Most dedicated PC gamers are familiar with the name GOG, otherwise known as Good Old Games, a digital game retailer owned by the company behind the Witcher series of games, CD Projekt. They're renown for selling games with no form of DRM whatsoever, believing that once you buy a game, you should be free to fully own it, rather than being bound by anti-piracy measures.

This stance has brought GOG to its latest attempt to inform gamers: the "FCKDRM initiative".

A new site, made by CD Projekt has gone live, called fckdrm.com, tries to advocate the public against all forms of DRM, claiming them as not only anti-consumer, but that they can also act as a "kill switch" that could easily prevent owners from accessing their purchases. A ticker on the top of the site says the following:

Did you know that there's a killswitch in your games/books/music/movies/apps?
It's called DRM, and it can block your access to things you bought.
You can still take control by choosing DRM-free sources.

The site then lists problems with media that has DRM, such as the inability to have offline access or a loss of consumer rights, as well as being a roadblock in terms of digital preservation.

DRM-free approach in games has been at the heart of GOG.COM from day one. We strongly believe that if you buy a game, it should be yours, and you can play it the way it’s convenient for you, and not how others want you to use it.

The landscape has changed since 2008, and today many people don’t realize what DRM even means. And still the DRM issue in games remains – you’re never sure when and why you can be blocked from accessing them. And it’s not only games that are affected, but your favourite books, music, movies and apps as well.

To help understand what DRM means, how it influences your games and other digital media, and what benefits come with DRM-free approach, we’re launching the FCK DRM initiative. The goal is to educate people and ignite a discussion about DRM. To learn more visit https://fckdrm.com, and share your opinions and stories about DRM and how it affects you.

At the bottom of the page is a list of causes to support, such as non-profit companies Defective By Design, which focuses on showing the failures of DRM in different forms, as well as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who try to lobby and fight legal battles against companies who try to force DRM upon their users. Bandcamp, GOG, OpenLibra, and Vimeo are all noted for being a source of DRM-free media, as an alternative to more mainstream options.

Source

 

[WildDog]

Right, let's make obnoxious comparisons that have no bearing to any part of the topic. You can leave now, sweetie. Grown ups are talking.

No is not.... It's quite logical.
Why you lock your doors? Because you want to protect your property from potential theft

Why companies use DRM? Because they want to protect their property from potential theft.

A door is not 100% theft proof, yet you still use it... DRM is not 100% pirate proof..

Using your logic, that companies should not bother using DRM because it won't help them if someone wants to pirate their stuff.. You should not lock the doors or use doors at all.. Because if someone wants to get in, will find a way...

Apples and oranges. Nobody's saying security isn't needed....

Well... He is.... DRM is not something new, denuvo is not the only DRM that exits.
Old Dos games used "physical" DRM like a card with codes, asking for a speciic word in the user manual.
A wheel you had to align to get the code (Another World used this)

 

[Pandaxclone2]

Both of them are Apples, when someone downloads software without the author permision is stealing, when someone goes inside your house and takes your stuff is stealing.

A door an alarm systems are all detrimental to you too.. you can get lock up if you lost the key... you can set the alarm system by mistake... Yet you still use them.

So, if they are comparable then it slices both ways? Am I stealing a TV if I copy that TV and distribute it? Don't be ridiculous. But since you like to compare DRM to door locks, it doesn't matter what you do; ultimately, the devs own an extra set of keys to gain access to their products you've bought to do with as they see fit.

Piracy is impossible to protect against, and arguably the only good DRM possibly does is help initial sales of the game, where they'll get most of their profit. But that's little yield for so much trouble, especially if the DRM in question is harming the consumer's products to enforce its security like the ever infamous SecuROM. Even DRMs where they require you to have a constant internet connection to even play single player in games is obtrusive and silly, no matter the reason.

This isn't saying that consumers shouldn't buy digital products and just pirate them. But comparing (essentially) security that prevents first few sales of a digital product to be skewed, to security that prevents theft of products consumers already own and will likely own for years to come, is rather silly.

 

[kingfrost]

I'm going to be that guy and say that GOG is ruining the industry with their shitty policy.

As much as you hate DRM, it's necessary. Why would you purchase anything if you can find it very easily online? The "people will pirate regardless" argument is flawed because, in order to download a crack, you need to do your research, download some malware, some bitcoin miner, maybe spend hours looking for the right file, until you have it. This is enough to scare off some people. It's entirely different when you can just go to some website and download the complete GOG library without any hassle.

But what GOG is doing is retarded beyond human capacities. Piracy is becoming a real issue between indie developers (just look at how many people pirate on mobile) but you can't talk negatively about it or you'll get harassed by entitled pirates. What GOG is doing is letting them win.

It doesn't take that long to find a crack and malwarebytes is pretty much free. GOG is not making piracy worse in any way. Pirates were pirating long before it.

 

[WildDog]

So, if they are comparable then it slices both ways? Am I stealing a TV if I copy that TV and distribute it?

If you clon a TV and distribute it without the rights from whoever owns the rights to the design you are stealing.
People did invest money to make that software in hopes to get a profit, when you distribute it, you are taking away that profit from them, that is stealing.

Ah yes, woe betide an unfortunate legitimate consumer if they lose paper or a wheel or "goodies" to play their perfectly legal copy of their game.

If you don't know how to take care of your stuff is not the mfg problem.

 

[Pandaxclone2]

If you clone a TV and distribute it without the rights from whoever owns the rights to the design you are stealing.
People did invest money to make that software in hopes to get a profit, when you distribute it, you are taking away that profit from them, that is stealing

The crux of the issue is initial sales. If the TV was bought and then sold to a secondhand shop, then bought again, it nets the same effect in that the second customer didn't buy the TV from the company. They still got their money out of the initial "product" but the distribution of that product screwed them out of a potential customer. The same thing happens with video games in that scenario.

The point is, "stolen profit" becomes a moot point when not much profit is being made anymore. In an ideal world, every developer should get their money's worth out of the product they worked on, but that is unfortunately unrealistic. What matters most is initial sales of a product, especially a digital product. Over time those sales will eventually drop regardless of piracy's part in it. DRM is a band-aid to patch that up, but its side effects outlasts that initial sale of the product and goes on to become a hindrance for consumers. Maybe not all DRM does this immediately, but eventually issues will crop up, like those physical DRM protection measures.

If you don't know how to take care of your stuff is not the mfg problem.

"Hey look, if we packaged malware into our product and it breaks your device, that's your problem, not ours."

 

[Deleted User]

This makes me happy. I completely agree once you buy it you can do whatever you want with it. Its no one else's business

 

[PalindromicBreadLoaf]

So this is a video game developer that doesn’t care if their game gets pirated, and are even against DRM. Man I love these guys. (They are smart because they know the game is going to get pirated anyway.)

 

[WildDog]

The crux of the issue is initial sales. If the TV was bought and then sold to a secondhand shop, then bought again, it nets the same effect in that the second customer didn't buy the TV from the company. They still got their money out of the initial "product" but the distribution of that product screwed them out of a potential customer. The same thing happens with video games in that scenario.

The point is, "stolen profit" becomes a moot point when not much profit is being made anymore. In an ideal world, every developer should get their money's worth out of the product they worked on, but that is unfortunately unrealistic. What matters most is initial sales of a product, especially a digital product. Over time those sales will eventually drop regardless of piracy's part in it. DRM is a band-aid to patch that up, but its side effects outlasts that initial .

Ah now i see... That's your mistake.
When the company sold you the TV and you sell it again is the same TV. It's only 1 product, if you give the TV to someone else, then you can't use it. Sure you can go to his house and watch it with him. But if you want to watch the TV in your house, then you will have to buy another TV. Plus the original TV won't multiply, it will be always one TV that may go from hand to hand.

Now when you distribute software it does multiply. So you still use that software, your friend will use the software because you gave it to him, then he will give it to another friend and so on. So there won't be any point in buying the software because someone will share it... So you cut the sales...

About the profit it doesn't matter if they lose 1 dollar or 1.000.000. The fact is that they lose money, in the same way you will lose money if someone breaks in your house and steal your TV.

About DRM being a band-aid of course it is, the same way that your door is a band aid an alarm system, etc... There is no security system that is 100% secure. That doesn't mean you are not going to use them, because they are not 100% secure.

 

[Kioku]

Ah now i see... That's your mistake.
When the company sold you the TV and you sell it again is the same TV. It's only 1 product, if you give the TV to someone else, then you can't use it. Sure you can go to his house and watch it with him. But if you want to watch the TV in your house, then you will have to buy another TV. Plus the original TV won't multiply, it will be always one TV that may go from hand to hand.

Now when you distribute software it does multiply. So you still use that software, your friend will use the software because you gave it to him, then he will give it to another friend and so on. So there won't be any point in buying the software because someone will share it... So you cut the sales...

About the profit it doesn't matter if they lose 1 dollar or 1.000.000. The fact is that they lose money, in the same way you will lose money if someone breaks in your house and steal your TV.

About DRM being a band-aid of course it is, the same way that your door is a band aid an alarm system, etc... There is no security system that is 100% secure. That doesn't mean you are not going to use them, because they are not 100% secure.

You're still trying to compare DRM in software to your home security? Something that is meant to protect your family? Your livelihood?? Can you stop being so petty?

You're not even comparing apples to oranges anymore. You're saying that you prefer cats over rectangles because the sky is green.

Digital Rights Management is cumbersome to all involved. Developers, consumers and even resellers.. It cuts out from the bottom line and is a waste in the long run. Why? People will pirate it and crack it regardless. No, that's not the same as malicious intent against me and mine. Don't even try that bullshit.

It has been proven to interfere with the longevity of some games and even screws up current games (Denuvo). You think you're white knighting for the devs but you're strictly talking out of your ass.

 

[Pandaxclone2]

Snip!

What the TV example ends up doing on the consumer end doesn't matter to a company. What matters is they "lost out" on a potential consumer buying their product from them thanks to them having bought the TV from somewhere else. The same thing happens with piracy, as it takes someone to first purchase the product before it can be distributed. You're correct that software can be copied, but that's just further proving the point that you're comparing apples and oranges here.

And yes, security systems on your house aren't 100% secure like DRM, either... but then again, a lock on your house isn't a temporary measure, nor will it steadily destroy your house upon installation.

 

[WildDog]

You're still trying to compare DRM in software to your home security? Something that is meant to protect your family? Your livelihood?? Can you stop being so petty?

You think you're white knighting for the devs but you're strictly talking out of your ass.

How sweet, you used white knighting, so edgy!!!

Both of them are security meassures, it doesn't matter what they protect. The point is the serve the same purpose, to protect something or someone.
You can say, i'm "white knighting" or any other crap you like to say in the US, but not matter how hard you try, DRM won't go away, because it protects the companies....
Without the money from those companies, you wouldn't have the games that you like to pirate so much.

What the TV example ends up doing on the consumer end doesn't matter to a company. What matters is they "lost out" on a potential consumer buying their product from them thanks to them having bought the TV from somewhere else. The same thing happens with piracy, as it takes someone to first purchase the product before it can be distributed. You're correct that software can be copied, but that's just further proving the point that you're comparing apples and oranges here.

Ome thing is losing one sale, other is losing almost all the sales, because someone thinks that making copies of a piece of software they did not make is ok.
And no is the same, stealing is stealing, say i'm whit knighting and that i'm comparing oranges to monkeys.... But when you pirate software, you are stealing somelse work, like it or not.





Sharing someone else work is easy.... i wonder if you love to share with me your profits???

 

[Song of storms]

It doesn't take that long to find a crack and malwarebytes is pretty much free. GOG is not making piracy worse in any way. Pirates were pirating long before it.

The point























You

 

[Pandaxclone2]

Ome thing is losing one sale, other is losing almost all the sales, because someone thinks that making copies of a piece of software they did not make is ok.
And no is the same, stealing is stealing, say i'm whit knighting and that i'm comparing oranges to monkeys.... But when you pirate software, you are stealing somelse work, like it or not.

Sure, because piracy is known far and wide as the swift destroyer of companies and is a terrible force to be reckoned with.../s

Stealing wasn't what we were calling to attention here, it was the security. Call it the same if you want, but DRM and security of your home are two different things. One is there to protect the consumer and his property, not the company; the other is there to protect the company's property at the expense of the consumer, whether they wanted it or not.

 

[Kioku]

Sure, because piracy is known far and wide as the swift destroyer of companies and is a terrible force to be reckoned with.../s

Stealing wasn't what we were calling to attention here, it was the security. Call it the same if you want, but DRM and security of your home are two different things. One is there to protect the consumer and his property, not the company; the other is there to protect the company's property at the expense of the consumer, whether they wanted it or not.

You have a scarily high amount of patience..

 

[Taleweaver]

Hmm .. I knew right from the title that this thread would derail into the same debate as usual.

So here's the question : why?

It's a website informing GAMERS . That's nice and all, but drm is implemented by DEVELOPERS who look at it from a different angle. Most if not all of them know these rhetoric, but they rather have a way to get payed (even a flawed one) rather than making a leap of faith. Result : a site isn't going to change anything.

Wait .. I take that back : it's basically propaganda for gog. Com. Not that I mind because I like the platform but that doesn't make it less propaganda

 

[kingfrost]

I'm going to be that guy and say that GOG is ruining the industry with their shitty policy.

As much as you hate DRM, it's necessary. Why would you purchase anything if you can find it very easily online? The "people will pirate regardless" argument is flawed because, in order to download a crack, you need to do your research, download some malware, some bitcoin miner, maybe spend hours looking for the right file, until you have it. This is enough to scare off some people. It's entirely different when you can just go to some website and download the complete GOG library without any hassle.

But what GOG is doing is retarded beyond human capacities. Piracy is becoming a real issue between indie developers (just look at how many people pirate on mobile) but you can't talk negatively about it or you'll get harassed by entitled pirates. What GOG is doing is letting them win.

The point























You

You clearly stated that GOG is making piracy worse. Also if it's so harmful to indies why are so many being made nowadays? And at what point do you factor in that fact that a lot of quality indie games are crowd sourced and a lot of crappy ones as well which basically means they were already paid for and any sale after that is in the green.

And what about the massive amount of shovelware indies that are on Steam and online console stores? Why hasn't piracy succeeded in even killing them if it's going to?

 

[Kioku]

Hmm .. I knew right from the title that this thread would derail into the same debate as usual.

So here's the question : why?

It's a website informing GAMERS . That's nice and all, but drm is implemented by DEVELOPERS who look at it from a different angle. Most if not all of them know these rhetoric, but they rather have a way to get payed (even a flawed one) rather than making a leap of faith. Result : a site isn't going to change anything.

Wait .. I take that back : it's basically propaganda for gog. Com. Not that I mind because I like the platform but that doesn't make it less propaganda

It's reminiscent of Linux vs Windows.. In a truly obscure, but logical way.

 

[smf]

It doesn't matter how good a DRM is, it will be cracked immediately. It's just a waste of time and money.

You must have a different definition of immediately to me. There are many examples of DRM that have taken a week or more to crack.

I'm surprised they didn't put more of an emphasis on the fact that some drm hinders the performance of games themselves, all the other stuff is bad, but to actually have your game negatively impacted even during standard usage is another really bad side effect of heavy drm solutions

And if there were no thieves then you wouldn't have the hassle of carrying car or house keys.

 

[gamesquest1]

You must have a different definition of immediately to me. There are many examples of DRM that have taken a week or more to crack.



And if there were no thieves then you wouldn't have the hassle of carrying car or house keys.

tbf I wouldn't mind a middle ground, of DRM for a set period i.e 6 months or something, or until a crack is released, once a game is cracked the DRM kinda serves no purpose, pirates will pirate it anyway so any negative side effects are only going to effect those who are being playing fair and not pirating. I feel as always the real answer has to be somewhere down the middle, not X always gets screwed over, or Y always gets screwed over, unfortunately both side only want everything their way

 

[WildDog]

Sure, because piracy is known far and wide as the swift destroyer of companies and is a terrible force to be reckoned with.../s

Stealing wasn't what we were calling to attention here, it was the security. Call it the same if you want, but DRM and security of your home are two different things. One is there to protect the consumer and his property, not the company; the other is there to protect the company's property at the expense of the consumer, whether they wanted it or not.

There is DRM because people steal software. It doesn' matter if the company goes bankrupt or not. If i steal your blender you are not going to starve... So it's ok if steal it??
Don't like the DRM? don't buy the software, plain and simple.