Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Copy Protection Firms Encourage Piracy?

Posted by Zonk on Wed Mar 15, 2006 06:45 PM
from the quite-possible dept.
Ars Technica has a reflection on the revelation that StarForce had linked to pirated versions of Galactic Civilizations II. From the piece: "It's not hard to see why the publishers use the stuff; after all, no one wants to spend a couple of years on a project only to see their efforts rewarded by flat sales and a robust pirate market. Still, in the quest for better protection, these copy protection schemes have grown in both sophistication and invasiveness. Some schemes now install their own hidden device drivers that monitor your computer's optical drive access, trying to prevent copying and other unapproved uses. (If this sounds familiar, it should. Game copy protection, after all, is just another form of DRM.)"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Controversial StarForce Copy Protection Creators Quizzed 952 comments
Thanks to FiringSquad for its interview with the creators of the StarForce copy protection scheme for PC videogames. The author explains: "In recent months there's been an increasing awareness and alarm over StarForce copy protection. It's actually a driver that installs itself with the [Windows] games that come shipped with it, and originally it didn't uninstall when the game was uninstalled." StarForce's Abbie Sommer argues the advantages of "driver-level copy protection", explaining: "The drivers are what prevents the use of kernel debugger utilities such as SoftICE, Cool Debugger, Soft Snoop etc. Also the drivers prevent emulators from spoofing a drive, and thwart burning tools such as Alcohol 120%." The author concludes by injecting a little personal opinion into the mix, arguing: "PC games will never go away, but if the market keeps shrinking due to the increasing ease of piracy... then the number and quality of games will almost certainly decrease."
[+] StarForce Copy Protection Causing User Ire 72 comments
Ant writes "According to a thread on the Rage3D boards, and another on The Adventure Company's site, the copy protection system StarForce, as used in PC videogames including Toca Race Driver 2, Traitor's Gate 2 and Broken Sword 3, is installed on a user's PC without proper explanation, and doesn't get removed on many uninstalls - some users report difficulty in keeping their systems stable due to conflicts, and think they've tracked it down to the StarForce protection."
[+] Galactic Civilizations II Breaks DRM Mold 168 comments
Machitis writes "A recent news item at GalCiv2.com says, 'Our license allows you to install the game onto as many machines that you own that you want as long as only one copy is being used at once. How many sales are lost because people want to have a game on their laptop and desktop and don't want to drag CDs around so choose not to buy the game? [...] we were quite disturbed to discover that the company that makes Starforce provided a working URL to a list of pirated GalCiv II torrents. I'm not sure whether what they did was illegal or not, but it's troubling nevertheless and was totally unnecessary.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Not surprising... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by babbling (952366) on Wednesday March 15 2006, @06:48PM (#14928443)
    They sell a product that solves (or at least claims to solve) a "problem".

    They have an interest in making that problem as large and as wide-spread as possible.
      • Proprietary software doesn't always present immediate and obvious problems.

        I'd say that proprietary software is more of a "limitation" than a "problem", and that there is a difference between the two. Limitations are not a problem as long as you never want to do the things that the limitations prevent you from doing. When you do become limited in a way that affects you, it evolves into a "problem".
      • If there was no piracy, anti-piracy measures would serve no purpose.

        If there were no computer viruses, anti-virus software would serve no purpose.

        If there was no proprietary software, OSS would serve no purpose?

        That's just silly.

      • by babbling (952366) on Wednesday March 15 2006, @07:25PM (#14928725)
        Yeah, I did consider pointing out Microsoft's major conflict of interest there, but figured most people have probably heard enough about it, anyway.

        It's great for them that they can sell their users a problem for a few hundred dollars and then charge a yearly subscription fee for a "treatment" (note: not "fix") for the problem. Sucks to be one of their customers, though.

        One interesting development that I think will come out of Vista/Trusted-Computing/Windows-OneCare is the fact that Microsoft will probably be able to squash piracy, now. Trusted Computing in Vista will probably mean that it will be very difficult to get Windows updates without having a legitimate copy. Assuming it's a given that Vista will eventually require security updates (safe bet) people won't be able to do much other than purchase Windows. OneCare will probably end up checking whether the copy of Vista is legit, too, since virus scanners updating themselves every week or so is a great way for Windows to constantly "phone home".

        The end result might be illegitimate copies of Vista being impossible to update, which effectively means that no one will want an illegitimate version of Vista. I think this will end up being a big mistake for MS, though. Most home users do not want to pay a few hundred dollars for Vista PLUS a yearly subscription fee. If MS didn't think people would need the OneCare subscription for Vista, they wouldn't be selling it.

        The one way that Vista could weasel its way onto everyones' computers would be by getting it pre-installed on all new computers. Companies like Dell only offering Windows seems like a very important part of MS maintaining their strangle-hold on the home OS market.
  • by paladinwannabe2 (889776) on Wednesday March 15 2006, @06:55PM (#14928496)
    While this tactic might be unethical, they are certainly behaving legally- it's allowed for me to tell people where they can download software. Now all the makers of Galactic Civilizations need to do is link to where people can illegally download Starforce-protected games with the protection removed. Turnabout is, after all, fair play.
    • I agree, especially since I don't belive in the starforce system. The best check you can have is requiring the player to have an online account linked to a serial number. You sign in, you play and no cd is required, and you can use as many computers as you would like to play from. Heck I play my games on several different computers depending on what I have going on, ie rendering/compiling tasks, on the road ... and toating a cd around is painfull. In addition physical media is on its way out to distribut
      • by Mycroft_VIII (572950) on Wednesday March 15 2006, @08:59PM (#14929389) Journal
        The problem is only changed a bit when you goto such schemes.
            Imagine you need to re-install your game a few years after release (hd upgrade, a virus imploded windows, you ran McAfee anit-virus, etc.). IF the company still exists, and is still supporting 'activation' and your not installing on a machine you don't want on the net, you are o.k.
            A lot of IF's there, I don't want to be beholden to some companies good will and financial stability to use software I've already paid for.
            And since these schemes DONT prevent copies being made I don't understand how these companies keep justifying the expense to the share holders, except to assume the shareholders are largely ignorant and/or apathetic.

        Mycroft
    • by NetDanzr (619387) on Wednesday March 15 2006, @07:57PM (#14928998)
      it's allowed for me to tell people where they can download software.

      Not exactly. As the MPAA v. 2600 case showed, linking to illegal material can get you in trouble. The only reason why StarForce is able to do so without a legal challenge is because they are based in Russia, where it may be legal. Stardock, based in the US, cannot do the same thing in return.

  • That'd be like letting a consortium of automobile and oil companies buy all the public transit companies so they can dismantle them.

    Next thing you'll be telling me that the President is Schicklegruber.
  • GalCiv2 (Score:4, Informative)

    by Bios_Hakr (68586) <xptical@gmai[ ]om ['l.c' in gap]> on Wednesday March 15 2006, @07:03PM (#14928559) Homepage
    GalCiv2 does have DRM of a type; you have to install StarDock in order to unpack the game data files. Think of it as almost like Steam.

    You also need an official CD key in order to download patches and other additional content.

    GC2 allows (and encourages) you to install a copy of the game on as many computers as possible. I even got instructions in the official IRC channel (irc.stardock.com #galciv) to make it easier to move the files between PCs.

    The only other commerical game I can think of that has no real DRM is Falcon: Allied Force. The only time you need the CD is when you install a patch. There is no CD key and the game is huge online. If you ever wanted to learn more than the common person wants to know about the F-16 Fighting Falcon, grab Allied Force and a joystick.
    • you have to install StarDock in order to unpack the game data files.

      I might be talking out of my ass here (I bought it over the internet) but I believe if you buy GalCiv2 boxed you don't need to install Stardock at the same time. You do still need to both install stardock and enter your CD key to get patches though, as well as package the game up to send to another computer, and unpack it again.

    • Re:GalCiv2 (Score:5, Insightful)

      by courtarro (786894) on Wednesday March 15 2006, @07:26PM (#14928737) Homepage
      I appreciate Epic's approach with the original UT and UT2004. For a few months after each game was released, you needed the CD in the drive to play the game. After a few months, a standard patch is released that removes the CD requirement, after the most significant piracy problems have died down. From then on, you no longer need to deal with the original CD.
  • Not sure. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by grub (11606) <slashdot@grub.net> on Wednesday March 15 2006, @07:03PM (#14928563) Homepage Journal

    I'm not sure that copy protection encourages pirating but I won't install a bought game on my machine without a no-CD crack, etc. as well. The original games are safest when in the jewel case packed in the box on a shelf.

      • StarForce are really showing their colours here. These guys are basicly acting like mobsters. "Buy our software or we'll show (with links) where people can pirate your game." There really needs to be a day of recokning for these Russian Mobsters, as well as any company who buys their product.

        Ubi is officially on my shit list. I actively encourage piracy of Ubi games until they stop using SF. I give classes at local LAN parties on how to use BitTorrent, VMWare, GameCopyWorld, and Daemon tools to activel
      • Unfortunately, NOCDs are going the way of the dodo. More and more, we are seeing mini-images that, when loaded in Daemon Tools, fool the game into thinking that the CD is present.

        I actually prefer disc images to patch-style no-CD hacks. My thinking is that I'd rather be running an unmodified version of the game program, because I don't know what secondary effects a hack will have on the game.

        I say that as someone who *does* hack games. I am pretty sharp, and so are most of the people who make no-CD patches,
  • PIA (Score:2, Insightful)

    The article speaks about the invasiveness and general irritation that DRM causes and I think when they state that DRM may be contributing to the problem of piracy, it's the same thing where legit Windows buyers have to jump through the Product Activation hoops and rigamarole. I know of at least one person who legitimately bought WinXP but installed a pirated version to avoid the hassles. Legitimate, law-abiding users pay the price.

    I'm all for the Valve's Steam method of distribution. It's the wave o
      • Re:PIA (Score:3, Interesting)

        Not trying to be critical or funny, but you're not normal. Your need to use Office or Windows isn't compelling enough for you to keep using them. Most people who buy Office and Windows don't see much of an alternative. Linux, Open Source, etc. are simply not on the radar screen. They don't read the EULAs either, by the way; they just use the products. When pushed to "validate" their product, they just go ahead and do it and don't worry about it. Where you can't be bothered with EULAs, they can't be bothered
  • Big Picture (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ludomancer (921940) on Wednesday March 15 2006, @07:10PM (#14928603)
    Fact: Anti-Piracy software developers are doing the same thing that regular software developers are trying to do: sell software.

    Fact: Anti-Piracy software does not stop piracy.

    Fact: Anti-Piracy softare adversely affects legitimate players.

    Fact: Not everyone who pirates a game is a guaranteed sale/loss of a sale.

    Fact: Pirated software is another model of distribution which helps create product recognition with your audience.

    Partial Fact and Opinion: Many people, myself included, use access to pirated software as a tool for determining what games are worth our monetary support. I can not count the number of times that piracy has either
    a) saved me from buying a horrible piece of software that marketting led people to believe otherwise, and
    b) caused me to buy a game (many, many times) that I would have otherwise never looked at or had a chance to try in another form.
    I wish everyone had this state of mind. Obviously that's not the case, but I also feel that the latter group of individuals also encompass the demographic that would not grant your title a sale even if they did not download the title. That is, they are usually either downloading it for the sake of downloading it, or have no access to the funds to purchase games regularly.

    There are as many beneficial reasons to piracy as there are negative aspects. The lies given by anti-piracy software developers are underhanded scare tactics, and not worth a publishers time. I hope the majority of educated individuals agrees when they weigh the facts in.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 15 2006, @07:16PM (#14928638)

    I work on a computer all day. I rip all the music I buy so that I don't have to carry around loads of CDs or bother swapping them around all the time. Digital media is more valuable to me than physical media, but I will only buy CDs because a) I want some kind of physical master copy in case my hard drive dies or anything like that and b) I want lossless compression.

    So what does the copy protection do? Lock the thing I value most away from me. If I'm lucky, I get crappy MP3s on a data layer. No thanks. You know what I do if I find out an album I want is copy protected? I download it.

    The simple fact of the matter is that, where copy protection is used, anonymous pirates provide a better service than the music labels. And the sad thing is that this isn't due to the record companies falling short in some way, it's because they actively choose to harm their own product.

    The reason they can get away with this is because there is no competition when it comes to media. I'm not talking about the RIAA cartel, I'm talking about the basic nature of copyright. If somebody owns the rights to a particular song I like, then no competition exists for that song. I either buy it on the terms the copyright holder chooses, I don't buy it at all, or I obtain it from a black market.

    For a free(r) market to exist, with competition acting the way it should, artists should be legally prohibited from signing exclusive contracts. Reduce the record labels to investors and publishers instead of the people with all the power, because right now, the situation is upside-down.

  • Two Words (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Tom (822) on Wednesday March 15 2006, @07:17PM (#14928647) Homepage Journal
    Two words: Notebook, CD-Check.

    There's a strong trend towards notebooks as the everyday computer of most people, replacing desktop machines. Once you have a notebook, you use the mobility. Whether you go into the living room for a comfortable surf or take it with you on the train.

    And all these stupid CD-Checks force you to carry a bundle of CDs with you all the time? How stupid is that? Not to mention that they're all fooled, cracked, broken in less time than it takes them to write new versions.

    Like I said before: If game developers would save the money for copy restriction stuff and instead pour it into writing better games, they'd probably sell more.

    Those who pirate always have, always will. Mostly it's the kids who couldn't afford more than one game every other month anyways if they had to buy them. Most of the pirated copies would not have been sales with harsher laws, better copy restriction or whatever else to prevent copying. They would simply be less people playing the game, not more people paying for it.
  • by Elwood P Dowd (16933) <judgmentalist@gmail.com> on Wednesday March 15 2006, @07:24PM (#14928711) Journal
    Penny Arcade news post on StarForce thugs [penny-arcade.com]

    The comic will briefly be available here [penny-arcade.com],

    And later it will appear in its permanent location: Penny Arcade comic on StarForce thugs [penny-arcade.com]

    (I wonder if they'll ever sort out their flakey software.)
  • Alternative models (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Honestly, the best way to stop piracy of all kinds (for all mediums) is to adopt a new marketing model. Consider digital distribution as a model ...

    For the average game it will probably cost less that $1 (definately less than $5) per copy sold to deliver the game to the customer via download through the internet; at the same time you no longer need an expensive distribution network nor do you have to cut a retailer in on the sale. This means that the only people who have to make money on the sale of the pro
  • by SeaFox (739806) on Wednesday March 15 2006, @07:47PM (#14928916)
    Antivirus software companies write viruses...

    Microsoft codes venerabilities into Windows, then patches in the next major version of Windows, coding different venerabilities into it...

    Congressmen ignore their constituents once they get elected...

    More at 11.
  • by SmallFurryCreature (593017) on Thursday March 16 2006, @05:17AM (#14931330) Journal
    I had a good income but worked nights so needed something to do during the day and the internet (being dutch I payed by the minute, peak times) was to expensive.

    So I played a lot of games, wich I bought. Still got a huge stack of CD's. The floppys were thrown out a few years ago as I figured if I ever wanted to replay one of them I would just download them.

    Recently I haven't bought a lot of games. Why? Well I was starting to feel screwed. Hard. In the ass. By a big black guy.

    While I am from amsterdam I still did not enjoy that feeling.

    What was giving me that feeling? An increasing number of games that were to short, to buggy, to kiddy and just not worth the high price charged.

    Lucasarts is for me the perfect example. Their early games were all near perfect. I had little doubt about buying x-wing and its expansions and sequels. Their adventures? Who needs a review when it got the lucasarts label?

    Then came games like that horrible Monkey island with the moronic 3d interface that was a bitch to control. Yuck. Fun but ruined by some kind of need to use 3d in the marketing bullshit.

    Worse was still to come. Forgot the title that was the galactic bit version of the current Empire at war release. Or howabout that RTS eh? The first one that was not based on the age of empire engine?

    Crap games, that were buggy and just not fun to play and certainly not worth full price.

    Even the x-wing series went downhill as it became less and less dogfighting and more and more missle dodging.

    I feel less and less inclined to buy the new releases as I know that what awaits me is a poorlyb designed game riddled with bugs.

    FEAR was great but is a 8 hour game really worth full price? Not in my book.

    But there was anoter problem as well. That is copy protection. Why is it that the PAYING public has to mess around with game-cd's, impossible to read keys, non-working drives etc etc when the pirate can just download a far better game that just runs, with the update and isn't slown down by constant CD accessing?

    An old sequel to elite, frontier something, took the absolute price in stupid copy protection. It stopped every 20 minutes or so to ask you to look up a word in the manual. Gee thanks, for that lovely experience. It was still BBS for me in those days but finally a friend gave me a cracked version of the game that skipped that stupid check. My first pirated game. Going from constant interruption to trouble free gaming by NOT paying 79,- guilders.

    Current game protections would be like having a DVD that forces you to watch a 10 second segment warning you not to pirate the movie that ofcourse no ripper includes so only the persons who do not pirate see it. You would have to be completly insane to do that to your paying customers.

    I still got money to spend, just that if I go to a game store today I just don't see that many games worthy of my money. The few that I still buy seem to insist on rewarding me for buying them by giving me a harder time then the people who pirate it.

    Oh, and none of the copy protections work anyway. Empire at war has starforce and all you had to do for hassle free, free play was to wait till a proper group got around to crack it.

    The game is indeed a current lucasarts game. CRAP. Worth about 3 euro in the store. Not 49.95

  • by (arg!)Styopa (232550) on Thursday March 16 2006, @09:38AM (#14932193) Journal
    Instead of "Copy Protection Firms Encourage Piracy" it might be more accurate to title it "Russian Software firm re-invents 2nd-oldest profession, extortion ala 'protection racket'."

    Gee, mister, it sure would be a SHAME if your store BURNT DOWN. Perhaps if you were to share your profits with us, we would MAKE SURE something like that WOULDN'T HAPPEN. If you choose not to participate in our generosity, who KNOWS what MIGHT happen?

    Sounds like someone could use an axe-handle across the knees.