Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Zangi]

Valid points but, I object to this:

My game saves can only be accessed online.  They don't belong to me and are at the mercy of someone else.

Yes, "The DRM! Oh, gods, the DRM!"

Not an argument, just a statement.  That is all.

[Urist McOverlord]

That's exactly my point. DRM sucks. I'd be the last person to say it's good. But let's not forget that they arise in direct response to piracy. No piracy excuse to cling to, and customer pressure would force them to remove the DRM. Is it really that important to play Assassin's Creed 2, or other titles like this?

[Agdune]

Excellent points actually, especially the figures from the gave devs themselves. I have to rescind my earlier statements about game piracy being overblown, in the face of a well made argument. Of course, it still leaves the issue of what can be done about it. The current methods of (trying to) deal with the problem are pretty well proven to not work.

There's still increasing penalties through legislation but... that's not exactly a nice path to take. Not to mention that most writers of legislation don't have the slightest idea how computers/internet/filesharing works, I recall one attempted bill a while ago that proposed something along the lines that any copying of any intellectual property from one system to another would be punishable by X fines or court action or what have you, however failed to recognize that with that wording, the entire internet would be deemed to be one giant IP infringment, since the internet functions by copying and transmitting data. The technology just advances too fast for the public servants to learn about it, make laws specific enough to not just be thrown out of court and enact those laws before the entire system has had another revolution and they have to start over again. Unless you're happy with being branded a pirate and slapped with some insane penalty whenever a corporate entity decides to exploit shoddily worded legislation.

[Zai]

First of all, because these company are fighting a war against your freedom of speech and right to privacy, and it is a lot more important.

what is this i dont even

Freedom of Speech? Elaborate, please.

So... we're roughly at a consensus on patenting? I can't really pick anything to bring up that hasn't been allready, unless we want to address Blacken's trolling or something.

From my standpoint, Blacken wasn't really trolling any more than the rest of you people, so I don't understand why you would only be discussing him. Being ENRAGED!!! does not equate to trolling. Baiting would equate to trolling, but I didn't notice any of that in his posts in my reading of the thread.

On topic (not current discussion, perhaps, but on topic nonetheless), I legitimize pirating things if the creator(s) would not even have a chance of receiving any money from purchasing it. This mainly includes old used games being sold in stores like GameStop. I'm one of those types who buy DOS games off of Steam if it's available instead of just downloading it off of a site.

[Bauglir]

-snip-

[Urist McOverlord]

5: "I can't find the game any other way."

If you have tried to find it in stores, used, traded in, on legitimate online sources, and through ancient voodoo rituals, then you have a valid case. But if you give it a cursory try, you probably would have pirated anyways, and are making excuses. This same gray area a

I think you forgot to finish a sentence there. But anyway, I do agree, with a slight caveat. In the case that the game is no longer produced and all firsthand copies have been sold (to be safe on this, I'd recommend waiting a year or two until after the game has stopped being produced), then I don't see the problem with a downloaded copy. You don't rob anybody who's put work into the product, because they would have no chance of seeing revenue from a sale, anyway. I don't think it's necessarily right to do so, but since (at least with computer software) there's a good chance a secondhand seller has played through the game and squeezed the last bit of enjoyment out of it and/or backed up a full copy on the hard drive anyway, so it works out to piracy anyway in the latter case. I also don't think the secondhand market ought be eliminated, either, I'm just saying that if a creator no longer desires to exploit a given idea, there's no ethical obligation to pay for that idea any longer.

Yeah. I was going to put more there but decided against it.
And yes, from an ethical standpoint, your argument is valid.

[Phmcw]

Ok the freedom of speech thing is several company are already trying to use copyright to silent critics (ralph laurent vs photoshop disaster or the Olympic games). Copyrighting the news can also cause a problem that way.
Second, enforcing piracy laws usually involve analyzing every data transmission. In france for instance, hadopi has been quite awful that way.

And by god, new technology = new ways to do things. Industrial revolution = a lot of craftsman loosing their job and working as blue collar worker for low wages.
internet = lot less rock star,and more competition between the artist. Now, as our expance for entertainment won't lower, there will still be money to earn. That's why it's not stealing.

And anyway, I discovered each and any of the band i like and spend money on by downloading them on the Internet or by youtube. So explain me how I steal them :I wouldn't have bought anything for them, wouldn't have talked about them if I hadn't downloaded their album.
They have taken time doing their album, good for them.   

And I'm sure everyone of you has already broken the law you defend so keenly.

[LegoLord]

And by god, new technology = new ways to do things. Industrial revolution = a lot of craftsman loosing their job and working as blue collar worker for low wages.
internet = lot less rock star,and more competition between the artist. Now, as our expance for entertainment won't lower, there will still be money to earn. That's why it's not stealing.

So if a farmer has a huge surplus of crops, it's not stealing to take a single basket of corn?

And I'm sure everyone of you has already broken the law you defend so keenly.

Nope.  You might want to rethink those misanthropic values of yours.  The law is the law;  you don't have to like them, but as long as they are in effect, you have to follow them.  That's why they're there.  If we didn't need laws, they wouldn't exist.  Anarchy would work on a large, unselective scale.  They may not work the way the should, but that does not mean you should break them.  It means you should support efforts to improve them, and the systems they involve.

[Areyar]

Second hand software.

So how does the 'DRM' limits placed on Spore (at launch, they were toned down after customer outrage) fight piracy?
In my opinion, limiting a copy to five re-installs only affects the paying customer.
Having paid the retail price for a complete game, I expect to be allowed to do reinstalls on my own PCs all I want. Also I'd expect to be allowed to sell this privilege. (assuming only a single online account)

The nicer features of the game (sharing creatures) was only available to registered users, that should be enough to limit piracy.
Most free software only provides updates to paying users, this is in my mind a bit iffy, because a lot of software is sold full of bugs.
Some companies require payment for extra features, that is fine.
...as long as this does not causes unequality in online games. Making online playability non-fun for players opting not to pay extra is plain wrong.
for free games these rules don't apply obviously, you get what you pay for.

[Phmcw]

@legolord When I say I'm sure it's not maybe. It's I'm know it. Ever watched a clip on Youtube? Guilty (if the submitter isn't the right owner) ever borrowed a software from a friend? Guilty. Ever gave copy of a book or a part of a book (you have if you're at the university)? Guilty. I stop here the list is too long.

And I can obviously break the law, I don't have to follow it blindly and I actually rarely does if I don't find the law just. It's called freethinking. You should try it.

Your example with crop is just perfect. If tomorrow you can have a crop replicating machine, will you pay for every meal you make?

[RedKing]

That's exactly my point. DRM sucks. I'd be the last person to say it's good. But let's not forget that they arise in direct response to piracy. No piracy excuse to cling to, and customer pressure would force them to remove the DRM. Is it really that important to play Assassin's Creed 2, or other titles like this?

It's a chicken-and-egg thing, IMHO. A complete lack of copy protection would virtually beg piracy to come into existence. It's just a natural law. If I was giving out ham sandwiches for free, with the understanding that you only take as many as you need, somebody would still come along and take a whole truckload *just because*.

[Phmcw]

Drm are a byproduct of "intellectual property". You are not allowed modify the software you own. Oh excuse me they say they merely allow us to use a copy of the software.
Gpl ftw

Edit ok it's too good to pass on, just check boing boing :  sonny just closed beyonce official channel because she was  broadcasting her own clip.

[Rooster]

Nope.  You might want to rethink those misanthropic values of yours.  The law is the law;  you don't have to like them, but as long as they are in effect, you have to follow them.  That's why they're there.  If we didn't need laws, they wouldn't exist.  Anarchy would work on a large, unselective scale.  They may not work the way the should, but that does not mean you should break them.  It means you should support efforts to improve them, and the systems they involve.

Oh boy! You didn't go there, did you?
You hurt my anarchistic feelings there.
I don't think you know what anarchy means.
It's a state where there are no leaders. Not the lack of law.
So please get out of my personal space.
Thank you.

Back on track.
You know wizards of the coast?
They hold the patent for the whole trading card game genre.
I can't develop a trading card came without them sueing my ass.
That's bad. Now you may ask about those other card games that are out there. Oh, wotc can still sue them all, it's just that they choose not to for some reason. The only case where they chose to fight something by law is pokemon ccg. They left the rest alone, but I tell you. If a trading card game comes close to magic's popularity, and it's not wotc, then it will get taken down fast. Or bought.

[Virex]

Nope.  You might want to rethink those misanthropic values of yours.  The law is the law;  you don't have to like them, but as long as they are in effect, you have to follow them.  That's why they're there.  If we didn't need laws, they wouldn't exist.  Anarchy would work on a large, unselective scale.  They may not work the way the should, but that does not mean you should break them.  It means you should support efforts to improve them, and the systems they involve.

Oh boy! You didn't go there, did you?
You hurt my anarchistic feelings there.
I don't think you know what anarchy means.
It's a state where there are no leaders. Not the lack of law.
So please get out of my personal space.
Thank you.

Back on track.
You know wizards of the coast?
They hold the patent for the whole trading card game genre.
I can't develop a trading card came without them sueing my ass.
That's bad. Now you may ask about those other card games that are out there. Oh, wotc can still sue them all, it's just that they choose not to for some reason. The only case where they chose to fight something by law is pokemon ccg. They left the rest alone, but I tell you. If a trading card game comes close to magic's popularity, and it's not wotc, then it will get taken down fast. Or bought.

All I can find on WotC's tranding card game patent is one from the US. As a rule of the tumb, patent laws in the US can be generaly regarded as "screwed up" (they allow patenting DNA, even thouhg finding a new strand of DNA isn't an invention for example). Under European patent law, patenting a game is impossible.

Drm are a byproduct of "intellectual property". You are not allowed modify the software you own. Oh excuse me they say they merely allow us to use a copy of the software.
Gpl ftw

Comercial anything's also a byproduct of intelectual property. Without any protection whatsoever on inventions, ideas and art, who's going to make it? I for one know that if they toss out intelectual property I'm going to ditch my uni education in favour of car mechanics or another technical field that doesn't depend on generosity.

[Phmcw]

That's being shortsighted at best. First I do hope that your little trip to the university isn't only motivated by the financial aspect.
Then you assume that somehow enforcing an ownership on your idea is the only way to attract investor? Excuse me but that is stupid, if only because intellectual property is a notion fist formulated in the sixties and only recently widespread. Einstein, Niels Bohr, Feynman, have all worked, and gotten rich without any intellectual property of their idea. An interesting thinking experiment would be figuring out what would have happened if that notion was enforced at the time. Probably nohing good as Mileva Marik couldn't have communicated Lenhart's work in  progress to Einstein. So no article on photoelectric effect for the world. It's only a start of course.

When I talk about intellectual property, I talk about the precise concept. I'll admit wikipedia as a valid source for the definition.