Your hypothetical situation is correct but off topic. You talk about doing things before seizure the OP and myself talk about after seizure.
Anyways it's all pointless as the police can't do anything. Trademark infringement is a civil matter. The police have no power to do anything until a court issues an order.
You are correct but completely fail to understand the situation.
They can't prevent you from putting a specific design on your jacket. Unless of course that design is trademarked or copy written.
A trademark is an asset. Assets may be seized under most drug laws. The gov grabs the trademark at which point it is illegal to use said trademark without permission.
This is just ignorant. You don't sign a contract and then expect people to not enforce the contract. Putting these clauses in the contract is intent to use them.
They can revoke access. The idea that your safe because they won't do it enmass is irrelevant. All they have to is do it to you, by accident. They're fully in the right. You have no game and and uphill battle (since technically you have no legal way to get it back) to get what you "purchased" back. I use quotes because the Steam contract explicitly states you own nothing.
It's completely unacceptable DRM. You don't give vendors permission to take your "purchases" back. This is the definition of slippery slope.
A good reasonable test for DRM is would you do it with other products. Would you buy food that the vendor could take back at any time. A house? A car? A TV?
Maybe at first. Many consoles have or have had plug in mod chips. Hell the PS1 eventualy had mass produced plug into the serial port on the back mod chips.
There are currently no solder mod chips for the wii. Console piracy is vastly easier than everyone makes it out to be.
Modding a 360 takes about 30 minutes for an experienced modder. Most of that time is case assembly and disassembly.
Once done console piracy is literally download burn play. The game will even update normally. Much much easier than PC piracy.
With Valve you have to ask permission to play. You have to agree to a contract that states valve can revoke your access at any time.
Ironclad on the other hand gives you an install file in exchange for registering your serial number with them. No DRM. No call home and ask permission. Literally the only thing you can't do is update. That's their hook to get you to not pirate.
With Valve you have to trust them. With Ironclad they have to trust you.
You have identified the exact moment the franchise jumped the shark for me.
I don't want to have to look at the other players notes. I don't want to have to plan. I just want to have some fun playing an overly simplified guitar.
If GH3 has game play then RB has game play, in tour mode. The items RB has that you mention as being game play are plot, levels, equipment, and characters.
They were however the first to do guitars and start the genre to begin with.
You sir are completely wrong. Konami had a stand up arcade version. They also had a guitar game with controllers for the PS. Yes the original PS. Last Century.
The word I think you mean is "unconscionable." It's impossible for a game EULA to be unconscionable. The game is a pure luxury item and you can simply decline the EULA and receive a refund. Please see Blizzard v bnetd.
Do I own this Slashdot comment? Slashdot says I do, and they don't claim any responsibility for it, but what happens if Slashdot deletes it on me? I've lost something I own, and there's nothing I can do about it. That doesn't seem right.
There is no ownership. You signed it away. If you want ownership stop playing and make changing it a requirement to start playing again.
From a major MMO EULA
3. Ownership.
A. All title, ownership rights and intellectual property rights in and to the Game and all copies thereof (including without limitation any titles, computer code, themes, objects, characters, character names, stories, dialog, catch phrases, locations, concepts, artwork, character inventories, structural or landscape designs, animations, sounds, musical compositions and recordings, audio-visual effects, storylines, character likenesses, methods of operation, moral rights, and any related documentation) are owned or licensed by Blizzard. The Game is protected by the copyright laws of the United States, international treaties and conventions, and other laws. The Game may contain materials licensed by third parties, and the licensors of those materials may enforce their rights in the event of any violation of this License Agreement.
If reducing pollution, green house gas emission, and dependence on foreign energy supplies is fucking the consumer then yes.
Nuclear is already developed we'd merely be deploying it. 66 years or so since the first controlled reaction. There are countries that receive up to 90% of their electricity from nuclear and are energy exporters. Build extra capacity and sell it to Mexico and Canada.
Figure out how to use electricity in a car? Your behind the times. We already know how to do that. The problem is that electrical and hydrogen cars are fossil fuel powered, green house gas emitting, just as renewable as gasoline cars.
I didn't mean to say that the plant was infrastructure as of yet, the facilities that are in place and distribute the hydrogen are. The plant is simply on a smaller scale to gauge the production capabilities, and on the side provide minimal power. It's like a pilot to a TV series, get it?
The problem with pilots are they are unproven and many often fail early. Nuclear is an existing proven technology with an almost 70 year track record. It also interfaces directly with our existing infrastructure as opposed to requiring resources to be spend on a whole new infrastructure.
But the cost to the consumer per mile driven is less when electricity is used.
This means nothing to me. My goal is not to lower consumer transportation costs. I feel lowering the financial cost of commuting within the current model of 1 person per vehicle is damaging.
Focusing ourselves on one fuel source makes us vulnerable and inflexible.
That's why you focus on building out a known working tech while you research an experimental tech like hydrogen.
This will help the average American handle rising gas prices.
Fuck the consumer. My goal is to reduce usage of fossil fuels. I think gas prices should be higher. I happily pay more for non-ethanol gas because burning food is fucking moronic. I think we should lower income taxes and raise gas tax. If you don't like it use less gas and enjoy the extra money in your pocket. Make a friend at work/school and carpool. Hell meet your neighbors and see if they work near you. Take the bus, bike, motorcycle. Walk.
I'm opposed to hydrogen and electric powered cars because it does nothing to wean us off fossil fuels. They are not alternate energy sources. You mention focusing on renewables but hydrogen and electricity are not renewables. They are alternate means of burning fossil fuels. We already have a way to do that. We don't need to waste money building out a whole new infrastructure to burn them in a different manner.
I take offense to concepts you seem to espouse with comments like, "He appears to be a luddite or paranoid that is afraid of his name appearing in a database."
I take offense at you being offended. On the scale of privacy issues facebook and windows aren't even on the list as far as I'm concerned. The only person who controls what data is exposed with both of these products is the user. There's no mention of the recent Homeland Security legislation mandating tracking of all credit card purchases. No mention of Epic Systems, one of the worlds largest electronic medical record software company, attempting to reduce privacy laws to make it easier to sell their CareEverywhere product. CareEverywhere is a product that allows sharing of your medical records. Thus I feel the OP has no real concept of what privacy concerns really are.
Now, don't get me wrong. Your comments were thoughtful and pretty much, true, as far as I can tell. It just seemed to me that you were expressing a view that we should all accept our recently imposed lack of privacy because of things like grocery store cards, traffic cameras, spy satellites, wiretapping, etc...
I have never mentioned most of those things. That is not my position at all. In no way do I feel that we lack privacy nor have I said that we lack privacy.
I don't like the fact that you are pointing out all these erosions of our privacy, while insuating that they are "normal" or "acceptable" and painting people who value the ideal of privacy as "paranoid" and have nothing to worry about unless they "stand out".
I don't like that you misrepresent me. At no point do I say these things are normal or acceptable. Nor do I say that people who value the ideal of privacy are paranoid. Please stop putting words in my mouth. I read what the OP wrote and made a judgment on the OP based on that. You then applied hyperbole.
Rant snipped
I agree with parts and think parts are sensational.
Slashdot Mirror
Steam is the worst possible DRM.
You admit you gave up right of first sale. Oh wait no you didn't because if you read your contract it states that you own nothing.
So it's ok that Steam can cut you off for any or no reason?
Would you buy a car that the dealer could take back when ever they wanted? A fridge? Anything?
I don't understand how asking permission to use the game is acceptable. You bought it. That's all the permission you need.
As I said before: Not making a judgment call.
I was simply explained how I though the process was legal and the problem with the OPs post.
If you'd like to rant about the unfairness of seizure laws, and I agree they are unfair, then post to a seizure law thread.
A trademark is an asset. Assets can be seized for drug crimes. They're charged with drug crimes. if found guilty what's the problem exactly?
This isn't a trademark issue. It's a seizure law issue.
If they hadn't trademarked it the cops couldn't do anything.
Your hypothetical situation is correct but off topic. You talk about doing things before seizure the OP and myself talk about after seizure.
Anyways it's all pointless as the police can't do anything. Trademark infringement is a civil matter. The police have no power to do anything until a court issues an order.
Steam DRM prevents legit customers from playing legally purchased product.
The PC version of the game is unplayable until it has been registered via Steam network.
You shouldn't have to call home to ask permission to play a legally purchased game.
You are correct but completely fail to understand the situation.
They can't prevent you from putting a specific design on your jacket. Unless of course that design is trademarked or copy written.
A trademark is an asset. Assets may be seized under most drug laws. The gov grabs the trademark at which point it is illegal to use said trademark without permission.
I'm not making a judgment call just explaining.
This is just ignorant. You don't sign a contract and then expect people to not enforce the contract. Putting these clauses in the contract is intent to use them.
They can revoke access. The idea that your safe because they won't do it enmass is irrelevant. All they have to is do it to you, by accident. They're fully in the right. You have no game and and uphill battle (since technically you have no legal way to get it back) to get what you "purchased" back. I use quotes because the Steam contract explicitly states you own nothing.
It's completely unacceptable DRM. You don't give vendors permission to take your "purchases" back. This is the definition of slippery slope.
A good reasonable test for DRM is would you do it with other products. Would you buy food that the vendor could take back at any time. A house? A car? A TV?
Maybe at first. Many consoles have or have had plug in mod chips. Hell the PS1 eventualy had mass produced plug into the serial port on the back mod chips.
There are currently no solder mod chips for the wii. Console piracy is vastly easier than everyone makes it out to be.
Modding a 360 takes about 30 minutes for an experienced modder. Most of that time is case assembly and disassembly.
Once done console piracy is literally download burn play. The game will even update normally. Much much easier than PC piracy.
How dare you compare these two companies.
With Valve you have to ask permission to play. You have to agree to a contract that states valve can revoke your access at any time.
Ironclad on the other hand gives you an install file in exchange for registering your serial number with them. No DRM. No call home and ask permission. Literally the only thing you can't do is update. That's their hook to get you to not pirate.
With Valve you have to trust them. With Ironclad they have to trust you.
With Steam you agree that you own nothing. That Steam can take away your access to the game for any or no reason.
Why is this acceptable DRM? Would you be ok if Samsung made you agree to this with your TV? What about your car? Your house?
You have identified the exact moment the franchise jumped the shark for me.
I don't want to have to look at the other players notes. I don't want to have to plan. I just want to have some fun playing an overly simplified guitar.
If GH3 has game play then RB has game play, in tour mode. The items RB has that you mention as being game play are plot, levels, equipment, and characters.
They were however the first to do guitars and start the genre to begin with.
You sir are completely wrong. Konami had a stand up arcade version. They also had a guitar game with controllers for the PS. Yes the original PS. Last Century.
This feature is a waste. It will mainly be used to create insanely difficult show off pieces. It will only be used by a tiny minority of players.
I think the designers are beginning to forget that they are making a game.
People who have the ability to make music already make music. With better tools and instruments.
Remember no vocals and they promised to delete copy written songs that people reproduce.
Personal responsibility?! Not in the USA. Here everything is someone else's fault. You should sue.
--This message brought to you by the Trial Lawyers of America.
Yup. 7th Circuit. ProCD v Zeidenberg.
The word I think you mean is "unconscionable." It's impossible for a game EULA to be unconscionable. The game is a pure luxury item and you can simply decline the EULA and receive a refund. Please see Blizzard v bnetd.
*stands up* I'm a customer lost due to DRM.
What happens if you show a picture of an apple and I enter fruit?
What happens if you show a picture of a cat? Cat, kitty, kitten, pussy-cat, animal, feline are all valid answers.
What happens if you show a picture of an apple and I enter fruit?
What happens if you show a picture of a cat? Cat, kitty, kitten, pussy-cat, animal, feline are all valid answers.
Frankly this whole thread is a null issue and should never have been posted.
You're making point 2 more complex than it needs to be. It's very simple and has a long history of precedent.
You're paying for a service.
When you go to a movie theater no one assumes they own the movie afterward.
When you play a game of ultrazone (or some other laser tag type game) no one assumes they own the packs or the arena.
When you go to the zoo no one assumes your entry fee buys you the animals.
Do I own this Slashdot comment? Slashdot says I do, and they don't claim any responsibility for it, but what happens if Slashdot deletes it on me? I've lost something I own, and there's nothing I can do about it. That doesn't seem right.
Nothing you can about it? Back it up.
There is no ownership. You signed it away. If you want ownership stop playing and make changing it a requirement to start playing again.
From a major MMO EULA
3. Ownership.
A. All title, ownership rights and intellectual property rights in and to the Game and all copies thereof (including without limitation any titles, computer code, themes, objects, characters, character names, stories, dialog, catch phrases, locations, concepts, artwork, character inventories, structural or landscape designs, animations, sounds, musical compositions and recordings, audio-visual effects, storylines, character likenesses, methods of operation, moral rights, and any related documentation) are owned or licensed by Blizzard. The Game is protected by the copyright laws of the United States, international treaties and conventions, and other laws. The Game may contain materials licensed by third parties, and the licensors of those materials may enforce their rights in the event of any violation of this License Agreement.
Read your EULA. You signed a contract that explicitly states that it is _not_ your property.
If reducing pollution, green house gas emission, and dependence on foreign energy supplies is fucking the consumer then yes.
Nuclear is already developed we'd merely be deploying it. 66 years or so since the first controlled reaction. There are countries that receive up to 90% of their electricity from nuclear and are energy exporters. Build extra capacity and sell it to Mexico and Canada.
Figure out how to use electricity in a car? Your behind the times. We already know how to do that. The problem is that electrical and hydrogen cars are fossil fuel powered, green house gas emitting, just as renewable as gasoline cars.
I didn't mean to say that the plant was infrastructure as of yet, the facilities that are in place and distribute the hydrogen are. The plant is simply on a smaller scale to gauge the production capabilities, and on the side provide minimal power. It's like a pilot to a TV series, get it?
The problem with pilots are they are unproven and many often fail early. Nuclear is an existing proven technology with an almost 70 year track record. It also interfaces directly with our existing infrastructure as opposed to requiring resources to be spend on a whole new infrastructure.
But the cost to the consumer per mile driven is less when electricity is used.
This means nothing to me. My goal is not to lower consumer transportation costs. I feel lowering the financial cost of commuting within the current model of 1 person per vehicle is damaging.
Focusing ourselves on one fuel source makes us vulnerable and inflexible.
That's why you focus on building out a known working tech while you research an experimental tech like hydrogen.
This will help the average American handle rising gas prices.
Fuck the consumer. My goal is to reduce usage of fossil fuels. I think gas prices should be higher. I happily pay more for non-ethanol gas because burning food is fucking moronic. I think we should lower income taxes and raise gas tax. If you don't like it use less gas and enjoy the extra money in your pocket. Make a friend at work/school and carpool. Hell meet your neighbors and see if they work near you. Take the bus, bike, motorcycle. Walk.
I'm opposed to hydrogen and electric powered cars because it does nothing to wean us off fossil fuels. They are not alternate energy sources. You mention focusing on renewables but hydrogen and electricity are not renewables. They are alternate means of burning fossil fuels. We already have a way to do that. We don't need to waste money building out a whole new infrastructure to burn them in a different manner.
I take offense to concepts you seem to espouse with comments like, "He appears to be a luddite or paranoid that is afraid of his name appearing in a database."
I take offense at you being offended. On the scale of privacy issues facebook and windows aren't even on the list as far as I'm concerned. The only person who controls what data is exposed with both of these products is the user. There's no mention of the recent Homeland Security legislation mandating tracking of all credit card purchases. No mention of Epic Systems, one of the worlds largest electronic medical record software company, attempting to reduce privacy laws to make it easier to sell their CareEverywhere product. CareEverywhere is a product that allows sharing of your medical records. Thus I feel the OP has no real concept of what privacy concerns really are.
Now, don't get me wrong. Your comments were thoughtful and pretty much, true, as far as I can tell. It just seemed to me that you were expressing a view that we should all accept our recently imposed lack of privacy because of things like grocery store cards, traffic cameras, spy satellites, wiretapping, etc...
I have never mentioned most of those things. That is not my position at all. In no way do I feel that we lack privacy nor have I said that we lack privacy.
I don't like the fact that you are pointing out all these erosions of our privacy, while insuating that they are "normal" or "acceptable" and painting people who value the ideal of privacy as "paranoid" and have nothing to worry about unless they "stand out".
I don't like that you misrepresent me. At no point do I say these things are normal or acceptable. Nor do I say that people who value the ideal of privacy are paranoid. Please stop putting words in my mouth. I read what the OP wrote and made a judgment on the OP based on that. You then applied hyperbole.
Rant snipped
I agree with parts and think parts are sensational.