DRM scheme that actually encourages sharing

[Arclight]

Confused? Yeah, I don't know where they're going with this stuff anymore either. :-?

A new DRM scheme proposed by Intertrust Technologies actually promotes sharing. (http://www.tomsguide.com/us/DRM-Forbes-Intertrust-Marlin-Sharing,news-4483.html)

Forbes Online features an article (http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2009/0907/technology-security-intertrust-scheme-for-protecting-content.html) detailing a new DRM scheme that actually encourages sharing. Talal Shamoon, chief executive of Intertrust Technologies (http://www.intertrust.com/) in Sunnyvale, California, has dumped years of research and funds into a "standard" called Marlin that supposedly protects patents while refraining from doing what other DRM methods have achieved: offending consumers.

Still, seems to be the way forward, away from the overly restrictive crap we have to deal with now.

[Raptor1]

Why must this nonsense go on? Can't all advocates of DRM of any kind just die spontaneously, now?

[HunterICX]

Why must this nonsense go on? Can't all advocates of DRM of any kind just die spontaneously, now?

That would make too much sense.

HunterICX

[Ilpalazzo]

To quote one of the comments there,
DRM won't be any good unless it is transparent to the end user. We want to use our media how we choose without having to go through any sort of auth process. This may be a small step in the right direction but I still don't like it.That said, at least it's going away from the horrible direction it was in. I'm not sure if this sort of drm allows me to lan with a friend or two. That's been a problem I've had with games for years. More and more of them trying to make me buy extra copies just so I can lan every now and then with a friend.

I read this somewhere before and found it too true,

Choosing not to implement local multiplayer in a game that already has system link and/or online modes increases the likelihood that friends who would have otherwise played against one another on the same system will give in and buy multiple copies of your title. It also increases the likelihood that you are a butt of mythical proportions.

[Raptor1]

This is not a step in the right direction because it tries to fix DRM while it's inherent problem is that it exists in the first place. DRM never has and never will stop pirates, and most game companies are too stupid to understand this.

[Ilpalazzo]

It is silly. What does drm accomplish anyway? What is the point? And can we stop putting out games that require logging into steam and xboxlive? guh

[Arclight]

Not saying I agree, but the point is to hinder, not prevent, piracy. It's also often used to limit/take away the possibility to sell your copy (every 2nd-hand sale=1 less possible new sale for devs). Just think of Steam: no way to transfer a title to someone else.

[Dowly]

Just think of Steam: no way to transfer a title to someone else.

Actually, it's possible. Cracked steam can decrypt the game files if copied from someone else. But then again, if one has a properly cracked steam, he already has all the games available on Steam with a click of a button.

Tho, SOME games make it impossible to play online via steam, but there's alot of games that can be played with a cracked steam client. Red Orchestra for example can be played on 60-70% of the servers with a cracked copy.

[Task Force]

I myself wish death to DRM... I dont care what it does... I dont want the crap on my computer...

Id rather have to put a disc in the drive to launch a game than have some program I dont want... like that stupid starforce...

If companys want to slow down piracy... they should lower there prices, so a person might consider buying the game, and not downloading it.

Cause I think 50 dollars is too much for a game...

[Dowly]

I myself wish death to DRM... I dont care what it does... I dont want the crap on my computer...

Id rather have to put a disc in the drive to launch a game than have some program I dont want... like that stupid starforce...

If companys want to slow down piracy... they should lower there prices, so a person might consider buying the game, and not downloading it.

Cause I think 50 dollars is too much for a game...

I'm with you, DRM has to go. It has 0 effect on piracy, like I've said in other threads, if it's manmade it can be cracked.

The price issue is something I agree 100% with you. 5-6 years ago, PC games were around 35€, today they are 49,99€ in most places. Sligtly OT, but what I hate is that if I buy a game, let's say thru Steam, it shows the price as $49. Now, when I buy it, of course, I except it to be less in euros, but noooo, it's 49€. Now that jsut sucks. :shifty:

[Ilpalazzo]

If companys want to slow down piracy... they should lower there prices, so a person might consider buying the game, and not downloading it.

Cause I think 50 dollars is too much for a game...

Word. I'm not just being cheap either. Honestly, I'd be buying a hell of a lot more games if they weren't so much money. Worse yet, if it turns out I hate the $50 game, I feel like such an idiot for buying it. That's why I like getting games on sale or used and whatever. If I hate it I just go 'well at least it was only so and so dollars.' And isn't it weird when some old ass games just seem to refuse to go down in price? eh maybe that's just me.

Could be worse. Frikkin console games retail for $60 don't they? Jebus.

[Arclight]

It should be mentioned that production budgets have gone up a lot as well, but screw it. :stare:

Prices did go up, quite a bit actually. It's not so bad for console games which retail at 60,- Euros (increase of about 5,- over last 7 years), but for PC games we pay as much in Euros nowadays as we did in the old currency, Dutch guilder (2.20371 NFL = 1 Euro).

I can understand prices going up with increasing budgets, but a doubling in price?!

And don't even get me started on "USD vs Euro"; 1 Euro = 1.4286 U.S. dollars, so Europeans are effectively paying over 40% more. Ridiculous. :nope:

[goldorak]

I wish the video game market crashed and crashed hard so it teaches those "professionals" a lesson. The publishers, game companies, developers etc.. all embraced a business model that is basically ****ed up.
You can't go on developing games as a "consumer" product and then price it out of the market. And no 60$/€ is not a just price for games.
And more importantly I don't want to hear the same old story of how creating games is somehow difficult. Writing a novel is difficult or do you think writers have divine inspiration on a daily basis. But still you don't see novels being sold at 60$ each.
I'd even say that reading a novel is a superior experience to playing bug ridden, half finished, advertising full games. Think about it, you're paying a ton of money for something which is not yours to own and is at most a half empty kind of experience. No Thanks. Get your s h i t together before I buy another game. And more and more lately I've explored independent games. They don't have AAA graphics but the overall gaming experience is much much better.

[Robsoie]

Those securom/starforce and various other drm had an effect on me : i just do not buy any games featuring something like this anymore, so i am out of 99% of the current videogaming production loop.

Fortunately i am not easily bored and so can enjoy what i have for years (i always play from time to time Red Storm Rising, and it is more than 20 years old !), so i don't really "miss" playing with anything new and do not care anymore as i always carefully selected what i bought, i made sure it was always something with a good replay value.

Having sadly few time for videogaming is helping too, as i am then being able to play my old software without them becoming repetitive.