Slashdot Mirror
Valve Cracks Down on 20,000 Users
An anonymous reader writes "Valve have disabled 20,000 steam user accounts belonging to users who have been caught using a pirated version of the game, or have attempted to use a cdkey to bypass the securom protection found on the retail version of the game. The Steam Forums have been swamped with people now claiming they are unable to play, many claiming they have had their accounts disabled for no reason. A Valve spokesman says, 'The number of people who actually had bought HL2 and used the CD key cheat was VERY small. VERY small. Most people just tried to rip off the game and not bother buying it.'" People are discovering that when you buy any product that is subject to "activation", you haven't really bought anything.
You have purchased something. A license to play the game on the terms and conditions that are told to you by the company.
If you violate the terms and conditions, the company can suspend or revoke your license to play the game.
They do not owe a refund to you if you decided to violate the agreement.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
Is there a way to disable the "feature" that forces me to load the CD every time I want to play the game? And will doing so get me banned? Why can't steam disable this annoying problem after we activate our game and prove to them that we bought it? At least there is a hack for Doom 3 and other newer games that disable the CD check without getting you banned from the network.
For some reason I thought that said 'scrotum protection'. I always did say anti-piracy measures were a load of bollocks.
I know that a lot of people will have huge problems with this.
I still don't see why though- most people knew about Steam going in (everyone who tried to use the crack knew about Steam).
Someday, circumventing copy protection won't be seen as a white-hat activity. But it will be seen as people trying to cheat others out of compensation for their work.
No reason to lie.
seems like someone may have slowed down the pirates for a little bit...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
People are discovering that when you buy any product that is subject to "activation", you haven't really bought anything.
Except...these people didn't actually buy the product, did they? No, they stole it. I don't see what the problem is.
This space intentionally left blank.
I have to say I like this approach better than the RIAA. If you get your account deactivated ok, big deal to some people but life isn't over. The RIAA just wants to run it's customers lives.
I can understand someone who bought a real copy of the game using a no-cd crack so they don't have to have the CD in all the time (I do this for most of my games - I HATE having to swap CDs all the time), but using a cracked CD key? There really doesn't seem to be an excuse for this.
"People are discovering that when you buy any product that is subject to "activation", you haven't really bought anything."
Uh, yeah, actually. I BOUGHT THE GAME. I didn't use a stolen key, because I ACTUALLY PAID FOR IT. And I have zero problems.
Puh-lease. Don't even try to slander Valve here, they're so on the ethical right on this they've got halos appearing over their heads right now.
And anyone with half a clue and that can do basic logic realizes that down the road Valve will eventually just patch the game to run without connecting to Steam. Especially if the network itself is in danger of dying for any reason.
I wonder all the hassle about the activation. My Steam-version of HL2 worked fine from the preload to the ending credits. It serves them right to have accounts banned if you tried to use pirated cdkey etc.
Although I wonder also why would anyone use their OWN account to try playing a game they didn't pay for. And the version I know of, pirated I mean, doesn't need the activation at all...
-Is the meaning of life vanity, or is vanity the meaning of life?
My Linux Command of the Day site : LCOD
You do buy something, but its a liscense to play the game. You agree to this liscense when you install the software. It clearly says (in über-legal-speak) "if you pirate this we castrate you". Alot of EULAs even have clauses making it a liscense violation to give the game as a gift, or install on more than one personal computer.
...that they have no clue how many legit customers were affected.
You buy a license to use them, and this license has terms and conditions.
Just don't post crappy editorial comments like this:
/. in a long time; so Valve decided that to attempt to crack down on piracy (and it's not as if we haven't seen lots of leaked games) they would force "activation" of the product, even for single player use. Boo hoo, and now some people got caught trying to stiff Valve. Cry me a river. Valve is a for-profit business selling a piece of closed-source software.
> People are discovering that when you buy any
> product that is subject to "activation", you
> haven't really bought anything.
OK? That's the stupidest thing I've read on
In other news, michael buys car and is shocked to discover must buy gas for it continue working.
John.
So, you try to pirate Half-Life 2, and they lock you out from playing it... That's all well and good. But if you've got other products you've legitimately purchased through Steam you can no longer access those either because you tried to pirate Half-Life 2? That sounds like a great reason to never use Steam. If you ever do something they disapprove of with one of Valve's products you could lose access to hundreds of dollars of software that is completely unrelated.
Why aren't they just blocking those users from Half-Life 2 instead of revoking (shall we say "stealing" since they like to mis-use the word too) ligitemately purchased licenses for other products too?
Wll I heard there were problems with the server when the game first came out, it was slow and such. Well it looks like /. has added another problem. On most of the links all I get is "database error". Looks like they didnt upgrade the servers at all.
It's comforting to see piracy protection which works.
People who paid for the product can enjoy it and those who didn't can't. Seems fair.
Unfortunately, I am not Wil Wheaton
"A Valve spokesman says, 'The number of people who actually had bought HL2 and used the CD key cheat was VERY small."
So how draconian are they being? Is that "VERY small" number of users being excluded from the blacklist? Or did they trigger some End Game transgression of the EULA by even trying the CD key cheat?
If the latter, that would SERIOUSLY suck.
Why is this such a big deal?
Go on usenet, find the appropriate cracks. Enjoy. The end.
See how easy that was?
We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
Go valve. Please deny acces to everyone who hasn't paid for the game. And then go on to deny access to everyone who cheats. I couldn't care less about people who stole a product being denied the ability to use what they stole.
You did not pay for the game, you paid for a license to play the game. If you break the contract, your license is revoked.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
Actually, the folks who didn't buy anything didn't get anything. Unfortunately, there is a point, because the folks are apparently purchasing an online service, and consequently, are subject to the whims of fate as to the playability after the online service shuts down (for whatever reason).
You also have to consider that it would be totally in keeping with the strategies of a certain large, yet unnamed, software company to purchase the online service's owning corporation and shut it down, or intentionally degrade it, to make Halo2/Xbox combos.
That is only one scenario. Purchasers would also be unable to set up a reverse engineered online service, because federal courts have ruled that it contradicts the purchase agreement.
On the bright side, those who have paid legitametly are probably having no problems. Just my 2 cents worth. hanzie.
********* sig: If you don't like the law, get filthy stinking rich, and buy a better one.
Who wants to bet that Microsoft is watching these developments very closely? All things told, they have been quite cooperative given the piracy level of their software. I get in fights with them all the time about valid IDs not working because of a failed motherboard in an OEM system or becuase of an added video card or some other component messing up the install ID, but they finally give in and release a working activation code.
Out of the gate, there's no way Microsoft can win by being the big brother overlord, especially when we're talking productivity software (OK, OK, a joke's a joke) as opposed to entertertainment, no matter that funds have changed hands, butwe all know that they will be getting better and better at license authentication.
If a program requires 'activation' I either don't use it or get a cracked/warez copy. I'll be happy to go back to buying their software when they drop the stupid activation schemes.
Over the past ten years, we've observed an overwhelming trend toward completely free exchange of everything digital. This revolution threatens all creators of digital media.
I believe that Valve has taken reasonable steps to ensure its survival in the climate of free information.
I bought Half Life through steam and was pleasantly surprised by how smoothly it went. I was expecting a nightmarish problem judging by Valve's earlier problems with network security.
However, regarding activation. Maybe if so many people in the "community" weren't so busy pirating the games Valve wouldn't need to go through these hoops.
What I'm more concerned about overall is, what happens when people have their steam accounts stolen? How is Valve going to deal with that. I could probably use Visa to get my $59 back, but what a tremendous pain in the ass.
Oderint dum metuant
Please, do not post your plea or your story or how sorry you are on the forums. If you follow the link in the post above to the FAQ document, you will find information on just how you can contact Valve if you wish.
I find this to be an arrogant/childish statement.
So, Valve telling affected customers to contact them directly rather than in a forum they don't explicitly monitor is childish? The forums aren't monitored by Valve, but rather appointed moderators. Since getting your account re-activated involves going through Valve, rather than a forum moderator, why is it arrogant for Valve to tell people to talk directly to them?
People who are cracking your CDs have made a conscious decision that a) you made something of value b) they want it c) they would rather steal it than pay for it. The rebuke that takes simply takes it away is a gentle one and shows restraint. The thieves (or "infringers" - the technicalities of the language are not important) probably deserve punishmnet. Given that Valve is acting with restraint, they certainly have the right to be as preachy as they want.
There have been many threads going on where we argued on how useless and unfair (compared to customers who bought it off steam) the cd-check is and valve did not reply even once. Instead, the moderators deleted the "800+ replies" thread but it's far from over because there are many other threads currently on this topic that are open to discussion and hopefully, we will make enough noise to get them to listen.
Using a no-cd patch with steam is a risk that you take because afaik, it could detect it but I can't confirm that. Frankly, this is Valve's job to remove the cd-check which is, like I said many times, utterly useless since activating Hl2 thru steam with your cd key is good enough to prove that one person has a legit copy. Even if the game had no-cd check, sharing the cds would be useless since Steam would popup asking for a valid key which is already in use....
It's their product. Why can't they say what they want how they want? Clearly there are enough people (like myself, who bought it over Steam and has been enjoying it with no issues) that could care less if a bunch of pirates (that don't deserve to play anyway) get booted and talked to harshly. It is AGAINST THE LAW, don't they have a right to be pissed?
We are one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. Back to you with the weather, Bob!
Use a cracked game, one which you didn't pay for, and then whine when you can't play.
Awwwww.
How about putting a crowbar in your wallet and actually paying the developers/programmers/distributors for their efforts.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
I bought HL2 the day it came out. The steam servers were so swamped that it took me over 2 hours to get the damn thing activated. Frankly, I do find the idea of being treated like a potential criminal every time I launch the game offensive. It's like having a store run a criminal record check every time you wander in to buy something. I'm not going to argue about the license - Valve certainly does have a right to protect their interests, but I'll certainly think twice once I see any product using Steam as a prerequisite to using it. They can do what they like, and me and my money just won't get involved. (btw - the post above about still needing the damn CD is right - what the hell for? If anything good could have come out of Steam it would have been able to stop having to swap CD's back and forth).
I'm glad that Valve is 'cracking skulls.' Mess with the bull and you get the horns buddy.
In all seriousness, Valve is an intelligent company and has most assuredly been very careful about this. Of course there are going to be mistakes, but out of 20,000 warez a**holes there's probably only a very VERY (to quote Valve) few people who actually purchased the game and then for some reason went out and grabbed a key generator when they didn't need one.
That's very likely 20,000 less cheating bastards at Counter-Strike Source (leaving on a few million to deal with.)
Loading...
So, what happens in 5 or 10 years when you want to play the game and can't install it on a new machine because Steam is gone or has been replaced? I understand their attempt to thwart piracy, but perhaps they should try a different approach. Perhaps innocent until proven guilty?
Wooden armaments to battle your imaginary foes!
What happens if I buy the game on ebay that somebody already played. Will steam not allow me since it's already registered to the previous user? More importantly what happens when VU shuts down valve and steam B/C profit margins aren't high enough or some other BS reason, and there are no servers to validate my copy? I don't want to buy a game that might not work in a few years.
same for me. I activated a steam account, paid for and downloaded HL2 (among other Valve games) via steam. Have played it over and over and over again since last friday. not a problem.
Scott
Scott
janitor
sdn website family
email: scott at sboss dot net
ever hear of this place called suprnova.org? I hear they've got torrents in the intarweb now! Actually, i love suprnova, its the only torrent site i go to anymore, they have everything (cept pr0n)
"Something's wrong with you...and I hope we never do meet again." - Deftones When Girls Telephone Boys
They are disabling accounts, thus effectively preventing people to play the legal games they did buy. So, is Valve obligated to provide refunds to users who cannot access their previously purchased games.
I mean, if I sell you a car, and you come into my house and steal my laptop, I don't get to take back my car and laptop and keep the money.
why the problem? It works just fine for me, and it's a great game.
If people choose to try to crack the system that's been set up to prevent copying, why shouldn't their accounts be deactivated? There's no hassle whatsoever getting it to work the legit way - it just works.
Seeing people complaining about companies that go after those who pirate software. yet when stories of EA employees being "explotited" bloody murder is claimed.
i don't think anyone at slashdot realizes how much money it takes to pay those programmers. if everyone purchased the copies they play with i am sure EA employees wouldn't bitch about not getting compenstated enough.
People are discovering that when you buy any product that is subject to "activation", you haven't really bought anything.
Aren't we talking about people who haven't bought the game, and are using an unlicensed copy and a cd-key generator? If so, they haven't really bought anything because they haven't paid for anything period. Or am I missing something?
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
I for one don't blame those people that want to risk getting Steam accounts banned by using a cracked game. Speaking as someone that bought the game retail, I spent 2 hours or so watching Steam 'unlock' my copy so I could play it. If someone wants to try to get round this, let em...
Cracking down on piracy is good, don't get me wrong but at risk of opening up the debate again, I think Valve got it wrong on this one...
and it's still working ok... Am I lucky or it's only a question of time?
Anyone else still playing with... err... pirated HL2?
(And don't give me that crap "oh, bad you, pirate! go sit on a corner". Hurl the first stone those who have NEVER pirated a piece of software!)
Good for you! I think this is the correct way to exercise your rights as a consumer. It's your product and you should be allowed to use it however you wish. When my internet goes down I want to play games!
But not allowing users to talk _about_ it in a forum where other users with the same problem can be found, seems arrogant and even sinister - It's harder to organize e.g. a class-action lawsuit if they deliberately put obstacles in the way of finding/contacting other victims.
We've secretly replaced Slashdot with new Folgers Crystals - let's see if it notices.
People are discovering that when you buy any product that is subject to "activation", you haven't really bought anything.
Companies are discovering that people will routinely and casually avoid paying for their products or for the use of their services whenever it is easy to avoid such payment.
Similarly, people routinely and casually avoid stopping at stop signs and using their turn signals.
"Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
You can't just dictate whatever terms you want to people. They'd like ot pretend you have a contract with them. No, sorry, it's not. A contract requires an exchange of things (goods, money, whatever) and requires both parties to agree and sign. Saying "You agree by opening the box" isn't valid. Also contracts must be open to negoation. If you are leasing an apartment and disagree with a clause in the lease, you can strike it out, inital the change, and send it back to the management company. They are not required to accept these changes, but they have to negotiate it.
EULAs try and do many things that are just unenforaceble. Basically they want the best of both worlds. They want it to be a physical good when it suits them, but a licensed product when it suits them. Doesn't work that way. When you sell a product on the shelf, with no contract signing, you are selling a good. Things like the doctrine of first sale apply, even if you write an EULA that says they don't.
This is different from something like an MMORPG. Here there are two parts: the good and the service. The game they sell you is a good, and you are welcome to keep it, even if you never use it online. Their servers, however, are a service, you pay for the right to use them. Being a service, they can put restrictions on that without a contract, since if you don't like it, you are free not to use the service.
Think if the logic Valve applied here was applied to a physical good, like a dishwasher. You go and pay for it up front, no contract, and take it home. Then, one day, it stops working so you call for warentee service. They say "Oh no, it's not broken, we just deactivated it. See you violated your license for using it, so we are turning it off. You'll need to go buy another one if you want to use it."
That's how stupid this shit with the software is. It's not a service, it's a good. You are purchasing it with the expecation that oyu are able to use it as such. You can use it in any way you like, reverse engineer it, resell it, whatever. All you can't do is make a copy of it, or a derivitive work. Those are copyright infringement.
Either way, I hope it blows up in their face. I can gaurentee I will not be buying a copy as a result. I'll stay with the Unreal Engine series, as Epic aren't assholes about things like this. Likewise, I'm recommending to all my friends that they do not purchase it.
Should such a time come when Valve wises up and gets rid of this retarded protection, I'll reconsider, but at this point, there's no way they are getting my money.
Then perhapse "buy" isn't the term software companies should use from now on, since you don't own the item outright to do as you will with it. For the sake of truth in advertising, I think "Rent" is a more accurate term.
But then, would you have bought a HL2 with the tag, "Rent Half Life 2 today!"
Journal rant immeninent.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
Half-life 2 is not an idea, it is an expression of an idea fixed in a tangible medium. You're free to get off your lazy ass and develop a game based in a post-apocalyptic world ravaged by aliens from another dimension and give it away for free if you wish. An idea and its expression are two very different things and the sooner you grasp this concept, the sooner you will understand copyright.
gotta say it... if you want it then buy it. It's a great game and yes I do play legit over steam.
I can't seem to figure out who Valve is actually banning? If somebody has a pirated version of the game, then they don't even have a Steam account to ban in the first place, because the cracked version bypasses Steam!
Are they only banning people who actually paid for the game and used a no-cd crack? That's just retarded; It stops the legitimate users but does nothing about the pirates.
Virtual CD-ROM Control Panel:
http://www.majorgeeks.com/download4402.html
Also the latest Nero has Nero DriveImage which does the same.
Let's turn this around, shall we?
If you come to my home and steal my silverware, you may not come back. I really don't care if the last time you came over you didn't lift my wallet. Doesn't matter... you are simply not allowed in my home again.
Of course, I know someone will point out the obvious "but" in this... so let's address it now, shall we?
You came into my business, rented time on one of my computers and then copied licensed software from my system. You are not welcome back. I don't care if you cam in last week and didn't copy anything... I don't want you as a client. You are a risk because you can't keep your grubby little fingers where they belong -- in essence, out of my cash drawer.
Are you crazy? Do that and the TERRORISTS win!
I've pirated a few games in my time.. and when a patch comes out and when I am no longer allowed to play it over the net because I am out of date, or they move to make some restriction that stops the juwarez monkeys from playing their game I don't bitch about it.. I accept it as the flip side to being able to play the game early or for free. Tough shit if I was too cheap to fork out the money for it!
Kudos to Valve for having the balls to try and tackle the root cause of the problem.. combine cutting out the publisher and a pretty darn secure way of delivering games to people and we might yet actually see a reduction in game prices. They are hopefully setting the trend - combine that with not needing the CD to play the game either, and you have a winning combination IMHO. Not quite sure whats gonna happen though if my broadband net connection goes off for some reason?
For the record I purchased the bronze package (cheapass I know.. never mind) about 10 minutes after Steam pricing packages were made available, and then at about 30 seconds past 'zero hour' when they were supposed to have enabled the HL2 authentication servers I closed and reopened Steam, unlocked HL2 and was playing in about 10 minutes.
The game is awesome. I finished it this weekend and loved every minute of it.. those who haven't tried it thanks to some irrational fear of Steam or something really need to get over it and try it out.. you ARE missing out by not playing this game. Its the new benchmark quite frankly.
"Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
People are discovering that when you buy any product that is subject to "activation", you haven't really bought anything.
Not true, not true!
If you buy the Half Life 2 Collector's Edition, you get a shirt!
I guess it doesn't effect me because I make it a policy not to install software requiring activation (such as Win XP). I don't care if there is a readily available crack or not.
I won't even download a bootleg version, since the company benefits anyway (market share and the ability to fuck me over later).
I do make an exception when needed for work or school, but that's a last resort after I've tried to get a waiver and I've put a best faith effort into first using someone else's copy, and if I cant, getting a bootleg version. So far this year, I have not even had to go so far as bootlegging, no less actually paying for something.
Once I get a job and a little money, I'll be willing to pay money for a good game, but any company that engages either in copy restriction (I don't care how trivial) or activation (once again, no matter how trivial) won't get my money, and there's enough choice out there to find anothber title.
"People are discovering that when you buy any product that is subject to "activation", you haven't really bought anything."
Well... As it's been pointed out the editorial comment by Michael isn't exactly the most insightful.
However, Slashdot has to be commended for not pandering to the advertising dollar. A scathing (and only half true) comment against a company who's ad pops up right next to the article.
Answers to the following questions would be more telling:
Will the editorial comment stay under pressure from Valve/Sierra?
Will Michael continue to post articles if there's pressure from Valve/Sierra?
Why does Slashdot post all these stories (even if they're negative) about companies they run ads for? Are they simply required to get a certain number of clicks?
--dhj
This is very interesting actually. One of the main arguments to distributing MP3's is that people who like music go and buy the music. There is no reason that this can't be applied to anything. If someone is using pirated software to sample and then actually go and buy the copy, why should they be punished?
Granted there are many people who will not go and buy the game. This could be for a couple reasons, they are cheap and immoral or the game just sucked and they have no interest. I would be surprised if anyone registered a pirate copy to their common login, but then again. Maybe Valve should allow a method of demoing the games through Steam. At least they get to control the "sampling"
Heh. Three Slashdot articles after the one that talks about US broadband penetration at 20%, someone suggests that people "just download the games through Steam".
Even if you have a backpack and a week's worth of supplies to walk the 120 miles to the nearest city with a CompUSA, you still have to spend a second week walking back home. But your point still applies -- with Steam, you can download the whole 4-5 gigabytes of content in as little as nine days! Don't you see how much more convenient Steam is?
How about a solution for people who actually take care of their CDs and know where their shit is at? (I have my original HL1 CDs and the original retail box, and two CD-Rs full of patches and mods I've accumulated over the years. They're sitting on a bookshelf. The images of those CDs and CD-Rs are sitting on my fileserver. There's a backup drive at my parents' place, and it's going to get swapped/reimaged this Thanksgiving weekend.)
My "content delivery system" has outlived dozens of "never gonna fail" companies including Origin, Infocom, and Microprose. Someday I'll add Valve to that list.
You didn't "buy" the software, you bought a license to run the bits on a CD (or in the case of HL2, 5 CDs) as well as the service that Steam provides. You're free to do whatever you want with those CDs: Use them at coasters, throw them at kids, grind them up and put the powder in your coffee. This is true with HL2, MS Windows, Adobe Photoshop, and most other software out there. Whether the game was downloaded or bought on CD isn't really important.
I'm sure "SlashdotMedia" will improve on all the wonders that Dice Holdings blessed us all with
What about those of us who want to try the game before we buy. I've boughten any game I've played for more then an hour. Including Doom3, UT, UT2k4, Theif (& 2) just to name a few.
Some of us like to try games to see if it's worth me sinking 6 hours of pay into it.
Since Valve did not release a demo either, I guess I'll never play it unless someone else buys it and I try it on their system. And since me and my friends didn't really like HL/CS none of us wanna buy it untill we've tried it out. So Valve will probably never see my $60 (CAD)
DarkMantle I been bored, so I started a blog.
they can, because you are a fool (sorry). People who paid for HL2 knew about this whole steam crap, some even like and defend it. So if valve sticks a big one down there, you have nobody to blame but yourself. I don't have hl2 only because of their method of distribution, because I don't want to deal with 50$ and 2 months later going through that kind of bullshit.
I have no problem buying games that require valid cdkeys to play online, starcraft, battlefield1942, farcry, need for speed 2 etc.
did you forget to take your meds?
Before the DMCA, I did it all the time. I do not own a big harddrive for no reason. One of the reasons to have it is that I can do a full install of all the games I get (though these days most games require a full install). I want to install it, put the CD back in the box, and not worry about it. It seems really stupid to me to have to give it a CD so it can do a little check just to let me play. Hence, I'd crack the game so that it would just run.
Of course that's not legal anymore, than's to the DMCA, but it still is in the rest of the world and you can see why peopel would want to do it. I don't really care that people also use cracks for illegal purposes, something shouldn't be illegal just because it has an illegal use. MOST things that have legal uses also have illegal uses.
Interestingly enough, the same people who pirate games wouldn't dream of stealing a boxed copy from the store.
Wooden armaments to battle your imaginary foes!
Yeah, I was actually planning to buy it, even with all the crap about Steam, until I read this:
CD key cheat? You mean, disabling the CD check? Otherwise I don't know what the hell they're talking about, but if I read this right you can't even disable the CD check. If that's the case, I'm definitely not buying this game, if I play it at all I'll be playing single player only, because I'll be playing a copy. It's not right to control what I am allowed to do with my own game if it doesn't involve cheating. If the only mechanism you have for controlling cheating is ensuring that the binary is not tampered with, your cheating prevention system is inadequate in any case.
Now, if I read that wrong, the "valve spokesman" is still a moron, because "cd cheat" doesn't mean anything.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The moral of this story, stealing is wrong. If you steal something from a store, the dont just take that back from you, or make you pay for it...you pay a lot more in court fees to get out of it, or you go to jail....
again, whats the problem?
At least we now know that the accusations against Valave, for putting out Warez spyware versions of their own game isn't true.
Phew, let's all take a deep breath. Now that we got that cleared...
For those of you people getting your accounts shut down and now crying about it... It was coming your way!
I think Valve did the right thing.
I tried to post my complaints about this to Valve on the forums, but it kept on pausing to load every time I turned the corner.
Dear diary: Today I stuffed some dolls full of dead rats I put in the blender.
Can anyone post a summary of:
. what the activation looks like (i.e. what does the user see?)
. how it works behind the scenes (some kind of key exchange to decrypt vital files?)
. how the cracks try to get around it
I've not been following this, and searching for "half life 2 crack" gets me only to dubious warez sites.
if activation is required, then why annoy end-users, aka the source of cash-flow for future projects with an ineffective method of protection such as SecuROM. Hell, a majority of those so-called protection schemes are the cause of so many incompatibilities and game crashes.
Besides, it's probably for Valve for them to drop SecuROM as it's pointless and it costs them money (I believe a percentage of their profits is taken for it's use). If activation is required, why bother and pay for a third-party protection scheme when your in-house developed method works especially when the third-party method can annoy users AND potentially cause bugs?
Annoying loyal, paying customers is like the BestBuy economics; it'll hurt you in the long run more than it'll help you in any parallel universe.
You said "People are discovering that when you buy any product that is subject to "activation", you haven't really bought anything." OK, let's play this game "You bought a product license, you haven't really bought anything". That's not a true statement: You buy the right to use the product, which is the good you paid for. It may not be the good you THOUGHT you paid for, but then again, you do read the end-user licenses, right? All product activation does is enforce the license. Oops...you don't want license enforcement. That's fine. Find another game then. The market will decide if this technology is a good idea or not.
Umm...more likely, people are discovering when they steal a product with product activation, they haven't stolen anything useful. And later, when they try to cheat playing Counter-Strike, they'll find they can't play anymore. All in all, I don't see the problem here. I quit playing CS a long time ago because of the repeated wallhacks and other cheats, even though I found the game very entertaining. Part of the license compliance that's enforced by Steam is also enforcing anti-cheat measures. I'm 100% in favor of features that keep the playing field honest. And if it gives the guys at Valve more money, well, as far as I'm concerned they've earned it.
Unlike the vast majority of the people here who don't like Steam, I actually do believe in giving people money for what they produce. I think people deserve to be compensated for their work. I don't think you have the right to deprive people who want compensation for their work of that compensation. And I think the "but I don't like swapping CD's" argument is thin, at best, and more likely it's an outright lie. It's a stupid argument all the way around. If you want to listen to a CD while you play the game, CD-ROM drives are what, $20? Here's a nickel, kid, buy a real computer.
It's obvious that no one should have trouble understanding the increasingly mind-numbing legalese that make up license agreements.
The complexity of the legalese doesn't excuse copyright violation, but it is a huge credibility problem for license agreements in my mind. It is impossible for the average person to completely understand the litany of complexe license agreements that so much commercial software contains these days.
People have so much paper work shoved under their nose these days that it's not feasible for someone to have both the money and time to get a lawyer to review every single purchase they make.
My opinion is that its time for license agreements to be standardized and for that standard required for a license agreement to be valid. People should be able to understand what they can and can't do without having to melt their brain reading through hundreds of pages of legalese.
At the very least, if someone can produce a receipt for the purchase of the software, Valve owes it to them to unblock their account.
Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
Not to say there aren't positives, but there are a few inherant problems with things like Steam.
1. Abuse. Hypothetically, let us say that some members of "Clan Uber" are actually friends with people in Valve. Someone online says some mean things about Clan Uber, and then mysteriously finds their Steam account banned the next time they are online.
Don't think this would happen? If you've ever played Ragnarok Online, this sort of thing happens all the time. There are a few guilds that have formed friendships with the GM staff, and people have been banned mysteriously from the game after "crossing" members of these guilds.
2. False positives. In their gusto to fight pirates, it is entirely feasable that Valve may make a mistake here and there and leave legit customers banned from Steam.
3. End of Service. Many people assume that if Valve sees themselves about to go out of business, a patch would be released for HL2 to make it playable without Steam. However, they are in no way obligated to do so. If Valve (and thus Steam) ever shut down, it is possible that all copies of HL2 would be rendered unplayable.
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
I don't agree with your statement. People who steal software aren't doing it to make a profit thus they see no value in it. They are stealing the software for various reasons known only to them...
When I buy bread, I don't profit, in fact I lose money, but that doesn't mean that there is no or negative value in bread. If I were to steal bread it wouldn't be because I find it to be without value.
The "infringers" do find the game something of value, a certain amount of entertainment value. Maybe not as much as what's on the price tag, but playing a game is neither a necessity nor basic right. Therefore, if they can't or don't want to pay, they can and should live without.
There's are plenty of free games they can play.
While I'm perfectly in favor of Valve's actions here, I know that the ability to run software on your PC will never be stopped by activation or other such features. Even if they encrypt the binaries separately for every user and digitally sign them and send each purchaser a dongle to decrypt the data on the fly, eventually the data is going to be in memory and executed by a general purpose CPU and GPU. If you were enterprising enough, you could capture the data and recreate the unencrypted binary and hexedit to your heart's content. Even a trusted computer will have untrusted parts like memory and a CPU running the OS of your choice.
Activation and other security schemes will slow down hackers, but not stop them. And once one person solves the problem, its out there for the world to copy.
A more interesting hack is to figure out how to fool the authentication servers of an online service, whether it be EQII or something less massively multiplayer. If their protocol is good or they implement two-factor authentication, this might be really hard.
If you try to shoplift something from Sears and get caught, you have to pony up 8x the price of the item you were stealing to avoid charges.
... You were the one who initiated an act of thievery first.
Or you could go to jail like the law says. Sears wouldn't get to dictate your punishment. But then, shoplifting is a criminal act and copyright infringement is civil, not criminal, so you're comparing apples to oranges anyway.
The days of stealing are over.
I don't intend on playing this game pirated or otherwise, so I haven't "stolen" anything, but the people who purchased other games through Steam had a license for them; a contract with Valve allowing use. Unless the license for those older titles says something about the license being terminated if you violate theoretical future license for products that didn't exist at the time there's a good chance that Valve is violating their contract with these users on the older titles, no matter what they did or tried to do with Half-Life 2.
Pay your way and if you get screwed, don't start whining about your treatment.
First of all, read that. I don't think it means what you meant to say.
Secondly, we don't live in a society where people or corporations can take the law into their own hands. No matter how wronged Valve is be software pirates, their remedies should be determined by the the legal authorities we have for exactly this purpose. Just because they are capable of imposing penalties on these software pirates outside of thwarting their efforts doesn't make it right.
In Minnesota you have 3 days to return any item, in it original purchased condition, to the place of purchase and recieve a 100% refund. One exception to this rule that I know of opened software cannot be returned in Minnesota under any circumstances.
There is or can be built a machine that can simulate any physical object. -Church-Turing principle
I saw the other reply getting modded into the dirt, and decided to reply here :-)
Up in Canada, the product is QuickTax (same company). I was trying to print out some tax returns for a exparte court visit (exparte meaning does not require proper service). So I find out late Friday afternoon that it's going to be a Monday morning epsisode in court, and I require tax returns. I have all my tax returns on cd, not printed, because, hey, I own the software.
I got 1999 printed, but not 2000, 2001 or 2002. Why? Because I had installed the software on an older, now dead and gone machine, previously when I did the original fucking returns. So their 'activation' detected that it was a new machine and prevented me from installing and printing out my returns. I attempted to call their amazing technical support, but because it was out of tax season, it was 9-5 Monday to Friday, or in my time zone, 10-6. So basically, they expect someone to make personal calls from work.
I ended up calling Revenue Canada and having someone pick up summary returns while I delayed in court. Thank you Intuit, for worrying that I might be trying to redo a 3 year old tax return. If you are going to disable shit, allow people to at least PRINT OUT WHAT THEY ALREADY HAVE and kill the ability to make a new return, or something more useful than that. And it would be nice if you would reply to emails too.
I use XP, simply because it came with my laptop. I do not use Office XP or later, or other software that requires *activation* unless I can now absolutely avoid it. After all, how are you supposed to ensure the company you are buying from will remain in business in case you need to reinstall. And for all you linux zealots that are going to attack me on the using Windows statement - piss off. I develop software for the predominant platform so I can feed my kids.
There seems to have been a slight problem with the database. Please try again by pressing the refresh button in your browser.
An E-Mail has been dispatched to our Technical Staff, who you can also contact if the problem persists. We apologise for any inconvenience.
"Be kind, for everyone you meet is facing a great battle." - Philo of Alexandria -
People are discovering that when you buy any product that is subject to "activation", you haven't really bought anything.
What the hell do you expect them to do then Michael? Is Valve just supposed to put up with tens of thousands of people playing their game without paying for it? So does this mean I can find some way to hack the Slashdot premium membership database and just start giving away premium memberships to whomever wants one? Would that be OK with you?
I understand that activation probably isn't the best method to handle this problem, but right now what's the better solution? This isn't some enterprise-level database you can just open source and start charging for support. Nobody needs a maintenance contract for HL2. A company like Valve has to try and keep their product from being blatently stolen.
I bought my copy through steam and now I have to connect to steam every time I want to play. If their server is down or my net connection dies then I can't play. This is complete BS! There are pirated copies of the game in circulation which indicates that their copy protection is nothing more than a major PITA to their customers. I'm sure I am not alone in thinking that I should not have to ask mommy (i.e. their game servers) permission to play a game I own! What if this sort of activation scheme extends beyond games? Imagine having to ask Microsoft if you can use your computer each time you boot it. As soon as I can get a crack for this nonsense, I will.
Those who would do good don't need laws to force them; those who would do evil will do so regardless of the law.
That being said, I hope to make it clear that I feel software piracy is wrong. However, Steam/Valve is doing itself a great disservice, seeing as how people who want to pirate their software will find a way to no matter what they do to enforce their licensing. Windows XP should stand as a good example - how long was it before the activation was cracked? Answer: days at most. When pirate keys were banned, we had SP1 cracks.
So what happens when the activation software shuts down the OS/game/whatever on a non cracked version? It often shuts down a legit user who simply changed hardware or the like.
So, we have a situation which puts the old wine of my original quote into the new modern wineskin - those who pay for software don't need activation to make them do so, and those who don't pay for software will circumvent any activation schemes in place.
And, as is the case in both examples, only the law -abiding citizen is left restricted by the laws/copy protections intended for the non-law-abiding sort.
Now, does this necessarily make laws/copyguards unnecessary? No, I'm not that naive. These are generally designed as a method of discouraging people from casually "changing camps," on top of providing recourse against those who do break the rules.
I suppose my real point here is that the only losers here are those in the right; those in the wrong have nothing to lose. Therefore, I don't see how such draconian methods will help Valve in the long run.
I hope the land around you yields, a crop like all the other fields, and then your waiting might make sense...
Even though i wasn't hacking, they suspended my account. Not only could i not play any game (halflife singleplayer or otherwise) without steam anymore, there was no recourse (sent email out to them, no response at all) in order to try and get it resolved. I had to create another account with a friend of mine's cd key (was on his shelf for quite some time). I bought the damn game and they somehow reserved the right to prevent me from playing it.
Now how many of those "Pirates" had actually bought half-life and had active accounts under steam? Now they lose the ability to play it. I certainly won't be buying half-life 2 or anything else from valve until they learn that when they sell something they don't have the right to stop me from using it unless they'll give me a refund.
Pending clarification of the statement "VERY small", I would think Steam is perhaps placing their revenue stream at risk. In nearly all cases, I expect folks who purchased the game used a credit card. If a significant number of the 20K turn out to actually be in that "VERY small" category, they can (as I CERTAINLY would) contact their bank, and reverse the charges. (This practice, not SSL encryption and what have you I would argue, is the only reason folks trust using a CC on line anyway.)
The all too important question to ask from the sidelines is, "Was this a knee-jerk reaction on the part of Steam?" If so... they may find themselves (20K * purchase price) poorer in the morning. If not, probably no big deal. I should also mention that I myself haven't purchased said product, and know very little about what is going on. Let us hope, for Steam's sake, that they are in the right. To add gasoline to the fire, however, I would also admonish all who paid good $$$ and cannot now play do precisely what I suggested above.
The SCOTUS has ruled more than once, that a) you bought it, you own it. b) you own it, you can fold spindle and mutilate it c) you bought it, you own it, you have the right to use it as "advertised"
Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
this is a real GREY area i guess for me. if someone tries to pirate HL2 , they got caught, so their account was disabled. its hard to say where the line here crosses the grey area into the black or the white. i think eventually there should be some sort of implementation to allow the valid games with the valid keys to be played but disable the other games that you pirated, copied, etc etc. on the other hand they want to crack down on the people who pirate period, so disable them all together. perhaps this is the way to go to send a message that pirating software will not be tolerated. i agree with this but when i talked about the grey area, i was talking about possible hearings in the court. of course with Valve i am sure it would take a something like a class action to get the ball rolling in the courts.
Doesn't matter how many are in each camp. There is a legitimate use, and that legitimate use should be protected.
www.kitchengeek.com -- Nosh for
Definition of bought:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q
Also if you dont understand that one,
(definition of acquire, defines bought):
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?
The plot thickens,
(definition of possession, defines acquire):
http://dictionary.reference.com/search
If you don't feel like clicking the links, let me summarize it for you:
to "buy", past tense "bought" is defined as "acquiring", but to "acquire" is to gain "possession", but "possession" is defined as "something owned."
Go ahead read it, it's right in the english dictionary.
So what you have just stated is an Oxymoron. What i have bought, is mine and i have the right to do what i want with it.
Examples:
House - i bought it - i own it. if i want to tear it down i can
Car - i bought it - i own it. - if i want to junk it or tear it to pieces i can
Underwear - i bought em- i own em. if i want to wear them on my head in private i can
Video Game - i bought it - i own it if i want to play without a cd or online authorization, i can. and i will dammit. Cause valve is infinging on my right as owner of said property.
You dont have to show anyone the deed to the house every time you step through the front door, do you?
I don't have to fax over a copy of the car title to the DMV every time i want to start a car do i?
I don't have to call Hanes every time i want to put on clean underwear now do i?
So why should i have to do those things with Valve's software, or any software for that matter.
On the other hand , i completely and wholehartedly agree with the rest of your comment.
EULAs have won in court, so have handshakes. Contracts do not have to be very formal, but consumer protection statutes do protect consumers from some of the most outrageous requests of a EULA. In this case, consumer protection statutes will generally require the company to allow all innocent owners of the game who were turned off because their number was used improperly to have their money back or turn their accounts back on.
And it's your right to say "I don't think your proposed settlement is fair. Prosecute me and let my punishment be determined by a judge." That's really not an option in this situation though.
It would be interesting if they made the game un-playable for those who downloaded a pirated copy. Perhaps change textures around or make the monsters invincible. :^D
Wooden armaments to battle your imaginary foes!
I think you should have included the words "Half Life 2" somewhere in it. That way we could all work out what you were on about with out reading the comments. The posting as written relied on you knowing who Valve were. Although this is news for nerds, you have to be a particular type of nerd to understand this posting as it is!
... that screamed when tapes started replacing LP's, and then CD's replaced tapes? I remember reading an article by a proud owner of ZX Spectrum (for those that don't know, a computer that used cassette tapes to store information) and boasted how well was he taking care of his tapes and that new floppy drive technology is inconvinient, and basically "thankyouverymuch, I'll stick to my tapes".
Were you that guy?
Like it or not, CD's are being replaced left and right by better, more convinient things as our society progresses. You can choose to evolve or risk becoming obsolete.
I tried to buy HL2 through Steam today.
The first bummer: trying to be holier than the pope they added VAT tax to the $59 (because I'm located in Europe), for a total of $72. The heck, I said. Dollars aren't worth shit today anyway.
Second bummer: after asking full address details it refused my perfectly valid credit card. This makes me feel rather uneasy, as they now have all my details, including CCV, without a valid transaction.
That's more than enough to turn me off. I'll try to live without HL2 for a while, if not forever. I've still got to finish Doom III.
Flourescent (adj): smelling like ground wheat.
I should probably have mentioned that I've bought Half-life 2 myself. A great game.
I also own Half-Life 1. The people who bought Half-Life 1 didn't know about Steam at time of purchase. I believe that the old multiplayer network (WON?) is down as well. So they are in a sense punishing you (dollar-wise) if they ban your Half-Life 1 account/serial; just because you couldn't resist the temptation of waiting for a download, waiting for your monthly pay or whatever.
So in that sense: You don't own your games, because you never know if they'll ban you for some obscure action. Eg. I hate that I have to put the Half-Life 2 DVD in everytime I want to play. If I use a no-cd crack, and that causes a ban of all my games from Valve. That would surely piss me off.
I'm not saying they will, I'm just entertaining a thought here.
This reminds me of the time my brother's hard drive broke down and I had to explain it to the 'authorities' at MS in order to get XP 'activated' again.
Wh47 d1d j00 541, 31337 15n't t3h r0xor5 ne m0r3???
Point being of course, people have paid for it but it won't work. Don't you read even the headlines to these articles before posting ill-informed asinine comments?
the layman's guide to computer science
Maybe if enough of us who are getting screwed started a letter writing campaign and made it clear to Valve how much money they're throwing down the toilet by being so restrictive, they'll bow down, kiss the holy bottom line and change their policy.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
He'd also be free to wait for copyright to expire, assuming that he will live for another 200 years. And assuming that companies didn't cheat even those ridiculously long protections by wanting to use contractesque restrictions when it suits them, and then go ahead and use copyrightesque when that suits them, and denying the limitations of either when it doesn't suit them. So, I say that he should get off his lazy ass, and help crack it in a way that they can't defeat.
Can anyone explain what the CD key cheat actually does? is it a key gen or is it some way of cheating or does it let you play without a CD or something? If its a key gen, why would someone buy the product and then use that? if its to stop CD checking then can't you just mount the CD on a virtual drive? If its for cheating and you've broken the EULA by cheating then you should have read the EULA (although i think thats bullshit and tricking people into 'signing' agreements that no-one reads is dishonest, its still law in most countries).
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
gmail filters most of it. This address re-sends to another address with another filter.
Spambots aren't a problem. I only see one or two messages a day of spam.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
Would the profit not be that they now have a functional piece of software that they didn't before they performed the illegal act?
Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
The Steam Forums have been swamped with people now claiming they are unable to play, many claiming they have had their accounts disabled for no reason.
Because I'm sure most software pirates would go to the forum and instead post remorsefully about how they tried to the steal HL2 and Valve caught em and they got what they deserved. Right.
It's possible that some legit folks got canned, but I bought the game and my account is still active.
I'd be interested in hearing the methods they used to catch people.
Or you go to gamecopyworld.com, download the patch, then play the game.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
Uhh, there's no EULA for CDs and DVDs, yet you have the right to view them.
How is software any different? Why does using software require a "license" in addition to posessing a copy?
Whoever thought up this greedy business model really should be slapped across the face. Was it Bill Gates?
I maintain that software should be like music CDs and movie DVDs: If you posess a copy, you can use it however you want; you just can't copy it and distribute the copies.
-Z
I think that this is a separate issue than Steam blowing goats. I don't have HL2, I am waiting. I almost got a new video card a YEAR ago in anticipation of the game, now I am very glad I didn't. If Steam sucks because it inconveniences legit users, then Valve needs to answer for it. But if they nail people who are trying to get away with playing it illegally, I am all for it. The real question is, is one the result of the other?
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
You came into my business, rented time on one of my computers and then copied licensed software from my system. You are not welcome back. I don't care if you cam in last week and didn't copy anything... I don't want you as a client.
They didn't come in and "rent time." They bought a license to use something within the terms of that agreement. It doesn't matter if you don't want that person as a client. You took their money and enterd into a contractual agreement with them. Until they violate that agreement or you have the agreement terminated by a court you have to live up to your end of it wether you like it or not. This is all about who interprets and enforces the law. Is it our legal system, or is it individuals and companies?
Imagine if all software were sold this way. If whichever company was in charge decided you did something they didn't like, or you broke some law outside of the scope of your agreement with them they would essentialy be allowed to deny you the ability to use any software again without paying for it a second time. We could take this analogy to extremes and start talking about why we don't use capital punishemnt for all crimes, even the most petty....
Valve should have recourse against software pirates, but they shouldn't be the judge, jury and executioner.
People are discovering that when you buy any product that is subject to "activation", you haven't really bought anything.
And Slashdot editors are discovering that when you tack your thoughts onto a story as part of the story submission itself, you aren't subject to the moderations of the public the same way you would be if you posted a comment like everyone else has to.
Okay, not all of them. Just michael. And he's known that for a while.
Editing != editorializing.
Completely irrelevant.
Besides, I doubt your numbers. There really aren't that many pirates out there.
20,000 accounts? How many copies did they sell release day? How many million? And only 20,000 cracked ones turn up?
Hell, lets say they only sold a million copies, by their math, that's only 2% copies that are cracked. Of those, how many were warezed? Not that many, considering most of the half life 2 "releases" out there are non-working or hoaxes. Of the ones that were downloaded, how many are illegitemate? If the game CD I got in my box won't read properly, I might download a copy.
I watch the torrent sites and have seen the warez "scene", and it's not that big, not nearly as big as Da Man would have you believe.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Meanwhile, I'll be happily playing my Steam-downloaded copy of the game without ever needing a CD in the drive.
The message here is don't trust Vivendi or Valve. Return the product to the store for a refund (in the EU the distance selling regulations mandate this for Internet sales). Then wait until the dust settles. In the event that Valve and Vivendi continue to hate customers more than they hate each other then just give up. It's only a game, after all.
K.
I payed $10 to play Tribes: Vengeance at the local lan gaming center. I did that as a try before you buy, even though I was in the beta for Tribes: Vengeance before release. After playing it for 4 hours there I decided it wasn't better enough over Tribes 1 and 2 to be worth purchase.
Obviously not an option for everyone, but it is something I do if I have a doubt about a game.
"He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
...with the G-Man staring at me from the side banner ad, and the exhortation "BUY NOW" blinking away. I did buy it, and it's grand. Best £10 I've spent in a long time (thanks to Sainsbury's putting it on the shelves the night before release, and forgetting to update the barcode database).
"Knowledge, sir, should be free to all!"
~Harcourt Fenton Mudd
have fun with your dongled games that don't work. I'll be playing the new version of Pirates!
We all know software piracy is rampant. And it is seems a bit disingenuous to sit there and bitch over a company trying to make a legitimate buck. If software piracy was not such a problem and so pervasive, then such seemingly draconian methods wouldn't be neccissaray. But here in the real world it is. Furthermore, for those of you crying over being locked out of steam because you tried pirating HL2, get a life. You play with fire, you get burnt. Maybe next time you'll think better of it. Frankly many of you out there seem to want to have your cake and eat it too. It seems somewhat ridiculous to expect a company to spend enormous time, effort and resources to create a game, which has a relatively short shelf life, and not to vigilantly protect that investment. So if you don't want to have to jump through hoops to play your games, don't engage it software piracy and make sure your friends aren't either. Otherwise stop your damn whining!!!
Sure it is. If your Steam account is closed by Valve, you could take them to court over it. You'd probably lose, though, unless you could prove they were in the wrong.
I own a copy of HL2. I have not opened it yet. I'm thinking about returning it depending on the answers I get here.
Do I have to install Steam to run HL2? Does Steam allow you to install the game onto more than one computer? If I have to buy one copy for each computer, I'm certainly returning it. I know they have the right to limit it one use per machine or one use per person, but I won't accept those terms. I'd rather have my money back.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
Sorry, was that the license they tried to enforce after you bought the game? Can I have my money back in that case?
Ya know in the olden days when that big "FBI" thing would come on the screen when you watched a VHS tape? ever read it? It tells you the rules for use: an EULA.
I maintain that software should be like music CDs and movie DVDs: If you posess a copy, you can use it however you want; you just can't copy it and distribute the copies.
While I agree, you know and I know that a lot of people won't play by the rules, and I think the company has a right to protect their property. When you click "I accept" you, too, are saying that they have the right to do so as well.
Game Overdrive - Gaming News
Current form with Valve is not good. They ban people from their forums for being critical (note: not for abuse, or disseminating illegal cracks, but for criticising Valve or Vivendi).
Current form with Valve is not good. They refuse to transfer a CD key to a new account. This means you cannot sell your game to someone else after you've finished playing with it. And before anyone posts a reply yakking about "license to use" not "a product" you should know that the Valve HL2 EULA specifically permits re-sale of the game. Yet they do not provide any means of doing so. You can't even pass on your Steam account with the game because (a) that violates the Steam EULA, and (b) you might have other games attached to the account you didn't want to sell.
Any way you read it, Valve's policies suck. They have had years to work on this yet end up releasing a game with authentication/account flaws that a monkey could spot problems with. That says that they hire marmosets (unlikely) or that they just don't care (more likely).
K.
I know I'm probably alone here, but I actually don't mind the activation. I no longer have to worry about keeping track of the game media. Case in point, a month ago my hard drive crashed. Luckily I had my important data backed up and had recently purchased a new 160 GB hard drive to install but hadn't gotten around to it yet.
.....
So I installed the new hard drive, re-installed the OS, restored the data I had backed up and started re-installing all of the software that I use. My Half-Life CD was gone. I have no idea where it went or at what point I lost it, but it had literally been years since the last time I had seen it. At first I was freaked because I love Counter Strike and Day of Defeat. Thanks to Steam, all I had to do was reinstall the Steam client, log in, and I could download and play the games again.
Basically, I see it as a fair trade off. My new position is that I'm willing to deal with a game that requires activation to run, provided the company allows me to re-download the content as many times as may be required should something happen to my PC, or should I be over at a friends and decide that I want to play the game.
Now, I understand the argument that you'd be totally S.O.L. if the company went under in the future, but I've got to be honest here, once I play a game and beat it number of times (which is usally within a couple of months after I buy it), I don't often find myself going back to it unless there's a multiplayer element. So, if 3 years down the road I can't play HalfLife 2 anymore because Valve goes belly up, I wouldn't be all that upset about it. I mean really, I can go out on any night of the week with friends and blow $40 or $50 bucks at the bar. If the game keeps me in for an evening or two when I otherwise would have gone out and partied, then the game has paid for itself. I know that I'll literally spend hundred of hours (maybe even in the low thousands of hours) playing HalfLife 2, Counter Strike: Source and Day of Defeat: Source over the next few years. To me, it's worth it, even if Valve goes totaly belly up after 3 years. The game will have paid for itself a million times over.
Import software, on the other hand, is a differnt story alltogather. There are times that I've had to go back and install an old version of a product to open up some document that I have saved. Product activation wouldn't work for me for that kind of software, but for games, if it allows me to redownload it as many times as I may need, then I don't really mind it.
Flame away
well yea but the point here is you don't know so that's a risk you take. When I buy any other kind of game, like those I listed in my previous post, I know as long as I have my cd I can play the game I paid money for. This is not guaranteed with HL2
did you forget to take your meds?
Sound familiar?
- Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
I'm with you man. People are too fucking obsessed with the idea of making every single last penny out of their products. It sickens me.
Having said that it doesn't bother me too much that Valve have used copy-protection, it just appalls me that they don't care about the "minority" of users they have banned who legtimately paid for the game.
Valve are going to make a ridiculous amount of money out of this game. Why do they care about a bunch of 12 year olds who couldn't afford the game anyway? To me it just looks like greed.
I should add that I am a producer of creative content myself.
Let's not kid ourselves. The cd check is a punishment from Valve for not purchasing the game online using Steam and giving them more money. It is accompanied by the lack of Day of Defeat and HL:source (considering the retail version has a comparative cost to the steam 'silver' package).
I pre-bought my game far earlier then they released the info on the Steam vs retail packages. I feel insulted by Valve and I personally hope Vivendi gives them some sort of legal grief for the way things turned out.
"Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest." - Denis Diderot
I haven't heard anyone here complain about the fact that your XBox live account will get locked if Microsoft finds you using a hacked XBox, yet most people here are complaining about the same exact thing -- Valve is locking your account if you get caught using a hacked (in this case, cracked) executable.
Besides, in both cases of being locked out by the vendor, you should still be able to play non-online games. If Valve locks your account for using a no-cd crack, you still should be able to play single player, since you can bypass the Valve validation anyway with another crack.
One more thing -- with the XBox, Microsoft knows that the Xbox was actually purchased (with the exception of those which were stolen), while in the case of HL2, there is a significant number (the percentage is of course debatable, but my guess it is >50%) of illegally copied software being disabled.
Note to self: Stop putting jokes in my insightful comments so I can get something other than +1 Funny!
Here's a question for the "EULA's are unenforceable" crowd:
The consumer software industry is almost thirty years old. The practice of enclosing license agreements in boxed software has been around nearly as long.
In all that time, has there ever been a court ruling addressing the question of whether post-point-of-sale EULA's are valid? If not, why not?
"Yesterday, Valve disabled approximately 20,000 Steam accounts which had been used to try to access Half-Life 2 without purchasing it. The method used was extremely easy for Valve to trace and confirm, and so there is no question that the accounts disabled were used to try and illegally obtain Half-Life 2." "Second, the number of people who actually had bought HL2 and used the CD key cheat was VERY small. VERY small. Most people just tried to rip off the game and not bother buying it." CD *KEY*. So explain to me why anyone who has a legitimate copy of the game would use a phony CD-KEY?
What you've been buying all these years are licenses to use a piece of software. The company that owns the software (in this case, Valve) can revoke your license any time they want, if they feel you have violated the license agreement. The difference now is that, for the first time, Steam allows them to do so with real and immediate effect. You are free to contest a revocation by contacting the owner, or by taking your case to a court of law, if you feel you did not violate the license agreement.
If you want to argue whether or not software should be licensed, that's fine. But this is the way it currently works, so you'd better get used to it.
Ya... i pirate video games.. i dont pay for most of them. so what? most games out there are shit. and the companies know it.. same games just with prettier grahpics, and even dumber A.I. than the last game of that genre.
But a game like Halflife2.. i know im going to get good money out of a game like that. $60 for a 5 year investment.. hey thats pretty good return rate. and downloading 5CD's what a hassle.. i just bought the game. Masters of Orian, Dungeon Keeper 1-2, Battlefield1942, Halflife2.. thoes are the games i own. the rest have lasted less than a week. its the Mod community that supports them
The More Knowledge you have the Luckier you Get- J.R. Ewing
Yes, it is a legitimate use. There's nothing you can say to convince me otherwise, so don't bother trying.
I don't own the game, but if I had, I would not have agreed to any contract upon purchase of the box. If I don't want to have to put the CD in the drive every time I want to play the game, I shouldn't have to. Period. Don't like it? Tough.
I support any efforts made to circumvent this and other forms of intrusive copy protection.
www.kitchengeek.com -- Nosh for
Generally agree with you, who cares if people who don't pay get banned?
But otherwise I want to say, don't call it stealing you stupid wanker.
Once again, someone bitchin' on SD about stealing something and not being able to use it... this is getting old.
From the article:
Yesterday, Valve disabled approximately 20,000 Steam accounts which had been used to try to access Half-Life 2 without purchasing it. The method used was extremely easy for Valve to trace and confirm, and so there is no question that the accounts disabled were used to try and illegally obtain Half-Life 2.
Accounts also may be closed due to fraudulent activity in an attempt to obtain additional products for your Steam Account. This includes Credit Card fraud, theft of accounts you do not own and using cracked versions of Valve games.
--
There is a direct link to what to do if you believe they made an error, etc.
I think this part of the message is vitally important, compared to the other piece, because people are going "oh I applied a no-cd patch, etc."
Note that the steam agreement does say you won't alter the software. Note you can also get a no-cd patch (as other posts have been saying) by simply uninstalling the game, and then running it via Steam.
And note, when you install a Steam game from CD, it doesn't necessarily copy the entire CD (or CDs) into the cache. When you play the game over Steam, the steam title has the option of loading files from the CD that aren't present in Steam's cache (and AFAIK there's no way to turn this option off from the steam client).
This "might" be why one of the CDs has to be in the drive, because it might be reading an index (I've not licensed Steam to develop games, just investigated licensing it, and that's one of the features in the list).
If your code is acting bloated, and is running rather slow, it's likely and predicted that some loops you will unroll.
I refuse to purchase a product that has to be authenticated for:
1) single player
2) playing MP on a LAN
Authentication for playing on the internet is perfectly fine and makes sense, but gaming companies have overstepped their bounds. You might not agree but, I really don't care...dish out the cash now if you want but don't complain later when all your games stop working after game company X stops their 'support.'
Go look how many people are downloading stuff at supernova et al right now, this very instant.
Compare that to how many people are in the checkout line at the Best Buys and EB's right now.
People are mostly honest, and given the option of paying or stealing, most will pay.
I was in a little shop yesterday, the owner was in the back room when I showed up. He called out that he'd be with me in a minute. I had the place to myself, I easily could have taken what I wanted and left without paying. Yet I didn't, and it wasn't for fear of being caught (I wouldn't have been).
Most people just aren't douchebags.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Of course not. Copying a game from someone isn't stealing. Stealing is when you take something away from someone else. If I steal your car, what makes it stealing is the fact that you don't have a car, not that I now have one.
Infringing copyright by copying games may be wrong and illegal, but it's sloppy to call it stealing or piracy because it's not.
Taking a box off a store shelf is stealing, because you are depriving someone else of it.
demi
There are still a shitload of people that get nothing but headshots on CS:S with scores of 10x kills to x deaths.
There are still people that know where EVERYONE's at, and you better believe they're coming for you in your new secret random hiding spot that's way out of the way. Likely aiming for your head through the wall.
There are still people that run faster than you, reload faster, shoot faster, etc. There are still people that will almost always win because all they have to do is push a button. They don't have to aim, use strategy, or anything.
Their CHEATS do it for them. Steam hasn't prevented these, because a third of the CS:S players still cheat, and obviously.
Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
More importantly, why aren't more people telling this company to fuck off? When TurboTax tried the activation bullshit, there was a huge public outcry, people applied for refunds in droves (and got them in states where the laws allow them), and rushed to H&R Block's TaxCut. TurboTax got the message big time and took out a full page ad in the NY Times and other major newspapers apologizing for the incident and as a result TurboTax for this year has no activation required.
Of course, I can answer my own question: because there are other ways to do your taxes, but Half-Life 2 is shiny and game addicts need their fix. If you hate a company's product, you shouldn't support them. People need to be stronger and stop buying movies and DVDs and software that impose restrictions. Only then will the companies wake up.
There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
At least we have the guts to post in ways that can identify us, sockpuppet.
And congratulations comparing a legitimate infringement of a perceived right to your car getting broken into. You win the 2004 Golden False Analogy Award.
www.kitchengeek.com -- Nosh for
So your excuse is that you didn't read the click through license agreement, so the fact that you were using a pirated key and they deactivated your account should mean they owe you compensation?
Good God.
Reading these comments strikes me as funny, with all the Steam defenders. If this was an RIAA affiliated music CD, I wonder if the comments like "But Steam has to make a living! Stop the Pirates!" would hold water to us slashdotters.
I hate replying to my own posts, but I feel like I left out this important element to put it into perspective.
I forgot to mention the MMORPG aspect. Take a game like Everquest or Star Wars Galaxies. You're actually worse off if you buy into something like that because of the monthly fee. Not only are you spending $40 - $50 bucks for the boxed product, but you've got to pay a monthly free of anywhere from $5 - $10+ to continue playing after the first month and you're in the same boat as you would be if you bought Half Life 2 from Valve in that if the software company goes belly up then you can't play the MMORPG that you paid for.
With Half Life 2 multiplayer (Counter-Strike: Source and Day of Defeat: Source), I spend $40 bucks up front, and can play as long as I like and never have to spend another dime. Let's say I spent $45 on it and played for 2 years and then Valve goes out of business. It cost me a total of $45, which comes out to about $1.66 a month to play the game. Now let's say I spend $45 on a boxed MMORPG game which includes one month of free play and then proceed to pay $5 a month for the next 23 months of play. That's a grand total of $160 bucks to play the game for 2 years, or about $6.66 a month.
Half Life 2 is the better deal. Especially when you consider that most hit MMORPG games cost more than $5 bucks a month.
When it comes to value, Half Life 2 with activation beats any MMORPG game out there hands down. Yeah you have to deal with product activation, but you're in a similar situation with a MMORPG and you don't have to deal with a monthly fee for each month you play Half Life 2's multiplayer games or Half Life 2 itself.
But in the British English, the company is a plural entity:
Microsft have annouced blah blah blah.
I puzzled over this for ages back in the day, a British computer gamer mag had an ad with the copy:
PSION HAVE PROBLEMS
It took me for freaking ever to get it into my head what that was supposed to mean.
Sure, one company is one entity, but it's made up of more than one individual, so in the British variant it is treated as a plural.
Here we might say "The Feds have arrested so and so" but to use your company analogy, The Feds are one entity... see it's kind of a gray area.
I'm not American. The DMCA doesn't apply to me. And I don't acknowledge the EULAs as valid. Many jurisdictions agree with me.
"Legitimate" doesn't necessarily mean "legal", anyway. History has shown that it is always legitimate to ignore bad laws.
www.kitchengeek.com -- Nosh for
I think they are, actually. It's helpful to distinguish between "illegal" and "wrong," for example, so it's probably helpful to distinguish between "violating the license" and "stealing." Language can be important because we absorb its connotations--your statement that the violators deserve "punishment" comes from what is implied by the term "stealing," I think. You don't "punish" someone for violating a license, though you may certainly be justified in revoking it.
demi
I will not purchase HalfLife 2 at this point. I had intended on purchasing it in a few weeks (after a system upgrade). This Steam thing puts all the cards in the hands of Valve. If they miss identify behaviour on your part, they can literally "unsell" hundreds of dollars of software in the blink of an eye. Now, of course, they will not refund your purchases, they will gladly keep that. I do not condone the theft and use of Valve's software, but I also am getting really tired about the "terms and conditions" that companies are giving themselves. Software should be treated no differently than any other form of purchase. Companies should not be able to give themselves super-judge powers, that in the blink of an eye can undo all purchases which have been done with that company. Kick the illegal software out, most certainly. But also kicking out legally purchased software, is not right.
Not in itself, but people expect (with some justification perhaps) that once they've "contacted Valve directly" Valve will tell them to go screw themselves. PR problems force companies to actually do something; it's much easier to ignore a problem when you can hide behind a faceless bureaucracy and tell people to shove it.
demi
I have a few questions about the EULA which pose some interesting situations. 1) If I'm under 18 and I install a game and push "I accept" but then violate the EULA, can they do anything? Since I'm a minor, the "contract" is null and void, and in theroy I can do whatever I want. 2) If I don't accept the EULA, does that mean that I can attempt to reverse engineer the software? I'm not to sure about copyright laws, but I didn't agree to the "no-reverse engineering" bit in the EULA. 3) What if (again) I don't accept the EULA, but manage to copy all the files off the CD and onto my computer, making the directory structure in tact and all files in place? In theroy I can do whatever I want (including play and/or possibly modify the files) as I did not agree to the EULA. I've been wondering about these questions, but I've never been able to find the answers. Maby someone can answer these questions.
What's the point of a sig?
The nature of the container is irrelevant.
If you don't need a license to use a book, then you don't (or at least should not) need a license to use software either. That is implicit in your purchase of the container.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Excellent point, very well said!
Wooden armaments to battle your imaginary foes!
Oh sorry, so they are enforcing the license that I bought, but wasn't shown until after I put down the money and could no longer get a refund. Thanks for clearing that up.
I love Steam! Here's why: 1. I don't have to drive to the store, which may or may not be sold out. 2. I don't have to wait in line to pay at said store. 3. I don't have to deal with uninformed employees, "HL2? Hmmm...we have Halo 2? Is that what you were looking for?" 4. I don't have to worry about scratched CDs (some may argue that you have to worry about a crashed HD) 5. It lets me pay Valve directly and saves me $5 in the process. 6. It's easy to use. So, no, you're not alone.
http://www.bynarystudio.com
The trouble with product activation is that it's implemented in such a painless and convenient way (in the majority of cases, where it works properly) that people fail to see this process for what it actually is: repeatedly asking permission from the manufacturer to use the product you purchased, after you purchased it. It seems the process is too automatic, too obscure not only for Joe User, but surprisingly, technically literate Slashdot readers who you'd normally expect to understand abstract threats to their freedom.
Perhaps if people had to actually speak to the company and say the words, "could you please activate my software?" and say it a few more times for other software packages, and a few more times after reinstallation, it might hit home. Perhaps if they had to wait on hold for thirty minutes, desperately seeking permission to use the software they purchased, it might sink in. Perhaps if, in a fit of nostalgia they decide to reinstall an old game only to be dismayed they can't play it because the activation system no longer works and no patch is available, they will get the message.
Indeed, whenever I've had to phone Microsoft to activate Windows XP, or Intuit/Reckon to activate Quicken, it's not the annoyance of being put through a five minute exchange of serial codes that sticks in my mind, but the more profound emotion of resentment of being put in that situation in the first place. I resent having to obediently request permission to use something I'd spent hundreds of dollars on. I resent having to repeatedly ask permission during the life of the product, according to criteria set by the company. I resent not knowing if I'll still be able to use the software a few years down the track. I resent that many of my friends, who paid nothing for their pirated/cracked copies, don't have to suffer the same indignities or worry about such things.
The most important issue about activation is not whether it's convenient or inconvient, but the way it fundamentally changes the relationship between the customer and a company selling proprietary software. For the life of the product, the customer is now dependent on the company to repeatedly affirm the most basic right of any software user. Not to peak at the software's source code or modify it, but simply to run the program they purchased legitimately.
If you use the nocd crack, Valve will assume you are a theif and disable your steam account and game.
Your screwed and this is why people are so pissed here.
I bet half of the 20,000 were using the crack.
http://saveie6.com/
I actually have bought the game, what a blast it is, I dig this thing a lot. However, my geek mind wasn't able to deal with the copy protection scheme, not in the sense that I didn't like it but in the sense that I was wondering what was sent to Valve, how, when, why does it need to connect everytime I play and so on. Since pirates usually figure that out before me I downloaded a crack version so I could check which file were changed and how, and maybe get a few hints on how the Valve authentication system works.
Pure curiosity since I already have bought the game. I downloaded, didn't find anything interesting since it was the actual source code that has been stolen which I needed to compile and so on. I was very disapointed but since I also have a life I stoped my investigation there, disapointed by the unfruitfull long wait of the download.
Thank God!
I could be cut off today...
Curiosity killed the cat... and the geek's Valve account.
My situation must not be very common but still, I'll think twice before trying to know next time...
Why dont companys just put ultra fine print on the box that says.
Why should it be ultra-fine print? What do they have to hide? Aside from that, I wouldn't have a problem with them making it available online. Just as long as they understand that some or all of their EULA may not even be valid where I live, and they should not be allowed to take action against me by removing my right to play the game if I violate unenforceable portions of the EULA. Now they could refuse to sell the game to people that live in places that won't enforce parts of the EULA, but that's up to them.
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
People are discovering that when you buy any product that is subject to "activation", you haven't really bought anything.
No. People are discovering they actually have bought nothing. In my country, lawyers would call this a fraud.
There you are, staring at me again.
I'm one of those would be customers this B.S. has lost.
I was really looking forward to Half-Life2.
But my laptop is often unable to connect to anything when(where) I'm playing, and I've been known to take out that power sucking cd/dvd drive to make room for a spare battery.
Obviously the stream activation/check in with mothership is not a good thing for me. Same with the CD route.
Besides, if I purchased via Stream, what do I do when I nuke and pave? It happens about every 8 months, if not every semester. (Yes, I'm a college student.) Can I download a copy to store on cd/dvd for when I reload, or do I have to download from stream everytime? And what do I do when the company changes, fails, stops supporting it? (That's not speculation, it will happen, and probably way too soon...)
Basically this whole HL2 mess looks like a timebomb debacle of incompetence that will only get worse.
At least they didn't tie the installation to a specific processor id code... Guess that's in the next patch....
The ad for this slashdot page says - "In Stores Now! Half Life 2. Buy Now!". Ah-hah, right.
The law of Unintended Consequences predicts:
Valve will loose more legitimate purchases than the number of illegitimate users it has banned. This will happen due to alienating consumers with it's tactics.
There are lots of posts on Steam about users being pissed about having to log into steam and use the disk check after verifying the serial. A no-cd crack was relased which would still require you to login and verify your serial with Steam. People are getting banned for using the no-cd crack. The Warez version of the game does not even go through steam so it would be hard for Steam to lock someone out.
h p? s=14a3ac916acc2a115bffcc6e53daa4ab&threadid=178908 &perpage=15&pagenumber=2
Also, I played the warez version of the game before I bought it since it was sold out in the store. The warez version started up in 5-10 seconds. The retail version takes almost 45 seconds with Steam verification and CD checking. I have a high end system so thats not the bottleneck.
http://www.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.p
Right, because you have so much proof they did that themselves. Not that it's impossible, but you're just talking out your ass. I've seen a whole lot more serial codes/cd keys released by hackers than by companies, haven't you? Seems the more likely situation to me....
:)
Anyway, while I don't know that I agree with their losing access to legitimately bought games, they would have to be pretty dumb to go and enter something like that in an online service if they actually thought it through first. I don't have a whole lot of sympathy in regards to that
(\(\
(^v^)
(")")
This is the cute vorpal bunny virus, copy to your sig or runaway, runaway in fear!
So what are you going to do when, in a day or a week or a month or a year, the steam database has a glitch and marks your account as using a stolen key? Or when steam is cracked (because it WILL be sooner or later - the temptation is just too great) and Valve will start locking down legitimate accounts? What recourse will you have then?
I hadn't known there were so many idiots in the world until I started using the Internet -Stanislaw Lem
A proper and legal way to punish someone that wronged you is to take the person to court, not to inflict what you consider due process upon them. In all honesty, it sounds very vigilante-ish.
Quote from a person who had his account banned:
"on my account i had over 200 dollars worth of legit software. in the consumer world they cant just take it away form u. its like stealing."
Apparently Valve "like stealing" his supposed legit software is verboten, but him straight out stealing HL2 is a-okay. Thats sound logic to me! Whatever. One less asshat to deal with in C-S.
The arrogance is not in telling them to talk directly. The arrogance is in combining that with a censoring of the topic in the forum, which they DO - which isn't just doing it for customer support, it's doing it for propoganda purposes.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
How do we guesstimate how much money they are gonna loose due to negative reactions (including "word of mouth" and rumours) relative to _stupid_ would-be "pirates" that don't know how to find/use properly cracked version (and that won't probably buy the game anyway)? What is the probability that the "pirates" and P2P nets would be blamed for this losses. Oh, don't bother with the second question. :)
... that Valve seems to be making this Steam stuff work well for it's direct customers who bought the download, but it's apparently screwing over some random customers who bought the game in a store, via all the middlemen.
I mean, Valve and Sierra have been bitching at each other over HL2 for a while, Valve is making less profit on the retail version than the download, and now, as soon as HL2 reaches the shelves, the boxed retail version suffers activation delays, and then Valve pisses off a bunch more retail customers with this CD check stuff. If I had my tinfoil hat on, I'd think that perhaps Valve is trying to make the retail boxed version a relatively jarring and annoying experience so that customers will be more inclined to buy straight from them.
This might be a foretaste of our brand new DRM age - proprietary software monopolists with complete power over their user's computers might start finding subtle ways to attack the consumer to 'persuade' them to upgrade....
This is why I will NEVER work in the gaming industry. I spent over 10 years going broke in the gaming industry and after leaving, I will never look back. It is so nice to work for people who appreciate your help. Computer Gaming is for the most part a thankless job.
These kids are so spoiled, they have had the paradise of American opportunity handed to them without any burdens of being raised in an unstable world (such as worrying about where your next meal is coming from, how to stay warm enough to avoid dying from exposure, etc), and they still have the audacity to believe they OWN someone after giving a measly fifty bucks to them. Most of these kids have no concept of what it is like to create something that actually generates money. Nor do they understand the work that goes in to making them. Their idea of work is "I beat the game in 5 hours".
I'd like to tell all these whiny complainers "Guess what kids, your measly $50 does not buy Valve, their talent, or their game. It buys a revocable license to play. Don't like it? Good. Tell your friends not to steal."
These kids will lie, cheat, manipulate, and do anything to circumvent any effort to make an even playing field online. Including coming up with the most bizarre story about how my uncle's brother's cousin shot the dog that was my sisters and so I bought her this game to make her feel better and she thought it was for her friend....
Sure. Whatever. Once in awhile those stories will be true and someone unfortunately will be inconvenienced.
So what.
Believe it or not it is still pretty much a reasonably free country. If you don't like Valve, don't buy their stuff. If you don't like Microsoft, don't buy their stuff. If you think there should be something better, get off your ass and go make something better.
This whole debate is like blaming Ford for loosing your car keys. "I wasn't stealing my car! I can't get into it! Is Ford going to pay to have a locksmith come unlock my car?"
Adults understand we are inconvenienced by thieves. If nobody ever stole cars, we would not need car keys. If nobody ever stole anything, we would never need keys at all.
Hey... Imagine that... a world without keys. Every door would open 24 hours a day 7 days a week. Wouldn't that be nice?
On the steam forums someone from the armed forces was complaining about not being able to play on ship because they were not allowed to use internet on their ship. Who was he blaming? Valve. Not the kids that stole the game in the first place, but Valve.
Someone who's livelihood depends on evil people doing evil things should realize the cost of splash damage.
Valve is only guilty of making a better lock. They are not guilty of locking these people our of their cars.
If you lost access, you lost your own keys. Either by choice of occupation or by not keeping the CD-Key secret or by trying to use a cracker to disable the need for leaving the CD in the drive.... It don't matter.
Buying Half Life again still costs less than re-keying your car.
"...people that had their accounts disabled had attempted to steal an item worth about $50. 20,000 accounts times $50 - that's about a million dollars worth of illegal attempts. That's hard to ignore."
Don't just disable their accounts, I say attempt to prosecute some of them, if at all possible. These people are thieves, pure and simple. (I don't care what you think about the definition or semantics of "steal" and copyright infringement; honest people inherently know that the two are for all practical purposes, equal).
Why do so many of you defend these thieves and act like the company is just so evil? Oh, becasue some of you ARE those thieves and had your account canceled?
If you can't agree with the terms of service, don't buy or use that product. Pretty simple eh? Its THEIR product, THEY make the rules. We only affect their rules with our wallets and purses, not by stealing or by whining here like little sissies.
I think its hilarious. The smug little software thieves are so used to getting away with anything, this time they got the smackdown. Go cry some more crybabies.
I bought the DVD for 60 Euros
Then i had to wait for more than two hours as steam was doing stange stuff to my computer and communicating god knows what to some evil corporation before i could play.
I arrive at work today bringing my laptop along and a collegue just downloaded the torrent,he was happily playing the illegal version.
Then i started my version to compare and steam started doing whoknows for a freaking half hour before i could play.
grrrr, next time i wait for the cracked version of any steam enabled game.
The game is exellent, no complaints there : )
And yes we can play games at work, we own the place.
Why not? The State has no problem punishing me for violating the terms of my drivers license, as well as revoke it.
Those are bad examples. Talk to your city about tearing down your house. They might have a problem with it. Actually, ask them if you can do anything you want to your house, since you own it. Talk to your local DMV about your car, ask them whether or not you can do anything you want to the car cause you own it. Again, don't like it, don't buy it.
used. Oh wait, Steam is used to get around our rights of First Sale Dactrine
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
when you steal something from a store, you are innocent until proven guilty.
Valve just assumes you are guilty and punishes you.
I, for one, am very sick and tired of being treated like a criminal every where I go.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
It seems like the software industry spends so much time thinking about the losses due to piracy they forget what those numbers really mean. You see quotes for billions of dollars lost for the industry as a hole.
I'd just like to stop for a moment to remind everyone in the software business here that these losses are imaginary. Not everyone who is cheating a software license would have bought the software to begin with. In fact we don't know how small a percentage of software theft results in real dolor loss. Since the product itself does not cost money per unit, and distribution costs are being paid by the crackers the maker of the software is not experiencing true losses.
Just keep this whole "look how much money we're loosing" shit in check, because when you piss off paying customers to the point of not wanting to buy your products then you are loosing real money not imaginary money.
It reminds me of the cartoon where the bear catches 5 fish then drops them all to catch one more.
I'm really getting tired of people not thinking problems all the way through these days.
-fire
...if downloading it off Steam. If you purchased the boxed version, didn't the store give you a receipt when you bought it? I teach Civics, and I always tell my students that smart consumers keep their receipts.
Get into the habit now, and you'll be a lot better off, trust me. You won't worry about things like "proving" you purchased the game.
I find it ironic that Valve isn't accepting the potential for a user to have their key ripped off somehow (via hacking, trojans, unethical friends/family, etc.) when they were hacked no less than a year ago and lost a substantial chunk of their code.
Add to that the fact that users typically don't have the resources to setup proper security when an organization like Valve *SHOULD*.
Of course, a good chunk of those people probably stole the product, but how does one prove they didn't?
What's really interesting about this is the fact that the gamers were the ones who committed theft by pirating copies of the game. This in turn results in their online account getting locked/disabled. Since the game depends on the online account to play, they get screwed.
Sounds fair to me. I liken this to using fake ID to get into a bar. Sure, you're paying for the beer and whatever else you're buying, but you used illicit means to get in. You're still going to get bounced from the bar.
People used cracked and pirated copies of the game as well as a cd key. People did this of their own free will in an attempt to get around paying for the game, but wanting in on the online gaming. Valve/Steam are in their full rights to bounce people out of the system for violating terms of service.
Simple example:
Steam TOS: You need a legit copy of the game to acquire and keep an account. If you don't have said legit copy of the game and/or Valve indicates that your copy is pirated, then we disable your account.
Sucks for the person(s) who decided it would be a good idea to share their CD key or share their copy of Valve's software.
The other thing is that it isn't like Valve/Steam aren't offering means of correcting the problem: Provide proof of a valid copy of the software and the valid CD key and they'll reactivate your account.
So... hey! Just send them the real cdkey and all is cool. You do have the real cd key, right?
Winged Power Photography
AFAIK there are pirate versions of the game that don't require that steam be installed. How did 20000 people manage to find a pirate version that ties you to a steam account? My feeling is that there are a pretty large number of people who *bought* the game, used a nocd, and got banned.
All Rights Reserved. All Wrongs Avenged.
Actually, if a demo is available, I use that to decide if I like the game. I realize I only see one level, and sometimes just certain facets of the game. However, it gives me a feel for it to decide if it's worth my hard earned money.
DarkMantle I been bored, so I started a blog.
... is 30,000 gamers buy HL2 at the most expensive retail price they can find and then notify Valve that they regretfully cannot accept the terms of a grossly one-sided EULA and would like a full refund. This is not about piracy, it's about Valve exploiting the ugly side of being a wired community.
Maybe I'm completely mis-informed here, but if I am Valve has a lot of damage control to do.
I'm in the process of building a nice pc, and have been planning on purchasing HL2. Now I'm affraid to do it.
I just can't stomache the idea of "owning" a game that I don't have enough rights even to play it w/o an internet connection. I have one, but it comes down to the principal of it all.
What happens if Valve goes down? Or their servers have a problem. When I want to play a game that's on my computer why should I ask permission from a server that may or may not be up? The whole "in 5 years when I reinstall the game" bit. Too scary for me to plunk down my hard earned money for. Too big brother.
I don't think I can buy it. Steam doesn't seem to have the personel or resources to handle heavy loads of customer support. Did I hear right that isnt' even a support phone number?
So how long am I going to be able to play this? I dont mind Valve preventing people from stealing the game, thats great. But I have 10 year old games that I still love to play, will I still be able to play HL2 in 10 years? I want to own my game, not rent it from Valve. One of my favorite games is Command and Conquerer Renegade, it is no longer supported by the manufacturer but I can still play it online because other users still play it, if I needed EA to validate it I would be up a creek. I really want this game, it looks like alot of fun, but I dont want to spend $50 to rent a game for however long Valve decides I deserve. If I'm wrong please say so (I would love to run out and get this game today), but from what I've read the EULA is to restrictive for me.
Before half-life 2 became available Steam was online and available for playing other games. I have owned the original half-life game for years and have never barrowed the game to anyone, or shared the key. When the WAN authentication servers went offline and you needed to use a Steam account to play over the Inet, I signed up for a Steam account. I found that someone had already used my key to register for an account. Valve's FAQ said that if I sent in my original printed key, they 'may' reactivate the key for my account and that they would not return the sleeve and key to me even if I provided postage.
Essentially, someone probably generated and used my Key. Then when I (a real Valve customer) decided to try to get my account back, they made it hard for me, and easy for the thief.
To make a long story short, there are a lot of games out there. I simply decided that Valve is no longer concerned about its customer and therefore no longer concerned about a good name.
I will use my dollar to show them what I think by purchasing titles from their competition. Hopefully others will realize that Valve has crossed the line and pay only someone who provides both a good product and A REASONABLE ANTI-PIRACY POLICY.
Valve may have made sure that two people didn't play the game from my single Key online, but they also made sure that I will never buy a Valve game again. I purchased that game, and never shared it with anyone. Then Valve gave the right to play the game to someone else, and took it from me...
First, the whole activation thing is just too inconvenient. It smacks of the RIAA-conspiracy model of 'You will pay us this much for the product, you will use the product in this way, and you will like it.' I think that a product should be at my convenience, to use and I see fit, and the only thing the publisher should be concerned with is that I actually paid for the product. But what Valve is doing is just too much.
Second, I usually only have time to play games when I'm on the road. That means I use a laptop. This thing requires me to have my battery-sucking CD attached all the time, and that's a deal killer.
Hey, Valve, how about making a really good product and then selling it for a really good price? Then most of the 'pirates' out there wouldn't bother to steal it because its not worth the effort. Sure, there would still be the losers that would do it for the challenge, but who would really bother to steal something that's really cool yet costs $20 bucks? You might actually sell 100x more copies than are stolen. In other words, how about giving some value for the money you're charging? Something to think about.
Meanwhile, I'm putting my dollars where they'll actually be appreciated.
"Stop whining!" - Arnold, as Mr. Kimble
While I tend to take Valve's side in this (since no one is forcing those who don't like the system to buy the game), it's still notably schizophrenic in some respects.
I mean, the physical media are protected with Securom - but if you buy & download the game via Steam, you can give free copies to all your friends and Valve tells you how to do that on Steam support pages. (You can just copy your entire Steam dir to all your friends' computers, activate each one and they can play in offline mode. After that, you can even change your Steam password to prevent them from accidentaly damaging your account). So, what use is having Securom on the media in this situation?
The problem with most EULA's is that they're so bloody long that they don't fit on the box. They just mention "this product bound by the containing EULA..." or some crap. It's catch 22. You have to open the software to read the EULA, but if you disagree with the EULA, you cannot return this software since it's now opened. I haven't seen an EULA actually on paper other than MS products. Have you?
"You, Socrates, are breaking the covenants and agreements which you made with us at your leisure, not in any haste or under any compulsion or deception, but having had seventy years to think of them, during which time you were at liberty to leave the city, if we were not to your mind, or if our covenants appeared to you to be unfair."
... if you don't like/agree with the rules as we ALL pretty much know them to be at this time, do not purchase the game/license/vapor/whatever. I think the number of people who disagree with these kinds of measures is probably ridiculously low compared to the number who won't purchase based on these tactics.
Now that we know, put your money where your mouth is and don't play the game. If you do purchase, I don't see how you can argue that you disagree with the method Valve is using.
My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
But the game itself is woefully overrated. I'd say, "Off to eBay with this," but who knows whether HL 2 will work if it has to be reactivated by a new owner?
HL 2 suffers most from being broken and from a fundamentally bad design choice. The STUT-STUT-STUT-STUT-STUT-STUTtering of dialogue at the start of virtually every new scene is something Valve will have discovered in testing, but obviously (and arrogantly) shipped anyway to get Xmas sales. The Source engine has big memory management problems.
Then there are the long, painfully slow load times, one coming every 10-15 minutes, and lasting around 60 seconds. Levels are split at arbitrarily unidentified points, so you never know when you're going to get hit with another minute-long delay--or make that 2-3 minutes, if you decide you want to go back to explore or find supplies.
HL 2 definitely has moments of brillliance. Fighting giant striders is interesting, and skimming along water reservoirs in your Road Warrior-style craft is fun for a bit. But it is far from being the masterpiece that the sold-out gaming press has blathered on about.
This doesn't happen to Valve for a couple of reasons. Walt Mossberg doesn't review games, but he did review TurboTax. Mossberg's column can propel a product's sales or destroy them; more importantly, he's an unbiased, reputable critic with a massive audience who writes for the most respected newspaper in America. That kind of credibility doesn't come easily, and no game critic has it.
That leads to the next point, which is that the gaming media is an incestuous pool of kick-backs and lame reporting with a generous amount of hype. Without a critical press and sufficiently discerning readers to follow that press, game companies are free to get away with almost whatever they want.
Your answer to your own question is relevent too. In economics, a competitive market often has perfect or near perfect substitutes, such as TurboTax and TaxCut. These products are not precisely interchangable, however, but they are much closer than games. Each game is unique, and as such one cannot find a near perfect substitute for HL2. That means people are willing to put up with Steam and all the rest of this bullshit.
Notice that I say people in general, because there's no way I would buy HL2 because of all the shit I've read on /. about it.
set my steam to offline mode, and fire up hl2...
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
Yeah what you say is true.
I think there's room for some developers to go back to doing things via shareware, and make ridiculous amounts of money again. The whole "intellectual property" route is not the most lucrative with computer games imo, not to mention you get situations like this one because you get paranoid about making every last penny.
In fact I want to try it out. I just need some artists willing to work for free until we release.
Honestly, if you don't want to deal with activation, don't use the product. End of story. Free Software will surely produce a game of HL2 quality before you die.
"For better or worse, I don't buy this crap anyway."
No wonder the software piracy problem is huge.
"[I]t's quite obvious that the concept of IP is absurd and robs the public at large."
Yep, as obvious as shit stinks. What is obvious is that no matter what the laws are you would still be trying to half-ass rationalize your position that the world owes you something. Obviously the position of someone who's never actually made anything and tried to sell it.
damaged by dogma
Beautifully put. This licensing scheme is hostile to consumers, and the companies involve need to be taught a lesson--probably through litigation.
Except that after they've banned your account, it won't work in offline mode.
I hadn't known there were so many idiots in the world until I started using the Internet -Stanislaw Lem
The better analog is to have a Gameboy game that requires you to have the box in hand whenevre you want to play. In short, an annoying physical vestage of the game that makes no sense to keep otherwise.
When you install a game on the PC, it copies all media to the PC itself (generally). In this case why are you required to ALSO have the game CD?
For HL2 this is doubly an issue. Because the game material you get via CD is the same encrypted stuff you get via Steam - only in the case of STeam you have no physical CD, so it doesn't require one to play. The HL2 CD should be treated as a much faster download from Steam, and then things are the same after that.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I bought the "Game of the Year" edition of Half-life in 2002. Now I can't use my CDkey to set up a Steam account. They say any key older than 90 days is invalid ... of course I could send in $10 and my CDcase to Sierra to have my key reset, but I still see that as not quite fair. I paid for the game expecting online multi-player ability, and I had it, for 2 years, but now I don't.
Wait a year or two and when it's in discount bin and working no-activation crack has been released, then buy it. Good games don't get old. If you suspect it might get old then maybe it isn't very good afterall.
Maybe FarCry2 or 3 or something else will be better. You just don't know. But you can bet that you'll know whether HL2 is any good after waiting a year, without even trying it out first.
Preserve old classics: copy your collection onto all hard drives.
Valve isn't prosecuting people. They are simply revoking licenses to use their property. Sort of like denying someone access to your home. It is their responsibility to prove they deserve access. People just need to get over the idea that they own the software they use. Read a EULA sometime. Whether or not a EULA is legally binding is a completely different discussion.
Honestly? It's a game. You purchase a license permitting you to play said game. Some people pirate it and then get their accounts killed. If you buy a legitimate copy and follow the directions, I don't honestly see how you could get banned. Then again, the people who are whining are the ones you used a NO-CD crack, or using an outright illegal copy. Go Figure. The people who whine the most are the people who don't like paying for things. Oh wait... this is SLASHDOT, not Fark.com. What am I doing here?
Instead of deactivating the entire account, just deactivate that particular game in that particular account - just make that particular key invalid.
If the software vendor is proactive in doing this, if they are "on the ball" when it comes to seeking out and deactivating known bogus keys, this should prove as effective a deterrent as disabling the entire account. Disabling accounts isn't going to win them any friends, and if the "word" gets out that people shouldn't even bother trying to use bogus keys because they won't work but for a short while before they get deactivated, there might be enough of a disincentive to prevent people from doing those things that the software vendor doesn't want people doing.
It's been a fad for quite some time to be harsh, draconian, and fierce, but in the interests of preventing the use of bogus keys, deactivating those bogus keys, silently, switfly, and without much fanfare would probably be equally effective.
>> but how does one prove they didn't?
Huh? That seems like a pretty easy one. Produce the CD and key that came with it. Having a sales receipt would probably help too.
How do you prove you didn't steal anything?
What am I missing?
If you buy HL2 and activate it, do you have to pay a subscription fee to use the game? I am thinking of buying it but not if they require _more_ money after I already bought the game.
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
http://neuro.snusnu.at/letter2valve.txt hope someone agrees with me :/
Do not trust this signature.
Valve should consult the previous "successes" of Circuit City.
All things are possible with everything.
Anyone know if this would work for cd check? I'm almost afraid to try at this point seeing as folks are getting banned for using nocd cracks. Sad to see paying customers penalized for something like that. This is the first game I've purchased in a while and if this trend continues, will probably be the last. Not the last, however, that I play. Not to say 'Valve/Steam did this so I'm reverting to piracy', but it's pretty frustrating.
_____ "If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." -- Orwell
Who the hell are the whiners complaining that you're account was terminnated because they circumvented copy protection and/or stole the product? Are these people INSANE? Who on earth thinks it's okay to steal something, have someone take it back, and then feel like you've been cheated?
It's like looking at the sky and flat out refusing to say it's blue. Come on, people, fork over the $50 to buy the game and support the people who BUILT IT so you can enjoy it.
How many games per year do you buy? Is $50 really that much for a game? It's not.
"Politicians find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the people."
But I'm all for this. Valve's property on steam includes several multiplayer games, including the most popular one by far. A central ID that you can't change is a vital part of keeping cheaters and griefers in check. Banning by steamid and wonid work much better than a simple IP ban. Perhaps the one thing I'll fault them for is not letting people know exactly what's going on before they purchase it, but since I haven't purchased HL2 or anything else over steam, I can't say I know this as a certainty.
But hey, I'm also the kind of guy who submits those voluntary machine info statistics. Judging by the typical outrage over privacy, I'm clearly a privacy lunatic giving out personal info willy-nilly.
I Browse at +4 Flamebait
Open Source Sysadmin
I notice this is >1000 comments already, I blatantly can't be bothered to read them and I'm surprised you can, but there we go. Apologies if this has been hammered out a bunch of times already ;)
;)
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
I find this terribly amusing. People hear about a sneaky crack or a leaked code or whatever and just blithely slap it onto their PC to try and get that special angle almost nobody else did (except the other 19,999 suckers). The result? they lose any Steam supported games they actually have bought. That sucks and is arguably a bit naughty of Valve, but this is a powerful message to send right at the start of something that will be running for a while (I expect Steam will catch the eye of a lot of games company marketroids. Of course rather than use it they'll write their own, but nm).
So, while I sit here and chuckle at the boneheads who thought they could get something for nothing, I shall also rue not being able to play HL2 or CS:S yet because Cedega isn't out for another couple of weeks.
Actually, I also want to poke fun at the people who are downloading hacked versions of HL2. The particularly amusing part being that they have to download hack patches *every time* steam updates part of itself. AHAHAHA. WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?
Chris "Ng" Jones
cmsj@tenshu.net
www.tenshu.net
So now, let me ask... how is this fundamentally any different than valve suspending accounts that don't use the CD?
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Yes, with Steam you're "only renting" software. Two points about that. First, Steam only actualizes the reality which already exists in standard EULA boilerplate, that either party can break the "contract" between the parties at any time. It's absurd, but it's fairly well established absurdity which Steam is illustrating. But that's not really my point.
Second, "renting software" can be really fucking cool, and Steam illustrates that as well. The idea that any game you've paid for can be played on any machine where steam is installed is nice. The fact that they offer this flexibility to people, along with the high-speed service to grab the stuff (instead of farming everything out to oddball mirror servers, like every major game publisher feels justified in doing with all their downloads) could become a pretty popular distribution model. People aren't necessarily choosing this product out of ignorance of the consequences: it has some nice, convenient features.
The problem is that they also sold a CD. They (and I couldn't say if "they" is Valve, or VU Games, or what) confused the issue. People feel, rightly or wrongly, that they are getting a perpetually useful product when they buy that CD, which doesn't fit very well with Steam, and the notion that a game can be turned on and off depending on who is logged onto Steam.
Add into that the utterly worthless and annoying requirement for having the CD in the drive even though the game works fine running from the drive and copying the CD doesn't really get a pirate anything with the authetication system that Steam uses and you've got a situation that is designed to cause trouble. Of course single-player users are going to crack the game to turn off the stupid CD verification. Of course a central authentication authority is going to shut down hacked games, and view users who use those hacks as their adversary. The superstupid thing was putting the CD requirement in there in the first place.
Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
So basically you resent anti-piracy measures (activation at least) as they currently exist. These measures place you in a situation/relationship that evokes the profound emotion of resentment.
What I don't understand is why you resent the company rather than the thieves who've forced companies to take this position. Where's your resentment towards the thieves? Don't they figure into this whole equation?
Your post seems like an honest effort to descibe what you feel and why. But this effort seems disingenuous without a mention of software thieves and alternate anti-piracy measures.
damaged by dogma
Overall I agree with you that activation *isnt that bad*. But there are two major issues that I would like to see resolved, by law if necessary:
(1) What if you dont have internet? In Microsoft's case they let you call in, which I think is sufficient.
In Valve's case, they say "dont buy the game". Half the time I play single player games its BECAUSE i dont have internet to play online. (like when i'd go home for my college winter break).
Still, for Steam it isn't that bad. You only have to get online and activate once - so as long as I dont reinstall steam+hl2 over winter break, I can play hl2 single player until my eye's bleed. So once again...really not that big of a problem.
(2) What happens when the company stops offering activation in 10 years, or the company goes bankrupt and dies? Are we no longer allowed to use the product?
Is the company legally liable for allowing activation for as long as the company is around?
What about Nintendo -- I can't buy an 8-bit NES anymore to play my 8-bit NES games. Should Nintendo be legally liable for continuing to create consoles that play 8-bit NES games? But I paid for those games, and I can't play them anymore!
I think the solution I would like to see for (2) is that the company is legally liable for providing activation as long as any company is around which owns the rights to that bit of software.
If the company dies, or otherwise gives up rights to the software, then people can reverse engineer the game to their heart's content and post the results online for anyone to obtain.
So really, the only thing we need is some laws saying
1) any software (or otherwise) product that requires activation must allow it in a timely manner, and via multiple communication forms (mail, phone, internet, whatever)
2) Any company which owns software that requires activation (or cd-key, or even cd-in-drive checks) to run, must continue allowing activation (or keep their cd-key checking servers around, or offering replacement media for scratched CDs) indefinitely.
3) Any software product requiring activation, may be reverse engineered and offered freely in any form, if activation is no longer available for that product. (this offers an easy out for if a company stops offering activation [reasonably] but still tries to retain the rights to the software)
Good point but can you carefully tell me how the heck does a cd key get entered into an account once its registered within the customer's account? It can't. Steam will popup saying "Duplicate CD KEY. This one is already in use" which makes almost everything you said false.
Once a cd key is entered, it takes $10 to make Valve remove it from an account. Otherwise, its there as long as Steam is running and even if you gave your cd key to somebody, that would be useless because nobody else can use it. Somebody would have to hack you some way to gain access of your account information and then if Valve detects that the same account is used among a range of different ip addresses, then the cd key will be subject to ban.
What I don't understand is why you resent the company rather than the thieves who've forced companies to take this position
1. No one forced any companies to take any position. The argument that unauthorized software distribution has a significant impact on corporate bottom line is nebulous at best.
2. Get off the bandwagon. They're not thieves. You can't steal software any more than you can steal air. No one is going to suffocate just because you're breathing harder.
3. The software companies have created a straw man in software piracy. Illegal software distributors may exist, but they're no more to blame for corporate losses than shoddy worksmanship, overbearing position with respect to customers, and the artificial bubble that has the world believing that entertainment is a get-rich-quick industry.
+++ATHZ 99:5:80
that I know to hold off on the game if they can.
I have a major lan party every Xmas, and my time isn't worth bothing pirating the games;
Now, pardon my french, but I ABSOLUTELY FUCKING HATE NEEDING THE CD TO PLAY THE GAMES. I want the option to be able to install a patch - or hell, write my OWN patch - or image the CD - so I don't need that CD. Swapping CDs sucks, and they get damaged and lost. There is NO POINT.
Requiring the CD is stupid because it's a measure that is so easily circumvented and dries people who legitimately buy the game mad. That's a great idea, guys. Rocket science.
I don't mind online activation; It would be a good compromise to not needing the CD. I'll even call a 800 number and do it voice. One thing I want though is once that copy is activated, is ability to NOT NEED A DAMN CD. What makes this especially inane is people who download it via steam don't need the CD; people who buy it do! Hahaha. Great.
There is, however, an easiy solution to this: An escrow clause in the contract. If the company ceases to provide online authentication, it has to provide a means to play the game under the terms of the contract. This is common in the software industry in the closed source critical applications field; so why can't we get this out of the way here? It's easy; it shows good faith on the part of Valve; and the game isn't going to be worth selling in 10 years anyway.
The bad press valve is picking up is not worth it. Maybe I'm wrong.. but this is going to snowball. Way to flush years of community goodwill down the toilet.
..don't panic
All of you people bitching about this must be brain dead. The reason things like this started in the first place (lisc agreements and other ways to copyright material) is because of people like you that like to steal software. Oh no, you're not stealing it, your buddy just backed up a copy of his software for you. If only one person buys the software and everyone else hacks it, the company is in for a HUGE. HL2 probably cost millions of dollars to make and wtf kind of company would release their software without putting some sort of lisc agreement on it to protect themselves from hackers out here. I for one will legally purchase this software and give credit where credit is due.
The ONLY people that are bitching about how much of a pain in the ass out there are the people stealing it. Why would anyone else care. Yes you buy software and you have to "activate" it. Oh wow, when you buy a car can you just drive home? NO!! you have to put gas, oil..etc other fluids in there to make it run. You have to continually pay for this gas/oil/maintainence to keep your car running smoothly. You say well what if the software companies go out of business and we can't activate software anymore?? Well what if 30 yrs down the road gasoline isn't the standard anymore. Saying that your car lasts that long, You would be the kind of person to be pissed off the 12k you spent on a new car 30 years ago is worthless.
oh yeah i forgot...quit your bitching and just pay for the software already, trust me it's worth it!!!
~Zach
Yeah, you're right! Fun is defined by the Overlord and only what He says is fun can be fun. How did I forget!
Get a fucking life.
I bought the game at Best Buy. I went home. I got a Steam account. They did not invade my personal privacy and I provided no personal information. I installed the game. The files were unlocked. The game opened. I played until I could not physically stay awake. I was happy. What is wrong with the above picture? Nothing! The install process was absolutely painless (if a bit lengthy - I managed to get through a documentary on The Great Escape while it was working, but that was my only gripe). I sometimes feel like a heretic in the gaming community for such blasphemous statements as "I pay for all my games," or, "I don't mind purchasing a license as long as it doesn't collect any unnecessary information," etc. I'm glad Valve shut down as many accounts as they did. Now, I would hope they checked carefully enough into each one (either via electronic security checks or eyeballing the questionable ones) to make sure that legitimate accounts were not eliminated, but the fact is, they can't afford to take chances. After all the problems they had with security leaks, who can blame them for their caution and paranoia? It's because of the people who get cracks and complain about registration/license issues like these that the security exists in the first place! Contrary to whishful thinking, we do not live in a society with the free and open exchange of ideas, goods, and services. We have money. And it is used to pay for things. If you have a problem with that, spend a little less time playing pirated games, get a job, earn money, and play legal games without hassle. I'm sure the quality of your life will improve dramatically.
So that means that once one or the other cracker group has made a perfect release, the pirate copy will not only be cheaper, but also more convenient, easier to install and risk-free?
Great way to discourage piracy.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
"If only the users were as enlightened as I am, they'd rail against this horrible system!" That's a remarkably condescending position to take.
It also isn't supported by facts. Of course people realize they are "repeatedly asking permission" to use the software: one of the main features of the Steam system is that you can "ask permission" to use the games you've bought with Steam on any computer where Steam is installed. The process all the way from download to login is very explicit, and everyone understands that "logging in" is more or less the same as "asking permission."
That's true, in a way. But what you apparently don't understand about steam is that the convenience and the change in relationship are the draw, they are what makes the system more attractive to a lot of users.
Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
While that is how it works normally, HL2 is unique because there are TWO schemes working together.
One scheme is online activation via STEAM. You have to do this whether you bought the CD or not. If you did buy the CD (or stole it or whatever), you have to register the cd-key with STEAM, which checks for uniques. This would catch the thiefs right here. So why have the other scheme, that requires the CD to be in the drive? If someone hacked HL2 to play without online activation (so they wouldn't need a cd-key), then they could also hack the game to not check the CD.
THE ONLY PEOPLE THIS HURTS are those who have a VALID CD KEY and want to play without the CD in the drive.
I've been reading the comments and to me it seems the issue boils down to this:
...
Is it right or wrong to use software you haven't paid for?
I contend it is, given the circumstances.
If software was priced fairly, there would be little point in stealing it.
What is it with people who think they should be paid over and over for the very same effort?
Consumer software is grossly overpriced, therefore people simply make an economical evaluation of the situation and choose the most valuable course of action.
Moralists can argue over these issues but pragmatists would simply lower the price point, forget copyright, profit! and move on
Words to men, as air to birds.
piracy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pr-s) n. pl. piracies
Robbery committed at sea. A similar act of robbery, as the hijacking of an airplane.
The unauthorized use or reproduction of copyrighted or patented material: software piracy.
The operation of an unlicensed, illegal radio or television station.
In my second example of using the nocd crack to illegally play the game on the friends computer without the cd, that seems like unauthorized use to me which would be piracy.
And while it doesn't give me a headache to have to go into great detail on precisely explaining everything I type, I do normally type for a certain intelligence level, where I assume the reader has a basic understanding of the topic I am presenting. In this situation stating that the people in the second case were illegally pirating software; that statement was just being just being used to confirm why Valve legal could and should ban the accounts.
Was my reply satisfactory in explaining my view point mister Anonymous Coward?
Riiiight, software companies use anti-piracy measures that piss off users, just so that....they can piss off users!? Get real. Software piracy is a real problem for companies.
Tell me: how, exactly, are software companies making more profit by pissing off users on measures that themsleves cost money to implement?
Get off "the world owes me something" bandwagon.
damaged by dogma
As all can now see, the problem is not just with software, but all forms of enncroachment on private property. If i decide to plant a tree, i should not have to go and ask the city, if the tree is to be planted on my property. I can't go and tell them they can't change their gutters because they have not bought a bribe^H^H^H^H^H permit from me.
The point is that they can control what the population is doing, because we have a bunch of "just accept it" clowns running around. I hear "don't like it, don't buy it" phrases all the time - and I don't like it and i'm not buying it.
I don't accept the goverment control over where i can piss, and i fight back agians this kind of slavery.
It easy to have them back down too, just treat them like they treat you - Case in point:
I recieved a ticket for Street cleaning, and being a good little citizen i went to pay it the next day. Well after about a month i recieved a letter stating that i have a court hearing for an unpaid cleaning ticket. Well being prudent i imediately called and gave them the check number they cashed. Well they couldn't do anything and i just HAD to come in to court. I'm not having any of that.
I politely told them that my time is very valuable, (lets say at $40/hour) and loosing a whole day of work they would recieve a bill for 8 hours x 40/hour + 25% inconvenience fee. If not paid within 10 days (their due date on tickets) a 100 dolar late fee would be assesed, after 30 days the bill would be submitted to a collection agency. Upon hearing so, the manager came upon the phone and i was told that the matter is completely resolved and they will take care of the whole issue. No bill necessary. No court date necessary.
I have done the same thing. I've ripped games and used Daemon Tools for a long time. However, this is *not allowed by the EULA*. Kinda sucks, but if you did it, and they found out, they can ban you.
If they can tell a difference, I think they'd do good to unban the cd-key hack people with a warning not to do it again.
But they don't have to.
Just the fact that they aren't suing every person who was trying to pirate the game is Valve being VERY NICE to a bunch of jerks.
That is what disables the steam account. That is what caused this story, that is the big deal.
You get home and have to activate the peaches.
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
I'm posting this way too late in the game to get any response, but here goes anyway.
Which is better?
A piracy prevention mechanism that prevents 100% of the pirates from playing the game AND 5% of the valid legal customers as well,
OR
A piracy prevention mechanism that prevents 95% of the pirates from playing AND 0% of the valid legal customers?
Methinks it's the latter and Valve has chosen the former.
Praying for the end of your wide-awake nightmare.
The majority (all?) of these particular users had tried to use 1 stolen/hacked key. You can argue that someone hacked your computer and inserted that key into your account, but we're really passing the realm of believability at that point.
Your argument still doesn't hold up. Stop assuming that because we're talking about software the rules somehow change. We've been dealing with piracy and fair-use issues in this country for two-hundred years. The only difference is that now the software, music, and movie industries are becoming more effective at convincing you that they're somehow doing you a favor by fucking you.
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -David Hume
I own a piece of software from 321studios. It REQUIRES active registration via the phone or internet. That company no longer exists. So the software that I paid $150 for about two years ago is now 100% useless if I have to reload EVER. And on that note, I will never buy forcefully activated software so long as I can possibly help it.
Did you even try and look for these answers? I had exactly the same ones and found them out VERY QUICKLY:
"If I download the game and my hard drive crashes, can I reinstall it via Steam to a different hard drive?"
Yes: I want to move my Steam installation to a different disk or computer, how can I do this?
"Can I install it to more than one computer if I only play one at a time (ie my desktop machine and my laptop)?"
Yes: Can I use my Steam account on other computers?
"Does it cost anything to have a Steam account other than the initial cost of the game?"
No: " Is Steam really free?
At least try and find these things before bitching the information is not available... that took me longer to cut and past the hrefs than it did to find those answers....
All you had to do was go to Support and type your question. I've had no problem with downloading all the Steam content onto my computer, then copying it over to my brothers (he only has dial up)... and that was it. He now has and is playing HL2, and when he is done with it, I just fire up Steam and away I go... it's already there for me to play. Excellent stuff!
I think the point our poster is trying to make is that traditionally, we have not been beholden to companies to consistantly affirm the right and (in most cases) ability to purchase, execute, and run applications purchased. People do make a good point.. (What if company A is absorbed by Company B.. there are no promises that Company B will uphold your ability to use that product.. if they don't.. then your X dollar purchase just became void. Not so bad with a 50 - 100 purchase.. but when you are talking in the thousands and hundreds of thousands... it makes a BIG difference).. Or company A decides that in addition to whatever initial provisions are made to use the software, you now have to activate it via this SPECIFIC ISP.. (not such a far fetched idea as lets be honest.. everyone need to do what they think will enable them to survive and grow)
Lets also be clear here.. yes, there are some indivduals for whom all software (in their eyes) is to be free. But the percentage is VERY small relatively speaking. Most users agree that talent (and the firms that represent them) need to be compensated. (if this were not the case, valve would have just enforced a purchase online policy and there would be no shrink wrapped issues.. (its significantly cheaper for them to do so..)
What we are seeing here with this activation trash is the notion that they might loose 3 cents to the 5 people that did not purchase the software over the 5000 that did.
I believe there have been numerious studies from our dear friends at the RIAA and others which, dispite their cries, show that those 5 people don't make a bit of difference in their profits..(in fact, in many cases they help in the "advertisement" of the product itself).
Personally, I refuse to make use of any product (hardware or software), regardless of method or means, that forces my use down a path that THEY enforce. This is a personal choice so lets not start flaming here. For others, they choose to wave that right (ie: choice) in favor of doing what they wish to do..
But I do have a problem with the masses that hand over their supposed rights (little tested as they are) in favor of the simple rewards they think they have.
Of course, that is just my 2 cents.
God made the Idiot for practice, and then He made the School Board -- Mark Twain Look for http://Thebar.steelbeachca
In Europe rights are things that you can't sign away.
If you believed that you were purchising xyz or that the contract is inavlid then in Europiean law the contact falls on the side of the person who purchased the goods (false adveertising etc..).
Click throughs don't carry any salt. Don't treat them like they do.
Not-for-resale is one of the funniest things that I've ever seen used, since that statement is compleatly against the law.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
From this C|Net article, These agreements normally take effect as a condition of installing software, and they ordinarily require customers to waive their right to sue over alleged defects. Such EULAs have been repeatedly upheld by the courts.
One such case is Zeidenberg v Silken Mountain Web Services, Inc, in which Zeidenberg won his case claiming the shrink-wrap license was invalid after he violated it to rip off the database on a CD and resell it cheaper - the case was overturned on appeal where the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld shrink-wrap licenses. They do make mention of a need to be able to return the product or see a refund if you refuse the license; but if it says, "by installing/using this you agree to these terms", then it considered that a valid contract under the UCC.
If you want to play lawyer on Slashdot, and least try to have your rudimentary facts correct.
Umm, I'd call them up and explain what happened and they would fix it...
Support a great indie game: http://www.abaddon360.com
Software piracy is a real problem for companies.
No. It's not. You only think it is because you believe them. They own you.
Get off "the world owes me something" bandwagon.
Whoa. Wait a minute. You (and software companies) think that the world owes you a watchdog. You feel that I owe you my tax money so that you can hunt down people who share software. I don't owe you anything and neither does the world. You're an intelligent human being, aren't you? Here's a tip: If you make something which is easily copied then people are going to copy it. That is REALITY. Deal with it.
Wake up: Tomorrow there are no copyright laws. Right, wrong, or indifferent, it's just not something that we waste taxpayer money on. Evolve your business model. Change your product line. Identify your customers better. Safeguard your products better and accept responsibility for legitimate and legal users which you alienate.
+++ATHZ 99:5:80
Annoying policies like this one may increase short-term profit but people will, I hope, gradually react. I must say that from all the best-selling FPS epic has showed the best company policies. They released a linux version concurrently (on the same CD!), ut2004 does not require the CD to be in the drive and they keep releasing free files in the ut2004 community (extra maps etc).
Sure, everyone wants to play HL2. I know I do. But I think I'd rather send them a message by NOT buying their game. Would you go to a restaurant where the waiter insults you, even if it is the best one in the town?
P.
I hate to break it to you guys, but not all companies are the same.
"Duh, but what happens when the servers go down?!". Well, we're talking about a company that releases game source for their products for people to modify. I'm pretty sure that Valve is more likely than anyone to release a "No-Steam" patch if they went out of business, just like they released a solution for WON being removed (remember that? HL1 had to log into a central server that doesn't exist anymore for multi, yet you're still playing that)
This is ignoring the fact that they'll be alive for at least another 5 years unless they blow all their money on coke, and that YOU CAN PLAY THE GAME OFFLINE ALREADY! So really, there's *no* situation where you won't be able to play the game.
What's funny is that the people the most pissed off about it haven't even bought it or don't know the facts behind it. I mean, it's way less restrictive than Apple's DRM on ITMS, for starters. I guess they're pissed that there's no Linux port and need a way to vent. It's okay. We understand.
Such EULAs have been repeatedly upheld by the courts.
Admissable only if you completely ignore political influences which have nothing to do with justice.
the case was overturned on appeal
Which further supports the case that the concept of true justice in the court system is being negated in favor of right by monetary might.
+++ATHZ 99:5:80
In my American Government course, our professor read an article to us something along the lines of "Do the Federalist Papers seem too difficult to understand to you?" He then read how the original writers made sure that the language was understandable by an average farmer at the time.
I wonder how many more people would know what our laws mean if we hadn't been educationally dumbed down.
Attributes of the physical media, that's why.
You can't scratch a cartridge.
I'm thinking about it, therefore I might be.
Yet it does NOT> say anywhere on the bottom of the box that you MUST create a Steam account.
If someone would scan and show the whole bottom of the box showing the Steam account requirement, I am sure that will kill the entire arguement.
My understanding of the Internet Connection Required is that it must be able to connect to a server somewhere out there, assumed to be run by Valve/Steam, but it doesn't mention anywhere in there that I MUST create a Steam account to access the software that would, if I purchased it, cost ~$50.
Go play the game online if you like. I buy for the Single Player aspect of the game. I find the idea behind the authentication to be a decent attempt to protect their rights as well. However it does infrige on the rights of the purchaser in such a way as to render the software on the disc completely useless.
Now why should I go out and purchase this CRIPPLED piece of software?
The irony of your statement is sublime.
/. editors should just alter story submissions rather than letting you know what was submitted vs their editorializing? No, you'd not like that either I suppose...
This is a news site (loosely). Editors modify content for their publication. Perhaps
I'm thinking about it, therefore I might be.
on my box under both the "Minimum System Requirements" AND the "Recommended System Requirements" lists.
I'm sure "SlashdotMedia" will improve on all the wonders that Dice Holdings blessed us all with
"You (and software companies) think that the world owes you a watchdog."
I think software companies don't owe you anything (non verification) for something you buy voluntarily.
"You feel that I owe you my tax money so that you can hunt down people who share software."
Huh? I never mentioned taxes or the federal government.
"I don't owe you anything and neither does the world."
Agreed. Did I ever suggeset otherwise?
"If you make something which is easily copied then people are going to copy it. That is REALITY. Deal with it."
So you do agree that piracy is a problem!? Seems to me that's exactly what Valve is doing, dealing with it.
You still haven't answered the question: How are software companies making MORE profit by implementing anti-piracy measures that themselves cost money to implement? Why are they doing this when they know users are going to be annoyed (=lost profit)? You've got your head in the proverbial sand thinking piracy isn't an issue companies have to deal with.
So software companies use activation on a product that NO ONE is forced to buy. But you seem to feel you're owed a non-verification version of the product. Why? Because you think you have a better business model? You know there's one way to prove that, start your own company and make your own game and sell it. You should have no problem with all the business acumen you seem to have.
damaged by dogma
The fact that they install anything on your hard drive is just because they're trying to make it faster. The CD is the master.
The GameBoy analogy is perfect.
Education is the silver bullet.
"If only the users were as enlightened as I am, they'd rail against this horrible system!" That's a remarkably condescending position to take.
This reminds me of the propagandist's standard response to his critics: "it is insulting the people's intelligence to suggest I am deceiving them". It is not condescending per se to suggest to others that they are overlooking something.
It also isn't supported by facts. Of course people realize they are "repeatedly asking permission" to use the software
As an explanation as to why many people view activation as benign, my suggestion was that people don't equate the standard process, whether it's logging in or just clicking "next" to let the software "activate" itself, with asking permission unless they've gone through more concrete experiences, like being refused permission or repeatedly going through phone activation. You've suggested otherwise, which is fair enough, but please don't refer to your opinions as "facts".
But what you apparently don't understand about steam is that the convenience and the change in relationship are the draw
It's not that I don't understand, simply that I didn't raise the other significant explanation: the size of the carrot. But I suspect for most people, the Half-Life 2 game itself, rather than content delivery mechanisms, has much more to do with people being prepared to overlook the activation issue. In any case, a nice carrot does not make the stick any less nasty, just more readily accepted or ignored.
Welcome to the real world.
I think software companies don't owe you anything (non verification) for something you buy voluntarily.
I am campaigning to ensure that more companies know that they will not continue to make money if they incorporate online verification for a game in single-player mode. Additionally, I do feel that if a software company advertises a game (how many ads say "online only", or "online verification required"?) that, when I buy a box with a CD and bring it home, it will work. Period. Anything past that raises suspicion for good reason.
Huh? I never mentioned taxes or the federal government.
Eventually we, the taxpayers and consumers, get stuck with the bill. The federal government gets stuck being lobbied for more legislation. It's inherent. To ignore it is naive.
So you do agree that piracy is a problem!?
I agree it exists. I do not agree that it is a problem.
Seems to me that's exactly what Valve is doing, dealing with it.
By misrepresenting their product and contributing to FUD about the state of and influences on the software industry. Corporate mismanagement, as in every sector, is far more to blame than piracy for poor software sales.
How are software companies making MORE profit by implementing anti-piracy measures that themselves cost money to implement?
Primarily speaking software is much more expensive than it needs to be and the public accepts the effective cartel stranglehold that major software companies hold over the price of software. A company is far more than the product on the shelves. Investments, agreements, collaborations... all of the nebulous parts of business which gamers have no knowledge of. The business world is a complex place.
Valve profits indirectly from serving the Windows platform. By serving the Windows platform Valve is aiding Microsoft in asserting its dominance as an OS--regardless of the merits of Windows vs its competitors. Microsoft has priced software primarily at the stranglehold level which has elevated the public's tolerance for what the fair price of software is. But, should the tables ever turn and people find out that quality software can be much more inexpensive, then the public will begin to wonder why games cost so much. Should Valve then engage in anti-Linux measures or should it adapt to Linux and a community that would not tolerate such insults as online verification?
So software companies use activation on a product that NO ONE is forced to buy.
And, if you would quit arguing and start doing something productive, you would aid those of us who are attempting to rail Valve to oblivion for even thinking of such a preposterous and insulting idea.
But you seem to feel you're owed a non-verification version of the product
Because it's advertised as a game and, until recently, ever game ever produced could be played in the middle of a rainforest as long as you had enough battery power.
You know there's one way to prove that, start your own company and make your own game and sell it.
Spoken like a true troll. How many companies have you started? None? At least I have an idea on how to make a better one. All you do is argue.
+++ATHZ 99:5:80
Won't work. The game will not launch. The executable will give you an error. If you get details on the error, it will take you to SecuROM's web site that explains that any type of CD / DVD Emulation software must be disabled in order to run the game.
I haven't seen it, but I imagine the EULA or other agreement specifies this is within their bounds.
Assuming this, don't bitch. If it wasn't covered, then people have a right to bitch, at least the legit players.
Otherwise, enjoy being treated like a criminal first, and a customer second.
Kind of glad I'm not a gamer these days, with this kind of trash running around.
-- Note: If you don't agree with me, don't bother replying. I won't read it.
1980's, Atari, copy protected diskettes...
..
Game market crash. Will it happen again?
"The avalanche has already started. It's too late for the pebbles to vote." - Kosh
The Supreme Court was very clear in its ruling that copyright infringement is not theft:
Dowling v. United States, 473 U.S. 207 (1985): copyright infringement does not equal theft
These are different actions which have different effects and different penalties. Thus, it behooves us to be clear in the speech we use when we're talking about them.
..wayne..
I find it very amusing that a Half Life 2 ad is/was displayed on this news article.
>"How are software companies making MORE profit by implementing anti-piracy measures that themselves cost money to implement?
>>Primarily speaking software is much more expensive than it needs to be and the public accepts the effective cartel stranglehold that major software companies hold over the price of software. A company is far more than the product on the shelves. Investments, agreements, collaborations... all of the nebulous parts of business which gamers have no knowledge of. The business world is a complex place.
Valve profits indirectly from serving the Windows platform. By serving the Windows platform Valve is aiding Microsoft in asserting its dominance as an OS--regardless of the merits of Windows vs its competitors. Microsoft has priced software primarily at the stranglehold level which has elevated the public's tolerance for what the fair price of software is. But, should the tables ever turn and people find out that quality software can be much more inexpensive, then the public will begin to wonder why games cost so much. Should Valve then engage in anti-Linux measures or should it adapt to Linux and a community that would not tolerate such insults as online verification?
Congratulations, 200 words and you still didn't answer the question. Something about indirect profitting, cartels, Microsoft (everyone hates Micro$oft)...but no answer. You'd make a good politician. You didn't answer because you don't have a logical answer. Because there's no logical reason to think that software companies spend money on anti-piracy just so that they can piss off users. What do they get out of it? Hint: it has something to do with piracy.
"And, if you would quit arguing and start doing something productive, you would aid those of us who are attempting to rail Valve to oblivion for even thinking of such a preposterous and insulting idea."
Can't believe they're not asking for our first born child as well. (Since you seem to like hyperbole)
And you're not arguing right, lol. You're on a "campaign", and that is not arguing. Get a grip.
damaged by dogma
As you note, if the seller wishes to impose additional restrictions after the contract is entered, you may sue to enforce the original contract, but Valve is not the seller, and the store is not imposing restrictions, so your line of argument does not apply.
This point was the basis of the defense in MacPherson v. Buick, (217 N.Y. 382 (1916)) and Judge Cardozo's ruling introduced an exception in the case where the object sold was "a thing of danger" which was negligently manufactured, but since a CD is not inherently dangerous, you'd have a hard time applying this precedent there.
Your state may have a laws declaring an implied warranty of merchantability, in which case you may have rights beyond what your contract with the retailer provides, but if you're going to assert that you have rights which are not spelled out in the contract, you will have a hard time arguing that the law can't also give Valve such rights.
Because there's no logical reason to think that software companies spend money on anti-piracy just so that they can piss off users. What do they get out of it? Hint: it has something to do with piracy.
Just like there's no logical reason that a politician would support a pork bill. It's obvious why they're supporting a bad policy: there's something in it for them. What is that something? Who knows? It's not our job to make money for Valve but it's certain that they have it figured out. I feel that it's part of a larger push to make the public comfortable with complete online verification, and to sway opinion against the open source community which has a reputation for not being concerned with registration systems.
Many of us simply do not believe that software sharing is a bad thing, and we reject EULAs and all attempts to assert control over software after it has been sold into our possession. If you don't like it, you're free to not sell it to me.
+++ATHZ 99:5:80
Well that's really the crux of the whole issue, isn't it? The publisher can cut you off at the knees at will because they "feel" you've violated some liscense agreement. What's the consumer's recourse? A lawyer. Right. People in general will hire an attorney, waste (more than likely) several months of their life and miss work all to pursue consideration from a judge on a $50.00 game. More than likely, customers will just be turned off, pissed off and then just plain off the company pulling these antics. If that's the future of gaming count me out. I won't be purchasing this game anytime soon or anything else from Valve in the near future. Unlike others in most of these forums I actually do vote with my pocketbook and I will survive without HL2. I've survived 3 years without new CD's and I, too, don't see this as an issue.
I still can't get the screen shots of Castle Wolfenstein for the Apple IIe out of my head.
that's a good point. Never thought about it to tell you the truth. But then, Vivendi's name is not the one on the box...in the end, Valve gets the heat when ppl's games don't work.
Maybe they should pull a Pixar and go solo (or sub-contract cd pressing to someone else).
I still play Half-Life multiplayer and Counter-Strike.
I own three legitimate copies of all of them so as to have enough software keys for myself and two buddies to play on-line simultaneously.
But I won't buy or play Half-Life 2.
I am sick and tired of being treated like a criminal by software companies. I do not mind having to register my software on a once-only basis but I do object to constant checking of my validity and I especially object to copy protection that stops me making legitimate backups of any software that I own.
Half-Life 2 may be even better than the original but until I'm treated like a valued customer by Valve and all the other software houses, I won't be buying ANY protected software.
Software piracy is nothing to do with me because I don't pirate software, it's that simple. But I won't be held accountable for what pirates do.
It's about time that all the "sheep" that make up the buyers of software, audio CDs and DVDs actually took a stand against being treated like criminals and just stopped buying this stuff, even if it's just for one day, until we all push home the message that we are sick and tired of inflated pricing, poor quality products and products that are more difficult to use as a result of protection.
Valve can stick that in their Steam pipe and smoke it...
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
I said that was an option, not the only option. And you don't generally need a lawyer or several months for small claims court. The better option, and the one Valve is actually encouraging, is for any user that feels they've had their account incorrectly terminated to contact Valve and provide evidence that they own a valid copy of the game. I suspect that anyone who can do so will find Valve very willing to rectify the situation.
Reminds me of their original press release that said that there were a "small number of users" encountering the stutter bug in HL2. Yeah, real small numbers.
[insert witty comment here]
"It's obvious why they're supporting a bad policy: there's something in it for them."
That "something" is obvious to anyone who doesn't think Valve is part of a larger conspiracy to control our computers; to combat piracy, that's why they implement verification and other measures commonly referred to as "anti-piracy". This view is more inline with a common & fundamental principle of most businesses, making a profit. And when people play without paying, companies lose profit. This easily explains why companies use anti-piracy measures, not some explanation about wider public acceptance and swaying the public away from open source gaming(?)
Occam would proud.
damaged by dogma
Something can be done about this. Don't buy the product. No one's forcing you to buy Half-Life 2, and it's certainly not essential to anyone's life or business. I highly doubt something as relatively nonintrusive as requiring the CD to be in the drive is "anti-consumer" by any means, nor is it illegal. It's their game, and they have the right to determine whether you need the CD to play it. They're not requiring you to pay anything more to play the game once you've installed it, they're asking you to do one small action with something you already have in your possession. You don't have a right in this country to have every game manufacturer follow exactly your guidelines for program usage. You do have the right to determine whether you open your wallet for the game in the first place.
Want Slashdot headlines on your site? Try SlashHead
Well, another one of those dilemas... On the one hand I like not paying a lot of money for software, and while I was in college (long time ago) did dabble in the black-arts. Unfortunately, I'm seeing today that HL2 is not, comparatively speaking, priced high enough for folks to complain about. What am I talking about you might ask? Well... I've noticed since leaving college that the cost of programs used in professional work environments make gaming costs look like pennies. Considering the number of people using the software in the professional environments, companies have to charge more... but in gaming there are millions of folks who are going to buy the software, so the total cost is relatively small. Suffice it to say, I've learned that paying the $50 and moving on with my life is better than surfing the "z" sites for the random crack, and all the potential virii that come with it. Maybe it's just me though.
All these HL2 users and other Steam users should have known better.
It's always been about protecting revenue. Period.
Remember - Valve is owned by Vivendi Universal. The people that squashed an open-source project (BNETD) because it
- might
have threatened their business in the future. (Those of you about to mention that BNETD allowed illegal copies to play online remember that BNETD tried to get a validation method out of Blizzard but was repeatedly ignored.)Now we see the result. BNETD had it been allowed to exist would have easily been a stepping-stone to a legal Steam alternative. By killing BNETD in court they have a leg to stand on when people say they don't want a Steam account to play their game. They have no alternative. You can't even "go elsewhere" if you still want to play the game. They can't even "make their own" without running into previous court cases.
I'm voting with my wallet. I didn't buy or "borrow" HL2 and I'm certainly not going to buy a Blizzard title either.
"Bah!" - Dogbert
"People are discovering that when you buy any product that is subject to "activation", you haven't really bought anything. "
Indeed - so don't do it in the future.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Stealing is wrong and covered under copyright and espianage laws. No EULA disagreement needed.
But it becomes a dangerous precident when a company can accuse you out of thin air for contract violation without a written document or proof that you reviewed it.
ALso it sets up a ludicrious scenario where anyone could just do something dumb like put up a sign on the road claiming "by driving you agree to a license where you owe me money" etc.
Without written proof with a notary it should not be valid.
http://saveie6.com/
They might own their software but you own your computer, and you paid for access to the game. If Valve cuts you off because of you installed a no-CD patch on YOUR computer, can't you take them to small claims court and get your $60 back?
Yeah, like how I learned that when I buy a legit copy and follow all the rules I still get wrongfully punished by Valve's anti-piracy dragnet?
If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
Claiming that the copy in RAM is a copyright protected copy is stupid. It's a copy required to function. It's like claiming that the mirror image of a book held up to the mirror is a protected copy.
The copy on hard disk is more stable, so is more reasonable to claim copyright protection. But since the software is written to require hard drive installation, the user is being forced to create that copy in order for the software to function.
If I was making the rules, copies required for the product to function would not be protected copies and would not require EULAs to be legal.
It's only that copy to hard drive or RAM that makes a EULA potentially legal. The act of printing a book or creating a CD and selling it grants an implicit right for the end user to read the book or CD with no EULA required. That's because it's a copy right. A right to restrict copies. Not a right to restrict reading.
You are purchasing a CD, which does not give you the right to play the game, but does save you time in downloading it from our system. Whether you purchase this CD or download the game from our system, you will be required to log on to our system and pay us $45 before you will be able to play the game, and you will be required to connect to our system every time thereafter that you wish to play the game. If for ANY REASON, we decide you shouldn't be allowed to play anymore, we will revoke your ability to play the game and you WILL HAVE NO RECOURSE. If our servers ever become unreachable, you will lose your ability to play the game and you WILL HAVE NO RECOURSE.
I think that's fairer than selling someone a box for $50 and delivering essentially the same thing, but the purchaser doesn't know what they have agreed to until AFTER spending $50 non-refundable (or at least it is likely to be very difficult to get a refund) and then only if they understand convoluted legalese.
Alternatively, have the sales jerk/clerk EXPLAIN the agreement every time someone buys it... nah, I think that's asking too much of your average retail clerk.
Of course I also think anyone who would agree to either Valve's agreement or the one I suggest really needs to think about where this is all heading... This is a bad trend, it will spread to movies & music, and the best way to stop it is to refuse to purchase this stuff. I know, it hurts that you can't play the latest game, but if everyone said no, they'd license it differently. Find another game, nearly as good but with a better license, and play that.
Disclaimer: I do not own (nor do I play) HL2, and do not anticipate I will do so ever.
Yes, the 9th circut covers California. I'll grant you that.
It also covers a few other areas, including Washington. Therefore, the court case is perfectly relevent.
Second, the case you refer to is at the state level, specifically the Superior and Supreme courts of Washington state. I'm not claiming problems with the state law or at the state level. I'm claiming issue at the federal level, so the 9th circuit is the place to be, not the state.
frob
//TODO: Think of witty sig statement
You have purchased something. A license to play the game on the terms and conditions that are told to you by the company.
;)
Woah, hold on a second. Putting aside, for the moment, whether you bought a game or a license: why would you need a license to play the game in the first place?
A license is just a permission from some competent authority to do some otherwise prohibited act. So, the question becomes: what (law, contract or custom) prohibits you from playing the game in the first place? And, what authorizes Valve to then permit you to act?
The game in question is software protected by copyright, yes, but copyright law in the US and in Canada, does not, to my knowledge, prohibit the use of copyrighted software in general, nor does it grant to copyright holders the right to restrict the general use of software (at least, as I say, in the general case, as the use of some software -- probably not games -- is or has been prohibited on other grounds: eg. software implementing strong cryptography or software that circumvents copyright protection apparatus).
In fact, copyright establishes for copyright holders only a few specific rights: to reproduce, to derive, to distribute and to publically perform the protected work. Copyright holders are not empowered, at least by virtue of copyright, to restrict the use of software (or other works) except insofar as reproduction, distribution, derivation and public performance are concerned.
So, on what basis does the need for permission to play the game arise?
If it is private contract, and not by virtue of copyright, at what point was this contract formed? Between what parties and with what consideration?
It certainly wasn't done at the time of sale (and not with Valve!), since that contract was between the retailer and the purchaser for the sale of some tangible good. It could possibly be done during the "EULA interaction" on running the software for the first time, but what possible consideration could arise from that encounter?
The consideration can't be an agreement to be bound by the EULA in exchange for permission to run the program, since, we've just established no such permission is necessary. It'd be a strange leap of logic to suggest that the act the license purports to authorize was prohibited by a contract entered into whose consideration is a grant of that very (and very worthless) license. Sounds more like protection money, to me
So, anyway... Maybe you're right (though, I doubt it very much) that you're buying a license and not the game. But if, that's true, you really have bought nothing: just permission to do what you already had permission to do.
Life after capitalism? The participatory economics project
Second, don't be a sheep. We all need some kind of control to keep civilization going, but don't put blinders on. What do you think revolutions stem from? It's because people blindly accept what the government tells them, without thinking, while a select few can see through all the BS that the government uses to oppress people. That's why it's as bad as it is. People just blindly accept what they are told. I'm not bashing control. I'm saying there is a difference between control and oppression.
I refuse to accept that, and I'll continue living my life ignoring anything that says otherwise.
If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
No you can't steal software any more than you can steal ideas. :)
I have purchased no less than 3 counter strike games - each from regular retailers and each came with CD keys. Why 3? Well so me and friends could play legitimately on my T1 at my home. ./ and learn of this mess, 20k users banned - and you know all are not valid bans, the forums closed because of all the negative postings, basically the entire community is in rebellion. S.O.B I was right to begin with and should have never spent $50 for such total bullshit.
Imagine my shock and horror when I try to play one day and receive a message that my steam account has been closed because I am using a cracked CD key. 3 F'n times I have paid, and I'm denied access to play to game.
Then along comes Half Life 2. I refuse to buy it in principal and because of my previous experience. But the reviews are too good. "It's the best game ever, again." Not to mention my IRC chat buddies calling me a moron because I object to steam.
OK, I give in and buy it. What do I get? The first CD cant be read because of the imbedded copy protection. It takes over 4 hours to install as I go through 4 CD-Rom drives until I find one that will read the disk. An hour to "decrypt" the files, WTF?
I play it - and indeed it is good.
Today I read
But, who do I blame? Is it valve/vivendi's fault? NO. IT IS THE LAME ASS COPYRIGHT STEALING IDIOTS THAT CAUSED THIS PROBLEM TO BEGIN WITH.
Two Days ago I read with disbelief incredible responses saying how walking into a movie theater with a video camera and then posting the movie on the internet is an OK thing to do. Some idiot even associated it with free speech.
There is an incredible "steal it if you can" culture here that has resulted in me having to deal with unbearable BS in copy protection - and I swear to God - if I see one of you in a movie theater with a video camera actively recording I am going to pull out a gun and shoot you between the eyes.
I am that pissed off.
slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
Ha!! Ha!!
I'll never understand the mentality of some people. There is an old saying "he who pays the piper calls the the tune". This means that Steam made the HL2 game and they get to dictate it's licensing. You don't like it? Stop buying proprietary software and start using open source or free software as, yet again, those who made it, licensed it as they saw fit: freely.
You people who think that just because you *can* download it means that it's "okay" need to get yourselves spanked ever now and then.
Is your ass sore now? Good. Think twice before screwing someone like this in the future.
You guys give the rest of us a really bad name.
GJC
Gregory Casamento
## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
Anybody want a peanut?
Perhaps I misunderstood the article, but I thought they had banned all users who used a hacked/stolen (i.e. multiuser) key.
I believe this means all unscrupulous individuals along with those who are the legitimate owners of said keys. I can't predict how many of those owners didn't intentionally give their key out, but I imagine there are a few who didn't mean to.
As the previous poster mentioned, it's possible that the original owner can show proof of purchase (photocopy of receipt, cd key, etc.) and become a valid user again, but I don't recall reading that in the article.
Why is this even an issue? First of all, I have no sympathy for anyone that has had their account disabled, and I see nothing wrong with what Valve is doing, or how they are going about it. If you used a leaked CD Key, you deserve all of what you've gotten, and if you installed a patch that was not endorsed nor created by Valve, you are stupid to do so. If I were in Valve's shoes, I would do the same thing. There is absolutely nothing wrong to enforcing the EULA in this manner, you agreed to it by installing the software, and the only reason that your account was disabled in the first place was because you violated it. You didn't HAVE to agree to the EULA. Well, that is what I think, IMHO.
A driver license is only a license to drive on public roads. We all pay for them with tax dollars, thus the government has not only a right but a duty to regulate them. However one does not need a driver license to drive on private land you can legally drive a car on private property before you are 16. Likewise you are not bound by any speed limit or other such thigns.
That's how Nascar and the like can exist. They don't have a special exemption or anything, it's a private track. Thus they can drive as fast as they like, in cars that are not legal for normal street use.
If the government revokes you license it does not remove the right to use your car, which is your personal property. It simply prohibits you from using it on public streets.
some of us had a really good experience with steam. I purchased the Silver version, and it couldn't have been easier. I was playing within hours of the activation servers being up. I have not had the game crash once. The only problem I've had is with the stuttering, but that's not too bad if I put texture detail at medium.
Steam is a good service, IMO. It has some teething problems, and completely ignores dialup users, but I like it.
And in the future there will be ways of playing hl2 even if valve is not around. If I can't activate it legally in 10 years time, I'll use a crack or some other hack to make it work. Hopefully if Valve was self destructing they would open up their games for anybody to use so that it would not require authentication anymore.
-- The doctor said I wouldn't get so many nose bleeds if I just kept my finger out of there!
At the time of this post, 82,542 users think that steam is working properly.
"We have to go forth and crush every world view that doesn't believe in tolerance and free speech." - David Brin
Since this is so uneducated but what the hell, I am bored.
1) The exchange must be agreed upon before hand. When you lease an apartment, purchase a house, sell a patent, etc the terms are spelled out and agreed upon in the contract before any such exchange takes place. That's what the contract is, the laying out of what will be exchanged and under what terms.
2) Nope, sorry, I'm aware of no case law where this has been upheld (if you are, cite the case if not, stuff it). Clicking a button is not a legal consent. There's a reason the signature is used in real contracts. What's more, what happens if I don't click it? Perhaps I have a teenager from next door install it because I'm not good at computers, and he clicks it. Minors cannot enter into a legal contract without parental consent and cosignature. What then? Companies want to think that click throughs are binding, but current law seems to say no.
3) Basic contract law. Like I said, they don't have to accept it, but the terms have to be open. It means they can't charge you the money, then set out the terms, which is what's happening here. The terms must be presented to you. You can then chose to rewrite the contract and submit it to them. They can decline the changes, or give you counter changes, but they can't say "Nope, sorry you have to give us the money first, THEN we tell you the terms." Terms cannot be dictated or modified ex post facto, that's the point of a contract. Everything is laid out on the table up front, before any exchange of goods/services. Both sides decide they like the agreement, then the exchange happens and those terms are binding, unless both sides decide to change them.
4) Already addressed.
As for your piracy bullshit, it's not the EULA that disallows that, it's copyright law. The law says you must have permission from the author to make a copy of their copyrighted work. If you don't have that permission, it's infringement and you can be subject to criminal and civil penalties.
As for ownership, look up doctrine of first sale. Well established legal concept and restriction on copyright. There is no case law, nor compelling legal argument, why software should be any different than a book in this regard.
IF they wrote the law in simpler terms i bet they'd cut 800 pages down to 100. Release a much simplified edition for laymen, so you don't have to contend with the legalese unless you want/have to.
example (from the revised code of washington):
RCW 9.03.010
Abandoning, discarding refrigeration equipment.
Any person who discards or abandons or leaves in any place accessible to children any refrigerator, icebox, or deep freeze locker having a capacity of one and one-half cubic feet or more, which is no longer in use, and which has not had the door removed or a portion of the latch mechanism removed to prevent latching or locking of the door, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
translation:
don't leave your fridge outside
>Ya know in the olden days when that big "FBI"
>thing would come on the screen when you watched a
>VHS tape? ever read it? It tells you the rules
>for use: an EULA.
Never lived in USA, but I would guess it told you about the LAWS. The laws would always apply regardless of if you agree to them or not.
>I maintain that software should be like music CDs
>and movie DVDs: If you posess a copy, you can use
>it however you want; you just can't copy it and
>distribute the copies.
Most countries doesn't have regulation in their copyright laws saying use of something is forbidden if there is copyright on it. So yes, if you own it (or really, even if you don't) you can use it at will unless you break other laws of course. IF you don't is the owner of the specific opy, you might be in trouble just as if you use someone elses car or whatever. Still, there is nothing in copyrigh laws that prevent me from using a friends book or computer game (obviously we can't do it at the same time).
>While I agree, you know and I know that a lot of
>people won't play by the rules, and I think the
>company has a right to protect their property.
>When you click "I accept" you, too, are saying
>that they have the right to do so as well.
You know, they they initially SOLD you the copy of their software, it magically turned into yours. If they don't like that concept, they should not sell software to start with!!
But the game itself is woefully overrated. I'd say, "Off to eBay with this," but who knows whether HL 2 will work if it has to be reactivated by a new owner?
Presumably, if Steam still exists, and you sell the original CD key along with the game discs, the game can be reactivated (after all you can activate it on multiple machines). Now, if you sold it but kept a copy, and try to still use it yourself, your use of that key will conflict with the new owner's. But doing that would be quite naughty anyway, and the new owner (and Valve) would be justified in being right pissed at you. Just make sure you uninstall, and the new owner should be perfectly happy.
Levels are split at arbitrarily unidentified points, so you never know when you're going to get hit with another minute-long delay--or make that 2-3 minutes, if you decide you want to go back to explore or find supplies.
I can see why this pisses you off. It's annoying. I do find that the load points tend to be in "quiet" areas - deserted tunnels, empty rooms etc. I.e. areas that you're just passing through, so the pause is less jarring than it might be otherwise. However, I doubt that mid-level loads are avoidable in a complex 3D game with today's desktop technology level. Until computers can hold the whole level in memory at once, we'll have to cope with it.
Freedom: "I won't!"
From downthread:
Half-life 2 uses a MMO style activation where you create an account and enter your key. One account, one key. Once a key is registered to an account is cannot be used on any other accounts. The only thing that could possibly happen people getting their steam accounts hacked
So you might have to give them your Steam account too, presumably they would have to rename it, and change the contact info. Hmm.
Freedom: "I won't!"
Technically, you can never resell software, this isn't new with Valve.
Read the EULA on any Microsoft software.
This sig is the express property of someone.
what does eq2 have to do with hl2 or the ps2?
you probably shouldn't have read this.
Maybe no one is telling the company's to F off because simply THE MAJORITY ARE NOT DISPLEASED WITH STEAM?
I don't really give a crap what it does, as long as it doesn't make me go out of my way. Which it hasn't - along with many other people.
The world isn't black or white, just because Windows' activation sucks, doesn't mean I have to start the second Crusades against Steam too.
... and that is what some of us complain about - not some shit about getting pirated versions (since they are already out there if you want)
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
What I don't understand is why you resent the company rather than the thieves who've forced companies to take this position.
No - they must take resposibility. Nobody FORCED them to do anything, they are making a ton of money as it is - their greed causes them to think they could make much more by amoral means. They deserve all they get.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
After reading so many positive reviews about this game, and since it will run under the next cedega release, I was all set to buy this game.
But after seeing the way Valve treat their customers , ie like criminals, they can keep their game. Steam is a nice idea for distribution and all, but this is going too far.
I think I'll go buy Doom3 instead.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
You still haven't answered the question: How are software companies making MORE profit by implementing anti-piracy measures that themselves cost money to implement? Why are they doing this when they know users are going to be annoyed (=lost profit)?
Because they know that the users are going to find cracks and won't be sufficiently annoyed to stop buying the products.
So software companies use activation on a product that NO ONE is forced to buy.
Because software activation is amoral and WRONG. Just like slavery is wrong and won't go away just because you say "well don't own slaves then" - and this is slavery
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
The path called HALF.LIFE.2.V1.0.ENG.EMPORIO.BACKUPCD.ZIP is available from megagames.com The patch will allow the game to proceed and run without contacting steam every bloody time. Granted this doesn't really address the issue of having to connect to steam in the first place since you need some updates etc. However at least now you don't have to keep connecting when your playing a single player game.
You didn't answer because you don't have a logical answer. Because there's no logical reason to think that software companies spend money on anti-piracy just so that they can piss off users. What do they get out of it? Hint: it has something to do with piracy.
Duh - perhaps some idiot lawyers think it prevents pirating, but here is a hint for you, mr idiot - it never has - its just gets cracked and they move merrily along.
There was an excellent example with Quake 3 and Unreal Tournament: Q3 had heavy duty encryption on its servers and according to ID it was never cracked, UT had some lame diskcheck which was cracked on the afternoon of its release. Yet UT sold much much more.
Moral of the story: Most things in the so called "intellectual property" genre is utter crap and therefore does not sell that well - but that which is quality does. End of lesson.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
after investing huge amounts of money
They invest huge amounts of money for THEIR sake not ours - because they know they have an immoral law that can allow them to make even more money back for a job done only once.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Yeah, given the loud noises, it is quite likely that Valve is probably screwing at least 15,000-20,000 of their legit customers!
If Valve actually deactivated people without warning just because they used nocd they are making a big mistake. As you mentioned steam verification can be quite annoying, so what are the odds that 20K people out of all the total customers tried using nocd?
IMO if someone bought a copy of your game for about USD1.50/disc (that's about the going rate here), they aren't likely to kick up such a big fuss if it stops working. They'd grumble, curse in front of their PC, then just go get another game for USD1.50/disc. Heck some "unauthorized distributors" will even let you swap for another game (with the same number of discs) no questions asked.
I argue that even if it were 20,000 of such users it'll just be grumbles not huge protests - coz they know what they are getting.
Of course a large number of these 20,000 could be actual customers who bought the game and loaned a copy to a friend.
But if so I argue there's quite a big difference between deactivating 20,000 people who got USD1.50 copies from one or five legit USD50 purchases (possibly crackers may need more than one copy for their research..), and deactivating 20,000 people who made legit purchases at USD50 each and made one or two copies for their friends... If Valve can't tell the difference, LOL! I suspect the complaints would be louder from the 2nd group, and that's not the biggest problem...
Guess what happens when these group of people meet the people who are using the "properly" warezed version you are talking about? Imagine the conversation. Imagine the likely outcome!
It's no surprise that warez versions of software for non-online play would be possible unless you have stuff like "Trusted Computing/Palladium" AND the necessary legislation and controls - to prevent sale of hardware that bypasses TC or provides alternatives/choice.
IF it's part of the _gameplay_ to connect to a Central server occasionally then that makes things harder.
Then you'd have to change the keys/certs on the warez copy AND have a custom server for the warezed versions.
If it's part of the the gameplay to connect to a central server _frequently_ as part of a _community_ that would make warez versions of limited use/popularity. Because the _community_ would be a major part of the game value.
Actually, last time I read a MS EULA (supposed to be doing Japanese homework, any distraction was welcome ), it said that a one-time change of ownership was ok, as long as you give all manuals, etc.
Complete BS, it'd never stand up in court.
Valve making a game playing in a future police-state, controlling the player in a police-state like fashion through Steam?
--
"The more prohibitions there are, The poorer the people will be" -- Lao Tse
Encryption alone isn't enough - it would do nothing to stop replay attacks. You need entity authentication, which gives a guarantee that the other side is actually present.
The system would have to have some kind of challenge-response protocol, or something like that. I can't find anything specific online about what protocols Steam uses.
There are also questions about how user identity is derived. Is it simply given by the CD-Key? Does registering your CD-Key provide you with an ID that's bound to your machine in some way?
I created a STEAM account, but can't find any way to purchase & download HL2. Can HL2 _only_ be installed by ordering the C/DVDs ? Can anyone advise or post the link? Thanks!
It doesn't NOT connect everytime you play if you set Steam to OFFLINE mode. If you do that you never have to connect to valve servers again, ever.
The key gets bound to a personal account : Ok, so the account + account password can be sold ; But it can't be reactivated...(or de-activated for that matter)
site with forum for criticism and discussion of stream and valve company policy.
since complaints and opinions on steam are removed from the official boards, something like this is badly needed.
spread the word.
Do not trust this signature.
On the contrary, it's the IP zealots who beleive the world owes them something for nothing. I can't send a copy of me to do my work for me as you apparently can with all your copyrights and patents and whatnot. I have to show up for my work. You should, too. I get paid for my time...for performing work, not selling copies of it. There's no reason a person should be paid for copies. Only the original will do. The copies are for advertisement. In fact, you should pay me for distributing your copies. I'm giving you free advertisement for your next performance. If someone wants to pay for copies, they're welcome to it, but they obviously shouldn't have to. Being first shouldn't bring exclusivity. If you want to keep an idea to yourself because you can't make a million bucks on it overnight, fine. Somebody else will be more generous to the community because he or she will benefit from the idea along with everybody else. You just want it for yourself. Pretty damn selfish. Do you honestly think we wouldn't have light bulbs if not for Edison? Or the airplane without the Wright Brothers? IP has actually retarded developement and avdvancement of these devices because of the stranglehold the inventors had on them through IP. It was IP that delayed the acceptance of the compression ignition engine because our friend Mr. Diesel insisted that the engine be manufactured his way that made it very inefficient and lack power. It wasn't until much later that other people were able to make the improvements necessary to make it a viable alternative the gasoline engine. IP makes it very difficult to build upon people's work. It's retarding human progress for the benefit of a few. It give control of information to people who should not have that control. It provides for gov't censorship through corporate proxy(or possibly the other way around). It feeds the "not invented here" sydrome. It's the ultimate in karma whoring. It's all "hey, hey, look at me". Also remember that the relation between publishers and pirates is very symbiotic(?). They depend on each other for mindshare. Don't think for a second that Microsoft would have the market it has outside the US were it not for piracy. If it was possible to pirate Apple hardware, they would be the ones with 90% of the market right now, and the rumors about them "dying" would never come up.
What?
...because they know they have an immoral law that can allow them to make even more money back for a job done only once.
This is exactly the sentiment I have been trying to express. Now, how can we get gen pop to understand this and realize the concept of IP is absolutely despicable? Obviously it will be impossible to convince those riding the IP gravytrain. If there is any thievery here, it comes from IP.
What?
I'll try. Standard non-lawyer disclaimers apply. I am a little more knowledgeable than the average slashdotter in that I've had some classes in law, but I'm no expert.
The issues that need to be resolved are:
I'll try to give a coherent example based on the court case I cited above; It's got almost all the elements covered.
The problem comes from the fact that software companies like the idea of a license. The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) has several liability and remedies available to consumers in normal sales. Visit cornell's or some other place to read Article 2 of the UCC, for reference. There are a lot of liability issues with software. Moving it away from a sale and into contract law gives the opportunity to get around the liability.
Anyway, that is an issue that various courts have decided both ways. The 9th Circut (covering CA, WA, and several other states) gave their decision, so all the federal courts (where UCC issues are resolved) in those states should parallel that decision. If you read the case that I referenced in the grandparent post, they state that under most circumstances, software is sold and not licenced, regardless of the presence of an EULA. That is not under ALL circumstances, even though they list a few specific elements that cover almost all normal software purchses as sales. Specifically:
So within those states (at least), if you make a single payment for a perpetual transfer of possession, you own that copy of the software. Period.
You can do anything with that copy that is allowed by normal copyright law.
On the topic of EULA's in general, the court said:
//TODO: Think of witty sig statement
>Technically, you can never resell software, this
>isn't new with Valve.
>
>Read the EULA on any Microsoft software.
If we assume EULAs actually ARE ok and valid, just don't agree with it and you can sell it all you want since if you don't agree to it, it can't possibly apply, now could it?
There was an example of a company who produced unlicensed add-ons to starcraft and possibly other games, Blizzard got em shut down via them violating the EULA for the world editor to sell the levels
This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.
Despite what EULAs say, most software is sold, not licensed.
I've never played HL2 at all - my point was - if they're so sure they're not vulnerable from a lawsuit, what are they afraid of?
We've secretly replaced Slashdot with new Folgers Crystals - let's see if it notices.