Witcher 3 Dev: Don't Buy From Green Man Gaming

[chikusho]

Then surely GMG can name those human mothers right? They wouldn't adopt stolen key babies if innocent.

Sure they could. But they are under no obligation to do so. And there is no precedent for them doing so, since there is no evidence that needs to be refuted. And if and when that happens it will probably be in a court of law, which will likely be held behind closed doors in order for them to keep their business secrets from the public as well as competing companies.

If there is foul play, you'll probably hear about it in "GMG convicted in court for doing something illegal", and until then any arguing is pointless.

 

[Bertinan]

The keys are purchased with stolen financial information.

A common tactic with professional credit thieves is to immediately purchase something easily resold and difficult to track(like digital game keys). It costs them literally nothing to purchase fraudulent copies of a game key then resell it at whatever value they want, whereas something physical would require things like transportation, storage, purchasers...physical things that can actually be tracked.

Technically, a Russian scam website where customers can purchase and resell "genuine" keys counts as a legitimate source if you don't ask how they purchased those keys.

 

[NezumiiroKitsune]

Well at least currently, in England, it's £49.99 on GMG, and £41.99 discounted at GOG. So unless this bargain is limited to consumers in the USA, I don't see this incredible discount. Or something happened, and dialogue between CPRD and GMG has solved the problem?

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Let's get real here people.

GMG did not say that their keys came from an "unknown source".
GMG DID say that their keys came from "legitimate third-party retailers".

And i said i came from Mars. You should instantly believe me even if Martians themselves would claim that i did not and i would provide no evidence for it and list my origins as "unknown". but no, im totally from Mars.

Very unfitting analogy. Rather, CDPR is calling GMG martians. GMG responded by saying that no, they were born from legitimate human mothers. You people are just agitated that they didn't specify which mothers gave birth to them.

The burden of proof is on CDPR. Until evidence of the contrary, GMG must be presumed innocent.

that's still not right, GOG is the owner/producer of said product, otherwise you would have a point in the analogy. How is it wrong for a producer to ask where a retailer is getting their keys from? GoG didn't give them to them, so obviously they are coming from somewhere, they just want to make sure they are legitimate. If this was some random company/whobody then yeah, I'd be much more agreeable in GMG telling them to essentially fuck off by listing an unknown source.

 

[chikusho]

that's still not right, GOG is the owner/producer of said product, otherwise you would have a point in the analogy. How is it wrong for a producer to ask where a retailer is getting their keys from? GoG didn't give them to them, so obviously they are coming from somewhere, they just want to make sure they are legitimate. If this was some random company/whobody then yeah, I'd be much more agreeable in GMG telling them to essentially fuck off by listing an unknown source.

CDPR did not ask where the keys came from.
CDPR stated that they don't know where the keys came from.
For all you know, CDPR might not even be interested to know the sources because they want people to use GOG instead.

Also, business secrets are not something you casually reveal just to tell someone to "fuck off".

 

[Soulrender95]

If CDPR are saying don't buy from GMG, then they've obviously tried to track down the source of the codes GMG has with GMG refusing to co-operate, otherwise I don't think they would have made this public they'd have dealt with the distributor on the quiet.

We [the consumer] don't have the right to know who sold the codes to GMG, But CDPR certainly does especially if the seller violated a legal contract, and they have the right as a business to deny people buying the keys from GMG access to the product, it'd be negative PR for sure, but frankly why should a business put up with someone else making money from their product without any return?

I don't blame anyone for buying from GMG, they do great deals and hopefully GMG will play ball with CDPR and sort this out and everybody wins, but if it can't be resolved be prepared to have your key revoked.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

that's still not right, GOG is the owner/producer of said product, otherwise you would have a point in the analogy. How is it wrong for a producer to ask where a retailer is getting their keys from? GoG didn't give them to them, so obviously they are coming from somewhere, they just want to make sure they are legitimate. If this was some random company/whobody then yeah, I'd be much more agreeable in GMG telling them to essentially fuck off by listing an unknown source.

CDPR did not ask where the keys came from.
CDPR stated that they don't know where the keys came from.
For all you know, CDPR might not even be interested to know the sources because they want people to use GOG instead.

Also, business secrets are not something you casually reveal just to tell someone to "fuck off".

oh good god...do you really need to be that obtuse? The whole deal here is because they don't know where they came from, if they did then there wouldn't be an issue, if they wanted people to use GoG instead, then why the hell would they even be selling keys through anyone else digitally? Your arguing for the sake of arguing here.

When it involves the original owner/producer of said product, yeah, you kinda need to be able to backup where your merchandise is coming from, which is why I said if it was any other random person/company asking, you'd have a point.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

oh good god...do you really need to be that obtuse? The whole deal here is because they don't know where they came from, if they did then there wouldn't be an issue, if they wanted people to use GoG instead, then why the hell would they even be selling keys through anyone else digitally? Your arguing for the sake of arguing here.

When it involves the original owner/producer of said product, yeah, you kinda need to be able to backup where your merchandise is coming from, which is why I said if it was any other random person/company asking, you'd have a point.

oh good god...do you really need to be that inane? The whole deal here is because CDPR stated they did not know where they came from. That's no reason to believe GMG did anything wrong. You're being suspicious for the sake of being suspicious here.

When it involves the original owner/producer of said product, yeah, you kind of don't need to do anything in response to that as long as it's done within the law. If CDPR didn't want to sell to GMG, and GMG bought from somewhere else, that's a deal that exists entirely with GMG and their third-party reseller. If GMG presented any sort of evidence of foul play, you'd have a point.

If you're just going to respond like a child, then we're just going to go around in circles here... so I'll just say hopefully this gets sorted out before a customer somewhere gets screwed and no one walks away looking good out of this.

captcha: turning point

yes captcha, hopefully this is a turning point.

 

[chikusho]

oh good god...do you really need to be that obtuse? The whole deal here is because they don't know where they came from, if they did then there wouldn't be an issue, if they wanted people to use GoG instead, then why the hell would they even be selling keys through anyone else digitally? Your arguing for the sake of arguing here.

When it involves the original owner/producer of said product, yeah, you kinda need to be able to backup where your merchandise is coming from, which is why I said if it was any other random person/company asking, you'd have a point.

oh good god...do you really need to be that inane? The whole deal here is because CDPR stated they did not know where they came from. That's no reason to believe GMG did anything wrong. You're being suspicious for the sake of being suspicious here.

When it involves the original owner/producer of said product, yeah, you kind of don't need to do anything in response to that as long as it's done within the law. If CDPR didn't want to sell to GMG, and GMG bought from somewhere else, that's a deal that exists entirely with GMG and their third-party reseller. If GMG presented any sort of evidence of foul play, you'd have a point.

If you're just going to respond like a child, then we're just going to go around in circles here... so I'll just say hopefully this gets sorted out before a customer somewhere gets screwed and no one walks away looking good out of this.

captcha: turning point

yes captcha, hopefully this is a turning point.

Honestly, it says a lot that you think I respond like a child when what I did was just borrow your own phrasing to emphasize the argument.

yes captcha, hopefully this will eventually be seen for what it is, a non-event.

 

[HerraMetsoila]

Here in Finland(Nordic region) GMG has price of 59,99? and GoG 49,97?. There could be a problem from customer(and business) POV if GMG are selling same codes from the same "unknown" source as with their US deal. If they are funding their discounts by fucking over other regions by selling overpriced codes that they have not paid much for, then it is bit shady and does affect market by stealing sales from competition.

Then again, nothing new under the sun. CDPR and GMG hopefully settle this before launch as another Farcry 4 CD-Key scenario would not look good for anyone.

 

[Strazdas]

Very unfitting analogy. Rather, CDPR is calling GMG martians. GMG responded by saying that no, they were born from legitimate human mothers. You people are just agitated that they didn't specify which mothers gave birth to them.

The burden of proof is on CDPR. Until evidence of the contrary, GMG must be presumed innocent.

The point was that GMG saying something does not make it truth in the slightest. And in your analogy, GMG looks like a martian but claims to be a human, providing aboslutely no proof of being a human.

The burden of proof is entirely on GMG. They are the ones claiming they have a legitimate source.

Sure they could. But they are under no obligation to do so. And there is no precedent for them doing so, since there is no evidence that needs to be refuted. And if and when that happens it will probably be in a court of law, which will likely be held behind closed doors in order for them to keep their business secrets from the public as well as competing companies.

If there is foul play, you'll probably hear about it in "GMG convicted in court for doing something illegal", and until then any arguing is pointless.

On the contrary. In order to sell keys that are according to CDPR not for resale they are under full obligation to disclose it, otherwise CDPR has every right to disable each and every one of these keys.

Also, business secrets are not something you casually reveal just to tell someone to "fuck off".

Source of keys should not be a business secret to begin with.

 

[chikusho]

Very unfitting analogy. Rather, CDPR is calling GMG martians. GMG responded by saying that no, they were born from legitimate human mothers. You people are just agitated that they didn't specify which mothers gave birth to them.

The burden of proof is on CDPR. Until evidence of the contrary, GMG must be presumed innocent.

The point was that GMG saying something does not make it truth in the slightest. And in your analogy, GMG looks like a martian but claims to be a human, providing aboslutely no proof of being a human.

The burden of proof is entirely on GMG. They are the ones claiming they have a legitimate source.

That's not how the burden of proof works. If I say that you're a drug dealer, you shouldn't have to provide proof that you are not. The burden of proof is on the accuser, and saying "I don't know" is not evidence of anything.

Sure they could. But they are under no obligation to do so. And there is no precedent for them doing so, since there is no evidence that needs to be refuted. And if and when that happens it will probably be in a court of law, which will likely be held behind closed doors in order for them to keep their business secrets from the public as well as competing companies.

If there is foul play, you'll probably hear about it in "GMG convicted in court for doing something illegal", and until then any arguing is pointless.

On the contrary. In order to sell keys that are according to CDPR not for resale they are under full obligation to disclose it, otherwise CDPR has every right to disable each and every one of these keys.

First, from where did you get that the keys are not for resale? If that was really the case, you wouldn't read about it in a forum comment. If anything it'd be "CDPR files lawsuit".
Second, that would be like Mercedes shutting down a car just because it was sold from a used car-lot simply because they didn't like the shop owner.
If GMG would ever be under any obligation to disclose anything, it would be in front of a court of law. Not just because you're needlessly suspicious.

Also, business secrets are not something you casually reveal just to tell someone to "fuck off".

Source of keys should not be a business secret to begin with.

Actually, source of keys/games/products etc. can very well be down-right necessary business secrets. Both from GMG's and their third-party resellers perspective. If GMG strikes a deal with a reseller for an exchange of keys vs. cash and/or services (or something or other) it's very much in their interest that the term of that deal doesn't go public. What if the low price they negotiated is lower than the third-party reseller has with another customer? That could sour relationships and result in a loss for both companies.

 

[Strazdas]

That's not how the burden of proof works. If I say that you're a drug dealer, you shouldn't have to provide proof that you are not. The burden of proof is on the accuser, and saying "I don't know" is not evidence of anything.

Yes, and GMG is the one making a claim that they got the keys legitimately while failing to provide proof of it.

First, from where did you get that the keys are not for resale? If that was really the case, you wouldn't read about it in a forum comment. If anything it'd be "CDPR files lawsuit".
Second, that would be like Mercedes shutting down a car just because it was sold from a used car-lot simply because they didn't like the shop owner.
If GMG would ever be under any obligation to disclose anything, it would be in front of a court of law. Not just because you're needlessly suspicious.

And we might see that headline too. Im not ruling that out. However CDPR seems to want to warn its costumers ahead of time about this possibility, hence the current headline.

Your comparison to Mercedes is misplaces. What happens on your example is a costumer buys a car, sells it to a used cars lot, they sell it to another costumer. What happens here is if the used cars lot would be selling cars that are, for all we know, stolen and refuse to tell anyone where they got them from.

Also digital keys are not cars. the way law regarding licenses work is that CDPR can sell a retailer keys that could not be resold to anyone but end-user, and doing so is breaking a license they have.

Actually, source of keys/games/products etc. can very well be down-right necessary business secrets. Both from GMG's and their third-party resellers perspective. If GMG strikes a deal with a reseller for an exchange of keys vs. cash and/or services (or something or other) it's very much in their interest that the term of that deal doesn't go public. What if the low price they negotiated is lower than the third-party reseller has with another customer? That could sour relationships and result in a loss for both companies.

In their interest =/= should be. It is in the interest of consumers that the source of the items sold is to be made known. something like distribution chain should not be allowed to be hidden in any business.

And of course of what they did was illegal it could sour relationships. GOOD. they got punished for commiting a crime.

 

[chikusho]

Yes, and GMG is the one making a claim that they got the keys legitimately while failing to provide proof of it.

Yes, and GMG is not accusing anyone of anything, so they have no need to provide any proof.

And we might see that headline too.

And until such a time, all suspicion and outrage is both unfounded and ridiculous.

Also digital keys are not cars. the way law regarding licenses work is that CDPR can sell a retailer keys that could not be resold to anyone but end-user, and doing so is breaking a license they have.

And CDPR have not said that they've sold keys that cannot be resold to anyone but the end-user, so your point is moot.

In their interest =/= should be. It is in the interest of consumers that the source of the items sold is to be made known. something like distribution chain should not be allowed to be hidden in any business.

It is in the interest of consumers that the source of the items is legal. Until such a time that the source is proven to be illegal, consumers have no reason to assume otherwise.
Also, should not be allowed =/= what is actually allowed.

And of course of what they did was illegal it could sour relationships. GOOD. they got punished for commiting a crime.

And if they didn't do something illegal, you are now punishing them even though they did not commit a crime. This is why the accuser is the one who needs to present evidence, which they have not.

 

[ryukage_sama]

So, GMG has codes purchased from undisclosed, yet legitimate retailers. Perhaps the retailers are approved, but the purchases may not be legit. The digital game code marketplace is rife with fake codes and codes purchased with stolen credit cards. We may never know for sure, but I wouldn't put my money in GMG for a AAA new release.

 

[rosac]

So, GMG has codes purchased from undisclosed, yet legitimate retailers. Perhaps the retailers are approved, but the purchases may not be legit. The digital game code marketplace is rife with fake codes and codes purchased with stolen credit cards. We may never know for sure, but I wouldn't put my money in GMG for a AAA new release.

If they named the source then we could confirm if legit or not. But their refusal to do so is obviously very very suspicious.

 

[Yozozo]

Whoever 3rd party retailer is... they are probably gonna lose out. CDPR are not idiots. How much you want to bet they will buy a copy from GoG and discover who the 3rd party retailer is that way?

They would more than likely be able to then use that as proof that said 3rd party retailer violated their contract, and have grounds to sue.

I doubt they will brick any codes this way, but I also doubt the 3rd party retailer is ever going to do business with CDPR again.

 

[Edl01]

CDPR chose not to engage with a number of significant, reputable, and successful retailers, including ourselves, as they instead focused on supporting their own platform GOG.

You're kidding me...I've used GOG for years now and I never knew CD Projekt Red owned the service. I mean my god...HOW DID I NOT KNOW THIS!?

On topic this sounds quite shady, but Witcher 3 is gonna be a big game and it makes sense that GMG would be desperate to get it onto their stores. Hopefully this all just blows over as nothing and all the keys are legitimate, but I certainly won't buy Witcher 3 from them.