The Grimoire Has Been Taken Down

[ATHATH]

https://github.com/ephe/grimoire/
https://ephe.github.io/grimoire/

[Naanomi]

It has been backed up and replicated here and there, with a little searching you can still easily find the info

[NecroDancer]

It has been backed up and replicated here and there, with a little searching you can still easily find the info

But will it ever be as convenient?

[dropbear8mybaby]

But will it ever be as convenient?

Actually, one of them is better designed than Grimoire was. Even has a spellbook function.

Although it still has the very annoying trait of losing the search query box when clicking on a spell.

[NecroDancer]

Actually, one of them is better designed than Grimoire was. Even has a spellbook function.

Although it still has the very annoying trait of losing the search query box when clicking on a spell.

Could I get the link please?

[Quintessence]

I think DnDmagic.com has fallen as well..

[RickAllison]

Dnd-spells.com still works, though!

[Quintessence]

Dnd-spells.com still works, though!

That site is so clunky though :(

[dropbear8mybaby]

Could I get the link please?

No, that would be illegal.

[R.Shackleford]

https://github.com/ephe/grimoire/
https://ephe.github.io/grimoire/

*plays taps*

Good.

Yeah, I like information just as much as the next person but what it was doing was illegal.

Hosting someone's property and giving it away for free is not something we should condone.

WotC is already freaked out about pirating material that their whole model is to turn D&D into a brand and not put out material which can be pirated. Sites like this just give people within Hasbro/wotc a "see, i told you pirating would happen!" argument to stand on when they are passing along a memo or while at a meeting.

[ATHATH]

Good.

Yeah, I like information just as much as the next person but what it was doing was illegal.

Hosting someone's property and giving it away for free is not something we should condone.

WotC is already freaked out about pirating material that their whole model is to turn D&D into a brand and not put out material which can be pirated. Sites like this just give people within Hasbro/wotc a "see, i told you pirating would happen!" argument to stand on when they are passing along a memo or while at a meeting.
You make a good point. I've edited out the taps.

[dropbear8mybaby]

Yeah, I like information just as much as the next person but what it was doing was illegal.

Hosting someone's property and giving it away for free is not something we should condone.

I agree in principle, but I also love the Grimoire and use it almost every day when working on content. I own all the books and there's no legal alternative so I don't feel an ounce of guilt for it.

[Ghost Nappa]

If WotC doesn't want people to pirate their material, they should create an easy and convenient way to perform the same tasks legally.

The legal options exist but are inconvenient and clunky.
The convenient and smooth options existed but were illegal.

If you're an existing player, already have the books*, and were simply using the Grimoire because it was more convenient than flipping through the PHB/EE like myself, you can rather safely argue that it's a matter of convenience. Being able to look through multiple sources of spells based on the type of magic, the spell level, and the classes that can learn them and go straight to the spell is easier and more direct than searching manually when your book is actually falling apart from heavy use.

I don't doubt that the Grimoire was abused by people, but there is a market for spell-planning tools and WotC needs to fill it.

What if they added some kind of web service that had a one-time payment for access, and you could get a free code with purchase of a PHB? I don't know if that's the best way to handle it, but it would certainly put it in the hands of players who got the book legally.


* - for the record, I have the PHB, MM, DMG, CoS, SCAG, and the Underdark adventure

[Discord]

If WotC doesn't want people to pirate their material, they should create an easy and convenient way to perform the same tasks legally.

The legal options exist but are inconvenient and clunky.
The convenient and smooth options existed but were illegal.

If you're an existing player, already have the books*, and were simply using the Grimoire because it was more convenient than flipping through the PHB/EE like myself, you can rather safely argue that it's a matter of convenience. Being able to look through multiple sources of spells based on the type of magic, the spell level, and the classes that can learn them and go straight to the spell is easier and more direct than searching manually when your book is actually falling apart from heavy use.

I don't doubt that the Grimoire was abused by people, but there is a market for spell-planning tools and WotC needs to fill it.

What if they added some kind of web service that had a one-time payment for access, and you could get a free code with purchase of a PHB? I don't know if that's the best way to handle it, but it would certainly put it in the hands of players who got the book legally.


* - for the record, I have the PHB, MM, DMG, CoS, SCAG, and the Underdark adventure

The fact of the matter is, if WoTC isn't going to fill the need, then other people are going to. People hosting Grimoire are not making money off of it so what is the harm?

I own all the currently published material from WoTC, and I am having my FLGS, pre-order me a copy of the Limited Edition version of the Volo's Guide to Monsters as well. If I had a more weekly gaming group (offline, I play with one online weekly), hell, I'd probably even invest in miniature's because I love D&D so much.

Would I pay an extra $5 to possibly $10 bucks for PDF copies of the books if I already own the physical copies? YEA! You know how much easier it is to search a PHB, MM, or DMG for rules on the fly when you are playing games with your buds?

WoTC's fault for missing out on this. You can find entire databases on a few clicks of google of everything 3.5e and 4th edition as well. 5th edition PDF's are out there as well if you know where to look. WoTC could of been raking it in. Not providing PDF's copies doesn't stop piracy, if people want PDF copies they will scan it themselves and distribute it regardless.

[dropbear8mybaby]

If WotC doesn't want people to pirate their material, they should create an easy and convenient way to perform the same tasks legally.

If you don't want someone to break into your home and rape you, you should create an easy and convenient way for them to have sex with you for money.

Seriously, does this logic genuinely make sense to you?


People hosting Grimoire are not making money off of it so what is the harm?
Because it's providing something for free that WotC rely on to make money so that they can make the products in the first place.

Until we live in a Star Trek-like Utopian society, products require being paid for to exist in the first place.

[ATHATH]

Because it's providing something for free that WotC rely on to make money so that they can make the products in the first place.
+1 to this, but not the first part of your post. I'm not -1-ing it either, though.

Relevant(?): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85fILN_m5pg

[Arkhios]

Good.

Yeah, I like information just as much as the next person but what it was doing was illegal.

Hosting someone's property and giving it away for free is not something we should condone.

WotC is already freaked out about pirating material that their whole model is to turn D&D into a brand and not put out material which can be pirated. Sites like this just give people within Hasbro/wotc a "see, i told you pirating would happen!" argument to stand on when they are passing along a memo or while at a meeting.

I rarely agree with you (no offense!) But with this I share your ideals.

WotC people work for living. They are not making games for fun (only). They, too, have to eat, sleep, have a nice bed to sleep in, and a nice cozy bedroom to sleep in. That often means owning or renting a house or apartment, and alas such things can't be conjured for free.

Giving out information for free while it might seem to be done with good intentions is stealing if the property owner did not give permission to that.

[dropbear8mybaby]

WotC people work for living. They are not making games for fun (only). They, too, have to eat, sleep, have a nice bed to sleep in, and a nice cozy bedroom to sleep in. That often means owning or renting a house or apartment, and alas such things can't be conjured for free.

Plus, they work for a pittance in an organisation that demands they make unreasonable amounts of profit off of their work or else they can projects. Hasbro is the Devil.

[Asmotherion]

I won't be advertising, but you can get awesome D&D apps on your smartphone these days... ^_^

[Hrugner]

The lack of easy online tools is one of the reasons I keep find myself back playing Pathfinder rather than 5. I'm not sure what their long term retention plan is, but competing against convenience is rarely a winning strategy.

[Matticusrex]

I dont know a single person who looks up spells in the physical book lmao. Going to any online spell list and crt-Fing is always going to be more efficient.
The fact that all the books are still above $20 is disgusting. I have my multiple groups just use online pdfs for free and none of us have been effected by guilt yet. :smalltongue:

[dropbear8mybaby]

The fact that all the books are still above $20 is disgusting. I have my multiple groups just use online pdfs for free and none of us have been effected by guilt yet. :smalltongue:

If I was a moderator of this board, I'd ban your account for life because of that admission.

Oh, and it's "affected".

[MrStabby]

I dont know a single person who looks up spells in the physical book lmao. Going to any online spell list and crt-Fing is always going to be more efficient.
The fact that all the books are still above $20 is disgusting. I have my multiple groups just use online pdfs for free and none of us have been effected by guilt yet. :smalltongue:

I can't say I am comfortable with this, but sometimes it is a fine line.

$20 for a book is a lot, but for the pleasure it has given me it seems like a good deal. On the other hand I am an adult with a good job; I recognise it isn't as simple for everyone. I also recognise that it is probably the younger crowd who are most likely to illegally use copied material - the same people that Hasboro needs to keep on-board to be their customer base when they have money. It isn't simple, not on any side. It isn't simple even ignoring the legal aspects as well.

I have copies of the 3 main books (physical) and I have no ethical problem sharing them with people. They want to leaf through them - fine. Take them away for a week - fine. Doing the same with a pdf doesn't feel the same.

On the other hand I would be quite happy to use a pdf or a database produced by a 3rd party for anything that I actually have a physical copy of.

[X3r4ph]

You can't fight piracy. It's gonna be there either if you like it or not. I'm not condoning it at all. I myself is a game developer so I feel piracy affecting my wallet on a daily basis.

However, what WotC should do is to copy Grimoire, line for line, and publish it themselves.

It would generate users on their website. Marketing loves users. It gives them an easy road to push their products. And a huge user base will keep the investors at bay as well.

[dropbear8mybaby]

Tou can't fight piracy. It's gonna be there if you like it or not. I'm not condoning it at all. I myself is a game developer so I feel piracy affecting my wallet on a daily basis.

However, what WotC should is to copy Grimoire line for line and publish it themselves.

It would generate users on their website. Marketing loves users. It gives them an easy road to push their ****. And a huge user base will keep the investors at bay.

Nice idea in theory, but there's a recent article about the utter nightmare that was (and still is) the IT department at WotC. There's a lot of reasons why they've gone the outsourcing way lately and that's one of them.

Now, an enterprising developer who could build a bunch of tools and actually deliver on their promises, that WotC could give a license to, but that just doesn't seem to be happening. The last attempt was a ****-up of epic proportions so I don't see it happening any time soon.

Problem is that WotC isn't a software company and them trying to be is what's gotten them to where they are today with software. If nobody else is going to do it (legally) then what options do they realistically have?

[X3r4ph]

Nice idea in theory, but there's a recent article about the utter nightmare that was (and still is) the IT department at WotC. There's a lot of reasons why they've gone the outsourcing way lately and that's one of them.

Now, an enterprising developer who could build a bunch of tools and actually deliver on their promises, that WotC could give a license to, but that just doesn't seem to be happening. The last attempt was a ****-up of epic proportions so I don't see it happening any time soon.

Problem is that WotC isn't a software company and them trying to be is what's gotten them to where they are today with software. If nobody else is going to do it (legally) then what options do they realistically have?
And I agree on their choice. No use polishing a turd.
However, a Grimoire copy would be so much simpler than what they tried to do before. There would be no need for inventing new stuff. And since the IT department got sacked, it's a perfect oppertuniry to bring in new muscle. Actually, copying Grimoire would be a two man job for a month. One graphic dude and one programmer. Tops. I mean. Hire me ffs. I could make that happen for a few thousand bucks.

[Finieous]

Problem is that WotC isn't a software company and them trying to be is what's gotten them to where they are today with software. If nobody else is going to do it (legally) then what options do they realistically have?

It's not just that they're not a software company -- they're a print publisher. Their business is selling a lot of cards and a few books. What's more, brick-and-mortar retail stores are hanging on by a thread and they're an important channel for renewing and expanding Wizards' customer base. So they don't want a "Grimoire." They don't want to "drive traffic to their website." They want to sell Player's Handbooks to distributors, who sell them to retail stores, who sell them to D&D players. That's their freaking business.

I know I'm old, but I hate the squatter mentality. Wizards has a right to defend their property and support their business. You don't have any obligation to buy the product they offer in the market, but if you don't, you also have no right to use it simply because "in your opinion" it isn't hurting anyone. Don't be a squatter.

[Matticusrex]

It's not just that they're not a software company -- they're a print publisher. Their business is selling a lot of cards and a few books. What's more, brick-and-mortar retail stores are hanging on by a thread and they're an important channel for renewing and expanding Wizards' customer base. So they don't want a "Grimoire." They don't want to "drive traffic to their website." They want to sell Player's Handbooks to distributors, who sell them to retail stores, who sell them to D&D players. That's their freaking business.

I know I'm old, but I hate the squatter mentality. Wizards has a right to defend their property and support their business. You don't have any obligation to buy the product they offer in the market, but if you don't, you also have no right to use it simply because "in your opinion" it isn't hurting anyone. Don't be a squatter.


If the company does not evolve, people have every right to make their stuff convenient and use it. The game itself has gone beyond the company to the point where they have no power over how anyone plays their game and they never will. People can complain here all day about how immoral the pdf's and spell books are but at the end of the day the bulk of the player base will be using it and wont care what the last generation thinks.

[dropbear8mybaby]

And I agree on their choice. No use polishing a turd.
However, a Grimoire copy would be so much simpler than what they tried to do before. There would be no need for inventing new stuff. And since the IT department got sacked, it's a perfect oppertuniry to bring in new muscle. Actually, copying Grimoire would be a two man job for a month. One graphic dude and one programmer. Tops. I mean. Hire me ffs. I could make that happen for a few thousand bucks.

It'd have to be more than just Grimoire though if they were going to charge for it, and they'd have to charge for it since it eats into sales of their core products.

I dunno, I don't really see a viable solution for them that could be justified to corporate, short of another 4e Digital Tools initiative which just brings everything back full circle to the original issues.


If the company does not evolve, people have every right to make their stuff convenient and use it. The game itself has gone beyond the company to the point where they have no power over how anyone plays their game and they never will. People can complain here all day about how immoral the pdf's and spell books are but at the end of the day the bulk of the player base will be using it and wont care what the last generation thinks.
Some mighty self-entitlement going on there. If they don't give you what you want, you'll take it anyway.

This is why we can't have nice things like quality journalism.

[Naanomi]

If there is a market for a product, someone will supply it. There is clearly a market for an online searchable spell database; even for people who own all the books.

If Wizards wants to be the supplier of this info, they have to find some way to do so; preferably one that doesn't interfere with their profit streams of stores->books... maybe a way to register your book online to add its content to your login-sealed account for access?

Because legal, moral, ethical concerns aside, the reality of the market is that these online info sources exist and will continue to exist; and while it is good for WoTC to protect their brand they also need to recognize and get ahead of the issue by understanding the reasons their customers use these services (not just for theft, but for ease of access and portability) and address it or nothing will change

[X3r4ph]

They want to sell Player's Handbooks to distributors, who sell them to retail stores, who sell them to D&D players. That's their freaking business.

I respect WotC's tenacity, but I think that the fight is futile. They need to diversify their bonds yo, and learn how to ride the digital market as well. They tried it once, they messed up, but they need to learn from their mistakes and evolve.

[X3r4ph]

It'd have to be more than just Grimoire though if they were going to charge for it, and they'd have to charge for it since it eats into sales of their core products.I don't know. In my line of business (computer games) there is a lot of good reasons to release some of your stuff for free.

[Finieous]

I respect WotC's tenacity, but I think that the fight is futile. They need to diversify their bonds yo, and learn how to ride the digital market as well. They tried it once, they messed up, but they need to learn from their mistakes and evolve.

There's obviously a digital transition well underway, but it's unclear even to the experts at what levels the digital/print shares will stabilize (mostly people have vastly overestimated the inevitable victory of digital) and Wizards probably knows more about how to best manage this transition for their business and their partners (and their parent, which sells IP-branded plastic to distributors/retailers/consumers) than we do. A lot of media companies have gone extinct by saying, "F--- it, let's be a digital content platform."

And just judging by results, they seem to be doing okay. Even they were managing it woefully, it wouldn't make squatting any less noxious.

[Daishain]

If you don't want someone to break into your home and rape you, you should create an easy and convenient way for them to have sex with you for money.

Seriously, does this logic genuinely make sense to you?

No, but that's because it is an insane comparison. The two situations are nothing alike.

Try, your customers want a more convenient version of the product you are already selling, and so created several because you weren't. If you don't want to lose revenue, you should follow suit by making a cheap and legal version of the product people want so that the people who are willing to pay you for it CAN DO SO.

I own physical copies of every major 5E book released by WoTC, and yet I end up using third party websites and hard copies of third party documents to reference things in those books simply because they are too clunky for table use most of the time, with spells being by far the worst offender in this regard. I will gladly pay WoTC a reasonable amount for a well organized digital spellbook, especially one that can be configured to match a character's actual spells known and then printed out.

[X3r4ph]

Even they were managing it woefully, it wouldn't make squatting any less noxious.I agree, f squatting! :)

[R.Shackleford]

A lot of people seem to think that just because a product isn't given to them exactly how they want it to be, then it's ok to steal that product or use that product however they see fit, even against the wishes of the person/people who own it.

I would agree if this information was a need. If the information was about a cheap $2 water filtration device that can be made out of used items... Then it would be amoral for me to not share that information.

However, D&D information is a want and not a need. You don't need this information presented in any format, you just want it presented in a certain format.

Which is fine, but breaking laws based on convenience is not something anyone should condone. Especially when breaking the law is based on greed/laziness.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely despise wotc/hasbro right now. I actually don't mind if they lose money. However, if you want tech based features (or new options in general) from hasbro/wotc then pirating and supporting pirating is not the way to go about it and will just cause them to push back even harder.

Twist it and make excuses all you want, but not only are you breaking the law but you are hurting the community as a whole.

It would be like a kid telling you they are afraid of clowns and doesn't want to go outside due to the clowns. Then, when they do go outside, you wear a clown mask and scare the kid. That kid isn't going to want to go outside again. Yeah, you wasn't a real clown, but in that kid's mind there are clowns out thwre.

So stop being clowns.

[IShouldntBehere]

A lot of people seem to think that just because a product isn't given to them exactly how they want it to be, then it's ok to steal that product or use that product however they see fit, even against the wishes of the person/people who own it.


They need to sell cargo shorts and fedoras to somebody.

[tkuremento]

Good.

Yeah, I like information just as much as the next person but what it was doing was illegal.

Hosting someone's property and giving it away for free is not something we should condone.

WotC is already freaked out about pirating material that their whole model is to turn D&D into a brand and not put out material which can be pirated. Sites like this just give people within Hasbro/wotc a "see, i told you pirating would happen!" argument to stand on when they are passing along a memo or while at a meeting.

You cannot prove that someone who has pirated something, even if they had the adequate money to purchase the product, would have purchased it to begin with. Yes, there are cases where that probably happens, but it isn't 1:1. There was this one author I heard of who was angry about pirating until he learned that a fan translation of one of his books, which is still apparently considered piracy, caused a fan to then buy some books that were ALREADY translated because they liked the author's works. I understand that that doesn't mean all piracy is a net gain either. It meets somewhere in the middle where some people are just going to pirate it regardless and some people see it and buy other products because of it.

[tkuremento]

If you don't want someone to break into your home and rape you, you should create an easy and convenient way for them to have sex with you for money.

Seriously, does this logic genuinely make sense to you?

No, because you blew it out of the water with the slippery-slope fallacy, going 200% hyperbole.

[CantigThimble]

Hrmmm, couldn't someone create a version that only included free content? I know some spells aren't in the SRD or EE that wizards offers for free, and those missing would suck, but couldn't someone create a mostly functional version that would be legal?

[RickAllison]

I'm just not sure whether WotC actually can oppose this. Since the majority of the spells are already open content, they are not selling anything (unless they are. Then it is a violation of fair use), and the few passages taken from the books do not decrease their value, it should fall under fair use law.

Well, unless WotC wants to say there are people who would only buy SCAG for the cantrips. Fair use law is supposed to preserve the value of the material and so adding spells from a book that is predominantly spells would certainly violate it (they would be effectively re-printing the book!). It seems more like WotC is just counting on people not being confident enough in the law to risk a lawsuit even when WotC doesn't have a case.

[ATHATH]

Hrmmm, couldn't someone create a version that only included free content? I know some spells aren't in the SRD or EE that wizards offers for free, and those missing would suck, but couldn't someone create a mostly functional version that would be legal?
This seems like the best plan. WotC should just resurrect the Grimoire under its (WotC's) name, slap some WotC logos and some ads on it, and remove the spells that don't come from free books. Blam, WotC makes its customers happier, gets some money from the ads, and reduces piracy on their work.

[Segev]

In the end, if it's IP that has not been released for free publication, WotC is wholly within their rights to demand anything giving it away for free be shut down.

[Finieous]

I'm just not sure whether WotC actually can oppose this. Since the majority of the spells are already open content, they are not selling anything (unless they are. Then it is a violation of fair use), and the few passages taken from the books do not decrease their value, it should fall under fair use law.


Internet IP lawyering is awesome!

"In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and “transformative” purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work."

http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/

The Grimoire is copyright infringement.

And I love the ethical defenses. "You can't prove the squatter would have bought a house if he couldn't squat, and maybe the squatter will like the house so much after squatting in it that he'll buy it! So squatting is totally legit!" :smallbiggrin:

[Segev]

And I love the ethical defenses. "You can't prove the squatter would have bought a house if he couldn't squat, and maybe the squatter will like the house so much after squatting in it that he'll buy it! So squatting is totally legit!" :smallbiggrin:

Not about to actually defend piracy, but I will point out the flaw in this analogy: As long as the house is being squatted in, its owner can't move in and can't even show it off to try to sell it to those who are offering money. The whole reason there's an ethical debate over "intellectual property" is that Bill pirating a copy of it doesn't mean that Brad can't buy his own, nor that Sony or Disney have physically had their inventory reduced. The costs are harder to measure (and subject to hyperbole on both sides, to the point that pirates might claim "no cost; I wouldn't have bought it anyway" or even "it's a gain; they're getting free advertising!" while the RIAA apparently claims that the amount of wealth lost each year is in excess of the GDP of the USA).

It's a hard problem. (Not in a legal sense: don't pirate. I mean in terms of what "should" the laws be.) Ultimately, it will take clever invention to find ways to compete with piracy in ways that make it less attractive than the legitimate services while still being profitable. Anything else is, at best, sticking your finger in the levy while the whole thing is pushed downstream by the flood.

[odigity]

Yeah, I like information just as much as the next person but what it was doing was illegal.

So was helping a slave escape, once upon a time. Laws are just words written down by whoever currently claims ownership over the human livestock of a particular region.


If you don't want someone to break into your home and rape you, you should create an easy and convenient way for them to have sex with you for money.

Did you seriously just compare copying bits to rape?

I have to conclude you've never been raped.

[tkuremento]

Internet IP lawyering is awesome!

"In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and “transformative” purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work."

http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/

The Grimoire is copyright infringement.

And I love the ethical defenses. "You can't prove the squatter would have bought a house if he couldn't squat, and maybe the squatter will like the house so much after squatting in it that he'll buy it! So squatting is totally legit!" :smallbiggrin:

Yea, what Segev said above. I am just saying some people take 100 copies pirated means 100 sales lost, but it isn't true because you can't prove they would have bought it to begin with.

[R.Shackleford]

Hrmmm, couldn't someone create a version that only included free content? I know some spells aren't in the SRD or EE that wizards offers for free, and those missing would suck, but couldn't someone create a mostly functional version that would be legal?

5esrd.com is what I typically use.

[R.Shackleford]

So was helping a slave escape, once upon a time. Laws are just words written down by whoever currently claims ownership over the human livestock of a particular region.



Did you seriously just compare copying bits to rape?

I have to conclude you've never been raped.

Oh yes, because hobby game info = slave trade. Real nice analogy.

[Finieous]

Not about to actually defend piracy, but I will point out the flaw in this analogy: As long as the house is being squatted in, its owner can't move in and can't even show it off to try to sell it to those who are offering money.

It doesn't matter if I want to live in my house, or sell it, or just keep it empty because I'm an eccentric old goat. You can't squat in it. It doesn't matter if I'm doing anything productive with my land or just letting it "return to nature" because I'm a weird hippy, you can't trespass because it's my property. That's what property rights are. You don't get to decide they don't apply to you because you don't feel that your appropriation of my rights is harming me, or because you don't approve of the way I'm using my property (or not using it), or anything else. If I offer to sell or lease my property to you, you can buy or rent it. If I choose to give it to you (or access to it on some terms) for free, that is my choice. But you don't get to squat, and doing so is both illegal and unethical.

ETA: And yes, this is even more odious because of how much of their IP Wizards has simply given away and distributed for free, including the Basic Rules, the SRD, free adventures, free PDF rules supplements, etc. There's no pleasing the entitled squatters!

[DizzyWood]

Nice idea in theory, but there's a recent article about the utter nightmare that was (and still is) the IT department at WotC. There's a lot of reasons why they've gone the outsourcing way lately and that's one of them.

Now, an enterprising developer who could build a bunch of tools and actually deliver on their promises, that WotC could give a license to, but that just doesn't seem to be happening. The last attempt was a ****-up of epic proportions so I don't see it happening any time soon.

Problem is that WotC isn't a software company and them trying to be is what's gotten them to where they are today with software. If nobody else is going to do it (legally) then what options do they realistically have?

Could you link to that article?

[tkuremento]

It doesn't matter if I want to live in my house, or sell it, or just keep it empty because I'm an eccentric old goat. You can't squat in it. It doesn't matter if I'm doing anything productive with my land or just letting it "return to nature" because I'm a weird hippy, you can't trespass because it's my property. That's what property rights are. You don't get to decide they don't apply to you because you don't feel that your appropriation of my rights is harming me, or because you don't approve of the way I'm using my property (or not using it), or anything else. If I offer to sell or lease my property to you, you can buy or rent it. If I choose to give it to you (or access to it on some terms) for free, that is my choice. But you don't get to squat, and doing so is both illegal and unethical.

ETA: And yes, this is even more odious because of how much of their IP Wizards has simply given away and distributed for free, including the Basic Rules, the SRD, free adventures, free PDF rules supplements, etc. There's no pleasing the entitled squatters!

I think you are mistaken as to what they were saying. If I have a PHYSICAL book and you TAKE IT from me, I no longer HAVE the book. If I have a COPY of the book, the first person STILL HAS A BOOK.

[Finieous]

I think you are mistaken as to what they were saying. If I have a PHYSICAL book and you TAKE IT from me, I no longer HAVE the book. If I have a COPY of the book, the first person STILL HAS A BOOK.

That's one form of rights to property. It isn't the only form, obviously, or this wouldn't be up for discussion. In your example, the person who presumably purchased the book still has his book and the person who made the COPY has violated the property owner's COPYRIGHT.

[Toadkiller]

This seems like exactly the sort of thing that they need to put on their own website. If it must be monetized then use ads. If they aren't excessively obnoxious most people won't even mind.

The fact of the matter is they aren't competing against piracy. That will be an issue, it shouldn't be done and they have the right to fight it, but that's not the competition. Pathfinder, and others, are the competition. They are kicking Wizard's rear in the realm of modern conveniences. Right now Wizards has, in my opinion, a better game. But the tipping point is influenced by things like being able to have my spell list readily accessible on my phone/tablet. That is just handy. If companies A and B both make solid games and B has handy tools readily available....

As a customer I would rather we continued to have competition between a few game makers. I'm even willing to spread the $$ around some. And/or let my eyeballs see some ads. But in the end I'm going to use the one that is easy and fun to use.

[tkuremento]

That's one form of rights to property. It isn't the only form, obviously, or this wouldn't be up for discussion. In your example, the person who presumably purchased the book still has his book and the person who made the COPY has violated the property owner's COPYRIGHT.

Yes, but that isn't what was originally being talked about before. With the squatter example, you can't make a copy of a house and give the copy away for free. With the squatters in it, it cannot be used by others, just the squatter. If the house was a book then it would be the squatter who stole the book, not made a copy.

[odigity]

Oh yes, because hobby game info = slave trade. Real nice analogy.

It illustrates the principle that law != morality.

It boggles my mind that it's nearly 2017, and some people still treat IP violations the same as real property violations. The two are not the same. If you advocate sending armed thugs to my house because I arranged the bits on my hard drive in a particular pattern, then you are an insane and violent tyrant.

[Finieous]

It illustrates the principle that law != morality.

It boggles my mind that it's nearly 2017, and some people still treat IP violations the same as real property violations. The two are not the same. If you advocate sending armed thugs to my house because I arranged the bits on my hard drive in a particular pattern, then you are an insane and violent tyrant.

Who advocated sending armed thugs to your house?

[tkuremento]

Who advocated sending armed thugs to your house?


If you don't want someone to break into your home and rape you, you should create an easy and convenient way for them to have sex with you for money.

Seriously, does this logic genuinely make sense to you?

Sure, the someone breaking in isn't said to be armed, but still

[Contrast]

There's obviously a digital transition well underway, but it's unclear even to the experts at what levels the digital/print shares will stabilize (mostly people have vastly overestimated the inevitable victory of digital) and Wizards probably knows more about how to best manage this transition for their business and their partners (and their parent, which sells IP-branded plastic to distributors/retailers/consumers) than we do. A lot of media companies have gone extinct by saying, "F--- it, let's be a digital content platform."

And just judging by results, they seem to be doing okay. Even they were managing it woefully, it wouldn't make squatting any less noxious.

A lot of companies have also gone extinct by not changing with the times.

I have physical copies and PDFs of the 5E rulebooks. If they were willing to sell me PDFs I would have paid for them (as I have done with numerous other systems). They're not so I didn't.

I don't feel bad about this decision and don't consider that I have done anything morally wrong in any fashion.

I have no objection to Wizards enforcing their copyright and getting the site taken down but (ignoring the argument about right or wrong) another site will just pop up to take its place. Unless they provide a similar service at a decent price point they're always going to be fighting a losing battle.

[Arkhios]

I agree that Wizards should opt in with selling their books as PDF as well as hardcover prints. I honestly think it won't do harm for them, on the contrary, I believe it'll bring the low income masses in as legal customers, since a PDF won't cost as much as a hardcover. True fans of the game will still buy the hardcovers. I've seen it with Pathfinder, I don't see why wouldn't it happen with D&D too.

In the meantime, though, as long as a legal PDF copy doesn't exist, any attempts to provide the printed material for easy access for the masses is, unfortunately, illegal, no matter how you try to justify acquiring them, or using the information within.

[R.Shackleford]

It illustrates the principle that law != morality.

It boggles my mind that it's nearly 2017, and some people still treat IP violations the same as real property violations. The two are not the same. If you advocate sending armed thugs to my house because I arranged the bits on my hard drive in a particular pattern, then you are an insane and violent tyrant.

See, this is where you are wrong.

Just because the state of the matter is different, doesn't mean that it is any less someone's. Just because you or others want to make excuses so you can feel less guilty about theft, compare a hobby game to slavery, or compare a hobby game to rape doesn't mean squat.

But then again, if you owned it I bet you would have a different opinion on this subject.

If a guy makes a specific mouse his company mascot and I see that it makes money and take that idea and use it to sell my stuff... I'm stealing. If I take his stuff and give it away for free, without permission, I'm stealing his potential profits.

You can can make any excuse you want but stealing rules for a hobby game is still stealing.

You are stealing because of a want, something that you don't need. That just makes you a thief no matter how you want to twist it to make you feel better about it.

[Toadkiller]

It may very well be that being owned by a big company will limit their ability to adapt and another more nimble game company will eat their lunch. There is clearly a demand for these kinds of tools. If someone else can provide them along with a cool game that threads through both digital and tabletop content then they will find a solid market.

Maybe someone like Roll20 spins out their own game mechanic and simply provides the whole experience. Or buys a mechanic and uses that. There could be real advantages to being able to deeply embed the mechanics into the online platform. We will see.

[DizzyWood]

If there is a market for a product, someone will supply it. There is clearly a market for an online searchable spell database; even for people who own all the books.

If Wizards wants to be the supplier of this info, they have to find some way to do so; preferably one that doesn't interfere with their profit streams of stores->books... maybe a way to register your book online to add its content to your login-sealed account for access?

Because legal, moral, ethical concerns aside, the reality of the market is that these online info sources exist and will continue to exist; and while it is good for WoTC to protect their brand they also need to recognize and get ahead of the issue by understanding the reasons their customers use these services (not just for theft, but for ease of access and portability) and address it or nothing will change

This would be perfect! A free or nominal fee for online search-ability for the products you own. I think that would be amazing. They could make it more desirable with sage advice notes poping up when your scroll over the topic in question. Simple and easy BOOM!

[Finieous]

Sure, the someone breaking in isn't said to be armed, but still

The line, "Seriously, does this logic genuinely make sense to you?" might have tipped you off that he was caricaturing the pro-squatter argument and not advocating armed thuggery against IP violators.


A lot of companies have also gone extinct by not changing with the times.

I have physical copies and PDFs of the 5E rulebooks. If they were willing to sell me PDFs I would have paid for them (as I have done with numerous other systems). They're not so I didn't.


There are probably many more like you. There is also a share of the customer base that would purchase the PDFs and not the books. There is also a share who would purchase the PDFs and provide them to all their friends. Lower sales on books would put some percentage of already endangered retail stores out of business. Fewer retail stores means fewer venues for organized play, fewer new players coming into the hobby, and long-term, a shrinking customer base and shrinking sales in all formats. Even then, despite those threats to their RPG business, Wizards -- like other RPG companies -- might still find that digital sales of their RPG books are a net-plus.

But Wizards isn't an RPG company. They're a trading card company, and a subsidiary of a toy manufacturer, that generates a little revenue from RPGs. The three-tier distribution infrastructure remains crucial to their business and it shouldn't come as a surprise that their business decisions in this small niche reflect those priorities. It's an extremely difficult problem to manage (one among many: Amazon, online card discounters, etc.) and my opinion is that they are in a better position to manage it than we are, and with a better understanding of their business than we have.

And in the meantime, regardless of their digital business strategy, they not only have a right but a responsibility to their employees and shareholders to protect their intellectual property and prevent others from distributing it illegally.

[odigity]

Who advocated sending armed thugs to your house?

What do you think a law is?


But then again, if you owned it I bet you would have a different opinion on this subject.

You are making two assumptions there.


You can can make any excuse you want but stealing rules for a hobby game is still stealing.

It's not stealing, it's copying. Stealing deprives you of your property, copying does not. If you light your candle by my firer, we both have fire.

You are again conflating property and "intellectual property". That is your core error, and why all your arguments make no sense.

[Finieous]

What do you think a law is?


I'm at a loss. Are you under the impression a) that laws and penalties for violations of laws are the same thing and/or b) that armed thuggery is the only penalty for legal violations enshrined in your institutions of civil and criminal justice? Where do you live, if you don't mind me asking?

[HeyBJ]

I'm at a loss. Are you under the impression a) that laws and penalties for violations of laws are the same thing and/or b) that armed thuggery is the only penalty for legal violations enshrined in your institutions of civil and criminal justice? Where do you live, if you don't mind me asking?

I believe the "armed thugs" in his argument are the police. By that perspective, yes, breaking the law (and refusing to pay fines, I guess?) means "armed thugs" will come to your house to take you away.

[Arkhios]

I believe the "armed thugs" in his argument are the police. By that perspective, yes, breaking the law (and refusing to pay fines, I guess?) means "armed thugs" will come to your house to take you away.

...and that attitude (=seeing police as "armed thugs") speaks volumes of how much a practitioner of said attitude respects the laws, its enforcers, and ones properties, whether it's physical or immaterial. I have no respect for people like that. Stealing is disrespectful and wrong, with or without laws.

[R.Shackleford]

What do you think a law is?



You are making two assumptions there.



It's not stealing, it's copying. Stealing deprives you of your property, copying does not. If you light your candle by my firer, we both have fire.

You are again conflating property and "intellectual property". That is your core error, and why all your arguments make no sense.

The problem here is that you are using excuses in order to say that IP doesn't belong to anyone.

You are wrong.

Stealing IP does deprive you of a very valuable resource... what is it again? Oh that's right, money.

Whenever you make a site like the grim, you are stealing money from wotc/hasbro. Instead of buying the books, buying the spell cards, or whatever else people can just go to that site and use wotc/hasbro IP for nothing.

You are the one that needs to stop using excuses in order to justify theft. You have a very archaic view of theft and are forgetting that the theft of money (or future earnings) is still theft of money.

Make excuses, call cops "armed thugs", and play mental gymnastics all you (and others) want but you are promoting theft.

And you are playing right into the people at hasbro/wotc that are afraid of pirating.

As I said earlier, don't be a clown.

[Finieous]

I believe the "armed thugs" in his argument are the police. By that perspective, yes, breaking the law (and refusing to pay fines, I guess?) means "armed thugs" will come to your house to take you away.

Okay, I guess if we skip over the distinction between laws and enforcement, skip over the distinction between criminal and civil law and penalties, skip over the distinction between a wide range of penalties (including fines) and police arrest, and we further stipulate that police are armed thugs, then yes, anyone advocating for laws of any kind -- IP or otherwise -- is advocating for armed thuggery. There may actually be places like this in the world, and I'm sorry the poster has to live in one.

But it's great that the regime allows internet access so they can get their pirated stuff!

[tkuremento]

The problem here is that you are using excuses in order to say that IP doesn't belong to anyone.

You are wrong.

Stealing IP does deprive you of a very valuable resource... what is it again? Oh that's right, money.

Whenever you make a site like the grim, you are stealing money from wotc/hasbro. Instead of buying the books, buying the spell cards, or whatever else people can just go to that site and use wotc/hasbro IP for nothing.

You are the one that needs to stop using excuses in order to justify theft. You have a very archaic view of theft and are forgetting that the theft of money (or future earnings) is still theft of money.

Make excuses, call cops "armed thugs", and play mental gymnastics all you (and others) want but you are promoting theft.

And you are playing right into the people at hasbro/wotc that are afraid of pirating.

As I said earlier, don't be a clown.

And this again is what I was saying before. Yes, there probably is money lose and I am in no way defending the actual piracy, but there are people who would also literally not get it otherwise. There are people who pirate just because they can pirate it, and even if they had more than enough money that in their head their choices are to not bother at all or to pirate. If they didn't bother at all WotC doesn't get money, and if they pirate WotC doesn't get money. Do you understand what I am saying now?

[Arkhios]

The problem here is that you are using excuses in order to say that IP doesn't belong to anyone.

You are wrong.

Stealing IP does deprive you of a very valuable resource... what is it again? Oh that's right, money.

Whenever you make a site like the grim, you are stealing money from wotc/hasbro. Instead of buying the books, buying the spell cards, or whatever else people can just go to that site and use wotc/hasbro IP for nothing.

You are the one that needs to stop using excuses in order to justify theft. You have a very archaic view of theft and are forgetting that the theft of money (or future earnings) is still theft of money.

Make excuses, call cops "armed thugs", and play mental gymnastics all you (and others) want but you are promoting theft.

And you are playing right into the people at hasbro/wotc that are afraid of pirating.

As I said earlier, don't be a clown.

A hundred percent support in agreement (and lots of words to warrant this post that doesn't include anything new :smallbiggrin:)

[Theodoxus]

There are probably many more like you. There is also a share of the customer base that would purchase the PDFs and not the books. There is also a share who would purchase the PDFs and provide them to all their friends. Lower sales on books would put some percentage of already endangered retail stores out of business. Fewer retail stores means fewer venues for organized play, fewer new players coming into the hobby, and long-term, a shrinking customer base and shrinking sales in all formats. Even then, despite those threats to their RPG business, Wizards -- like other RPG companies -- might still find that digital sales of their RPG books are a net-plus.

This is happening. This is known to be happening. What affect has it had on the game? Has your LFGS gone away? More comic stores in my area have died than gaming stores (that legitimately differentiated themselves). Is the lack of updated product by WotC a direct result of lack of sales because PDFs exist that they aren't selling? I would think that the lack of product is by design, not in response to slumping sales (which I haven't seen reported either).

Yes, I think WotC is doing a disservice by not providing PDFs. PDFs are great, but they're not the end all be all. I prefer somethings by book - like developing a character concept, looking over lists of things, and certainly reading through adventures. I prefer PDFs for finding obscure references, copying copious amounts of information into a Word or Excel sheet and they're a lot lighter when i'm already lugging 20 pounds of minis and maps.

There's a reason Paiso is still around, even though they're marketing to a game that has two generations of support past it. They're prodigious, but they're also smart enough to offer all their products in both print and electronic format. And it hasn't hurt them in the slightest.

WotC needs to boost their Wisdom stat...

[8wGremlin]

Pity WotC didn't buy the asset and put it behind a pay wall.

I have all the books (I have every edition since the Whitebox), but having the resource like that was very beneficial to me when I was away from books (AFB)

I would pay for a service that allowed me access to resources such as the grimoire.
Has WotC missed an opportunity, in my opinion, yes?
Has WotC got burned by this in the past, yes?

Does WotC have a good Customer Experience record, no?
Does WotC have a good Customer Experience for anyone outside of the USA, no?

Could they do better, yes, and we all know this. But they do have to protect their IP, but allowing it to be paid access would be more beneficial to the fans and thus the market.

[BigONotation]

I bought their books and almost NEVER use them because I found high quality PDFs of said books which are much more convenient. I don't distribute the PDFs and don't feel the slightest but bad about how I use them.

[R.Shackleford]

Pity WotC didn't buy the asset and put it behind a pay wall.

Ummm... Why would they do that?

They already have their own system set up and ready to go, it just needs to be updated.

4e Insider or whatever it was called (online character builder, rules compendium, monster compendium).

Really, if they put all the rules of D&D into 4eInsider and called it D&D (Awesome Name McAwesomename) they would make a killing at 5 or 10 bucks a month.

They don't need this site to do something like this.

[Finieous]

This is happening. This is known to be happening. What affect has it had on the game? Has your LFGS gone away? More comic stores in my area have died than gaming stores (that legitimately differentiated themselves). Is the lack of updated product by WotC a direct result of lack of sales because PDFs exist that they aren't selling? I would think that the lack of product is by design, not in response to slumping sales (which I haven't seen reported either).


I was in the industry from 1996-2006, and yes, the decline of hobby games retail stores was precipitous during that period. I can't imagine that they've recovered in the last ten years, but I have no first-hand knowledge of the current retail marketplace. There were many reasons for this: the distribution implosion in the 90s, decline of war- and boardgames (before the resurgence), the CCG glut and subsequent implosion, fragmentation of the gaming audience as D&D languished in the late 90s, pressure from Big Box stores similar to that exerted on independent book stores, increased competition from video games and then MMOs, online bookstores, game stores, and card discounters, and yes, towards the end of that period, digital products and piracy. The point, though, is simple: The retail tier is shaky and Wizards needs it.



There's a reason Paiso is still around, even though they're marketing to a game that has two generations of support past it. They're prodigious, but they're also smart enough to offer all their products in both print and electronic format. And it hasn't hurt them in the slightest.


Paizo is almost entirely an RPG company. Wizards is almost entirely a trading card company. As I said, if that were reversed, Wizards might see PDF and other digital products as a net-plus for their business.



WotC needs to boost their Wisdom stat...

And again, my position is that the people at Wizards are better positioned to know their business and how to manage it than we are on the GitP forum. Alternatively, I suppose it's possible that the most commercially successful hobby games company in history has been managed by a succession of different idiots for the past twenty-five years.

[Arkhios]

Pity WotC didn't buy the asset and put it behind a pay wall.

I have all the books (I have every edition since the Whitebox), but having the resource like that was very beneficial to me when I was away from books (AFB)

I would pay for a service that allowed me access to resources such as the grimoire.
Has WotC missed an opportunity, in my opinion, yes?
Has WotC got burned by this in the past, yes?

Does WotC have a good Customer Experience record, no?
Does WotC have a good Customer Experience for anyone outside of the USA, no?

Could they do better, yes, and we all know this. But they do have to protect their IP, but allowing it to be paid access would be more beneficial to the fans and thus the market.

And if they had, maybe, employed the site keeper for keeping it up and running, they'd have made a new job. The world needs new jobs!

[dropbear8mybaby]

No, but that's because it is an insane comparison.
That's because it's not a comparison. But I see this level of rhetorical argument is a lost cause here so I'll abandon it and nod my head in acceptance at everyone's "victory" over logic.


I own physical copies of every major 5E book released by WoTC, and yet I end up using third party websites and hard copies of third party documents to reference things in those books simply because they are too clunky for table use most of the time, with spells being by far the worst offender in this regard. I will gladly pay WoTC a reasonable amount for a well organized digital spellbook, especially one that can be configured to match a character's actual spells known and then printed out.
I think you're confusing two different concepts. I am in the same position as you. I buy the products, but I use the digital and illegal resources. The difference is that I don't insist on being given access to illegitimate resources or try to justify my access as some sort of right. Furthermore, I understand that the existence of such resources reduces the revenue for the company. As has been seen in this thread, there are people who will justify their theft unashamedly and blatantly, with zero regard for the requirements of producing the content or any responsibility towards the producers.

It's a very narcissistic, self-entitled attitude to demand someone give you something for free just because you want it.


Hrmmm, couldn't someone create a version that only included free content?
They're available. donjon has a spell list which is very awesome but doesn't include the text of the non-SRD content. Same for the magical items.


So was helping a slave escape, once upon a time. Laws are just words written down by whoever currently claims ownership over the human livestock of a particular region.



Did you seriously just compare copying bits to rape?

I have to conclude you've never been raped.

And I have to conclude that you've never been a slave.

Could you link to that article?

Eh, it's somewhere on that mess of a site called EN World. Sorry, I can't be bothered finding it again.

[DizzyWood]

Eh, it's somewhere on that mess of a site called EN World. Sorry, I can't be bothered finding it again.

Ugh you mean I have to like work for myself? Ewwww! Thanks anyway sounded interesting I might try and find it to read on the train home.

[Contrast]

See, this is where you are wrong.

Just because the state of the matter is different, doesn't mean that it is any less someone's. Just because you or others want to make excuses so you can feel less guilty about theft, compare a hobby game to slavery, or compare a hobby game to rape doesn't mean squat.

But then again, if you owned it I bet you would have a different opinion on this subject.

If a guy makes a specific mouse his company mascot and I see that it makes money and take that idea and use it to sell my stuff... I'm stealing. If I take his stuff and give it away for free, without permission, I'm stealing his potential profits.

You can can make any excuse you want but stealing rules for a hobby game is still stealing.

You are stealing because of a want, something that you don't need. That just makes you a thief no matter how you want to twist it to make you feel better about it.

Except thats not what we're doing here (unless the site was making money off the traffic? I have no idea and certainly wouldn't condone someone making money off their IP). In terms of my usage, its more like I bought a poster with an image on it. I wanted to use that image as a background on my phone so I checked if the person selling the poster did a digital copy I could get. They did not. I could get photo of my own version but I notice someone online has a high quality scanned copy of the poster so I use that one. Would you accuse me of stealing if you saw a photo of a poster on my phone? Who, if anyone, am I hurting? You can't even argue the creator is being harmed as I bought the product and they don't sell it in that format.

To be clear I'm not trying to make excuses here - if you haven't bought the books and you use PDFs I argee that you're morally in the wrong. But if I own the books and I just want a way to access the content (which I have paid for) in a different format (which the creator has declined to provide) and I'm using it for personal use with no profit making intent...where exactly is the moral downfalling?



There are probably many more like you. There is also a share of the customer base that would purchase the PDFs and not the books. There is also a share who would purchase the PDFs and provide them to all their friends. Lower sales on books would put some percentage of already endangered retail stores out of business. Fewer retail stores means fewer venues for organized play, fewer new players coming into the hobby, and long-term, a shrinking customer base and shrinking sales in all formats. Even then, despite those threats to their RPG business, Wizards -- like other RPG companies -- might still find that digital sales of their RPG books are a net-plus.

But Wizards isn't an RPG company. They're a trading card company, and a subsidiary of a toy manufacturer, that generates a little revenue from RPGs. The three-tier distribution infrastructure remains crucial to their business and it shouldn't come as a surprise that their business decisions in this small niche reflect those priorities. It's an extremely difficult problem to manage (one among many: Amazon, online card discounters, etc.) and my opinion is that they are in a better position to manage it than we are, and with a better understanding of their business than we have.

And in the meantime, regardless of their digital business strategy, they not only have a right but a responsibility to their employees and shareholders to protect their intellectual property and prevent others from distributing it illegally.

This argument would hold more weight with me if I believed that not selling the books in PDF form had made illegal PDFs any more difficult to get hold of. Getting a copy of any PDF of your chosing is generally as simple as typing '<title of book> PDF' into google. I don't believe anyone has ever tried to find a PDF of a book they wanted and failed to find it. The only difference is rather than google directing people to Wizards and telling them a fee is needed, they're directed to some other website with a download button. I don't know about you but if the options you have for your business model are 'customers pay us for our product' or 'customers don't pay us for our product', I would suggest taking the money is the better option. I would also note that making PDFs available is not even a difficult process as they already have the product in the form needed I would assume and a distribution method.

As I said earlier, I'm not arguing against them taking legal action as they see fit to protect their copyright. I'm just saying that's just mowing the lawn and hoping the weeds die out on their own rather than trying to tackle the root cause of the problem.

[pwykersotz]

Sure, except thats not what we're doing here (unless the site was making money off the traffic? I have no idea and certainly wouldn't condone someone making money off their IP). In terms of my usage, its more like a bought a poster with an image on it. I wanted to use that image as a background on my phone so I checked if the person selling the poster did a digital copy I could get. They did not. I could get photo my own version but I notice someone online has a high quality scanned copy of the poster so I use that one. Would you accuse me of stealing if you saw a photo of a poster on my phone? Who, if anyone, am I hurting? You can't even argue the creator is being harmed as I bought the product and they don't sell it in that format.

Why is the question "Who am I hurting?" relevant when discussing the law? The question is a useless emotional appeal that has no bearing other than trying to justify your actions in spite of the law.

[Contrast]

Why is the question "Who am I hurting?" relevant when discussing the law? The question is a useless emotional appeal that has no bearing other than trying to justify your actions in spite of the law.

I accept it's illegal. I specifically wasn't trying to argue it wasn't illegal. I was asking why it was wrong. If there is a law that I have zero chance of being punished for disobeying then I need to understand and accept the moral justification for why I should obey that law in order to consider it worth obeying. An example might be speeding - you typically have a very low chance of being caught speeding but generally speaking people accept that the law is there for a reason (highway safety) and obey it on that basis. If there was a law saying I had to wear a top hat when I drove but the police didn't bother enforcing that law then I likely would not bother wearing a top hat when I was driving unless someone could convince me there was a sensible reason to.

In the specific example I gave (I own the books and simply wish to access them in a way convenient to me for personal use with no financial gain) I do not see any moral imperative which drives me to obey the law. So if I don't want to, I won't.

As an aside, being able to demonstrate harm is often a very relevant question when dealing with legal concerns but thats kinda off topic from the actual point I'm trying to make :P

[Finieous]

For what it's worth, and apart from the issues of legality, I don't think there's anything unethical about making a digital copy of a printed book you've purchased for your own personal use. You're not a squatter. I think it's mildly unethical to download the PDF from a site that hosts illegal copies, because you're normalizing and enabling the squatters to whatever small degree. I think it's quite unethical to actually host such a site which you know is being used by people to take something of value that doesn't belong to them. IMHO.

[RickAllison]

Except thats not what we're doing here (unless the site was making money off the traffic? I have no idea and certainly wouldn't condone someone making money off their IP). In terms of my usage, its more like I bought a poster with an image on it. I wanted to use that image as a background on my phone so I checked if the person selling the poster did a digital copy I could get. They did not. I could get photo of my own version but I notice someone online has a high quality scanned copy of the poster so I use that one. Would you accuse me of stealing if you saw a photo of a poster on my phone? Who, if anyone, am I hurting? You can't even argue the creator is being harmed as I bought the product and they don't sell it in that format.

To be clear I'm not trying to make excuses here - if you haven't bought the books and you use PDFs I argee that you're morally in the wrong. But if I own the books and I just want a way to access the content (which I have paid for) in a different format (which the creator has declined to provide) and I'm using it for personal use with no profit making intent...where exactly is the moral downfalling?



This argument would hold more weight with me if I believed that not selling the books in PDF form had made illegal PDFs any more difficult to get hold of. Getting a copy of any PDF of your chosing is generally as simple as typing '<title of book> PDF' into google. I don't believe anyone has ever tried to find a PDF of a book they wanted and failed to find it. The only difference is rather than google directing people to Wizards and telling them a fee is needed, they're directed to some other website with a download button. I don't know about you but if the options you have for your business model are 'customers pay us for our product' or 'customers don't pay us for our product', I would suggest taking the money is the better option. I would also note that making PDFs available is not even a difficult process as they already have the product in the form needed I would assume and a distribution method.

As I said earlier, I'm not arguing against them taking legal action as they see fit to protect their copyright. I'm just saying that's just mowing the lawn and hoping the weeds die out on their own rather than trying to tackle the root cause of the problem.

I have had more than a few textbooks where the appropriate editions did not have a pdf form yet (don't judge me!). Then I just rent from Chegg...

[Contrast]

I have had more than a few textbooks where the appropriate editions did not have a pdf form yet (don't judge me!). Then I just rent from Chegg...

To clarify, I was talking about RPG books and 5E rulebooks specifically :smalltongue: I have no doubt there are many many books of which there is no digital copy available but I don't see that being an issue for anything Wizards produces in the immediate future given the tech savvy and general nature of their fan base.

[PapaQuackers]

Why is the question "Who am I hurting?" relevant when discussing the law? The question is a useless emotional appeal that has no bearing other than trying to justify your actions in spite of the law.

Because laws are the will of the people, not something handed down divinely. Prohibition is a great example of people not following the law. They did it because that law was unjust and enforced upon them against their will.

I'm not saying that this is a similar situation, but if you're not seriously questioning law at all times you are doing yourself a disservice and neglecting your obligation to be a critical and thoughtful person.

As an aside I'm going to treat wizard's books the same way I treat game ROMS and Emulators. If I bought that system and that game I should be allowed to transfer it into another medium should I so choose, I have bought the rights to that content for personal use.

Now I'm not as computer savvy as some so perhaps I need to go download the PDF from someone who's not profiting from it. I see no harm in doing this so long as you have legally obtained a hard copy of the material at some point.

Wizard gets their due and you get the information in a format that's more convenient. I don't see how you could reasonably be upset with that situation unless you also get upset when people burn mixtapes out of songs they've already purchased just because they're not listening to the album CD.

[R.Shackleford]

I have had more than a few textbooks where the appropriate editions did not have a pdf form yet (don't judge me!). Then I just rent from Chegg...

Textbooks are criminal to begin with, just no one will get them for price gouging.

[RickAllison]

Textbooks are criminal to begin with, just no one will get them for price gouging.

One of my professors refers to those .pdfs as "more economical means" to obtaining the textbook. He only doesn't approve it because he isn't allowed to :smallbiggrin:

[Ghost Nappa]

To be clear I'm not trying to make excuses here - if you haven't bought the books and you use PDFs I argee that you're morally in the wrong. But if I own the books and I just want a way to access the content (which I have paid for) in a different format (which the creator has declined to provide) and I'm using it for personal use with no profit making intent...where exactly is the moral downfalling?

As I said earlier, I'm not arguing against them taking legal action as they see fit to protect their copyright. I'm just saying that's just mowing the lawn and hoping the weeds die out on their own rather than trying to tackle the root cause of the problem.

I snipped it, but QFT.

If Wizards told me there was an approved searchable .pdf of the spells, I would use it over a free, online third-party tool 100% of the time because I want to support their products and a brand and franchise that I find entertaining (even if what they gave me was a janky, clunky piece of garbage). But if there is no legal supply to fill that demand that I am aware of (I am using the economic definition of the term, since we have already escalated to rebutting with slavery and rape for some reason and demand has other definitions in other contexts), consumers will face the decision of whether or not to use third-party tools.

It would have been smarter for WotC to pick a third-party tool that has their stuff down and together, ask them to do what they're doing on their website, lock it behind a pay wall or a subscription, and promote it. I can't blame them for making the decision they did, but it's a frustrating and ultimately useless gesture because stopping one supplier does not destroy the market.

So to anyone who is telling me that WotC is losing money because I'm using third-party tools, I will confidently tell you they are losing money from me by not offering that tool themselves. I cannot speak for others and the general consumer base as a hole and perhaps it is really is in WotC's best interests not to provide it. I don't know, I don't have their information and data. If they make one, I'll get it. But there are times when I want to find out whether or not a spell is Conjuration or Evocation and my three options are:

Sog Painfully through three different Books, which can only grow worse over time
Create some kind of flash card organization system and carry it everywhere I go, which is a significant investment of time and effort on my part
Ask WotC to magically create a legal tool to aid in my search in the span of five seconds - which is hilariously impossible and unlikely
Use an online tool which is illegal but provides far more utility at the time that I want it than any of the other options



3.5 had a similar issue in the past because of how many books there are. Having a computer do the search for a piece of information is infinitely superior because of how much more reliable it is.

[tkuremento]

Because laws are the will of the people, not something handed down divinely. Prohibition is a great example of people not following the law. They did it because that law was unjust and enforced upon them against their will.

I'm not saying that this is a similar situation, but if you're not seriously questioning law at all times you are doing yourself a disservice and neglecting your obligation to be a critical and thoughtful person.

As an aside I'm going to treat wizard's books the same way I treat game ROMS and Emulators. If I bought that system and that game I should be allowed to transfer it into another medium should I so choose, I have bought the rights to that content for personal use.

Now I'm not as computer savvy as some so perhaps I need to go download the PDF from someone who's not profiting from it. I see no harm in doing this so long as you have legally obtained a hard copy of the material at some point.

Wizard gets their due and you get the information in a format that's more convenient. I don't see how you could reasonably be upset with that situation unless you also get upset when people burn mixtapes out of songs they've already purchased just because they're not listening to the album CD.

I can agree with that, though you know others will get uppity if the PDF is a reprint and you own a prior version :| Like some people are so strewn into laws that they don't even dare step into the grey area. I'm not saying laws are bad, I'm, just saying there is evidence of public figures getting away with breaking the law and I can't play D&D because I bought the book AND got a PDF version for the magic ctrl + f?

[Sigreid]

If you don't want someone to break into your home and rape you, you should create an easy and convenient way for them to have sex with you for money.

Seriously, does this logic genuinely make sense to you?


Because it's providing something for free that WotC rely on to make money so that they can make the products in the first place.

Until we live in a Star Trek-like Utopian society, products require being paid for to exist in the first place.

Not to mention that intellectual property law is set up so that if a company does not aggressively defend their IP, then they are considered to have voluntarily released it into the public domain. Even if they wan't to be cool about a site like this, they can't or they will loose all rights to it, unless there is a contract in place between WoTC and the site in question.

[tkuremento]

Not to mention that intellectual property law is set up so that if a company does not aggressively defend their IP, then they are considered to have voluntarily released it into the public domain. Even if they wan't to be cool about a site like this, they can't or they will loose all rights to it, unless there is a contract in place between WoTC and the site in question.

It is rare but there are cases where people get hired because of things they do. I forget which fan-game but the person behind it got hired by Sega, and then the person who did the Another Metroid 2 Remake got DMCA's so hard by Nintendo. As one person on twitter put it: "Sega hired the guy responsible for a fangame to work on their newest game while Nintendo DMCA's fangame projects

Sega does what Nintendon't"

Of course there is NO OBLIGATION for them to hire someone, but it is cool when it happens.

[Sigreid]

It is rare but there are cases where people get hired because of things they do. I forget which fan-game but the person behind it got hired by Sega, and then the person who did the Another Metroid 2 Remake got DMCA's so hard by Nintendo. As one person on twitter put it: "Sega hired the guy responsible for a fangame to work on their newest game while Nintendo DMCA's fangame projects

Sega does what Nintendon't"

Of course there is NO OBLIGATION for them to hire someone, but it is cool when it happens.

Even if they were to want to do this, the cease and desist would go first while they haggled out details. In your example, for all we know, both Sega and Nintendo made offers and the Sega fan accepted and the Nintendo one did not. I have no way of knowing.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: Thread locked for review.