Brontoforumus Archive

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:


This board has been fossilized.
You are reading an archive of Brontoforumus, a.k.a. The Worst Forums Ever, from 2008 to early 2014.  Registration and posting (for most members) has been disabled here to discourage spambots from taking over.  Old members can still log in to view boards, PMs, etc.

The new message board is at http://brontoforum.us.

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14

Author Topic: To Steam Or Not To Steam  (Read 18192 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Arc

  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: 0
  • Posts: 3703
    • View Profile
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #160 on: February 11, 2009, 08:49:57 AM »

You know if you made a new account for every game you downloaded you could probably just sell your account. It wouldn't surprise me if something in the user agreement bans that,

It's in the first line of the EULA. Not that a blackmarket hasn't already been propped up to facilitate this very demand.
Logged

Bal

  • Cheerful in the face of nuclear armageddon
  • Tested
  • Karma: 62
  • Posts: 3861
    • View Profile
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #161 on: February 11, 2009, 02:24:10 PM »

There is also still the issue, even in a legitimate, Valve supported system, that there is no way to ensure that I have actually "sold" my property, or simply backed it up elsewhere with a crack or two, and sold the opportunity to do the same to someone else.
Logged

TA

  • Tested
  • Karma: 29
  • Posts: 3219
    • View Profile
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #162 on: February 11, 2009, 02:59:55 PM »

Okay, here I think is where the biggest disconnect is coming from.

There is also still the issue, even in a legitimate, Valve supported system, that there is no way to ensure that I have actually "sold" my property, or simply backed it up elsewhere with a crack or two, and sold the opportunity to do the same to someone else.

You're entirely right.  It is difficult, if not impossible, for Valve to create a flawless, foolproof method of digital distribution that both gives full support to the right of first sale and also cannot be bypassed by piracy.  The problem is, the law looks at it from a standpoint of consumer protection, and doesn't care about what theoretical hardships this might cause Valve.  Valve has a legal obligation to protect the right of first sale in their account-based digital distribution scheme, and their own anti-piracy methods would have to build around that.  You seem to expect that Valve's first priority in constructing Steam should be to make sure it maximizes their options, and only then to worry about whether it's legal.  That's not how it works.

From an anti-piracy standpoint, Steam is an abject failure.  Most DRM schemes are bypassed by downloading the game from a peer-to-peer system, and stripping the DRM from it.  With Steam, you can download the game directly from Valve with a cracked version of Steam, and they can't actually distinguish that from a legitimate download.  Steam's DRM serves no purpose except to strip aftermarket rights from the customers.

There's been a lot of talk about the benefits of Steam, the community and chat functions.  That's all well and good, but let's look at this in the context of Dawn of War 2, as that's what prompted all this.  What beneficial function of Steam wouldn't work in a setup where DoW2 supports Steam registration, and can be made to look through Steam for online games and facilitate Steam's community-building features, but does not require that you so register it?  What would be lost, from the perspective of the consumer?
Logged
Do you understand how terrifying the words “vibrating strap on” are for an asexual? That’s like saying “the holocaust” to a Jew.

Kazz

  • Projekt Direktor
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65475
  • Posts: 6423
    • View Profile
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #163 on: February 11, 2009, 03:11:59 PM »

I love it when people argue that you, the consumer, are stupid for not pirating your games when you clearly could.
Logged

Romosome

  • Tested
  • Karma: 20
  • Posts: 1841
    • View Profile
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #164 on: February 11, 2009, 03:12:55 PM »

this thread could use some actual law quoting rather than wild claims from both sides of what Valve is legally obligated to do.
Logged

MadMAxJr

  • Tested
  • Karma: 5
  • Posts: 2339
    • View Profile
    • RPG Q&A
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #165 on: February 11, 2009, 03:13:04 PM »

I would be more than willing to pick a side in this debate, but steam has suddenly decided to stop accepting my credit card that it has accepted previously for some time now, so I can't even pre-order DoW2.  Instead I have to go with a physical copy that will delay me about a day after launch.

So I'm quite irritated with steam, but not exactly for the same reasons as you fellows.  Carry on.
Logged
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt." - Bertrand Russell

Got questions about RPGs?

Kazz

  • Projekt Direktor
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65475
  • Posts: 6423
    • View Profile
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #166 on: February 11, 2009, 03:15:35 PM »

Steam gave me a CC rejection once, but then I tried again an hour later and it worked.
Logged

Bal

  • Cheerful in the face of nuclear armageddon
  • Tested
  • Karma: 62
  • Posts: 3861
    • View Profile
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #167 on: February 11, 2009, 03:16:07 PM »

DOW2 requires you have Steam installed and registered because they use it as their patching service, which was the initial goal of Steam. Matchmaking is handled by GWFL.

Steam's failure as a form of DRM is somewhat questionable, but also irrelevant. Steam isn't primarily a form of DRM, it's a platform for distribution and support that, by virtue of it's design, functions as a form of DRM. I'm sure Valve appreciates that aspect, but as they've stated multiple times, they keep players buying their product legitimately by making sure to continue support. Look at Team Fortress 2 for example. Still seeing good sales more than a year out due to Valve's continued support of it, and of the community.

On another note, maybe you can help me with the legality of it as regards digital medium, but is it a sale if I make an identical copy to keep for myself? I have trouble reconciling this in my mind. If I sell a CD, at the very least I no longer have that CD, but in a purely digital form there's nothing lost.
Logged

TA

  • Tested
  • Karma: 29
  • Posts: 3219
    • View Profile
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #168 on: February 11, 2009, 03:32:08 PM »

It'd be as much a sale as if you buy a book, scan it, and then sell it again.  Or if you sell that CD after ripping it.  Which is to say, yes, of course it's a sale.
Logged
Do you understand how terrifying the words “vibrating strap on” are for an asexual? That’s like saying “the holocaust” to a Jew.

Detonator

  • You made me come back for THIS?
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: 42
  • Posts: 3040
    • View Profile
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #169 on: February 11, 2009, 04:19:24 PM »

Here's how it works.

Lets suppose Valve lets you sell or gift games to each other in order to allow your right of resale. There's a flurry of activity as people want to get rid of their old games, either for cash or in free trade with friends. Gabe Newell is happy.

Until, that is, a hacker compromises his Steam account. He logs in one Monday to find that over the weekend, somebody donated away all his games to another account. He has staff close that account, only to find that several thousand dollars worth of games have already been sold to unwitting players who assumed they were buying legitimately.

Valve a hold on the account's funds transfer, but it's too late - most of the money is already gone from the Valve system and is on its way to a bank account in Nigeria.

Now, even if holds are placed to allow only one trade per game each month, there's still high reward in raiding inactive accounts.

Of course there's a possibility of criminal activity whenever money is involved.  What you're saying is basically "don't keep money in your wallet, you're just encouraging people to mug you".

Making the point AGAIN: it's not a matter of profit or crime or safety or the existing system: it's a matter of rights guaranteed by law.

I also noticed this is analogous to your Legalize It thread argument about potential crime if legalization came about.  Any sort of freedom carries its risks of abuse, but that doesn't give corporations or the government the right to deny me those rights.
Logged
"Imagine punching somebody so hard that they turned into a door. Then you found out that's where ALL doors come from, and you got initiated into a murder club that makes doors. The stronger you punch, the better the door. So there are like super strong murderers who punch people into Venetian doors and shit"

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #170 on: February 11, 2009, 05:23:43 PM »

To argue on the other side for once, if there's no DRM, how can one tell if a reselling of a game is from a legitimate copy or a pirated copy?  When you see a pirated DVD for sale, it's pretty obvious it was not legitimately created.  The identicalness of digital distribution erases that.  Would it be the burden of the game companies to find out which sellers legitimately bought their game in the first place?

Well, in the Steam case I think we're still talking about having the download tied to your account and simply removing your ability to re-download it once you've transferred it.

Apple, if I'm not mistaken, puts metadata in its MP4's that identify the original purchaser and make piracy traceable.  I'm sure this is easy to scrub, but once again, pirates will pirate no matter what protection is in place.

Standard "Yes, because people TOTALLY DON'T PIRATE STEAM GAMES ALREADY" response goes here.

But that people use Steam at all implies that some people will pay for games that could be pirated, and would unwittingly buy a "stolen" digital copy. If it was just the games then the thief could simply pirate, but once someone will pay money, your account becomes worth stealing.

And then we're talking about identity theft, which I'm pretty sure is already illegal.

Here's how it works.

Lets suppose Valve lets you sell or gift games to each other in order to allow your right of resale. There's a flurry of activity as people want to get rid of their old games, either for cash or in free trade with friends. Gabe Newell is happy.

Until, that is, a hacker compromises his Steam account.

Hey JD, I've got a question.

How come you try to inject every debate with a hypothetical situation where people start doing something that's already illegal, already hypothetically possible, and involves some sort of bizarre, convoluted Underpants Gnome moneymaking scheme?

There is also still the issue, even in a legitimate, Valve supported system, that there is no way to ensure that I have actually "sold" my property, or simply backed it up elsewhere with a crack or two, and sold the opportunity to do the same to someone else.

Already covered.  People who want to pirate a game already can and Steam is not stopping them from doing so; game resale is not a major source of piracy; you can already fucking do this with a disc-based game right the hell now.

I love it when people argue that you, the consumer, are stupid for not pirating your games when you clearly could.

Nobody's actually making that argument, but yes, anyone who's been paying attention for the past 30 years knows that anti-piracy protection of any kind only inconveniences legitimate users.

this thread could use some actual law quoting rather than wild claims from both sides of what Valve is legally obligated to do.

...I'm going to have to hitch my wagon to the law student instead of the guy who thinks binary files spring to life with DRM already attached two posts after it's explained that this is not the case, but fair enough; TA, can you cite some specifics?

Steam's failure as a form of DRM is somewhat questionable, but also irrelevant.

You don't get to decide what is and is not relevant.

Steam isn't primarily a form of DRM, it's a platform for distribution and support that, by virtue of it's design, functions as a form of DRM.

And a baseball bat isn't designed to crack your skull open, but if I used it to do that it would still be illegal.

...nope, still not as bad an analogy as the underwear one.  I'll keep trying.

I'm sure Valve appreciates that aspect, but as they've stated multiple times, they keep players buying their product legitimately by making sure to continue support.

NO.

NO THEY DO NOT.

BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE NOT BUYING A PRODUCT ON STEAM, OR THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO RESELL IT.

Look at Team Fortress 2 for example. Still seeing good sales more than a year out due to Valve's continued support of it, and of the community.

...Now see, from TA's and my perspective, THAT'S irrelevant.  The positive aspects of Steam do not erase the fact that it ignores certain consumer rights, and, as I have already said, there is absolutely no contradiction or cognitive dissonance inherent in praising the one while damning the other.

On another note, maybe you can help me with the legality of it as regards digital medium, but is it a sale if I make an identical copy to keep for myself? I have trouble reconciling this in my mind. If I sell a CD, at the very least I no longer have that CD, but in a purely digital form there's nothing lost.

IIRC, under pre-DMCA copyright law, software users were allowed to make one backup copy for personal use.  The DMCA makes copy protection circumvention of any kind illegal, but there are several examples of that broad claim being thrown out in court.

Logged

Bal

  • Cheerful in the face of nuclear armageddon
  • Tested
  • Karma: 62
  • Posts: 3861
    • View Profile
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #171 on: February 11, 2009, 05:50:57 PM »

Quote
Already covered.  People who want to pirate a game already can and Steam is not stopping them from doing so; game resale is not a major source of piracy; you can already fucking do this with a disc-based game right the hell now.
Quote
Nobody's actually making that argument, but yes, anyone who's been paying attention for the past 30 years knows that anti-piracy protection of any kind only inconveniences legitimate users.

So your argument on this point is to just let it happen, and even facilitate it? Valve manages to protect their interests and the interests of their clients to a sufficient degree without inconveniencing the legitimate user, and in fact adding layers of functionality.

Quote
You don't get to decide what is and is not relevant.

Uh, fuck you I can make any assertion I like. If you don't agree, argue the point.

Quote
NO.

NO THEY DO NOT.

BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE NOT BUYING A PRODUCT ON STEAM, OR THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO RESELL IT.

That's pretty semantic, but the upshot is that I feel that I have gotten my value for money, however you choose to define what I have actually purchased, and honestly I don't think there is a perfect definition for what we're talking about.

Quote
...Now see, from TA's and my perspective, THAT'S irrelevant

And to me this is very relevant to the quality and value of the service. I guess it's only you who can determine what is and is not relevant?
Logged

Bal

  • Cheerful in the face of nuclear armageddon
  • Tested
  • Karma: 62
  • Posts: 3861
    • View Profile
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #172 on: February 11, 2009, 06:14:38 PM »

This is anecdotal, so take it how you will, but it is an example of how Steam can prevent piracy. Malvado, the mutual friend of everyone from the LB, is a fucking enormous pirate. He caps out his Comcast download limit every month downloading music, movies, and less often these days, games. I say less often because the man buys everything on Steam now. If it's available there, and he's interested, he will always put down the cash. He's got like 40 games in there now. Why? It is more convenient than piracy, and the services offered are valuable to him.

This is one reason why I question the "abject failure" of Steam as a DRM platform. It doesn't succeed by making it impossible to pirate, it does so by making it more convenient and more valuable not to.
Logged

Bongo Bill

  • Dinosaurcerer
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65431
  • Posts: 5244
    • View Profile
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #173 on: February 11, 2009, 06:26:36 PM »

I'm trying to think of a real-world service where the word "buy" is used where the concept of right of first sale is ridiculous. A tattoo, maybe? You buy a tattoo, but you can't resell it without grievous bodily injury. You didn't pay for the ink, you paid to have it applied to your skin. I don't know if people use the word "buy" in conjunction with tattoos, though.

One can purchase a service, though, is the point. Services can't be resold. The nature of digital property is fuzzy enough that I feel confident in saying that it's counterproductive and obfuscatory to attempt to eliminate the differences between the ways digital products and physical products can be exchanged.

Digital products are economically broken, since as soon as it exists, the supply is effectively infinite. A digital service still has value, because the supply can remain finite. However, the method used to monetize a digital service can be constructed to intuitively resemble business practices applicable to physical products. I think that they are justified in marketing the service using terms associated with the widely-understood practice that it most closely resembles.
Logged
...but is it art?

TA

  • Tested
  • Karma: 29
  • Posts: 3219
    • View Profile
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #174 on: February 11, 2009, 06:30:05 PM »

this thread could use some actual law quoting rather than wild claims from both sides of what Valve is legally obligated to do.

...I'm going to have to hitch my wagon to the law student instead of the guy who thinks binary files spring to life with DRM already attached two posts after it's explained that this is not the case, but fair enough; TA, can you cite some specifics?

Well, the right of first sale is codified in 17 USCS § 109(a), "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."  That § 106(3), by the way, says "the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following: ... (3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;".  Distilled, this is saying that although copyright owners have the exclusive right to sell or rent copies generally, someone who buys a copy has is entitled, without the approval or authority or anything whatsoever of the copyright owner, to sell that particular copy.  So, if you're actually buying a copy of the game, which everything from Valve except the specific functioning they've built into Steam says that you are, then you have an absolute right to resell it or otherwise permanently divest yourself of ownership as you like.

Misfortunately, the case law is sparse on the subject.  Much if it is about creating derivative works and whether or not you can sell those - for example, cutting up a book and mounting the pictures on ceramic tiles and selling those, or whether an authorized reseller on a University can alter the packaging of Photoshop to peel off the "EDUCATION VERSION--Academic ID Required" and reshrinkwrap it (answers: no, and no) - but Christopher Phelps & Assocs. v. Galloway, 477 F.3d 128 is a Fourth Circuit case affirming that, yes, the first sale doctrine is very much active law.  And again, there's the promo CD case Thad mentioned, UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Augusto, 558 F. Supp. 2d 1055.  More on that later.

SoftMan Prods. Co. v. Adobe Sys., 171 F. Supp. 2d 1075 is only a District Court case, but it's recent (2001) and pretty on-point.  Basically, Adobe was claiming that it was only selling licenses to use its software, rather than copies of the software itself, and that the EULA explaining the difference was binding.  The court's take on that argument was "Ownership of a copy should be determined based on the actual character, rather than the label, of the transaction by which the user obtained possession. Merely labeling a transaction as a lease or license does not control. If a transaction involves a single payment giving the buyer an unlimited period in which it has a right to possession, the transaction is a sale. In this situation, the buyer owns the copy regardless of the label the parties use for the contract. Course of dealing and trade usage may be relevant, since they establish the expectations and intent of the parties. The pertinent issue is whether, as in a lease, the user may be required to return the copy to the vendor after the expiration of a particular period. If not, the transaction conveyed not only possession, but also transferred ownership of the copy." and "The Court agrees that a single payment for a perpetual transfer of possession is, in reality, a sale of personal property and therefore transfers ownership of that property, the copy of the software.", at 1086.

As for the EULA, while it was specifically invalid in that case because they never installed the software anyway, they point out Vault Corp. v. Quaid Software, Ltd., 847 F.2d 255 and Step-Saver Data Sys. v. Wyse Tech., 939 F.2d 91, Fifth and Third Circuit cases respectively that both find shrinkwrap licenses to be unconscionable and unenforceable, specifically pointing out how the licenses violate the UCC in their decisions.  The case law is mixed by jurisdiction on the subject, but it's

Basically, as Valve constantly calls the game a sale, and accepts a payment for an indefinite transfer of possession, it's a goddamn sale.  Thus, I as purchaser have an absolute right to resell that copy however I like.  Now, as for specifically making copies and then selling the original, UMG Recordings v. Augusto does address that, saying "To invoke the first sale defense, a defendant must show: (1) the property was lawfully manufactured with the plaintiff's authorization; (2) the plaintiff transferred title to the property; (3) the defendant was the lawful owner of the property; and (4) the defendant disposed of, but did not reproduce, the property. An affirmative answer to each question validates the defense. Failure to qualify under any prong dooms it."  So if you install Half-Life 3, sell it, and retain a usable installation of it, then Valve could go after you in court.  Otherwise, no.
Logged
Do you understand how terrifying the words “vibrating strap on” are for an asexual? That’s like saying “the holocaust” to a Jew.

Brentai

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnXYVlPgX_o
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65281
  • Posts: 17524
    • View Profile
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #175 on: February 11, 2009, 06:32:45 PM »

Thank you for posting all that just to prove the immediately obvious.

...

No, seriously.  Thank you.  Somebody apparently really needed to do that.
Logged

Mongrel

  • Emoticon Knight-Errant
  • kodePunc Team
  • Tested
  • *
  • Karma: -65340
  • Posts: 17029
    • View Profile
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #176 on: February 11, 2009, 06:33:33 PM »

I think that's the most relevant post I've seen in this thread in several pages.
Logged

Bal

  • Cheerful in the face of nuclear armageddon
  • Tested
  • Karma: 62
  • Posts: 3861
    • View Profile
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #177 on: February 11, 2009, 06:37:40 PM »

So what happens when there is no way to guarantee the veracity of the sale, and the adherence to the first sale requirements you just listed?
Logged

Thad

  • Master of Karate and Friendship for Everyone
  • Admin
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65394
  • Posts: 12111
    • View Profile
    • corporate-sellout.com
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #178 on: February 11, 2009, 06:46:23 PM »

So your argument on this point is to just let it happen, and even facilitate it?

Okay.  I am sick of fucking repeating this, as TA and I have done so at least half-a-dozen times by now.  So if anyone makes this argument again, I am simply going to respond with a series of :wrong: emotes.

But, one more time, since this is apparently so very difficult to grasp:

COPY PROTECTION IS NOT A NATURALLY OCCURRING PHENOMENON.
IT HAS TO BE DELIBERATELY ADDED INTO SOFTWARE.
NOT ADDING IT IS NOT "FACILITATING" ANYTHING.

Valve manages to protect their interests and the interests of their clients to a sufficient degree without inconveniencing the legitimate user, and in fact adding layers of functionality.

Quote
You don't get to decide what is and is not relevant.

Funny you put these two things back-to-back, because now I get to declare all the great and wonderful value-added shit you keep bringing up to be irrelevant.

That's pretty semantic

I will repeat: what the fuck do you think law IS?

Quote
...Now see, from TA's and my perspective, THAT'S irrelevant

And to me this is very relevant to the quality and value of the service. I guess it's only you who can determine what is and is not relevant?

Uh, fuck you I can make any assertion I like. If you don't agree, argue the point.

...we're going round and round at this point.  You don't seem to actually grasp what I'm saying -- viz, that it's quite possible for a service to have both good and bad qualities, and that it's possible for these good and bad qualities to have different weights with different people.  You clearly believe the merits outweigh the flaws, which is fine; what's starting to bug me is that you don't seem willing to acknowledge that the flaws exist and keep saying "butbutbut THE MERITS!" every time anyone points them out to you.

Case in point:

This is anecdotal, so take it how you will, but it is an example of how Steam can prevent piracy. Malvado, the mutual friend of everyone from the LB, is a fucking enormous pirate. He caps out his Comcast download limit every month downloading music, movies, and less often these days, games. I say less often because the man buys everything on Steam now. If it's available there, and he's interested, he will always put down the cash. He's got like 40 games in there now. Why? It is more convenient than piracy, and the services offered are valuable to him.

This is one reason why I question the "abject failure" of Steam as a DRM platform. It doesn't succeed by making it impossible to pirate, it does so by making it more convenient and more valuable not to.

THIS.  DOES NOT.  HAVE A MOTHERFUCKING THING.  TO DO.  WITH WHETHER OR NOT THEY ALLOW YOU TO RESELL A GAME.  YOU ENORMOUS.  MORON.

I've already SAID that anyone who can convince people not to pirate software by providing them a more convenient platform with value added should do so, should be lauded for it, and should serve as a leader to other content providers.  The problem with your reasoning is that this and what TA and I are arguing for ARE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE.

You don't actually seem to understand our objection or the point we are making, at all.  What was the line on The Daily Show the other week?  Something to the effect of "It's like a wife comes home and finds her husband fucking her sister, and he thinks the problem is he didn't tell her he was going to be home early."
Logged

Disposable Ninja

  • Tested
  • Karma: -65447
  • Posts: 4529
    • View Profile
Re: To Steam Or Not To Steam
« Reply #179 on: February 11, 2009, 06:49:17 PM »

Well, in the Steam case I think we're still talking about having the download tied to your account and simply removing your ability to re-download it once you've transferred it.

But wouldn't that still be facilitating resale?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14