Activision Targeting Individual Pirates

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
I buy almost all of my PC games. The only ones I don't buy are the games that are no longer available. As an owner of a legal license for certain games like Command and Conquer: The First Decade, I would expect that I would have no legal recourse for downloading a copy of the DVD, and using my purchased key. Disks get scratched. I like having a digial copy of my games. It is either that, or go with a digital system like Steam, where no matter how many times I reformat my PC or I lose and break a disk, I can always get my game back.
 
Steam is great. I just bought the HL2 Episode Pack. The other games I've bought are always available when ever I want to download them when I reformat my OS. +1 to Steam and the guy above me^^^
 
Its sounds like they are targeting the people that post multiple games for download. I would much rather have them go after pirates than put restrictive DRM on games that I buy. Don't punish the innocent for the crimes of the guilty.
 
The real issue is your ISP acting as an agent of law-enforcement, for a non-criminal activity.

Copyright infringement is complex and civil, not criminal.

You would have a fit if your ISP ratted you out for adultery, or tax evasion...but for copyright infringement? Pathetic. No wonder that industry is in full on fail mode.
 
Why would Activision want to silence those that they successfully prosecuted? After all, if their aim is to deter people shouldn't they want the public to know what is going to happen to them if they break the law? Maybe they prefer to make their money through litigation than selling their product.
 
[citation][nom]MDillenbeck[/nom]Why would Activision want to silence those that they successfully prosecuted? After all, if their aim is to deter people shouldn't they want the public to know what is going to happen to them if they break the law? Maybe they prefer to make their money through litigation than selling their product.[/citation]

Perhaps what they are doing is suing and winning then allowing the offending party to forgo payment in return for silence. This way they get the word out w/o actually screwing their client-base
 
It simple you don't go around telling people you're sueing.. For the simple reason its a grey area for a lot of people. And not many people like to see the big guys push around the small guys. Even if they got some justifaction for doing so. But 1000+ anyways is a load of crap. It should be the cost of the game unless they can prove their selling it. But they got lobbyist and naturally pirates don't. Go figure.
 
i was introduced to steam too when i bought half life 2 and find it good sense one of my disks got scratched and couldn`t install anymore so i just download it now. and i got an extra bonus too. when I entered my cd key for my old copy of half-life GOTY edition i was able to download all the old half life games like blue shift and counterskrike
 
Game companies don't want my money, so why should I buy games?

If they don't make games for Linux, its like saying "We don't need money from Linux users"

I'll download my games thank you. And Windows too, just to play the game. That's what I keep my handy dandy 80Gb hard drive for.
 
i think the future of PC gaming is what Steam is doing. better than the DRM implemented by spore and sure as hell is better than the suing everyone.
 
Why is everyone talking about PC piracy when the lawsuits mentioned are all related to console piracy? Why did the article even bring it up?
 
The future of PC gaming is dead. Its gone. It's all about media PC and MMO's.

This however this is about someone copying console games and selling them for profit. More than likely anyway.

Simply don't copy games and sell them and you'll be ok. I promise!



[citation][nom]godmode[/nom]i think the future of PC gaming is what Steam is doing. better than the DRM implemented by spore and sure as hell is better than the suing everyone.[/citation]
 
Bah you're missing the whole points of serious concern: DRM is not allowing users their LEGAL RIGHT to make backups of THEIR purchased material. RIAA/MPAA have learned (wisely so) that instead of going after the copies themselves, why not make the MEDIUM used to transfer said product, null. Aka you're not paying for the disc and the coding on it, you’re paying for the LICENSE to use a product! In essence, you and I don't actually "own" anything but a license to use, and what if they stop supporting the product license? You're left out on your asses complaining on forums like THG. If I PAY money for a game, it's MINE to do wtf ever I feel like, as aside from mass distribution etc. MY DISC, kiss off and stay out of my business in MY home/machine.

Another point of interest: All this server-side control with invasive and bloated ADVERTISING mini-appz like STEAM REQUIRE internet connectivity to get "your" beloved games. What if you're from an @home unfriendly country like Australia, where they PAY for GBs of DL'd data? ISPs in the USA are attempting to implement traffic shaping and quotas for "high bandwith" DLs... All of these industries are tied hand in hand, and once media markets make a major shift to the internet to conduct their business. Steam is bullocks if you ask me. While a good idea, I'd rather not be punished and assumed guilty b/c of a small group of pirates Vs the MAJORITY of law abiding citizens. Oh and you do know that just b/c something is a law doesn't make it right—lets start enslaving people again or rounding up "orientals?" Ring any bells? It was perfectly legal at 1 point in time.

Lastly... DRM doesn't do a damn thing when a cracker can just include a patched exe/dll etc. to subvert all the checks. DL the patched version and have full functionality, the only hindrance is server-side serial key checks (stolen ones are very common). I have no qualms about copyright owners having legal right to pursue, BUT at what cost to us—the mass market? WE all have to suffer for their incessant greed: “YES WE'RE going after EVERYONE possible@the cost to the law abiding consumer’s hassle and infection of near root-kit like ‘protection’ schemes (UBIsoft and StarForce, anyone?). So if you copy a game you get fined on the scale of major grand larceny Vs if you stole 5 copies of the game from best buy and got a small fine and community service? LMFAO *TSSST* Houston we've got a problem with an BIAS, PRO-Corporate legal system TSSSST* OVER...TSSSST*

Bah why bother with these kinds of posts, most of you old dogs and young sheep will continue to buy this crap up and slowly erode your rights to common-sense down the PcB polluted river. Enjoy! GOOOO STARFORCE!


BTW- Console piracy starting with the DreamCast (Disc Juggler + boot.bin for the win!) and Xbox etc, was just as, if not easier than PC. Both markets share the same interests for increasing anti-consumer type legislation and pro-corporate bias.
 
[citation][nom]DFGum[/nom]Goodluck ever collecting 150,000 dollars from the average pirater.[/citation]

Nahh, they'll just hack the Activision's bank account to pay the fine.

 
V12V12, you have some very valid points in there. I especially agree with your thoughts on how games that need to be downloaded through an ISP have limitations for users without internet access or large fees to access the web.

However, in the end, they have to do something, right? I don't agree with the settlement sizes, but if it was my product, and I was stuck distributing it in this broken system, I'd seek legal action for my software being distributed.

The system needs to be fixed... but all the solutions have been patch-work at best.
 
[citation][nom]sakrash1102[/nom]Why is everyone talking about PC piracy when the lawsuits mentioned are all related to console piracy? Why did the article even bring it up?[/citation]

Because in the eyes of the corporate part of the company, the legal system, and the general public, it's all the same. Or at least that's what they are trying to make it.
 
Just shows the hypocrisy of game companies using PC piracy as a scapegoat when it's not a big deal, and console piracy is just as prevalent. I used to like Activision but they're really turning into the stereotypical big, soul-sucking company.
 
Game companies don't want my money, so why should I buy games?

If they don't make games for Linux, its like saying "We don't need money from Linux users"

I'll download my games thank you. And Windows too, just to play the game. That's what I keep my handy dandy 80Gb hard drive for.
Click to expand...

Grats on being part of the problem.

If you don't want to use Windows and pay for games, then don't. Don't attempt to legitimize your software theft because "Games aren't made for Linux".

1) Some decent Linux ports exist, just play those.

2) There is no money in it for most game companies to code games for Linux, an operating system which doesn't have the mainstream user base to support a seperate development team to re-code games. This is the same reason why less games are coded for Macs, though more than Linux. However, with your statement you're basically saying companies should lose money, just to make games for your operating system of choice.

3) If you're already stealing Windows + Games, why on earth would anyone believe you'd pay for them if they were coded for Linux?

By all means, steal your games and operating system to play it. That's your choice. However, don't try to justify it by using some convoluted logic because in the end you're still stealing and part of the problem. If you were to really stick by your 'morals', you wouldn't download or play the games period. lol.. Try to use that as a defense in court.. "Your honor, I'm just so very upset that they do not code for Linux, that in turn 'forces' me to download and use Windows to play stolen games. So, really, it's all THEIR FAULT that I stole software."

Thanks for giving me a good laugh today. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom