you don't even have to do that. if you have a retail box copy, you can install and play without registering online. you do have to register in order to access patches, updates, and new content for free. only games downloaded from impulse require you to register beforehand, because you need to in order to download the files.
regarding wardell's comment about the lawsuit, i agree with others here that the lawsuit is perfectly valid. EA did not disclose the presence of secuROM to the public at large, which is blatatnly anti-consumer. it may even run afoul of consumer protection laws. we'll have to see what the courts decide.
you can -- its called a a receipt. that transaction is a form of contract between the buyer and seller. within that transaction are your first-sale and fair-use rights -- which includes the ability to do what you want with the product without making additional copies (beyond copies for backup and personal, non-commercial use) of the content. software companies have been trying to change this for decades by calling sales "licenses" rather than sales. and courts have decides that simply calling a sale a "license" doesn't make it one.
i'd say that the law isn't clear on this because the nature of digital content means that existing copyright laws don't perfectly cover what people can do -- digital content essentially removes the physical limitations of analog content that copyright law relies upon to prevent unwarranted copying of content.

You can play steam games offline once they are verified. I installed HL2 on my laptop before i moved to japan. Then i could quite happily play it in japan, and i didn't get an internet connection set up for months. Just use the "go offline" option, or whatever its called.
If anyone's only impressions of steam are from the HL2 launch then they should give it another go.. its hugely improved since then. And it makes up for it's DRM features by providing many benefits.
If you have a bitter pill for people, its best to give them something sweet to make it taste better.
I'd buy all my games off steam (or GOG) if i could...

Uhm, I think the idea is to develop a "minimal" security solution, with no kernel-level or ring-0 level hidden drivers but only the need to write down an authentication code like the usual serial key. Maybe Stardock is working on something like "Steam off-line", that is the need to "unblock" all the game files after having given the above said serial key.
For me, if they won't install crapware on my system, that kind of solution is fair and fine. You can't possibly do intelligent things like kill the DRMs for good with assholes like the EA big boss John "you fuck pirates!" Riccitiello.

personally ea and ubisoft are fools they can see the drm does not have any effect on pirating except to increase it well they hav't even killed the preowned market lol still back to the point i agree with stardocks idea simply because something has to be done

A lot of good insights here, and a thoughtful discussion on DRM that hasn't fallen into the depths of flaming.
I do not agree with DRM, and when I found out about Starforce and what it does, I uninstalled all my games with it and removed Starforce from my computer with a proggie I downloaded from somewhere on the interwebz.
It appears secuROM is following in starforce's footsteps, and I would bet it's only a matter of time before the legislation against secuROM and what it does makes it cease to exist as it stands now.
I had thought I didn't have secuROM on my computer, but I bought Fallout 3 off Direct2Drive and had to do a verification process before I could play. I have no clue if that was through SecuROM or not, but it did connect to the internet and give me an authentication code.
Disc checks are one thing, and even then there's no need for them if you trust your consumers. But any form of DRM and disc checks will promote pirating because it >always< causes issues. Not everyone has the same setup and a lot of people (maybe a small percentage of the whole but still a lot of people in sheer numbers) have problems with stuff like this. Look at the official Fallout forums over at Bethesda, there have been quite a few people who have had issues with secuROM's disc check and haven't even been able to play the game.
Granted, Bethsoft tried to do a minimal approach, but the best approach would have been their own disc check like what they had on Oblivion vanilla. I really don't understand why these companies spend however much they spend on licensing rights for spyware that can dictate what software you have on your computer.
DRM is a mess and pirating is a mess. But there have been pirates for a very long time, and DRM is not the solution. I have never bought a Stardock game but I salute them for not using DRM.
Hopefully these lawsuits see some judges that are tech savvy and understand what exactly these hidden drivers are doing, and how they are trying to enforce what can and cannot be on a PRIVATE computer.

Okay, but since I acquired my copy via Direct2Drive can I uninstall secuROM or will it mess with other games I have that may have installed it?

yes, you can uninstall secuROM; however, you'll have to find no-cd cracks for all of your currently installed secuROM protected games if you want to be able to run them.

Hmm I don't like looking for cracks. I remember back in the day looking for a no-cd crack for Diablo 2 and getting a trojan.
I don't seem to be suffering from securom yet *knock on wood* and I have Nero, so... I guess I'll leave it as it stands.
Definately considering my game purchases being digital purchases though... Sure it takes a few hours to download a big game but it seems to be worth it so far for me.
Here's hoping Stardock can sway the minds of those who can't be swayed! My thoughts keep going back to how us legitimate consumers are being punished in all of this, though.
-Cym

Saw a neat quote the other day, forgot where:
Treat customers as customers, you make more money. Treat customers as pirates, you make more pirates.

If there was a single operating brain cell left at EA or any other big publisher/developer, they would try removing DRM from one big release and see how it sells.
They can afford the loss, if it turns out it doesn't sell well. And perhaps they might learn something.
Still, why learn when you have no balls but lots of money.

EA announced its Q2 2008 financial statement, and reported that sales are up but profits are down.
so it sounds like something was eating into EA's costs... perhaps, paying a lot of money for overly intrusive DRM schemes? if only that were true, oh the irony.

Profits are down because they had to delay the Harry Potter game, which was slated to release this past summer, forcing them to move 120 million dollars of revenue into the next fiscal year (and they game was almost finished, which also cost millions in development and marketing). As well, they spent 35 million in upfront expenses for its EA Partner deals. So that explains much of the 'sales are up but profits are down' scenario.

Holy shit, I'd make a t-shirt with this and wear it! :-D