ESA Rebukes EFF's Request To Exempt Abandoned Games From Some DMCA Rules

eldavojohn writes It's 2015 and the EFF is still submitting requests to alter or exempt certain applications of the draconian DMCA. One such request concerns abandoned games that utilized or required online servers for matchmaking or play (PDF warning) and the attempts taken to archive those games. A given example is Madden '09, which had its servers shut down a mere one and a half years after release. Another is Gamespy and the EA & Nintendo titles that were not migrated to other servers. I'm sure everyone can come up with a once cherished game that required online play that is now abandoned and lost to the ages. While the EFF is asking for exemptions for museums and archivists, the ESA appears to take the stance that it's hacking and all hacking is bad. In prior comments (PDF warning), the ESA has called reverse engineering a proprietary game protocol "a classic wolf in sheep's clothing" as if allowing this evil hacking will loose Sodom & Gomorrah upon the industry. Fellow gamers, these years now that feel like the golden age of online gaming will be the dark ages of games as historians of the future try to recreate what online play was like now for many titles.

Comments

Rally Masters!

[Anonymous Coward]

Give me back the online play for rally masters! It does not even work on a local network. Such a nice multiplayer game and cannot multi play anymore...

Era of micro transactions

[sreever]

Everything is micro transactions... who would want to remember that?

Re:Era of micro transactions

[Anonymous Coward]

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

Re:Era of micro transactions

[ArcadeMan]

That may be true, but don't forget that those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

Re:Era of micro transactions

[crystalclaw]

Also, who says the new servers people would set up wouldn't make all of the micro transactions free in some way? It's not like the company would care; they abandoned the game.

Re:Era of micro transactions

[boojumbadger]

Nobody can remember the past because it is all lies! And anyways you can only remember what you have personally experienced, and even then the remembering changes the memory.

Re:Era of micro transactions

[captain_nifty]

The thing is I don't want to play a game with the best business model, or revenue.
People want to play games because they are enjoyable and fun.

This is one of the big problems with the large game studios.

Re:Era of micro transactions

[Cederic]

I have 100 dollars to spend on a game. I can spend 10 dollars on each of ten complete games, or make ten transactions to acquire all of the content for a single game.

It's a pretty fucking easy choice. Your business model just earned zero dollars from me.

Re:Era of micro transactions

[wallsg]

Good news, citizen! The Chocolate Rations have been increased!

ESA?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't understand why the European Space Agency would be involved in this.

Re:ESA?

[jamiesan]

That just highlights the problem with TLA's IANAL, but FWIW, IMHO, I think we should stop using them altogether.

Re:ESA?

[NotFamous]

AAAA - All Acronyms Are Awful

Re:ESA?

[Minwee]

Oh, I see.

Re:ESA?

[prefec2]

My thoughts exactly. That's what happens when you do not introduce acronyms correctly in a text.

Re:ESA?

[ilsaloving]

That's it, I'm reporting you to the AAAAA (American Association Against Acronym Abuse)

Re:ESA?

[sjames]

Sorry, that was taken by the American Association for the Abatement of Alliteration.

Re:ESA?

[Darinbob]

Does that have an Auxillary Association?

Re:ESA?

[mr_mischief]

The Association for the Advancement of Assonance in the Americas would like a word.

Re:ESA?

[Grog6]

Ya man, and it's all African-American. :)

Re:ESA?

[Ash-Fox]

An IPv6 record in DNS?

Re:ESA?

[ilsaloving]

Why do I suddenly have the urge to listen to ABBA?

ESA

[internerdj]

I am on the EFF's side here, but isn't it the game industry's job? If the game industry wants to be taken seriously artistically, it is ultimately the industry's duty to set up ways to preserve the art. If the industry won't take itself seriously, then individuals attempting preservation are going to end up being blocked over and over again by whatever form our trademark and copyright laws take.

Re:ESA

[Pi1grim]

Fun fact, but in some countries it is actually 100% legal to reverce engineer and patch a game to restore it's functionality to original level in case the game was legally obtained and for research purposes. So whoever ESA is, they can go and cry a corner, while other countries enjoy the functionality lost to US. Also, their arguments reek of manure - reverse engineering should be made legal (as any type of research) and "hacking, closely asosiated to piracy" - that's a gem, how about we ban ESA, RIAA, MPAA because they condone "DRM, closely associated with scams, illegal spying, privacy and customer rights violations"? What's really needed is a law, that would allow people to get a refund on multiplayer games in case official servers go down and there is no way to start your own, then ESA would make a quick 180 on their stance.

Re:ESA

[Chris Mattern]

If the game industry wants to be taken seriously artistically

Well, that's the problem. With a few notable exceptions, the game industry doesn't give two figs about being taken seriously artistically. They just want to make as much money as possible.

Re:ESA

[TWX]

Well, for what it's worth (which is probably about $100 a year) I stopped gaming when games started requiring Internet connectivity to play. We went from an era where the player could compete against a fairly well-implemented computer opponent to where the player only or mostly competes against other players. I had a lot of fun in games like Doom and Quake where it was just me, an agressive midi synth track, and a bunch of startled monsters screaming at me, and I didn't have to worry about having a connection or dealing with racial epithets from random strangers.

LAN parties were fun, but mostly fun because I was playing against my friends all in the same room, so our trash-talking was moderated by the fact that we had to look each other in the eye and wanted to continue being friends. Internet play can be fun too, but mandating it just to play a game, and at the will of the game publishing company's interest in keeping servers running doesn't do it for me.

Re:ESA

[snadrus]

Hit them where it counts then. Servers turn off? Give me the no-server patch or a refund. That should be the law.

I know if my lawnmower was intentionally bricked by the manufacturer 1 year after purchase (assuming I didn't but it on release day), they would be in-for-it.

Re:ESA

[Darinbob]

The game makers are all about today's games. They hate last year's game because there's no profit in it. Ten year old games are right now. The game industry seems more worried about reselling or regifting games than with actual piracy. Thus the rise of ubiquitous DRM which has never slowed down any pirates but which punishes consumers who legally purchase the games. Always-online games may be the more onerous of these types of DRM, but all DRM is fundamentally designed to restrict the consumer's rights.

Re:ESA

[harryjohnston]

I have to wonder why there was no class action lawsuit (or was there?) over this.

But yes, you shouldn't need a lawsuit. In New Zealand the consumer guarantees act should apply, though I have no idea whether anyone tried using it to obtain a refund. I don't imagine we're the only nation with a similar law.

At an absolute minimum, they should be obliged to grant permission to third parties wanting to provide ongoing support if they are unwilling to do so themselves.

20 years too late

[pla]

these years now that feel like the golden age of online gaming will be the dark ages of games as historians of the future try to recreate what online play was like now for many titles.

While I agree with your premise, you overlook the fact that many of us in the "first gen" of gamers already view this as a "dark age". Personally, I have a fairly impressive game library, spanning a dozen platforms and worth probably tens of thousands of dollars (at original retail price*) worth of games. And I basically stopped buying games about a decade ago, with a few notable exceptions.

Make no mistake, I still game regularly - Between the occasional non-obnoxious modern release, and the back catalog of once-great games that I still haven't played (just finished Fallout a few weeks ago, no idea how I never got into that when it first came out), I figure I have enough material to keep me content for the rest of my life. But I will not play any game that depends on any aspect of the game under the exclusive control of a third party. Open servers and a really viable single-player mode, or GTFO, simple as that.


* Not that I actually paid full retail, which counts as an entirely different problem with modern games - Reselling a game used to mean putting it back in the box (or putting everything you had left in a ziplock bag), and passing it along to someone else for a few bucks. Now, if you even have the option of reselling it, you usually need to do so with the "permission" of the publisher. Fuck that!

Re:20 years too late

[orlanz]

I don't think its the dark ages. The gaming world has just been redefined and left us old timers out. From my view, the average game is now an interactive movie. The old school definition of "fun" has long ago died. Its all about graphics and "showing" a story or a cool suit or a cool weapon design. In some ways its just playing dress up with dolls, or action figures, but now they call them "video games" and the accessories are DLCs.

Gone are the complex paper,rock,scissor strategies or couch coops and personal connections. Now its very anonymous and the player is the key content in the game without which other players would stop playing. Its up to the player to create the micro stories like kids used to with dolls/action figures with their imagination. The game itself is just a catalyst to bring the faceless masses in for the movie watching and of each other.

As for us old school gamers, we are pretty much irrelevant. The current set of gamers are on mobile phones and only online. They need instant gratification and once the next one comes out or the trophies are achieved, they forget the last. No significant number of them care about replay or nostalgia. And they will pay up front and months in advance based on the cover or press release. Whether it meets their expectations or value is irrelevant, because that money is spent and the next press release just came out. Not much different than the IT stock buyers in the last 90s.

I miss the old days but .. damn-it those kids are on my lawn again!

Re:20 years too late

[pla]

The only way that people with your view will make a difference is if you go out of your way to support the few devs that push quality products that meet your requirements.

And as I mentioned, I do. Drop in the bucket, though, and such content becomes increasingly rare.

Re:20 years too late

[neghvar1]

There are some publishers that actually have the balls to call the first sale doctrine legalized theft

Re:20 years too late

[orlanz]

Agreed, but what I am saying is that the word "gaming" has been so successfully hijacked not only at the financial level, but also the social/consumer level that we can't use the old definition anymore. Those of us who still define gaming the old way and basically puke at the current environment are so few and insignificant that we are the odd balls. We are that rambling random guy in the street that has "End of the World is Here" sign on our shoulders.

Gaming as currently defined is considered to be extremely successful. People paid $100 for Destiny and 2 DLCs 12-18 months before release! The game was a shell of what was advertised and there is no boycott or riot. There are few industries that can claim such success, let alone escape fraud investigations. I am surprised theaters haven't followed suit and don't sell no-refund tickets 6-12 months in advance at $12 (vs $15) for new movies.

Re:20 years too late

[Minwee]

The "Dark Ages" are called that because of the lack of historical records from that time.

Really. It has nothing to do with how complicated their games were.

Since so much of modern culture -- not just video games but also books, music and movies -- is locked into digital formats which prioritize new sales over preservation of the original, future historians may well look at the current era in the same way.

The ESA is trying to ensure that we continue to live in a Digital Dark Age.

Re:20 years too late

[TWX]

Almost all of those can be limited by not overusing the technology though. My friends come over and we work on stuff in the workshop. My Internet-friends don't even compare to my real-world friends that I see on a regular basis.

Re:20 years too late

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's look at the top played games the last weeks, as per steamspy.

1) DOTA2. I've never played it myself, but it seems to a a fairly intense team vs. team affair that takes skill and rewards experience.
2) Counterstrike:GO. The same thing applies there, perhaps even more: Even playing field, skill and experience determines the winner, team vs team.
3) Team Fortress 2: Ditto.
All three have "dress-up" elements (TF2 famously sells hats), but I'd hesitate to call them "shallow online dress-up".

Let's keep going.
4) Garry's mod. An offline (or is there an optional multiplayer mode?) sandbox mod for the half-life engine, used to record machinima videos and goof around with the physics engine, from what I can tell.
5) Skyrim. Huge sprawling singleplayer offline RPG.
6) Unturned. Free-to-play online small-group multiplayer survival/engineering game where you build forts and stuff.
7) Civilization V. Offline or multiplayer turnbased strategy game.
8) Payday 2. singleplayer or (recommended) up to 4-player coop FPS assorted-crime game with some stealth.
9) Counterstrike:Source: See CS:GO.
10) Left4Dead2: Coop zombie survival/escape FPS.
11) Cities:Skylines : City simulator, everything the last SimCity dreamed of being. Singleplayer.

Not a single game on that list fits your "get off my lawn"-whining.

Re:20 years too late

[Nemyst]

The gaming world hasn't left you old farts out, you just need to go beyond watching the latest Call of Duty ad, huffing and puffing a bit about it and declaring gaming dead.

If you care as much as you imply, look for new games. No, you won't find them in TV ads. You didn't find them on TV way back when anyway. There are dozens, even hundreds of new games that come out that have amazing gameplay, depth and breadth and everything in between. Yes, some of them even look pretty while doing it, *gasp* you don't have to look ugly to be engaging!

You want strategic depth? Beyond the obvious choices like Starcraft 2 (which has more strategic layers than most RTS of yore), you can find stuff like Cities: Skylines (amazing, in-depth city builder, released less than a month ago), Endless Legend (amazing and beautiful 4X), Homeworld Remastered (yes it's an old game but it plays like a modern one with the remaster), Crusader Kings 2 (you want complex interactions? this goes way beyond rock/paper/scissors), Europa Universalis IV (it's Crusader Kings but with a scope 10x larger), Kerbal Space Program (make rockets, send things to space, all physically-driven), Invisible, Inc. (early access turn-based spy game, extremely well crafted and difficult), Planetary Annihilation (spiritual successor to Total Annihilation, but set on multiple planets in the same match, with all that that entails), Civilization V (the pinnacle of the series with both expansions), Wargame: Red Dragon (latest in a series of highly accurate historical RTS games, focus on realism and scale, very detailed), Frozen Cortex/Synapse (turn-based duel games where you give orders to a squad and watch your orders and the enemy's unfold simultaneously, very high skill ceiling)... need I go on? I've barely checked 10% of my own library here.

Then there's the stuff outside of the more strategic/planning. Let's only name a few examples: Transistor (amazingly beautiful and atmospheric isometric brawler with unique pause planning combat set in a cyberpunk setting), Bayonnetta (probably the best spectacle fighter ever made, easy to learn, hard to master, incredible depth), The Stanley Parable (very funny, very enjoyable interactive fiction with a lot of branching paths), Antichamber (really really novel puzzler, lots of interesting brain teasers), Portal 1 and 2 (if you don't know about them, where the hell were you?), Gunpoint (excellent noir-style 2D hacking game) and more besides.

So I'm sorry if I'm not partaking in the Slashdot tradition of bashing on modern gaming as though it lacked substance and depth, but unlike most people here I seem to have actually followed gaming's development instead of merely going "get off my lawn."

Re:20 years too late

[Holi]

Donate? Why donate? Aren't they trying to sell me something? Why does everything have to be some charity?

Re:20 years too late

[pla]

You did not mention doing anything aside from playing old games and buying very few games, if any, now. But go ahead, get an attitude about it.

"Make no mistake, I still game regularly - Between the occasional non-obnoxious modern release".

Attitude? Well, one of us seems to have attitude, anyway. Or at least a reading comprehension problem...

Re:20 years too late

[Altrag]

That's like saying the term "sports" should only encompass the national leagues and that minor players or even casuals playing with friends in their back yard can't use that old definition any more.

Gaming is what you make of it. I certainly won't claim that the current AAA direction of over-promised, retailer-specific preorder bonuses and micropayments for hats and required-to-play social media tie-ins and whatever other crap is good for the industry long-term, but there's a hell of a lot of game producers at all levels that include more than the letters "EA" in their logo.

An AAA game these days is like a blockbuster action movie -- the spectacle is amazing but if you're looking for much beyond that you're deluding yourself. But that doesn't mean nothing else exists.

And really at the end of the day, if they push it too far then they'll just be replaced in the #1 spot by some other company who's a bit less pushy about those things. The one nice thing about most modern AAA games being practically clones of each other is that they're a lot closer to being in true competition with each other. Switching to Battlefield when Call of Duty bites a turd is a lot smaller of a hop than switching from say, Mario to Sonic.

Re:20 years too late

[Altrag]

Because food isn't free and someone has to make the things you want. In the interwebs that generally means one of three things:
- Selling things outright.
- Blasting you with ads.
- Asking for donations.

Of course there's always the unscrupulous bastard who will pick more than one (finding ads in something you purchased in particular is hardly uncommon.)

But generally speaking unless its something the dev needed to create anyway and thought it was useful enough to release, there are few cases where things are truly 100% free (and in those cases, good luck getting any support because said dev will probably be working a day job in order to obtain that aforementioned food.)

When was the last time you gave away something completely for free and then actually dedicated months, years or even decades to maintaining whenever some random person on the internet had a problem?

Re:20 years too late

[VGPowerlord]

Garry's Mod has online game modes. The most famous ones are Trouble in Terrorist Town, Prop Hunt, and Deathrun.

Perhaps

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps the security technology in the abandoned games is the similar to that in the non-abandoned games.

If so, the game makers would really not want folks to know how to open the abandoned games.

That would explain the situation.

If so, seems the game makers dug the hole they are in.

Re:Perhaps

[Translation Error]

Why would the fact that it's not legal to circumvent protection in old games be any sort of deterrent to people willing to illegally circumvent protection in current games?

Re:Perhaps

[Altrag]

This isn't about breaking the DRM so much as working around company servers that no longer exist.

Of course, there are cases where these overlap (call-home style copy protection,) but in those cases, if the servers were still available for non-abandoned games then they'd also still be available for abandoned games.

Unless the company is such a dick that they use the exact same server tech and just change the IP address or similar in order to explicitly break older games. I'm pretty sure they'd find themselves in a class action lawsuit really fast if that was discovered though.. its one thing to actually shut down a server after its unprofitable.. its quite another for that server to still exist and just be rejecting authorization requests purely because the company wants you to go buy a new game.

For nerds, ESA = European Space Agency

[Anonymous Coward]

Any true nerd would know that ESA stands for the European Space Agency.

Non-nerds ( and their "Editors" ) should clarify other uses.

Triannual exemptions are a joke

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean I only get to do this one thing for three years and after that the results of such an exemption are back to being illegal again? The DMCA is one bad idea after another.

Wrath of the Litch King

[Bing Tsher E]

Thank goodness Trinity is curating WOTLK.

The game's publisher has gone astray.

Re:For nerds, ESA = Ecological Society of America

[IgnitusBoyone]

I hate to tell you but this article is clearly a reference to the Ecological Society of America. Why they have an interest in the DMCA and video game hacking is beyond me.

The Library of Congress

[Bonzoli]

Just have the Library of Congress step in and ask to have a copy of every game and its backend supporting software for the archives. Have a game assignement number for tracking like a book. We have an institution, it just needs a storage and process upgrade.

Re:The Library of Congress

[romiz]

The French national library is doing it - they have all physical software releases since those started, and they have some technical folks that try to keep them readable and running. But they do not really have all the hardware means to do it, so they usually use emulators to run the software.

nuke nintendo!

[user.aaaaa]

evil they closed multiplayer servers for mario cart wii! !!! start the engine for Enola Gey!

The answer to the problem

[reboot246]

Just refuse to buy any game that can't be played in standalone mode. If it requires an online server, just say no.

If enough people do this, the companies will have to change their perverted business model.

Can you live without your online gaming habit for a year or two?

Re:The answer to the problem

[Anonymous Coward]

> Can you live without your online gaming habit for a year or two?

Bwa ha ha ha. That's just the problem. They cannot. Seriously. They are all addicts and cannot give it up long enough to make a stand.

Re:The answer to the problem

[_xeno_]

Assuming you're aware that it requires an online server when you buy it.

I recently bought LEGO Batman 3 since I love the LEGO games and enjoyed the previous two Batman games in the series. None of them have ever had an online component. LEGO Batman 3 has no online multiplayer, it only has single player and split screen co-op.

Guess what? It requires an online connection to some server somewhere. This isn't mentioned in the Steam page anywhere. If you can't connect to the server, you can't play the game.

I hadn't thought to check if it required an Internet connection to play because why the fuck should it?!! (And if I had checked, I almost certainly wouldn't have found out about it because none of the reviews mention that fact.)

Re:The answer to the problem

[Altrag]

Yep. That one got me too. Which I probably wouldn't have even cared all that much about if the damned thing didn't take like 3-4 minutes to connect the first time I tried to play it. Don't know what was up with their servers that day but holy fuck.

Steam really should try to pressure developers to reduce this kind of BS as much as possible. Steam's DRM works just fine. There's no real need for the games on Steam to include a second level of DRM other than the developers just being too lazy to remove it for the Steam edition of the game.

(Things like Origin or Live popping up are another story -- they're still fucking obnoxious but at least those have a purpose outside of pure DRM.. namely that achievements/leaderboards/etc aren't shared between Steam and the other companies so a Steam-only login would fragment the games' communities.)

fuck archival and museums

[Anonymous Coward]

The point is being missed entirely. If i buy a game that requires infrastructure from the manufacturer to play and the manufacturer decides to just stop providing that infrastructure, all bets are off. I should be free to do whatever I want/need to continue to be able to play that game. if the manufacturer feels like there is still some IP there, then continue to support it. If they feel like they can't afford to continue to support it, then what IP is remaining, really?

As soon as a good becomes "not fit for purpose" the manufacturer of the good should lose all rights associated with it and it should enter the public domain.

Re:fuck archival and museums

[neghvar1]

A use it or lose it clause should be added to copyright law.

Re:fuck archival and museums

[Altrag]

That's far too wide. Any new laws or changes to existing laws to address this particular problem will need to be specific to the issue of online-mediated DRM. Because if its not, too many counter-examples crop up (or more likely, are made up) in order to shut the law down before it comes into effect.

Really though, what the EFF is asking for is probably the best you can do.. its not really plausible to burden the developer with this -- they can't keep unprofitable servers running without going bankrupt (and then guess what -- those servers will stop running anyway) and requiring them to release a serverless patch is at best going to get you some shoddy half-assed patch that probably breaks so much that the game's unplayable anyway.

Sony, Microsoft and Steam could in theory push something like this through -- as part of their certification process, they could require that the developers provide a server-free version to be held in escrow until such time as said servers are actually shut down (and would have to be updated with every new submitted patch of course.)

But of course none of those companies have any reason to accept such a large responsibility other than being nice to consumers.. its something I could see Steam doing if the outrage got big enough.. not going to hold my breath on MS or Sony bothering.

Re:fuck archival and museums

[Rakarra]

A use it or lose it clause should be added to copyright law.

But then Disney couldn't remove movies from circulation to put into their Vault for limited-time re-releases later.

Not sure who said it

[argStyopa]

...but I recall some economist observing that against market demand, arbitrarily constraining supply will create black markets.

I'm not saying that's how it should be, just how it IS.

I understand that ESA want to control any and all access to products of their developers (on principle, if the developers no longer exist, etc), but I expect that ultimately this will be futile, and lead to their irrelevance sooner rather than later.

Stop buying the crappy new games

[AndyKron]

Stop buying the crappy new games and bring them to their knees.

Re:Anyone remember...

[Chris Mattern]

Doom might be a little hard to find (but not impossible), but you can get Secret of Monkey Island from Good Old Games. It's a remake (still kinda old even so), but very faithful.

Do they not grasp the concept here?

[Vermonter]

I wonder how these people would react if they were told A: their cars needed to have a GPS connection to be allowed to drive, and then B: a few years after owning their cars, the GPS system they used was taken offline and they were told they were SOL and had to buy a new car.

Re:Do they not grasp the concept here?

[mark-t]

Except the EFF isn't arguing that.... nice strawman you did there.

The EFF is only arguing that the DMCA should not apply.... ordinary copyright law is still entirely applicable. If somebody else makes a server for your software by reverse engineering the protocol so that that the game could connect to it, then they haven't necessarily actually copied any of your work at all, but the DMCA would still apply. All the EFF suggests with their proposal is that after such a game has been abandoned because the copyright holder is no longer hosting said server, the DMCA would not apply to such activities. Conventional copyright law would still disallow actions that otherwise infringe on copyright, such as either making unauthorized copies of said work or creating derivative works.

Re:Do they not grasp the concept here?

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

And this EFF request doesn't even include abandoned MMORPGs, yet, which would have to be a later step.

City of Heroes is one of the more egregious shutdowns that could have benefitted from this. It wouldn't rescue supergroup bases you may have invested hundreds of hours in in customizing (though there may be ways to record layouts) but to shut down a game that has been a hobby to tens of thousands for almost a decade is criminal.

If a model company goes out of business, they don't come into your home and smash your collection of ships in a bottle.

Re:Do they not grasp the concept here?

[DarkOx]

They would be indignant, I am sure.

They are like the ISP/Telco/Wireless provider crowd though they want to have it both ways. "I am a common carrier" when it affords me legal protection or entitles me to some government handouts, rights of way etc, "I am pure commercial entity that should be except from regulation" when I want invent new revenue streams and leverage my monopoly by double dipping.

Same for the games industry, suggest they should be regulated and the cry is "We are artists, free speech!", unless that pesky first sale doctrine implies you could resell it like a novel or a painting, than "we are service providers!". Same deal on copyrights if someone uses their stuff for anything "OMG Pirates!, save the intellectual properties", they want to use something, "its just sampling".

These are not rational and consistent arguments they are making. You can't therefore try and reason with them or make assumptions about what their position will be for a given set of facts, you have to understand there thinking just boils down to "Whatever is most favorable to us right now!", that is really all there is if you try and analyze beyond you will reach incorrect conclusions 99% of the time.

Re:Do they not grasp the concept here?

[dgatwood]

I'm firmly of the opinion that we need a change in the way we interpret laws, if not a change in the laws themselves. If you sell a physical product, you must support it for a minimum of 7 years with repairs, etc. How is software any different? Game companies should be required by law to maintain their servers for a minimum of 7 years from the time that the last copy was sold.

And honestly, given that the products actually stop working en masse instantly when the company pulls the plug, rather than merely failing naturally as components fail to function, I think we need a law change that requires any company that sells software that depends on a server to make that server available as open source a minimum of one year before they shut down their own servers, and requires them to make the data available to users so that they can migrate their data to someone else's server.

Re:Do they not grasp the concept here?

[drinkypoo]

but to shut down a game that has been a hobby to tens of thousands for almost a decade is criminal.

The burned child fears the flame. Maybe you'll learn not to spend your money on platforms designed first and foremost for lock-in. HAHAHAHAHAHAyeahright. You'll just keep spending your money on these games and then complaining when they get shut down.

Maybe one of these days the vaunted open source gaming community will finally get together and put out some decent free/open MMO engines that we can use to build virtual worlds on our own servers and then link them together meaningfully, which is the missing part really.

Re:Do they not grasp the concept here?

[Altrag]

Maybe you'll learn not to spend your money on platforms designed first and foremost for lock-in.

Well you'd save a lot of money, but you'd be pretty short on the gaming stick. No Playstation, no XBox, no Steam, no Origin, no MMOs, no Minecraft, etc etc. You'd be limited to basically whatever Good Old Games has available and the occasionally indie game you stumble across by chance.

decent free/open MMO engines

http://sourceforge.net/directory/games/mmorpg/os:windows/freshness:recently-updated/Didn't Google that one too hard I take it..

then link them together meaningfully, which is the missing part really.

That's really the trick. Unfortunately its close to impossible. What meaningful link could there possibly be between my 60-level, 1000-max-stat fantasy game and your 200-level, 100-max-stat science fiction game?

Even among similar games, there will be huge disconnects in content and lore making this particularly challenging. You could set up farms of a handful of cooperating servers to be sure, but to get that "Massively" part in there, you really won't get away with just "linking them together." Someone will have to spend the money and time on developing an actual large-scale server farm, advertising the game to enough people to make it worthwhile, etc.

All of that is expensive.

But if you just want a small MUD-scale server of a few dozen people, that should be totally in the realm of possibility.

Re:Do they not grasp the concept here?

[drinkypoo]

What meaningful link could there possibly be between my 60-level, 1000-max-stat fantasy game and your 200-level, 100-max-stat science fiction game?

I propose that you'd have federations of servers which would come to agreements, and then you'd have federations of federations who would decide how they would play out. However, mass is the great equalizer in many cases. It takes x amount of energy to do something, work from there.

Re:Anyone remember...

[ArcadeMan]

How appropriate. You fight like a cow.

The link is vague.....

[mark-t]

The linked article says that "a user cannot hack the server-based authentication and âoematchmakingâ access controls for console-based video games without also hacking the video game console access controls", and then applies the "wolf in sheep's clothing" metaphor to it. I won't argue that this might be a concern for the ESA, and if the concern were a legitimate one, I can even potentially see how it could be a problem with respect to software that hasn't been abandoned, but does anyone have any further details about how they actually came to that conclusion? Bearing in mind that even if such "hacking" were done for genuinely nefarious purposes with respect to inrfringing on the copyright of software that was current and hadn't been abandoned, the EFF isn't suggesting that copyright law have any less claim over such matters, and action could still be taken against such criminals anyways under ordinary copyright law, I just want to understand what kind of point the ESA believed that they had that would ever give them a justification to disallow what is by their own admission a superficially reasonable activity, to use their own metaphor's words, "in sheep's clothing", under the allegation that it could somehow actually be utilized in much more nefarious ways, or any alleged such connection only exists in their own imagination, and from what I can find on the matter, this is the conclusion I am inclined to come to. If the latter is genuinely applicable, then the ESA is basing their entire objection upon a concern that doesn't have any bearing on reality (as I suspect they may be),. and is doing nothing more or less with this objection than making a strawman argument, and should be called on that.

New business model

[ArcadeMan]

1. Make a game that requires server authentication and have date X for the launch of the servers.
2. Sell a boatload of games.
3. Take the servers off-line on date X plus 10 seconds.
4. Profits!

According to the ESA, that would be legal and appropriate?

EFF is very specific in their request

[Rastl]

The summary (didn't RTFA so please forgive if there's more) clearly states the EFF is bringing up only those games that require a vendor-provided online service to get full functionality and that the vendor has discontinued support for that game. It's not a free for all to open up all games. Only those that the vendor has declared end of life, defunct, abandoned, etc.

Of course the vendors want people to buy the new version of the game instead of wanting to play the one they have. That's the big reason for their objection. It's also a big reason why they take down the online servers.

This shouldn't be that big of a deal. EOL a game, the online services become public domain.

Re:Anyone remember...

[VGPowerlord]

Anyone remember the good old days when we were playing Doom and Monkey Island? 'Cause I don't. Wish there was a possibility to replay those classic originals in a legal way.

I'm assuming this is sarcasm since both of these games are still available for sale on sites like GOG and Steam.

Secret of Monkey Island Special Edition is a remake, but the remake is frame-per-frame compatible with the original. You can switch between the original graphics/UI and the new graphics/UI at the press of a button (F11 for the PC version I think).

For DOOM, not only can you buy it independently on Steam, but buying DOOM 3 BFG Edition also includes both Doom 1 and 2, plus the new Doom 2 campaign released in the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions of the game.

Yeah, There You Go

[Greyfox]

Don't buy games that require an online component unless it comes with the server and matchmaking software for you to run. The gaming industry only gets away with its shit because consumers let it.

Promoting piracy

[neghvar1]

When the publishers and copyright holders cease to produce, market, support and profit from their games, yet there are still consumers demanding the game and those consumers will do whatever it takes to continue playing the games they love. Are the publishers and copyright holder then indirectly promoting the piracy of their own products? It's like giving a suicidal person a gun. The suicidal person makes the choice to kill himself or not, but the other person put him in that situation.

use it or lose it

[neghvar1]

First off, I believe software should have a different copyright length. (Windows XP's copyright expires sometime after 2100. How crazy is that?) I also believe a "use it or lose it clause" should be added to copyright law. If a publisher or copyright holder ceases to publish, market, support and profit from a product, then after X number of years, that game will fall into public domain. I believe this clause should apply to all copyrights and not just software.

Re:use it or lose it

[DarkOx]

holder ceases to publish, market, support and profit from a product

Its a nice idea but kinda hard to enforce. Suppose Microsoft wants to make sure XP's copyright does not expire early. They gather up 20 retail copies of "new old stock" they have somewhere an set an Outlook reminder to put one on Ebay once a year. Does that count? What if its a small ISV with a shareware product that they maybe only sell a handful of license for per year. Its not a product they pay much attention to but hey once in a while someone decides to toss them $50 to make the nag screen go away, it costs them nothing to leave the license generator and sales page up on their site, so what not? Should they not be allowed to do that as long as they care to?

We you make to many rules it just creates to many questions and to many competing interpretations. It leaves everyone wonder what really is allowed and what isn't and the real beneficiaries end up being the attorneys.

I think we need to keep it simple like, authors lifetime + 15 or just strait 75 years where author is a nonhuman legal entity. No ifs, ands, or buts, no renewals, sorry Disney you can't own Micky for ever.. type system.

Re:use it or lose it

[neghvar1]

And what of orphaned works? Works in which the copyright owner cannot be found or has died and that person's copyright were never handed down. There are thousands of works which will fall into the abyss of time because of IP giants who want to continue commercialy exploiting their few copyrights. http://www.public.asu.edu/~dka...

Re:use it or lose it

[Voyager529]

holder ceases to publish, market, support and profit from a product

Its a nice idea but kinda hard to enforce. Suppose Microsoft wants to make sure XP's copyright does not expire early. They gather up 20 retail copies of "new old stock" they have somewhere an set an Outlook reminder to put one on Ebay once a year. Does that count?

If they're selling them as new products, with the support entitlements that any new copy of Windows XP should expect, and Microsoft keeps their activation servers up indefinitely, then I'd say yes. If they're selling copies of Windows XP that won't activate...not so much. More to the point, the essence of what's being asked is that Microsoft can't sue someone for running

What if its a small ISV with a shareware product that they maybe only sell a handful of license for per year. Its not a product they pay much attention to but hey once in a while someone decides to toss them $50 to make the nag screen go away, it costs them nothing to leave the license generator and sales page up on their site, so what not? Should they not be allowed to do that as long as they care to?

If the ISV doesn't have any server-side requirements and it's a matter of a simple keygen that displays or e-mails a serial number, then this request doesn't apply. Moreover, if the ISV does have a server side requirement, this request, if honored, simply means that the ISV can't file a lawsuit, citing the DMCA, should someone reverse engineer their software enough to enable the software to continue to perform its intended purpose. Conversely, if the software is reverse engineered in order to remove the requirement for the serial number to be entered, then that's already covered under garden variety copyright laws.

We you make to many rules it just creates to many questions and to many competing interpretations.

"Can the software perform its intended purpose after the vendor labels it end-of-life and deactivates the server side requirements?"
IF "yes" THEN request.applies = "false"
IF "no" THEN request.applies = "true"

About the only place where there's room for interpretation is in the term "indended purpose" - in the context of games, the continued availability of a single player campaign without multiplayer capability would be a point of contention for the lawyers to debate.

It leaves everyone wonder what really is allowed and what isn't and the real beneficiaries end up being the attorneys.

Such is the cross bore by a legal framework, and it's why "court judge" is an actual profession.

I think we need to keep it simple like, authors lifetime + 15 or just strait 75 years where author is a nonhuman legal entity. No ifs, ands, or buts, no renewals, sorry Disney you can't own Micky for ever.. type system.

Copyright isn't, strictly speaking, in question here. The question is whether software under copyright that is symbiotically dependent upon a publisher that can unilaterally disable some form of authentication and/or data processing can be altered by the end user in order to restore the functionality that was initially paid for. Ordinarily, reverse engineering of that nature isn't legal...but it's also not necessary. The request is intended to decriminalize the situations where such reverse enginerring /is/ necessary.

ESA = Entertainment Software Association

[morgauxo]

ESA = Entertainment Software Association

Some of us might not be gamers and yet due to the wide applications of the DMCA still thought this article looked worth clicking on.

The ESA I knew was the European Space Agency!

Re:Anyone remember...

[Minwee]

you can get Secret of Monkey Island from Good Old Games. It's a remake (still kinda old even so), but very faithful.

You may not be able to see "A Midsummer Night's Dream" performed in the Globe Theatre by the Lord Chamberlain's Men, but you can watch "Get Over It" on Netflix. It's practically the same thing.

Note to the ESA

[Nyder]

Go fuck yourself.

Re:Anyone remember...

[Bing Tsher E]

Or you can buy a Doom CD when you see it on the clearance pile at HalfPrice Books for $1-2.

Loose Sodom & Gomorrah?

[almitydave]

How do you loose a pair of cities on an industry?

Unless you're talking about DRM, in which case the users are already f***ed.

It's about making the product still usable

[phorm]

It's not "you haven't updated it in awhile", it's "you took away a core component required for it to [fully] function"

In various cases - after less than two years - they took the servers that allowed multi-player offline. In the "good ol' days", this would have been OK, because people were still capable of hosting their own servers. These days, you can only play on "official" servers (which are now offline), so you've either lost the ability to play a fairly key component of the game, or in some cases can't play at all.

The ask is that you be allowed to either
a) Modify the game to play on non-official multiplayer servers (also reverse-engineer things to be able to host your own server)

Or, in cases where the game doesn't work at all because it requires an authentication server which no longer exists
b) Modify the game to remove the shitty DRM which doesn't allow play without authentication

The DRM is getting bad. You're even online-authentication it on games that are pretty much intended for single-play (simcity) or ports of games which are only single-player (Final Fantasy series on iPad/Android). If you have no internet connection, or the master servers are down, the game will refuse to even launch

Re:Anyone remember...

[CronoCloud]

On the Playstation Network:

Doom Classic Complete for PS3:

https://store.playstation.com/...

DOOM 3 BFG edition (also includes DOOM I and II)
https://store.playstation.com/...

Secret of Monkey Island Special Edition:

https://store.playstation.com/...

For PC:

DOOM Classic Complete on Steam:

http://store.steampowered.com/...

or

sudo yum install prboom

or

sudo apt-get install prboom

Then all you need are the wad files, which are included on the DOOM Collectors Edition disc, which also includes the DOOM95 binaries. Or you can just use the WADs from your original discs.

Secret Of Monkey Island Special Edition for PC on GOG:

http://www.gog.com/game/the_se...

Secret of Monkey Island Special Edition for PC on Steam:

http://store.steampowered.com/...

One and a half years is plenty for a sports game

[CronoCloud]

The vast majority of sports-gamers are also "sports fans" want to play with the CURRENT roster, only a few cheap bastards who buy Madden 09 in 2012 or something go whining about the multiplayer servers going down. Even then, singleplayer and local-multiplayer still work, so their experience is the same as someone playing the old tyme pre-online Maddens

Do we really expect EA to keep the servers for each year's madden release up forever?

It's just bitching

[Sycraft-fu]

For whatever reason, humans (some of them at least) have this need to view the past with rose coloured glasses and then whine about everything modern. Happens with gaming just as anything else.

An objective look at gaming shows we are in an amazing golden age of gaming right now. Tons of games are being made. With that means tons of crap, of course, but plenty of good ones. What's more, basically everyone's needs are being met. Gaming isn't targeted at just one or two demographics, there is a massive variety out there. So we can have both something like Call of Duty, which is designed to appeal to a mass market, and something like Kerbal Space Program which has a much more limited audience. One does not choke out the other and everyone can find something they like.

My problem with games these days lack of time to play all the games I want. I have a big wishlist of games on Steam, and a collection of games I bought but haven't yet installed. However life intrudes and I have only so much time to spend gaming. I wish I could waste more time playing games but I can't.

Very different from my childhood where I would have to play and replay the same games over and over since I had very few.

Re:It's just bitching

[Sycraft-fu]

You are a perfect example of what I'm talking about. No perspective on modern games, just bitching. You act like CoD is all there is. Let's see, off the top of my head for modern games that are deep and involved: Kerbal Space Program, Wasteland 2, Pillars of Eternity, Frozen Cortex, Sins of A Solar Empire Rebellion, Endless Space, Grey Goo, Transistor, Starpoint Gemini 2, Divinity Original Sin, and Age of Wonders 3.

That's not a list of all of them, just what I can think of easily. These are all titles that have come out in the last year or two, have real meat to the gameplay, little to no cinematics and are a hell of a lot of fun.

If you can't find games that are good, that's you being a stick in the mud and being too lazy to read anything but IGN, not because there aren't tons of releases.

Re:It's just bitching

[Cederic]

No, we're in a golden age of gaming and have been continuously since the mid-80s.

Alpha Centauri and Civilisation have been updated, expanded and released in newer versions every few years and are now the entry level into grand strategy, with a wealth of far more complex games with significantly more depth.

Quake3 and UT2004 are primitive compared to the Battlefield series - they don't even have usable vehicles!

Some videogames are indeed interactive movies, but many are not. There's more choice than I can remember, games are more affordable than they've ever been and there are multiple high quality options in almost any genre you want to play.

Maybe you're constrained to a platform that doesn't enjoy the diversity and variety available on a PC, but the games exist, they're available, they're very playable and please, get a Dwarf Fortress fortress surviving for a decade before claiming "there are actually less things to do" because trust me, no game before it has even tried to come close.

Re:It's just bitching

[Nemyst]

UT2004 actually had quite a few vehicles you could use, and the comparison isn't really correct anyway because "having vehicles" doesn't make the game necessarily better. Still, games like CS:GO and TF2 show just as much focus on skill and gameplay as older titles.

Re:It's just bitching

[Cederic]

Ah, apologies - I was thinking of UT from '99, which is the Quake3 era.

UT03 was so awful it put me off even trying '04 - I was onto the Battlefield series by then and enjoying its mix of environments and play styles.

Re:It's just bitching

[geminidomino]

Please provide the "objective proof" that we are in this "Golden Age" of gaming, rather than rattling off a list of games that you think are good.

Re:It's just bitching

[Sycraft-fu]

The proof is in how many different kinds of games are being made. That we have games which are massive franchises, that have been homogenized and distilled to appeal to the masses, yet we have games that are filling niche wants for gamers of certain types. We have games for people who are extremely hard core games, and games for those that are extremely casual. We have games targeting all skill levels, all types of play, and so on.

Whatever you likes, there is probably a game being made for you.

That list of games was a list of games which were to counter the point of things just being "movies" since all were most emphatically not. If you want a list of something else, then specify what you are interested in. The whole point was the AC, like so many of the other whiners, are complaining about a very specific type of game that is popular, but hardly the only thing. I was providing a list of games that are not what they are complaining about, and were released fairly recently as a counter example.

What has happened is that various things have brought down barriers, so now small groups of people, or even single people, can create and compete in the games marketplace. The upshot is we get things for more interests, not just the mainstream.

Re:It's just bitching

[geminidomino]

The proof is in how many different kinds of games are being made. That we have games which are massive franchises, that have been homogenized and distilled to appeal to the masses, yet we have games that are filling niche wants for gamers of certain types. We have games for people who are extremely hard core games, and games for those that are extremely casual. We have games targeting all skill levels, all types of play, and so on.

If that's your metric, then by your own definition of "golden age", your "objective proof" fails to support your assertion. The time period I spoke of elsewhere (mid-90s to early-naughties) was still more deserving of the title than what we have now. Both eras had their share of shovel-ware that made up the majority of the "variety" (Sturgeon's Law and all) but we haven't gotten any new "types" of games since the rise of the MMO with Everquest, other than perhaps the "non-game" art-games which DO legitimately fit GPs complaint about being (barely) interactive movies (Journey, Dear Ester, e.g.). The games we do get are either the homogenized, "safe" crap with some production value from the ever-consolidating established studios, warmed-over rehashes or navel-gazing self-indulgence from the independents, and cynical shovelware from mobile ad companies which come close to (or surpass) most objective definitions of "malware."

And there are some types which have been all but abandoned by both groups -- such as space combat simulators (XWing, Wing Commander, B5:IFH, e.g.) which belie that assertion, as well.

What we have now are the union of the manufactured mega-hits, console exclusives which might as well not exist for any player who can't/won't pay $1200 every five years, and indie developers putting out 9 turds for every diamond, all with the technology that the music and movie industries have been dreaming of for decades - the power to make every full-price purchase into a long-term rental, and our own version of the "loudness war"

What has happened is that various things have brought down barriers, so now small groups of people, or even single people, can create and compete in the games marketplace. The upshot is we get things for more interests, not just the mainstream.

That's hardly a new thing. That's the exact situation that caused the Atari crash.

The major paradigm shift has been smartphones, which opened up the "casual" market to people who might want to play games but not buy separate expensive equipment (consoles or a gaming-rated PC) and is largely dominated by the third group mentioned above. That doesn't make a "golden age" for anyone other than the people grubbing for money, and certainly not for the players.

You know many games don't need that, right?

[Sycraft-fu]

There are a -LOT- of single player games these days. A lot fo multi player ones too, but that one exists doesn't get rid of the other. Whatever genre you like, you can find some of both.

Since you mention shooters, Wolfenstein the New Order is a single player only shooter acclaimed by critics and fans alike.

Am I missing something?

[Sleeping Kirby]

" Modifying game software may involve the creation of a derivative work, in the form of a new version of the game that will play without a server authentication check or one that connects to new matchmaking servers. It may also involve the making of intermediate copies while reverse-engineering authentication mechanisms or server communication protocols. These copies and modifications are made in order to access the functionality of lawfully acquired software." This is saying that it could entail reverse engineering, but possibly not as well. This sounds like modifying the source and recompile or making a service that mimics/mirrors the auth server or the game server. Why did this become all about hacking all of the sudden?

People have only themselves to blame

[ilsaloving]

"A given examples is Madden '09, which had its"

And nothing of value was lost.

Seriously, games should have thought of this before buying these asnine games that force you to log into some ephimeral DRM network just to let you play.

At this point I have written off almost all major game manufacturers cause of this crap. If I can't play a game offline, then I don't get that game (unless it's 90% discounted on steam, then *maybe*)

I remember being really excited about Starcraft 2, until I found out that the single-player mode is basically one big tutorial sessions, they stripped out local LAN plan, and you have to log into battlenet just to play the game. They did similar with Diablo 3. My interest instantly evaporated and I've basically written Blizzard off because of this nonsense.

EA is another fantastic example. Maxis is now a dead brand cause EA screwed things up so utterly badly. The only reason I can think of that EA is still in business, is because they've managed to tap the demographic of emotionally stunted males with self-esteem and co-dependency issues.

If you look around, we now have a new renessance of indy developers making all sorts of amazing games. There's a reason for that..... they make games without bullshit attached. I can only hope that this trend accelerates and that the existing big box publishers go bankrupt.

Re:nope

[spauldo]

In the sense that they represent the game publishers and pay lobbyists to "inform" congresscritters on laws, yes; yes they do.

Re:Anyone remember...

[Darinbob]

You can also have your neighborhood drama club also do enactments, or your high school can do it. If you don't like the modern version with explosions and car chases you can still read the original.

Re:EFF being alarmist as usual

[Cederic]

You have evidence of this? Just that the EFF can wheel out a long list of games that people paid good money for and now can't play purely and only because it would be illegal to build a new server to support them.

How I feel about this

[the_pouar]

http://i.imgur.com/dJ1vxbb.jpg

"Golden Age," my ass

[geminidomino]

Anyone who parrots that "golden age" industry wank (I wish I could remember which sock-puppet kicked it off a few years back) unironically clearly didn't live through the Age of Legends (Gen 3-4 with Atari/Intellivision/Odyssey/et al as Gen 1).

Re:Anyone remember...

[geminidomino]

> you can watch "Get Over It" on Netflix.

Is that a crack that GP should get over wanting to play his old games, or is there an actual video on Netflix that's actually like A Midsummer Night's Dream?

I ask as one who very much enjoyed the play, and wants to know if there's something I need to add to my weekend queue. :)

Re:Anyone remember...

[VGPowerlord]

I read the question as more of a "where can I legally acquire the game" as opposed to "how can I legally play the game".

Otherwise I would have mentioned ScummVM for Secret of Monkey Island.

Re:One and a half years is plenty for a sports gam

[thesupraman]

Well, unless when they sold the game they STATED CLEARLY that the game was not sold, but was an 18 month lease of service then YES WE DO.
Otherwise it is a violation of the contract established at the time of sale - at a minimum they owe the purchaser a percentage refund based on the possible
time the purchaser could play the game - lets say 10-20 years of hardware compatibility availability? 90% should be fair.

You see, when you sell someone an item, YOU HAVE TO DAMN WELL STAND BEHIND IT!

Imagine if you bought a house and it started falling down after 18 months... perhaps that would also just be ok? after all, the seller got what they wanted..
Or are people who want what they paid for just cheap bastards?
Still, I guess you will get your EA shill money no matter.. but then they dont pay you to be a moron do they, you do it voluntarily.

Re:One and a half years is plenty for a sports gam

[CronoCloud]

Well, unless when they sold the game they STATED CLEARLY that the game was not sold, but was an 18 month lease of service then YES WE DO.

You see, when you sell someone an item, YOU HAVE TO DAMN WELL STAND BEHIND IT!

Games aren't sold, they haven't been for a long while...they're LICENSED. Look at the back of the damn box, or the manual. And with most games the license notes clearly state the online multiplayer functionality can be discontinued at ANY time and isn't guaranteed to last forever.

Imagine if you bought a house and it started falling down after 18 months... perhaps that would also just be ok? after all, the seller got what they wanted..

Actually there are rules on that, and I do believe that it isn't the sellers responsibility, after a certain period of time. That's what the inspection is for, to catch things that need fixing. Now if something happens AFTER that, it's the new owners responsibility.

Still, I guess you will get your EA shill money no matter.. but then they dont pay you to be a moron do they, you do it voluntarily.

I actually don't play sports games. Are you an overly entitled whiny 12 year old? The reality is that software is licensed, it's that simple.

Re:For nerds, ESA = Ecological Society of America

[gmhowell]

No, this is about old stuff, so they are clearly trying to protect Earth Orbit Station.