Speaking up against our would be soviet overlords.
Published on January 21, 2010 By taltamir In PC Gaming

DRM as a whole is not meant to stop piracy; no form of DRM has ever been effective in stopping piracy, nor has any of it ever been designed in a way that could be effective in stopping piracy. DRM is nothing but a trick to force customers to purchase the same product again and again; which several big DRM advocates (such as the CEO of sony BGM) have publicly declared as their ultimate goal. DRM pushers also came on records as saying that libraries are nothing but massive scale piracy by the government and should thus be shut down. It is no surprise that the library of congress (and many others) have been complaining about their inability to archive works with DRM as libraries are another of the real intended targets of DRM.

Software companies like to pretend that their product is both intellectual property which they license, as well as a physical product which they sell you at the same time. Furthermore, they pretend that somehow the two are combined so that the consumer gets the responsibilities of both and the benefit of neither while they get the benefits of both and the responsibilities of neither.

When you sell a DVD you are transferring a physical product, one that was manufactured, transported, purchased, and has to be disposed of (at taxpayer expense) when trashed. And has to be repurchased if damaged. Just like a car. This is taking the "physical object" approach.

Digital distribution does not do that. Digital distribution treats it as 100% IP that is licensed to you. You have one lifetime license to use a game/song/movie/program/etc. A license that does not need to be repurchased if your CD is scratched, degrades from age, or otherwise damaged. Therefore you are getting the benefits (you can make copies, transfer devices, and get a duplicate of the data at no cost) and drawbacks (you may not resell it) of the IP licensing method. Which is fair and reasonable; you must remember that in the license approach, you should not have an inherent right to resell an item.

If you wanted the model in which you the consumer could resell the DVD than you have to agree to a model where DVDs can not be duplicated under any circumstances, that the DVD has to be in the drive to run the game. And that if the DVD breaks then you are obligated to buy a new one at full price, even if you already purchased the game/software. This is a ridiculous notion since a DVD is worth under 10 cents, but the software on it is worth at least 50$. It isn't a car, it is a method of transferring the software, which is pure information.

Most unauthorized copying (called piracy by DRM advocates) exists to reclaim the benfits of either the license or the physical property method, but many users forget that if you reclaim both at once than you are going from protecting your rights as a customer and into the realm of thievery (which, ironically, is what the content owners do to you when they claim the rights of both and the responsibilities of neither).

I am very happy with license type digital distribution. Now in a system that no longer tries to exploit me and steal from me (which is exactly what software companies do when they pretend that their product is two different things at once) I am quite satisfied with purchasing software again. This is why services such as impulse are so much better than buying a DVD at the store.


Comments (Page 4)
7 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5 6  Last
on Jan 25, 2010

Humanity !!!! Since when the US is the humanity...

Patent law is a blight on more than just the USA. International trade agreements mean most countries in the world are bound with insane patent laws, the new Iraq government even passed a copy of the DMCA with 2 weeks of their creation.

China, Israel, Eruope (with a few exceptions), Canada, Australia etc are all falling into the same traps in this regards. Europe USED to have sensible approaches, but with the unification into the EU those have broken down, and the EU patent system is as messed up.

Why shouldn't intellectual property be patented/copyrighted?  If you invent something, shouldn't you have the exclusive right to sell it, simply because it belongs to you because you created it?  Now, imagine a company that spends millions of dollars on a product.  Without protection of their intellectual property, their competitors can sell the created product at a lower price, simply because they didn't spend a great deal of money inventing it.  If you were a businessman, would you invent things under a system where your creations could be pillaged and mimicked by your competitors?

So, you believe it to be legitimate for a company to patent "an arrow that points at your target in a game" or "a mini game during the loading screen" (both real patents), then sue anyone who uses it into the ground? remember the "protection" here is that the other company will sue you for all that you are worth. They will lie in wait for years until you have established yourself before springing the suit and ruining you. There are far to many patents and they are far too vague for you to know ahead of time if you are breaching any.

on Jan 25, 2010

As an aside, I don't believe this to be true for DA:O, at least the retail version.  I've played with my DLC offline numerous times.  Only time I have had to be online was activating it the first time.  I've since backed up the files once activated, reinstalled on another OS, copied them over, and can play with everything showing activated and in my inventory/quests.  I've blocked online connectivity in my firewall of DA:O just to be sure if the servers ever go down I'll be able to play what I paid for, and it doesn't effect my DLC one bit.

It doesn't communicate directly, there is a program called "EA download manager", it is the one that authenticates online.

@aeortar: did you know:

1. EULAs have been upheld in courts.

2. Pharmaceutical companies and food creators (as of yet, only via hybridization and selective breeding), and other related companies all make EULAs saying that by buying their products you may not:

a. Test them to see if they are harmful to people

b. Give them to someone else.

This makes it illegal for 3rd party groups to verify the original safety claims until the product's patent expire... NEVER buy a drug for which there is no generic, because it is illegal for anyone to verify that it isn't harmful.

3. Many EULAs include a blurb saying that by agreeing to it, you automatically agree to any revisions they make to it in the future.

4. etc

on Jan 26, 2010

Ultimatley I think some developers want the pay system to be like an arcade where you pay per play.

 

You must log on to play, to log on you must pay....

 

on Jan 26, 2010

Looks like I made a mistake with DA:Origins - I'd frequently got an error message when trying to load a saved game saying I had to be logged in as it used DLC (and so assumed it meant just that), but it seems I only get this message when I'm actually online+logged in, and it lets me play fine offline.

@aeortar: did you know:

1. EULAs have been upheld in courts.

Which countries/jurisdictions has this happened in? From a quick look online it seems it's gone both ways in the US, but I can't find anywhere detailing whether it's been upheld elsewhere, such as in the EU. I'm assuming EULAs are frequently the same across countries, even when the laws can be signficantly different, and so would be shocked if there weren't a number of western countries for whom EULAs weren't enforceable.

Also wherever they are deemed enforceable the law is in need of an urgent rewrite (although again back to the issue of politicians appearing to be happy to ignore any such issues presumably due to antiquated stereotypes about gamers)

on Jan 26, 2010

His examples were about EULA's for other industry like the medical/pharm industry as if that is even remotely the same as software.

on Jan 26, 2010

taltamir
Patent law is a blight on more than just the USA. International trade agreements mean most countries in the world are bound with insane patent laws, the new Iraq government even passed a copy of the DMCA with 2 weeks of their creation.

China, Israel, Eruope (with a few exceptions), Canada, Australia etc are all falling into the same traps in this regards. Europe USED to have sensible approaches, but with the unification into the EU those have broken down, and the EU patent system is as messed up.

In fact, since the unification of EU, patent system is better... before, each European country was having his own system... now, they all follow the EPC ( european patent convention )... At the international level, 184 country have sign the Patent Cooperation treaty ( PCT )... Rules 39 and 67 permit International Searching and Preliminary Examining Authorities not to carry out search and examination on certain types of subject matter, such as scientific and mathematical theories, methods of doing business and computer programs. The PCT does not provide for the grant of an "international patent", as such multinational patent does not exist, and the grant of patent is a prerogative of each national or regional authority.

About the new Iraq government, it is not relevant... everybody know that Iraq is somehow controled by the US, that the candidat from the first gov was selected by the US... sure that with time, a lot of copy of US laws will be voted in Irak !!!

Anyway, rules 39 and 67 allow any country having sign the PCT to refuse patent for computer programs... Since EPC don't allow patent for computer programs, Europe will not grant a patent for them...

In Europe, computer programs fall under the intellectual property and copyright... a example in these topic was the "one click buy"... copyright will not allow your to copy the code but will allow your to create a original code who lead to the same function...

I agree that soon of later, all country will have identical rules but somehow, as now, nobody will give up his national right... until rules are not identical everywhere, international enforcement is impossible...

on Jan 26, 2010

I agree that soon of later, all country will have identical rules but somehow, as now, nobody will give up his national right... until rules are not identical everywhere, international enforcement is impossible...

While it is true that the laws vary, the overall structure is a blight on free enterprise and ingenuity worldwide. Some places are less messed up in this regard, but all countries are suffering from it right now and things are only getting worse every year as patents become more draconic.

Which countries/jurisdictions has this happened in? From a quick look online it seems it's gone both ways in the US, but I can't find anywhere detailing whether it's been upheld elsewhere, such as in the EU. I'm assuming EULAs are frequently the same across countries, even when the laws can be signficantly different, and so would be shocked if there weren't a number of western countries for whom EULAs weren't enforceable.

Also wherever they are deemed enforceable the law is in need of an urgent rewrite (although again back to the issue of politicians appearing to be happy to ignore any such issues presumably due to antiquated stereotypes about gamers)

Various countries... and yes there have been rulings back and forth, but they should have been struck down outright... generally there seem to be more rulings that favor them.

Another tricks eulas do is end with "Except where prohibited"... so they could tell you "you have no right to do X except where prohibited"... and it so happens that it is prohibited in all countries and/or states where the item is sold. this is an attempt to trick people into believing and accepting such laws and limitations.

on Jan 27, 2010

When I asked about DRM and/or copy protection of Mass Effect 2 on the Bioware board people immediately started asking why that would be so important, and shoving down the "you just own a license and not the product" crap down my throat. Looks like the fanbois now even start adopting EA's mantra about reselling software is bad and everyone who cares about DRM must be a pirate. *shakeshead*

on Feb 23, 2010

This is crap. I am furious that I have to install more junk on my computer just to get a patch for a game I bought. I really enjoy their games. Makes me sad but, this is the last one I buy from stardock.

on Feb 23, 2010

Star Adder
When I asked about DRM and/or copy protection of Mass Effect 2 on the Bioware board people immediately started asking why that would be so important, and shoving down the "you just own a license and not the product" crap down my throat. Looks like the fanbois now even start adopting EA's mantra about reselling software is bad and everyone who cares about DRM must be a pirate. *shakeshead*

Are you serious?  There are idiots who have completely accepted whatever DRM scheme the publishers cram down our throats?  Ha, it looks like my prediction that there will be time limits on future games may happen sooner than later, if people are already willing to bend over to this degree.

on Feb 23, 2010

Colin, you can uninstall Impulse after patching and all your games that use it to patch will still run fine. You can also opt not to install Impulse and only play the base game as is installed on the disk.

on Feb 23, 2010

colins, implulse is not a form of DRM. the games (even patched to latest version) work fine with it uninstalled. and it is never run except to download games and patch them. it is a convenient tool if you have many stardock games.

on Feb 23, 2010

taltamir
colins, implulse is not a form of DRM. the games (even patched to latest version) work fine with it uninstalled. and it is never run except to download games and patch them. it is a convenient tool if you have many stardock games.

 

Impulse IS a form of DRM taltamir. How many copies of Demigod do you think work as intended unpatched? They rebuilt large parts of that game to fix the problems it had coming out of the gate. When companies release their games complete and with minimal bugs where patches are minor fixes at best, then you can say Impulse is not DRM. When they release them, often times broken and with major changes needed, the patches are hardly optional even if some claim they are.

on Feb 23, 2010

Nesrie
Impulse IS a form of DRM taltamir...

Technically, in the strictest sense, this is true however in terms of Copy Prevention - which is Taltamir's meaning - Impulse itself isn't.

on Feb 23, 2010

I've had some 2-3 games now work for a while, and then at some point decide that they are pirated (which they aren't) and stop working. Roller coaster Tycoon 3 and Sims 3 come to mind off the top of my head (though Sims 3 got worse after a certain update).

I used to think I didn't need to worry about DRM because it didn't effect me. I was following the rules after all. Now I've decided not to buy games like Assassins Creed 2 even though I really enjoyed the 1st one. I just don't know at what point it will stop working for me, and I'm not gonna risk blowing $50 for a game that only works while I'm logged on, and may not work at all 6 months down the line.

Frogboy is right. People who pirate games aren't stopped by DRM. They just find ways around it. Even with consoles, if you log onto craigslist, there are a ton of people offering cracked systems where you can play a million games on it for free. I've known people who've done it with the Wii and the DS.

So they as thieves get to enjoy all the free games they want, and I as a legitimate customer who spends WAY too much on video games is screwed.

Long Live Stardock! Thanks for keeping your games free of DRM! I will be a loyal customer as long as you keep that up!

The Library of Congress should get some 13 year olds to work there who know their way around those constraints. I haven't fact checked, but anyone who thinks of libraries as stealing content or government piracy needs to be water boarded. These people are sick.

7 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5 6  Last