Re: Blacklisting

So many people only seem concerned with whether or not a game can be copied. And that’s cool. Obviously that’s what this particular forum is focused on.

But as I see it, software blacklisting is MUCH more insidious. And it is far more intrusive/invasive…trampling on your personal rights in a most draconian fashion. I want to use whatever cd burning software I choose to use. And I refuse to have MS or Codemasters to tellme otherwise. I can already foresee building a second machine JUST for gaming so that I can keep Alcohol/CloneCD/CloneDVD/whateverotherprogramMSdeemsas evil on my “other” machine. It sucks, but if that’s the way they want to play, then it is a valid workaround.

It seems that some legitimately purchased games protected with SafeDisc 2.9 refuse to play on machines with blacklisted software installed. Codemaster’s recent releases spring immediately to mind. What if it backfires and results in fewer sales because people refuse to buy a game that dictates to them what software they can and cannot run? What about the possibility of a class action lawsuit on the part of disgruntled customers who bought a game that refuses to run unless we uninstall and cleanse our registry of “certain” programs?

Just my thoughts. Yours?

Consider Tages protection. The disc is so far removed from the original coloured book standard that it requires special drivers, that need a reboot, to run.

If that is the case, I would rather use crack and give up supporting original game that violate my consumer rights. Games that are cracked play absolutely even without updating in most computer, and some groups even relasing cracks on updates for some popular game titles. Who would spend so much money to buy an so called original game that are not totally belong to you and have to sacrifice something in order to play from your computer! Then what is the differences between sacrifice the use of updates and use cracked copy that play on all systems.