[Rockin Robbins]

Here is the long and short of it. Process Explorer can no more help you crack a video game than Disk Defrag. There is only one reason SecuROM discriminates against it: Mark Russinovich found Sony's rootkit hiding on Sony music CD's. Sony's rootkit was a worm, using you as the kind vector, which damaged hundreds of thousands of customers world-wide. Russinovich cost Sony big money, even for Sony. Sony has a score to settle with Mr Russinovich. This is how they settle it. Piracy is not the issue here. Revenge is. Al Capone is putting the hit on Elliot Ness. Just as in "The Untouchables" Russinovich/Ness works for the Feds/Microsoft, not the mob/crackers.

SH4UBM was cracked before it was ever released. SecuROM is useless against the big-time crackers, who were ready to go years ago. Only the legitimate purchasers of SH4UBM cannot run Process Explorer and presumably the other Microsoft Sysinternals Utilities. People who steal SH4UBM are under no such restriction! The pirates cloak their third-party software so SecuROM cannot see it. The pirates remove SecuROM when they post their stolen games! Can't you see that you are encouraging the very thing you claim to fight? Treating honest customers as criminals while leaving the guilty unhindered serves no purpose but to aid Sony in their racketeering.

You are correct: SecuROM is not a virus. A virus is a piece of malware that replicates itself and sends itself to other victims.

SecuROM is worse than that, it is a classic worm: a piece of malware that piggy-backs on a desirable piece of software and installs itself without consent, performing unwanted "functions" that the computer owner does not want or consent to. It does not announce its presence until the "gotcha" and it has no provision for normal uninstall procedures. And it defends itself against other uninstall procedures by rendering software that you DO want inoperative.

What part of SecuROM does not qualify? It is pond scum: useless to UBI, harms your customers and destroys our faith in Ubi. That is its only function. Ubi could have written the call-home procedures itself and ensured that patches were legitimately purchased without assaulting its customers.

I repeat. I know not what course others may take but I've purchased my last Ubi product until SecuROM is no longer an undocumented "feature" of their products. Treating good, honorable, honest, paying customers as criminals is unacceptable. I'm going back to 1.4 and recommend that all do likewise. Don't you dare call me a crook. My honor is not for sale.

The shame is Ubi's isn't for sale either. They PAID to have their reputation trashed. Think about it. Do you think they did that in an informed manner, with full knowledge of the consequences, or were they dishonestly sold a product that did harm to Sony's real customer: Ubi? I'd say the most costly hit and must egregious deception was to Ubi. Not one cracker has been deterred. Every slimeball who wants an illegal copy not subject to the worm can get one right now. All paying customers have been harmed by having their freedom to lawfully use their computer unreasonably and indefensibly infringed upon. Sony has already been paid. I'd call that a lose/lose situation.

Ubi needs to do what I have done. Take their losses (the money to Sony is already gone) and do the right thing by eliminating SecuROM. Write your own checking routines that don't promote a private vendetta against harmless foes and rerelease the software with apologies to customers who have been inadvertently harmed. This should be accompanied by public statements that Ubi values and respects its customers too much to treat them like criminals and is careful to protect their property without interfering with customers' rights to use their machines honestly and honorably. All previous purchasers should be given the right to download the replacement for free, which should automatically remove SecuROM from their machines IF THE CUSTOMER CHOOSES (SecuROM may be holding other games hostage!). THEN sales will raise by a surprising amount as Ubi stands revealed as a company who values their customers and believes that if you care enough to buy a product, you care enough not to distibute copies for free.

Trust is a two way street. If you don't trust me, should I trust you? Not being trusted is a good reason not to trust in return. There are good companies (Midway among many--don't believe the garbage about "everybody does it") who let you run their games without the CD in the drive and without restricting your use of your own property. Ubi needs to become one of them.