They might be. But I'm now going to claim I know the definition of them.
If there is any restrictions on a game, then I would consider it DRM.
I propose as a general definition of DRM within the context of cboard -
DRM - Any feature or aspect of a software system which is not strictly necessary to perform the core functionality of the software and has as a primary intent the limitation on use by persons or entities which have not purchased a copy from the copyright holder and may or may not have made any extraordinary effort to circumvent said feature.
I think that should cover all known forms of copy protection.
DRM is unacceptable unless it's perfect. I think it's funny how all people do is whine when the products they paid for stop functioning because of DRM related issues. Why aren't you suing somebody?
Back when I did play games, I would just download them. It's not that I didn't want to pay, it's that I knew that even if I did pay I would still have issues with the copyright controls. It is far easier to get a version with these "features" removed. And if you're going to do that... why bother with the "paying for it" part?
Later on, I realized how ethically stupid that was, and stopped playing games altogether.
I don't download MP3s either. If it's not on the radio, I don't hear it.
Treat me like an honest man, take my money and give me a product that works, and I'll buy it every time.
Some parts of DRM folks are not considering is the DVD situation. It is illegal to make a backup of a dvd, even to your computer, because your have to circumvent the DRM that is part of it. I know with VHS I had copies of my movies that I would watch more often than others so I didn't wear and tear on the original that I paid for. Another example is my CD collection, I have a (near) complete duplicate of my CD collection in my car, why you may ask? 2 reasons, first, if they get stolen it isn't the originals, no big deal, second, if I drop them or the sleeve tears them up from being taken out and put back too often it is no big deal, I just burn another copy for my car.
I also took my CDs and burned them to MP3 CDs back before I had an MP3 player. I would go out skateboarding all day and would like a lot of music with me, but didn't want to have to carry my whole binder of CDs, 2-3 MP3 CDs would provide hours of music. By todays standards, it would be illegal to take your DVDs burn several of them to a Blu-Ray disk for a long plane flight (so you didn't have to carry a multiple movies in your carry on) or train ride or whatever even for personal use, which should fall under the fair usage, but since there is DRM on the DVDs it is illegal to copy in any way shape or form because the afformentioned circumvention laws.
Just the same as burning copies or cracking your installed games so you don't trash your real CD/DVD. Illegal reproduction if it has any sort of DRM on it, even if it would otherwise full under fair usage.
This is bullcrap in my opinion and I should be able to install and play either without my CD or burn a copy of my CD to play with so I don't have to risk my original.
The afformetioned laws are due to the DMCA, if your country doesn't abide by something similar to DMCA then it doesn't apply, but there are a lot of countries that have very similar laws regarding this stuff.
What makes it possible for you to make a living writing software is a PRIVATE agreement (or two) with someone else. I do not see how it follows that you and these other parties have the right to make up rules for everyone else. The vast majority of music "consumers" regularly copy CD's, etc, and this has been totally normal since the cassette, but it is still "illegal". I bet, however, that none of them feel particular guilt about it, and why should they? IN REALITY, 90% of music fans have far less income than 90% of (major label) recording artists. I don't care how great your art is. If I am concerned about ethics, I would much, much rather give $10 to some homeless guy they say to myself (like a complete fool) "Gee, I have to buy the million+nth copy of that album instead, because I don't want to break the law and rip a copy from somewhere." Nuts.
AFAIK the software industry is mostly immune to piracy in so far as people are dependent on their computers and software and will feel (hopefully: correctly) much more secure if everything is "proper" about it.
If this logic applies far less to games, that is the nature of the beast. I know that today's games are the best games ever and beyond criticism, but really -- most of them look like very slight variations on one another. They are very clearly intended to be consumed 1) quickly 2) easily. Perhaps that is the best idea for a game, but considering it is an "obsessive" activity* like watching TV, of course you will then have a significant percentage of consumers who's appetite for the quickly and easily consumed will far out weigh their budget (in part, because they consume them even more quickly and easily than other consumers). Do you really think some game fanatic kid needs to pay for every single game s/he is going to play? I don't. Like music consumers, most of them almost certainly do pay for the product, when they can afford it. But the nature of the beast, again, is that they are not getting enough for the $$$, so they "pirate" more. Which since the music/game industry would not even exist without these people, seems fair to me. They do not need to milk them for even more money.
This is the consequence of the format, which the industry itself choose (eg, there is nothing in nature that created the LP). I don't know if this applies as much to console games, but I am pretty sure that it does and that is 100% because they are using a DVD or CD medium. They did not have to do that. They did that because it now costs about $0.50 a unit to produce. If they had stuck with cartridges, even if $5-10 out of the cost was now a real cost (reducing the profit), they could have made piracy virtually impossible.
Anyway, if you want to be a pig, be a pig ;) but don't wave a "moral compass" around. That is the kind of perversion called hypocrisy. It's common and apparently effective in politics, but I don't think anyone is really fooled -- there's just a lot of perverted hypocrits around who will always vote for their favourite sick-pig method actors. Don't be a sucker!
*I'm not knocking that; I'm obsessive, happily, just not about video games.
I honestly struggle to find the place where you have your argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by MK27
brewbuck really only told us what his preference is, not what other people should do. I think that by this ...
He means that he wants to obtain the things he enjoys legally like he would if he were obtaining software, a matter of personal constitution. Where's the beef? Go argue with a preacher if you want to talk about moral compasses and waving them around.Quote:
I make my living writing software. Apart from any moral or ethical considerations, following the rules is a matter of consistency.
And I did not introduce the term moral compass, either. I hope someone puts those up for sale so I can steal one ;)
*the only other explanation would be that by "apart from" he meant his attitude has absolutely nothing to do with morality. But there was an argument about pirates somewhere around here...
>> And I did not introduce the term moral compass, either.
I never claimed such. But apparently you are happy to thank people for compliments you did not receive too, so I don't think it makes a difference who says what, anymore.
>> If you follow this from further back in the thread ... "apart from ethical concerns" which
>> implies the next phrase is "not just" ethical, but also sensible and reasonable*.
>> *the only other explanation would be that by "apart from" he meant his attitude has
>> absolutely nothing to do with morality. But there was an argument about pirates
>> somewhere around here...
That's the trouble with debating inferences. We have to keep in mind what you said first, and maybe brewbruck just didn't get how he was being "suckered by capitalists" if he was following his own example.
>> I am sure that jews fleeing Nazi's were, in fact, breaking the law.
I was wondering who would invoke Godwin's Law.