Slashdot Mirror

It's important to explicitly call out the properties of DRM that make it bad. DRM is out there to prevent the player from willy-nilly installing on everyone's PC's, which can be bad as it prevents you from switching computers or backing up your own games. Steam actually facilitates transferrence, as you can download any purchased games on any computer you log into. You don't need a CD to play, you don't need a CD to install on another computer, you can play your games on all the computers you have available.

Steam only runs with your games, doesn't take up a lot of CPU time, and has been stable for several years now. The one outstanding question is "what happens if Valve shuts down," but they have promised to unlock everything in such a case.

I still hear lots of complaints on forums about Steam being slow and at times denies them access to the games they've purchased. There's even a complaint in this thread. So saying Steam is stable isn't really 100% accurate. Also, anything running in the background while I play my game is going to be using some resources. Thanks, but I need those resources to play my games. Also, since Steam constantly checks to see if your games type of DRM is very bad for people overseas who have unreliable access to the internet (e.g. people overseas, military, etc.).

If we shout that DRM in all forms is terrible, none of the companies will or can listen. If we work towards removing the problematic portions of the system, we might get a compromise setup that is better than we started with.

I'm much more comfortable with the approach StarDock uses which they've been very successful with. No DRM on the disc (other than a CD key), but when you want to install updates you have to eseentially check-in online. Also Impulse, their distribution system (similar to Steam) doesn't have any DRM built-in. The game can have DRM, but the distribution system doesn't.

Although that said, it isn't just a file sharer. This may actually be a major large scale for-profit piracy organisation, in which case this could be quite reasonable.

Well, they are not file sharers and we don't really know what they did.

The story is tagged Democrats yet the bill's sponsor is a Rebuplican.

Bill sponsor Sen. Andrew Lanza (R) countered with:

This [law] does not prohibit the sale of video games based on ... content. This simply requires a labeling. And at the end of the day if a game is rated mature, or violent, this does not preclude or prohibit someone from selling it to a minor. I wish we could do that, but the First Amendment, I believe, protects against that.

Reference

And how truthful will the stickers be?

Quote:Connecticut State Senator Gayle Slossberg (D) is eager to do something about the rape scene in Grand Theft Auto IV, she told the New Haven Advocate.

Too bad there isn't a rape scene in the game, whoops?
http://www.gamepolitics.com/2008/06/25/connecticut-state-senator-alarmed-over-non-existent-rape-scene-gta-iv

Video Software Dealers Association v. Schwarzenegger involved in part mandatory video game labeling.

To pass the strict scrutiny test, therefore, the state must demonstrate that the industry labeling standards, either alone or combined with technological controls that enable parents to limit which games their children play, do not equally address the state's interest in protecting the physical and psychological well-being of children. The State has not demonstrated that the Act is narrowly tailored to address its purpose. Therefore, the Act cannot pass strict scrutiny.

Entertainment Software Association v. Blagojevich

The SEVGL requires video game retailers to place a four square-inch label with the numerals "18" on any "sexually explicit" video game. ...
As the
State concedes, the SEVGL is a content-based restriction on speech, and we must employ strict scrutiny in assessing its constitutionality....To survive strict scrutiny, the SEVGL
"must be narrowly tailored to promote a compelling Government interest." ...
Here, the State's identified purpose is "shielding children from indecent sexual material and in assisting parents in protecting their children from that material." Governor's Br. at 16. We need not spend time determining whether this is a compelling interest; it clearly is....
Applying strict scrutiny, we cannot say that the "18" sticker is narrowly tailored to the State's goal of ensuring that parents are informed of the sexually explicit content in
games. As we described above, the State has not demonstrated that it could not accomplish this goal with a broader educational campaign about the ESRB system.

We're talking about non-narrowly tailored content-based compelled speech here. Is it really that hard to follow?

Actually, I believe it was a federal court that decided that JT would not be allowed to file court papers with them, unless they were also signed by another attorney. That didn't really have anything to do with this bar trial, other than JT trying to cut off the bar trial by going to the federal court, which slapped him down. I'm just a layman, so check out these links for better info: link 1 link 2

What has happened, is that the bar trial judge has found JT guilty, and her recommendation is PERMANENT disbarment, which wasn't mentioned in the summary. It's old news that he was found guilty, but we originally thought he'd only get disbarred for 10 years. Now it's being made permanent AND he has to pay costs.

Actually, I believe it was a federal court that decided that JT would not be allowed to file court papers with them, unless they were also signed by another attorney. That didn't really have anything to do with this bar trial, other than JT trying to cut off the bar trial by going to the federal court, which slapped him down. I'm just a layman, so check out these links for better info: link 1 link 2

What has happened, is that the bar trial judge has found JT guilty, and her recommendation is PERMANENT disbarment, which wasn't mentioned in the summary. It's old news that he was found guilty, but we originally thought he'd only get disbarred for 10 years. Now it's being made permanent AND he has to pay costs.

Check your links!!!

http://www.gamepolitics.com/images/legal/JT-picture-letter.doc

More of a typo: http://www.gamepolitics.com/images/legal/JT-picture-letter.doc

No, this is a job for the government. If anyone has the power to defeat copy protected games, it's them. Vote Fairlight in 2008!

Coincidental that you point that out. Did you see this article? San Diego Republican Boss is Former Game Piracy Ringleader

And not just any piracy group - Fairlight. Yeah, that Fairlight! Wow! Man, those guys were The Shit back in, like, 1990. Zero-day apps with full cracks, with trainers, and cool cracks with 3D demoscene graphics and great chiptunes...

Man, can you imagine waking up every morning and saying to yourself, "I used to be part of the bleeding edge of the warez scene, but now I spend my days defending the Iraq war and bending over for the RNC and the Moral Majority?" Can you imagine how much that stings? How the mighty hath fallen...

But, yeah - here in the U.S., we're hosed. Public interest is great and all, but it's a little short on campaign contributions... as opposed to, say, Big Media. So no serious politician can get any traction with a "fair use" or "balanced copyright" policy.

Look, there's only one logical solution: we're all gonna have to move to Sweden and vote for Piratbyran. Time to start brushing up on our Svesish...

- David Stein

Unfortunately, there are people that still take him seriously. For example, he was recently on the Glen Beck Show. I personally don't take that show seriously, but I'm sure there are some people who do.

Well, in GTA IV, you kill a lawyer and right before he dies he says, "Guns don't kill people. Video games do."

I spoke to soon in my previous reply.

Ha! Clearly they have not been following the other comedic geek-related case, the Bar Trial of Jack Thompson.

a Turing test. They're clearly a bunch of pre-programmed reactionaries who run screaming into the night at the first sign of controversy...

a Turing test. They're clearly a bunch of pre-programmed reactionaries who run screaming into the night at the first sign of controversy...

When I tell people in Germany what I do for a living, they usually react with a mixture of pity and disgust, like I had admitted to them I was a male prostitute.

For computer games both the press and public are histrionic, and the politicians are keen to tap into every reactionary outrage...

http://www.gamepolitics.com/images/legal/JT-picture-letter.doc

The "picture book" is here. (Warning, this is a word document.)

His basic premise in creating the book was to make his arguments crystal clear, through illustration. In fact, his submission is a wandering and apparently pointless scree. It's reminiscent of the kind of rants people write when their WoW account is suspended.

I can well understand the court's reaction. It isn't because of the fact of using a picture-book style; it's the lack of any coherent argument in said picture book.

Game Politics unearthed a filing that may well be what got him in trouble in the first place:

http://gamepolitics.com/2008/02/22/did-this-document-bring-florida-supreme-courts-wrath-down-upon-jack-thompson/

From the article:

"The court described one of Thompson's recent filings in detail. [Thompson] dubbed it a "children's picture book for adults," interspersing images with text in his motion due to "the court's inability to comprehend" his arguments.

Images included "swastikas, kangaroos in court, a reproduced dollar bill, cartoon squirrels, Paul Simon, Paul Newman, Ray Charles, a handprint with the word 'slap' written under it, Bar Governor Benedict P. Kuehne, a baby, Ed Bradley, Jack Nicholson, Justice Clarence Thomas, Julius Caesar, monkeys, a house of cards," the order said."

Tipper Go... I mean Hillary Clinton is not very liberal, really. I mean, for one, she's pro censorship. Besides health care, she's pretty conservative.

There is no shortage of "experts" with opinions, and as long as "experts" like these are getting face time on national television, seeking an "expert" opinion is a total crapshoot.

Nah, you've got it backwards. In a twist, this time it's TTWO that has recently filed suit against Thompson: http://gamepolitics.com/2007/03/16/breaking-take-two-sues-jack-thompson/

Research has shown that violent and sexually explicit media contribute to aggressive behavior, early sexual experimentation, obesity, and depression. Hillary Clinton Tells Common Sense Media She Would Support Video Game Legislation

And it's always the Dems doing it.

I hate to break it to you my friend, but this kind of thing goes on on both sides of the aisle. This really boils down to tugging on the heartstrings of parent voters, and the members of the GOP see the opportunity as clears as the Dems do.

Sometimes it's both? Military Recruiters Snag Underage Players at Halo 3 Launch Bash

It's a damn shame Jack's disbarrment hearing wraps up today. The only thing funnier than Jack getting planked is Jack getting planked even though he was right* all along.

* Still a liar too stupid to be an effective bully. But right.

The full NIMF report is located at http://www.gamepolitics.com/images/legal/NIMF-2007.pdf. Some of the report makes sense (like having parents learn more about game ratings) and some of it does not (e.g., recommending that the ratings board review all the code in a game before assigning a rating, not just the "official" game code - how many games would get rated each year if they had to do that?).

Their main gripes about the ESRB seem to focus on children somehow getting to Adults Only (AO) content in Mature (M) rated games like Manhunt 2. Is it just me or is it not common sense that an "M" rating means that a 12 year old should not be playing the game in the first place?


Never let reality temper imagination

One more thing that will get Thompson disbarred: repeatedly picking fights with judges.

You dropped your hat

Just posted this comment on Ben Witherington's blog in question, and thought I'd share. Be interesting to see how Ben replies, and others' thoughts on this:

"Interesting discussion, there is further debate at Game Politics and the venerable Slashdot.

The commentary (particularly at the sites above) is sometimes quite openly hostile toward Christianity - this is not uncommon amongst the youth community today. I wanted to write a little about why I think this is the case.

Society has become far more sceptical of "messages of goodwill" and young people - quite rightly - demand more concrete evidence and credibility before committing to a belief.

This cynicism has developed out of necessity and I believe it is "a good thing". One only has to look at the widespread "good will" messages (with hidden motives) and false promises that we are bombarded with every day from marketers, politicians, et al to see how this cynicism has been nurtured.

• "Our product/service will make you a better person!"
• "Vote for X and build a better Britain!"
• "Catch the monkey and win a FREE iPod!"
• "There's something for everyone at Mecca Bingo!"
• "If you download MP3s, you are funding terrorism!"
• "Come join our Youth Group, it's loads of fun!"

When a young person rejects Christianity, they are not saying "I do not wish to be a good person" or "I do not believe in God". They are simply applying the same level of cynicism and questioning to something often promoted in a very similar way to - frankly - a miracle cure, a politician's manifesto or a bingo club.

Personally, I attended Sunday school in the UK until my mid-teens and maintain a strong interest in religion as a humanitarian subject. When asked to Confirm, I chose not to. My reasoning was that I believed in the common-sense principles behind Christianity, but was put off by the inconsistencies and uncertain history of the Bible. Therefore, I decided to live my life by commonsense, hold respect for Christianity as a belief alongside others, but I couldn't commit to unquestioning adherence.

Were I to make my decision now, as young people today must, I would also be strongly influenced by the examples of extreme negative effects of all-consuming belief in a particular religion that we see today. If my faith in particular teachings were so strong that I was prepared to detonate myself in a public place, killing hundreds, was commonsense not a better way to live my life?

Take Scientology too as an example of a vile cult that is marketed using the similar methods to Christian preaching. How is a young person to know with conviction the difference between your typical friendly-friendly leaflet-brandishing youth group leader and a smiling face offering free "personality tests"?

Without a means to prove credibility over the sea of other "me too" ideas that young people are exposed to and must weigh up every day, Christianity will face the same scrutiny, scepticism and sometimes outright hostility as any other message.

I hope this is a useful insight into the rise of Agnosticism?"

In point of fact, the judge did order the filing handled: (appropriate action).

Some factors involved in sealing documents: (from here, a different jurisdiction, but the principle remains)
        (1) the need to ensure a fair trial;

        (2) the need for witness cooperation;

        (3) the reliance of the parties upon expectations of confidentiality;

        (4) the public or professional significance of the lawsuit;

        (5) the perceived harm to the parties from disclosure;

        (6) why alternatives other than sealing the documents are not available to protect legitimate private interests as identified by this Rule; and

        (7) why the public interest, including, but not limited to, the public health and safety, is best served by sealing the documents.

As was pointed out, filing publicly removed even those limits the original web site had on access (while imposing new ones - PACER access). Another thing guaranteed to irritate a judge, he filed them as an exhibit with a motion asking permission to file some other document, instead of letting his motion stand on its own legs. If I understand it right, the judge is saying "it doesn't promote justice, why should we publish it?"

You're looking to hoist Mr Thompson by his own petard. The judge is looking to preserve the dignity and process of the court. Both are worthy causes, but I suspect that you might feel differently talking from the bench instead of the cheap seats. :)

¹ Immediately upon being aware of the contents of the exhibit, I [Judge Adalberto Jordan] requested that the Clerk of the Court take appropriate action to prevent public access to the exhibit.

I can't help but wonder, with all of the free publicity he has kindly given to GTA, if he isn't on Take Two's bank-roll.
No, not with all the legal action he brought to and directed at them. And then there are the un-constitutional laws he has passed, and that game industry lawyers had to waste time and resources fighting, with the the states in the end wasting even more tax payer money.... This is just a disturbed individual who has himself fixated on a particular target, which he KNOWS is the only one that really gets his name out there. I mean, the twat singled out Take Two's "age verification system" on their website store when other MAJOR online retailers had the SAME "you must be 17+ to order" click through "age verification" bullcrap, and recently had his son target yet another Best Buy(picking them again out of countless others, I wonder what his beef with them is...) in a sting picking up Bioshock(Yet another Take Two related game, and is one that DEFINITELY one that doesn't need his publicity).

Seriously, this is great advertising. I'm sure they intentionally released this information about the game simply to get JT to put up a stink. What brilliance on their part!
Now this part I have no doubt about, but at least this time they are not saying Jack "massacre chaser" Thompson is a Bisexual pedophile...

But I would love to see a reference to his "massacre chasing" in GTA4.

Here is the link to the actual study. I found it through Gamepolitics, which has its own analysis.

I wondered why I didn't see this on the front page of GP. Then I looked at the URL:

http://gamepolitics.com/2007/07/03/jack-thompson-claims-bar-official-demanded-psych-test-suspension/

So it's a story from july, and even the slug says it was his claim, not an order (the suspension, in fact, has not yet happened).

I guess I'm overqualified to be a slashdot editor.

If you want the original story, check out the Gamepolitics article The submitted link is practically word for word plagiarism of the gp article. At the end of the submitted link, they state "thanks gamepolitics", but that hardly makes up for ripping off the article.

In summary, if you want well written and interestering articles on politics and games with no advertisements, check out Gamepolitics.com. I'm not affiliated with the site in any way, I'm just a fan.

Cheers

If you want the original story, check out the Gamepolitics article The submitted link is practically word for word plagiarism of the gp article. At the end of the submitted link, they state "thanks gamepolitics", but that hardly makes up for ripping off the article.

In summary, if you want well written and interestering articles on politics and games with no advertisements, check out Gamepolitics.com. I'm not affiliated with the site in any way, I'm just a fan.

Cheers

How about, "We don't have the rights to the material, and even if we did, it's none of your fucking business anyway"?

or alternately, "Congress shall make no law..."

For the last week, the website Gamepolitics.com has been covering the Manhunt controversy and related stories. Gamepolitics is one of the few high quality journalistic websites that covers gaming news. Check it out.

Heres a couple choice stories:
Yee: What is ESRB Trying to Hide?
Californias Leland Yee: Let Consoles Play Adults Only Games
Consumer & Game Industry Reps Weigh In On Dreaded AO Rating

For the last week, the website Gamepolitics.com has been covering the Manhunt controversy and related stories. Gamepolitics is one of the few high quality journalistic websites that covers gaming news. Check it out.

Heres a couple choice stories:
Yee: What is ESRB Trying to Hide?
Californias Leland Yee: Let Consoles Play Adults Only Games
Consumer & Game Industry Reps Weigh In On Dreaded AO Rating

For the last week, the website Gamepolitics.com has been covering the Manhunt controversy and related stories. Gamepolitics is one of the few high quality journalistic websites that covers gaming news. Check it out.

Heres a couple choice stories:
Yee: What is ESRB Trying to Hide?
Californias Leland Yee: Let Consoles Play Adults Only Games
Consumer & Game Industry Reps Weigh In On Dreaded AO Rating

For the last week, the website Gamepolitics.com has been covering the Manhunt controversy and related stories. Gamepolitics is one of the few high quality journalistic websites that covers gaming news. Check it out.

Heres a couple choice stories:
Yee: What is ESRB Trying to Hide?
Californias Leland Yee: Let Consoles Play Adults Only Games
Consumer & Game Industry Reps Weigh In On Dreaded AO Rating

It kind of reminds me of the people who don't understand that when Britain bans a game or a movie, it is actually banned. They think because you can't legally do that in the U. S. that its just some kind of extra restriction. Then I usually have to bring up Video Nasties, etc...

Also, the people who are for this law, probably don't have to worry. I expect this measure to become law, and for video games to become even more restricted in Germany than they are now. I assume Crytek is not kidding about leaving either, since they don't want to once again experience the fun of German Stormtroopers... er, S.W.A.T. teams invading their offices again. I just don't understand why they haven't already left, but then my family saw the writing on the wall back when Bismark was in charge.

The quote is from here for everyone who cannot believe he'd actually make such a comment: http://gamepolitics.com/2007/08/15/dr-phil-invited -me-says-jack-thompson/#comment-144717