Valve Cracks Down on 20,000 Users 1942
An anonymous reader writes "Valve have disabled 20,000 steam user accounts belonging to users who have been caught using a pirated version of the game, or have attempted to use a cdkey to bypass the securom protection found on the retail version of the game. The Steam Forums have been swamped with people now claiming they are unable to play, many claiming they have had their accounts disabled for no reason. A Valve spokesman says, 'The number of people who actually had bought HL2 and used the CD key cheat was VERY small. VERY small. Most people just tried to rip off the game and not bother buying it.'" People are discovering that when you buy any product that is subject to "activation", you haven't really bought anything.
You're wrong. (Score:4, Insightful)
If you violate the terms and conditions, the company can suspend or revoke your license to play the game.
They do not owe a refund to you if you decided to violate the agreement.
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:You're wrong. (Score:3, Informative)
And yes, the box DOES state that you have to have a working account on their Steam network.
Fact of the matter is, there's no excuse to pirate this game, and Valve took the logical step that they can to protect their property. Don't even try to front like you've got any ethical ground to stand on.
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Informative)
This is a lie. It says you have to have an Internet connection.
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
Uh? I do this with friends all the time with Half Life 1. We've bought more copies than we have people that play it. What's the problem?
Fact of the matter is, there's no excuse to pirate this game, and Valve took the logical step that they can to protect their property. Don't even try to front like you've got any ethical ground to stand on.
How is using someone else's CD key pirating the game if you've bought an original copy?
The fact is that Valve have messed up big time. I don't know how they could throw away so much goodwill that they bought with HL1. Everyone who has bought HL2 will want to go online at some point, at which point they will need a valid key. What morons are still left in the software industry that haven't learned:
* don't require the CD in the drive - much as your precious software is *your* baby, we have several hundred other bits of software just as important to us stacked all over the house
* no hardware dongles - again, your software isn't the only one we use. Can you imagine trying to plug a dozen dongles into one parallel port, ignoring the usual screwing up of the printer
* no online activation - we don't all have Internet, and those of us that do don't trust being able to connect to servers. Steam sucks, I've lost count of the number of times I couldn't access CS for days at a time.
I'm going to hold off buying HL2 for a few months, and if they don't change their tune then I'm sure a new title will come out I can purchase instead.
Phillip.
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Funny)
Geeze, at least TRY and read the online docs (Score:5, Informative)
"If I download the game and my hard drive crashes, can I reinstall it via Steam to a different hard drive?"
Yes: I want to move my Steam installation to a different disk or computer, how can I do this? [custhelp.com]
"Can I install it to more than one computer if I only play one at a time (ie my desktop machine and my laptop)?"
Yes: Can I use my Steam account on other computers? [custhelp.com]
"Does it cost anything to have a Steam account other than the initial cost of the game?"
No: " Is Steam really free? [custhelp.com]
At least try and find these things before bitching the information is not available... that took me longer to cut and past the hrefs than it did to find those answers....
All you had to do was go to Support [custhelp.com] and type your question. I've had no problem with downloading all the Steam content onto my computer, then copying it over to my brothers (he only has dial up)... and that was it. He now has and is playing HL2, and when he is done with it, I just fire up Steam and away I go... it's already there for me to play. Excellent stuff!
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
Stores will not accept returns, but the company who put out the product usually will.
Also, check your local laws. Stores in MA cannot have a "No Refunds" policy, because that is against state laws. Also, they cannot turn down a refund within 30 days of the purchase date.. but that's again in MA.
No lemon law in Minnesota (Score:5, Informative)
Re:No lemon law in Minnesota (Score:5, Informative)
Re:No lemon law in Minnesota (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Interesting)
Another great thing to do is - buy with your credit card - you get plenty of protection. My mom's fiancee bought a laptop through Dell - didn't use it - but was able to return it two months later for a full refund due to his AMEX card...
Just a side note, I live in PA -A
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Interesting)
Correction: Do not buy with "your credit card". Buy with "your American Express card". American Express is notorious in retail stores because they defend you more than any other credit card company and even let you charge back a transaction to the store and keep the item (even if it's a large one) if you claim that they didn't let you return it. This includes items that are specifically marked "Open Box -- Final Sale" or "Last One -- Final Sale", because American Express apparently doesn't believe in such things.
Unfortunately, that's also why not everyone carries American Express, as well as why many people that I know have told me that they pay a premium for American Express in comparison to their other cards.
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
Once you have notified them that they are breeching the original sales agreement at a minimum they can refund the purchase price, pay you damages for wasting your time, and come and retrieve their product at their own expense within a reasonable period of time (probably 10 days) or else you are in your rights to simply throw the product in the garbage and still get your money back.
Alternatively you can also file a civil suit for misleading advertising and sue for actual and punitive damages. And just once I wish someone would.
This notion that a software developer can sell you something and retain a residual right to change the terms of the agreement merely by offering you your money back is not supported in law.
This type of activity is generally called extortion.
You could even take the retailer to court as they are a party to the crime. The court merely needs to find that the retailer knew (or ought to have known) that the packaging was misleading and then the retailer is liable because the retailer knowingly displayed the misleading advertising.
Re: You're wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: You're wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
Duped into buying a license? Have you (legally) bought any software that wasn't licensed? Companies don't sell software; they never have. They sell the license to use their software. You don't own Windows, or Half-Life, or any other copyrighted software; you're bound by the license agreement, and all you own is what that agreement gives you. Obviously, if you're playing the game then you've already bought a license for your operating system. Console games too are mere licenses; you can't simply redistribute Halo 2, becuase it would be in violation of your license.
Activation is what you have a problem with, and that exists because people are dishonest. Activation is an attempt to make the "cost" of pirating a game higher than the cost of actually buying--if you still think the games are too expense, stop buying. No, I don't like it either; just try not to confuse it with licensing. CDs are licensed. Movies are licensed. Some software is licensed. A license does not necessitate any "activation" in the terms which you spoke about.
Re: You're wrong. (Score:5, Informative)
Specifically, from their court ruling,
So unless Valve lawyers are going to try to challenge the district appeals court, The individual own that copy. I can smell the lawsuits in the works.
frob
Is reselling Half Life 2 OK under this license? (Score:5, Insightful)
But the game itself is woefully overrated. I'd say, "Off to eBay with this," but who knows whether HL 2 will work if it has to be reactivated by a new owner?
HL 2 suffers most from being broken and from a fundamentally bad design choice. The STUT-STUT-STUT-STUT-STUT-STUTtering of dialogue at the start of virtually every new scene is something Valve will have discovered in testing, but obviously (and arrogantly) shipped anyway to get Xmas sales. The Source engine has big memory management problems.
Then there are the long, painfully slow load times, one coming every 10-15 minutes, and lasting around 60 seconds. Levels are split at arbitrarily unidentified points, so you never know when you're going to get hit with another minute-long delay--or make that 2-3 minutes, if you decide you want to go back to explore or find supplies.
HL 2 definitely has moments of brillliance. Fighting giant striders is interesting, and skimming along water reservoirs in your Road Warrior-style craft is fun for a bit. But it is far from being the masterpiece that the sold-out gaming press has blathered on about.
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
You know, that's not a bad idea. Maybe it would give them some incentive not to pass so damn many laws. I've always heard that "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." Fine. Except for one teeny tiny little thing --- attaining knowledge of all the laws you are expected to obey is practically impossible for most people. One has to have (1) access to the information, (2) the time to peruse it, (3) the ability to read English (in the U.S.), and (4) the ability to understand legalese.
Let me tell you a little story. I used to drop off/pick up my child at Kindergarten. The parking lot was usually packed, so I parked at the curb. Now, I was nowhere near an intersection, and there weren't any "No Parking" signs anywhere. As I headed back to the truck, a school janitor informed me that a cop had just told him that if I continued to park there, I would get a ticket. So, I conducted a little investigation.
I went to the cop shop and made an inquiry. Why would I get a ticket? Exactly what ordinance was I in violation of? Well, one officer said "I think there is some rule about parking on a street adjacent to a school building (which I later learned was false). Another told me that maybe the traffic would be congested --- you could not park at a curb if there was less than 10 feet between your car and the other side of the street (that condition was not satisfied in my case.) So, in other words, none of them knew. However, I was told to consult the book of city ordinances, of which 2 copies exist in our town of about 20,000 people. I went to the library and looked it up. The book is about 1000 pages long. I asked how much they cost --- $800 per copy! Now, do the math. Most people cannot afford or will not purchase one of these books. This book is in the reference section of the library, so cannot be checked out. With 20,000 people and 2 public copies for viewing between the hours of 8am and 8pm, and a conservative estimate of about 1 month per person to digest the book, I come to a figure of about 833 years for each citizen to be familiar with its contents --- and that is just to learn the city ordinances. If we are to be held accountable to the law, our government needs to make it simple and brief and plentily available.
Incidentally, after reading the entire corpus of ordinances pertaining to parking, I discovered that I was in the right after all, and photocopied the sections of the book for the occasion of receiving a ticket. Oops. Guess I broke some copyright laws there.
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Interesting)
I reckon that's not a bad idea.
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Interesting)
+5 insightful (at the time I started replying)? More like -1: No contract law knowledge.
Sale of an item is a contract between a seller and a buyer. If you accept that you are buying a game software at the store, then that's the whole agreement between you, the buyer, and the seller. If the seller wants to impose additional restrictions onto the buyer which were not agreed upon during the sale (EULA wasn't agreed upon or signed during the transaction), then the seller has to provide additional consideration in return. If the seller provides no additional consideration, then there can be no lawful contract. And buyer refusing that additional consideration cannot be denied the original purchase item either.
So, what does NOT constitute an agreement?
- printing some website URL on the back of the box does not consitute a buyer agreeing to it if the contract is not expressly agreed upon during the actual sale;
- some "common" knowledge or a suspicion that some kind of EULA text probably or possibly exists somewhere does not constitute to a buyer agreeing to it;
- anything else to which you, the buyer, did not expressly agree to at the time of purchase cannot be considered as a part of the sales transaction.
Now, to argue that the required additional consideration provided to you by the seller after the purchase is to let you actually play the game, then you have to admit that you didn't really purchase a copy of the game at the store, but rather a coaster and possibly a copy of a manual. In that case, the almost empty can of pears analogy is more appropriate, but of course not perfect.
It would be more like - buy this can of pears from IPFruit, Inc., having a small print that you need to activate the can before you can use those pears. When you go home you find out that "activation" involves agreeing to additional restrictions in an EULA that says you can only use IPFruit approved forks for handling pears, you cannot re-sell directly or any food item that contains the pears, and you cannot share them with your friends or neighbors either by any means.
Disclaimer: IANAL.
Re:You're wrong. (Score:4, Insightful)
They're abusing the common perception of a product and misrepresenting a rental as a sale. People buy products. 99% of the population does not buy licenses. Even in geek circles people are generally of the mindset that, if you don't want to play online, you don't need to be online.
It's all hogwash to feed the lawyers. There is no reality in licensing an intangible product. Either you sell it or you don't. Once companies begin to face reality then society will be a much better place. Rather than wasting their time (and our money) on these useless cat-and-mouse authentication schemes maybe they'll put thought into more effective and controllable distribution.
The reality is: If you don't want someone to know something, DON'T TELL ANYONE. Once you tell one person you must face the reality that they may tell someone else. Sure, you can waste your life and everyone's time/money trying a legal pursuit... Or you can quit being a dumbass and decide that, if the IP Is really that important, you should keep your mouth shut.
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
I am too tired to join this Valve/Steam fray, especially that I had my fight in it already, days ago, even before this 20k account fiasco hit the fan. But this particularly illogical part of your argument caught my eye. Someone on ./ here has a great sig, something to the effect of "Lets eat more shit! After all millions of flies cannot be wrong!"
You should ponder this in light of countless times in our history when far worse stupidities were accepted as "common sense" for far longer then 20 years by millions of people. Popularity and longevity of something does not have a slightest bearing on its validity and morality.
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Funny)
We were discussing journalistic integrity in my junior year Journalism class in High School. One of the stories we discussed was about potentially devastating NEOs and the hunt for them. They were calculating timelines for possible impacts, but the journalist - in his infinite lack of even the simplest scientific tenets - decided to exclude the actual numbers and say "sometime in the future".
Upon hearing this, a girl at one edge of our discussion circle perked up, her eyes got really wide, and she exclaimed "When is this supposed to happen!?"
Without missing a beat, the class clown said in the most serious, matter-of-fact voice I've ever heard....
"About 10 minutes"
She never was the same after that....
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is where the line is drawn; you simply don't know the licence details before buying. As far as you know, as a consumer, you're buying a boxed game which you expect to own, to do whatever you want with it. Sell it, play it, sit on it, burn it with gasoline. Can you even return the game if you don't accept the licence?
Michael put it with little subtlety, but he's right. You buy something and you have absolutely zero control on how it works, when it works and for how long. Hence, you don't really own it. This is fine if you're buying the game online via Steam, where the licence should be agreed on before the purchase. Not for a boxed game.
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
andy
Re:You're wrong. (Score:4, Insightful)
People put up with it because the likelyhood that there will be an authentication problem is very small. Less than the chance of having some kind of hardware incompatability or glitch; something PC gamers already deal with all of the time, and gladly.
Remember, the people that Valve is cracking down on are people who are too cheap to buy the game. They aren't customers, and Valve has little incentive to treat them as though they were.
Re:Michael's whining is irrelevant (Score:5, Insightful)
Again, this is fine on Steam. It's not on a boxed game.
Re:Michael's whining is irrelevant (Score:5, Interesting)
You buy a book, you should get a book, and not a license agreement. You buy a game (which is being sold to you as a game, and not as a licence) and you should get precisely that as well.
Re:Michael's whining is irrelevant (Score:5, Informative)
You need a notary to witness you sign it or a laywer present for a real contract document.
Unless you specifically sign the document in writing with a notary or Lawyer present as a witness its non valid.
No one has ever took a software company to court over this its currently a gray area.
Big businesses who buy corporate licenses actually have lawyers and notaries present so the licenses there are valid.
Just because the CD is copyrighted does not mean you own your purchase.
Most places like CompUSA will charge you a 15% restocking fee or will refuse to let you return it since the package is opened.
You may want to read the news with retailers refusing returns if you return items frequently. That is another penalty that will happen as a result.
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Informative)
And for the last time you do not have to agree to the GPL to use GPLed software. The GPL is a license to distribute the software. It gives you something over and above the rights you already have with copyright, as opposed to EULAs, which take some away.
If the GPL were invalid SCO would still have every right to use the software themselves, just not to distribute it.
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
Now am I expecting people to associate the longevity of a game with the required longevity of tax returns? Of course not but I was thinking about purchasing HL2 but I think I'll pass until the dust settles instead of the risk/hassle of the validation scheme.
TurboTax (Score:5, Interesting)
Up in Canada, the product is QuickTax (same company). I was trying to print out some tax returns for a exparte court visit (exparte meaning does not require proper service). So I find out late Friday afternoon that it's going to be a Monday morning epsisode in court, and I require tax returns. I have all my tax returns on cd, not printed, because, hey, I own the software.
I got 1999 printed, but not 2000, 2001 or 2002. Why? Because I had installed the software on an older, now dead and gone machine, previously when I did the original fucking returns. So their 'activation' detected that it was a new machine and prevented me from installing and printing out my returns. I attempted to call their amazing technical support, but because it was out of tax season, it was 9-5 Monday to Friday, or in my time zone, 10-6. So basically, they expect someone to make personal calls from work.
I ended up calling Revenue Canada and having someone pick up summary returns while I delayed in court. Thank you Intuit, for worrying that I might be trying to redo a 3 year old tax return. If you are going to disable shit, allow people to at least PRINT OUT WHAT THEY ALREADY HAVE and kill the ability to make a new return, or something more useful than that. And it would be nice if you would reply to emails too.
I use XP, simply because it came with my laptop. I do not use Office XP or later, or other software that requires *activation* unless I can now absolutely avoid it. After all, how are you supposed to ensure the company you are buying from will remain in business in case you need to reinstall. And for all you linux zealots that are going to attack me on the using Windows statement - piss off. I develop software for the predominant platform so I can feed my kids.
Re:TurboTax (Score:5, Informative)
Either purchase or steal the full version of Adobe Acrobat, or any other software that allows you to print PDF's.
All of my tax returns get printed to PDF's then to paper as nessecary. I don't normally keep the paper copies around for more than a year, but it's easy to keep an encrypted zip file contianing those precious documents.
People laugh at PDF's but they are really convient, and can be read over long periods of time without dealing with MSFT's change the format per minor version games.
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
True, but that's what hardcopies are for.
True, but that is not an excuse. If you use a program, say Quickbooks, to manage your company's financial data, and then you want to get into your data, and you own a legitimately purchased copy of the software bought and paid for with your own money, you'd better damn well have access to your data whenever you damn well please, irrespective of the software company's wish for you to buy the $200 upgrade every other year.
I did not buy the "license" to use this software until the software developer arbitrarily decides my time is up. I bought the fucking software. I should be able to use it however I want, for as long as I want, on any and however many computers of mine that will run it.
I'm so sick of software makers restricting my freedom to use software the way I want to use it when I've paid for it. Same goes for DVDs. I'm SO SICK of sitting there waiting for the FBI, Interpol, Mossad, Secret Service, MI-6 and the Office of Navel Lint warnings that I've read time and time again. I want to skip them, dammit. Don't tell me what actions are and are not "permitted" by the disc. It's my fucking disc!
Back to decaf for me ..
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
I wish people would get over the holier-than-thou ego trip that they get from invoking licensing.
Face reality. A license is a fancy name for a rental concocted by lawyers to turn the breach of a rental agreement into a federal felony.
Face reality. There is nothing real in an attempt to enforce a rental agreement of intangible material such as intellectual property. The software industry can't, in reality, license software any more than I can license to you a method to make biscuits. Either you sell it or you don't.
Stop feeding the trolls/lawyers. Quit hiding behind licenses.
Re:You're wrong. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Informative)
Half-life 2 uses a MMO style activation where you create an account and enter your key. One account, one key. Once a key is registered to an account is cannot be used on any other accounts. The only thing that could possibly happen people getting their steam accounts hacked.
I suspect the people complaining fall into one of two catagories. They purchased the retail game and got pissed that they had to insert the CD everytime they started it while people who bought it over Steam don't so they downloaded a nocd crack.
Somebody bought it retail and also installed it at their friends house and had their friend login with their Steam account and used a nocd crack to allow their friend to also play.
In the first case it sucks to be them as they got screwed over by Vivendi in needing to use authenicate with a CD, and felt screwed over that online purchases didn't need this.
For the second case they were committing piracy, and well it really sucks to be them, but they were pirating something with activation. They took the risk and lost.
Sorry, but it doesn't work that way (Score:5, Insightful)
EULAs try and do many things that are just unenforaceble. Basically they want the best of both worlds. They want it to be a physical good when it suits them, but a licensed product when it suits them. Doesn't work that way. When you sell a product on the shelf, with no contract signing, you are selling a good. Things like the doctrine of first sale apply, even if you write an EULA that says they don't.
This is different from something like an MMORPG. Here there are two parts: the good and the service. The game they sell you is a good, and you are welcome to keep it, even if you never use it online. Their servers, however, are a service, you pay for the right to use them. Being a service, they can put restrictions on that without a contract, since if you don't like it, you are free not to use the service.
Think if the logic Valve applied here was applied to a physical good, like a dishwasher. You go and pay for it up front, no contract, and take it home. Then, one day, it stops working so you call for warentee service. They say "Oh no, it's not broken, we just deactivated it. See you violated your license for using it, so we are turning it off. You'll need to go buy another one if you want to use it."
That's how stupid this shit with the software is. It's not a service, it's a good. You are purchasing it with the expecation that oyu are able to use it as such. You can use it in any way you like, reverse engineer it, resell it, whatever. All you can't do is make a copy of it, or a derivitive work. Those are copyright infringement.
Either way, I hope it blows up in their face. I can gaurentee I will not be buying a copy as a result. I'll stay with the Unreal Engine series, as Epic aren't assholes about things like this. Likewise, I'm recommending to all my friends that they do not purchase it.
Should such a time come when Valve wises up and gets rid of this retarded protection, I'll reconsider, but at this point, there's no way they are getting my money.
Re:Sorry, but it doesn't work that way (Score:5, Informative)
IANAL, but one of the first things taught in Business Law 101 is how basic contracts work. There is no requirement to offer, accept, or negotiate a contract. If I make an offer, you are certainly allowed to make a counter-offer (what I assume you mean by negotiating) but now my original offer is void. Also signing is not required for contracts, only certain types of contracts.
If you buy a piece of software, and it says that you agree to whatever terms by opening it (and purchasing it, which you have already done), then the deal is complete when you open it. If the terms are not available before you open it, obviously nothing is binding. These days its more often done as part of the installation. If you change the terms of a lease and send it back, you are correct that they do not have to accept it, but they also don't have to ever talk to you again (or accept a subsequent unmodified lease that you send them, since its now void).
Re:Sorry, but it doesn't work that way (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe you can answer a question for me, then:
If I buy a book, I can then sell it to someone else. Doctrine of first sale, correct?
If I buy HL2, but *don't* install it, I can then sell it to someone else. Again, doctrine of first sale. At this point, it's a product that I own; there is no licensing agreement, no contract entered into, etc.
If I buy HL2, and *do* install it, then Valve (and other companies) argue that I've entered into a contract with them. As part of that contract, I have *lost* something - my ability to resell the product. I cannot sell my copy of HL2 to someone else without Valve's permission. Well, I guess I can still sell it - but because of the issue of registration, that particular copy of HL2 is worthless now, to anyone but me.
Here's my question: how can Valve sell me something that is obviously a product, a physical good, something that can be resold and treated by law exactly as if it were book or a car or an iPod... but which later is somehow redefined or transformed into a license?
It's as if the law considered a car a "product" only so long as you didn't start the engine; but as soon as you actually get behind the wheel and put the key in the ignition, you no longer *own* a car, but instead now have a "license" to drive that one particular instance of a car.
Re:You're wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
If you violate the terms and conditions, the company can suspend or revoke your license to play the game.
This should actually say:
If * the company says that * you violated the terms and conditions, the company can suspend or revoke your license to play the game.
Whether or not you violated the terms and conditions is not at all relevant.
CD hack? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:CD hack? (Score:5, Informative)
Admittedly, you'll have to download quite a bit of data and it's a pain in the rump and it might not work after their next patch, but that's what's been going around the message boards.
Re:CD hack? (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem's not that people are pirating the game -It's a problem, don't misunderstand, but the issue of legitimate purchasers being locked out of the game because they chose to circumvent the game's CD requirements.
IMHO, it's perfectly alright to bypass such protection on a legally purchased copy of the game. For instance, I downloaded such a hack to circumvent the protection on Civ III for the PC, which required that a CD be inserted to play, and which I had purchased at Best Buy. BTW, the hack works great!
And Valve has a right to 'lock out' customers stealing the game, but they enter a grey area of legality when they lock out legitimate purchasers who simply want to avoid the annoying CD checks on their legal copy of the game.
I think this is going to be a growing problem as game programmers get wise to the hacks and cracks that are put online almost simultaneously with the game releases. The ideal solution would be one in which the purchaser controls where and how they use the product for which they've paid money, while preventing unauthorized users from doing the same. Valve seems to have nailed a lot of actual piracy with the method they've chosen to use, but they've also impacted some legitimate users as well.
Interestingly enough, gamers on the Mac (Yes, there are a few!) don't have as many problems with this kinda protection since they can have store and mount CD images directly off their hard drive. When I play Civ on the Mac, I simply have to click the CD image of the game, mount it as a disk image, and bang!, the game thinks I've inserted the CD. Too bad PC users don't also have this option. It's also too bad that more games are not released for the Mac. The G5's ready, but the gaming company's still don't see it as a viable game platform. 8(
Re:CD hack? (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, PC people do have this option using software such as Alcohol or Daemon Tools (which is free for private use). This is why the newer CD checks refuse to allow you to run if you have these programs installed. In fact, I've heard of cases where the game refuses to run if you have Nero, a very popular CD/DVD burning package and rumors of games which won't work if you have a burner attached. If the Mac ever takes off, you can kiss your disc images goodbye or find a www.MacGameCopyWorld.com.
Re:CD hack? (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, the ideal solution would be for everybody to be honest and buy the games that they play! But instead, people have the attitude that they have the RIGHT to have something that they have not paid for. This leads to a few possible outcomes.
1) The company does nothing. They loose sales. Bad for them.
2) The company builds in DRM. This causes consumers to complain. Bad for us.
3) In addition to the DRM, the company lobbies for laws cracking down on "copy technology." Of course, these are a "BFG-900" which, in addition to having some affect on the pirates, has the side-effect of causing a lot of collateral damage do the honest consumer. Bad for us.
4) The company does what Valve did and disables cracks. The is another "BFG-9000" which hurts the pirates, but also causes some collateral damage to a few honest users. Users complain, bad for us. They also get a black eye in their reputation. Bad for them.
In short, if they do nothing, they are screwed. If they do something, everybody complains and they may be screwed (depends on how much people complain).
To those who pirate games: If you don't like DRM and the DMCA, look in the mirror for the reason that we are stuck with those. If you want to change the world, start with the only person that you CAN control: yourself.
Re:CD hack? (Score:5, Informative)
> they have the RIGHT to have something that
> they have not paid for.
Let me clarify something here.
I bought HL2 via Steam. I now have a copy of activated, legal HL2 on my machine. It doesn't need a CD to run (which is good, because since I bought via Steam, I don't have one)
Now those people who went and bought the CD had to do the Steam activation *and* put the CD in the drive.
Arguing that they're "stealing" and "ripping off Valve" by CD-cracking the retail version ignores the fact that Valve are quite happy for people to play with the online activation only, since Steam purchasers are doing just that.
Re:CD hack? (Score:5, Interesting)
1) The company does nothing. They loose sales. Bad for them.
Does a lack of invasive copy protection lead to decrease sales? Or, the other way round: do invasive copy protection schemes increase sales? And in a related issue:
2) The company builds in DRM. This causes consumers to complain. Bad for us.
Could the consumer aggravation lead to decreased sales? Does it have any other side effects for the company that could eventually lead to decreased sales?
Of course, the answers might well be that invasive schemes do actually increase sales by some margin and the consumer aggravation isn't something to worry about. There are few people who won't buy a game because of the current and previous "sins" of a developer or publisher.
On the other hand, many people quite correctly argue that many invasive schemes annoy the paying customer, but don't do much more than inconvenience the typical pirate. Publishers often claim that copy protection serves to prevent casual pirates from copying the game. I don't think that works anymore: cd cracks are incredibly easy to find on both the web and in filesharing networks.
Then you get only the bad aspects, and even if you don't care about your customers hating you, you don't get out of anything.
Securom protection (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Securom protection (Score:5, Funny)
I too read it like that. Although, wouldn't scrotum protection rather be a load of ball-locks?
It's still fair (Score:5, Insightful)
I still don't see why though- most people knew about Steam going in (everyone who tried to use the crack knew about Steam).
Someday, circumventing copy protection won't be seen as a white-hat activity. But it will be seen as people trying to cheat others out of compensation for their work.
Re:It's still fair (Score:4, Insightful)
How is trying to bypass a broekn and buggy overzellous copy protection system AFTER I've payed money for the prodyct cheating anyone out of compensation for their work? Downloading the game witout paying for it would qualify, but getting their spyware off my computer seems like a good thing to me.
Re:It's still fair (Score:4, Insightful)
Circumventing copyprotection is often white-hat (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course that's not legal anymore, than's to the DMCA, but
cd key? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:cd key? (Score:3, Insightful)
Legit way worked just fine.. (Score:3, Informative)
Although I wonder also why would anyone use their OWN account to try playing a game they didn't pay for. And the version I know of, pirated I mean, doesn't need the activation at all...
I'm torn (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I'm torn (Score:5, Insightful)
That last part scares me, since it indicates to me that the game has some sort of malware built into it, and because it would require valve to reenable wrongly disabled cd keys. Bluntly, I don't trust any corporation to find me innocent or guilty of any crime. That's a matter for the courts. I like halflife, but I kinda hope this doesn't catch on, or if it does become widespread, it gets shot down legally.
And by "very small" they mean of course (Score:4, Insightful)
michael: STFU (Score:4, Insightful)
> People are discovering that when you buy any
> product that is subject to "activation", you
> haven't really bought anything.
OK? That's the stupidest thing I've read on
In other news, michael buys car and is shocked to discover must buy gas for it continue working.
John.
Re:michael: STFU (Score:5, Funny)
Then you don't read
-Charles
Re:michael: STFU (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:michael: STFU (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:michael: STFU (Score:3, Insightful)
Except this isn't like buying gas, buying gas would be a MMO(RPG) however in this case, people buy a product to only find out that they dont really have full rights to what they purchased.
In reality it would be more like:
In other news, michael buys a car, tries to take the govenor off and finds out that FORD (who he bought it from) says he can no longer drive it, and pushes a little button at head office to
Re:michael: STFU (Score:4, Informative)
> product that is subject to "activation", you
> haven't really bought anything.
OK? That's the stupidest thing I've read on
No, actually what you wrote is the stupidest thing you've read on
The vast majority of the population have no clue about how digital restriction management can be used to take away something that they think they own. Whether they "stole" it or not does not matter here.
What matters is that more than 50,000 people just learned that their continued use of a product that they thought they owned (after all, they have posession of it, like a car) is in constant jeopordy of someone pressing the big red stop button.
Should Valve go under and their steam network be turned off, all legit purchasers of half-life2 will be in the exact same situation that these suspected pirates are today. People who paid for divx dvds are in the same boat already, they just weren't widespread enough for the lesson to make an impact.
Maybe this time the lesson will have an impact, especially on the teenagers of today who will be the ones who have to live in the DRM-ruled world the copyright cartel envisions. Maybe the fact that people have paid money for something that could disappear in an instant leaving them no recourse, will sink in enough on these kids that they will decide that the next product, be it music from the iTunes store or WMV-HD DVDs with "phone-home" DRM or the entire MS "Trusted Computing" baloney is not worth their money.
A free market requires education and Michael's comment is exactly the kind of education that the masses need to avoid a DRM-ruled world.
Violating the license for one locks you from all? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why aren't they just blocking those users from Half-Life 2 instead of revoking (shall we say "stealing" since they like to mis-use the word too) ligitemately purchased licenses for other products too?
Re:Violating the license for one locks you from al (Score:5, Interesting)
More importantly, why aren't more people telling this company to fuck off? When TurboTax tried the activation bullshit, there was a huge public outcry, people applied for refunds in droves (and got them in states where the laws allow them), and rushed to H&R Block's TaxCut. TurboTax got the message big time and took out a full page ad in the NY Times and other major newspapers apologizing for the incident and as a result TurboTax for this year has no activation required.
Of course, I can answer my own question: because there are other ways to do your taxes, but Half-Life 2 is shiny and game addicts need their fix. If you hate a company's product, you shouldn't support them. People need to be stronger and stop buying movies and DVDs and software that impose restrictions. Only then will the companies wake up.
Legit Owners Screwed? (Score:5, Interesting)
"A Valve spokesman says, 'The number of people who actually had bought HL2 and used the CD key cheat was VERY small."
So how draconian are they being? Is that "VERY small" number of users being excluded from the blacklist? Or did they trigger some End Game transgression of the EULA by even trying the CD key cheat?
If the latter, that would SERIOUSLY suck.
It's not that hard to play a pirated version of it (Score:5, Funny)
Go on usenet, find the appropriate cracks. Enjoy. The end.
See how easy that was?
HL2 (Score:5, Insightful)
However, regarding activation. Maybe if so many people in the "community" weren't so busy pirating the games Valve wouldn't need to go through these hoops.
What I'm more concerned about overall is, what happens when people have their steam accounts stolen? How is Valve going to deal with that. I could probably use Visa to get my $59 back, but what a tremendous pain in the ass.
Activation sux... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Activation sux... (Score:4, Insightful)
If you have the CD, stick it in.
Scenario 1:
One CD drive on the computer.
Try to play a game while playing a music CD as well.
Scenario 2:
Taking a laptop on a trip. Space is at a premium. Now you have to bring CD's of all your games just to activate them even though you installed their contents to your hard drive with full installations.
Scenario 3:
CD gets a scratch. Without CD keys, you just play anyway since you installed it already. With CD keys now you can't play until you wait to prove your case to the company, and get a replacement sent to you via snail-mail.
Good, 99.9% of them absolutely deserved it. (Score:3, Insightful)
In all seriousness, Valve is an intelligent company and has most assuredly been very careful about this. Of course there are going to be mistakes, but out of 20,000 warez a**holes there's probably only a very VERY (to quote Valve) few people who actually purchased the game and then for some reason went out and grabbed a key generator when they didn't need one.
That's very likely 20,000 less cheating bastards at Counter-Strike Source (leaving on a few million to deal with.)
Future Install? (Score:5, Insightful)
So, what happens in 5 or 10 years when you want to play the game and can't install it on a new machine because Steam is gone or has been replaced? I understand their attempt to thwart piracy, but perhaps they should try a different approach. Perhaps innocent until proven guilty?
Re:Future Install? (Score:3, Informative)
Perhaps innocent until proven guilty? (Score:5, Funny)
The $100 Question (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The $100 Question (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The $100 Question (Score:3, Interesting)
Refunds (Score:4, Interesting)
I mean, if I sell you a car, and you come into my house and steal my laptop, I don't get to take back my car and laptop and keep the money.
Got it by bittorrent... (Score:4, Informative)
Anyone else still playing with... err... pirated HL2?
(And don't give me that crap "oh, bad you, pirate! go sit on a corner". Hurl the first stone those who have NEVER pirated a piece of software!)
Companies are discovering... (Score:3, Interesting)
Companies are discovering that people will routinely and casually avoid paying for their products or for the use of their services whenever it is easy to avoid such payment.
Similarly, people routinely and casually avoid stopping at stop signs and using their turn signals.
Who? (Score:5, Interesting)
Are they only banning people who actually paid for the game and used a no-cd crack? That's just retarded; It stops the legitimate users but does nothing about the pirates.
Re:Who? (Score:5, Interesting)
Assuming I did and I got banned...I paid $60 for the game after tax, and just like that Vavle decides they can pull the rug out from under me because I don't want to have to find the damned CD when I want to play? That is utter BS. And let's remember this is the software industry, things can change overnight. Valve could close down one day (anyone remember Sierra?) and what happens then? I'm not allowed to play the game anymore? What happens if Steam gets hacked and my key gets stolen? Is their bot going to auto disable me? I respect that Valve is trying to limit piracy, as is the right of any software publisher, but Steam is going overboard. I feel I haven't paid for jack, and that Valve controls when I can play the game which I shelled out this money for.
I had no idea how evil Steam was before I bought HL2, but you had better believe it will be the last game I buy or play that uses it or a similar activation scheme. The sad thing is I'm willing to bet that other software manufacturers will see how much money Valve is raking in because of it and adopt a similar scheme, or maybe even license Steam itself. Oh well, I've given up TV and movies, how much harder can video games be?
At least I'll have the time to do more Linux hacking or go back to the occasional classic with DOSBox [sourceforge.net]
Re:Who? (Score:4, Insightful)
And suppose you could take all of your carts and load them into memory on your GB. How would you feel about still needing to haul the carts all over the place when the data already exists in the box?
Boo hoo.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Kudos to Valve for having the balls to try and tackle the root cause of the problem.. combine cutting out the publisher and a pretty darn secure way of delivering games to people and we might yet actually see a reduction in game prices. They are hopefully setting the trend - combine that with not needing the CD to play the game either, and you have a winning combination IMHO. Not quite sure whats gonna happen though if my broadband net connection goes off for some reason?
For the record I purchased the bronze package (cheapass I know.. never mind) about 10 minutes after Steam pricing packages were made available, and then at about 30 seconds past 'zero hour' when they were supposed to have enabled the HL2 authentication servers I closed and reopened Steam, unlocked HL2 and was playing in about 10 minutes.
The game is awesome. I finished it this weekend and loved every minute of it.. those who haven't tried it thanks to some irrational fear of Steam or something really need to get over it and try it out.. you ARE missing out by not playing this game. Its the new benchmark quite frankly.
Lies, damned lies! (Score:5, Funny)
Not true, not true!
If you buy the Half Life 2 Collector's Edition, you get a shirt!
if activation is required, then.... (Score:3, Informative)
Besides, it's probably for Valve for them to drop SecuROM as it's pointless and it costs them money (I believe a percentage of their profits is taken for it's use). If activation is required, why bother and pay for a third-party protection scheme when your in-house developed method works especially when the third-party method can annoy users AND potentially cause bugs?
Annoying loyal, paying customers is like the BestBuy economics; it'll hurt you in the long run more than it'll help you in any parallel universe.
Great Journalism there. (Score:3, Insightful)
Umm...more likely, people are discovering when they steal a product with product activation, they haven't stolen anything useful. And later, when they try to cheat playing Counter-Strike, they'll find they can't play anymore. All in all, I don't see the problem here. I quit playing CS a long time ago because of the repeated wallhacks and other cheats, even though I found the game very entertaining. Part of the license compliance that's enforced by Steam is also enforcing anti-cheat measures. I'm 100% in favor of features that keep the playing field honest. And if it gives the guys at Valve more money, well, as far as I'm concerned they've earned it.
Unlike the vast majority of the people here who don't like Steam, I actually do believe in giving people money for what they produce. I think people deserve to be compensated for their work. I don't think you have the right to deprive people who want compensation for their work of that compensation. And I think the "but I don't like swapping CD's" argument is thin, at best, and more likely it's an outright lie. It's a stupid argument all the way around. If you want to listen to a CD while you play the game, CD-ROM drives are what, $20? Here's a nickel, kid, buy a real computer.
Re:Great Journalism there. (Score:4, Insightful)
So yes: you "bought" a license. Live with the terms. And vote with your wallet, hopefully *before* you get burned.
In my opinion, however, the posters statement you quote is a true statement. You didn't buy anything, you *rented* it, and there is a big difference between buying and renting. People should be aware of that difference. A sticker on the box of HL2 that says "you can play this game until: (we go out of business|decide you can't|want to force an upgraded version on you)" would make that a bit more clear.
All right, fine: What's the solution? (Score:5, Insightful)
What the hell do you expect them to do then Michael? Is Valve just supposed to put up with tens of thousands of people playing their game without paying for it? So does this mean I can find some way to hack the Slashdot premium membership database and just start giving away premium memberships to whomever wants one? Would that be OK with you?
I understand that activation probably isn't the best method to handle this problem, but right now what's the better solution? This isn't some enterprise-level database you can just open source and start charging for support. Nobody needs a maintenance contract for HL2. A company like Valve has to try and keep their product from being blatently stolen.
Sorry, but killing em all ain't right (Score:4, Insightful)
Sir, would you kindly allow me to use my software? (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps if people had to actually speak to the company and say the words, "could you please activate my software?" and say it a few more times for other software packages, and a few more times after reinstallation, it might hit home. Perhaps if they had to wait on hold for thirty minutes, desperately seeking permission to use the software they purchased, it might sink in. Perhaps if, in a fit of nostalgia they decide to reinstall an old game only to be dismayed they can't play it because the activation system no longer works and no patch is available, they will get the message.
Indeed, whenever I've had to phone Microsoft to activate Windows XP, or Intuit/Reckon to activate Quicken, it's not the annoyance of being put through a five minute exchange of serial codes that sticks in my mind, but the more profound emotion of resentment of being put in that situation in the first place. I resent having to obediently request permission to use something I'd spent hundreds of dollars on. I resent having to repeatedly ask permission during the life of the product, according to criteria set by the company. I resent not knowing if I'll still be able to use the software a few years down the track. I resent that many of my friends, who paid nothing for their pirated/cracked copies, don't have to suffer the same indignities or worry about such things.
The most important issue about activation is not whether it's convenient or inconvient, but the way it fundamentally changes the relationship between the customer and a company selling proprietary software. For the life of the product, the customer is now dependent on the company to repeatedly affirm the most basic right of any software user. Not to peak at the software's source code or modify it, but simply to run the program they purchased legitimately.
Re:Nice response Valve! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Just Say No To Activation (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Just Say No To Activation (Score:5, Funny)
The doctor says, "You must be Polish, right?"
"How'd you know?"
"Your finger is broken."
("Those damn software companies. How dare they use product activation to help curb piracy? Well just for that, I'm going to pirate their stuff until they stop!" Yeah. I'm sure that's likely to convince them.)
Re:Obviously a jaded warez-monkey. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Good News (Score:3, Interesting)
This is especially relevent when a given protection ref