EA, Atari Sue Over Videogame Copying Software

Thanks to the Monterey Herald/AP for its news story regarding EA, Atari, and VU Games' lawsuit against the makers of the Games X Copy backup software. The article explains: "The federal lawsuit [PDF version], filed Tuesday in New York, alleges that Games X Copy software by 321 Studios Inc. of suburban St. Louis violates copyright laws by illegally cracking copy-protection systems used by [PC] game makers." Doug Lowenstein of the ESA trade body, also backing the lawsuits, explains: "I wouldn't get into speculating on dollar losses here. What's at stake here is a rather important legal principle - that products with no purpose other than to circumvent copyright protection are illegal under the DMCA." The piece also notes that "Federal judges in New York and California have barred 321 from marketing... [similar] DVD-cloning software - a victory for movie studios, which contended that such products violate the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act."

Comments

Just wait...

[infonick]

13 torrent will become avialible in the following minutes, and their worst fears will come true.

Re:Just wait...

[Synonymous Yellowbel]

13 torrent will become avialible in the following minutes, and their worst fears will come true. Obviously you're joking, but I thought it worth reminding everyone else that the "powers that be" (that's the corporations, not the government, folks) aren't worried about the 0.05% of the population that are geeks using Bittorrent. It's the mainstream market finding out that they can copy their neighbours' software and music that keeps them up at night. Even more importantly, it's the legitimisation of such activity that they really want to crush. Even if it's legal to back up one's software, they want people to think it's not, because if the plebs know they can do that, it's just a short jump to widescale copyright infringement which they fear will wrest control from their cold, dead fingers. steve

Re:Just wait...

[crazyray]

This is a very valid, and very true, point. They really don't care about the .001 per cent that can circumvent it anyway- its the "critical mass" of average joes and janes that cause concern. I would also add to your point that this can be seen in the "click to accept" agreements- no one really expects the user to read and understand them, but they do want the user to THINK that the software issuer grants and decides what is or will be "fair use".

Re:Just wait...

[Anonymous Coward]

> Obviously you're joking[...]
Doesn't seem like /. is thinking the same: Score:4, Insightful

Re:Just wait...

[cloak42]

It's the mainstream market finding out that they can copy their neighbours' software and music that keeps them up at night.

Somehow, I think it's not that. It seems to me that what they're really afraid of are people who download these games and programs for free off of P2P software (I'm thinking Kazaa, Morpheus, Gnutella, etc. more than BitTorrent). Even the RIAA has said that making a copy for a friend or neighbor is fine and that it's the mass distributors they're really focused on.

Re:Just wait...

[FictionPimp]

what about the 90% of people that can just download a fixed exe from gamecopyworld.com?

Re:Just wait...

[sql*kitten]

aren't worried about the 0.05% of the population that are geeks using Bittorrent

You're missing the point that busting the early-adopters is a powerful technique for keeping the rest of the population in line. Especially since they're so easy to find, they post about it on /.!

Re:Just wait...

[88NoSoup4U88]

" what about the 90% of people that can just download a fixed exe from gamecopyworld.com?"

Make that 80 percent of those 90 ; the rest gets stuck in the horrible site design.

Re:Just wait...

[Anonymous Coward]

However the RIAA isn't the MPAA or the BSA and only speak for the music industry.

It's becouse the statistics look diffrent. For software Friend to friend makes up the bulk of software piracy. Your getting an identical copy every time. But movies and music degrade as friend 2 friend copying of music and movies is to anolog medium and often in the worst copying conditions.

Downloading software was a major consern now it's not as software comes on 2 to 4 500 meg CDs and malware authors LOVE p2p as a way of delivering viruses and trojens.

The diffrences are important.

Re:Just wait...

[morleron]

What bothers me is that, if the game companies prevail in this suit, another bite is taken out of the doctrine of "fair use" and the traditional right to make backup copies of software. Where is it written that society is required to provide content producers with all the money they want? This is another example of how badly flawed the DMCA is. With database companies beginning to assert copyright over aggregations of raw data I can foresee a time when backing up your own data will be legally questionable because it may be derived from a copyrighted database somewhere. Someone needs to put an end to this madness.

Does anyone know if the EFF or ACLU will file amicus briefs on the side of 321? This seems like the sort of lawsuit those organizations ought to be trying to stop.

Just my $.02,
Ron

Re:Just wait...

[cloak42]

For software Friend to friend makes up the bulk of software piracy. Your getting an identical copy every time. But movies and music degrade as friend 2 friend copying of music and movies is to anolog medium and often in the worst copying conditions.

That may be true for some copying, but not for all of it. Especially with DVD burners coming down in price--and for the newer, dual-layer DVD burners that are coming out now--you can copy a DVD without any loss in quality. Especially in terms of friend-to-friend copying, it's VERY easy to make a perfect copy of a CD, and now even a DVD. The RIAA has no less valid stance here than do the MPAA or BSA; the likelihood of a movie, album or application being perfectly copied is the same.

Re:Just wait...

[yamla]

Friend-to-friend copying of music (i.e. not p2p) is almost always done CD-audio to CD-audio. Hence, a digital copy, not an analogue copy. So yes, you get an identical copy every time. There's no degradation of music.

This is probably not always the case with movies as they are generally recompressed to fit onto a DVD-R. Still, once that initial copy is made, the rest are bit-for-bit compatible.

Similar reasoning works even for friend-to-friend copies of music when said music is converted into MP3 first. That's a lossy process but every subsequent copy is digital (including copying an MP3 CD-R). So I'm not at all sure why you think analogue is involved. Nobody I know uses cassette tapes any more, most of my friends are even moving away from CD while listening to music.

Re:Just wait...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Even the RIAA has said that making a copy for a friend or neighbor is fine and that it's the mass distributors they're really focused on."

Excuse me? Actually the RIAA tried to say during a Senate hearing that you aren't even allowed to make a copy for your own spouse.

Re:Just wait...

[Afrosheen]

I totally agree as well. It's when the public, average joe user finds out about something and it becomes ubiquitous that it gets corporations' attentions.

Take mp3 and movie trading for instance. Some of you have been doing it for years before Napster ever existed through IRC or other means. Napster just made it easy enough for the average jerk that it spread like wildfire. IRC swapping channels will live on, but most of the Napster users have either switched clients or accepted the outrageous fees that record companies charge for a CD.

Re:Just wait...

[Afrosheen]

CDs are dead as far as I'm concerned..at least for day to day usage. Once I bought an mp3 cd player for my car, I used grip to convert my entire cd collection to mp3 and burned a few cds full of all of my music.

No more fishing around while driving looking for that song that I want to hear, or asking passengers to dig for me. It's on one of 3 discs..and they all have so many songs it's easy to take them anywhere.

I highly recommend the San Jose MP3 player from Blaupunkt. Cheap, cool looking and loud. :)

I want the second disc damnit!

[RobPiano]

I had a game that takes several hours to defeat and spans more than one disc called, ``Lunar 2 Eternal Blue'' for Playstation 2. I was playing through the game very slowly and when I got to the second disc I realized the disc was scratched. Well, it had already passed the 30 day point, so I wrote the company and asked if they would sell me a replacement second disc. The answer, of course, was no. I would have to buy the whole thing over again.

What kind of crap are they pulling. I am legally entitled to backup my games, but they put in measures to prevent me doing so. Would these companies allow me to ask for a copy? No. Could I send in a damaged copy and get another? No.

Okay fine, piracy is a problem for you. You lose tons of money (well I don't actually believe this). Then it is your job to provide me with backups. I have a legal right, and a need as a consumer for legitimate backups.

It is in the best interest of corporations to take away your rights if they can instead sell them to you. The only way our rights stand a chance is if we stand up for them. In fact I will go a step further and say, the only way our rights stand a chance is if we demonstrate common practice what our rights are.

Laws are defined by practice. They are both made and broken by what we do. When we started buying ``copy protected'' materials we set a precedence that copying was not a legitimate activity. Had we wanted to keep our right to copy we would not have bought anything copy protected.

This case is clear. Our right to copy is almost gone. We set the precedence for it by buying things with copy protection and now we have to live with it.

Grr! I want the second disc damnit!

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[RobPiano]

No, I'm an informed voter. (What's great about this comment is that its totally 'subtle' You see I don't have a party I belong to, but I read up before voting.. So I'm an informed voter... Not that I'm trying to imply anything.... Cause I'm not.....)

Also I meant Playstation 1.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you have the American version? According to the publisher's web site, "If you have a receipt ... we offer free replacement of defective discs for a 90 day period."

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Anonymous Coward]

For what it's worth, they actually can't refuse even after the 30 days. Game companies, as well as music companies, are obligated to replace media that becomes damaged (even if the owner is at fault) for the cost of replacement.

I've had software CDs replaced long after they were originally purchased, usually about $5-$15 dollars. I think $15 is probably a bit stiff, but the original software cost enough that we were more than happy to pay it.

Whoever you talked to didn't know their posterior from a whole in the ground. Next time, insist on talking to a superior and - if necessary - call their legal department if the superior is also an idiot.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[finkployd]

I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. A democrat signed the DMCA into law.

Bad laws that hurt consumers are certainly not the sole domain of either party, they are both bought and sold to their corporate masters.

Finkployd

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[nasor]

You have to be very careful with this sort of "law A says I'm allowed to do such and such, but law B hampers it, so law B must be violating my civil rights" reasoning. It's true that the U.S. Copyright Act contains a provision that allows people to make backup copies of copyrighted works, but this does not mean that you have some sort of inalienable right to make backup copies - it merely means that there is nothing wrong in principle with making backup copies. You're still legally obligated to follow any other laws that might enter into the picture. You don't get to ignore the copy-protection circumvention sections of the DMCA in your pursuit of making a backup copy, just like you wouldn't be able to murder someone if shooting someone was somehow necessary for you to create your backup copy.

And no, I don't think that the DMCA is a good idea, I'm just trying to correct a common legal fallacy that I've see repeated many times on slashdot.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Zork the Almighty]

Lunar 2 is awesome. If you really can't get a replacement, mod your playstation and I'll make you an iso. Oh, and I think you'll like my sig :)

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[servognome]

yes, since you purchased a license from the company, they are obligated to continue your access to the information.
If companies replace my broken CDs at cost ($1-2). I have no problem with me not being able to make backup copies of my own.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[xoboots]

You have to be very careful with this sort of "law A says I'm allowed to do such and such, but law B hampers it, so law B must be violating my civil rights" reasoning. It's true that the U.S. Copyright Act contains a provision that allows people to make backup copies of copyrighted works, but this does not mean that you have some sort of inalienable right to make backup copies - it merely means that there is nothing wrong in principle with making backup copies.

This is true. It is also true that copyrights are not inalienable rights but rather an act of the people to grant specific, short-term rights to producers of works (or at least, that was the original intent). It is also true that many laws work at counter purposes. There is much dispute over the impact that the DMCA has over rights that the people have decided not to give to producers (eg. restricting fair-use). While your argument is sound, IMHO, it does not seem like a proper response to the parent post. [I could be wrong but it is not clear to me that using such software in fair-use scenarios is illegal--even though under the DMCA, creating such software seems to be considered illegal.]

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Anonymous Coward]

Duh... Just use a bittorrent client and go to www.suprnova.org to get the full lunar 2 psx game and burn it with your cd burner. ;)

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[mrchaotica]

Until the company goes out of business, of course.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[pdbaby]

What if the company says "We'll get you that replacement in 6-8 weeks" or "We don't feel like it"?

If you don't have the right to make your own backups, you're relying on the good will of a company: and if it is more profitable to screw you over, a lot of them will (at least try). It's your CD: you paid your money for it (well, morally it's yours, anyway).

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoever you talked to didn't know their posterior from a whole in the ground.

Apparently you wouldn't know a whole in the ground from a hole in the ground.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[badasscat]

And no, I don't think that the DMCA is a good idea, I'm just trying to correct a common legal fallacy that I've see repeated many times on slashdot.

It's not a fallacy. US Copyright law specifically says "it's ok for you to make copies under circumstances including this, and this, and some other stuff". Case law supports making backup copies as fair use under that law.

Now another law comes along and says "well, whether or not you're allowed to make copies, you're not allowed to make copies by getting around this thing we put in place to stop you from making copies." This is like saying you bought a car, and yes, you own the car and are legally allowed to drive it, but you're not legally allowed to open the door to get into it. It doesn't make any sense, and one law is clearly designed to contradict the other, even if it doesn't do so specifically or by actually retracting any part of the original law. It's a sneaky way of taking away rights you were specifically granted by legislation and then case law.

So I realize that you're not arguing in favor of the DMCA, but it sounds like that's because you're morally opposed to it, not because you think there's any legal problem with it. There are legal problems with it, in as much as it basically retracts portions of copyright law in practice without doing so specifically. If you ask me, congress got hoodwinked on this - I don't think they meant to pass a law retracting portions of copyright law as they pertain to digital media, but the RIAA and MPAA told them the law was good and congress believed them. I think most members of congress probably honestly believed they were simply adding to and clarifying copyright law as it pertains to digital media. But that's not what they did; the DMCA by nature cannot be applied fairly (since it only applies to digital media - an artist holding a copyright on a painting, for example, can't invoke it), and it so far has only really been invoked in this one specific way in lawsuits, which is in the restrictions it places on fair use rights defined elsewhere in copyright law.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Hungus]

In cases where laws overlap, legal precidence simply states that the previous law trumps the later one.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Insurgent2]

The car analogy is a perfect example of the current state of affairs.
I just grabbed Hoyle Puzzle Games 2004. The EULA states:

"10. Limitations on License. Nothing in this License Agreement shall preclude you from making or authorizing the making of another copy or adaptation of the Program provided, however, that"..."or (2) such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes ONLY and all archival copies are destroyed..."

...bla...bla
Yet I cannot actually make a backup copy of the game without software like theirs as the CD is copy protected.

They have known the situation would escalate just like it did back in the days of Copy ][...so they have preempted it this time by getting the DMCA passed.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Technician]

If companies replace my broken CDs at cost ($1-2). I have no problem with me not being able to make backup copies of my own.

I do have a problem having to wait 6-8 weeks and pay $5-15 for a replacement when I already have a CD burner and blanks are $0.25 each. Some games such as Nerf Arena was purchased for under $10 and does not have copy protection. $5-15 is not replacement media cost, it's retal replacement cost. (Nerf Arena works fine without the CD in the drive after editing it's .ini text file. It would have been nice if they eliminated the editing step.) Other than copy protection, I'd rather make the backup myself for about 2 minutes time on my part and 10 minutes on my computer's time. That way a spare is on hand with no waiting needed. All too often the game CD's the kids use end up being carpet protectors under the wheels of the chair. I back up all my games, software, and music and run from working copies due to the cost of originals. Games that prohibit that are simply not used by the kids. Other titles from the same manufacture go un-purchased.

DVD's because of the DMCA don't get a working copy. Due to the lack of back-ups, I pretty much limit DVD purchases to the under $10 movies. Copy protection lowers the value, not increases it.

The same applies to my music and PC software. My laptop does not travel with the originals of any software to prevent loss or dammage. Software that runs without the disk in the drive is a big plus. (Minesweeper and Hearts are the biggest office time wasters because they run from the hard drive. If they needed the original CD in the drive, they would not be work time-wasters that they are.) CD's for my car are also all working copies, not originals. They are at home in the case ready to produce another working copy if the work copy becomes dammaged.

Copy protected software that requires the originals in the drive are being ignored because there are online alternatives for the kids, such as NeoPets. It's free and there is no hunting for it's disk.

The copy protection keeps me from buying pig in a poke software. (No impulse buys because it looks like it might be nice) I pretty much limit my purchases to software that others have reviewed and given an OK for user friendlieness.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[sumdumass]

exactly, if it was the intention of lawmakers to void a previous law with a new one, they would have done so. unintentional effect of overly broad laws can and will be misconstrued to the benefit of someone with an agenda. I guess it will take a law suite to actually get that part of the DMCA tossed out of court.

OTH i was under the impresion that the 321 studios software would copy the protection scheme instead of breaking it. If my impresions are corect, i don't see were a DMCA violation would be.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[The Famous Brett Wat]

Game companies, as well as music companies, are obligated to replace media that becomes damaged (even if the owner is at fault) for the cost of replacement.

Under what law? I think there's a good chance I live in an area that doesn't have that law, although I should look into it.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Hungus]

Dunno, since I am a mac user and don't play games I have never used their software If I had a couple of million to blow on lawyers though I would happily challenge it in court. Anyone wanna donate? (am only half joking)

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Binary Judas]

(Nerf Arena works fine without the CD in the drive after editing it's .ini text file. It would have been nice if they eliminated the editing step.) Heh, I love that kind of "copy protection", Giants has the best one though: start the exe with -nocdcheck...

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Firethorn]

This is where the difference between license/purchase scheme comes in. Companies want the best of both worlds (dictate how you use it, and you're responsable for the media). However, if they don't have a disc replacement policy, the idea is that judges will tend to see the 'purchase' point more than the contract point, and that means that you can do whatever you want with it. Kinda like when you buy a car.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[shadowcabbit]

OK, having a little bit of knowledge about the Lunar games (hell, I created alt.games.lunar back in the day), I can say that there might be just a little bit more to the story.

Lunar 2: Eternal Blue, released in 2000 for the Playstation, was one of Working Designs' masterpiece games. It also, unfortunately, was a VERY limited edition. This being 2004 I would not be surprised if the game was completely and totally out of stock, having been out of print for close to three years now; to the best of my knowledge Eternal Blue was not re-released as Silver Star Story was (ie without the extra goodies).

Obviously, you bought this as a used game. What I would suggest, as others have, is that you go to the place you bought it from (if they're still in business) and ask them politely to run it through a disc doctor or resurfacer, explaining that it took you this long to get through disc 1 (bring the other discs with you, too, just in case). If they won't do that, I would highly recommend buying the disc doctor yourself; THAT has a guarantee to work, so if it fails to fix disc 2 (which, incidentally, is when things start getting REALLY good in the game ^_^) it's the disc doctor company's responsibility to find you a (working) replacement. (disclaimer: I worked for Electronics Boutique 3 years ago but have not worked there in 18 months) Additionally, the disc doctor would be an insurance policy against this happening again.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[cortana]

Maybe these are not examples of developer incompetance, but instead evidence that the developer is on your side in the fight againtst the fuckwits in Publishing? :)

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[general_re]

In cases where laws overlap, legal precidence simply states that the previous law trumps the later one.

That's exactly backwards - in terms of both statute and case law, the more recent law supersedes the older law. It has to be that way. After all, if old law always trumped new law, you'd never be able to repeal old laws - they'd simply trump any attempt to do so ;)

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[dirk]

On the flip side of this though, you are expecting something that you couldn't get for any other product as well. If I buy a book and find out that 2 pages are ripped out at the end, the store won't take it back after 30 days (or whatever their policy is) and the publisher isn't obligated to replace the book (and won't replace it). Same thing if I buy a light bulb and notice it doesn't work. They may replace it, but they aren't obligated too.

Don't get me wrong, I certainly think they should replace it if you prove it's broken (i.e. send them the broken/defective part for replacement), but they aren't obligated too. Game makers aren't acting any different than anyone else in that respect.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[dirk]

Can I ask where the ruling is that decalers back-up copies as fair use? I'm not trolling, I just always see reference to it, but have never seen anyone talk about the ruling itself. I know it isn't part of the original fair use rules (which deal with using limited piece for education, review, and the like). It also wouldn't be covered under the VCR ruling I think (at least not the portion commonly sited), since that deals with copying for the purpose of time-shifting, and this is just copying to have an extra copy (which I'm sure would be legally different). I'm just curious what the actual ruling is...

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[jkabbe]

But see, the laws don't exactly overlap and that's why the previous analogies are a little off. It's not just that it is illegal to make a backup copy if in doing so it defeats a copy protection scheme. Even if the court would uphold that right (which it probably would) it is also illegal for a company to sell a product capable of doing so.

The situation we're currently in is one where people have a right but companies are forbidden from selling the products that allow people to exercise that right.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Anonymous Coward]

> What kind of crap are they pulling. I am legally entitled to backup my games, but they put
> in measures to prevent me doing so.

You're confusing rights and duties. Yes, you have a legal right to make backup copies, but the seller does NOT have the legal DUTY to make it possible for you to do so.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[guyblade]

I actually had a scratched disc from that same company (Working Designs) and when I emailed them, they just wanted $5 and the disc to get a replacement. I was getting a replacement disc for one of the Arc the Lad CDs though. It may be that they simply didn't have anymore Lunar discs; after all, it did come out several years ago...

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[AviLazar]

My car was stolen years ago. Had about 20 ORIGINAL CD's (I didn't use my cd burner for anything other then data backup at the time). I have 20 empty cd cases with the booklets from the music, but I do not have the songs. I'll be damned if I have to buy those 20 CD's again.
For those that might say "your car insurance company should pay for it" - the car companies response to theft of non-auto parts (cds, clothing, books, etc left in your car) is that you are not covered for this unless you want to get extra insurance. Sorry, no, I am not paying an $$$ so I can have my personal property insured incase my car gets stolen. On a side note, i can understand if i told the car insurance company I had four laptops, and $5,000 in cash sitting in my car, but sheesh - a fleece, spare pants/underwear/socks, 20 cds, a blanket, pillow, quart of oil, windshield wiper fluid, jumper cables is NOT unreasonable!! Damn racket all of them (insurance companies have a racket)

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Laur]

Can I ask where the ruling is that decalers back-up copies as fair use?

It's not a ruling, it's specifically spelled out in copyright law, TITLE 17, CHAPTER 1, Sec. 117 - Limitations on exclusive rights: Computer programs. Here's the relevant section:

Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:
(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[u-235-sentinel]

What kind of crap are they pulling. I am legally entitled to backup my games, but they put in measures to prevent me doing so. Would these companies allow me to ask for a copy? No. Could I send in a damaged copy and get another? No.

Some companies many moons ago used to provide you with a second disk clearly labeled "Backup Copy". I think it was an Atari game (Psi something) for the Commodore 64 (Yes.. I had on of those too). It's a pity they don't continue this practice (to my knowledge).

If companies don't want this sort of software floating around then they have a legal obligation to provide us with backup copies or we are allowed to make such archived copies for private use.

Hopefully this will go well for 321 Studios.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop wanting. Don't buy their shit.
End of story.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Anonymous Coward]

I was under the impression that the more recent law had to make explicit reference to the old law to make any changes to it. If there is no reference then the old law is used.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Anonymous Coward]

I call bullshit. Every game company out there will replace your media but not necessarily for free. You do have to fax or send them a receipt of purchase which is quite fair.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[arkanes]

I wonder if a clause like this in the EULA would be considered a waiving of thier DMCA rights. If you repackaged your backup software so that it only worked on titles with such a license, that might be an effective loophole.

After all, if you can give up your legal rights by reading and clicking the button, can't they give up legal rights by offering the license?

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[arkanes]

I used to work at a bookstore. If someone came back with a book that was physically damaged (ie, a binding flaw or something like it) we'll take it back as long as you've got a reciept. We'd do this because we can get OUR money back from the distributor, who in turn gets defective returns back from the publisher. There absolutely is an obligation to provide working products. It becomes a grey area in places where it's hard to tell if the damage was the users fault or not. I probably wouldn't accept returns of pages literally torn out of the book unless it was a recent sale. Scratches on a CD are similiarly hard to judge, although you can often tell by the general condition of the CD.

Anyway, simple summary: Yes, people selling things are obligated to provide them in working order (with some exceptions, like with used products or when it's made clear up front that the product is broken).

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah, that's great and all, but the Great-grand-parent post said "case law" which means that it was used in court, meaning there would be a ruling that supports the idea that backups are legal. That's what the G-P wanted.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[BuckaBooBob]

90 days is a joke... It should be years like 3-4 years... This is why we need Archival Backup.... but its just as easy to hop on the net and download a pirated copy than to send away the origonal.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

Amen.

Here is another example...

I bought ICO for Ps2 when it came out. I beat it in one sitting. It was the best gaming experience that i've ever had, and i've been a gamer from the start of the industry. It is a work of art. It was so moving, and so good... I traded it in like a big dummy... I thought i would never play it again because it was so emotionally incredible, and i would never relive the experience that you get when you first play it.

Fast forward 2 years. I have been ranting and raving about how good the game is to everyone i know, and they never heard of it. They never played it. Only a handful of folks out there actually know of ICO for p2,and they all agree that its a work of art.

WEll.. I searched hard... and FINALLY there was an ORIGINAL version at my local EB. They had 1 copy. It was brand new they said. So i ran down to EB instantly to buy it. When i get there, they cant find it. After searching hard... they discover it.

They bring out a disc, thats shrink wrapped with the manual. (No BOX) The disc doesnt look too new... But it doesnt look used either. 10 bucks... He says.. since he cant find the box. I ask him if its new... He says yes, sometimes we do this because we put the box on the shelf if its our only copy.

(A friend of mine's younger brother that worked at EB for a period of time, said that this is a legit policy at EB and the game probably is new.)

Well i bought the game... Its rare enough... So i had to have it again and he took 10 bucks off the price.

I get home i call up EB customer service asking if the policy is legit, because i thought it was used, being sold as new. They guy didnt answer my question and was a complete dick about it. Dick at EB customer service says "What do you want me to do about it" He's practically yelling, and i was simply asking in a police manner. I told him "I dont know, i was just wondering if this is normal" And the guy asks "if they said its new, its new" and continued to be a total ass.

Well What do i do about getting a box for a NEW game that i bought?

Where do i go?

Oh i go to GAMECOPY WORLD and DL THE GAME COVER.. and print it out... and make my own dam box.

I could have called sony, but i would get the same "fuck off little man" attitude.

Now i'm not insane :) ICO is a collectors game from the point of view of many. It really is one of the finest games ever made. I wanted a copy to hold on to for life, just as you would a fine car, or a babe ruth baseball.

The game has meaning to me, and others. I know that i'll have to make a back up of the game just to make sure it does last with me for a life time. Because hell i wont ever find a legit copy of it 10 years from now. The only place i'll be able to find it, is on the net. Either used by someone insane like me who loves the game... Or by folks who keep the emulation scene alive... where Roms that are historic are distributed, emulated, maintained for their historic value. Their artistic value.

If games are like Hollywood... Why arent they being preserved like Hollywood films?

The only ones doing the perserving, ARE THE PIRATES.. because they care about the historic value, the memories, the experience.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[zaffir]

You raise a very valid point.

The big problem i have is that EAs games all require their game CD to be in the drive. This means swapping discs frequently, and a greater chance that they'll get scratched. I've emailed EA on this subject and they have told me to just buy the game again.

Thankfully, with Alcohol 120%, Clone CD, and a good CD-RW drive you can back up these games and fool their copy protection.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Hungus]

You do not repeal old laws by passing new ones (with the exception of specifically repealing a law) You might want to go find a constitutional lawyer or a judge that actually deals with case law, precidents and the like and have them explain it to you.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Hungus]

Where A and B are two sets, and C is the overlap between the two, the ealier set (lets say its A) is the superior set for the purposes of C. It does not make set B go away, unless set B is whorely a subset of A.

Just a different way of saying it all.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[general_re]

I was under the impression that the more recent law had to make explicit reference to the old law to make any changes to it. If there is no reference then the old law is used.

The way judges do it is, if it is at all possible, one should interpret two laws in such a way as to avoid any conflict between them. If that's not possible, such as when one law directly contradicts another, the more recent law controls. That's black letter law, and it dates back many, many years.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[general_re]

You do not repeal old laws by passing new ones (with the exception of specifically repealing a law)

Sure you can. If your town council passes a law saying that the speed limit is thirty miles an hour in your town, and then the following week passes a law saying the speed limit is twenty-five miles an hour, they don't have to specifically repeal the first law for it to no longer be in effect - the second law overrules the first, by virtue of the fact that it's later in date. They've effectively repealed the first law and replaced it with the second, simply by passing a law that directly contradicts the first law.

You might want to go find a constitutional lawyer or a judge that actually deals with case law, precidents and the like and have them explain it to you.

Gosh, and to think I wasted all that money on those con law classes ;)

Trust me - you're conflating the notion of stare decisis in case law with how conflicting statute laws are resolved. Under the principle of stare decisis, old precedents in case law and common law are to be given great weight, and all else being equal, old precedents should outweigh newer precedents when they conflict. That's case law. When statute laws - legislation - conflict with each other, the new law overrules the old.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't like posting as an anonymous coward, but in this case I'd be violating company policy if I were to use my name.

I work at a game development company, and we do see piracy as a problem. Any title that is pirated rather than purchased is money that we don't see to pay salaries or expand the business.

But that doesn't mean we should assume all consumers are thieves and remove their ability to make legitimate backups under fair use principals.

I've done the warez scene thing when I was younger and didn't have a lot of money. I had a budget to stick to for expenses, and after necessities it didn't leave a lot of room for software purchases. Still, even though I would download and check out every title I could find, as any obsessed gamer I've known would do, I still purchased the titles I really enjoyed.

What we need to do is instill a sense of loyalty in consumers, rather than simply install irritating safeguards on the products. Sure, you can't win everyone over, especially with the price of some titles, but if people believe that your product is worth their time and money, most will pay.

Users should be able to store their originals in a safe place, or play without the CD after a full install. If we can't avoid copy protection, then at least make it a robust CD-key system. Sure, people hate typing in a key, but at least you only have to do it once (typically), and the key can be stored with the original game in a safe place, and can be backed up as well.

Of course there will always be keygens, but there will always be forms of circumvention in any protection scheme.

Maybe publishers need to look at perceived value instead. To a lot of people, 50 or 60 dollars US can be a lot of money for a game. If research indicates that lowering the price point will encourage sales to match the drop, then more consumers may make the initial purchase, and possibly buy future titles.

I could be naive, but I'd rather see consumers getting a fair shake than being pegged as thieves from the start.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[karmatic]

I don't know about you, but I use Daemon Tools to handle copy-protected software. Not only does it let me run even CD-Based software from the HD, it has the option to emulate many copy protection programs.

For example, with SafeDisc enabled, you need only install the software and run it once with emulation on. Daemon-tools will memorize which sectors are bad, and auto-skip them allowing you to burn a fully usable, copy protected version of the software in question.

You can also make a copy which would fail the copy protection check, then enable the emulation. The software will then pass, even if the CD is a copy.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[hesiod]

> The only ones doing the perserving, ARE THE PIRATES

Except for the first Carmageddon, I've been searching for months for that, but can't find it anywhere. Not that it'll kill me not to have it...

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[danknight]

Unfortuately, the masses thend to say 'Ohh, Shiney!' and dont care about fair use being taken away, and they drive the market

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[mOdQuArK!]

Lunar 2: Eternal Blue, released in 2000 for the Playstation, was one of Working Designs' masterpiece games.

Cool, I didn't know it was so rare - I've got a "Lunar 2: Eternal Blue Complete" box sitting on my shelf which I bought new (a few years ago), and enjoyed thoroughly. Maybe I should take it out & play it again (if my PSOne is still working...)

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[ElForesto]

Exactly the reason I like to copy my CDs. I play with the copy, abuse it terribly, and then make a new one when I need it. Games are one of the few pieces of software that I don't have issues paying for because I usually get my money's worth out of them (with the notable exception of MOO3 which wouldn't have been worth $5).

It's terrifying to see fair use laws tossed out on every front and us being stuck with the bill. If I ran a games company, I'd definitely have a game replacement program with a small fee for the new piece of media and shipping. In this age of DVD burners, it's silly to not do it.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Anonymous Coward]

I had a similar issue. A few months ago i wanted to play good old soldier of fortune 1 -- the mood struck me. I attempted to install it and found out that the CD was scratched. I e-mailed activision or maybe it was raven i e-mailed... i can't remember, but anyway they told me it would be $10 for a new disc. I was thinking the same thing -- they put protections on so you can't back up the software, the disc scratches and since i can't back it up I would have to pay $10 for a game I already bought in the first place.

However, we also need to consider their side. If the software wasn't copy protected, I know there would be lots of people just copying the disc and giving it to their friends. It isn't fair for them to take our rights away, but it isn't fair for us to use our rights to break other laws. Someone needs to come up with a solution that will allow us to back-up our software but not pirate it.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Hungus]

You did waste your money on con law if that is your opinion. My con law profs at SMU certainly taught me differntly, as has my experince working in private investigations, security and dealing with lawyers way to much .. see my linked web page for more background.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[dslbrian]

90 days is a joke... It should be years like 3-4 years...

Even 3-4 years is a joke. Fair-use does not have a time limit. It should be for the life of the product. And if the company complains that providing backups for the life of the product is too much of a financial burden on them, then they should have no complaint about our ability to copy it ourselves. Otherwise fair-use is merely a theoretical rather than a practical concept.

I really don't understand how the courts can segregate digital works from the rest. Copying images or text from books has been allowed for a long time now (otherwise photocopiers wouldn't exist). CD/DVD copiers are nothing more than the digital equivalent of a photocopier. I can take a digital PDF file, print it, photocopy it, and scan it back into another digital PDF file - does the sum total of all that constitute a DMCA violation?

Seems whats missing from the DMCA is an "intent" clause. In other words you have to be copying with the intent of doing something illegal for there to be a violation. Judges decide things based on intent all the time, is that not a reasonable thing to have in there?

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[general_re]

My con law profs at SMU...

...are probably not happy about you blaming them for your misunderstanding. This is the simplest, shortest explanation I can find at the moment - the simplest, shortest version that doesn't have pictures to color in and dots to connect anyway...

If a bill proposes to enact certain provisions, but does not explicitly amend existing law on the same subject, then the intended relation between bill and law can be ambiguous. The resolution of these ambiguities may come through juridical or administrative interpretation. In the absence of clear conflict between an existing and a new provision, courts normally presume that the two are intended to be read together, and attempt to give both the fullest effect possible. In that case the provisions in the new law would be interpreted as additional to the previously existing ones. By contrast, an earlier enactment may always be superseded by a later one, so that, if a new enactment is interpreted as conflicting with existing provisions of statute, the new provisions may be held to supersede the earlier ones.

"How Bills Amend Statutes", Congressional Research Service (Library of Congress)

If you want more, I'll get more.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Anonymous Coward]

Okay, I get what you are saying, but you used a crappy analogy.

just like you wouldn't be able to murder someone if shooting someone was somehow necessary for you to create your backup copy.

A better analogy is backing up CDs protects yourself from unforseen circumstances that threaten your investment even if it isn't condoned(sp?). This is just like a person owning a gun to protect themselves from unforseen circumstances that threaten their life, even if it isn't condoned by some.

Not sure about this analogy either, but I do know its more applicable than yours.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[dvdeug]

If I buy a book and find out that 2 pages are ripped out at the end, the store won't take it back after 30 days (or whatever their policy is) and the publisher isn't obligated to replace the book (and won't replace it).

There's an implied warranty of merchantability--remember all those EULAs and licenses that try and disclaim it? If they sell you a broken product, it's their responsiblity to fix or replace it.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[spir0]

I am legally entitled to backup my games

no, you're not. morally, you may feel entitled to it, but LEGALLY, you're not.

sorry, I agree with you on nearly everything else, but just had to point out that this statement is blatantly false.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[dirk]

Yes, that is why every store will exchange a defective product for a limited amount of time. This includes CDs and video games. But once you go past the stores timeframe for returns/exchanges you are SOL. If this guy would have taken the game back a week after he bought it, he could have gotten a new game. He waited over a month to try and return it, and they told him no. The same thing would have happened if it was a book or a toaster. He wants the store to take it back indefinitely, even when he himself may have caused the damage. That is more than unreasonable.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Hungus]

And in such cases the bill or statute should have followed the Ramseyer/ Cordon Rules when explicitly affecting other statutes ( as is well stated in the OPINION you quote since it is an OC and not a law itself.) in the cases of implicit alteration it is the opinion of this OPINION that later law supercedes original, however from a constitutional law position this is quite obviously incorrect. This is of course one of the issues we are facing with the difference between actuvist and conservative judiciary members. So I will grant you that there are a number of experts who will tout and write OPINIONS and give us their opinions, for both sides of the argument.

Note to other readers I have capitalized the word opinion in places where is is a legal opinion and not a personal opinion the differences are signifigant but outside the realm of /. discussion those of you with a legal bg of any kind already know the difference.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[DunbarTheInept]

You do not repeal old laws by passing new ones

Yes, you do. For example, there are two constitutional amendments about alchohol prohibition on the record - the one that instituted it and the one that repealed it later. If what you say was true, then the old one would have been striken from the constituion, instead of being left in place to be contradicted later in the document.

Yes, new laws superceed old ones - if the new law is of equal or higher jursidictional level. Only if the new law is of a lower jurisdictional level than the old one, then and only then does the old one superceed it. (i.e. a law can only superceed a constitutional amendment by being a constitutional amendment itself.)

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[bluGill]

I could even buy 19 those 20 Cd's again if I had to. Last time I lost a CD though it was a limited edition. Unless I find someone else who has a copy (and only a few thousand were made, and the band isn't from my state) I can't get a copy.

Thats why I now backup everything. Course a large part of my CD collection is from small artists who don't sell a lot of music. I have to protect myself.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[iserlohn]

Regarding your sig - that's why you pay income tax.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[general_re]

And in such cases the bill or statute should have followed the Ramseyer/ Cordon Rules when explicitly affecting other statutes...

What are you talking about? The Ramseyer and Cordon rules are wholly irrelevant in this context - they're simply conveniences for members of Congress, dictating how bills must be formatted when printed. That's it - new legislation still supersedes old legislation, even if Ramseyer and Cordon disappear tomorrow, because those are internal rules for Congress, not integral parts of the legislative process. Ramseyer and Cordon weren't around

... however from a constitutional law position this is quite obviously incorrect.

Feel free to cite someone - anyone of authority - that can support such a claim.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Technician]

I don't know about you, but I use Daemon Tools to handle copy-protected software.

Unfortunately that defeats the free market vote. I vote with my wallet. You accept the hardship with the DMCA liability in doing so. I'd rather have the DRM go away just like the hardware dongle and laser burned floppies of the past. Lots of copy protection was attempted on floppies, but the trouble they caused affected sales and support costs, so they generaly went away. I would like to have the same sway on the software industry. I make back-up's, I buy software.

I avoid stuff that has problems and is overpriced, not work around it. It's my vote against bad software and DRM DMCA legal problems.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[Hungus]

If you want to discus this further just email me and we can banter back and forth all day long. My listed email is legit.

Re:I want the second disc damnit!

[mobets]

It is a difference in the way it is sold. When you buy a book, you are buying the physical book. However, when you buy software, you are mearly buying a license to use the software. Scratching the disk makes it unusable, but that doesn't matter. You did't buy the disk.

Too bad

[Bill_Royle]

These guys don't seem to be making any friends.

It looks pretty coordinated, if you ask me.

Re:Too bad

[thedillybar]

These guys don't seem to be making any friends.

Unfortunately, they have many suckers who have bought the console and now must buy the games.

Who cares if you're a friend or just a customer?

Have you ever called their technical support? They're not trying to make friends; they're trying to make money.

This is the same EA

[DAldredge]

This is the same EA that just made it IMPOSSIBLE to bypass the 15 second startup movies that play every time you start up Ultima Online. There is a way to disable them, but they can ban your account for making unauthorized mods if you use it.

Re:This is the same EA

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, you're kidding, I hope.

The game industry (should have) learned that lesson with the (original) Castle Wolfenstein!

Re:This is the same EA

[vastabo]

They can detect you renaming two .bik files in your music directory? Really? And they care?
Well, it's their fault for making me watch "EA Games, Challenge EVERYTHING" everytime UO crashes. Challenge THIS!

Re:This is the same EA

[WWWWolf]

Thou art a town crier, sworn to tell the decrees from the lord of the land to the townsmen unaltered. The lazy and vain lord asks thee to begin the news with a pompous praise to him. Dost thou
A) Honestly refrain from praising the lord, knowing the townsmen dislike him as well, or
B) Honor thy agreement and do as thou hast been told?

Aww heck, as if that would matter. =)

Re:This is the same EA

[dnoyeb]

You know, I got thorougly annoyes with EA when I bought Battlefield 1942 and had to listen to their stupid logo jingle every time I start the game. Until I scoured the net for the startup switch.

But by that point I was annoyed to high hell. In today's age, who thinks its a good thing to annoy the hell out of your customers?

Re:This is the same EA

[Anonymous Coward]

Challenge everything is what they said, so I did. Including their copy protection...

angry

[mikeeeeeee]

im sort of mad i didnt know about the game X or dvd X copy sooner...i mean...

Kids

[BancBoy]

Many children (young and old) treat their game discs with a bit less respect than they should sometimes. Who wants to buy a new copy everytime your copy starts skipping or fails? Won't you please think about the children!?

Re:Kids

[CAIMLAS]

They're kids. For the most part, they've not reached the point where they realize that things actually break, deteriorate, or die - they don't have the perspective of multiple years of life yet to reflect back on. A week is a very long time for 10 year old, and a month an eternity.

Sure, kids shouldn't abuse their stuff, and most don't unless they're spoiled. But expecting a kid to keep a CDROM scratch-free is a bit absurd when most grown adults have difficulty with it.

Re:Kids

[Anonymous Coward]

I totally agree with you and I agree that people should have every right to copy/backup the things they own, however something does have to be said for user responsibility. If you scratch your game disc because you're not taking care of it, I don't think the company should have to supply a perfectly new one in it's place.

That's like saying you are welcome to take your new car out and ram it into a lightpost because the manufacturer will just fix it for you.

Maybe I misunderstood your post?

Re:Kids

[MMaestro]

True, but its goes beyond that. Do you REALLY think that just because you keep your CDs in a nice jewel case everytime you stop using it, its not gonna take some wear and tear? Course not, by merely owning it its gonna take damage. Lets go over the list of "what goes wrong, when you're doing things right."

1. Merely removing the shrink wrap from the jewel case exposes it to air and airborne chemicals which will erode your disc.
2. Removing the CD, causes pressure to be FOCUSED on the center because thats really the only part of the CD thats being used to hold it in place. This leads to potential cracks and simple wear and tear.
3. USING THE CD, causes its damage. Think about it, whats the RPM (rotation per minute) of your CD player? How long do you typically use that CD at a time? How hot does the CD get when its rotated that quickly and for so long? What about the heat generated from the rest of the system (PC of stereo system?)
4. The area you live in also predict the lifetime of your CD in the longrun. If you use the CD in a closed, temperture controlled, atmosphere controlled laboratory and use the CD maybe once a week, yeah its gonna last about the estimated 10 years. But if you live in a tent, in the middle of the Sahara Desert and the sand just somehow manages to get into your air-sealed CD case and scratch it up, you'll be lucky if your CD managed to make its way into the hands of a black market dealer with 2 tracks still playable.

Re:Kids

[martinX]

That's like saying you are welcome to take your new car out and ram it into a lightpost because the manufacturer will just fix it for you.

Not really. When you buy software/music/movie whatever, you are buying two things. Firstly you are buying the physical medium which might cost a few dollars to make, burn, wrap and deliver to you. Secondly you are buying a licence to use/listen to/watch whatever it is you bought. (In the case of music, this is the equivalent of 'mechanical royalties'.)

While the physical medium can get wrecked, your licence should remain valid. It should not die just because your CD has. Therefore you should be able to get a replacement CD or DVD for the cost of the physical medium only, i.e. a few bucks.

That the copyright holders, under the interpretation of our current copyright laws, require consumers to buy the same things over and over again is disingenuous of them. They know it's wrong, but they like us replacing stuff every ten years.

Re:Kids

[Alsee]

Secondly you are buying a licence to use/listen to/watch whatever it is you bought.

I've said it countless times before, and I guess I'll have to repeat it countless times more.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A LICENCE TO USE.

You no more need a licence to play a CD or install and play a computer game than you need a licence to read a book. US law at least is quite specific on this. You buy some media with stuff recorded on it and you are the owner of that specific copy.

The only exclusive rights the copyight holder has are listed in title 17 section 106 - the rights to create new copies and distribute them and public display. And those rights are loaded with exeptions and limitations.

Normal consumer purchases never come with any of those rights included, thus it is completely licence-free. About the only exception I can think of is a few rare software products that come with a licence to install copies on more than one computer.

The RIAA and others are certianly trying to change the law to create some sort of licence to play music and run software and read books, they are certainly spreading plently of misinformation about the law, painting an image that the law already says what they want it to say.

If you can convince everyone (including congress) that the law already says what you want it to say then it becomes very easy to get congress to chage the law to say what they think it already says. Very insidious.

-

Re:Kids

[Anonymous Coward]

This is nothing new. Microsoft has been doing this for years with their licensing. You buy a name brand computer and it comes with Windows installed. The license sticker is fused to the box. If it dies, you buy a new computer and it comes wiht a new license. Microsoft is not interested in seeing you transfer the license from your old box.

Re:Kids

[stoborrobots]

Maybe I misunderstand, then,

Surely if I have the right to use something, without needing an explicit licence, then the "few rare software products that come with a licence to install copies on more than one computer" are providing me with rights I already have...

Why do I need a licence to install on more than one computer, if I already own the specific copy, and can use it as I see fit???

Assuming that your response is going to be that I need the licence because installing on multiple computers requrires making new copies, a right which IS reserved under t17s106 then surely I would need such a licence to install any software product, even on a single machine - wouldn't I?

As I see it, what the "LICENCE" that people speak of is actually the conditions of sale - that is, since the copyright holder has exclusive right to distribute said materials, they decide to pnly distribute copies to entities which agree to a contract of sale. That contract of sale, otherwise known as a "licence", "end user licence agreement" or "EULA" may prescribe any conditions which it chooses, without compelling one into illegal behaviour. Since the copyright holder is not compelled to distribute any materials to me, they can freely say "We will not distribute materials to you unless you agree to this contract". It is my understanding (and of course, IANAL) that this is what people talk about when we say "licenced to use".

So you are probably right to say that I do not *NEED* a licence to play a CD. But if I acquire a CD under licence, then the terms of the licence as a legal contract are probably binding...

(The other question of whether the contract of sale survives destruction of the media on which said content was provided is left as an exercise for the reader.)

PS: I agree with you on the last couple of paragraphs, I am just not 100% sure on the first few...

Re:Kids

[runderwo]

Why do I need a licence to install on more than one computer, if I already own the specific copy, and can use it as I see fit???

What gave you the right to make more than one copy and run them simultaneously? That's all default copyright law gives you license to do, besides use the original copy for any non-performance reason you see fit.

Re:Kids

[Alsee]

then surely I would need such a licence to install any software product, even on a single machine - wouldn't I?

Nope.

Congress even specifically went out of their way to exclude the possibility of such an interpretation:

TITLE 17 CHAPTER 1 Sec. 117. - Limitations on exclusive rights: Computer programs
(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy. -
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:
(1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other mannerr, or
(2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful.

When you buy software you do not need any licence at all to install and run it. Copyright law is NOT about use. As far as copyright is concered the single installation of software is not the creation of a new copy - it is the normal use of a single functional copy.

they decide to [o]nly distribute copies to entities which agree to a contract of sale

Sure, they are perfectly free to refuse to sell me a copy unless I sign a contract first. But if I state that I have no interest in that contract and they sell me the copy anyway, well, then they got my money and I own that copy and there is no contract.

All of the EULA cases thus far (at least so far as I am aware) are NOT in any way based on a legal theory of needing a licence to install and run software. They are all based on a legal theory that the buyer somehow actively and willingly chose to be bound by a contract.

I'd say it's a rather doubious legal theory that someone chose to be bound by a contract simply by opening a box. But even if we grant that rotten legal theory, it is still not copyright infringment to install and run software if you somehow still manage to do so without agreeing to that contract.

EULA's are not licences. With the exception of those that licence you to make additional copies they do not licence you any rights you do not already have. They are contract offers. You are free to decline contract offers, but then obviously you do not receive anything that contract offers. EULA's generally offer nothing you want or need anyway. That's why they want the UCITA - to force EULA's to be binding.

So there are certianly legal arguments about whether EULA's are binding or not, but is has absolutely no connection to copyright infringment.

-

Re:Kids

[stoborrobots]

... is not the creation of a new copy ...

fair enough... I didn't know that (though I had assumed that something like it applied)... I'm not in .us, and while I assume that something similar applies here in .au, I don't know the exact legal implications of the relevant laws. I was just extrapolating from the statement which I quoted... It's good to know that there is some legal basis to fall back on...

As regards the second point, I agree with you entirely. However, since "install and run software" is the token used to signify assent to the contract, it is somewhat impossible to "manage to do so without agreeing to that contract".

FWIW, as I understand it, the unsigned assent clause is the same one used by carparking companies and department stores; "by [parking your car here/shopping here] you agree to these terms and conditions". All a EULA says is "by continuing to use this product you agree to these terms and conditions". It is (i believe) accepted legal practice to enforce unsigned contracts with an appropriate assent clause.

Re:Kids

[PhilHibbs]

the unsigned assent clause is the same one used by carparking companies and department stores; "by [parking your car here/shopping here] you agree to these terms and conditions"

Not the same - the company owns the car park, you have no right to park there without their permission, and their permission comes at the expense of you agreeing to there T&C. You do have a right to install the software without being further encumbered with any contract, so doing something that you do not need their permission for should not make you party to some bogus contract that they are forcing on you. If I said "By stepping on that flagstone, you agree to hand over your wallet", would you be scared to step on the flagstone? Would you call a cop?

Re:Kids

[Alsee]

Ah. For all I know installing software may be infringement in AU. From what I hear there's no Fair use and there is much more reliance on the fact that in many cases what is technically infringment is simply not enforced.

As for assent, I don't know the legalities but there have to be limitations on what they can actualy declare indicates assent from you. They can't effectively forbid you do do things you already have the right to do by claiming that it activates some contract. If you flush your toilet you agree to blah blah blah. Heh.

Even trying to make the sale itself the assent runs into all sorts of absurdities. Not the least of which is who is who is contracting with who? They sold the box of software to the store. Did they bind the store to some contract? And even if my purchase is assent contract, that contract is with the store. Even if the store contract says that I must assent to the manufacturer's EULA, I could violate the store contract (and only be liable to the store) by declining to assent to the manufacture's EULA. Chuckle. But stores are not claiming contracts.

We really need some huge and high level case tossing out EULA's in general. In most cases so far judges have bent over backwards to decide cases on any other grounds, to avoid ruling on the issue. Sigh.

-

Re:Kids

[dirk]

Why is this not expected of other industries then? You don't own the contents of a book when you buy it? You are buying a license to read it. But no one expects a free replacement copy of a book when they spill something on it or their kids rip a page out. As far as markups go, books as as bad if not worse than games and music. A hardcover can cost anywhere from $20 to $50 to but, but the material cost at most $1. So why is there no outrage and indignation about the book industry? Could it be because there is no way to make a free, acceptable copy of the book (well, acceptable to the majority of people)?

Re:Kids

[jkabbe]

Surely if I have the right to use something, without needing an explicit licence, then the "few rare software products that come with a licence to install copies on more than one computer" are providing me with rights I already have...

You can use the original copy on the disks you purchased any way you want....as long as you do not copy them to a computer (other than for making a single backup :). In copying it to the computer you are violating copyright law. So there is an included license in the software that allows you to do this for one computer at a time.

Re:Kids

[jkabbe]

Further reading (should've known better :) indicates that I stand corrected. In this case the "license" is probably just to serve as a reminder or scare people.

Good on the DMCA

[pVoid]

I'm sure a lot of people will find this just another excuse to shit on the DMCA, but let's admit that for once, it's actually useful.

I mean, sure, there's a limit to how much authority we want in our lives, but if you're gonna pirate a game, it might as well be something underground... I find all these software companies (like 321) very fucking hypocritical...

There's being an 3733t haxxor group the takes pride in cracking stuff (whether that's good or bad - I have no comment), then there's being a company who's hypocritical enough to say "games aren't worth paying money for... oh btw, use our software so we can make some money"...

Re:Good on the DMCA

[Wehesheit]

and when my 4 year old nephew grabs a disc off my computer when I'm not looking and trashes it I can go ahead and do what exactly?

I backup the current game/dvd I'm watching and put the original away. Coincidently all my originals are in excellent condition despite having children and my own clumsy ass around.

This will not stop piracy but it sure as hell makes it a pain in the ass for ME.

Re:Good on the DMCA

[Dimensio]

You are aware that the software is useful for allowing people who legitimately own the game to make backup copies, as otherwise it is impossible due to copy protection measures put on the CDs, right? Yes, it could be used by someone who wants to dupe the game for a friend, but this software is hardly going to encourage widespread piracy.

Honestly, I'm sick of CD protection on PC games. It does nothing to curb piracy, but it does impact legitimate owners who now can no longer make legal backups of their software (and thus their game is ruined if the original CD gets scratched) AND it often imposes artifical system requirements as users need to make sure that their CD-ROM or DVD-ROM drive is capable of handling the nonstandard code that makes the copy protection work -- and since SafeDisc, SecureROM, etc are constantly updating their software, it is impossible to get a steady list of supported hardware.

Re:Good on the DMCA

[SlashdotKeefey]

I'm actually sick of copy protection full-stop. A couple of examples that wind me up (and ensure I make a point of circumventing them):

Copy-controlled music CDs - I travel A LOT, and don't want to have to lug my entire CD collection with me everywhere I go, when I have a hard drive big enough to have it ripped and stored. I legitimitely own each and every one of them, but I have to go through hoops to get this stuff onto my machine. This doesn't target the professional hacker, who'll get past all measures anyway, but targets the consumer, and makes it more likely that they'll just download the sodding thing in the first place.

Secondly - in terms of games, most copy protection can be put into the same category. A typical games pirate will get the software anyway (through the vast array of P2P, FTP, and IRC clients available to all but the most novice of users), but I, as a consumer, am forced to either cart the CDs everywhere if I want to enjoy a game (legally), or get round it all by downloading a "patch" from somewhere like GameCopyWorld (note, I patch legally bought software).

In terms of piracy, I think they are tackling the wrong end of the situation: the problem, rather than the cause.

Re:Good on the DMCA

[NightWulf]

Have you looked into Alchohol 120%? http://www.alcohol-soft.com/ are the makers of this fine software. I use it all the time, and the game copy protection companies change the software once in a blue moon. Atleast with Alchohol I can burn 1:1 copies with the protection right on it. It's completly legit.

P.S. I am in no way owner, involved, employed with alcoholsoft. I just use their software and am happy with it.

Re:Good on the DMCA

[0racle]

I bought SimCity 4 and the Rush Hour expansion. After installing the expansion, running it cam back with the error "Please insert the correct disk." Rush Hour is one disk and it was the one that was in there, so just to play the game I legally bought, I had to find a NoCD crack for it.

Copy protection my ass, I had to go and look for a way around it just to play it. I'm glad I did though, damn its fun.

Re:Good on the DMCA

[Jeff Reed]

I agree. Even if it's just a (fairly) simple "insert disc 1 before you're allowed to play the game" form of protection, it's still annoying. What happens if my disc 1 is broken or stolen, but I still have the game on my hard drive? I'm screwed - I've got to buy another copy of the game. This is why I use programs like Alcohol 120% and Daemon Tools to make a CD-image of the PC games I play often. If something happens to my original disc, I can still make a backup -- or better yet, avoid having to insert the disc to play and risk damaging it in the first place.

These sorts of protections don't really do much other than piss off the consumer, anyway. No-CD cracks are released for games within hours, and those who simply choose to download a pirated copy instead of buying it will have little trouble running the games. Unreal Tournament 2004 requires you to leave the CD inserted to play the game until you get the first patch. Before that patch came out (which was a few weeks after the game did), several people I know had already downloaded the game and used a keygen and No-CD crack to play the game online for free. These disc protection systems don't stop the pirates for very long and just make CD-ROM drives freak out. Why even bother with them?

Re:Good on the DMCA

[black mariah]

and when my 4 year old nephew grabs a disc off my computer when I'm not looking and trashes it I can go ahead and do what exactly?

Punch the little bastard in the face, then put your damn CDs up next time.

Re:Good on the DMCA

[cgenman]

I had a similar experience. The last game I worked on was a fun little multiplayer, multidisk romp, though I won't say which one. Anyway, after the project was over, we were all sent complimentary copies of the title to play / give to family / whatever. Well, the game came, and played well, but I couldn't stand swapping it in and out of the CD drive all of the time. A quick google, and a NoCD patch later, and I'm playing exactly the way I should have been playing all along... verified by my registration password.

And actually, the NoCD crack turned out to be very popular where I was working. Apparently, nobody else likes a dongle either.

Yes, there were other games that wouldn't play due to faulty copy protection, but I thought people might like to know that we don't like those damned things either. It's the publishers that insist on them.

Re:Good on the DMCA

[Mycroft_VIII]

To bad you can't just tell the publishers to take a hike.
Do tell them you get alot of people complaining about the 'protection' who thing the problems thier computers are having are cause by your code and it's often the protection.
Tell them you can always find a bypass for it within a week of release on the net.
Tell them they are being sold snake oil by "the purveyors of that junk".
That last one is telling. If you can show them how it hurts thier bottom line, they'll stop doing it.
And that's ALL it doese is cost them money. They ARE being sold a bill of goods by the 'protection' people. Most of these schemes are broken withing weeks of thier introduction, and are sold for a year or two for many titles.
Find the article about how one scheme was bypassed by drawing a line with marker on the cd!.(slashdot covered it)
Follow the Money, fix the Problem.

Mycroft

Re:Good on the DMCA

[Alsee]

Hmmm, you're other posts don't seem to be trolls, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Before you whine about getting modded down for "opposing slashdot groupthink", I'd say you were probably modded down for your rediculous and troll-looking arguments.

if you're gonna pirate a game

Who the hell it talking about pirating games? Making a copy of a game is not piracy (it is not copyright infringment either, blah blah blah).

There's being an 3733t haxxor group the takes pride in cracking stuff (whether that's good or bad - I have no comment)

Too late, I'd say your pejorative "3733t haxxor group" is already commenting.

If some dumb-ass company sells me crippled printer cartidges that actively try to prohibit refilling, or a crippled DVD designed to oxidize and self destruct after 24 hours, or a DVD player that refuses to fast forward during the commercials, or a music CD that attempts to autoinstall undesired software on my computer, or a computer game crippled to prevent me from making a perfectly legal and legitimate backup copy, then yeah, I'm gonna "take pride" in reparing that crippled and defective product.

I will melt open that ink cartidge and refill it and reseal it if I damn well please. I will spray that self destructing DVD with hairspray or other sealant to prevent it from oxidizing if I damn well please. I will enter the secret manufacture code or reflash the damn firmware on a DVD player to enable the fast-forward butting if I damn well please. As for the stupid DRM-installing music CD's I disabled autoinsert/autorun ages ago, and if I hadn't, I'll hold down the shift key any time I damn well please. And if I own a crippled game, I'll dig around in my copy with a hex editor any time I damn well please, and if I fix the problem working from the raw executable then I'll be damn proud of myself.

If that makes me an 3733t haxxor, well fine, I'm an 3733t haxxor.

a company who's hypocritical enough to say "games aren't worth paying money for

Here you REALLY sound like a troll. 321 Studios have never said any such thing.

I have a question - do you support the DMCRA? The DMCRA leaves "piracy" just as illegal as before. The DMCRA only decriminalizes NON-infringing activities, it only stops innocent non-infringing people from going to prison.

So, do you support the DMCRA? Or do you advocate imprisoning innocent non-infringing people?

You're assuming everyone who violates the DMCA is some evil pirate. When we attack the DMCA we're not talking about pirates. We're talking about the innocent non-infringing people it says are felons.

-

Re:Good on the DMCA

[anethema]

While I agree and sympathize 100%, you can buy a tool for around 30 dollars that will simply sand the bottom of your cd. Gets rid of scratches great and has definatly saved me money.

Course them sending you a cheap replacement cd is what they SHOULD do, this works as well :) (just dont scratch the label side)

Re:Good on the DMCA

[cgenman]

There are three rules to surviving at a publisher.

1. C
2. Y
3. A

Even if you create a compelling financial argument why they shouldn't include them on disk, the risk is too great for any individual to risk their future without it. How do you explain to them that the online portion of the game is compelling enough that people will need to have a legal registration code? There are just too many ways around it, and while half of the people at any given publisher are hardcore gamers, the other half are toothpaste salesmen, and sadly anyone in the know will have to answer to both.

And actually, Macrovision claims that they can delay the release of a cracked version by "as much as two weeks," but because it is the first two weeks that's a whole lot of money. To you and me that's snake oil, but to a publisher that's a condo in Florida.

Re:Good on the DMCA

[Anonymous Coward]

An excellent piece of software that is well worth the purchase price. It can even properly emulate the latest Securom protections.

Re:Good on the DMCA

[Mycroft_VIII]

If macrovision was telling the truth, then yes it might be o.k. if thier crap didn't screw up peoples computers from time to time. Not shure if thier specific products have, only that many products in thier field have.
The problem is it's NOT TRUE except for the first two weeks after the FIRST title using a new version that's significantly different that the last version. And that assumes no inside leaks at macrovision, any of the companies developing the game, or any of the companies distributing the game. Those last two on some games I have make about 5-8 companies. sheesh how many logo movies can they put on one cd.
Once a new system is cracked, it's a matter of hours after it's known what a new game is using before the crack hits the web. I've even seen notices along the lines of 'just use the same crack for game-x on the new game-y that comes out tomorrow.'
It's snake oil. And you better believe that it not only makes the new game you just bought unreliable, but more expensive.

Mycroft

Hypothetical Question

[phaetonic]

If all of the companies (like EA) who sold CDs (movies, music, video games) had the same sort of support that Disney movies have (disc replacement program), would there still be a justification for this sort of program?

Re:Hypothetical Question

[SenatorTreason]

For the others who had no idea what the parent was talking about, see the following site:
Disney FAQ, see "How do I replace a damaged DVD?".

Re:Hypothetical Question

[KnacTheMife]

yes, because regardless of any disc replacement program a company offers, the "fair use" exclusion is an established part of copyright law. no company policy can ever be an adequate replacement for constitional law, if for no other reason than a company can easily change their policies. if a product is produced that allows people to excercise their rights, then that is justification enough, even if other choose to exploit that product to break the law.

Re:Hypothetical Question

[pla]

If all of the companies (like EA) who sold CDs (movies, music, video games) had the same sort of support that Disney movies have (disc replacement program), would there still be a justification for this sort of program?

From Disney: "If you accidentally damage or break one of your Disney DVDs, you can get a replacement disc for a nominal charge of $6.95. Please call (800) 723-4763 for details."

"Replacement" program? The guys at Disney must love this! Considering that Wallyworld can make money selling older DVDs for $5, Disney must do very well "replacing" titles they actually publish for $2 more per copy. What a great scam they have going! Especially when you consider that younger kids, their target audience, tend to beat the hell out of everything they touch (including DVDs)... Wow.

Even at a more reasonable price, though, such an offer would not justify depriving us of our right to make backups. Either we buy the media, in which case we can do with it as we will (including copying it, since we would need to supply our own blank, the physical "product", to do so), or we license it, in which case the physical copy holds no special value (and thus, we can copy it at will because the license, not the media, reflects the purchase price). Either way, we have a right to back it up.

Re:Hypothetical Question

[cgenman]

While "fair use" is an established part of copyright law, it is by no means constitutional or a "right." Indeed, fair use provisions arose essentially because the letter of the law extended protections further than the intent of the law. Courts correctly assessed that there were many uses of copyrighted material unanticipated by the law that were beneficial to society and didn't harm the producers.

I'm not saying that protecting people's ability to protect a fragile medium is insufficient compared to the potential for piracy. I am saying choose your wording wisely and your arguments will be more effective... especially because of the less clearly delineated ground common law constructions like "fair use" occupy.

Re:Hypothetical Question

[dvNull]

Fair Use is about as constitutional as the right to copyright. The two should go hand in hand.

Re:Hypothetical Question

[gehrehmee]

Perhaps if they were legally obligated to provide such services at no cost other then the price of media. If we're legally obligated to not break their encryption, surely the same strength of demand can be made the other way around.

Re:Hypothetical Question

[Anonymous Coward]

No.

Re:Hypothetical Question

[KnacTheMife]

agreed to the point on being more careful of the words i choose, but, the "fair use" exclusion is part and parcle of the same law that gives authors their "copyrights", that law being created from the constitutional power divulged to the legislature, from that viewpoint an author's "copyright" is not a right in the constitutional sense either but is common law... mostly I get a little heated because the pro-copy protection crowd keeps harping about consumers being able to make perfect digital copies when they were the ones who chose to sell consumers a perfect digital copy to begin with...

Re:Hypothetical Question

[wo1verin3]

Unfortunately for you, $6.95 from Disney is a pretty reasonable cost to include manufacturing + cost of media + shipping + cost to have someone on the phone to talk to you. A single phone call to a call center costs the company between $20-$50 when you work out all expenses including employee salary, benefits, facilities, electricity, IT support, software being used by that call taker.

Re:Hypothetical Question

[Trurl's Machine]

From Disney: "If you accidentally damage or break one of your Disney DVDs, you can get a replacement disc for a nominal charge of $6.95. Please call (800) 723-4763 for details." "Replacement" program? The guys at Disney must love this! Considering that Wallyworld can make money selling older DVDs for $5, Disney must do very well "replacing" titles they actually publish for $2 more per copy. What a great scam they have going!

Yeah, what a scam. They actually want to make a profit from their business! And how much would that be - according to your estimates, it could be even a whopping fiver per copy! Man, it should be banned right away.

Re:Hypothetical Question

[Anonymous Coward]

"Why does the picture alternate between light and dark?

You are seeing the effects of Macrovision copy protection, probably because you are running your DVD player through your VCR or VCR/TV combo."

So if your only TV happens to be a VCR combo unit you are screwed?

Re:Hypothetical Question

[pcmanjon]

QUOTE " Perhaps if they were legally obligated to provide such services at no cost other then the price of media. If we're legally obligated to not break their encryption, surely the same strength of demand can be made the other way around."

"surely the same strength of demand can be made the other way around"

Nope. Thats not how the government works.

Government fights for the rights of business, not for the rights of it's people.

Fighting for the rights of it's people is so 18th century! Get real! Stop living in the past!

Re:Hypothetical Question

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently.

Re:Hypothetical Question

[Erwos]

It's not. Not at all. You might get that impression from certain /.'ers, but it has no basis at all in reality.

Copyright is explicitly laid out in the Constitution. Fair use is a _defense_ against copyright infringement issues. It is not really a right in a legal sense.

In fact, fair use is a judgement call (literally, by the judge!) nased on whether certain mitigating factors are being met, and to what degree they are. Compare this to the rather specific laws of actually getting and enforcing a copyright. There's no comparison.

This is not to say I disagree with the idea of fair use rights, but they are nowhere near as legally strong as people make them out to be - similar to your right to privacy, it's something a judge determines rather than a specific set of legal requirements.

-Erwos

Re:Hypothetical Question

[bhtooefr]

Most DVD players have an undocumented "VCR Friendly" mode, which turns off Macrovision. The only thing is, it's EXTREMELY illegal in the US. Read: Qrsrngvat Znpebivfvba (naq ernqvat guvf grkg) vf n ivbyngvba bs gur Qvtvgny Zvyyravhz Pbclevtug Npg bs 1998.

Re:Hypothetical Question

[pla]

Yeah, what a scam. They actually want to make a profit from their business!

Except, this targets people who already bought the DVD in question. Disney already made their sale, and this program targets only victims of the DMCA.

So yes, I do call that a scam. If not for the DMCA , I (or anyone, I don't mean this as some sort of whine about a personally missed marketing op) could provide that same service for under a buck per disc, including shipping, and still make a few cents per disc. Only laws passed thanks to "monetary incentives" from Disney and similar companies prevent me from doing exactly that.


If you can make your own bed, and I get a law passed requiring you to pay me to do it, that counts as a scam - Arguments about "how to fold sheet corners" as a trade-secret ignored.

Re:Hypothetical Question

[untaken_name]

should I be on the phone to my lawyer, then?
I prefer double rot-13 myself.

Re:Hypothetical Question

[KnacTheMife]

sorry, but I have to disagree...

the only thing the constitution says is "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries" (Clause 8, Section 8, Article 1).

No mention of copyrights ther for it is not explicitly laid out. Copyrights were established with the US Copyright Act.

This same Act established limitations on the exclusive rights of authors. One of those limitations is fair use (Section 107 of Title 17).

As they are both established in the same law code, there is a reasonable comparison. I'll grant you that the extension of fair use to allow individuals to make copies for personal use was an interpretation by a judge. However since it is explicitly the purpose of the judicial branch to interpret the laws as part of the system of checks and balances then judicial decisions have the same weight as laws passed by the legislature.

Copyright Law:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/ch1.ht ml

US Constitution:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitu tion/constituti on.overview.html

Re:Hypothetical Question

[Anonymous Coward]

how did a post with completely false statements get modded as informative?

Re:Hypothetical Question

[gehrehmee]

Which raises the question, if slashdot had a "Depressing" moderation option, would it default +1 or -1?

Now I know

[BobPaul]

Thanks to this article, I know of the existance of "Games X Copy," a product I would never have known about had EA and the others sued.

What will I do with my knew found awareness? Probably nothing right now, but I'm sure I'll let others know about it eventually and there's a slim possibility I might buy a copy before they're gone...

Thanks EA and Atari! Now I know about another great 321 Studios project!!

Re:Now I know

[SmittyTheBold]

FYI, do yourself a favor and don't. Their software is crap; significantly better solutions are available for free.

For example, DVD backup can be done much better by the stellar DVD Shrink. For games, one might consider GameCopyWorld.

Fair Use

[UnCivil Liberty]

"What's at stake here is a rather important legal principle - that products with no purpose other than to circumvent copyright protection are illegal under the DMCA."
What's at stake here is a rather important legal principle Mr. Lowenstein, it's fair use. A fair use clause must be added to the DMCA, this is a travesty.

Re:Fair Use

[mothz]

What I don't understand about that quote is this: Suppose a brand of refrigerator, bicycle, wristwatch, or telephone had DVD cloning functionality. Would these products be legal simply because they have purposes besides copy-protection circumvention?

If that's the case, then DVD cloning cannot be illegal on its own (although any copyright infringements still would be, of course). And if that's the case, then DVD-cloner products are legal without any attached refrigerators.

If it's not the case, then any product which could possibly be used to break the law must inherently be deemed illegal. Then guns are illegal. Cars are illegal. Computers are illegal.

Re:Fair Use

[bitrot42]

>What's at stake here is a rather important legal principle Mr. Lowenstein, it's fair use.

Keep in mind that this is the same Doug Lowenstein that has said emulation is illegal. It has been proven in court that it isn't, but that doesn't stop groups like the IDSA from saying it is when it suits their purposes.

Clearly they have no respect for the rights of the consumer, other than the right to pay... and pay... and pay again...

And Saddam was behind 9/11, and cows are causing global warming, not SUVs...

Saying it doesn't make it so. Yet...

Re:Fair Use

[untaken_name]

Your logic is circular. That doesn't stop your point from having merit, namely that just because something *can* be used to circumvent the law does not mean that it *must* be. However, your middle argument does not help forward your point. Please also note that this product can be used either to make legal backup copies or to make illegal copies. Thus your final argument works with no circular logic required.

DMCA

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesn't the copyright protection have to be "effective" for the DMCA to apply?

Re:DMCA

[Mycroft_VIII]

Yes, however I do not believe they mean effective in the sense you or I might use it in.
By effective I believe they basically mean 'works as long as nothing is specifically done to bypass it'.

Mycroft

Re:DMCA

[Aneurysm9]

Yeah, I always got a kick out of that "effective access control" provision. It's "effective" as long as it works when you use it the way we say you can use it. Hell, in that case, it's effective for them to say "please, don't copy this CD."

Re:DMCA

[untaken_name]

Yeah, I always got a kick out of that "effective access control" provision. It's "effective" as long as it works when you use it the way we say you can use it. Hell, in that case, it's effective for them to say "please, don't copy this CD."

Yes. It's like saying a screen door is 'effective security' because when nothing's trying to come through it, nothing gets through it. I wonder if that 'please do not make illegal copies of this disc' label they're putting on some software now counts as 'effective access control'.

"circumvent copyright protection"

[Anonymous Coward]

This is their weapon. You see, it used to be "legitimate use", of which backing up is one. However, now it's "circumvent copyright protection", which is a much lower standard, because you have to circumvent copyright protection to enable some of your LEGAL rights.

Screw 'em. I don't really play new games anyway, and if I want to play one, I'll just hit the trackers and get it that way.

Re:"circumvent copyright protection"

[reub2000]

No you don't. Copy the copy protection, copys it, not circumvent's it. The copy of the CD is still copy protected, or else it wouldn't work. This will be thrown out for that reason.

Dumbfucks . . .

[DA-MAN]

Federal judges in New York and California have barred 321 from marketing... [similar] DVD-cloning software - a victory for movie studios, which contended that such products violate the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act."

God some people are so fucking retarded. 321 got spanked in court for decrypting dvd's without having a legal license to decrypt. The products functionality was never in question, the way they got that functionality going was . . .

Re:Dumbfucks . . .

[Kjella]

DVDs are protected by CSS. Pretty much all commercial games are protected by some protection system as well. The DMCA is a wonderful way to give you the right to make a back-up, without actually giving you a WAY to back them up.

A right you can not exercise is no right at all. Which is exactly what they're doing, without actually getting into legal trouble over removing the right itself.

Kjella

Re:Dumbfucks . . .

[abb3w]

So, are you suggesting they should have applied for the CSS decryption license, and then sued when it was (presumably) refused?

Re:Dumbfucks . . .

[DA-MAN]

So, are you suggesting they should have applied for the CSS decryption license, and then sued when it was (presumably) refused?

Actually no. In the US, 321 would not be able to sue for being denied the sale of a license, AFAIK. However if they sued from a European office, maybe . . . My point is that many "journalists" (i use that word lightly) haze what was really in question. The software was not illegal, per say, but the fact that they didn't have a license for CSS!

321 Studios

[Rick and Roll]

Somebody needs to come out in support of these guys.

These are the good guys. They are pissing off the evil copy-protection guys. They have a very reasonable argument.

I would like to see RMS write an article about this specific issue. It may help people to see how stupid these lawsuits are. I would like the Electronic Frontier Foundation to help out as well.

If I had a DVD-R drive, I would definitely buy their products.

Re:321 Studios

[RLiegh]

The problem seems to be that they are using the "throwing ourselves under the wheels of the juggernaut" school of social reform.

I'll agree they're pissing people off, but they don't seem to be doing so in a particularly productive manner.

Re:321 Studios

[ThatsNotFunny]

I would definitely buy their products If you want, I can make you a copy. ;)

Re:321 Studios

[mrchaotica]

Hey, it worked for Rosa Parks and Ghandi!

Re:321 Studios

[Anonymous Coward]

Refresh my memory; which of them fought for free mp3s and which for warez?

Re:321 Studios

[Lumpy]

Somebody needs to come out in support of these guys [321studios.com].

These are the good guys. They are pissing off the evil copy-protection guys. They have a very reasonable argument.

you obviousally never owned one of their products... their activation and CALL HOME scheme is nastier than anything any game maker or movie maker has ever created.

I a msitting here with a legitimate copy of DVD X copy PLatinum that they REFUSE to give me a activation key for bcause they did not see a "uninstall call home" when my hard drive crashed.

they are Assholes that are no better than the people suing them. and their products are BASED on open/free versions that are on the net now... DVD shrink is 20 times better than their dvdXcopy product. (I unfortunately found out about 2 months after I bought the crud from 321.)

and the tools to backup PS2 games have been on the net for just as long...

they are NOT the good guys otherwise they would not be jerks to their own customers.

There oughta be a law

[RLiegh]

...protecting the consumer's fair use rights. Too bad there's no money to be made going that route.

Re:There oughta be a law

[Anonymous Coward]

that's supposed to be the duty of the government.

but when the government is moved in directions that their donaters want them to go... well, it's obvious what happens.

it's not about the greater good of the populace but of the greater good of corporations quarterly financial reports (as much as they lie on those).

Re:There oughta be a law

[Richard_at_work]

There is money to be made, but everytime a class action suit is brought, people on slashdot bitch about the fact that the laywers get the lions share of the settlement. Damned if you do, damned if you dont.

Re:There oughta be a law

[dmaxwell]

There is money to be made, but everytime a class action suit is brought, people on slashdot bitch about the fact that the laywers get the lions share of the settlement. Damned if you do, damned if you dont.

Maybe it would help to look at class action suits differently then. I look at CA suits as a way to bitchslap a corporation thats getting too big for its breaches. So what if I only get a check for $0.23? (true story) They had to mail out several million just like it. We're depositing the damn thing just so they get hit with the processing charges as well.

CA suits are way to punish corps. You'll never enrich yourself from one of the things.

Maybe...

[NightWulf]

321 Studios should have listed 123 Fake St. as their address. Then the subpeona wouldn't have reached them.

Re:Maybe...

[cujo_1111]

Neither would the cheques from their customers...

Re:Maybe...

[Patoski]

321 Studios should have listed 123 Fake St. as their address. Then the subpeona wouldn't have reached them.

Rest assured boys, it would've taken a while but the cops would still have found them.

Just in case you can't buy a copy in your country

[Anonymous Coward]

DVDXCopy

Maybe consumers should sue game makers...

[meanfriend]

Three makers of video games sued a Missouri company marketing software that enables consumers to make backup copies of computer games.

Very well then, if I cant make a backup or bypass the copy protection, then they should be legally required to issue refunds for software if that backup protection renders the software defective.

From my own personal experience, I bought KOTOR the first day it came out for PC. For some reason, when doing the cd check when launching, the game would hang about half of the time requiring a hard reset. After a couple weeks I got fed up and downloaded a no CD-crack and havent had a problem since.

My PC met all the requirements on the box, yet when it doesnt work properly because of stupid copy-protection schemes the publisher has no accountability to the consumer, yet *I'm* the one breaking the law (DMCA) when I take steps to make the damn thing usable?

If I bought a toaster and it only toasted half the time, I'd return it to the store and get a new one with an apology. Yet if it's software, why does consumer protection go right out the window?

Re:Maybe consumers should sue game makers...

[Anonymous Coward]

...because people just download a crack instead of going back to the store and publisher, and then their congressmen, and raise a big stink.

Re:Maybe consumers should sue game makers...

[Acidic_Diarrhea]

" If I bought a toaster and it only toasted half the time, I'd return it to the store and get a new one with an apology. Yet if it's software, why does consumer protection go right out the window?"

I think this is the case for a couple of reasons. Typically, to get consumer protection, it usually takes negative publicity to force the company and/or government intervention. Both of these take a motivated consumer group that is going to push for reform and has the power/money to make it happen. Also, a news story on 60 Minutes where some old grandma buys a toaster, it doesn't work as advertised, and the company won't make it right is a public relations nightmare. Some male between the age of 15 and 40 who can't play his computer game isn't going to receive much sympathy from the viewing public, if such a story were to even make it onto 60 Minutes.

Another issue that I see is the fact that most people have a very limited understanding of computers and the software running on them. Sure, you knew that the copy protection scheme was what was causing the problem. How many other people can figure that out? A lot of people don't know that copy protection schemes are leading to these problems and will instead blame it on their own computer instead of the company for including a mechanism to prevent theft.

So I guess we just need to get some old ladies playing KOTOR, call 60 Minutes, and start a rally to get some change.

Re:Maybe consumers should sue game makers...

[Monkelectric]

Every time there is a copyright story I tell this story -- but its similar to yours.

Few years back I bought a copy of Steinbergs LM4 and 3 sample cds to go with it (200$ total I think)... LM4 won't install on Windows 2k because it has a LAME copy protection that only works in 95 EVEN THOUGHT WIN2k IS A SUPPORTED PLATFORM FOR CUBASE (lm4 plugs into cubase). Steinberg basically says "fuck you" and I download the Oxygen release of LM4 and continue about my business having vowed not to purchase any more steinberg software.

A *YEAR LATER* Steinberg releases an installer that will install on 2k, but won't install the samples that come with it.

Re:Maybe consumers should sue game makers...

[Anonymous Coward]

So I guess we just need to get some old ladies playing KOTOR, call 60 Minutes, and start a rally to get some change.

Not going to help.Joe Average will just think she's a freak and switch off.

From across the pond it seems that americans don't seem to care about other peoples problems, lack the interest to see what's causing theirs in any depth, or just couldn't be assed to do anything. This is a crude generalisation, but It explains the huge amount of poverty in america, america's complete disregard for the enviroment, america's huge prison population, americas willingness to be bought and manipulated by megacorps, foriegn policy, lack of political interest/action etc. etc. Sadly this countrty seems to be following suit. I doubt things will get better before they get worse.

Looks like y'all screwed. And so am I.

Re:Maybe consumers should sue game makers...

[sindarin2001]

See, Americans DO care about other people's problems, they just don't care to help FIX them. Take a look at (gag me) all of the "reality" tv shows out there. Filled with other people's problems and it keeps Americans enthralled, but on the same page, the don't give a flying $*%@ about helping out their neighbors. That's what's driven me nuts since 9/11...all those people out there driving their gas-guzzling SUV covered in flags and "United we stand" stickers, yet they cut you off in traffic and then give you the finger. Most Americans are sheep, walking around in a hazy bubble, not caring or noticing anything around them, and especially not aware that they are being lead to slaughter.

Re:Maybe consumers should sue game makers...

[untaken_name]

Feeding time.

Quick note on your assumptions: they're wrong.
What's considered 'poverty' in america is middle class in many other places, europe included. Our 'poor' people own, on average, 1 car per adult and 2 televisions per household. A large number of our 'poor' have cable or satellite television. A trailer park resident in the us has an average of 1000 sq feet of living space. In many parts of the world, these people would be considered quite well off. This is the only one of your incorrect assumptions that I can be bothered correcting atm.

Have it resurfaced

[cgenman]

Many places charge as low as 5 dollars to have a disk resurfaced, and unless the disk is cracked it always works. The home-resurfacing kits are mostly jokes, but the professional ones work... ask at a local used CD store where they resurface theirs. Of course, you can always buy it new from EB and return the broken copy... that would be dishonest, but let's just say they lost that protection the day they sold me an unopened copy of FF7 on the release date that was scratched to hell, and didn't have a replacement available for weeks.

I agree, with your position though, that if media companies are going to take the we-own-the-media-you-have-to-return-it-to-us-on-de mand position, we should get the rights associated with it.

Lunar 2 was better on the Sega CD anyway. The animation was more charming.

Re:Have it resurfaced

[king-manic]

Lunar 2 was better on the Sega CD anyway. The animation was more charming.

It's the muddy sega colors right? They made it every so charming.

Re:Have it resurfaced

[Mr. Hankey]

For me, I think it was playing it about 5 years before it came out on the Playstation. At the time, it was really an incredible game. The involved dialogue, much better than average acting, and detailed story (with cinemas!) were not something you could find on every game system at that point.

At the time, what I think impressed me the most was that Lunar: EB took great advantage of the Sega CD hardware to produce an incredible game. The Playstation might as well be sleeping, although the bitmaps still have to go through the geometry engine. I still have both Lunar: SSS and Lunar: EB for this system and have no plans to get rid of them. They're a great reminder of how far gaming technology has come, and more importantly (or paradoxically?) that 3D graphics do not a great game make.

A bit more on topic though, my Dark Wizard CD became too scratched to play properly a few years ago. Luckily I was able to make a copy, since my CD-RW drive was able to read the disc more accurately than my Sega CD unit. If copy protection had prevented me from copying this game, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be happy with the vendor either.

Re:Have it resurfaced

[nathanh]

Many places charge as low as 5 dollars to have a disk resurfaced, and unless the disk is cracked it always works. The home-resurfacing kits are mostly jokes, but the professional ones work...

One of the home kits worked for me. I had a really badly scratched PS2 game (second hand, Prince of Persia, bought it on ebay). It refused to load a certain level. No amount of cleaning would make it work. I picked up a $5 kit, rubbed the chemical solution over it for 5 minutes, and the disc worked first time and every time after that.

Re:Have it resurfaced

[Anonymous Coward]

It won't work if the scratch is deep enough on the label side.

Re:Have it resurfaced

[Rinisari]

The thing is, though, he shouldn't have to pay to have it resurfaced. He has a legal right to backup his own games for personal use (I would find and quote the USC, but I'm too lazy ATM) and since the gaming industry now seeks to prevent that, they should have to provide that backup copy.

Re:Have it resurfaced

[drinkypoo]

I have a DVD Dr. (aka Disc Dr. and others) and it does a really good job. I use it for long enough to make a copy of whatever :) My games don't tend to get scratched because I take care of them and keep them in their jewelcases or keepcases, unlike my video (except for DVDs) and audio which I keep in binders.

I agree Lunar was better on Sega CD, though.

Re:Have it resurfaced

[mOdQuArK!]

The home-resurfacing kits are mostly jokes,

I screwed up a few discs discovering this the hard way (that the home-resurfacing kits are jokes), but I did discover that using Rain-X (the stuff that makes water bead up on your car windshield) will often make damaged discs readable, as long as the scratches aren't too deep or wide. (I saved quite a few of my own abused master CDs this way, at least long enough to make a backup copy of them.)

Who cares?

[sqrt(2)]

Has the DMCA really influenced anyone in doing what they want with their own property? I can do whatever I want with my software. I don't buy a license to use a game, a buy a copy of the game that is then mine to use/copy/destroy/modify as I wish.

It's impossible to make a legal backup

[Anonymous Coward]

No matter if you paid for the software yourself, if you need to bypass "any" kind of copy protection in order to perform a single backup for your own personal use, it is illegal. Even if it's just typing a single key to bypass protection. That is the DMCA at work.

So you want a legal way? I suppose software companies could just include a copy of the disc for you, they're dirt cheap to make. But I'd rather just backup my games to a nice raid 5 array.

Re:It's impossible to make a legal backup

[DirkDaring]

You're not bypassing the copy protection at all. It's irrelevant. You're making a perfect copy of the cd, the copy protection is still right where it's supposed to be along with the rest of the data.

Re:It's impossible to make a legal backup

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullshit. I *guarantee* you that there will be a protection scheme that CANNOT BE DUPLICATED BY CONSUMER EQUIPMENT. Hell, they had that back in the good old Amiga, and even further back, C64 days.

When they come out with disks that have little holes physically burnt into them as a precise position, I'd like to see you duplicate THAT protection.

These guys are whacked.

[mark-t]

The purpose of this software, and software like it, is *NOT* to circumvent copyright protection, as they would seem to have us believe.

It is to circumvent *COPY* protection, not copyright protection.

These two ideas are not one and the same... And they need to get it through their skulls that this is the case.

Re:These guys are whacked.

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, they're very aware that copy protection and copyright protection are two different things. But they use the words interchangeably on purpose, because that way consumers begin to associate the two. It's like that whole Al Gore invented the internet versus helped create the internet thing. He said the latter, but the former, which is only subtly different, sounds much worse. So people always use the former. Not that the second one is much better, mind you, but the point is that as it has less punch people avoid it.

These sorts of word games are one of the most basic concepts in propaganda. It's like the whole apocryphal story about Bush bringing up 9/11 everytime Iraq was mentioned, and although he never specifically stated that the two were related, the end result was that most Americans thought the 9/11 hijackers were Iraqi citizens. This may actually be true but I'll be skeptical since I don't have a link to back it up, but anecdotally it demonstrates the point well.

RMS has similar problems with the terms "Intellectual Property", "Content Providers", and "Software Piracy", because these terms are designed to make people interpret a situation one way when it actually probably oughtn't to be.

I used to think that RMS was a hippie zealot tin-foil hat wearer, but I'm beginning to see what he's been going on about all these years. Free Software (using his definition of the word) is the only way to circumvent this kind of nonsense. When you have no corporate backing and the code is copied freely, it's very hard to sue anyone for it. When I first read his "Right to Read" I laughed my ass off. What a twat! But go reread it now. It's scary. Just imagine for a minute if he really is right about all that stuff he yammers on about.

Makes you think.

Re:These guys are whacked.

[corian]

It's like that whole Al Gore invented the internet versus helped create the internet thing. He said the latter, but the former, which is only subtly different, sounds much worse

Actually, he claimed that he "took the initiative in creating the Internet" (ref) which is a LOT closer to the former. "Taking the initiative" is a fundamental, creative role in producing something. "Assisting in" or "funding" is something completely different. If that's what he had meant, that's what he would have said.

Re:These guys are whacked.

[Boronx]

What's even more horrible about Gore's statement was that there was, in the context of the discussion (Gore's legilative accomplishments), alot of truth to it:

In the March 21 Washington Post, for example, Jason Schwartz quoted several Internet pioneers, including Vinton Cerf, the man often called "the father of the Internet." Cerf praised Gore's role in the Net's development. "I think it is very fair to say that the Internet would not be where it is in the United States without the strong support given to it and related research areas by the vice president," he said. Meanwhile, Katie Hafner, author of a book on the Internet's origins, penned a short piece in the New York Times, quoting experts who said that Gore "helped lift the Internet from relative obscurity and turn it into a widely accessible, commercial network." On March 18, Gore tried to clarify his remark in an interview with USA Today. "I did take the lead in the Congress," he told Chuck Raasch; he described his Internet work in detail. Raasch quoted Gore's explanation--but it was mentioned in no other paper.

-- From Bob Somersby

Re:These guys are whacked.

[Anonymous Coward]

That's great, but offtopic. Please save it for another conversation.

Re:These guys are whacked.

[Keeper]

Copy protection is implemented to protect their copyright -- the act of copying copyrighted material is a voilation of copyright. It is also unlawful except in cases where fair use applies.

Re:These guys are whacked.

[Arker]

It's like that whole Al Gore invented the internet versus helped create the internet thing. He said the latter, but the former, which is only subtly different, sounds much worse

Actually, I watched him say it, and as I recall the exact words were 'I took the initiative in creating the Internet.' Which isn't quite as bad as 1, but certainly more grandiose sounding than 2. If it got exagerrated, that's surely in part because his choice of words encouraged that.

Re:These guys are whacked.

[mark-t]

the act of copying copyrighted material is a voilation of copyright

No.

It is only a violation of copyright in the cases where it is unlawful, which is to say, when fair use does not apply.

Re:These guys are whacked.

[Aneurysm9]

Or, in the case of a computer program (which is what we're discussing, isn't it), when 17 U.S.C. 117 applies and the owner of a copy of a computer program has a right to create a copy if that copy is temporary and necessary to use the program or is a backup copy, notwithstanding the exclusive right of the copyright owner to make and distribute copies.

Re:These guys are whacked.

[Lord Kano]

It's like that whole Al Gore invented the internet versus helped create the internet thing. He said the latter, but the former, which is only subtly different, sounds much worse.

No. It's not. Al Gore was making things up. Pure and simple. He stated that "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet". The funding for the ARPAnet was passed years before Al Gore got into congress. Email and file copying (UUCP primarily) were going on for YEARS before he was elected to congress.

It was not a misunderstanding, he got caught lying.

Just like when he claimed to have a hand in the creation of the strategic petroleum reserve, but that was established two years before he entered congress.

the end result was that most Americans thought the 9/11 hijackers were Iraqi citizens. This may actually be true but I'll be skeptical since I don't have a link to back it up, but anecdotally it demonstrates the point well.

Most of them were (Saudi) Arabian expatriots.

LK

Re:These guys are whacked.

[Echnin]

I hate replying to sigs, but...

"The Internet is just a big scam"
-Ray Bradbury

"[Bush] is wonderful. We needed him. Clinton is a shithead."
-Ray Bradbury

Source.

Re:These guys are whacked.

[stanmann]

So in other words Al gore is responsible for the current ad infested version of the internet that has approximately reversed the signal/noise ratio from when he started getting involved. I'm not sure that I would want to take credit for taking a profitable( wordnet definition 2) tool and making it profitable (definition 1).

Re:These guys are whacked.

[stefanb]

These sorts of word games are one of the most basic concepts in propaganda. It's like the whole apocryphal story about Bush bringing up 9/11 everytime Iraq was mentioned, and although he never specifically stated that the two were related, the end result was that most Americans thought the 9/11 hijackers were Iraqi citizens. This may actually be true but I'll be skeptical since I don't have a link to back it up, but anecdotally it demonstrates the point well.

Most of them were Saudi citizens. This page lists the citizenship of all attackers that were on-board the planes, and it's fairly close to what I remember from various news reports.

Re:These guys are whacked.

[Sloppy]

Same here; I don't know what else to say but "me too."

First time I saw 'Right to Read' I thought it was paranoid bullshit. Then parts of it started coming true.

Likewise, I used to think RMS' pedantic insistance on certain terminologies, was useless. But there's a deep and important point behind all of it. Language is complex and words have implications, and it matters how you say things.

RMS deserves a lot more respect than he gets around here.

Re:These guys are whacked.

[PsiPsiStar]

"Taking the initiative" is the opposite of being reactive. In other words, he didn't wait for a problem to come along so he could solve it, like government typically does. He was being "proactive" not "reactive."

Specifically, Gore was asked by Wolf Blitzer what he brought to the table that Bill Bradley, his opponent, didn't. Gore said that he brought "his vision" and then gave various examples of where he took the initiative in certain matters.
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1 999/03/09/ president.2000/transcript.gore/index.html

Polititians always use action words as abbreviations for what they're saying. "Building a better America," "building a bridge to the 21st century," or whatever. This does not mean that a polititian is out there with the engineers and construction crews.

DMCA exemption for obsolete games

[radimvice]

A while back (Oct. 28, 2003), the Librarian of Congress granted certain classes of works a three-year exemption from the DMCA. The classes of interest are:

(2) Computer programs protected by dongles that prevent access due to malfunction or damage and which are obsolete.

(3) Computer programs and video games distributed in formats that have become obsolete and which require the original media or hardware as a condition of access. A format shall be considered obsolete if the machine or system necessary to render perceptible a work stored in that format is no longer manufactured or is no longer reasonably available in the commercial marketplace.

I know these classes apply to old, obsolete console systems, but couldn't they apply to CD-ROM anti-circumvention programs for games that are no longer being manufactured, because in that case the original CD-ROMs themselves are the necessary systems? If so, copy-circumvention programs like this would have a legal, legitimate use.

Of more general concern is the fact that such special exemptions need to be made in the first place, suggesting that the whole DMCA is bogus in the first place.

Re:DMCA exemption for obsolete games

[Alsee]

CD ROM is not an obsolete format.

Hell, according to the Library of Congress even 5 1/4 inch floppies are not an obsolete format. 5 1/4 inch drives are easily availble in the commercial marketplace.

9 1/2 inch disks would probably qualify, though I'm sure you could still find the drives on e-bay or something. I doubt there was ever any key-disk locked software made on 9 1/2 inch disks. So there probably isn't anything that qualifies for that exemption.

The Library of Congress exemption process is absolutely worthless.

-

Re:DMCA exemption for obsolete games

[_|()|\|]

Of more general concern is the fact that such special exemptions need to be made in the first place, suggesting that the whole DMCA is bogus in the first place.

Copyright is a monopoly granted for a limited time, after which the work goes into the public domain. Copy protection is an attempt to renege on the deal. If copy protection is legal, but circumvention is not, then copy protected works should enjoy no copyright protection.

Re:DMCA exemption for obsolete games

[Archibald Buttle]

You've misunderstood the original post.

They were arguing that by adding copy protection measures to a program on a CD-ROM they change the nature of that CD-ROM. The CD-ROM itself becomes part of the device that allows access to the software. The CD-ROM drive is not sufficient.

According to this law if it is no longer possible to obtain the access device, i.e. the CD-ROM itself, then according to this law it may be legitimate to bypass the copy protection.

Of course to enable the use of this law the CD-ROM would have to be defective such that the copy protection rendered the disc unusable.

Re:DMCA exemption for obsolete games

[Alsee]

I don't think that's an interpretation that the Library of Congress or any court would accept. "Malfunctioning" DRM is targeted in a different exemption. This exemption is directly targeted at obsolete formats. General floppies or CDs are formats. The software itself is not a format. What you describe has nothing to do with obsolete formats.

Whether a specific peice of software is no longer available is irrelevant. If you don't already have a copy then you are entitled to no circumvention exemption.

Hell, they didn't even allow a general circumvention exemption for blind/visually-impaired people to use text-to-speech converters or braile readers or special font systems. They only allowed that exemption when there was no existing edition that supported such functionality. If someone goes blind they still go to prison if they circumvent the copies they already owned or otherwise aquired. Blind people are legally required to go out and try to locate and RE-BUY those alternate editions. Even if that edition is only offered at a one million dollar price tag.

Since the DMCA was passed the Library of congress has only permitted 4 exemptions, and all 4 were exteremely narrow and essentially worthless. They are excruciatingly careful not to permit anything that could conceivably have any impact on profits. Reading some of the Library of Congress's statements is the issue is rather appaling. For one thing they issues an extensive analysis/explanation that they are NOT in the business of permitting any exemptions for Fair Use.

-

Write them a letter

[eidolons]

Just FYI, here are some addresses in case you wish to speak your mind about copy-protection issues in general. I find that writing letters is a better way to create some sort of stir opposed to firing off an email. EA and Atari are bigwigs, some sort of "political" response has to start somewhere.

Electronic Arts Inc.
209 Redwood Shores Parkway
Redwood City, CA 94065-1175
U.S.A.

don't forget to send one to their "report piracy" address:

Electronic Arts Inc.
915 - 118th Avenue SE, Suite 370
Bellevue, WA 98005

Atari:
Head Office
Atari, Inc.
417 Fifth Ave.
New York, NY 10016
Tel: +1 212-726-6500

Product PR
us.pr@atari.com
Tel: +1 978-921-3700

Re:Write them a letter

[a24061]

Any fax numbers?

Could someone please

[goombah99]

Could someone please post a copy of DVD-X-Copy and Games-X-Copy. I..er.."lost" my original copy and I need a back-up. Yeah that's it. Honest!

Re:Could someone please

[sumdumass]

i'm sure you can find it on kazza or irc. It will prolly be availible well after it gets pulled from the shelve if it does. would be nice if one of the programers included some obscure helper program that used the gpl and just realized it right after they get ordered to stop producing it and then they have to open source it becuase the distributed it

--help comesd to those that help themsleves

Re:Could someone please

[Anonymous Coward]

No,that would be a copyright violation.

BPAC

[argoff]

I know this has been posted here before, but ....

BPAC

Re:BPAC

[randyest]

That's the first time I've seen it, and it's not bad. Unfortunately, the author repeatedly spells have as half. Maybe I'm nitpicking, but I found that very distracting from the (valid) message.

I could find no link to comment or email. If you know the author, please consider asking him or her to s/half/have/g that article and re-post it.

Re:BPAC

[argoff]

OK, did it, thanks.

Re:BPAC

[randyest]

Thank you for the follow-up, and for not taking offense.

I hear grammar nazi's aren't usually very welcome around these parts, but proper presentation is key to getting a point across.

Re:BPAC

[Anonymous Coward]

No,
Thank you, I love any critizisim I can get. It teaches me, and improves it for everybody. Sometimes when I post, or in the heat of a debate when I miss something, a mistake is used to attack me instead of addressing the point - that I don't like. But your comment was not that way at all and much appreciated.

Pissing off their customers.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't want to have to put a CD in the drive to play a game:

(1) CD drives spinning up and down as I'm playing drives me up the wall. They're noisy fuckers. I had a game (Black & White) kill a CD-drive because it accessed the disk constantly for about 3 hours as I was playing. The drive overheated, the plastic holding a cog in place softened - and the mechanism broke. I've never seen a game that would allow me to play 100% from the CD anyway - so what the hell are those game developers doing?

(2) I have a notebook computer. I'm not going to carry a bundle of CDs with me when I'm travelling. Period.

(3) Copy protection methods don't work. People who copy games were never going to buy them in the first place. It only opens the door to organised criminals, a black market - and limits market penetration. If people copy your game they're going to be more likely to buy a sequel.

Anyway, the game I play the most on my notebook is Quake 2 simply because it doesn't require a CD in the drive. Newer games are such a hassle to start:

(1) find game disk
(2) set DVD movie that was in the drive somewhere on the table
(3) put disk in drive
(4) close drive, wait for drive to spin up
(5) double-click game icon
(6) remove wrong disk from drive (disk 2, oops), insert disk 1 instead, click okay
(7) wait for drive to spin up
(8) sit through annoying uncancellable logo / fanfare. snicker that the logo looks better than the game itself
(9) navigate horrible 3D rendered main menu

Ironically, this ritual has made me appreciate online game much more. They have personalised keys, accounts and passwords. No stupid CD in the drive. It's relatively bliss.

Re:Pissing off their customers.

[SlashdotKeefey]

Exactly, the key to copy-protection (if copy protection is a must) is to use logical protection (unique keys that are server verified) rather than physical "protection" which, in the most part, is quite easy to overcome.

Re:Pissing off their customers.

[Buran]

Why should I allow some company to know when I'm using their software and from where? No thanks. I'll keep running my outgoing-connection monitors, and if the software tries to connect to a server without notifying me and allowing cancellation, filing complaints with the developers.

Re:Pissing off their customers.

[SlashdotKeefey]

I suppose it's a case of if you want to use it enough, you'll allow it. I don't personally care if they know when I'm using it - and in the most part these places tend to be controlled by a third party intermediary (such as WON, Bit-Arts, and some others whose name escapes me). I suppose it also depends on the context and the nature of the information gathering.

Re:Pissing off their customers.

[Buran]

The only time I've run into an app that forces any kind of connection at all to use it is Dreamweaver MX 2004. That's only to register it. It did try to connect, but my outgoing monitor (Little Snitch; I use a Mac) allowed me to block it. It works just fine. I've heard of a few apps that require checking every time they load and I refuse to use those (Trillian 2 programmers, are you listening? A chat app needs to connect to the IRC/AIM/etc servers, sure, but not to yours.) There's alternatives (including older Trillians) to all of the apps I've seen that do that, and those are what I use. I suppose I may be a bit choosier than some people, but I still prefer to keep my usage habits to myself, and when there's competition, developers have got to be aware they're losing people with those kinds of practices.

Re:Pissing off their customers.

[Buran]

OK, clarification (sorry). DW requires activation. You have to let it connect for that. It does try to phone home during normal use but that can be blocked.

Re:Pissing off their customers.

[fermion]

You know, that is a big reason I have given up on games. They are just too damn inconvenient. I bought my video games. I copied them to my hard drive. I played them off and on. The money that I paid for the games was not a big deal.

But my time is worth something, and I don't want to waste it. So, when I bought a copy of the Sims and it required the CD to be in the drive to play, that was it. I didn't want to waste my time looking for a CD. I did not want to waste my time putting the CD in the computer when I all I wanted to do was to play a game. There was no reason for it.

So, I decided that buying the game was a lesson. I had wasted my money on the game, as the manufacturer had no respect for me as a customer. But i would never spend another dime on the Sims. In fact, I have pretty much given up on games altogether. The manufacturers, like so much of the entertainment industry, seems to have become obsessed with making sure that no one uses their stuff without paying, and in the process condemns them to a less that luxurious life.

Copy2pc??

[Anonymous Coward]

Wasn't this all settled twenty years ago with copy2pc?

DRM only harms those who actually buy the software

[tmundar]

I have alway felt that all of the copy protection schemes only hurt those suckers (like me) who actually pay for the software. CDs won't last forever, and with no way to backup the games to another media (when CDs go the way of the floppy disk), the money I spend on copy protected software ends up being wasted.

The funny thing is, all of these copy protection schemes never stop the real pirates. You can find a cracked version of any popular piece of software. All that the software companies do when they attack a company that enables users to backup their software is stop a few amateurs from giving the games to their friends. Maybe they even drive a few to try to find another way to get the game for free, and suddenly the user who used to buy software finds out that they can get it all for free.

I have been burned by DRM in the past. I probably have paid about $1000 for games for my Amiga (a long time ago). I occasionally have a bout of nostalgia, and want to play some of my old games (that I paid for) through emulation. Unfortunately, I couldn't find a way to make image files of the copy protected games, and in order to play the games that I paid for, I had to find pirated versions of those games.

Now imagine it is 5 years from now and suddenly Microsoft somehow manages to push through "trusted computing" or some such, and the only way to play your older games is through emulation. Or more likely, one of the CDs for your favorite old game that you break out every once in a while starts having read errors. The game companies just tell you "too bad, sucker" because some people (or maybe even most people) out there might use the software to break a law and give the game to their buddy down the street.

I buy all of my software, or find a free alternative, and I actually have a legitimate use for backup software in order to protect the investment I have made in my software. It really annoys me that the software industry just assumes that all of us users are criminals.

When copyright law goes wrong

[sethstorm]

I'd not be surprised if they'd call tools such as cp, dd and friends piracy tools as well - they interact with data in manners that can be used in piracy if used for such purpose. The only worse I've seen outside of trade organizations (and other antitrust law dodgers) is Novell in the 1990's who'd sue BBS's left and right (and brag about it).

Re:When copyright law goes wrong

[Buran]

Now I'm curious; what did they sue for? I'd like to hear more about that.

I think copy protection is fine, but...

[TimTr]

Contrary to FSF beliefs and other moral pundits, I actually think copy protection should be totally legal, protected, and respected. A company should have the right to say "you have rights to ONE instance of this software and rights to use this ONE instance for every $40 you pay". You want it on two computers, you pay for running it on two computers (or you take the CD and bring it to the other CD.)

Here's the problem and why the game companies and other media companies are full of "stuff". Their argument is that the $40 for the game is due to the effort and IP contained on the CD. Totally true, and since that thought pays my salary, I love it. The problem is, if I scratch my CD or DVD, shouldn't I be able to replace it for the price of the media (like $1)? I still have rights to the value I paid $40 to own, right? The crappy media scratched or whatever, so the company should make it POSSIBLE for me to replace that media so I can continue to get my $40 value.

Companies need this policy: "send us your scratched CD and we'll replace it for shipping costs and $1" or "bring the CD to your game store and they will replace it for you for $1." The software company I work for sells software for up to millions of dollars - the last thing we would do if a customer's CD died is tell them "tough luck". Why do game companies think "tough luck" is an ok answer for a scratched $40 CD? And when someone tries to protect that $40 investment with a backup they want to stop it? Maybe they do think the CD itself is the value?

If they had this replacement policy, then this legal argument that these backup tools serve no purpose but piracy would be legit. As it stands right now, if I am paying $40 for "rights" to the contents of the CD, I should be able to back up those contents. Some people could use those for piracy, but until the industry comes up with a way to know the difference, then backup tools DO serve a legitimate purpose.

When I had to buy a replacement copy of an XBox game a year ago I sure wish I had a LEGAL backup DVD...

~Tim

Re:I think copy protection is fine, but...

[SlashdotKeefey]

It's all well and good a company saying you are entitled to one instance of an installation, but how does physical copy protection ensure this happens? It doesn't - you can take that CD and install it on as many PCs as you so wish, you just need the CD "key" to be able to play it on that machine. Per-seat licensing using this method rarely works. Plus, if I pay x amount of dollars for a piece of software, I want to be able to use that software wherever I am, whether it be on my laptop, or on my home desktop PC.

I have no qualms with companies protecting their intellectual rights, but I do think they go about it in the entirely wrong way. They effectively force people to obtain software they wanted legally through less-than-legal means.

Re:I think copy protection is fine, but...

[Mycroft_VIII]

The only serious problem I have with your premis is the fact that many copy protection schemes are BAD for your computer.
The most common issue is software that boots on startup and always runs, stealling cpu cycles. but at least one system not only doese that, but installs itself as a driver, one that till recently conflicted with the usb drivers used by windows to work with usb-memory key type device. I read at least one report by a colledge student who lost a good part of a semesters work while transfering files to such a device.
Then there are copy protection schemes that like to write to areas of the HD in the boot track so that they can hide data and protect it from a format, nevermind that the owner might be dual booting with an os that needs that area to boot properly.
So no, even if they were willing to replace a damaged or defective disc for free, should they be putting that crap on my computer. especially when they don't even tell you thier doing it. If it runs when the program I installed is not running, or it writes to parts of the HD that are NOT in user space, or tinkers with my o.s. without my explicit and informed consent, it's morally the same as hacking in and trojaning my system.

Mycroft

Re:I think copy protection is fine, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

LMAO,

For a second, I thought you wrote:
"The only serious problem I have with your penis ...."

Re:I think copy protection is fine, but...

[DirkDaring]

"A company should have the right to say "you have rights to ONE instance of this software and rights to use this ONE instance for every $40 you pay". You want it on two computers, you pay for running it on two computers (or you take the CD and bring it to the other CD.)"

Microsoft already does that with Windows.

Where does it stop if this becomes the norm? I just bought City of Heroes. I play at home on my desktop and on the road on my laptop. So I have to buy the game twice. Should I also be paying the $15 monthly fee twice for 1 account?

Re:I think copy protection is fine, but...

[Mycroft_VIII]

good grief, I'd hate to think what the last three words did with that thought in your mind.

Mycroft

Re:I think copy protection is fine, but...

[Featureless]

And then when the company goes out of business, and all their media degrades, their work is lost to history forever.

Yeah, that sounds like a great bargain in exchange for the publisher to eke out another 2% in sales.

Making backups yourself is legal, has always been legal, and needs to stay legal.

Re:I think copy protection is fine, but...

[TimTr]

I agree that copy protection that has other negative impacts in a technical sense are bad - but that is an implementation detail. Much like the work done to localize DVDs, the industry could work out a copy protection mechanism without making it harmful. People would probably go along with it, as long as there was an alternative for backups.

Not saying it is a perfect plan, but today's implementations of copy protection shouldn't rule out the basic idea of protecting their property rights. It just sucks that I have to pay for those rights based on the life span of something worth less than a dollar.

Re:I think copy protection is fine, but...

[TimTr]

You're debating licensing models, not backup policies. Even without copy protection, with some companies what you want to do is against their licensing policies (even if they legally don't mind if you do backups.)

I agree that software should be licensed to people, not machines, but that is separate to the issue of backing up.

I do like backups - don't get me wrong - especially since now there is no choice. My point is that the game industry is trying to take away one option without an alternative.

Re:I think copy protection is fine, but...

[untaken_name]

I have no qualms with companies protecting their intellectual rights, but I do think they go about it in the entirely wrong way. They effectively force people to obtain software they wanted legally through less-than-legal means.

I agree with most of what you said, but that last sentence is dangerous. No one is *forced* into breaking the law because of any of this. It may be more convenient, but there are legal ways to obtain software, and backups. If the company no longer exists, or no one owns those rights, then there will be no one to sue you, but that still doesn't mean that you are *required* to break the law. If you don't have the money to fight in court, or you don't have the pull to get the answer you want legally, then you're SOL.

Re:I think copy protection is fine, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

No other form of product gets this protection though. Kenmore can't tell me that I can only use their vacuum cleaner for ONE room in my house, or that I can't vacuum my neighbour's house with it.

If I have two computers in my house, I should be able to install that software on both without having to buy two copies.

I can see their point when it comes to companies with 10000 machines, but for home use a rule like this should never apply.

And don't get me started on the artificial licensing limitations on software in regards to "per-CPU" licenses... What a fucking money-grab.

Re:I think copy protection is fine, but...

[Mycroft_VIII]

Even if a safe, unobtrosive, copy protection were devised, it would still raise the cost of anything it was added to. And would be useless (as it is now) for it's intended purpose without hardware drm and laws like the dmca. Both of which limit my rights and endanger such things as open source. This is ignoring my rights concerning the software itself.
This stuff is snake oil that only harms the customer buying such damaged goods.

Mycroft

A bit of Apple ][ nostalgia

[Bob Cat - NYMPHS]

Anyone remember Skeleton Keys? Back around 1979 or so, we used it to copy all the Apple ][ floppies we were selling AT AN AUTHORIZED APPLE RETAILER so we could have a backup. Customers could easily wipe the media they went home with, and they expected us to replace it. G #600 (boots a floppy? something? well, you see...)

This was innadaze of badly mimeographed manuals and a couple disks in a ziploc bag. BTW, that was the first ziploc bag usage I recall. Sue Glad, eh?

I still have an s.keyed "Wizard and the Princess" floppy here somewhere. How the HELL do you get past the snake???

Re:A bit of Apple ][ nostalgia

[NanoGator]

"How the HELL do you get past the snake???"

Mushroom! Mushroom!

Re:A bit of Apple ][ nostalgia

[Anonymous Coward]

Badgers, Badgers, Badgers ...

Re:A bit of Apple ][ nostalgia

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone remember Skeleton Keys? Back around 1979 or so, we used it to copy all the Apple ][ floppies we were selling AT AN AUTHORIZED APPLE RETAILER so we could have a backup. Customers could easily wipe the media they went home with, and they expected us to replace it. G #600 (boots a floppy? something? well, you see...)

Actually, no, I don't remember skeleton keys. What I *do* remember were a couple of young guys working at local department store in the newly christened computer section going at it after hours with a set of Happy drives they brought in for the Atari 800 demo machine and then re-shrink wrapping the software. It was funny how a certain circle of friends ALWAYS had the new stuff within two days of release.

I think they got away with it for about a year and a half before somebody either caught on or actually gave a damn.

From where I am standing

[colonslashslash]

Preventing people from making legal backups of their games that they purchased for $50 odd is insane.

That basically boils down to the fact that when you spend your hard earned 50 bucks, all you are getting is a CD / DVD disc (and hopefully a box and a manual), as you have no rights to do anything to the data contained on it.

That's one damn expensive disc.

Don't get me wrong, its their work and they should keep ownership rights, but for the money consumers pay for the product, they should at least have some freedom to copy the data providing it is for personal use. Whatever happend to "fair usage"? I can understand their concern over piracy, but from a business point of view, is screwing over your customers in an attempt to stop a few people getting the product for free really a wise move? Seems like the path most corporations and companies are travelling recently.

Also, by preventing your customers from copying the data, you are implying guilt before innocence, ie: people are more likely to be pirating than making legimate backups, so treat them as criminals by limiting their experience.

Re:From where I am standing

[SamNmaX]

Preventing people from making legal backups of their games that they purchased for $50 odd is insane.

That basically boils down to the fact that when you spend your hard earned 50 bucks, all you are getting is a CD / DVD disc (and hopefully a box and a manual), as you have no rights to do anything to the data contained on it.

That's one damn expensive disc.

Companies should be required to separate the content from the media when selling their product. If they will only replace a broken disc for the price of the original product, then clearly the disc itself is worth the entire price, and the content is worthless and doesn't need protection.

Realistically, if we are going to have laws like the DMCA, we really need laws that also protect fair use. The copy protection should either allow for backups, or the company should be required to replace the media. If neither is satisfied, either the company should lose the protection the DMCA gives them.

This is why all good software dies...

[Thaidog]

Tightass companies... ok so knowbody uses this software for what it's supposed to be used for... *but* it is good software and does have a legitimate usage and there *is* demand for the product that is also legitimate.

So even though the demand is greater for the illegal usage of this product, does that really mean it should be killed?

The lawsuit after all would not have happened if the companies were not worried about the illegal usage of the product.

Re:This is why all good software dies...

[Buran]

I seem to recall someone suing the manufacturer of an FTP client because the FTP client could be used to download illegal files. Or was it a newsreader? I don't remember. In any case, they had literally years to sue -- FTP and NNTP are very old, both -- and never raised a fuss then. All of a sudden they started bitching.

Software that can make bit-for-bit copies has been around for a long time. The way I see it, these people need to be laughed at and told they should have complained a long time ago, and thus no longer have any justification. It's kind of like waiting ten years to whine someone stepped on your toes.

Re:This is why all good software dies...

[Thaidog]

The problem I see that differs from FTP and this technology is that by itself, FTP has no illegal components. This software, however has the ability to break encryption... which is illegal. It's the difference between an M-16 and a toaster oven. Sure you can pick your toaster up and beat somebody to death with it... but an M-16's sole purpose is to kill somebody.

If the software did nothing but a bit for bit copy and did not break any encryption there would be no grounds for a lawsuit.

But once again it comes back in to the hands of the company and the user and what the software was intended for. Kind of like a shotgun vs an M-16 this time... sure you can kill a *person* with a shotgun, but that's not the sole reason for a shotgun (123 software).... but the M-16 it is. (An M-16 being a straight up hack tool)

Re:This is why all good software dies...

[Buran]

In the Betamax case, it was ruled that VCRs, which can be used to copy stuff, were not illegal because they could also be used for legit stuff. I would think the same would be true here.

I haven't (that's just me) ever heard of a game that was actually encrypted, though... just weird routines that look for certain deliberate flaws in the disk and such. That's not encryption -- you can read the data on the CDs if you have the right readers, not just play the game. If the data were encrypted, all you could do was play the game.

Re:This is why all good software dies...

[Arker]

The lawsuit after all would not have happened if the companies were not worried about the illegal usage of the product.

You know, I don't agree. That makes a nice cover story, but I really think they want to destroy fair use entirely and reduce the population to intellectual serfdom. Seriously.

The 'piracy' argument holds no water, and I can't believe companies these big could stay in business without someone in the top levels being smart enough to figure that out. If they really wanted to stop copyright infringement they'd be going after the real infringers - the commercial operations that make a profit selling illegal copies by the truck and boat load. Not going after products like this, which are useless to the bootleggers but helpful to Joe Schmoe that just wants to backup his game.

Re:This is why all good software dies...

[vegetablespork]

There was a joke done by the authors of PAN about an RIAA lawsuit against them based on their newsreader being used to download copyrighted songs.

Wonder how long before it becomes reality?

Without backups

[dtfinch]

You're basically just renting the game until the CD is damaged beyond usability. At an inflated price nonetheless, to pay for all their extra work, lawsuits, lobbying, and lost sales due to copy protection.

I can still listen to my music, despite some of the original CD's having turned into coasters, frisbees, or messes of shattered plastic. Had my purchases died with the CD's, I'd be out of luck.

I expect the same courtesy with my games. And it's not just the backup issue. "Copy protection" doesn't always work like it should, causing other problems. But since copy protection is now so widespread, my gaming budget has gone to the open source crowd. Commercial game developers don't want my money anymore, so now I just give it away freely to those who've earned it. $70 in the past year to support open source games, of which none of them demanded anything, only $20 to buy two commercial games from the bargain rack, and no piracy ever.

I hope they ignore first-amendment arguments

[Todd Knarr]

I truly hope they skip the 1st-Amendment arguments entirely. There was an early case in computers involving a user making backup copies of software, and the software maker tried to sue him for violating copyright. IIRC the judge in that case not only ruled that making backup copies of computer software was fair use under copyright law (and the DMCA specifically says that nothing in it may be construed as limiting fair-use rights) but that any license provision purporting to take away or limit those rights wasn't legal. That right there would take the legs right out from under the game company's case, and would leave 'em with the hard argument to make that the courts should ignore existing precedent.

fuck the lawyers, just use alcohol 120%

[Indy1]

i use alcohol 120% from http://www.alcohol-software.com and it kicks some serious ass. Bypasses every game protection i ran into, and i can emulate cd's so i dont need the fucking cd to play the games i've LEGALLY have purchased. EA, eat me lusers, i've paid for my copy of 1942, and i'll use it any goddamn way i PLEASE.

Re:fuck the lawyers, just use alcohol 120%

[lendude]

Amen to that! I use DiskJuggler to rip an image of my legally purchased game cds, and mount them as virtuals using Daemon Tools. Quite apart from the issue of damage to original cds, the bullshit cd checks on level loads for some games means load times are preposterous off the inserted original cd: if game developers cared two hoots about user experience then surely if I've got a valid cd licence code the friggin' game doesn't have to verify this every map load?

They got my dollars - are they seeking to guarantee further payments upon the inevitable damage to the original cd?

Re:fuck the lawyers, just use alcohol 120%

[Anonymous Coward]

And you can get the crack at...

Re:fuck the lawyers, just use alcohol 120%

[Anonymous Coward]

i assure you that game developers hate copy protection as much as you do, if not more. Most of the time copy protection is forced upon the game by the higher-ups

Vote with your wallet

[Anonymous Coward]

and buy a copy, if you want to help. I really do think that these companies should set up some kind of "shark feed donation fund" to pay for lawyer fees... if everyone did that, you would have a nice mutual support group and the worthy causes would automatically emerge. That's how unions were supposed to work back then when they meant something -- we definitely need a consumers' union.

(no I don't work for them, but objectively, the software is good -- a little pricey perhaps.)

Re:Vote with your wallet

[MrTangent]

There already is a consumer's advocacy group, especially in relation to electronics.

They're called The Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Fair use implements the First Amendment

[tepples]

The opinion of the Supreme Court in Eldred v. Ashcroft upheld the Bono Act, but it also upheld that the fair use exemption implements the First Amendment, and without a fair use exemption, the constitutionality of copyright law as we know it would be even more in question:

The CTEA's extension of existing and future copyrights does not violate the First Amendment. [...] copyright law contains built-in First Amendment accommodations. [...] the "fair use" defense codified at s107 allows the public to use not only facts and ideas contained in a copyrighted work, but also expression itself for limited purposes.

Some analysts have pointed out that this holding in Eldred could be used to argue against the constitutionality of the DMCA, which bans possession of circumvention devices even for purposes of fair use.

Re:Fair use implements the First Amendment

[Mitchell Mebane]

That's quite odd you posted that... just this morning I was wondering if there was any chance one could sue Macrovision et. al., and potentially argue the constitutionality of the DMCA. It looks like there just might be.

Re:On the subject...

[Anonymous Coward]

If all you care about in your life is have a bigger car than your neighbour, that's exactly what you'll get.

In the meantime, your wife will be open-sourcing her vagina because your penis doesn't meet her system requirements.

WINE?

[Anonymous Coward]

A lot of copy protection algorithms use drivers that are highly specific to Windows. Therefore the only way to play legitimately bought games with WINE (not Transgaming's WineX - they've licensed varying forms of copy-protection) is to crack them.

(Not only this, there is no guarantee whatsoever that these protection algorithms will still work on Windows Longhorn or 2010 and some of these games that can only be considered a form of art may be lost under the bulk of these drooling lawyers! - but I digress.)

I for one would be extremely annoyed if the copanies denied me pretty much the only way I can play their games - stopping me from using them on anything BUT Windows and refusing to release them FOR anything but Windows is a rather underhanded and short-sighted tactic at best.

Yes and apparantly yes

[SmallFurryCreature]

It is one of those thing that I hate most in games. Endless logo movies that can't be disabled. Consoles are extremely evil in this regard. At least pc solo games allow you to alter them easily.

Why do they care? God knows, some power trip from having their inane company motto shown every time? Lengthing the "gameplay"?

Anyway can UO detect it? In theory yes. It scan the files that are on your pc and sends back a report, this would be expected as it would help catch out cheaters with customized data/code.

The game industry is a funny field. On the one hand it is slowly turning into a gigantic industry worth billions of dollars. On the other hand it still seems to be run by idiots, reviewed by idiots and bought by idiots. I myself am in the last group. Despite everything that is wrong with Star Wars Galaxies I still pay for it.

We are like the pretty boy send to prison who goes in to the shower and drops the soap. Don't complain about being raped when you are bend over with your ass in the air.

Re:Yes and apparantly yes

[vastabo]

Two files MISSING shouldn't indicate cheating. Invalid checksums on certain executables would...but I digress.
As to your second point (about being raped in the ass), I voted with my dollars long ago; when OSI put in these movies during the Age of Shadows debacle, I quit. No eBay, no giving my stuff to other players, just me holding on to my $12 every month forevermore.

I still play on free, player-run shards though Like this one.

Re:Yes and apparantly yes

[JaredOfEuropa]

Why do they care? God knows, some power trip from having their inane company motto shown every time?

One of the UO guys explained this on Stratics: they got this requirement (preventing people from bypassing the intro movies) handed down to them by the EA legal departments, for "legal reasons having to do with copyright".

Re:Yes and apparantly yes

[Trillan]

Ditto. Only I was spending $36. :)

Re:Yes and apparantly yes

[Alsee]

Ah. Ok then. As long as they had a good reason.

LMAO.

-

Ironically, the Eisner Company agrees with you

[tepples]

The problem is, if I scratch my CD or DVD, shouldn't I be able to replace it for the price of the media (like $1)?

Buena Vista Home Video has actually implemented this. But that still doesn't end the boycott.

Re:Pissing off their customers -yup

[Hellasboy]

I keep on hearing complaints from everywhere as to why people are still playing counter-strike.

you want to know why i still play it? i don't have to have that damn CD in my hard drive. The last game I bought was battlefield 1942 and it's sitting here collecting dust. I was sick and tired of it spending all of its time seeking and searching for the CD. It already takes up some 1.4 gigs of space on my HD so it obviously doesn't need to retrieve any gameplay information.

Battlefield 1942 will be the last game I buy from EA. If you want to treat me like a criminal for paying 50$ for a game, then fine ... go ahead. You won't see a further dime from me.

Go ahead game companies. Use macrovisions latest "security" feature that end up pissing off all your paying customers (thousands and millions) so that you can delay crackers for an extra 5 minutes.

If you're going to force me to go through the troubles of using no-cd cracks, etc, why should i even bother paying for your product when i could go ahead and download a fixed (pirated) version of your broken software? It seems like I would have less problems by going the pirated route.

Games X Copy sucks!

[sn0wcrash]

Real men use Copy2PC!

Conspiracy Theory

[icecow]

Conspiracy Theory

I'm starting to wonder if 321 Studios is in on an orchestration to usher in new copywrite laws in a controlled manor.

I mean, 321 Studios makes $$ selling their public domain cr#p so the effort would be self-funding to boot

Now adays anything short of a conspiracy is a bad business model.

cow

Re:Conspiracy Theory

[Gonarat]

I was actually wondering the same thing at times. Such a scheme would actually not be a half bad idea to get copyright and DMCA issues out to the typical Wal-Mart shopper (I say Wal-Mart because that is where I saw the original 3-2-1 DVD ripper package sold when the court ruling came out).

The Slashdot crowd only has so much pull, but if you get get Joe Wal-Mart pissed off, there will be a lot more noise made, and hopefully action taken.

Now they are looking to get the Gamers to join the party. I don't know if this is what 3-2-1 is intending to do or not, but if it is, it actually isn't a bad plan.

Re:Enacted by.....

[EvanED]

"Enacted by that great Democrat, Bill "blowjob" Clinton..." ...but first by the Republican-controlled congress.

Re:On the subject...

[Anonymous Coward]

Be happy. If making money and living out your Alpha desires with money is all it takes for you to be happy, so be it. If writing free software and being praised for his efforts is all it takes to make the "kid" (do I notice hints of child labour there?) happy, so be it. After all, you're just posting this to build up your ego, to make yourself believe you're better than others. Be happy, you jut delivered the proof that the human is nothing but a sophisticated animal.

Oh, and make sure to tell the women about your deeds, after all, what's being Alpha good for if not getting the best girl to fuck?

But we were unaware they were being taken...

[MacFury]

Most game boxes don't state that they have copy protection schemes.

You can't return software once it's been opened.

It's hard to vote with your dollar once they already have your money.

Re:On the subject...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, my sex life is great!

Yeah, can get a whole lot of prostitutes for the money saved on one employee.

Yes, as a matter of fact...

[leonbrooks]

...I do like your sig. Sums up D'ohl MacBride's strategy nicely.

Money Whores

[SolidiusRock]

I see this a lot from these "software companies." They create schemes that don't protect them, but make them more money. It's ludicrous that they can sue companies for providing a service so that a legit user can make an archive of his legally obtained, license and all, copy. Being a software engineer, I do understand the importance of protecting ones work and getting paid your just reward, but it's coming to the point where the reward isn't enough. They want more. I say we boycott the bastards unless they give us a means to get replacement discs for free and/or cheaper than initial license ($2.95 max). This is reasonable.

What the fuck!

[JNighthawk]

Where the FUCK did our liberties and freedoms go? This shit sickens me, I would rather live in Soviet Russia than the modern USA. At least then I wouldn't have freedoms taken away one by one, I just wouldn't have any. It's sad when people see we're being fucked over and no one does anything.

Re:What the fuck!

[SolidiusRock]

I concur.

Re:What the fuck!

[Anonymous Coward]

You are justly being punished for buying commercial games. No troll, just the truth.
If you experience with crap culture (gaming, pop music, etc) is made to suck enough you might consider doing something better then giving money to people who despise you. :)

Suddenly I understand...

[leonbrooks]

...how Microsoft can lay claim to "effective" security.

WarCraft 3 (offtopic, sorry)

[mrchaotica]

I, too have a laptop, and I want to be able to play WarCraft 3 without the CD. However, I haven't been able to find a crack for it - I suppose it doesn't help that I have a Mac. Anyway, do you know of one? Or even a way to get a working .iso file (which I could mount directly instead of burning as an actual disk)

Re:WarCraft 3 (offtopic, sorry)

[Anonymous Coward]

err, you can just .dmg the disc using Disk Utility or whatever, then mount it. it works fine.

Re:WarCraft 3 (offtopic, sorry)

[Anonymous Coward]

Disk Image or Toast can easily create and save a dmg from the CD. This is not supported by Blizzard, but it's an available avenue that is very useful for laptop gamers. It works for Starcraft and Diablo II as well.

Some other companies perform hardware checks to make certain that the volume is physically in the CD drive. I'll stick to purchasing from companies that don't treat me like a criminal and let me use my legally purchased software in a way that won't pose a risk to my hardware.

What?

[Trillan]

Delete the movie files. They won't ban you for that.

They might ban you if you modify the client, but why bother when you can just delete the file?

Either party?

[Mark_MF-WN]

Let's face it -- America has a one-party system: the Republimocrats. They're also known as the Democrublicans in some parts, but it's all the same shit.

Re:Either party?

[Anonymous Coward]

Then get out and vote them out! Stop listening to the same old bullshit that you can't make a difference, and vote for people who are not members of the two majority parties.

Re:Either party?

[Anonymous Coward]

and as long as you have that defeatist attitude this will never change

Re:Either party?

[Lynxara]

*nods*

Tastycrats and Fingerlicans.

Re:Either party?

[CmdrGravy]

We have a branch of them in the UK as well; the Consebour party and their opposition the Labosertives. Both parties are in fact one and the same except they each favour different coloured ties and it is on this battle ground the next election will be fought.

Ooh.

[Trillan]

Free publicity. I'd never heard of this software before...

Bit for bit.

[WhatAmIDoingHere]

As long as you copy the entire CD bit for bit, you're not cracking or bypassing anything. Just use A120%, and what's the problem?

Re:On the subject...

[sumdumass]

well you part right. in 10 years you will be driving around in some sort of car while you will work even harder to pay this kids welfare and unemployment. I know people that refuse to work because the gov will take tax money from asses like you and give it to people like them. meanwhile if they need somethign extra, they will do something under the table and keep getting the free checks.

So work harder and more often because every "kid" you decide to be a dick to will cause you to get taxed more.. /How does it feel to work real hard at your comercial software so you can pay the welfare check of the free software developers.. Not that all oss developers are on welfare, but your logic states exactly that..

Look Mickey Mouse

[jotaeleemeese]

One could do backups oneself for 0.25 if the companies were not intent in robing us of any rights we may have to make those backup copies.

It is OK to make a profit when you offer a vaulable service, it is not OK when you are lobbying (no, I will not go as far as to use words like bribbing whne refering to the honourable activity of political lobbying...) with all your might to erode people's rights so their only legal choice becomes using your overpriced "service".

Sometimes the lack of criticism and logical reasoning of some people is perplexing.

They are NOT the good guys!

[Anonymous Coward]

When they first started down the whole DVD backup line. Their product used FREE software without consent of the authors.

They were essentially selling tutorials on how to use a number of programs for dvd back-up, found free on the net.

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/3408.cfm

"321 Studios is still, at least to my knowledge, selling software and information found and distributed free of charge on the Internet."

Thats the only news item i could find on the subject with just a quick google. But the subject was also discussed on doom9 forums, where many of the authors whos software was stolen weren't pleased.

I have no symathy for 321, imo they are just as bad as whoever is suing them.

-twokay

hey, that's pretty cool

[Trepidity]

So devices to copy ROMs from NES games are officially legal.

Re:hey, that's pretty cool

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah, there's a different law that covers ROMs.

Third Party!

[Anonymous Coward]

Join the LP!
http://lp.org

WHO IS JOHN GALT?
$

Re:Third Party!

[Anonymous Coward]

in Regards to your Sig, "WHO IS JOHN GALT?", No word of a lie, he is a homosexual who runs an automobile museum (if you can call it that) in Lasalle, Ontario.

321Studios?

[TwistedSpring]

Who the hell are these guys? I'm glad the game publishing industry is so clued up on these things that nobody uses. If they were really serious they'd go after Alcohol Software or Elaborate Bytes, both of whom offer CD/DVD copying software with options to "break" copy protection. Of course they don't "break" the copy protection at all, they simply copy the copy protection.

As Macrovision (creators of SafeDisc) have said in the past, their products are not so much copy protection as copy dissuasion: making it more of a pain in the ass to copy stuff. And it sure is. Copying a SafeDisced game takes hours in raw mode, as exactly duplicating the ECC/EDC data on the disc is a painfully slow process (probably because ECC/EDC checking has to be done in software for every block when it's disabled on the drive).

Anyway, all the above is besides the point. 321Studios have made a critical error which I see as remarkably foolish: Marketing their product as "HAY GUYS, SOFTWAREZ TO KOPY UR GAMEZ!" Who in their right mind would do this and not expect their ass to be kicked severely by some legal body? You don't get any more obvious than calling it "GameXCopy" which is a name that doesn't even make sense anyway. What the hell is the X about? Other software remains legal because it sells itself on the fact you can create exact clones of any CD for back up purposes: not just games.

It's not this kind of software they should be going after anyway. People don't copy games onto another CD anymore. People create images of a game and distribute it over the internet. It's considerably easier to create an image file, and from what I can tell GameXCopy doesn't let you do this. Furthermore, software such as Daemon Tools, Alcohol 120% and Virtual CloneDVD will let you mount ripped protected images in Windows as if they were a CD-ROM drive. Just download and mount. No burning. Surely this should be what they're worried about?

Re:321Studios?

[HBI]

The "X" part probably refers to the old DOS utility Xcopy.

Re:321Studios?

[TwistedSpring]

That crossed my mind as well, but that doesn't make sense. xcopy copied recursively. So?

Re:321Studios?

[HBI]

Well, it was the way we used to copy floppies to the hard drive back when. It had the advantage of buffering everything in RAM rather than reaching back to the floppy for every file. Much faster, in other words.

Re:321Studios?

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyway, all the above is besides the point. 321Studios have made a critical error which I see as remarkably foolish: Marketing their product as "HAY GUYS, SOFTWAREZ TO KOPY UR GAMEZ!" Who in their right mind would do this and not expect their ass to be kicked severely by some legal body? You don't get any more obvious than calling it "GameXCopy" which is a name that doesn't even make sense anyway

Yes, and calling your product "Alcohol 120%" makes much, much more sense.

I think the big problem is that 321 is an American company, while Alcohol is European and (for now) harder to get to. After all, don't you have to order their stuff off their site and then download it? (If you wish to use the 'full' version that is).

Re:Pissing off their customers -yup

[the grace of R'hllor]

Call of Duty is an excellent online shooter, that does not require the CD in the drive either.

I have no clue anymore who its from, as I haven't seen the box for a few months, and I don't have any splashscreens or whatnot. It does take 1.2GB on the harddrive, but it's worth it for me.

Re:Just in case you can't buy a copy in your count

[Anonymous Coward]

DVDshrink is much better to use and better written and 100% free and open.

I suggest NOT buying or even using dvdXcopy. it's low grade crap.

re-surfacing kits?

[nten]

5 dollars for a pro job? You just need some toothpaste! A few years back my daggerfall cd got scratched and I fell into deep despair. But the dental association came to the rescue in the form of the diatoms that are in most toothpaste. I just smeared the toothpaste on the disc then rubbed it around until the entire surface had kind of a matte finish and I couldn't see the original scratch. I was quite certain it wouldn't work, but it did. However, I haven't been able to get it to work with win2k using NTFS. I have heard other people getting it to work with NTFS, so I think maybe my new CD drive isn't as forgiving as the one that used to read it.

Re:re-surfacing kits?

[Anonymous Coward]

BE CAREFUL with the toothpaste one.

It does work, but only for a limited amount of time; then the toothpaste dries and flakes out.

If you're using it as something to rescue the disc to rip it and make a clean copy, then that's fine. Don't expect to be able to use the original for too long afterwards though; regard that as a bonus.

is it so hard to do the right thing?

[PhiberOptix]

I play war3 a lot. I bought both war3 and frozen throne (war3 expansion).
When you install war3, it copies about 500mb of data to the hd. Yet, when you want to play, you have to insert the games disk just so you can play online. And guess what the game does? it reads data from the disc. brilliant.
why not copy the whole game to the friggin hd? its not that hard.
so now i use a virtual cd drive with the image in it. I dont use the mentioned software, but the one i use does exactly the same thing, and i see nothing wrong with it.

Not Again

[thebdj]

Why do all the companies think that everyone using DVDXCopy and GameXCopy are performing an illegal act. Did there not used to be something in the copyright laws allowing end users to make Personal Backups? I mean a CD and/or DVD will not last forever, of course if they did new media would never sell write?

Copy Protection is not worth it.

[jellomizer]

A company sees that they are "Leaving money on the table" because there are a percentage (I am going to pull a made up number here) lets say 25% of the people will pirate the game to 2-3 friends on the average. So they put copy protection on their products and magically they seem to be getting less revenue from the product so they go after all the people who find a way to break their DRM.

There is a much smaller amount of people who use DRM software because they are normally lazy. So their profits should be going up from all the sales that they are not loosing. But they are not. It is a simple reason why. Piracy on a small scale is good for business! what piracy is, is a form of advertisement for their product and for the company. Lets use some old true story to show my point. Back when I was a kid on my Amstrad 8086 (thats right a 8086 (Or a 086 or the Pentium -5) not an 8088) I liked to play games but mostly action games but my friend gave me a copy of Sierra's Kings Quest 4, (and for the amstrad buffs) the 80's Kings Quest 4 came with a video for the Amstrad 16 Color Display! The only game that had it to my knowledge. So I was in awe of the graphics it displays if you squinted it looked almost real), All my other games were in 4 Colors (Red Green Yellow, 1 of 16 background colors usually back) or (Cyan, Magenta, white, and one of 16 background colors usually black) that was in 300x200 resolution. so a 16 color game was like heaven. After that I was hooked to the Sierra Game company and Ill save up my money and buy myself a new game when it comes out (and copy the video driver over) Like Quest for Glory 1 (hero's quest back then), Code Name Iceman, Space Quest 6, Quest for Glory 3, then share it back with my friends and they did the same Space Quest 3, Quest for Glory 2, Kings Quest 1 remake. So except for the company making 1 sale from 2 people of the product they actually made 4 or 5 sales out of 2 people because each version was a little better and encouraged them to get the next game.
Controlled piracy is great for business and the companies should not try to hard to contain it, just get the big guys who actually sell the pirated software, or people who mass spread it. But for the friend to friend sharing it actually is helpful.

Re:Copy Protection is not worth it.

[Mitleid]

I think this is a really good point. Take DOOM, for example. Now, that game boasts sales numbering in the millions, which I guess was pretty insane for its time, but for all those millions of people buying DOOM with cash money, my friends nor myself had ever paid a dime. Yet DOOM still remains one of the most popular games ever release for the PC, not to mention several other interesting ports...

Anyway, my point is that even though DOOM raked in enough cash to buy Carmack a shiny new Ferrari, it's "ownership" wasn't based completely on legitimate paying customers. However, the game was HUGE, and it still has a pretty strong loyalist following. Source ports, internet deathmatch clients, you name it. Bottom line is, a greater majority of the 14 year old pirates of today become the 23 year olds of tomorrow with a great deal of disposable income that goes to buying videogames.

The publishers really need to stop having kittens about the fact that people can copy their games. The widespread bootleggers and pirate organizations are the ones they need to go after, not the consumer-base. Strategies like suing a CD-copying software company just displays that the publishers have no faith in the value and merit of their product, and I feel it is essentially an admittance that they are trying to shill the customer with half-assed releases. Why else would anyone get so concerned about a few individuals having the ability to copy a game disc? People spend money on the things they want, and chances are if something is getting stolen or copied it's because that person wasn't interested in buying it anyway. I'm not suggesting that it's justified to take something you weren't going to pay for, but people take things because they can, not because they "don't want to pay for it". Closing off channels people use to take things is only a means of preventing the publisher from being the victim, not a method of increasing sales like the suing companies apparently claim.

UT2004 NoCD

[Fortyseven]

The latest patch for UT2004 removes the requirement of the 'Play Disc' being in the drive. I will love Epic for a long long long time for doing that so soon after the game was released. :)

(And I'm quite pleased that I actually bought the game for once -- when it came out, no less, not the bargain bin. These guys deserve every cent.)

Re:UT2004 NoCD

[Anonymous Coward]

they did the same thing for the original UT. in fact, the copy protection was the exact reason i did *NOT* buy ut2k3. the second i heard that the patch for 2k4 removes the CD check, i went out and dropped $40 on it.
i don't like being treated like a criminal when i go out and pay ~$50 for a videogame. the cd-checking/copy protection only hurts the people who actually bought the game, the people who take the game without paying for it (oops, i meant "copyright infringers") wont even get slowed down by it.

Re:Pissing off their customers -yup

[Aliencow]

Put a CD in your hard drive? So you're one of these guys who turns his monitor off when you ask him to turn off his computer uh? ;)

Re:Enacted by.....

[HBI]

You know, wouldn't it be great - your battleaxe wife is upstairs, some chubby 20 year old girl with her lips wrapped around your schlong in the room adjoining the Oval Office.

Now if he could just have controlled where he shot that stuff...

Predatory contracts

[CarrionBird]

Even if you concede that EULAs are somehow legitmate contracts, that doesn't mean that just any crazy old provision should be able to go in there.

In other areas of contract law (insurance, loans) there are restrictions on what can be in the contract.

It seems to me that we need to either invalidate EULAs outright, or regulate them like we do insurance contracts. No onerous porvisions enforced.

Re:Predatory contracts

[untaken_name]

Even if you concede that EULAs are somehow legitmate contracts, that doesn't mean that just any crazy old provision should be able to go in there.

In other areas of contract law (insurance, loans) there are restrictions on what can be in the contract.
It seems to me that we need to either invalidate EULAs outright, or regulate them like we do insurance contracts. No onerous porvisions enforced.

I think of EULAs the same way I do of 'You break it, you bought it' signs in stores. I glance at them, and ignore them, and then forget them. They're there for the gullible. There's no law which states that you are obligated to pay for something you accidentally break in a store. (obviously if you're rampaging around throwing stuff on the ground, they're just gonna call the cops) but if you bump a vase off a shelf, for example, you aren't legally obligated to pay for it. Any reasonable limitations in every EULA I've ever seen were things a responsible person wouldn't do anyhow (selling the program as your own, mass copy/distribution of the product) and people who do those things aren't concerned with EULAs anyhow. EULAs are used to convince people that they're legally obligated when in fact they're not. Just like those signs that say 'not responsible for valuables/safety/damage/etc.' They may have a sign, but that doesn't stop a good case. For example (warning, anecdotal evidence) we had a sign in the parking lot of a movie theater where I used to work that said 'not responsible for valuables left in car.' When we had 5 cars broken into in one day (the only time in over 3 years that *any* cars were broken into) 3 of the 5 people got us to pay for their windows and valuables. Sign notwithstanding, the judge found that we *did* have basic responsibility. The point is, signs like those and EULAs are basically deterrents at present. Perhaps someday companies will get EULAs made completely binding, but right now it's like putting a sign on your product that says 'by using this product you agree to hold the manufacturer completely blameless regardless of cirumstances for any damages whatsoever.' Might frighten some people, but it's hardly a legally binding contract.

Re:Predatory contracts

[CarrionBird]

All very true.

The thing that bugs me is, what if the lawmakers are convinced of these statements and make stupid laws? Like the DMCA. They created a law to protect rights that didn't exist in the first place.

Thing is, we don't even need EULAs. The software industry worked just fine before they became common use. Piracy is illegial regardless.

And either way I don't consider some text that comes up after the transcation of buying the software has occured to be a real contract.

You've already paid the money, for a license inside a box that you can't read until after you bought it? I don't think so.

Bah, anyway we're preaching to the choir here, so I'll end this rant.

Open Source?

[KrisHolland]

321 Studios should release the code via the GPL so everyone can have their own copy, and modify it.

There is no DMCA in some countries so they could host the source there. Anyone work for 321 studios? Ask them to release the code.

Re:Open Source?

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny, they are already using gpled and freeware software for their DVD copying software(see third to last post and continue on from there). Wouldn't be surprised if this one contains gpled and freeware programs as well.

Re:Open Source?

[Anonymous Coward]

321 is down to one tester, a graphics guy and phone support. Nobody there to release the code. It's dead Jim.

Funny, those movies haven't been on my hd

[AzrealAO]

in seven years, and I haven't been banned yet.

You're just making shit up. There's even a setting in the UO.CFG file (ShowIntroAnim=On/Off) to bypass the movies.

Guns don't kill people....

[Mephie]

Software doesn't pirate games... People do.

Re:Guns don't kill people....

[Man in Spandex]

I was waiting for somebody to reply with something similar like this.

This is nothing but the pure truth. It all depends of the person's needs. I remember when I lost my cdkey for red alert 2. I emailed westwood and they simply asked for a picture taken of your game your box and your receipt to at least prove that you own it. By doing so, they shipped me a new, closed box, copy of Red Alert 2. I found that it would of been nice if other companies also cared about their customers.

Companies such as EAGames are too traumatized to even care at that group of customers who actually make LEGAL backups. The media which is in your hands does not have a lifespan, so I assume it should last a lifetime. Well why must companies be against the fact that some of us just want to protect our media which we payed for? So we can buy other copies to fill their deep pockets?

Sure the software can break copy protections but technically, anything in life can break any kind of law. For example, I can take my hammer which is used to bash nails and use it as a doorknob fucking device and technically that would be wrong. It's all in the person's mind. EAGames, when they see a software such as XCopy, they think immediatly that everybody using it will make illegal backups so they have to make sure we, the users, have no way to make backups which *can* be redistributed illegally.

Good thing there's no law against the use of AOL Cd's as coasters

Why is it DVD copy is on the shelves here...

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, wait.. I'm in Canada.

Crap

[Colt_7571]

This is really a bunch of crap. The software does not strip away the copy protection it just makes an exact duplicate. If I pay for the damn software I should be able to make a backup. Go after the people who are actually stealing the software and not the software makers.

He's lying, and modded up Informative...

[AzrealAO]

There's a setting in the UO.CFG file ShowIntroAnim=on/off which controls whether the intro movies are played or not. It also happens to be the FIRST setting in the ingame options, under Misc. "Show the intro movie on launch". It controls both the spinning EA Logo, and the Intro Story Movie to Ultima Online. You cannot be banned for changing this setting.

Re:He's lying, and modded up Informative...

[DAldredge]

Notice how it says unsuported? IOW you may not be able to get support if you do this and are violating the UO TOS, which can get you banned.

http://uo.stratics.com/news/GeneralNews.shtml#ne ws item1087262178,40775,

Posted on Wednesday, June 9, 2004, 5:27 PM EDT by Lady Malynn (GeneralNews)
Here's a tip on how to remove the introduction movie. This tip was identified previously by our very smart discussion forum participants!

delete or rename the .bik files in the music subdirectory

Binky (Community Manager, All Things Ultima) had this advise about modifying the .bik files to remove the movie.

The ability to not be able to bypass the Origin and EA logo screens was a mandate passed down by the EA legal department. This is something that needs to be in place when we ship the products in order to comply with copyright and trademark laws. We cannot support, endorse, or condone methods to bypass these screens and any modification of the game files could result in the inability for our technical support department to assist in situations where the end user may experience errors.

So essentially, any posts telling people how to bypass the logo movies would fall under the "Unsupported System Configuration" area and not be viewed as an exploit.

Just note, if less than honest players decide to abuse this feature I will turn this into an exploit in no time flat. =)

Hope that helps.

Digital Rights ?

[spudgun]

yay now we are all safe

we have the right to make a copy but for our safety , so that we will not inadvertantly make a 2nd coy, we no longer have the tools.......

the pendiulum will come the other way eventually
and the further the IP coorperations pull it away from center , the bigger the swing the other way/force it hits their asses with on the way back!

game cracks

[Anonymous Coward]

The first thing I do after installing a game I buy is download a no-cd crack and the cd goes safely on the shelf. I HATE having to put in the cd just to play a damn game. I dont have a single game on my system that I didnt purchase, but evey one of them is cracked.

I know most of this has been dead above..

[cbreaker]

But I really feel the need to comment here as well. It's my law-given right to make a backup of my games.

I take all my games, and put them into CD-Images. If they are copy protected, I use something like this or CloneCD. I never have to worry about losing my media. It's always right there on a hard disk. I simply mount the disc when I need it.

Many games now a days don't require the disc in the drive (or virtual drive) since you can play online, and they verify with your CD-Key. Making a copy of my CD won't allow someone else to use my CD-Key.

Now, if they SOMEHOW manage to get all the copy protected copiers off the streets (which they will never do anyways) I'll STILL be able to play all my games without the CD's because people will continue to write game cracks.

Going after this company for selling a lawful application is not just wrong, it should be illegal. They do not claim it to allow pirating, and it DOES NOT BREAK copy protection, it copies that too! You can't copy the copy.

Dont Sell it!

[Braingoo]

Moral of the story is. If you make realy cool software to back up media give it away for free and don't sell it or you will get busted!

Re:Dont Sell it!

[Luminous]

I got my copy of this back up software off of Kazaa.

Re:Pissing off their customers -yup

[umrgregg]

This tactic would work if there weren't a sucker born every minute to replace the bitter 13-20 somethings who used to buy their games. And at the rate EA qand Atari is growing, I'd say it'll be a long time before they piss off enough people for your tactic or eventual bitterness to work.

Alcohol 120%

[Prince Vegeta SSJ4]

is another great copying product

LINK

Re:Alcohol 120%

[Anonymous Coward]

Bahh... that sucks compared with good old Slysoft CloneCD and the twinpeaks method...

just use daemon tools for your CD emulation needs, and you can avoid the buggy alcohol drivers. (What?? Securom without emulation?? Only with CloneCD/TwinPeaks!)

Turtle wax

[Otto]

For minor scratches, Turtle wax has always worked for me to get it working again. Of course, the first thing I do is back the sucker up after that. :)

Re:Pissing off their customers -yup

[Maestro4k]

• Go ahead game companies. Use macrovisions latest "security" feature that end up pissing off all your paying customers (thousands and millions) so that you can delay crackers for an extra 5 minutes.

The latest version of Macrovision for games may have finally gone too far. It checks to see if you have certain "bad" software installed such as CloneCD. (There are others, I forget which though.) If it finds one of them installed, the installation fails, and without telling you properly why. Worse yet, if the software's not still on your computer, but the registry entries didn't get all removed it assumes the software's installed and fails.

Now aside from the fact that the copy protection software is trying to tell you what other software you can and can't own to play the game is how I found out about this. The letter from the Editor in the latest copy of Computer Games. It happened to him on a new game, and he was quite unhappy about it. While other magazines might not be quite as bold about reporting this fact, it's not going to go over well with them either. Pissing off the gaming press is a really great way to get the gaming market in general riled up.

In any case I know that thanks to Macrovision and this latest idiocy I refuse to buy any more new PC games. I'll still pick up games for my PS2, since I don't have to worry about the copy protection making them unplayable, but for the PC I'll pass. Neat how they lost my business even without it affecting me directly ehh?

Dear software publishers:

[veritron]

Copy protection doesn't work. It hasn't worked for years now. All software that's remotely valuable is posted on the internet for free weeks before its official release, with cracks that allow you to bypass the copy protection.

Also, all commercial copy protection is capable of being bypassed by a determined fifth-grader. It's not that damn hard to image a disk. It's a little harder to make the game accept the image as valid, but as long as you keep buying commercial solutions (all very recognizable in a hex editor, if a canned solution doesn't already exist.) Quit trying.

Re:DRM only harms those who actually buy the softw

[Maestro4k]

• The funny thing is, all of these copy protection schemes never stop the real pirates. You can find a cracked version of any popular piece of software.

I think the best proof of this was the TurboTax activation debacle in 2003. Despite Intuit updating the code as the tax season passed along, new cracks kept coming out within days (if not hours) of each update. No one who wanted TurboTax free paid for it, but Intuit found out the hard way that they had pissed off a LOT of customers. Seems they underestimated badly the number of their customers who installed TurboTax on more than one computer for various reasons. It was so bad that Intuit not only declared they'd never use activation again, they took out a full-page ad in the New York Times to let customers know. They said they did that because customers were so mad that they doubted they'd read any mail or E-mail from Intuit, so the ad was their only hope of getting the message across.

To make it worse, 2003 was when TaxCut software debuted, I'd say Intuit caused a large exodus to their new competitor.

Moral is, copy protection and activation stuff only hurts the legit customers. People who want it free will get it free, they're willing to hunt for the means to do so.

Meanwhile, near a pit in the desert...

[ps_inkling]

Am I the only one that read the headline as:

"E.T., Atari Sue Over Videogame Copying Software"

and were scratching their head over why Atari was suing themselves for the Atari 2600 E.T. game, and who was wanting to copy it?

Re:Pissing off their customers -yup

[Anonymous Coward]

If you don't like it DON'T BUY THE GAME.

Insurance confusion

[cdrguru]

Normally it is your homeowners/renters insurance that covers the contents of your car, not the auto insurance. Yes, you can get "extra insurance" as part of an auto policy that covers the contents in case of theft, but that usually isn't needed because of the homeowners/renters coverage.

"May facilitate"?

[gillbates]

Lowenstein said game-copying software may facilitate theft of intellectual property, given that creating and marketing a top video game typically costs companies $5 million to $10 million. [emphasis mine]

Think of what would be legal if it "may facilitate" lawbreaking:

• Cars - used by bankrobbers for a fast getaway.
• Houses - used by criminals for drug use.
• Pantyhose - used by criminals to disguise their identity...

The foremost problem I see with their logic is that they see any device or program which could be used for copyright circumvention as a device that will be used for such a purpose.

How would EA like it if I sued PC manufacturers because they were being used to pirate my manuscript? What if the computer was declared a circumvention device under the DMCA?. Where would EA be then?

They're literally shooting themselves in the foot. If I can't be assured that I can restore a game from a backup copy, I'm not going to buy that game. I can write my own games if I have to; can EA afford to lose my revenue?

Re:"May facilitate"?

[Anonymous Coward]

• The word "Literally" - misused by idiots to make them look stupid

Notice it says "Modifying the .bik files"

[AzrealAO]

Not showing the Intro Animation is an option right in the goddamn client options screen. Options opens on the Misc page by default, and it's the very first option available.

They WILL NOT BAN YOU for enabling or diabling that option, as you said they would in your initial post.

They MAY deny you support if you have modified the .bik files, or have made a modification to the client executable to stop them from playing, but they will not BAN YOU!

They may deny support because removing the files, or modifying the client to make them not display, could cause patches to fail.

I have always had Show Intro Animation set to disabled, and I have never been denied support, nor have I been banned. It is also not IMPOSSIBLE to disable, as you said in your initial post.

Re:Notice it says "Modifying the .bik files"

[DAldredge]

Listen you lying piece of shit. (see, I can insult people to) I said they CAN ban you, not that they will. I understand that you are about 13 and think that calling someone a liar makes you cool or something, but it doesn't.
And, if the change is so simple, why didn't the devs point out you could turn off the movies from the GUI? A lot of people on stratics said the only way to remove the movies is to del those files.

Re:Notice it says "Modifying the .bik files"

[Valar]

OMG U AWESOMEEDDE!!@!

EA Games:

[SlashDread]

Challenge EVERYTHING*

"/Dread"

*Except EA Games.

No CD no problem for mac users

[Naum]

Just create a disk image of the CD and mount it whenever you want to play WC3 (or any other game). You can combine the steps in a simple AS or bash too.

Here's a how-to guide - though it's written for 10.2, you can use Disk Utility just the same as the article describes using "Disk Copy". You may want to turn off "verify" too, so that the image mounts quicker.

I've done this for quite a few games so when I travel with my PB I don't have to tote the CDs along.

CDs *need* to be backed up

[Sloppy]

If the games were on really robust media, like ROM cartridges or something, I might be able to buy into the argument that backup tools are somehow related to copyright infringement. But in this case, it just isn't true.

I don't know how anyone who has been around for a few years, can possibly believe tools that copy CDs or DVDs, are primarily intended for copyright infringement. It is just plain stupid to not back them up, and that is particularly true with games, which are often handled by children. I wonder if any of the legislators who voted for DMCA, actually own any CDs or DVDs.

Maybe this would be a sneaky way to both bribe and demonstrate the principle to legislators: Find the ones that have kids, and then give them a console game system that is based on CD-like media. Let the legislator spend their own money buying games for their kid, and then let them see what inevitably happens.

Re:CDs *need* to be backed up

[Starsmore]

heh, yeah right. Good in theory, but it wouldn't work. The Legislators would just take the money given to them by all the lobbyists (tobacco, booze, video game makers, people against video games, gun makers, mothers against gun makers, etc), and fork it over to their kids to buy more games. They wouldn't care if their kid snapped a brand new copy of Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow in half. They'd just get the brat a new one. And then when their unsupervised kid goes out and buys Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, it wouldn't be the legislator in the wrong for not supervising their kid! Noooo, it'd be the game company for making it, and the Wal*Mart for selling it! Because we all know that in America, bad parentting is never the fault of the parents, but the fault of everything else, for not being the kid's parent. But that's another rant right there.

Estoppel?

[n6kuy]

Couldn't some brilliant lawyer argue that when a company tries to prevent fair use of their intellectual propertry, it constitutes an estoppel? In other words, if they don't want to play by the rules of the copyright protection game when it comes to fair use, shouldn't they then not expect to be protected by copyright otherwise?

I'm not a lawyer, so I would prolly get creamed in court if I tried to argue thusly...

Re:On the subject...

[kin_korn_karn]

In the meantime, your wife will be open-sourcing her vagina because your penis doesn't meet her system requirements.
Hey buddy, at least MINE is a valid input device.

Loophole?

[MisterSquid]

Software doesn't pirate games... People do.

Now you've got me wondering. If software that circumvents digital copyright protection schemes can be classified as munitiions or arms, then wouldn't US citizens have a right to own them under the Second Amendment?

Re:Loophole?

[Mephie]

I'm curious about the potential legal slippery slope if a lawsuit were to hold a company liable for piracy because of a program they write.

Would that provide case law that could be used against the gun industry or other industries?

Re:Loophole?

[pVoid]

Then we would have a new organization to fill the place the NRA has for software... it would be called NSA...

uhh. wait a min...

Hmmm

[hattig]

The first thing I had to do with my CPM 2.2 and CPM 3 discs was to make a backup of them. This was in the instructions that came with the system! You had to use a supplied disc copying application!

Shame how sensible practices have been replaced by money grabbing protectionism. :(

Re:DRM only harms those who actually buy the softw

[Anonymous Coward]

I've never gone back, they lost me for good. I buy their competitor's Tax Cut now.

What I don't get

[BayBlade]

Is why they don't just ship you an original disk labelled "backup" when you buy the damned thing. Its would inflate the price of it by what? $2? Probably less. Manufacturing is hardly the pricepoint for these things, and they have a pretty good way of pointing out your fair use has been exhausted when you decide to make a copy.

Customer service...

[DrCode]

About 6 years ago, I found a copy of "Martian Dreams" at a used-software store, but one of the disks was bad. I emailed the publisher, Origin, about it, and with no charge, they sent a replacement.

I guess those days are over (and Origin no longer exists).

EULA?

[joeljkp]

I don't get how this is a legal position. In their EULAs, they say you can make a copy of the disc for backup purposes. Then, they implement a copyright protection scheme that makes it illegal (in the U.S.) to make such copies.

Perhaps they should be held to their side of the EULA, just like the users of the software? Or maybe they should have to put a "copyright-protected" notice on the box.

A bit of nostalgia

[abb3w]

How the HELL do you get past the snake???

Throw stick at it, it would seem.

Lost cost backups are not available

[speters]

Back in my C64 days, I remember that most game companies allowed you to get a backup copy of the game you owned for a nominal fee. Due to copy protection, I thought that this offer was required since copyright laws allowed this. If this were still allowed, I'd have few problems with this. But since you can't backup your media products and you cannot get your one backup copy, what is a person supposed to do. In the end, the consumer is the one who is screwed, not the companies.

Re:Pissing off their customers -yup

[leland242]

This macrovision thing happened to me with Battlefield Vietnam.

Most of the games I play I get from places other than the store. I have *never* had a problem installing or playing those games (well, except for the menu in Simpsons Hit & Run). 90% I play for an hour and its deleted. Actually, when I think about it, probably 75% I never play at all.

I go out and buy BFV and install it. Keep in mind that I could have easily obtained a copy (and had actually already done so). I click the icon and I get some nonsense about the right drive or cd (I forget the specifics).

An email to tech support goes unanswered (obviously) and it takes the knowledge of my peers on IRC to figure it out.

Keep in mind that nowhere on the EA site does it reference the virtual drive thing. Besides that, who the hell decided that this accomplishes something? I don't think it's a stretch to assume that someone using somewhat obscure cd burning software like clonecd or alcohol 120% probably has a CD-R and/or DVD-R and isn't afraid to use it.

Literally?

[Anonymous Coward]

15 years of top-rated posts on slashdot, with excellent karma, and it comes down to this.

One grammar mistake.

Gosh, I just can't believe it. I had so much going for me. How could I do that! Will my karma ever recover?

Grammar Nazi troll? Come on - you've got to do better than that if you're going to troll with the best on /. Take my advice kid, at least RTFTM (Read The Flaming & Trolling Manual, for those luser types...) before attempting to troll /.

I've seen your kind before sonny, and you don't scare me. Maybe you can get away with grammar nazi troll on those softcore sites, but this is /. boy - 'f you can't represent, you best step off. Go back to your luser forums and your porn sites, before the mighty slashdot mod's be gettin' a hold a yo' post. Fear da mod's, boy - they is ya master.

And put dat grammar nazi troll back in 1999 where it belongs. No hardcore /. is gonna fall fo' that. Damn.

Lawsuits Counter Productive

[Anonymous Coward]

It appears to me that these lawsuits are simply endorsing piracy by irritating the user base. I can imagine some people reading this article would get all pissed off and go download an illegal copy of a game rather than purchase a new game and support these companies.

And it's all fun and ok cause no one gives a shit about the big media companies...

Re:DRM only harms those who actually buy the softw

[quantum bit]

To make it worse, 2003 was when TaxCut software debuted, I'd say Intuit caused a large exodus to their new competitor.

And thanks to the activation scam, I discovered that TaxCut works great under WINE, where TurboTax never did.

Why bother....

[Kaos_Supreme]

Why bother using these programs to copy games and movies when we have hacker groups doing that for us. Just download what you need from Newsgroups or P2P software. 321 Studios software sucks anyway because they leave a fingerprint on all copies made. Would you like to make copies of cds or dvds knowing that the disc can be link back to your computer? There's free software out there for all these tasks including SmartRipper, DVD2One, DVDShrink, Discjuggler, Alcohol120%, or CDR-Win 5. Here I'll even tell you how to copy. First you ...sorry, this portion has been deleted by Atari and EA. Find your source elsewhere buddy.

Offer a solution

[zmollusc]

Any company that whines about people making copies of their product, whether music or software, should offer to replace any damaged or stolen disks. If they don't do that then they should STFU. Alternatively, their customers should be able to limit what the vendor does with the customer's money. 'You can only keep this money as dollars, you cannot electronically transmit these funds.If this check is not as good as it seemed when it was accepted that is your problem" etc.

Jedi Knight II

[Cornflake917]

I know that this was a pretty recent game that didn't have any copy protection. There was no CD keys or anything. I believe you had to have a CD in the drive to play it. But I don't remember having to get a no-cd crack to run it off a burnt cd. I'd imagine that they saved lots of money by avoiding all this copy protection.

Any know how well Lucas Arts did with jk II? I think they are setting a good example for other game companies that shows them that fighting against piracy hurts themselves more than it helps.

The Big Lie

[Nom du Keyboard]

that products with no purpose other than to circumvent copyright protection are illegal under the DMCA.

And that's the Big Lie. The programs serve the purpose of allowing the making of legal, usable, backups. What you do with those backups may or may not be legal, but making them is. The DMCA was badly flawed from the beginning, and this type of lawsuit shows it. They can't sue on the basis of copyright violation, so now they sue on the fact that you have to break their anti-backup system to back it up. Damn the assholes that ever passed the DMCA in the first place!

The Feds need to confront the flawed DMCA

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the DMCA is in conflict with existing fair use laws. The Feds need to confront this issue an decide one way or the other. If fair use is still on the books I would interpit the situations as, yes, it is legal for me to create a backup copy of every album, game and movie that I own.

Unless the RIAA/MPAA can guarantee that I can exchange a damaged disc for a good one at no sigificant cost to me, I'm going to exercise my right to fair use.

Re:Obl. Simpson's Reference

[PsiPsiStar]

Worst... Simpsons reference... ever

90 days?? vs Lifetime

[lcsjk]

The old audio casettes I purchased years ago came with a "lifetime" guarantee. I wish I had kept the guarantees so that I could go back to them now and ask for a replacemant for those tapes that squeal and won't work anymore.

I have an idea the CD, DVD and game companies could all have lifetime guarantees so defects sent in could be replaced for free. And, doing so would bring so much good-will to the industry that most people would not see them as the greedy moneygrubbers they seem to be now, and sales might actully go back up. Of course, the overall way of doing business has to change so people are not forced to buy music they don't want to listen to.

Re:On the subject...

[Ath]

I know people that refuse to work because the gov will take tax money from asses like you and give it to people like them.

You know some seriously stupid people. Honestly, I have no heard the argument "There are people who go on welfare to get rich." in quite a long time. I had thought such stupidity was dead. Apparently it is alive and well in your world.

Why do I respond to crap like this?

Resuface it yourself !

[kace]

I had a favorite Playstation (one) game that was scratched to all hell. (The two year old had literally played hockey with it.) After doing a little googling, I tried the following.

- Get an old T-shirt and some plain old-fashioned toothpaste (they have a fine grit; no gels).
- Put a little paste on there and start polishing. The strokes must be radial! That is, straight lines from the center to the outer edge.
- Keep going. Add a little more paste if need be. If it's bad it could take you 20 minutes.
- Remove all paste with clean side of t-shirt (strokes still radial). You should be in business.
Scratches on the top through to the reflective surface (which is actually closer to the top) or deep gouges may make it hopeless, of course.

I was so happy to get this game back. Hope it works for you.

K.C.

Re:On the subject...

[Anonymous Coward]

What's wrong with getting the best girl to fuck?!?

Hell, I wanted the best girl to fuck so badly that I ended up marrying her after she finished being a cheer leader.

And yes, the sex is still great! ;)

Re:Pissing off their customers -yup

[Anonymous Coward]

That's exactly what he said he's going to do, twit.

Besides, how are you supposed to know that game X is protected with protection Y without buying it first or waiting a week or two for people to start bitching in the forums?

They don't exactly come out and tell you "Annoying software protection will fail with these CD-ROMs and if the following software is installed!"

Re:On the subject...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Yeah, can get a whole lot of prostitutes for the money saved on one employee"

Can also get a nice car too! And nice car = good sex for free, but from what Ive read here I dont think most of you would understand that.

A symptom of a typical American - bad spelling!

[Anonymous Coward]

Your spelling is "disgraseful" too! As is the size of your penis.

Typical Americans

Re:Just in case you can't buy a copy in your count

[Anonymous Coward]

Wrong program, dipshit.

Re:On the subject...

[Anonymous Coward]

Today I just had an amazing fuck!

The woman kept on about her no good husband, his obsession with cars and his inability to satisfy her, so I gave her a good screw.

Now lets see if hubby will ever be able to attract her attention again.

While I'm having a great screw, hubby was posting some lamearse troll to Slashdot. I'll think back to how good the advice was that proprietory software owner's wives are married to losers and lookin' for some decent action! During her multiple orgasms she kept on screaming about what a miserable fuck her hubby was and how he couldn't see past how much money he thought his software was going to make him. She reckons she doen't need "Mr Software" anyway. Well, after my performance I reckon that is true.

I get the funny feeling that in 10 years time while Mr Software is, driving around in a better car, I'm still going to be getting (and giving) the fucks of my life. He will be stuck with a defuct business, no life and still raving on about how much money his proprietory software will make him.

Have a nice day!

Re:On the subject...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I hear those cigarette lighter sockets give a real buzz.

The DCMA is evil, but...

[agraupe]

Of all the bad things associated with the DCMA, this is the lightest. I have had games for over 6 years (Final Fantasy VII) that are still in as good condition as the day I bought them. I think CDs get scratched by people who pick them up wrong, and generally mishandle them. I try to avoid letting my friend touch my game discs for this reason. I treat all my discs properly, and I have never had a problem. Furthermore, I was first allowed to use the CD player at approximately age 4. Sure I might have scratched one or two, but I haven't scratched any more in the past ten years. Saying you're a clumsy idiot (or you haven't taught your children to handle CDs properly; it's not that hard) is no reason to want legal copying software. I was looking for such software once. Why? Because I wanted to copy a game for my friend of course. It was illegal, and I knew it was. I don't see how people can argue that copying games isn't illegal. I've noticed that whenever something like this is discussed, the "I copy games for my children's use!" people come out of the woodwork. Whether they actually do this or not, I think it seems proportionately higher than the actual pirates because the pirates have the good sense to keep their mouth shut. Just my $0.02

Re:On the subject...

[Anonymous Coward]

Speaking from personal experience???

Re:Pissing off their customers -yup

[Maestro4k]

• I go out and buy BFV and install it. Keep in mind that I could have easily obtained a copy (and had actually already done so). I click the icon and I get some nonsense about the right drive or cd (I forget the specifics).

  An email to tech support goes unanswered (obviously) and it takes the knowledge of my peers on IRC to figure it out.

  Keep in mind that nowhere on the EA site does it reference the virtual drive thing. Besides that, who the hell decided that this accomplishes something? I don't think it's a stretch to assume that someone using somewhat obscure cd burning software like clonecd or alcohol 120% probably has a CD-R and/or DVD-R and isn't afraid to use it.

Imagine your experience if you were a non-technical user. The company won't respond to tell you why, their website doesn't mention anything that applies to you, and the game you paid for just won't work. You then try to return it and find out you can't. Well, if you're lucky you can, but most places won't allow you to return an unopened game. I know at Wal-mart the official policy is 30 days on unopened games. If it's opened, even if it's the same day, you can only exchange it for the same thing. That sure as hell won't help when the fault is intentional (the use of copy protection that breaks on detecting certain software)!

I used to work at a Wal-mart so I'm perhaps more familiar with the return policy, but I can also tell you that the change in it was not because Wal-mart didn't want to let people return things, it was because the publishers started refusing to credit Wal-mart unless it was a defective game, so only exchanges are allowed if it's opened. Same goes for movies on DVD or VHS and CDs as well.

Frankly I just can't see how these companies can justify this. In the case of Macrovision's latest copy-protection they KNOW that the game will fail to install on some subset of computers. Yet they still won't credit a retailer for a return on that game. It seems to me to be a sort of self-fulfilling prohecy at that point. Those smart enough to have things like CloneCD are probably going to find a way to copy that sucker once they get refused installing a legit copy!