It is done......

[Méo]

Originally Posted by jwilliams

(dont let them find out your sharing you account with others)

I'm trying to imagine how could they find out that he shares his account with his own son...

BTW, even if they know, I don't even think it's illegal.

[jwilliams]

Originally Posted by Méo

I'm trying to imagine how could they find out that he shares his account with his own son...

BTW, even if they know, I don't even think it's illegal.

Its not illegal, I never said it was..... but its in violation of the TOU (terms of use) and EULA (end user licence agreement).

And if he says that he shares his account using his account name on ubi forums then ubi would have found out. So be very careful who you tell that your sharing an account.

and by clicking agree when you install :-

1. Grant of a Limited License to Use the Service. Subject to your agreement to and continuing compliance with the Terms of Use agreement, you may use the Service solely for your own non-commercial entertainment purposes by accessing it with an authorized, unmodified Game Client. You may not use the Service for any other purpose, or in connection with any other software.

Solely = Only you.

8. Account Suspension/Deletion. UBISOFT MAY SUSPEND, TERMINATE, MODIFY, OR DELETE ACCOUNTS AT ANY TIME FOR ANY REASON OR FOR NO REASON, WITH OR WITHOUT NOTICE TO YOU. For purposes of explanation and not limitation, most account suspensions, terminations and/or deletions are the result of violations of this Terms of Use or the EULA.

Just google "banned for sharing account" and you get over 7 million hits.

so maybe try this :-

Anne Loucks made a little cardboard placque with a downward extension, put it over her keyboard, and by charmign her cat into walking over it, the placque pressed down on the space bar, agreeing to Adobe Reader's EULA. Her cat might not be a legal entity, but the fact of the matter is that she herself did not agree to the EULA, so technically, she shouldn't be covered by it. Right?

link :- http://www.osnews.com/story/21010/Ca...ee_to_an_EULA_

[piri_reis]

Originally Posted by jwilliams

link :- http://www.osnews.com/story/21010/Ca...ee_to_an_EULA_

Kitty Agrees!

[Brag]

I am all for freedom of choice. Therefore I can't critisize the choice of buting SH-5.

What I disaprove iss the lack of consideration for those who want to buy SH-5 who do not have decent internet access. They are hoping that Ubisoft will drop the online requirement. Each purchase is a stab in the back to our comrades.

Remember Quisling, Vichy?

By not buying, we are telling Ubisoft, "Abandon this injustice."

My internet works well. I am against the wars in the Middle East but I think the U.S. and NATO service people there should be able to play games, which is the only escape they have.

Overall, we are loyal to our friends. This loyalty will eventually defeat DRM.

Enjouy your game!

[Heretic]

Originally Posted by Brag

Each purchase is a stab in the back to our comrades.
Remember Quisling, Vichy?

And how is this not a personal attack on those who choose to buy the game?

[Méo]

Originally Posted by Brag

but I think the U.S. and NATO service people there should be able to play games, which is the only escape they have.

http://armymomstrong.com/internet-ac...stan-and-iraq/

Internet access is a morale booster for deployed soldiers! We are fortunate to have Internet access available at all. In previous wars, letter writing was the only form of communication and letters were received every few weeks. I am thankful for Internet for deployed soldiers! HOOAH!

Soldiers can have Internet access in their living quarters. It is very expensive. The Internet access and expense is shared with other soldiers. I know of one example in Afghanistan where many soldiers share the Internet bandwidth and expense of $60 per month per person.

Of course:

Soldiers in remote outposts do not have access to Internet

But they probably can't bring their own PC in those remote outposts, anyway.

Of course it's relatively expensive (60$/month), but I don't know for US but Canadian soldiers are paid approximetely 10 000$ per month in Afghanistan, TAXES FREE!!

----

Edit: My point is not to defend OSP, I'm just saying that in 2010, internet is pretty accessible and I don't feel ''culpable'' for ''not supporting them''.

[urfisch]

100 posts for just the statement of a buy???

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by urfisch

100 posts for just the statement of a buy???

Amazing no?

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Brag

Each purchase is a stab in the back to our comrades.

Remember Quisling, Vichy?

As I said before, when you make my money for me you can tell me what I do with it. But last I checked, you don't. So take that attitude and shove it.

Post reported.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Brag

I am all for freedom of choice. Therefore I can't critisize the choice of buting SH-5.

What I disaprove iss the lack of consideration for those who want to buy SH-5 who do not have decent internet access. They are hoping that Ubisoft will drop the online requirement. Each purchase is a stab in the back to our comrades.

Remember Quisling, Vichy?

By not buying, we are telling Ubisoft, "Abandon this injustice."

My internet works well. I am against the wars in the Middle East but I think the U.S. and NATO service people there should be able to play games, which is the only escape they have.

Overall, we are loyal to our friends. This loyalty will eventually defeat DRM.

Enjouy your game!

UBI can not be responsible for poor internet service in any area of the world. I would equate that to General Motors being responsible for good roads all over the world so their Corvette can drive on them. I think we have to believe that DRM is not forever. The cost to watch it will outweight the profits being generated. It is diminishing returns before long.

[Méo]

Originally Posted by Brag

Each purchase is a stab in the back to our comrades.

Remember Quisling, Vichy?

I don't know if you really realize the comparison you make?

You compare a computer game that automatically connect itself to internet with dictatorship of the past..


Let me get this straight:

- No one is gonna get hurt for it.

- No one will starve for it.

- This is not gonna cause global warming.

And I wonder what you're doing here, there are currently several REAL dictatorship that require your attention.. ..if you really care.

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

I don't know if it's just me, but for some reason the anti-DRM zealots are starting to remind me of these guys...

Yeah!

I don't know if I must use this or this

[AVGWarhawk]

- This is not gonna cause global warming.

It might because there will be running computers with glowing LCD monitors generating all kinds of heat while playing SH5!

[Thomen]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

It might because there will be running computers with glowing LCD monitors generating all kinds of heat while playing SH5!

In that case, I hope they will deliver early.. they announced snow again coming the next couple of days.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Thomen

In that case, I hope they will deliver early.. they announced snow again coming the next couple of days.

No issue sir! SH4 is alive and well on my hard drive. Then again I will be shoveling so what is the difference? Bummer. It makes no difference if I get it early, on time or late. As long as it is in the pipeline somewhere is all I need to know.

[Highbury]

Originally Posted by Brag

By not buying, we are telling Ubisoft, "Abandon this injustice."

My internet works well. I am against the wars in the Middle East but I think the U.S. and NATO service people there should be able to play games, which is the only escape they have.

Overall, we are loyal to our friends. This loyalty will eventually defeat DRM.

Enjouy your game!

Well Amazon.com lists SHV as the #9 selling PC game this week (one of only 4 games in the top ten that are on an upward swing) and Amazon.ca lists it as #1.. something tells me Ubi is hearing little more then a squeak.