I just discovered that the DRM-free version of Deus Ex Invisible War from GOG is only DRM-free because it uses the crack which Fairlight released for the game. Checkout the dx2.exe file included in the release with a hex editor for the shocking details.

Seriously, GOG, Square Enix/Eidos couldn't give you a legitimate unprotected executable? Supposedly a legitimate, DRM-free version of the game was distributed by some Italian magazine back in 2006. What happened to that version?

So, GOG, does this mean that I can pirate your release of the game because you know what's good for the goose is good for the gander?

Yes, shocking. So what, really, if the exe is cracked? Does it work or not?

If it works, I don't care.

Would you like more cheese with your whine?

First, GOG has licensed some of Square Enix's games to sell here. Square Enix is the one in control. Do you really think that GOG would be using an unofficial crack if Square Enix had not given them the okay to do so?

Second, there have been other instances where GOG has included fan-made patches in their releases.

Third, again, GOG got the okay from Square Enix to use that crack. That does not give you carte blanche to pirate their releases.

Last, following from point 3, you are obviously an entitled little brat who wants everything for free. Get out.

I have no doubt that this is true because I'm sure GOG would never do it any other way. The legal iaaues just wouldn't be worth it.

But isn't it surprising that Square Enix and other publishers would give that permission? It must mean that they don't want to spend even the smallest amount of resources to do it the right way and dig up or make an unprotected exe. It's as if they said they can't be bothered and just make it work so we can try to make a few bucks on this old stuff.

From both a legal and an ethical standpoint, there is a big difference between a fan-made patch and a crack, whose sole purpose is to circumvent DRM. Both Square Enix and GOG are profitting from the unauthorized and unpaid work of a third-party, illegal work at that. I personally don't care if they do, but it is hypocritical for them to do this especially when Square Enix still puts DRM in its other games. You are obviously a dimwit who doesn't recognize sarcasm when you read it. And telling me to "get out" when you don't have the authority to make me do so makes you a delusional, self-important dimwit.

No, I generally do not recognize sarcasm when people use it on a text-based forum, where you don't have the often-critical tone of voice and facial expression to figure out that something is sarcasm.

My use of the adage "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" was the clue.

Never heard that expression before.

Lol you funny.

You are aware that from the legal standpoint, if you modify a program (and cracking an exe in 99% is just a modification) it is still the property of its owner? Especially if you do it without consent?

So your argument on "unauthorized version" makes you a dimwit, because cracks for a Square Enix owned game are in fact the property of Square Enix :) Which is kinda ironic because the original purpose of the crack was to allow people to run illegal copies of the game, and now crack helps the process of preparing the game for sale ;)

Im starting to suspect that you are the guy who made the crack and now you are hyperventilating because someone "stole" your "stolen" work ;)

Actually from a legal standpoint in the U.S. a crack could be considered a "derivative work" under copyright law which means that the one who created the crack owns the copyright to it, but he cannot redistribute that work without permission from the owner of the copyright of the base work. Conversely the owner of the base work does not have the right to redistribute the derivative work without permission because the owner does not own the copyright to it. If so, Square Enix couldn't distribute the crack legally. No, you are the actual dimwit because you don't understand US copyright law nor did you understand my point. First, the copyright to derivative works are owned by their creator NOT by the copyright owner of the base work. If the crack is a derivative work, Fairlight owns the derivation. Square Enix does NOT. However, in that case neither party can legally distribute the crack without consent of the other. Second, legality aside my point was it is hypocritical for Square Enix to profit from the unpaid work of the cracker especially when the crack wouldn't have been necessary if the game had been released DRM free in the first place. Square Enix can't condemn cracks or try to prevent their distribution and then turn around and use crackers' work to make money without being hypocrites.

Hahahahahahaha. Hahaha. Ahahaha. Hah. Sorry, you just too funny.

Lol, stop embarassing yourself. Do you even know what derivative work is:)? Please do not use terms you do not understand. Do you even know what a crack is and how they are made:)? And google for "notion of originality" while you are educating yourself.

Seriously, replying to you is just giving you and this thread attention it does not deserve. I think I will stop now, or more hilarity will ensue.

I obviously do, but you apparently do not. A translation, remix, or significant modification of a copyrighted work is a derivative work. However, whether or not a crack is a modification enough to be considered a derivative work is immaterial to my main point that it is hypocritical for Square Enix to profit from the unpaid work of the cracker especially when the crack wouldn't have been necessary if the game had been released DRM free in the first place. Square Enix can't condemn cracks or try to prevent their distribution and then turn around and use crackers' work to make money on GoG without being hypocrites. Yes, I do from first-hand experience in creating them. You obviously do not.

You stupid fucks are paying for cracked software and you don't see any issue with that? No wonder you're paying for 20 year old games made by defunct companies.