Slashdot Mirror
Valve Gets Tough On Counter-Strike Cheaters
Tycow writes "Valve is finally getting tough on Counter-Strike cheat creators, according to a post by Gabe Newell on HL2-Fallout, who confirms: 'We've started taking legal action against cheating (cheat-sites, cheat creators,...) both in the US and abroad.' The makers of OGC, one of the mainstream cheat software sites for online games, are apparently seeking legal advice. CS-Nation also has a story noting: 'This is just another front in Valve's anti-cheating campaign. Back in April, Valve began a significantly more aggressive banning methodology, that came as a byproduct of a rapid series of VAC updates silently distributed to all CS servers.'"
Perhaps, instead of relying on yet-more-lawyers and yet-more-lawsuits, Valve should try to fix the FUCKING BUGS FIRST.
The vast majority of exploits and cheats are based on bugs. Fix the bug, you fix the problem.
Quit blaming other people for your own problems Valve.
What exactly gives them the right to shut down a website that distributes software that they don't like?
While I hate cheating, I don't know how they have the legal right to do this.
I take issue with these actions for the same reason that P2P shouldn't be outlawed. What if you are using/allowing cheats on private servers? (Note: I didn't see in the article whether or not the cheats work on private servers or if they are explicitly written for Valve's servers.) In other words, there are legitimate reasons for the cheats. If Valve wants to ban CD keys of users who are using the cheats, that's really their own business. But trying to get the cheats removed is rather unacceptable.
Exactly. We all hate cheaters, but mucking around in the legal system isn't exactly the best solution here.
Is distributing a cheat a violation of the (US and/or international) law? Nope.
The people who run the cheat website's haven't necessarily violated the EULA either.
The US and International governments are busy dealing with millions of starving people, wars, trade agreements. Your "cheat" isn't even a blip on anyone's radar...
Good timing being an election year. I'm sure they could bribe^h^h^h^h^h lobby for an amendment to make any cheating (or any enabling of cheating such as talking about cheating, linking to sites about cheating, even whispering the word cheating in a low breath) punishable brutal whipping.
Too bad DMCA already stands for Digital Millennium Copyright Act. It would be a nice acronym for the Digital Millennium Cheater Act. Maybe it could be TATTLE (Technology Amendment To Target Lying game Enthusiasts)
_______
2B1ASK1
13 year old counter-strike players all over the world cower in fear.
Natural-Selection Be
hmm... not to troll (that means don't hurt me, I am not trolling or making a bad comment), but when have we seen a company blaming it's own failures on someone else and then going lawsuit crazy over it?
this sounds very familiar indeed
main(0)
I loved the original Half-Life and most of the mods for it. Back in the early days, me and my friends on our land would quite often turn on wall hacks, aim modifiers, rapid fire hacks, and bunny hop scripts while playing with each other. We never would do this in the public games out of respect for other players. I don't feal it is Valve's place to say people can't make hacks. In effect they are stiffling the creativity and enjoyment of the other people. Adding this tactic of suing cheat makers with many of their other recent tatics I am seriously considering not buying H/L 2. They are becoming very dictitorial about their game which I don't care for either. I have not bought an RIAA album in over 4 years, nor have I downloaded song on P2P from an RIAA label because I do not care for their tatics or the crap they love to put out now. Now of course I have used P2P for obtaining opensouce software, or artist who don't mind P2P (and have even bought a large amount of their work). So adding Valve to the list is not that hard.
Reserved Word.
There goes their entire customer base. :)
(Just kidding, I'm sure there are very few people who cheat in CS.)
Please?
I am a proponent of anti-cheating measures & detection, however this seems like it could be bent to serve other purposes, such as attacking the creators of trainers for games. The difference between most of the cheating that goes on in CS and a trainer is that (usually) the trainer is used only for singleplayer, while cheats are used in multiplayer.
My question is, who draws the lines and where do they fall; is a trainer now considered cheating? I would argue quite heavily against someone who favored the illegality of trainers given that they are meant for a player to change a single-player experience more to their liking. Developers have mixed feelings about trainers, ranging from 'you can play the game how you like' to 'we made this game this way for a reason, by changing that, you wreck the entire game, we dont like that', both of which are understandable. Now, what stops a developer who is highly against trainers from hijacking such legalities to go after trainer developers & distributors. Are they drawing the line at multiplayer cheating only? Or are they going to go with the more artistic: non-permissible alteration of a game is not allowed since it ruins its original purpose of the game which the developer intended.
In short, is this the potential road to DRM-like measures in games, where your ownership is only partial and is dictated by the publisher as to what you can and cannot do to the game. I know my comments are somewhat off-topic and may seem a bit overly dramatic but this can easily lead in other directions, especially in the enterprising hands of companies such as EA whom are trying to further consolidate the market.
"What can a thoughtful man hope for mankind on Earth, given the experience of the past million years? Nothing." -Bokonon
i'd prefer that they get tough on people who use keygens that manage to generate LEGAL keys, thus making my legal copy useless since STEAM refuses to let me sign up with a key already used! thanks!
and it's only $10 to ship me a new cd! how thoughtful of you valuve. and FYI, this CD is 2 years old. i can't get the "90 day free cd".
- tristan
Has anyone else noticed that myg0t.com has made a donation into OGC's legal penny tray?
Because I know subjects like the war on terrorism and the condition of our economy are trivial matters when choosing a president. The most important thing on my mind when voting is of course whether or not it should be legal for the 13 year old fuck wad who handed me my ass in CS last night to cheat.
Note to self: No more arguing with the faithful.
So, a company (Redhat) produces a product that has a bug in it. That bug causes a security hole. Some asshole exploits the security hole and causes millions of dollars in damages. Are you saying that RedHat shouldn't be able to sue that person, or that anybody shouldn't be able to sue that person, because it's RedHat's fault for not fixing the bug? Your logic doesn't hold up.
In my example, a malicious user taking advantage of an exploit cost financial damage to companies. Cheaters cause financial damage to companies too; I'm sure there are people out there who have decided not to buy one game or another after having a bad experience with cheats. Perhaps a cheat-ridden demo put them off a final purchase.
Cheaters also cause other damage; it's no fun playing with a cheater. And while ruining other people's fun isn't illegal, it should damn well be something to sue over.
I'm not an American, but I understand that American culture is big on freedom. Shouldn't the freedom to be entertained be something that you shouldn't be allowed to violate for your own entertainment?
As a former CS gamer from a Cal-IM team (Slow in the head) it is my opinion Counter-Strike should be destroyed altogether. I was around since the early beta versions and every version past Steam was more and more nub friendly and more and more system stressing leading to random results while playing. The quick scope awping was ruined and so was the last ounce of skill in that game. Divert your efforts from fixing Counter-Strike and focus it like a laserbeam into releasing HL2 bug and hack free (like thats possible).
If cheats are outlawed only outlaws will have cheats!
OMG Mods
When I was playing PC multiplayer games on a regular basis, there were always games with cheaters in them. They (usually the cheater, otherwise the game) were easy to figure out. The solution? Switch to a different server. It ain't rocket science. The idea of suing someone for ruining an online game (specifically, a non-persistent online game with beaucoup other servers available) is ludicrous. The idea of a company suing people who make and distribute cheats - assuming they aren't breaking copyright law - is ludicrous.
There's an easy way to remain free of cheaters in online games. Make friends and then play with them. Not only will you be reasonably certain there's no cheating going on, but you'll probably enjoy the experience more regardless.
I mean, hell, if we're going to talk about lawsuits for ruining people's fun then why not go after spawn campers, consta-jumpers, loot whores, etc., too? How about suing people who are frustrated but remain in the game and on a team doing badly on purpose?
If you're taking online games that seriously, though, I would recommend first that you quit playing online games and stick with single-player - clearly, you don't have thick enough skin to deal with other humans. Either that, or start a service - or find a way to encourage companies to start a service - with pay servers. If people are so invested in these games it's worth tying up court time, then it should be worth $10 a month to have a bank of exclusive servers not open to the general public. I would guess you'd weed out 90% of the cheaters with that one stroke since they'd probably keep cheating on free systems.
PS- The next time you find a clause guaranteeing "freedom to be entertained" in a government's constitution, let me know so that I can snicker. Aren't there enough SERIOUS and IMPORTANT issues of freedom to deal with?
PPS- The type of person who would make your suggestions would be the type of person with whom I would want to play and punish with cheating - I'm just that kind of bastard.
scoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscosc oscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscos coscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscosco scoo scosc oscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscos coscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscosco sco
scoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscoscosc
Lameness filter encountered.
Your comment violated the "postercomment" compression filter. Try less whitespace and/or less repetition. Comment aborted.
Valve suing people for spreading freely available, legally obtained information. Riight. That falls into the "sucks" category. As above posts said, waste less time suing and more time fixing the obviously broken code.
Great - Future FAQ authors will now have to see if their techniques are legally allowed.
"In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, 'Make us your slaves, but feed us.'" -Dostoevsky
It's absolutely %100 not possible. Untill servers have the power to render every player's frame and the bandwidth to stream these frames to all the clients, it is absolutely impossible to stop people from cheating. (Even by the time we're there, it will be likely that the clients will have the processing power to analyze the frames *still* be able to do things like aim assistance...)
/.er, but something really has to be done about this issue. Cheaters destroy multiplayer games for legitimate players, no question, which translates to sales which translates to employment vs unemployment for people in the industry. It's really not harmless.
The simple fact is that whatever the client is trusted with is vulnerable to cheating. There are plenty of things that can be done to make the cheating more difficult (and most games do at least *something* to try and slow down cheat authors), but the sad part is any amount of clever engineering can be completely undone as soon as a tool is made publicly available.
Is legal action the best idea? I don't know. It's hard for me to jump on board and shout "Go get 'em!" because I hate the legal system medeling in technology it doesn't really understand as much as the next
Do people have a "right" to cheat? Good question. I couldn't begin to answer it, but I'd say that if that's the way teh law book bounces right now, maybe it needs to change. We all love our right to free speach, but can also all agree (unless you're an anarchist) that there are certain limitations, like going to see a movie and standing up and shouting through the whole thing is not cool. These people making cheats available are the equivelant of having someone standing outside of every theatre running some particular movie and passing out air horns as you walk in the door. Not everyone is going to go nuts, but you know there will be at least one ass hole in every theatre setting the thing off.
Good, cheaters should be put in their place, and not be able to play the game at all. It ruins it for the rest of the gamers and us. I hate cheaters!
TW
Television is dead. Long live That Weasel Television
The degrading affects cheating has on Counter-strike's enjoyment compared to the degrading affects that the AWP has on Counter-Strike's enjoyment is negligible.
If the software hooks into the client somehow then it could well violate the EULA, however its going to be a very weak stance even if this is the case. Some cheat software does not exploit bugs per-se, so to blame Valve only is not fair, for example it is only in years after HL that people have come up with concepts like not sending the client information about occluded objects (and so its impossible to wallhack). IMO it's just propaganda building up ready for the realse of HL2. Get the name everywhere in the gamign and other media and start whipping up the hype. Otherwise why wait so long? a gaming community called the online warfare pact (.org) has had a strict stance on cheating across a fair few HL mods and has been heavily flamed for it by the more 'leet' side of the community. damned if you do, damned if you don't.
.. the other soccer mom's kid, because that was clearly a late tackle on little Johnny and should have landed someone in the ref's book.
Well - let us hear exaclty HOW you would implement an anti-cheat system that exists on a client compueter you basicly cannot trust?
My guess is that you are not a developer...
It sucks that they're doing this. This is exactly the same as the US cracking down on xbox modchip makers and whatever else DRM-unlocking schemes that are being crushed right now. (How many people whine about people using cheats and how many of these whiners own modded PS2's, roms, or chipped Xboxes?) Once a company ships a product, who are they to say how exactly you're allowed to use it and how not to? Obviously there's overlap with redistribution and other copyright issues, but come on, where does our fair use come in? Why can I rip apart my toaster oven but not my playstation 2? Why can't I hack my own game? I payed for it!
That said, I've never used a cheating program to "help" me along in Counter-Strike, and I've never had my game ruined by those who chose to use them. And it's nearly impossible to play a CS game without encountering a cheater, but it doesn't matter... they don't ruin the game. It's the other players that let their game get ruined. Honestly, if a hacker comes on, get the guy kicked, otherwise there's 10,000 other servers to play on, don't let your fun be spoiled by some kid who doesn't want to play by the rules. If you really crave legit play, get your own server... administrate it well. Or find a community that administrates their server well. It should be the players that choose how the game is played once it's in their hands, and not the companies who aren't directly losing because the players are modifying the game. Obviously when you stake a business model on direct player interaction with the game environment (a game's economy, i.e. MMORPG) then it's a direct attack on the company, but none of this bullshit where I can't hack where it's not hurting anyone.
Epic is pulling this same shit too, with banning and threatening to take legal action if you modify your game in a way they don't like, and yes it's in the EULA. There's just no reason for it. These people need to stop whining and just deal with it, and not let it get to them. Some people choose to use these hacks, and you can choose to not let it get to you, or to not allow it in your space. Just don't whine to the company until you force them to take away some of your rights and impliment DRM in order to limit how you can or cannot play your game.
Hey, it's my OPINION that dogs have eight legs and make a sound like a car horn every time they take a piss.
Well, here's a solution: Let's just not trust anything the client says. Sanity-check everything. Make the game a dumb frontend that merely sends key signals and receives player/ammo coordinates. I know this is technically very much infeasible, but it is the only way.
One other obvious solution would be a half-baked sanity checking that might be feasible on games - of course, this might mean letting the cheater go out of sync with the game itself.
Of course, this way, cheaters may soon find out the game isn't anything like they are seeing on the screen, and will go permanently insane. And that's the beauty of the game being off sync with the cheater's client.
For example, on their screen, they sneak around and kill people, apparently going up the ranking, but on everyone else's screen, the cheater isn't actually hitting anyone and gets frequently killed by other players, ending up to the bottom of the list. The cheater's screams of "I am victorious! Rejoice!" (you can translate that to the gaming slang of the day, I'm not up to date...) sound like delusious rambling to other users, who may say something like "My friend, truly you jest, you haven't proven to be competent in this field of glory" and "I am confused by his remarks, maybe there is some kind of problem?" (again, these statements probably are usually said in slangish manner).
This contradictory communication may tell the cheater that there is some kind of problem with the game, but they can't tell what it is. This might be require strength of will, and, well, if one is resorting to cheating in multiplayer games, I suppose these people do not have much strength of will to begin with.
So let's just drive the cheaters insane. =)
The problem with this setup is it isn't the most responsive. Anyone who has played MMO's knows that lag is simply something that comes with the territory. When you've got a server side database trying to keep track of the interactions of 5,000+ players, plus tracking NPC's and such, you can see how it can get a little slow. This is not ideal for FPS-type gaming. You NEED the server to update your characters info instantaneously. Any delay, and you die.
However, this is why I prefer MMO to standard multiplayer online games. The hacking is pretty much nonexistant in comparison.
Two problems with this - it needs more bandwidth - alot of people are still on modems.
:)
I would work for a mmorpg - but not a fps.
Secondly - how would that affect my ability towrite an aimbot?
If I really want, I make an aimbot running on another machine - looking at the clients screen with a webcam, parsing that info and sending signals to control the mouse on the client computer.
How would this EVER be detected by anyone?
I know the example is extreme - but it's on purpose to demonstrate that you CANNOT make a perfect anticheat system - it will not happen.
I used to play CS but have stopped due to cheaters. I got a little fed up and created a fake aimbot/wallhack. Lamers download the hack, which is simply a batch file compiled to an .exe, run it, and get sent to an unlisted page on my website where their IP is logged and they're added to a counter. They are asked to share their thoughts in the forum.
So far I have logged over 900 (counter messess up every once in a while) to my counter, but my stats page shows 17324 hits, and the list of IP's I have logged is 31 pages long.
http://igogg.com/mrgrey/
-Tolerate my intolerance
They can suck my ass. I'll reverse engineer their games if I want to, THE LAW ALLOWS ME THAT. EULA's can't remove rights that the law explicitly gives you, UNLESS YOU PHYSICALLY SIGN A CONTRACT BEFORE THE POINT OF SALE. And yes, that means YOUR PHYSICAL SIGNATURE.
Read the EULA closer. Most bans on reverse engineering have a little disclaimer at the end which basically amounts to 'you can't RE unless the law allows you to'.
The vast majority of exploits and cheats are based on bugs. Fix the bug, you fix the problem. What's the incentive? This is a 5 year old game. I'm completely amazed they support it at all. They should just discontinue it. Hell, I remember playing it in 1999. I've since got bored of it long ago and moved on to better games, but apparently there are still people who can't give it up. The graphics suck, the gameplay sucks on Steam, and it's the same god damn maps over and over again. Give it a rest CS people, let it die.
1.)DMCA law makes it illegal to circumvent encryption, companies use it to prosecute people who make mod chips for Xboxes, free DVD players for Linux, remanufactured toners for printers, etc. Slashdot rating - EVIL!
2.) RIAA sues people who write software that could possibly be used for pirating material they protect - EVIL!
3.)Company sues people who make add ons to a product they have because at times use of product can be inconvient to some in the community, even though the afore mentioned programs probably contain no intellectual property of the company in question. - GREAT!
Really, thank god there is no town called Slashdot, because living with you people would probably mean no smoking in or around bars, a town ordinace requiring you to mow your lawn once a week, and requiring landlords to finish cellars of their apartment buildings so that when you moved out of your parents house at 35, you can find a suitably dark apartment that won't hurt your eyes that never see the light of day.
Oh, there's cheaters on counter strike servers! You poor little players! Seriously people, this is not really a good thing. What if someone out there made a MOD for half life, with a theme or some sort of controversial content? Does Valve have the right to sue you to stop you distributing that too?
Easy guys, I put my pants on one leg at a time. The difference is after I put on my pants I make gold records!
I played CS from the original beta release up to the 1.1 release. I only stopped because the cheating had gone from a minor annoyance to an epidemic. After the retail game was released, there was an explosion of new servers and players, and the cheating went out of control. Outside of a few well run clan servers, most servers were unadministered, or the admin just didn't care (he was the one cheating). Once that happened, I dumped CS altogether, and I switched over to Day of Defeat. DoD doesn't have anywhere near as large of a community, but cheating is not as rampant. I tend to play on clan servers where the administrators do not put up with griefers, or cheaters (GSS is my regular haunt, in case any DoD players are reading this). It makes all the difference when the people playing on the server are there to play the game, and not be a bunch of immature jerks.
Valve is going to have a heck of a time stopping cheating, however. There is only so much you can do when you can't really trust the client. You could put statistical detection on the server (ie, 5 headshots in a row and its probably cheating), but that will be to the detriment of players who legitimately have above average skills. A lot of cheat detection and suppression is really going to come down to the administrators-most of the existing cheat detection takes care of the most obvious "script kiddy" cheats.
So cheats such as "super speed", "flying" and "walk through walls" are prevented but the cheats that are *very* common in CS are "wallhacks" (letting you see through the wall so you know if there is an enemy round the corner) and "aimbots" (tells the engine that the mouse moved so that you have perfect aim) Although these cheats may not seem too bad, they are a huge advantage in the Ultra-Competative world of CS.
I also do not cheat and agree that Valve be allowed to sue cheaters, they are causing Valve to lose money. It is worth doing as CS is not dead, it's still one of the most popular online games!
I wish to remain anomalous
I've always thought that some smart cheater-hater should come up with the ultimate cheat that just happens to be a trojan that transmits the cheaters' cd keys and/or steam ids back to a home server... then randomly add those IDs to a published "Master Ban Page" somewhere. It'd be great if said smart person could get Valve to secretly add code to the servers so that the ID transmission went through the game channel itself, then had the server send the data back through steam and then to the ban server for processing. You'd at least get a large list of kiddies that just want the latest and greatest hacks. Probably wouldn't do much good against cheat clans that have their own programmers and in-house hacks, though.
All Your Memory Are Belong To Java
That's how it already works, the server calculates the entire game and the clients receive the results and send back control information (i.e. tell the server "I'm moving forward", etc). Aimbots or wallhacks are clientside cheats that behave like a normal client does and simply display data the normal client hides (players behind walls) or pretends that its user does something he doesn't (like adjusting his aim and pressing the fire button). These cheats are undetectable for the server since they change the internal behaviour of the client, not the data sent to the server. The server doesn't know whether an object is drawn on your screen even though it shouldn't be or whether it's you or the client software that pulls the trigger.
BTW, cheaters don't go out of sync since we have a server-client model, that means if the client isnt sure about something it asks the server. Any game with good netcode will make sure all objects are synced, no matter if a client miscalculated something or (more likely) packet loss occurred. If you tell your client players move at twice the speed it will move you maybe ten metres and receive a message from the server that you're in a position 5 m from your old one and move you there. The server is the only accepted authority when it comes to game data and will not "outsource" any work to the clients.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
It has struck me for some time that we shouldn't be so worried about whether someone is cheating or not, but rather: "How well are they playing". Right now detecting cheating software is somewhat easier, but imagine a day in the future when we will have webcams connected to software that generates 100% valid inputs into a 100% valid client that is 100% indistinguishable from a human playing the game. At that point you can no longer "detect" that it isn't a human, and the focus will be simply: "Is that person to good for this competition bracket?"
Right now it's very difficult to create a novice only server for beginners to learn a new game. Many griefers love to log into such a server and wreak h4v0c on the n00bs. But if we had a way to measure playing ability you could restrict play to that ability. Basically someone to who is consistently surpassing the metric for a period of time would be ejected or handicapped automatically.
Now before you assume that such a method is impossible (which it might be for some games), I can give a small example from Starcraft, where it might work. An interesting statistic often discussed about masters of SC is their actions per minute (APM). An average player does 50 to 70 APM, while a tournament pro can hit 400 APM. Why not allow that to be used by those who wish to as a metric for auto-handicap or server boot.
Sure a total novice could still use cheat software to move up a bracket or two by this metric, but as long as he's playing at the same level that everyone else in that game is, who really cares? And it wouldn't help at all at the highest levels of competition where there is no cap, but when there is money/titles on the line, shouldn't all those people be in the same room, or at least have witnesses/referees present?
Another benefit of such a system would allow for auto-handicapping so that an itermediate player could play against a novice and still have an enjoyable game.
I feel the need to add to this discussion, as the opening post is both misleading and untrue. I have not played CS for some time, but I currently run/admin an SoF2 server which is very similar exceot that the engine is two generations newer. From my experience with both games, they are very similar in the issue of cheating.
As an admin, I run into all kinds of cheating. Wallhacks, ballhacks, and aimbots are some of the worst and most widely known, although there are a number of other types that exist. However, just looking at these three most prevalent types, none of them rely on any kind of bug in the game to operate. The majority of cheats operate by writing hooks into the OpenGL data that allows them to obtain additional information about the game and then display that to the screen. That is how wallhacks are able to show players that would normally be occluded and ballhacks are able to display balls (or any kind of symbol) over all player's head no matter where they are in the level.
These specific types of cheats are just hooks, however. They do not rely on any kind of bug/issue/hole in the game as they are utilizing information that is contained within the OpenGL subsystem on the client machine. In SoF2 there are a couple of exploits that are based on bugs in the game, but these are widely known and fall into a "gray area" as they do not *really* give a player an advantage, but might in some particular instances. From an admin standpoint, there are tools (namely PunkBuster) that allow for easy observation of these types of exploits, and these same tools are available for pretty much all mainstream online FPS games.
The solution to cheating goes far beyond merely insulting the developers and claiming that all the responsibility is on them to fix these nebulous "bugs" in their software. This is an extremely difficult problem to surmount in every facet of the issue. While I may not completely agree with Valve's approach to the issue, I applaud them for actually standing up and taking some sort of action. IMO, cheating is one of the largest deterrents to online gaming today.
Perhaps they're resorting to lawsuites because the technical measures don't cut it anymore?
i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer
Prevent the screen from being rendered correctly, or better yet, from being drawn at all. Either constant fade-to-black, or replace the battlefield with soothing images, or better yet, pornography. In fact, forget the FPS and the mouse :)
I should not talk so much about myself if there were anybody else whom I knew as well. -Henry David Thoreau
There is a program that you can run server and client side that does this already, it's called cheating death.
for the most part I think it works, although I have heard about hacked CD clients.
So whats better? being able to play a game without having cheaters or the ability to cheat at a _computer game_ without being a criminal? Keep in mind that its always going to be impossible to stop cheating all the way, the best you can do is design the game as well as you can and keep a look out for new ways of cheating.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Calling something someone didn't agree to a contract, as you incorrectly did, is like calling a bike frame without wheels a bicycle. A bicycle is defined by having two wheels. Likewise, mutual assent is required to have a contract. Don't bother saying "you can't enforce a contract someone didn't agree to" because if they didn't agree, then there is no "contract." There is a license, but it is not a contract until it is agreed to.
And while Valve cannot "take" your copy away from you, the act of playing the game is a manifestation of assent to the license. If you play the game, and know of the license, guess what? you've accepted it.
Lastly, EULA's have CERTAINLY held up in court. See ProCD v. Zeidenberg which held that shrinkwrap license ARE enforceable. I'd be interested to see the "case law" you are rferring to since ProCD is pretty much THE authority on this matter.
You don't discuss surgical procedures with a plumber. Neither should slashdoters pretend that they know what they are talking about when it comes to the law. And no, IANAL, but at least I do a little research* before shooting my mouth off.
* research does not include RTFA.
-truth
I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...
What a fucking ridiculous attempt by Valve. Their sole recourse is something they already do: ban accounts. Here are the possible "legal actions" Valve could take. 1) EULA violation - This is only available to Valve against an end user. The total recourse that Valve has against the end user is to terminate the license to use the software. Can Valve seek monetary damages? I doubt it because the EULA probably says that YOUR sole recourse against Valve is a refund of the purchase price or some similar limitation. If they aren't liable to you for any damages, then you probably aren't liable to them for any damages. There needs to be reciprocity. Besides all that, the enforceability of a EULA is definitely not clearly established. Courts have often accepted some terms but not accepted other terms. A EULA is [B]not[/B] a contract because a contract requires a) an exchange (which you have here - give us money and we will let you use our software) and b) mutual agreement to the terms. Part B is where EULAs are at risk. Software licenses tend not to give any ability to negotiate them, making them actually less enforceable. I am not saying they are not enforceable, I am just saying that you should not assume that just because a company writes something in a EULA that it is always enforceable. Regardless, a EULA does not apply to an independent person or company who writes a program because they never enter into the EULA. So you cannot use the EULA violation argument when going after a cheat program maker. 2) Copyright violation - Valve could only use this against the cheat program maker, as they could not sue an end user under this violation. I will give an example. If you buy a music CD and the artist is sued for stealing one of the songs, you cannot be sued for the copyright violation because you didn't actually violate the copyright - the artist did. The problem for Valve is that, unless the cheat program actually uses software code from Valve, there is no violation. A person is free to reverse engineer the protocol Valve uses and make a compatible program. While there may be a different type of violation for using that program on Valve's network (see the EULA violation above) the software author is not liable for anything. 3) Interference with business - By using the cheat program, an end user could also be considered to interfere with Valve's business because maybe people will not use the service in the future. Highly speculative damages and usually not accepted by the court. Again, Valve's recourse is under the EULA to terminate the service. No additional damages are likely. Valve could also go after the cheat program makers under this theory, only to also likely lose. Why? Because if someone makes a cheat for Half-Life, the cheat can also be used on networks that Valve does not own or control. Therefore, the cheat program has a usage that does not infringe upon Valve's interests. My point is that Valve's attempt to use the legal system to stop cheating is pretty much useless. While many of you may think cheating is bad and annoying and whatever else, it is not illegal and Valve needs a legal basis to go after software creators or end-users. I don't see any legal basis for them to do it. Their recourse is to terminate accounts. That's pretty much it.
Maybe if he spent less time talking to the press and more time working on his game, it would be here.
Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.
Try to constantly interrupt a super bowl match by stealing the ball, parking you car in the middle of the field and throwing buckets full of paint on the players. According to your logic I should be allowed to do that because this is only a game plus like other people say they should fix the security instead of blaming me.
Yahh, hiii haaaaa! -Major Kong, from Dr. Strangelove
sounds to me, valve just needs money to finsh hl2