Quote:
Originally posted by podunkviller
duplicating the protection shows that it wasnt really a protection in the first place, thus DIScouraging its future use.
|
Actually, no, for a couple of reasons. First, it doesn't discourage its use because of the "hoops" you have to jump through to do it. Not everyone has the software, proper CD-RW drive, and technical knowledge to make working copies. However, anyone can use an executable which has had the protection removed. The trouble is right now those executables are hard to find and even harder to make because no one is detailing how to make them. Second, as we are now seeing with the latest versions of Securom and Safedisc, trying to completely duplicate the protection is impossible. The developers of these copy-protection systems have shown that drive compatibility is not much of a concern to them. If they have to break compatibility with older CD-ROM drives to prevent the protection from being duplicated , they will do it. Therefore, they will eventually be able to refine their products until CD-RW drives cannot duplicate them. Securom is already there from what many are saying.
What really would discourage the use of copy-protection is to show that it truely is futile because the original disc can be easily used to break it. Right now too few people can remove the protection from the latest games. This needs to change and the only way it will is if those who know share what they know. Trying to monopolize this information doesn't help anyone because the copy-protection developers connstantly change their protections anyway. However, by building upon each other's experience, the user community will have a chance to keep up. The main reason that the versions of Safedisc after 2.4 were broken is because r!sc shared his work so others could build upon it. We need more of this type of sharing, not less.