Pirating as a 'demo'. Your opinions?

[Khyron]

Better to let this thread fizzle out by not adding fuel to the fire. In other words, please don't feed the troll.

[therapist]

@ssilk

I find it much more difficult to shorten my postings, than to elongate them. Coming to the point. Removing useless sentences or even words. Make it easier to read.

Much to learn here, how to make it wrong.

I would agree, except people just reassert their earlier unaddressed points as a reply to your reply to their reply.

[quote=""ssilk"]
Well, even on a forum time goes out. You don't need to answer to every single point. You have to find THE point and answer it, because the others are not stupid and can and want follow or they wont. [/quote]

Nope, time here is unlimited. The only limit is how little a person wished to read. The limits are self imposed and based on the interest of each reader.

[quote=""ssilk"]You have to make it somehow interesting. It is not interesting, if I write a sentence and three coming back. That is just stupid. [/quote]

Sorry, it isn't going to be interesting, it's gonna be a slow, painful crawl towards a conclusion. That is the nature of the topic we are discussing.

[quote=""ssilk"]Hm. This belongs now to a meta-meta-discussion. I'm not sure, but as moderator I should have to stop this, but my personal feeling is ... indifferent.[/quote]

Just one meta will suffice. It happens alot but is hard to understand why, you start responding to an on-topic post, but your reply requires you broaden the discussion to ethics and things like that. How can you discuss your opinion on piracy if you don't initiate and discuss the ethics part of it?

I feel guilty for participating in the meta-meta too. This thread went bad pretty early and turned into completely random chat thread somehow. And the whole "discussion" about what various technical terms mean and other nonsense...

It's a messy topic.

In context of Factorio, the developers have made a statement that they aren't going to do anything about the piracy, and they hope it might help them. That's, like, end of the discussion. The devs have stated their opinion and I don't think many people disagree about that. Are there actually people who believe the developers should be stricter about enforcing their copyrights?

"End of discussion" lol, that should be your signature or your catchphrase or your pornstar name of something.

Some people disagree with you, and think the devs have taken actions that impede piracy while restricting what legitimate users can do. Did you know that a few developers actually release torrents of their own material and allow release teams to post links to their torrents on their own forums. They also have taken the position that they do not support piracy, just wish to curb and control piracy by being their own game's torrent release team.

[therapist]

Better to let this thread fizzle out by not adding fuel to the fire. In other words, please don't feed the troll.

Lol, trolls always respond to individual points in block format and try to be courteous even when others are being rude right?

I used to troll the stormfront (neonazi) forums, trolled habbo with the "patriotic nigras" when i was a little underage ban, trolled the John Benet Ramsey forums because trolling conspiracy theorists is fun, trolled the John McCain forums because I was sure most of his supporters could barely use computers.

What I do on this forum isn't trolling, it's responding. Responding to all the things you say. All my responses are real, and I don't intend to invoke emotion in you, although I am getting a floodgate of emotion none-the-less.

Better to let people who want to discuss the opportunity to continue the discussion on the topic at hand, and go post how much you want this discussion to end in the thread that was created just for people like you to talk about how they don't find value in this discussion.

[ssilk]

Well, I must agree, this is not trolling.

But hard at the border. Cause nobody needs to response to every sentence. If that would be true... pffff.

I make an easy example: Look at this post, I took the most important part from above and answer to that. It's easy and this makes conversation interesting, cause answering to all don't give me the chance to see, what's important for you and what's not.

It's a sign of cleverness not to answer all, not to comment everything, not to bother all with reading walls of text. Or in short: Just to keep your thoughts and concentrate on the important stuff.

In other words: You assume, the others are stupid, if you try to answer everything. But from the things you don't write, can be read much more, then from the things you write.

So pleeeaaaase: keep your answers short and come back to the subject.

[therapist]

Well, I must agree, this is not trolling.

But hard at the border. Cause nobody needs to response to every sentence. If that would be true... pffff.

I make an easy example: Look at this post, I took the most important part from above and answer to that. It's easy and this makes conversation interesting, cause answering to all don't give me the chance to see, what's important for you and what's not.

It's a sign of cleverness not to answer all, not to comment everything, not to bother all with reading walls of text. Or in short: Just to keep your thoughts and concentrate on the important stuff.

In other words: You assume, the others are stupid, if you try to answer everything. But from the things you don't write, can be read much more, then from the things you write.

So pleeeaaaase: keep your answers short and come back to the subject.

I don't respond to each point to assume people are stupid.

Responding to you in this very post may lead me off the original topic, are you saying that you are not allowed to make a response to another person if it deviates from the subject? If so, how rigid are you on this?

In your opinion, does the discussion of the ethics of piracy or the immorality of piracy belong in this topic or does each subdivision or expounding or exploration of a topic need its own dedicated thread?

[ssilk]

To make it short (I couldn't sleep, it's 4'clock here): No, yes, no.

[therapist]

Nvm what I originally, posted, I get it now. The no, yes, no thing was short to the point of being confusing.

I've been trying to send people private messages when they want to deviate too far from the original topic to continue these deviations in private. I haven't gotten good results doing this, people always seem to prefer the public exchange, especially when they want to flame or seem to have something to prove.

I hope it isn't too harassing to private message people, my goal is only to preserve the integrity of the original thread.

[muzzy]

Some people disagree with you, and think the devs have taken actions that impede piracy while restricting what legitimate users can do.

Not this again...

As a legitimate user I really want to install the patches from an official USB stick, but they aren't sending me one in the mail! They should provide this type of service! I really want to do my updates this way, can't you see they're restricting what legitimate users can do?

As a legitimate user I really want to install the patches from the official server without authentication, but they aren't letting me download as a guest! They should provide this type of service! I really want to do my updates this way, can't you see they're restricting what legitimate users can do?

Did you know that a few developers actually release torrents of their own material and allow release teams to post links to their torrents on their own forums. They also have taken the position that they do not support piracy, just wish to curb and control piracy by being their own game's torrent release team.

That would make the copies legitimate, not pirate copies. As in, downloading them is no longer copyright infringement at all since the developers themselves released them. These developers have effectively chosen a "pay if you want to" scheme where the choice of not paying is 100% legal and OK.

I've been trying to send people private messages when they want to deviate too far from the original topic to continue these deviations in private. I haven't gotten good results doing this, people always seem to prefer the public exchange, especially when they want to flame or seem to have something to prove.

Holy hell. So those 14 responses I sent to you were not good results because I thought you were wrong? I'd say that's some pretty damn good result, you got dozens of hours of my attention. What exactly would you consider a good result to an attempt to continue discussions in private, if a series of long exchanges spanning 5 days does not qualify?

[therapist]

Not this again...

As a legitimate user I really want to install the patches from an official USB stick, but they aren't sending me one in the mail! They should provide this type of service! I really want to do my updates this way, can't you see they're restricting what legitimate users can do?

Because thats totally the same thing. Not a false equivocation at all.

As a legitimate user I really want to install the patches from the official server without authentication, but they aren't letting me download as a guest! They should provide this type of service! I really want to do my updates this way, can't you see they're restricting what legitimate users can do?

It isn't the lack of delivery at all, its hiding parts of a product or doing things for the purpose of reducing piracy that is considered DRM. You actually made the claim that starcraft 2 doesn't use DRM, and the things they do to make LAN play impossible is a "proprietary service". You don't anything at all is DRM that most gaming news outlets and gaming communities everywhere all agree is clearly DRM. You just call it a "proprietary service" that locks paying users out of using their product the way you want, not DRM, thats crazy.

Did you know that a few developers actually release torrents of their own material and allow release teams to post links to their torrents on their own forums. They also have taken the position that they do not support piracy, just wish to curb and control piracy by being their own game's torrent release team.

That would make the copies legitimate, not pirate copies. As in, downloading them is no longer copyright infringement at all since the developers themselves released them. These developers have effectively chosen a "pay if you want to" scheme where the choice of not paying is 100% legal and OK.

Nope, they don't condone or promote using torrents to get the game. They still stand firm on the position that you have to pay for the game if you want to play it. Uploading a torrent =/= Consent to pirate and do whatever you want. They just want to be able to put links to the download page and the price in the description of the torrent to promote people buying the game.

Also, allowing people to torrent the game is a technique to make more sales especially for an indie dev that has a hard time promoting their product. The sales gained by "fair" pirates far outweighs any losses from people that would never have bought an indie game they never heard of anyway.

Holy hell. So those 14 responses I sent to you were not good results because I thought you were wrong? I'd say that's some pretty damn good result, you got dozens of hours of my attention. What exactly would you consider a good result to an attempt to continue discussions in private, if a series of long exchanges spanning 5 days does not qualify?

Lol, you did help to stop changing the topic of the piracy thread for a day or so, and now your back saying things like "end of discussion" in this thread AGAIN, rather than the other tread set up SPECIFICALLY FOR YOU (and 1 other guy) to discuss how we should stop discussing the things we are discussing in this topic. Remember your little outburst and flaming about script kiddies? You didn't respond to that message at all that I sent you asking not to poo-poo up another thread and turn it into a flamewar just because you want to very oddly insist that you have to write a whole security auditing suite before you get to call yourself a pen tester. I use industry standard auditing tools, get over it.

[muzzy]

You actually made the claim that starcraft 2 doesn't use DRM

This is a lie.

What I was saying that DRM isn't some magical property attached to things. It's always a specific technology and I was speculating what parts of SC2 are DRM and what are not.

You are twisting my words. Not cool.

Uploading a torrent =/= Consent to pirate and do whatever you want. They just want to be able to put links to the download page and the price in the description of the torrent to promote people buying the game.

WTF? If they distribute it themselves, then it doesn't matter if they consent to its use or not. It's a legitimate authorized copy, not copyright infringement, and such copies can be used without a license (assuming you don't need additional rights granted by such a license). It's 100% legit to not pay in such case.

In the United States, Section 117 of the Copyright Act gives the owner of a particular copy of software the explicit right to use the software with a computer, even if use of the software with a computer requires the making of incidental copies or adaptations (acts which could otherwise potentially constitute copyright infringement). Therefore, the owner of a copy of computer software is legally entitled to use that copy of software. Hence, if the end-user of software is the owner of the respective copy, then the end-user may legally use the software without a license from the software publisher.

(emphasis added)

And it's the same in EU as well. EU Copyright Directive 2001/29/EC article 5, paragraph 1, section b allows for similar temporary copies for legitimate use of the work, so it means owner of the copy can use it without infringing on the copyright.

Holy hell. So those 14 responses I sent to you were not good results because I thought you were wrong? I'd say that's some pretty damn good result, you got dozens of hours of my attention. What exactly would you consider a good result to an attempt to continue discussions in private, if a series of long exchanges spanning 5 days does not qualify?

Lol, you did help to stop changing the topic of the piracy thread for a day or so

You're the one that wanted to discuss DRM where none existed.

Remember your little outburst and flaming about script kiddies? You didn't respond to that message at all that I sent you asking not to poo-poo up another thread and turn it into a flamewar just because you want to very oddly insist that you have to write a whole security auditing suite before you get to call yourself a pen tester. I use industry standard auditing tools, get over it.

You sent no such message.

Also, I didn't bother continuing that because you seemed to have completely missed my point about script kiddies, and then you completely missed my point about fallacies. There was no use making yet another point that you would again completely miss.

[therapist]

This is a lie.

What I was saying that DRM isn't some magical property attached to things. It's always a specific technology and I was speculating what parts of SC2 are DRM and what are not.

You are twisting my words. Not cool.

Not a lie at all. Reread what I asserted, I was very specific to specify the part of SC 2 that makes LAN play impossible, and that makes multiplay impossible without bnet. THOSE are the parts you called a "proprietary service" over and over and over. I can quote you if you need me to out of the message you sent me, but that is exactly what you said. If you don't believe that is DRM, your opinion on DRM differs from the accepted definition the rest of us all use for DRM.

WTF? If they distribute it themselves, then it doesn't matter if they consent to its use or not. It's a legitimate authorized copy, not copyright infringement, and such copies can be used without a license (assuming you don't need additional rights granted by such a license). It's 100% legit to not pay in such case.

The game is still copyrighted and subject to copyright law. They never grant permission to break this copyright. They make an illegal torrent that makes breaking the copyright easy, but without granting some sort of license with the torrent, it is still illegal to install that torrent and run the game. It is legal to download and install IF YOU OWN A LICENSE ALREADY, but if you don't own a license, you are still breaking the law.

In the United States, Section 117 of the Copyright Act gives the owner of a particular copy of software the explicit right to use the software with a computer, even if use of the software with a computer requires the making of incidental copies or adaptations (acts which could otherwise potentially constitute copyright infringement). Therefore, the owner of a copy of computer software is legally entitled to use that copy of software. Hence, if the end-user of software is the owner of the respective copy, then the end-user may legally use the software without a license from the software publisher.

You are completely changing the meaning of Section 117 of the Copyright Act. Section 117 means that a user of a software program has the right to make copies of software they legally own FOR THE PURPOSE OF USING SAID SOFTWARE. This means that loading a program into computer memory from a CD is legal, even though technically speaking you are making a copy of the program in memory. If you have to make a copy of a program to load it into a virtual machine, you can't be in trouble with the law for this because your intent is just to make use of the program, not to pirate it.

You can read the whole law here:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/117

This doesn't have anything to do with pirating your own property in addition to releasing it to the typical channels. If I release a torrent that has a terms of service that says "DO NOT RUN THIS SOFTWARE WITHOUT BUYING IT FIRST YOU JERKS" then even though I distributed that torrent, the copies are not "legal" to run and distribute at all because of the terms of service.

Distribution =/= Permission to Use, the Terms of Use or Terms of Service dictate these kinds of things. I don't get how you quoted Section 117, maybe you figured it was hard to read or something? It's pretty straight forward in saying that it allows legal copies to be made ONLY IF these copies are for the purpose of loading and using said program, and a few other caveats like "Machine Maintenance or Repair" meaning, during maintenance and repair, copies of software might be made unintentionally or not for the purposes of piracy, and this does not break copyright.

And it's the same in EU as well. EU Copyright Directive 2001/29/EC article 5, paragraph 1, section b allows for similar temporary copies for legitimate use of the work, so it means owner of the copy can use it without infringing on the copyright.

Same thing:

Article 5

Exceptions and limitations

1. Temporary acts of reproduction referred to in Article 2, which are transient or incidental [and] an integral and essential part of a technological process and whose sole purpose is to enable:

(a) a transmission in a network between third parties by an intermediary, or

(b) a lawful use

Article 5 allows you to make "temporary copies" like that would be made when a program is loaded into the memory, OR for the express reason of transmitting that program to another place for the purpose of the use of that program.

Data transferred over the internet is copied several times as it passes between devices like routers, switches, servers, etc, these copies are not an infringement of copyright because they facilitate the use of the program. Lets say you're playing farmville. Farmville's software is copyrighted. As you play, the game passes through several thousand devices on the internet between the makers of farmville, and you (third parties). These third parties are IMMUNE from copyright law because they are just creating "temporary copies" for the purpose of transferring the software to a legal license holder.

This is what both of those laws say, not anything about releasing your own torrent of your own game. That has literally nothing to do with these two laws.

You're the one that wanted to discuss DRM where none existed.

You continue to insist that DRM doesnt exist because your definition of DRM doesnt include the schemes like those used in SimCity and Starcraft 2. You want to only count the serial keys and ignore the requirement of "always online" to be a DRM mechanism and you call it a "proprietary service" to require people to go online. This is ridiculous. You can't redefine DRM as a whole just to remove the examples from these games. (Again, I'm not claiming you dont think serial keys are DRM, you admit this, what you won't admit is that stuff like "always online" is DRM, and it clearly flipping is DRM, and your the only person who thinks it isn't)

You sent no such message.

Yeah, I did, you ignored it. And I also messaged others asking to divert off topic discussion to private chat, I was fascinated that the purposes of discussion is solely for other people, and not for the sake of the discussion. Vanity is quite a monster.

Also, I didn't bother continuing that because you seemed to have completely missed my point about script kiddies, and then you completely missed my point about fallacies. There was no use making yet another point that you would again completely miss.

You're point that I'm a script kiddie? I didn't miss your point, I responded to it asserting that you are not a script kiddie just because you use other people's freeware industry standard security auditing tools rather than developing your own. You actually bragged about having written programs Didn't we all have tasks like these as homework our Sophomore years or did you just think you got into a really really good program?

Maybe if you made actual points rather than trying to make insults and insist I'm not a computer security professional you'd get the responses you think your "points" warrant. Funny how you won't reveal your "real point", the one that wasn't just a baseless insult. Almost like there wasn't one. I'll have to go reread to find out whatever your talking about fallacies for. For a guy who knows alot about fallacies, you sure do make alot of false equivocations.

[muzzy]

The game is still copyrighted and subject to copyright law. They never grant permission to break this copyright. They make an illegal torrent that makes breaking the copyright easy, but without granting some sort of license with the torrent, it is still illegal to install that torrent and run the game. It is legal to download and install IF YOU OWN A LICENSE ALREADY, but if you don't own a license, you are still breaking the law.

It is not an illegal torrent since they made it. All the copies are legal if the developers themselves willingly participated in making the copies. It is therefore legal to download.

You don't need a license to run software you have legally obtained, as I explained (the temporary copy thing).

If I release a torrent that has a terms of service that says "DO NOT RUN THIS SOFTWARE WITHOUT BUYING IT FIRST YOU JERKS" then even though I distributed that torrent, the copies are not "legal" to run and distribute at all because of the terms of service.

Terms of "service" to do not apply, nor does the end user license agreement apply. You didn't enter into a contract with the developer. They gave you a copy, it's yours now and you can do anything the copyright law allows you to do with it. You don't have to agree to their terms unless you want some additional rights not granted by the copyright law.

It's pretty straight forward in saying that it allows legal copies to be made ONLY IF these copies are for the purpose of loading and using said program

Loading the software to memory is the relevant action here. That is explicitly permitted and is not a form of copyright infringement. That means you can load, run and use the software. Without a license.

You continue to insist that DRM doesnt exist because your definition of DRM doesnt include the schemes like those used in SimCity and Starcraft 2.

This is a lie. You're oversimplifying things to make statements like this. I don't have time for your trolling.

You sent no such message.

Yeah, I did, you ignored it.

Lies. Trolling is uncool, but lying about private messages is outright fucking disgusting because you know I cannot prove that I didn't receive a message.

You actually bragged about having written programs Didn't we all have tasks like these as homework our Sophomore years or did you just think you got into a really really good program?

You were arguing that you were no script kiddie because I supposedly hadn't written any tools either, which is A fallacy of hypocricy. You completely missed the point that I was calling you unskilled, and you retorted with the above mentioned fallacy. Since you don't care about making argumentation errors, I figured I'd just show that your assumption was completely unfounded. Also, the tools I referred to are not homework, I wrote them for a specific need where no existing tools did the job.

However, I agree it was a mistake and I lost my cool, I should've just ignored you instead.

[therapist]

It is not an illegal torrent since they made it. All the copies are legal if the developers themselves willingly participated in making the copies. It is therefore legal to download.

You don't need a license to run software you have legally obtained, as I explained (the temporary copy thing).

Temporary copies do not make this legal. Temporary copies only applies to copies made that are required to run a program, or copies made as copyrighted software is transferred over the internet from device to device. Seriously, I just detailed what both of those laws actually say, so either dispute that and show I'm wrong somehow, or stop asserting that temporary copies applies to a dev who releases a torrent of his own work. Just because the developer released the torrent, doesn't make it legal for you not to pay for the game/software when it has a legal copyright, excuse me if I mixed up terms of service and end user license agreement, I'm a flipping pirate after all.

Terms of "service" to do not apply, nor does the end user license agreement apply. You didn't enter into a contract with the developer. They gave you a copy, it's yours now and you can do anything the copyright law allows you to do with it. You don't have to agree to their terms unless you want some additional rights not granted by the copyright law.

The copyright law and the fact the software itself is protected by a copyright means that despite who released the torrent, you break copyright when you install the copyrighted software.

Loading the software to memory is the relevant action here. That is explicitly permitted and is not a form of copyright infringement. That means you can load, run and use the software. Without a license.

No, it means that if you have a license, you can create copies that would otherwise be considered illegal under copyright law, except they are not illegal, because you are only creating a "copy" in memory to run the program. You still have to own the software first. This clause protects you from being considered an "illegal copier" just because you loaded a program into memory or into a virtual machine or something like that. It doesn't have anything to do with the scenario we are discussing, so you are either very bad at interpreting laws, or a complete troll.

This is a lie. You're oversimplifying things to make statements like this. I don't have time for your trolling.

QUOTING YOU EXACTLY:

In all seriousness though, don't you find it odd that no one simply rewrote the interface of SC2 to direct the netcode between 2 local machines rather than thru battlenet? This is because parts of the netcode that make multiplayer work, are "hidden" in the cloud.

Interesting. That would make it a proprietary service, which is not necessarily a form of DRM

I didn't lie or oversimplify anything. You assert that hiding the code on blizzard's service is NOT DRM and EVERYONE ELSE IN THE WORLD which would be gaming media and the gaming community disagrees with you COMPLETELY. You went on to talk more and more about how it isn't DRM and it has all these other reason's for existing, but I bet you'll say I'm lying about that too.

Lies. Trolling is uncool, but lying about private messages is outright fucking disgusting because you know I cannot prove that I didn't receive a message.

That thing about the copyright law is a pretty good indication you are trolling. I really don;t think you can ignore the true meaning of the law when someone lays it out for you like I just did in my last post. This is why I now have to assume you are trolling on this matter as well, if you weren't already an obvious troll, I might have just resent the message and assumed it got "lost in the email" but you've lost all credibility when you try to reinterpret copyright law to totally ignore the implications of a piece of software being copyrighted.

You actually bragged about having written programs Didn't we all have tasks like these as homework our Sophomore years or did you just think you got into a really really good program?

You were arguing that you were no script kiddie because I supposedly hadn't written any tools either,

That isn't what I argued at all, what i said was, using other people's programs doesn't make you a script kiddie. I asked "Do you write all your own programs?" and of course the flipping answer is no. That makes you just as much of a script kiddie as I am by your own silly logic. We all use other people's program, and it would be silly to write your own security audit tools.

EDIT: Found the post:

I don't develop my own tools for doing security audits. Do you? No? Then we both use other people's "scripts" to do our jobs.

When in the holy heck did I ever say you never wrote a tool? If you read this IT IS OBVIOUS that I'm defending my use of "scripts" to do my job because it is commonplace and I'm asserting YOU DO THE SAME. You DONT create all the tools that go into a security audit, even if you did, that would be more of a zero day attack than a security audit. Changing the meaning of what I said and calling it a "hypocrisy fallacy" is a pretty hefty claim, one you cannot support or substantiate with any kind of evidence at all. Quote fallacies all day, but you can't honestly expect me to sit by and let you put words in my mouth and then call me out on words I didn't even say can you? Obvious Troll, obvious Strawman. Not so subtle attempt at "spin".

You completely missed the point that I was calling you unskilled, and you retorted with the above mentioned fallacy.

Your making a complete strawman of what I said, it's easier for you to argue with the false argument I did not make (you have never written programs) than to address the point I actually made. (that we both use other people's "scripts" every single day and this doesn't make any determination of skill level at all. It's simply a requirement of using a computer that you don't program every aspect of it.)

Since you don't care about making argumentation errors, I figured I'd just show that your assumption was completely unfounded. Also, the tools I referred to are not homework, I wrote them for a specific need where no existing tools did the job.

Oh look who's talking about argumentation errors mr strawman and constantly false equivocation, do you really think you get to decide what my words mean and then just respond to the weakest possible meaning you could find if you twist them? You have to respond to what I say, you don't get to rewrite my argument until it's easy to knock down and declare some kind of "Ultimate Argumentational Authority".

However, I agree it was a mistake and I lost my cool, I should've just ignored you instead.

You should have just ignored me because your trolling and strawmen are just going to be pointed out by me in a methodical and very boring fashion. I'm absolutely convinced you are trolling with the laws that you cited, you can't possibly think those somehow apply to releasing a torrent of your own software?

You posted a "My Little Pony" picture for craps sake, how could I have been so blind? It's actually kind of funny I didn't notice that, you weren't even being subtle like you are with your other trolls.
Don't think I'm giving you too much kudos for your "subtle" trolling, if you use images that tell everyone you're a "/b/rony" it should be obvious, I'm really kind of smirking that I didn't notice it sooner, I just give people too much benefit of the doubt I suppose.

[muzzy]

This is getting huge again.

Just because the developer released the torrent, doesn't make it legal for you not to pay for the game/software when it has a legal copyright

Yes it does.

Copyright is about the exclusive right to make copies. Copyright infringement (casually speaking "piracy") is a violation of the copyright holder's exclusive right to make copies. That's all there is (until DRM is involved, but I'm assuming it is not, why would the official "pirate" version be unplayable?)

If your local copy is legally acquired, it is legal for you to run it. Copyright is not infringed when executing a local copy.

If the developer is distributing the game through a torrent, they are participating in the act of making the copies of it. By definition, making of these copies cannot infringe copyright because the copyright holder was involved in making the copies. They are thus legally acquired.

you break copyright when you install the copyrighted software.

This only applies if you don't own your local copy. Pretty much the only way to legally get a copy without owning it is through a licensing agreement, but nobody has to agree to a license before downloading a torrent. Thus the downloaders cannot be licensees and they own their copies.

And because the downloaders own their copies, they can install them and completely disregard the end user license agreement. DRM makes this a little complicated because laws favor them, but the warez release would get nuked if there was such a thing in place.

I didn't lie or oversimplify anything. You assert that hiding the code on blizzard's service is NOT DRM

EXACTLY. Forcing players to use Battle.net is DRM, but the act of not giving multiplayer server code to players is not DRM. Forcibly stopping players from using competing server implementations is DRM, but having their own proprietary servers is not DRM.

I repeat: having proprietary multiplayer servers is not DRM.

Lies. Trolling is uncool, but lying about private messages is outright fucking disgusting because you know I cannot prove that I didn't receive a message.

That thing about the copyright law is a pretty good indication you are trolling. I really don;t think you can ignore the true meaning of the law when someone lays it out for you like I just did in my last post. This is why I now have to assume you are trolling on this matter as well, if you weren't already an obvious troll, I might have just resent the message and assumed it got "lost in the email" but you've lost all credibility when you try to reinterpret copyright law to totally ignore the implications of a piece of software being copyrighted.

Funny that you didn't quote the message this time. Harder to quote something that doesn't exist, huh?

... also, not bothering to touch the script kiddie thing since it's a waste of time, you went and reinterpreted your earlier "I don't develop my own tools" into "I don't develop all of my own tools" which is complete 180 degrees turnaround. The message changed completely.

[therapist]

Yes it does.

Copyright is about the exclusive right to make copies. Copyright infringement (casually speaking "piracy") is a violation of the copyright holder's exclusive right to make copies. That's all there is (until DRM is involved, but I'm assuming it is not, why would the official "pirate" version be unplayable?)

If your local copy is legally acquired, it is legal for you to run it. Copyright is not infringed when executing a local copy.

If the developer is distributing the game through a torrent, they are participating in the act of making the copies of it. By definition, making of these copies cannot infringe copyright because the copyright holder was involved in making the copies. They are thus legally acquired.

You can distribute your software without granting a license to it to every downloader. When you copyright a piece of software you are making it illegal to copy that game or software without permission. It is perfectly reasonable to release a torrent and ask that only license holders use that torrent to access the game. Anyone who downloads the copy who isn't a license holder is still a pirate, and still violating copyright law, uploading a torrent =/= permission to own the software if you didn't pay for it

This only applies if you don't own your local copy. Pretty much the only way to legally get a copy without owning it is through a licensing agreement, but nobody has to agree to a license before downloading a torrent. Thus the downloaders cannot be licensees and they own their copies.

You agree to the license when you start up the installer and the first thing you see is a license agreement with accept / deny.

And because the downloaders own their copies, they can install them and completely disregard the end user license agreement. DRM makes this a little complicated because laws favor them, but the warez release would get nuked if there was such a thing in place.

.

Downloaders don't "own" the copies. They were not sold or given any permissions just by downloading a torrent. Sure, they POSSESS the software, buy you don't just own anything you are in possession of. Especially if that work is subject to international copyrights. You don't need DRM to protect the software, you just need a screen in the install interface that says "License holder's only beyond this point: Accept/Decline" (almost all software has a several page licensing terms of service agreement that includes this caveat). Running the software after that point without being a license holder is piracy of that software.

I didn't lie or oversimplify anything. You assert that hiding the code on blizzard's service is NOT DRM

EXACTLY. Forcing players to use Battle.net is DRM, but the act of not giving multiplayer server code to players is not DRM. Forcibly stopping players from using competing server implementations is DRM, but having their own proprietary servers is not DRM.

I repeat: having proprietary multiplayer servers is not DRM.

If the multiplayer servers were proprietary I'd agree, but moving a tiny little chunk of the function of a multiplayer server off of the otherwise complete client to a mainframe or similar server scheme IS an implementation of DRM. And again, everyone else who has ever written about or talked about Starcraft 2 disagrees with your silly definition that doesn't include SC2 to have this sort of DRM. Again, do not put words in my mouth, I never said EVERY proprietary multiplayer server was DRM, I said that this instance is, because it is a stretch to even call it a "multiplayer server" when the client is the one handling most of the code except for a few DRM protected bits.

Funny that you didn't quote the message this time. Harder to quote something that doesn't exist, huh?

I just copy pasted the reply from this thread and asked you to discuss the issue in PM rather than poo-poo-ing up another thread with a pointless flamewar. Nice troll though.

... also, not bothering to touch the script kiddie thing since it's a waste of time, you went and reinterpreted your earlier "I don't develop my own tools" into "I don't develop all of my own tools" which is complete 180 degrees turnaround. The message changed completely.

No, the message IN YOUR HEAD changed.

I didn't say: "You don't ever, and never have, developed your own tools that might be included in a security audit"

I did say: "You don't develop the tools that go into performing a security audit, and neither do I, no one does, that would be stupid, and not even really a security audit."

Reading is an easy way to clear up issues like these, but lets not pretend you're just constantly making innocent mistakes, you tend to make these mistakes because you like them, because they support your argument when you make these mistakes.

My little pony my little pony, SING IT MUZZY! It's your trolling themesong.

[muzzy]

You can distribute your software without granting a license to it to every downloader. When you copyright a piece of software you are making it illegal to copy that game or software without permission. It is perfectly reasonable to release a torrent and ask that only license holders use that torrent to access the game. Anyone who downloads the copy who isn't a license holder is still a pirate, and still violating copyright law, uploading a torrent =/= permission to own the software if you didn't pay for it

License isn't needed to run software, it's perfectly legal to run software regardless.

There is no such thing as the act of "copyrighting" something, all works are automatically protected under copyright since the Berne Convention of 1886. If the copyright holder participates in making the copy, it's pretty hard to argue it was done without permission.

It is completely unreasonable to assume that a licensing requirement, which is akin to a contract, applies to something that was freely provided to the downloaders. The intent was clearly to make it available to everyone, especially to those who didn't purchase the game.

The downloaders are not pirates. They do not infringe the copyright since the copyright holder made the copy available and participated in the act of copying. Uploading the torrent to the public is definitely the same thing as granting a permission to make a copy of the enclosed works.

You agree to the license when you start up the installer and the first thing you see is a license agreement with accept / deny.

The EULA doesn't doesn't grant any rights the user didn't already have (the right to run the software), so it's unenforceable due to lack of consideration.

AFAIK the only times any EULAs have been found enforceable are when information about the license agreement has been presented to the user and the user has performed a transaction before obtaining the copy. You can download files with bittorrent without reading the descriptions on the torrent sites, downloading a torrent does not signal acceptance to any licensing terms and it is possible to download the software without ever knowing about an end user license awaiting you inside.

And finally, clicking on "Accept" button does not actually mean you accept the EULA. It's a machine, that's a button that installs the software, you have to press it to install the software no matter what text on the button is saying. If it said "I am stupid" you would still press it to install the software even if you didn't agree to what the button says.

And again, everyone else who has ever written about or talked about Starcraft 2 disagrees

Consensus fallacy. (I'm not even going to bother to ask you to show the claimed consensus since it's still a fallacy even if many people are wrong about it)

Funny that you didn't quote the message this time. Harder to quote something that doesn't exist, huh?

I just copy pasted the reply from this thread and asked you to discuss the issue in PM rather than poo-poo-ing up another thread with a pointless flamewar. Nice troll though.

You never sent such a message. The only PM of yours that I didn't reply to is the most recent one, which only contained sexual harassment (your little sexual fanfic about me and factorio inserters, no I'm not cool with that shit)

[therapist]

License isn't needed to run software, it's perfectly legal to run software regardless.

Not if you didn't purchase it or get permission to use it from the author, either thru a freeware license or other agreement. You can't just find a CD on the street and declare you own and have rights to that software.

There is no such thing as the act of "copyrighting" something, all works are automatically protected under copyright since the Berne Convention of 1886. If the copyright holder participates in making the copy, it's pretty hard to argue it was done without permission.

No permission given = a lack of permission. You see some kind of "implied permission" and that is nonsense, as the developer or owner of the software gets to decide what he/she considers to be permission to use their works. Also, all works are not automatically copyrighted by magic (troll pretending to be a lawyer here), you have to use a phrase like "all rights reserved" or at least sign your name on any work to let people know it's yours. Otherwise, it is safe to assume that you can redistribute and do whatever you want to an image or piece of paper because it has been released and distributed without restriction. I don't know where you live, but he US didn't agree to any part of the Berne Convention of 1886 until 1989, and even then they didn't agree to all the things you say they did. Maybe you live in the UK or something, I'm not sure.

It is completely unreasonable to assume that a licensing requirement, which is akin to a contract, applies to something that was freely provided to the downloaders. The intent was clearly to make it available to everyone, especially to those who didn't purchase the game.

The downloaders are not pirates. They do not infringe the copyright since the copyright holder made the copy available and participated in the act of copying. Uploading the torrent to the public is definitely the same thing as granting a permission to make a copy of the enclosed works.

Unless the developer makes it very clear that the torrent is only for LICENSED AND LEGAL OWNERS. Which they have made clear, and which you continue to ignore to make a silly argument about implied consent.

The EULA doesn't doesn't grant any rights the user didn't already have (the right to run the software), so it's unenforceable due to lack of consideration.

AFAIK the only times any EULAs have been found enforceable are when information about the license agreement has been presented to the user and the user has performed a transaction before obtaining the copy. You can download files with bittorrent without reading the descriptions on the torrent sites, downloading a torrent does not signal acceptance to any licensing terms and it is possible to download the software without ever knowing about an end user license awaiting you inside.

And finally, clicking on "Accept" button does not actually mean you accept the EULA. It's a machine, that's a button that installs the software, you have to press it to install the software no matter what text on the button is saying. If it said "I am stupid" you would still press it to install the software even if you didn't agree to what the button says.

I'm not saying that the EULA restricts rights, I'm saying it has the power to grant rights and license terms. You don't magically get the right of ownership when you download a torrent, but if the EULA happens to grant a freeware license, THEN you are covered and it isn't piracy. If the EULA grants no such freeware license, and you did not obtain the game thru a legal transaction with the developer, then you are still a pirate.

And again, everyone else who has ever written about or talked about Starcraft 2 disagrees

Consensus fallacy. (I'm not even going to bother to ask you to show the claimed consensus since it's still a fallacy even if many people are wrong about it)

A consensus, or argument ad populum (I remember the latin name of that one from class) cannot change a FACT. A definition is something arbitrary we all get to decide on. The dictionary changed the meaning of the word "literally" recently see: http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/15/living/li ... efinition/.

Since all people used the word differently than what the word actually meant, THE DEFINITION CHANGED. A definition is based on how we all choose to use a word, argument ad populum applies to immovable facts, which are not swayed or changed by the opinions of the majority. Definitions ARE changed by the opinions of the majority, and this is illustrated and proven by the updating of words in the dictionary to receive new definitions. YOU don't get to decide the definition, even if you like the old definition better, we get to change and broaden that definition to include Starcraft 2 if we so choose. The "populum" has spoken, and has the authority to change the definition if they wish.

You're an amateur at citing fallacies, this is just the like that time, in our private conversation, when you told me "argument from authority is a fallacy". It is only a fallacy if the authority you cite isn't actually an authority figure on that issue. In logic and argumentation, it is PERFECTLY VALID to cite an authority. You know the names of fallacies, you have a limited understanding of what they mean, but you are incorrect in the way you use both "argument from authority fallacy" and "argument ad populum fallacy". Both an argument from authority, OR an argument ad populum are valid in some situations, and fallacies in others. It's okay, logic is hard.

You never sent such a message. The only PM of yours that I didn't reply to is the most recent one, which only contained sexual harassment (your little sexual fanfic about me and factorio inserters, no I'm not cool with that shit)

Lol, all of a sudden the troll who likes to cuss people out and act tuff on the internet feels "sexually harassed". What a poor little victim you are, I'm setting up a series of assemblers to create a constant supply of the world's tiniest violins. I thought you would laugh or make fun of me, especially considering you post my little pony, implying your a hardcore /b/rony (who else posts my little pony images?). Sorry you are so butthurt.

So remember kids, When the fallacies you quote are revealed to be supported by malformed logic, you can always play the victim and say that "the jokes went too far this time".

[muzzy]

Since all people used the word differently than what the word actually meant, THE DEFINITION CHANGED. A definition is based on how we all choose to use a word, argument ad populum applies to immovable facts, which are not swayed or changed by the opinions of the majority.

Holy fscking bullshit. You changed the subject again. You were talking about a consensus whether SC2's implementation of specific functionality was DRM, not consensus about the definition of the word!

There is no consensus about DRM meaning what you think it means. You are completely mistaken about what it means.

[VapidLinus]

Holy shit this discussion got out of hand o.o

[muzzy]

Holy shit this discussion got out of hand o.o

Too true. Time for me to take a break and not be baited further... I just need something to do, And I can't play Factorio because of the power pole placement crash bug. Ohwell, I'll figure something.