DRM Tolerance

deanej said:

Only because the industry has twisted the issue this way. There is nothing inherintly different with games compared to music and movies that requires this - the only reason it's this way is because the industry has taken advantage of the technological ignorance of the lawmakers. We need to take back the issue.

Click to expand...

Actually mjs0 describes the issue strikingly well. You do indeed get a licence rather than buying a copy of a game. I think the analogy with a movie ticket is spot on indeed. If you pass your ticket to a friends after you passed inspection then that friend may get in - as long as no employees of the theatre spot that, of course. The friend however does not have any right whatsoever to see the movie too. That right was granted exclusively to you.

What you should keep in mind is that the actual transaction of paying money for a product does not grant you any rights in of itself. It is just a monetary payment in order to get a right in return. The company can grant a licence, but then you as an end user may not because the agreement stated that you cannot transfer your rights. You can sell your copy of the game of course, but not your licence. Distributing the licence is the exclusive right of other parties. We can of course think of workarounds to the same effect - like selling a game like new, i.e. before it is registered, or selling a movie ticket before it is used - and factual this may seem like a transferring of a licence from one end user to the other, but legally it is not since all you do is inventing ways to circumvent the rules that enforce the agreement.

If you open a fast food store and want to get into the McDonalds franchise, you need to get a licence. When it turns out that the fast food buisness is not for you, you cannot just sell your licence to the cafeteria on the corner. You can sell the restaurant itself of course, and that has consequences that no doubt the licence agreement has foreseen. If McDonalds says it is ok that the restaurant remains a McDonalds then it may remain a McDonalds - but this is not for the person selling the restaurant to determine. Seems fair? This is what happens with a gaming licence too. It is the exact same deal legally.

One thing that I think is important is being able to transfer your game license to another person. Games setting on a book shelf just take up space. There used be a thriving resale market for video games. It seems like some of the more recent DRM schemes are designed to keep people from selling their used games. With digital downloads, buying used games is getting more difficult. I think when a person buys a license to download a game, they should have the option of putting that license on the used game market when they are finished with it.

Murky said:

One thing that I think is important is being able to transfer your game license to another person. Games setting on a book shelf just take up space. There used be a thriving resale market for video games. It seems like some of the more recent DRM schemes are designed to keep people from selling their used games. With digital downloads, buying used games is getting more difficult. I think when a person buys a license to download a game, they should have the option of putting that license on the used game market when they are finished with it.

Click to expand...

But it often does not work like this. You know this, the question is what you do with this info. If you feel like being able to resell the games is really something that games must have, you can decide to stop paying full price for games that do not allow reselling. Also you can decide to stop buying these games. Gaming companies miss out on a lot of money should they allow reselling of games. They will never allow this if they can help it, and from a buisness point of view that makes sense.

Shurdus said:

But it often does not work like this. You know this, the question is what you do with this info. If you feel like being able to resell the games is really something that games must have, you can decide to stop paying full price for games that do not allow reselling. Also you can decide to stop buying these games. Gaming companies miss out on a lot of money should they allow reselling of games. They will never allow this if they can help it, and from a buisness point of view that makes sense.

Click to expand...

True, it does not work like this. It should though. "That's the way it is" and "it's just business" are two phrases that have been used to justify all of the world's problems. It has to stop. The world will be a better place the moment we stop letting corporations run our lives.

Why's the poll closed? Count one more for the CD-Check.

I'm actually surprised that this option received so many votes. 72% of the 240 voters don't seem to mind slipping a CD into the drive. I don't either. I prefer that to Steams offline workaround of disconnecting the network connection when I don't have a connection capable of handling update downloads.

I'd rather not ever have to go online to register a game. But a true one time net validation is far more preferable than a persistent validation. I still don't like net validations though! If I can help it I will never have another registry based DRM on my system. I learned I must do my research and know what DRM scheme is used prior to making purchase. No DRM would be great. But I don't mind a DRM method that doesn't act as a pesky gate keeper between me and the media I purchase.

I would like the option to buy and sell used games. Used CD's comprise much of my music collection. And I've sold some over the years in times of great need. I'd be happy for the game publishers and developers to get a slice of that resale pie. They're entitled to it. I'd be happy to pay a little extra on both ends of the resell.

Reselling 1s and 0s doesn't make sense because they're not degraded by use. Given this it means all reselling is offering an equally high quality product as the original for a lower price. Its not surprising that these companies don't want to compete against their own products.

It's still years after the game has been released. Resale is the only way to get many games these days. If something is still good, and you aren't using it anymore, why shouldn't someone else get to use it? It doesn't matter weather it's digital or not. Many things bought used are still practically in new condition anyways. It's like music and movies. Yes, there are those of us that still buy games on CDs!

CD/DVD medium is subject to degradation. They aren't permanent. But thats beside the point.

Old games don't retain full value because they are old. The majority of gamers have moved on. I bought brand new, store bought copies of the complete versions of Age of Empires 1 and 2 real cheap years after they were released. I also bought the Diablo 2 BattleChest real cheap, brand new from the store. I got the full game, all the expansions, and a thick book for half the price of a single expansion. All because the game lost value over time.

Your on record here Senethro, talking about how Steam reduces game prices at christmas time. Various Steam users here (perhaps you said it as well), project at least a 25% reduction in Civ5 this christmas season. Civ4 Complete was so cheap some people bought it just to try out Steam before Civ5 comes out. So I know you know all this.


Some used games however increase in price. The Legend of Zelda and other early Zelda games are not cheap when you can find them. So long as the cartridges still work, there are still the old consoles to play them on. I for one would like to replay those games. They still have replayability value to me. There is still a resell market for them. Can't buy em new anymore. Only way to get em is to get em used. I also wouldn't mind playing Castle Wolfenstein and a few others from the Apple2e days if I still had that system. Why not allow for old games be resold?

Well I'm glad you know I know all this. All I said was that use does not degrade software, not that the value of software doesn't decrease with age. In fact, that software can be offered at budget prices means I'm not worried at all by the decrease in the second hand market.

Edit in response to your edit: Old games with that kind of value get resold, remade, released on Xbox Live Arcade. A collector's price is not a market's price.

And Castle Wolfenstein is most certainly still on sale. I own it. Would you like to guess where I bought it from?

The license-based selling point is the current legal situation, but that doesn't make it any less screwy.

Imagine if the situation was the same with used vehicles. Or furniture. Yes, you just bought a used couch, but now you have to pay the furniture factory extra money for a license to use it

Senethro said:

All I said was that use does not degrade software, not that the value of software doesn't decrease with age.

Click to expand...

It would be better to say the quality doesn't decrease.
That's more accurate, because the technology evolves and old technology will lose partially its value because of it, but that doesn't mean that it gets worse.

Old games do not have the same value like in the old days when they've been released.
The graphics and sound are not at the same level compared to current games. But the quality can still be excellent (hhmm...i have to play Plansecape torment again, and i'm still not through with the lost vikings...).

Senethro said:

Old games with that kind of value get resold, remade, released on Xbox Live Arcade. A collector's price is not a market's price.

And Castle Wolfenstein is most certainly still on sale. I own it. Would you like to guess where I bought it from?

Click to expand...

I'm not interested in a collectors edition, I've just got a nostalgia driven desire to sit on the floor in front of an analog TV and play the old Zelda games again. I have played a PC version complete with some incredible mods. But its not the same. 20 years into the future, maybe I'll have the same nostalgia driven desire to sit in front of the PC and play a few games of Civ5.

I don't know if we're talking about the same Castle Wolfenstein version. The 1980's Apple version is the one I'm longing for. Played it when I was supposed to be computing, in a Apple BASIC class in high school. Would be nice to play it again on an ole AppleIIe. Its all about the memories.

So yeah, I do have an interest in knowing that I can play my games 20 years into the future; because in the here and now, I'm wanting to play games from 20 years in the past. I didn't think of this 20+ years ago when I was in my late teens, early 20's. I had a different understanding of nostalgia back then. I hadn't lived long enough to get it yet. I'm still just learning about it. I wish now I'da kept those old Zelda cartridges and that AppleIIe. I think I'd like to have that option for Civ5... problem is, Steam, with its net validation, might get in the way.

White Elk said:

I'm not interested in a collectors edition, I've just got a nostalgia driven desire to sit on the floor in front of an analog TV and play the old Zelda games again. I have played a PC version complete with some incredible mods. But its not the same. 20 years into the future, maybe I'll have the same nostalgia driven desire to sit in front of the PC and play a few games of Civ5.

Click to expand...

How can you have a nostalgia driven desire to play Civ5 again when you are not going to play it because of steam? You 'say No 2 net validation!!', right?

Shurdus said:

How can you have a nostalgia driven desire to play Civ5 again when you are not going to play it because of steam? You 'say No 2 net validation!!', right?

Click to expand...

There is precedence for fan feedback altering 2k's DRM scheme. I argue for a modification of the Steam arrangement. At the very least I inform the developers, publisher, and distributor of my reasoning for not buying a game that was otherwise already sold. Perhaps Civ5's Steam will be scaled back. Perhaps Civ6 will never have it. Perhaps another developer will take notice and make a better Civ than the one 2k is shaping.


From the Senior Manager of Interactive Marketing for 2K Games...

Scaling Back BioShock 2's DRM

January 22, 2010 - Elizabeth

Over the past two days, I've fielded a lot of questions and concerns about the DRM for both the retail and digital versions of BioShock 2. Because of this feedback, we are scaling back BioShock 2's DRM.

There will be no SecuROM install limits for either the retail or digital editions of BioShock 2, and SecuROM will be used only to verify the game's executable and check the date. Beyond that, we are only using standard Games for Windows Live non-SSA guidelines, which, per Microsoft, comes with 15 activations (after that, you can reset them with a call to Microsoft.)

What does that mean for your gameplay experience? This means that BioShock 2's new DRM is now similar to many popular games you advised had better DRM through both digital and retail channels. Many of you have used Batman: Arkham Asylum as an example to me, which uses the exact same Games for Windows Live guidelines as us as well as SecuROM on retail discs, and now our SecuROM is less restrictive on Steam.

I know that the variables of PC gaming can be frustrating and confusing, and when you say there is a problem, we listen, and use your suggestions to make things better. Feedback like this does not go unheard, and while this might not be the ideal protection for everyone, we will continue to listen and work with you in the future when formulating our DRM plans.

http://www.2kgames.com/cultofrapture/article/bioshock2drmupdatescaling

Click to expand...

The main issues with DRM (Digital Right Management) is that tends to limit the rights of consumers compared to what they were legally allowed to do before.

For example if one buys a music CD he/she will have the right to:
a. Resell the item
b. Use it on any compatible device
c. Use it (temporary) at a friend's house
d. Make backup copies (in most of EU this is a legal right) for personal use

With the advent of DRM consumers' rights have been eroded while business models for companies have been strengthened.
If you think about systems like Steam or iTune all the 4 rights I listed before have been eliminated without any "compensation" for the end user (prices did not change radically to compensate the lower rights):
a. One cannot resell a game bought on steam as cannot resell a song purchased from itune
b. I cannot (legally) export songs out of iTune.
To some extents this applies to Steam and much more to other online DRM systems
c. Same as above
d. Not possible (legally)

At the same time network distribution of digital content reduces drastically the costs for the distributor but rarely such saves are reflected to retail price.

The markets, thanks to DRM and people's limited knowledge about their rights, is quickly shifting from selling goods to selling licenses to use them.
And at the same time our rights get eroded too (there is no reason why consumers shouldn't be allowed to re-sell their licenses to use goods).

arstal said:

Everything already IS standalone. Unlike steam, there is no DRM attached to the games themselves. At the very worst, a simple retail crack would suffice.

Click to expand...

This would also mean you are going to do something illegal.
Many DRM systems actually force the users to perform illegal actions to protect themselves (e.g. backup copy) or to use it better (e.g. use the same software or content on multiple devices).

gingerbill said:

Using steam and impulse grants the exact same experience to the end user , you register and then you play but with steam it runs in the background taking up virtually no resources .

Click to expand...

I think that most of people does not complain about resources used by Steam/impulse/anythingelse, but by the legal limitation that it imposes compared to a full ownership of a physical copy of the game.

gingerbill said:

Nevermind the benefits with using steam , of course they are never mentioned as they have already made there mind up.

Click to expand...

Sure, there are advantages for users to use Steam, Impulse, and any other similar distribution and management system: those advantages are well known and well advertised by the companies themselves.
Having an open discussion about the limitations is very important too.

mjs0 said:

It would be a perfectly valid scenario to consider your purchase as being in the same category as an admission ticket.

Click to expand...

I think software, especially games, have a much different life-cycle than movies at cinema or exibitions in museum.
You can go to watch the same movie at the cinema only once.
Maybe twice.
But that's very far from the hundreds of times you'll be booting-up CIV-V.

What we buy now with software is a life-long right to use such software.
There is no reason why we shouldn't be allowed to re-sell the license or use it on different devices.



In short, at parity of price I prefer to buy the full good, not only a license to use it on a temporary basis.
If I do get only a license i expect to pay only a small fraction of the full price with the same rate of decreased righs I get with the license.

Incorrect wolfigor, you can most certainly do b, c and d through Steam.

White Elk said:

There is precedence for fan feedback altering 2k's DRM scheme. I argue for a modification of the Steam arrangement. At the very least I inform the developers, publisher, and distributor of my reasoning for not buying a game that was otherwise already sold. Perhaps Civ5's Steam will be scaled back. Perhaps Civ6 will never have it. Perhaps another developer will take notice and make a better Civ than the one 2k is shaping.

Click to expand...

They may decide to take it easy on the DRM, but to switch away from steam altogether is something I would not expect. How do you suppose 2k will scale steam back? Making it optional is probably not an option for them anymore.

Whatever you need to tell yourself is fine, but I would not hold my breath waiting for any of that.

Senethro said:

Incorrect wolfigor, you can most certainly do b, c and d through Steam.

Click to expand...

Can I make backup copies legally?
Can play them even if steam will exist no more as a service?

for c and d I write that doesn't fully apply to Steam

No, you can fully do C. But remember to not save your password on his computer.

Steam has a backup facility explicitly for making backups so you don't have to redownload the game.

Given we don't know the exact nature of any de-authentication Steam will do on closing down I can't answer the second question. But I can compare it with many other modern releases which require an online authentication once and them turning the servers off, which they will most certainly do eventually as they get no continuous benefit from them unlike Steam, will coaster your disks just as effectively.

Senethro said:

Steam has a backup facility explicitly for making backups so you don't have to redownload the game.

Click to expand...

But you still have to have Steam to run the game.