Did Ubisoft just deactivate all german copies of SH5?

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Nordmann

Does this mean that you must return the game, or is it a request? Because if it is a request, I would ignore it. It's not as if the political enforcement agency are going to come and dig through your games, checking for illegal iconography, right?

That could happen in combination with predating, more serious investigations against you, for example if you are under surveillance due to a suspicion of being a distributor of Nazi stuff, or the Office for the Protection of the Constitution (a national intelligence service) has listed you as a member of a Nazi organisation. It could also happen if you get raided by police over suspicion of pirating software, and then they check your collection. I cannot imagine that ressources get unlocked to raid your home for just the purpose of searching swastikas in games. Police hardly can be assumed to have these ressources free these days - they are short on personnell and money.

Theoretically, possessing the version that features the "unconstitutional symbol" is illegal in Germany and could lead you to getting sued. The legal basis is like that indeed. Downloading and possessing a swastika mod for IL-2 for example also could get you into trouble.

that is, if the law enforcement authorities would learn that you own such an illegal thing.then they have an obligation to examine.

Maybe it is clever then not to tell them, or anyone else.

Which leaves the interesting question what the legal grounds of German Amazon is if they know you have not returned your copy. Obviously they know that you ordered it, and if you do not return it, you still owe it.

Maybe they agree to not use their sensitive information against you if you agree to pay them a monthly fee.

However, nowadays that your internet data is stored everywhere for eons to come, it certainly is a clever idea if you are German or austrian not to boast in forums with your downloaded Swastika patch, and your collection inclduing titles featuring these unconstiotutional symbols. The circumstance itself in principal can be legally used against you.

I personally think people on both sides of the law make too much tam-tam about Nazi swastikas being shown in games. It is an unimportant visual feature that neither increases realism and functionality, nor immersion. It simply is not important for the game. and people having suffered under the rule of the swastika, are still living. One must not confront them with the easyminded use of these symbols again.

It's a question of piety - not historic accuratesse. And a game like the SH or IL series has no educational value about the why and how of WW2, so whether swastikas are shown or not adds nothing to the realism at all. You could as well demand to have only recordings of original death cries in game, for reasons of "realism". I think that realism debate over critical symbols in a game almost always is an excuse often made in the same way like a man claims he only buys the Playboy or Penthouse magazine because of the good journalistic quality of the articles in it.

Originally Posted by Nemesis43

Yes, it does sound rather peculiar
However, the german wording is "verfassungsfeindliche Symbole", and "verfassung" = constitution, and "feindlich" = hostile. I suppose it's really "Symbols hostile to the constitution", then, but "unconstitutional" seemed the nearest useful approximation thereof

"Verfassungsfeindliche Symbole" means symbols standing for ideas and content that are hostile to the German constitutional order.

[Nordmann]

Originally Posted by Skybird

*Snip*

That's insane! I'm glad I don't live in such a system, it's far too oppressive for my tastes. I thought my laws were bad enough, but this is taking it to the extreme.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Nordmann

That's insane! I'm glad I don't live in such a system, it's far too oppressive for my tastes. I thought my laws were bad enough, but this is taking it to the extreme.

Don't throw out the baby with the bath water. Germany still is one of the most liberal, free countries in the world, and the level of freedoms and the display of tolerance for almost everything even reaches hilarious, sometimes suicidal levels (although manipulative media and EU legislations slowly change that. But that effects England and all of Europe as well).

But there was a time in the past when that was different, and that in recognition of that time and responsibility the careless, easyminded use of according symbols gets forbidden, is understandable. The crimes committed under the Swastika emblem were not of peanut sizes, you know.

[Gunney]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Don't throw out the baby with the bath water. Germany still is one of the most liberal, free countries in the world, and the level of freedoms and the display of tolerance for almost everything even reaches hilarious, sometimes suicidal levels (although manipulative media and EU legislations slowly change that. But that effects England and all of Europe as well).

But there was a time in the past when that was different, and that in recognition of that time and responsibility the careless, easyminded use of according symbols gets forbidden, is understandable. The crimes committed under the Swastika emblem were not of peanut sizes, you know.

No one better to know that than someone who lives in England. The country, particularly London, was bombed by the Nazis almost daily, if not daily....

Yet dispite that, you dont see them outlawing the Swastika, or any other Nazi deplicting media.....

[pythos]

I have to agree. From what I have read of Germany it is VERY nice country to live. Personal freedoms are far more than even the States. This one rule is just one of a few intruding rules, and there is some good intent behind it.

[tater]

Originally Posted by pythos

Personal freedoms are far more than even the States.

This I doubt. Heck, I know it's wrong. The USA is the only country that has separation of church and state, for example as I recall.

Personal freedoms "given to you" by the state are not freedoms at all. Freedom is having the state FORBIDDEN from taking them away from you, ever, since anything granted you my the goodness of the state can equally be taken away. A very, very different thing, indeed.

[Gunney]

Even the Vatican....jk..

[Nordmann]

Originally Posted by tater

Personal freedoms "given to you" by the state are not freedoms at all. Freedom is having the state FORBIDDEN from taking them away from you, ever, since anything granted you my the goodness of the state can equally be taken away. A very, very different thing, indeed.

This. Something which Europe would do well to remember.

[Exakt]

Originally Posted by tater

This I doubt. Heck, I know it's wrong. The USA is the only country that has separation of church and state, for example as I recall.

Personal freedoms "given to you" by the state are not freedoms at all. Freedom is having the state FORBIDDEN from taking them away from you, ever, since anything granted you my the goodness of the state can equally be taken away. A very, very different thing, indeed.

Rights, Freedoms, Liberties are God-given, not given by State or anybody else. They are unalienable under the constitution. But, ever since the Patriot Act, most of those rights are actually infringed, removed or totally disregarded. And this is happening all throughout the world (Canada, UK, France, etc). Now governments believe that we should give up our rights for security. When this happens, try getting your rights back... not an easy job.

So, if the German collector's edition is now being disabled if you haven't returned your manual, now Ubisoft is going against the constitution (mostly their whole DRM is).

Let me explain:

(1) The home is inviolable.

Having a program that monitores my game is a violation of that.

(2) Searches may be authorized only by a judge or, when time is of the essence, by other authorities designated by the laws, and may be carried out only in the manner therein prescribed.

Said DRM is searching for files on my computer without a proper warrant.

(3) If particular facts justify the suspicion that any person has committed an especially serious crime specifically defined by a law, technical means of acoustical surveillance of any home in which the suspect is supposedly staying may be employed pursuant to judicial order for the purpose of prosecuting the offense, provided that alternative methods of investigating the matter would be disproportionately difficult or unproductive. The authorization shall be for a limited time. The order shall be issued by a panel composed of three judges. When time is of the essence, it may also be issued by a single judge.

Basically, the DRM is a form of Wire-tapping, henceforth illegal without a proper authorization.

Article 10 [Privacy of correspondence, posts and telecommunications]

(1) The privacy of correspondence, posts and telecommunications shall be inviolable.

The internet is a telecommunications means and shall be inviolable under this article.

(2) Restrictions may be ordered only pursuant to a law. If the restriction serves to protect the free democratic basic order or the existence or security of the Federation or of a Land, the law may provide that the person affected shall not be informed of the restriction and that recourse to the courts shall be replaced by a review of the case by agencies and auxiliary agencies appointed by the legislature.

Where do it says that a video game is a threat to the Free Democratic basic order, or security of the Federation or of a Land???


BTW, these Articles were taken from Basic Law of The Federal Republic of Germany. In the version promulgated on 23 May 1949 (first issue of the Federal Law Gazette, dated 23 May 1949), as amended up to and including 20 December 1993.



So, i have just showed you how Ubi's DRM is unconstitutional under the German one, now imagine how it is also illegal in other countries.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by tater

This I doubt. Heck, I know it's wrong. The USA is the only country that has separation of church and state, for example as I recall.

Then you need to know it better. Most nations in the West are secular and have the separation of church and state, and germqany does have that, too. And different to the United States we do not have a strong Christian fundamentalist civil lobby trying to bring that secularism down. First amendement to the US constitution should prevent that in the US, too, but it is already violated in many states.

Personal freedoms "given to you" by the state are not freedoms at all. Freedom is having the state FORBIDDEN from taking them away from you, ever, since anything granted you my the goodness of the state can equally be taken away. A very, very different thing, indeed.

http://www.iuscomp.org/gla/statutes/GG.htm