Can You Still Say DRM Is Effective When It Creates Security Vulnerabilities, Performance Degradation, Incompatibilities, System Instability And 'Other Issues'? [Update]
from the seems-like-a-stretch dept
Modplan alerts us to a developer at Wolfire games who wrote a blog post claiming that DRM can be "effective," and giving the example of StarForce's DRM on Splinter Cell 3: Chaos Theory, which supposedly took over a year to crack. But, for this to happen, there were all sorts of problems and even lawsuit threats over people reporting on those problems:StarForce 3.0 used a plethora of controversial methods to achieve this, most notably, it secretly installed mandatory device drivers. This obviously was highly controversial and there were many reports of new security vulnerabilities, performance degredation, incompatibilities, system instability, and other issues. As an aside, StarForce actually threatened to sue BoingBoing and CNET for reporting on these issues.Wait, what? You can't just toss aside those massive consumer issues. "Security vulnerabilities, performance degradation, incompatibilities, system instability, and other issues," does not sound like it "worked" at all. It sounds like the exact opposite. It pissed off and potentially put at risk tons of paying customers. That's not DRM "working" -- though, that is how DRM works.
Massive consumer issues aside, it worked.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: drm, effective, security, software, video games, vulnerabilities
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Yes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
*snort*
Can anybody name one DRM scheme that hasn't been cracked?
By definition, a DRM scheme that has been cracked is ineffective, therefore, logically, there does not yet exist an effective DRM.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: *snort*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: *snort*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: *snort*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: *snort*
Sony game houses complain about a shortage of skilled programmers - but we can't teach students how to use the GPU - so after one year our PS3 lab has been mothballed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: *snort*
wow, i hadn't thought of that. when you put it that way it seems so obvious:
if you make games that aren't worth stealing, then no one will steal them.
BRILLIANT!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: *snort*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: *snort*
Can anybody name one DRM scheme that hasn't been cracked?
"""
Back in the "good ol' days", there was a game called (ironically enough) Pirates! It came on a 3.5 inch floppy. Back then it was pretty common to 'copy that floppy' and pass one on to a friend, and one way the developers/publishers tried to prevent this was by introducing bad sectors and the like onto the media. Even back then there were tools that would let you make supposedly "perfect" copies, bad sectors and all. But I don't know of anyone that was ever able to copy THAT floppy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe it does work...
http://www.psychtreatment.com/zoloft_side_effects.htm
Zoloft side effects: Some of the more common side effects may include:
Abdominal pain, agitation, anxiety, constipation, decreased sex drive, diarrhea or loose stools, difficulty with ejaculation, dizziness, dry mouth, fatigue, gas, headache, and decreased appetite are some of the more common Zoloft side effects. And, they also may include increased sweating, indigestion, insomnia, nausea, nervousness, rash, pain, sleepiness, sore throat, tingling or pins and needles, tremor, vision problems and vomiting.
Those are just the common side effects. Yet people see the commercials and buy this stuff up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Maybe it does work...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Maybe it does work...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Maybe it does work...
DRM has no positive side. A cracked DRM only affects legitimate customers and not the "pirates" it's intended to combat. Since there's no such thing as an uncrackable DRM, there are no positive effects to balance the negative side-effects.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Maybe it does work...
DRM doesn't bring *anything* to the customer. I do enterprise software. Someone tells me I need to set up and run a license server and register their products with said server to use their products (think Rational), I say forget it.
Why should I have to buy resources and pay staff to police the use of your product??? If a customer of mine HAS to have such products, I hold my nose and do it. BUT I gripe about it each and every day, every time we can't work because there is some issue with their license server.
What literally blows my mind is how often a customer accepts this and demands the suite of products DRM'ed to the point it costs each project thousands of lost dollars, lost man hours, and delayed project schedules.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Maybe it does work...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Maybe it does work...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Maybe it does work...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
...at stopping me from buying PC games, downloadable movies or anything else containing it. "Piracy" is far less of a threat to the industry than their pathetic attempts to "combat" it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DRM
Any one have sales figures for this game?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: DRM
2.5 million copies. People complain about DRM, but in the end it doesn't seem to affect sales figures all that much (or enough to convince publishers to stop using DRM). Ubisoft seems quite happy with the 2.5 million figure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: DRM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: DRM
But it lists sales of the xbox as 1.11m, the ps2 0.81m, and the DS 0.07m. Add those up to 2 million sales not including the PC(if indeed the sales cited in the gamespot article include all sales).
The article is dated a month after the release date, though I doubt there was a ton of change after the first month. Long story short, it doesn't tell us much but it's something.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: DRM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sounds like a Microsoft product.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DRM definition
In software developement (particularly Object Oriented) bugs are not written when defining interfaces. It is the implementation that we blame, not the interface for malfunctioning technolgy. I think we need to apply this to DRM as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: DRM definition
It's arguable that there could be some Platonic ideal of DRM, but that doesn't mean it does or even can exist in the real world, and almost assuredly not at a price point that makes it comercially feasible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
still effective
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Open GL?
http://blog.wolfire.com/2010/01/Why-you-should-use-OpenGL-and-not-DirectX
Talk about a company that doesn't know the current market.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Open GL?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Open GL?
1. DirectX is a Microsoft Technology.
2. PC Gamers are slowly but surely moving away from their windows based PC's. Either to console's or simply away from Windows to Mac or even Linux (I'm one of a half dozen friends who went to Linux, so while the group is a small one, it does exist).
3. Some of those simply changing their computer's OS, are NOT also picking up consoles to continue their gaming...
This would very much lead me to believe that the future of PC gaming would lie in a technology that does not depend on a product that is losing ground in it's own market.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Open GL?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Open GL?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Open GL?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Open GL?
Also, on the subject of DRM, I believe wolfire, being and indie games dev n'all, is pretty hard against DRM, theyre just looking at how it works, or how it doesn't work, purely out of curiousity im sure, due to it being topic of the month.
And the editors of this must be fucktards too, as two blog posts earlier they had a post saying how it didnt work (http://blog.wolfire.com/2010/03/Where-does-DRM-come-from), and ONE OF THEIR COMMENTERS told them splinter cell DRM worked.
By worked, you have to take into account that it stopped piracy of the game for over a year, which is what the blog says, and in that sense, it does work. Because those half-pirates who would have pirated it they could but still wanted to play it would have bought it. DRM doesnt have to work forever, sales slow down anyway... so... I think theyre being perfectly reasonable, and more sensible about the whole thing than the editors of this article.
Did you get paid by someone to try and fuck up some indie devs rep?
By god i hope you did, else you should just burn in hell. MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
StarForce DRM
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ok,
For all the lawyers to Scare people..
Wouldnt it be better to Lower the price and make it NOT worth hacking?
Most games have gone to Online distribution..
Which means there is no shipping/handling/Making DVD's for MILLIONS of packages.
There is little or NO art work on packaging.
These 2 things would drop the price in 1/2.
There is no LOSS to damage, there is no Store theft, there is no Profit margin for the STORE, there are no BOXES in the back room gathering DUST.
Example= $50 game, Store profit is $20, Shipping and handling is another $10, we are at $20.
NOW get rid of the lawyers, and the DRM, and it should be in the $15 price range, and I havnt removed ANY PROFIT.
Is it worth hacking, if there is NOTHING to hack?
Is it worth $15 if you are getting the whole program and the PROGRAM is GREAT TO PLAY?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ok,
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
trusted idiacy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The point...
"A couple of days ago I asked the question "Where does DRM come from?" From my perspective, DRM did not add up no matter how you looked at it. It is obviously bad for the consumer and conventional wisdom dictates that pirates can simply bypass it, getting a better experience. However, this is largely because one of my assumptions was that all DRM in a popular, AAA title is guaranteed to be cracked shortly after the release."
I think the point the Wolfire was trying to make is that as long as people still buy DRM-protected titles, and the DRM is effective at preventing piracy while the game is popular, publishers will continue to use it. They really don't care about how badly it farks up your computer, because when it comes to software, once you've opened the box, they have your money.
Wolfire isn't advocating DRM, in fact the developer expresses his distaste for it. His is explaining why Ubisoft and others still use it.
but you imply he thing's it's a system to be emulated nad advise people to stay away from Wolfire?
I dunno about Starforce suing BB, but Wolfire's legal department might be justified in having a word with you.
You're putting words in their mouth, and that's libel.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The point...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
all over nothing?
If anyone bother opening up the blog post and actually read it, you can see that the author of the post is discussing about his thoughts on DRM as an indie game developer. He is not making a stance on pro or con of this issue but simply stated in RARE CASES, DRM does do what it's intent to do, prevent people from copying. Yes it's by using all those potentially illegal technique but by golly it worked.
If you read between the lines, he's actually a bit CON on using DRM. However, by quoting him on such a short section of his article, it protrait him in the light that he is PRO on using DRM.
so really, this post is all about nothing...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But It DOES Work
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DRM does not have to be perfectly effective for it to be profitable. Do not create a false dichotomy; it hurts your argument. As long as DRM impels "enough" people to buy instead of pirate, and that increased earning is greater than the implementation cost, it's a win. You can probably subtract some for PR issues, but what game doesn't have PR issues?
Measurement of "enough," of course, is fairly hard to do, as well as trying to figure out if another course of action might have been more profitable. Of course, that's true of any other business model, including CwF + RtB. This stuff cuts both ways.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Some people will not pay, even if the price is near zero. Talk to some shareware creators with five dollar programs. These people are at one extreme.
Some people will either pay or decide they will not use the program. These people are at another extreme.
The middle everyone ignores in their ideological struggles for one side or another are the people who would pay at a certain amount and pirate at higher amounts. And if pirating is "hard" (either in terms of complexity or immediate availability of a cracked version as compared to "I want to play this game NOW!") the pirate/pay curve shifts yet again.
I do not think the middle group is small, either, but I have yet to see either side address the concept in more than passing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
you get the point.
Piracy as a Business model.
Its the competition.
If the price of a game is to high, someone ELSE will have a reason to Crack it.
After looking at the recent games released and how many people play after the first week. Most games arent worth playing. So the thought goes..Why pay $50 for something I may not like(just like movies). Let me find another way to TEST if I like it, BEFORE I BUY IT.
The problem is that after a person Finds out HOW CHEAP it is to get Copies off the net, rather then Paying $50. They tend not to BUY full price any more.
Give them a reason not to spend 2 hours to 2 days, downloading. The Corp is saving TONS of money using Online distribution. GIVE it back to the customer.
Not long ago i looked into International distribution. And found that in Europe and Japan, there are 10 times more games released then in the USA. Prices were also cheaper then in the USA. Games that get TO the USA are Pigeon holed into certain TYPES. The market also hasnt looked at WHAT is being played ONLINE, only what can be sold on the shelf. There are TONS of online games that are NOT the genre that is always touted for RELEASE in the USA.
In the USA they SLAP a game in your face and say PLAY IT. In other countries they COMPETE for the market.
Also you have to know something about the USA market on Software/movies/audio. ITS A CLOSED MARKET. If you want into this market you have to PAY. Look at Anime titles. HOW in hell can they charge that much. BECAUSE they had to PAY into the market, and use USA distribution systems which ADD 2-3 times to the price of a product.
This country needs a BIG FIX.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DRM plus prosecution, a leathal combination
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: DRM plus prosecution, a leathal combination
Because the RIAA is run by morons. While they've been suing people for rediculous sums, their profits have steadily dwindled. So no, it's not a good business model. Nice example. Any other stupid comparisons you'd like to throw out there?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DRM only "works" in preventing legal competition
FairPlay DRM didn't do much for the music executives that demanded it, except help transfer control of the music biz from them to Steve Jobs. So, DRM "worked" pretty well for Apple in music. Now their trying to repeat that success for e-books, videos and apps.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DRM works
for everyone else it is a loss...
Their salesmen con the rightholders into believing it helps them - but actually it is just a way of preventing legal competition - most in the devices rather than the content.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Irreparable damage to their own reputation for a sale
Point is, they may have sold copies - but every one of them has messed with the PCs of the people that bought them, long after the game is forgotten and probably represents the last sale they will get from that person once they find out who is responsible for their PCs woes.
Splinter Cell is a forgotten franchise now - they aren't getting repeat customers, either because their computers are stuffed or they know SC caused their computer problems.
If you bought a car radio that stopped your car from working you would avoid that brand as much as possible.
I also used to love International Cricket Captain 2005 - I got the trial with every intention of buying it, but when I went to run it under WINE in Ubuntu it gave a message that it had detected a decompiler on the system and therefore was not going to run. Technically it could have run, but they chose to make it not run - this annoyed me greatly. I didn't buy the game.
Can anyone think of an instance when the presence of DRM made them decide to buy the game? 'Cos I've only experienced being burned by DRM, or choosing not to buy because of DRM.
Where is the reason to buy DRM?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yep, the same UBIsoft now using the new always on/uninterrupted internet connection DRM to play single player games.
Apparently they've learned at all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They can even count how effective Starforce is by how many programmers their clients have to lay off due to poor sales.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A note from the author
Wolfire is 100% anti-DRM and our games do not have any DRM in them, nor will they. This post that you are using as an example to "stay away from Wolfire games", is actually a minor technical correction to a previous post where I blast DRM. We are actually a company that develops on Mac OS X, Linux, and Windows and has several open source games. We advocate open standards loudly and are card-carrying members of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
When I received several pieces of hate mail about how Wolfire loves of DRM, it was a serious WTF moment. This is the exact opposite of what we believe.
In my original anti-DRM post, I incorrectly assumed that DRM is guaranteed to be cracked within a day or two of a AAA release. I received many comments and emails that this was inaccurate. Splinter Cell is one of the few games where the DRM prevented the game from being cracked for 422 days using highly suspect methods. I wrote a correctional piece explaining this.
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I hope that TechDirt writes a correctional piece as well. :)
Jeffrey Rosen
Cofounder
Wolfire Games
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A note from the author
I
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A note from the author
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
you moron
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Are you serious?
Also I must ask, and please don't take this as an insult because it is indeed a genuine question. Are you retarded?
I only ask because as soon as I read that article I understood that what they were saying was that the security could work as it was a contrast to their previous blog post saying that often DRM can be broken with in a day or even before the game is released and this is simply saying that the DRM can stop piracy, so next time you make a comment that could jeopardize a company that only survives because of pre-orders and their own determination because of you not knowing what you are talking about I suggest you read around the subject a little bit more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For the record
Thank you.
First time visitor, last time visitor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: For the record
Everyone makes mistakes and Mike is pretty good about owning up when he makes a goof, which is more than can be said about a lot of other writers on the internet.
I think the least you can do is give him a chance to apologize and admit the goof before writing him and this wonderful site off completely.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: For the record
"I want you to correct this mistake, but I will never come back and thus would never be aware of the correction anyway."
Lots of incentive there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kudos
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Updated
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Updated
I have in fact revisited the site to read some articles of interest to me (hoping that this doesn't promote bad publicity as good publicity) and enjoyed the short, bite-sized reads. I'm also amazed at the frequency of postings, which might explain the occasional mistake.
Anyway, cheers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike blogs about a blog and totally misconstrues it.
- Mike gets called out as wrong two hours after the article is written, and first commenter to point it out gets ridiculed.
- Then someone actually thinks "hey, wait a minute", reads the article, and also comments, pointing out just how wrong Mike is.
- The guy from Wolfire comments a whole 12 hours later.
- Then the real morons start to comment, jumping on the bandwagon, calling for Mike's head.
- Mike prints a correction and apologizes in the comments.
But this is hardly the first time (or will be the last time) a wildly inaccurate, heavily biased, jump-the-gun piece has appeared on Techdirt (or Boing Boing, or Slashdot...)
Above all, this is a perfect example of why bloggers are not, and will never be, real journalists.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
AND NOT apologizing (or prints a small correction at the edge of the newspaper, right beside the obituaries) Hooray for the "real" journalists! Hooray for mainstream media! Hooray for Fox Network! Hooray for Glen Beck! for they are the true journalistic heros!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh wait...let's boycott ridiculous internet magazines!
Even though there is an apology, this kind of braindead journalism spreads wrong information among the readers and destroys friendly people's business.
Whaleman is not amused.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
However, unlike many journalists, he did not attempt to "disappear" his mistake but actually posted a retraction and apology. That buys him a lot of respect in my book.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
UbiSoft Again
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Late to the party but still funny
http://www.bradcolbow.com/archive.php/?p=205
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]