Good fundamentals bear repeating.

I read the list of DRM-free games for Steam and what I noticed is that their definition of DRM-free is that you can install the game from steam and then run it without needing to ever log in. This, however, is still DRM since you can only use those files on that specific PC, unless you download it again on another PC (i don't know what their policy is on install limits).

To be clear, real DRM-free is when you can download the install files themselves and therefore your ability to install the product on another device, like a laptop, or the ability to make backups is not hindered whatsoever. Which means that your right to ownership is not infringed.

I know that it might seem pointless to restate the obvious on a site like this. I think, however, that the basics are worth repeating, especially in a world where people seem to have gotten so used to unethical practices like DRM that they cannot clearly define it anymore.

It's hopeless on this site too. It's not worth arguing about.

People will define DRM in whatever way is convenient them. They want to say they stand for DRM-free, but they'll happily accept DRM that doesn't bother them, and then try to wringle their way out of it by defining DRM in such a manner that their DRM-infested game is supposedly DRM-free.

It's a dead horse.

Considering they do give you the option to download for a different system than the one you are using (so you can download a Linux build through a Windows machine, or a Mac build on a Linux machine), you can move said games to another machine instead of downloading them.

Its an incredibly easy definition for me. I want the product completely on my hardware, which is totally functional with no requirement for an internet connection. This store provided this for a long time, but it is slowly going, bit by bit, release by release.

Unfortunately the world in general is moving more towards the rental scenario, not just games, everything, cars, tv, items on credit cards. Its reverting to medieval times where the lord of the castle (or in this case publishers) owns everything and you just toil each day to get access to things.

you can do that with those games mentioned in the drm free steam games. you can zip the folders and move them to a different machine.... at least thats what I did. put them on a zip drive and played on another offline computer. it was kind of the main point.


anyway. there are different definitions of what DRM free is, but that's a different discussion again, which never ends well.

ftfy

Many Steam games require no internet connection once in your hardware, but they do require the Steam client to be installed and running for the game to work. That's still DRM.

And yeah, what amok said. Once you've downloaded the game (with or without the Steam client, as you can alternatively use SteamCMD), if it is really DRM-free, you'll be able to back it up, move it to another computer without an internet connection nor the Steam client installed, and be able to play it.

*I* want to play my games without having to run other non-essential[*] software like a game client, so *I* would consider the need of having the Steam client running alongside the game to be affecting my rights to manage my products as I want.

This of course only goes to show you that there are nearly as many definitions of DRM as people. :P


[*] I consider drivers, game engines and the like as essential for, I hope, obvious reasons.

There is a reason why the OP of the thread in question has named it "Steam games you can play without the Steam client" and NOT games that are DRM-free (I know the wiki list itself still is named that way but that's another matter). It's because of this stupid and endless discussion that started everytime someone defined something as DRM-free while also mentioning "Steam" in the same sentence which is by definition of some people DRM itself.

My opinion (meaning it is completely subjective) to this: I don't care at all if it is CALLED DRM or not. I want my games to play whenever I want and on whatever PC I want without having to log in - meaning depend - on some server or client. This is possible with the games on this list. By the way: you don't OWN any game at all. You only buy the rights to USE it. :)

You do not own the intellectual property, and therefore may not sell a copy or distribute it, however you do own your copy of it. Think of it this way; you may not recreate your car model and sell it since that would infringe on the right of the car manufacurer's ownership of the design, the intellectual property. However, the copy of the design which you bought belongs to you and the manufacturer may not prevent you from using it in any way nor take it from you, since that would infringe your right to ownership. The same with a book or a movie.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/apr/05/digital-media-licensed-not-owned

Which I still find strange. Because it is really easy. Just take the words literally. Digital Rights Management. If it is digital and can be used to manage the rights to some software, it's DRM. I.e. any software 'feature' that can be used to restrict or monitor the use of some software is DRM. That means any non-physical form of copy protection is DRM and any form of online monitoring that the user can't opt out of is DRM.

The only ones trying to wiggle out of that definition are the DRM-using companies and their apologist fanboys.

To apply that definition to the example: a game downloaded from Steam (even through the client) that can afterwards be installed on a computer that doesn't have internet connection nor the client installed is DRM free. If it requires the Steam client or some online verification for installation, it isn't DRM free.

Thank you for that article.
It does go to show how dangerous the idea of licensing could become. I think our world hasn't come to grips yet with the idea of digital media and the corporations that sell these products are abusing this fact. They are essentially knowingly claiming more rights than they have.

I understand the difficulty surrounding re-sale, but the problem is that those companies are infringing the rights of everyone to attempt to stop the few who may infringe their rights (and their profits).

I think GOG and others are currently doing a good job of showing that the first-sale doctrine and the idea that you own what you buy will apply to any medium. It seems more and more people are taking note, hopefully the trend will continue.

GOG at least gives us the feeling that we actually own our games - even thought pure legally speaking it is still just a license - by trusting their users. That is one reason why I will never abuse their service and why I will also always prefer to buy here.