LGP Introduces Linux Game Copy Protection

[colo]

Rumor has it, that LGP eventually overhaul there website

About time. Maybe they'll also fix the blatant XSS vulnerabilities on the current one, which I informed them about a week ago or so... *sigh*

[miles]

On the mailing list, there's an interesting quote that explains the copy protection thing a bit better. One just wonders why they didn't want to say it in the first place - I guess Michael really wants to make sure he doesn't sell any games, break even or, heaven forbid! make money !

According to what Michael said in an earlier email....

Quoting:
++++++++++++++++++++
As it stands, you never need an internet connection ever. It tries to
use one, it tries to see if youve been sneaky and blocked out our
server, it tries to get round the blockage to connect to us, but if it
cant, it cant and it carries on.

It does still use internal checks to make sure the key you have is a
valid key, if it cant connect.

The only time you NEED an internet connection, is if you have had one
previously and the game found it was an invalid copy. If that happens,
nothing will make it start unless you have connected to the server again
to prove you should be allowed to.

On the OLD system
It wouldnt require a connection for install, but it would complain if it
couldnt verify that key after a while.
++++++++++++++++++++

Seems pretty clear to me. Innocent until proven guilty.

[Max Spain]

Hehe, I guess the next "game" LGP is porting to Linux is WGA

Puns aside, as Linux gamers, it is in our best interest to support Linux gaming and that "innocent until proven guilty" and "never need an internet connection ever" isn't too bad.

I just worry where this will lead I'm leaving Windows because of DRM for crying out loud

[krzta]

Even harder, but a hudge potential :

Civilization IV. The game is so huge and online, would last hundred of hours and sell like hot cakes in Linux. But it's true there's not much chances for this one.

Thanks for bringing up this title. This is one of those games I would buy IMMEDIATELY if only it was available for Linux. Can you elaborate why there's not much chances for this one? I've been wondering why we get only pretty old stuff (for pretty ridiculous prices in many cases).

As for the copy protection - I think it's a bad move. I will really think twice before placing my order for a game with this "feature". There are reasons we moved to Linux, you know... But in any case, I won't download a pirated version either (frankly, I don't even use p2p) - but I wouldn't blame legitimate users downloading cracks to disable this copy protection in their legally purchased products.

[Redeeman]

Thanks for bringing up this title. This is one of those games I would buy IMMEDIATELY if only it was available for Linux. Can you elaborate why there's not much chances for this one? I've been wondering why we get only pretty old stuff (for pretty ridiculous prices in many cases).

As for the copy protection - I think it's a bad move. I will really think twice before placing my order for a game with this "feature". There are reasons we moved to Linux, you know... But in any case, I won't download a pirated version either (frankly, I don't even use p2p) - but I wouldn't blame legitimate users downloading cracks to disable this copy protection in their legally purchased products.

the prices really arent so ridicoules when you think about it.

some original studio/publisher releases a game for winblows, and some time later you can purchase it for $5-10, but for LGP to get to release the game, not only must they pay the studio/publisher probably a relatively big sum just to get permission to port it, then they probably have to pay ATLEAST $5-10 for each copy they sell. And then they ofcourse have to actually pay themselves to do the actual port.

People dont work for free, and for those reasons, an LGP title costs more than the winblows version..

[krzta]

the prices really arent so ridicoules when you think about it.

some original studio/publisher releases a game for winblows, and some time later you can purchase it for $5-10, but for LGP to get to release the game, not only must they pay the studio/publisher probably a relatively big sum just to get permission to port it, then they probably have to pay ATLEAST $5-10 for each copy they sell. And then they ofcourse have to actually pay themselves to do the actual port.

People dont work for free, and for those reasons, an LGP title costs more than the winblows version..

Well, I'm talking about games e.g. published in 1998 (win) and sold in 2008 (lin) for $38. If you think that's a reasonable price, then I tend to disagree.
$50 for Sacred Gold is acceptable, IMHO.

[xav1r]

Thanks for bringing up this title. This is one of those games I would buy IMMEDIATELY if only it was available for Linux. Can you elaborate why there's not much chances for this one? I've been wondering why we get only pretty old stuff (for pretty ridiculous prices in many cases).

As for the copy protection - I think it's a bad move. I will really think twice before placing my order for a game with this "feature". There are reasons we moved to Linux, you know... But in any case, I won't download a pirated version either (frankly, I don't even use p2p) - but I wouldn't blame legitimate users downloading cracks to disable this copy protection in their legally purchased products.

People (the big industries, EA, etc) see big money to be made in brand new, cutting edge technology on new games, and see that theres lots of high stakes on the title. Then they see linux and it's community, tech for the sake of tech and no artificial restrictions on it, and get nervous. It's a big risk to them, the way they see it. Thats why every new windows release has more digital locks on it than the previous one, why HD video is encrypted, and why bluray won the HD format wars.

[Fixxer_Linux]

People (the big industries, EA, etc) see big money to be made in brand new, cutting edge technology on new games, and see that theres lots of high stakes on the title. Then they see linux and it's community, tech for the sake of tech and no artificial restrictions on it, and get nervous. It's a big risk to them, the way they see it. Thats why every new windows release has more digital locks on it than the previous one, why HD video is encrypted, and why bluray won the HD format wars.

I'll be nervous as well if I had invested in the work of 40 people during 5 years for making a cutting edge game that I could then download over p2p just a few days after it's out.
UT3 for example (see our previous post on that topic xav1r :-)) is about 3 or 4 years of intensive work. I have worked on IT projects and I can easily understand that they want a copy protection.
On other hand, I can understand that such copy protection must not deprecate the freedom of the end-user.
Would it possible that open-source community develop some open-source copy protection for softwares, eventually with a server connection to check the validity of the copy being used, so everyone is happy : the studios that are sure that their game can't be massively copied and the linux community because that protection software is open-source and therefore has no particular security holes and doesn't introduce spywares and so on...

[Ex-Cyber]

Would it possible that open-source community develop some open-source copy protection for softwares, eventually with a server connection to check the validity of the copy being used, so everyone is happy : the studios that are sure that their game can't be massively copied and the linux community because that protection software is open-source and therefore has no particular security holes and doesn't introduce spywares and so on...

No. A huge part of the point of Free Software and Open Source is that it ensures that the software is not controlled by any single entity; the (technical) purpose of copy protection is precisely to give the publisher control over the software. You can't have it both ways.

[Chris]

Would it possible that open-source community develop some open-source copy protection for softwares, eventually with a server connection to check the validity of the copy being used, so everyone is happy

The big problem with that, for me, is the server connection. Online games are one thing (you're connecting to a server anyway, not hard to just check then), but offline single player games have no bussiness connecting to remote servers, IMO.

While one-time *optional* connections are (barely) tolerable, they should not be trying to connect all the time (eg. every start, every few days, etc) and should not assume an illegit copy if it can't verify.

Of course, by then, anyone trying to play an illegal copy can do so with little trouble (just go offline, or otherwise prevent connecting to the server). Only way to stop that is to not allow playing at all without an internet connection, but to me, that is intolerable for a game that can be played offline.

Besides, I think it's more important to have a foolproof method for even detecting a legit copy from an illegit one, of which there isn't one AFAIK. Verifying a CD key doesn't work because they can be stolen without the legit owner's knowledge. As can passwords. Lost passwords and CD keys can, in turn, prevent a legit owner from using the product. IMHO, the foremost important part for any anti-piracy measure is to never disallow a legit owner from using the product, under any circumstance (sans losing the media and all legal backups).