Rock, Paper, Shotgun

08/03/2010 at 16:50 Wulf says:

“The idea is not so much if crackers are… “evil” or not. I do not fully agree with your general notion they eliminate DRM from games. Not on all instances at least. They are a decisive factor on illegal software distribution and have their share of accountability for piracy, with a few groups even engaging on distributing their work.”

The problem with this is that I use ‘evil’ as a term because people are simple-minded, and evil is something that anyone can understand, however, I will admit that the pragmatic mind realises that these are but human constructs, and operates on a more complex understanding of ethics.

Then I would put to you that in this case scenario, the actions of Ubisoft are unethical as they do nothing but harm legitimate customers, and they do this for shady motivations that could involve a move away from the PC market, or to build obsolescence into their games.

However, the cracking groups (not involving pirates) are ethical because they took Ubisoft’s challenge, the challenge that Ubisoft goaded them with, and proved that the DRM could be cracked, and in doing so they gave us — the legitimate customer — a better position to argue from. If the DRM had not been cracked, we would not have had that foothold. Furthermore, the crack allows those foolish enough to have bought the game to play it without suffering at the hands of the DRM.

Therefore, I would claim that crackers are the ethical party in this case, and Ubisoft are the unethical party. It’s quite cut and dry that this is the case.

What you’re mixing up though is use with existence. I’ve made this point before but I’ll make it again: Torrent technology exists. Torrent technology can have legitimate and illegitimate uses. One can pirate via it, sure, but Blizzard’s updater, BBC iPlayer, Linux, and free content distributors all use peer-to-peer in a legitimate way. Should we damn the torrent technology, or the pirates using it to illegitimate ends?

Likewise, should we damn the creation of a crack (which is ethical by its very nature), or should we damn the pirates who choose to use it for illegitimate means?

It’s not fair to mix up cracking groups and pirates, as many cracking groups will tell you that they do believe that worthwhile games should be bought, and I know one or two people who have a hand in this, they’ve told me the same of their motivations. Pirates sully crackers just like they sully torrents, but it’s not fair to allow this to happen, because allowing this to happen is just allowing the spread of misinformation.

Let misinformation end here, you don’t want to be a font for it. It’s no different than any other form of closed-minded or misinformation-fuelled discrimination. Level your ire at Ubisoft, they deserve it, and at the pirates, because they bloody well deserve it too, but if the crackers hadn’t managed to crack that DRM then Ubisoft would still be operating under the fallacious belief that their DRM was unbreakable, and that wouldn’t benefit any of us, at all.

If nothing else, at least have the decency to be thankful for the stronger position the crackers have given us, they deserve that at least.

“- That the true “evilness” resides in those sharing illegal copies, and especially in those downloading it. When those times come that we point our guns at piracy, these are the two major groups deserving our laser scopes first, before anyone else.”

- And for the exact same reason, DRM is the sole responsibility of companies implementing it. Not of the crackers breaking it, or the scum of our society who downloads illegal content. So it’s these companies we fire our rounds at.”

This is the full picture, when considered together, but what you’re not considering is that the second point leads to the first. Here’s my train of thought:

1. A person sees a Ubisoft game running on a friend’s PC.
2. They see the friend not being able to connect.
3. They realise that pirating that will result in them being able to play it.
4. They choose to pirate it.
5. This is the publisher’s fault for not providing a superior service.

Why do you think Valve games sell by the bucketload? Steam is a superior service, it’s painless, it’s benign, and because of that, Valve are considered to be the good guys, but more than that, Valve want to be the good guys. They talk to us, they listen to us, they treat us as equals.

Here is the bottom line: If the publisher does not respect the buyer, why should the buyer respect the publisher with a purchase? If the publisher treats the buyer like a human being, with all the dignity that a human being deserves, then the buyer will be happy to part with their money for them. If a piracy system provides a better service, and more dignity to the downloader than the publisher allows, then the pirates are going to win. Pirates have never won versus Valve, why?

“It’s because pirates and companies shrug off their responsibilities justifying their actions on the other, and because so many people can’t tell the difference, that all that FUD on both sides keeps surviving.”

To be fair, there’s only FUD on the one side. All the stuff about RING0 access rootkits and trashed hardware is true, and there’s been actual, physical evidence of such, whereas the publishers and DRM creators have never provided any evidence to the contrary. DRM is a very destructive force, unless it’s coded intelligently (see: Valve), but most DRM coders are lazy and they just want to get the job done for their paycheck. And if you have a lazy RING0 rootkit on your computer…

“It’s all the more frightening because, contrary to popular belief, piracy strengthens DRM and DRM strengthen piracy. Neither weaken the other.”

Piracy? Yes. Cracking? No. We need continual cracks for legitimate users to be able to play their games, and to prove to the publisher that any DRM they create can and will be beaten. This is necessary for any kind of revolution to take place. If we want to create a better future for PC gaming, we need people who’ll consistently and constantly prove that DRM is completely fallible.

“If companies want to fight piracy, they need to move for legislation criminalizing certain behaviors and move for governmental support particularly on countries where piracy is rampant in exchange for business deals (much like Microsoft is starting to do in China).”

I disagree.

If companies want to fight piracy then they need to provide a better service than the pirates do.

Again, see: Valve and Steam.

If the publisher is providing a better service than the pirate, then people will put the money down for the game. If the publisher is providing a worse service than the pirate, then the average joe is just going to go to the person who provides the best service. Ignore laws for a moment, please, let’s not go there. Instead, just consider basic business acumen. It’s not a matter of legalities, and the thing is that something like this can’t even be combated successfully on a legal front, due to false positives. People get arrested due to growing paranoia, not fun. It’s not the way to fight this.

The only way to fight this is for the publisher to look at piracy, understand how piracy works, and then provide a better service than piracy does. They need great bandwidth, they need to talk to ISPs to make sure that their products will get as much bandwidth priority as possible, and they need to continue to support their products. This is something that pirates are slow with: If a company lets out a trickle of free content tied into a system like Steam, it’s hard for them to keep up.

Look at Bioware, they’re getting it, do you see? Bioware and EA are getting it. They’re adding these new Hammerhead/Firewalker missions, for free, post purchase, but for those who’re on the Cerberus network, for those who’ve bought the game, they’ll get this content first.

What I’m saying is that by doing this, they’re providing a better service than the pirates.

This is the road to victory.

“Meanwhile if consumers want to fight DRM, they must stop buying these games, they must organize themselves and demand legislation in their own country (which is already on most cases against DRM-like measures) to be extended to video games.”

I agree, 100%.

“And no one, no one whatsoever, should support pirates distributing or downloading software in any way.”

I agree, again. 100%. As I previously said, piracy should not be easy, and by doing this piracy is made easy.

“Those are the ones who damage it all. Damage the companies and damage legitimate consumers. They are the true “evil”.”

This is assuming that Ubisoft is not trying to use this to navigate away from PC gaming, and this is also assuming that this isn’t some form of planned obsolescence. To assume that the DRM exists solely to fight piracy is naive.

Ubisoft are acting in an unethical way. And if the theories about this are right — that Ubisoft are using this to prove to their shareholders that PC gaming isn’t worthwhile — then Ubi is being more unethical than ANY other group. We must acknowledge this. We must realise that there’s the potential that Ubisoft are being more unethical than anyone else. To not understand and acknowledge this is to be naive, to not understand and acknowledge this is to stick our heads in the sand, and to beg for more abuse.

We have to be as damning to the publishers as anyone else. I am not naive.

“The stain that makes all this possible in the face of governments all over the world that are still struggling to keep up with the pace of internet-based technology and business.”

I disagree. What makes this possible is that publishers aren’t showing great business sense, and thus they’re losing customers to a better competitor.

And there you have it.