LGP Introduces Linux Game Copy Protection

[techieMoe]

[Phoronix] LGP Introduces Linux Game Copy Protection

I understand that some sort of copy protection is probably necessary (if for no other reason than to appease the CEOs and other suits of the world), but their particular implementation bothers me.

When I purchased Penny Arcade: Episode 1, I was asked to verify my key with an internet connection, once. It was annoying (since my work network blocked it and I have no reliable net at home), but once it was done, I was golden.

This system LGP will use calls home indefinitely, and requires you to enter a password every single time you launch the game. There's a threshold here that they've crossed between "protecting our investment" and "treating our customers like criminals." I had considered purchasing Sacred, since it's the first game by LGP that's a genre I like, but this move has forced me to reconsider.

What do you all think of this?

[carlosponti]

I don't much care for copy protection because there are some games I play long after the company really stops supporting them. In the case of what you describe that means the game at some point wont be playable at ALL when they stop supporting it. Companies at least if they are going to cram this crap down our throats ought to release a patch that disables it when it comes time for them to decide the game wont be supported. Also I just wont buy a game anymore that has copy protection. For starters I am within full right to make a backup copy a right that I would otherwise be deprived of.

p.s. from what I have found is that copy protection is an annoyance for users and those who pirate hack it so they don't have to use it and copy it anyway. so the protection doesn't work and the people that buy the product are inconvenienced in the mean time. Every game I have bought I found a no cd hack to play without the cd in cases of games that did that. In most cases the games had hacks to circumvent copy protection within weeks after release if not sooner.

[elija]

The last game I bought with "over zealous" copy protection (it could disable CD / DVD writers)
was X3 - Reunion, I got my money back from the publisher and sent it back. Apparently so did
a lot of people as later releases had the protection removed.

[thesimplecreator]

counterstrike: source and acouple other games i have use steam, which makes you have to have a password to play your gamess.
but this really isnt a bad thing, because even if someone gets your cd it doesnt matter, they dont have the account name and pass, and all you have to do is have steam installed and download the games that are yours.they keep track of what games who has.

it is in there rights to protect there products, if you had a product that was making money and a bunch of kids were making copies of it wouldnt you go to measures they do to protect it and your investment.
plus this really isnt that bad, its only an extra step like when you log in to an online game.

[carlosponti]

I disagree the kids who copy said software are most likely to not have bought it regardless of said protections. Its beem the RIAA MPAA and gaming software corporations who use faulty statistics to make every one believe it is being robbed.

[GNU-Fan]

One of the major reasons I turned my back to Windows were its phoning-home habits. Why would I want anything on my GNU/Linux system doing the same?

[thesimplecreator]

the kids who copy said software are most likely to not have bought it regardless of said protections

what would make them less likely to buy the games with copy protection if the protection isn't a factor
they wouldn't buy it because they wouldn't be able to copy it.

[carlosponti]

if the kids doing the copying are suddenly stopped and whether they buy the game isn't a factor or not just as long as they don't copy it, then why put the copy protection on there to begin with? Its not like they are protecting any investment in that case either. Not to mention copy protection usually is at the detriment to the user, shouldn't you have a right not to have the copy protection on the software to begin with. I most certainly do not buy software with extreme copy protection at all. Mainly because I think its a invasion into my fair use of the product.