Two New Class-Action Suits Against EA Over DRM 336
In September, we discussed a class-action suit filed against Electronic Arts over the DRM in Spore. Now, two new class-action suits have been filed that target the SecuROM software included in a free trial of the Spore Creature Creator (PDF) and in The Sims 2: Bon Voyage (PDF). If this sort of legal reprisal continues to catch on, EA could be seeing quite a few class-action suits in the future. One of the suits accuses:
"The inclusion of undisclosed, secretly installed DRM protection measures with a program that was freely distributed constitutes a major violation of computer owners' absolute right to control what does and what does not get loaded onto their computers, and how their computers shall be used ... [SecuROM] cannot be completely uninstalled. Once installed it becomes a permanent part of the consumer's software portfolio ... EA's EULA for Spore Creature Creator Free Trial Edition makes utterly no mention of any Technical Protection Measures, DRM technology, or SecuROM whatsoever."
Of course the installer must leave something (Score:3, Insightful)
If uninstalling the free trial would leave your computer in exactly the same state as before, then nothing could stop you from free trying again.
Re:Of course the installer must leave something (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not sure that's really a great defense. If I uninstall software, I don't expected phantom memory use by something I'm not using anymore.
I know it's not realistic, but it doesn't change that uninstalled programs should not leave shit all over my hard drive.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Of course the installer must leave something (Score:5, Insightful)
There is a difference between leaving "hey, I was here before" traces, and actual executables that continue to load and run on a machine.
Re:Of course the installer must leave something (Score:5, Insightful)
One continues to affect your computer's operation while the other does not.
Re:Of course the installer must leave something (Score:4, Insightful)
Just off the top of my head...
Make the trial phone home with a hash of the hardware specs on install or run. Invalidate the hash once the trial is up. Yeah, phone-homes are a pain, but I'm only talking about the trial version, here.
You could key the specific installation with a time-based or otherwise random method, and key the save-game or data files to it (you would have something like Maya's solution, where trial-mode saves wouldn't be usable on the purchased version). You could reinstall the game as much as you wanted, but you'd have to start from scratch.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You didn't get the hint that you have to compare effectiveness as well.
No I don't. The only thing I have to consider is that one damages my computer. I guess I'm just selfish, but I couldn't care less which method is more convenient for publishers.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So frikking what?!
It would be the same situation if people had Deep Freeze installed on their PCs... or even if they re-installed or re-imaged their computers after the trial. It is stupid to think that people will not use free things over and over and over again. It is more stupid to take steps to ensure that their computers are impaired or limited in some way to ensure that. Sony did that and it didn't work out so well for them although I believe the remedy wasn't harsh enough.
What if drug manufacturer
Should not have to. (Score:5, Insightful)
Why should I have to run Deep Freeze, or any type of software to return my system to a state before a program is installed?
Unless I give explicit permission for a program install something, then it should not be installed.
How is EA doing this different from anyone installing trojans, spyware, or virus?
Re:Should not have to. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Should not have to. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Should not have to. (Score:4, Informative)
How about you RTFA, or even the summary?
"EA's EULA for Spore Creature Creator Free Trial Edition makes utterly no mention of any Technical Protection Measures, DRM technology, or SecuROM whatsoever."
It was not in the EULA, so EA has installed software on the users computer without the users knowledge.
No. That's not right... (Score:5, Informative)
Their EULA says nothing about installing hidden software that will never be removed.
Even by agreeing to the EULA you don't agree to "all things not mentioned."
If so where would it end? Could they search my harddrive for credit card information? Format my harddrive on a whim? Store their own stuff on my computer without telling me? Of course not!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
While that rant was way off topic, let me respond anyway.
How about we use a more valid anal
Re: (Score:2)
It would only be justified if it worked, and you could be sure that they weren't just bringing in or fostering their own set of murderous wild-eyed lunatics.
Have you looked at Iraq and Afghanistan lately? The Taleban is on the rebound, civil services have gone back to the same levels they were under the _Russians_ in Afghanistan, and Iraq has become a recruiting ground for Muslim terrorists worldwide. The invasion has, in fact, made it less safe than it was under Hussein, at least for those in Baghdad.
Re: (Score:2)
I believe that's what the grandparent meant by "invading other nations".
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I consider it a "judgement call". While invading other sovereign nations opens one up to retaliation, the balance between sovereignty and human rights must be weighed when choosing to breach another nation.
There's really no set formula for this-- for even telling what's "right" or "wrong", and what "wrong enough to intercede" is. It's why international organizations exist, and it is an important reason-- aside from unified military might-- why "rescuing" nations need to have international backin
Re:Of course the installer must leave something (Score:5, Insightful)
Fine, but they need to ask permission before making a change that can only be backed out by reformatting your HD. Either that, or PAY for you to have your machine reformatted and re-installed with everything but their steaming pile.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would they want to stop you from using something that they are giving away for free? EA do not stop you from reinstalling the program, nor would they ever wish to do so. As a result, there is no justification for leaving any traces of anything behind when you uninstall.
Re:Of course the installer must leave something (Score:5, Informative)
It might sound like a dumb idea and has no reason (there is no disc to authenticate with), but the DRM is present in demo versions only because crackers used to use demos to crack the retail versions of the games. They were a good starting point (especially with StarForce games) as most of the code to start the game was EXACTLY the same as what would appear in the retail version if it had not a copy protection placed on it.
Re:Of course the installer must leave something (Score:4, Interesting)
I said the demos that were left unprotected were a good starting point for crackers. You are right in saying the retail versions have cracked executables too, because no copy protection is going to stop these motivated crackers. I recall that Splinter Cell Double Agent was protected with StarForce (the worst yet of all the copy protections). A real proper crack did not come out till 1 year later. That is some serious devotion.
SecuROM and SafeDisc have existed for a very long time. The first SecuROM game I ever got was Diablo II. Once CloneCD came out and 1:1 copied CDs were possible, that and SafeDisc (of the time) were broken. Beyond that, cracked EXEs still existed (and I tended to use these anyway, sped up loading time and still do quite often). SecuROM of that time was quite simple, relying upon subchannel data (similar to PSX's copy protection that came along later) for a checksum, of which Data CD copiers at the time did NOT read at all (like Easy CD Creator of the time, which came with my first burner). SafeDisc did nearly the same thing, except with corrupted data, similar to their CSS protection; files on the disc were placed but were also corrupted data (and possibly encrypted) that drives could read but no general user programs would ever read properly to a hard drive or to an ISO image (not even Nero). If I took a disc like that and used dd to copy it, dd would fail upon seeing those sectors even on a completely clean CD. CloneCD started the whole 1:1 copy 'revolution' (which has led to Alcohol 120%, AnyDVD, and other products) and made it possible to copy these CDs up until SecuROM and SafeDisc both got major security upgrades to the point where it is now, you might as well (a have the real disc or b) use a crack.
For some reason, although many games used the disc ONLY to check for a real disc and did not read any data from it like older games would (what ever happened to leaving the FMVs on the disc? No I don't have 9 GB to spare for EVERY game, sorry!), this did not stir up any controversy. People were only beginning to get CD burners (they were also slow), media was not nearly as cheap as it is now, many people still had 56k so downloading ISO's was unheard of, and a number of other factors kept CD copy protection information in the dark to most consumers.
The real controversy started with StarForce by the way. I think people seem to have forgotten about this. UbiSoft finally decided to stop using it after much consumer demand, and in general, guess how many games have StarForce now. None that I have heard of recently.
I am a consumer of PC games but I wonder for how long because I was perfectly happy buying games and I was glad that cracks worked, even on-line. I was glad that even though there was a stupid copy protection (most people would often not notice their disc is spinning during that Sims screen just for copy protection sectors), I could backup these games in some form. Cracked copy is better than none. Do any company give you a new CD if you scratch yours up? Very few do, and they give you a hard time about it. I remember that enough complaints to Take2 made GTA3 for PC no longer have copy protection (which was SafeDisc, a version that did not work with the current version of CloneCD). Take2 released an update that included bug fixes and no copy protection.
If EA wants to not have complaints about this copy protection other than what it does to Windows, they should preferably drop it altogether, go back to SafeDisc (a much less draconian system), or give people 5 copies for those 5 activations! Legally, due to the DMCA, we cannot even make backups! But EA should not forget about Windows. It sucks, everyone knows, however, Sony, Macrovision and a number of other companies make software for Windows that just makes it slower, could leave it vulnerable to attacks, etc, especially since many are kernel driver-based (SecuROM has been this way since its beginning; StarForce takes this approach; SafeDisc takes this approach in a much more minimalistic way).
I do
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
They do, in fact, stop you from reinstalling programs. Both Spore and Red Alert 3 have a limit on the number of re-installs you're allowed.
Spore was originally 3 installs per purchase of the game but I think it got pushed up to 5 after thousands of people complained (correct me if I'm wrong - it may still be 3). Red Alert 3 is limited to 5 installs.
(And with the rate my boyfriend breaks my computer bad enough to need reformatting, I'm damn glad I pirated both or I'd need to buy a second copy by now...)
Hugely disappointed with Spore (Score:5, Funny)
What's to stop them? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:What's to stop them? (Score:5, Informative)
IANAL
There is a principle in law that a clause in the contract can not invalidate a law. Also, you cannot waive a fundamental right that is granted by the constitution. To give an (absurd) example...
In a hidden clause of a contract (or EULA) it says that you agree to give up your first born child. If the other party tries to enforce that clause of the contract, the courts would invalidate that clause (and maybe the entire contract).
Re:What's to stop them? (Score:5, Informative)
Unconscionability [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Unconscionability does not apply. The criteria under which a contract is deemed unconscionable is very narrow and it's virtually impossible for a computer game EULA to ever meet the criteria.
The reason is quoted here from your link "...one party to the contract took advantage of its superior bargaining power to insert provisions..."
As long as you can decline the contract with no harm then it cannot be an unconscionable contract. A computer game is a luxury good. There is no possible harm from not being a
Re:What's to stop them? (Score:5, Interesting)
Also, this is not a contract. Clicking 'I agree' is not a legal way to sign a contract and it is not legal to unilaterally add conditions once a deal is done (once you gave them money, they can't force more conditions on you). They know this, this is why they call it a license. However, a license cannot only grant you rights, it cannot remove them from you.
Hence, EULAs are bogus.
Re:What's to stop them? (Score:5, Interesting)
The courts do not see it that way. I've seen a number of cases were EULA's were deemed valid, I have yet to see one where the EULA was deemed invalid (though parts of it being unconscionable are probably common enough).
Re:What's to stop them? (Score:5, Interesting)
The U.S. District Court of Kansas in Klocek v. Gateway [2000 U.S. Dist. Lexis 9896, 104 F. Supp.3d 1332 (D. Kan., June 16, 2000)] ruled that the contract of sale was complete at the time of the transaction, and that additional terms included in the package did not constitute a contract, because the customer never agreed to them when the contract of sale was completed.
There ya go.
But really the case *I* want to see is one where software installation pops up a click though EULA, the person clicks the EULA's DECLINE button, and then proceeds to complete installing and using the software anyway. It's not particularly hard for a programmer to write a utility to do that.
US law Title 17 Section 117 explicitly states that you need no license whatsoever in order to lawfully install and run software you have bought. So you have explicitly declined their EULA contract offer (which is what an EULA actually is, nothing but a contract offer), and you have perfectly lawfully installed an lawfully use the software. By declining the EULA you receive no license and receive nothing else the contract offers, but generally EULA offer nothing that you want or need.
THAT is the court case I want to see. There is absolutely no legal reason you need to accept an EULAs. You don't need it. It's just that they make it really inconvenient to install it without clicking the agree button. In the case I described they have absolutely no hook available for them to hang a claim of contract acceptance. They sold it to you, you declined the contract, and you perfectly lawfully proceeded to use the software you bought without any contract and without any license.
Actually I believe there is a valid argument that a purely local process of clicking the "accept" button on your own computer and involving no one else and doing nothing you didn't already have the right to do, that that would validly establish a contract either. However that is a far more disputable situation and it seriously has the appearance of accepting a contract. I think judges are going to have a hard time seeing past that appearance of contract and ruling against it unless there is a a clear ruling on my reject-and-install example first. Once it is clear that you *can* legitimately avoid the contract then they will be far more accepting of the legitimacy of other means of avoiding the contract, more accepting of more subtle arguments on what exactly what act does or do not indicate binding acceptance of the EULA contract offer.
-
Re:What's to stop them? (Score:4, Interesting)
But really the case *I* want to see is one where software installation pops up a click though EULA, the person clicks the EULA's DECLINE button, and then proceeds to complete installing and using the software anyway. It's not particularly hard for a programmer to write a utility to do that
Again, in a Devil's advocate mode: What about the DMCA? Wouldn't it apply here? Apparently, it "criminalizes the act of circumventing an access control, whether or not there is actual infringement of copyright itself.. It would seem that your method, while completely feasible (and I think reasonable), would possibly fall afoul of this provision as it would be circumventing the access control which prevents install if you click "decline".
Thoughts?
Re:What's to stop them? (Score:5, Interesting)
What about the DMCA?
Thoughts?
My first thought is to puke.
My second thought is that "click yes to continue" ranks about three levels below ROT13 as a technical protection measure.
The DMCA is a totally incoherent clusterfuck of a law. I have actually read most of the judge rulings on DMCA-circumvention cases, and I don't think any of them have managed a coherent construction of the critical issues. They apparently decided if they like or dislike what you are doing, dodge the undefined aspects, and then conjure some very creative narrow discussion with little connection to anything in the actual law an no connection to anything any of the other judges have ever ruled. If the judge views you as some naughty hacker doing something to annoy wholesome businessmen, then he rules against you. If he decides the businessmen are abusing the DMCA then he makes up some excuse to toss the case.
Some judges would likely be more than willing to hit you with the DMCA in a ROT13 case but I think.... I hope... that few would actually buy into "click YES to continue" as an effective technical protection measure. But yeah, I can definitely see some company pushing that argument. Puke puke puke.
-
Re:What's to stop them? (Score:4, Interesting)
So if I manually extract the files from the installer and add all the registry entries and what not (if I happened to know what they were), such that the application will function perfectly, that means I'm using the software without the EULA even being presented to me. If I was never given a "license" to agree to, how does that stand legally?
I'm sure EA/etc. would make some bogus claim of not being allowed to "reverse engineer", which is rather amusing since that clause is usually in the EULA too.
Re:What's to stop them? (Score:5, Interesting)
Some courts have upheld EULAs in the past. In some cases they have even upheld shrinkwrap EULAs that you cannot see until after you have accepted them (where a 'reasonable person' would have expected the clause to be present in the contract). I am not a lawyer, but I strongly suspect the parent poster isn't either and you should think twice about taking his "EULAs are bogus" advice.
Re: (Score:2)
The software companies claim you should hire a lawyer before installing any program to review the license for $200 an hour. Pfft
Why does software get this special treatment?
Imagine not buying anything and just buying a license to use products like groceries or your car? People may actually want to hire a lawyer before buying a car if they pull this crap but its not worth it for a $45 game.
Re:What's to stop them? (Score:5, Informative)
The 7th circuit court of the USA disagrees with you. Click through licenses are valid legal contracts.
Please see ProCD v Zeidenberg [findlaw.com]
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
In a hidden clause of a contract (or EULA) it says that you agree to give up your first born child.
Damn, EA is getting tight on those EULAs. Oh well he was a cute little bugger, but he screams and poops a lot and I REALLY want to play Spore. "Hey honey, where's our son at the moment?" ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
In a hidden clause of a contract (or EULA) it says that you agree to give up your first born child.
Damn, EA is getting tight on those EULAs. Oh well he was a cute little bugger, but he screams and poops a lot and I REALLY want to play Spore. "Hey honey, where's our son at the moment?" ;-)
"Oh come on Honey, that's not mean. They probably just want him to bring him up as a code slave. You know the drill, 120 hour weeks for a pitance wage. Just like daddy. Only we won't have to feed him or pay for college beca
I prefer another form of protest (Score:5, Insightful)
I've just stopped buying any of their games. Simple yes, but the easiest form of protest, and it works because they are right now down about £200 in lost sales from me.
I don't download them from piracy sites either, I just completely ignore their products.
Re:I prefer another form of protest (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Given their recent earnings troubles, I think you are wrong. Whether they believe that's because of the economy, piracy, bad games, or DRM backlash, I don't know.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah. I want them to helplessly struggle to find the reason nobody buys their shit, wasting all their money to fight those windmills, and to drown in the process.
Yes, maybe I'm cruel. But I think, there's only so much I as a customer can take, until I let them burn like this. (Think of lava to fit the burning metaphor with the drowning metaphor. ;)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I want to add, a letter, not an email..
Re: (Score:2)
I want to add, written on skin, and inked in blood, not pulp and ink.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I prefer another form of protest (Score:5, Insightful)
In a similar way, I stopped buying CD's as a protest against the RIAA. I've got over 200 albums on my iPod: no downloads, all imported from CD's I own, of which exactly *one* was bought less than so many years ago.
Some time after I stopped buying, I read that they were suffering from a loss in revenue (not that I think my personal bit was of any visual influence in that), and they were attributing it to piracy. Not to displeased customers like me giving them the middle finger, only to piracy.
So in a way, they were using my protest to "prove" that their actions - the same ones that made me stop buying CD's - were right all along.
Re:I prefer another form of protest (Score:5, Insightful)
For example, I don't think the RA3 devs had ANYTHING to do with the SecuROM crap, yet by not buying their games you essentially cut off their fundings. If the studio disappears because of it, we'll all be crying because yet another good PC developer will have bitten the dust.
Then developers will learn not to work for studios that sign on with distributors that use DRM. Pain is the best teacher.
Re: (Score:2)
That makes no sense at all..
Class action lawsuits "bite you in the ass" because of increased pricing, however you say that lost sales because people refuse to purchase has no effect? What?!
Re:So, EA has to do business your way? (Score:5, Insightful)
I just don't get this attitude. Copyright is a social contract. It isn't part of a capitalist economy. It is defacto a subsidy for production of culture in the form of a government mandated monopoly. In a pure capitalist society you wouldn't have rights to control the replication of bits. Copyright IS by definition a form of socialism.
Here is the deal. We give companies and people a time limited, government mandated monopoly on the reproduction of a good because the cost to develop the good is large and the cost to reproduce it is very small. We throw in a few caveats to try to stop them abusing that monopoly. We do this with a good everyone has a right to have access to (national culture), and in return we expect a few things.
First off, don't abuse the monopoly. You get the financial benefit of a monopoly, that's it. You don't get to screw customers just because you are the only provider of a product. Secondly, respect the social contract. The monopoly is time limited and if you release a product in such a way that you establish a permanent monopoly you are abusing the social contract. DRM does exactly this because it is design to prevent works of art from being copied.
Here EA have basically done both. They have abused the social contract by putting DRM in the product in the first place. Then they have abused the monopoly by essentially infecting machines with a virus. That virus would not be there in a free market environment because competitors to EA would not be stupid enough to put it there.
The rule should be simple. You can have the protection of DRM, or you can have the protection of copyright. But you cant have both because one is a de facto permanent monopoly.
Now I happen to be one of those people who is prepared to put up with a bit of socialism if it increases net societal good. But if EA cant live up the the social contract then their monopoly should be withdrawn. That should be the penalty for abusing what is at the moment a pretty sweet deal (at least for the major content producers). Heck I wish I could still be getting paid for work I did today 100 years from now.
Re: (Score:2)
Lawsuits are the best option, no company likes going to court and it gets this information out to the public who might know anything about DRM.
It legitimises the whole thing as well, instead of making it look like a bunch of nerds that are bitching because they can't pirate anymore it shows REAL pissed off consumers that don't want this crap on their computers.
Hopefully with enough lawsuits they'll be a law outlawing this practice. I'm really sick of how programmers are allowed to get away with anything the
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Going to court over DRM isn't frivolous and as a game developer myself I disagree with your "starving developer's families" speech. In fact I'd go so far to say that it makes you sound quite ignorant.
Do you happen to work for a publisher by any chance?
Re:I prefer another form of protest (Score:4, Insightful)
Frivolous lawsuits are bad, mmmkay?
Suing someone for infesting your computer with hidden irremovable DRM without explicitly saying so hardly sounds frivolous.
I'm usually not a proponent of lawsuits, but in this case, they deserve it. I hope they get to pay a large amount in damages. If you want to hurt your customer, it should come with a hefty price tag.
Best way to get back at them (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't buy them and don't download them.
Just don't play them at all.
Re:Best way to get back at them (Score:4, Insightful)
They'll just blame their losses on piracy.
Re:Best way to get back at them (Score:4, Funny)
That's fine. When they can't find anyone to prosecute for downloading and have no money, it really doesn't matter what they blame.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just proves the PC market is dead and will move everything to consoles instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, suing them is pretty good too. Boycotts take a long time to work, if they ever work. A nonstop barrage of expensive lawsuits can have an effect very quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course they can, just ask the RIAA!
How to remove that crap? (Score:3, Interesting)
I installed the Creature Creator back when I was still looking forward to Spore, and I was unaware of that the Creature Creator came with that crap too until today.
Does anyone know of a way to remove it?
Re:How to remove that crap? (Score:5, Informative)
Note: This will, of course, stop any SecuROM game from functioning until you reinstall it, and various games may put the actual files in different places....but this should give you a starting point. I haven't actually tried this...although I plan to when I get home tonight. But it looks sane enough to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I've installed Mass Effect PC and Spore Creature Creator, and I don't have any of those files or registry entries.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't suppose that any of this will remove the deliberately invalid filenames in your Windows profile?
Those files prevents a user from copying the con
Re: (Score:2)
Can you mount under Linux and delete them?
Re:How to remove that crap? (Score:5, Informative)
I have not tried, but I suppose you can.
But that is not the point. The point is that SecuRom on purpose makes illegal filenames to block normal Windows file commands from working on those files.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And properly working file copying tools are not a requirment for an OS?
Even my OS supports weird files and "broken" filenames.
Re: (Score:2)
delete the SecuROM folder
Note that you can't do this through Explorer. Windows will give you an error message saying it can't find two of the files, because Sony - being lowdown shits - had SecuROM give them invalid names. You need to use the command line: change directory to the folder, then do del /F /AH *. Or something like that. It's been a while since I've done it.
Re:How to remove that crap? (Score:4, Funny)
I'm having a little difficulty following those directions. I've always considered myself a bit of a computer geek, but they were a bit complex even for me.
Ok... so far I've reflashed my BIOS.... extracted my CPU and located the prime numbered pins and alternatingly wired them to ground and +3.5Vdc then reseated the CPU... then I clipped a wire to the motherboard A20 address line and clipped the other end to my corpus callosum just like you explained...
and that's where I'm stuck. I've still got those electrolytic capacitors shoved up my nose but there are no more free terminals to attach them to on the high voltage winding of the powersupply.
I tried calling EA tech support asking if there was an easier way to remove this SecuROM crap, but they just gave me the same instructions you did.
HELP!!!!1!1111ONE
-
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
in run->services.msc, stop and disable the securom service. In the Documents and Settings, in Application Data, delete the SecuROM folder. Delete UAService7.exe from windows\system32. Run "sc delete useraccess7" from the run command on the start menu, or from a command-line prompt. Delete the key [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\SecuROM] from the registry...
..open CONFIG.SYS and remove the line "srom.com /ng:43h /b /v". Using a hex editor, open windir\system32\comsvcs.dll and change the byte at offset 0xB3
Re: (Score:2)
I use a freeware version of "Revo Uninstaller"(got it from downloads.com....yeah, yeah. Shake your heads, but it works, and works well).
What it does is images your drive BEFORE an installation(must have hunter mode active for this imaging to take place) so that when you go and UNinstall something, it knows what shouldn't be there. It then runs the applications built-in Uninstaller. After that it does a comparison and lists ALL changes that were made to your harddrive by the installation, BUT NOT CHANGED BAC
Re: (Score:2)
Dial-A-Fix [lunarsoft.net] is your friend
Factual information, please? (Score:5, Insightful)
Does anyone have a solid description of specifically what this form SecuROM "installs", what it does, how it is harmful, and why it can't be removed?
Every time this topic comes up it becomes a "How dare they!" bitchfest so I've never been able to figure out the answers to the above.
I'm not saying that this is definitely just a pile of FUD combined with general anti-corporate hate against EA. But I'm leaning that way without real evidence.
Re:Factual information, please? (Score:5, Informative)
Reading over the legal filing for the creature creator demo, a few very specific complaints are made.
It allegedly disables a number of semi legitimate (Any DVD, Daemon tools), and completely legitimate (Process Manager, Alchohol 120%) software tools. (10 specific programs are named) It also claims that it interferes 'in some circumstances' with having a secondary CD drive (I assume it prevents burning a copy of a CD that's in the other drive), and that all of this occurs whether the demo is running or not.
Looking at the filing, they mention process manager as its own claim, given that this is a legitimate tool used to identify rogue processes, EA can't really claim, (falsely or otherwise) that it is a piracy tool, the way they'll surely claim with the others. AnyDVD is a particularly interesting one as well, since to my knowledge, it only affects movies, and has nothing to do with any EA product at all.
I can't actually say if the claims are correct for the specific version of SecuROM in the demo game, or if a lawyer simply looked at the things SecuROM is known to do and filed those, depends on how bright s/he is I suppose.
The other complaint (Score:3, Informative)
Ok, looking at the complaint over Sims 2: Bon Voyage, the same allegations of not informing the consumer of SecuROM is made (including not making the user agree to it in the EULA, which is moronic in the extreme in my completely non legal advice opinion, EA may lose this on the basis of having crappy lawyers). In this case, ambiguity as to exactly what SecuROM does is lessened, since the primary plantiff's personal experiences are listed.
Allegedly, backup CDs of other Sims 2 games stopped working. Her USB
Re: (Score:2)
It allegedly disables a number of semi legitimate (Any DVD, Daemon tools)
What is 'semi legitimate' about AnyDVD or Daemon tools? As far as I'm aware, they allow you to perform acts that are completely legal, and really rather useful. They have as much potential to be used for illegal purposes as any other tool such as a hammer or screwdriver.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
To my understanding, AnyDVD contains features that are specifically illegitimate (bypassing region codes). Daemon tools, why not illegitimate on its own, is frequently used for illegitimate purposes (note that playing a game you bought with Daemon Tools is probably not allowed under the games EULA, many of the ones I've actually read say something along the lines of 'only play the game with the original CD'.
Please keep in mind I'm not saying either of them is *wrong*. The DMCA, coupled with the ridiculous
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
This article [reclaimyourgame.com] has a fairly comprehensive list addressing the "how is it harmful" question.
The truth is, most people will never notice that SecuROM is installed. But if you do run into a problem, SecuROM is very hard to remove, and in fact goes to great lengths to conceal its presence.
Re: (Score:2)
The question of what it installs and how to remove it have already been covered in other comments, listing the relevant files, registry keys, and services. The problem with removing it is not so much that it's "impossible", but more that the removal process is quite beyong the capabilities of your average user, so for all practical intents and purposes it is impossible to remove for them. Even worse than that, each new version of Securom adds (or can potentially add) a whole batch of new things in different
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that the information in all the other posts is of the "I found this on the internet and haven't tested it" type.
I would happily accept that if it weren't for the fact that I have a copy of Spore Creature Creator installed and my Daemon Tools work fine, my Process Explorer works fine, and none of the files that these instructions tell me to remove even exist.
Re: (Score:2)
But the big problem is that EA refuse to say exactly what it does.
They don't even want to say what consist a new computer and thus requiring a new install, and I could not even get the Spore license from their webiste(Despite the fact that the box say to go to their website and download it before buying the game).
After 3 mails to EA tech support I have simply given up finding out exactly what what the license for Spore is, what exactly SecuROM does and if it overwrite my boot sector(There were some versions
Re: (Score:2)
According to the complaints in the Sims 2: Bon Voyage filing, it prevented the primary plantiff from using 'backup' copies of other sims games. If this is in fact intentional, and not a bug, EA may be attempting to force people who pirate some games and buy some games to buy all the games.
What is wrong with EA? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It's true. Piracy will only continue to spike too either as a real 'stick it to the man' type of attitude of gamers or simply 'I don't have the money but I really want to play'. Honestly, I support both opinions because I hate DRM. Even the cracked games still run the normal installers which still install SecuROM or SafeDisc or whatever they want to use at any given time. So yeah you still have that 'garbage' running on your PC that can never be fully removed, seemingly. The EXE (and other files) are cracke
Re:What is wrong with EA? (Score:4, Informative)
Honestly, I support both opinions because I hate DRM. Even the cracked games still run the normal installers which still install SecuROM or SafeDisc or whatever they want to use at any given time.
I have a warezed version of Spore installed, and I don't see any of the SecuROM stuff (reg key, service, system32 file, etc)... so I'm not sure about that.
This ain't going anywhere (Score:2)
To waste their time on so fundamentally trivial a complaint as the DRM used to protect a free demo - is ludicrous.
Re:This ain't going anywhere (Score:5, Insightful)
Umm, BULLSHIT.
SecuROM revokes some of your administrator priviledges and disables other legitimate programs on your computer. This is anti-competitive behavior (interfering with other products from other companies/individuals,) and a violation of my property rights. I own this computer, you do not have the right to revoke some of my administrator priviledges and make it to where I cannot delete files from my own goddamned system.
Maybe in YOUR bizarro world this wouldn't go anywhere, but then again facts always fly in the face of the bizarre.
Re: (Score:2)
Read the rest of the articles, if you look at the two filings, one was specifically about the free demo. The other appears to be about Sims 2: Bon Voyage.
For those who want to join any SecuROM lawsuit (Score:2, Informative)
You got served (Score:2)
but apparently it takes infinite amounts of lawyers to understand that as a company. or, EA's lawyers were TOTALLY stupid, or bloodless bastards.
this is 21st century, not wild west. enjoy your class action damages, jerks.
Rip 'Em Good (Score:3)
What we need to do... (Score:2)
Band together, plan out a distributed attack against EA in court. file multiple individual lawsuits for different charges for the maximum allowed in your small claims court area.
Basically a legal-system DDoS - no lawyers allowed in small claims court, and multiple suits (loss of property, trespassing, etc.) will be enough to bring up so many criminal charges against the company they'll likely lose their business charter and be sued out of existence by their shareholders.
Good luck to them, DRM is killing PC gaming (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:How do you return software? (Score:4, Informative)
This happened to me once- I bought something from Microsoft - same exact situation. I couldn't see the policy until I opened the software, and once I opened the software I couldn't return it even if I disagreed with it and didn't install it. I went to the store and raised a fuss with the manager. First they attempted to tell me that if I didn't agree with the terms I could return it to *Microsoft*. After I kept pushing it (I went to a different store location), the manager there told me that if I didn't agree with the terms I could bring it back to the store. Turns out the terms weren't as onerous as I thought they'd be, so I kept it. But it was nice to know what my options were.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
i hope they burn (Score:1, Flamebait)
How appropriate.
Re: (Score:2)
One: All the good games have already been invented
Everything that can be invented has been invented.
Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. patent office, 1899
I'm not defending EA but that statement is 87 kinds of stupid.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Depends: games like Fallout 3 have minimal DRM with the ONLY purpose being to prevent "impulsive" piracy. That is, pumping out 5 copies of the game for all your friends simply because its as simple as copying the CD.
To pirate the game, you have to actually "try", as easy as it can be. For that, DRM is successful. Any efforts beyond that (like what EA does a lot), is futile.