the unutterable smugness of many of the posters here. I just hope that anyone browsing ENW to see if our community is one worth joining doesn't judge us by threads like this.




Smugness? I don't see smugness, I see incomprehension, and scorn, and anger, all justified by WotC's actions and attitude.

The "He did something wrong too, so don't judge me for what I did wrong" defense does not work, even if it applied here (which we do not know yet).


----------



## Wraith Form

Jack99 said:


> Why exactly? I mean, which part of this mess made you stop playing the game that (I assume) you are playing with 4-5 other people?




Seriously?  I asked this of someone else just a few posts up: where have you been for the past 9 or 10 years?

These are the things that I can name off the top of my head considering it's 4:30AM where I am:

3.0 -> 3.5 and WotC's smug "if you don't like it, tough" attitude (there's that word smug again....!)
_Dungeon & Dragon_ mags folded
the use of the term "Gleemax" (I may be stretching it a bit here)
promises about DDi functionality that haven't come to light in over a year
intimations that we'd get PDF versions of D&D4 books at lower cost or even free [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slLNNbcgiSs&feature=related[/ame]

...and I know others can add to things I've forgotten off my list.

Look, I'm happy that some of you (apparently a small majority) were absolutely 100% unphased by some of the stunts WotC has been pulling over the past several years, but me?  I'm taking my cash elsewhere.


----------



## Jeff Wilder

wedgeski said:


> (Go and ask Apple for a repeat download after you lose an album you bought off iTunes, and see what they say.)



If Apple didn't permit this occasionally, I would be stunned.  If your claim is that Apple _doesn't_ permit this, I really have to ask for some evidence, because I simply don't believe it.  Denial of reasonable requests like this would be _horrible_ business practice, and while I don't own an iPod or download from iTunes, it doesn't strike me as inept segment of Apple's business.


----------



## wedgeski

aboyd said:


> They said, "OK."  So I was grateful and kept using them to buy more.



Perhaps an EU/US divide then... that was certainly not the answer given to me. The lesson I learned from that experience was having a decent back-up strategy, something which many people here sound like they may now have learned as well...


----------



## Darrin Drader

Jeff Wilder said:


> If Apple didn't permit this occasionally, I would be stunned.  If your claim is that Apple _doesn't_ permit this, I really have to ask for some evidence, because I simply don't believe it.  Denial of reasonable requests like this would be _horrible_ business practice, and while I don't own an iPod or download from iTunes, it doesn't strike me as inept segment of Apple's business.




I can't speak to Apple's business practices but I do know that when PDFs of older product was sold through the Wizards Online Store, it was your responsibility to back them up. They did not provide replacements for lost PDFs. The ability to get replacements came when they were moved to Paizo and OBS. Honestly, I'm a firm believer in creating backups, so this doesn't bug me as much as the simple lack of availability of the old stuff.


----------



## Fenes

wedgeski said:


> Perhaps an EU/US divide then... that was certainly not the answer given to me. The lesson I learned from that experience was having a decent back-up strategy, something which many people here sound like they may now have learned as well...




I have a decent backup startegy for PDFs - I copy them on all my computers, meaning two desktops and one laptop. I am still mad at thise boneheaded move by WotC.


----------



## Friadoc

wedgeski said:


> (Go and ask Apple for a repeat download after you lose an album you bought off iTunes, and see what they say.)




As a former member of Applecare (worked for them at two different periods over the past 12+ years), I can tell you that not only does Apple allow for a repeat download, they have a process and policy for it, as well as online documentation that anyone can access and follow the instructions on how to do this process.

Unlike a lot of companies out there, especially in the computer industry, Apple has an extremely high level of customer service with their Applecare program, to the point that some groups who do not recommend extended warranty programs do recomment the Applecare Protection Plan, as it is seen as adding value to an Apple product.

Out of all the potential choices out there that you could have selected for your analogy, you chose poorly. No worries, they are a big name and we are talking about the Internet delivery of protecting IP, so I could see why you selected them. In my opinion, you might have been better off selecting Amazon, however I've heard that they're fairly good with much of their customer service, too.

Hmmm, good customer service equates to vocal customer testimonials, maybe someone should tell WotC about that, too.


----------



## Nymrohd

Well this will certainly make a lot of people happy. You know, those people who did the illegal scans and got huge rep for posting the pirated material on their communities. WotC will only lose money from this (maybe some from PR backlash though honestly I don't believe that PR backlash affects this kind of product that much) certainly a lot from people who actually bought the PDF copies. If they want to do something to mitigate losses because of piracy their only viable option is to sell the PDFs themselves dirt cheap. And even if RPGNow was offering those backup copies illegally and not within their contract with WotC, WotC must have known of the fact and also know that they would be the ones who get all the crap for pulling prodcut back. At best they managed to increase the size of pirated files (since the scans are likely to be rather bigger) . . . And they killed their revenue from old edition sales. Lastly I am pretty sure that one big torrent I am aware of, which has everything published for D&D ever (I mean ever) can likely be accessed by more than those eight websites.


----------



## jgbrowning

Wow, you don't check up on industry news for one day and look what you miss.

joe "stopped checking ENworld at 10am yesterday" b.


----------



## warlordgdx

I just scanned through the last page of these comments, so I'm sure my two copper have been covered ad-nausea, but here goes 

At first I was reluctant to immediately bash WotC for their choice - I try not to fall into that group of folks who are immediately biased against the company because WotC represents the 800 lb. Gorilla of the industry. More specifically, the designers/developers at WotC seem like genuiently great guys and enthusiastic game makers - i.e. they are NOT the business execs at Hasbro or down the line at WotC that make boneheaded decisions like this.

After thinking about it for a bit however, I've really got to agree with the fire branders on this one. This is a decision that will not disable PDF piracy of their products in any capacity (on the contrary, I think this kind of 'grab your ball off court and take it home' approach will actually encourage piracy due to the anti-corporate revolution that seems to be a core tenet of piracy). Not to mention that this may have HUGE ramifications for companies and/or individuals who depend on gaming PDF sales for income. Those WotC PDFs were a big draw for RPG customers to sites like RPGnow.com, which could then be turned into potential customers for indie publishers and the such. So what happens now that WotC eliminates a huge chuck of customer traffic for PDF publishers? 

This strategy is regressive (being that paperless medium is going to eventually be the de facto standard of consumption), dismissive of other business partners (i.e Paizo, RPGnow), and is just plain old anti-technology (RIAA anyone?).

Sounds to me like the suits envolved in making this decision probably didn't understand how important it is to have a digital medium, or at least don't know how to wrap a business model around it. Shame that the customers have to be punished for it.

EDIT: I understand that WotC is going to be working on an alternative for digital downloads - let's hope that it's sooner than later. 

Also, I'll continue to buy the 4E stuff just simply because I don't want to punish the game designers for their bosses decisions. They make good gaming products and work hard to do so - if only I could determine how much of my $20-30 went to R&D 

Warlord GDX


----------



## wedgeski

Jeff Wilder said:


> If Apple didn't permit this occasionally, I would be stunned.  If your claim is that Apple _doesn't_ permit this, I really have to ask for some evidence, because I simply don't believe it.  Denial of reasonable requests like this would be _horrible_ business practice, and while I don't own an iPod or download from iTunes, it doesn't strike me as inept segment of Apple's business.



Well I can't give you anything more than anecdotal evidence, because I didn't keep any of the 'proof'. There is no provision for multiple downloads built into iTunes and it took two calls to customer support before they (begrudgingly) gave me a one-time re-download. They left me under no illusions as to whether they would do it again. Ultimately, that experience, and the general package of DRM/authorisation/max downloads/max burns/etc. that comes with buying music from iTunes turned me off the service altogether.


----------



## wedgeski

Friadoc said:


> As a former member of Applecare (worked for them at two different periods over the past 12+ years), I can tell you that not only does Apple allow for a repeat download, they have a process and policy for it, as well as online documentation that anyone can access and follow the instructions on how to do this process.



See my previous post, but I have to tell you that the 'process', when I endured it a year or so back, was neither documented nor straightforward. The only way I even found out that it was possible (directly *contrary* to the content of emails from Apple) was Googling other people who had made a point of phoning and demanding a re-download.

It's quite possible it has changed in the interim, I don't shop with iTunes any more so I wouldn't know.


----------



## CharlesRyan

As a PDF user myself (PDF + iPhone = always having D&D with me!), I'm surprised and saddened by this news. But what's really floored me is all the melodrama on this thread.

WotC took some old products off the market, and eliminated the availability of products in a particular format. Companies do that _all the time_. But you'd think WotC had been setting people's cats on fire.

*But Piracy Can't Be Stopped!*

That's probably true. And piracy has been around since before the first D&D PDF was released, and WotC has always known about it. (I'm the guy that launched the first current-edition PDF sales, so I know what I'm saying here.)

It's pretty clear to me that what WotC is reacting to is a _trend_ in piracy. Based on these events, I'm guessing there's been a pretty dramatic _increase_ in piracy, particularly of key titles. WotC may not be able to put an end to piracy, but that's not likely the goal. The goal is to change the trend.

Also, a lot of people are comparing WotC to TSR, in a disparaging, "They Sue Regularly" sort of way. But lawsuits are expensive, and it hasn't been my experience that WotC likes to spend its profits on heavy-handed action unless it has a really good case. (Seriously, have you really observed WotC suing lots of people?) I think this is a situation where WotC legitimately believes they can substantially affect specific piracy activities or a current trend.

*But 4E Has Already Been Pirated!*

Yeah, it's too late for the PHB, MM, DMG, and PHB2. But it's not too late for the MM2, the PHB3, or any number of other strong titles. It's still early in the 4E life cycle. (Some people have tried to tie the timing of this into other things, like the Hasbro quarterly report (Really? You _do_ have an active imagination!)--the strongest connection I see is to the imminent release of MM2.)

*But I Didn't Get to Download My Purchase Five Times!*

It's been less than 24 hours since this was announced, and clearly it took the resellers by surprise. Take a deep breath. I'd bet money that they and WotC will make a good effort to reimburse anyone who wasn't able to download their purchases or redownload a lost file. WotC obviously did this because they had big fish to fry--not because they want to steal your pennies.

*But Bad WotC Didn't Give Us Any Warning!*

I'm not a legal expert, and I have no special info on this issue, but I bet it's no coincidence that this happened within hours of the lawsuits being filed. I bet WotC needed to get all their ducks in a row--and all their court summons served--before tipping their hand to organized pirates. The lack of warning was probably a specific tactical move--not a PR fumble. That might suck for us, but it's no reason to heap vitriol on WotC.

*I Like PDFs, So Now I'm Not Going To Play D&D!*

Really? The format is more important to you than the game?

*But . . . But . . . I Like PDFs!*

Yeah, me too. But in the grand scheme of things-I-want-to-buy-that-are-no-longer-sold, this is really not that big a deal. Seriously, would you really react like this if you went into The Home Depot for a string trimmer and found out it wasn't sold any more? Those evil bastards at Black & Decker! They've lost this customer forever!!!


----------



## Gorrstagg

I'm going to be blunt as a customer. They can take their ball away from other companies, that's fine and its totally within their rights. I'm not even getting into that aspect, from a perspective of whom they hurt as a result of this action on the reseller's end. Those companies agreed to some contract that apparently allows this choice to occur. Fine, that is their perogative. (Yes it obviously affects me as a customer of RPGNOW or what not, and I now no longer have my 4 downloads due to catastrophic incidents. But that's another story.)

My complaint. They are getting rid of a modern version of our game. I do NOT want to lug around 10 frakking books anymore. Or as it's slowly turning out, another book each month.

They even used it as a Major sales option. (As presented in that 4E release youtube video a page or so ago.)

And I really bought into it. I'm gung-ho on .pdf's. 

But don't yank it away and not provide me a real method for buying them. Let me buy it and stop trying to punish ME. I didn't pirate, and as everyone who's got any lick of sense will tell you, the only people you've harmed is the just. The unjust are not going to stop. They won't be deterred. And you've taken away a method for your actual customers. The people who pay your wages, with our hard earned money in this economy. 

Stop being boneheaded. Learn how to do business in an ethical manner. Stop treating me as a criminal. I'm not going to boycott you, at this time. This is the game in one form or another I've been playing for 26 years. 

I want you to look at a calender, notice the year, and stop. Realize that almost everything is digital now. Book on .pdf's. Get back in the game, and sell them ASAP. And I mean there needs to be a legal option that isn't intrusive to my using of the products in question and it should be available by the time Arcane Power is to be released.

And Jeff Leed's, really, really needs to take a good close look at the havoc that's been caused by this gunshot to the head reaction, they've taken. 

We are your customers. Once we get past the boycott histrionics, look at us. We give you money. Give us your product in the method and manner we want. Realize your excuse of fighting pirates is so ephemereal, that no one is buying it. 

A pirate doesn't take money out of your hand. They weren't going to buy it. But taking a method of purchase out of our hands. IS money out of your hand.

This choice was not rational.


----------



## jgbrowning

CharlesRyan said:


> Seriously, would you really react like this if you went into The Home Depot for a string trimmer and found out it wasn't sold any more? Those evil bastards at Black & Decker! They've lost this customer forever!!!




I'm pretty sure WotC has actually lost some customers forever over this. Whether or not that's "foolish" doesn't really matter, IMO. The money from foolish customers spends just as well as the money from smart ones.

joe b.


----------



## Bagpuss

WotC_Trevor at WotC forums said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, due to* recent findings of illegal copying and online distribution (piracy) of our products,* Wizards of the Coast has decided to cease the sales of online PDFs. We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content and as soon as we have any more information I'll get it to you.




I cannot believe this is true, it was well known that even before WotC entered the PDF market that their books were available on file sharing sites, often well scanned with OCR.

Part of the reason they went into the market was because customers were demanding the service so they didn't have to be criminals in order to have books in PDF format. By removing the only legal source of WotC PDF, they are just making criminals of people again.

They can't pretend that they have suddenly discovered that piracy exists.

I really suspect that real the motivation behind this is tied to this court case. Since in order to defend a copyright you have to demonstrate you are making efforts to protect it. I would not be surprised if they had not been advised by lawyers that this will help their case.

If piracy was really effecting sales would the PHB2 be up on the top sellers lists? Would it selling better than expected?

Charles Ryan checking into why Amazon.co.uk is delayed shipping.
_
"OK, here's the scoop: *Demand for this book has exceeded supply.* The book channel in particular has had unforeseen levels of demand. Amazon.uk may well be out of the PHB2 (we don't have point of sale data on it yet, so I can't confirm that); if that's the case, it will likely be several weeks before they have more."_

So piracy of the PHB2 has lead to a loss of sales? Maybe it has lead to a loss in sales of the PDF version of the book, but as we have seen WotC isn't interested in PDF sales at all.


----------



## mach1.9pants

Woah, Deja Vu... I am sure I just read that post somewhere else... freaky...


----------



## Samuel Leming

Bagpuss said:


> Since in order to defend a copyright you have to demonstrate you are making efforts to protect it.



That's certainly true in the case of trademarks, but I don't think you're correct about copyright. Copyright law IS the only thing you have for protecting your copyrights.


----------



## Bagpuss

mach1.9pants said:


> Woah, Deja Vu... I am sure I just read that post somewhere else... freaky...




Yeah but you know some people only visit one board.


----------



## Breschau of Livonia

jgbrowning said:


> I'm pretty sure WotC has actually lost some customers forever over this.
> 
> joe b.




I can't imagine you being mistaken in this. If there is one customer who is a pdf-only customer they no longer have a product for him. Nothing to do with a boycott. They just won't sell to him.


----------



## Charwoman Gene

The problem isn't WotC.  The problem is Hasbro's lawyers.  I'm a big WotC defender, 4e fanboy, what have you, and I've defended the claims of "hands off" management from Hasbro.  I still think this is the case in terms of the product development at Wizards.  Unfortunately, I don't think they have an independent legal department.  I think when legal issues, (GSL, Piracy lawsuits)  come up, WotC gets put into "Order 66" mode and their hands are tied.


----------



## Fenes

Breschau of Livonia said:


> I can't imagine you being mistaken in this. If there is one customer who is a pdf-only customer they no longer have a product for him. Nothing to do with a boycott. They just won't sell to him.




Correct. I was planning to buy a number of 3.5 PDfs in addition to the ones I already own, and now I can't. I am not interested in 4E, so they just lost a customer.

I'll spend the money on Pathfinder instead.


----------



## Psion

Plissken said:


> WotC took some old products off the market, and eliminated the availability of products in a particular format. Companies do that _all the time_. But you'd think WotC had been setting people's cats on fire.




Companies shoot themselves in the foot all the time. That doesn't make it not a bad thing.

I don't know how this affects 4e's bottom line. If 4e loses a few fans over this, I won't say I'm sad about that. But plenty of people never game using pdfs.

But as for me, WotC was getting my money whenever I felt like picking up an classic tsr product or 2 or a dozen. Now they won't. And considering how many old-school and retro-clone fans there seem to be out there, I certainly not alone.

How significant this was, I don't know. It may well be that what they lost in 4e product piracy is greater than what they are making off classic products. But if that was the problem, they could have taken 4e products down and let the rest remain.

As it is, they have a corporately-typical ham-fisted blanket policy that throws money away.

Don't cast this as a smart move. It's not.


----------



## Fenes

Yeah. For all those who claim this was done because piracy was hurting their sales: 3E and older material is not sold anymore as books by WotC. They have no sales to be hurt by piracy, other than PDFs - which they just cancelled themselves.

It's a stupid move, and it does look like "Buy 4E, nothing else will be offered" was at least part of the reason this was done.


----------



## avin

In my head I'm officially seeing Wotc as Laibach's "Life is Live" videoclip.


----------



## Breschau of Livonia

btw anyone with experience in such things... I know WotC indicated they are "looking into alternatives".  Assumging they mean selling pdfs themselves - which it may not (for example they may also feel the sales of older editions is hurting 4e sales) - how long would it take to get an online store into place. Their DDI obviously isn't sufficient for it as it stands now - I know they had all sorts of problems with autorenewal. And this was for a store that had just one product for all intents and purposes, at least from a purchasing perspective. They'd need the storage, the servers, customer support, billing, etc. I'm guessing we're talking at least several weeks if not months.


----------



## Arivendel

I know this is completely unfounded, and in no way does it justify Hasbro's (Yes im agreeing with Gene here in that this is Hasbro's Palpatine Order 66 command), but after reading Trevors post for like the fiftieth time today it finally hit me: Could it be that this has nothing to do with the current lawsuits but instead is a direct response to RPGnow's policy of "we will keep them for you to redownload later"?

Think about it, Trevor said "...illegal copying and distribution (piracy) of our product..." and most people assumed he was referring to the standard Torrent/Piracy issue. However what if the "(piracy)" was just a explanation? in which case the statement would read "...illegal copying and distribution of our product..." why do i point this out? because isnt what RPGnow is doing effectively this? they are letting you buy a PDF, after that they are keeping a "copy" of said PDF (which is watermarked i assume) and storing it for later distribution, so as far as i can tell producing this "copy" is illegal since RPGnow is in no way paying WotC for this secondary "copy" or even for the ability to "copy" said file, whats more RPGnow is effectively allowing said "copy" to be redownloaded at no cost (which translates into Wizards not earning any more money) in case any number of issues arise with the buyer, so basically they are buying one book but getting 4 free, this are 4 extra books/pdfs which WotC make no cash from.

Of course I know not what kind of Contract WotC and RPGnow signed, if they signed a contract in which RPGnow detailed the use of such a distribution/storage system and Hasbro's Lawyers approved it then this whole post is a crazy conspiracy theory, however if this distribution/storage module was never drafted/explained in the contract it could be grounds enough for Hasbro's lawyers to jump on this (again this doesnt excuse the reaction made but it does put a different angle to the situation, and angle i havent even seen considered yet since most RPGnow buyers are used to the system and wouldnt even consider it being possibly the reason for why this came about).

I would like to add this is was perhaps a "why didnt i think of this sooner?" moment, but im still quite surprised after 18 pages hasnt even once been considered, i blame it mostly on the fact Trevor's message plus the lawsuit against the PHB2 leakers came in such a short and sequencial manner and people just added this and took it as fact and didnt consider other angles.


----------



## Urizen

Cadfan said:


> Contracts do not work that way.
> 
> Electronic media does not work that way.
> 
> Think it through.
> 
> I write a song, which will be sold exclusively through your online music retailer in mp3 form.  I give you a copy of the mp3, and you allow people who pay you money to download that mp3.  Then we split the money.
> 
> Lets say that our contract requires 30 days notice before cancellation.
> 
> How can I "pull the plug?"  Lets say I order you to stop selling the mp3, and I don't give you 30 days notice.  What do my words accomplish?  You still have the mp3, and the right to sell it.  What can I do?  Its not like the data is piped from my master server to your customer.  I can't turn it off like water from a faucet.  I can't sue you either since you have a valid contract.  My words are just talk.
> 
> One of the following scenarios happened.
> 
> 1. WOTC didn't have a 30 day notice clause for terminating the license.  They had a much shorter period, maybe even 24 hours, which they followed.  I suspect this one as most likely.
> 2. WOTC did have a 30 day notice clause, and offered RPGNOW and the other retailers a new, more lucrative contract in the future if they agreed to cancel this contract now.  RPGNOW decided that breaching their contracts with their customers was the better choice, terminated their current contract, and accepted the new one.
> 3. WOTC did have a 30 day notice clause, and gave notice 30 days ago.  No one told the customers until today.
> 
> And I suppose, for the sake of argument, we can include:
> 
> 4. No one at WOTC, Paizo, or RPGNOW has any clue what their licensing agreement says.




Just got back to the comp.

OK that makes perfect sense.


----------



## Mottokrosh

Boo, Wizards of the Coast, boo!

PDFs are simply great when preparing adventures on the computer, and on the go. They make my life as DM so much easier.

Once again we have a radical announcement (like the sudden Dragon and Dungeon magazine withdrawal) without a solution, replacement, or remedy. Instead we get a vague announcement of "we're looking into it", and are left hanging in the air.

Have you considered having solutions ready before acting out like this?


----------



## Bleoberis De Ganis

Right, since WOTC haven't learned from TSRs mistakes we may as well start down this line.

Who do you think will buy up the D&D brand when WOTC go bump?

Who would you like to buy D&D?


----------



## Mottokrosh

Bleoberis De Ganis said:


> Who would you like to buy D&D?




Paizo. Bring on 5th edition!


----------



## jgbrowning

Urizen said:


> Just got back to the comp.
> 
> OK that makes perfect sense.




He forgot...

5. Perhaps, technically WotC can't do what they did, but what PDF retailer in their right mind would risk the chance of never regaining WotC's PDFs to sell by being a stickler for the contract and irritating WotC over 30 days of sales? Reality trumps contractuality every time and you don't piss off your biggest seller unless you know with a certainty that you'll never be able to do business with them again.

joe b.


----------



## Kid Charlemagne

Haffrung Helleyes said:


> You know, you and Mistwell can keep repeating that mantra as much as you want, but those of us here who aren't sock puppets aren't buying it.
> 
> Have a nice day.




*I think there have been enough mod warnings in this thread - I've threadbanned you.  Everyone should know this - personal attacks are not acceptable.*


----------



## D.Shaffer

Someone once gave me some advice...never make a final decision (Or post on the internet) when drunk, tired, or angry.  When you do, you're not exactly thinking straight and tend to see issues where they dont really exist. 

I really think people need to cool off a bit as I'm seeing some mighty huge jumping to conclusions going on here.  At the very least, give WotC time to at least DEFEND themselves before lynching them.



Wraith Form said:


> All due respect?  Where have you been for the past several years?  Under a rock?
> 
> You obviously never bought D&D 3.0 (only go get 3.5 crammed down yer throat), _Dragon_ & _Dungeon_ (only to have them discontinued), listened to the WotC propaganda about their DDi "we'll give you a discounted PDF of D&D4 books that you purchase" or several other _interesting_ business decisions made by WotC over the past...what? 9 or 10?....years.



Whoa. Hang on there. WotC NEVER promised cheap PDF's on 4th ed books.  They mentioned at one point that they were LOOKING INTO IT as an option, but they then later stated they didnt find it feasible.  We ended up having a much more open form of the DDI Compendium/Character builder because of it. Let's keep it to being upset over stuff they've actually done, here.


----------



## Urizen

On Puget Sound said:


> As a past owner of a brick and mortar store (different hobby - aquarium not gaming), I applaud WOTC for shutting down PDF purchases.  Now if they could just do something about Amazon, we might be able to save at least a few places people can go to talk to, and game with, actual live humans, and also save those live humans' jobs.




Live humans?

What, do you think OBS ( or any PDF publishing company for that matter) is run by some heartless AI that twists it's digital whiskers at the thought of putting a brick and mortar store out of business??

OBS is run by people. Good people, and they took a big monetary hit yesterday, losing one of their largest clients. This is definitely going to impact them, and it will impact publishers of PDFs, as the customer base shrinks.

I hope they don't have to let anyone go because of this.


----------



## Fenes

D.Shaffer said:


> Someone once gave me some advice...never make a final decision (Or post on the internet) when drunk, tired, or angry.  When you do, you're not exactly thinking straight and tend to see issues where they dont really exist.




What decision? WotC decided for me that they did not want my business anymore. I did not get any say in that, it was their decision.


----------



## Dausuul

aboyd said:


> You know, I buy into your premise, and yet I'm _still_ upset at Wizards of the Coast.
> 
> Here's the thing.  If I am the representative of a company that sells something made by company X, and company X says, "stop selling our stuff," I am going to immediately ask for a grace period, for grandfathering support for existing purchases, etc.  _Even if those things are not contractually obligated_ I am going to ask for them anyway, out of goodwill for my customers.  If company X doesn't allow consideration for my (our) customers, or gives me a paltry few _hours_ to notify customers, then I'm going to think poorly of company X, _even if it was their right to do what they did._
> 
> I think that's important.  Customers have a right to perceive companies as they see fit.  We may not even like or agree with how some people view other companies.  But those people have that right.  And in this case, people perceive Wizards of the Coast to have handled this harshly and to the customer's detriment, and even if they are legally allowed to do it _the customer can be upset with them anyway._
> 
> What's more is that _WotC should have known this._  This is PR 101.  Bungling this is just _another_ reason to shake heads in dismay.




Well spoken. You have the legal right to cheat on your girlfriend. Doesn't mean she won't be justified in dumping you for it.


----------



## Bleoberis De Ganis

They believe the lack of sales of Player's Handbook 2 is through piracy, but it has been said everywhere that people are either not taking up 4E and many who did have got bored and gone elsewhere, so I think this is more likely a reason.

3rd edition has sooo many pirated copies all over the internet if you put a search in google for legitimate sites (if any of those exist anymore on account of WOTC closing one a second) you will get torrent site links popping up as well with pdfs on them, and 3rd edition sold really well. It wasn't such a problem because people wanted them.

They are getting upset about illegal 4E pdfs because their sales are doing badly. The two things are probably not related (not to the point it is worth spending money on lawyers.)

I'll just state I love 4E and they have done a really excellent job in their design of a good many elements of the game. But instead of just fixing what was broken and introducing some fantastic new aspects they have, for some reason, thrown any logic out of the window, neglected any depth, and broken some other parts leaving the whole thing feeling hollow, shallow and implausible.

I'm not a grognard, I love new rules and improvements. I'm the kind of person who can't wait for 5E, I'm just not so sure I want WOTC and Hasbro to be the ones making it and the way they are playing it I think my wish will come true.

Perhaps the next company who gets it should not use an acronym. TSR, WOTC, coincedance?

Actually it is isn't it. I'm just being silly.


----------



## CharlesRyan

Charwoman Gene said:


> The problem isn't WotC.  The problem is Hasbro's lawyers. [. . .] I think when legal issues, (GSL, Piracy lawsuits)  come up, WotC gets put into "Order 66" mode and their hands are tied.




I doubt this very much, for a couple reasons. First, because WotC does have its own legal department, and second because a policy change like this, including the decision to take legal action, would be Brand-led, not Legal-led.

[I know the "Hasbro corporate suits" boogeyman is one of the intarwebs' best-loved and most enduring myths, but in 99.9% of businesses, Legal is a support service, not a policy font.]


----------



## Dausuul

D.Shaffer said:


> Someone once gave me some advice...never make a final decision (Or post on the internet) when drunk, tired, or angry.  When you do, you're not exactly thinking straight and tend to see issues where they dont really exist.
> 
> I really think people need to cool off a bit as I'm seeing some mighty huge jumping to conclusions going on here.  At the very least, give WotC time to at least DEFEND themselves before lynching them.




That was my attitude until WotC posted their "defense." I could think of a number of legitimate reasons to stop .PDF sales. Cracking down on piracy isn't one of them. It's the same old crap the RIAA spent years doing, to no avail.


----------



## Umbran

This will be unpopular... Thread closed.

Overnight, a whole mess of you folks thought it would be okay to be jerks here.  It is not fair to allow that to go unanswered.  Nor is it okay to allow people to continue to spew vitriol while the moderators sort this out.

We'll be having some discussion, and I expect we'll reopen this thread once we've sorted out how to deal with those who think that it is okay to be jerks at 3 AM.  Thank you for your patience.


----------



## Umbran

Folks,

Okay, we are starting to get caught up with the backlog.  In a little while, the thread will be reopened.  But we need to be clear about something:

*The fact that this news is upsetting in no way removes your responsibility as posters on EN World.* 

We expect you to be kind, respectful, and reasonable.  As this thread goes forward, we will be coming down hard on things we see as personal attacks, excessive hyperbole, or vitriol.  Please consider this to be the only warning you are likely to get.


----------



## Umbran

Okay, we're opening up the thread again.  

One final note - no digging after folks for things they said before the closure. Cool heads only, please.


----------



## Treebore

Umbran said:


> Okay, we're opening up the thread again.
> 
> One final note - no digging after folks for things they said before the closure. Cool heads only, please.





Good. By and large I thought the majority of posters were doing very well at following policy. As usual its a few bad eggs/pirates that make the rest of us get penalized. Pun on piracy completely intended.


----------



## Mark

I think the secondary market for print versions of older products will see a considerable rise in prices.


----------



## rogueattorney

I guess the main thing I'd like to know from Charles or anyone else from WotC is what the piracy of new 4e print products has to do with the availability of OOP D&D products.  Why take these down, too?  That makes no sense and seems to be more of an incitement towards piracy than a move to prevent it.


----------



## Alzrius

I want to thank the mods for opening this thread back up again. This is simply too big to not let it be discussed amongst our community.

While I agree with what the mods said about not being jerks, I also think that there's a lot of anger here at WotC, and rightfully so. Whether it's about how this move - officially stated to be a measure to fight piracy - won't have any practical effect at stopping pirates, or about how there was no notice given prior to this happening (save for the brief one from Paizo), or the nature of the contract between WotC and OneBookShelf, or remaining downloads that were lost, the ultimate fact of the matter here is that WotC did their customers a bad turn with this latest move.

Maybe they have another method for digital distribution of their products that they'll unveil in the future; I don't think that matters. Every part of this latest move of theirs was done poorly no matter how you look at it; this is a PR folly, a marketing folly, and a business folly. No good will come from this, either for WotC or the people they're ostensibly trying to serve - the only positive ramifications will be for other companies who stand to gain the customers that WotC is driving away.


----------



## Aberzanzorax

One response I'd like to make to  a general point I have seen from the very few WotC apologists on this and other boards:

The point: Hold on a minute, we don't know anything. Give WotC a chance to defend themselves!!!

(This is my true understanding of the point, and is not an intentional strawman).



My response: They were the ones that put all of this into action. If they wanted to defend themselves, they could have done so before putting it into action or have had something ready for when they did.

It appears that they are gauging our responses to best (and likely way too late) put some spin on that will mitigate the fallout at this point.

Sadly, when/if they respond, it's my belief that it will re-ignite the anger, rather than smoothing things over.


----------



## thedungeondelver

I think this is going to be something that WotC finds regrettable.  But they did so out of a percieved necessity.  Whether or not they're hiding behind a false reason (the "sudden discovery" of the phb2 piracy) or they feel that their reasoning is legitimate, they're going to stick with their guns.

With that said I find it curious that (to my perspective) they haven't been able to follow through with a single technology enabled extension of *D&D*, which is sad because the perception I had in 2000 was that, despite my misgivings about d20 and 3e, *D&D* was in the hands of very geek-tech savvy people who knew what they were doing.  Has that conceit been disposed of, then?  Is *D&D* now just in the hands of people who are just nudging it along?  I find that hard to believe.  

I think, rather like the death and rebirth of *DUNGEON* and *DRAGON* magazines that what this really is, is WotC bringing all their chickens home.  

If it _is_ a long term strategy to do just that then the people who are responsible for creating it are either "very smart or very dumb", to quote *JAWS*.  The eyes of most of us internet enabled gamers (which has to be a considerable portion of WotC's customer base - they allegedly designed 4e around that very notion) are now pointed at them waiting for what they do next.  

With all that said I don't think I've ever made it unclear what version of *D&D* I prefer and think is best, but I don't think this is some attempt by WotC to kill off old *D&D* once and for all.  Original *D&D* didn't go away when *AD&D* came out, and likewise *AD&D* didn't go away when *AD&D 2e* came out, and so forth.  So it won't now that PDFs aren't available.  I won't be a fan of 4e, regardless of what they do, and if anything this makes me view them with a far more skeptical eye.


----------



## Dannager

I don't think this move is actually going to drive many customers away.  There might be a handful of people who were completely dependent upon PDFs to the exclusion of physical books completely, and those people will find themselves unable to play.  There might be a handful of people who get furiously upset at not being able to re-download something they wanted to re-download.  And there might be a handful of people who enjoy being filled with righteous indignation over something that doesn't affect them in any way.

But for the vast majority of gamers, this decision has absolutely no effect on them.  Yeah, it's a botched PR job.  But the _magnitude_ of the issue is pretty small.


----------



## Voadam

Alzrius said:


> Maybe they have another method for digital distribution of their products that they'll unveil in the future; I don't think that matters.




I think it does matter. If they never make these available again that would be worse than them selling them themselves or redistributing them through OBS/Paizo.

I don't think they have anything in place however and selling them themselves runs into the exact same conceptual piracy possibility problems as selling them through OBS/Paizo.

Policies can change and they have sold pdfs before, so there is the possibility that these will come around again. Which would be better than the current nothing they offer on this front.


----------



## Charwoman Gene

CharlesRyan said:


> I doubt this very much, for a couple reasons. First, because WotC does have its own legal department, and second because a policy change like this, including the decision to take legal action, would be Brand-led, not Legal-led.




Thanks for helping to promote truth over hysteria.


----------



## seankreynolds

rogueattorney said:


> I guess the main thing I'd like to know from Charles or anyone else from WotC is...




I may be a bit muddled from my many cross-country moves, but I don't believe Charles works for Wizards any more, and hasn't for a couple years.


----------



## Silverblade The Ench

A) You cannot stop digital piracy, piracy cannot be stopped short of draconian evil.
Digital piracy is not theft, it can't be theft, no one is breaking into your home and robbing you or worse.
It's UNAUTHORIZED COPYING, completely different, and should be seen as such.

Digital items cannot be stolen, only copied, real items have ot have prices based off rare materials etc used to make them, they are "limited" material items and are *real*: you _cannot _copy them onto a CD or the Net, but digital copies can be almost unlimited, distributed to _everyone on Earth _in seconds if they have a net connection, and cannot be worn out!! They should thus be dirt cheap.

yes it can hurt folk, mostly if some git claims they made an item someone else worked hard on, but financially, it's not as simple as companies want you to think.
Why?

because if the product had been sold, at a price the user likes, with all the things the user likes, they'd have bought it! 
Piracy is the competition and thus it's good for the industry, because industries always try to form monoploies and price fix things. Ironic but true.
Governments are useless at stopping price fixing and monopolies in the digital era.

Someone with an unauthorized copy is not a thief, they are a _potential buyer _who has not been enticed to buy...think about it a minute.

Do you want to get them to buy, or, your "pound of flesh" and alienate more folk?
better lots of sales cheap, and a massive happy user base, than being a moron who cuts away his own foundations.

While folk like things for free, most *real users*, as opposed to "magpies", preffer real items and pay for them, to support creators, to get new updates and content etc.

Seen this stuff a lot in digital art, and piracy forced the greedy monopolies ot change a fair bit (still not enough though IMHO).
Doesn't mean I like artists losing money, just that it's not as simple as the RIAA etc want you to believe (IMHO, they are much worse criminals than the P2P folk, see the way recordign artists were paid/treated versus profit made from them)
if WOTC is going down that road, like TSR they will die out as they've lost the plot.

This is no longer the 19th century. totally new ways of looking at things are needed, includign companies NOT being run as the personal fiefdom of folk who don't understand how things really work.


b) Corporations are immortal, non-real entities with almost no responsibilities or limitations and enough power to bend the law/makers. 
Few folk appreicate how damn dangerous that makes them..some are gettign the point now though (see RIAA and other companies grotesquely immoral law suits and recent mayhem in business).

c) D&D thrives on user loyalty...but this on top of other decisions is way too much even for me, 
WOTC management needs excoriated. there needs ot be heads on the block of their maganement to appease the fans, but not Scott or the designers, this is due to bad higher management, of not running things smoothly between the company's various parts, and critically, it's users.

When many very bad decisions have occured to offend folk, you find who was responsible and didn't stop it, and fire their butts in a very public way with a very public apology.
People are utterly fed up with being treated like victims by big business, we demand respect.
That's not vitriol, it's common sense.

Or better yet, get WOTC/D&D out of Hasborg, and into the hands of folk who care for it, again.
I love D&D, I do not love WOTC.
I love 4th ed and think the DDi stuff is good, others disagree.
But there's no excuse for WOTC to be so grossly out of step with it's user base, _who keep them in employment!_


----------



## Mallus

Some thoughts...

... the anti-piracy statements were dumb. The way to fight piracy is through competitive pricing and convenient downloading, cf iTunes.

... WotC will probably (eventually) make these materials available through other channels, either their own online store or some kind of "legacy" Compendium --why sell people information when you can _rent_ it to them?.

... aside from some distaste over WotC making a dumb --and badly rolled-out-- move, I really couldn't care less.

... I like their new product, and will continue buying it, up until the point I no longer like it.

... I liked their older products too, and fortunately, I still have them.

... if I want more of them, there are always used book stores, and their modern-day replacements, eBay and Amazon Marketplace.

That about wraps up my feeling on the matter. Stupid move on WotC's part, but barely an inconvenience for me in practical terms.


----------



## Wicht

Now that we are allowed to talk about this again...

Paizo made it clear not all that long ago that they would continue to allow people to download PDFs they had bought up until the publishers told them to pull the download.  That let me know that publishers can tell distributors to no longer allow any downloads of their products.  Which means that WotC was within their rights to do what they did.  It doesn't make the act any less worse however

Buying a PDF is a matter of trust.  Trust in both the publisher and the distributor.  We trust the distributor to be able to provide us downloads of what we bought and we trust the publisher to continue to allow us access to what we paid for.  Its a bit of a gentleman's agreement.  WotC showed that they can't be trusted not to pull the rug any time they feel like it.  

I want to know if this makes those publishers who are trusting WotC not to change or yank the GSL without warning rethink their position as partners in that license.


----------



## Xyxox

Well, I like to look on the bright side of things.

My collection of D&D material that goes all the way back to the white boxed set has certainly increased in value.


----------



## Roman

CharlesRyan said:


> As a PDF user myself (PDF + iPhone = always having D&D with me!), I'm surprised and saddened by this news. But what's really floored me is all the melodrama on this thread.




Charles, nice to see you here! That said, I think the anger here is based on the fact that for many people this is the last straw in a string of decisions by WotC over the past several years that are perceived to be hostile to the RPG community at large, ranging from the cancellation of the magazines, through the GSL fiasco to the current PDF fiasco. 

In early 2000s, WotC was my favorite company (kudos to you for being there at the time - it shows that profitable corporate decisions don't have to alienate customers), but in the past few years they have done their utmost to squander the goodwill build up over this period. I think this final episode is just the spark that set people off - but the fuel for the fire has been building for a while now. 

Besides, it doesn't matter if it is a company's legal right to do something - it is our legal right to complain about it too and be displeased. After all, just because I can come up to somebody on the street and swear at them for no reason, doesn't mean I should do that or that others will look kindly upon me if I do. 



> *But 4E Has Already Been Pirated!*
> 
> Yeah, it's too late for the PHB, MM, DMG, and PHB2. But it's not too late for the MM2, the PHB3, or any number of other strong titles. It's still early in the 4E life cycle.




Right, so what sense does it make to pull 2E PDF products, 3E PDF products and already existing 4E PDF products from the market? If prevention of future piracy were at stake, WotC could have decided to not include these future products as PDFs - it certainly is not helping to fight piracy of future products by pulling already existing ones off the market. 

I am more and more inclined to suspect duplicity - after the ongoing fiascos I have now moved past giving WotC the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps WotC may have decided that it wants to sell PDFs exclusively on its own and thought providing piracy as an excuse to pull them from existing publishers would defuse any customer complaints about this - after all, nobody would want to defend piracy... 



> I'm not a legal expert, and I have no special info on this issue, but I bet it's no coincidence that this happened within hours of the lawsuits being filed. I bet WotC needed to get all their ducks in a row--and all their court summons served--before tipping their hand to organized pirates. The lack of warning was probably a specific tactical move--not a PR fumble.




Well, their tactical move has strategic implications for the market. They have deliberately decided to hurt a section of their customer base that is now understandably angry at them. Even if this was done to go after the pirates, which I am sceptical about, it is like 'collateral damge' in a war - if you decide to hurt many innocents in a war to get at a couple of bad guys, you may find that many of those affected innocents turn against you.


----------



## SabreCat

Dannager said:


> But for the vast majority of gamers, this decision has absolutely no effect on them. Yeah, it's a botched PR job. But the _magnitude_ of the issue is pretty small.



Sad but true. Internet forums like ENWorld tend to amplify the vocal minority. In turn, Hasbro/WotC are unlikely to feel much of an effect in profits or goodwill.



> And there might be a handful of people who enjoy being filled with righteous indignation over something that doesn't affect them in any way.



This, however, is an unnecessarily belittling characterization of, e.g. people who would undertake a boycott on principle. Someone might yank their Insider subscription or cease purchasing D&D4 products, and make their voice heard by what channels they can, without its being a mere case of getting off on anger.


----------



## Jack99

Mark said:


> I think the secondary market for print versions of older products will see a considerable rise in prices.




I think WotC will come out and sell the PDF (old and new) themselves.


----------



## Stormtalon

I'd agree it's a spectacularly dumb move -- for many of the reasons already outlined: punishing honest customers, being counterproductive, etc, etc.  Can't exactly say I'm worked up over it, though; PDF books aren't my cup of tea, as it were.

I'm one of those tactile folks -- gotta have the book in my hands, feel its weight, feel the texture of the paper (get the occasional paper cut) and indulge in that wonderful new book smell, so I'll likely never use 'em.  Doesn't mean I've no sympathy for folks who do like 'em, though.  It's a sucky move and woefully shortsighted.  

I just hope they've got something in the works _soon_ to pick up the slack and show they've not totally gone ostrich on us.  They'll need a lot longer to rebuild even a small amount of the goodwill they've lost doing this, that's for sure.


----------



## Arivendel

I would like to point out again that we dont know if their reactions are due to the recent discovery of the PHB 2 piracy, Trevors statement can just as easily had been made to refer to actual stores with distribution policies which WotC Legal staff now consider piracy and have done a massive pullout to detemine who is actually pirating and who isnt and to consider their legal options after that.

Again this doesnt excuse their actions, but it is a more plausible reaction to the "We skipped the last 10 or so years of internet history, and just NOW realized our product was being torrented"


----------



## Brown Jenkin

Despite the statements that this is about piracy, I am wondering if this has anything to do with the GAMA Trade Show next week when they will be facing all the retailers face to face.


----------



## mach1.9pants

Arivendel said:


> I know this is completely unfounded, and in no way does it justify Hasbro's (Yes im agreeing with Gene here in that this is Hasbro's Palpatine Order 66 command), but after reading Trevors post for like the fiftieth time today it finally hit me: Could it be that this has nothing to do with the current lawsuits but instead is a direct response to RPGnow's policy of "we will keep them for you to redownload later"?<snip>



That is a good point, maybe the licence or whatever with WotC is for one product, therefore one download. Which is legally fine, just like anything if you loose it it is your problem. RPGnow/Paizo just automatically carried over their normal 5/unlimited download model without checking the fine print.

I don't think it is the case but it is a good point.


----------



## Scribble

If I remember correctly it took wizards a while to actually get into the pdf market at all. When they did, they started with heavily DRMed ebooks that lacked a number of key functions pdf users wanted/needed. Then when they finally switched to the current PDF form, they did so at prices that were increadibly high (for pdfs) and not every book was available. It wasn't until the current edition that they started offering all the books released at a price discounted from the print version.

I know based on the limited statement we have it appears that this action was done as a "reaction" to pirating, but I kind of get the feeling that it's more that piracy was used as the ultimate "proof" against pdfs.

I think someone just finally had the numbers needed to show PDFs in a bad light.


----------



## Klaus

WotC was selling something through a specific media.

WotC decided to stop selling.

Where's the beef?

When I buy an eletronic *anything*, I make a backup copy. If I buy a physical book and I later lose the book, do I go to the bookstore and pick up another copy for free? Is an eletronic book to be treated any different?

As for piracy: piracy IS theft, no two ways about it. Someone spent hours creating that thing, someone paid for the software used to layout the thing, someone paid artists to do the cover of the thing... Is their work worth "less" because the fruit of their work is intangible?


----------



## Alzrius

Voadam said:


> I think it does matter.




I wasn't clear in my initial post. I don't think it matters in terms of the loss of trust and ill-will generated among their customers. WotC may very well come up with a new digital distribution system for their books in the future. However, that won't erase how many of their customers feel burned and vote with their wallet accordingly right now.

When you do something that alienates your customer base, you can't just undo the damage by coming back later and doing the opposite.


----------



## Zaruthustran

Silverblade The Ench said:


> Someone with an unauthorized copy is NOT a thief, they are a potential buyer who has not been enticed to buy...think about it a minute.




Wrong. Simply incorrect, on technical legal as well as moral grounds. It's simple: if you've taken something of value without paying for it, you've stolen it. That's what stealing _means_.

That said, your long rationalization for theft does have some merit to the discussion. Some percentage of pirates likely would buy if the price was right. iTunes is an excellent example. $1 songs are demonstrably at the convergence of price, convenience, and guilt aversion. Most people are willing to pay a buck for a song that's easy to browse and buy. And most people think a dollar is not too high a price to pay in exchange for not feeling like a scumbag pirate/thief.

Wizards clearly needs to adjust to the realities of the digital generation and I think the new direction of DDI is a big step in the right direction. If they make more money by selling quality services, they can afford to price their digital (and print?) offerings lower... hopefully, low enough that convenience and the joy of guilt-free living tips the balance from piracy.

In my opinion, the community can help the situation by applying social pressure against pirates. Shun these cowards. There's one in every group; the loser who proudly pulls out stapled prints of new books. Refuse to game with them, and hit 'em with the "what, you can't afford twenty lousy bucks for a book?" shame. It should work on anyone worth knowing. Certainly anyone who considers themselves an adult.

-z, who grudgingly accepts that there'll always be penniless teens who resort to shoplifting/piracy.


----------



## tmatk

Klaus said:


> ...
> 
> As for piracy: piracy IS theft, no two ways about it. Someone spent hours creating that thing, someone paid for the software used to layout the thing, someone paid artists to do the cover of the thing... Is their work worth "less" because the fruit of their work is intangible?




No it's not, it's infringement. If I make a copy, they still have their copy, so I didn't take it. One can argue I cheated them out of the money I would have gave them, but one would have to prove that I would have paid to begin with.

It's still wrong, no mistake, but it's not theft.


----------



## Xyxox

Jack99 said:


> I think WotC will come out and sell the PDF (old and new) themselves.




I think that there will be 4E electronic availability, but only with a DDI subscription.

I do not beleive we will ever see older versions available in PDF again.


----------



## Aberzanzorax

Argh.

There is at least one old thread here (I think it is locked) that debates the difference between theft and infringement.

EDIT: I think this is the thread: http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/146688-piracy-serious-issue-game-developers.html

They are different legal concepts, as are stealing, burglary, robbery, etc.

They have specific legal meanings.

Look them up if you don't believe me.


If you are using them in the colloquial way, fine, but if you claim to be using them in the legal way, please look them up so that you are correct.


You don't want to be saying "murder" when you mean "manslaughter."


----------



## Vyvyan Basterd

Has anyone been able to confirm (ENWorld staff, especially) that WotC_Trevor's post is reflective of Wizards official stance on this subject? I assume at least that an ENWorld opster can't take a WotC moniker without confirmation they are a WotC employee. Even so, are we sure that Trevor is speaking with authority?

Beyond that I am extremely disappointed with WotC's actions to remove pdf sales (especially the OOP products) and their inaction in giving us an official response.


----------



## Jack99

Xyxox said:


> I think that there will be 4E electronic availability, but only with a DDI subscription.
> 
> I do not beleive we will ever see older versions available in PDF again.




Anything is of course possible. But if there is money to be made of the old pdf's, it would be very uncharacteristic of WotC to not sell them.

Cheers


----------



## Voadam

Scribble said:


> If I remember correctly it took wizards a while to actually get into the pdf market at all. When they did, they started with heavily DRMed ebooks that lacked a number of key functions pdf users wanted/needed. Then when they finally switched to the current PDF form, they did so at prices that were increadibly high (for pdfs) and not every book was available. It wasn't until the current edition that they started offering all the books released at a price discounted from the print version.
> 
> I know based on the limited statement we have it appears that this action was done as a "reaction" to pirating, but I kind of get the feeling that it's more that piracy was used as the ultimate "proof" against pdfs.
> 
> I think someone just finally had the numbers needed to show PDFs in a bad light.




WotC started doing pdfs in house long ago, I think it was even before 3e was anounced. They were super cheap to start, something like $3 each then.

They then spun it off to be run by an outside company still using their ESD format with special software for generating big pdfs.

Later it went on to rpgnow as straight pdfs.

Originally they said 3e pdfs would come on after a period of time but they did not show up, just the old edition ones with later scans being outsourced to be done quickly and cheaply leading to large file sizes and poor OCR.

I'm a little fuzzy on the interim period after that first outside distributing company stopped. I think they went off of rpgnow for a while and then onto DTRPG with 3.5e ones coming on with DRM and full hardcopy cost. Later DTRPG and RPGNOW formed OBS and it was on both. WotC eventually took the DRM off but kept the full cost price point. Later 4e ones were sold with I think it was 25% off cover price, about $25 for each of the core books.

At some point the old edition pdfs were available on paizo as well with different prices and not a complete overlap of catalogues.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol

Zaruthustran said:


> Wrong. Simply incorrect, on technical legal as well as moral grounds. It's simple: if you've taken something of value without paying for it, you've stolen it. That's what stealing _means_.




Well, if you want to be technical about it, piracy isn't theft.  It's copyright infringement, which is a completely different branch of criminal law.  According to the law, stealing _means_ to take an object into your possession without ownership of the object being transferred to you.  

Making a copy of a PDF is much the same as using a photocopier to make a copy of a book.  Under normal circumstances, you have the right to reproduce (under fair use) and distribute 10% of the document, or one chapter, whichever is shorter, or 20% of the document if it does not contain chapters.  If you copy more than that, you're in violation of the law, not because you've stolen anything but because you have copied more than you were allowed to.  If you make a copy of a book, and leave that copy lying around on a desk, and someone takes it without asking, that would be theft.

This distinction is pretty cut-and-dried, and it comes up every time a piracy-related thread occurs.  It baffles me that there is still some kind of confusion on the legal realities of copyright law, considering how many times I've seen this exact point explained in detail on these boards.


----------



## Admiral Caine

Xyxox said:


> I think that there will be 4E electronic availability, but only with a DDI subscription.
> 
> I do not beleive we will ever see older versions available in PDF again.




I agree. Particularly prior edition material. I don't think you'll see that stuff available ever again. It is in competition with 4th Edition. Particularly since that material could be converted to Pathfinder and other systems that are close to those legacy products.

I am prepared to be wrong, but I don't think I will be.

Just to be clear, I don't think getting rid of old edition products was the intent behind this decision, but this is an excellent opportunity to kill two birds with one stone.

And I'm seeing feathers on the ground right now.


----------



## The Ghost

Alzrius said:


> I wasn't clear in my initial post. I don't think it matters in terms of the loss of trust and ill-will generated among their customers. WotC may very well come up with a new digital distribution system for their books in the future. However, that won't erase how many of their customers feel burned and vote with their wallet accordingly right now.
> 
> When you do something that alienates your customer base, you can't just undo the damage by coming back later and doing the opposite.




True. But many (most?) of us have very short memories. At some point in the future WotC will produce a product that will *Wow!* us once again, and many people who have sworn off WotC will be back as customers. 

Now, this does not excuse them from the colossal -up that this move is/was. And they do deserve to hear about it. They have shown in the past, at least as far as their Magic: the Gathering property goes, to actually listen to their customers and make good and appropriate changes.


----------



## Kask

Arivendel said:


> I would like to point out again that we dont know if their reactions are due to the recent discovery of the PHB 2 piracy,




No, ceasing to sell 1st & 2nd Ed PDFs does nothing to stop pirating of 4E material.  The only logical reason is that they don't want people playing older editions (spending $ on them) as they see it as eroding 4E sales.  It costs them nothing to have people sell older PDFs and makes them $.  The only reason to stop it is because someone doesn't like the current 4E sales numbers and in a misguided move decided to eliminate some _competition._


----------



## Obryn

Roman said:


> Charles, nice to see you here! That said, I think the anger here is based on the fact that for many people this is the last straw in a string of decisions by WotC over the past several years that are perceived to be hostile to the RPG community at large, ranging from the cancellation of the magazines, through the GSL fiasco to the current PDF fiasco.



You know, I keep on hearing things referred to as "the last straw."

I don't buy it.  There have been way too many "last straws" for me to believe it.  I think a lot of those claiming this was the last straw have had _previous_ last straws, and that there will be _more_ last straws after this one.

Which is fine - I just think a statement like "I WILL NEVER SUPPORT THIS COMPANY EVER AGAIN BECAUSE OF THIS ACTION!" is (usually) the internet version of a politely-worded complaint letter, just with extra froth because there's barely any barrier between thought and publication.

For me?  I'm disappointed, but as I said elsewhere, I'm disappointed because it's simply a dumb move.  It's like when your buddy gets back together with a horrible ex who's bad for him.  It's forehead-smacking idiocy and a feeling of dread, not anger and rage.

It's not like WotC is supporting totalitarian regimes, using child labor, or even suing grandmothers for downloading.  They're just making a mind-numbingly stupid response to a legitimate concern and showing astonishingly poor customer relations skills in the process.

-O


----------



## mach1.9pants

Klaus said:


> WotC was selling something through a specific media.
> 
> WotC decided to stop selling.
> 
> Where's the beef?



 Well, you might have no problem with it but there is 20 odd pages of beef here, 22 at WotC boards and a similar number on RPG.net. So there is beef, not just the fact that people can't get the ever so useful 4E PDFs or out-of-print older edition PDFs but also the manner in which it happened, no announcement just gone.

Pirating is wrong but this won't stop it. If they never sell another PDF again Complete Arcane etc will be on the torrents within a week of release. This is only annoying those that want to buy a PDF.


----------



## Waylander the Slayer

This is just a business decision, inline with WOTC's recent trend to bring all their IPs in house and maximize their value to the company. I am sure within the next couple of weeks, all the 4E stuff will be available to DDI subscribers at a discounted cost. The older stuff might not show up, however, as they might be considered as direct competition to 4E.


----------



## Xyxox

Jack99 said:


> Anything is of course possible. But if there is money to be made of the old pdf's, it would be very uncharacteristic of WotC to not sell them.
> 
> Cheers




My point is, it is my belief that WotC has determined 4E is competing against prior versions available via PDF downloads, thus the removal of PDF availability makes this a twofer for WotC. They (incorrectly) believe this will help their fight against piracy and they believe the self competition will go away. They use the arguably legitimate argument about piracy (regardless of teh fact that such an approach will only serve to punicsh their good customers) and say nothing at all about the older material.

If I'm right, we'll never again see 3.xE or older material legally available electronically.


----------



## DaveMage

Klaus said:


> WotC was selling something through a specific media.
> 
> WotC decided to stop selling.
> 
> Where's the beef?




I think that if Wizards had provided warning (say, 30 days notice), there would be no beef (or at least, a lot less).

But they didn't.  So there's beef. 

Mmmm....beef.


----------



## Scribble

Voadam said:


> WotC started doing pdfs in house long ago, I think it was even before 3e was anounced. They were super cheap to start, something like $3 each then.
> 
> They then spun it off to be run by an outside company still using their ESD format with special software for generating big pdfs.
> 
> Later it went on to rpgnow as straight pdfs.
> 
> Originally they said 3e pdfs would come on after a period of time but they did not show up, just the old edition ones with later scans being outsourced to be done quickly and cheaply leading to large file sizes and poor OCR.
> 
> I'm a little fuzzy on the interim period after that first outside distributing company stopped. I think they went off of rpgnow for a while and then onto DTRPG with 3.5e ones coming on with DRM and full hardcopy cost. Later DTRPG and RPGNOW formed OBS and it was on both. WotC eventually took the DRM off but kept the full cost price point. Later 4e ones were sold with I think it was 25% off cover price, about $25 for each of the core books.
> 
> At some point the old edition pdfs were available on paizo as well with different prices and not a complete overlap of catalogues.




Voadam, I was talking about their current edition stuff. I guess I wasn't clear. I wasn't talking about someone objecting to PDFs in general, just objecting to their sales in adition to the regular product. The 3e stuff took a while to get into the market,  wasn't a full line, and the price was greater then the market seemed to say it should be.

Based on that, it seems to me the current edition being sold in pdf form was always something someone objected to, and it was finally stoped. Or rather then something somone specificaly objected to, it was something whomever makes the ultimate choice, was wary of to begin with, and while giving it a shot, was still ultimately ready to pull the plug if certain things occured.

I could be completely wrong, I have no inside info, it just seems that way to me.

I think the dissapearance of the old edition pdfs was more a result of it being easier to make a general change, rather then just certain aspects.


----------



## Caerin

Lonely Tylenol said:


> Making a copy of a PDF is much the same as using a photocopier to make a copy of a book.  Under normal circumstances, you have the right to reproduce (under fair use) and distribute 10% of the document, or one chapter, whichever is shorter, or 20% of the document if it does not contain chapters.  If you copy more than that, you're in violation of the law, not because you've stolen anything but because you have copied more than you were allowed to.  If you make a copy of a book, and leave that copy lying around on a desk, and someone takes it without asking, that would be theft.




While I agree with the other parts of your message not copied, I do not believe this to be entirely accurate under US law. Fair use (17 USC 107) does not provide percentages or hard-and-fast rules for what is or is not a fair use. There are fair use guidelines which do describe percentages in this manner, but those guidelines are not the law and are not safe harbors. Fair use is decided on a case-by-case basis using the four factors set forth in the law. 

However, the law generally covers public rather than private uses (ie., public display, public distribution). You can very likely make a copy of your own legally acquired book without infringing in most situations, provided that you do not redistribute that copy (which may or may not be infringing depending on the fair use analysis or other claimed exemption). Case law has thus far mostly supported the concepts of space shifting and time shifting. This does not necessarily apply to digital copies; the anti-circumvention clause of the DMCA prohibits you from circumventing technological protection measures even when they otherwise might be legal. Additionally, software backup has its own exemption in the law in 17 USC 117. 

At any rate, this is an Internet forum and anyone reading should research the matter and decide for his or her self. ^_^

For myself, I have always purchased both the physical book and the pdf. I tend to work late, and I generally purchase the pdf as soon as it's released. I was planning on doing so with Arcane Power, so I sincerely hope that the pdf will be released as originally scheduled. It's a slim hope at this point.


----------



## Voadam

*For Reference*

From the current RPGNOW FAQ



> *What do I do if I accidentally delete or lose my PDF?*
> 
> We allow up to 5 replacement downloads of our products for each purchase. If you need to re-download a product you have purchased for any reason, simply log onto your account, go to "My Account", and click on the order you need to download. This will take you to a page that will have the links at the bottom to re-download your products. If for some reason you need more than 5 downloads, please let us know using the "Contact Us" link from the home page and we can make necessary adjustments.




But then later under backing up pdfs



> *How do I back up my eBooks? *
> You can back up watermarked eBooks simply by copying them to a secure location.
> 
> Back up your DRM-protected eBooks using the Backup button in "My Bookshelf" in Acrobat Reader. This will copy your eBooks to another location such as a hard drive, file server or CD. You will not be able to view these eBooks from another PC or Macintosh unless it has also been activated under your account in the Adobe DRM Activator.
> 
> If you lose your eBooks, we generally attempt to replace them based on circumstances. _We reserve the right not to replace lost books. So please back up your books!_




Emphasis added.


----------



## malraux

Well, I'm late to the party.

Man this really pisses me off.  I loved grabbing old edition books and adventures to mine for ideas.  The quality of the scans was sometimes so-so, but the price was great, I didn't have to deal with ebay or shopworn books at some out of the way gamestore.  I do wish I had had a chance to grab a few books from my wishlist first.

Since i haven't even seen any of the pirated pdfs since the core rule books a year ago, for someone who has, are the pirated books out now mostly taken from the legit sites, or are they more like the leaked rule books, because I don't see the leaked file issue going away any time soon.


----------



## Arivendel

Kask said:


> No, ceasing to sell 1st & 2nd Ed PDFs does nothing to stop pirating of 4E material.  The only logical reason is that they don't want people playing older editions (spending $ on them) as they see it as eroding 4E sales.  It costs them nothing to have people sell older PDFs and makes them $.  The only reason to stop it is because someone doesn't like the current 4E sales numbers and in a misguided move decided to eliminate some _competition._



That was not my point at all, quoting me out of context will not validate your point and it actually brings a lot of harm to your argument which i will explain later, my point was that throughout this thread people have been considering that the reason behind WotC actions is due to the PHB 2 Leak, Piracy lawsuit. My point was that rather than that being the case, it is possible that WotC just became aware of Paizo's/RPGnow redownload policy, a policy which could very well be the reason for this whole thing, after all like i said it is possible WotC contract refer to selling single pdfs if thats the case then the redownload policy could be interpreted as illegally copying and distributing their IP since people are technically getting a "buy 1 get 4+ free" deal and thats 4+ instances in which WotC make no profit.

Now for your argument, your argument is that since 4e is low in numbers WotC is going to cut its other cash cows in order to increase the numbers of their newest cash cow? ok i can see how you can get that idea but that is far from the "only logical reason" for them to do this.

Is it really so hard to believe that RPGnow/Paizo might have gone and implemented a policy without consulting WotC thinking that it wasnt a big deal, WotC noticed and decided to pull out ALL of their products until they can review the problem with their legal team because this wouldnt be only 4e piracy but rather D&D piracy? That also sounds like a very logical and plausible reason as to why the pdf's where pulled out.

Of course this is the internet, reason isnt required


----------



## tomBitonti

Xyxox said:


> Well, I like to look on the bright side of things.
> 
> My collection of D&D material that goes all the way back to the white boxed set has certainly increased in value.




LOL

I'm with you.  Lots of boxes of stuff that I have is now worth a bit more than before.

Peace

TomB


----------



## JeffB

I was away for a few days and now see all this. Dang. Although I like 4E, I don't buy any 4E products except from Goodman, but there were a quite a few O/B/X/A D&D PDFs I still wanted but had not purchased yet 

I cannot believe they pulled them down so quickly? WTF??


----------



## Voadam

Arivendel said:


> My point was that rather than that being the case, it is possible that WotC just became aware of Paizo's/RPGnow redownload policy, a policy which could very well be the reason for this whole thing, after all like i said it is possible WotC contract refer to selling single pdfs if thats the case then the redownload policy could be interpreted as illegally copying and distributing their IP since people are technically getting a "buy 1 get 4+ free" deal and thats 4+ instances in which WotC make no profit.




Only if WotC was ignorant of the actual open practices of the distributor they contracted with and decided upon discovering the practices that WotC irrationally decided they were being hurt by these vendor backup practices.

I do not think WotC was ignorant or irrational in this way.

People can legally make backups for themselves and get a buy 1 get 200 deal if they want off a single download, this was just rpgnow doing it for them.

I find that supposition very unlikely.


----------



## Umbran

Lonely Tylenol said:


> It baffles me that there is still some kind of confusion on the legal realities of copyright law, considering how many times I've seen this exact point explained in detail on these boards.




I don't think there's actual confusion, so much as different contexts. "Piracy is theft" in a legal context is incorrect.  In a moral or ethical context, however, they are arguably more equivalent.

I think more often folks around here who say piracy is theft are speaking in the ethical/moral sense, even if they don't explicitly realize it.


----------



## Voadam

I typically picked up between 1 and 4 WotC old edition pdfs a month.

I'm not sure if I have more than a hundred currently, I do know that I was planning on continuing in this vein for at least a decade more as there were hundreds of interesting ones I was still interested in that I had not gotten yet.

That's $5-$20 a month that WotC is no longer getting.


----------



## Plissken

On Puget Sound said:


> As a past owner of a brick and mortar store (different hobby - aquarium not gaming), I applaud WOTC for shutting down PDF purchases.  Now if they could just do something about Amazon, we might be able to save at least a few places people can go to talk to, and game with, actual live humans, and also save those live humans' jobs.




So websites like RPGnow adn drivethru are run by sentient robots?


----------



## Friadoc

Umbran said:


> I don't think there's actual confusion, so much as different contexts. "Piracy is theft" in a legal context is incorrect.  In a moral or ethical context, however, they are arguably more equivalent.
> 
> I think more often folks around here who say piracy is theft are speaking in the ethical/moral sense, even if they don't explicitly realize it.




One of my criminal law courses hammered this point home relentlessly and, to be honest, folks, if you were charged with piracy, it'd be much easier on you if it was actual theft, instead of infringement. See, theft of a $30 gaming book is next to nothing, usually a slap on the wrist, community service, or a couple weeks behind bars. However, infringement, it falls under a whole other bailiwick that ain't that nice since it falls under federal purview.


----------



## jmucchiello

I can't believe WotC could make a mistake of this magnitude. Every other PR fiasco has happened on a Friday giving us a whole weekend for wild speculation and chest thumping pledges of being for or against WotC. Who dropped the ball and hit the switch on a Monday? I'm sure heads will roll over this.


----------



## Scribble

Kask said:


> No, ceasing to sell 1st & 2nd Ed PDFs does nothing to stop pirating of 4E material.  The only logical reason is that they don't want people playing older editions (spending $ on them) as they see it as eroding 4E sales.  It costs them nothing to have people sell older PDFs and makes them $.  The only reason to stop it is because someone doesn't like the current 4E sales numbers and in a misguided move decided to eliminate some _competition._




Hrmm I'm not sure I can see how that's the "only logical" explaination or reason.

To me, it seems the most logical explaination is that when the decision was made, it was easier to just stop ALL sales of PDF product rather then a split decision.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol

Obryn said:


> For me?  I'm disappointed, but as I said elsewhere, I'm disappointed because it's simply a dumb move.  It's like when your buddy gets back together with a horrible ex who's bad for him.  It's forehead-smacking idiocy and a feeling of dread, not anger and rage.




Yeah, exactly.  It's just one more on a long chain of events that have made me say to myself, "hmm...I wonder what's going to happen with WotC?"  I really have no idea how what the outlook is like there.  They're very careful to never let any hints drop.  But I haven't seen many good signs.  The books are apparently selling like hotcakes, but there seem to be a lot of bad decisions being made, and I wonder if the quality of the product is going to start to suffer for it.  Certainly, they're not doing a great job of maintaining good relationships with their existing customer base.


----------



## mach1.9pants

More Beef 







> As a disabled individual, I'm unable to read hard bound books. I have to read PDFs from drivethrurpg on my computer or send them to my kindle. This move has left me unable to read new D&D books, like Arcane Power, because there will be no accessible product for me. Thanks Wizards/Hasbro, or whoever, for making it impossible for me to enjoy the game to the degree of your able-bodied customers.



Wizards Community - View Single Post - WotC halts sales/downloads from rpgnow.com


----------



## Plissken

Most people don't read other's posts when the thread becomes long. Here is what pogre found just in case anyone missed it:


> Quote removed by Admin. That was speculation, not a fact. Please be careful not to quote someone out of context, or to take a guess as fact.  ~ Piratecat


----------



## coyote6

Arivendel said:


> My point was that rather than that being the case, it is possible that WotC just became aware of Paizo's/RPGnow redownload policy,




I can't believe that's the case; the redownload thing has been a part of both sites (and DTRPG, when it was separate from RPGNow) from the beginning; it's also a part of e23, Green Ronin's online store, and I think every other PDF selling site I've done business with. So if WotC didn't know about the policy until just now, that would be nigh-idiotic, and certainly incompetent, of them. 



> since people are technically getting a "buy 1 get 4+ free" deal and thats 4+ instances in which WotC make no profit.




I think you are misunderstanding how that works. Only the person who purchased the PDF is allowed to download it. You don't get to download it five times, and give four copies away. You get to download it once, find out your DL is corrupted; DL it again, have your HD die before you backup your PC; DL it a third time, have your house burn down with backups & all; DL it a fourth time, have your new laptop stolen before you back it up; and DL it a fifth time, and back it up securely quickly before your horrible luck dooms you again. At no point are you legally allowed to give a copy to someone else.


----------



## Remathilis

Plissken said:


> Most people don't read other's posts when the thread becomes long. Here is what pogre found just in case anyone missed it:




Not doubting you, but source?


----------



## coyote6

Plissken said:


> Most people don't read other's posts when the thread becomes long. Here is what pogre found just in case anyone missed it:



[snip]

Umm, I think that was Pogre's speculation. After that, he also wrote:



> Obviously, a real report would have a bit more corporate speak and would never make the overall HASBRO quarterly. However, I would bet you a memo with similar content is drafted or will be drafted for internal consumption.




See post here.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol

Caerin said:


> While I agree with the other parts of your message not copied, I do not believe this to be entirely accurate under US law.



Well, I am Canadian.  The reason I know the percentages is that my wife is preparing a course package for the philosophy course she's teaching, and the university explained to her exactly how much material she could copy out of a particular source before they'd have to start paying for it.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol

Umbran said:


> I don't think there's actual confusion, so much as different contexts. "Piracy is theft" in a legal context is incorrect.  In a moral or ethical context, however, they are arguably more equivalent.
> 
> I think more often folks around here who say piracy is theft are speaking in the ethical/moral sense, even if they don't explicitly realize it.






Zaruthustran said:


> Wrong. Simply incorrect, on technical legal as well as moral grounds. It's simple: if you've taken something of value without paying for it, you've stolen it. That's what stealing _means_.




I don't know about you, but it seems clear to me that this poster was attempting to say that, legally, theft and copyright infringement are the same thing.  Obviously, they think that both are morally wrong, but the whole "technical legal" part indicates a misunderstanding of the actual legal situation.


----------



## xechnao

jgbrowning said:


> He forgot...
> 
> 5. Perhaps, technically WotC can't do what they did, but what PDF retailer in their right mind would risk the chance of never regaining WotC's PDFs to sell by being a stickler for the contract and irritating WotC over 30 days of sales? Reality trumps contractuality every time and you don't piss off your biggest seller unless you know with a certainty that you'll never be able to do business with them again.
> 
> joe b.




Do not forget the brick & mortar clause. This clause has to mean something, hasn't it?


----------



## Lonely Tylenol

mach1.9pants said:


> More Beef Wizards Community - View Single Post - WotC halts sales/downloads from rpgnow.com




Reminds me of my friend who is completely blind and relies on OCR PDFs in order to read his game books using his text reading software.  I hadn't thought of him yet, but he's totally screwed for future titles.


----------



## mach1.9pants

Plissken said:


> Most people don't read other's posts when the thread becomes long. Here is what pogre found just in case anyone missed it:



I was just Pogre's thoughts, not a quote from anywhere, you need to edit your post before too many people take it as truth.


----------



## I'm A Banana

> Most people don't read other's posts when the thread becomes long. Here is what pogre found just in case anyone missed it:




Looks like you didn't read that post very well yourself, mang.  Porge didn't "find" anything. Hopefully people will not just read your post.


----------



## Kask

Plissken said:


> Most people don't read other's posts when the thread becomes long. Here is what pogre found just in case anyone missed it:





Yep, my analysis was 100% correct.  You will now see pirating of previous edition PDFs skyrocket.


----------



## joethelawyer

[FONT=&quot]deleted---double post[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]


----------



## joethelawyer

So what does WOTC do next?  Come on, we're mostly DM's here, and are used to plotting the actions of arrogant powerful bad guys.  Assume the bad guy just screwed up and blew his cover as a villain, and needs to recover a bit.  What does WOTC do next?

 First, apologize profusely.

 Second, the smart thing is to allow a grace period for people to go back and download pdf's from RPGNow, if they already bought them.

 Next, I would allow all sites a grace period for sales of pdf's, for all those who didn't get a chance to get what they wanted.

 Fourth announce your intentions as to pdf sales.  You have to keep up the pretense of piracy for the reason you pulled the pdf's in the first place, even though 95% of the customers don't believe you.  State that you intend to make pdf's available once you get some form of DRM plan in place.

 Ignore questions as to whether you will allow access to older editions.  Then make an announcement sometime later that due to your dedicated mission of listening to your Valued Customer feedback, you will be making the older pdf's available, after you of course convert your CURRENT product line over.  The delay tactic worked with the GSL modifications, so it ought to work again with the suckers, I mean customers.

 Later, after much delay, the older product pdf's never actually get converted, or only some token ones do, the phony reason stated is because of staffing resources, technical problems, cost vs. return, or whatever you think they'll believe.

 In the meantime, make the pdf's available only through DDI.  This shores up the disappointing revenue stream by hopefully getting new customers to sign up for the pdf’s, which is after all the real reason you pulled the  pdf's anyhow. At least for another quarter or two, you have saved your job.   You also get the claim the move as a major expansion of DDI, which is destined to bring in more revenue.  After all, look how many pdf's sold the day you announced that pdf's were no longer going to be sold?  That’ll look good for the next quarterly meeting coming up in just a couple weeks.

 Sales projections are of course made based on that BS, and a future disaster looms when those revenue goals are not met. But hey, you have another quarter or two with a job. (Note to self---spiff up the resume, befriend Erik Mona on Facebook).

 In the meantime, the formerly fractured customer base rears its head and looks around, decides that hey, we may be cousins who fight each other a lot, but we are cousins after all.  Only I am allowed to beat my cousin’s arse!  How dare WOTC do that to my gaming cousins!!  That’s the last straw!  I’m never buying from WOTC again!! 

 If only a percentage of those people follow through on that promise, other game systems, From Paizo and Green Ronin all the way to the Retroclones experience a growth in their customer base.

 The new feeling of brotherhood amongst gamers lasts until Diaglo proclaims that the only true Dungeons and Dragons is OD&D.  It all goes to hell from there.


----------



## Umbran

Lonely Tylenol said:


> Well, I am Canadian.  The reason I know the percentages is that my wife is preparing a course package for the philosophy course she's teaching, and the university explained to her exactly how much material she could copy out of a particular source before they'd have to start paying for it.




Well, I know that at MIT there are agreements directly with publishers (especially periodicals and journals) over how much of what can and cannot be used without having to pay more.  So, that may be in play - it'd make sense to have a license that meets the guidelines.

Or, since much of the point of "fair use" is to support academic use, it may simply be that the University knows that nobody is going to try to come down on them for use under the guidelines.


----------



## JohnRTroy

Lonely Tylenol said:


> I don't know about you, but it seems clear to me that this poster was attempting to say that, legally, theft and copyright infringement are the same thing.  Obviously, they think that both are morally wrong, but the whole "technical legal" part indicates a misunderstanding of the actual legal situation.




While there is legal terminology, other things complicate it.

For instance, part of the copyright statute in the US includes the NET Act, or "No Electronic Theft Act", established in 1997.

NET Act: 17 U.S.C. and 18 U.S.C. as amended (redlined)

This act, while still sticking to the term copyright infringement, is labeled as a theft act and can be referred to by name when the law is invoked or those specific statues are being sued.

This, to me, is a clear case that the US Government, both Congressional and Judicial branches, consider the term theft to be an accurate description--or at least an accepted colloquialism--of copyright infringement.


----------



## Hawke

So... I've been pondering this. Until I get a good answer (and likely even then) I'm putting off my purchase of AP and E1... I just renewed so I have a few months before my subscription is coming up again. 

I purchased 4E PDFs. I also purchased a bunch of Dark Sun PDFs for reference. My brother purchased books he had physical copies of for easy reference.

I like the 4E system a lot - but if anything I think this will push others to go to third party publishers who aren't hurting a room filled with customers in a half-blind hip-shotgun attempt at taking out one pirate. 

Again, I'll wait for some more information... but I really feel slighted by them jumping on this without giving us warning or explanation. I don't trust them to sell me pdfs either if they do this stuff. And if it's hasbro that is driving this, they can either fix it and keep getting my money or not get any of it.


----------



## fanboy2000

Plissken said:


> Most people don't read other's posts when the thread becomes long. Here is what pogre found just in case anyone missed it:



This is the actual post. As Kamikaze Midget pointed out, pogre didn't find anything, he made that up to prove his hypothesis that Hasbro is responsible for the pull.


----------



## Nagol

joethelawyer said:


> So what does WOTC do next?  Come on, we're mostly DM's here, and are used to plotting the actions of arrogant powerful bad guys.  Assume the bad guy just screwed up and blew his cover as a villain, and needs to recover a bit.  What does WOTC do next?
> 
> <snip>





Remain quiet for a few days and watch the furor.  It'll probably die down since the customer base is fickle.

If the furor decays naturally, remain quiet and continue your plan on the original timeline.  If the furor remains high or begins to grow, start planning a recovery strategy.  Put a patsy -- I mean a public relations person -- out front to draw attention and offer more information as to possible future plans without committing the business to anything.  Like a stage magician, his role is to distract and befuddle while offering calming but ultimately meaningless sounds.  If things continue to go poorly, he also acts as a lightning rod and can be disposed of as an act of contrition by the company.

As things grow quiet, probably 3-6 weeks, announce plans to allow "some form" of access.  The access is going to be protected and it will take a while to adapt the product.  New product will be adapted first.  Older product will be adapted as time permits.  Offer no timeframe.

Advertise the Compendium as having the new book crunch.  Explain that the protected files aren't ready yet, but people can always get a short-term subscription.  Possibly offer a discounted price for the first 3 months.


About 6 months from the initial decision, issue a notice that the books will become displayable through DDI as a optional purchase linked to the subscription account.  Current subscribers may access the books.  Promise to put all non-pdf'ed books up within 3 months.

One month later, have one month's worth of books complete and make it known that the process is harder than expected.

Four months later, have all non-pdf'ed books available.  Two months after that, have all 4e books available.  Announce that older editions aren't worth the effort to convert -- manpower is needed for the next amazing thing that subscribers of the current game will just love instead.

Bask in the glow of appreciative subscribers.


----------



## scruffygrognard

Obryn said:


> You know, I keep on hearing things referred to as "the last straw."
> 
> I don't buy it.  There have been way too many "last straws" for me to believe it.  I think a lot of those claiming this was the last straw have had _previous_ last straws, and that there will be _more_ last straws after this one.
> 
> -O




I know that venting on boards tends to be full of hyperbole but I can honestly say that NONE of the guys I game with (about a dozen people) or that my brother games with (another dozen or so people) buy WotC products anymore.  Sure, that's nothing in the grand scheme of things... but I'd imagine that we're not alone in our collective move away from WotC.

Their handling of 3.5's release soon after 3rd edition's release, their killing Paizo's good run with both Dungeon and Dragon magazines, their release of 4th edition soon after the release of 3.5 (and the dishonesty that surrounded the timing of that release), their bungling of the GSL and seeming lack of respect for 3rd party publishers and, now, their withdrawal of pdf products from the marketplace (much to the detriment of companues like RPGNow and Paizo) has made them a company that I CANNOT support.  

This is not the same company that once saved D&D when TSR fell into ruin, and this is not a company that shows regard for its customers or partners in the RPG market.


----------



## mach1.9pants

Possible _nasty, evil pirates_ named (well apart from the 3 John Does, unless there are actually people out there called that and they are DnD pirates, but I digress) and shamed here


----------



## Obryn

cperkins said:


> I know that venting on boards tends to be full of hyperbole but I can honestly say that NONE of the guys I game with (about a dozen people) or that my brother games with (another dozen or so people) buy WotC products anymore.  Sure, that's nothing in the grand scheme of things... but I'd imagine that we're not alone in our collective move away from WotC.
> 
> Their handling of 3.5's release soon after 3rd edition's release, their killing Paizo's good run with both Dungeon and Dragon magazines, their release of 4th edition soon after the release of 3.5 (and the dishonesty that surrounded the timing of that release), their bungling of the GSL and seeming lack of respect for 3rd party publishers and, now, their withdrawal of pdf products from the marketplace (much to the detriment of companues like RPGNow and Paizo) has made them a company that I CANNOT support.
> 
> This is not the same company that once saved D&D when TSR fell into ruin, and this is not a company that shows regard for its customers or partners in the RPG market.



OK, but did you quit buying WotC stuff because you were angry about the company's actions, or because you simply weren't playing their new edition?

It's one thing to stand on principle and refrain from buying products you actually want.  It's another thing to say you're standing on principle, and subsequently not-buy something you wouldn't have bought _anyway._

Additionally, that's a pretty sizable list of grievances - and I'm guessing this newest development wasn't in any way a camel's-back-breaking straw for you.  Correct me if I'm wrong. 

-O


----------



## Mephistopheles

Piratecat said:


> What I find most annoying about this is that the honest people are being punished, and it's not going to slow down the dishonest people one bit.




This is the most frustrating thing about the way corporations and industries react to piracy: they punish their paying customers while inflicting minimal or no impact on the people who are stealing their product. Look at DRM schemes on computer games that make the product more inconvenient to use for the paying customer and the "Downloading is theft" intro movies and warning screens that you watch every time you put in the DVD you bought - do we even need to guess if the pirates leave those intact on pirated copies?

There's a fundamental contradiction in that the product is a media that needs to be read yet they're trying to limit who can read it. I have no problem with them wanting to protect their incentive to innovate and the right to profit from that innovation - even if the laws involved seem to have been perverted so that the period for profit before releasing something to the public domain is gradually being extended to eternity - but I think it may be a problem for which there is just not any practical solution.


----------



## joethelawyer

Steve Jackson Games' Twitter response to the pdf mess...

Twitter / Steve Jackson Games: BTW, to prevent people fro ...


----------



## HeinorNY

Nagol said:


> As things grow quiet, probably 3-6 weeks, announce plans to allow "some form" of access.  The access is going to be protected and it will take a while to adapt the product.  New product will be adapted first.  Older product will be adapted as time permits.  Offer no timeframe.
> 
> Advertise the Compendium as having the new book crunch.  Explain that the protected files aren't ready yet, but people can always get a short-term subscription.  Possibly offer a discounted price for the first 3 months.
> 
> 
> About 6 months from the initial decision, issue a notice that the books will become displayable through DDI as a optional purchase linked to the subscription account.  Current subscribers may access the books.  Promise to put all non-pdf'ed books up within 3 months.
> 
> One month later, have one month's worth of books complete and make it known that the process is harder than expected.
> 
> Four months later, have all non-pdf'ed books available.  Two months after that, have all 4e books available.  Announce that older editions aren't worth the effort to convert -- manpower is needed for the next amazing thing that subscribers of the current game will just love instead.




Are you serious? 
Gleemax.
DDI.
The kitchen table in your PC thing.


----------



## Darrin Drader

Obryn said:


> It's one thing to stand on principle and refrain from buying products you actually want.  It's another thing to say you're standing on principle, and subsequently not-buy something you wouldn't have bought _anyway._




I haven't watched TNT for a decade now because of the horrible way they mishandled the Babylon 5 spinoff series Crusade (for those not in the know, they wanted to change the whole format and then they canceled the series when JMS refused to compromise). Consumers can hold grudges for a long time. And yes, there are things TNT has shown over the years that I might have been interested in had they not screwed the pooch on B5.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle

So I guess WotC just up and decided they'd severely piss off their fan base today?

*slow clap*

Well done WotC... well done.

EDIT: Guess I'll download the Pathfinder beta and see what all that's about.


----------



## Bishop Odo

cperkins said:


> Their handling of 3.5's release soon after 3rd edition's release, their killing Paizo's good run with both Dungeon and Dragon magazines, their release of 4th edition soon after the release of 3.5 (and the dishonesty that surrounded the timing of that release), their bungling of the GSL and seeming lack of respect for 3rd party publishers and, now, their withdrawal of pdf products from the marketplace (much to the detriment of companues like RPGNow and Paizo) has made them a company that I CANNOT support.
> 
> This is not the same company that once saved D&D when TSR fell into ruin, and this is not a company that shows regard for its customers or partners in the RPG market.




I think that‘s a pretty accurate statement. For the most part, it’s the corporate blame game, there have been some very bad choices made, as you illustrated and even the WOTC creative fiascos, like the exodus of thier  really good creative minds, and the remake of Forgotten Realms setting, all has a financial bottom line to it. 

The photocopier and scanner has been around long before the current “PDF” crisis and to blame all PDF users is really stupid. I love books and that’s what I use and buy, PDF don’t replace your core books, they are suppose to help the small publisher, with the really well written book get his product out there, and that is what I use it for. I’d rather buy a “GOOD” book anytime, and that is another problem with WOTC quality, but that is more of an subjective issue, I will leave for another time.


----------



## Firos

Sorry. Missed the mod directive.


----------



## Obryn

Darrin Drader said:


> I haven't watched TNT for a decade now because of the horrible way they mishandled the Babylon 5 spinoff series Crusade (for those not in the know, they wanted to change the whole format and then they canceled the series when JMS refused to compromise). Consumers can hold grudges for a long time. And yes, there are things TNT has shown over the years that I might have been interested in had they not screwed the pooch on B5.



Oh, I'm not saying that people _don't_ stand on principle.  Heck, I refuse to shop at Wal-Mart on principle.

I am saying that somewhere north of 90% of nerd-rage boycott threats on the Interweb are probably BS.  (I have zero hard facts to back this up - so you can put this in the BS section as well, while we're categorizing.   Like I said, it's just a hunch.)

-O


----------



## lmpjr007

WOTC fumbles the ball with the PDF fiasco... and how does White Wolf pick it up and turn it into a marketing opportunity.... 

Get Exalted 2nd Edition for free!  *Read about it here!!!!* It is good to see their are still some smart business people out there.


----------



## Firos

As above.


----------



## Nagol

ainatan said:


> Are you serious?
> Gleemax.
> DDI.
> The kitchen table in your PC thing.




Well, I am assuming the evil villain was capable of learning from his previous failures, yes.  

I think I'm assuming a reasonable level of arrogance by having a year go by before being able to provide a complete replacement.

Also, it reflects tactics used during the Autumn_Serene / Gamer_Zer0 fiasco that struck the wotc boards just before GZ was removed.


----------



## Firos

As above.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle

lmpjr007 said:


> WOTC fumbles the ball with the PDF fiasco... and how does White Wolf pick it up and turn it into a marketing opportunity....
> 
> Get Exalted 2nd Edition for free!  *Read about it here!!!!* It is good to see their are still some smart business people out there.




Ahahahaha!!!
Well done WW.


----------



## merelycompetent

I'd just like to point out a few things:

1. WotC appears to be engaged in legal action in multiple countries against software pirates/copyright violators (no, I'm NOT a lawyer -- if I were, I'd get paid more)

2. That legal action may require WotC to take certain action with regard to legal PDF distribution either for evidence or to comply with relevant laws. IOW, they pulled the PDFs because they had to.

3. WotC, possibly required to/possibly ordered to by legal department, may not be able to talk about the why's and wherefore's of cutting off PDF purchases. There may be a vulnerability in the distribution method that required they take this drastic action - such that they couldn't publicly disclose it, but have notified the appropriate companies. (It's not like Adobe Acrobat hasn't had security issues before.) Or they may be trying to do damage control.

4. AFAICT, WotC's actions with cutting off PDF availability was in the contract(s). Note: I don't have even a smidgen of a copy of such contracts. But if I were to have any of my books available in PDF, you better believe I'd have a kill clause, too. That's just smart business.

It is *very* early in the game to start leveling accusations, making predictions, or performing analysis on such limited information. No, I'm not very happy with WotC - over 4th Ed, the GSL, and a number of other things. But I'm going to assume that they're not stupid, that they make mistakes, and that they want to stay profitable. I'm sure that they will either release a statement in the next few weeks, or offer more information during the company's (Hasbro's?) next SEC filing, or profit/loss conference. If they don't, or if (as some suspect) the PDFs go to a WotC online store/DDI subscription, then that tells us something about the choices the company has made.

For the record: I'm getting heartily sick and tired of being treated like a criminal, especially after reporting cases of copyright violation and outright banning people with "pirated" material from my gaming table. I'd just thumbed through a copy of Open Grave at Borders this weekend, liked what I saw even though I don't run/play 4E, and was going to pick up a PDF copy if it was reasonably priced. If the only way to get legal PDF versions of the books is through a DDI subscription, then my money goes elsewhere. No, I won't resort to illegal downloads. There are some things that I will not abide in my presence. That is one of them.


----------



## Jack7

> Two years ago this month, Wizards made their first major step in failing to act like an industry leader by cancelling the Dungeon and Dragon Magazines and failing to inform the public themselves. They allowed Paizo to deliver the official announcement while they remained silent. They were unable to own up to their own actions for a solid week when they finally caved and continued the mags as electronic only publications.
> 
> Today, in my opinion, they have taken their last act as an industry leader. Their actions over the past two years have become increasingly inexplicible. No longer can I, or anyone else I fear, look to Wizards for leadership or the new direction that role playing should go. No longer can Wizards claim to be on the cutting edge of the way products should be produced. No longer is Wizards the gold standard of the industry. Others will rise up to claim their place. May they learn what not to do.
> 
> Good-bye Wizards. May your Coast be peaceful and tranquil. I shall not visit you there.




Well spoken.




> Steve Jackson Games' Twitter response to the pdf mess...
> 
> Twitter / Steve Jackson Games: BTW, to prevent people fro ...




It has been my personal business experience that when any company becomes more interested in controlling access to their market base than in expansion and generating new market share they are thereafter hoist helplessly by their own petard. Until it explodes.

Good luck Wizards with this extremely clever and time-tested marketing strategy. You're gonna need it.

On the positive side this means many gaming companies will be forever parting ways with WOTC which can only eventually mean more innovation throughout the entire industry. And that's way overdue.


----------



## HeinorNY

Nagol said:


> Well, I am assuming the evil villain was capable of learning from his previous failures, yes.  .



I honestly assume it wasn't. link


----------



## fanboy2000

cperkins said:


> I know that venting on boards tends to be full of hyperbole but I can honestly say that NONE of the guys I game with (about a dozen people) or that my brother games with (another dozen or so people) buy WotC products anymore.  Sure, that's nothing in the grand scheme of things... but I'd imagine that we're not alone in our collective move away from WotC.



You make some good points, but I disagree.



> Their handling of 3.5's release soon after 3rd edition's release,



To be fair, I felt that 3.5 was needed at the time it was released. I am not a game designer. I don't get any enjoyment from fiddling with the game system, and if something isn't fun and I need a house rule to fix that's a problem. 3.5 re-wrote the combat chapter so that I could understand it while I was reading it for the first time. The core books included more feats, essential for a feat based system. They included core rules like level adjustment, effective character level, and epic campaigns. Those rules had become part of the game and there continued exclusion from the core books would have been a poor idea.



> their killing Paizo's good run with both Dungeon and Dragon magazines,



I submit that WotC's real problem was spinning off their magazine division into Paizo in the first place. There was a real value in keeping the magazines in-house and WotC forgot that. In my opinion, they were correcting a mistake.



> their release of 4th edition soon after the release of 3.5



You call five years too soon? This is fairly normal. AEG released two Spycraft editions just three years apart (2002-2005). Mutants and Masterminds released two editions on exactly the same time frame. True20 Started off in Blue Rose in 2005, with a just a rules distillation PDF later in the year. In 2006 they released an expanded hardcover. In 2008 they release a revised softcover and combined two books. New editions every few years are hardly a bad thing. They keep people interested in the brand and show customers that the company cares about making the game more fun.



> (and the dishonesty that surrounded the timing of that release),



I think this is false. IIRC a WotC rep was misquoted at the D&D experience just prior to the announcement of 4e at that year's GenCon. 



> their bungling of the GSL and seeming lack of respect for 3rd party publishers



For what it's worth, I saw 4e products long before the revision, so it's not like it was preclusive. I've bought 4e 3rd party products so, I have trouble believing this is as bad as it's made out to be. It is WotC's product, and they have have a right to see it treated they way they want. The GSL is still more liberal than negotiating a separate contract with every publisher.



> and, now, their withdrawal of pdf products from the marketplace (much to the detriment of companues like RPGNow and Paizo) has made them a company that I CANNOT support



.  



> This is not the same company that once saved D&D when TSR fell into ruin, and this is not a company that shows regard for its customers or partners in the RPG market.



I think that it's a company that learned several lessons from 3e, 3.5, OGL, and d20. Lessons that, I think, are unpopular here.


----------



## Firos

As above.


----------



## Wraith Form

Obryn said:


> OK, but did you quit buying WotC stuff because you were angry about the company's actions




Yes.



Obryn said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong.




Consider yourself corrected.  (This may not apply to the person you were replying to.)


----------



## HeinorNY

Ashrem Bayle said:


> Ahahahaha!!!
> Well done WW.



Well done indeed.
Unfotunately they pissed off all the 4 guys who paid for the PDF yesterday.


----------



## Scribble

ainatan said:


> Well done indeed.
> Unfotunately they pissed off all the 4 guys who paid for the PDF yesterday.




I know you were making a joke, but I still had to comment: 

I once bought a number of books from drivethru, only to have them go on sale a few days later. I wrote them an email and they refunded me the money I paid over the sale price, no argument at all.

So in my book as far as things like this- Drivethru = Excellent Company.


----------



## jmucchiello

Waylander the Slayer said:


> This is just a business decision, inline with WOTC's recent trend to bring all their IPs in house and maximize their value to the company.



This I might believe, except...


> I am sure within the next couple of weeks, all the 4E stuff will be available to DDI subscribers at a discounted cost.



Why the gap when they are unavailable? If you plan to sell them yourself why not start selling them yourself and then cut off the other retailers. No, I don't think this is part of the current plan except "down the line".


> The older stuff might not show up, however, as they might be considered as direct competition to 4E.



Sadly, and most likely, true.


----------



## Ycore Rixle

Just got my free copy of Exalted. I have the hardback already, but nice to have an electronic version. Now to go check out the Pathfinder goodness.

Sigh.

You know, if the original 4E announcement (Chris and Bill's presentation at Gen Con 07) regarding electronic products were even half true, I think the RPG landscape might be a lot different right now.


----------



## Kask

Arivendel said:


> Now for your argument, your argument is that since 4e is low in numbers WotC is going to cut its other cash cows in order to increase the numbers of their newest cash cow? ok i can see how you can get that idea but that is far from the "only logical reason" for them to do this.




My argument was based on my years of experience as a business exec.  And, it turned out to be the correct one...


----------



## Scribble

Kask said:


> My argument was based on my years of experience as a business exec.  And, it turned out to be the correct one...




No it didn't.  (Unless you have some unshared information?)


----------



## Vorput

Meh, this whole thing is depressing.  Being this disconnected from your fan base is mind boggling.

I suppose it's possible the typical ENworld readers aren't indicative of Wizard's fan base though...  perhaps most people will never notice.  Still, I can't imagine how this is going to reduce piracy.  I remember seeing illegal copies of 3e stuff- and that was before legal .pdfs of it were ever released (I believe).  People just unbound their copy and scanned it.

Gonna put off the 4e purchases I was considering until I see how this plays out.  It'll be a silent and meaningless protest.


----------



## pawsplay

*cough* *sputter* What the... ?

Is WotC absolutely determined to look like a "behemoth" in the industry? What's next, printing everything on grayed paper so it doesn't mimeograph as well? Selling books with little cardboard wheels you use to answer security questions on DDI?


----------



## Scribble

Vorput said:


> Meh, this whole thing is depressing.  Being this disconnected from your fan base is mind boggling.
> 
> I suppose it's possible the typical ENworld readers aren't indicative of Wizard's fan base though...  perhaps most people will never notice.  Still, I can't imagine how this is going to reduce piracy.  I remember seeing illegal copies of 3e stuff- and that was before legal .pdfs of it were ever released (I believe).  People just unbound their copy and scanned it.
> 
> Gonna put off the 4e purchases I was considering until I see how this plays out.  It'll be a silent and meaningless protest.




What I'm thinking is it might not be so much that they're trying to "reduce" piracy so much as they found that piracy increased when they fully entered the pdf market. (And this is a reaction to that.)

Either way it still sucks for me. The guy who wants to buy some D&D pdfs.


----------



## Solodan

Adding fuel to flame:

Unfortunately, I can't blame WotC.  I know of a few fellow gamers who use PDF's of WoTC games.  I can't name a single one, however, that paid for it to my knowledge.  Some have even boasted about their extensive collections of illicitly acquired 3.5 and 4E books.

If we fail to police ourselves, we reap the consequences.


----------



## HeinorNY

Vorput said:


> I remember seeing illegal copies of 3e stuff- and that was before legal .pdfs of it were ever released (I believe).  People just unbound their copy and scanned it.




2E books were available even before 3E.


----------



## Edena_of_Neith

(muses sadly, mutters something about 'The Narn of Turin')

  I suppose then, that the new rule is:  4E, or Nothing.  At least, for anyone and everyone new coming into the game of D&D.


----------



## HeinorNY

Solodan said:


> If we fail to police ourselves, we reap the consequences.




huh?
The people actually suffering the consequences are those who legally buy the PDFs.

The harder is for the pirate to put on an ilegal PDF, the more prestige he gets when he does it.
4E PDFs now gained an extra 100 prestige pts per book.


----------



## mach1.9pants

Edena_of_Neith said:


> (muses sadly, mutters something about 'The Narn of Turin')
> 
> I suppose then, that the new rule is:  4E, or Nothing.  At least, for anyone and everyone new coming into the game of D&D.



How come? The 4E PDFs are gone a well!

EDIT: Meaning that If you are going to start RPGing you can either buy a physical product (where 2nd hand you can get anything you want, or you can get 4E or other current games new) _o_r you can buy PDF versions, except here you cannot buy 4E or any other DnD. If you were going to start DnD by using PDF (rather than physical product where this has changed nothing) now you have to go Pathfinder, True20 or something else. So this doesn't encourage 4E at all, it discourages newbies from starting any form of DnD at all!

And get your tin foil hats one they have closed down the thread on WotC boards now...Wizards Community - View Single Post - WotC halts sales/downloads from rpgnow.com


----------



## MerricB

mach1.9pants said:


> How come? The 4E PDFs are gone a well!
> 
> And get your tin foil hats one they have closed down the thread on WotC boards now...Wizards Community - View Single Post - WotC halts sales/downloads from rpgnow.com




It's open again.  Only locked for 24 minutes.

Cheers!


----------



## mach1.9pants

MerricB said:


> It's open again.  Only locked for 24 minutes.
> 
> Cheers!




Bother, I have to put my hat away. I got it all dirty for nothing!


----------



## JDragon

I have a question, and don't currently have the time to try and read all 20 pages of this thread to see if its been posed so far. :-(  

Sorry if its a repeat.

Is it possible that WotC needed to temporarily stop the sales of PDF's to be able to give their case more weight?

I don't know anything about how these cases work, but it was just a thought.

It really just seems like a knee jerk reaction as many people have mentioned already to me.

JD


----------



## mach1.9pants

JDragon said:


> Is it possible that WotC needed to temporarily stop the sales of PDF's to be able to give their case more weight?



It is possible, we don't know. WotC hasn't had the common decency to tell their customers anything beyond 







			
				WotC_Trevor said:
			
		

> Hey all. I wanted to step in and shine a mote of light on the subject. First off, this cesation of PDF sales has absolutely nothing to do with the Internet Sales Policy. I know it's the 6th of April and I can definitely see how the two would appear linked, but the truth is, this is a completely seperate matter.
> 
> Unfortunately, due to recent findings of illegal copying and online distribution (piracy) of our products, Wizards of the Coast has decided to cease the sales of online PDFs. We are exploring other options for digitial distribution of our content and as soon as we have any more information I'll get it to you.



 Posted on this thread and WotC boards. (thanks Trevor at least it is something!)


----------



## Mouseferatu

mach1.9pants said:


> It is possible, we don't know. WotC hasn't had the common decency to tell their customers anything beyond




To be fair, _if_ it was a requirement for the lawsuit, they might not be _able_ to reveal that fact.


----------



## El Mahdi

Submitted my _Request to cancel Auto-Renew _to WotC. 

​ 
Received confirmation e-mail of request submission.

*Request to cancel Auto-Renew [Incident: 090407-000510]*

Tuesday, April 7, 2009 10:12 PM

From: "Wizards Customer Support" wizardscusthelp@wizards.com



To: _ME_ @ yahoo.com

Thank you for contacting Wizards of the Coast!

Your question is important to us. We will make every effort to respond to your message within 2 business days or less. 

This is a computer-generated response confirming that your email message has been received. Please do not respond to this message. 

Please do not send multiple email messages (regarding the same subject) before you have received a response as this can cause confusion and possibly delay our response to you. 

To access your question from our support site, click here.

​ 
Awaiting e-mail of confirmation of cancellation.


----------



## mach1.9pants

Mouseferatu said:


> To be fair, _if_ it was a requirement for the lawsuit, they might not be _able_ to reveal that fact.



I suppose I don't know the legal ins and outs. However I would drop a lawsuit against 8 people (3 of which are John Does) like a hot stone to stop the bad press they are getting at the moment.

ps the elf monk martial artist is doing great IMC


----------



## weem

Trevor (WoTC) posted this over on those forums earlier...

(this is a snippet, read post here)...


> ...I don't feel like you guys are attacking me when I come in and try to make sure the information is flowing, and I understand how frustrating this has been on some of you. I expect to get entrenched with how you all feel about this issue and any other issue that affects D&D, and I expect some people will want to vent at me personally. Just part of the job.
> 
> That being said, I do want to remind everyone that I am paying very close attention to this conversation and passing on this feedback on a frequent basis to the rest of the company. Please don't feel like you're not being listened to or heard because that's just *now* the case.




*Emphasis mine*

I know it's a typo, but it just made me lol.

Sorry Trevor, I do appreciate the updates and can understand your position, it was just a funny typo is all


----------



## Jeff Wilder

Mouseferatu said:


> To be fair, _if_ it was a requirement for the lawsuit, they might not be _able_ to reveal that fact.



I can't think of any legal reason for WotC to need to remove PDFs.  I don't know much about IP law, but statutes and common law tend to have similar underlying rationales, and those rationales don't seem to apply here.  (For example, contract law's requirement to mitigate damages doesn't fit.)

I realize people are only speculating about WotC doing this for legal reasons, but what rationales are people assuming?


----------



## Edena_of_Neith

I meant to say, that metaphorically, the Tale of Turin Turambar has been played out.  I won't go any further on this, except to say it is a sad affair (just like the story was very sad.)

  -

  There were only a limited number of ways that a New Player in D&D *could* access OD&D, 1st Edition, 2nd Edition, and 3rd Edition products:

  1:  He could find them in a used bookstore or comic book store that sold old collectables. 
  2:  He could buy the product on e-bay, searching under D&D and Older Products.
  3:  He could buy it from online gaming stores that sold old products. 
  4:  He could access it online, downloading it for a fee (or, in some cases, for free.)

  Option 4 was just deleted, indefinitely.

  Options 1, 2, and 3 are often used by us, the Old Timers.  We remember the old game, and we actively search for the old products.  The old products have meaning for us.
  Option 4 was the only viable option for anyone new to the game.

  Those new to the game, those casually entering the game for the first time, are not going to employ options 1, 2, and 3.  
  They are going to buy from bookstores, from gaming stores, and from online sources.  And these sources, cut off from selling older material, will sell only new material.
  Those new to the Hobby, will never see the older editions.

  Effectively, the older editions are being erased.  Just erased.  Their memory will live on only within us, the Old Timers.

  Or, until the rights to the old editions are released, and someone (WOTC or otherwise) decides to place the great library of What Once Was back on the Internet.


----------



## Dausuul

One hopes they are noticing there is virtually _no_ support for this decision, even from the people like me who normally give WotC the benefit of the doubt.


----------



## Krensky

JohnRTroy said:


> This, to me, is a clear case that the US Government, both Congressional and Judicial branches, consider the term theft to be an accurate description--or at least an accepted colloquialism--of copyright infringement.




I don't know... To me it's more of a case that Congress has been giving bad laws stupid names that make cute or catchy acronyms for over a decade.


----------



## mach1.9pants

@Edena, I see what you are saying. I just think that will reduce the number of people picking DnD fullstop. Not by much, I guess but it is just as anti new 4E players as it is anti new older DnD players. Anyone who wants to start playing DnD using the (generally cheaper) method of getting PDF rules will have to start on something other than DnD. Everyone loses.


----------



## SteveC

For me, the single biggest issue is the lack of communication on WotC's part. If you take a look at the Wizard's boards, you see a very put-upon Trevor trying to let people know he's passing information up, but doesn't have anything to report back. I don't envy his job at all. Hang in there!

WotC has people who work PR for them. A decision like this needed to be explained up front, even if that explanation was "we're doing this because of litigation, and we can't comment on it more than that." The less than 24 hour notice on it, and all of the notice coming from RPGNOW and Paizo was incredibly unprofessional.

I have purchased a few PDFs from WotC, older edition stuff, and I would have liked to get another crack at downloading it to archive, but that's small potatos compared to the people who paid top dollar for 4E materials and now can't get them anymore. Not only are their PDFs not going to be updated, they can no longer even get them in the case of a hardware crash.

When the PDF issue first came about, Scott Rouse asked me why I wasn't buying them, since I let it be known that I do purchase a lot of PDFs. I said at the time it was price, but I'll have to say that in the back of my mind there was always the idea that something like this would happen. I didn't want to post about it because it would have sounded petty and rude, and frankly the mods didn't need to deal with any more nonsense in that thread. I'm glad I listened to that voice and didn't buy.

--Steve


----------



## Storm Raven

Bagpuss said:


> I really suspect that real the motivation behind this is tied to this court case. Since in order to defend a copyright you have to demonstrate you are making efforts to protect it. I would not be surprised if they had not been advised by lawyers that this will help their case.




No. You don't. Not for copyright. Trademark, yes, but copyright, no. So I'm pretty certain their lawyers didn't give that advice, because it would be stupid of them to do so, as it is wrong.


----------



## jdrakeh

Storm Raven said:


> No. You don't. Not for copyright. Trademark, yes, but copyright, no. So I'm pretty certain their lawyers didn't give that advice, because it would be stupid of them to do so, as it is wrong.




There _are_ stupid attorneys, man. Some states have shockingly low standards for SBE applications (frex, in California, some correspondence courses or local apprenticeships meet the requirement of 'law school' as I recall). That said, I'm certain you're right in this case


----------



## Storm Raven

tmatk said:


> No it's not, it's infringement. If I make a copy, they still have their copy, so I didn't take it. One can argue I cheated them out of the money I would have gave them, but one would have to prove that I would have paid to begin with.




No, one wouldn't. Not under the current copyright laws. That's what statutory damages are for.


----------



## Beginning of the End

jdrakeh said:


> There _are_ stupid attorneys, man. Some states have shockingly low standards for SBE applications (frex, in California, some correspondence courses or local apprenticeships meet the requirement of 'law school' as I recall). That said, I'm certain you're right in this case




You'd have to be pretty bloody stupid to say, "The best way to show that you're protecting your IP is to stop selling your IP."

First, you'd have to confuse trademarks with copyright. (Which, if you're a copyright lawyer, would be mind-bogglingly stupid.)

Then you'd have to advise someone that the best way to show that you're defending your use of the trademark is to stop using the trademark. (Which is actually a pretty brilliant way to _lose_ a trademark, not protect it.)


----------



## pawsplay

Mainly, axing your own sale of PDFs would just weaken the argument that sharing of the PDFs dilutes your financial interests in the IP. No sales, nothing to dilute!


----------



## jdrakeh

Beginning of the End said:


> Moot stuff.




_I said that I was certain he was right_. Brother. Some people just want to argue.


----------



## Orius

rogueattorney said:


> I guess the main thing I'd like to know from Charles or anyone else from WotC is what the piracy of new 4e print products has to do with the availability of OOP D&D products.  Why take these down, too?  That makes no sense and seems to be more of an incitement towards piracy than a move to prevent it.




As some people have already stated, it may be related to this court case they're pursuing.  Taking down everything is probably the easiest option for them to take, it might be harder for them to just remove 4e stuff and leave older stuff up.  Especially if the case goes before a jury that's not going to know the difference (and I'd say very avid D&D players probably wouldn't make the jury pool anyway, they wouldn't be considered objective enough or whatever).

This also may be the reason WotC isn't saying much on the matter either; the terms of the case may forbid it.  If so though, they should mention it ASA legally P.  



jmucchiello said:


> I can't believe WotC could make a mistake of this magnitude. Every other PR fiasco has happened on a Friday giving us a whole weekend for wild speculation and chest thumping pledges of being for or against WotC. Who dropped the ball and hit the switch on a Monday? I'm sure heads will roll over this.




I'd disagree.  Making a decision like this at the end of the week and letting the fanbase spew and fume and cook up conspiracy theories all weekend is probably worse than doing it on a Monday, when they have the option of trying to mollify angry customers over the week.



mach1.9pants said:


> And get your tin foil hats one they have closed down the thread on WotC boards now...Wizards Community - View Single Post - WotC halts sales/downloads from rpgnow.com




Old news, as the thread was reopened (and it was closed for the same reason this one was), but I got a chuckle out of the WizO's avatar.


----------



## Roman

Obryn said:


> You know, I keep on hearing things referred to as "the last straw."
> 
> I don't buy it.




That is your prerogative, but do you really believe people would be this angry if this was the first action by WotC to which they objected? A few would, perhaps, but I still think for many this was merely the last straw that got them angry and not some sort of isolated incident. 



> There have been way too many "last straws" for me to believe it.  I think a lot of those claiming this was the last straw have had _previous_ last straws, and that there will be _more_ last straws after this one.




I am not sure what you are getting at. Obviously, for different people there are different last straws. There are also different last straws for different levels of reaction in the same person. For example, my personal last straw for not giving WotC the benefit of the doubt came about a month or two ago with the endless GSL delays. I began to entertain the possibility that malice (deliberately butchering the 3PP market) rather than incompetence were the cause - quite possibly that is not the case, but I began to consider it as a possibility rather than auto-assuming that WotC's intentions were clean and taking their statements at face value as I have more or less done hitherto. By the same token, for many people this fiasco seems to be the last straw before becoming angry at WotC. Some might even stop buying products, and others will not despite being angry. Different last straws for different levels of reaction and for different people and all that...  



> Which is fine - I just think a statement like "I WILL NEVER SUPPORT THIS COMPANY EVER AGAIN BECAUSE OF THIS ACTION!" is (usually) the internet version of a politely-worded complaint letter, just with extra froth because there's barely any barrier between thought and publication.




Only a few people have said something to that effect and they might well follow through for all we know, but again, the numbers of people who have said something like that are not large. There is a difference between expressing anger, as many have done, and actually expressing a desire for boycott. 

That said, dismissing the power of the internet to organize consumers for a boycott and an anti-company campaign is not prudent. From personal experience, I was engaged in the anti-EA boycott because of draconian DRM they imposed on their games. It took about 6 months to a year (depending on when you start counting), but EA is now backing off the draconian DRM scheme, but only after the public relations fiasco has cost it 10s of millions of dollars in lost sales in its own admission. EA deserves credit for rectifying its mistake, but it has lost many sales and much goodwill by trying to last out the boycott. This was an internet-based campaign and I am not saying that WotC is about to suffer something like that - I am just using it to illustrate that internet-based customer anger can have an impact on the bottom line of a huge gaming company (EA is surely much bigger than WotC). 

The EA case actually bears a sad parallel to the current WotC case. In both cases, the companies argued that they are fighting piracy with their moves. In both cases, their real motivations were more suspect. In EA's case, a likely alternate motivation was destroying second-hand sales through draconian DRM mechanisms and in WotCs case it may be some sort of weirdly veiled attempt to bring all of its electronic products into a service-based model (perhaps based on the DDI). In the case of EA, the DDRM proved completely ineffectual in fighting piracy and Spore (the poster-child DDRM-infested game) became the most pirated game in history. WotC's move will prove similarly ineffectual. 

Let us hope WotC wisens up to the stupidity of its decision faster than EA did and reverses it as quickly as possible.


----------



## Jeff Wilder

Orius said:


> As some people have already stated, it may be related to this court case they're pursuing.



How?  (I'm not looking for legal terms of art, here.  I'm just curious as to how people think the pulling of PDFs could be related to legal action.  People keep saying it "may be related," but the only explanations offered as to why it "may be related" have been flatly incorrect.)



> This also may be the reason WotC isn't saying much on the matter either; the terms of the case may forbid it.



"Terms of the case"?  Can you explain what you mean here?  (Again, not looking for specific legal jargon; just an explanation of what you mean, because, as a lawyer, I honestly have no idea what you've got in mind.)


----------



## Mephistopheles

Orius said:


> jmucchiello said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't believe WotC could make a mistake of this magnitude. Every other PR fiasco has happened on a Friday giving us a whole weekend for wild speculation and chest thumping pledges of being for or against WotC. Who dropped the ball and hit the switch on a Monday? I'm sure heads will roll over this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd disagree.  Making a decision like this at the end of the week and letting the fanbase spew and fume and cook up conspiracy theories all weekend is probably worse than doing it on a Monday, when they have the option of trying to mollify angry customers over the week.
Click to expand...



I think you may have a faulty power coupling in your sarcasm detector.


----------



## amethal

jdrakeh said:


> _I said that I was certain he was right_. Brother. Some people just want to argue.



No they don't!


----------



## CharlesRyan

Hi, all--

Before I write anything else, I want to reiterate that I'm not a WotC employee. Aside from a little more context, I don't have any more info about what's going on than anyone else.

But here's what my context tells me:

Back in about 2004 or 2005 I launched the first PDF sales of current-edition product. We were very concerned about piracy at the time--it already existed even before we put out the first PDF, and it certainly occurred once we started selling PDFs. I'm sure it occurred over the five years since. If there's one thing I know for sure, it's that piracy is _not_ suddenly a surprise to WotC.

So why would WotC suddenly make a policy about-face, _and_ launch a major (for WotC, at least) and probably very expensive legal offensive?

Here's what I think: *It's because something has changed*. WotC isn't doing this because they've suddenly become aware of everyday, run-of-the-mill piracy. They're doing it because the amount, or nature, of the piracy has sifted substantially in recent months. Maybe this new piracy already threatens their business, or maybe it's trending sharply in that direction. Whatever the case, it's beyond the routine.

So why did they cut off _all_ PDFs, and without warning? I don't know, but I suspect it's no accident. It's probably a tactical move related to the legal offensive. Here's something else I know for sure: Scott _had_ to know there would be PR fallout for this approach (though I don't think anyone could have predicted the depth of vitriol). He chose to pay that price, so it must have been pretty important to the success of the legal action.

Again, this is my speculation. Slightly informed speculation, maybe, but still pure speculation and nothing else. Like everyone else, I'm waiting to see what happens next.

(Hi, Sean!)


----------



## Maggan

Roman said:


> I am not sure what you are getting at. Obviously, for different people there are different last straws.




Well, yes, but I read quite a few posts over the Internet, on forums and blogs, about "last straws" from people who then continue to support WotC until something else happens (or who has withdrawn support from WotC ages ago), and then loudly claims that the latest issue is the last straw.

And around and around it goes. Which basically means that there certainly are last straws, but probably not as many as one could be led to believe reading feedback on the Internet.

/M


----------



## Fenes

Since cutting off legal access to PDFs won't diminish piracy at all I think you're wrong, Ryan - unless WotC's decision makers have missed the last 10 years of internet piracy.

Given that I do not think WotC's decision makers are that stupid I think this is not piracy-related, but related to remove legal access to older editions.


----------



## Miar

Have to agree with most people in that this is a huge PR blunder but that at this point is a dead horse.  A bit ago I read something up on Teleread which now seems to be down (edit it's back up).  Just in case it comes back up here's the link.  The quote I'm wondering about is this:

"This makes just about as much sense as J.K. Rowling’s famous piracy-driven refusal to authorize any electronic editions of her Harry Potter novels. In both cases, the “pirated” copies circulating on-line come not from authorized versions, but from people scanning in the dead-tree book."

Anyone else heard that the piracy they're pursing is from dead-tree scans?  Was this just something I missed in all the pages, or just random speculation on the article writer?


----------



## Mephistopheles

CharlesRyan said:


> Here's what I think: *It's because something has changed*. WotC isn't doing this because they've suddenly become aware of everyday, run-of-the-mill piracy. They're doing it because the amount, or nature, of the piracy has sifted substantially in recent months. Maybe this new piracy already threatens their business, or maybe it's trending sharply in that direction. Whatever the case, it's beyond the routine.




I think it may be interesting to consider the point you're making in the context that this is the first edition of D&D to be released and targeted - at least to some degree - to the first generation to grow up with broadband internet.

I saw a documentary not so long ago about the topic of electronic downloading, in particular the topic of downloading music. There were quite a few people on the show in the 15-25 year range who admitted to downloading music illegaly and thought nothing of it; a common perspective was that if the material is available to download for free then why should anyone pay for it?

A launch of a new edition with electronic product support to such an audience could understandly see a spike in piracy of the product to a degree that would alarm WotC and perhaps goad them to take this action - not to mention the prelaunch leak of the 4E core, which certainly could not have helped matters. Still, I wish they would have put a little more thought into their response as I doubt it will generate much for them besides customer resentment.


----------



## Fenes

Maggan said:


> Well, yes, but I read quite a few posts over the Internet, on forums and blogs, about "last straws" from people who then continue to support WotC until something else happens (or who has withdrawn support from WotC ages ago), and then loudly claims that the latest issue is the last straw.
> 
> And around and around it goes. Which basically means that there certainly are last straws, but probably not as many as one could be led to believe reading feedback on the Internet.
> 
> /M




In my case it does not matter what would be the last straw for me. I do not play 4E, I play 3.5, and WotC decided they won't sell the books I wanted (MIC, Complete Mage among other things) to me anymore. I did not decide anything, it was decided for me.


----------



## Maggan

Fenes said:


> I did not decide anything, it was decided for me.




Well, you did decide not to buy the books while they were available. That's one thing we all can take with us from this.

PDFs are not guaranteed to be available forever. Which is a shame, but then again, I didn't buy PDFs so it's easy for me to not be bothered about it.

/M


----------



## Jeff Wilder

Maggan said:


> PDFs are not guaranteed to be available forever.



They pretty much are, actually.  I know you meant "legal PDFs," but that's the thing: taking away the legal versions isn't going to affect the illegal versions.  Except to make them more popular for less guilt and stigma.


----------



## xechnao

jmucchiello said:


> Why the gap when they are unavailable? If you plan to sell them yourself why not start selling them yourself and then cut off the other retailers. No, I don't think this is part of the current plan except "down the line".




For legal reasons? (exclusivity contracts?)
For avoiding damaging industry-business and customer PRs reasons?
For technical reasons? (not ready yet but soon to be?)
For beneficial marketing reasons that come along with issuing the lawsuits?
All of the above???


----------



## Xyxox

CharlesRyan said:


> So why would WotC suddenly make a policy about-face, _and_ launch a major (for WotC, at least) and probably very expensive legal offensive?
> 
> Here's what I think: *It's because something has changed*. WotC isn't doing this because they've suddenly become aware of everyday, run-of-the-mill piracy. They're doing it because the amount, or nature, of the piracy has sifted substantially in recent months. Maybe this new piracy already threatens their business, or maybe it's trending sharply in that direction. Whatever the case, it's beyond the routine.
> 
> So why did they cut off _all_ PDFs, and without warning? I don't know, but I suspect it's no accident. It's probably a tactical move related to the legal offensive. Here's something else I know for sure: Scott _had_ to know there would be PR fallout for this approach (though I don't think anyone could have predicted the depth of vitriol). He chose to pay that price, so it must have been pretty important to the success of the legal action.
> 
> Again, this is my speculation. Slightly informed speculation, maybe, but still pure speculation and nothing else. Like everyone else, I'm waiting to see what happens next.
> 
> (Hi, Sean!)




Here's my speculation.

What changed was the resurgance of people picking up older versions of the game. This competed directly with the current version. That coupled with piracy which has always been around spurred a strategy of pulling ALL PDFs and using piracy and the legitimate court case as the scapegoat. All older product gets pulled along with new product, thus ending the self competition and forcing price increases in the after market sales of older edition material.

There will never be an end to piracy, or even a slowing of it. The RIAA proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt, but piracy makes an oh so handy scapegoat to allow the pulling of the older edition material.

IF my speculation is correct, this is what will happen:

1) 4E Electronic Media will be made available via the DDI in the not too distant future, and will be announced as the next "feature" in DDI.

2) Promises will be made that older material will appear in DDI at some unspecified future date. This alleviates the nerd rage and is the "I'll never beat you again" phase of the spousal abuse syndrome.

3) We will never see the older material legally available in electronic media again.

Yeah, I know I'm saying WotC is lying to us.

But I would say, "look at the pattern of the past two years starting with the promise that 4E was not forthcoming."


----------



## Nymrohd

After a little research I can attest that the majority of 4E pirated PDF products currently available are not scans but official copies. The difference being a rather diminished file size (close to a third of scanned books) as well as a far better index, easier to search file and the fact you can copy paste text and images easier than you could from even the best quality of scan. Make of that what you will.


----------



## xechnao

Mephistopheles said:


> I think it may be interesting to consider the point you're making in the context that this is the first edition of D&D to be released and targeted - at least to some degree - to the first generation to grow up with broadband internet.
> 
> I saw a documentary not so long ago about the topic of electronic downloading, in particular the topic of downloading music. There were quite a few people on the show in the 15-25 year range who admitted to downloading music illegaly and thought nothing of it; a common perspective was that if the material is available to download for free then why should anyone pay for it?
> 
> A launch of a new edition with electronic product support to such an audience could understandly see a spike in piracy of the product to a degree that would alarm WotC and perhaps goad them to take this action - not to mention the prelaunch leak of the 4E core, which certainly could not have helped matters. Still, I wish they would have put a little more thought into their response as I doubt it will generate much for them besides customer resentment.




This is a valid logical argument: trying to educate public regarding the new generation. But then why this lightning like reaction? Why having to stop the PDFs? It seems less about educating and more about denying and this is what it seems that has alienated customer base and industry (see white wolf promotion for example).


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Nymrohd said:


> After a little research I can attest that the majority of 4E pirated PDF products currently available are not scans but official copies. The difference being a rather diminished file size (close to a third of scanned books) as well as a far better index, easier to search file and the fact you can copy paste text and images easier than you could from even the best quality of scan. Make of that what you will.




Reminds me of the biggest problem of any DRM measurement that exists: 
It's more a hassle to the customer than to someone using a pirated version. Sure, the pirates first have to crack your DRM, but in the end that will always be possible, since the protected material will eventually "leak out" unprotected to the users eyes, and shortly before that, it will be in unprotected digital form. (Until we have brainware encryption/decryption.)

Without legally available PDFs, people have to use the scanning route, and that doesn't get you the same results as the original PDFs.

I suppose the closest one could come to this would be creating watermarks embedded in the illustrations in a PDF. The only way to remove them would be to remove them from the image, which would likely affect its quality (due to the way image compression works) - but would this be enough to stop it? I doubt it. Ugly illustrations with rules text is still better than no rules text at all.


----------



## CharlesRyan

Xyxox said:


> using piracy and the legitimate court case as the scapegoat.




You know, I work from a marketing and PR budget. Although I've never done so, I suppose I could imagine someday having to use some of that budget to give me a scapegoat for something.

But could I imagine spending tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars? Legal cases are expensive. Cross-border legal cases involving two foreign countries? Not a very good RoI for the PR budget.

No, this legal case is important to WotC. Really important. Probably a lot more important than the sales lost by pulling all PDFs, and apparently even more important than all the ill-will that's been generated. WotC didn't pour all these resources into a scapegoat.


----------



## Jeff Wilder

CharlesRyan said:


> No, this legal case is important to WotC. Really important. Probably a lot more important than the sales lost by pulling all PDFs, and apparently even more important than all the ill-will that's been generated.



I'm still in search of the mechanic by which pulling their PDFs helps in a legal entanglement, Charles.  Can you shed some light on that, even if purely hypothetically?


----------



## xechnao

Hmm, is it possible that because of the streamlined and balanced crunchy gamist nature of 4e, content has gained more gamist value than "fantasy environment immersion and inspiration" value and so text books could eventually seem less and less appealing than digital pdfs regarding product utility? It seems the game could very well have been made on a card format instead of a book format (except adventures-scenarios) - multiclassing and dualclassing seem the most serious reasons for a game player to be bying whole books.  

So they could be afraid of some kind of fan base pdf trend developing in expense of buying the text books -and since pdfs may have less material value than text books, they could also have less long lasting appeal (because their value is mostly connected to their gamist utility) which may mean fewer customers in the long run. Add to this trend the fact that pdfs are highly subjecticable to piracy since they have less product value quality to oppose it by being mostly valued by their gamist utility and you may have a receipt for "disaster" regarding the long standing profitability of 4e.

This may be a possibility regarding what they are thinking regarding pdfs.


----------



## xechnao

CharlesRyan said:


> No, this legal case is important to WotC. Really important. Probably a lot more important than the sales lost by pulling all PDFs, and apparently even more important than all the ill-will that's been generated. WotC didn't pour all these resources into a scapegoat.




Important as what? As the financial result of the lawsuit? As a campaign against piracy that will put it to an end so they could sell more pdfs in the future?


----------



## Bagpuss

CharlesRyan said:


> Here's what I think: *It's because something has changed*.




Could the something that has changed be something internal to WotC, such as

A) They plan move publication of digital materials in house.
B) Management (who have a different view of how big an issue piracy is)

as opposed to your suggest that the level of piracy has dramatically increased?


----------



## joethelawyer

Xyxox said:


> Here's my speculation.
> 
> What changed was the resurgance of people picking up older versions of the game. This competed directly with the current version. That coupled with piracy which has always been around spurred a strategy of pulling ALL PDFs and using piracy and the legitimate court case as the scapegoat. All older product gets pulled along with new product, thus ending the self competition and forcing price increases in the after market sales of older edition material.
> 
> There will never be an end to piracy, or even a slowing of it. The RIAA proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt, but piracy makes an oh so handy scapegoat to allow the pulling of the older edition material.
> 
> IF my speculation is correct, this is what will happen:
> 
> 1) 4E Electronic Media will be made available via the DDI in the not too distant future, and will be announced as the next "feature" in DDI.
> 
> 2) Promises will be made that older material will appear in DDI at some unspecified future date. This alleviates the nerd rage and is the "I'll never beat you again" phase of the spousal abuse syndrome.
> 
> 3) We will never see the older material legally available in electronic media again.
> 
> Yeah, I know I'm saying WotC is lying to us.
> 
> But I would say, "look at the pattern of the past two years starting with the promise that 4E was not forthcoming."





I agree completely, and with the additional thought that we won't get a good honest answer from WOTC on the pulling the pdf's because "It has to do with a pending legal action and it is our policy not to comment on anything related to a pending legal action."   Blah Blah Blah...


----------



## Azgulor

Mephistopheles said:


> I think it may be interesting to consider the point you're making in the context that this is the first edition of D&D to be released and targeted - at least to some degree - to the first generation to grow up with broadband internet.
> 
> I saw a documentary not so long ago about the topic of electronic downloading, in particular the topic of downloading music. There were quite a few people on the show in the 15-25 year range who admitted to downloading music illegaly and thought nothing of it; a common perspective was that if the material is available to download for free then why should anyone pay for it?
> 
> A launch of a new edition with electronic product support to such an audience could understandly see a spike in piracy of the product to a degree that would alarm WotC and perhaps goad them to take this action - not to mention the prelaunch leak of the 4E core, which certainly could not have helped matters. Still, I wish they would have put a little more thought into their response as I doubt it will generate much for them besides customer resentment.




 Wait, you mean the younger audience, the one with supposedly more disposable income that is the proverbial gold mine customer base that is preferred over the loyal 30+ customer base, <gasp> _might_ have a perspective that *supports* piracy?!?!   I'm STUNNED!!

Kidding aside, that's excellent information and a parallel I hadn't considered.  

I just find the irony LMAO mind-boggling.


----------



## Klaus

Jeff Wilder said:


> I'm still in search of the mechanic by which pulling their PDFs helps in a legal entanglement, Charles.  Can you shed some light on that, even if purely hypothetically?



I'm not Charles, but I know of cases where a company lost their copyrights after failing to protect those copyrights publicly.

For instance, Adobe has to publicly defend the name "Photoshop", and tries to keep any media from using "photoshopping" as a verb for "image manipulation in a computer". If they fail to do so, they might lose their claim to the name.


----------



## Bagpuss

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Reminds me of the biggest problem of any DRM measurement that exists:
> It's more a hassle to the customer than to someone using a pirated version. Sure, the pirates first have to crack your DRM, but in the end that will always be possible, since the protected material will eventually "leak out" unprotected to the users eyes, and shortly before that, it will be in unprotected digital form. (Until we have brainware encryption/decryption.)




Which is why DRM has been dropped by the music industry. They still go after pirates but they now don't penalise the paying customers and have made efforts to make their music accessible in a legal and affordable form through other sources. For example I'm currently listening to the entire content of Bat for Lashes new album free online legally, it is tempting me to go out and buy the CD.


----------



## Bagpuss

Klaus said:


> I'm not Charles, but I know of cases where a company lost their copyrights after failing to protect those copyrights publicly.
> 
> For instance, Adobe has to publicly defend the name "Photoshop", and tries to keep any media from using "photoshopping" as a verb for "image manipulation in a computer". If they fail to do so, they might lose their claim to the name.




Photoshop is a trademark not copyright.


----------



## webrunner

Bagpuss said:


> B) Management (who have a different view of how big an issue piracy is)




So you're suggesting the new management.. _likes_ piracy?  Because this is 100% a completely pro-piracy move if taken to be related to piracy at all.


----------



## Bagpuss

webrunner said:


> So you're suggesting the new management.. _likes_ piracy?  Because this is 100% a completely pro-piracy move if taken to be related to piracy at all.




No, I'm suggesting they might be idiots not up to speed on the issues surrounding piracy, and still be living in the 1990's.


----------



## Shadowsong666

ok - so how long until they realize that with the character builder you do not need most of the books anyway? Everything based around characer creation is in the character builder - everything the majority needs and wants when buying a book or pdf... the only things missing are fluff stuff and campaign setting material. Every item, power, class feature, feats, race is in the builder. Why should a "player only" DnD gamer buy a book/pdf if he gets everything for just a small fee with the character builder? 

But lets see what the next step is...
Create a new subscription model for the character builder so that you only get an update if you have bought it?
Wanna use arcane power stuff in the character builder? buy it.
Wanna use divine power stuff in the character builder? buy it.
Have bought the arcane power book and use the stuff inside your book in the character builder? well, buy it again.

I just feel robbed of easily going digital with my DnD stuff in the future. Back to the old way then - someone seen my scanner? 
There is just no way that i will get back to hurling around 10 books for a session if can simply grab my netbook and go off gaming the whole night... sorry WotC. I don't want to live in the 20th century anymore.


----------



## Fenes

Klaus said:


> I'm not Charles, but I know of cases where a company lost their copyrights after failing to protect those copyrights publicly.
> 
> For instance, Adobe has to publicly defend the name "Photoshop", and tries to keep any media from using "photoshopping" as a verb for "image manipulation in a computer". If they fail to do so, they might lose their claim to the name.




You are wrong. That's a _trademark_, not copyright. You can refuse to print a book you have the copyright of for decades, and you'll not lose the copyright.


----------



## scruffygrognard

Obryn said:


> Additionally, that's a pretty sizable list of grievances - and I'm guessing this newest development wasn't in any way a camel's-back-breaking straw for you.  Correct me if I'm wrong.
> -O




True.  I had been moving away from being what you would call a loyal customer back around the time that _Dungeon _and _Dragon _magazines were pulled.  

Instead of buying EVERYTHING they put out, I started to buy only "necessary" books and became a lot my discerning about what I considered to be necessary.

Once 4th edition came around and I looked over the PHB, I got wise to their business model (release increasingly incomplete core materials, make support materials increasingly necessary, and, once the buyers are tapped out, make those materials obsolete by making them incompatible with the next iteration of the game) and happily left them behind.  

I think, with 4th edition, WotC has mastered the art of bilking customer's for all they are worth.  I hope that their decision to remove pdf support for earlier versions of the game bites them in the ass.


----------



## Nikosandros

Klaus said:


> I'm not Charles, but I know of cases where a company lost their copyrights after failing to protect those copyrights publicly.
> 
> For instance, Adobe has to publicly defend the name "Photoshop", and tries to keep any media from using "photoshopping" as a verb for "image manipulation in a computer". If they fail to do so, they might lose their claim to the name.




That's a trademark issue, not a copyright one. Besides, the question isn't why is WotC suing the copyright infringers, but how does removing all PDFs help their legal case.


----------



## Xyxox

CharlesRyan said:


> You know, I work from a marketing and PR budget. Although I've never done so, I suppose I could imagine someday having to use some of that budget to give me a scapegoat for something.
> 
> But could I imagine spending tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars? Legal cases are expensive. Cross-border legal cases involving two foreign countries? Not a very good RoI for the PR budget.
> 
> No, this legal case is important to WotC. Really important. Probably a lot more important than the sales lost by pulling all PDFs, and apparently even more important than all the ill-will that's been generated. WotC didn't pour all these resources into a scapegoat.




I don't deny the case is important.

I deny that the case is the reason they pulled the PDFs. It was a bonus feature of WotC having to move on the issue.

In other words, the plan was to pull the PDFs all along. Piracy was a separate issue, but pulling the PDFs was a benefit because now they had a ready made excuse to pull all PDFs.


----------



## MerricB

Jeff Wilder said:


> They pretty much are, actually.  I know you meant "legal PDFs," but that's the thing: taking away the legal versions isn't going to affect the illegal versions.  Except to make them more popular for less guilt and stigma.




I would expect that taking away the legal versions _will_ affect the illegal versions: it makes them take more time to produce and the quality won't be as good as what we've had (scanned as opposed to being produced from the original printing files).

If Charles is right (hi Charles!) and Wizards are reacting to an upswing in direct piracy of the pdf files they produce, then it will make some difference. By no means will it eliminate piracy, but it will make it slightly harder to do and the end result is likely to be not as attractive to the "consumer".

I expect that the pdfs of the old products will come back, although I'd not be surprised to see them offered in a different way than before. PDFs of brand new products? Now, that is going to be a tricky business.

Cheers!


----------



## Shazman

Fenes said:


> Since cutting off legal access to PDFs won't diminish piracy at all I think you're wrong, Ryan - unless WotC's decision makers have missed the last 10 years of internet piracy.
> 
> Given that I do not think WotC's decision makers are that stupid I think this is not piracy-related, but related to remove legal access to older editions.




Yeah, I'd think if anything this will encourage piracy of WotC products.


----------



## Bagpuss

MerricB said:


> By no means will it eliminate piracy, but it will make it slightly harder to do and the end result is likely to be not as attractive to the "consumer".




When the only other alternative is no PDF copy at all how attractive do they need to be?


----------



## Sunderstone

add some Star Warsy Imperial theme miusic, add a dash of Princess Leia....

"... The more you tighten your grip, the more customers will slip through your fingers..."


Nothing bad tends to last forever, hopefully WotC will sell off D&D sooner rather than later. WotC's idiotic bullying tactics never fails to amaze me.


----------



## catsclaw227

Xyxox said:


> 2) Promises will be made that older material will appear in DDI at some unspecified future date. This alleviates the nerd rage and is the "I'll never beat you again" phase of the spousal abuse syndrome.



You did NOT go there, did you.....

Please don't make comparisons between a corporation decision to (legally) no longer sell THEIR product and and the real, sad and quite devastating issue of spousal abuse.


----------



## MerricB

Bagpuss said:


> When the only other alternative is no PDF copy at all how attractive do they need to be?




That's not the only alternative.

Print books.
DDi.

A potential customer of _Player's Handbook II_ might rank his options as follows:

1) Wizards quality PDF copy of PHB2
2) Print copy of PHB2
3) Pirate PDF copy of PHB2
4) DDi access to PHB2 rules.

Now, if the pirates provide #1 for no cost, that customer goes with that. But with that option gone, it's on to actually buying the PHB2 (as the customer doesn't like the quality of the pirated PDF as opposed to the professionally created one).

Obviously, this is one of many permutations - there are plenty of people who would reverse 2 & 3, and only stopping piracy altogether will get rid of _that_ option!

I don't know how big the pdf market is - I would guess an order of magnitude smaller than the print market at the very least - but when access to better-quality PDFs also eats into the print share of the market, it gets a lot more serious for Wizards.

Cheers!


----------



## Bagpuss

MerricB said:


> That's not the only alternative.
> 
> Print books.




Are not an alternative, they are not transportable, searchable, you can't copy or paste from them.



> DDi.




While the Character Builder is available off line it doesn't have all the information in it, it certainly is of little use for a DM preparing an adventure. 

The Compendium is much more useful in that regard but is only available online, still does not contain all the information a DM might require, so isn't really a true alternative (especially if you take into account the different payment methods one off compared to ongoing subscription).


----------



## Fenes

MerricB said:


> A potential customer of _Player's Handbook II_ might rank his options as follows:
> 
> 1) Wizards quality PDF copy of PHB2
> 2) Print copy of PHB2
> 3) Pirate PDF copy of PHB2
> 4) DDi access to PHB2 rules.
> 
> Now, if the pirates provide #1 for no cost, that customer goes with that. But with that option gone, it's on to actually buying the PHB2 (as the customer doesn't like the quality of the pirated PDF as opposed to the professionally created one).




That's 4E. For 3E material there is:

Buy second-hand print copy.
Download pirated pdf.

Neither alternative makes WotC any money. Stopping the sale of 3E material was not done to battle piracy.


----------



## kilpatds

[... deleted for redundancy...]


----------



## Brown Jenkin

CharlesRyan said:


> No, this legal case is important to WotC. Really important. Probably a lot more important than the sales lost by pulling all PDFs, and apparently even more important than all the ill-will that's been generated. WotC didn't pour all these resources into a scapegoat.




This is what I am having trouble wrapping my mind around. What could possibly be that important? 

There is zero chance that suing 8 people will stop piracy or even reduce it. The RIAA sued thousands with no success. The D&D pirate market it not supplied by just 8 people. So this can't be it.

There is zero chance that suing 8 people will deter others. The RIAA sued thousands with no success. People will keep pirating and will keep downloading So this can't be it.

The only vaguely plausible thing that I can think of as to why this could be so important as to loose PDF sales money, and other sales money due to bad PR is that somehow these 8 people are super rich and that WotC somehow thinks that the money they can recover in a lawsuit is more than the cost of lost sales and lawyer fees.


----------



## CleverNickName

WotC's silence on this subject is deafening.  Have there been any new press releases, statements, or explainations on their site?  (It's blocked here at work.)


----------



## Nymrohd

Someone suggested DI having something like Scribd (only with no editing options) that has new books. And maybe they can sell them in pdf format a few months after a book has been released.


----------



## Klaus

Yeah, yeah, yeah, IANAL etc. My point is: it may have something to do with the legal case. We don't know the whole story here. It is certainly possible.


----------



## Shadowsong666

MerricB said:


> That's not the only alternative.
> 
> Print books.
> DDi.
> 
> A potential customer of _Player's Handbook II_ might rank his options as follows:
> 
> 1) Wizards quality PDF copy of PHB2
> 2) Print copy of PHB2
> 3) Pirate PDF copy of PHB2
> 4) DDi access to PHB2 rules.
> 
> Now, if the pirates provide #1 for no cost, that customer goes with that. But with that option gone, it's on to actually buying the PHB2 (as the customer doesn't like the quality of the pirated PDF as opposed to the professionally created one).
> 
> Obviously, this is one of many permutations - there are plenty of people who would reverse 2 & 3, and only stopping piracy altogether will get rid of _that_ option!
> 
> I don't know how big the pdf market is - I would guess an order of magnitude smaller than the print market at the very least - but when access to better-quality PDFs also eats into the print share of the market, it gets a lot more serious for Wizards.
> 
> Cheers!




Ok, so lets see:

I want Monster Manual 2.
It must be a digital version, as i only use digital stuff (may it be of a disability, interest in technology, geekness... whatever. wotc has not to decide which reasons i have).
I need to access it offline and still get a book-like feeling (mobility, lack of internet etc.).

How is (how legally so ever) removing pdf support going to help me as a customer?

I don't want a printed example of the book.
DDI has no service which would help me in any way. Character builder doesn't cover the MM and the compendium is simply not good enough here (lacking pictures, history etc.).

So whats next for me? Going back in time, starting to buy physical books again and spending 6hours scanning a book or should i turn to piracy, downloading a scanned version in a minute at no cost?
Feeling robbed myself (of the ability to satisfy my desires with wotc pdfs) i'm asking myself why shouldn't i do the same the same too. There is only one group who provides my needs now - pirates. Time to let wotc walk the plank? i damn feel so...


----------



## MerricB

Fenes said:


> That's 4E. For 3E material there is:
> 
> Buy second-hand print copy.
> Download pirated pdf.
> 
> Neither alternative makes WotC any money. Stopping the sale of 3E material was not done to battle piracy.




Well, not as directly, no, given it's mostly already been copied!

Which is why I suspect that Wizards are in the middle of something bigger. I think they're reorganising how they sell old material pdfs, but we're in the middle of "internet rage" which rises and consumes everything...

...and the news isn't even 48 hours old.

Urgh. The employees of big corporations can't just say what occurs to them. There are laws about that. However, as we need to know now, Now, NOW!, we happily ignore than and assume that despite it being 3am, they'll be online and answering every question we ask.

Do I think they could have given out more information by this point? Absolutely! 

They've given us a moderate amount of information: they've identified a problem (pirate pdfs) and the solution to the problem (no pdfs!). Unfortunately, as the solution is a bigger problem _for us_ (no pdfs! Argh!), we need another solution. Well, we've been told that there might be a solution, but - alas - that's all. And we need more.

I'm willing to be somewhat patient, but if we haven't heard more in the next few days, there are a few people at Wizards who will need to be reeducated in the realities of the modern era.


----------



## Fenes

Klaus said:


> Yeah, yeah, yeah, IANAL etc. My point is: it may have something to do with the legal case. We don't know the whole story here. It is certainly possible.




Again I doubt that. They pulled all pdfs, even from editions that haven't been sold as print books since decades.


----------



## Umbran

Xyxox said:


> 2) Promises will be made that older material will appear in DDI at some unspecified future date. This alleviates the nerd rage and is the "I'll never beat you again" phase of the spousal abuse syndrome.





Someone seems to have missed the message about hyperbole.  This someone will no longer be participating in this discussion.

To be clear - inability to get the gaming content you want in the form you want is in no way, shape, or form analogous to spouse-beating, or any other form of physical or psychological abuse.  

Such comparison shows a lack of a sense of proportion and reason, and you were all told earlier that such would be required if you wanted to participate.  We hope we don't have to speak on this again.


----------



## Caliber

Further hypothesizing from Charles's speculation, do we have any idea who the people being sued are? The pirate copies of the 4E core books were print proofs, suggesting a leak in the production line somewhere. Perhaps they're going after people who are involved in situations analogous to that (or even that situation itself)?


----------



## webrunner

Bagpuss said:


> No, I'm suggesting they might be idiots not up to speed on the issues surrounding piracy, and still be living in the 1990's.




I wish there was a way to get information directly to the shareholders of Hasbro that these acts are not in their best interests.


----------



## xechnao

MerricB said:


> That's not the only alternative.
> 
> Print books.
> DDi.
> 
> A potential customer of _Player's Handbook II_ might rank his options as follows:
> 
> 1) Wizards quality PDF copy of PHB2
> 2) Print copy of PHB2
> 3) Pirate PDF copy of PHB2
> 4) DDi access to PHB2 rules.
> 
> Now, if the pirates provide #1 for no cost, that customer goes with that. But with that option gone, it's on to actually buying the PHB2 (as the customer doesn't like the quality of the pirated PDF as opposed to the professionally created one).
> 
> Obviously, this is one of many permutations - there are plenty of people who would reverse 2 & 3, and only stopping piracy altogether will get rid of _that_ option!
> 
> I don't know how big the pdf market is - I would guess an order of magnitude smaller than the print market at the very least - but when access to better-quality PDFs also eats into the print share of the market, it gets a lot more serious for Wizards.
> 
> Cheers!




But why other big companies offer pdfs then (Paizo, White Wolf, Mongoose, Green Ronin, SJG, Catalyst etch)? Then again FFG that has products whose selling points is already highly popular IP (warhammer) does not.

Also didn't Wotc offer quality pdfs with 3.xe?  

So could we aggree that the piracy effect to your business depends on some factors that have to do with your marketing and commercial model? As it also happens with the competition effects.

The problem though is that if you want to associate to your customer base the value of your name -which only you possess- you have to remain consistent too.

Wotc has not paid attention to this in the last move and this perhaps is going to cost it. We will see.


----------



## Gorrstagg

To CleverNickName, the silence has been just surreal.

cross-posted at WotC

One thing that has me thinking a little is. Imagine the stock holder, who just heard that a subsidiary of the company he owns stock in (Hasbro), in a completely unexplained move, just cut off a revenue stream that brought in steady money, daily. And did it before the release of a major enhancement product for their product line?

I would be angry because that means someone decided to essentially take money out of my pocket, and the pockets of every single other share holder. Directly.

Not to mention the actual PR reaction this has engendered, and that it's starting to get picked up in many places. I would be very, very concerned about who authorized the choice to stop a fully functional revenue stream.

This whole process has just been incredibly mind boggling. And to the folks who say that WotC has to keep on protecting their copyrights, by specifically asking and threatening those who host said pirated goods, to take it down, they are protecting it. And they also have protected it by going to court against the pirates listed. And none of it should of affected the current PDF sales.

You do NOT pull everything out, in order to find an alternative approach. You spend the entire year working on the methods in question, and search for alternative digital distribution methods. You put that into place before you do this move. And you most assuredly communicate with people to let them know you've been exploring this technology. 

This action just seems, so erratic, and inspires extreme concern about this incredible mistake. Especially in light of the economic downturn. You don't stop taking in money for a virtual product, you keep bringing in the money, because ... that's your JOB.

And seriously, there needs to be an immediate response from a PR perspective on this subject. Look in MMO circles, when a company makes an incredibly bad choice, the president/ceo comes out and admits that they made an error, and are working to rectify that issue. And be responsible. And get the problem fixed. And I reference the MMO field because Wizards has been building itself into the digital medium, and have been trying to lure MMO players either back into the D&D fold, or at least add them into it.

I'm still blown away by this decision to take down all PDF's.


----------



## Fenes

MerricB said:


> They've given us a moderate amount of information: they've identified a problem (pirate pdfs) and the solution to the problem (no pdfs!). Unfortunately, as the solution is a bigger problem _for us_ (no pdfs! Argh!), we need another solution. Well, we've been told that there might be a solution, but - alas - that's all. And we need more.
> 
> I'm willing to be somewhat patient, but if we haven't heard more in the next few days, there are a few people at Wizards who will need to be reeducated in the realities of the modern era.




I'd be willing to be patient if I was offered anything that even remotedly made sense as a reason. As it is I was either lied to, or - if WotC really did what they did for the reasons given - they are incredibly ignorant of the reality of today's internet and economy. I somehow doubt that the latter is the case.


----------



## MerricB

Shadowsong666 said:


> How is (how legally so ever) removing pdf support going to help me as a customer?




It's not. 

Pre-2006*, you weren't a customer. (*: I can't remember the exact date PDFs of the core books went on sale, but I think it was about then).

Now you're not a customer again.

I'm sorry, but if Wizards thinks that it'll sell to 100 extra customers whilst losing 10 customers, it'll choose to sell to those 100 extra customers. It's part of what businesses need to do to keep going.

Yes it sucks. It also sucks that I can't get true broadband: I have to pay more to get less speed than most other people in Australia can get. But there are financial realities involved.


----------



## Obryn

CleverNickName said:


> WotC's silence on this subject is deafening.  Have there been any new press releases, statements, or explainations on their site?  (It's blocked here at work.)



Well, on the one hand, it's been _less than 48 hours_.  I know it feels like more, here in the message board bubble, but that's an eyeblink.

On the other hand, I think it's pretty irresponsible that they wouldn't have had _something_ official posted right when the plug was pulled.  That just seems like common sense to me...  And, no, some guy on a message board - even if he does have "WotC" in his handle - making occasional posts on a forum isn't what I'd call adequate communication.

-O


----------



## Fenes

MerricB said:


> It's not.
> 
> Pre-2006*, you weren't a customer. (*: I can't remember the exact date PDFs of the core books went on sale, but I think it was about then).
> 
> Now you're not a customer again.
> 
> I'm sorry, but if Wizards thinks that it'll sell to 100 extra customers whilst losing 10 customers, it'll choose to sell to those 100 extra customers. It's part of what businesses need to do to keep going.
> 
> Yes it sucks. It also sucks that I can't get true broadband: I have to pay more to get less speed than most other people in Australia can get. But there are financial realities involved.




Again, by removing older edition PDFs they are not winning any customers, they are losing customers - unless they actually beleive by removing older PDFs they can force people to buy 4E.


----------



## Nymrohd

xechnao said:


> But why other big companies offer pdfs then (Paizo, White Wolf, Mongoose, Green Ronin, SJG, Catalyst etch)? Then again FFG that has products whose selling points is already highly popular IP (warhammer) does not.
> 
> Also didn't Wotc offer quality pdfs with 3.xe?
> 
> So could we aggree that the piracy effect to your business depends on some factors that have to do with your marketing and commercial model? As it also happens with the competition effects.
> 
> The problem though is that if you want to associate to your customer base the value of your name -which only you possess- you have to remain consistent too.
> 
> Wotc has not paid attention to this in the last move and this perhaps is going to cost it. We will see.




The necessity of PDFs to make your product available for WotC and 3PP is vastly divergent. I think I can reasonably say that the majority of FLGS do not sell a lot of 3PP books or at least do not have a steady market for them. I would expect those publishers make a lot more sales online than they do in print.

And WotC has not been offering PDFs for that long.


----------



## MerricB

xechnao said:


> But why other big companies offer pdfs then (Paizo, White Wolf, Mongoose, Green Ronin, SJG, Catalyst etch)? Then again FFG that has products whose selling points is already highly popular IP (warhammer) does not.




Big companies? Not quite the same scale. 

I expect they'll be watching the lawsuits that Wizards has launched with great interest. Stopping piracy should be tremendously important to each of them... although perhaps not as important as to Wizards.



> Also didn't Wotc offer quality pdfs with 3.xe?




For 3.5e, but not when it first came out. As I recall, they were full price (no discount at all) and came out a couple of years into the system's release, when 3.5e was already on the slope downwards. They tested the water first, and only started releasing pdf books at about the same time as the official release date quite late.

Cheers!


----------



## MerricB

Fenes said:


> Again, by removing older edition PDFs they are not winning any customers, they are losing customers - unless they actually beleive by removing older PDFs they can force people to buy 4E.




I don't believe at all that's the reason.

I do expect that the older pdfs will become available again.

What did WotC_Trevor say again? Oh, yes:
"We are exploring other options for digital distribution of our content and as soon as we have any more information I'll get it to you."


----------



## Lonely Tylenol

JohnRTroy said:


> While there is legal terminology, other things complicate it.
> 
> For instance, part of the copyright statute in the US includes the NET Act, or "No Electronic Theft Act", established in 1997.
> 
> NET Act: 17 U.S.C. and 18 U.S.C. as amended (redlined)
> 
> This act, while still sticking to the term copyright infringement, is labeled as a theft act and can be referred to by name when the law is invoked or those specific statues are being sued.
> 
> This, to me, is a clear case that the US Government, both Congressional and Judicial branches, consider the term theft to be an accurate description--or at least an accepted colloquialism--of copyright infringement.




No, they name laws like George Orwell named government departments.  Laws are named in such a way as to support the ideology of whomever it is that wrote the law.  One might call a hypothetical law that lets police search cars without a warrant the "Protect our Children Act", because it sounds better than the "Invading Your Privacy Act", and who wants to be accused of voting against the Protect our Children Act...what, do you want to hurt children or something?  It's just two-bit politics.

When it comes to the legal terminology used _in_ the law, there is no question that everyone knows that theft and copyright infringement are two different things.


----------



## Kask

Fenes said:


> For 3E material there is:
> 
> Buy second-hand print copy.
> Download pirated pdf.
> 
> Neither alternative makes WotC any money. Stopping the sale of 3E material was not done to battle piracy.




Correct.  Right now pre-4.0 editions sold on PDF are a profit center for WotC with no costs associated.  Now, companies don't eliminate profit centers unless they see it as a threat to new/existing products.  That would ONLY be the case if 4.0 wasn't moving as well as it should be...  Which I know to be true.


----------



## Shadowsong666

MerricB said:


> It's not.
> 
> Pre-2006*, you weren't a customer. (*: I can't remember the exact date PDFs of the core books went on sale, but I think it was about then).
> 
> Now you're not a customer again.




I am a customer since a very long time now... the only thing that changed is the kind of media format i *want*, *like* and *desire*. Things change. Times change. Future awaits. I left the BETAMAX stage i got born and now arrived at the digital age with blueray and all the rest of the HD media. No desire to watch VHS anymore, sorry pal. ^^

I bought dnd books since 2nd edition and have 4e books here as well (not to mention shadowrun, cyberpunk, merp, earthdawn, ars magica, all the WW stuff and all the other great systems out there.) and i will continue to buy books if there is no other way. Thats not the point. The point is ripping me of the format i desire. Getting me to a point where i need to chose how to get what i want - legally(scan it myself - much work) or illegaly(download it from pirates). Time before that i could simply pay the bugs and get it instantly...


----------



## Jeff Wilder

Klaus said:


> Yeah, yeah, yeah, IANAL etc. My point is: it may have something to do with the legal case. We don't know the whole story here. It is certainly possible.



It "may have something to do with" the conspiracy to deny Stephen Colbert his name's rightful place on a space-station urine-recycling node.  Given that nobody seems, so far, to be able to explain how pulling PDFs "may have something to do with the legal case," suggesting the urine-node conspiracy "explanation" is about as useful.  Probably more so, since it's funnier and more easily recognized as bogus.


----------



## Obryn

Kask said:


> That would ONLY be the case if 4.0 wasn't moving as well as it should be...  *Which I know to be true*.



You keep saying this but haven't given any evidence - only speculation.

Wouldn't it be more accurate to say "Which I believe to be true"?

-O


----------



## MerricB

Caliber said:


> Further hypothesizing from Charles's speculation, do we have any idea who the people being sued are? The pirate copies of the 4E core books were print proofs, suggesting a leak in the production line somewhere. Perhaps they're going after people who are involved in situations analogous to that (or even that situation itself)?




I've seen a list of the people being sued by Wizards posted on the Wizards boards by someone who is much, much better at finding out that sort of stuff than me. 

From the original press release:
"eight defendants located in the United States, Poland and the Philippines"

Here's the post by someone on the Wizard's boards that names them:
Wizards Community - View Single Post - WotC halts sales/downloads from rpgnow.com

WotC halts sales/downloads from rpgnow.com - Page 32 - Wizards Community

Cheers!


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully

Brown Jenkin said:


> This is what I am having trouble wrapping my mind around. What could possibly be that important?
> 
> There is zero chance that suing 8 people will stop piracy or even reduce it. The RIAA sued thousands with no success. The D&D pirate market it not supplied by just 8 people. So this can't be it.
> 
> There is zero chance that suing 8 people will deter others. The RIAA sued thousands with no success. People will keep pirating and will keep downloading So this can't be it.



It seems not uncommon for the RIAA to go after people that just download via bittorrent or similar options, without acquiring a regular copy and than offering it for others to upload.

The latter case might actually be useful to sue for - since most people will not go through the hassle of buying something, possibly cracking it, and then uploading it. 

Technically, if you're using bittorrent and most other filesharing tools to get your illegal copies, you become both a provider and a consumer of pirated material, but from your view of personal responsibility, it wasn't you that provided the pirated copy.

How many on EN World download MP3s, TV show episodes or PDFs? I have no idea.  But I bet that the number of EN Worlders that actually rip a CD and offer it on a bittorrent site, or the numbers of EN Worlders that download a Players Handbook PDF from DriveThru, remove any existing watermarks and then upload it to a bittorrent site so that others can consume it, is quite low. 
Most downloaders wouldn't even know how to do this, most don't care to do it. Heck, most _can't_ do it. (How do I remove the watermark from my Pathfinder Beta PDF? I have a vague idea to begin with, but I am actually working professionally with PDF and related technologies!)

So yes, going after 8 specific "pirates" might be exactly what you need to do. Especially if you have reasonable information suggesting that they were the primary source, possibly in more than one case. (Though I don't know if that's also true.)

And if these 8 (or just some of them) are convicted, it becomes clearer to the pirates that there is a real threat of getting caught. 

So much at least, for my theory. 
It doesn't seem to work for the RIAA, but the RIAA covers a lot more organizations and also has a different customer base. Transforming CDs to MP3s is also a lot easier than digitalizing (scanning, OCRing) books.


----------



## Obryn

MerricB said:


> I've seen a list of the people being sued by Wizards posted on the Wizards boards by someone who is much, much better at finding out that sort of stuff than me.
> 
> From the original press release:
> "eight defendants located in the United States, Poland and the Philippines"
> 
> Here's the post by someone on the Wizard's boards that names them:
> WotC halts sales/downloads from rpgnow.com - Page 32 - Wizards Community
> 
> Cheers!



Could you post the list over here?  I can't get there from here, but am burning with curiosity. 

-O


----------



## Bagpuss

I'd love to know who this Wizards spokeswoman is that told the Register the follow.

"A Wizards spokeswoman told El Reg online companies that were legally selling D&D handbooks in PDF format were given 24 hours yesterday to remove the content. She said those retailers aren't being accused of any wrongdoing, but it's Wizards' priority now to "take care of all the crazy action going out there" until it finds a safer way to distribute digital copies."

from The Register.

The internet is like crazy man.


----------



## scruffygrognard

Has anyone read WoTC's Authorized Internet Retailer Agreement?  Is it me, or does this sound nutty?  

How will this impact retailers like Amazon or BN.com?


----------



## scruffygrognard

Sorry for the double-post.  The internet at work is VERY buggy.


----------



## dmccoy1693

CharlesRyan said:


> You know, I work from a marketing and PR budget. Although I've never done so, I suppose I could imagine someday having to use some of that budget to give me a scapegoat for something.
> 
> But could I imagine spending tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars? Legal cases are expensive. Cross-border legal cases involving two foreign countries? Not a very good RoI for the PR budget.
> 
> No, this legal case is important to WotC. Really important. Probably a lot more important than the sales lost by pulling all PDFs, and apparently even more important than all the ill-will that's been generated. WotC didn't pour all these resources into a scapegoat.




Charles, I hear what you're saying (and I gotta admit, it makes ALOT of sense), but imagine how different this week would have been if Wizards did 2 things differently:

They made the announcement themselves instead of letting DTRPG/RPGNow break the news, and
included the following in their press release:
During this action, we are suspending sales of all PDF based books.  Wizards of the Coast understands that this action unfairly punishes legal customers.  For our customers, we are continuing legal downloading of previously purchased products until noon tomorrow (pacific time).  As soon as we are able to, we will be bringing back PDFs to sell and we will make every effort to make those previously purchased products available for download without any additional cost.  Until that time, we urge all our customers to only use legal products and not illegally produce or download copies.  "Piracy hurts the industry as a whole and we can no longer take a passive role in combatting it.  We are choosing to instead take bold action, even if that does require all of us to sacrifice together during this time." said president Greg Leeds.​Personally, I'd see Wizards as more of a hero than as the villian of this tale.  Its not *what* they do that has made them loose their status as a leader, but *how* they do it.


----------



## Bagpuss

That only refers to "Magic Products" I wouldn't be too concerned about it yet.

Anyone catch this post by Steve Wieck of drivethrurpg and rpgnow?

It clears up if it was any contractual disagreement, and seems to clearly link it to the court case.

Combined with the Register quote I posted earlier it's looking to me like some knee-jerk reaction not really thought through. Perhaps WotC really are that clueless.


----------



## wedgeski

DM, I hazard to guess that the reaction would have been almost exactly the same.


----------



## Caerin

dmccoy1693 said:


> Personally, I'd see Wizards as more of a hero than as the villian of this tale.  Its not *what* they do that has made them loose their status as a leader, but *how* they do it.




For my money, if this move does end up being part of legal gamesmanship- for example, to show actual damages, loss of goodwill, and so on in court- I'll be sorely disappointed.


----------



## Maggan

This might be of interest to some:

Wizards Community - View Single Post - WotC halts sales/downloads from rpgnow.com

DTRPG weighs in with some more info.

/M


----------



## tomBitonti

A thought ...

At what point do the printed books (and corresponding PDFs) become unnecessary?

Here I am viewing the printed books as an assembly of D&D information that is printed out.  A PDF may be viewed similarly as an assembly of D&D information that is placed into an electronic document.

I _think_ that we are in the midst of a fundamental shift of how D&D information is provided to customers.  The older style is to provide books (and by extension, PDFs).  A newer style is to have the information available as an assembly in *only* the DDI.  The only printed materials will be on-demand subsets of the information.  That is: scenario printouts, character sheets, power cards with complete information for a single power.  The most that will be printed for rules information will be small primers to get started with.

Under the new scheme, the only access to the complete rules is *by subscription*.

The new scheme has the benefit that *all assemblages of D&D Information other than the DDI are copyright violations*.  Period.

That is consistent with the sparseness of the MM and PHB: These are light scrapings of the DDI information to get folks into the game, and as a transition to the new DDI format.  A point-in-time sampling of the newest material, and nothing more.

If all assemblages are copyright violations, then a transition will be necessary where these are removed from the market.

Note that if assemblages are copyright violations, that makes detecting violations rather trivial.


----------



## MerricB

Obryn said:


> Could you post the list over here?  I can't get there from here, but am burning with curiosity.
> 
> -O




Wizards Community - View Single Post - WotC halts sales/downloads from rpgnow.com


			
				SYB said:
			
		

> I decided to do some research. I don't blame WotC. I blame the following individuals:
> 
> Stefan Osmena
> Thomas Patrick Nolan
> Mike Becker
> Arthur Le
> Krysztof Radzikowski
> John Doe 1
> John Doe 2
> John Doe 3
> 
> According to US District Court for the Western District of Washington, these are the defendants in the three lawsuits WotC filed yesterday. The case numbers are C09-0459TSZ, C09-0461RSM, and C09-0460RSM.
> 
> -SYB





Wizards Community - View Single Post - WotC halts sales/downloads from rpgnow.com


			
				Steve Wieck of drivethrunow said:
			
		

> Wizards gave us legal notice to remove their titles. Due to what I'll characterize as a miscommunication on intent, we complied immediately and removed all public access to Wizards' products from DriveThruRPG and RPGNow. In turns out this was not a situation that either we or Wizards desired. I am in discussions with Wizards legal and it looks highly probable that we will be able to offer customers time to come back and re-download prior purchases for their personal archives. We will email and post information on sites once we have final confirmation on this.


----------



## CleverNickName

Obryn said:


> Well, on the one hand, it's been _less than 48 hours_.  I know it feels like more, here in the message board bubble, but that's an eyeblink.



Actually....in sales and marketing, that is an eternity.



Obryn said:


> On the other hand, I think it's pretty irresponsible that they wouldn't have had _something_ official posted right when the plug was pulled.  That just seems like common sense to me...  And, no, some guy on a message board - even if he does have "WotC" in his handle - making occasional posts on a forum isn't what I'd call adequate communication.



I agree.  This whole thing has felt very unprofessional, from a consumer's point of view anyway.  It makes me wonder what's going on higher up the ladder.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol

CharlesRyan said:


> ...though I don't think anyone could have predicted the depth of vitriol




Wait a minute.  Are you sure you've worked in the gaming industry for as long as you claim to?  What have you done with the real Charles Ryan, you cad?


----------



## SteveC

Maggan said:


> This might be of interest to some:
> 
> Wizards Community - View Single Post - WotC halts sales/downloads from rpgnow.com
> 
> DTRPG weighs in with some more info.
> 
> /M



I really suggest that people read this linked post...it explains a lot. I daresay that if this level of communication had come from WotC we could have avoided about 90% of the problems that have emerged. Seriously.

--Steve


----------



## Agamon

Slashdot's picked up this story, and links to here.  Might that be why it's soooooooo slooooooowwwwwww?


----------



## Hussar

This quote just needs repeating:



> Originally Posted by Steve Wieck of drivethrunow
> Wizards gave us legal notice to remove their titles. Due to what I'll characterize as a miscommunication on intent, we complied immediately and removed all public access to Wizards' products from DriveThruRPG and RPGNow. In turns out this was not a situation that either we or Wizards desired. I am in discussions with Wizards legal and it looks highly probable that we will be able to offer customers time to come back and re-download prior purchases for their personal archives. We will email and post information on sites once we have final confirmation on this.




But, but, that means that ... WOTC isn't the evil bastards that everyone keeps repeating that they are.  That means, err, *shudder* someone made a mistake and WOTC had nothing to with it.  Naw, can't be.  You can't fool me.  WOTC is just out to screw gamers and make a quick buck in the meantime.  It's not like anyone would try to cash in on the ill will generated to make a quick buck, would they?


----------



## Umbran

SteveC said:


> I daresay that if this level of communication had come from WotC we could have avoided about 90% of the problems that have emerged. Seriously.




Not really.

It would not have been appropriate for WotC to communicate with the general public before they discussed things with the vendors, and given the vendors time to get their ducks in a row for the inevitable questions.  A vendor reacted before WotC could then communicate with the public.  Even if WotC had planned this level of communication, they weren't allowed it.  WotC management probably heard about the action after we did - such is the nature of news on the internet.

So, WotC has probably been playing catch-up.  And, it if wasn't WotC's action that caused the problem, it makes seven kinds of sense (and is far more professional) for them to not talk until the vendor spoke first.


----------



## roguerouge

CharlesRyan said:


> *But Piracy Can't Be Stopped!*
> 
> That's probably true. And piracy has been around since before the first D&D PDF was released, and WotC has always known about it. (I'm the guy that launched the first current-edition PDF sales, so I know what I'm saying here.)




We agree on this point. So you can see why WotC making "stopping piracy" their first impression was a bad move. Never treat customers as if they have no common sense. But that's exactly what they did. 



CharlesRyan said:


> It's pretty clear to me that what WotC is reacting to is a _trend_ in piracy. Based on these events, I'm guessing there's been a pretty dramatic _increase_ in piracy, particularly of key titles. WotC may not be able to put an end to piracy, but that's not likely the goal. The goal is to change the trend.




You have no evidence for this position. Moreover, if such evidence did exist, you're hoping that WotC will eventually share evidence for this position. And you just said that stopping piracy was not possible. Reducing piracy by preventing legitimate purchases is nonsensical; the demand for their pdfs has no place to go BUT to the black market. Imagine if a DM said that the monarch was shutting the city marketplace to fight smuggling. As a player, you would assume that the monarch had intelligence as his dump stat.

You have faith that they have evidence that you don't have. But since their strategy is so obviously flawed, you can understand why most customers would not have your faith that they have the evidence that will make it possible for them to construct a plan to fight piracy that no other company has been able to pull off. 



CharlesRyan said:


> *But 4E Has Already Been Pirated!*
> 
> Yeah, it's too late for the PHB, MM, DMG, and PHB2. But it's not too late for the MM2, the PHB3, or any number of other strong titles. It's still early in the 4E life cycle.




You're begging the question. It's too late for the MM2 and the PHB 3 too, as they'll be pirated as soon as they're available. The point is that such piracy is evidence that it's ridiculously easy to create copies. You can't reduce piracy by driving up demand for blackmarket goods. You attack the pirates and you drive down demand for their services through features, quality, and reliability. 



CharlesRyan said:


> *But I Didn't Get to Download My Purchase Five Times!*
> 
> It's been less than 24 hours since this was announced, and clearly it took the resellers by surprise. Take a deep breath. I'd bet money that they and WotC will make a good effort to reimburse anyone who wasn't able to download their purchases or redownload a lost file. WotC obviously did this because they had big fish to fry--not because they want to steal your pennies.




So, with no evidence, you assert that WotC will be reimbursing people. How much compensation will they be giving customers for lost access to an online storage facility for their gaming materials? Or are you really betting that WotC will be off-loading the cost onto small businesses like Paizo and RPGNow? 'Cause I'd take the former bet, but not the latter. After the GSL, I'm completely confident that WotC would let other people pick up the tab for their choices.



CharlesRyan said:


> *But Bad WotC Didn't Give Us Any Warning!*
> 
> I'm not a legal expert, and I have no special info on this issue, but I bet it's no coincidence that this happened within hours of the lawsuits being filed. I bet WotC needed to get all their ducks in a row--and all their court summons served--before tipping their hand to organized pirates. The lack of warning was probably a specific tactical move--not a PR fumble. That might suck for us, but it's no reason to heap vitriol on WotC.




So your best defense is that WotC was more concerned with vengeance than they were with their customers? 



CharlesRyan said:


> *But . . . But . . . I Like PDFs!*
> 
> Yeah, me too. But in the grand scheme of things-I-want-to-buy-that-are-no-longer-sold, this is really not that big a deal.




Really? It's not a big deal when a superior technology is abandoned? You don't think that DnD becoming MORE technologically backward as it attempts to compete with World of Warcraft and videogames might be a sea-change in the health of our hobby?



CharlesRyan said:


> Seriously, would you really react like this if you went into The Home Depot for a string trimmer and found out it wasn't sold any more? Those evil bastards at Black & Decker! They've lost this customer forever!!!




Wrong metaphor. The equivalent would be if Black & Decker said without warning or defensible reason that they would no longer honor any warranties for their product's loss or damage, because you purchased through Home Depot online, rather than at a brick and mortar store. And that would piss me off to lose something valuable (peace of mind) for no good reason. 

Look. You seem like a nice guy who has experience with the company. I just want you to think about why nice people who don't have experience with the company might be outraged about this decision.


----------



## xechnao

MerricB said:


> ...Stopping piracy...



Many(most) people seem confident that there will not be such an effect on piracy.



MerricB said:


> For 3.5e, but not when it first came out. As I recall, they were full price (no discount at all) and came out a couple of years into the system's release, when 3.5e was already on the slope downwards. They tested the water first, and only started releasing pdf books at about the same time as the official release date quite late.




Perhaps this is what they wanted with 4e too (pdf support during the downturn). But since 3.xe was present they decided that would not seem so good for 4e on behalf of its premise so far (that is till 4e got more grounded: say for example the launch of PHB II and a considerable amount of DDI subscriptions.

Either this or they want to bring pdf service in-house.


----------



## coyote6

Umbran said:


> Not really.
> 
> It would not have been appropriate for WotC to communicate with the general public before they discussed things with the vendors, and given the vendors time to get their ducks in a row for the inevitable questions.  A vendor reacted before WotC could then communicate with the public.  Even if WotC had planned this level of communication, they weren't allowed it.  WotC management probably heard about the action after we did - such is the nature of news on the internet.
> 
> So, WotC has probably been playing catch-up.  And, it if wasn't WotC's action that caused the problem, it makes seven kinds of sense (and is far more professional) for them to not talk until the vendor spoke first.




I'm not sure I agree with that reasoning -- Paizo and DTRPG/RPGNow both took down the WotC PDFs at about the same time, so they both must have misinterpreted WotC's request. Given that they are the only vendors around, IIRC, then it seems like 100% of whom WotC communicated with misunderstood their communication. 

Personally, if I say something to people, and everybody misunderstands me, I tend to suspect that I didn't phrase it very well.


----------



## Wicht

Hussar said:


> But, but, that means that ... WOTC isn't the evil bastards that everyone keeps repeating that they are.  That means, err, *shudder* someone made a mistake and WOTC had nothing to with it.  Naw, can't be.  You can't fool me.  WOTC is just out to screw gamers and make a quick buck in the meantime.  It's not like anyone would try to cash in on the ill will generated to make a quick buck, would they?




Firstly, the quote does not really seem to lay blame for the miscommunication on either party so it strikes me as a bit of an assumption to blame the listener and not the messenger.  

Secondly, the miscommunication was over a period of 24 hours.  Paizo worked as quick as possible to alert their customers and it still was too little time for some in Europpe who woke up to find their buying plans for the day had been altered and they had precious few hours to make sure their files were backed up.  

It seems strange to say that WotC had nothing to do with this recent fiasco when it was their decision to pull the PDFs.  And they were only at the most going to allow a 24 hour window to make the announcement.

Lastly, if one company makes a mistake and a second company profits from it, its normally the fault of the first company.  You seem to be implying that there is something unethical in Paizo and Green Ronin and White Wolf making announcements that they are happy to sell PDFs and will even give a discount on them this month.  I fail to see what's unethical or below the belt in these announcements.  It cheats no one and it insults no one.


----------



## Harlekin

coyote6 said:


> I'm not sure I agree with that reasoning -- Paizo and DTRPG/RPGNow both took down the WotC PDFs at about the same time, so they both must have misinterpreted WotC's request.




I don't think that this  statement accurately represents what happened. To me it seems that Paizo correctly understood wizard's request, informed their customers and orderly removed all the files after a short grace period. And made a killing in the process.

OTOH RPGNow removed files without any warning. Had they correctly interpreted Wizards request and given every customer 24h to download backup copies and to make purchases, some customers would certainly have felt less cheated.


----------



## Obryn

Wicht said:


> Lastly, if one company makes a mistake and a second company profits from it, its normally the fault of the first company.  You seem to be implying that there is something unethical in Paizo and Green Ronin and White Wolf making announcements that they are happy to sell PDFs and will even give a discount on them this month.  I fail to see what's unethical or below the belt in these announcements.  It cheats no one and it insults no one.



Someone will have to fill in the blanks, but isn't there a relationship between DTRPG and White Wolf?  Or at least people involved in both businesses?  I'm not wearing my tinfoil hat at the moment, can't remember for sure, and can't even muster up the belief that it's relevant.  (Specifically, I think that it's silly to believe someone would willfully misinterpret an email in order to give out free things on another website.  That's crazy.)

Regardless, I agree that it's only logical that competitors will jump on this.  It's the way the market works.  WotC made a mistake, other folks profit.

It's one of the reasons my forehead is sore.  I've been smacking it for two days now.

-O


----------



## jasonbostwick

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Most downloaders wouldn't even know how to do this, most don't care to do it. Heck, most _can't_ do it.* (How do I remove the watermark from my Pathfinder Beta PDF? I have a vague idea to begin with, but I am actually working professionally with PDF and related technologies!)*
> 
> So yes, going after 8 specific "pirates" might be exactly what you need to do. Especially if you have reasonable information suggesting that they were the primary source, possibly in more than one case. (Though I don't know if that's also true.)
> 
> And if these 8 (or just some of them) are convicted, it becomes clearer to the pirates that there is a real threat of getting caught.




The note about Pathfinder is of interest here.

The .pdfs of 4E D&D books (and DDI subscription content) have had their watermarks removed within an hour or so of the book releases on RPGNow and been up on torrents and rapidshare for distribution. 

For the first year or so of Pathfinder (and for Dungeon/Dragon before that) this was pretty much the case with Paizo's .pdfs as well. About half a year ago (I think after the the release of Pathfinder beta, but I'm not really positive as this is second-hand information and I don't play Pathfinder) in one fell swoop, Paizo banned the accounts and credit cards of a number of users they had determined were pirating their material, *and* changed their watermarking system.

Since that time there have been no (to my knowledge) 'releases' of any Paizo products to the pirating community. The new system can't be cracked by the old methods, and it requires too many seperately purchased copies of a product to do a side-by-side comparison and ensure that all of the watermarks and identifying features have been removed.

To add to that, Paizo has been fairly quick about issuing Cease and Desist orders to the uploaders of .torrents of their products, keeping those .pdfs released before the watermarking change out of easy distribution.

Now, Pathfinder is a bit of a niche product, so it may be that the pirating community isn't devoting as much attention to cracking Paizo's protection. 

Accepting that caveat, though, Pathfinder has managed to be successful in preventing the piracy of their products, *without* stopping sales of their .pdf or filing any lawsuits.


----------



## caudor

Wow, I can't believe this is happening.  I'm taking a break from D&D (both playing & purchasing) until all this blows over.  

In the meantime, I can get my adventure fix by playing World of Warcraft or something.

Having gone the straight and narrow route myself, I kinda feel betrayed by this move.  When it comes to shooting themselves in the foot, WotC is proving to be quite a sharpshooter.


----------



## Fenes

jasonbostwick said:


> Accepting that caveat, though, Pathfinder has managed to be successful in preventing the piracy of their products, *without* stopping sales of their .pdf or filing any lawsuits.




Paizo also offers a very good deal on PDFs. As an example: If you subscribe to their adventure path then the PDFs are free with the book purchase.


----------



## avin

Trevor is talking:

Wizards Community - View Single Post - WotC halts sales/downloads from rpgnow.com

Steve Jackson Games is talking:

"BTW, to prevent people from sharing their books, SJG will no longer print books. All rules will be whispered to authorized customers."

Twitter / Steve Jackson Games: BTW, to prevent people fro ...

lol


----------



## coyote6

Harlekin said:


> I don't think that this  statement accurately represents what happened. To me it seems that Paizo correctly understood wizard's request, informed their customers and orderly removed all the files after a short grace period. And made a killing in the process.




I don't know the exact timing involved -- when WotC told the vendors whatever -- so I can't really say how correctly anyone understood anyone else. I was merely offering an alternative interpretation of the (few) facts that are known. 

I do know that the email I got from Paizo was timestamped 8:24pm Monday, which would have left 3.5 hours for me to buy new stuff, and left 15.5 hours to download old stuff. However, I had signed off the 'net by then, so I didn't see the email until I was at work the next day -- where I can't access Paizo's website. So, for me, there was no effective period of notice from either vendor. 

The quote from Wieck on the ENWorld news page says they were informed sometime Monday; it seems like the total time given was at best 24 hours, which isn't very long to send notices to people, people to get said notices, read them, and act on them.

Compare with the end of Pelgrane Press's the Dying Earth RPG -- first, notice was given six months ago, apparently; I got an email a week or two ago from a couple of PDF vendors, mentioning that the DERPG PDFs would be going away soon -- several days in advance of the date. And then the expiration date was extended an extra month. Plenty of time for fans or just the curious to pick stuff up. 

Granted, if WotC's purpose was anti-piracy, weeks of notice might not have suited that purpose; but 5 days or a week or so would have been better than <24 hours, and ought to have been less prone to "break the Interwebs in half".

(Well, probably not; I suspect anything mildly controversial that WotC does at this point will trigger loud paroxysms. But at least WotC wouldn't have seemed to me to have fumbled the PR ball. And it's really all about me, right? )


----------



## SteveC

Umbran said:


> Not really.
> 
> It would not have been appropriate for WotC to communicate with the general public before they discussed things with the vendors, and given the vendors time to get their ducks in a row for the inevitable questions.  A vendor reacted before WotC could then communicate with the public.  Even if WotC had planned this level of communication, they weren't allowed it.  WotC management probably heard about the action after we did - such is the nature of news on the internet.



This is true, but a huge part of how you communicate with your vendors is to plan how the information is going to be disseminated. Once the vendor decided to break the news early, you need to quickly get in touch with them and get things corrected, and then make a statement calming the situation down. None of that happened, which makes me think that the regular PR people haven't been allowed to do their jobs for some reason or another.

Perhaps the lawsuit is the reason for the silence. Okay, that's not a problem: I have a good friend who is an attorney, and has to craft basic statements about how company X can't say anything more because of pending legal action...the verbiage is boilerplate. We didn't even see something as basic as that.



> So, WotC has probably been playing catch-up.  And, it if wasn't WotC's action that caused the problem, it makes seven kinds of sense (and is far more professional) for them to not talk until the vendor spoke first.



Even so, I'm shocked that WotC wasn't aware of this possibility, and once it occurred, couldn't get something basic put together to react to it. Again, you don't have to give us the full story, but saying, well, anything is better than letting all the rumors fly like they did. Saying nothing made this situation 10x worse. I have seen posters who are usually the first people to defend WotC come out strongly against what's happened here. That's never a good thing.

And beyond that, this whole situation has put the Mod community here into a real bind, and made their (and your) life stressful over something that will likely prove to be a simple mistake in the long run. It's as if there's no one steering the ship away from the iceberg, or even worse: there's the thought that if they can just pick up enough speed, they'll punch right through it!

I don't envy your jobs at all at the moment...perhaps we should put together a "buy an ENWorld Mod a <beverage of their choice> campaign." I know I'd be in for that...

--Steve


----------



## Wayside

jasonbostwick said:


> Since that time there have been no (to my knowledge) 'releases' of any Paizo products to the pirating community. The new system can't be cracked by the old methods, and it requires too many seperately purchased copies of a product to do a side-by-side comparison and ensure that all of the watermarks and identifying features have been removed....Pathfinder has managed to be successful in preventing the piracy of their products, *without* stopping sales of their .pdf or filing any lawsuits.



This is completely untrue. PDFs of all Paizo and other 3PP products are widely available to anyone who knows where to look. Paizo has been no more successful in this regard than WotC.


----------



## aboyd

dmccoy1693 said:


> During this action, we are suspending sales of all PDF based books.  Wizards of the Coast understands that this action unfairly punishes legal customers.  For our customers, we are continuing legal downloading of previously purchased products until noon tomorrow (pacific time).  As soon as we are able to, we will be bringing back PDFs to sell and we will make every effort to make those previously purchased products available for download without any additional cost.  Until that time, we urge all our customers to only use legal products and not illegally produce or download copies.  "Piracy hurts the industry as a whole and we can no longer take a passive role in combatting it.  We are choosing to instead take bold action, even if that does require all of us to sacrifice together during this time." said president Greg Leeds.​Personally, I'd see Wizards as more of a hero than as the villian of this tale.



I'm going to agree with wedgeski on this one -- your proposed "better approach" would have resulted in the same outcry.  Specifically, your better way still includes a VERY limited window to download existing purchases.  That hits people in the pocketbook -- they thought they paid for a re-download service and they're not getting it.  All the people on vacations or offline due to sickness or family matters will simply miss the window and become irate.  *You can't mess with people's purchases without making them very angry.*

Having said that, I think your approach would work with modification.  For example if I read this from WotC:

"Due to rampant piracy, we are exiting the PDF market.  For our customers, we will allow dowloads of previously purchased products for the next 30 days.  Please work with vendors such as rpgnow.com to ensure that your purchases are secured and backed up offline before this deadline.  Thank you."

...I would take the time to download my backups, and I wouldn't feel ripped off at all.  So, no hard feelings.  I'd probably still laugh at WotC about trying to combat piracy by making piracy the only option (c'mon, you have to admit that's a hilariously inept solution), but there would be no anger or vitriol to it.  I'd just feel amusement, which would peter out quickly.  Everyone would probably wander off to other topics to keep doing what they're doing.


----------



## Scribble

Jeff Wilder said:


> It "may have something to do with" the conspiracy to deny Stephen Colbert his name's rightful place on a space-station urine-recycling node.  Given that nobody seems, so far, to be able to explain how pulling PDFs "may have something to do with the legal case," suggesting the urine-node conspiracy "explanation" is about as useful.  Probably more so, since it's funnier and more easily recognized as bogus.




Jeff, I'm not a lawyer but since you seem to be, maybe you can answer if this has any validity?

Could it be that in a case like this, (a corporation vrs a private individual) you need to show that the action was harmfull enough to cause damage, and therefore to do so you need to show that you've taken action to prevent it from happening in the future?

IE taking it down removes questions like: If it was that harmful to your company then why haven't you taken steps to fix the problem?

Again I'm not a lawyer, so I don't really know the answer.

I agree though with Charles that this issue isn't caused by WoTC suddenly becoming aware of piracy. I think like he says, the thing that changed is that WoTC started offering high quality PDFs on day one of release. 

A lot of the pirating I think in this case might simply be more of the "casual" pirate crowd. IE they want the new and shiney, and will buy it sure, but if it's the new and shiney and available for free immediatly? 

I doubt they have any intention of stopping piracy of their books. They just want to make sure they're not practically promoting it. (Kind of like leaving your car unlocked, and turned on in the ghetto.)


----------



## Harlekin

jasonbostwick said:


> The note about Pathfinder is of interest here.
> 
> The .pdfs of 4E D&D books (and DDI subscription content) have had their watermarks removed within an hour or so of the book releases on RPGNow and been up on torrents and rapidshare for distribution.
> 
> For the first year or so of Pathfinder (and for Dungeon/Dragon before that) this was pretty much the case with Paizo's .pdfs as well. About half a year ago (I think after the the release of Pathfinder beta, but I'm not really positive as this is second-hand information and I don't play Pathfinder) in one fell swoop, Paizo banned the accounts and credit cards of a number of users they had determined were pirating their material, *and* changed their watermarking system.
> 
> Since that time there have been no (to my knowledge) 'releases' of any Paizo products to the pirating community. The new system can't be cracked by the old methods, and it requires too many seperately purchased copies of a product to do a side-by-side comparison and ensure that all of the watermarks and identifying features have been removed.
> 
> To add to that, Paizo has been fairly quick about issuing Cease and Desist orders to the uploaders of .torrents of their products, keeping those .pdfs released before the watermarking change out of easy distribution.
> 
> Now, Pathfinder is a bit of a niche product, so it may be that the pirating community isn't devoting as much attention to cracking Paizo's protection.
> 
> Accepting that caveat, though, Pathfinder has managed to be successful in preventing the piracy of their products, *without* stopping sales of their .pdf or filing any lawsuits.




Doesn't this suggest that going after a few  miscreants can help? Together with beefing up security of course.


----------



## Nymrohd

It could be that pirated copies of the electronic forms, being of quite superior quality, have increased the traffic of those products. By making high quality pirated products inaccessible maybe that traffic will also subside? Just a theory.


----------



## jasonbostwick

Wayside said:


> This is completely untrue. PDFs of all Paizo and other 3PP products are widely available to anyone who knows where to look. Paizo has been no more successful in this regard than WotC.




Obviously this isn't the place for a challenge over who is better at finding illegally pirated material, and I can't give evidence for this, but I'll stand by what I said.
The protection used by Paizo is a significant hurdle for the most prolific pirating communities. 
I'd be very impressed if you could find pirated copies of the last two issues of Second Darkness, for example. You would have to delve very deep indeed to find them, and the files would likely still have identifiers of the purchaser attached.

I didn't mention anything about other 3PP - most of them use the RPGNow watermarking, and their products are just as available as 4E .pdfs are.


----------



## gribble

Obryn said:


> You keep saying this but haven't given any evidence - only speculation.



Actually, we have plenty of evidence:


			
				WotC Press Release about Lawsuit said:
			
		

> The lawsuits allege that the defendants illegally distributed the Player¹s Handbook 2 via free file-sharing websites and that these illicit uploads resulted in *a substantial number of lost sales and lost revenue* to Wizards of the Coast.



How can you prove lost sales/revenue? WotC certainly can't prove that people who downloaded the book from a filesharing site would have purchased either the PDF or print copy of the book (or at least, if that is their argument then I'd expect any half decent defence lawyer would rip them to shreds).
They must be basing this claim - at least in part - on revenue projections based on previous sales. So clearly the actual revenue earned from recent books is below those projections, or else they wouldn't be able to demonstrate that lost revenue.

At least that's my read of the situation. As a non-lawyer and all.


----------



## mach1.9pants

Here is the entire RPGnow post for those that can't won't go to the WotC boards 







			
				SWieck said:
			
		

> Steve Wieck with DriveThruRPG/RPGNow here.
> I thought I would respond to a couple items discussed on the thread.
> 
> First, there are no "contract negotiations" with Wizards that led to the current situation. We have been doing business with Wizards on downloads for over six years now and always enjoyed a positive and co-operative license relationship. The thread's hypothesis that the situation might be a result of a negotiation issue is a reasonable hypothesis but is incorrect.
> 
> On Monday I spoke with Wizards' legal department in a call that I thought would discuss the lawsuits Wizards has filed. We had been co-operating with Wizards to supply information on pirated files for those lawsuits (as allowed under our site privacy policy). Instead I was informed of Wizards' decision to cease all PDF sales at this time. It was a complete surprise to me.
> 
> Wizards gave us legal notice to remove their titles. Due to what I'll characterize as a miscommunication on intent, we complied immediately and removed all public access to Wizards' products from DriveThruRPG and RPGNow. In turns out this was not a situation that either we or Wizards desired. I am in discussions with Wizards legal and it looks highly probable that we will be able to offer customers time to come back and re-download prior purchases for their personal archives. We will email and post information on sites once we have final confirmation on this.
> 
> I regret that some customers have inferred that our download counts are any guarantee of availability to re-download titles. We really do not like iTunes' approach of "one download, you lose it, pay again" so we do our best to offer perpetual downloads of purchased titles. Our agreements with publishers though do not let us guarantee this - as this situation makes clear. We have learned a lesson here by reading that some customers inferred otherwise, and we will make some changes soon to clarify this on DriveThruRPG and RPGNow.
> 
> We are offering full refunds to anyone who purchased a Wizards title from us but never downloaded it. These are extremely rare cases, as most everyone downloaded the goodies as soon as they were originally purchased.
> 
> I am otherwise as confused as anyone else here on the rationale behind Wizards' decision. I know there are some smart people at Wizards like Scott who get it, so I can only speculate that there are others who are not as informed and who are making the call on this.
> 
> As many other folks on this forum have stated, I also believe that piracy for the foreseeable future is unavoidable for books. So long as printed copies and scanners and torrents exist, rpg books have been and will be pirated. It's sad and fatalistic, but it's true.
> 
> Given that rpg books will always be on file-sharing sites, it means that anyone who purchases a legal PDF is doing so because they prefer to make that choice over pirating the file. Thankfully, the number of rpg fans who make that decision are legion and it lets us send payments every month to hundreds of rpg publishers and creators. By making this choice to legally support thier hobby, fans are keeping rpgs alive. I say that without one bit of exaggeration or melodrama. Around seven new rpg titles go live every day at DriveThruRPG and RPGNow. The hobby could not be nearly that prolific if not due to fans choosing to support their hobby.
> 
> This makes DRM an extremely poor choice for any publisher. DRM inevitably restricts ease of purchase and ease of use, and anything that tips customer choice from legal purchase toward pirating is a bad business decision. DRM does nothing to prevent pirated files from being available, since the files will already be available anyway from scanned copy.
> 
> We already learned lessons on DRM the hard way in the past, so I know the issue intimately. For many years now, we have embraced watermarking as the preferable solution.
> 
> The posts by D&D fans across all gaming forums, while angry at times, are ultimately posted out of concern for Wizards and the desire to see Wizards make the best choices. Whether I ever do business with Wizards again or not, Wizards is a big part of the hobby that I love and for that reason alone, I hope that they reconsider. Especially given the ongoing fan feedback on this, I am optimistic that they will.
> 
> Steve
> www.DriveThruRPG.com
> RPGNow.com - The leading source for indie RPGs



Commonsense speaking there IMO!


----------



## aboyd

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> And if these 8 (or just some of them) are convicted, it becomes clearer to the pirates that there is a real threat of getting caught.



And this matters to pirates?  I mean, have we ever seen an illegal filesharing service diminish due to lawsuits?  Suing over MP3s, suing over ebooks & PDFs, suing over software, suing over movies & TV shows -- have _any_ of those illegal offerings disappeared or even just noticeably shrunk over the years?  Last time I checked, they're all flourishing.  And so, to connect the dots for anyone needing it, I'm flat-out stating that suing these 8 people will have _absolutely the same effect that lawsuits before have had._  That is to say, no effect at all.

The _only_ counteraction I've seen that has worked is for a place like hulu.com to pop up and make it easier for me to view shows legally.  I'm willing to endure a few commercials if it's legal and safe.  As for PDFs, my account with drivethrustuff.com shows I've made 39 orders over the years.  I'm willing to pay for something professionally done and fairly priced.  I'm trying to do the right thing.  But nobody can do the right thing if the right thing is removed as an option.


----------



## Scribble

jasonbostwick said:


> Obviously this isn't the place for a challenge over who is better at finding illegally pirated material, and I can't give evidence for this, but I'll stand by what I said.
> The protection used by Paizo is a significant hurdle for the most prolific pirating communities.
> I'd be very impressed if you could find pirated copies of the last two issues of Second Darkness, for example. You would have to delve very deep indeed to find them, and the files would likely still have identifiers of the purchaser attached.
> 
> I didn't mention anything about other 3PP - most of them use the RPGNow watermarking, and their products are just as available as 4E .pdfs are.




Then perhaps Wizards taking down the pdfs is simply what they had to do while they attempt to figure out how to upgrade their protection.

I doubt it's a "simple" thing to do to a catalog as big as they had. Especially for a corporation. (Corps can sometimes move realy slow when fixing problems.)


----------



## merelycompetent

Cool! EnWorld's been Slashdotted!
(Please note that I sincerely hope this does not create any headaches for the excellent Moderators at EnWorld. I just like to see my favorite hobby site get some nerd cred.)

Reasons for pulling the PDFs (please note that the following opinions are US-centric):
1. Stop the bleeding. Standard triage treatment for a business. Somehow, copies of their products are going out for free. The source apparently was tracked back to PDF purchases. Standard reaction: Halt the availability of all PDF purchases while they figure out what to do about it. Not necessarily the most skilled, experienced, or correct troublehsooting, but it is Troubleshooting 101.

2. (I Am Not A Lawyer) Legal requirement: Copyright holder must show that reasonable steps were taken to stop the violations. I expect that the argument could be made that failure to take reasonable steps to stop the violations, once the copyright holder was aware of them, equals complicit agreement with the violations.

3. (IANAL) Legal requirement: Seizure of evidence - all evidence concerning the violations, and distribution of infringing material, must be sealed, secured, and verified.

Court cases are, in my very limited experience (IMVLE), massive chess games, where fine shades of wording and meaning are shaved into fractions of carbon nanotubes. Smart parties hire experts (lawyers) to help them win the chess game. Courts (again, IMVLE) tend to proceed at speeds well below glacial, very conservatively, and in considerable fear of making an incorrect decision that will result in massive expense and/or disruption. The involved lawyers and clients will also proceed very slowly, carefully, and conservatively. That leads to...

4. (IANAL) Professional Legal Advice: If your expensive, bill-by-the-hour, expert who will determine whether or not your passive income stream (PDF sales) may again generate income in the future or turn into a huge, financially crushing, company-destroying screwup, advises you to do something, you do it 99% of the time - even if you think you shouldn't have to. Otherwise, you are wasting your hard-earned money paying for expert advice that you are now ignoring, and will likely lose BIG in court.

Legal issues are strange conflicts, combining elements of privacy, time, secrecy, strategy, tactics, resource management, evidence, discussion, referrals to previous cases, and history of archaic and mind-boggling precedents, that are conducted on a rarefied battlefield laden with pitfalls and traps for the ignorant. I hope no one on this forum ever has to enter that battlefield. Events on that battlefield will determine whether people go to prison, are financially ruined, continue to be employed, or retain ownership of property. Even the cost of merely defending oneself in this theatre of conflict (and yes, that is intended as a pun on multiple levels) can ruin one's bank account and/or reputation. In light of that, I don't think it is unreasonable to go a month, even two, without PDF purchases while WotC tries to straighten this frakked up mess out.

I applaud WotC taking the necessary steps to shut down copyright violators and bring them to the consequences outlined by law. If I had the ability to help them pursue these copyright violators, I would gladly donate my information, skills, and time to the effort. I also don't expect any significant information on the why's and wherefore's of their actions for several weeks, if not several months. Smart lawyers recommend things like that, so that their non-lawyer clients don't muck up the legal proceedings by shooting their mouths off.

Watching the court filings will likely provide more information than anything else.

Short of someone releasing additional verifiable, concrete information, all we have now are a few limited facts (already posted) and lots emotional speculation and guesses.


----------



## ProfessorCirno

I think what's bothering me the most right now is the group of posters going around saying "Well, *I* don't use any .pdfs, so clearly there's no problem at all here.  Furthermore, if you have a problem, you're obviously just a WotC hater and your opinion doesn't matter in the first place."

It's like people were waiting for something to wake up the edition wars, and seeing this, they're plowing straight ahead.


----------



## joethelawyer

*The more I think about this...*

The more I think about this, the more I am driven to a simple conclusion.  If you know that:

1.  It's a stupid business decision to pull the pdf's---which is something any 12 yr. old can tell you; and

2.  It's a PR debacle of legendary proportions; then

3.  It must be the fault of the lawyers.


I can imagine a situation where, for whatever reason, the illegal pdf's got onto the radar of some executive at WOTC or Hasbro.  Who knows, maybe he saw his kid downloaded a torrent of AD&D stuff onto the family computer.  He decided to make a big deal of it and calls a "Come to Jesus Meeting" of all involved.  

A directive is given to make a stand and sue to put the fear of the law into these pirates.

The lawyers get involved.  They start to consider the legal aspects of the case.  They see its a clear-cut win for them, assuming they can find the people that shared files.  However, they immediately see that the issue of damages is going to be a pain in the arse to prove.  In other words, how do you prove your losses?  How do you prove that every download was a lost sale?  Or was made by someone who didn't already have a copy of the book?

Also, since the plaintiff, WOTC, has the duty to all they can to mitigate damages, could it be an offset to the damages awardd to WOTC if it is proven that WOTC's actions in making downloads available for download actually added to the illegal downloading of the files?  

So if I'm the legal dept., the first thing I do is report up the chain of command that in order to mitigate damages, we need to stop selling the pdf's, so we can't be held to be at least partly at fault.  We need to make it look like we did all we could do to stop the illegal downloading of files.  That incudes not making high quality copies available for distribution. 

Otherwise, someone might be able to argue that prior to WOTC's making available high quality pdf's for download, the illegal pdf market was small.  Sure, you could find files out there, but the scan quality sucked. Only after WOTC started making these high quality scans available did the illegal pdf download market explode.  Therefore, a lot of the blame for the illegal downloads lies with WOTC themselves.

Makes sense, right?

The thing that is interesting is that the mitigation measures won't affect the pending lawsuit. They only affect suits going forward...which would mean there are more to come.

Just a theory.


----------



## Scribble

joethelawyer said:


> The more I think about this, the more I am driven to a simple conclusion.  If you know that:
> 
> 1.  It's a stupid business decision to pull the pdf's---which is something any 12 yr. old can tell you




It might not be. It might just appear to be to anyone without the numbers.

Would you still think the 12 year old was correct if you knew that:

The damage being caused by allowing the pdfs to continue being sold was greater then the damage caused by not having the income from pdfs + angry customers?


----------



## merelycompetent

joethelawyer said:


> Makes sense, right?
> 
> The thing that is interesting is that the mitigation measures won't affect the pending lawsuit. They only affect suits going forward...which would mean there are more to come.
> 
> Just a theory.




I apologize for adding to the pure speculation. But since I just failed the Will save...

Except for the degree of PR debacle and responsibility for it, this matches pretty close to one of my theories.

Add to it that it may not just be a matter of protecting copyrights, the trademarks involved (please, nobody confuse those two!!) for 4E, and their online business model; and I can well understand why WotC is taking this course of action.

I think, though, that there is significantly more to the story than the above speculative fiction.


----------



## xechnao

joethelawyer said:


> Makes sense, right?
> 
> The thing that is interesting is that the mitigation measures won't affect the pending lawsuit. They only affect suits going forward...which would mean there are more to come.
> 
> Just a theory.




How are they going to find the people they are going to sue regarding those "more to come" you are talking about? It has been said so far that it were the watermarks that lead them to the suits this time around. 

Also the fact that you sell pdfs yourself or not I think is irrelevant regarding damages or any lack of necessary security measures.


----------



## joethelawyer

Scribble said:


> It might not be. It might just appear to be to anyone without the numbers.
> 
> Would you still think the 12 year old was correct if you knew that:
> 
> The damage being caused by allowing the pdfs to continue being sold was greater then the damage caused by not having the income from pdfs + angry customers?




The thing is, I have no idea how they can prove that by the numbers at hand at the time they killed the pdf market. How can a person possibly calculate such a thing?  The only certainty at the time of the decision was that you would piss people off.  Since pissing your customers off usually leads to lower sales, I would have decided it wasn't worth the risk to find out if the calculation you outlined above was accurate.  Then again, who am I?


----------



## xechnao

Scribble said:


> Would you still think the 12 year old was correct if you knew that:
> 
> The damage being caused by allowing the pdfs to continue being sold was greater then the damage caused by not having the income from pdfs + angry customers?




I asked something like this before, I will ask again: how can you possibly know this? How can you quantify this damage? Especially since products are not equal (phbII is not equal in sales expectations with phbI since they are different products)


----------



## Wayside

jasonbostwick said:


> Obviously this isn't the place for a challenge over who is better at finding illegally pirated material, and I can't give evidence for this, but I'll stand by what I said.
> The protection used by Paizo is a significant hurdle for the most prolific pirating communities.



Are you knowledgeable about where most RPG pirating takes place? People with a passing familiarity tend to assume it's all torrents, but that's not the case. Torrents are mostly useful for large files or large groups of files (read: entire product lines), and they require more of a time investment to share. The "prolific" RPG pirating, however, takes place on networks that connect users directly and allow them to browse each others' collections in their entirety.

I'm sure that volume-wise most sharing is done via torrents, since torrents are an easy way for people to find, say, every 3.5 WotC book, or every Exalted 2e book; but those torrents themselves come from the people who populate the "prolific pirating communities," and if someone is interested in something, those communities have it. If I couldn't find Paizo's products there I'd be worried for them, because it would mean nobody cared about Paizo anymore.



jasonbostwick said:


> I'd be very impressed if you could find pirated copies of the last two issues of Second Darkness, for example. You would have to delve very deep indeed to find them, and the files would likely still have identifiers of the purchaser attached.



To test your theory I connected to the lowest volume hub I know of. I'm not a Paizo customer, but from wikipedia it looks like Second Darkness ends at issue 18? I found issues going up to 18, at any rate, and it took one whole search at the least hidden place I'm aware of to do so. This isn't surprising. If Paizo had succeeded where companies with far more resources have failed, on the other hand, _that _would be surpising.


----------



## Waylander the Slayer

joethelawyer said:


> The more I think about this, the more I am driven to a simple conclusion.  If you know that:
> 
> 13.  It must be the fault of the lawyers.




I have to disagree with this conjecture. I have worked intimately with lots of Corporate Counsel and have never, not once, seen Counsel make business decisions. In fact, many a time, good advice from the legal department is ignored in favor of making money. Legal departments are largely auxiliary and do not function in the way many people here seem to percieve. They do not make the business decisions. They might be consulted on the decisions to ascertain the legal implications, but they are not the final arbiter. The final arbiters are always the CEO/CFO or the subsidiary, or in instances, where needed, the CEO/CFO of the corporation. So one might want to look to whoever holds those positions within WOTC. 

 Maybe all this lawyer bashing has to do with popular culture where the big bad is the scheming lawyer.


----------



## joethelawyer

merelycompetent said:


> I apologize for adding to the pure speculation. But since I just failed the Will save...
> 
> Except for the degree of PR debacle and responsibility for it, this matches pretty close to one of my theories.
> 
> Add to it that it may not just be a matter of protecting copyrights, the trademarks involved (please, nobody confuse those two!!) for 4E, and their online business model; and I can well understand why WotC is taking this course of action.
> 
> I think, though, that there is significantly more to the story than the above speculative fiction.





And I agree its total speculation on my part.  I just figure something so screwed up must have lawyers and lawyer logic involved in some way.

The way I view lawyers is as a mercenary.  We don't get paid to deal with perception/PR issues.  We don't get paid to affect the bottom line in any way other than in the case we are hired for.  Therefore, if you hire a lawyer to go to war for you, expect some collateral damage, both on the PR and business fronts, unless you have someone in control of the overall situation who knows how to manage the lawyer within the scope of the business and public relations needs of the company.


----------



## joethelawyer

Waylander the Slayer said:


> I have to disagree with this conjecture. I have worked intimately with lots of Corporate Counsel and have never, not once, seen Counsel make business decisions. In fact, many a time, good advice from the legal department is ignored in favor of making money. Legal departments are largely auxiliary and do not function in the way many people here seem to percieve. They do not make the business decisions. They might be consulted on the decisions to ascertain the legal implications, but they are not the final arbiter. The final arbiters are always the CEO/CFO or the subsidiary, or in instances, where needed, the CEO/CFO of the corporation. So one might want to look to whoever holds those positions within WOTC.
> 
> Maybe all this lawyer bashing has to do with popular culture where the big bad is the scheming lawyer.




I think it all depends on the power relationship within the corporation between the legal department and the business/sales people.  That relationship varies from company to company, and even on a situational basis. 

For example, when I was in sales, the large company I worked for had the legal department involved in reviewing all non-standard sales contracts.   Most of the time we worked together just fine.  In one particular situation, however, their obstinacy blew a $1.3 million deal I set up.  It was such an irrational concern that we had to go to the CEO of the company to override the legal department.  By the time we had legal out of the picture, the deal was shot to hell. 

On the flip side, I have seen situations where legal advice was ignored to the business' detriment.  I've also seen good advice ignored to the detriment to a local political board.

Bottom line though, is that this is all speculation. Who knows what happened.  I, along with trillions of others it seems, are trying to figure out what's going on.  Since we'll never know the whole truth from WOTC, and it's a commercial for the show I'm watching I figure I may as well speculate.


----------



## Umbran

joethelawyer said:


> The thing is, I have no idea how they can prove that by the numbers at hand at the time they killed the pdf market.




Well, it is not as if any business decision, in the history of mankind, was made on the base of "knowing".  There is never certainty.  There are only estimates.


----------



## WotC_Trevor

Hey guys. I haven't been back to post here since things got started, but it looked like everyone was doing a good job of dragging the information into this conversation, and I really didn't want to come in here and spam you with the same information twice.

I did want to let you know that while I'm gathering all the feedback on the pdf conversation, I'm not just looking through Wizards' forums. I'm looking here, other D&D communities, blog and article sites, etc. 

I know this hasn't been a beautiful walk in the park, so thanks for taking the time to contribute to the conversation.


----------



## Nikosandros

coyote6 said:


> I'm not sure I agree with that reasoning -- Paizo and DTRPG/RPGNow both took down the WotC PDFs at about the same time, so they both must have misinterpreted WotC's request. Given that they are the only vendors around, IIRC, then it seems like 100% of whom WotC communicated with misunderstood their communication.
> 
> Personally, if I say something to people, and everybody misunderstands me, I tend to suspect that I didn't phrase it very well.




It is also possible that there wasn't any misunderstanding. WotC is slightly changing its course due to the negative reaction and they have asked Drivethru to cooperate.


----------



## JohnRTroy

ProfessorCirno said:


> I think what's bothering me the most right now is the group of posters going around saying "Well, *I* don't use any .pdfs, so clearly there's no problem at all here.  Furthermore, if you have a problem, you're obviously just a WotC hater and your opinion doesn't matter in the first place."




But in that thread about Lorraine Williams, you stated yourself that "gamers deserve to be dismissed sometimes".  It's a little ironic that you're getting upset now because somebody is dismissing your POV.  

I think the big thing in those threads are just people getting "meh" about WoTC decisions, since in the past few years they've been doing a lot to alienate people, from releasing 4e and losing some fans, to the GSL fiasco (I no problems with the GSL instead of the OGL, but they did really botch vendor/partner relations with that).  And maybe some people wondering how big the PDF market is compared to the print market.




> How can you prove lost sales/revenue? WotC certainly can't prove that people who downloaded the book from a filesharing site would have purchased either the PDF or print copy of the book (or at least, if that is their argument then I'd expect any half decent defence lawyer would rip them to shreds).




This comes up everytime piracy is discussed.  However, we have sales forecasting--algebra, calculus, logic, statistics, etc., that can help predict trends and can predict things with a high level of accuracy.  While we can't always predict the weather or financial markets with 100% accuracy, we can make good judgement calls.  If we couldn't, nobody with an education would be able to get anywhere in those professions.

In some cases, educated guesses are all that are needed.  Hell, Scientific theories can't always be proven 100%.  Believes in Intelligent Design like to say that Evolution is "just a theory", but scientific theories are more than a hypothesis and can usually be tested.

So, I think businesses predicting costs of piracy are not just pie in the sky figures or FUD.



> Maybe all this lawyer bashing has to do with popular culture where the big bad is the scheming lawyer.




Isn't "Joethelawyer" a Lawyer?  

Regarding the law, I tried to look up the cases on PACER and they aren't showing up.  I couldn't enter the numbers MerricB copied her from Wizards, as they weren't the exact format, but I don't see any cases in the Western Washington PACER system.  The only reason they should be omitted would I guess be if the court records were ordered sealed, but I'm not sure this case qualifies as one to be sealed.  Could a real lawyer explain why these records wouldn't show up in PACER?


----------



## Scribble

xechnao said:


> How are they going to find the people they are going to sue regarding those "more to come" you are talking about? It has been said so far that it were the watermarks that lead them to the suits this time around.
> 
> Also the fact that you sell pdfs yourself or not I think is irrelevant regarding damages or any lack of necessary security measures.






joethelawyer said:


> The thing is, I have no idea how they can prove that by the numbers at hand at the time they killed the pdf market. How can a person possibly calculate such a thing?  The only certainty at the time of the decision was that you would piss people off.  Since pissing your customers off usually leads to lower sales, I would have decided it wasn't worth the risk to find out if the calculation you outlined above was accurate.  Then again, who am I?




Well, obviously they can't know anything with 100% certainty, but I'm sure they're not inexperienced with their company.

With my company, though we don't know for certain how much our clients EE's will spend on medical bills in a certain quarter we can usually give a pretty darn good estimate. 

We look at things like, population size, income level of the population, what the job actually is, how educated the population is, age range, etc... Lots of things that someone experienced in the field can use to give a good estimate.

I don't know what a game company uses to evaluate its numbers, but one thing is certain- I'm sure Wizards knows a lot more about how their sales "should" be then the common person on the street. 

I'm also sure rather then just some random guy making a "gut reaction" to the piracy it was also looked at, and evaluated by people with that knowledge using lots of info we don't have.

Sometimes companies do stuff that's just plain dumb sure... But also sometimes companies do things that if you don't have all the numbers looks dumb, but in reality "we're going to look dumb" was one of the considerations made before the plan was enacted, but in the end the ends justified the means.

My company again... we switched around accounts from various people, a move which caused some people to be doing some aspects of the "new" accounts with no experience. To some parts of our clients this move looked really dumb... But to the people that matetred, the consultants, the HR people in charge of buying our services, the "integrated" model was the smart move despite how dumb some poeple thought it was.


----------



## joethelawyer

Umbran said:


> Well, it is not as if any business decision, in the history of mankind, was made on the base of "knowing".  There is never certainty.  There are only estimates.





I'd be curious how to even estimate that sort of thing.  Seriously. Not trying to be snarky.  Where does one even begin to start?  What base numbers do you use to figure out if someone who downloaded a pdf illegally would have bought it had it not been available illegally?


----------



## Scribble

joethelawyer said:


> I'd be curious how to even estimate that sort of thing.  Seriously. Not trying to be snarky.  Where does one even begin to start?  What base numbers do you use to figure out if someone who downloaded a pdf illegally would have bought it had it not been available illegally?




That's not what you're determining though.

You're determining if your sales are down from what they "should" be and then looking for causes.

If you determine:

Sales are not down due to lack of interest.
Pirating is UP (and the amount of increased pirating roughly coorelates to the loss of sales.)

I'd say that's a reasonable start to show that entering high quality easy to pirate PDFs into the market is a contributing factor to sales being down.


----------



## gribble

JohnRTroy said:


> So, I think businesses predicting costs of piracy are not just pie in the sky figures or FUD.



Sure - that wasn't my point. If you read the rest of my post, I say exactly what you've just said - that any lost sales/revenue will be based on forecasts/predictions based on previous sales/revenue data.

So I think we can safely say that 4e sales/revenue is less than expected, based on that press release. What we can't say for sure is whether this applies to PDF, print or both.


----------



## JohnRTroy

The Internet can detect traffic of specific pirated goods from torrents and from deep packet sniffing, or signature detection.  

You make estimates based on the following.

Incidents of specific products being pirated.

Compare those incidents to sales of products.

Use Algebra and perhaps some basic Calculus to come up with formulas, statistics to measure means, standard deviations, and predict patterns.  As you compare previous patterns to data, you get a better understanding.

You also take into account competing reasons for sales dips--price elastisity, feedback from customers and vendors, etc.


----------



## jasonbostwick

Wayside said:


> To test your theory I connected to the lowest volume hub I know of. I'm not a Paizo customer, but from wikipedia it looks like Second Darkness ends at issue 18? I found issues going up to 18, at any rate, and it took one whole search at the least hidden place I'm aware of to do so. This isn't surprising. If Paizo had succeeded where companies with far more resources have failed, on the other hand, _that _would be surpising.




I concede, certainly. My knowledge of RPG pirating was limited to torrents and forums sharing rapidshare links.
I'm aware of DC++ hubs in general, but didn't actually think they were very prominent in the RPG sharing community, and didn't think to look for any hubs.


----------



## joethelawyer

more commercials, more time for random thoughts...

I'd bet that WOTC wants this to settle out of court.  

First, I don't have any experience in Federal Courts, so take al this with a grain of salt.  In the state courts I have experience with in Connecticut, if you sue someone and they don't "appear", in other words they are properly served and notified of the lawsuit but they don't do anything about it, a default judgment can be entered against them.  A special hearing would then be held where the plaintiff would have to show how they've been hurt financially.  Usually these things are uncontested, and the court just accepts the plaintiff's word for the amount of damages, assuming there is some proof of them.

Here's where it gets interesting.  If the defendants try to fight it, or the Court demands something more than speculative proof of the damages in the hearing in damages, the official sales figures for WOTC's products will be out there in the public's eyes.  Also, the discovery process would also necessarily have to expose this information to opposing counsel.

The only way to prevent this from hapening would be for WOTC to somehow get the court case sealed, and ask for a sealed court for the trial/hearing in damages.  They can cite business secrets, etc.  I don't know if it will work.  Courts are reluctant to do that these days, at least in the CT state court I am experienced with.  

Even if they win, at least for the out of state people, it's going to be a pain in the arse to collect on the judgment.  They would have to enter the judgment in foreign jurisdictions, and then find some asset to seize or wages to garnish.  Is it worth it?

So, more speculation here, WOTC will try to settle this for some small amount of money and withdraw the case before this info is out there.  
They don't want it going that far.  Even the RIAA cases almost always settled out of court for some small amount of money.  If I remember right, he RIAA cases even had high statutory damages predetermined, so that if they won they would automatically get a lrge amount of money. I don't think its the same thing with pdf files, thougb I could be wrong since I have no experience with copyright law.

Anyhow, more food for thought.   Commercial's over, be back next one.


----------



## resistor

JohnRTroy said:


> The Internet can detect traffic of specific pirated goods from torrents and from deep packet sniffing, or signature detection.




This is not true.

Deep packet inspection can only detect stuff flowing through a particular router.  It can't be done at the endpoints, but rather "in the middle" of the network.

Unless WotC suddenly owns a large percentage of the internet infrastructure, they have no way of doing DPI on it.


----------



## jdrakeh

Hussar said:


> That means, err, *shudder* someone made a mistake and WOTC had nothing to with it.




If you're going to quote things, you need to quote them in context. 

According to the _whole_ post by Mister Wieck, WotC _still_ didn't give distributors any more than a few hours _notice_ that they were pulling their products. They apparently _did_ give distributors a short grace period to offer access to already purchased products, but that's not the same thing. 

Also, FWIW, I do think that RPGNow dropped the ball there. But what if we move past the strawman argument that not making additional copies of already purchased PDFs available is the _only_ issue on the table? Where does the liability land then, eh? From where I sit, there's no possible way it could sit with the vendors.

As I mention elsewhere in this thread, 9 to 5 jobs expect you to give two weeks notice as a common courtesy. WotC apparently told distributors sometime Monday afternoon or evening that they had to cease the sale of WotC titles by midnight and end distribution the following day. That's not professional or considerate in any way. 

_This_ clearly _is_ the fault of WotC. _This_ decision (to pull content from circulation) _made by nobody other than WotC_ left consumers and vendors out in the cold _without any meaningful notice_.


----------



## resistor

jasonbostwick said:


> I concede, certainly. My knowledge of RPG pirating was limited to torrents and forums sharing rapidshare links.
> I'm aware of DC++ hubs in general, but didn't actually think they were very prominent in the RPG sharing community, and didn't think to look for any hubs.




I think Paizo's _relative_ success (i.e. lack of high-volume torrents) has a lot to do with how well they instill a sense of customer loyalty.  Their subscription plans give people a feeling of getting an awesome deal, what with the free PDF and across-the-board discount.

Overall, I think they're a very good example of how to make money _in the face of_ piracy.


----------



## JohnRTroy

joethelawyer said:


> Here's where it gets interesting.  If the defendants try to fight it, or the Court demands something more than speculative proof of the damages in the hearing in damages, the official sales figures for WOTC's products will be out there in the public's eyes.  Also, the discovery process would also necessarily have to expose this information to opposing counsel.




Actually, Courts can seal parts of the cases from the official record.  You can keep specific business affairs out from the public eye.  The defendants and their lawyers can see them, but in many cases courts will respect a companies right to privacy, and specific documents can either carry a seal and/or be destroyed after the trial so they never enter public record.

I think what WoTC makes as a private company might count as that.  If it was a case for public interest, they could be a fight to keep those unsealed, but I doubt in this particular case it would be unsealed.

Of course, IANAL...


----------



## mach1.9pants

WotC_Trevor said:


> I know this hasn't been a beautiful walk in the park, so thanks for taking the time to contribute to the conversation.



Especially not for you and the guys'n'gals at CustServ I guess, chin up


----------



## joethelawyer

JohnRTroy said:


> Isn't "Joethelawyer" a Lawyer?
> 
> Regarding the law, I tried to look up the cases on PACER and they aren't showing up.  I couldn't enter the numbers MerricB copied her from Wizards, as they weren't the exact format, but I don't see any cases in the Western Washington PACER system.  The only reason they should be omitted would I guess be if the court records were ordered sealed, but I'm not sure this case qualifies as one to be sealed.  Could a real lawyer explain why these records wouldn't show up in PACER?




Actually, I called up WOTC's legal separtment today and asked them if they could email me the pdf's (hehe) of the 3 court filings.  They are looking into it in order to see if they can do such a thing.

I also called the Federal Court out there today and asked if they could send me the pleadings in pdf.  They would only send it in paper format.  It's not worth the 5 or 6 bucks and probable few day wait to get them.  I'm not that interested.  If anyone else here wants to do it and scan them in, I'd be interested to read them though.   The clerk didn't say anything about them being sealed.

I've never used the PACER system, so I am not sure why they wouldn't show up yet, unless its too early.  There might be a delay.  I did ask the clerk why two of the files have a 3 letter suffix different than the other one.  She said it was because 2 files were assigned to one judge, and one went to another judge.  Who knows why.  I assume its standard operating procedure.


----------



## avin

WotC_Trevor said:


> I know this hasn't been a beautiful walk in the park, so thanks for taking the time to contribute to the conversation.




We have another topic here, about Scott Rouse, just let me know if my "scotch" theory wins... 

By the way: checked repercussion on Slashdot?


----------



## Brown Jenkin

A little more info for us to digest from ars technica's article with quotes from Wizards of the Coast PR Manager Tolena Thorburn.

Wizards of the Coast fails saving throw against pirates - Ars Technica

Her quotes are as follows

On the removal of the files


			
				Tolena Thorburn said:
			
		

> We have relationships, contracts with those companies [that provided the downloads] What we did is we terminated our contracts. When we terminated the contracts, the files come down. The reason? The severe increase of piracy of the products.




At what point was the action neccesary


			
				Tolena Thorburn said:
			
		

> There wasn't a specific number for us, these lawsuits, which are public information, you would see that this specifically revolves around the players handbooks. They were released and, the same day, there were thousands of copies being downloaded illegally. It's very frustrating for us.




Is there a way to download legally


			
				Tolena Thorburn said:
			
		

> There should not be. You can buy the books online, but not the pdfs. [Wizards is] actively exploring other avenues for digital distribution.







			
				Tolena Thorburn said:
			
		

> It's a difficult problem to have, and it's one that plagues our industry. We didn't do this lightly, and we understand our fans enjoy that format. Most of the fans who have legally purchased PDFs are also customers who have the physical product. Until we have another digital solution, I think our fans at least are not being deprived of the product, and I think that's really important, that they have the product that they know and love.


----------



## JohnRTroy

joethelawyer said:


> I've never used the PACER system, so I am not sure why they wouldn't show up yet, unless its too early.  There might be a delay.  I did ask the clerk why two of the files have a 3 letter suffix different than the other one.  She said it was because 2 files were assigned to one judge, and one went to another judge.  Who knows why.  I assume its standard operating procedure.




Actually, I see them NOW!!

I'll have them in a few minutes.  It's cheaper to get them from PACER.  

I don't feel like Transcribing the PDFs, though.  Would there be a place to attach PDF files here?


----------



## mach1.9pants

Tolena Thorburn said:
			
		

> It's a difficult problem to have, and it's one that plagues our industry. We didn't do this lightly, and we understand our fans enjoy that format. Most of the fans who have legally purchased PDFs are also customers who have the physical product. Until we have another digital solution,* I think our fans at least are not being deprived of the product,* and I think that's really important, that they have the product that they know and love.



*My bold* Yes they are being deprived of a product! Just bizarre corporate speak, what if you know and love PDFs?
This sort of _we _know what the fans want type statement  makes my blood boil!


----------



## CleverNickName

resistor said:


> I think Paizo's _relative_ success (i.e. lack of high-volume torrents) has a lot to do with how well they instill a sense of customer loyalty.  Their subscription plans give people a feeling of getting an awesome deal, what with the free PDF and across-the-board discount.
> 
> Overall, I think they're a very good example of how to make money _in the face of_ piracy.



Absolutely.  I think that Hasbro could learn a thing or two from Paizo in this department.


----------



## joethelawyer

JohnRTroy said:


> Actually, I see them NOW!!
> 
> I'll have them in a few minutes.  It's cheaper to get them from PACER.
> 
> I don't feel like Transcribing the PDFs, though.  Would there be a place to attach PDF files here?






there is an attachment mechanism with the posts here.


----------



## xechnao

Scribble said:


> That's not what you're determining though.
> 
> You're determining if your sales are down from what they "should" be and then looking for causes.
> 
> If you determine:
> 
> Sales are not down due to lack of interest.
> Pirating is UP (and the amount of increased pirating roughly coorelates to the loss of sales.)
> 
> I'd say that's a reasonable start to show that entering high quality easy to pirate PDFs into the market is a contributing factor to sales being down.




I doubt that the demographics of d&d products' market are that easy to do even for them. You do understand that on scale a 10% differentiation is pretty major regarding your sales -business wise. And that is a 10% differentiation of things you can measure. And higher differentiations from your estimates are not uncommon I guess.

Now imagine trying to estimate things you cant measure such as damage from piracy or level of interest as you say. You cant even figure out the result of your estimation. 

Charles Ryan speculated about "trends" (even if he was only talking about piracy). I would say that one should rather more generally try to think about trends if he wanted to be more correct about perception possibilities on our demographic ground: trying to spot trends and make policies than trying to figure out numbers. It is mostly an empiric thing. And the target market wants to and gets to know its trends too. Eventually, policy and trend should be connected with a kind of feedback mechanism -if the business marketing department is successful that is.

The question now is what their true policy seems to be behind this current event (if there will be change or if it will remain like this) and this is fairly important to the members of this(our) demographic -at least on the net (as it seems so far) because it may influence our trends and we want to know that. So was it really about a new trend in piracy (contrary to the good sale numbers we have been advertised with by various magazines) or is it really something else? Perhaps some other kind of policy regarding pdfs and/or retailers? And since fans seem to trust the marketing department of Wotc they consider it important to figure out what policies the marketing does carry on.


----------



## jdrakeh

Tolena Thorburn said:
			
		

> Until we have another digital solution, I think our fans at least are not being deprived of the product, and I think that's really important, that they have the product that they know and love.




This was part of the article that I commented on at Ars Technica. I have to wonder what was going through her mind when she made this comment. I mean, she is aware that they pulled the _entire_ back catalog of OOP products from commercial circulation, right? 

Unless she knows something that I don't, fans absolutely _are_ being deprived of access to these products. 

Maybe Ms. Thorburn can prove me wrong, though. Maybe Ms. Thorburn can tell us all where to easily, legally, and affordably obtain copies of _Supplement 1: Greyhawk_ with Gary's notes hand stenciled in the margins now that WotC's official PDFs are off the table.


----------



## joethelawyer

JohnRTroy said:


> Actually, Courts can seal parts of the cases from the official record.  You can keep specific business affairs out from the public eye.  The defendants and their lawyers can see them, but in many cases courts will respect a companies right to privacy, and specific documents can either carry a seal and/or be destroyed after the trial so they never enter public record.
> 
> I think what WoTC makes as a private company might count as that.  If it was a case for public interest, they could be a fight to keep those unsealed, but I doubt in this particular case it would be unsealed.
> 
> Of course, IANAL...





Who knows.  I do know it is very hard to do that in CT state courts. But as I said, I have no idea how the federal system is with sealing. It might be a lot easier.  Out here, there was a judge who had his divorce case sealed and he got in a lot of trouble because of it.  There is a big "courts and court records should always be open to the public unless in extreme circumstances" thing going on in CT.


----------



## merelycompetent

JohnRTroy said:


> Actually, I see them NOW!!
> 
> I'll have them in a few minutes.  It's cheaper to get them from PACER.
> 
> I don't feel like Transcribing the PDFs, though.  Would there be a place to attach PDF files here?




Ah, PACER. Enworld, meet groklaw.net. Groklaw, meet Enworld.org. 

I'm exhausted due to RL matters, and my own bottle of Rouse is calling very loudly.

I sincerely hope that all of you WotC (current & former) employees following this thread have a peaceful and boring time of it. No one needs this kind of excitement in their day job or hobby.

G'night.


----------



## JohnRTroy

I placed the documents in the official docket here:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/254013-pdfs-court-cast.html

Feel free to move it there.  I figured it's better to fork the thread (and maybe avoid a slashdot effect).


----------



## joethelawyer

JohnRTroy said:


> I placed the documents in the official docket here:
> 
> http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/254013-pdfs-court-cast.html
> 
> Feel free to move it there.  I figured it's better to fork the thread (and maybe avoid a slashdot effect).





Thanks!   reading now...


----------



## Alzrius

Interesting read of the court documents. I had no idea that OBS also placed a micro-watermark in their PDFs that embedded the purchaser's name and account number in a single pixel.


----------



## Mephistopheles

resistor said:


> I think Paizo's _relative_ success (i.e. lack of high-volume torrents) has a lot to do with how well they instill a sense of customer loyalty.  Their subscription plans give people a feeling of getting an awesome deal, what with the free PDF and across-the-board discount.
> 
> Overall, I think they're a very good example of how to make money _in the face of_ piracy.




This reminds me of Stardock. Brad Wardell has often discussed the topic of responding to piracy in a manner that he deems the most productive for his business and I think he has a very realistic approach to it. That approach, in essence, is to spend money on adding value to a product rather than spending that money on adding inconvenient copy protection that will almost certainly be overcome by pirates anyway.


----------



## Jason Anderson

Alzrius said:


> Interesting read of the court documents. I had no idea that OBS also placed a micro-watermark in their PDFs that embedded the purchaser's name and account number in a single pixel.



Neither did I (or, I'd bet, most people). And I'm sure OBS would have preferred ensuring that people didn't know about that fact!


----------



## Odhanan

Interesting comments from Ryan Dancey:



> This is a classic example of Death Spiral.  As things go bad, the regressive forces inside the organization (lawyers, commissioned sales people, creative folk who feel stifled by history, precariously tenured executives) are increasingly able to exert their agenda.  It always makes a bad situation worse, but there's no magic bullet that would likely make the bad situation better so you get a rapid unbalance in the Corporate Force towards the Dark Side.
> 
> > OGL?  Risky (someone might make us look bad, steal our ideas before we print them, or create a competitive brand that siphons off sales), and lack of faith in network marketing devalues ROI assumptions.  Kill it.
> 
> > PDF?  Causes endless problems with hardcopy partners creating pressure on sales team they could really do without, and revenues are so small as to be non-strategic.  Cut it.
> 
> > Online?  Every time you talk about it someone produces a $10 million minimum cost estimate to "do it right".  After spending 3-5x this amount in a series of failed initiatives (lead by utterly unqualified people), executives assume Online is plutonium.  No qualified lead or team will touch it.
> 
> > Evergreen?  Sales of each unit are going down and few products have any staying power.  The only (seemingly viable) solution is to put more books in production - make up for the revenue hole caused by lack of evergreen sales by getting more money out of each customer.  The Treadmill.
> 
> The next things that will take hits are the RPGA (costs a lot to operate - slash it's budget), then quality (put fewer words and less art on fewer pages and raise the price), then consistency (rules varients generated by inexperienced designers and/or overworked developers start to spawn and cohesion in rulings breaks down leading to ad hoc interpretations as the de facto way to play).
> 
> Meanwhile sales just keep going down, the gap in the budget keeps getting bigger, and no matter how many heads roll, there isn't any light at the end of the tunnel.
> 
> Wizards is about to be forced into the D&D end-game which is something that many publishers have gone through but none ever with a game the scale and impact of D&D (TSR walked right up to this cliff but WotC saved them from going over the edge).  There are 3 outcomes:
> 
> 1:  A total collapse, and the game ceases meaningful publication and distribution at least for one gamer generation and maybe forever.
> 
> 2:  Downsizing until overhead matches income; could involve some kind of out-license or spin off of the business - think BattleTech in its current incarnation.
> 
> 3:  Traumatic rebirth, meaning that someone, somewhere finds some way to cut out the cancers that are eating the tabletop game and restarts the mass market business for D&D.
> 
> Note that 2 and 3 can be mileposts on the road to 1.
> 
> RyanD




From RPGPundit's blog.


----------



## joethelawyer

Seems its all about Scribd and hidden watermarks huh?


----------



## JohnRTroy

I fully suspected watermarked PDFs weren't just visible ones but invisible ones as well.

Perhaps that's why Wizards might be pulling the PDFs.  They probably know once this gets out a lot of pirates might be aware of the watermark and work on expunging it.  So they might want to now move to a new system of protection.  

Just a thought.


----------



## MerricB

Odhanan said:


> Interesting comments from Ryan Dancey:




See his later comment:



			
				RyanD said:
			
		

> I think the root cause is the end of classic D&D style tabletop roleplaying as a viable business in its current format.  There are two paths forward - abandon it and leave RPG play to the internet and non-commercial interests, or hybridize it and find a way to bring technology to the tabletop and make it new for the future.  The longer WotC trys to stay with a dead format the more stress they will put the business through.  I don't think 4E, per se, had any effect on this at all, positive or negative.




Obviously, this applies to the entire RPG industry whether you're White Wolf, Paizo or Mongoose: by Ryan's reading, it's a dead format unless you go to a computer-enabled model.

Cheers!


----------



## xechnao

JohnRTroy said:


> I fully suspected watermarked PDFs weren't just visible ones but invisible ones as well.
> 
> Perhaps that's why Wizards might be pulling the PDFs.  They probably know once this gets out a lot of pirates might be aware of the watermark and work on expunging it.  So they might want to now move to a new system of protection.
> 
> Just a thought.




Well that would be rude to the rest of the industry. But I would find more probable they would be thinking on cutting on retailer costs or eliminating pdf distribution at this point for different reasons (mentioned earlier).


----------



## xechnao

MerricB said:


> See his later comment:
> 
> 
> 
> Obviously, this applies to the entire RPG industry whether you're White Wolf, Paizo or Mongoose: by Ryan's reading, it's a dead format unless you go to a computer-enabled model.
> 
> Cheers!




Nah, I would not take it this way. What he says it applies to the mediums or highs of D&D scale as we know from its history. Or anything Hasbro could be bothered with regarding also the value of the tabletop D&D brand name.


----------



## Lanfranc

MerricB said:


> Obviously, this applies to the entire RPG industry whether you're White Wolf, Paizo or Mongoose: by Ryan's reading, it's a dead format unless you go to a computer-enabled model.



I think he's right about that. When I look at the gaming table of one of my game group, we all use things like virtual tabletops, electronic character sheets, PDF files, and so on. As GM, all my notes and such are in Excel files and databases. Sometimes we play by VoIP if we can't meet up in RL. My other group is a bit more old-school, but moving in the same direction. I'm sure that RPGs will be increasingly computerized, and Wizard's move here is a step in the completely wrong direction - not least because it suggests that they might not be entirely in touch with what's happening out here in the gaming groups.


----------



## Odhanan

MerricB said:


> Obviously, this applies to the entire RPG industry whether you're White Wolf, Paizo or Mongoose: by Ryan's reading, it's a dead format unless you go to a computer-enabled model.
> 
> Cheers!




I see how you can get to that conclusion Merric.

I don't think it's the case, however.


----------



## El Mahdi

For those who don't believe people will follow through with the whole _"Last Straw"_ thing ... even though there have been posts from a few others that have also said they cancelled their DDI accounts ...  (I'm looking at you -O) ...



This email is a communication with Wizards of the Coast support. You may reply to this message, or follow the link below and provide your Wizards account login credentials. 

The support incident that has been created will remain open in our system for the next 14 days.

Thank you for allowing us to be of service to you.

To access your question from our support site, Click here.

* Subject*Request to cancel Auto-Renew * Discussion Thread** Response (Support Agent)*04/08/2009 10:45 AMMark,

The auto-renew feature for your Dungeons and Dragons Insider subscription has been turned off as requested. Your current membership will remain active and you will be able to access the online content until your expiration date on Apr 16, 2009.

If you wish to renew, you must wait until after the date listed above. At that time you can renew your membership by purchasing another subscription at http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/insider/subscription . If you purchase a new subscription prior to the expiration of your existing one, your subscription period will begin immediately, and all time remaining on your prior membership will be lost.

We would appreciate your feedback on the service we are providing you. Please click here to fill out a short questionaire._ editWhich you all can be assured I certainly did!)_

To login to your account, or update your question please Click here.

_Xxxxxxx_
Online Response Crew
Wizards of the Coast
1-800-324-6496 (US and Canada)
425-204-8069 (From all other countries)
Monday-Friday 9am-6pm PST / 12pm-9pm EST
Saturday-Sunday 10am-4pm PST / 1pm-7pm EST
* Customer (Mark Armstrong)*04/07/2009 07:12 PMRequest to cancel Auto-Renew of the D&D Insider subscription for ID: _ME_




Besides the cancellation of my DDI account, I will also no longer visit the WotC site, period.  I will patiently await the day when the D&D brand no longer belongs to WotC, though I do realize it may never happen.  But, until then, or possibly forever, I will continue to play and enjoy *MY* D&D.


*OGL FOREVER!*


signed, former WotC customer - Mark _"El Mahdi"_ Armstrong




P.S.:  I wonder if an OGL adaptation or version of 4E would be possible?


----------



## Wulf Ratbane

MerricB said:


> Obviously, this applies to the entire RPG industry whether you're White Wolf, Paizo or Mongoose: by Ryan's reading, it's a dead format unless you go to a computer-enabled model.




"Dead format" doesn't necessarily mean the product. You can also change the format of your business model.

Monte Cook, for example, will be able to publish tabletop RPGs for as long as he wants, collaborating with like-minded creatives, and they'll all do just fine. 

"Dead format" seems to assume that table-top RPGs are a failure unless you can justify forming a corporation, renting out offices, hiring administrators, staffing up a Human Resources department, etc.

I think the days of looking at table-top RPGs as a _commodity _as opposed to an _art form_ are probably over, yes.


----------



## Brown Jenkin

Odhanan said:


> Interesting comments from Ryan Dancey:
> 
> 
> 
> From RPGPundit's blog.




Well that certainly wasn't a reaction WotC probably thought was coming. That kind of analysys by someone as big name as Ryan Dancey can't be good PR.


----------



## MerricB

Brown Jenkin said:


> Well that certainly wasn't a reaction WotC probably thought was coming. That kind of analysys by someone as big name as Ryan Dancey can't be good PR.




Gary Gygax hated the OGL and didn't think much of 3e either. Didn't stop it being really successful.

Cheers!


----------



## NMcCoy

JohnRTroy said:


> Perhaps that's why Wizards might be pulling the PDFs.  They probably know once this gets out a lot of pirates might be aware of the watermark and work on expunging it.




Now that's the most logical interpretation of this I've seen yet. (Which is not to say it was a good move, but it's a clear potential motive.) This court case will potentially involve revealing details of the watermarking system, and thus quite possibly make them easier to circumvent. WotC hypothetically views this as "our PDFs will no longer be safe now that this case has been filed, so we shouldn't leave them out there". Definitely food for thought.


----------



## Brown Jenkin

NMcCoy said:


> Now that's the most logical interpretation of this I've seen yet. (Which is not to say it was a good move, but it's a clear potential motive.) This court case will potentially involve revealing details of the watermarking system, and thus quite possibly make them easier to circumvent. WotC hypothetically views this as "our PDFs will no longer be safe now that this case has been filed, so we shouldn't leave them out there". Definitely food for thought.




Except that John Does #4-infinity will just use the existing PDFs to distribute the existing stuff. This only works for new stuff that hasn't been released yet.


----------



## gribble

MerricB said:


> Gary Gygax hated the OGL and didn't think much of 3e either. Didn't stop it being really successful.



While I think Brown Jenkin is dead wrong that WotC cares anything about what Ryan Dancey has to say, from *my* perspective there is a big difference between the opinionated dislike of a gamer* towards a system and the reasoned analysis of someone like Ryan about the RPG business. Ryan has a track record of being dead right in most of his analysis - I don't think there are many individuals with as good a grasp on the RPG business as him.

* _before the flames start, Gary may have been a god among gamers, but ultimately he was just a gamer like the rest of us with different views on different systems._


----------



## Gallo22

I kept reading here and there that some believe that Paizo (and other pdf sellers) may have known for awhile about WotC's decision to pull the pdfs and that it's Paizo's (and others) fault for not letting their customers know sooner than one day notice.  Well..., I did not believe this for an instant, so I emailed Lisa Steven, CEO of Paizo and she graciously responded.  Here is what she said:



			
				Lisa Stevens said:
			
		

> Hi there
> 
> We received word with less than a days notice. I've posted this on
> paizo.com so feel free to disseminate the information. We tried to do
> what we could in the timeframe that we were given to make the
> transition as painless as possible for everyone.
> 
> -Lisa Stevens
> CEO
> Paizo Publishing


----------



## MerricB

gribble said:


> While I think Brown Jenkin is dead wrong that WotC cares anything about what Ryan Dancey has to say, from *my* perspective there is a big difference between the opinionated dislike of a gamer* towards a system and the reasoned analysis of someone like Ryan about the RPG business. Ryan has a track record of being dead right in most of his analysis - I don't think there are many individuals with as good a grasp on the RPG business as him.
> 
> * _before the flames start, Gary may have been a god among gamers, but ultimately he was just a gamer like the rest of us with different views on different systems._




To some extent, I agree. 

I always think Ryan's posts are worth reading and considering, and I do in this case as well. However, as this is the person who failed to get MasterTools up and running, any discussion of the lack of hybridization of D&D and computer gaming must keep that in mind. Wizards, with their Character Builder and D&D Compendium are already in front of where Wizards were under Ryan Dancey's watch.

The failure of Wizards to provide the Character Visualiser and Game Table _at this point_ should be counted against them. However, have they stopped trying to bring that technology to us? And is it the hybridization that Dancey is interested in?

I have a feeling that the World of Warcraft gorilla is so important in his thinking that other approaches _despite being able to maintain a solid player base_ are dismissed as "dead" because the new format is just so big!

Cheers!


----------



## mmurphy1968

I understand and agree with most of the anger people here are feeling but I wonder how much of WotC's decision is because of Hasbro. Maybe I am alone here but I always felt like much changed about WotC's products and policies after being bought by Hasbro.


----------



## Alzrius

El Mahdi said:


> Besides the cancellation of my DDI account, I will also no longer visit the WotC site, period.




Don't forget to go download all the existing 3.X material (and the bit of 2E material) still available on the WotC website while it's still there!



> _*OGL FOREVER!*_




Indeed.



> _P.S.:  I wonder if an OGL adaptation or version of 4E would be possible?_




Goodman Games's 4E _Dungeon Crawl Classics_ line uses 4E mechanics and is published under the OGL (I'm not sure if the newest adventures still do this, but the first few certainly did), so the groundwork for something like that is already laid.


----------



## Scribble

xechnao said:


> I doubt that the demographics of d&d products' market are that easy to do even for them. You do understand that on scale a 10% differentiation is pretty major regarding your sales -business wise. And that is a 10% differentiation of things you can measure. And higher differentiations from your estimates are not uncommon I guess.
> 
> Now imagine trying to estimate things you cant measure such as damage from piracy or level of interest as you say. You cant even figure out the result of your estimation.




I have absolutely no idea what metrics they use to do their analyzing, I'm just saying I'm absolutely positive they have people that can and DO do it.

We have a whole team of people that do that, and only that type of stuff, all day every day.

Now I don't know if Wizards has it to that level, but they're a darn successful corporate entity, so I'm pretty sure they know what they're doing.


----------



## Piratecat

mmurphy1968 said:


> I understand and agree with most of the anger people here are feeling but I wonder how much of WotC's decision is because of Hasbro. Maybe I am alone here but I always felt like much changed about WotC's products and policies after being bought by Hasbro.



Agreed. Previously, WotC was very much a personality-driven company that had strong leadership between Peter Adkison (who has always been wise enough to hire smart, competent people) and Ryan Dancy, an opinionated guy whose vision drove the OGL. Once they departed, I strongly suspect the company culture and the decision-making process changed.


----------



## gribble

MerricB said:


> To some extent, I agree.



Yeah, and I hear what you're saying too. Lets just say that I think he has a great understanding of the RPG business, but that I also think he still has much to learn about the computer software business (and how it relates to RPGs)...


----------



## MerricB

Piratecat said:


> Agreed. Previously, WotC was very much a personality-driven company that had strong leadership between Peter Adkison (who has always been wise enough to hire smart, competent people) and Ryan Dancy, an opinionated guy whose vision drove the OGL. Once they departed, I strongly suspect the company culture and the decision-making process changed.




Definitely. After they departed, I'm sure Wizards got a lot more cautious.

Unfortunately, one of the key reasons for Wizards getting more cautious was because of their big hit on Pokemon. As I remember it, Wizards management were warned by Hasbro that they were over-committing*, and after the bottom fell out of the Pokemon TCG market, they were left with a lot of product unsold. There were layoffs all over the company because of that (including Ryan Dancey). (* I really wish I could remember where I read that).

We like to think of the Adkinson/Dancey era as the golden age, but there were quite a few massive blunders in it. (Fallen Empires, anyone?)

Cheers!


----------



## jdrakeh

Gallo22 said:


> I kept reading here and there that some believe that Paizo (and other pdf sellers) may have known for awhile about WotC's decision to pull the pdfs and that it's Paizo's (and others) fault for not letting their customers know sooner than one day notice.  Well..., I did not believe this for an instant, so I emailed Lisa Steven, CEO of Paizo and she graciously responded.  Here is what she said:




Thanks for confirming that with somebody. I personally caught some serious flak elsewhere for suggesting that vendors received less than 24 hours notice.


----------



## El Mahdi

Alzrius said:


> Don't forget to go download all the existing 3.X material (and the bit of 2E material) still available on the WotC website while it's still there!




 I've stayed pretty much up to date on that front.  I really don't think there's anything other than items I don't want anyways, that I haven't already gotten off the site.  But that's definitely good advice for everyone else if they've made the same decisions to boycott WotC.

I tell you, I'm almost convinced to get rid of the 4E books I've bought (just kidding) , delete my purchased 4E pdf's (definitely just kidding) , and even delete all of my _pirated_ ... other ... pdf's (maybe kidding?).

Speaking of other material, I wonder what WotC is planning to do to protect their _Dungeon_ and _Dragon_ pdf's?  And I wonder why those weren't pulled also?  I find it hard to believe that the _Dungeon_ and _Dragon_ pdf's aren't pirated just as much, or more than, the out of print books are (were).




Alzrius said:


> Goodman Games's 4E _Dungeon Crawl Classics_ line uses 4E mechanics and is published under the OGL (I'm not sure if the newest adventures still do this, but the first few certainly did), so the groundwork for something like that is already laid.




Yeah, I think it's cool they did that also, and I think still possible, just probably not as necessary now that the GSL is satisfactory to most publishers.

But, I was wondering if a 4E _clone_ or similiar _system_ (like True20 for 3E, etc.) could be done using the OGL?  I know I'm adding some 4E-like elements into my own 3E houserules (that if I ever get finished, I'll save as a pdf and put up somewhere for downloading), such as a _"power"_-esque type thing I'll call _"combat maneuvers"_ for non-spellcasting classes.

But, nobody really needs to answer this as it's mostly just a rhetorical question and I don't want to derail the thread.


----------



## Jeff Wilder

Scribble said:


> Could it be that in a case like this, (a corporation vrs a private individual) you need to show that the action was harmfull enough to cause damage, and therefore to do so you need to show that you've taken action to prevent it from happening in the future?



Well, copyright infringement involves its own statutes, and I'm not familiar with them.  (My only IP experience at all comes from a series of seminars in law school.)  But I'd be seriously shocked if, in order to prevent (via the justice system) the unlawful acts of others, you had to cease your own completely lawful acts.

It simply makes _zero_ sense, and (contrary to popular opinion) the underlying rationale of common law and statutes usually makes sense.

Let's say you've written a best-selling book, and somebody has taken a copy of it, scanned it, and started printing their own physical copies to sell.  There's just no conceivable way that, in order to stop anyone from ever ripping off your book and printing their own copies, you'd have to stop selling your completely legitimate copies.  (Among other things, it simply wouldn't work, for hopefully obvious reasons.)

So no, this really isn't a possibility.  Nor is joethelawyers similar suggestion about mitigating damages, for similar reasons.

I'm glad you mentioned it, though, because I have a feeling this is what people have it mind when they keep talking about the PDFs being pulling due to "something to do with the case."  While it's vaguely possible, through some mechanism I can't figure out, that pulling the PDFs for reasons related to the lawsuits makes sense, your suggestion (and joethelawyers) aren't the reason.

I personally suspect it has more to do, as has been suggested, with wanting to install different anti-pirating measures, and that the timing issue is just a symptom of near-complete boneheadedness.



MerricB said:


> We like to think of the Adkinson/Dancey era as the golden age, but there were quite a few massive blunders in it. (Fallen Empires, anyone?)



To be fair, Fallen Empires was, itself, a response to two sets which were blunders in the other -- way too powerful -- direction.  (Legends and The Dark.)  Fallen Empires was a massive _over_-reaction, but, still, a reaction was needed.  (Besides, I liked my Thrulls and Saprolings!)


----------



## jmucchiello

Brown Jenkin said:


> Well that certainly wasn't a reaction WotC probably thought was coming. That kind of analysys by someone as big name as Ryan Dancey can't be good PR.



I don't think the PR effect is that meaningful. Ryan is well known in RPG Industry circles and among OGL fanatics (not fans, fanatics). But the average D&D player probably never heard of him.


----------



## MerricB

Jeff Wilder said:


> To be fair, Fallen Empires was, itself, a response to two sets which were blunders in the other -- way too powerful -- direction.  (Legends and The Dark.)  Fallen Empires was a massive _over_-reaction, but, still, a reaction was needed.  (Besides, I liked my Thrulls and Saprolings!)




Actually, I wasn't talking about power levels, but rather the amount of Fallen Empires produced. 

Up until Fallen Empires, Wizards based their production of Magic purely on distributor pre-orders, which meant that when it became successful, Legends was massively underproduced and Fallen Empires was massively overproduced!

The latter is more of a problem for Wizards than the former, of course.

After Fallen Empires, Wizards realised that they needed to be more careful with the amount of product produced. (Didn't help them with Pokemon, when it failed, though...)

Cheers!


----------



## jmucchiello

El Mahdi said:


> But, I was wondering if a 4E _clone_ or similiar _system_ (like True20 for 3E, etc.) could be done using the OGL?  I know I'm adding some 4E-like elements into my own 3E houserules (that if I ever get finished, I'll save as a pdf and put up somewhere for downloading), such as a _"power"_-esque type thing I'll call _"combat maneuvers"_ for non-spellcasting classes.
> 
> But, nobody really needs to answer this as it's mostly just a rhetorical question and I don't want to derail the thread.



The short answer is "yes" it is possible. The devil is in the details. There would be a lot of terms that you could not import directly without giving them some kind of alias, meaning official 4e material or the clone material would need translation before you could use it. An annoyance for some but a deal-breaker for others.

(Sorry, I'll hit the switchback and get the thread back on track.)


----------



## Jeff Wilder

MerricB said:


> Actually, I wasn't talking about power levels, but rather the amount of Fallen Empires produced.



Oh, okay.  But they _are_ related.  If Fallen Empires had been a set on a power level equivalent to The Dark (or, God help us, Legends) it's very, very likely that you wouldn't be observing that WotC'd put out too much of it, because it would have sold like mad!

Instead, Fallen Empires was the weakest set ever -- a record it might still hold? I gave up Magic after Alliances -- and once Magic players figured that out, it sat on shelves until it could be had for $8 a case.


----------



## Ycore Rixle

*Regarding Ryan's Death Spiral*

Hybridization is great, and I'd love to see it. But I'm not convinced it's necessary to the survival of the hobby. People are still making money publishing _poetry books_, for goodness' sake. Video didn't kill the radio star. Horses are still around. CRPGs have been around forever (that is, for the entire lifetime of many people currently playing RPGs) and yet people still play RPGs.

And well they should. Tabletop is awesome, tons of fun, and very different from online.

Will the tabletop rpg hobby change? I'm sure it will. It has in the last 35 years. It could get serious and grow up literarily, the way science fiction did in the mid-20th century. It could go hybrid, maybe with miniatures having chips in them that communicate with other miniatures to make sounds, give rule tips, scream when the Huge mini comes near, who knows what.

But I don't think the industry is in a death spiral any more than anything else is. Change and adaptation are always necessary.


----------



## MerricB

Jeff Wilder said:


> Oh, okay.  But they _are_ related.  If Fallen Empires had been a set on a power level equivalent to The Dark (or, God help us, Legends) it's very, very likely that you wouldn't be observing that WotC'd put out too much of it, because it would have sold like mad!
> 
> Instead, Fallen Empires was the weakest set ever -- a record it might still hold? I gave up Magic after Alliances -- and once Magic players figured that out, it sat on shelves until it could be had for $8 a case.




Mercadian Masques might come close... and that was after a couple of sets that overall were actually more powerful than Legends. (Urza block in particular).

Cheers!


----------



## Korgoth

I dunno. Maybe this is all a tragically ineffectual response to online piracy... but I can't help but think that perhaps WOTC has realized that a _lot_ of people consider 4E inferior to the legacy products. And they're tired of competing with those golden games... so out they go.

Perhaps my suspicion is informed by my confirmed grognardishness (though I suspect that many who play legacy D&D play 3E rather than Old School). But I really did give 4E an honest try, and I really did want to like it, and it really was (to me) about as fun as visiting the proctologist.


----------



## Wraith Form

Korgoth said:


> But I really did give 4E an honest try, and I really did want to like it, and it really was (to me) about as fun as visiting the proctologist.




Except your proctologist  is polite, warms his hands a little before...um, _insertion_, and in the middle of the examination doesn't say, "Due to pirating, I'm no longer writing prescriptions for specialty hemorrhoid cream.  You're on your own!"


----------



## Pramas

Piratecat said:


> Agreed. Previously, WotC was very much a personality-driven company that had strong leadership between Peter Adkison (who has always been wise enough to hire smart, competent people) and Ryan Dancy, an opinionated guy whose vision drove the OGL. Once they departed, I strongly suspect the company culture and the decision-making process changed.




WotC is always changing and seems to have a major shift every couple of years. It is surely a long way from the days when most of the Seattle Camarilla worked there and there was a "bi-curious" day. While things certainly did change after the Hasbro buyout, the atmosphere had already become way more corporate in the years leading up to it. It is funny that the company that once published a Dilbert card game is straight-facedly enacting policies that would be right at home in a Dilbert strip.


----------



## xechnao

Scribble said:


> I have absolutely no idea what metrics they use to do their analyzing, I'm just saying I'm absolutely positive they have people that can and DO do it.
> 
> We have a whole team of people that do that, and only that type of stuff, all day every day.
> 
> Now I don't know if Wizards has it to that level, but they're a darn successful corporate entity, so I'm pretty sure they know what they're doing.




It is the field we are talking about that makes it difficult for them to analyze it like it can be in other fields. Of course they have to make informed decisions but they would be mostly beased on more broad observations IMO. 

Now regarding Wotc actual efficiency in estimations: they could not manage to develop their DDI at launch which is something they have much more estimation control over, so it seems that the control you seem to assume is not right there. This of course may not be entirely their fault but mostly the nature of operations which are difficult to estimate.


----------



## Derulbaskul

Pramas said:


> WotC is always changing and seems to have a major shift every couple of years. (snip)




That has always been my perception of large US corporates in particular. I have always refused to allow any business in which I hold some or all of the shares or otherwise have influence to deal with a US bank because of the very risk that a sudden (ill-considered and illogical) change in strategy will jeopardise my business. Thank God that has been my approach because it has insulated us to a large degree from the current financial crisis.

Because of the leadership cult that seems to accompany anyone with CEO on his business card, there needs to be marked shifts in strategy to show that the CEO is indeed receiving revelation from on high.

One of the things that has shocked me about this whole situation is the total absence of COMMERCIAL leadership that has been exercised. The lawyers seem very much in charge but they are not balancing their advice with commercial/market realities (and I do not criticise the lawyers for this: they have their role to play but the company leadership should be measuring that advice based on commercial reality). It's time for the "leadership cult" to attract some new adherents and actually exercise some leadership so that this fiasco is sorted out without further complication and delay.


----------



## avin

After reading tons of pages here, at RPGNet, slashdot and some other forums all I can think is that this decision will hurt Wotc sales more than help.


----------



## Clefton Twain

*Ugh*

I haven't much cared for WotC's direction the last couple of years. I care for it even less, now. There was already rampant piracy of WotC materials before they offered PDFs. People would simply scan their books and offer them as PDFs. I don't really see how this move will do much against piracy--if people want something badly enough, they will find it.

--CT


----------



## roguerouge

So, according to the lawsuits, all this was for less than 3000 .pdf copies resulting in a MAXIMUM of 100,000 bucks, if one makes the absurd assumption that every pdf download represents a lost sale. I doubt that the PR hit is worth 100 grand.


----------



## Kask

Korgoth said:


> I dunno. Maybe this is all a tragically ineffectual response to online piracy... but I can't help but think that perhaps WOTC has realized that a _lot_ of people consider 4E inferior to the legacy products. And they're tired of competing with those golden games... so out they go.





That's the only logical business reason to kill a revenue source that has no costs associated with it. They (legacy product line PDFs) are more popular than the current line.


----------



## Brian Compton

I haven't waded through all the posts here, but I did want to ask this (and apologies if this has already been dealt with):

When 4E was being rolled out, was there not a point that every WotC book would be available on-line for free if you bought the actual book?  Something about every book having a code and, by inputting that code, you could access all the material from that book on the WotC site?  What happened with this?  And wouldn't this have helped alleviate some of these problems?


----------



## JohnRTroy

PR doesn't mean squat if it means losing your rights.

When you discover copyright violations, you are obligated to defend them.  If you don't, that non-action can be used against you later.

The only thing that might be the PR hit is taking down the PDFs from sales.  However, I suspect they're either going to strengthen the watermarks, ban or delay availability of these works in foreign countries, or find alternate means of distribution.  After reading the works, I really doubt it's some kind of an excuse for a conspiracy.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane

This seems to be the natural consequence of "firing" the existing playerbase-- older adults with expendable income-- and replacing those customers with a ruleset designed to appeal to younger players, who do not have disposable income, who are technologically savvy, and who have been cultivated in an online culture that shows no particular regard for electronic copyrights.

_Strategery_.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane

This seems to be the natural consequence of "firing" the existing playerbase-- older adults with expendable income-- and replacing those customers with a ruleset designed to appeal to younger players, who do not have disposable income, who are technologically savvy, and who have been cultivated in an online culture that shows no particular regard for electronic copyrights.

_Strategery_.


----------



## roguerouge

NMcCoy said:


> Now that's the most logical interpretation of this I've seen yet. (Which is not to say it was a good move, but it's a clear potential motive.) This court case will potentially involve revealing details of the watermarking system, and thus quite possibly make them easier to circumvent. WotC hypothetically views this as "our PDFs will no longer be safe now that this case has been filed, so we shouldn't leave them out there". Definitely food for thought.




Any pirate worth his salt doesn't use the records of a lawsuit to undo a watermarking system. The appeal is in demonstrating your mastery of the code publicly. It's more like graffiti tagging than like piracy, really. If WotC made a decision based on that reasoning, well, that's another blunder.


----------



## roguerouge

JohnRTroy said:


> PR doesn't mean squat if it means losing your rights.
> 
> When you discover copyright violations, you are obligated to defend them.  If you don't, that non-action can be used against you later.




You're thinking of trademarks. There, yes, you can lose your trademark for failing to defend it. It's not true for copyright. One of the annoying things for found footage artists is that there is no assumption of abandoned copyrights due to inactivity or failure to defend.


----------



## JohnRTroy

roguerouge said:


> You're thinking of trademarks. There, yes, you can lose your trademark for failing to defend it. It's not true for copyright. One of the annoying things for found footage artists is that there is no assumption of abandoned copyrights due to inactivity or failure to defend.




You don't lose copyright, but if you don't prosecute known violations, it might make your case weaker if you sue another party later.  They can argue you knew about it but didn't sue.  This is why they enter lawsuits against the foreign citizens as well as the domestic.  

The whole PR mess is the pulling of existing PDFs.  If this was just about the lawsuits I doubt it would make as much of a stink.  Although I'm going to wait and see what happens before I judge.


----------



## pedr

JohnRTroy said:


> When you discover copyright violations, you are obligated to defend them.  If you don't, that non-action can be used against you later.



People keep saying this. It seems there are two very large legal misconceptions at work here:

1) For the duration of a copyright, the copyright owner has the right to prevent copying other than by authorised parties or under the terms of copyright law (e.g. fair use/fair dealing). A copyright owner does not have to do anything to gain or retain this right, and failure to pursue unauthorised copying does not threaten the continuation of the right.

2) The primary consequence for copyright violation is a civil suit for damages and/or an injunction; it is only relatively recently that moves to make non-commercial copyright violation criminal have been successful, and the definition of those crimes remains quite narrow. Copyright violation is not accurately described as 'theft' any more than negligently driving a car into someone's fence is accurately described as 'criminal damage'.


----------



## jensun

Wulf Ratbane said:


> This seems to be the natural consequence of "firing" the existing playerbase-- older adults with expendable income-- and replacing those customers with a ruleset designed to appeal to younger players, who do not have disposable income, who are technologically savvy, and who have been cultivated in an online culture that shows no particular regard for electronic copyrights.
> 
> _Strategery_.



I wasn't aware that I and my group of disposable income rich thirty something players had been fired.  Shouldn't we get a P45 or something?


----------



## Beckett

Brian Compton said:


> I haven't waded through all the posts here, but I did want to ask this (and apologies if this has already been dealt with):
> 
> When 4E was being rolled out, was there not a point that every WotC book would be available on-line for free if you bought the actual book?  Something about every book having a code and, by inputting that code, you could access all the material from that book on the WotC site?  What happened with this?  And wouldn't this have helped alleviate some of these problems?




Too many problems with implementation. Just off the top of my head, how do you stop someone going into the bookstore and writing down the code? They go home and use it, and the person who actually buys the book finds their code invalid because it's already in use.


----------



## Kask

Beckett said:


> Too many problems with implementation. Just off the top of my head, how do you stop someone going into the bookstore and writing down the code? They go home and use it, and the person who actually buys the book finds their code invalid because it's already in use.





You just give sealed item to retailer that has the code. When a person purchases the item he is given the code at the counter...


----------



## Krensky

Beckett said:


> Too many problems with implementation. Just off the top of my head, how do you stop someone going into the bookstore and writing down the code? They go home and use it, and the person who actually buys the book finds their code invalid because it's already in use.




Off the top of my head, the same way Microsoft does it with special offers, pre-orders, Live subscriptions, and points. A card with a strip you pull off to reveal a code. The you tier DDI to have a paid and unpaid level. Unpaid gets to see previews, play in (but not host) VTT games, post on the forums, etc, and redeem codes. Paid gets the magazines, the full vtt, the compendium, whatever else DDi has going for it. Log into DDi, pull strip, enter code, and BAM, pdf of the book is added to your DDi bookself, along with whatever web enhancements or whatever they want to give you. You could even let retailers sell the cards directly at a higher price so they could get in on the PDF market indirectly.

Or, if that wouldn't work because of the extra cost of the cards and what not (or because MS patented it) go back farther, and when someone goes to redeem their offer, have them log into DDi, then ask what the book says on page 34, paragraph 8, sentenace 4, word 2. Change the numbers at random.


----------



## Brown Jenkin

JohnRTroy said:


> You don't lose copyright, but if you don't prosecute known violations, it might make your case weaker if you sue another party later.  They can argue you knew about it but didn't sue.  This is why they enter lawsuits against the foreign citizens as well as the domestic.




There is a statute of limitations on bringing a civil case for copyright infringement, so if you wait to long you will get nothing. Within that statute of limitations though your copyright rights are impervious. You can passively allow someone to make and distribute 1 million copies of your work for free and decide the next day that they must stop. Unless they have written (or maybe oral) permission you can still sue for damages. There can be no dilution of copyright no matter what.



JohnRTroy said:


> The whole PR mess is the pulling of existing PDFs.  If this was just about the lawsuits I doubt it would make as much of a stink.  Although I'm going to wait and see what happens before I judge.




I will agree on this part. It is the pulling of the PDFs that is the problem. WotC made things worse by tying piracy to that decision. Just the PDFs would have riled feathers. Just the Lawsuits would have been quickly forgotten. Doing what they did though makes them look like complete fools.


----------



## Ourph

avin said:


> After reading tons of pages here, at RPGNet, slashdot and some other forums all I can think is that this decision will hurt Wotc sales more than help.



I had a thought this morning about this very thing. What if that's not true? What if (and this is pure unsubstantiated conjecture, I know), but what if against all logic and reason WotC actually sees a spike in sales after these PR fiascos just because of the extra publicity they generate?

It seems to me that, over the course of its lifespan, WotC has had experience with a not-insubstantial number of cases where they've horked off their fans (either D&D, Magic, DDM, etc.). If such instances really hurt sales, any halfway smart business organization would clean up their act. If anything, WotC seems to be getting worse and worse at PR. It seems like we've got a new nerd-rage inspiring move coming out of WotC every few months for the last year or so.

So what if these PR gaffs are intentional? What if it's true that any publicity is good publicity and (again, despite all common sense and logic), royally POing a bunch of D&D fans on the internet actually pushes the sales figures of D&D books a few percentage points higher for a couple of weeks?

I'm not a betting man, but if I were I might put money on WotC doing something else to generate a firestorm of nerdrage before the end of the summer (for example, making a sudden and unannounced revision to the GSL that's not very advantageous to 3PPs), maybe right around the time the next major 4e core book comes out.


----------



## Treebore

Ourph said:


> I had a thought this morning about this very thing. What if that's not true? What if (and this is pure unsubstantiated conjecture, I know), but what if against all logic and reason WotC actually sees a spike in sales after these PR fiascos just because of the extra publicity they generate?
> 
> It seems to me that, over the course of its lifespan, WotC has had experience with a not-insubstantial number of cases where they've horked off their fans (either D&D, Magic, DDM, etc.). If such instances really hurt sales, any halfway smart business organization would clean up their act. If anything, WotC seems to be getting worse and worse at PR. It seems like we've got a new nerd-rage inspiring move coming out of WotC every few months for the last year or so.
> 
> So what if these PR gaffs are intentional? What if it's true that any publicity is good publicity and (again, despite all common sense and logic), royally POing a bunch of D&D fans on the internet actually pushes the sales figures of D&D books a few percentage points higher for a couple of weeks?
> 
> I'm not a betting man, but if I were I might put money on WotC doing something else to generate a firestorm of nerdrage before the end of the summer (for example, making a sudden and unannounced revision to the GSL that's not very advantageous to 3PPs), maybe right around the time the next major 4e core book comes out.




Well, crazier things have certainly been found to be true. So your scenario is definitely within the realm of possibility. I would think, hope, and pray that it is wrong, but it could be true. Not because I want WOTC to fail, I don't. A healthy WOTC is a healthy RPG hobby. I just don't want your scenario to be true because I like believing that a company needs to be concerned with keeping their customers happy, and not having it financially beneficial to them to tick us off.


----------



## catsclaw227

Korgoth said:
			
		

> I dunno. Maybe this is all a tragically ineffectual response to online piracy... but I can't help but think that perhaps WOTC has realized that a lot of people consider 4E inferior to the legacy products. And they're tired of competing with those golden games... so out they go.



The problem with this thinking is that no matter what WOTC does now, they lose.  

If they continue to no longer sell the legacy PDFs, the people espousing this attitude will cry out how right they were.  See?  I knew it was because people like older D&D products more than 4e and this just proves it!

If they decide to put them back up for sale, the people espousing this attitude will cry out how right they were.  See?  They put them back up because people like older D&D products more than 4e and this just proves it!

I am guessing they are damned if they do, and damned if they don't.



Wulf Ratbane said:


> This seems to be the natural consequence of "firing" the existing playerbase-- older adults with expendable income-- and replacing those customers with a ruleset designed to appeal to younger players, who do not have disposable income, who are technologically savvy, and who have been cultivated in an online culture that shows no particular regard for electronic copyrights.



Please, can we not dredge up the old "I got fired by WOTC!!!111!" argument?  That is a twice dead horse that needs to stay in it's grave.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane

catsclaw227 said:


> Please, can we not dredge up the old "I got fired by WOTC!!!111!" argument?  That is a twice dead horse that needs to stay in it's grave.




Please, can we not dredge up the old, "'I got fired by WotC' is a dead horse" argument?

You have some counter-argument you'd like to present, I'm all ears.

But if it starts with the premise that 4e was not, in fact, designed to infuse new, younger players into the aging customer base, you have a serious uphill climb.


----------



## Caliber

Wulf Ratbane said:


> Please, can we not dredge up the old, "'I got fired by WotC' is a dead horse" argument?
> 
> You have some counter-argument you'd like to present, I'm all ears.
> 
> But if it starts with the premise that 4e was not, in fact, designed to infuse new, younger players into the aging customer base, you have a serious uphill climb.




I don't think the claim that "WOTC fired me as a customer" equates to "4E was meant to bring in new players". Agree with that or not, I thought we were trying to avoid edition warring here?


----------



## fanboy2000

Wulf Ratbane said:


> But if it starts with the premise that 4e was not, in fact, designed to infuse new, younger players into the aging customer base, you have a serious uphill climb.



I don't what the design goals for 4e were beyond make NPC and monster design easier, but I know at least one long time player (since Chainmail) loves 4e. I would imagine anyone who has played long is used to major rules changes.

My own group is made-up of long-time and first time players and we all love 4e.


----------



## Edena_of_Neith

I just want to have fun.

  The game is fun.  All editions.  Neat stuff.  Great core material.  Great supplements.

  Don't shelve the game.  Don't take the game away.  Don't erase it, lock it away in a vault.  

  Don't cause Ryan's prediction to come true.  Where is the fun in that?  (or the money?)

  Edena_of_Neith


----------



## Scribble

Jeff Wilder said:


> Well, copyright infringement involves its own statutes, and I'm not familiar with them.  (My only IP experience at all comes from a series of seminars in law school.)  But I'd be seriously shocked if, in order to prevent (via the justice system) the unlawful acts of others, you had to cease your own completely lawful acts.
> 
> It simply makes _zero_ sense, and (contrary to popular opinion) the underlying rationale of common law and statutes usually makes sense.




Jeff-

I think you're missing a key piece of information- WoTC_Trevor said they are looking into how to offer digital content going forward. 

Sure, always possible that he's misinformed, but as it stands if that's the case (and I have no reason not to accept what he says as truth) then they aren't completely ceasing a lawful act. They're temporarily halting until they can figure out HOW to sure up their defenses.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane

Caliber said:


> I don't think the claim that "WOTC fired me as a customer" equates to "4E was meant to bring in new players". Agree with that or not, I thought we were trying to avoid edition warring here?




Umm... Where exactly is the perceived edition war?

Especially since I am on record dozens of times supporting the decision-- the _necessity_-- to bring new players into the game?

Commentary about one edition or another is not de facto an edition war.


----------



## Scribble

Kask said:


> That's the only logical business reason to kill a revenue source that has no costs associated with it. They (legacy product line PDFs) are more popular than the current line.




I'm not sure anyone can really argue something as being the only reason for soemthing with what little actual facts we have.

For one thing, perhaps they were worried that just taking down the new edition, but leaving up the other material, would have an even bigger neative backlash. 

Perhaps they DO plan to re-release everything in a new format they consider stronger. 

It's just too early to tell.



			
				Korgoth said:
			
		

> I dunno. Maybe this is all a tragically ineffectual response to online piracy... but I can't help but think that perhaps WOTC has realized that a lot of people consider 4E inferior to the legacy products. And they're tired of competing with those golden games... so out they go.




I'd be more accepting to this idea I think if they hadn't also taken down their current edition.

The fact that ALL of their pdfs came down (new or old) pushes me into the opposite direction, that it's NOT an edition vrs another thing. 

I tried checking on drivethru but they've already taken all wizards info down. Does anyone have any actual data from drivetrhu showing the older stuff outselling the new stuff? (The wayback machine gets blocked by my company for some reason.)


----------



## Caliber

Wulf Ratbane said:


> Umm... Where exactly is the perceived edition war?
> 
> Especially since I am on record dozens of times supporting the decision-- the _necessity_-- to bring new players into the game?
> 
> Commentary about one edition or another is not de facto an edition war.




The line about "being fired from WotC" smacked of edition war to me, but hey, if I misinterpreted your meaning I apologize. 

Edit: Vyvyan Basterd gives a good approximation of why I complained about edition warring though, if you want to know the thought process that lead me to initially post.


----------



## Vyvyan Basterd

Wulf Ratbane said:


> Umm... Where exactly is the perceived edition war?




It's when one uses hyperbole to equate the design of a new game system to that of being forcably terminated from a job.

It insinuates that WotC set out to intentionally lose you as a customer. The decision to no longer be their customer due to the creation of 4E is your own.

The more apt hyperbole would be that you quit being a customer. Actually, that's not even hyperbole and is more appropriate for these boards per the moderator's instructions.


----------



## Fenes

Vyvyan Basterd said:


> It's when one uses hyperbole to equate the design of a new game system to that of being forcably terminated from a job.
> 
> It insinuates that WotC set out to intentionally lose you as a customer. The decision to no longer be their customer due to the creation of 4E is your own.
> 
> The more apt hyperbole would be that you quit being a customer. Actually, that's not even hyperbole and is more appropriate for these boards per the moderator's instructions.




You're wrong. Up until Monday I was a customer of WotC. Then _they_ decided they did not want to sell me old edition PDFs anymore.

WotC doesn't want to do business with me anymore.


----------



## Vyvyan Basterd

Fenes said:


> You're wrong. Up until Monday I was a customer of WotC. Then _they_ decided they did not want to sell me old edition PDFs anymore.
> 
> WotC doesn't want to do business with me anymore.




Maybe you should read my post before crying foul. I said "The decision to no longer be their customer *due to the creation of 4E* is your own."

I made no mention of their current decision and if you read my previous thoughts on the matter I am extremely disappointed with their actions this week.

And, even so, I am not "wrong." A company no longer wishing to offer a product does not equate to being fired from a job. The moderators have specifically asked all of us to curb the use of hypebole to make our points.

Also, I think it is too soon to say that WotC doesn't want to sell old edition PDFs any more. So far the little indication we have, taken at face value, is that they are looking into ways to offer these products again. Whether any of us has any remaining goodwill left to believe that they will follow through is another matter.

Edit: Another Also - I disagree with your premise. WotC *does* want to do business with you. They want to sell you 4E books in physical form, dice, Magic cards, dungeon tiles, miniatures, etc. *You* ultimately decide whether you want to be a customer. Saying that they don't want to do business with you implies an intent that desn't really exist. They just don't make a product you enjoy, just like a multitude of other businesses around the world that you do not purchase from.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane

Vyvyan Basterd said:


> It insinuates that WotC set out to intentionally lose you as a customer.




Uhhh, yes. That's exactly what happened. 

There's a subset of existing customers, _and WotC knows who they are_, that they intentionally wrote off-- and rightly so.

They produced a product that they knew would not appeal to a portion of their existing customers, in order to appeal to a larger market.

All good businesses do this on a regular basis. 

If it was possible to provide a product that meets the needs of ALL customers, every business would obviously prefer to do that.


----------



## Fenes

Vyvyan Basterd said:


> It insinuates that WotC set out to intentionally lose you as a customer.




That's exaclty what they did by removing the products I was  buying.


----------



## Fenes

Vyvyan Basterd said:


> Edit: Another Also - I disagree with your premise. WotC *does* want to do business with you. They want to sell you 4E books in physical form, dice, Magic cards, dungeon tiles, miniatures, etc. *You* ultimately decide whether you want to be a customer. Saying that they don't want to do business with you implies an intent that desn't really exist. They just don't make a product you enjoy, just like a multitude of other businesses around the world that you do not purchase from.




They did have a product I enjoyed, the OOP PDFs. And they removed that. I do not know many businesses who would remove a product from cirulation that cuased them no cost at all, and pure profit, unless there's another motive - like "make them all buy the new edition".


----------



## Scribble

Fenes said:


> They did have a product I enjoyed, the OOP PDFs. And they removed that. I do not know many businesses who would remove a product from cirulation that cuased them no cost at all, and pure profit, unless there's another motive - like "make them all buy the new edition".




Let's say you make money selling lemonaid. You have a big bowl of lemonaid sitting nearby that you scoop cups out of and sell to pople for 25 cents a cup.

You have five people buying that lemonaid. $1.25 woohoo! It covers the cost of you making that lemonaid so sweet deal. But then you notice that there's a line of people like 10 or so, who've been walking up behind your back and just scooping their own cups of lemonaid out of your bowl without paying you 25 cents.

Do you continue as is and just let those guys drink your lemonaid? Hey they're thirsty, but they might not have bought any from you anyway right?

Or do you take a break, put your lemonaid in your house, and go back to Target to try to find a better lemonaid holding mechanism? Maybe one with a lid and one of those spout things so you can have more control over who gets your lemonaid?

(My point being- Are you really firing those 5 people buying your lemonaid if you're only shutting down to find a more secure way to offer them lemonaid?)


----------



## Roman

Wulf Ratbane said:


> There's a subset of existing customers, _and WotC knows who they are_, that they intentionally wrote off-- and rightly so.




I agree that there is a subset of existing customers that was intentionally written off, but I am much less sure it was such a good thing for the company to do so. Although these customers tend to have less growth potential, they could nevertheless provide a stable base and a steady source of income from which to try to expand the market and the cost of keeping a large number of them might have been as small as a token effort to address their concerns (for example, I might have well switched editions if a token effort were made to address some simulationist concerns) - a token effort that would likely not jeopardize the appeal of the game to their new target audience. 

Besides that, RPGs are a niche hobby and this is not going to change any time soon. This niche market expands in mostly two ways: 

1) Direct advertising by companies (mostly WotC) and the associated experimentation by non-gamers (probably also lured by Lord of the Rings or similar, more mainstream cultural influences). For all practical intents and purposes, advertising to non-gamers is essentially independent of the actual contents of the ruleset. 

2) Organic growth by existing gamers spreading the word to new people, taking them in their groups, setting up new groups and so on. This largely depends on the existing customer-base and a general rule that applies here is that larger the customer base, the higher the absolute rate of growth. Legacy customers are therefore very useful in this regard. 

Yes, there are other issues that may help market growth, such as how easy it is to learn the game and so on, but my point is that I don't think intentionally cutting off a considerable section of the legacy market, when a token effort may have been enough to bring many of them on board, is as clearly a winner-strategy as you seem to imply. WotC obviously believed it was a winner-strategy, otherwise they woldn't have pursued it. I have little doubt that WotC will be a successful company with their strategy, but I disagree with their assessment and believe they could have been even more successful if they tried to bring more of the legacy market on board (not all, of course, a 100% conversion rate is not realistic, but more than they did). 

Well, this is getting into edition-effect assessments rather than PDF-blunder assessments, which is somewhat off topic for this thread, but an interesting subject nonetheless (interesting at least as long as it does not degenerate into a flame war).


----------



## Scribble

Roman said:


> Besides that, RPGs are a niche hobby and this is not going to change any time soon.




Maybe that's soemthing they'd like to see change. After all video games at one point were a niche market, and now they're HUGE. So was snowboarding, and now it's the most popular winter sport.

I remember one time way back in 96 at an Origins con when Adkison talked about his dream of seeing gaming one day being as accepted and popular as the movies.

Don't know if it's achievable, but maybe WoTC still holds that as part of its mission statement?


----------



## Fenes

Scribble said:


> Let's say you make money selling lemonaid. You have a big bowl of lemonaid sitting nearby that you scoop cups out of and sell to pople for 25 cents a cup.
> 
> You have five people buying that lemonaid. $1.25 woohoo! It covers the cost of you making that lemonaid so sweet deal. But then you notice that there's a line of people like 10 or so, who've been walking up behind your back and just scooping their own cups of lemonaid out of your bowl without paying you 25 cents.
> 
> Do you continue as is and just let those guys drink your lemonaid? Hey they're thirsty, but they might not have bought any from you anyway right?
> 
> Or do you take a break, put your lemonaid in your house, and go back to Target to try to find a better lemonaid holding mechanism? Maybe one with a lid and one of those spout things so you can have more control over who gets your lemonaid?
> 
> (My point being- Are you really firing those 5 people buying your lemonaid if you're only shutting down to find a more secure way to offer them lemonaid?)




Please... try to find a better example. The PDFs I was buying were already copied. I was buying OOP ones of older editions. Pulling them back did not change anything with regards to piracy, and WotC as anyone who did not ignore the realities of the internet knows this.

No, the only reason older edition material was pulled was to prevent people from legally buying it. Either to try to drive people to buy 4E, or in prepration to sell them through other channels - in whcih case WotC botched that move so much (lack of communication, lack of alternative offer) one has to ask oneself if they really could be that stupid.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane

Roman said:


> I agree that there is a subset of existing customers that was intentionally written off, but I am much less sure it was such a good thing for the company to do so.




Right. It ain't a crap shoot up there in WotC R&D. They had a strategy, and yes, they _intentionally _pursued it. That doesn't imply malice.



> I don't think intentionally cutting off a considerable section of the legacy market, when a token effort may have been enough to bring many of them on board, is as clearly a winner-strategy as you seem to imply.




Nobody knows what percentage they hoped to convert but there's no way that, for example, Vancian Magic die-hards were going to be on board for powers for all classes. There simply is no token effort that would suffice there. (That's the biggest, non-negotiable, fundamental change I can think of off the top of my head. Cosmology would be 2nd.)



> WotC obviously believed it was a winner-strategy, otherwise they woldn't have pursued it. I have little doubt that WotC will be a successful company with their strategy, but I disagree with their assessment and believe they could have been even more successful if they tried to bring more of the legacy market on board (not all, of course, a 100% conversion rate is not realistic, but more than they did).




I think we can easily agree they hoped to convert as many as possible. But "Hope" is not a strategy. Every player they _expected _to lose, who nevertheless converted, is icing.

At any rate, it's clear that the _current _4e strategy is obviously not what they had in mind when 4e was in development. 4e should be driving the sales of miniatures and DDI subscriptions-- neither of which is susceptible to digital piracy.

So the current PDF freak-out is a bit of a surprise. I didn't figure that the "dead tree" component of the product was that significant. The core rules-- even pirated PDFs-- should be whetting the appetites of the "larger market" to put their money down for the full experience.


----------



## Scribble

Fenes said:


> Please... try to find a better example. The PDFs I was buying were already copied. I was buying OOP ones of older editions. Pulling them back did not change anything with regards to piracy, and WotC as anyone who did not ignore the realities of the internet knows this.




The example holds no matter what you believe the "realities of the internet" to be. 

WoTC has a product, and finds that product is compromised. So they pull the product back, in order to find a less compromised method of sale. Whether or not it costs them any money to make that poduct, is insignificant. They have a product that has been compromised.

Will it work? Who knows? It might help, or it might not, I'm glad I'm not the one who had to make that choice. 

I doubt it will ever make the problem fully "go away" but it's possible it could help reduce it to "acceptable" levels.

Someone might still steal your car, but at least you're no longer leaving your doors unlocked.

But to argue that it's some type of hidden plan to get people to buy a product they don't want? That just seems WAY to over the top for me to believe. (Especialy whn done in such a fashion.)


----------



## Fenes

Scribble said:


> The example holds no matter what you believe the "realities of the internet" to be.
> 
> WoTC has a product, and finds that product is compromised. So they pull the product back, in order to find a less compromised method of sale. Whether or not it costs them any money to make that poduct, is insignificant. They have a product that has been compromised.
> 
> Will it work? Who knows? It might help, or it might not, I'm glad I'm not the one who had to make that choice.
> 
> I doubt it will ever make the problem fully "go away" but it's possible it could help reduce it to "acceptable" levels.
> 
> Someone might still steal your car, but at least you're no longer leaving your doors unlocked.
> 
> But to argue that it's some type of hidden plan to get people to buy a product they don't want? That just seems WAY to over the top for me to believe. (Especialy whn done in such a fashion.)




There's no need or reason to talk further with you if you honestly believe pulling the PDFs of OOP editions had anything to do with battling piracy.


----------



## Nagol

Scribble said:


> The example holds no matter what you believe the "realities of the internet" to be.
> 
> WoTC has a product, and finds that product is compromised. So they pull the product back, in order to find a less compromised method of sale. Whether or not it costs them any money to make that poduct, is insignificant. They have a product that has been compromised.
> 
> Will it work? Who knows? It might help, or it might not, I'm glad I'm not the one who had to make that choice.
> 
> I doubt it will ever make the problem fully "go away" but it's possible it could help reduce it to "acceptable" levels.
> 
> Someone might still steal your car, but at least you're no longer leaving your doors unlocked.
> 
> But to argue that it's some type of hidden plan to get people to buy a product they don't want? That just seems WAY to over the top for me to believe. (Especialy whn done in such a fashion.)




The difficulty I have understanding pulling back "compromised" material is the original material is unaffected and removing it does nothing to affect the availability of pirated work.

The best analogy is counterfeiting.  If you discover that someone is counterfeiting your product, removing the auhentic product from the marketplace only increases the market share possibilities for the  counterfeiters.


----------



## Scribble

Fenes said:


> There's no need or reason to talk further with you if you honestly believe pulling the PDFs of OOP editions had anything to do with battling piracy.




That's what was indicated by a company spokes person. I have no reason to call that man a liar, so that's the information I have to go on. If you don't want to discuss it because I disagree with you? Well hey whatever floats your boat man!


----------



## Scribble

Nagol said:


> The difficulty I have understanding pulling back "compromised" material is the original material is unaffected and removing it does nothing to affect the availability of pirated work.
> 
> The best analogy is counterfeiting.  If you discover that someone is counterfeiting your product, removing the auhentic product from the marketplace only increases the market share possibilities for the  counterfeiters.




Well, I'm not going to argue if it's the best strategy or not. Like I said, I'm glad I'm not the one who had to make that call. 

But as to your point, it's not so much that pulling back is what you're doing to fight the counterfitting. You've discovered that the method you use to create whatever you create is actually making it easier to counterfit, so pulling back is the unfortunate side effect of figuring out how to fix it.

Pull back, patch your holes, then re-release for the people that want the product then work on fighting the old products floating in pirate space while you hope your new method holds?


----------



## Roman

Fenes said:


> There's no need or reason to talk further with you if you honestly believe pulling the PDFs of OOP editions had anything to do with battling piracy.




I don't think anybody actually believes that. Clearly, there is some other motive at hand or perhaps multiple motives. Some possibilities (some combinations are possible): 

1) Desiring to bring PDF publishing in-house, WotC might have thought that yanking their PDFs from established distributors for that reason might generate some ill will among consumers, so they decided to make it coincide with some piracy lawsuits and blame it on piracy, believing that people would be sympathetic to the move on that account. 

2) WotC has decided that OOP PDF products compete with 4E sales and has decided to pull them for that reason. 

3) WotC has decided to send a message to GSL-using companies that their business is not safe and that they cannot rely on WotC goodwill or reasonableness not to cancel their license abruptly and capriciously at a whim. The message is: "Get out of this market or else!" This might be part of a strategy of 'reclosing' the system and delivering a blow to open gaming, but without actually yanking the GSL itself, which would have generated consumer outrage. 

*Note: If it was a strategy to deflect consumer outrage by blaming the move on piracy to mask the real move, WotC has clearly miscalculated the level of anger their policy would generate. It may, however, still have been less anger than what they would have incurred if they had stated the real reason for the move.

There might be other reasons as to why WotC did what it did, but 'fighting piracy' does not even figure on my list of possibilities, because that would be so mind-bogglingly stupid and ineffectual (and actually likely to increase piracy) that it just cannot be.


----------



## f33b

Scribble said:


> But as to your point, it's not so much that pulling back is what you're doing to fight the counterfitting. You've discovered that the method you use to create whatever you create is actually making it easier to counterfit, so pulling back is the unfortunate side effect of figuring out how to fix it.
> 
> Pull back, patch your holes, then re-release for the people that want the product then work on fighting the old products floating in pirate space while you hope your new method holds?





Much of the OOP OD&D, 1st and 2nd pirate content pre-dates official TSR/WOTC pdfs by several years, so it's not necessarily a case of PDFs from vendors making copy infringement easier. Further, PDFs from licensed vendors contain identifying marks that help discourage or punish piracy. There are other DRM options, such as using the Microsoft Reader .lit format, but none are as universally acceptable as the PDF, and none have even half the market penetration as the PDF.

Finally, there is no marketplace that generates revenue for WotC from OOP sales other than PDF sales.

When a company completely abandons a market and all associated revenue streams, they aren't generally looking to "fix" problems in that market, rather they usually have identified that market , service or product as being outside their core competencies, and are removing themselves completely, in the interest of streamlining their business.


----------



## Scribble

Roman said:


> There might be other reasons as to why WotC did what it did, but 'fighting piracy' does not even figure on my list of possibilities, because that would be so mind-bogglingly stupid and ineffectual (and actually likely to increase piracy) that it just cannot be.




Roman- What I see is not so much "fight" piracy, as figure out a way that they can sell digital product without basically handing that product to the pirates.

I mean while I liked being able to get the D&D pdfs in the same form I get all the other gaming PDFs I can see how vulnerable those things are.

Not only like all digital products can they be pirated, but it's laughably easy to do so. It's a fine method for the smaller companies whos product is mainly consumed by people more "involved" in the game community... But once you start getting into the size D&D is, and start selling outside of that  "community" to people who don't know or care about it? That method is pratically useless.


----------



## Scribble

f33b said:


> When a company completely abandons a market and all associated revenue streams, they aren't generally looking to "fix" problems in that market, rather they usually have identified that market , service or product as being outside their core competencies, and are removing themselves completely, in the interest of streamlining their business.




That might very well be the case, but:

They've removed themselves from the market entirely, not just the OOP stuff, and we've been told they're looking at other avenues to return to the digital market.

That's the main reason at this point I see it as that they really are attempting a fix. They shut the whole shebang down, not just parts they didn't feel helped them.

Shutting down the whole thing is a HUGE move, one that (quite obviously) is having huge consequences. You REALLY think they wouldn't have seen that coming?

Wouldn't it be easier to just shut off the old product? A large portion of the fanbase buying that product have already written off the new product to begin with. Why risk ill will with your current product fans?

It just seems way to crazy an idea to me to picture this as some sort of underhanded scheme to get rid of the old product and cause people to suddenly want to buy the new. 

(Especialy when there is history of the company/ product routinely cutting off the old market in favor of the new. It just seems simpilar just to say we're no longer supporting the old product, and be done with it rather then an elaborate rouse involving a court battle and loss of sales of their main product.)


----------



## Edena_of_Neith

(look of despair)

  I'm not a corporate person, or a lawyer, or a professional, or even a gaming professional.
  Just a Nobody.  (A Nowhere Man, as the Beatles might have put it.)

  But I remember some things.

  -

  Remember dice?
  Remember how popular dice were, when we were kids playing?

  - Now, we could have economized and shared one set of polyhedron dice between us, between the whole group (maybe a second set, for the DM) but that is not what happened.  We did not economize in that way.
  - We could have economized and had one set of dice (1d20, 1d12, 1d10, 1d8, 1d6, and 1d4) per player.  Reasonable, no?  Everyone would have had enough dice.  Is that how it was?  Sometimes ... but in my experience, it was rare.

  Did players come to the table, and unload dice bags, and dozens, or - literally - hundreds, of dice come rolling all over the table (and floor) ?
  Sometimes that happened, yes.

  Did *several* players come to the table, and unload dice bags with dozens, or even hundreds of dice (almost a Dice Arms Race, as it were) ?
  Yes.  It happened. 
  I saw it happen, over and over.

  What drove such extravagance?  What drove such flagrant spending of money?
  It was a side effect of their love for the game.

  -

  Books ...

  We could have bought one 1E player's handbook, one 1E dungeon master's guide (for the DM *ONLY* like it *itself* specified), and one 1E monster manual (also, generally, for the DM *only* as it itself implied should be done.)
  Thus, one DMG, one MM, and one (or maybe two) PHs, for the whole group.
  Definitely, an Economy Group, that would have been.

  Of course, it did not work out that way.
  EVERY player *HAD* to have the PH.  *And* the MM.  *And* the DMG (which they, of course, perused from end to end, memorizing the DM Only Rules down to the last word on the last obscure page.)  *And* the Unearthed Arcana supplement.  And for many, Oriental Adventures, the Manual of the Planes, the Wilderness Survival Guide, and the Dungeoneer's Survival Guide.

  On to 2E.  Isn't what happened there pretty infamous?
  Haven't we, over the decades, been hit with repeated and endless complaints about how Player A bought obscure Book Z from (somewhere, preferably somewhere the DM wasn't familiar with), and unleashed a whole bunch of X-Rules on the poor DM?
  And this went further and further.  Books ZA.  Books ZB.  Books ZZ.  Books ZZA.  Books ZZZ.  Books ZZZZ.  Books ZZZZZZZ.  Rules from Beyond the Realm of Cthulu, brought into the light of day.  Rules Mankind Was Not Meant To Know (much less the DM, nuked, irradiated, slimed, ghost touched, and plane shifted into the Deep Beyond, before he ever had a chance to get out a d20 ...) were brought into the light of day ... well, into the game.

  What prompted all this book buying?
  Was it economical?  Was it money smart?  Couldn't the players have shared notes?  Couldn't the players have explained the rules to each other?
  Couldn't the players have restrained themselves from spending hundreds, or thousands, of dollars on books and supplements that might or might not ever have been used?
  Think of the Complete Book of Elves, 2E.  But has anyone ever used Elven Plate?  (why anyone would want to, is beyond me.  It *still* didn't allow for spellcasting.)

  What prompted all this extravagant, flagrant (and oftentimes futile, since the DM never allowed their use) book buying?
  Love of the game, of course.

  -

  How about 3E?  How about the explosion of products under the OGL?  How about those thousands of feats that got written up and put in supplements (which were never used for the good reason that too few feats are allowed for characters for them to have the luxury of taking 10 Social Feats?)
  Yet the products were sold, and players bought them.  (They regretted it, when the product was low quality, obviously, but that didn't stop them from going out and buying more products, hopefully of better quality.)

  What caused all this?
  Love of the game.

  -

  We still love the game, us Old Timers.
  We may fight and bicker, warmonger and flame, but we love the game.

  Hopefully, others could come to love the game like we have loved it.

  But ...

  If you shut the game away, so that the Young cannot access it, except on the most stringent and limited basis, will they bite?  Will they flock to our Hobby?
  Or will they go for World of Warcraft, that titanic game up there on a marquee (theater-like) across the street, with it's high visibility and it's aggressive marketing?  Or to other games?

  For us, the Old Timers ... did someone say that we were discarded, and this was a good decision?  (I thought I read someone saying that ...)
  I *do not know* if such a decision was made, but *if it was* made, then I would question how reasonable that decision is.
  We Old Timers are a faulty bunch, yes, but are we worthy of discard?  I do not believe so.  I am guessing most others here at ENWorld would agree that we are not discards.

  -

  (sad, frustrated, bewildered)

  What is this?
  The game of D&D is about fun.
  Having war after war, people arguing, people frustrated, people angry, a perpetual angry mood, a mood of despair and anger, resignation?

  How did it come to this?  This is not fun.

  The game is about fun.  Take away the fun, and nobody buys dice, or books.  Nobody wins, nobody makes money, nobody has a good time.

  Keep the fun.  Without the fun, what's the point?  There is no point.

  I am no corporate CEO, not working in a corporation, not anyone of any importance, not anyone of any significance at all.  I do not even know how to play D&D very well, I never did.  I was always lousy at it.
  But even I can see that without fun, who will play?  Why will they play if it is not fun?  Why not do something else that *is* fun, instead?  (and rivals on all sides are very busy making alternatives available.)

  Why not ... just ... keep the fun?

  Edena_of_Neith


----------



## Edena_of_Neith

(really, really, really frustrated)

  Just keep ... the ... fun.

  That's the true Bottom Line.  Corporate Bottom Line.  Game Bottom Line.  DM and Player Bottom Line.  Everyone's Bottom Line.

  *** Fun, the Bottom Line. ***

  You can take that Bottom Line to any bank, real or metaphorical.

  Yours Extremely Sincerely
  Edena_of_Neith


----------



## Primal

Scribble said:


> That's what was indicated by a company spokes person. I have no reason to call that man a liar, so that's the information I have to go on. If you don't want to discuss it because I disagree with you? Well hey whatever floats your boat man!




I don't think anyone actually thinks Wotc_Trevor is a liar. I get the feeling that he was simply told what to say, and may very well not even know the real reasons. Reading between the lines (based on his comments about forwarding all feedback to the "brass"), I think he actually understands the backlash and symphatizes with the fans.


----------



## Mephistopheles

Scribble said:


> That's the main reason at this point I see it as that they really are attempting a fix. They shut the whole shebang down, not just parts they didn't feel helped them.
> 
> Shutting down the whole thing is a HUGE move, one that (quite obviously) is having huge consequences. You REALLY think they wouldn't have seen that coming?




If they did see it coming then I'm finding it hard to come up with reasons why they would have gone ahead with it.

Piracy happens. I think it's something we just have to accept. The problem I have with this action is that they're letting the pirates call the shots. WotC have customers out there waiting to give them money for this product, yet they've removed the product from the market because there are people out there who aren't willing to give them money for the product. Rather than giving their customer base what they want they're focusing on not giving pirates what they want.

Further, I think it's fair to say that not all pirates are potential customers. Why spend money on trying to prevent them from accessing the product for free? Presumably it is so that they will instead spend money on the product when they can't easily get it for free. Whether that represents a wise investment depends entirely on the percentage of pirated copies that represent actual lost sales, something that would seem to be very difficult to determine with any certainty.

Even if you can determine it with certainty it does beg the question of why would you opt to harm relations with your known customer base - the people who are keeping you in business - to try to win over people who not only are not your customers but are stealing your product? Why not focus on providing the best customer experience possible for your customers rather than trying to reform thieves into customers at the expense of your customers? It all seems very counterproductive to me.


----------



## xechnao

Scribble said:


> That might very well be the case, but:
> 
> They've removed themselves from the market entirely, not just the OOP stuff, and we've been told they're looking at other avenues to return to the digital market.
> 
> That's the main reason at this point I see it as that they really are attempting a fix. They shut the whole shebang down, not just parts they didn't feel helped them.
> 
> Shutting down the whole thing is a HUGE move, one that (quite obviously) is having huge consequences. You REALLY think they wouldn't have seen that coming?
> 
> Wouldn't it be easier to just shut off the old product? A large portion of the fanbase buying that product have already written off the new product to begin with. Why risk ill will with your current product fans?
> 
> It just seems way to crazy an idea to me to picture this as some sort of underhanded scheme to get rid of the old product and cause people to suddenly want to buy the new.
> 
> (Especialy when there is history of the company/ product routinely cutting off the old market in favor of the new. It just seems simpilar just to say we're no longer supporting the old product, and be done with it rather then an elaborate rouse involving a court battle and loss of sales of their main product.)




That would create so much paranoia and nerd rage...you couldn't imagine...

You either pull off all of your pdf catalogue or none of it. It would also be stupid to blame piracy and leave some of the catalogue behind: it would be as saying we do not mind about these remaining catalogue files being pirated. What they could have done is stop adding the new releases. But they did not. This could be because of future store front image reasons.

I also believe that there is a very strong possibility they will bring pdf sales in house. I am not sure but I think it is a strong possibility.


----------



## Scribble

Primal said:


> I don't think anyone actually thinks Wotc_Trevor is a liar. I get the feeling that he was simply told what to say, and may very well not even know the real reasons. Reading between the lines (based on his comments about forwarding all feedback to the "brass"), I think he actually understands the backlash and symphatizes with the fans.




Oh I think he sympathizes with the fans as well. I just don't feel his statement is an outright lie. (Whether he was told to say it or not.)

I think Wizards sympathizes with the fans to. They want our money, so they have to to a degree. But some backlash is inevitable, and sometimes you have to make hard calls to fix a problem. 



Mephistopheles said:


> Even if you can determine it with certainty it does beg the question of why would you opt to harm relations with your known customer base - the people who are keeping you in business - to try to win over people who not only are not your customers but are stealing your product? Why not focus on providing the best customer experience possible for your customers rather than trying to reform thieves into customers at the expense of your customers? It all seems very counterproductive to me.




Because again I don't thibnk it's about stopping piracy altogether. As you said, it happens. But I think WoTC realized that how they WERE attempting to mitigate the problem didn't work at all. And since they were making the pdfs available day one, it probably actually helepd the pirates. (Now people who might otherwise have gone out and bought the book because they couldn't find a good pirate copy quick enough were finding them on day one, or at most day two. It's not about the hardcore pirates. It's about the people who are generally willing to buy stuff they want unless presented with an increadibly easy alternative.)



xechnao said:


> That would create so much paranoia and nerd rage...you couldn't imagine...




They already created paranoia and nerdrage. If they were actually trying to just kill off old edition sales, based on how they've handled it with other products, in my opinion they would have just done so, and not created an elaborate rouse that costs more in the end.


----------



## seankreynolds

Primal said:


> I don't think anyone actually thinks Wotc_Trevor is a liar. I get the feeling that he was simply told what to say, and may very well not even know the real reasons. Reading between the lines (based on his comments about forwarding all feedback to the "brass"), I think he actually understands the backlash and symphatizes with the fans.




I hear that. 

"Problems with the printers" may be familiar to some people online circa January 1997....


----------



## Miyaa

Just curious, did Wizards of the Coast take over the copyright from TSR for their 1st and 2nd editions? If I recall correctly, copyrights have a shelf-life of about fifty years, meaning something published originally in the 1970's have until 2020 before their copyright date expire.

I will agree that piracy is a big deal strictly on the issue of copyrighting infringement alone. And while what the RIAA attempted to do became essentially a Sisyphus task, they did what they had to do. The internet has turned out to be really hard to make a profit except for a very select band of companies (Apple, Google, maybe Amazon, the MMORPG group).

One minor thing I have heard is that the piracy allows access to materials that you might not be able to get to from paid sources. I heard someone complain that is the problem with Napster. You don't have that problem with Apple's iTunes, where anything can be found at inexpensive prices that makes it more likely to be swayed from the sirens of the pirates.

Piracy is a lot like getting repair parts for your car from the junkyard. It's used, maybe not as high quality as you might get from your quality (insert car brand here) dealership, but you might get the selection that maybe more suitable to your problem. And it's much cheaper than having to deal with your dealership. But you could also be getting a piece that was just as defective, if not more so than the problem piece you have in the car already.

And here lies the problem with Wizard's and the pdfs. If they didn't charge full price for a pdf as they did for the book, they might have had more buyers of the pdf, and less of a piracy threat. But, because they didn't want to diminish the physical book market (i.e. Amazon, the local gaming store, etc.), they kept the rates the same, which they didn't need to since the RPG gaming market is such a niche market made up of a majority of fanatics who will buy the book and buy the pdf.

I think Ryan Delancy was right about Wizards as a business being in a death spiral. The only difference between it and TSR is that it has an even bigger entity in Hasbro with them, and it is a matter of time where either Wizards becomes either an appendix and thus completely useless, or is spun off before hand by Hasbro. Either way this is finalized before it minimizes the profits that Hasbro could potentially receive if it weren't in their umbrella of brands.


----------



## seankreynolds

I'm not sure what you mean by "take over" TSR's copyrights, but TSR was a subentity within Wizards until about 1998 when they stopped using the TSR name and logo (IIRC an Alternity book was the first RPG book produced by the formerly-TSR staff that used the Wizards logo rather than the TSR logo).


----------



## Treebore

seankreynolds said:


> I'm not sure what you mean by "take over" TSR's copyrights, but TSR was a subentity within Wizards until about 1998 when they stopped using the TSR name and logo (IIRC an Alternity book was the first RPG book produced by the formerly-TSR staff that used the Wizards logo rather than the TSR logo).





I don't think he realizes WOTC bought TSR lock, stock, and barrel. IE, anything and everything TSR owned, WOTC now owns.

Plus copyright has lasted much, much longer than 50 years since 1978 in the USA. Trademarks are what have short periods of duration, in comparison.


----------



## DaveMage

seankreynolds said:


> I hear that.
> 
> "Problems with the printers" may be familiar to some people online circa January 1997....





Oh, yes.


----------



## merelycompetent

seankreynolds said:


> I hear that.
> 
> "Problems with the printers" may be familiar to some people online circa January 1997....




Ugh. Let's not go there just yet. You may remember my old moniker, Guardian, from that time period. Your point, however, is most emphatically understood.

On a related tangent, the more I look at 4E core (1st 3 rulebooks), Pathfinder, and my own houserules, the more I see how 4E *could* have easily been an evolutionary, backwards-compatible change in the game that wouldn't require trashing/major revamping of campaigns in progress. It may be my own bias coloring my opinions... No. I'll stop there. Back on topic.

I get the impression that all the public statements/information that are coming from WotC representatives are carefully vetted by legal and/or marketing. This is expected - they have to proceed carefully to protect the court case(s). WotC's next moves will be very telling - and I mean *moves* as in actions, not filtered text responses that can easily be misinterpreted.


----------



## avin

Can anybody explains what's this "problems with printers" about?


----------



## Nyarlathotep

avin said:


> Can anybody explains what's this "problems with printers" about?




http://www.enworld.org/forum/publis...tandards-d20-system-guide-17.html#post1115145


----------



## Roman

seankreynolds said:


> I hear that.
> 
> "Problems with the printers" may be familiar to some people online circa January 1997....




Can you explain for those of us not familiar with that? Thanks!


----------



## Nagol

avin said:


> Can anybody explains what's this "problems with printers" about?




In the late '90s TSR was being starved of cash to the point that announced prooduct couldn't be provided for sale.

TSR used "problems with the printers" as a common cover story for its financial troubles.  Sometimes it really was trouble with the printers such as when the printer wouldn't release items until cash appeared.


----------



## seankreynolds

It's December 1997. TSR's just had another round of layoffs right before Christmas. The company owes the printing company some money, due to an earlier arrangement TSR's president made to get some books out the door. Printer says, "cough up some money." TSR says, "we don't have any cash right now, but the distributor just made another order of the Player's Handbook... if you print that, we can ship it to them, and they'll pay us for it, and we can pay you." Printer said, "no, we want to be paid before we print anything else for you."
So we waited.
And waited.
And people started to wonder why their subscription issues of Dragon and Dungeon hadn't appeared in their mail yet. The reason is that they hadn't been printed yet.
Then people started to wonder where all the January products were. The reason is that they hadn't been printed yet.
And here I am, TSR Online Coordinator, the online face of the company. Nobody gave me anything official to say about the situation, so I said nothing. And the emails kept rolling in. And the newsgroup posts asking the same questions. And still I was given nothing official to say.
And people were getting angry.

So I took the truth that I knew, and made a statement that was true, though it didn't give anything close to the whole story, because I wasn't authorized to say anything specific. What I said was, "Due to a problem with the printers, we have been unable to release any new products or magazines since December."

Which is true: the problem was that the printer wouldn't print anything for us until we paid them.

I wouldn't be surprised if the WotC customer service people were given a very limited amount of information (if that), told that they could only say X, Y, and Z, and yet are left holding the bag when people come asking for more information. It's a sucky position to be in, and they have my sympathies.

Edit: Note I am NOT comparing TSR's financial situation at that time to Wizards's situation now, I'm just talking about the tough position customer service-type people get put in when things are happening at the company that a part of the fan base is negatively vocal about.


----------



## Nyarlathotep

Roman said:


> Can you explain for those of us not familiar with that? Thanks!




So the link in my post above is a little vaguely named....



			
				SKR said:
			
		

> I'll point you back to 1997 and a certain "problem with the printers that's delaying our products" statement posted by yours truly on the TSR site, when the actual problem was that TSR had no money to pay the printers. Everyone at TSR knew the truth, but nobody could say anything.




Edit: Beaten to the punch ... kinda.


----------



## Roman

Nyarlathotep said:


> So the link in my post above is a little vaguely named....




No, it's just that ENWorld for me is extremely slow (it usually is) and it takes more than a minute to load a thread or the reply window and then another minute before it posts, so by the time I posted, the question had already been asked by somebody else and you had already provided a link...


----------



## Mephistopheles

Scribble said:


> Because again I don't thibnk it's about stopping piracy altogether. As you said, it happens. But I think WoTC realized that how they WERE attempting to mitigate the problem didn't work at all. And since they were making the pdfs available day one, it probably actually helepd the pirates. (Now people who might otherwise have gone out and bought the book because they couldn't find a good pirate copy quick enough were finding them on day one, or at most day two. It's not about the hardcore pirates. It's about the people who are generally willing to buy stuff they want unless presented with an increadibly easy alternative.)




It is probably true that it helped pirates, but it is also probably true that it helped customers. I still question the soundness of a response that works against the wants of your customers in an effort to secure the business of people who are obtaining your product without paying for it.


----------



## Roman

seankreynolds said:


> It's December 1997. TSR's just had another round of layoffs right before Christmas. The company owes the printing company some money, due to an earlier arrangement TSR's president made to get some books out the door. Printer says, "cough up some money." TSR says, "we don't have any cash right now, but the distributor just made another order of the Player's Handbook... if you print that, we can ship it to them, and they'll pay us for it, and we can pay you." Printer said, "no, we want to be paid before we print anything else for you."
> So we waited.
> And waited.
> And people started to wonder why their subscription issues of Dragon and Dungeon hadn't appeared in their mail yet. The reason is that they hadn't been printed yet.
> Then people started to wonder where all the January products were. The reason is that they hadn't been printed yet.
> And here I am, TSR Online Coordinator, the online face of the company. Nobody gave me anything official to say about the situation, so I said nothing. And the emails kept rolling in. And the newsgroup posts asking the same questions. And still I was given nothing official to say.
> And people were getting angry.
> 
> So I took the truth that I knew, and made a statement that was true, though it didn't give anything close to the whole story, because I wasn't authorized to say anything specific. What I said was, "Due to a problem with the printers, we have been unable to release any new products or magazines since December."
> 
> Which is true: the problem was that the printer wouldn't print anything for us until we paid them.
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised if the WotC customer service people were given a very limited amount of information (if that), told that they could only say X, Y, and Z, and yet are left holding the bag when people come asking for more information. It's a sucky position to be in, and they have my sympathies.
> 
> Edit: Note I am NOT comparing TSR's financial situation at that time to Wizards's situation now, I'm just talking about the tough position customer service-type people get put in when things are happening at the company that a part of the fan base is negatively vocal about.




Thanks a lot for the explanation! I appreciate it. I also agree with not taking it out on the unwilling and possibly even unwitting messangers (customer service people) even if I think the company is at the very least being misleading. That said - I don't think anybody has done that here - nobody is blaming the messanger or customer service for this.


----------



## merelycompetent

Roman said:


> Thanks a lot for the explanation! I appreciate it. I also agree with not taking it out on the unwilling and possibly even unwitting messangers (customer service people) even if I think the company is at the very least being misleading. That said - I don't think anybody has done that here - nobody is blaming the messanger or customer service for this.




It helped a great deal that Sean (aka VeggieBoy) had, by that point, established a good reputation on r.g.f.dnd (usenet). The vitriol directed towards him was vastly reduced from what his predecessor in that position earned. It was also blatantly clear by that point that the problems originated well above Sean's level. I'm sure that there are archives of the whole thing stored somewhere, if you really want the gritty details. Even so, Sean had to endure an undeserved amount of..., well, a certain grandmother would object strenuously to the accurate, technical terminology, but you get the picture.

Companies often put their frontline, PR people in very uncomfortable, and untenable positions. The public/audience equally often forgets that as frustration rises.


----------



## Dausuul

Roman said:


> There might be other reasons as to why WotC did what it did, but 'fighting piracy' does not even figure on my list of possibilities, because that would be so mind-bogglingly stupid and ineffectual (and actually likely to increase piracy) that it just cannot be.




You've never worked in a corporate environment, have you?


----------



## William Ronald

I am still going over this complicated affair, but I would like to make a few comments based on what I have read so far.

All businesses, I believe, depend heavily on their reputation.  Indeed, perhaps credibility  is the ONLY thing that companies have in the end.  If you have faith in a company and its products, you will patronize that company.  If not, you will likely move on elsewhere.

I do not like the removal of the PDFs.  First, it does seem to have infuriated a great many gamers.  People were expecting products and cannot get them now.  So, I understand the anger.  What I am puzzled at is what seems to be poor handling of the public relations storm around this.  (I realize that often companies can't always comment on some things, such as legal matters and future plans.)  I have to wonder why things were handled in this way.  It has hurt the company's image with many customers, and may make other companies more reluctant to carry WotC's products or create works derived from WotC's products.  


I do understand why WotC is concerned about piracy, but I am not sure what can be done to stop it.  For every way to stop piracy, someone will find a way around it.

So, I would hope that we get some more communication soon from WotC, particularly on what happens next.  At the same time, we should remember that while we may hold different opinions in this thread that we are bound together by a love of gaming and a desire to have fun.  So, I would hope that in the end, we will continue to talk with each other.  I like to think that what unites us is ultimately more important than what divides us.  

So, let's keep talking -- whether or not we think WotC was justified in its actions or what game we play -- and hopefully we can all meet as friends at the gaming table.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol

Mephistopheles said:


> It is probably true that it helped pirates, but it is also probably true that it helped customers. I still question the soundness of a response that works against the wants of your customers in an effort to secure the business of people who are obtaining your product without paying for it.




Exactly.  Pirates are not customers.  Customers are customers...except when you refuse to sell to them, at which point they stop being customers.

Rule #1 of running a successful business: Sell products to customers.


----------



## Storm Raven

JohnRTroy said:


> PR doesn't mean squat if it means losing your rights.
> 
> When you discover copyright violations, you are obligated to defend them.  If you don't, that non-action can be used against you later.




No. You are not.

This bit of misinformation gets trotted out every time a case involving copyright shows up, and it is dead wrong. As in, the statute governing copyrights is exactly the opposite of this.

You can lose trademark protection if you do not defend your trademark. You do not lose copyright protection until the period of years defined in the copyright statute elapses, no matter how much copying you ignore.

Copyright. Trademark. Two different things, with two different standards.


----------



## Orius

Korgoth said:


> I dunno. Maybe this is all a tragically ineffectual response to online piracy... but I can't help but think that perhaps WOTC has realized that a _lot_ of people consider 4E inferior to the legacy products. And they're tired of competing with those golden games... so out they go.




People have been bringing up that view the whole thread, but it seems a tad paranoid to me.  But that's nothing new in discussions like this.  

Anyway, pulling all PDFs doesn't seem like just cutting the legacy stuff.  The stated problem was PHB2 piracy.  Some people of course don't believe anything WotC says, so reject everything they say.  But the PHB2 problem is believable, especially if they're worried about other new books being heavily pirated. 

 Also, if they were cutting legacy support, wouldn't they have pulled the site archives?  Everything is still there, the free old edition PDFs, the 3.x articles, and so on.  Granted, it's not the easiest to find if you haven't been there in a while, but the site's always been kind of jumbled.





Miyaa said:


> Piracy is a lot like getting repair parts for your car from the junkyard. It's used, maybe not as high quality as you might get from your quality (insert car brand here) dealership, but you might get the selection that maybe more suitable to your problem. And it's much cheaper than having to deal with your dealership. But you could also be getting a piece that was just as defective, if not more so than the problem piece you have in the car already.




No, getting pirated stuff is like getting parts from a chop shop; they're obtained illegally.  Getting gaming material from a used book store is more like getting parts from a junkyard.


----------



## Echohawk

Orius said:


> Also, if they were cutting legacy support, wouldn't they have pulled the site archives?  Everything is still there, the free old edition PDFs, the 3.x articles, and so on.  Granted, it's not the easiest to find if you haven't been there in a while, but the site's always been kind of jumbled.



At the risk of straying off topic, I'd like to say thanks to WotC for maintaining such a thorough archive of their web site content. The lay out of their web site could perhaps be improved, but it is very cool that URLs I have for D&D articles published back in 2001 or 2002 still work just fine.


----------



## Storm Raven

Klaus said:


> I'm not Charles, but I know of cases where a company lost their copyrights after failing to protect those copyrights publicly.




It is highly unlikely, since copyrights don't work that way. You may know of cases where a company lost their trademark after failing to protect it.

Trademarks are not copyrights, and don't work the same way.


----------



## thecasualoblivion

I think people might be missing the big picture here. What we are lacking here is numbers. How many PDFs are purchased(and in that vein, how much money WotC makes off of them) compared to how many are pirated illegally. If pirated copies are significantly more common than legitimately purchased ones, I don't see where WotC had any real choice here. The issue is competition. They essentially are in competition with free pirated copies of themselves. If the ratio is really bad, they are in an untenable position.


----------



## Kask

Orius said:


> The stated problem was PHB2 piracy.  Some people of course don't believe anything WotC says,




Here's a good way to detect a lie.  WotC says PH2 is being pirated so we are stopping the sale of ALL PDFs.  Okay, how does ceasing the sale of a D&D 1st Ed DMG PDF have anything to do with 4.0 PHB2 pirating?  Answer, nothing, ergo a lie.

So, it's not that people don't believe anything WotC says, it's that people with an IQ can see when they are blatantly fibbing...


----------



## Kask

thecasualoblivion said:


> If pirated copies are significantly more common than legitimately purchased ones, I don't see where WotC had any real choice here.




No.  Pulling PDFs that are already all over the net does NOTHING to stop the piracy of those items.  So, that is a lie.  It ONLY keeps legit customers from purchasing legacy product.  Now, that is a strat if you think an old product line is damaging an existing one.  That is what the pulling of legacy product is ALL about.


----------



## vsper

I seem to be a bit late in learning this. I got word when LPJ they were having a sale.

I already own everything from Wizards (and TSR) from 1st through 3.5 in dead tree form. I was starting to collect the pdf from RPGnow. I have only a couple hundred dollars in Wizards products, which I now find I can no longer access. I am as many folks a bit mad about what I feel is being robbed. I hadn't followed WOTC to 4th but it seems with this action they want none of my money.

The cynical side of me wonders if they are still selling far more 3.5 than they would like and this is their attempt to kill it off. 

I have decided to take the $30 a month I would have spent on WOTC products and will be investing in 3rd Party stuff, which I already spend $30 a month on. I wish all 3rd party publishers luck and as long as you keep producing I will keep buying

Vsper


----------



## thecasualoblivion

Kask said:


> No.  Pulling PDFs that are already all over the net does NOTHING to stop the piracy of those items.  So, that is a lie.  It ONLY keeps legit customers from purchasing legacy product.  Now, that is a strat if you think an old product line is damaging an existing one.  That is what the pulling of legacy product is ALL about.




Actually it does, in a sense. As long as Wizards is providing PDFs they are participating in the PDF industry as a whole, piracy and all. If they are being buried under a tide of piracy, the logical course of action is to remove themselves from the PDF industry altogether. 

How many people actually purchase PDFs of legacy products(as opposed to downloading free pirated copies)? I expect the number to be very low, *and may not even justify the amount of work required to make them available*. Making PDFs available takes some amount of work and bandwith, and both of those things cost money. There are many torrents available that are huge libraries of pirated PDFs of legacy material, that can be downloaded after one simple search and one click. How is WotC supposed to compete with that? 

The question is not about piracy and WotC as a whole, but does piracy make the WotC PDF initiative not worth the bother/expense? Bowing out of the PDF marked does not stop piracy, but piracy is rampant with or without WotCs participation.


----------



## Kask

thecasualoblivion said:


> Actually it does, in a sense.




In a _sense_ it helps solve the energy crisis.  In reality it does nothing to stop those PDFs from being pirated...


----------



## Obryn

vsper said:


> The cynical side of me wonders if they are still selling far more 3.5 than they would like and this is their attempt to kill it off.



I put this theory in the tinfoil hat category, and I scratch my head whenever I see it.  I think a lot of people would _like_ it to be true, but this move isn't evidence for it.

There would be no reason whatsoever to take down _both_ the 4e and older edition materials, if they simply wanted to stop selling the older editions.

Yes, there would have been an uproar about removing the older editions from sale.  I can't imagine the uproar would have been _larger_, though, if they had only removed the older editions and left the 4e materials for sale.  You can come up with scenarios where it somehow makes sense if you add on about three or four assumptions, but occam's razor doesn't give me any reason to doubt Wizards' official statements here.

-O


----------



## Nagol

thecasualoblivion said:


> <snip>
> 
> How many people actually purchase PDFs of legacy products(as opposed to downloading free pirated copies)? I expect the number to be very low, *and may not even justify the amount of work required to make them available*. Making PDFs available takes some amount of work and bandwith, and both of those things cost money. There are many torrents available that are huge libraries of pirated PDFs of legacy material, that can be downloaded after one simple search and one click. How is WotC supposed to compete with that?
> 
> <snip>




There is some work at the start of the process of presenting pdfs for sale (preparing a master, distributing to interested retailers), but once the pdfs are available, there is no work, no cost, and no effort other than that of collecting monies paid by the retailer and performing appropriate due diligence.

I could easily understand announcing no future product would use the pdf format due to piracy concerns.  Future books would have to be pirated the "old-fashioned" way.

Pulling down already available pdfs accomplishes nothing with regard to pirated product (since piracy in this sense acts like counterfeiting -- pulling the original has no effect on pirated stock), costs money (legal contacts, contract reviews, official notice, PR statements, management meetings, potential contract renegotiation), reduces future earnings (people really did buy them), and because of the communication tactics created great angst and annoyance among the hooby base.  Sort of a lose-lose-lose-lose proposition.


----------



## funkytable

*A new gamers opinion*

I think my opinion on this subject is noteworthy for one huge reason:

I am a new Tabletop Gamer. So new, I've only played for 3 months total.

My brother and I bought a game called Descent Journeys in the Dark for Christmas because I remembered how much I enjoyed HeroQuest as a kid (The only thing I had ever played that comes close to DND prior to Descent). Once I went back to home far away from my brother, I decided I wanted to continue that style of gameplay, so I turned online.

As I researched for games that could be played online that were similar to Descent, the most famous of all RPG's of course caught my eye. I researched DND and found it to not only be like Descent, but more fun because Character personality is involved. I enjoy creative writing, so this looked even more appealing.

But I still needed to play online, I couldn't do a DND group that meets once a week. Plus that sounded more like Improv theater than my interest in Creative Writing. So then I found a Play by Post site that hosted DND games. I was hooked.

Then I needed to decide how to purchase the materials for DND. *My wife gets extremely annoyed whenever I purchase anything not on the basis of money, but on the basis of space.* She doesn't like a lot of books on the bookshelf, and she certainly would hate it if I started buying miniatures (She bitterly tolerated Descent). So I researched if there were some sort of Digital Distribution for DND materials. There was the DNDinsider, but I wary of monthly subscriptions. That lead me to RPGnow and their PDF store, and I was thrilled. I started purchasing one book a month.


And yes, I went into my local stores, both chains and a game shop, and flipped through the books available to me before I bought them online. I did this twice. I didn't read the entire things like retailers get upset about with comics. I just flipped through them.

I logged in today to purchase a copy of the Monster Manual (The PHB's were more important to me out of the gate) and I learned the terrible news that they no longer sell WotC products.

So here's my response. I will NEVER purchase any DND products that are not Digital. I will NEVER pay a monthly subscription for a service that I do not get to keep once the monthly subscription is over. So that pretty much leaves PDF's as the only option for me to enjoy RPG gaming. I find it confusing that right after WotC wins a new customer, they point me to the exit. They were going to get some of my money today, but now they won't.

Again, let me stress the number 1 reason for this. *My wife will not let me purchase the hard copies of WotC products*. Both she and I get frustrated with too much clutter, and we don't need a new hobby taking up space in our house. However, space on a hard drive is totally fine.

So yes it sucks that some Retail stores may be getting hit bad by Amazon or PDF sales. But unfortunately, that's the way the business world turns. I doubt Obama will promote a stimulus bill to save geeky hobby shops, so it looks like the retailers are on their own to figure out how to stay in business or opt to sell now before it gets really bad. I wish you guys the best, but at the same time if WotC wants my money, they have to release their product digitally. The idea of forcing a dying business model (print media) for the sake of locally owned businesses is heartwarming but ultimately fatal.


----------



## Obryn

thecasualoblivion said:


> The question is not about piracy and WotC as a whole, but does piracy make the WotC PDF initiative not worth the bother/expense? Bowing out of the PDF marked does not stop piracy, but piracy is rampant with or without WotCs participation.



This is a good point.

I'll also note that the direct-from-WotC PDFs are excellently done, and far higher quality than scanned (or scan/OCR) PDFs.

-O


----------



## Storm Raven

thecasualoblivion said:


> How many people actually purchase PDFs of legacy products(as opposed to downloading free pirated copies)? I expect the number to be very low, *and may not even justify the amount of work required to make them available*. Making PDFs available takes some amount of work and bandwith, and both of those things cost money.




For .pdfs that are already available the work is done. For .pdfs being sold by Paizo and RPGNow, the bandwidth is paid for by someone other than WotC.

How does keeping .pdfs available under these circumstances cost WotC any money?


----------



## Storm Raven

funkytable said:


> Then I needed to decide how to purchase the materials for DND. *My wife gets extremely annoyed whenever I purchase anything not on the basis of money, but on the basis of space.* She doesn't like a lot of books on the bookshelf, and she certainly would hate it if I started buying miniatures (She bitterly tolerated Descent).





Given that I have over 4,000 books (not counting the books for my kids), I would need to get a new wife.


----------



## darjr

Storm Raven said:


> For .pdfs that are already available the work is done. For .pdfs being sold by Paizo and RPGNow, the bandwidth is paid for by someone other than WotC.
> 
> How does keeping .pdfs available under these circumstances cost WotC any money?




Maintenace of the contract and fees from those companies. Someone has to manage that. I'd think this would have been obvious.


----------



## vsper

Obryn said:


> I put this theory in the tinfoil hat category, and I scratch my head whenever I see it.  I think a lot of people would _like_ it to be true, but this move isn't evidence for it.




I wouldn't say it quite qualifies for tinfoil hat. I don't know about wanting it to be true. I would like to see Wizards do well. 

My reasoning for saying that is when they told retailers you can do 3.5 or 4 not both. As incidental evidence I know that two bookstore chains have had poor sales and two FLGS owners I am friends with told me of poor sales.

Having been in big business when you have had a legacy product with huge popularity and a new product that is getting luke warm support you try to kill the legacy hoping it will force the customer to the new product. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.



Obryn said:


> There would be no reason whatsoever to take down _both_ the 4e and older edition materials, if they simply wanted to stop selling the older editions.




Actually I wonder why take down the old versions to stop pirating of new stuff. If all the old stuff is so readily available from piracy seems silly. Taking it down now serves no purpose but to cut a revenue stream. 

Making PDF's available doesn't really change Piracy. Take a look at Palladium books. They refuse to create PDF's and I just googled Palladium and torrent and it looks like it has almost everything they ever printed.

So if they did this to prevent piracy it was pretty foolish. It looks like they shot the horse to keep people from stealing it.  I assume someone there would realize that so I think there is another motive.




Obryn said:


> Yes, there would have been an uproar about removing the older editions from sale.  I can't imagine the uproar would have been _larger_, though, if they had only removed the older editions and left the 4e materials for sale.  You can come up with scenarios where it somehow makes sense if you add on about three or four assumptions, but occam's razor doesn't give me any reason to doubt Wizards' official statements here.
> 
> -O




I like using occam's razor. Here I would say removing profits to stop the innevitable isn't the simplest solution.

I am not saying you are wrong. Unfortunately, or fortunately depending on your point of view, we can not know why they made the decision they made unless we were in the room at the time. I was just stating that is how I feel. Not a fact, just a feeling


vsper


----------



## JohnRTroy

Storm Raven said:


> It is highly unlikely, since copyrights don't work that way. You may know of cases where a company lost their trademark after failing to protect it.
> 
> Trademarks are not copyrights, and don't work the same way.




I didn't mean to say you legally lose your right to defend copyrights like you would with trademarks.  But I'm sure a defense lawyer might be able to argue issues if they can prove "selective enforcement", at least enough to give pause to a Jury or Judge.


----------



## Jamfke

darjr said:


> Maintenace of the contract and fees from those companies. Someone has to manage that. I'd think this would have been obvious.




Sorry, no.  The contract is a one time affair, and "fees from those companies" are taken out of each sale of product.  The only thing WotC has to do is collect their payout each month, which is basically cashing a check sent by the online retailer, and I'm pretty sure Wizzards has an accountant flunky that handles that for all their income.

Selling PDFs through an online retailer does nothing but earn them money.


----------



## Storm Raven

JohnRTroy said:


> I didn't mean to say you legally lose your right to defend copyrights like you would with trademarks.  But I'm sure a defense lawyer might be able to argue issues if they can prove "selective enforcement", at least enough to give pause to a Jury or Judge.




Unlikely. I've never seen a case where that argument has carried any weight. I haven't been involved in any copyright cases in a while though, so maybe there's been something in the last couple years. I'd need to see a transcript of such a case to find it plausible.


----------



## Staffan

MerricB said:


> I always think Ryan's posts are worth reading and considering, and I do in this case as well. However, as this is the person who failed to get MasterTools up and running, any discussion of the lack of hybridization of D&D and computer gaming must keep that in mind.



I feel I have to step up and defend Ryan Dancey on this point. Unless I'm totally misremembering things, Master Tools was originally supposed to be overseen by Jim Butler, and was originally supposed to be something along the lines of what they've shown us of the D&D Gaming Table (except without the online component) plus character/monster generators. After numerous delays (partially due to the company they outsourced stuff to spending their time and budget on things like sound effects, which Butler and/or the actual creators mentioned in their periodic updates), Dancey took over and narrowed the focus of the product to what eventually became E-tools. That might also have been related to Hasbro selling off rights to make computer games based on their products to Infogrames (later Atari).


----------



## Staffan

funkytable said:


> She doesn't like a lot of books on the bookshelf,



What's a bookshelf for if not being filled with books?


----------



## Jeff Wilder

Storm Raven said:


> Unlikely. I've never seen a case where that argument has carried any weight. I haven't been involved in any copyright cases in a while though, so maybe there's been something in the last couple years. I'd need to see a transcript of such a case to find it plausible.



If you're an IP attorney, Storm Raven lemme ask:

Would knowing failure to pursue copyright infringement impact the ability to win a judgment of recovery _for that specific infringement_?  (In other words, if you know I'm pirating movies from your studio and you make no move to stop me for six months -- say, even to the point of an internal memo stating, "Nah, not worth the effort" -- at which point I stop of my own accord, can that knowing failure keep you from getting any recovery from me if you change your mind?)

Because this seems to me to be pretty plausible, in the realm of equity, if not law.  (Both of which, of course, courts can consider.)


----------



## Storm Raven

darjr said:


> Maintenace of the contract and fees from those companies. Someone has to manage that. I'd think this would have been obvious.




The contracts have already been executed, so "maintenance" is likely trivial, if anything. Managing the fees is simple bookeeping, which they probably have people on staff for. It is almost impossible to imagine a scenario in which the marginal costs of the accounting work involved are not completely trivial.


----------



## funkytable

Staffan said:


> What's a bookshelf for if not being filled with books?





Maybe I should have just said she doesn't like a lot of bookshelves. You can put knickacks or pictures on shelves too though.


----------



## mhensley

No.


----------



## Storm Raven

Jeff Wilder said:


> If you're an IP attorney, Storm Raven lemme ask:




I am a lawyer. I have handled some trademark issues, and a few copyright matters, but not for a while (I work for the government these days, and copyrights are not so much of an issue for us). But:



> _Would knowing failure to pursue copyright infringement impact the ability to win a judgment of recovery for that specific infringement?  (In other words, if you know I'm pirating movies from your studio and you make no move to stop me for six months -- say, even to the point of an internal memo stating, "Nah, not worth the effort" -- at which point I stop of my own accord, can that knowing failure keep you from getting any recovery from me if you change your mind?)_




Probably not. The only legal theory I could think of that might prevent you from recovering in these circumstances are laches, and that isn't normally applicable in cases where a statute of limitations in in place. I know of more than one case in which a plaintiff allowed a defendant to run up a fair amount of potential damages and then stepped in - that didn't prevent the plaintiff from recovering.

If the plaintiff gives the defendant some sort of concrete basis for believing their copying is okay, that might run against them (it would then depend on whether they gave implied consent), but that would require some sort of actual communication between the copyright holder and the infringer, not merely a lack of action by the copyright holder.

What you are trying make out here is analogous to a case for adverse possession - if you live on a piece of property under some sort of colorable claim for a long time without the true owner taking action against you, then you end up owning it. But adverse possession cases are hard to make, the duration needed is usually twenty years or more. The courts simply don't like squatters very much, and don't have a lot of sympathy for copyright infringers.

Disclaimer: I am not offering legal advice to anyone online. Not only am I probably not licensed in the jurisdictions most of you are living in, I do not know any of the specific facts of any case you may be dealing with. Anyone relying upon what I say in this thread to take actions does so at their own risk. The information I am providing here is for general educational purposes, and based upon my own experiences and research. If you have actual legal questions, go and conslut directly with a lawyer in your home jurisdiction.


----------



## Jeff Wilder

Storm Raven said:


> If you have actual legal questions, go and conslut directly with a lawyer in your home jurisdiction.



Lemme tell ya, there are some lawyers in my firm I would _love_ to conslut with.


----------



## funkytable

mhensley said:


> _Comment deleted by admin._




Oh good lord, she just doesn't like books. Big deal.


----------



## Jeff Wilder

Storm Raven said:


> Probably not. The only legal theory I could think of that might prevent you from recovering in these circumstances are laches, and that isn't normally applicable in cases where a statute of limitations in in place.



I'm not exactly doubting you, but according to my old Remedies outline, laches can not only be asserted when there's a statute of limitations, but the laches period can actually be "much shorter" than the statute of limitations.

Now it's possible that this is specifically different with respect to copyright law.  It's also possible I made a horrible Remedies outline.  It's also possible I should stop wasting my time and get something constructive done today.


----------



## Storm Raven

Jeff Wilder said:


> I'm not exactly doubting you, but according to my old Remedies outline, laches can not only be asserted when there's a statute of limitations, but the laches period can actually be "much shorter" than the statute of limitations.




Laches _can_ be applied in a situation where a statute of limitations exists, and if it does, then it is almost certainly shorter than the SoL. But courts (in my experience) don't like to apply laches under those circumstances, finding that it usurps the authority of the legislature in many cases. I'm not saying you couldn't make a laches argument, just that you'd likely face a very uphill battle if you did.


----------



## borfaxer

*Possible Reason for WotC Pulling Pdfs*

I'm afraid I only had the time to read the first 17 pages of this thread (two days ago), so someone may have already suggested this idea.  If not, I'm confident enough that I'm right to post and accept public ridicule if I'm not:

This morning it occurred to me that the probable reason for WotC pulling their pdfs is that they no longer have an effective watermarking system.  Other than the visible watermark with email and order #, etc., their lawsuit reveals the (previously hidden) existence of another watermark of the account number embedded in a pixel in each pdf.  Now that they have had to reveal this through the lawsuit, they need to come up with a different watermarking scheme so pirates can't completely scrub the pdfs that are sold.

If this is correct, then those of us who legitimately bought pdfs and only bought pdfs of RPG material lost our access because WotC (and RPGNow) depended on "security through obscurity".  Hopefully they will quickly come up with a better design that doesn't depend on secrecy and re-release the pdfs.  They can contact me if they need some help with that design.

Why would they pull old (non-watermarked) pdfs too?  Probably they have decided to only provide watermarked versions of any pdfs from now on.  Hopefully they will discount them to reflect the reduced utility to the consumer of having a watermark.

The real question this brings up is: what are the other publishers who insist on watermarks going to do right now if their watermarks are now completely removable because WotC revealed the secret part of the watermark in their lawsuit?  If I were a publisher depending on a secret to ensure the security of the watermark, I would be pretty mad that WotC revealed it.  Then again, I wouldn't be surprised if most publishers didn't know the secret either.  Do all the watermarked pdfs at RPGNow use the same system?  I would be surprised if they didn't.

Of course, this doesn't eliminate piracy.  If that was the only secret about the watermark system, all the watermarked WotC pdfs sold up to now can now be completely stripped of their watermarks.  However, stopping pdf sales and coming up with a new watermark system is the only thing that can be done about it now, particularly if the secret had to be revealed in the lawsuits.


----------



## Odhanan

Obryn said:


> There would be no reason whatsoever to take down _both_ the 4e and older edition materials, if they simply wanted to stop selling the older editions.
> -O




I object that first, there is no reason to pull the plug on older materials if the real issue is the piracy of 4e PDFs.

We are told WotC is exploring new ways in which to deliver these online formats. Fine.

If later we see 4e materials reappearing in online format delivered via DDI or other WotC venues, and if, at the same time, we do not see older editions' materials resurface, or very selectively so, your argument here will have lost its appeal.


----------



## Shadowsong666

Odhanan said:


> I object that first, there is no reason to pull the plug on older materials if the real issue is the piracy of 4e PDFs.
> 
> We are told WotC is exploring new ways in which to deliver these online formats. Fine.
> 
> If later we see 4e materials reappearing in online format delivered via DDI or other WotC venues, and if, at the same time, we do not see older editions' materials resurface, or very selectively so, your argument here will have lost its appeal.




The problem i also have with the whole thing is simply that WotC looks like they act first, think second and communicate sometimes later. And when they communicate, they simply do not offer enough informations for the community to satisfy their desire for information.

Sorry, but we do not live in the 80s anymore. Where is the problem to just make the lawsuit ready, let no new pdfs get published, think about a new way of delivery and when present - start the new delivery system? Where is the problem in easily communicating the when, how and why to your really loyal userbase before it happens (in a civilized time frame)? Don't tell me its a matter of time. Really - i am not believing that. And neither should anyone else imho.

I simply believe that people are making the wrong choices without really thinking things through. Thats sad and hurts.

I really know how hard it is to communicate something to the masses (having a mmo CM background) if the folks above don't give you the OK for the informations the community desires, but that doesn't change my view at the receiving end as a customer here. I respect Scott Rouse and think that his job is really hard and hope he gets payed well enough to the stuff he does, but i really want that to change. Thats like a communication crisis and the longer we don't get any information the bigger it gets imho. And thats a thing that really pisses me off as i know that the whole thing that happened could have gotten another spin with the right way of telling folks how it goes, why it got the point and how itwill go on in the future. But that needs facts which WoTC isn't really good at. Thats really one level with Funcom. Sorry.


----------



## ShadowDenizen

> How many PDFs are purchased(and in that vein, how much money WotC makes off of them) compared to how many are pirated illegally. If pirated copies are significantly more common than legitimately purchased ones, I don't see where WotC had any real choice here. The issue is competition. They essentially are in competition with free pirated copies of themselves. If the ratio is really bad, they are in an untenable position.




Yes, we all acknowledge piracy is rampant, and it hurts publishers, retailers and legitimate consumers like. But it is unfortunately, a fact of modern life.  

I certainly don't fault WotC for pursuing litigation.  BUT, with this new stance, they're currently not even giving themselves a CHANCE to compete in the growing PDF market. 

For example, I have been buying older edition PDF's (mostly Planescape, DarkSun and Ravenloft stuff I wasn't able to get when they were in print); I only need a few items to complete my collections, but now that seems like an impossibility to do legally for the time being... 

That said, I'd dispute that it's more than just numbers at stake.
Beyond the sheer numbers, other factors WotC should consider include:

1) Fan backlash, including alienation of the "PDF-only" gamers, a growing market.
2) Retailer backlash.  How is Paizo/DTRPG, etc., supposed to react to this quite-sudden 180 degree shift in policies?
3) Public perception (this ties in to to #1 above.)
4) Company reputation- And this is something that was ALREADY, it seems to me, on shaky ground (IE: The Dragon/Dungeon debacle from a few years ago, the GSL fiasoco, and the DDI still being a hot mess almost a YEAR after 4E debuted..)


----------



## darjr

Storm Raven said:


> The contracts have already been executed, so "maintenance" is likely trivial, if anything. Managing the fees is simple bookeeping, which they probably have people on staff for. It is almost impossible to imagine a scenario in which the marginal costs of the accounting work involved are not completely trivial.




I dunno, I'll have to take your word for it.

For me, if this were a way to eliminate the competition to D&D from D&D I'd think we would see some move towards taking down the clones.


----------



## Roman

OGL protects the outshoots of D&D, so it is doubtful that WotC could do that.


----------



## darjr

Roman said:


> OGL protects the outshoots of D&D, so it is doubtful that WotC could do that.



Yes, I agree.

But its about intent. If they were into bone headed moves to eliminate D&D competing with D&D would they not do the next bone headed thing and go after them? They have not.


----------



## Dumnbunny

thecasualoblivion said:


> I think people might be missing the big picture here. What we are lacking here is numbers. How many PDFs are purchased(and in that vein, how much money WotC makes off of them) compared to how many are pirated illegally. If pirated copies are significantly more common than legitimately purchased ones, I don't see where WotC had any real choice here. The issue is competition. They essentially are in competition with free pirated copies of themselves. If the ratio is really bad, they are in an untenable position.



I don't follow. If the ratio was, to use completely made up numbers, 3 legit copies for every 4 pirated copies, how is Wizards helped by the ration going to 0 legit copies for every 4 pirated copies? Or, to be more realistic (or cynical), 0 legit for 5 or 6 pirated.


----------



## carmachu

Vyvyan Basterd said:


> It's when one uses hyperbole to equate the design of a new game system to that of being forcably terminated from a job.
> 
> It insinuates that WotC set out to intentionally lose you as a customer. The decision to no longer be their customer due to the creation of 4E is your own.
> 
> The more apt hyperbole would be that you quit being a customer. Actually, that's not even hyperbole and is more appropriate for these boards per the moderator's instructions.





No, no it wouldnt at all, be more apt that one quit being a customer. And its not quite right to say one has been fired as a customer either.

Its akin to GW currently. 4e and GW's newest move its more approriate to say that we(that is the folks that have been around since beginning or near begining, say roughly 30+) are not the target audience anymore. 

That would be entirely approriate to say. And perhaps fairly accurate.  *shrug* And much like in GW, you can be of the target audience and like and enjoy the product.(for example, my wife and some of her friends LOVE Twilight, but their not the author's target audience.)


----------



## jonshaft

If you want a pdf borrow your friends book, scan it and send WotC some cash in a plain brown envelope. If you don't want the pdf and do want the book, buy it. If you want the pdf but don't want to pay for it, download Pathfinder.


----------

