Piracy & DRM Article

[Harbringer]

I noticed that, too, but I thought it was to do with Picasa.

Its so tards don't accidentally delete the folders, not some huge corporate conspiracy to ruin your life. But regardless, you don't own a game, you agree to the EULA, whether its right or wrong doesn't matter, its what is.

 

[Splime]

Its so tards don't accidentally delete the folders, not some huge corporate conspiracy to ruin your life. But regardless, you don't own a game, you agree to the EULA, whether its right or wrong doesn't matter, its what is.

The only problem is that you have to buy the rights to play the game before you can see the EULA, and apparently you have to agree to the EULA in order to buy the game... there's a bit of a Catch-22 there.

You are correct that the companies have the right to drop support for a DRM game at any time, stop legitimate customers from using the software, etc. That doesn't mean we should just accept it.

 

[Harbringer]

The only problem is that you have to buy the rights to play the game before you can see the EULA, and apparently you have to agree to the EULA in order to buy the game... there's a bit of a Catch-22 there.

You are correct that the companies have the right to drop support for a DRM game at any time, stop legitimate customers from using the software, etc. That doesn't mean we should just accept it.

And theirs nothing we can do about it. We can whine all we want, but until we stop buying, which we will never do, they don't give a damn.

 

[Aramazd]

The only problem is that you have to buy the rights to play the game before you can see the EULA, and apparently you have to agree to the EULA in order to buy the game... there's a bit of a Catch-22 there.

You are correct that the companies have the right to drop support for a DRM game at any time, stop legitimate customers from using the software, etc. That doesn't mean we should just accept it.

While the EULA may say that, the legal validity of that is questionable, there isn't a lot of case law on the subject currently.

 

[Rub'Rum]

While the EULA may say that, the legal validity of that is questionable, there isn't a lot of case law on the subject currently.

Yeah, that was my point on the previous page. The myth that an overly complicated lawyer-written cryptic document suddenly creates the law is not true. Actually, I don't see why we need company specific EULAs and Terms of Service, in an ideal world, the government itself would make all of this clear. The fact that they don't gives us a wrong feeling that the companies are empowered to do their own wild west laws.

 

[Maniacal]

Most of the people in government have a hard enough time looking up stuff on the internet, little alone having any sort of understanding about the internet.

Although one Norwegion member of government did have his son investigate an online game for him so he (the father) could learn more about the internet.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

I read somewhere that EULAs aren't binding as they're not negotiated.

I had a good article on it in my bookmarks, but I can't seem to find it...

 

[Harbringer]

I read somewhere that EULAs aren't binding as they're not negotiated.

I had a good article on it in my bookmarks, but I can't seem to find it...

They are negotiated. You bought the license for the game.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Yes, but you don't know what the EULA will exactly say until you open it up, and when you open it, it's non-returnable (at least for most stores.)

 

[Harbringer]

Yes, but you don't know what the EULA will exactly say until you open it up, and when you open it, it's non-returnable (at least for most stores.)

Yes, but you can still not play the game. Think of it like reserving a seat in the stock exchange, all your doing essentially is paying to get on to the floor, theirs no guarantee of success or whether youl even get anything done at all, but once you pay for the seat, you cant get a refund, but you can still choose not to trade at all because it might be a bad day for stocks.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

Yes, but the publishers still get the money in the end, even if you sell it second-hand, all you can do is recoup your "investment", not get the money back from the store.

 

[Harbringer]

Yes, but the publishers still get the money in the end, even if you sell it second-hand, all you can do is recoup your "investment", not get the money back from the store.

And the stock exchange owners still get there seat money in the end as well, your point?

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

It means whichever way you put it, you're screwed.

 

[Harbringer]

It means whichever way you put it, you're screwed.

And finally we understand. Welcome to the market.

Industry will use any number of ways to ensurer there safety financially. We have to abide by there rules, because they own the means of production, and have wants and needs.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

I found that article, but it appears to have turned into a plain white page. It works in google cache, though, so here's the link:
http://www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=197003052

I've found another article, too.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3735/is_199710/ai_n8778077

 

[Rub'Rum]

We have to abide by there rules.

That's what they want us to believe. In theory, anyone could have a serious case against many of the articles in an average EULA or ToS.

As far as I can tell, I could already go in court here against a company and quite possibly win just by claiming that I can't realistically even read the ToS or EULA of many services before I pay for them. It's just that no one stands up for their rights and attempts it because it's such a hassle and companies exploit that.

 

[Maniacal]

wrong thread

 

[Harbringer]

wrong thread

don't you hate that?