News CD Projekt to fine Witcher 2 pirates

Preordered the game the instant I got the offer to my e-mail. Really enjoyed the first game, and I sincerely hope their plan to go DRM-free doesn't seriously backfire on and bankrupt them.

And, to every pirate troll whining about them taking legal actions against your sorry thief asses, please go and choke on bile. You people make me sick.

 

All i can say to cd projekt is good luck.

 

I'm with you on that, the very fact they're offering it DRM free should be commended!!

Yeah I can't argue with that either; not an easy task and talk like that is, unfortunately, like a red rag to a bull. The bull being people who don't believe in paying for the hard work and effort of others.

 

if you in the uk the digital economy act would be enforced, which means a couple of letters, from the isp, and then the copyright holder can request details, via a court order

 

No, it's not theft, not under UK law anyway. Please stop going around quoting it as a legal fact because it's not. Thankfully someone else is done the work before so I'll just quote them:

Unfortunately, to show your statement is fact legally, we don't have to prove piracy isn't theft, rather you'll have to prove piracy is theft, under UK law. Off you go then, good luck with that.

Absolutely. Spot on mate.

 

I just hope they make the combat good in witcher 2 then I might consider buying it, didn't enjoy the first one at all so was quite disapointed after seeing all the positive pro reviews & user reviews, tried getting into it but just couldn't, the combat was really irritating & fiddly, I really like the way they keep supporting the game though for those that do like it, is it a hardcore RPG? might be the reason I'm not into it, I tend to prefer a slightly more casual RPG.

Now about the fining pirates, no problemo, about no DRM, couldn't care less to be honest, either way both cost a lot of money being thrown in the wrong direction, I'm not saying piracy isn't a problem & I sure as hell don't know a good solution as some people will pirate even the best game ever made which really bugs me as it stops some outstanding games from ever being PC exclusives, people who pirate are really short sighted & have no love for pc gaming.

If I like the look of a game I just buy it, if I don't then forget it , but all games should have demos & gameplay videos not cinematic trailers to make it look way cooler than it is, so you can at least get a rough idea of if you'll like it or not, I picked up the witcher in a steam sale so no real loss .

Now Two Worlds 2, bought that the other day & is the best looking action/rpg I played & been enjoying it since, heaps better than the first one which is why I still have hopes for the witcher 2, it's gone & proven sequels are sometimes way better than the original , honestly for an RPG it is eye poppingly good looking, bought it through a german proxy trick since it's not available to UK yet & happy I did .

 

Apparently The Witcher 2 is more action than RPG. And that every decision you pick get you to a different path (if the trailer is to be believed), so I think it will please you better. The Witcher 1 game style kinda depended on what difficulty you played. If you played easy you had less of an RPG element taking a part of the game. If you played hard you better know your potions and equip the best weapon you have and so on, very RPG'ish. But the battle is the same though. And they are using a different engine... personally I find that a good idea as the Unreal engine didn't seam to fit quiet well for such game style.

Hey it worked like charm for many PS2 games. I still find people swearing that PS2 graphics are better than the Wii That's what I call brainwash marketing.

 

I know the original article was about the developer seeking fines from those who pirate the game and the discussion has devolved into definitions and semantics but I'm more interested in the fact that a developer is targeting the PC audience FIRST. I mean who does that now days? The game looks all the better for it. It's absolutely gorgeous compared to all the console ports we are used to. I didn't play the first game but when I heard PC exclusive, no DRM, a reasonable price point, free extras and cought a glimpse to satisfy my graphics-whorism, I pre-purchased on Steam right away. I hope this game brings them success if only to show other devs the light. Also, anyone who targets pirates is ok in my book.
Tim

 

I'd just like to point out that here in little old mauritius 1000$ will put you in debt for quite a while.

1000$ is 5 full months of the minimum legal salary.

And a 50$ game is a 3rd of that salary.

(Not justifying piracy here, just giving you a sense of proportion)

 

I am completely with kylew on this one. And I can also say that even though I enjoyed the first Witcher, I will not be buying the sequel. I will rather pirate the game than give any money to a company that uses bully tactics to make money.

Please try to understand: copying a game != stealing. A copied game != lost sale.

 

Please try and understand: copying a game = the publisher will more likely shaft future paying customers with DRM and/or move the game to console only.

 

While I understand that getting a "demo" (so to speak) doesn't always equal a lost sale; 99.9% of the time it does.

Maybe it's the language barrier that's adding to my confusion. Would you mind explaining how CDPR wanting to take legal action and trying to ensure their livelihood is "bully tactics"?

Personally I enjoyed the 1st Witcher immensely and pre-ordered a copy of Witcher 2 as soon as I got the GOG email. If I could afford it, I'd buy 50 copies of Witcher 2 just because it's DRM free...

 

Unfortunately this assumes that everyone who pirates the games would otherwise have bought it had it not been available to pirate.

Would it not be safe to assume (in general - obviously there are exceptions) that those whose pirate are doing so because they are unwilling (or simply refuse) to pay for the game.

 

Not sure about the rest of the world, but in SA when someone says something happens "99.9% of the time" it's means "for the most part" or something to that extent.

I merely meant that if someone pirated a game, they normally don't do it just to see if they'd like the game before rushing out to buy a legal copy of it. Sure, there are people who do pirate it to see if they want to buy it, but they're vastly outnumbered by those who simply pirate it because they can.

I didn't mean to drag ACTUAL statistics into the discussion...

 

Greetings!

I stopped calling them pirates or thieves and just call them parasites.
They take advantage of the established system of developer/publisher/consumer and just parasite it, contributing nothing for it and harming the sustainability of it.

Always entertaining reading the justifications they give for their actions, though.

 

Just Concentrate on the Quality and Remove the Stupid DRM Protection that doesn't Work with the Sole purpose of Annoying us PC Gamers who bought Genuine Original Software's. Damn! I Hate DRM's! Just Come up with Any Anti-Piracy Program or whatsoever just Please Abandon the Obviously not WORKING DRM.

 

I don't tend to buy (or play) PC games because of the DRM but if this turns out to be decent I will probably get it.

Also, piracy is not theft. There are similarities between them, just like there are similarities between forks and combs, but they are not the same thing.

@Impar: How about we just call them copyright infringers, as that is the most accurate term.

 

Yeah, maybe I should not have stated it as a Legal Fact, because that can be quite misleading. Especially to those who will focus and seek to disprove the "Legal Fact" point due to an inbuilt guilt or stone cold determination to justify their piracy habits.

Whether or not the Law covers their specific behaviour, or they manage to find some kind of loophole in the Law, technically, they are still stealing.

Now, you know and I know that laws can have grey areas and don't always totally fit the Dictionary Definition of words they may cover, or partially cover.

On top of that, the problem of Law definitions is that different Lands and Jurisdictions have slightly different definitions of what their Law covers. Again, further complicating the situation, which is why it's not so much about which Law covers your act of theft, but the fact you have a game sitting on your PC that you did not pay for.

If there was no internet, and no pirated game available anywhere on DVD, it would be likely that the only way you would have ended up with that 'FREE' game on your PC is if you walked into a high street store and took it from the shelf.

Now, just because we are dealing mostly with the act of taking the games via modern day technology, such as via the internet cyberspace, and you no longer need to steal it from a shop, doesn't change the fact that you have stolen something that did not belong to you.

What is the Dictionary Definition of Theft? "THEFT = Stealing of property: the stealing of somebody else’s property".

What is the definition of theft defined under the Law?

What is Burglary? Certain Jurisdictions say Burglary can cover Trespassing and Theft

What is Fraud? The specific legal definition varies by legal jurisdiction. Fraud is a crime, and also a civil law violation. There are many types of fraud. Some cover various types of theft via deception or trickery.

What is Joyriding? It's to drive around in a stolen car.

Different types of theft.

Now, the fact that we have a specific law covering copyright infringement instead of just using the Theft Law does not prove that copyright infringement is not theft.

The reason we need a whole new specific copyright law is because we must detail and set the terms for the many complex areas of copyright ownership, including the many areas and scenarios that may or may not cover what the Theft Laws deal with.

How did that game get on your PC?

It's entirely up to you if you want to convince yourself that it's not theft because you didn't burgle a property or rob a shop in order to get it.

It's also up to you if you want to believe that quote you gave about the nonsense that: "when you make a copy of the data that makes up a copyright works, you're not really copying anything, because the arrangement of bits on a storage medium, is not even guaranteed to be the same". What kind of logic is that? It does not matter whether the bits of data are stored exactly as the original copy, you are still copying a game. And, even if the original pirate uploaded a copy that he did purchase legitimately, you have now downloaded a copy of the file that remains on the internet server for millions of other people to download copies from.

You can convince yourself that it is not theft because only the laws regarding "copyright infringement" would apply rather than the Theft Law. Even though the laws covering "copyright infringement do actually cover some areas of theft. In this case, the theft of the owners work, or the theft of a "copy" of the owner's work.

So, it's simple ... If you have a copy of a full video game installed on your PC that you did not pay for, win in a prize or something, and fair usage rights don't apply in your situation, and you did not get the copyright owner's permission to take that copy, then you stole it. It doesn't matter whether or not you took the copy from a high street shop or you took it from cyberspace, you stole it. You took something that doesn't and shouldn't belong to you.

 

COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
simples