They're resolved by the simple fact no one called it DRM until the company managed the product after the sale through the internet, which is what DRM means.

Can you buy a single book an have 12 differnts peoples across the country reading it at the same time ? No not unless you fly from city to city with the book and lend it to them; then doesn't it mean that books are a form of DRM too ?

Or if you prefer Steam or other DRM prevent you from playing the game without buying it, anti-theft tags on retail copies also prevent you from taking a game from a store and playing it without paying for it first; does it means that anti-theft tags are DRM too ? (or should they be called PRM or NDRM)


Disk checks are copy protections there are there to prevent you from making a copy of the media, it's copy protection it doesn't "manage" anything if you have your CD you can play the game anytime you want and the rights owner can do absolutely nothing about it.


Just because two different things can be used to achieve the same purpose doesn't mean they are the same thing.

Concerning CD-Check I take them over DRM any day; heck I even kind of regret evil Starforce, only had an issue once with it which is more than I say about Steam funky offline mode.

DRM demands nothing of the Internet. It does not stand for Digital Remote Management, even if that is a very practical component. Its just an umbrella term that cropped up after " copy protection," failed to properly encompass the rather broad spectrum solutions that were cropping up. Just because nobody thought the term up in the 80's and early 90's doesn't mean it doesn't apply in some respect.

And no matter what the original intentions of a term are, it only has meaning as far as the public has given it. If a large portion of the population wants to generalize the term then thats kind of what it means in the here and now. Sort of like how English majors probably abhor the word redonkulous being so readily exchanged for ridiculous the last couple of years. It doesn't matter, language keeps on mutating, and sparing no feelings or personal convictions along the way.

If GOG took such a looks interpretation to the phrasing then I would find myself much more carful about what I was purchacing here.
A book can't be read in several places by the natural basic laws of the universe. CD checks are an intelligently designed system aimed deliberately at enforcing the developer's "right" to prevent unwanted distribution, by digital tying it into those same basic laws that keep books from being read in more than one place at one time.

In the end the goal is always the same, keep a game from getting copied so that everyone has to buy their own copy. That is the fundamental intent that I use to define if something is RM'ed. Digital or otherwise. Its all just flavors of copy protection. Online activations, CD checks, Manual checks, they are all unique flavors or colors, but they are all flavors and colors.

However, if I reallllly wanted to bad enough, there is nothing preventing me from hand copying a book.

i swear, this is the only place on the internet where you'll find a DRM discussion at least every day. wall upon wall of text about the same old topic. repeated daily since 2008. holy crap.

Well, it's kind of expected for a website that sells cheap, DRM free, old games to attract people interested in cheap prices, old games and highly opinionated about DRM.

Yet there are very real and important differences between copy protection and DRM that neccessitates the two terms. A DVD has copy protection but certainly does not suffer from the drama and impact of modern PC gaming DRM. Blu-ray actually has some annoying and advanced methods to keep the disc in the tray and they call those methods copy protection on movie websites, not DRM.

In any case you can call it whatever you want I guess, but I strongly disagree and have said so.

I'll probably stick with calling it stuff that annoys me that I would rather not pay for.

CSS encryption used on DVD's was also called copy protection but did little to nothing to prevent copying and really only dictated what devices you could use and what you could and couldn't do at a given moment, like not being able to skip past a preview or the copyright notices. It was more or less a branding scam used to snake it in as something it wasn't. Thats about the last time I've heard the term used for much of anything and I guess I can relate to some degree because I felt like that was a rather twisted, perhaps deceptive use of the term. I don't really know anything about how Blu-ray works but I wouldn't be surprised if its a similar situation. I've honestly avoided the transition.

In other news: people are discussing and even arguing about old PC games on this site, ever since 2008. Holy crap! Get on with times, no one is interested in old PC games anymore. :)

It also the only place on the Internet where you can find peoples who don't want to talk about DRM, who don't like threads about DRM, and yet read and post in a thread called "Risen going DRM-Free", holy crap indeed.

and yet you seem to find your way into complaining about every single one of them. I can understand how it can be annoying to have new users keep dragging up old subjects and have to keep explaining them to people, but around here many of the long timers still seem to enjoy the debate. If the community wishes to, and it does and seems to enjoy it, discuss something they are personally invested in (personal DRM philosophies) then why should you care so much? You are not in any way obligated to participate in any one of them, and there are various topics daily you are free to spend your time with. But as near as I can tell (and perhaps I am mistaken) you don't. I don't think I have ever seen you post outside of a DRM or steam related topic.

Its enough to make me think you secretly enjoy discussing it, or are somehow working for someone trying to undermine anti-DRM proponents. I may be being a little unfair, and I may not be around enough to say so, but something almost feels fishy about it.

Personally, I like going around in circles on the issue, just like people like to go around in circles on things like the meaning of life. Its really no big deal. Don't worry about it.

They do let you install games now on many of your personal systems. But to be fair most people only had one computer back when disc checks were common place. Consumers demand the right to pay once and have something work across their various systems. Its a practicality I am betting companies wish wasn't so true, but are forced to yield to customers on.

When it comes do disk checks and copy protection, those things frequently don't prohibit you from installing "copies" of games onto other systems. They by manual check, by disc check, or now by Internet authorization make that copy unusable. In the end the company is finding ever changing solutions to keep one sale associated with one buyer. If not DRM what term can we lump all of those efforts into? Thats not just some question I expect no answer to, do we have one? If so I want to be using that generic term. For discussions on what kind of efforts are the most invasive or restrictive, I am happy to speak of manual, disc, and Internet verifications, steamworks and all that business separately, but until those times I need something to call the whole damn lot, and DRM just seems like the only option.

Oh boy, here we go... again.

Can't you all just shut the fuck up and enjoy the damn game? :)

Games aren't for playing and enjoying! They're for bitterly arguing about! :)

I don't really give a fuck about DRM anymore but defining terms is a pretty important thing for an English major.