The Denuvo DRM Thread

[Mustawd]

^ butthurt

That's a stand-up guy right there.

I'm not arguing against piracy. Hell, in some cases it can be downright positive (i.e. archived roms of games that are not being sold anymore).

I personally had a hard drive full of pirated games when I was in grad school and couldn't afford to actually buy them. As it stands now, I have deleted 98% of those games and I now have 300+ games on steam that I purchased because it's more convenient and I now have plenty of money to spend on them.

It's just sometimes jarring to see how far the internet's expectations of free stuff has come when we start deluding ourselves this way. Whatever. 3rd world countries have completely different views on this, so I don't see most of the Euro-centric rpgcodex agreeing with me.

 

[Sankarihauta]

I haven't made it past page 1 so i'll remove this post if someone already pointed it out. but this idea that you can always detect a program a cheater made is a form of special pleading.

when you give the cheater's program full access to install all its shit and time to setup, after that time steam is easily fucked as is the people who think they can make a copy of the unlocked version of the cheat. and it's for the same reason actually.

1. You can decrypt and reencrypt a file while maintaining cryptographic security over the contents.
2. You can make a program run with cryptographic security still intact but require an unlock code for it to function. ( see 1)

It would be very slow to do 1 at all times. and games are still about performance somewhat. what's really detectable is the payload. unless the hacker defeats steam, it's encryption protocols, and the drm for the specific game in mind, they can't make the emulation of reasonable expectations about the state of the client-side program not bust them in general. hacking is also about the specific game you're hacking too, so there are cases it's easier. leaving the last concern is can the effects of your hack be detected by unrealistic actions your client is taking. for aimbots pretty much yes.

the payload isn't necessarily an object in memory btw. once the changes are made it can kind of fuck off. oh right if you didn't catch on why 2 is enough to stop from the unlocked cheat to be uploaded. think about 1 more deeply. all i'm saying.

 

[J_C]

Artist paints a picture. Artist sells the picture for money. I don't pay for the picture, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the picture, but the artist had not been paid a cent. - Stealing

Developer makes a game. Developer sellt the game for money. I don't pay for the game, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the game, but the developer had not been paid a cent. - Stealing.


Arguing that piracy is not stealing is literally one of the dumbest thing ever. Sure, legislations need to change, but until that happens piracy is stealing.

It is not by accident that we are talking about stealing corporated data, or stealing corporate records. Just because something is not tangible, you can steal it. It might be a different kind of theft, but a theft nonetheless. Of course Pirate King Excidium will come and try to prove otherwise.

 

[Zed]

Artist paints a picture. Artist sells the picture for money. I don't pay for the picture, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the picture, but the artist had not been paid a cent. - Stealing

Developer makes a game. Developer sellt the game for money. I don't pay for the game, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the game, but the developer had not been paid a cent. - Stealing.


Arguing that piracy is not stealing is literally one of the dumbest thing ever. Sure, legislations need to change, but until that happens piracy is stealing.

It is not by accident that we are talking about stealing corporated data, or stealing corporate records. Just because something is not tangible, you can steal it. It might be a different kind of theft, but a theft nonetheless.

what if I murder you, with your kitchen knife. is it my murder, or yours?

 

[J_C]

Artist paints a picture. Artist sells the picture for money. I don't pay for the picture, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the picture, but the artist had not been paid a cent. - Stealing

Developer makes a game. Developer sellt the game for money. I don't pay for the game, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the game, but the developer had not been paid a cent. - Stealing.


Arguing that piracy is not stealing is literally one of the dumbest thing ever. Sure, legislations need to change, but until that happens piracy is stealing.

It is not by accident that we are talking about stealing corporated data, or stealing corporate records. Just because something is not tangible, you can steal it. It might be a different kind of theft, but a theft nonetheless.

what if I murder you, with your kitchen knife. is it my murder, or yours?

This doesn't make any sense, but please, continue.

 

[Darth Slaughter]

Artist paints a picture. Artist sells the picture for money. I don't pay for the picture, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the picture, but the artist had not been paid a cent. - Stealing

Developer makes a game. Developer sellt the game for money. I don't pay for the game, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the game, but the developer had not been paid a cent. - Stealing.


Arguing that piracy is not stealing is literally one of the dumbest thing ever. Sure, legislations need to change, but until that happens piracy is stealing.

It is not by accident that we are talking about stealing corporated data, or stealing corporate records. Just because something is not tangible, you can steal it. It might be a different kind of theft, but a theft nonetheless.

what if I murder you, with your kitchen knife. is it my murder, or yours?

This doesn't make any sense, but please, continue.

that line of though would only make sense if no life were taken from an inventory. A dead pirated J_C, but the original still intact.

 

[markec]

Artist paints a picture. Artist sells the picture for money. I don't pay for the picture, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the picture, but the artist had not been paid a cent. - Stealing

Developer makes a game. Developer sellt the game for money. I don't pay for the game, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the game, but the developer had not been paid a cent. - Stealing.


Arguing that piracy is not stealing is literally one of the dumbest thing ever. Sure, legislations need to change, but until that happens piracy is stealing.

It is not by accident that we are talking about stealing corporated data, or stealing corporate records. Just because something is not tangible, you can steal it. It might be a different kind of theft, but a theft nonetheless. Of course Pirate King Excidium will come and try to prove otherwise.

Friend buys a game, he borrows me the game to play it. I played the game without paying for it, I delete the game from my hard.

Am I a thief who needs to be prosecuted?

 

[J_C]

Artist paints a picture. Artist sells the picture for money. I don't pay for the picture, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the picture, but the artist had not been paid a cent. - Stealing

Developer makes a game. Developer sellt the game for money. I don't pay for the game, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the game, but the developer had not been paid a cent. - Stealing.


Arguing that piracy is not stealing is literally one of the dumbest thing ever. Sure, legislations need to change, but until that happens piracy is stealing.

It is not by accident that we are talking about stealing corporated data, or stealing corporate records. Just because something is not tangible, you can steal it. It might be a different kind of theft, but a theft nonetheless. Of course Pirate King Excidium will come and try to prove otherwise.

Friend buys a game, he borrows me the game to play it. I played the game without paying for it, I delete the game from my hard.

Am I a thief who needs to be prosecuted?

No, borrowing something never was a crime. Just like it is not a crime if you borrow my car for a few days. But if you are just taking it away without me giving a permission, then you stole it.

 

[RK47]

Just like cucking, then.

 

[markec]

Artist paints a picture. Artist sells the picture for money. I don't pay for the picture, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the picture, but the artist had not been paid a cent. - Stealing

Developer makes a game. Developer sellt the game for money. I don't pay for the game, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the game, but the developer had not been paid a cent. - Stealing.


Arguing that piracy is not stealing is literally one of the dumbest thing ever. Sure, legislations need to change, but until that happens piracy is stealing.

It is not by accident that we are talking about stealing corporated data, or stealing corporate records. Just because something is not tangible, you can steal it. It might be a different kind of theft, but a theft nonetheless. Of course Pirate King Excidium will come and try to prove otherwise.

Friend buys a game, he borrows me the game to play it. I played the game without paying for it, I delete the game from my hard.

Am I a thief who needs to be prosecuted?

No, borrowing something never was a crime. Just like it is not a crime if you borrow my car for a few days. But if you are just taking it away without me giving a permission, then you stole it.

What is the difference between downloading a game from some guy from Bulgaria and borrowing the game from a friend next door. For both I will play them for few days without paying and then delete them. So whats the difference that makes one a crime and one not a crime.

 

[hajro]

You make a clone of yourself and then kill it. Is it murder or suicide?

 

[ArchAngel]

Artist paints a picture. Artist sells the picture for money. I don't pay for the picture, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the picture, but the artist had not been paid a cent. - Stealing

Developer makes a game. Developer sellt the game for money. I don't pay for the game, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the game, but the developer had not been paid a cent. - Stealing.


Arguing that piracy is not stealing is literally one of the dumbest thing ever. Sure, legislations need to change, but until that happens piracy is stealing.

It is not by accident that we are talking about stealing corporated data, or stealing corporate records. Just because something is not tangible, you can steal it. It might be a different kind of theft, but a theft nonetheless. Of course Pirate King Excidium will come and try to prove otherwise.

Such a terrible example and comparison.

What you should have said is Artists makes a picture, puts it in a gallery and charges people to see it. You enter inside without paying, see the picture and leave.
Then compare it with second example.

Everything else is you being a dumbfuck.

 

[J_C]

Artist paints a picture. Artist sells the picture for money. I don't pay for the picture, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the picture, but the artist had not been paid a cent. - Stealing

Developer makes a game. Developer sellt the game for money. I don't pay for the game, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the game, but the developer had not been paid a cent. - Stealing.


Arguing that piracy is not stealing is literally one of the dumbest thing ever. Sure, legislations need to change, but until that happens piracy is stealing.

It is not by accident that we are talking about stealing corporated data, or stealing corporate records. Just because something is not tangible, you can steal it. It might be a different kind of theft, but a theft nonetheless. Of course Pirate King Excidium will come and try to prove otherwise.

Friend buys a game, he borrows me the game to play it. I played the game without paying for it, I delete the game from my hard.

Am I a thief who needs to be prosecuted?

No, borrowing something never was a crime. Just like it is not a crime if you borrow my car for a few days. But if you are just taking it away without me giving a permission, then you stole it.

What is the difference between downloading a game from some guy from Bulgaria and borrowing the game from a friend next door. For both I will play them for few days without paying and then delete them. So whats the difference that makes one a crime and one not a crime.

The differense is that your friend bought the game and (if the game has no DRM) he owns the game, and he can give it to anyone. Technically the results are the same, but legally, pirating is stealing because you didn't get permission from the developer to use that game. And you get that permission by paying.

Artist paints a picture. Artist sells the picture for money. I don't pay for the picture, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the picture, but the artist had not been paid a cent. - Stealing

Developer makes a game. Developer sellt the game for money. I don't pay for the game, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the game, but the developer had not been paid a cent. - Stealing.


Arguing that piracy is not stealing is literally one of the dumbest thing ever. Sure, legislations need to change, but until that happens piracy is stealing.

It is not by accident that we are talking about stealing corporated data, or stealing corporate records. Just because something is not tangible, you can steal it. It might be a different kind of theft, but a theft nonetheless. Of course Pirate King Excidium will come and try to prove otherwise.

Such a terrible example and comparison.

What you should have said is Artists makes a picture, puts it in a gallery and charges people to see it. You enter inside without paying, see the picture and leave.
Then compare it with second example.

Everything else is you being a dumbfuck.

Way to go calling me a dumbfuck while giving an even worse example. When you go into the gallery and leave, you are not keeping a copy of the picture. If going by your example, it would go like this:

Tha artist makes a picture and invites people to his gallery. In the gallery, you can ask the artist to make an exact copy of the picture, and you pay for it. But you just go into the gallery and grab one of the copies lying around, and run off.

Everything else is you being a bigger dumbfuck.

 

[markec]

The differense is that your friend bought the game and (if the game has no DRM) he owns the game, and he can give it to anyone. Technically the results are the same, but legally, pirating is stealing because you didn't get permission from the developer to use that game. And you get that permission by paying.

The guy who cracks the game needs to buy the game before he can crack and share it. So you are saying that since he bought the game and he owns it its legal for him to share it.

Lets make this clear, in your opinion. I buy a game from GoG, it has no DRM and I decide to borrow it to all my friends. I have lots of friends so instead of giving it one by one, I upload it online and let all of them try it out. That is completely legal in your mind since I bought the game.

 

[ArchAngel]

Artist paints a picture. Artist sells the picture for money. I don't pay for the picture, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the picture, but the artist had not been paid a cent. - Stealing

Developer makes a game. Developer sellt the game for money. I don't pay for the game, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the game, but the developer had not been paid a cent. - Stealing.


Arguing that piracy is not stealing is literally one of the dumbest thing ever. Sure, legislations need to change, but until that happens piracy is stealing.

It is not by accident that we are talking about stealing corporated data, or stealing corporate records. Just because something is not tangible, you can steal it. It might be a different kind of theft, but a theft nonetheless. Of course Pirate King Excidium will come and try to prove otherwise.

Such a terrible example and comparison.

What you should have said is Artists makes a picture, puts it in a gallery and charges people to see it. You enter inside without paying, see the picture and leave.
Then compare it with second example.

Everything else is you being a dumbfuck.

Way to go calling me a dumbfuck while giving an even worse example. When you go into the gallery and leave, you are not keeping a copy of the picture. If going by your example, it would go like this:

Tha artist makes a picture and invites people to his gallery. In the gallery, you can ask the artist to make an exact copy of the picture, and you pay for it. But you just go into the gallery and grab one of the copies lying around, and run off.

Everything else is you being a bigger dumbfuck.

You are not just a dumbfuck, you are biggest dumbfuck that ever lived. You get +10 dumbfuck points for totally not understand what I was even talking about.
Come back once your IQ gets over room temperature (in celsius).

 

[Mustawd]

Artist paints a picture. Artist sells the picture for money. I don't pay for the picture, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the picture, but the artist had not been paid a cent. - Stealing

Developer makes a game. Developer sellt the game for money. I don't pay for the game, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the game, but the developer had not been paid a cent. - Stealing.


Arguing that piracy is not stealing is literally one of the dumbest thing ever. Sure, legislations need to change, but until that happens piracy is stealing.

It is not by accident that we are talking about stealing corporated data, or stealing corporate records. Just because something is not tangible, you can steal it. It might be a different kind of theft, but a theft nonetheless. Of course Pirate King Excidium will come and try to prove otherwise.

Such a terrible example and comparison.

What you should have said is Artists makes a picture, puts it in a gallery and charges people to see it. You enter inside without paying, see the picture and leave.
Then compare it with second example.

Everything else is you being a dumbfuck.

Way to go calling me a dumbfuck while giving an even worse example. When you go into the gallery and leave, you are not keeping a copy of the picture. If going by your example, it would go like this:

Tha artist makes a picture and invites people to his gallery. In the gallery, you can ask the artist to make an exact copy of the picture, and you pay for it. But you just go into the gallery and grab one of the copies lying around, and run off.

Everything else is you being a bigger dumbfuck.

You are not just a dumbfuck, you are biggest dumbfuck that ever lived. You get +10 dumbfuck points for totally not understand what I was even talking about.
Come back once your IQ gets over room temperature (in celsius).

Someone got their dumbfuck tag removed and is feeling pretty

 

[Mustawd]

Artist paints a picture. Artist sells the picture for money. I don't pay for the picture, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the picture, but the artist had not been paid a cent. - Stealing

Developer makes a game. Developer sellt the game for money. I don't pay for the game, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the game, but the developer had not been paid a cent. - Stealing.


Arguing that piracy is not stealing is literally one of the dumbest thing ever. Sure, legislations need to change, but until that happens piracy is stealing.

It is not by accident that we are talking about stealing corporated data, or stealing corporate records. Just because something is not tangible, you can steal it. It might be a different kind of theft, but a theft nonetheless. Of course Pirate King Excidium will come and try to prove otherwise.

Friend buys a game, he borrows me the game to play it. I played the game without paying for it, I delete the game from my hard.

Am I a thief who needs to be prosecuted?

this is a very valid point. It goes back to the original napster/torrent argument. On one extreme I make a cassette tape copy and let a friend borrow it. On the other extreme I run a cassette tape copying operation at no cost (theoretically) and I give away the tapes to thousands, if not millions, for free. Somewhere in between those two poles is "stealing". The argument some try to make is that one extreme is the same as the other. Just simply not the case.

Now let's say this theoretical cassette tape has copy protection. and you break it AND then copy it and give it to you friend. There might be an argument to say that's stealing. It's a very complex subject to be sure.

 

[ArchAngel]

His Cuck tag is worse so it is not a problem.

 

[Destroid]

Remove from inventory -> Theft
Create unauthorised copy -> Copyright infringment

You can argue they are morally equivalent if you like, but thats a different thing than claiming they are identical events.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Borrowing a game from a friend vs pirating the game is a good example though. It's just more convenient for both of us that I pirate the game instead of having to log into steam with my friend's account in order to play it.

I'd say piracy classifies as theft in cases when there's no other means of you getting that game save for buying it, and you played a significant portion of it. Of course "significant portion" is very subjective and varies from one game to another.

In the other cases, we can just presume I borrowed the ability to play the game from someone, or whatever, and it makes no difference whether I pirated it or not.

On the other hand, let me ask you this - if I've bought a movie and watch it with friends, is there theft here? Or if I borrow a movie on a dvd/blu-ray and watch it more than once?

 

[Destroid]

Artist paints a picture. Artist sells the picture for money. I don't pay for the picture, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the picture, but the artist had not been paid a cent. - Stealing

Developer makes a game. Developer sellt the game for money. I don't pay for the game, but I get a hold of it anyway. Now I own the game, but the developer had not been paid a cent. - Stealing.


Arguing that piracy is not stealing is literally one of the dumbest thing ever. Sure, legislations need to change, but until that happens piracy is stealing.

It is not by accident that we are talking about stealing corporated data, or stealing corporate records. Just because something is not tangible, you can steal it. It might be a different kind of theft, but a theft nonetheless. Of course Pirate King Excidium will come and try to prove otherwise.

Friend buys a game, he borrows me the game to play it. I played the game without paying for it, I delete the game from my hard.

Am I a thief who needs to be prosecuted?

this is a very valid point. It goes back to the original napster/torrent argument. On one extreme I make a cassette tape copy and let a friend borrow it. On the other extreme I run a cassette tape copying operation at no cost (theoretically) and I give away the tapes to thousands, if not millions, for free. Somewhere in between those two poles is "stealing". The argument some try to make is that one extreme is the same as the other. Just simply not the case.

Now let's say this theoretical cassette tape has copy protection. and you break it AND then copy it and give it to you friend. There might be an argument to say that's stealing. It's a very complex subject to be sure.

Total insanity.

 

[Mustawd]

On the other hand, let me ask you this - if I've bought a movie and watch it with friends, is there theft here? Or if I borrow a movie on a dvd/blu-ray and watch it more than once?

This goes back to my point on scale. Technology has bypassed cost in terms of reaching a global scale. Your example, is what...5 or 6 lost sales for the movie production company? Ok. What about if you projected a movie in an auditorium somewhere. That climbs to a hundred? What about an empty college basketball court? A few 10 thousands? Stream it on the internet? Put it on a torrent?

I think a purist would say that going .0001 mph/kph over the speed limit is technically breaking the law. At what point should we start to care? Again, equating copying for a few friends vs wide dissemination to thousands or millions of people (or participating in downloading it) is like equating going over the speed limit by .5 mph vs 100 mph. At least to me anyway.

 

[Santander02]

You wouldn't download a car...

 

[AwesomeButton]

On the other hand, let me ask you this - if I've bought a movie and watch it with friends, is there theft here? Or if I borrow a movie on a dvd/blu-ray and watch it more than once?

This goes back to my point on scale. Technology has bypassed cost in terms of reaching a global scale. Your example, is what...5 or 6 lost sales for the movie production company? Ok. What about if you projected a movie in an auditorium somewhere. That climbs to a hundred? What about an empty college basketball court? A few 10 thousands? Stream it on the internet? Put it on a torrent?

I think a purist would say that going .0001 mph/kph over the speed limit is technically breaking the law. At what point should we start to care? Again, equating copying for a few friends vs wide dissemination to thousands or millions of people (or participating in downloading it) is like equating going over the speed limit by .5 mph vs 100 mph. At least to me anyway.

I wrote my post and only later saw your example which was pretty similar.

The points I wanted to make with this example were two:
1. Anti-piracy laws and threat of the stick is needed for PR purposes, so that piracy is tolerated on individual level but not openly socially acceptable.
2. Publisher companies would have been happy to charge us per viewing of a film, or per hearing a song, if they could do that. Only if they could, they would certainly move the boundaries of the definition of "theft" and "morally justifiable" in order to fit a business model which such a technology would permit them to use.

With the digital distribution of games, maybe we are just entering an age where we'll be paying by "hours played" - imagine being able to download a game for free, and then the first 60 hours cost you $1, the next 75 - 75c, the next 125 - 30c and from then on it's 10c. The billing schemes could be arranged in a flexible way to allow for "DLC packs" that give you a discount to the base game, "Enhanced Editions" that modify the cost per hour, etc. I don't think we're too far from such a moment, provided the distributors and developers reach the conclusion that this is more profitable.

In short, I don't think they would hesitate to fuck players in the ass if they see it as the more profitable option. That's why I have little remorse about pirating. Pirate first, ask questions later, and if the game is good, reward the developer.

 

[Excidium II]

Remove from inventory -> Theft
Create unauthorised copy -> Copyright infringment

You can argue they are morally equivalent if you like, but thats a different thing than claiming they are identical events.

the end