260 réponses à ce sujet

[Kyda]

Hi, I don’t know if this was asked before... I just got my copy. I haven´t installed it yet... here is my question. I read somewhere (can´t remember where) that you can only install the game 3 times and I am probably changing my computer sometime soon... so, is this true? This might be a stupid question so I apologize if it is...

[Thandal N'Lyman]

Kyda wrote...

Hi, I don’t know if this was asked before... I just got my copy. I haven´t installed it yet... here is my question. I read somewhere (can´t remember where) that you can only install the game 3 times and I am probably changing my computer sometime soon... so, is this true? This might be a stupid question so I apologize if it is...

Not a stupid question, but it is incorrect infomation.

The limits are: As many installs as you like, but can only be played (active) on 5 systems "at a time", (defined as, "within the same 24-hour period".) 

[Edit:  Link to "official" BioWare description: http://social.biowar...1/index/6194280.]

Modifié par Thandal NLyman, 23 mars 2011 - 06:29 .

[Kyda]

Thandal NLyman wrote...

Kyda wrote...

Hi, I don’t know if this was asked before... I just got my copy. I haven´t installed it yet... here is my question. I read somewhere (can´t remember where) that you can only install the game 3 times and I am probably changing my computer sometime soon... so, is this true? This might be a stupid question so I apologize if it is...

Not a stupid question, but it is incorrect infomation.

The limits are: As many installs as you like, but can only be played (active) on 5 systems "at a time", (defined as, "within the same 24-hour period".) 

[Edit:  Link to "official" BioWare description: http://social.biowar...1/index/6194280.]

Thank you very much for the answer!

[tsolless]

SecuROM Release Control IS SecuROM.

Enjoy your lawsuit EABioware.

[City6]

tsolless wrote...

SecuROM Release Control IS SecuROM.

Enjoy your lawsuit EABioware.

I don't understand whay they couldn't just put a label on the box, like they're legally obliged to?

[OstatniKosmita]

City6 wrote...

I don't understand whay they couldn't just put a label on the box, like they're legally obliged to?

After releasing unfinished product why would they care? They prefer to lie and ban players who complains about this. EA never paid attention to customers. In my country they even do not care to answer tech questions. Giving them money is good, asking them for anything in return is seriously bad and in most cases ends with ban

[BarbSwift62]

TacPlay wrote...

Not a problem BarbSwift. I like to find info for myself rather than take the words of people who proven they are not trust worthy. If your interested there are more similar cases about the same thing. The list and contact info of the lawyer, Alan Himmelfarb, is here.

http://www.reclaimyourgame.com/content.php?564-The-People-Vs.-SecuROM-Collated

The problem here is not that it is DRM.. the problem is that they did not say that it was SecuROM, in fact tried to cover it up with slick marketing when they were orderd to dislose if they used SecuROM. Really.. if they cared about there customers they would not need a court order for that. Think about it.

You're welcome TacPlay. Oh, and thanks for the lawsuit link. I found it before but when I went back to find it again, I couldn't and thought it might have been removed and thank God it wasn't.  Phew!

But, seriously, people here need to put their disapointment/anger/disgust into action and make sure EA/Bioware learn their lesson and NOT lie to us again.

I'd start or join a class action lawsuit if I could but I didn't end up buying the game due to their lying about SecuROM being used (almost wish I had bought it now, then I could get one started). That is unforgivable in my eyes. If we can't trust the people we hand our money to for games, who can we trust and why should we pay for lies... we can get that anywhere for free.
I mean, seriously, if any other company we purchased a product from had lied like this, then we'd do something about it, and if nothing is done to make them realise that lying is the WRONG thing to do to their consumers and wrong way to do buiness, they will continue to keep doing it because you are all allowing them to by not taking a stand against it. 

And what's worse, there is still no fix for those what are STILL not able to play a game they paid for over 2 weeks ago, which is really bad. Especially when those are now turning to the people who circumvent DRMs to get help/a fix, because they're not getting it from the ones that are meant to be helping them and fixing the issues that they themselves caused.

I have a solution for you Bioware/EA...

REMOVE ALL OF THE DRM.   IT'S NOT WORKING.   IT'S ALREADY BEEN ON THE FREE SITES FOR MORE THAN 3 WEEKS AND YOU ARE ONLY HURTING YOUR HONEST CUSTOMERS BY STILL USING IT.

If you can't/won't do that, then give everyone their money back... back to those that still can't play it without using an illegal cracked exe and to those that would never have purchased it in the first place if they had of know it contained SecuROM.

I won't hold my breathe though, because I have no faith in Bioware/EA doing the right thing for their customers due to it not bringing more money in so they can purchase their fancy cars, take fancy holidays, eat fancy meals in fancy resturants, etc....  We are only their money supply and nothing more and they will never treat us any differently unless we all take a stand against this sort of treatment from them.

Bioware/EA.. PLEASE do the right thing for a change and consider your honest customers.

[chrisdaddy]

well said i guess

[Valaskjalf]

City6 wrote...

The arguement they are trying to make is that SecuROM DRM is not the same as SecuROM Release Control.

However, this arguement is irrelevant: the ruling's conditions for future releases were not about SecuROM DRM, but the totality of SecuROM. They admitted in the original post that SecuROM Release Control is a facet of SecuROM (Release Control is from the "Sony SecuROM technology group").

The ruling specifies SecuROM (ie "the technology group") not SecuROM DRM (the specific program).

The relevant page from the ruling which states this is the one posted in the previous post (http://img14.imagesh...isclosures.jpg/).


EA/Bioware have violated this ruling. It's not a question of arguement, it's a definitional fact.

That page looks irrelevant. Note the wording "copy protection". The Sony DADC implementation in DA2 is not a form of copy protection. I suspect you would be able to copy the disc as much as you want if you tried. You can also copy all the installed files as much as you like. Therefore there is no copy protection included.

[Sapphira]

Valaskjalf wrote...

City6 wrote...

The arguement they are trying to make is that SecuROM DRM is not the same as SecuROM Release Control.

However, this arguement is irrelevant: the ruling's conditions for future releases were not about SecuROM DRM, but the totality of SecuROM. They admitted in the original post that SecuROM Release Control is a facet of SecuROM (Release Control is from the "Sony SecuROM technology group").

The ruling specifies SecuROM (ie "the technology group") not SecuROM DRM (the specific program).

The relevant page from the ruling which states this is the one posted in the previous post (http://img14.imagesh...isclosures.jpg/).


EA/Bioware have violated this ruling. It's not a question of arguement, it's a definitional fact.

That page looks irrelevant. Note the wording "copy protection". The Sony DADC implementation in DA2 is not a form of copy protection. I suspect you would be able to copy the disc as much as you want if you tried. You can also copy all the installed files as much as you like. Therefore there is no copy protection included.

IM QUOTING FOR NO REASON! YOUR AVATAR CRACKS ME UP LOLOLOLOLLOL

[TacPlay]

That is the wording they are ordered to print on there game, not what makes them have to put it there. If you look up just a little bit, it sais "All future games that are published by the Defendant that use SecuROM will contain or display the fallowing" and then it goes into what you just said. It does not say "that use SeuROM copy protection" it sais "SecuROM" which is all SecuROM.

[Camenae]

I'm confused and need people who are more computer-savvy to enlighten me: What exactly is so great about SecuROM, that companies want to use it so bad? There must be reasons to go against a court order other than, we hate you and want to spite you.

[CenturyCrow]

Camenae wrote...

I'm confused and need people who are more computer-savvy to enlighten me: What exactly is so great about SecuROM, that companies want to use it so bad? There must be reasons to go against a court order other than, we hate you and want to spite you.

Nothing is really great about SecuROM from a user's point of view. From EA/BW's statements they 'apparently' chose to use it to prevent the game being played prior to release.

Many users have experienced no problems at all with SecuROM; others have had various problems, including not being able to remove SecuRom because it's isolated from the operating system like a rootkit (other than reformatting the drive) and would prefer not to have it knowingly or unknowingly installed.

Given how much EA and other companies are always in court, I'd find it hard to believe they 'forgot'  to follow the judgement (Spore). As to going against a court order, a lot of corporations ignore the law, because the fine is (usually) much cheaper than taking it through the court system and can be written off as an expense–'the cost of doing business.' Of course, we saw the opposite of that not too long ago, where the US Government didn't take a large corporation to court,  saying they were 'too big to sue.'

And generally, the only way to put the corporations to task from a user's point of view, is a class action law-suit, wherein mostly the lawyers win.

Modifié par CenturyCrow, 27 mars 2011 - 01:30 .

[yuanyelss]

As a player, there is no reason to believe ...... they avoid and conceal the truth, they do on my computer, I do not know what, I paid them to do so?

[Warheadz]

How can I get rid of this SecuROM?

[ManiacalEvil]

Yeah, my father runs a company. They manufacture trousers and shirts. The shirts are often times very defective, while the shoes aren't. Does that mean they can't use the same shoes.

IT IS NOT THE SAME PROGRAM. OR IS BIOWARE OBLIGED TO SAY THEY USE SOFTWARE WHICH COMES FROM A COMPANY WHO HAPPENS TO MAKE THAT OTHER COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SOFTWARE?

Cause, you know, Sony also happens to make consoles, DVD readers and a whole lot of other stuff. Should BioWare be obliged to say it's DRM comes from a company who makes consoles? No more than it should be obliged to say it comes from the company who makes SecuRom, I think.

[Seifz]

ManiacalEvil wrote...

Yeah, my father runs a company. They manufacture trousers and shirts. The shirts are often times very defective, while the shoes aren't. Does that mean they can't use the same shoes.

IT IS NOT THE SAME PROGRAM. OR IS BIOWARE OBLIGED TO SAY THEY USE SOFTWARE WHICH COMES FROM A COMPANY WHO HAPPENS TO MAKE THAT OTHER COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SOFTWARE?

Cause, you know, Sony also happens to make consoles, DVD readers and a whole lot of other stuff. Should BioWare be obliged to say it's DRM comes from a company who makes consoles? No more than it should be obliged to say it comes from the company who makes SecuRom, I think.

The proper name for the release control software used in DA2 is "SecuROM Release Control".  It is made by the SecuROM team (Sony DADC), it's advertised as part of the SecuROM DRM package, and it shares a lot of its code with other SecuROM components.

In short, you're wrong.

[ManiacalEvil]

Seifz wrote...

ManiacalEvil wrote...

Yeah, my father runs a company. They manufacture trousers and shirts. The shirts are often times very defective, while the shoes aren't. Does that mean they can't use the same shoes.

IT IS NOT THE SAME PROGRAM. OR IS BIOWARE OBLIGED TO SAY THEY USE SOFTWARE WHICH COMES FROM A COMPANY WHO HAPPENS TO MAKE THAT OTHER COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SOFTWARE?

Cause, you know, Sony also happens to make consoles, DVD readers and a whole lot of other stuff. Should BioWare be obliged to say it's DRM comes from a company who makes consoles? No more than it should be obliged to say it comes from the company who makes SecuRom, I think.

The proper name for the release control software used in DA2 is "SecuROM Release Control".  It is made by the SecuROM team (Sony DADC), it's advertised as part of the SecuROM DRM package, and it shares a lot of its code with other SecuROM components.

In short, you're wrong.

So it is made by the same team and shares some libraries so it is securom? Securom is a solution who leaves undeletable files behinf while checking everytime you start a game. This technology checks if the game is released, then bothers you no more, even if your version is not legit. So yeah, they are the same, right?

[Seifz]

ManiacalEvil wrote...

Seifz wrote...

ManiacalEvil wrote...

Yeah, my father runs a company. They manufacture trousers and shirts. The shirts are often times very defective, while the shoes aren't. Does that mean they can't use the same shoes.

IT IS NOT THE SAME PROGRAM. OR IS BIOWARE OBLIGED TO SAY THEY USE SOFTWARE WHICH COMES FROM A COMPANY WHO HAPPENS TO MAKE THAT OTHER COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SOFTWARE?

Cause, you know, Sony also happens to make consoles, DVD readers and a whole lot of other stuff. Should BioWare be obliged to say it's DRM comes from a company who makes consoles? No more than it should be obliged to say it comes from the company who makes SecuRom, I think.

The proper name for the release control software used in DA2 is "SecuROM Release Control".  It is made by the SecuROM team (Sony DADC), it's advertised as part of the SecuROM DRM package, and it shares a lot of its code with other SecuROM components.

In short, you're wrong.

So it is made by the same team and shares some libraries so it is securom? Securom is a solution who leaves undeletable files behinf while checking everytime you start a game. This technology checks if the game is released, then bothers you no more, even if your version is not legit. So yeah, they are the same, right?

The product has SecuROM in the name.  It uses SecuROM code.  It's SecuROM.  You're talking about one component of SecuROM, but SecuROM is a suite of products and this is one of them.

For what it's worth, SecuROM Release Control did leave behind a number of files and registry entries after it was "removed" from my system and at least one of those registry entries cannot be deleted because the registry claims that it doesn't exist (even though I can see it).

[ManiacalEvil]

Seifz wrote...

ManiacalEvil wrote...

Seifz wrote...

ManiacalEvil wrote...

Yeah, my father runs a company. They manufacture trousers and shirts. The shirts are often times very defective, while the shoes aren't. Does that mean they can't use the same shoes.

IT IS NOT THE SAME PROGRAM. OR IS BIOWARE OBLIGED TO SAY THEY USE SOFTWARE WHICH COMES FROM A COMPANY WHO HAPPENS TO MAKE THAT OTHER COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SOFTWARE?

Cause, you know, Sony also happens to make consoles, DVD readers and a whole lot of other stuff. Should BioWare be obliged to say it's DRM comes from a company who makes consoles? No more than it should be obliged to say it comes from the company who makes SecuRom, I think.

The proper name for the release control software used in DA2 is "SecuROM Release Control".  It is made by the SecuROM team (Sony DADC), it's advertised as part of the SecuROM DRM package, and it shares a lot of its code with other SecuROM components.

In short, you're wrong.

So it is made by the same team and shares some libraries so it is securom? Securom is a solution who leaves undeletable files behinf while checking everytime you start a game. This technology checks if the game is released, then bothers you no more, even if your version is not legit. So yeah, they are the same, right?

The product has SecuROM in the name.  It uses SecuROM code.  It's SecuROM.  You're talking about one component of SecuROM, but SecuROM is a suite of products and this is one of them.

For what it's worth, SecuROM Release Control did leave behind a number of files and registry entries after it was "removed" from my system and at least one of those registry entries cannot be deleted because the registry claims that it doesn't exist (even though I can see it).

You do know that happens with a huge variety of programs, perhaps including Dragon Age right? How about running a nice regstry cleaner and trying again. Anyway, it doesn't perform the same as any DRM Securom. It is simply a release date check. It has no other effect on gameplay. You would say DA2 is DA:O? It uses a lot of DA:O code.

[Seifz]

ManiacalEvil wrote...

Seifz wrote...

ManiacalEvil wrote...

Seifz wrote...

ManiacalEvil wrote...

Yeah, my father runs a company. They manufacture trousers and shirts. The shirts are often times very defective, while the shoes aren't. Does that mean they can't use the same shoes.

IT IS NOT THE SAME PROGRAM. OR IS BIOWARE OBLIGED TO SAY THEY USE SOFTWARE WHICH COMES FROM A COMPANY WHO HAPPENS TO MAKE THAT OTHER COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SOFTWARE?

Cause, you know, Sony also happens to make consoles, DVD readers and a whole lot of other stuff. Should BioWare be obliged to say it's DRM comes from a company who makes consoles? No more than it should be obliged to say it comes from the company who makes SecuRom, I think.

The proper name for the release control software used in DA2 is "SecuROM Release Control".  It is made by the SecuROM team (Sony DADC), it's advertised as part of the SecuROM DRM package, and it shares a lot of its code with other SecuROM components.

In short, you're wrong.

So it is made by the same team and shares some libraries so it is securom? Securom is a solution who leaves undeletable files behinf while checking everytime you start a game. This technology checks if the game is released, then bothers you no more, even if your version is not legit. So yeah, they are the same, right?

The product has SecuROM in the name.  It uses SecuROM code.  It's SecuROM.  You're talking about one component of SecuROM, but SecuROM is a suite of products and this is one of them.

For what it's worth, SecuROM Release Control did leave behind a number of files and registry entries after it was "removed" from my system and at least one of those registry entries cannot be deleted because the registry claims that it doesn't exist (even though I can see it).

You do know that happens with a huge variety of programs, perhaps including Dragon Age right? How about running a nice regstry cleaner and trying again. Anyway, it doesn't perform the same as any DRM Securom. It is simply a release date check. It has no other effect on gameplay. You would say DA2 is DA:O? It uses a lot of DA:O code.

No, but that's a stupid analogy.

Look, if you can't be bothered to go to the Sony DADC website that outright shows you that Release Check is in fact SecuROM Release Check, then ****** off and stop trolling.  BioWare told us that this was an entirely separate product from SecuROM and it isn't.  They lied.  End.

[Taura-Tierno]

Isn't it just a case of Bioware saying "We don't use SecuROM" while intending to say "We don't use the SecuROM services that are widely despised?" Which is what they should've said, at least.

[Seifz]

Taura-Tierno wrote...

Isn't it just a case of Bioware saying "We don't use SecuROM" while intending to say "We don't use the SecuROM services that are widely despised?" Which is what they should've said, at least.

Maybe, but instead they chose to tell us that their release control software wasn't SecuROM at all, only admitted that it was from the Sony DADC team when called on it, and never admitted that it was, in fact, part of SecuROM.

While I'm willing to believe that the community managers here were ignorant to the reality of this software, I cannot excuse those at BioWare who made the choice or those who did not fully explain it to the others.  Then again, maybe the community folks did know.  Either way, the situation is no good for BioWare.

[KyreneZA]

Taura-Tierno wrote...

Isn't it just a case of Bioware saying "We don't use SecuROM" while intending to say "We don't use the SecuROM services that are widely despised?" Which is what they should've said, at least.

Possibly. I tend to be more cynical than that though. I work for a software production company too, and I know how many times we omit certain details that could cause a negative perception. And perception is a VERY LARGE factor when it comes to clients/customers.

Yes, the SecuROM release check software is (from all accounts) benign (apart from the files/registry entries sloppily left over after uninstallation), but since it's made by SecuROM it is stigmatised by association. And that's why BioWare has not disclosed all/misinformed everyone about its use and nature regarding DRM for DA2.

Honestly, I would too, even if I didn't like them doing it.

[Taura-Tierno]

Kyrene wrote...

Taura-Tierno wrote...

Isn't it just a case of Bioware saying "We don't use SecuROM" while intending to say "We don't use the SecuROM services that are widely despised?" Which is what they should've said, at least.

Possibly. I tend to be more cynical than that though. I work for a software production company too, and I know how many times we omit certain details that could cause a negative perception. And perception is a VERY LARGE factor when it comes to clients/customers.

Yes, the SecuROM release check software is (from all accounts) benign (apart from the files/registry entries sloppily left over after uninstallation), but since it's made by SecuROM it is stigmatised by association. And that's why BioWare has not disclosed all/misinformed everyone about its use and nature regarding DRM for DA2.

Honestly, I would too, even if I didn't like them doing it.

If it really is benign, and only shares developer and certain library files, I can understand why they would choose not to use the name "secuROM", if it was intentional. 

Although I'm a bit on the optimistic side, so I'll choose to believe that it was a form of miscommunication.