663 réponses à ce sujet

[Seifz]

In Exile wrote...

Seifz wrote...
Besides that, the requirement that we tie our activation key to our EA account violates all sorts of rights guaranteed to us by law.  In addition, nobody from BioWare or EA seems willing to tell us precisely what information they plan to collect each time the game phones home to tell them which computer you're on.  That's a huge invasion of privacy. 

You're wrong. I understand you're sentiment, but insofar as fact is concerned...

Privacy law is very messy right now, especially with regard to data collection. It's not entirely clear to what extent a particular consumer has to be informed re: data collectionf or that data to be justifiably collected.

I wasn't really getting at privacy laws, here.  As far as I'm concerned, it's entirely unethical for EA to collect some of the information that they admit to collecting.  I don't believe that they're collecting undisclosed information.

As well, first sale rights in the US are also a confused when it comes to software. To begin with, it isn't clear that first sale even applies,  because you're not actually talking about a sale transaction but rather a licensing agreement. Or rather, this is what the software companies will want to argue. How it stands up in court is anyone's guess.

Thus far, every court has thrown out the "it's only a license" argument except for one appeals court (the Autodesk case).  The Copyright Act of 1976 and the Clayton Act are very clear in saying that software sales are sales.

If this is something very important to you, the appropriate course of action would be to focus on what you can do to clarify these rights legally, i.e. via pushing your representative for clear legislation on the issue. Otherwise, until you have a landmark case in court, there won't be any precedent and everyone will run wild.

I hope that my local representative has something more important to focus on right now!  The economy, the wars, immigration, etc.  I think the BioWare boards are the perfect place to express my displeasure with BioWare's DRM scheme. 

[Seifz]

mcneil_1 wrote...

I say we wait and find out if bioware are going for the periodic phone in version.
Looking at it, solidshield without the phone in mode seems almost like the cerberus network <_< (I wonder if it was a test run)

Actually, has anyone said if we'll have to authenticate our DLC each time we play?  Will it work like DA:O where we only need to authenticate each DLC once?

[In Exile]

Seifz wrote...
I wasn't really getting at privacy laws, here.  As far as I'm concerned, it's entirely unethical for EA to collect some of the information that they admit to collecting.  I don't believe that they're collecting undisclosed information.

Whether or not its ethical isn't so important. Insofar as whether or not you have a right to something what matters is whether it's legal.

Unless you're talking about natural rights that aren't legal rights... in which case that really means you don't have any practical protection at all, and EA can well do as they please. So I'm sure you're not talking about that.

Thus far, every court has thrown out the "it's only a license" argument except for one appeals court (the Autodesk case).  The Copyright Act of 1976 and the Clayton Act are very clear in saying that software sales are sales.

No, you're wrong. There have been at least one decision in the early 2000s that have found that the EULA stands as a binding contract and that re-sale is prohibited. I can't remember the name right now. More to the point, so long as there isn't a Supreme Court ruling you can always have a higher court overturn this. I'm pretty sure the 9th Circuit recently overturned a software first sale ruling recently. These are all things I researched when looking to buy SC2, so I can't remember the names off the top of my head.

The Clayton Act, though, is anti-trust. IIRC, what consumer groups are actually arguing is that by trying to bypass the Clayton act, software companies explicitly recognize software as a sale per the Copyright Act and so consumers have the right to first sale. But this hasn't been clarified at all.

Anyway, in terms of their actual provisions, neither the Clayton Act or the Copyright Act of 1976 actually clearly specify software as a good to be sold, equivalent (for example) to a book.

I hope that my local representative has something more important to focus on right now!  The economy, the wars, immigration, etc.  I think the BioWare boards are the perfect place to express my displeasure with BioWare's DRM scheme. 

I'm talking about your strongly held beliefs about your rights. As of right now, the law is unclear. When the law is unclear, people don't really have the protection that they'd expect when they hear the word "right".

Also, as always, not lawyer, this is not legal advice, etc. etc.

[AlanC9]

In Exile wrote...

Seifz wrote...
Besides that, the requirement that we tie our activation key to our EA account violates all sorts of rights guaranteed to us by law.  In addition, nobody from BioWare or EA seems willing to tell us precisely what information they plan to collect each time the game phones home to tell them which computer you're on.  That's a huge invasion of privacy. 

You're wrong. I understand you're sentiment, but insofar as fact is concerned...

I'll save you a little trouble here. When Seifz talks about "the law," he means his own preferred interpretation of the law, rather than what courts do today or what they're likely to do in the near future.

[In Exile]

AlanC9 wrote..
I'll save you a little trouble here. When Seifz talks about "the law," he means his own preferred interpretation of the law, rather than what courts do today or what they're likely to do in the near future.

Okay, that makes sense. So, basically... not the law at all, but rather some idea of natural rights that should be the law?

[mcneil_1]

Seifz wrote...

mcneil_1 wrote...

I say we wait and find out if bioware are going for the periodic phone in version.
Looking at it, solidshield without the phone in mode seems almost like the cerberus network <_< (I wonder if it was a test run)

Actually, has anyone said if we'll have to authenticate our DLC each time we play?  Will it work like DA:O where we only need to authenticate each DLC once?

I dont think any of the devs have mentioned anything yet about it, I know someone asked them about it though.

[AlanC9]

In Exile wrote...

AlanC9 wrote..
I'll save you a little trouble here. When Seifz talks about "the law," he means his own preferred interpretation of the law, rather than what courts do today or what they're likely to do in the near future.

Okay, that makes sense. So, basically... not the law at all, but rather some idea of natural rights that should be the law?

More like an unwillingness to recognize the difference between the two.

Last I heard the 9th Circuit still hadn't decided if they were going to take another look at Autodesk, and the speculation is that the Supreme Court won't hear it because there isn't enough of a split between the circuits. But  trying to predict this stuff is like predicting who's going to be in the football playoffs in August.

Could be worse, though. If the current Congress decides to get involved they're likely to expand corporate copyright power even more.

[Ghidorah14]

BioWare, you just lost a costumer to this DRM. Namely, myself.

I was already unsure of whether DA2 would be worth a buy or not, looking at whats been revealed and how you cant even import your DAO warden. Now, this DRM only confirms it; I am NOT getting DA2. Period. I'm not pre-ordering it, I'm not purchasing it, and I'm not playing it. I will NOT support you if this is how you treat your ever-so loyal customers.

I play DAO almost exclusively offline. Not because I dont have an internet connection, but because I like playing in the comfort of my room. And my xbox 360 will often stay there for weeks at a time. And you're gonna sit there and tell me I need to "check in" every once in a while just so I can play with the retail game disc that I legally bought?!

Unacceptable.

So congrats. Not only did you just lose a customer, but as of now, I'm going to go out of my way to "boycott" DA2. I will talk as much crap about it to anyone who listens, because this is some serious BS. I will do my best to convince people not to support you and your game. Not on this forum, oh no. I'm sure enough people have an idea of whats going on here.

Modifié par Ghidorah14, 05 février 2011 - 07:28 .

[ClassyUnicorn]

Ghidorah14 wrote...


I play DAO almost exclusively offline. Not because I dont have an internet connection, but because I like playing in the comfort of my room. And my xbox 360 will often stay there for weeks at a time. And you're gonna sit there and tell me I need to "check in" every once in a while just so I can play with the retail game disc that I legally bought?!

You realize that when ever DRM such as this one, or any other form of DRM for that matter is implemented it only effects PC users and not your Xbox as it has it's own form of DRM built into the console right?

Modifié par ClassyUnicorn, 05 février 2011 - 07:39 .

[Seifz]

In Exile wrote...

Seifz wrote...
I wasn't really getting at privacy laws, here.  As far as I'm concerned, it's entirely unethical for EA to collect some of the information that they admit to collecting.  I don't believe that they're collecting undisclosed information.

Whether or not its ethical isn't so important. Insofar as whether or not you have a right to something what matters is whether it's legal.

Unless you're talking about natural rights that aren't legal rights... in which case that really means you don't have any practical protection at all, and EA can well do as they please. So I'm sure you're not talking about that.

I was just clarifying that what I saw about laws wasn't related to what I said about privacy.  That's all.  I don't think that EA is violating any privacy laws, but that doesn't mean I have to be happy with what they're doing.  I'm very much not.

Thus far, every court has thrown out the "it's only a license" argument except for one appeals court (the Autodesk case).  The Copyright Act of 1976 and the Clayton Act are very clear in saying that software sales are sales.

No, you're wrong. There have been at least one decision in the early 2000s that have found that the EULA stands as a binding contract and that re-sale is prohibited. I can't remember the name right now. More to the point, so long as there isn't a Supreme Court ruling you can always have a higher court overturn this. I'm pretty sure the 9th Circuit recently overturned a software first sale ruling recently. These are all things I researched when looking to buy SC2, so I can't remember the names off the top of my head.

The recent appeal was the Autodesk case that I mentioned.  I can't find any other case that was ruled in favor of the software industry, but there have been a number of rulings against them and many states have laws that specifically make software count as a sale, not a license.  The Supreme Court has made at least one ruling on the idea of using a license to escape First Sale rights, Bauer & Cie. v. O'Donnell.  Their conclusion was that calling a sale a license does not make it a license.

Anyway, in terms of their actual provisions, neither the Clayton Act or the Copyright Act of 1976 actually clearly specify software as a good to be sold, equivalent (for example) to a book.

Actually, the Copyright Act of 1976 is pretty explicit.  "Notwithstanding the provisions of section
106
(3),
the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this
title, or any person authorized by such owner, is entitled, without the
authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the
possession of that copy or phonorecord."  "Copy" is clarified elsewhere in the act to include computer programs.

I hope that my local representative has something more important to focus on right now!  The economy, the wars, immigration, etc.  I think the BioWare boards are the perfect place to express my displeasure with BioWare's DRM scheme. 

I'm talking about your strongly held beliefs about your rights. As of right now, the law is unclear. When the law is unclear, people don't really have the protection that they'd expect when they hear the word "right".

While I agree with everything that you're saying, I still hope that my local representative is too busy to deal with this situation.  More likely, someone with a lot more money and free time than myself will eventually bring this issue to a major court and it will be dealt with there.  Congress, in all of their infinite wisdom, is working as we speak to give copyright holders even more rights while stripping them from us.  I could e-mail my local Congress Critters all I'd like, but it wouldn't do any good.

However, I'm comforted that at least one person at BioWare has probably read this.  Will EA change?  Maybe not.  They're not exactly the shining example of a Good Business.  But at least I made my grievances known!  And hey, maybe they will listen.  It's happened before. 

[marshalleck]

Ghidorah14 wrote...

So congrats. Not only did you just lose a customer, but as of now, I'm going to go out of my way to "boycott" DA2. I will talk as much crap about it to anyone who listens, because this is some serious BS. I will do my best to convince people not to support you and your game. Not on this forum, oh no. I'm sure enough people have an idea of whats going on here.

Oh no, a boycott! Someone post the picture of the "boycott MW2" Steam user group that shows almost every one of the members playing the game. 

Also, if you go around telling people that the Xbox 360 version of DA2 has PC version DRM built into it, have fun being laughed at like the moron you are.

[Tin Soldier]

I have two questions for anyone from EA/Bioware.
In the other thread Mr.  Priestly posted:
- There is a limit to the number of unique/different PCs that can start/play the game within a time window [5 PCs in 24hrs].
Does this apply only to installing the game?
Will there be any way to decouple the game from your EA account?

[Spinifer]

Let's vote on DRM
social.bioware.com/2505863/polls/14894/

I know this is only about periodic check feature, but as I've read it's the most discussed featuro of DA2 DRM.

[Ghidorah14]

marshalleck wrote...

Ghidorah14 wrote...

So congrats. Not only did you just lose a customer, but as of now, I'm going to go out of my way to "boycott" DA2. I will talk as much crap about it to anyone who listens, because this is some serious BS. I will do my best to convince people not to support you and your game. Not on this forum, oh no. I'm sure enough people have an idea of whats going on here.

Oh no, a boycott! Someone post the picture of the "boycott MW2" Steam user group that shows almost every one of the members playing the game. 

Also, if you go around telling people that the Xbox 360 version of DA2 has PC version DRM built into it, have fun being laughed at like the moron you are.

Well, excuse the [monkey] out of me for being misinformed about this stupid DRM. I dont exactly keep up to date with alot of this [manatee] like you nerds here. I just started posting here, saw some dribble about "DRM this and that" and thought "oh [kangaroo], that sucks." Maybe if they'd just release that information on it I would have known better. Not everyone plays the oh-so-perfect PC version. =/

Still not gonna buy DA2 though. And still gonna talk trash about it.

[No swearing, please.]

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 06 février 2011 - 06:44 .

[Lyssistr]

Probably everything is in check with the law. EA lawyers must have checked EAs products, there may be some borderline practices but I wouldn't expect an EA DVD to violate more laws than a car full of pot.

Ofc if someone is a lawyer (s)he may be able to shed more light on this.

But it's not a matter of being compliant with the law or not, it's a matter of providing feedback of what's acceptable as a practice and whatnot. Spore was probably perfectly legal but EAs DRM practices led to a fiasco.

Now some people are fine with whatever DRM publishers want to put into their games, good for them. Others have problems with DRM for various reasons. I think the whole theoretical discussion of whether DRM is a problem or not is entirely pointless as each one will say if (s)he has a problem or not.

The fact is that, for many, it is a problem to the extent consumers have boycotted several games because of DRM.

My stance is a simple one, vote with your money, unless you do that, even if you write 100000 pages of why you don't like DRM, EA simply doesn't care.

Modifié par Lyssistr, 06 février 2011 - 03:29 .

[Buzzz.Killlington]

I was really looking forward to DA2, I completed the first one several times over and had preordered the next one (signature edition). Not now; this is StarCraft 2 all over again. I fear I'll have to miss out on Mass Effect 3 as well

Congratulations EA, you've just put off a paying customer.

Modifié par Buzzz.Killlington, 06 février 2011 - 11:21 .

[AlanC9]

Seifz wrote...

Actually, the Copyright Act of 1976 is pretty explicit.  "Notwithstanding the provisions of section
106
(3),
the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this
title, or any person authorized by such owner, is entitled, without the
authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the
possession of that copy or phonorecord."  "Copy" is clarified elsewhere in the act to include computer programs.

Of course, EA's position is going to be that there is no sale. You bought a license.

I've heard that one reason you don't see an aggressive challenge to this position -- say, from the EFF or some such  -- is that nobody really wants to take this one on with the courts the way they are. There's a little ambiguity in the law, but that ambiguity has a good chance of being resolved in favor of the corporate position if it comes down to it.

[ZaroktheImmortal]

AlanC9 wrote...

Seifz wrote...

Actually, the Copyright Act of 1976 is pretty explicit.  "Notwithstanding the provisions of section
106
(3),
the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this
title, or any person authorized by such owner, is entitled, without the
authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the
possession of that copy or phonorecord."  "Copy" is clarified elsewhere in the act to include computer programs.

Of course, EA's position is going to be that there is no sale. You bought a license.

I've heard that one reason you don't see an aggressive challenge to this position -- say, from the EFF or some such  -- is that nobody really wants to take this one on with the courts the way they are. There's a little ambiguity in the law, but that ambiguity has a good chance of being resolved in favor of the corporate position if it comes down to it.

Well if we're just buying a license then it hardly seems worth the money we give them. Things like this really shows how much they value the people who buy their games.

[ARustyFirePlace]

EA don't care about the PC anymore, and either do Bioware, just don't buy this console crap and buy a REAL PC RPG, Witcher 2.

[zzqzzq_zzq]

<Sigh>



I know I might as well do something more useful with my time like <pee into the wind> but...



I'll add my comments as one of the folks who just finished canceling their pre-order over this.



If I don't have a "working" product when I leave the retailer (or UPS delivers/etc) I don't buy the product. Its really that simple. <As an aside, Steam violates this principle as well.>



I'm perfectly happy leaving the disk in the drive, or typing in the 30 character serial #, heck I'm happier looking up the 3rd word on page 42 in the manual, than I am "renting" my software, which seems more and more the norm.....



I know EA doesn't really care, but <shrug> ...



David

[riccaborto]

I think it is UNFAIR they revealed the DRM only AFTER the pre-order period.

BioWare disappointed me a lot with this...



I only hope the check doesn't come too often (like each 15/20 days, that would be ok).



In any case, I'll crack the game even if I will get the original... so I can play my game, the game I payed... IN PEACE

[BigJas]

zzqzzq_zzq wrote...

<snip>

I'll add my comments as one of the folks who just finished canceling their pre-order over this.

<snip>

I haven't decided yet. I'm waiting for EA/Bioware decisions on whether or not the game needs to re-authenticate before I decide to cancel. Though I undererstand and agree to some degree with your position, I don't see the harm in waiting a while longer.

I admit I'm more likely to win the lottery than the DRM being loosened though.

[ilPianiste]

In the meantime I've come to the conclusion that it's not just unacceptable if we have to re-authenticate the game. The need for an initial authentication is already asking too much, this being a single-player game.
I simply don't want to be at all dependent on those servers to be able to play -- there can never be any valid guarantee that EA suspends authentication one day (and if the do, after how many years earliest?), no matter what they say now to dispel our concerns ...

--- 

Also, still unanswered, although asked several times: Will there be any option to detach the game from an EA-account again?
If not, you REALLY should put that fact prominently on your retail boxes, or buyers who didn't know before they try to do it in order to resell their game will be really pi... angry.

Modifié par ilPianiste, 10 février 2011 - 08:18 .

[mcneil_1]

BigJas wrote...

zzqzzq_zzq wrote...



I'll add my comments as one of the folks who just finished canceling their pre-order over this.

I haven't decided yet. I'm waiting for EA/Bioware decisions on whether or not the game needs to re-authenticate before I decide to cancel. Though I undererstand and agree to some degree with your position, I don't see the harm in waiting a while longer.

I admit I'm more likely to win the lottery than the DRM being loosened though.

I agree, I still think Bioware is going to do a ME1 and decide on not doing the phone home every x days about a week out before DA2 gets released