German Court Recognizes That An Internet Connection Is Now Indispensable For Modern Life

from the and-that-it's-rather-wonderful dept

The German Federal Court of Justice in Karlsruhe has acknowledged that an Internet connection is indispensable for life in the modern world, and that being cut off for several months deserves monetary compensation per day for the knock-on losses that inevitably causes:

The plaintiff was erroneously disconnected and demanded that the unnamed telecommunications company pay for costs that incurred in switching to a new provider. The plaintiff also demanded compensation of [about $67] per day for the period his was unable to use his DSL, fax over IP and VoIP services, according to the court.

The Federal Court, however, awarded compensation only for loss of the internet connection. Compensation for the loss of a fax connection was denied because a fax only enables the user to send text and images faster than conventional mail and the technology is increasingly becoming irrelevant due to the rise of alternatives such as email, the court ruled.

The court's reasoning for the award is worth reading for its wide-eyed enthusiasm that is reminiscent of the early days of the Web (original in German):

Being able to use the Internet is an economic benefit whose continuous availability, even in the private sector, has for a long time been crucially important for a person's standard of living. The Internet makes available global information in the form of text, image, video and audio files. Thematically, almost all areas are covered and the most varied quality requirements satisfied. For example, light entertainment files are as readily available as information on everyday issues or highly academic subjects. Because of this easy availability, more and more the Internet is replacing other media, such as encyclopedias, magazines or television. It also allows global exchanges between its users, for example via e-mail, forums, blogs and social networks. In addition, it is increasingly used for the initiation and conclusion of contracts, for serving legal instruments and fulfilling public service obligations. The overwhelming majority of people living in Germany use the Internet on a daily basis. As a result, it has developed into a decisively important medium for the lifestyle of a large part of the population, and one whose failure has a significant impact on everyday life.

It's great to see courts in Germany and elsewhere recognizing the central importance of the Internet to modern life -- not least because this necessarily implies that "three strikes"-type punishments that involve disconnection from it are totally disproportionate, and akin to cutting off someone's electricity or water supply for months or more.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+

Filed Under: germany, indispensible, internet connection

When A Mouse Requires An Internet Connection, You're Doing 'Cloud' Wrong

from the so-many-options-for-the-hardware,-so-few-for-the-users dept

In a situation eerily similar to "always-on" DRM schemes, Razer mouse and keyboard purchasers are finding their high-end peripherals bricked by software that requires an internet connection to function.

So, why would a mouse need an internet connection to be usable? Well, it's supposed to be a feature, but it's behaving more like a bug. A forum member at Overclock.net explains the problem with his new ~$80 mouse:

This really took me by surprise. Just bought a new Naga 2012 mouse, installed the software and get greeted by a login screen right after. No option to bypass it to use the software to configure the mouse, set the options, sensitivity, shortcuts, macros etc.

So I go ahead and create an account and try to log in. Nothing. Try several more times, and still nothing. Try to make new accounts with different email addresses and it still wont work.

Finally call Razer who tells me the activation server is down, and I wont be able to use the mouse until it goes back up and will only be able to use it as a standard plug and play mouse til then. I ask about a workaround to use the mouse offline and they say there is none. Supposedly once the mouse is activated on the computer offline mode will work, but it needs to upload my profile and activate my account first and since their server is down its not going to happen. I ask for a supervisor to confirm this is the case and ask again for a workaround to use it offline. He said sorry theres nothing they can do, tells me the call center is closing and hangs up on me.

I'm pretty shocked Razer thought it was a good idea to do this to customers. Nowhere on the box does it say anything about needing an internet connection to "activate" a mouse. If the servers go down in the future, anyone who buys this mouse is out of luck.

The idea behind this unfortunate requirement is to save your gaming preferences for supported mice and keyboards to the cloud so the next time you're at a LAN party (assuming your LAN party lets you "dial out," so to speak), for example, you would just log in and retrieve your settings, rather than start from scratch on a new computer. Unfortunately, the execution is all effed up.

Synapse, the software driving the cloud setup, has both an online and offline mode. Unfortunately, you can't access the offline portion until you've registered your new hardware. This is a problem, especially when the company forcing you to create an account before you can use your mouse can't keep its servers up. Furthermore, if you're away from your own computer (with its offline settings synched) and without an internet connection, your mouse becomes useless again. And it's not just spotty internet connections that cause a problem. It's also other software.

If you work somewhere that has a network behind firewalls, chances are even though you can download the Synapse software, the firewall may also block you from activating and using the software as well.

As for Razer's suggested workaround ("standard plug and play")? No one spends $80 for a "plug and play" mouse (or over $300 with the keyboard -- which also requires a connection and an account). The FAQ for Synapse (required going forward for Razer's products) suggests that once your setup is complete, moving between online and offline modes will be a "seamless experience." The definition of "seamless" seems to vary from person to person.

If your connection drops out for any reason, the Synapse software will make a habit of locking up on you while it transitions to offline mode. During that time your settings may revert or possibly not be saved.

Google disagrees with Razer's definition of "seamless" as well. Searching for "Razer Synapse" autosuggests the following, which hardly inspires confidence.


Reviews of Razer hardware requiring Synapse haven't been too kind either (at least not to the software). Here's what the person shelling out nearly $400 for just a Razer keyboard has in store for them:

As of this writing the Razer Synapse driver software is easy to download and frustrating to use. Conceptually, it's great: download Synapse and create a free Razer account, then customize your peripherals and your settings will be saved to Razer servers automatically, meaning you can take your Razer gear anywhere and simply download Synapse to have access to your custom configuration. In practice, Synapse runs slowly and sports an unintuitive interface.

Most frustrating of all, during testing Synapse had a hard time reliably detecting Razer peripherals; while testing the DeathStalker Ultimate I had to install Razer Synapse three times across three different PCs, and each time I had problems convincing the software that I had in fact connected our review keyboard. I was able to solve the problem on all of our test machines by either rebooting the PC or reinstalling the software, but it was always a headache.

Fun stuff. All this hassle for a "seamless experience." Min-Liang Tan of Razer had this to say in defense of the Synapse software (via a Facebook post):

We invented onboard memory for gaming mice many years ago and called it Synapse to allow gamers to bring their profiles with them on the go. However, we realized that we ran into another issue where we had to keep increasing the amount of memory onboard to provide for more storage and this resulted in higher and higher prices for gamers.

We then invented Synapse 2.0 where we could provide almost limitless amount of storage for profiles, macros, etc in the cloud as opposed to being limited by physical memory.

We wanted to avoid raising prices to gamers for higher memory space onboard (think about it like having to buy bigger and bigger hard drives as opposed to having all your storage on the cloud) and provide a much better service for our users.

Synapse 2.0 is NOT DRM. Our products work perfectly well out of the box without Synapse 2.0. Synapse 2.0 provides ADDITIONAL functionality of almost limitless memory in the cloud as opposed to taking away functionality (which is what DRM is).

We recognize that gamers will want to be able to use their gear without an online connection, and that's why Synapse 2.0 has an OFFLINE mode. Basically you have to register, create an account, save your initial settings and if you so prefer, you can stay in offline mode all the time without going online.

I realize that we have had issues with the activation server, and we're making sure we get that sorted out.

First off, it would appear that Razer's products don't work perfectly well out of the box, seeing as they require activation and a registered account before settings can be tweaked. They make work as well as much, much cheaper plug-and-play peripherals but people don't buy Razer devices with the intention of using them like a $10 Kensington vanilla mouse. Second, claiming additional functionality is a bit rich when the software itself is too flaky to guarantee this additional functionality. "Limitless memory in the cloud" is only as good as the software connecting it to the user and, so far, it looks like Synapse 2.0 isn't getting it done reliably.

Third, while it's true that Synapse has an offline mode, it's completely unusable until everything else has been connected via registration. It would be preferable to have a choice before all the extra steps (register, create account, save settings, etc.), rather than be forced to utilize the online version first. (One helpful user of Overclock.net has helpfully posted a real workaround that allows Razer purchasers to use their peripherals and preferred settings, rather than settling for plug-and-play limitations.)

Last, if internal storage is so expensive, why are competitors able to keep their peripheral prices in line with Razer's while still offering the same options and functions? If the price is an object, why not give users the option to store their settings on something else equally portable, like a USB drive?

And then there's the data harvesting. This post at Overclock.net goes on at great length about Synapse's terms of service even though there's nothing really unusual about them. Razer wants as much data as it can get ahold of, much like any other company or online service. The difference here is that registration is forced, with the device pretty much held hostage until the purchaser jumps through all the hoops, hopefully dropping lots of usable information along the way.

Registration for computer hardware is nothing new, but for the most part, people could just indefinitely delay the process if they so chose, or eliminate it completely. I've installed hard drives, DVD writers, printers, etc., all of which asked me to register and voluntarily hand over personally identifiable information. Whether I did this or not had no effect on my usage of these products. Sure, anyone can fill out a form with a bunch of fake information, but Razer will still collect usage data and specific computer information from every computer it comes in contact with. Bringing your mouse with you to a LAN party and downloading the Synapse to access your settings just gives Razer more data to work with.

While some people are referring to this internet-connection-required aspect as "DRM," it really isn't. What it is though, is a consumer-unfriendly choice. If your customers are going to shell out $300+ for a keyboard, wouldn't you think they deserve more than one badly implemented "option?"

Perhaps its Razer's lack of an online help forum that has shielded it (until now) from the complaints of Synapse users. Sure, it has an email address for technical support, but most people probably consider that a last-ditch option at best and a customer service black hole at worst.

Bottom line: people loathe software that requires internet access to use. Pushing Synapse going forward doesn't necessarily make Razer a bad company, but the insistence that users log in and register first certainly plays right into its desire to collect information on its customers. Compounding this misstep with a party line that basically states "Synapse is great and works great" is a large step in the wrong direction. Razer claims to crafting a better user experience, but perhaps it should actually listen to its users, rather than telling them what they'll like and getting defensive when users express their displeasure.

Filed Under: cloud computing, drm, hardware, internet connection, mouse
Companies: razer

Ubisoft Cuts Off Legit Players With DRM Server Migration; Pirates Play On

from the of-things-to-come dept

When it comes to DRM, nothing is more annoying and hated than DRM that requires a constant internet connection. This DRM regularly pings a server controlled by the creator of the game in order to prove that you, the paying customer who paid money to buy the game, are not a dirty pirate. One of the loudest critiques of this type of DRM is what happens when the DRM cannot make the connection to the server. We have already seen what happens to Ubisoft games when there is an unexpected server crash. Gamers weren't too thrilled about that. Now we learn that Ubisoft is looking to give its paying customers another look into why such DRM systems are a real bad idea. Ubisoft will be taking its authentication servers down on Tuesday, February 7th for an unspecified amount of time.

While Ubisoft takes its servers down to migrate them, gamers who paid good money in order to play DRM'ed games will be unable to do so. What makes this worse is that all those pirates that this DRM was supposedly going to stop will be able to play those games all they want during the migration. This is the thanks that paying customers get. This is the thanks that fans that want to support Ubisoft in its PC gaming endeavors get for their loyalty. When it comes time for Ubisoft to go to bat for them, the fans get slapped in the face.

To top things off, Ubisoft seems to not be all that concerned with how this affects paying customers. In the announcement of the downtime, it states:

We apologize to our customers for the inconvenience. This move ultimately will help us improve the maintenance of our infrastructure and deliver better uptime and greatly improved services for our customers.

Hey, thanks for the sympathy. Unfortunately, Ubisoft has not apologized for the inconvenience of having to prove you are not a criminal every few seconds while playing legally purchased games. Too bad Ubisoft is not improving its services by not forcing paying customers to prove they are not dirty pirates. Ubisoft could really go above and beyond in thanking its customers but is instead continuing on the same path of DRM.

This server migration is merely an example of what happens when content creators rely on these types of DRM in their fight against piracy. This is a taste of what will happen when Ubisoft decides it is just not worth it to support these authentication servers any more. When these servers go dark permanently, all those paying customers will never legally be able to play their games again. Yet, the pirates will be able to continue playing as this DRM never stopped them to begin with.

Filed Under: drm, internet connection, video games
Companies: ubisoft

Ubisoft Learns Nothing From Its DRM Past; Condemns Paying Customers To Repeat It

from the achievement-unlocked:-infinite-stupidity dept

Rock Paper Shotgun brings us the unfortunate (but rather unsurprising) news that Ubisoft will be (once again) requiring an online connection to play their upcoming title, Driver: San Francisco. As far as DRM options go, this is by far the worst one, especially considering the failure of Ubisoft itself in keeping its own servers up and running.

As is par for Ubisoft's effed-up course, this DRM will also cripple the apparently unsociable "single player" part of the game. This crippling will also extend to any player, single or not, whose internet connection fails them for whatever reason:

Even if the system weren't a gross mistreatment of customers, unforgivably stupid and spiteful, it's a DRM designed for a universe other than this one. My home internet, with the extremely reliable Be, drops frequently. A noise on our BT line causes problems, along with normal service outages, sudden blips, and all the times I trip over the phone wire and pull it out of the wall. Let alone if I want to do something crazy like, I don't know, play a game outside of my house.

Compounding this farce is the fact that console players will be saddled with additional DRM in the form of U-Play. Granted, this won't affect the original purchasers whose outlay of ~$60 will nab them a full-featured game that will often be rendered unplayable. However, second-hand gamers looking to save a few dollars will find themselves in possession of an incomplete game.

"In each new copy of a Uplay Passport-enhanced game will be a one-time use registration code that, when redeemed, provides access to Uplay Passport content and features," the company said in an emailed statement. "The code can be found on the insert card inside the game box. Gamers can identify Uplay Passport-enhanced games by looking for the logo on the back of the box."

Given that this code can only be redeemed once, consumers who purchase a used game laced with Uplay Passport restrictions will be forced to shell out an extra $9.99 to unlock online content and features. This means that a used game which normally costs $5 less than the new packaged version will essentially cost $5 more than the new unopened copy.

Well, that is certainly a fine way to stick it to the second-hand market. At this point you might as well buy it new, or better yet, not buy it all. And you have to love the PR team's misinterpretation of "enhanced," which is rarely linked to something that is also described as "mandatory."

But it's not all bad news, as RPS points out. Ubisoft is going the extra mile to make sure that PC gamers will be screwed just as quickly as their console counterparts:

Astonishingly, Eurogamer reports, when one customer complained on Twitter about the PC DRM, Ubisoft replied saying, "Bear in mind though that the PC version of DRVSF is released simultaneously to consoles."

Brilliant. I suppose the bright side is that cracked versions for consoles and PCs should appear within moments of each other. But Ubisoft isn't done ruining the "game experience" yet:

Oh, this one just keeps getting better. As reader Anarki points out, Ubisoft have now tweeted confirming the driving game will not support steering wheels!

The question at this point is no longer "When will Ubisoft learn?" but rather "How much does Ubisoft despise its customers?" And it looks as if the answer to the second question is swiftly approaching "infinitely."

Filed Under: drm, internet connection, video games
Companies: ubisoft

EA's Own Employees Annoyed At Pointless DRM Solutions

from the not-so-good dept

We were among those who were disappointed that EA -- a company that has tried to suggest it had learned that DRM was bad -- decided to move forward with a required internet connection on Command & Conquer 4, even after many people had complained last summer, when such plans were leaked.

However, now it appears that it's even pissing off EA employees. Slashdot points out that the editor of EA.com got really frustrated over the game kicking him out because his DSL was flakey:

"Booted twice -- and progress lost -- on my single-player C&C4 game because my DSL connection blinked. DRM fail. We need new solutions."

He later warned people to beware if their connection wasn't solid:

"Well. I've tried to be open-minded. But my 'net connection is finicky -- and the constant disruption of my C&C4 SP game makes this unplayable. The story is fun, the gameplay is interesting and different at least -- but if you suffer from shaky/unreliable DSL -- you've been warned."

Perhaps next time EA just focuses on giving people a reason to buy, rather than treating them like they're criminals-to-be?

Filed Under: command & conquer 4, drm, internet connection
Companies: ea

Despite Plenty Of Warning EA Still Decides To Follow Ubisoft Down The Wrong Path With DRM

from the this-is-a-mistake dept

Last summer, we wrote about some reports that EA was going to require a constant internet connection for Command & Conquer 4. At the time, many people argued that this was a bad, bad idea and would backfire greatly. Given EA's serious problems with bad DRM pissing off customers, you would think that EA would tread carefully here. In fact, late last year, EA gave some signs that it was moving away from annoying and draconian DRM.

On top of that, we all saw what happened when Ubisoft tried to require an online connection as a form of DRM. The game was cracked within hours of release -- and then the DRM servers crashed and were offline and slow for quite sometime -- pissing off all sorts of legitimate customers.

Given all of this, you would think that EA would know better than to move forward with plans to include this same form of DRM with C&C4. No such luck. Brian was the first of a few of you to send in the news that EA appears to be sticking with the plan. While that news report seems to indicate this is a new thing, it's not. It was announced last summer -- but it's really unfortunate that EA hasn't yet seen the strategic error in moving forward in this manner.

Filed Under: command & conquer 4, drm, internet connection
Companies: ea, ubisoft

Ubisoft DRM Gets Worse And Worse: Kicks You Out Of Game If You Have A Flakey WiFi Connection

from the lovely dept

Last month, we wrote a bit about Ubisoft's bizarre anti-consumer policy of using DRM on games that requires an internet connection to check in (even if you're just playing locally). But, it gets worse. As a whole bunch of you sent in (but compgeek was first), apparently it doesn't just check once to see if you have an internet connection, but regularly checks, and if you've lost that internet connection, it will boot you out of the game and you'll lose everything that you've done since your last checkpoint or save. This is a serious problem for anyone who has even slightly flakey WiFi or an internet connection that goes down frequently (all too common these days). Ubisoft's history with DRM is filled with similar missteps, and it's really amazing that the company seems to be so oblivious to why treating fans badly is such a bad idea.

Filed Under: drm, internet connection, video games
Companies: ubisoft

EA To Require Internet Connection For Command & Conquer

from the but-why? dept

A bunch of folks have been sending in this story that EA has said that, while it won't have DRM, on Command and Conquer 4, it will require an internet connection to play, and this already has people up in arms. The company is quick to say that this is so it can include certain useful features, but it still is upsetting people. It's hard to believe that EA wouldn't realize this would be an issue. Why not offer an "offline" version with limited features then? While, yes, we have reached an online world where most people are online most of the time, not everyone is online all of the time, and some of that offline time is time when people might like playing a video game...

Filed Under: command and conquer, drm, internet connection, video games
Companies: ea