Meh, RPS is still one of the best gaming sites, I don't really know any better one.

One that reports without opinion.

Unbiased journalism doesn't exist.
Anyway, can you name one that's better, then?

No, I can't. When it comes to gaming I read headlines and retweets and nothing more because a decent news source just doesn't exist as far as I can see.

Who's "we"? A lot of people here were angry at CDP including me - before RPS even mentioned it. They're extortion tactics so for good reason people should be angry.

Alright, I get that. I'd do that, but I actually enjoy reading a decently written article. Also, that way doesn't work with reviews.

If there were a method for accurately identifying who torrented something (IP addresses aren't people, just ask the RIAA), it would have been revealed.

I'm OK with CDP trying to combat piracy, but if there is even a slightest chance that I get hit in the crossfire (forced fines, DRM, toxic copy protection), can they fault me if I'm strongly against it?

Not really, disclosing such things at this stage would only ensure that pirates had information about getting around it. Until at least one case makes it to trial there's no benefit to be had from disclosing their methodology. These people know whether or not they pirated the game and it's easy enough to determine that during the discovery.

And the RIAA had other issues, they failed to take the steps necessary to verify that the information was correct. I remember one case where they failed to verify that the username actually belonged to the person they named and it actually belonged to somebody completely different.

Also, as in the Jammie Thomas case, they failed to back off when it turned out that there was no original disk to examine because it had failed and been replaced prior to them notifying her of their allegations. Furthermore they went on to claim that she had destroyed the disk in response to a suit which she hadn't yet been served with.

The reality here is that if they're careful and maintain high standards there's no inevitability to getting it wrong and being unable to correct it. To date nobody has come forward to say that they hadn't infringed upon the game and those that have come forward to complain haven't provided any accurate information to lead us to conclude that there was something shady going on.
Yes, they both can fault you for it and they should. In the US our standard for criminal justice is beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt, the reason being that if we demanded absolute perfection in all cases nobody would ever be convicted unless they committed their crime at trial and or admitted to doing so.

Civil suits are lower in stakes than criminal ones so the burden is somewhat lower, but expecting that level of accuracy is impossible without a ridiculous amount of monitoring.

I was already happy with them. They removed DRM after the game lost its "brand new title" status and they removed DRM even before that for GoG folks.

To protect their ability to sell DRM-free games, they went after crooks.

Still happy here.

NOW, they have relieved my worst fears that they may tread down a slippery slope in chasing thieves that tends to put honest customers in the cross fire... i.e. still seems like their customers are priority 1.

win/win/win in my book. Its why I'll buy their next game from GoG. Its why I bought Witcher 2 when I wasn't even close to playing it. (nor had I finished the first one to even know how much I'd like it for sure). Sometimes I buy on principle and Witcher 2 was a principle purchase for me.

Reviews and news are totally different things. News is for letting you know what's going on, reviews are for evaluation and opinion. I just don't read reviews, normally, since I'm happier formulating my own opinions about a game, movie or book.

"We" is anyone who isn't affected by the legal move. Nobody who didn't pirate the game, is a member of CDP's law firm or is a CDP employee needs to be angry about it. There is absolutely no way the legal process here could ever affect you. Except, I suppose, if GOG was to shut down as a result of the move. I find that unlikely, though.

Some drug dealers had their house raided recently, they lived round the corner from me. I never spoke to them, or anybody who bought from them. I'm not angry at the arrests, nor am I elated. I guess I'm kind of happy for the neighbours, it must be a lot more pleasant for them now the dealers are gone. But their prescense never affected me at all. All the raid was for me was an hour of lost sleep (plenty of yelling, no biggie, it was Friday).

I didn't buy drugs from those guys. I didn't pirate The Witcher 2. Why should I care about the legal procedings? In what way am I affected by them? I guess you could say there's the risk of wrongly accusing someone, but that's what the court process is for. I know I can prove that I didn't pirate The Witcher 2.

This is pretty much it for me. The whole method seems to be very underhanded because of the offer of the "lower" fine. If the detection method was accurate, surely you'd take them straight to court?

They've always given the impression (at least, to me) to know the gaming community quite well, which makes it seem strange that they didn't see this reaction coming. It gives me a unsettling theory that they did it on purpose so they could "backtrack" and get kudos from the community for 'changing their mind'. A very risky move, to be sure! I'll err on the side of not-so-cynical though this time :P

1. There are multiple reasons not taking them directly to court - the lawyers being the only ones really benefitting from it for one - thus it's at most a weak indication of the accuracy of the methods being used.

I don't know german law but here the court doesn't have time to have every little argument dragged to court, thus there are steps that need to be taken before you're even allowed to bring it to court. Regardless, at the point where a letter can be sent out they've already spent a given amount of money; why add even more costs after that when you can accomplish what you set out to do - deterring pirates by showing them that their actions actually may have unpleasant consequences?

If I'm stopped for a speeding violation, I get the option to accept a fine there and then. This fine is smaller than what I'll get if I refuse and it's taken to court. Is this extortion? Not at all, it's recognizing that no one (except lawyers) is really benefitting from flooding the legal system with minor transgressions, offering a quick and easy solution.

The way you put it, it sounds like you'd prefer it if CDPR immediately dragged people to court rather than attempting to resolve the issue (one way or the other) at an early (and inexpensive) stage. I really don't see how that'd be an improvement - other than getting rid of the false extortion label.

2. You don't have to be very adept at human psychology to see that such a "strategy" would fail. Good news never travel as fast as bad news and scandalous/outrighteous hearsay. It's not cynicism that makes you suggest this, though.

They are completely different, but sites tend to write both in a similar style, so they are comparable in that way.
Also, reviews aren't there to influence your opinion about the game, but to help you decide whether you would like that game and therefore should buy it, or not.

The popping of champagne corks still doesn't excuse the actions of some individuals on these forums who specifically targeted GOG with posts that were at times abusive, irrational or fallacious.