I started caring for similar reasons. Before that I innocently believed DRM just stopped people from copying the games and share them online. Now I believe DRM is there to punish customers for doing the legal thing.

Sometimes I think that perhaps those in charge of the big game companies knows nothing about games, people or computers. DRM can't stop pirates, the only thing DRM does is hurt their customers :(

Pirated games are nice and clean and won't hurt your computer, while if you pay for your game you might end up with a really bad DRM if you are unlucky. The one I happened upon myself was snuck into an expansion of a game I had up to them been buying and playing with no problem. They changed DRM in the middle of the run and it ended up costing me a LOT of money and time. I will not ever again pay someone to destroy my computer, and I'm not going to sit and research every single game I buy to see what DRM it uses and if people have had problems. Games should be fun! Not work!

I have refused to join Steam, and I have stopped buying games in stores where I live, but one day someone showed me GOG and I was all "Hey, they're not treating me like a criminal even though I haven't done anything!" So I registered and have been happily buying games again. Probably more than I will ever have time to finish, though that isn't stopping me buying even more games :)

No doubt it'll happen some day, but it's too big to go down any time soon. Even some day, when it goes down, even if there's no change to the way Steam works by then (like embracing DRM-Free, it could happen), even if they don't change the client to allow people to play the games people have already downloaded, even if some other company doesn't straight up take over Steam (extremely likely), I have little doubt either the community will find a way to patch the games so they can play their games anyway, or by then, there will be other (hopefully even better by then) portals more than happy to take over from Steam.

For instance, if it were to ever happen, assuming they've grown enough, I think GOG would *love* to open the doors and let as many customers and their games GOG connect over to this side. There's only upsides for GOG and there'd be a ton of willing publishers/devs allowing the transfers. Heck, they could even backlog people's Steam customer game lists in case GOG adds those games to their libraries as well at some point.

Unlikely, but shit happens - just let there be some new terrorism/sex/$somthing craze connected to videogames and the twitter-potus demanding to shut that "cesspit" down with a few obendient ISP in tow...

More likely though that, while Steam itself is left untouched, in some country with more authoritarian/paternalistic attitude Steam suddenly is seen as the herald of sex and violence spoiling the kids and gets blocked... and all users from that country who don't know how to bypass IP-blocks (which is the vast majority) effectively lose their accounts.

Or, other scenario : laws on gambling get enforced, steam gets quarantined. Drama.

Switzerland will soon vote for or against online gambling. Given the blurry status of lootboxes, some fear that it would prevent them to play their favorite online shooters. I find the idea immensely funny, to be true, but I don't expect anything spectacular of that sort.

If it gets to that point I'd be more concerned with gaming as a whole than any kind of DRM to be honest. If it remains in one area devs/publishers just move to another area and keep creating/selling from there. People in the affected country will likely just go underground.

Yes, I had same problems with Starforce when switched from Windows Xp to Windows 7. Also, there were reports that some Securom versions was affected too by new OS.

Well, I hope they learn our lesson and ban this s...t! We had murder few days ago by 15 years old kid who needed money for his online game and killed 21 years old girl for her money: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6191427/video-game-obsessed-boy-15-fatally-stabs-female-student-21-in-the-eyes-and-chest-because-he-wanted-to-know-what-real-killing-felt-like/

Actually, strange that they write about "recreating killing" because some Russian sources reports that he just needed money and killed girl after she withdrew money. And he said that he needed money to buy lootboxes in game: http://c-ib.ru/else/238308.html

Original text:

Подозреваемого в убийстве задержали по «горячим следам» у него дома на улице Академика Скрябина. Им оказался 15-летний Алексей Максимов. Когда пришли полицейские, подросток играл в видеоигры.

Во время проведения следственных действий задержанный признал вину, — сообщают в московском управлении Следственного комитета.

Парень рассказал, что в тот вечер решил совершить ограбление, с этой целью он взял дома кухонный нож. В сумерках он встал неподалеку от банкомата. Планировал, что дождется человека, который в силу своих физических данных не сможет оказать серьезного сопротивления и снимет в банкомате крупную сумму денег. Наличные подросток собирался забрать.

Соседки 15-летнего подростка, подозреваемого в убийстве 21-летней студентки в Москве рассказали о нем. "Да вроде хороший парень. Работают родители. А он учится наверное", — поведала жительница дома.

Против подростка возбудили уголовное дело по статье 105 УК РФ «Убийство», во время допроса Максимов во всем сознался.

Полицейским школьник признался, что ему были очень нужны деньги на покупку лутбоксов в игре.

Translation:

The suspect in the murder was detained "hotly" at his house on Academician Skryabin Street. He was 15-year-old Alexei Maksimov. When the police came, the teenager played video games.

During the investigation, the detainee pleaded guilty, - the Moscow department of the Investigative Committee reports.

The guy said that that night he decided to commit a robbery, for this purpose he took a kitchen knife at home. At dusk, he got up near the ATM. He planned that he would wait for a man who, due to his physical data, would not be able to seriously resist and withdraw a large sum of money from the ATM. Cash the teenager was going to pick up.

Neighbors 15-year-old teenager, suspected of murdering a 21-year-old student in Moscow, told about him. "Yes, like a good guy, parents work, and he's probably studying," the resident told the house.

Against a teenager, a criminal case was opened under Article 105 of the Criminal Code "Murder", during interrogation Maximov confessed everything.

The policeman said that suspect admitted that he needed money to buy lootboxes in the game.

Generally, the less clutter the better when trying to run games on Linux through Wine, so I'm happy with GOG providing a simple setup.exe without unnecessary extra layers such as clients and DRM schemes. It would also be more convenient if every game had a Linux native version, but oh well.

Do you realize that if this is the case, doesn't matter if it is sold on GOG or on Steam?
You still loose the right to listen to that soundtrack?

If you happen to have backup old copies of the game with those sound track, you are still illegally using that IPs?

In fact, this has nothing to do with DRM, but licensing some third party IP.
Probably DRM is only the mean by which IP property is enforced.

I never signed such a contract.

And if there is no contract, they have no right to retroactively take away originally legitimate copies.

The license that expires is between the game developer (or publisher) and whoever holds the rights to the music. That contract does not apply to me.

Oh well, this have to be seen, if you signed: aware or not.
I don't read license agreement for all games, but I guess something on the matter could be written.

No. They've lost the license to sell the game with those tracks, the user didn't lose the license to listen to it. The correct way would be to leave the game in the libraries of existing owners as it is, but sell another version with the tracks removed.

For instance GTA:SA: It's perfectly fine to install the game from the original game disk including the now removed tracks.
For instance GOG: When they lose the right to sell a game here, it stays in the accounts of people who have bought it.

No. What becomes illegal after such a license ends is the pubilisher's ability to sell the game with the track of which its license expired. Which means if I bought the game before that license expired, it's still fine for me to use that version past the song license's expiry date.

With DRM, a publisher can cook up a mandatory patch on all users to remove offending soundtrack. Can I opt out of the update? With DRM, the answer is no. That's an advantage given to DRM-free installers and downloads: you can keep outdated versions with removed content without anyone having a say over you.

I wander if that is plainly illegal how they managed to dig this out.
It means very few people care enough to set up a case.

A possible analogy could be like VW selling engines that cheat emissions tests.
You can have been fraud, but having a car that is within the limits is still end user responsability.

Because you have not factored in the concept of ownership: With that CD you need in your drive to play, you still own that CD - the publisher or dev team has no way of invalidating the product you bought. You own one copy of that game, and the devs or publishers cannot take it from you.

With DRM, this is no longer the case: The functionality of your software relies on factors outside of your control, i.e. authentication servers and/or relying on accounts that can be excluded from accessing the game: The devs or publishers can take away your access to the game you bought. That means you now lack, for all intents and purposes, ownership of your copy because outside factors can interfere with you running your copy.

Interestingly, EU case law exists that explicitly counts ownership of one copy to the purchase of a license, which means that depending on the specifics of how a game works, DRM may be latently on shaky legal legs in individual cases.

This concept of ownership is why I prefer GOG to other game shops: I own a copy of any game I buy here. Neither GOG nor any dev that publishes here can take that copy away from me again, or invalidate it.