The Dark Side of Digital Distribution

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Dark Side of Digital Distribution

Posted by Soulskill on Friday February 24, 2012 @06:06AM from the careful-not-to-lose-your-right-hand dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Game journalist Stuart Campbell has written an incisive piece on how the digital distribution model users have grown to know and love over the past several years still has some major problems that go beyond even the DRM dilemma. He provides an example of an app developer using very shady update techniques to screw over people who have legitimately purchased their app. Touch Racing Nitro, a retro racing game, launched to moderate success. After tinkering with price points to get the game to show up on the top download charts, the developers finally made it free for a period of four months. 'Then the sting came along. About a week ago (at time of writing), the game received an "update," which came with just four words of description – "Now Touch Racing Free!" As the game was already free, users could have been forgiven for thinking this wasn't much of a change. But in fact, the app thousands of them had paid up to £5 for had effectively just been stolen. Two of the game's three racing modes were now locked away behind IAP paywalls, and the entire game was disfigured with ruinous in-game advertising, which required yet another payment to remove.'"

63 of 270 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Beyond the DRM dilemma by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-24 06:10 · Score: 5, Funny

So what s the DRM dilemma? Whether to just not buy DRM products or whether to burn down the houses of those who make them?
1. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by causality · 2012-02-24 06:55 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  which the best possible means of making displeasure known is the age-old Voting With Your Feet (or dollars) by walking away from anyone practicing such things. I'm a slow adopter on quite a few things, largely because of my elevating level of disappointment with the way people are deciding is appropriate for doing business - by wrecking something you have already paid for and are using.
  You're right about "age-old". In fact I'm wondering what the news is here. That digital distribution is not abuse-proof or fraud-proof just like brick-and-mortar sales? That there are dishonest people with exploitative business practices? This has been going on in one form or another ever since the origin of barter and the later invention of currency.
  
  How is this not another "... with a computer!" story?
  
  The solution to this is to make such people notorious, so that potential customers think twice before doing business with them, same as any business that causes legitimate grievances and dissatisfied customers. Make them more famous for their terrible business practices than for any software they have created. Let them be the ones who fail while honest people with good business practices thrive. That's how you create an environment hostile to this sort of thing and select against it. It's just an iteration of that old saying, "fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me."
  
  --
  It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
2. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by petermgreen · 2012-02-24 06:57 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  In the old days if an upgrade removed functionality it was annoying but you could always reinstall from your original media and not install the updates (or install an older update since in the old days most devs made standalone update installers available) but with online activation and/or digital distribution systems that may no longer be an option.
  
  --
  note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
3. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by Maxo-Texas · 2012-02-24 07:02 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Here is how it is different.
  I sell you a book, car, TV, shirt, power drill. You pay a fair price for it.
  Then with an update, I remove your book from your reader, limit your car to driving 30mph, your TV to only working with bluray content so you can't use your DVD's any more, remove the pocket from your shirt, and limit your power drill to using phillips head bits so you have to buy a nother drill for star, hex, and flat head bits.
  You can't do those things. But with digitial updates, not only can you do it, it is happening already.
  
  --
  She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
4. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by Cosgrach · 2012-02-24 07:06 · Score: 2
  
  I agree that physical violence is appropriate in the case. If an update locks up an application that I have legally paid for and then demands yet more money to unlock it, I'd have to say that the developers need to be publically flogged and run out of town.
  
  --
  Why is it that most of the people that I encounter seem to have been shat from the Sphincter of Mediocrity?
5. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-24 07:28 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Aaaannnnd welcome to the licensing model, which allows for legal theft.
  Everything you mentioned above is an actual product, not a license to use the product....which nobody in their right mind would buy if they had a real alternative.
  The problem is all of our new devices are being treated as if they are still ideas that need licensing, as if they never made it though a production line(ereaders, cell phones, etc), and somehow are different from any other tool you can buy. I realize they are more complicated tools, but tools nonetheless.
  This isn't a problem with digital distribution, this is a problem with a lack of integrity, and a willingness to force others to suffer your bad ideas for your own profit. In any REAL free market, this shit would never fly. But we live in America, where an actual free market is as elusive as the Dodo.
  It's a sad day for justice and equality when a guy who steals a small ticket item will see jail time, meanwhile these asshats who steal en masse will go without so much as a visit to the local police station.
6. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by TheCRAIGGERS · 2012-02-24 07:37 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The solution to this is to make such people notorious, so that potential customers think twice before doing business with them, same as any business that causes legitimate grievances and dissatisfied customers.
  In the non-digital world, this is a feasible approach. Opening a store and stocking merchandise are both expensive acts- a shopkeeper can't keep reopening his or her store repeatedly. Changing your name or moving doesn't help with this.
  In the digital world, this is far harder. You have no stock. You have no manufacturing costs. Changing your name / the location of your store is a trivial matter ranging from completely free to taking back a few loads of bottles for deposit and buying a new dev license.
7. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by MobileTatsu-NJG · 2012-02-24 08:12 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Boycotting will not actually do anything useful in this context. Bitching loudly about it, now that actually does something. Take a look at what happened to Spore.
  
  --
  
  "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
8. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by ZombieBraintrust · 2012-02-24 08:15 · Score: 2
  
  It works if your google, wikipedia or reddit. Then you can "boycott" buisnesses like Go Daddy.
9. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by Solandri · 2012-02-24 08:16 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  I just revert to the old version of the app from the backup TitaniumBackup made. Then I unlink it from the market so it's never updated again.
  
  Remember folks, Fair Use includes being able to make backups of software you buy. Exercise that right. The only time a company should be able to pull a bait and switch like this is if they're selling you a service for an annual or monthly fee. And there you can simply stop subscribing (in the case of cell phone contracts, you can quit before your contract is up without penalty).
  
  I also run firewalls (DroidWall or LBE Privacy Guard) which let me turn off an app's network access. If the free version of a single-player game requires network access to run, that's a big red flag that I don't want to buy the pay version.
10. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by MaWeiTao · 2012-02-24 08:17 · Score: 2
  
  A boycott in a digital space is far easier to organize than for physical businesses. The problem is that people are not principled. Far too many people, especially in the gaming and tech world, feign indignation but hand over their money anyway. For every one person who commits to a boycott there are probably 10 who complain but buy it anyway and another 50 who don't care. And the extreme convenience of the web makes it so that people are even less likely to care. But it's fundamentally no different than what you'd find in the real world.
  At least online you can get a movement organized to not only organize the boycott but call attention to the problem.
11. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by Pausanias · 2012-02-24 08:21 · Score: 2
  
  Here's how to navigate this new DRM world. Have an app that you like? Do not update it. Be aware that if you update, you may lose everything.
  On the iPhone, if you must update, find the physical copy of the app in your iTunes folder. Copy it somewhere safe. THEN update the app. If you don't like the upgraded version, delete it, drag the physical copy back to iTunes, and restore it. You're good to go again.
  I'm sure there's an analogue of this on Android.
  Point being, if you've got an app, it's up to YOU to maintain version history, because you can't trust developers any more. A disturbingly large fraction of app upgrades are actually downgrades in preparation of a for-pay upgrade, and you just can't see these coming. Of course, on a jailbroken iPhone, you have more options, such as update-hider, which allows you ignore upgrades selectively in the app store.
  Jailbroken/rooted is always going to be the key to freedom in this new world. Hooray for the hard working people who make it possible (better yet, donate $$$ to them).
12. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by Surt · 2012-02-24 08:22 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Voting with your dollars doesn't communicate WHY you made the decision not to buy, just that you made the decision. Burning their houses down and explaining why you did it on the news and in court makes that clear.
  
  --
  "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
13. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by Darinbob · 2012-02-24 09:10 · Score: 2
  
  Because DRM means you do not get sold an item, you are only rented that item. You do not own any games you buy this way and the company can take it all back at a moment's notice. And many of the customers don't care, they have voluntarily and in many cases gladly given up their rights in exchange for digital downloads or access to certain games not available elsewhere.
  And if someone is renting something it make sense for them to actually get some sort of agreement or contract spelling out the terms of the rental, and it make sense to read the agreement instead of clicking yes quickly and later regretting it.
14. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by Surt · 2012-02-24 09:25 · Score: 2
  
  Well then they're just dilettantes.
  
  --
  "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
15. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by feepness · 2012-02-24 09:29 · Score: 2
  
  Why is it that most of the people that I encounter seem to have been shat from the Sphincter of Mediocrity?
  You need to look up the definition of mediocre and consider how it relates to the statistical mode of the people you meet.
16. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by MobileTatsu-NJG · 2012-02-24 09:49 · Score: 2
  
  Once word got out that they were only going to allow 3 unlocks, then you'd have to call them to get a code, over thousand ppl went to Amazon and gave it a 1 star review. EA relaxed the rules a bit, expanding it to 5 unlocks plus another concession or two that I cannot recall at the moment.
  I'll concede that they didn't get as far as teaching EA a lesson about bad DRM, but only a thousand people got them to take notice and quickly react. It'll certainly be on their mind for the next game. The thousands of people who didn't buy the game didn't cause a reaction at all.
  
  --
  
  "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
17. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by ae1294 · 2012-02-24 11:25 · Score: 2
  
  Wait isn't this the PS3 dual boot bait-and-switch model????
18. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by Penguinisto · 2012-02-24 12:43 · Score: 2
  
  Your sermon doesn't make his point any less correct.
  On an objective level men (generally) behaved like gentlemen a century ago, because not doing so ran the risk of injury or death by the offended party and/or that party's spouse. Even as late as 50 years ago? If you mouthed off to someone or screwed them over in some way, they could break your nose with near-impunity, and odds were good that no jury would convict them for doing so - because quite frankly you 'had it coming'.
  Today, things are a whole lot different.
  
  --
  Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
19. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by Anonymous Coward · 2012-02-24 14:47 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  And all of those are covered by laws and you have a chance to recover your money through the courts.
  This one is not, though it should be.
  It's like if you buy a power drill and then the seller comes, breaks off the reverse switch and tells you to pay him to put it back.
20. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by geminidomino · 2012-02-24 16:17 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  please provide an example of software that no longer works
  Uh... the game from TFS?
21. Re:Beyond the DRM dilemma by sjames · 2012-02-25 04:57 · Score: 2
  
  I certainly don't advise violence upon family, but what you call 'voting with your feet' is also known as tucking tail and slinking away. If you have been ripped off and have a chance, spit in the crooks face and tell him why.
  Rip-off artists LOVE when you vote with your feet. It means they suffered no real consequence and the field is clear so they can see their next mark more clearly. Meanwhile, their continued existence slowly degrades life for everyone. They damage the bonds of trust that are so necessary to form a cohesive society. They make everyone start to look like a suspect. Each one adds his own drop of poison to the community well.
that's the magic of auto updates by alen · 2012-02-24 06:10 · Score: 4, Insightful

come to the cloud, updates are free, automatic and easy
1. Re:that's the magic of auto updates by GaratNW · 2012-02-24 06:38 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  This is purely developer/publisher fault. Perhaps Apple and Google should put more in place to prevent this sort of thing, but the correct, and customer friendly route, to changing something like this, create a new version. Now you have Touch Racing Nitro, and Touch Racing Nitro+. Already bought the first? Awesome. Enjoy and have fun. It's no longer available for sale, but if you bought it, its yours. Play TRN+ for free, and here's all these IAP things, such as paying to remove advertising. If those various pay things are important to you, you have them, if not, you can keep playing for free. This keeps their early supporters happy, with the version they bought, and provides them a better revenue generating version for fans, new and old, that they can probably even afford to update and add new content to. This was just crappy behavior, or poor planning, on the part of TRN team.
2. Re:that's the magic of auto updates by masternerdguy · 2012-02-24 07:36 · Score: 2
  
  This is the government's fault for not making this behavior a felony.
  
  --
  To offset political mods, replace Flamebait with Insightful.
3. Re:that's the magic of auto updates by gstoddart · 2012-02-24 07:45 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  This is the government's fault for not making this behavior a felony.
  But ... but ... without corporate profit seeking, the Earth would stop spinning and the universe would collapse.
  We need for this to be legal, it drives the entire economy. /sarcasm
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
4. Re:that's the magic of auto updates by ZombieBraintrust · 2012-02-24 08:18 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  The goverment doesn't need to make new laws everytime a new product comes along. This is already a crime. The users just need to find a prosecurter who will prosecute it. (No sure if the word felony applies. This is a Swedish company.)
Well... by MightyMartian · 2012-02-24 06:11 · Score: 4, Insightful

I guess there might be a case for misrepresentation, though I'll wager the licensing agreement allows the company to do whatever they like.
The real solution here is, of course, not to pay these guys. Don't play their stupid game. If their stunt loses them customers, they're not likely to try it again.

--
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
1. Re:Well... by Kenja · 2012-02-24 06:21 · Score: 2
  
  But what does that have to do with digital distribution? If the same thing happened with a game you installed from a DVD and then applied a patch for, what's the difference?
  
  --
  
  "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
2. Re:Well... by PIBM · 2012-02-24 06:36 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  I don't understand how they've been able to pull something like this. On a free game on iOS we added some stuff which required us to block some content of one of the levels for old ipods, as they didn't had the required power to play it. We were denied the update as apple said that nothing could be taken away from the users in an update (!), and we had to build 2 different code path & levels so that both could exists together. In a free game... I would expect them to prevent such a thing even more on a paid game!
sony all over again.. by SuperDre · 2012-02-24 06:12 · Score: 2

yeah, I know, I'm stupid for bringing this up, but it's exactly what Sony did with OtherOS, you paid for certain functionalities but the seller changes it's mind and screws you over..

What the developer did in this case seems illegal to me from a consumerlaw standpoint.. But these things are stuff why I rather just have the old physical discs/carts..
1. Re:sony all over again.. by poena.dare · 2012-02-24 06:18 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  On December 8, 2011, U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg dismissed the last remaining count of the class action lawsuit, stating: "As a legal matter, [..] plaintiffs have failed to allege facts or articulate a theory on which Sony may be held liable." He then removed massive amounts of wax from his ears after the trial.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OtherOS
  Once again, I am in the wrong damn business.
Reminds me of an old scam by ackthpt · 2012-02-24 06:13 · Score: 4, Insightful

There was something on Slashdot a few years ago about people buying a service, then having to pay more to disable advertising.
I'd dump them without a second through. Cut your losses and move one.
I'd probably warn others as well as prospective future clients, by going to /. and other sites and writing about the craptivation of the game.

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
1. Re:Reminds me of an old scam by Guppy06 · 2012-02-24 06:37 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  There was something on Slashdot a few years ago about people buying a service,
  Cable/DSS television.
  
  then having to pay more to disable advertising
  Premium channels.
2. Re:Reminds me of an old scam by TheRaven64 · 2012-02-24 06:51 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  The trick is to do it gradually. You don't make people pay to remove advertising immediately. You give them a useful product, then a bit later you introduce a small, easy to ignore, amount of advertising. Then you give them the option of paying to turn it off. It's easy to ignore, so most people won't bother. You also add some new (minor, easy-to-implement) features or, better yet, a security fix, at the same time, so people will want to get the update. Then you increase the number of ads. Now people are locked into your app or, at the very least, used to using it. Now they'll pay to remove the ads. Repeat and you've got a revenue stream.
  This is a small variation of the business model of a lot of proprietary software where you pay for 'major updates' which include features like 'not crashing on launch when you run it on the new version of the OS' or 'not corrupting your documents'.
  I've come across this behaviour so many times that I now have a standard reaction: find the open source program that's closest to the proprietary one and give them a donation equal to the cost of the upgrade. The problem is that other people are willing to continue to pay companies that have screwed them over in the past.
  
  --
  I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Users respond with poor ratings by MetalliQaZ · 2012-02-24 06:13 · Score: 5, Insightful

In response to the underhanded update, users take to the ratings system with a vengeance and downmod the developer into oblivion. Thus, the app ecosystem sees shady behavior as 'damage' and 'routes' around it.

--
"Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
1. Re:Users respond with poor ratings by TheSpoom · 2012-02-24 06:23 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Poor ratings do not help those who have already paid for the shadily-updated app.
  
  --
  It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
  - E. Debs
2. Re:Users respond with poor ratings by TheSpoom · 2012-02-24 07:43 · Score: 2
  
  And your comment is also kind of selfish, letting others know the developer is a cheat is a good thing even if it doesn't have some immediate personal payoff it certainly helps others avoid getting cheated. But oh well eff them.
  You're attributing to me words I never typed. Did I say they shouldn't give the app a bad review? No, I simply said that it doesn't solve the unfortunate user's main problem (the irreversible reduction in value of the app for which they paid), as the GP seemed to be attempting to say it did.
  
  Thus, the app ecosystem sees shady behavior as 'damage' and 'routes' around it.
  Not really. It only prevents new people from downloading that app (or at best, that developer's apps). They or another developer could absolutely repeat the whole scenario with a new app, make a buttload more money, and rinse and repeat. This is not "routing around" the problem as one would say the internet "routes around" censorship; the problem is not abated by bad reviews.
  
  --
  It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
  - E. Debs
3. Re:Users respond with poor ratings by forkfail · 2012-02-24 07:43 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  And then the company rebrands, rinses and repeats with the next app.
  
  --
  Check your premises.
4. Re:Users respond with poor ratings by dissy · 2012-02-24 07:55 · Score: 2
  
  Once again the pirates are not bothered by this one bit.
  Checking the standard iOS warez site, I can download versions 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4. All kracked and fully unlocked.
  v1.5 is the current broken one, which ironically I see an entry for and the comment "You don't want this version, use 1.4 instead"
  And people wonder why I always try the pirated version first, and only purchase after!
  I can honestly say not a single app on any of my devices is pirated. However I can guarantee that nearly all of them were pirated for at most 30 minutes.
  Plenty of time to know if I want to just delete it and move on, or go buy it.
  Of course I'm not exactly their target market, as the few games I do have I already knew about before seeing them available on iOS. Either ports of PC games, clones of PC games, or a buddy had it and let me try it.
  But I'm weird like that.
iOS store price points were too low by alen · 2012-02-24 06:13 · Score: 4, Insightful

i noticed it a while ago that the price points were way to low to be sustainable. Not only were they low, but users expected unlimited updates for their $.99 game. and not just bug fixes, but new functionality. it worked for a while as the iOS installed base exploded but as growth slows down expect the return to version numbers.
it already started with "HD" versions of games and apps. separate iphone and ipad versions. sure you can run the iphone version on the ipad but it looks like crap.
next is the return to version numbers
cool racing game
next year is version 2 with new features and new IAP
and a new version every year and dropping compatibility with new iOS versions after a year or so
1. Re:iOS store price points were too low by Overzeetop · 2012-02-24 06:59 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  HD was Steve Jobs fault. He was afraid that nobody would design an app for his 1024x768 screen when they had just redesigned the app for the iPhone's 960x640 screen. So what does he do? He locks out the 960x640 versions on the iPad, forcing a pixel doubled 480x320 screen even when the higher resolution version existed.
  I wanted to throw a chair at him for that bit of assholishness.
  
  --
  Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
2. Re:iOS store price points were too low by Have+Blue · 2012-02-24 08:15 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  That's not at all what happened. At the time the iPad was released, iPhone screens were all 480x320. The 960x640 phone came later (and, in the usual Apple fashion, not revealed to developers until that time).
  
  Also, the store supports and encourages "universal" apps- a single purchase/single binary that works natively on both devices, and has done so since the iPad launched.
If only there was some way to avoid this! by Thanatopsis · 2012-02-24 06:14 · Score: 3, Insightful

Oh yeah. Delete the app. If you don't like it post change, don't use it. I mean I think it's a foolish move but it's their game. You are just buying a license to it.

--

Thalasar
Similar things have happened before... by Cinder6 · 2012-02-24 06:15 · Score: 5, Interesting

A couple years back (or maybe just a year), an "update" came out for WipEout HD on the PS3. The game cost $15 to buy, but the update added video advertisements to the loading screens of each race. Aside from being annoying, they drastically increased load times in order to force you to actually watch the ad. While not as bad as actually crippling the game as in this case, that event really soured me to the concept of digital distribution.
Really, the only company I trust with digital distribution these days is GOG, who don't use DRM in any of their games. Yeah, they pulled that weird "shutdown" stunt a while back, but to my mind it only proved their value--nobody was unable to play their games during the outage (except for those few people who hadn't gotten around to downloading them yet).

--
If you can't convince them, convict them.
1. Re:Similar things have happened before... by ConceptJunkie · 2012-02-24 06:41 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  GOG.com provides such good value, I have even repurchased games from them that I already own, because I know they have been properly updated, configured or bundled with DOSBox so that they run on modern Windows versions (and often Linux too) with absolutely zero hassle.
  
  --
  You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
2. Re:Similar things have happened before... by amoeba1911 · 2012-02-24 08:02 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Sharing without the copyright holder's consent has existed and will exist regardless of DRM. Humans are social creatures, we like to share stuff. We've had 100 thousand years of sharing knowledge through spoken language and thousands of years of sharing knowledge through written language. Our impressive ability to share is what differentiates us from the rest of the animal kingdom. Sharing of knowledge and ideas is an indispensable component of the human success story. The whole idea of "must not share" goes against the very foundation of human nature and is an insult to the roots of our civilization.
3. Re:Similar things have happened before... by Shagg · 2012-02-24 08:07 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Piracy is the reason DRM exists.
  You'd have to be pretty foolish to actually believe that. Piracy is the red herring that provides the excuse for them to force DRM on legitimate consumers, but preventing piracy is not what DRM exists for. It's not even very useful for preventing it.
  
  --
  Unix is user friendly, it's just selective about who its friends are.
Re:Or how about Android Marketplace? by Kenja · 2012-02-24 06:18 · Score: 4, Insightful

Explain how you not agreeing to the terms of use for a service disables said service is evil. If you dont plan on using the features of the marketplace, why do you care if its disabled? What exactly is it stopping you from doing? Your phones OS updates dont come from there, only apps and add updates. And since its Android, you can just install apps from the APK files and totally ignore the app store.

So how is it that your "paid-for phone is now becoming less and less useful"?

--

"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
No Refund Terms of Sale by dietdew7 · 2012-02-24 06:22 · Score: 5, Informative

It's in the terms of sale from the article that Itunes has a no refund policy. It's also true for Barnes and Noble. I've been reluctant to purchase any apps and now that seems wise whereas before I was just being cheap.
Why update? by jimmyswimmy · 2012-02-24 06:23 · Score: 4, Interesting

This is one reason why I rarely update anything on my Android tablet. I have a number of kids' games on there which never had many privileges when I installed them, so there's little security worry (plus it's only connected to my WLAN). What could "Draw by Numbers" possibly need to update to work better? The only "upgrade" I expect is them to remove pictures. My 3 year old is thrilled with the 10 or 20 different things she can draw on there, and that probably is limiting sales.
I only upgrade OS items now and disable the automatic upgrade checking for everything else. I'm sure I'll hear about why that's bad here. I think years of free and truly beneficial MS updates have confused a lot of us into thinking that an upgrade actually means what the word is defined to mean. Much like "gender" replaced "sex" I think the true meaning of the word "upgrade" is being replaced by something. Something not good.

--

Just my $0.55 (US inflation, 1774-2008, for $0.02)
Where's the Update : Never setting? by RealGene · 2012-02-24 06:25 · Score: 4, Interesting

From the latest version of PocketCloud Remote Free (RDP/VNC client for iPxxx):

What's New in Version 2.2.134

We noticed we had mistakenly enabled multiple computer support on a previous release.
This free version of PocketCloud has always been limited to 1 computer as documented on the app description.
We apologize for the inconvenience and ask for your understanding.
We are discounting PocketCloud Pro 40% to ease the migration for our power users who need to access multiple computers.

--
Mission: To provide products that consume time and energy as entertainingly as permitted by the laws of thermodynamics.
Re:Really? Is this the worst that can happen? by dietdew7 · 2012-02-24 06:37 · Score: 2

I from a generation that has the mindset that if I pay for something it stays paid for.
Re:Or how about Android Marketplace? by spire3661 · 2012-02-24 06:55 · Score: 2

Unfortunately, Google is using Android as a club, instead of a carrot. Open Source my ass.

--
Good-bye
Caveat Emptor by argStyopa · 2012-02-24 07:03 · Score: 3, Interesting

A purchase is an investment in the credibility of the seller.
There are so many ways a seller can screw over a purchaser, that's why letters of credit were invented.
If you're purchasing something (effectively) that you have no idea how it works, from someone you don't know, and you give them (by update) the authority to make changes at will...well, to suggest that you are trusting is an understatement.
We've become so habituated to this model, we've forgotten that in the same way that Darwinism works by death, capitalism works by failure. For people to realize a seller can be identified as unscrupulous, a number of people have to get screwed.

--
-Styopa
What the market will bull by sixtyeight · 2012-02-24 07:07 · Score: 2

Customers dumping products and companies that do things like this is what traditionally kept them in check. The underlying problem seems to be not that merchants have started using these underhanded tactics - that's been something merchants have always tried for centuries - but rather that the customer base accepts it. Gripes perhaps, but predominantly accepts it.
When is the last time you heard the word "boycott"? Particularly when it comes to digital media, consumption has become so convenient that large swaths of the customer base will put up with it. And thus it continues. Peoples' standards are more lax today than they used to be, and the standards of customers overall have the moral uprightness of a bowl of yogurt. Remember when stores used to thank you for your patronage, rather than just your business? That was in the fifties. They would be glad you stopped by and considered making a purchase, and were eager to build a relationship with their potential customers. Nowadays, it's 30-minute seating limits and Restrooms For Customers Only. How nice.
With the internet facilitating so much free communication (well, for the moment at least) and social co-ordination, there's even less of an excuse for people to be accepting this kind of treatment. Boycotts are even easier to organize than they were in the Seventies, and when people still don't manage it you really have to wonder about the acceptance level of the People. It seems they'll take quite a bit. That also accounts for much of our political situation in the U.S., by the way. If people wouldn't tolerate it, let alone enable it, it couldn't perpetuate.
It's less a matter of, "Et tu, Brute?" and more one of the People collectively forgetting their life skills. And getting consistently shorn for it.

--
The Wolfpack Project: BitCoin + Crowdfunding = Political Accountability
This isn't a technical issue by davidwr · 2012-02-24 07:13 · Score: 5, Insightful

This is not a technical issue. This is an issue of unfair trade practices.

--
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Re:Or how about Android Marketplace? by jimshatt · 2012-02-24 07:22 · Score: 2

The evil thing here is, of course, that whilst you not agree to the new terms, the app (or whatever) is still updated and then disabled rather than not updated at all. Because the update is forced the new EULA is forced as well. Furthermore OP clearly states he intends to use Marketplace to update his phone, which he now cannot do anymore.
Re:Or how about Android Marketplace? by St.Creed · 2012-02-24 07:25 · Score: 4, Funny

Open Source my ass.
You sure about that? :)

--
Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
Re:Really? Is this the worst that can happen? by Qzukk · 2012-02-24 07:26 · Score: 2

the vast majority had probably already received more than enough value from their dollar.
At what point is it OK for me to steal your car since you already received more than enough value from your dollar?

--
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Re:Or how about Android Marketplace? by Farmer+Tim · 2012-02-24 08:16 · Score: 2

Then it should give you the option of specifying directories, not take the liberty of indexing everything.
No! My data! Bad Google! [hits Larry Page on nose with rolled up newspaper]

--
Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
Re:Update? Downgrade! by mfnickster · 2012-02-24 08:34 · Score: 2

Don't expect Apple to help the consumer on this issue. They practically started the practice.
I remember when Apple introduced QuickTime 3, which let you play back content for free but to edit audio and video you had to pay for the "Pro" version.
The editing features had previously been distributed for free with MoviePlayer 2.5, which still worked with QT3, so a lot of us users kept the old MoviePlayer to avoid having functionality taken away from us. Eventually it stopped working with QT after a few more "upgrades."

--
"Slow down, Cowboy! It has been 3 years, 7 months and 26 days since you last successfully posted a comment."
Bullcrap: This isn't different for TVs, etc. by tlambert · 2012-02-24 11:17 · Score: 2

Here is how it is different.
I sell you a book, car, TV, shirt, power drill. You pay a fair price for it.
Then with an update, I remove your book from your reader, limit your car to driving 30mph, your TV to only working with bluray content so you can't use your DVD's any more, remove the pocket from your shirt, and limit your power drill to using phillips head bits so you have to buy a nother drill for star, hex, and flat head bits.
You can't do those things. But with digitial updates, not only can you do it, it is happening already.
Sure you can, at least with TVs. Remember the Broadcast Flag? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadcast_flag -- It's already been used to remove value from devices purchased like that, by NBC on 18 May 2008.
Similarly, HDCP, which is pretty much in all new televisions, DVD players, BLU-Ray players and so on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-bandwidth_Digital_Content_Protection -- has a revocation feature which would permit rendering those devices useless as well.
Game systems with modchips and pay-per-view systems with programmable paycards have similarly been remotely disabled. While technically more grey-market, if you consider third party content not being permitted onto a physical device, which is perfectly legal, denying network access to these devices when they are not being used for circumvention purposes definitely also falls under making the hardware less useful after I've already purchased it.
Similarly, Amazon has already revoked ownership of books -- ironically, George Orwell's "1984" and "Animal Farm" -- from on the Kindle; there's no reason to believe they couldn't revoke anything, including the books which persuaded you to buy the Kindle in the first place (if they weren't the Orwell books already revoked).
I'll stop after this last example, but there are many others...
iPhone carrier locking. U.S. Law requires that a carrier unlock a cell phone from the original carrier in the event of contract buy-out, or normal time-based termination, at the request of the customer who wants the device unlocked. Yet you can not get the iPhone unlocked by requesting an unlock code. The reason? The code for the unlock is not known to the carrier, nor is it even known, or recratable, by Apple; it lives only on a secure server in the factory in China, and not all of them have been stored. Why? The code is a combination of the IMEI of the device, and the flash chip serial number for the baseband flash, and a secret key known only to that server, and that information is not exposed in such a way that it's even physically possible for someone to give you an unlock code.
Like the HDCP key revocation, Amazon key revocation, or the broadcast bit, it's a submarine attack on a device which you purchased in good faith.
So basically, your argument that physical artifacts don't suffer from this problem is BS.
-- Terry