I never said that, I did say that it happens more because of DRM.
And DRM happens more because of piracy.
And people have problems with the games they own not working because the DRM servers have been switched off or are offline because of a new release by the company or the DRM
Evidence? Of course not. As I said before, it's paranoia that drives your argument.
OK you've wandered away from all logic here. So if I stop saying that DRM is snake oil then it will go away?
No, but if you stop making excuses for piracy, society won't have this view that piracy is good because everybody does it and nobody gets caught (as it does now), thus piracy will decrease, thus DRM measures will decrease.
You might as well claim that shoplifting will go away if you clap your hands and believe! Believe with all your heart!
No, but I bet if people stopped shoplifting, stores would have no financial incentive to hire security guards to protect their products.
Because, you know, they're a company, and their goal is to make money, not terrorise people for the sake of it, as you seem to think. If the store believes that the cost of a security guard outweighs the loss of shoplifting, they won't hire security guards. But it doesn't really matter what the store believes anyway, because if they make the wrong choices, they go bankrupt. Thus the proof is in the pudding.
And guess what? EA believes that the loss of piracy outweighs the cost of using DRM (which includes loss of sales due to misinformation and scaremongering by pirates and apologists). And they're a multi-billion dollar company (recent economic downturns, rabid piracy advocat-sponsored anti-DRM slander campaigns, and losses of piracy notwithstanding).
Or is that simple logic beyond you?
Why? Because I like the majority of humanity will line up and pay of their own free will.
Because you have just enough morals to believe stealing physical property is wrong, but not enough to believe stealing intangible property is wrong, even though they both required the same amount of labor and resources to produce (in fact, often more so in the case of intangible property).
So you're almost a moral person. Good for you.
Intent is the difference. The intent of malware is to harm. The intent of DRM is to protect the developer's rights, and thus the entire gaming industry. Unless of course you only believe it's the end result that matters. In which case, I wish you luck when a murderer attacks you and you kill him in self defense
Not that you've even show how DRM hurts the consumer anyway. If the best argument you've got is a whole 30 seconds of entering a CD key equating to having your machine turned into a spam relay or having the drive erased, you're really clutching at straws.
Pleanty of people get finacially harmed when drm intentionally or otherwise damages their property.
Google -drm "broke my"- and you get thousands of hits.
Google - DRM "broke my" +"irrefutable evidence"-
Wow a whole 3 hits that aren't related to the search subject!
DRM is shitty code sold by scam artists.
As I said in another post, what about internally-developed DRM?
You know it is illegal in the UK to block a public right of way even if you own the land?
You know it's not illegal in any country to be punished for jaywalking or slander?
Fair use is the IP version of public rights of way yet shysters still try to block it.
DRM has never stopped me from playing a game, taking video or screenshots or other excerpts of a game, or copying the game into memory or on hard drive in order to run it. And if I buy games online, I even get to have them backed up as long as the company exists, and that's not even a fair use right! Which part of my right to fair use is being violated by DRM?
I have. You must never have acutally used anything with DRM.
Well let's see...Bioshock (before the DRM removal patch), Spore, FarCry2, Red Alert 3, Fallout 3, all the Battlefields, Crysis, all the Quakes, all the Unreal Tournaments, several Steam games, a couple Impulse games....these are just the few I happen to have right in front of me. Never had a problem with any of them being played offline. Maybe there's something wrong with your copies? Which torrent site did you download them from?
Or I can have a perfectly good internet connection but my ISP's DNS system cuts out occasionally.
My electricity cuts out sometimes. Can't do much with the game then, can I? And that's not even listed on the box as a requirement!
I meet every requirement on the box but they haven't given every requirement.
Well, looking at Spore, it says "Internet connection, online authentication and end user license agreement required to play". Those sure sound like requirements to me. But it doesn't say anything about "unstable internet connection". But I have the Galactic edition, maybe it says something different on the.jpg box cover that came with yours?
Or stops me playing my legitimate copy of spore on my completely up to spec laptop util I spend 2 hours on an international phone call to their support line. Real great that.
This is the "up to spec laptop" that doesn't have a stable internet connection and thus doesn't meet the requirements, right? Or perhaps you had some other reason to spend 2 hours on an international phone call that you'd like to mention?
No it's like locking out your tennents when they have the key, are the people who rented the room. Got a haircut and have tried to unlock their door more than 3 times since they last called you for your permission to get at their property which they have paid for.
No it's like your condition of renting the property is they can't have any more than 3 guests at a time which they have agreed to, but every day they come inside the house with a different guest, and you never see any of those guests coming out, then whinge when you want to come in and have a look to confirm there are only 3 guests in there, but they bitch that that's invading their privacy, even though they already agreed to that condition, because if they're tenants, it's technically your property.
Yes, software did have some form of copy protection long before DRM became a buzzword, code wheels, specially colored code lookup books, parallel / serial port dongles, etc
Which were designed to (shock!) prevent piracy, which also existed well before that.
and yes, DirectX was regularly installed without the end user being asked. However, small thing, DirectX is not a form of copy protection, it's a DEVELOPMENT LIBRARY
Oh, so you agree that DirectX has the exact same attributes as DRM, but has a different purpose. You know, I'm looking through the lawsuit, I can't find anything in there that states they have a problem with the purpose of DRM, rather than what it actually (unprovably) "does".
DRM software such as secuROM basically acts like a system level driver, it takes in the various software calls, such as those going to your CD/DvD drive and decides whether or not your allowed to perform the action being attempted, map editors and other such included bonus software do not.
And yet, many games actually do that exact same thing, which is why many games can't be installed or even run without an admin account. You know what else acts like a system level driver? System level drivers. And related stuff like DirectX.
Someone tried to do a real world example with regards to breaking into a house and it didn't work so well,
Thanks for noticing, I'm glad you enjoyed my analogy that has yet to be shown to not "work so well". Unless of course you count "ZOMG a lock is a lock, but DRM is DRM they'refore you're analogy is epic phail lol!".
As for GTA:SA, that's just bad coding
Which is irrelevant to the point that the game itself is messing with system files, which is what rabid DRM-haters complain that DRM does.
DRM software is like setting up a security system on your house, and then letting the security company decide who you're allowed to open the door for.
Yes, brilliant. Someone finally gets it. DRM is exactly like setting up a security service that has the company do all the security control for you. And then complaining that the security is an inconvenience to you because they have to verify you before they let you in, and deciding to break into the houses of other people who choose to use that same security service, because you really hate being inconvenienced like that regardless of the overall benefit to society (and your property). As opposed to simply not using that security company any more. Which of course proves the point succinctly when you consider that video games are a privilege, and not a right like many/all piracy advocates and apologists seem to think.
But the funny thing is, at least in this scenario the security has been tried, tested, and you've made a decision based on that. In 100% of DRM-hating cases I've seen, the only complaint is that "DRM might fail to authenticate me", or "DRM might prevent me from using the product sometime in the future", and that these are the reasons they pirated the game. Which of course implies they were never actually inconvenienced by or even used the DRM at all, and are only paranoid about what might happen to them.
So a piece of software installed on my computer without my consent which collects my information without my consent is illegal?
You consented to it when you installed the game, since the DRM is part of the game, and you've shown no legal or logical reason to believe otherwise.
Subtle how you stuck in the note about game theft even though it has sweet fuck all to do with DRM.
Subtle how you are obviously avoiding the simple fact that DRM wouldn't exist without pirates.
Protecting my land is legal, protecting my land with a field of land mines is not.
It's a good thing then that DRM doesn't blow you up, and only denies entry while it tries to verify your right to use the software, sometimes going so far as to contact the authorities (ie. what it's meant to be doing), which is pretty much exactly what security on your land does.
good comparison, for the more agressive forms of DRM it's like you've hooked it up to the mains power supply.
Funny, I don't remember getting physically or permanently harmed when entering a CD key incorrectly. Are you sure you've wired your computer up correctly?
No no, those wires there, you're not meant to attach them to your testicles...
Fair use being stamped on = putting the fence up over an old public Right of Way.
Like slander destroys my freedom or speech, or jaywalking and trespassing laws make me a criminal just for walking somewhere. Outrageous!
Dial home DRM = renting out living space on your land then locking all your tenants out of their rooms when your phone breaks over the weekend and they can't call you.
That's weird, I've never had a problem playing any of my DRM-protected games when I'm temporarily disconnected from the net.
But strangely enough, the requirements on the game box say "Internet connection required". No internet connection means you're not meeting the system requirements. Like how that stupid evil DRM prevents me from playing Crysis on my Atari 2600, those bastards. It's more like locking your tenants out of their rooms when they don't have the key, won't show you their ID, and look absolutely nothing like the tenants you rented the property out to.
Bringing up piracy again and again fails to address the major point:
Bringing up piracy drives home the major point: DRM wouldn't even exist if it weren't for piracy, and asshole apologists of piracy who take great pleasure in thinking up new ways to justify criminal behaviour.
You hate DRM? Fine, I can accept that people have problems with having to spend all of 30 seconds entering a key code. Some people are just really lazy and stupid. The way to get rid of it of course, is to stop encouraging piracy or making excuses for it.
awful awful awful analogy but I'll bite. It isn't like a lock on your house since every lock is different and takes time to open or they can just kick the door in, meatspace rules don't fit well.
Every lock is not different. There are really only a handful of different types of locks in place, each one just uses different keys. You can try to pick the lock, or you can just brute force your way in. And yes, it takes time to open, just like it takes time for the legitimate owner to get in, while the thief just smashes a window. Sounds exactly like DRM to me. ZOMG, locks on physical property like houses and cars only hurts legitimate consumers! Guess it's time to go on a shopping spree!
Show me a system like that which has been out for a resonable length of time which hasn't been cracked wide open.
Bioshock took several weeks to crack. It too was SecuROM. The trick, of course, is not that the DRM will remain uncracked forever (as you seem to assume is their intention and measure of success).
Pirates are a joke.
It works for 0.00% of cases. it it worthless. it it crap, it is snake oil.
False, and you know it. Anecdotal evidence suggests otherwise - just by trawling/. comments you can see cases of "going to crack it, but couldn't, so caved in and bought it".
Any Exec who pays for it is a fool who should be fired by those above him and anyone who sells it should by jailed as a con artist.
Good point, I totally agree. We should bring in the execs who rely on the honor system to keep the company alive. "Oh sure, you can obtain our game freely and totally anonymously, but you have to promise, cross your heart and hope to die, that you'll pay us for it". Good idea, numbnuts.
And as I said, this is about DRM not piracy. the 2 have very little to do with each other.
I thought the correlation was pretty obvious. Piracy causes DRM.
pirates never encounter DRM and people who have to deal with DRM are, almost by definition, using legit copies.
Yes, because we should just throw out all logic and make the widespread claims that if you have to spend 30 seconds worth of your time to do something legitimately, it's not worth it and the system is broken. Well, it takes me a month of hard work to earn money to eat, therefore the system must broken and clearly, by your fantabulous logic, I should be robbing banks and stealing from supermarkets instead.
Tell me. by any chance do you work for a company selling DRM?
Just to make you happy, yes, because I just know you won't accept that anyone outside the DRM industry could possibly disagree with piracy.
DRM prevents them from selling the game second hand and so devalues their purchase a great deal. Does this lost value factor in anywhere?
The answer to that, of course, is to not agree to a license that explicitly states "this license is not transferable".
And we weren't talking about piracy. we were talking about DRM.
Yes, because I'm sure DRM has nothing to do with piracy...
DRM doesn't prevent piracy
And locks on a house don't protect criminals from breaking in. But I bet you a hundred dollars you still have locks on your house.
it encourages it since people are often unwilling to install crap-ware on their PC's and the copy protection in no way at all affects people with pirated copies.
Close. It provides another excuse for pirates to rationalize their criminal behaviour, because sometimes, "too expensive", "demo not long enough" and "poor quality" just aren't enough to avoid cognitive dissonance.
Games get cracked before they're even released so what good is DRM?
You mean like Spore? How it was "cracked" before release because pirates got their hands on a DRM-free review copy? Saying that DRM fails if it isn't implemented is like saying oxygen fails to keep you alive because if you stop breathing it you die.
How does DRM encourage creativity?
Preventing piracy does, because there's more incentive to keep developing. Even if DRM doesn't work for 100% of cases as you keep maliciously claiming, it makes no difference, since merely the perception that it's doing something is enough to encourage further development. And you know that perception exists because it keeps getting used.
Company execs who think DRM prevents piracy are fools
And people who steal games are assholes and are ruining the gaming industry, and they should all be shot. Not to mention your hatred of companies protecting their rights is solely cause by pirates, so you too can only agree with that. So what's your point?
How was the music on sony CD's any more part of the music than the sony rootkit?
Music is music. XCP is not music.
Game is game. Map editor is not game. Cheat protection is not game.
It's all just bits and bytes. If I install a free game which infects me with a virus which listens for credit card details it's still just bits and bytes.Is the keylogger less a part of the game than anything else?Would the eula save them then?
Last I checked, stealing credit card info was a crime (kind of like stealing a game is...), but protecting one's copyrighted content was not.
Don't you think other players of the game might be impacted when piracy a) devalues their purchase and b) stifles creativity and future development?
Well, I can see simple things like that are of no concern to you when you're busy being paranoid that developers and publishers are doing everything they can to intentionally hurt legitimate gamers.
I don't see how they would, they're a part of the game, just a part that not everyone uses with somewhat dull gameplay.
How are map editors any more a part of the game than DRM?
who used the phrase "separate executable that doesn't have game content"?
Nobody, but then, nobody has clearly defined what is part of the game and what isn't in a way that is anything more than just a convenient label for piracy advocates.
the uninstaller performs a useful fuction for me.
And SecuROM performs a useful function for the developers. Yet the lawsuit doesn't mention anything about whether this software is a value-add or not. Point?
Mostly all part of the game and few of which try to prevent me from doing something.
There's a difference between a mistake and an intentional action.
PunkBuster, VAC, nProtect, DMW Anticheat, Warden. All intentional, all prevent you from doing things, all installed with the game, none indicated on the box, none removed with the game. In fact last I checked, the majority of the/. crowd supported Warden against circumventions like Glider.
DRM which burns out CD drives which try to copy CDs: intentional.
So you're saying there's code in SecuROM which intentionally does physical damage to the CD drive. And you have proof of this?
DRM. A piece of software that installs alongside the main game content. It's required for the game to run. The game box will usually inform you it's included, but most people ignore it and complain anyway. Usually it will install without your knowledge. It stays around on your PC even after you uninstall the game. Unless you are a PC expert it can't be removed without a format and clean install. When installed, it may break the PC. And even if you did know about it before it installed, if you disagreed with it your chances of being able to return the game are slim to none.
Games did this long before the DRM buzzword came about.
It was called DirectX. Where are the lawsuits for that?
And then there's the question of whether DRM is part of the software you've decided to buy and install. Almost all software comes with binary that isn't related to game content, but they don't tell you about in the EULA or on the game box. Do map editors count? Should we sue for them being installed? What about the game uninstaller, that's a separate executable that doesn't have game content. Multiplayer clients? Mod tools? Registry settings? DLLs? I distinctly remember DLL Hell with GTA:SA and MSVCR71.dll (or something like that), GTA is modifying my system files and breaking my other apps. SUE!
No. WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.
I completely agree with your point, but I believe the much more troubling lesson learned from the Radiohead example was that even when people could get it for free 100% legally, they still chose to download it illegally, which leads to the natural conclusion that people aren't even bothering to consider the price offered in the first place, going directly to P2P as their first port of call.
Going to your TV example, it would be like Store A offering free TVs to anybody who wants one, but people still going to Store B and stealing the same model TV. As I said, much more troubling that this is the society we live in.
If people actually did boycott, instead of just succumbing to piracy and calling it a boycott, that wouldn't happen. That's the only reason boycotts don't work.
Surely if you could be told to act suspiciously and be identified as suspicious by the machine, you could just as easily act unsuspiciously and not be identified by the machine.
"First" and "second" don't imply time, they imply order, one of the methods of which is chronological. The posts could just as easily be sorted alphanumerically and there would still be a first and second, no chronology required.
Crime rates are a fallacious metric because they don't account for the fact that most of society would rather have 3 cases of shoplifting than 1 case of murder. Their only purpose is to provide a statistic to either prove or disprove an otherwise pre-conceived notion with a random set of numbers that has no substance.
And that's ignoring the fact that even if you DID consider "crime rate" as an accetable measure, you're flat out lying anyway, as overall crime rates in Canada have actually been lowering, not "rising rapidly" as you falsely assert; in fact 2006 was stated as having the lowest crime rate in 25 years. Sounds like somebody is just upset that they can no longer go to their local corner store and buy a machine gun with which to kill..."deer".
Slashdot Mirror
I never said that, I did say that it happens more because of DRM.
And DRM happens more because of piracy.
And people have problems with the games they own not working because the DRM servers have been switched off or are offline because of a new release by the company or the DRM
Evidence? Of course not. As I said before, it's paranoia that drives your argument.
OK you've wandered away from all logic here. So if I stop saying that DRM is snake oil then it will go away?
No, but if you stop making excuses for piracy, society won't have this view that piracy is good because everybody does it and nobody gets caught (as it does now), thus piracy will decrease, thus DRM measures will decrease.
You might as well claim that shoplifting will go away if you clap your hands and believe! Believe with all your heart!
No, but I bet if people stopped shoplifting, stores would have no financial incentive to hire security guards to protect their products.
Because, you know, they're a company, and their goal is to make money, not terrorise people for the sake of it, as you seem to think. If the store believes that the cost of a security guard outweighs the loss of shoplifting, they won't hire security guards. But it doesn't really matter what the store believes anyway, because if they make the wrong choices, they go bankrupt. Thus the proof is in the pudding.
And guess what? EA believes that the loss of piracy outweighs the cost of using DRM (which includes loss of sales due to misinformation and scaremongering by pirates and apologists). And they're a multi-billion dollar company (recent economic downturns, rabid piracy advocat-sponsored anti-DRM slander campaigns, and losses of piracy notwithstanding).
Or is that simple logic beyond you?
Why? Because I like the majority of humanity will line up and pay of their own free will.
Because you have just enough morals to believe stealing physical property is wrong, but not enough to believe stealing intangible property is wrong, even though they both required the same amount of labor and resources to produce (in fact, often more so in the case of intangible property).
So you're almost a moral person. Good for you.
Intent is the difference. The intent of malware is to harm. The intent of DRM is to protect the developer's rights, and thus the entire gaming industry. Unless of course you only believe it's the end result that matters. In which case, I wish you luck when a murderer attacks you and you kill him in self defense
Not that you've even show how DRM hurts the consumer anyway. If the best argument you've got is a whole 30 seconds of entering a CD key equating to having your machine turned into a spam relay or having the drive erased, you're really clutching at straws.
Pleanty of people get finacially harmed when drm intentionally or otherwise damages their property. Google -drm "broke my"- and you get thousands of hits.
Google - DRM "broke my" +"irrefutable evidence"- Wow a whole 3 hits that aren't related to the search subject!
DRM is shitty code sold by scam artists.
As I said in another post, what about internally-developed DRM?
You know it is illegal in the UK to block a public right of way even if you own the land?
You know it's not illegal in any country to be punished for jaywalking or slander?
Fair use is the IP version of public rights of way yet shysters still try to block it.
DRM has never stopped me from playing a game, taking video or screenshots or other excerpts of a game, or copying the game into memory or on hard drive in order to run it. And if I buy games online, I even get to have them backed up as long as the company exists, and that's not even a fair use right! Which part of my right to fair use is being violated by DRM?
I have. You must never have acutally used anything with DRM.
Well let's see...Bioshock (before the DRM removal patch), Spore, FarCry2, Red Alert 3, Fallout 3, all the Battlefields, Crysis, all the Quakes, all the Unreal Tournaments, several Steam games, a couple Impulse games....these are just the few I happen to have right in front of me. Never had a problem with any of them being played offline. Maybe there's something wrong with your copies? Which torrent site did you download them from?
Or I can have a perfectly good internet connection but my ISP's DNS system cuts out occasionally.
My electricity cuts out sometimes. Can't do much with the game then, can I? And that's not even listed on the box as a requirement!
I meet every requirement on the box but they haven't given every requirement.
Well, looking at Spore, it says "Internet connection, online authentication and end user license agreement required to play". Those sure sound like requirements to me. But it doesn't say anything about "unstable internet connection". But I have the Galactic edition, maybe it says something different on the .jpg box cover that came with yours?
Or stops me playing my legitimate copy of spore on my completely up to spec laptop util I spend 2 hours on an international phone call to their support line. Real great that.
This is the "up to spec laptop" that doesn't have a stable internet connection and thus doesn't meet the requirements, right? Or perhaps you had some other reason to spend 2 hours on an international phone call that you'd like to mention?
No it's like locking out your tennents when they have the key, are the people who rented the room. Got a haircut and have tried to unlock their door more than 3 times since they last called you for your permission to get at their property which they have paid for.
No it's like your condition of renting the property is they can't have any more than 3 guests at a time which they have agreed to, but every day they come inside the house with a different guest, and you never see any of those guests coming out, then whinge when you want to come in and have a look to confirm there are only 3 guests in there, but they bitch that that's invading their privacy, even though they already agreed to that condition, because if they're tenants, it's technically your property.
Yes, software did have some form of copy protection long before DRM became a buzzword, code wheels, specially colored code lookup books, parallel / serial port dongles, etc
Which were designed to (shock!) prevent piracy, which also existed well before that.
and yes, DirectX was regularly installed without the end user being asked. However, small thing, DirectX is not a form of copy protection, it's a DEVELOPMENT LIBRARY
Oh, so you agree that DirectX has the exact same attributes as DRM, but has a different purpose. You know, I'm looking through the lawsuit, I can't find anything in there that states they have a problem with the purpose of DRM, rather than what it actually (unprovably) "does".
DRM software such as secuROM basically acts like a system level driver, it takes in the various software calls, such as those going to your CD/DvD drive and decides whether or not your allowed to perform the action being attempted, map editors and other such included bonus software do not.
And yet, many games actually do that exact same thing, which is why many games can't be installed or even run without an admin account. You know what else acts like a system level driver? System level drivers. And related stuff like DirectX.
Someone tried to do a real world example with regards to breaking into a house and it didn't work so well,
Thanks for noticing, I'm glad you enjoyed my analogy that has yet to be shown to not "work so well". Unless of course you count "ZOMG a lock is a lock, but DRM is DRM they'refore you're analogy is epic phail lol!".
As for GTA:SA, that's just bad coding
Which is irrelevant to the point that the game itself is messing with system files, which is what rabid DRM-haters complain that DRM does.
DRM software is like setting up a security system on your house, and then letting the security company decide who you're allowed to open the door for.
Yes, brilliant. Someone finally gets it. DRM is exactly like setting up a security service that has the company do all the security control for you. And then complaining that the security is an inconvenience to you because they have to verify you before they let you in, and deciding to break into the houses of other people who choose to use that same security service, because you really hate being inconvenienced like that regardless of the overall benefit to society (and your property). As opposed to simply not using that security company any more. Which of course proves the point succinctly when you consider that video games are a privilege, and not a right like many/all piracy advocates and apologists seem to think.
But the funny thing is, at least in this scenario the security has been tried, tested, and you've made a decision based on that. In 100% of DRM-hating cases I've seen, the only complaint is that "DRM might fail to authenticate me", or "DRM might prevent me from using the product sometime in the future", and that these are the reasons they pirated the game. Which of course implies they were never actually inconvenienced by or even used the DRM at all, and are only paranoid about what might happen to them.
So a piece of software installed on my computer without my consent which collects my information without my consent is illegal?
You consented to it when you installed the game, since the DRM is part of the game, and you've shown no legal or logical reason to believe otherwise.
Subtle how you stuck in the note about game theft even though it has sweet fuck all to do with DRM.
Subtle how you are obviously avoiding the simple fact that DRM wouldn't exist without pirates.
Protecting my land is legal, protecting my land with a field of land mines is not.
It's a good thing then that DRM doesn't blow you up, and only denies entry while it tries to verify your right to use the software, sometimes going so far as to contact the authorities (ie. what it's meant to be doing), which is pretty much exactly what security on your land does.
good comparison, for the more agressive forms of DRM it's like you've hooked it up to the mains power supply.
Funny, I don't remember getting physically or permanently harmed when entering a CD key incorrectly. Are you sure you've wired your computer up correctly?
No no, those wires there, you're not meant to attach them to your testicles...
Fair use being stamped on = putting the fence up over an old public Right of Way.
Like slander destroys my freedom or speech, or jaywalking and trespassing laws make me a criminal just for walking somewhere. Outrageous!
Dial home DRM = renting out living space on your land then locking all your tenants out of their rooms when your phone breaks over the weekend and they can't call you.
That's weird, I've never had a problem playing any of my DRM-protected games when I'm temporarily disconnected from the net.
But strangely enough, the requirements on the game box say "Internet connection required". No internet connection means you're not meeting the system requirements. Like how that stupid evil DRM prevents me from playing Crysis on my Atari 2600, those bastards.
It's more like locking your tenants out of their rooms when they don't have the key, won't show you their ID, and look absolutely nothing like the tenants you rented the property out to.
Bringing up piracy again and again fails to address the major point:
Bringing up piracy drives home the major point: DRM wouldn't even exist if it weren't for piracy, and asshole apologists of piracy who take great pleasure in thinking up new ways to justify criminal behaviour.
You hate DRM? Fine, I can accept that people have problems with having to spend all of 30 seconds entering a key code. Some people are just really lazy and stupid. The way to get rid of it of course, is to stop encouraging piracy or making excuses for it.
Or would you rather just keep making the backwards claim that piracy only happens because of DRM?
awful awful awful analogy but I'll bite. It isn't like a lock on your house since every lock is different and takes time to open or they can just kick the door in, meatspace rules don't fit well.
Every lock is not different. There are really only a handful of different types of locks in place, each one just uses different keys. You can try to pick the lock, or you can just brute force your way in. And yes, it takes time to open, just like it takes time for the legitimate owner to get in, while the thief just smashes a window. Sounds exactly like DRM to me. ZOMG, locks on physical property like houses and cars only hurts legitimate consumers! Guess it's time to go on a shopping spree!
Show me a system like that which has been out for a resonable length of time which hasn't been cracked wide open.
Bioshock took several weeks to crack. It too was SecuROM. The trick, of course, is not that the DRM will remain uncracked forever (as you seem to assume is their intention and measure of success).
Pirates are a joke.
It works for 0.00% of cases. it it worthless. it it crap, it is snake oil.
False, and you know it. Anecdotal evidence suggests otherwise - just by trawling /. comments you can see cases of "going to crack it, but couldn't, so caved in and bought it".
Any Exec who pays for it is a fool who should be fired by those above him and anyone who sells it should by jailed as a con artist.
Good point, I totally agree. We should bring in the execs who rely on the honor system to keep the company alive. "Oh sure, you can obtain our game freely and totally anonymously, but you have to promise, cross your heart and hope to die, that you'll pay us for it". Good idea, numbnuts.
And as I said, this is about DRM not piracy. the 2 have very little to do with each other.
I thought the correlation was pretty obvious. Piracy causes DRM.
pirates never encounter DRM and people who have to deal with DRM are, almost by definition, using legit copies.
Yes, because we should just throw out all logic and make the widespread claims that if you have to spend 30 seconds worth of your time to do something legitimately, it's not worth it and the system is broken. Well, it takes me a month of hard work to earn money to eat, therefore the system must broken and clearly, by your fantabulous logic, I should be robbing banks and stealing from supermarkets instead.
Tell me. by any chance do you work for a company selling DRM?
Just to make you happy, yes, because I just know you won't accept that anyone outside the DRM industry could possibly disagree with piracy.
And you seem to use DRM as an excuse for piracy. Just scream "DRM" and everyone should accept criminal behaviour. Except piracy came first.
DRM prevents them from selling the game second hand and so devalues their purchase a great deal. Does this lost value factor in anywhere?
The answer to that, of course, is to not agree to a license that explicitly states "this license is not transferable".
And we weren't talking about piracy. we were talking about DRM.
Yes, because I'm sure DRM has nothing to do with piracy...
DRM doesn't prevent piracy
And locks on a house don't protect criminals from breaking in. But I bet you a hundred dollars you still have locks on your house.
it encourages it since people are often unwilling to install crap-ware on their PC's and the copy protection in no way at all affects people with pirated copies.
Close. It provides another excuse for pirates to rationalize their criminal behaviour, because sometimes, "too expensive", "demo not long enough" and "poor quality" just aren't enough to avoid cognitive dissonance.
Games get cracked before they're even released so what good is DRM?
You mean like Spore? How it was "cracked" before release because pirates got their hands on a DRM-free review copy? Saying that DRM fails if it isn't implemented is like saying oxygen fails to keep you alive because if you stop breathing it you die.
How does DRM encourage creativity?
Preventing piracy does, because there's more incentive to keep developing. Even if DRM doesn't work for 100% of cases as you keep maliciously claiming, it makes no difference, since merely the perception that it's doing something is enough to encourage further development. And you know that perception exists because it keeps getting used.
Company execs who think DRM prevents piracy are fools
And people who steal games are assholes and are ruining the gaming industry, and they should all be shot. Not to mention your hatred of companies protecting their rights is solely cause by pirates, so you too can only agree with that. So what's your point?
How was the music on sony CD's any more part of the music than the sony rootkit?
Music is music. XCP is not music.
Game is game. Map editor is not game. Cheat protection is not game.
It's all just bits and bytes. If I install a free game which infects me with a virus which listens for credit card details it's still just bits and bytes.Is the keylogger less a part of the game than anything else?Would the eula save them then?
Last I checked, stealing credit card info was a crime (kind of like stealing a game is...), but protecting one's copyrighted content was not.
Don't you think other players of the game might be impacted when piracy a) devalues their purchase and b) stifles creativity and future development?
Well, I can see simple things like that are of no concern to you when you're busy being paranoid that developers and publishers are doing everything they can to intentionally hurt legitimate gamers.
I don't see how they would, they're a part of the game, just a part that not everyone uses with somewhat dull gameplay.
How are map editors any more a part of the game than DRM?
who used the phrase "separate executable that doesn't have game content"?
Nobody, but then, nobody has clearly defined what is part of the game and what isn't in a way that is anything more than just a convenient label for piracy advocates.
the uninstaller performs a useful fuction for me.
And SecuROM performs a useful function for the developers. Yet the lawsuit doesn't mention anything about whether this software is a value-add or not. Point?
Mostly all part of the game and few of which try to prevent me from doing something. There's a difference between a mistake and an intentional action.
PunkBuster, VAC, nProtect, DMW Anticheat, Warden. All intentional, all prevent you from doing things, all installed with the game, none indicated on the box, none removed with the game. In fact last I checked, the majority of the /. crowd supported Warden against circumventions like Glider.
DRM which burns out CD drives which try to copy CDs: intentional.
So you're saying there's code in SecuROM which intentionally does physical damage to the CD drive. And you have proof of this?
DRM. A piece of software that installs alongside the main game content. It's required for the game to run. The game box will usually inform you it's included, but most people ignore it and complain anyway. Usually it will install without your knowledge. It stays around on your PC even after you uninstall the game. Unless you are a PC expert it can't be removed without a format and clean install. When installed, it may break the PC. And even if you did know about it before it installed, if you disagreed with it your chances of being able to return the game are slim to none.
Games did this long before the DRM buzzword came about.
It was called DirectX. Where are the lawsuits for that?
And then there's the question of whether DRM is part of the software you've decided to buy and install. Almost all software comes with binary that isn't related to game content, but they don't tell you about in the EULA or on the game box. Do map editors count? Should we sue for them being installed? What about the game uninstaller, that's a separate executable that doesn't have game content. Multiplayer clients? Mod tools? Registry settings? DLLs? I distinctly remember DLL Hell with GTA:SA and MSVCR71.dll (or something like that), GTA is modifying my system files and breaking my other apps. SUE!
No. WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.
I completely agree with your point, but I believe the much more troubling lesson learned from the Radiohead example was that even when people could get it for free 100% legally, they still chose to download it illegally, which leads to the natural conclusion that people aren't even bothering to consider the price offered in the first place, going directly to P2P as their first port of call.
Going to your TV example, it would be like Store A offering free TVs to anybody who wants one, but people still going to Store B and stealing the same model TV. As I said, much more troubling that this is the society we live in.
So you're saying we need MacGyver to stop spam?
If people actually did boycott, instead of just succumbing to piracy and calling it a boycott, that wouldn't happen. That's the only reason boycotts don't work.
Surely if you could be told to act suspiciously and be identified as suspicious by the machine, you could just as easily act unsuspiciously and not be identified by the machine.
Sorry. I should have used my psychic powers to determine that.
"First" and "second" don't imply time, they imply order, one of the methods of which is chronological. The posts could just as easily be sorted alphanumerically and there would still be a first and second, no chronology required.
Crime rates are a fallacious metric because they don't account for the fact that most of society would rather have 3 cases of shoplifting than 1 case of murder. Their only purpose is to provide a statistic to either prove or disprove an otherwise pre-conceived notion with a random set of numbers that has no substance.
And that's ignoring the fact that even if you DID consider "crime rate" as an accetable measure, you're flat out lying anyway, as overall crime rates in Canada have actually been lowering, not "rising rapidly" as you falsely assert; in fact 2006 was stated as having the lowest crime rate in 25 years. Sounds like somebody is just upset that they can no longer go to their local corner store and buy a machine gun with which to kill..."deer".
Maybe they should have consulted the Danish for their snap-together solution?
It's not just a spaceship... It's a Transformer!
I think more likly, the Chinese are Mel Brooks fans.
What you talkin' bout Willits?
Mr AC, I have a question for you. Why did you pirate Spore?