Old Fashioned 'Pirates' Steal 6,000 Copies Of The New Call Of Duty Game

from the time-to-institute-some-PRM,-perhaps? dept

Thu, Nov 10th 2011 4:58am — Tim Cushing

In this day and age of digital goods, where the waters are constantly muddied by the use of phrases like "stealing" or "content theft" in place of "copying" or "infringement," it's refreshing to see a youthful group of go-getters shaming their basement-dwelling peers by leaving the house and, you know, actually stealing something.

Via Computer and Video Games comes the somewhat surprising news of actual theft(!).

French site TFI News reports that the truck suffered a collision with a car on saturday morning in Créteil, south Paris, before two masked individuals emerged.

The criminals reportedly used tear gas to neutralise the truck drivers before hopping in and making off with the video game shipment said to be worth 400,000 Euros.

Separate reports say the truck contained a delivery of Activision's much-anticipated shooter, Modern Warfare 3 - an estimated 6000 copies of it.

Additional details from the source article (via Google Translate) indicate that a second truck was hit later in the day, bringing the total loss to nearly 800,000 euros.

This time the bad guys, three hooded people, used a weapon to commandeer the vehicle after having blocked the road. They quickly escape the wheel of the delivery van containing the same game.

While stealing physical product would seem to be completely redundant in this age of "epidemic level" piracy, there's something to be said about putting in a dishonest day's work. Of course, these stolen goods will likely be useless, considering Activision will likely have already pinned down the serial numbers affected by the time Jean Q. Publique has purchased his copy via LeBay or whatever. While pirating in the physical realm allows you to wear kickass hoods and toss around tear gas, the pirated digital equivalent will contain none of the damning evidence (invalid serial numbers, tear gas residue) and all of the fun of the original. I mean, this is a Call of Duty game and you're going to want to get online, right? Nobody buys/steals CoD for the single player.

On the other hand, maybe there's another lesson to be learned from this. Perhaps the "new" piracy will start to resemble the "old" piracy again. After all, the content industries would much rather have you stealing their physical product than downloading the hell out of it, as is evidenced by Creative~~Accounting~~America's nifty new coffee mug, which blatantly invites passersby to make off with this beautifully photoshopped item, rather than their non-rivalrous goods. (Hood and tear gas optional.)

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: stolen, video games

70 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 5:10am

They'll have to rush to make this a level in the next Call of Duty, due out in March, 2012.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 5:19am

And I bet HADOPI will never catch them. Pirates!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 5:29am

AAARGGGHH MATEYS!!!!!!!!!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 5:39am

It would be entertaining to learn that Activision has no way to know what serials were boosted, because they eliminated that position to save money. Our DRM will protect us well enough.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 7:51am
  
  Re:
  I bet the games end up back in the retail distribution channel somehow and consumers end up being the ones that lose out in the long run because Activision "disables" completely valid copies of their games which some consumers bought innocently.
  
  In the end, I bet some mom-and-pop retailer ends up taking the fall for buying completely legitimate-looking games on the cheap from a supplier that they can't track down after the fact.
  
  Original thieves will probably get away with it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
ZidaneT, 10 Nov 2011 @ 5:45am

At long last!
On the bright side, now we have some solid numbers on just how piracy is harming the industry! ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- That Anonymous Coward (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 5:52am
  
  Re: At long last!
  Waiting for them to blame it on Google for giving them streetview of the path so they knew the best spot to hit them.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 8:54am
    
    Re: Re: At long last!
    I'm pretty sure this would constitute a violation of all three strikes. Guess it's time to permanently shut down that road. Pity; it was so very useful for other forms of traffic and commerce.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - DOlz (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 10:09am
    
    Re: Re: At long last!
    The thieves must have used Modern Warfare 1&2 to train for the mission. Darn Activision for providing the tools to enable piracy!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Steve R. (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 5:53am

But why be honest? Target BAD,
There is little reason to be "honest". If you actually buy the software there seems to be no method to return the product for a refund. Given that,why should the consumer be honest when a company takes your money and refuses to give it back. With that Target - BAD.

The TOS and EULA deprive you of any rights and to my knowledge none of the software offers a return policy. So if you reject the terms of service, the product does not work on your computer, or you are otherwise displeased it you just spent big $$$ for useless cheap plastic.

Honesty needs to work both ways, not just to the benefit of the seller. Good old "Buyer Beware". With that, why should the consumer be "honest".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Butcherer79 (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 5:53am

Though amusing to read, I can't help the feeling that this article somewhat glorifies violence and theft, I see the comparison that is made between real and online piracy and the importance of that point, but perhaps this could have been made whilst not bigging up a "dishonest day's work".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Fushta (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 6:17am
  
  Re:
  I think we are mostly adults here, who recognize sarcasm when we see it. Nobody is glorifying anything. If Mike's joking nature feel on deaf ears for you this time, rest assured, he'll keep trying in future "tongue-in-cheek" posts.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Fushta (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 6:17am
    
    Re: Re:
    *err, fell*
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - iamtheky (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 6:33am
    
    Re: Re:
    by Tim Cushing:
    
    is all you need to recognize that the article will be short on substance on long on hyperbole.
    
    Mike's are generally buried in the last paragraph as a kick in the balls after laying out the facts. Tim likes to word every paragraph as if it his last, and yet it never is :(
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 1:56pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Good news, Constant Detractor!
      
      I've got a new post up!
      
      http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111110/12201016710/royalty-collection-agency-sabam-demands-34 -piracy-license-belgian-isps.shtml
      
      Feel free to jump right in and start bashing it!
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Butcherer79 (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 7:50am
    
    Re: Re:
    First line of my comment above:
    "Though amusing to read"
    
    Tim's joking nature, not Mike's, did not fall on deaf ears and I look forward to reading more, both serious and tongue in cheek posts.
    It was just an observation, not an attack. I have posted here several times and I don't think I skimmed so low as to be trolling, this was just my view, to be taken or not by others.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 6:33am
  
  Re:
  I'll assume this is sarcasm; you can't really be that fragile.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Butcherer79 (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 7:56am
    
    Re: Re:
    At no point did I imply that I was, in fact I pointed out that the comparison between real and digital piracy is important. I was not damaged by reading this article, I did not feel down after reading this article, if I am interested in the articles here on TD I try to show it through a post or two.
    This was an observation, not a complaint and certainly not an attack on the author.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- FuzzyDuck, 10 Nov 2011 @ 6:50am
  
  Re:
  Life must really suck without a sense of humor.
  
  Or maybe it doesn't if you don't know any better.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Butcherer79 (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 7:51am
    
    Re: Re:
    From above, applies here too:
    "Butcherer79 (profile), Nov 10th, 2011 @ 7:50am
    
    First line of my comment above:
    "Though amusing to read"
    
    Tim's joking nature, not Mike's, did not fall on deaf ears and I look forward to reading more, both serious and tongue in cheek posts.
    It was just an observation, not an attack. I have posted here several times and I don't think I skimmed so low as to be trolling, this was just my view, to be taken or not by others."
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - FuzzyDuck, 10 Nov 2011 @ 9:26am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      but perhaps this could have been made whilst not bigging up a "dishonest day's work".
      
      The thing is I found the phrase a "dishonest day's work" particularly funny as I did Tim's "bigging up" of this event.
      
      But I'll accept your explanation and retract my implied statement that you lack a sense of humor. I'll have to reserve that for a more deserving commentator.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - FuzzyDuck, 10 Nov 2011 @ 9:28am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Damn, quote vs blockquote, I never learn! The first sentence is supposed to be a quote.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Forge, 10 Nov 2011 @ 8:43am
  
  Re:
  Sarcasm. On the internet, it sounds like "Whoosh!".
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Fickelbra (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 9:57am
  
  Re:
  I'm fairly confident if you're even reading this article, you probably aren't in the stage in your life where you need to be reminded about what is and isn't moral. We know armed robbery of a truck is a no-no.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 1:59pm
  
  Re:
  I can see your point, and I'm glad that you can see mine. I don't think I was trying to "glorify" the violence as much as point out the absurdity of treating online criminal acts with the same severity as offline criminal acts.
  
  But, as was ably pointed out by iamtheky: I am fond of the hyperbolic. :)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - That Anonymous Coward (profile), 11 Nov 2011 @ 12:21am
    
    Re: Re:
    You?! Really?! Why I never!!
    
    Sorry I'm trying to get known for sarcasm ;)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
abc gum, 10 Nov 2011 @ 5:56am

Parley?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ima Fish (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 6:09am

I'd bet anything that their collective restitution will be less than Jammie Thomas' restitution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 12:51pm
  
  Re:
  uh, if caught, I think these guys are goin to prison bro.
  
  So yeah, I'd say that's significantly worse.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 6:32am

this will not help gamers on the 'Games don't make us violent!' front...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jay (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 8:29am
  
  Re:
  But there's no more attack on games coming. Games are protected speech under the 1st Amendment.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ima Fish (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 10:03am
  
  Re:
  Playing games don't make you violent, apparently selling games makes you violent.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 6:33am

If you buy games, are you supporting terrorists?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lord Binky, 10 Nov 2011 @ 6:39am

Punishment fits a crime (not necessarily the one commited)
I do find it entertaining that if they had downloaded 6,000 copies of MW3 the punishment would be far worse than just hijacking a delivery van with 6,000 copies. It seems an eternal problem whenever video games are involved, which is : physics suck.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Richard (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 6:47am

Pirates
Would have been better if this had happened at sea - lorries just don't have the same romance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wes, 10 Nov 2011 @ 6:49am

Even you, Tim
"While pirating in the physical realm allows you to wear kickass hoods and toss around tear gas, the pirated digital equivalent will contain none of the damning evidence (invalid serial numbers, tear gas residue) and all of the fun of the original."

As you pointed out, the waters are muddied by the replacement of "copying" and "infringement" with terms implying theft. So much that even you, Tim, can't help but describe an infringing, cracked copy as "pirated".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NullOp, 10 Nov 2011 @ 6:51am

Pirates?
On shore these guys are just thieves. Sounds like an inside job to me. But, whether it's downloading or old-fashioned stealing it's still a crime by any standard.

Two points for going old-school, however!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 6:55am
  
  Re: Pirates?
  Yes, This is a crime. Just as digital piracy is a crime. Its just a different crime.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Jay (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 7:00am
    
    Re: Re: Pirates?
    Digital piracy has always been a service issue. Too bad you're paid to think otherwise.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 7:11am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Pirates?
      It still counts as a crime, just not as bad as actual stealing.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 8:14am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Pirates?
        Who is the idiot that made Jesus a criminal?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 12:54pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Pirates?
        Jesus didn't take things without asking the owner, bud.
        
        Might want to quickly restock your karma for bringing him into this... careful when crossing the street until then.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 8:15am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Pirates?
        With SOPA, the punishments that come with downloading, and the stigma you're trying to put on anyone who does, it seems that downloading is much, much worse then stealing.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 8:34am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Pirates?
        Infringement, not crime. But you know that and is purposely ignoring the fact.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 12:56pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Pirates?
        Infringement is a crime.
        
        You are committing a crime when you rip off music.
        
        You've just been able to do it without fear of being caught, so that's why you're desensitized to it.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        nasch (profile), 14 Nov 2011 @ 4:22pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Pirates?
        Most infringement is civil, not criminal. So illegal, but not a crime.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Jay (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 8:39am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Pirates?
        *sigh*
        
        Let's try this again. Digital unauthorized downloading of files has always been a service issue. Not a legal one. While those in the movie and music industry continue to try to make it a legal issue, it has always been ineffective in trying to litigate piracy away, which has NEVER worked.
        
        Cyberlockers such as Google Music or Rapidshare continue to fulfill niches that the MPAA and RIAA will not fulfill. While criminalizing linking is within their grasp, the cheaper outcome maintains that those within the industry build their own platforms of commerce instead of complaining to Congress.
        
        The litigation route continues to work against those that use it, vilifying their approach and showing the ineffectiveness of illegal search and seizures, faulty evidence collection, and lawsuits based on circumstantial evidence.
        
        But of course, making tapes was a crime too. Great way to enforce the law... Just think everyone is a criminal.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 7:04am

"In this day and age of digital goods, where the waters are constantly muddied by the use of phrases like "stealing" or "content theft" in place of "copying" or "infringement,".."

But the results are the same, obtaining something to which you are not entitled. Merriam Webster defines stealing as "to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully". Perhaps the laws regarding theft should be changed to reflect this definition. Then maybe TechDirt would stop arguing over VOCABULARY and look at the real issue which is that a product or service is being used without compensation to the rights holder.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 7:15am
  
  Re:
  You do know that legal definitions are not the same as the ones a layman would use, right?
  
  Or that infringement is a civil matter, not criminal, right?
  
  And that it is this way because that's how the laws are written, right?
  
  And that its really not a problem of vocabulary, but of your understanding of these facts, right?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 8:12am
  
  Re:
  If the results are the same just prove it, it is easy to do so right?
  
  Because I want to see you explain why radio isn't destroying the music bussiness but somehow sharing is.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ron Rezendes (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 8:18am
  
  Re:
  And this is why I don't think I'll ever technically pirate anything:
  
  "to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully"
  
  No matter how I obtain it - I'm ALWAYS willing to give it back when I'm done!
  
  It's really too bad that when I pay for it I can't actually return the software if it doesn't fulfill my needs, something doesn't seem quite right about that. Almost anything else I buy allows a return for refund.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Steve R. (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 8:32am
  
  The Definition of Stealing is Becoming More "Liberal"
  Anonymous, content creators are involved in a massive land-grab that consistently aggrandizes their so-called property privilege. This land-grab needs to be stopped.
  
  Not only that, but scarcity is used, in some situation, as a basis for asserting a property right. Well, if there is infinite scarcity, then the property right should diminish.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Steve R. (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 8:34am
    
    Re: The Definition of Stealing is Becoming More "Liberal"
    Oops. Should be "infinite availability"
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 10:49am
  
  Re:
  That does not encompass copyright infringement because it's copying , albeit unauthorized copying, not "taking" or "appropriating" both of witch wold negatively result in the rightful owner lossing whatever it was that was taken from them.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 10:49am
  
  Re:
  That does not encompass copyright infringement because it's copying , albeit unauthorized copying, not "taking" or "appropriating" both of witch wold negatively result in the rightful owner losing whatever it was that was taken from them.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 10:52am
    
    Re: Re:
    sorry for the double post. I try to stop the browser from sending the first one, so that I could edit it and only realized it didn't work went i when to view the second one.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 10:51am
  
  Re:
  "Merriam Webster defines stealing as..."
  
  Nice cherry picking of one part of your preferred definition. Luckily for us, the law needs to be more specific.
  
  Whether you like it or not, infringement and theft are 2 totally separate things with different definitions. Stop trying to muddy the waters and accept this.
  
  Here's a quick guide to which is which - stealing deprives the owner of the original product and thus incurs costs and/or other direct quantifiable harm. Infringement does not incur any other these costs, only *potentially* depriving of a possible sale. Simple.
  
  "maybe TechDirt would stop arguing over VOCABULARY"
  
  Stop pretending that words mean things other than what they're intended to mean when it suits your argument, and maybe they will.
  
  "the real issue which is that a product or service is being used without compensation to the rights holder."
  
  Same thing happens when I borrow a friend's book. Should I be subject to legal sanctions when I do that?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kevin L (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 7:05am

Infringement is cheaper
Considering they made off not just with physical product and license keys, but caused damage and will cost the municipality money for investigation, I'd say good old digital infringement is far cheaper than actual crime. If DRM got to a point where it were unbreakable, you'd get more cases like this, where people really get hurt - maybe even killed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 7:22am

Unlike computer games, the console versions (PS3 and XBOX360) do not contain any serial numbers so there would be nothing to distinguish them from copies sold at any other location. This is a really sizable haul for the thieves even if they sold the games at just half price.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 7:29am

Sounds like a publicity stunt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Luffy the Pirate King, 10 Nov 2011 @ 7:36am

Yaarrrr! This story arrrrmuses me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Nov 2011 @ 7:41am

Will they be free?
Are they going to give them away for free after all this hard work? I just wanna know how close to "file sharing" this will end up being - or if they actually intend to directly make money from the sales of non-counterfeit goods.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PrometheeFeu (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 7:49am

I waiting for the thieves to give a press conference explaining that tear gas costs money and that if people don't stop pirating games, the thieves will loose their jobs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lord Binky, 10 Nov 2011 @ 8:08am
  
  Re:
  No no no no.. If people don't stop pirating goods digitally, then tear gas makers will lose their jobs. Just the thought makes me cry.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - PrometheeFeu (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 8:25am
    
    Re: Re:
    If you cry without buying tear gas, you're a thief!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Lord binky, 10 Nov 2011 @ 10:03am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Aligator tears? Are they harmful to the environment or the economy........
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
crade (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 7:49am

I'm still staring at that mug.. It's like putting your add against gay marriage in a gay magazine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PrometheeFeu (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 7:56am

Does the truck door count as DRM for the purposes of the DMCA?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Groove Tiger (profile), 10 Nov 2011 @ 9:36am

Wait, I thought stealing meant changing bits of 0s and 1s so that they're in the same order as another pattern of 0s and 1s...

This must be a different crime, like... loitering.

Yeah! No matter how you try to spin it, this is loitering, plain and simple!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sam, 10 Nov 2011 @ 6:18pm

Serial Numbers?
Why would it matter if they figure out the serial numbers? I can imagine they could kill PC activation codes, but I doubt they could do much for console copies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]