Starforce Petition!

[BarryB]

I wonder if those companies that have dropped starforce will release patches to remove it from those titles that were protected by it?

[dr_psikick]

boycote, no starforce in my system.
In fact all the copy protection schemes IMO are dubious and abusive, because when you buy one game, you are not buying only the game itself, you buy the box, the media (CD / DVD) and so on... and you have every right to copy/backup any part of the product - it's yours you have paid - for your personal use.
For example, when I was in the university, I often copy my own books (that I have bought) just to study, because I like to write and cut pages... so I still have the originals nice and cleans...
Other point is that a copy protection scheme that makes you to have the CD on drive to play the game is demaging the drive - CD/DVD drives are like commom lights they have a certain number of hours of life...
Finishing a key code, IMO is the only legit scheme of copy protection - I can have 1000 copies but I only have one code...

[Grumpy]

@dr_psikick

because when you buy one game, you are not buying only the game itself

This is a common misunderstanding as you 'never' really own the game. When you purchase the disc etc you actually only purchase the licence to play that game on 1 pc at a time. You dont technically own the actual game itself.
I know this sounds stupid but thats how it is.

[Joe Forster/STA]

Yes, you have the right to use the game (with tons of limitations, see the EULA for the details) but you never get the copy- and intellectual rights of the game.

See chips in cars. As far as I've been told, their firmware is also copy protected (at least, by the law) and you may get into legal trouble if you provedly changed it without the manufacturer's agreement (besides losing the guarantee of the car, of course). You may use it as you received it but you may NOT reverse engineer it, change it, copy it (partially or fully), resell it etc. etc.

[Mason]

Laws trump the EULA. AFAIK, USA law has recognized things like the right to make a copy for archival purposes, the right to resell and the right to reverse engineer regardless of what the EULA says.

[Grumpy]

@Mason

Laws trump the EULA

Yes in some countries this is very true but (and I quote Joe's wording on this)you still.......

have the right to use the game ......but you never get the copy- and intellectual rights of the game.

[Joe Forster/STA]

Yeah, I'm sure are a few countries where authorities don't give a fuck about intellectual property and copyrights. However, software companies don't sell much software there either as they actually COULDN'T.

I would assume that China is today the greatest software pirate on the planet. Not only because of the sheer number of citizens but also the weird government that is 1) anti-capitalist but 2) - not surprisingly! - open for new technology, including hardware and software, because that makes them money. (Please, don't get me wrong, I'm not against China in any way... They are great people, with their own Red Flag Linux for the government's use, YEAH! )

E.g. in Hungary, laws concerning copy- and intellectual rights of software are going to change to more strict as this is mandatory for the EU membership. I don't wish to comment on that because time - however long it takes, though - will show the truth anyway...

[VenOmaX666]

i never buy starforce games i hate this protection
i want to know if they say in the game box that the game is starforce protected so i will never be fooled...

starforce may die ...
were all with you guys
gl

[Faraz_Hayat]

Originally Posted by Joe Forster/STA

Yeah, I'm sure are a few countries where authorities don't give a fuck about intellectual property and copyrights. However, software companies don't sell much software there either as they actually COULDN'T.

I would assume that China is today the greatest software pirate on the planet. Not only because of the sheer number of citizens but also the weird government that is 1) anti-capitalist but 2) - not surprisingly! - open for new technology, including hardware and software, because that makes them money. (Please, don't get me wrong, I'm not against China in any way... They are great people, with their own Red Flag Linux for the government's use, YEAH! )

E.g. in Hungary, laws concerning copy- and intellectual rights of software are going to change to more strict as this is mandatory for the EU membership. I don't wish to comment on that because time - however long it takes, though - will show the truth anyway...

To, surprise you then as USA caused approximately 7 Billion dollar loss(highest) on piracy rather than China's 4 billion.This is ofcourse a figure given by Global Software Piracy Study.This is solely because USA's markets are so big that even small piracy markets amongst them cause huge losses.Still however the piracy rates in USA are quite low about 21% in 2005.

[kosmiq]

Estimating lossed money based on pirated software is just dumb. Let me make an example.

Here's John Doe, he's a 17 year old kid that buys all games he likes. Yes thats fine and good. However, he also downloads a lot of games and applications becaues he can not afford them all. Or afford them AT all. Lets say he downloaded 3d studio max from the net, because there is no way he could afford that. However he wants to learn 3d rendering and therefore will do it somehow.

Lets say that 3d studio max would NOT be piratable (aka uncrackable). Would John ever use it then? Most likely not as he can not afford it. How can it be a loss for a software company if the person never would have the possiblity to get it legally anyway?

I am not defending piracy in any way. It is wrong. But the way they make up numbers and how much they "loose" is just wrong. Potentioal loss for something that never would happen makes it sound a lot more serious. When in reality the actual loss is much smaller even if there of course is a lot of pirates that could afford the software or would use it in a company.

Same goes for movies and games. John is still in the game here. He buys all games he likes and supports the companies that he thinks deserves it. Ok, thats good in a way. But would John be able to decide wich games to buy? Would he be forced to buy and after that see if the game is worth having or if it is just waste of money. Some product made by a company with a cool cover and only to get some easy cash. Thats where the biggest problem is IMO. Demos are getting rare, atleast they are not as many as a few years ago. But if John would not have downloaded a few of those games, he never might have bought them either. Or he could've bought a few games that he just hates but can't refund for a new one that he might like.

Movies, John goes to the cinema every now and then to see some great movies. However he also downloads a few. Perhaps he downloads a lot of movies he never would've gone to the cinema for. Maybe because they are bad or perhaps because they are unknown in his country. If there is a movie he really likes he might get it on DVD when released. If he downloaded a movie he never would've payed for in the cinema there is no loss for there either. What could've happen is that he never would've seen the movie and not put any money into it anyway. Or he might like it and decide its worth buying wich he otherwise may have thought it was not.

To go a little further, we can look back in time. 20-30 years ago, even 40 years. People copied cassettes all the time, traded cassettes with music taped from the radio. Even made copies of LP's and sold through ads in papers or similar. Noone was as active hunting down them back then even if it in reality was almost as easy as getting music now.

With that said I'll leave the discussion for now (gotta go to sleep and don't feel like typing anymore ).

[Dieselbrad]

Well put kosmiq. John Doe downloads them off the net, but he never would have paid for "X" game anyhow.

The industry needs to change.. make things as affordable as they could be and sell more! Instead of Preventing Piracy which creates a culture against your product.. embrace open-source and the like...

Oh well.. the people who make these decissions don't read the forums anyhow.

[gazza1970]

you hit the nail on the head there with selling games cheaper

if the original cost is about the price of a cd/dvd then say cost of distribution marketing .blah blah blah

then why does it cost someone like say joe blogg down the road about 50pence to make a dvd

why does it cost £30 to sell it and if thats a million copies then surely its gonna be big profits and just a case of being greedy and not looking after the costumers

cost of a game in my eyes should be around about 5-10 pounds

then it would sell more and everyone would be happy

[Joe Forster/STA]

Again, please, note that the vast majority (about 95% or more!) of the profit goes to the publisher and the vendor; only the rest goes to the developers! And that's not enough because (at least, part of) the copyright belongs to the publisher, too. So, the publisher 1) expropriates the intellectual material of the developer AND 2) rips them off by sucking away most of the actual profit. And the reason: the developers cannot make a living while they're developing the software so they need to borrow money from the publisher in the meantime, have themselves sponsored. But they pay back that money multiple times!

The same goes with most other things, even including agricultural products: traders get the money, while the farmer/manufacturers do the harder part of the job. This is how capitalism works: unfairly.

[IMMANUEL]

but you are right.

Originally Posted by Joe Forster/STA

Again, please, note that the vast majority (about 95% or more!) of the profit goes to the publisher and the vendor; only the rest goes to the developers! And that's not enough because (at least, part of) the copyright belongs to the publisher, too. So, the publisher 1) expropriates the intellectual material of the developer AND 2) rips them off by sucking away most of the actual profit. And the reason: the developers cannot make a living while they're developing the software so they need to borrow money from the publisher in the meantime, have themselves sponsored. But they pay back that money multiple times!

The same goes with most other things, even including agricultural products: traders get the money, while the farmer/manufacturers do the harder part of the job. This is how capitalism works: unfairly.

[Eindhar]

i hate SF protection and i will boicott all games in the list.
simply i hate that i can't make a back-up of my Second Sight and i won't buy two copies of it.
and i really dislike softwares that install something that i don't want on my system.
i will boycott StarForce games