EA hit with class action suit over 'Spore'

Status
Not open for further replies.
XionTawa said:
/rant that will probably make no sense...

In the US where many of us tech people believe in a free FUBU (for the users, by the users) internet, especially our open source supporters (such as myself), see SecuROM as invading our space and telling us what we can do what stuff we believe to be ours... If a company tells me I can only install my game 5 times, I will go out and pirate the cracked version just to remove that, because a game company does not control what I do with my games...

/end rant that probably made no sense...
Click to expand...

1. EA games is not part of your FUBU society. So your casual rules do not apply to them, nor should you expect them to. FUBU internet is different then a company who exists to generate revenue to pay for development, support, infrastructure, pays taxes and most importantly, pays employees. Don't confuse the two.

2. SecuROM does not invade your space and tell you to do with stuff that is yours. It tells you what you can or can not do with stuff that belongs to EA games. Regardless of what you believe, the EULA of many games reads like this: The contents of the packages is ours, not yours. We will allow you to use it but not own it. (Paraphrased but basically the jist of all EULAs).

3. Just because a company says you can only use their product in a specific way does not give you the right to dissamble it to use it as you see fit because you don't like thier stance. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. And just because you believe people should be allowed to do that with your works doesn't mean everybody should hold to that view.

4. A game company has the right to control how its property is used.
 
Last edited:
At the end of the day, no matter what they do a cracked version will appear on isohunt th enext day. Restricting the numbe rof installs just alienates the peopl ewho would buy it properly.. Hence the flip-flop increasing it to 5 installs... I imagine if pressure continues, they will removed DRM for good as it just doesnt work.
 
I'm guessing I'm insane...I buy a copy of software for each computer that it will be running on. Am I missing something, does the EULA really give us rights as licensees of the products, to do what ever we wish? Does the EULA transfer ownership? Can somebody actually post where it says we own it, or is it just a bunch of feelings? (ie...I feel we should own it and do what ever we please with it). Is there a reason that I should break the EULA and make 15 copies of what ever it is.

Can I get an answer to these questions that don't involve "sticking it to the man?"
 
ya know, this seems really selfish of you guys to want to dictate the rules and usage of ToS and really hypocritical for those current running any form of microsoft windows which "licenses" you the use of their software. and throughout this i thoroughly agree with Gods Peon
 
I'm not advocating the current use of SurCOM, I'm not even sure how DRM entirely works or how it can work to meet the two conflicting interestests.

I do advocate an entity who creates a piece of work right to protect that work, to profit from it as he, she or it sees fit and our right as ultimate users of that work to agree or disagree to the terms of usage.

I never said I agreed with how EA handled it as a matter of fact I don't like the idea that they hid it and were seemingly vague about it in the EULA and ToS. And I said this was a legit claim.

It does say its limited and it does say that the person you transfer the game to may have to buy additional rights to use it. Its there but not very transperant. I think EA could've been a lot more clear and right on the box say..."This software is limited to 5 activiations after which you will have to contact EA games to obtain additional activations." and give you the clear option on not buying it. Although, I beleive strongly that despite that being there, many people would still buy it and still complain about it.


The fact that they seem to be clandestine about it does not deter my position that the creator of such work has the right to dictate how it will be used. And you as the consumer\user has the right to say agree to the terms and use it or say no and not use it.
 
Gods_Peon said:
The fact that they seem to be clandestine about it does not deter my position that the creator of such work has the right to dictate how it will be used. And you as the consumer\user has the right to say agree to the terms and use it or say no and not use it.
Click to expand...

That would be all fine and dandy, except that the box does not state the DRM imposed upon the consumer. A person can willingly go and buy the game and be hit with limitations not agreed to prior to purchase. THIS is what is wrong, as that person will be out 50 dollars for something they can neither use nor return. As most software cannot be returned upon opening.

I am against piracy, but I simply take a logical approach to things when I state that a paying consumer will have more hassles imposed upon them then a person who fraudulently steals that same item. Many developers do manage to do business and survive without imposing even half the limitations EA has done, it isn't about protecting copyright so much as it is an attempt to limit the freedoms of their own paying customers. I bet the decision to limit installs was based on the idea that valid, paying customers would hit that limit and think they were forced to buy the game again. While the consumer can call up EA and get another install added, chances are they are betting on the stupidity of the average consumer to not know the steps to take.
 
Most EULAs that I've bothered to read tell you how to get your money back if you do not wish to comply with the TOS and EULA. Even if you can't take it back to the original store you bought it from, you may be able to ship it back to the manufacturer for 100% refund.
 
When i purchase the disc. I then own it (IMO). If it has DRM, i'll crack it. Simply as that. It's not like i'm taking money from EA, just avoiding their malware.
 
vibrokatana said:
That would be all fine and dandy, except that the box does not state the DRM imposed upon the consumer. A person can willingly go and buy the game and be hit with limitations not agreed to prior to purchase. THIS is what is wrong, as that person will be out 50 dollars for something they can neither use nor return. As most software cannot be returned upon opening.
Click to expand...

I did mention that the box should've said that. As Durruck mentioned, the EULA or ToS normally includes a means of returning product you don't agree with it.

vibrokatana said:
I am against piracy, but I simply take a logical approach to things when I state that a paying consumer will have more hassles imposed upon them then a person who fraudulently steals that same item.
Click to expand...

That is why people do things illegally: Because it easier then doing things proper. But that is not what we are about is it?


vibrokatana said:
Many developers do manage to do business and survive without imposing even half the limitations EA has done, it isn't about protecting copyright so much as it is an attempt to limit the freedoms of their own paying customers. I bet the decision to limit installs was based on the idea that valid, paying customers would hit that limit and think they were forced to buy the game again. While the consumer can call up EA and get another install added, chances are they are betting on the stupidity of the average consumer to not know the steps to take.
Click to expand...

Never know will we? All we have are conspiracy theories, which are nothing more the toiler fodder.
 
you own the disc. you do not own the contents of the disc. by the TOS/EULA, you are borrowing it from the publisher.

like it or not, it's that simple. crack it, hack it, break it, haul coal with it... but if you don't follow the agreement, you're breaking the law. *shrug*

I've really been trying to not come thru with a "holier than thou" attitude here, but to those of you that are trying to justify cracking it... you are stealing (or generally breaking the rules) and encouraging others to do the same. This is hardly something I'd like to see promoted in a Christian community. Just because EA played dirty and did wrong by the end user, does that justify you in doing more wrong?

I would seriously hope the answer is "no."
 
I think the idea of trying to prevent piracy on PC games is a good thing. However i think we can all agree that Spore just didnt get it right. It overly restricted the people who were willing to pay for it, and those that werent just got a cracked version with no restrictions.

I guess EA were just willing to try something new, but it did little in terms of the fight against piracy. I think thats more of the problem than the legality of hacking up your copy of spore so you can install it on 6 machines instead of 5.

EDIT: Hopefully it wil lbe ported to the PS3/Xbox where this kinda thing wont be an issue.
 
Last edited:
Durruck said:
like it or not, it's that simple. crack it, hack it, break it, haul coal with it... but if you don't follow the agreement, you're breaking the law.
Click to expand...

No one here is promoting stealing the game, but rather promoting fair use of the game.

You also call into question the legality of cracking the game to get rid of DRM, but the legality of this sort of DRM is being taken to the courts as well--hence the reason for this thread!
 
tjguitarz said:
No one here is promoting stealing the game, but rather promoting fair use of the game.

You also call into question the legality of cracking the game to get rid of DRM, but the legality of this sort of DRM is being taken to the courts as well--hence the reason for this thread!
Click to expand...

Promoting fair use of the game by breach of contract is only promoting a lack of integrety.

As for calling into question the legallity of cracking the game, well, two wrongs have never made a right. But they often keep each other company.
 
tjguitarz said:
No one here is promoting stealing the game, but rather promoting fair use of the game.

You also call into question the legality of cracking the game to get rid of DRM, but the legality of this sort of DRM is being taken to the courts as well--hence the reason for this thread!
Click to expand...
circumventing any kind of encryption is a federal offense under the DMCA. While the chances of one individual being prosecuted are slim..just have to keep that part in mind.
 
Odale said:
I can understand EA trying to prevent people from copying their work, but once you buy the work from them, you now own a copy of that work and should be able to install it how ever many times you need. If they were scared that people were buying one copy and using it on multiple PC's, that's why they have CD keys and registrations.
Click to expand...

you don't *own* a copy of software...you simply have paid for a license to use it...
 
inkelis said:
When i purchase the disc. I then own it (IMO). If it has DRM, i'll crack it. Simply as that. It's not like i'm taking money from EA, just avoiding their malware.
Click to expand...

uhh...regardless of your opinion, you do not OWN the software - end of story. i can't think of a single piece of software or media in general that grants *ownership* - they all grant *usage* *privileges* - period.

regarding your bit about cracking it - if you're willing to violate the law for the purposes of utilizing intellectual property in a manner not intended or desired by the author - you'd probably be better served by not posting such a fact on a public forum lest it come back to bite you in the future.

i'm rather curious as to how postings encouraging and arguably inciting illegal acts are allowed to remain on the forums when i've seen others removed for posting too much text from a speech, paper or what have you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top