Wizards of the Coast Sends Pinkertons to YouTuber Over Products Copyright Infringement

[Wargamer08]

Yeah, again, have fun writing a law that bans what happened here without fucking up the American legal system even more. This wasn't legally theft.

The childish "I'll make a law" ignores how this problem actually happened. The Pinkertons knew what the law was, and were still able to intimidate by preying on ignorance and going right up to the line of legality.

The solution is simple: don't be ignorant. There's no amount of law that can cure dumb.

You're right, just stand up to the armed private security and you get to keep your property easy. Man I wonder why organizations don't just go door to door issuing not quite illegal threats to people to get them to give over property or else. Some kind of racket, a protection racket if you will. It's the individual's fault for not knowing their rights.

Still haven't heard from you how big corporations ability to intimidate and rob people is a requirement to current social order. Just insults about how childish it is.

 

[Abhorsen]

You're right, just stand up to the armed private security and you get to keep your property easy. Man I wonder why organizations don't just go door to door issuing not quite illegal threats to people to get them to give over property or else. Some kind of racket, a protection racket if you will. It's the individual's fault for not knowing their rights.

In your own home? Yeah, shutting your door on them isn't hard. Or don't open your door. Having a ring camera, etc. Literally call the cops. All of these would have worked. The second you know they are working for WOTC, their physical threat level goes way down.

Shit, he could have given the property away, then lawyered up, and sued and got a settlement by lying about what they did to intimidate him. But by making a youtube video about it, he lost even that.

Still haven't heard from you how big corporations ability to intimidate and rob people is a requirement to current social order. Just insults about how childish it is.

No, see, I want you to write a law that actually bans this without stopping settlements happening or other huge social problems. You are the one positively claiming that the law can be changed. Tell me how.

Look, the way I see it, any enforceable banning of this also bans a lawyer representing a client with cancer from using the threat of suing Monsanto to obtain a settlement.

As for the physical intimidation, it's used because its hard to prove. They basically appear and are innately threatening because they are armed men. Banning people from appearing threatening sounds like a great excuse to ban open carrying and some concealed carry as well.

There simply is no free lunch, only tradeoffs, in government policy. For how rare this action is, and how the solution is just to say no, I don't think a law that will have negative consequences is worth it.

The reason why I called it childish? Because every legal system will always have a grey area, and that grey area is needed because there are going to be good behaviors and bad behaviors that look very similar. That you think the law could be perfect is something only a child should believe.




Also, tbc, this isn't me saying "but they didn't violate the NAP". They did. They used deceit and an implied threat of force to grab something that wasn't theirs. I'm just saying I don't see a remedy for it

 

[Wargamer08]

In your own home? Yeah, shutting your door on them isn't hard. Or don't open your door. Having a ring camera, etc. Literally call the cops. All of these would have worked. The second you know they are working for WOTC, their physical threat level goes way down.

Shit, he could have given the property away, then lawyered up, and sued and got a settlement by lying about what they did to intimidate him. But by making a youtube video about it, he lost even that.


No, see, I want you to write a law that actually bans this without stopping settlements happening or other huge social problems. You are the one positively claiming that the law can be changed. Tell me how.

Look, the way I see it, any enforceable banning of this also bans a lawyer representing a client with cancer from using the threat of suing Monsanto to obtain a settlement.

As for the physical intimidation, it's used because its hard to prove. They basically appear and are innately threatening because they are armed men. Banning people from appearing threatening sounds like a great excuse to ban open carrying and some concealed carry as well.

There simply is no free lunch, only tradeoffs, in government policy. For how rare this action is, and how the solution is just to say no, I don't think a law that will have negative consequences is worth it.

The reason why I called it childish? Because every legal system will always have a grey area, and that grey area is needed because there are going to be good behaviors and bad behaviors that look very similar. That you think the law could be perfect is something only a child should believe.




Also, tbc, this isn't me saying "but they didn't violate the NAP". They did. They used deceit and an implied threat of force to grab something that wasn't theirs. I'm just saying I don't see a remedy for it

See this is where I know you're talking out your ass. His wife answered the door and tried to close it on them. They physically barged in and prevented her. They forced their way into his house. The situation was eventually talked down, but they opened with forced entry. Why didn't she just beat up the armed goons to keep her property, am I right?

 

[Abhorsen]

See this is where I know you're talking out your ass. His wife answered the door and tried to close it on them. They physically barged in and prevented her. They forced their way into his house. The situation was eventually talked down, but they opened with forced entry. Why didn't she just beat up the armed goons to keep her property, am I right?

Did they? You gotta source for that? Cause when he talked about it on his youtube channel, he didn't say anything about them barging in, just that he knew who they were and was intimidated.

 

[ThatZenoGuy]

>When normal people pay goons to take stuff off of others
D:<
>When rich people pay goons to take stuff off of others
<;D

 

[Abhorsen]

>When normal people pay goons to take stuff off of others
D:<
>When rich people pay goons to take stuff off of others
<;D

I mean, this is kinda true for everything when it comes to the law system, as shitty as it is:


There were always be a 3 tiered justice system, those that know how to exploit the rules, those that don't know, and those that are favored anyway (Hunter Biden).

Again, not saying the Pinkertons don't deserve to suffer, but I am saying a) they did nothing illegal, b) a law banning what they were doing will likely hit behavior that is generally good (other than the threat of being accused of a crime), and c) this isn't a huge problem when you know your rights.

 

[Wargamer08]

Did they? You gotta source for that? Cause when he talked about it on his youtube channel, he didn't say anything about them barging in, just that he knew who they were and was intimidated.

Magic 'Raid' Wasn't First Time WotC Hired Pinkertons [UPDATED]

Formatting on the quote is beating my phone, you'll have to read halfway through.

 

[Abhorsen]

Magic 'Raid' Wasn't First Time WotC Hired Pinkertons [UPDATED]

Formatting on the quote is beating my phone, you'll have to read halfway through.

Thanks for that, that is illegal.

Specifically this:

In an email exchange with io9, Cannon confirmed the statements he made on the video and added additional context, stating that "as soon as my wife answered the door they aggressively asked for me by my full name… announced themselves as the Pinkerton Agency (which I am very familiar with their reputation), and said they were there to recover 'stolen goods'." After his wife asked them to wait outside, Cannon says that they "forced themselves" at least partially through the door and prevented her from closing the door all the way. When Cannon eventually got to the door he says he "assertively moved everyone outside" and told the agents that they needed to treat the Cannons with more respect. "They did eventually dial it back and become more civil after that," he says. At some point, Cannon alleges, the treatment by the agents made his wife cry.

Yeah, this is grounds enough to sue and makes this illegal. The Pinkertons did the stupid and stepped over the line, and since they were employed by WOTC, I think WOTC has direct liability here.

I kinda doubt the person will sue though, unfortunately, but he should. He later got product from WOTC, which makes me concerned that he signed away that right.

 

[Wargamer08]

Thanks for that, that is illegal.

Specifically this:

Yeah, this is grounds enough to sue and makes this illegal. The Pinkertons did the stupid and stepped over the line, and since they were employed by WOTC, I think WOTC has direct liability here.

I kinda doubt the person will sue though, unfortunately, but he should. He later got product from WOTC, which makes me concerned that he signed away that right.

Like I said at the beginning, the lack of criminal charges is due to the guy being nice, not due to the lack of criminal activity. Forced entry, assault and maybe armed robbery. Not sure if the theft of goods valued at 3k is enough for armed robbery.

 

[Doomsought]

Like I said at the beginning, the lack of criminal charges is due to the guy being nice, not due to the lack of criminal activity. Forced entry, assault and maybe armed robbery. Not sure if the theft of goods valued at 3k is enough for armed robbery.

It wouldn't matter if they stole a used lint roller from the trash can, its armed robbery because they used weapons.

 

[Wargamer08]

It wouldn't matter if they stole a used lint roller from the trash can, its armed robbery because they used weapons.

It's unlikely that the robbery charges would stick, but assault and the like are open and shut.