Kingdoms SecuRom discussion - forum rules only

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Per Ole

Actually no, you buy a license. This means that you can do whatever you want physically with your cd/dvd, but you're not allowed to copy or anything else the game (software), only install it and use it. Only the CD/DVD is yours by legal rights, not the software, you're only allowed to use it.

---

Wowww! hang on there...basic principles of contract law.

A contract is not a contract unless.....

a) it is legal....

b) both parties are fully aware of the terms at the time the contract was entered into

c) there is measurable consideration

In other words, the contract is made at the time the customer hands over the cash in the shop. That is the only point at which consideration exists on the part of both the contractor (the shop) and the contractee (the customer). The shop provides the product, the customer provides cash.

Anything that happens after that is outside the terms of the contract as there is no consideration.

So, basically the license agreements that pop up as part of the installation process are not contractually binding on the owner of the software as there is no measurable consideration involved at that point on the part of the owner of the software which an english court would recognise as forming a contract.

For the EULA terms to be legally binding the shop would need to get the owner to sign them before handing over the money in the shop, and be able to show that the purchaser fully understood them. Even then, if the contract includes terms which require secret and illegal installation of invasive software onto the contractee's computer, the contractee cannot be forced to accept this as part of the contract as it is illegal.

It would be like a garage saying in their contract for the sale of a car "You can only buy this car, if you allow me to use it next week to rob a bank." The law would never accept that term as binding upon the purchaser, even if they agree to it.

The fact that in this case the purchaser is not made aware of the fact that this product includes a piece of invasive software which is going to embed itself permantently onto their system BEFORE they paid for the game. Means that the acceptance of this fact cannot form part of any contract related to the purchase of the game.

It is in fact a completely seperate issue. In legal terms the game producer is hacking the customers system using the game merely as a trojan horse to get their software onto the purchasers machine, in the same way as a virus writer might embed his malware into a World of Warcraft Mod. This has to be illegal under English law and I suggest we raise this with European Trading Standards as at the very least it is an unacceptable trading practice.

BTW:
The reason it is illegal to copy the content on the CD has nothing to do with the contract at the time of its purchase, or the acceptance of the license agreement that pops up when you instal the game. It is entirely based upon the general and existing legilsation protecting the copywright and intellectual property rights of the supplier which are legally binding on everyone whether they bought the game or not. After all if someone just gave you a copy of Kingdoms you still would not be entitled to copy it, even though you have no contract at all with the supplier.

1) Thanks for all the info.
2) Based on what i read abaut Securom i will NOT buy Kingdoms.
3) Even the 600+ MB patch for MTW2 (which solves not all problems!) &%$§%&% me off.
Now i know why eBay was full of MTW2 games shortly after release...
4) Is Securom legal in Germany? I do not know and i am not wealthy enough to take it to court.
5) I enjoy playing MTW2 but CA is going to lose a long time customer.

Have a read gentlemen.

This is the Bioshock write up on the SecuROM which can be applied to varying degrees to Kingdoms.

It's a good read.

The most important aspect I can see are the very unimpressive disclosure that something is being put on your machine permanently and that fact that only a few hardware changes can cause the problems documented here.

http://www.twitchguru.com/2007/08/27/bioshock_drm/

I'd also like to add that most people should not get intimidated by what is in reality company policy as apposed to the actual LAW.

It's like companies posting their refund policy and giving a whole bunch of conditions on how they will handle it.

In reality that will deter many many many people in the first place. However the fact remains that your rights as protected under actual consumer protection laws are what you should be referring to and not some legalise worded document created by company or industry lawyers.

An example:

I went to New Zealand for a snow boarding holiday. Qantas some how lost my rented snow board between Sydney and Wellington.

When I got back I told the snowboard rental company what happened and they said the replacement cost was about 500 bucks.

I contacted Qantas and they said their company policy was to cover only 250 dollars.

After some entertaining discussions I said to the Qantas rep that I have not interest in their company policy but am more interested in the law as it is stated in New South Wales. I had a lawyer friend write an letter...got the full amount back and more.

These companies survive because as Sapi said, the average punter doesn't have the money the "Test" the legal advise creating these contracts by the software companies who have a lot more cash than you do.

That's why consumer protection and privacy laws are in place. These "Agree" documentations are going to have a hard time fighting actual consumer protection law and privacy law if someone decides to have a go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AussieGiant

Have a read gentlemen.

This is the Bioshock write up on the SecuROM which can be applied to varying degrees to Kingdoms.

It's a good read.

The most important aspect I can see are the very unimpressive disclosure that something is being put on your machine permanently and that fact that only a few hardware changes can cause the problems documented here.

http://www.twitchguru.com/2007/08/27/bioshock_drm/

I'd also like to add that most people should not get intimidated by what is in reality company policy as apposed to the actual LAW.

It's like companies posting their refund policy and giving a whole bunch of conditions on how they will handle it.

In reality that will deter many many many people in the first place. However the fact remains that your rights as protected under actual consumer protection laws are what you should be referring to and not some legalise worded document created by company or industry lawyers.

An example:

I went to New Zealand for a snow boarding holiday. Qantas some how lost my rented snow board between Sydney and Wellington.

When I got back I told the snowboard rental company what happened and they said the replacement cost was about 500 bucks.

I contacted Qantas and they said their company policy was to cover only 250 dollars.

After some entertaining discussions I said to the Qantas rep that I have not interest in their company policy but am more interested in the law as it is stated in New South Wales. I had a lawyer friend write an letter...got the full amount back and more.

These companies survive because as Sapi said, the average punter doesn't have the money the "Test" the legal advise creating these contracts by the software companies who have a lot more cash than you do.

That's why consumer protection and privacy laws are in place. These "Agree" documentations are going to have a hard time fighting actual consumer protection law and privacy law if someone decides to have a go.

---

Qantas's policy is rather worrying. I'm sure a lot of people carry items worth well over $250 with them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AussieGiant

I'd also like to add that most people should not get intimidated by what is in reality company policy as apposed to the actual LAW.

---

There are loads of examples of this....companies often try to con customers into accepting that their company policy is in fact legally binding when it isn't. They do this because most people are stupid and don't know their rights, therefore it saves them money.

Classic examples:

Quote:

---

CUSTOMERS PLEASE NOTE: All products purchased in this store are sold on a sight as seen basis, no returns or refunds will be given.

---

This is rubbish, English law states that all products sold must be 'fit for purpose'. Selling someone something that doesn't work and then refusing to refund them their money is actually a criminal offence. Its Theft.

Quote:

---

CUSTOMERS PLEASE NOTE: Refunds will only be made if a valid receipt is produced within 14 days of purchase.

---

Again...rubbish. Consumer protection legislation states that any faulty goods can be returned at anytime provided that the customer can show that the quality of the product did not meet reasonable expectations. A receipt is not needed as long as the customer can satisfy the court that the product was purchased from that store.

Quote:

---

Cars left in this car park are left at the owners own risk.

---

Rubbish....the owner of the car park is providing a service for a fee. As such under English law he has a duty of care to ensure that the service provided does not place his customers at risk. If he fails to do so he is liable and any number of notices saying otherwise doesn't change a thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AussieGiant

Have a read gentlemen.
I'd also like to add that most people should not get intimidated by what is in reality company policy as apposed to the actual LAW.

It's like companies posting their refund policy and giving a whole bunch of conditions on how they will handle it.

In reality that will deter many many many people in the first place. However the fact remains that your rights as protected under actual consumer protection laws are what you should be referring to and not some legalise worded document created by company or industry lawyers.

---

Agreements, contracts, licenses are put together by top-of-the-range corporate lawyers not some paralegal uni dropouts. Its most unlikely that they would include anything that conflicts with common law, although admittedly many a cunning lawyer will find leaks in almost anything. Also contracts have precedence over most other rights, provided its not criminal at least in Australia whether you wish to believe this or not. The example above "You can only buy this car, if you allow me to use it next week to rob a bank." is a bad example b/c the contract involves criminal intent. On the other hand if the contract included a clause for a third party to use your car every weekend then you could be bound to these terms whether your rights are eroded or not. This you should have considered before signing. You can breach a contract of coarse, many do but you run the risk of being sued for damages and legal costs which can run into horrendous costs even for just minor cases.

I also think your Qantas example is the exception not the rule. By corporate standards it involves peanuts and any challenge to their policy involves time and money which could easily add up too much more than $500. It's simply way easier to pay so that you just go away. I have seen this a hundred times and I doubt it would have anything to do with being intimidated by a lawyer friend. Corporations are not so easily intimidated, why should they, the people you talk to only work there. Its not as if they are personally being threatened with legal action.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Didz

loads of contract laws (sorry, but everything is too much to quote, too much space)

---

Who deleted my post? was nothing wrong with it. BTW I was not reffering to contract laws, only merchantile laws (or whatever they're called in English). You do not buy the game, you buy the right to use it. (same with all other software unless you're informed otherwise)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stig

For the same reason as why on some housedoors it says that that house is protected electronically.
You'll get in by throwing in a window, but it can scare people off.

---

how is this relevant to software??

the software exists to stop copies being made not to stop unauthorised access.

futhermore if u are selling your house u will have to let the buyer know about the security system and give him the choice if he wants it or not. in this case the systems been hidden behind doors etc and when the buyer finds out, he cant remove it. and further more it leaves a window here and there unlockable to the buyer thereby leaving him in otential danger to criminals

@ Nebuchan

your assumption that corporate lawyers are think about every aspect of the law before writing user contracts is not what happens in practice and its very common for companies to include limitation laws that infringe on other statutory laws. classic example is where some shops may say you have to return a product within 3 days if defective. this is clearly against the law when every consumer has the right to return the product within 14 days if not fit for purpose. also there is an underlying principle in Uk law where any clauses grossly unreasonable to one party whether the party agreed to it knowingly or not (even in writing) will be ignored by the court. this may not be tha case in other countries but in the UK we are quite well protected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AussieGiant

I'd also like to add that most people should not get intimidated by what is in reality company policy as apposed to the actual LAW.

It's like companies posting their refund policy and giving a whole bunch of conditions on how they will handle it.

In reality that will deter many many many people in the first place. However the fact remains that your rights as protected under actual consumer protection laws are what you should be referring to and not some legalise worded document created by company or industry lawyers.

---

Very, very true. I recently bought two VPUs that had rebates from eVGA. One was approved, the other rejected due to the fact that they had already given me one rebate. I wrote them a polite (very important, IMO) and formal e-mail in which I summarized the situation, quoted their local jurisdiction contract law, and asked them to correct the 'error.' I got one reply, which stated that the second rebate was approved and apologized for the inconvenience.

Companies will often try to strong-arm you with the law and with their attorneys. When it comes down to it though, you need to remember that it is simply not worth it for them to argue with a customer over a tiny sum of money. They count on their ability to scare you away with a simple message from their general counsel/firm rep, but they don't really have time to deal with you. No company will spend a couple thousand dollars on court fees or out-of-house counsel if they can avoid it by paying a customer a tiny sum. If you are persistent, quote the law (rather than their policies), and polite (again, I cannot emphasize this enough) they will usually give in relatively quickly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Per Ole

Who deleted my post? was nothing wrong with it. BTW I was not reffering to contract laws, only merchantile laws (or whatever they're called in English). You do not buy the game, you buy the right to use it. (same with all other software unless you're informed otherwise)

---

No English court would accept this view when dealing with the purchase of a game.

I agree entirely that most commercial software is purchased in this way.

If I decide I need to instal MS Office on 500 PC's as part of a commercial project I would simple ring MS Sales and order a 500 user license. I would also order as many master disks as I needed to ensure that there were enough for the installation teams. But this would be two seperate orders and thus two seperate contracts.

However, if I were to walk into PC World this afternoon to buy myself a copy of MS Office, merely select the box from the shelf, go to the checkout and pay £120 for it. PC World don't ask me how many licenses I want, nor would they be happy if I simply walked out the store without paying on the grounds that I already had a license to use the product and merely needed a spare installation disk.

Likewise, a kid going into Game to buy a copy of Bioshock doesn't for a minute believe he is buying anything else other than a box containing the game. The shop assistant does nothing to explain that in fact the box, the CD and the manual are free and all he is paying for is the right to use it.

Therefore, the contract is for the purchase of the game and all its components not the right to play the game.

To test this theory just try walking into PC World or Game taking a game off the shelf and walking out without paying. I doubt any store will allow you to do this even if you can prove you don't own a Pc and so have no way of using the software.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nebuchadnezzar

"You can only buy this car, if you allow me to use it next week to rob a bank." is a bad example b/c the contract involves criminal intent.

---

How was this a bad example. It was intended to illustrate that a contract cannot bind either party to comply with terms involving an illegal action, and you seem to have grasped this point very well.

The point being that any contract which requires the purchaser to accept that his system will hacked by the supplier is equally not binding because that too is an illegal act.

While I can understand your logic, I must sadly inform you that you are wrong :P You buy the license to use the game, the physical disk and the box, not the game itself. I find this quite hard to explain in English, but all software you purchase is sold this way.

You are not allowed to edit, copy or anything else the game becouse you don't *own* "the game", you own the right to use it. Most people do not know/care (and therefore, most likely someone at the disk in a cd store doesn't know), but it significally reduces the things you're allowed to do with it.

Per ole, youre confusing copyright law with consumer law.

If you buy a book, you own that book. The publishers cant come and take it away from you, not even if they offer you your money back - you own that book - thats due to consumer law.

Youre still not entitled to make copies of it (barring exceptions e.g. for academic use etc) - thats due to copyright law.

The two things are entirely separate. Arguing that you dont own software because the license states that youre not allowed to copy it is meaningless. If youve paid outright for something, the owners are not entitled to take it away from you again. If they do so without your permission, it's theft. And youre still not allowed to copy the software (again with certain exceptions e.g. making a backup) regardless of whether you "own" it or not.

Licenses that say things like "you cannot re-sell this game" are on dubious legal ground in many countries (at least in europe - in the US consumers dont have as many rights). I'm waiting with interest for someone to test this in a court of law.

a book and software are two compleatly different things. It's a special case when it commes to software, and that's not becouse of the EULA (it just states it, but same laws would apply even if it wasn't there). It's quite simple, but as I said not many ppl know/care about it. You are not allowed to copy/edit (and a bunch of other things) becouse you don't *own the game*, you own a copy of it and the right to use it.

Let me give you an example. You can buy a screwdriver, and then it's *yours*. You can do whatever you'd like with the screwdriver. When you buy a game, the *copy* is yours, and you can do whatever you want with it. However, the software does not belong to you (program), it belongs to (in the case of mtw2) CA/Sega, so you're not allowed to edit/copy it (on the screwdriver you can do whatever you please).

See the difference?

Screwdrivers are not covered by copyright law. Books and CDs and software are.

The reason youre not allowed to copy software it is nothing to do with the EULA, its because of copyright law. Even if you dont agree to the EULA (both parties have to agree to a license for it to be legally binding) youre still not allowed to copy it. 10 years ago games didnt even come with EULAs - you still werent allowed to copy them.

Also, the EULA cannot remove certain legal rights from you, - these rights are defined by consumer law, and a EULA cannot overrrule them, any more than a EULA could state that "by clicking OK you agree that CA are allowed to come into your house and murder you in your sleep". Even if you click OK, CA are still not allowed to murder you in your sleep.

There is a LOT of stuff in these EULAs that is of questionable legal standing - (e.g. a company's right to withdraw a service that you have paid for, or your right to sell the software on to a third party) and so far none of it has been tested in court.


Edit - sorry misread some of your post, but will add this anyway:

The DMCA and the EUCD make certain things illegal, such as circumventing copy protection - however there is no law that prohibits you from altering software outside of that specific purpose. E.g. if i want to hack my copy of excel to make the add function perform subtraction instead i can do it quite legally. What I cant then do is distribute or sell modified copies of excel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Per Ole

a book and software are two compleatly different things. It's a special case when it commes to software, and that's not becouse of the EULA (it just states it, but same laws would apply even if it wasn't there). It's quite simple, but as I said not many ppl know/care about it. You are not allowed to copy/edit (and a bunch of other things) becouse you don't *own the game*, you own a copy of it and the right to use it.

---

They're not really that different. The only significant point is that a book is harder to copy due to the fact that it is not stored digitally. Copyright law applies just as much to photocopying a physical book as it does to pirating software. That in itself is not a major issue here. Copyright law is certainly incredibly out-dated and poorly designed to deal with digital media, but it's the actions of 2K and SecuROM themselves that are really in violation of the law here. The more appropriate analogy would be if Bloomsbury Publishing came to your house and repossessed your copy of Harry Potter after you had read it five times.

There is no doubt in my mind that 2K is in heavy violation of both contract and copyright laws on this matter, at least in the US. If I were them, I would be worried about a class action lawsuit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TinCow

The more appropriate analogy would be if Bloomsbury Publishing came to your house and repossessed your copy of Harry Potter after you had read it five times.

---

That's actually both correct and scary. We, as costumers, have somehow accepted that games/software isn't something we can share with others as we like. How would we react if book publishers tried the same thing, by saying that we can't lend a book to more than say 5 people? Would we ever accept such a thing? If not, then why have we accepted it for software?

The install limit is particularly scary, since the usual response with any kind of problem with the TW series has always been "re-install." Can't get the patch to work? Reinstall. Graphics issues? Reinstall. Instead of including a proper uninstaller that deletes registry entries, so that end users don't have to muck around in their registries in order to reinstall the game, apparently CA has taken the opposite tack and is making the problem worse by putting in entries that cannot be deleted.

I'm seriously considering cancelling my Kingdoms order. This is ugly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gardibolt

The install limit is particularly scary, since the usual response with any kind of problem with the TW series has always been "re-install." Can't get the patch to work? Reinstall. Graphics issues? Reinstall. Instead of including a proper uninstaller that deletes registry entries, so that end users don't have to muck around in their registries in order to reinstall the game, apparently CA has taken the opposite tack and is making the problem worse by putting in entries that cannot be deleted.

I'm seriously considering cancelling my Kingdoms order. This is ugly.

---

I want to make it clear that the installation limit discussion refers to Bioshock, NOT M2TW: Kingdoms. This discussion began because both use SecurROM, and it then jumped over the the additional problems that 2K are having with Bioshock. Please do not think that Kingdoms has any kind of installation limit because, as far as I am aware, it does not. It only runs the normal SecurROM copy protection software which, while many consider it bad, is nowhere near as horrible as what has happened with Bioshock.

mkay, that settles it for good.

*permanently crosses Kingdoms off the To-buy list*

I got screwed by Starforce once, not gonna let Securom do the same thing to me.

Guess it's the "fool me once...fool me twice..." thing.

It's not only this issue that has confirmed my not purchasing this expansion. Regardless of Sega or CA who are at fault, the end product is a mess IMO

........Orda

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TinCow

Copyright law is certainly incredibly out-dated and poorly designed to deal with digital media, but it's the actions of 2K and SecuROM themselves that are really in violation of the law here. The more appropriate analogy would be if Bloomsbury Publishing came to your house and repossessed your copy of Harry Potter after you had read it five times.

---

To complete that analogy, it would be like having the Harry Potter book delivered to your house by a guy who pounded a big nail into the wall of your library, and used it to attach a chain to the book. He says "I'll be back to repossess the book after you read it five times, and oh yeah... sorry about that hole in the wall, but I won't fix that. You'll just have to live with it."

The way CA is using SecureRom in Kingdoms isn't quite that bad, but they're still pounding that nail in the wall, and it stays there when you're finished reading the book.

Gosh! that was a long read i have just read the four pages in one go and i must admit that it was a bit scary :sweatdrop: until now i did not know anyhing about this topic and for gods sake i have already installed stalker, nwn2 and tiberium wars 3 without knowing anything about this programme and the thing is that i was not able to run firt two at all although my sytsem was suitable for handling it and i played tiberium war in uk and i tried to intall it to my pc in cyprus but the game just did not work. Do you know anything about this? sorry for getting of the topic but if see that i will have this kind of problem with kingdoms than i am not buying it although i was dying to play it.:thumbsdown:

Last time I discussed this here it was a bit of a brew-ha-ha between myself and a certain CA member that caused that interesting thread to be closed. Hopefully that wont happen again.

The other point on this issue that hasnt been discussed yet is "fair use".

Copyright law does not prevent me from photocopying a book I own, converting it to a PDF or to text, and reading or using it however I wish. So long as those copies are not distributed to others in any way, I've done nothing illegal. Every time an important "fair use" case has come up before the Supremes, it has been won by the consumer. Yet the gaming industry holds on to the idea they can decide what we can and cannot do with our copy of their software. IMO, they are terrified of the day when the case reaches the Supremes. Perhaps the Bioshock backlash will provide he impetous for change. There has to be a better way for the software industry to protect their investments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Turk

Gosh! that was a long read i have just read the four pages in one go and i must admit that it was a bit scary :sweatdrop: until now i did not know anyhing about this topic and for gods sake i have already installed stalker, nwn2 and tiberium wars 3 without knowing anything about this programme and the thing is that i was not able to run firt two at all although my sytsem was suitable for handling it and i played tiberium war in uk and i tried to intall it to my pc in cyprus but the game just did not work. Do you know anything about this? sorry for getting of the topic but if see that i will have this kind of problem with kingdoms than i am not buying it although i was dying to play it.:thumbsdown:

---

Are you freaking kidding me, Stalker has it as well?!?!

I am against such things. I already have StarForce on my computer, but I do not think I will get this. I see a load of potential security breaks. I guess I will have to send it back to Amazon. Good thing I didn't open it.

Vuk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Didz

How was this a bad example. It was intended to illustrate that a contract cannot bind either party to comply with terms involving an illegal action, and you seem to have grasped this point very well.

The point being that any contract which requires the purchaser to accept that his system will hacked by the supplier is equally not binding because that too is an illegal act.

---

Very bad example by the simple fact that it has never been established that the bundling of securom crapware in with games and its subsequent installation on gamers PC's is illegal. If anyone feels that it is then they can certainly test this theory with the courts if they so wish. Good luck!

@crpcarrot
Its not uncommon for contracts to contain waivers Edit - removed example. Not intended to suggest basic consumer rights can be waived but other rights. - He may be able to find a lawyer that may convince a court the contract isn't legally binding for whatever reason. The courts may rule in his favour and he will get back his deposit and maybe if hes really lucky a portion of his courts costs. Then the vendor will sue for full cost of purchase, damages and court costs and the buyer will ultimately be either bankrupt or pay several times more than the initial purchase cost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nebuchadnezzar

Very bad example by the simple fact that it has never been established that the bundling of securom crapware in with games and its subsequent installation on gamers PC's is illegal. If anyone feels that it is then they can certainly test this theory with the courts if they so wish. Good luck!

@crpcarrot
By the way, a contract has precedence where your rights can be waived. If for example consumer laws state a land buyer has a 3 day cooling of period to allow the buyer to change his mind but a contract may also include a clause were the buyer waives his rights to this cooling off period. If he changes his mind tough titties. He may be able to find a lawyer that may convince a court his basic rights were denyed because he was drinking at the time or suchlike. The courts may rule in his favour and he will get back his deposit and maybe if hes really lucky a portion of his courts costs. Then the vendor will sue for full cost of purchase, damages and court costs and the buyer will ultimately be either bankrupt or pay several times more than the initial purchase cost.

---

You have a point there, Neb. However, I think this discussion has transcended the legal aspects of installing Securom. I don't know whose bright idea it was, but whoever it is, they have pissed off a great many a customer. Now, instead of saving money on piracy prevention they will instead lose money on unbought copies of Kingdoms. I most certainly hope that einstein at Sega/CA/Wherever wakes up unemployed.

Just to add a little more which hopefully puts this thread back on track.

Why use Securom. I'll take a wild guess and that would be to stamp out the second hand game business eg ebay and hand-me-down (I finished with it so you can have it now) game business for nothing more than to sell more copies even at the expense of a few fans deserting or jumping ship. The PC game business is all about mega-profits and insta-sales with little or no regard to consumers, quality or service and the current trend is witness to this fact. Has anyone ever got anything better than an auto-response from customer service at CA, SEGA, huh?

No demo, how convenient is that. Smells a little like Bioshock by releasing a demo with the launch of the official game. So that securom issue isn't discovered prematurely and affect the all important sales? mmm?

Have mercy, its only an expansion. So what can we expect in Empires for Heavens sake? Let me guess, a two time install? Yes indeed! Thanks SEGA

and I have no doubt that they will scream how the whole industry is at risk because of piracy.

If all this is getting too much than don't buy Kingdoms or better still write to your local consumer & competition regulatory body with a complaint. Perhaps in the future we can see better government regulations governing this runaway industry that has more characteristics of a scam than it does of a business.

Well this certainly kicked off nicely :2thumbsup:

As TinCow states there are only some similarities with the secuROM version being used in Bioshock and the one being used on Kingdoms. Keep that in mind.

I'm pretty sure any company would have been told by their own lawyers that it has a substantial amount of risk attached to the strategy that believes they can install permanent files on a person’s private PC under the guise of purchasing an $80 piece of software.

Given the attempt at preventing...what ever they think they are preventing...has failed entirely (see any and all articles about the crack that happened within four days of release), all you have done has annoyed a whole boat load of people that are behaving correctly.

With regards to Bioshock's attempt then I'll summarise.

It's been ill conceived, poorly executed, badly communicated and has a real world impact on the enjoyment of the game and people ability to change basic hardware on their machine.

Guess what…I'd say the money they THOUGHT they were going to make due to this strategy has been ENTIRELY lost with the negative impact this has caused.

I love the phrase “opportunity cost” in economics and this is a classic example of the “opportunity cost” of what they have done.

The meeting goes like this:

Up steps the dude:

Money apparently saved due to the difficulty but not entirely preventable hacking of the machines….$400 000.

Money lost due to sales reductions and unplanned costs due to this being ill conceived, poorly executed, badly communicated and has a real world impact on the enjoyment of the game and people ability to change basic hardware on their machine…$800 000.

Total result…minus $400 000. Oh and I’ve not included the fee we paid Sony for implementing the secuROM solution.

As for someone commenting that corporate lawyers would be unlikely to attempt to have company policy conflict with law...boy I must be cynical, because that is just what I see everywhere and especially when it comes to the IT world and games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AussieGiant

As for someone commenting that corporate lawyers would never attempt to have company policy conflict with law...boy I must be cynical, because that is just what I see everywhere and especially when it comes to the IT world and games.

---

I never said NEVER. I said unlikely and that was in reference to Agreements, contracts, licenses etc. not policies. Who cares about policies?

But anyones interpretation of the law will always differ from others and at the end of the day the only one that matters is the one decided by the courts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nebuchadnezzar

I never said NEVER. I said unlikely and that was in reference to Agreements, contracts, licenses etc. not policies. Who cares about policies?

But anyones interpretation of the law will always differ from others and at the end of the day the only one that matters is the one decided by the courts.

---

Totally true and it's those "Licensing Agreement" we all check "I agree" to, that leave a lot to be desired when it come down to it.

I'll change my post from "never" then, because I'd also suggest that it is it more than likely these agreement are designed to protect the purchaser of the legal advise as far as they can get it. Whether it is tested in court is the only real test to thier "attempt" at protection.

This discussion has gone on for a good four pages (not including the locked thread) and Kingdoms has been released for a few days already, so can we please hear from Sega or CA on this issue? I know some representatives do visit this forum and post replies occasionally.

At the very least, an official confirmation is due to those who still have any doubts as to whether Securom v7 is used on Kingdoms. They and other prospective customers have a right to know this as it may well affect their decision to purchase the game. It isn't fair to have someone buy the game and unknowingly install some 3rd party malware they may come to regret later.

I also like to know if there are any plans for a patch release to remove Securom from my system. Many have taken a stand against the use of this intrusive copy protection and the reasons for this displeasure is clear. I believe many others are still sitting on the fence undecided on whether to purchase Kingdoms until they get an official response on this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpencerH

Last time I discussed this here it was a bit of a brew-ha-ha between myself and a certain CA member that caused that interesting thread to be closed.

---

Really?
Certainly I'm sure with the relative popularity of the org this thread has caused 1 less copy or more of kingdoms to be sold (and rightly so). To the issue at hand... I don't think this stops pirating and it hurts consumers.
The need for a cd stops 11 year olds from lending it to their friends but adds nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Per Ole

While I can understand your logic, I must sadly inform you that you are wrong :P You buy the license to use the game, the physical disk and the box, not the game itself. I find this quite hard to explain in English, but all software you purchase is sold this way.

---

As Daveybaby has ably explained you are wrong. There are two seperate issues here Contract Law and Copyright Law and you cannot confuse the two.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkarbiter

Really?
Certainly I'm sure with the relative popularity of the org this thread has caused 1 less copy or more of kingdoms to be sold (and rightly so). To the issue at hand... I don't think this stops pirating and it hurts consumers.
The need for a cd stops 11 year olds from lending it to their friends but adds nothing.

---

Really.

The discussion was about my "right" to make images of the games (for my own use). After it was implied I was a thief it got a "little heated" IIRC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Didz

That might be true in your country, but in the UK the basic rule is that a consumer cannot waive their consumer rights (even if they want to) and any contract which attempts to force them into doing so is by implication illegal and not binding.

---

I believe that is the case in Australia also.

does anyone know whether the other games using securom (apart from bioshock) doeslimit the installation times in any way or not i mean for god sake many of my favourite games seems to be using this thing and i didnt even know that, probably many of the probles i encounter with the game was because of this programme.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Turk

does anyone know whether the other games using securom (apart from bioshock) doeslimit the installation times in any way or not i mean for god sake many of my favourite games seems to be using this thing and i didnt even know that, probably many of the probles i encounter with the game was because of this programme.

---

I sincerely doubt it.

whatever

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nebuchadnezzar

Australian law is much the same as UK as both are based on the westminster system. This is not illegal. In fact it is standard practice with many contracts.

---

But that is the point I was trying to make Nebuchadnezzar.

Even though it is perhaps not illegal, any time I've seen these contracts attempt to infringe on consumer protection that don't stand up very well.

Especially when you can do the whole; "Big bad software company, against the poor young innocent consumer."

I've been a fan since beta STW, I was always amoung the 1st line to buy the TW games as soon as they reach the shops, but this SecuRom is too disapointing. Tomorrow will be the 1st day Kindom on sale here in Adelaide, I will give it a pass the 1st time. If it still exist in ETW, I guess I won't buy it as well. I will reconsider to buy if this issue gets solved. May be most of the people don't care much and will try the Kingdom anyway, it's a small risk by the sounds of it, but I don't like to take any risk, I wants full control of my own PC, not to say how CA/ SEGA is treating their royal customers .....

1) On Aug 31, I installed Kingdoms
2) On Sept 2, I fired up “City of Heroes” (an MMORPG) and it patched itself with a patch released 08/30

When I tried to play “City of Heroe” after patching up on Sunday, if I tried to log in on a character that was in an outside environment the game would lock up before the loading in process finished. One time it did completely load in on a character which was outside – and after loading in I had framerate of less that 1, then it locked up.

I rebooted and tried logging into a different character - at this point I was just trying to log successfully log in on any of my characters - as it happened, the character I tried was in an indoor environment. I was able to move around and do what one normally does, I used the showfps command and found frame rate was only 38 or so. Pretty low for an indoor environment but, acceptable. I then took the character out into the world where you can actually play and boom! Fps dropped to .07 followed by lockup.

After a reboot, I noted that the only difference between the character that loaded in and the two that didn’t was that the one that did was ‘indoors’. I then made a lucky guess and loaded in on a different character who was ‘indoors’. I stayed on that character, without leaving that inside environ to see what would happen and eventually got an “out of memory” system message.

Log out, reboot, fire up task manager, log back in on that character while running task manager and I sit there watching the memory usage escalate.

O.k, it wouldn’t be the first time a CoH patch caused a memory leak so off to the official forums I go to see what is being said about it and…nothing (at this time, I still didn’t know SecuROM was involved with Kingdoms). No one else is squawking about a memory leak or anything. One post that did catch my eye said that CoX would not run after Bioshock was installed. Nothing really concrete there but, it got me thinking that I did just install Kingdoms and other than the patch that is all that happened.

I hop over to the total war forums and find the SecuROM thread and how Kingdoms includes SecuROM which is also used in BioShock yadda.

Hmmmm. So, that installed and now I have a memory leak that I didn’t have before. CoX patches have caused memory leaks in the game before but, there would be more people than just me bitching if that was the case. Maybe I found my culprit?

I rolled back to the restore point that was made just prior to installing Kingdoms and tried CoH, to find the same issues. Then I did a system search and found secuROm was still there. Even though I rolled back to a pre-Kingdoms restorepoint….

I downloaded the reg editing utility that post from Tom’s Hardware mentioned in how to remove secuROM after unistalling the bioshock demo but, that utility didn’t seem run on Vista. (the command line interface window flashes up briefly and goes away)

At this point I may not have enough evidence to satisfy those of you who want the same provenance you would need as if you were a federal judge issuing a warrant but, I do have a problem that didn’t exist before, and I have enough circumstantial evidence to satisfy me that I have my perp. I will keep digging – I have no choice, I pay monthly to play CoH and now I can’t!

As much as I enjoy TW and Kingdoms, it pisses me off that the game installs this software without my knowledge or consent. It pisses me off more that I can’t simply uninstall it when I find out about it and decide I don’t want it. It REALLY pisses me off that this is only a problem for people like me who took the time to go buy a legitimate copy of the game!!! The crakerz and hackers have already cracked the game and removed the secuROM. The people stealing it don’t have to deal with this [censored]!

God! That pisses me off!

Actually, it seems its getting worse even.

So far, we had been assuming M2TW uses SafeDisc (OK) and Kingdoms uses SecuROM (Intrusive).
Well, looks like it changed.
I've just read elsewhere, that with 1.3, the vanilla M2TW exe file is now also SecuROM 7 rather than SafeDisc.
Of course, not having the 1.3 exe makes it kind of difficult to verify on my end, but if someone who has 1.3 installed (from Kingdoms or elsewhere) would like to check on its protection status (legally) using ProtectionID, that would be useful.

VIQ: CAN I install Kingdoms without internetconnection? Yes or No? Can someone answer this.

@ stranger
no kingdoms wont work without SECUROM

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crpcarrot

@ stranger
no kingdoms wont work without SECUROM

---

So if I understand correctly, I won't be able to install Kingdoms as my Game PC has no Internet Connection ? Right ?

What the...?

A person does not need an internet connection to be able to install M2TW - Kingdoms.

We good? Clear enough?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kraggenmor

1) On Aug 31, I installed Kingdoms
2) On Sept 2, I fired up “City of Heroes” (an MMORPG) and it patched itself with a patch released 08/30

When I tried to play “City of Heroe” after patching up on Sunday, if I tried to log in on a character that was in an outside environment the game would lock up before the loading in process finished. One time it did completely load in on a character which was outside – and after loading in I had framerate of less that 1, then it locked up.

---

Quoted from Wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Securom

"Certain games installed using SecuROM will prevent other select games from working correctly, and will continue to do so even after game is uninstalled."

It's exactly why I am adamant a patch is released by Sega that completely removes Securom. It bugs me no end that as long as Securom stays on my system, some time later I may find I cannot run other games purchased legitimately.

Do a google and you find Securom is also reported to conflict with other software and applications (some anti-virus programs, Process Explorer, Nero, software emulation programs etc.) Please, Sega, I bought Kingdoms to enjoy it, not get punished for my loyalty and money with this headache.

Lots of people who play total war don't visit this forum, and your post made me think how clueless they'd be when some of their software suddenly no longer worked properly because of Securom malware they never even knew existed when they bought and installed Kindoms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Stranger

VIQ: CAN I install Kingdoms without internetconnection? Yes or No? Can someone answer this.

---

Yes you can.
This is not Bioshock.

OK, someone mentioned that this thread probably caused someone NOT to buy Kingdoms. I admit it, I'm that one. I understand the points made by the people who say it is no big deal, but I am also for people's right to privacy, and thus totally opposed to the idea of any malware being installed on my system. To those people who say it's no big deal, I say this "It's only a game...." If you are willing to give up any of your rights just to play a game I say good on ya. But I won't. Lotsa games out there. If all the companies start adding this to all their games, well, then I play console games. The idea that you cannot remove this securerom by uninstalling the game is absolutely unbelievable to me. Whoever made this decision certainly did NOT "stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night". C'mon Sega or CA or whoever, get your thumbs out your duffs and fix this! It's bad enough what Microsoft is doing to us, but guess what! I need my operating system, although Linux is looking better and better.....I don't need this game. Period.

I'll never forget my excitement when I first purchased Shogun. I thought "wow, finally a game that gets it..." I bought every game since, but now that's all over. Thanks for the memories, CA

later,
B-Dog

"Bioshock/SecuROM also accesses the internet and attempts to bypass firewall permissions at some point during its installation, and installs files in a hidden directory[4] that cannot easily be deleted [5]"

Sounds like a rootkit to me. I find it extremely humorous that it has correctly been identifie as a rootkit by the tool, and then they have to jump around and wave their hands and try to convince you that it's not a rootkit.

I guess that's easier than trying to explain why they think *they* should have the right to install hidden unremovable software on your system.

Yeah, i say "to hell" to this expansion. Well, to tell the true i didn't intend to buy it anyway. Why? Even though i liked the changes made to the 2handers, i completly disagree with the changes made with cavalry. I mean, these are medieval times, the golden times from cavalry. Even in the ancient times the importance of cavalry was showed by alexander (he who prooved how devastating is a frontal charge), by hannibal (and by scipio in the battle of zama, which he won essentially due to his better cavalry), and in the medieval times it got even more importance. Notice how genghis khan created the greatest empire the world had ever seen with an army with basicly 60% cavalry archers and 40% heavy lancers. Anyway, my point is, I think the cavalry power is very much balanced in MTW, and that Kingdoms make it weaker then it actually was.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ixidor
Well, to tell the true i didn't intend to buy it anyway. Why? Even though i liked the changes made to the 2handers, i completly disagree with the changes made with cavalry. I mean, these are medieval times, the golden times from cavalry. Even in the ancient times the importance of cavalry was showed by alexander (he who prooved how devastating is a frontal charge), by hannibal (and by scipio in the battle of zama, which he won essentially due to his better cavalry), and in the medieval times it got even more importance. Notice how genghis khan created the greatest empire the world had ever seen with an army with basicly 60% cavalry archers and 40% heavy lancers. Anyway, my point is, I think the cavalry power is very much balanced in MTW, and that Kingdoms make it weaker then it actually was.

---

Apologies for the OT post;

Many historians point out that armies in the medieval times were mostly composed out of infantry that are likely ignored in accounts. Things aren't as black and white as you present them IMO.

From a gameplay perspective the SP game in M2 can be won essentially with all cavalry armies that perform repeated frontal charges - tactics are degraded even to the most basic point of lacking the necessity of using flank attacks with horsemen; light cavalry is practically equally effective in frontal charges against infantry as heavy cavalry(!) Even if the historical accuracy argument would stand (although IMO it definitely doesn't) i'd surely prefer to play a game where tactical thought and maneuvers actually pay off, instead of head on rush charges.

Kingdoms contains gameplay/stat balancing that aims for a more satisfying experience without taking the flavor of the period. It is a pitty to depreciate the effort that actually seems to be the only from the part of CA in order to bring some balance in the very one-sided, gameplay of M2TW. I comment the community members and CA employes that worked to balance kingdoms for their choices and thank them for the effort, hard work and good ideas; if only the vanilla release was similarly treated!

Noir

I don't know if anyone realised this yet, but since securom apparently prevents any methods of backing-up the discs, is securom itself then in violation of this part of the liscensing agreement (re-printed verbatim from section d of the liscence conditions):

(d) make copies of the Game Software or any part thereof, except that you may make one (1) copy of the Game Software for backup or archival purposes, or make copies of the materials accompanying the Game Software;

for reference, I am no lawyer, nor do I pretend to be, but according to Title 17, Chapter 1, § 117 of the U.S. Copyright code, I am allowed to make (1) copy of any software program that I puschase a copy of for Archival Purposes only, provided that in the event that I no longer posess the origional copy of the program, that I then destroy the archival copy.

For those of you who want to follow this further, I referenced the website of Cornell University Law School (see this page for the specific section of the code:

HTML Code:

---

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000117----000-.html

---

Just wanted to point this out.

Also, please forgive my being long-winded, the following is my opinion on this issue:
To CA, I have been a loyal customer and fan on the Total War series for many years now, and for the record, I have legally purchased every Total War product I own. I have had absolutely no interest in ever trying to obtain a copy of any Total war product by less than legal means. I have done this because as a fan of the series, I have wanted the sereis to continue. However, since purchasing Kingdoms, and first gearing about the securom rootkit that was attached to the product and the issues that that program causes with other legitimite programs. It has caused me to seriously doubt whether I will continue to loyally purchase your products, or whether I call continue to call myself a fan any more.
I think that although protecting your product from the thieves and pirates of the world is perfectly admirable, if those "protections" intrude on and restrict my ability to enjoy your product and other software programs that I own, I have to wonder why as a customer, that I am being treated as such.

I know that just my voice alone might not have any effect, but if enough people voice thier minds and speak out against this type of restrictive programming, and if enough people from CA read this and realize the effects of what these types of "security" programs do to your customers and fans. Then possibly, we could prevent this sort of issue from occouring with the release of Empires. I hope that can still consider myself a loyal fan and customer when Empires is released as I seriously want to purchase that product when it is released.

I apoligize since it appears that my opinion was longer than my arguement.
But if you read through that entire post, Thank You.

While it is worth debating whether or not SecuRom and similar products are actually, technically legal, the fact is they will stand until someone knocks them down. Gamers aren't known for their willingness to pursue long and expensive lawsuits.

My position remains that SecuRom places an unecessary and unusual burden on the purchaser, and I personally won't be buying or recommending Kingdoms until there is, at the very least, a reliable method provided by the game's distributor for the removal of the program upon the uninstallation of the game.

I also want to say that I disapprove of piracy and will never steal a game, but if you want Kingdoms without SecuRom you can find it right now, you just can't do it honorably or legally.

:egypt:

Noir, i think you are taking my point to deeply. I know that the fact that cavalry is so powerful may take so of the strategy that most of the hard players like but still, even though sometimes medieval armies lacked cavalry, (which, let's face it, harder to get and mantain), let's face it, several 80 kg man riding 500 kg horses and coming at full speed holding a big spear against simple armored men holding quietly? Of course the damage will be devastating, even in frontal charges, unless the momentum is broken or something (like pikes) can stop them...

Just some thoughts,

After reading all this, I have several questions/thoughts and observations.

1. If SercRom is placing hidden applications on peoples systems, is this not electricity theft? Have you/we agreed to it's use of our resources? The EULA does not give it this right.

2. If the Above is true, then it maybe, that by acting as a trojan, or rootkit which by definition it is, (if it "phones home, then it is also a Trojan), then are they not also in breach of many countries Privacy Acts. No law gives them this right, not even with a defense of self protection.
As any information must have the individuals' "written" consent?

3. Any item purchased by a consumer, in many English Speaking countires, is simply an offer to treat, Case law, Boots Cash Chemist.
The point of ownership, is when the money changes hands, as consideration has been given and recieved, Therefore a contract has been concluded.
Case law, Byrne.

4. The EULA, is just that, an agreement. And in many countries, holds no legal obligation, nor legal standing. Except where it confines itself to legal precendent, and copyright law.

5. A product offered to consumers, must be of reasonable fitness for use.
I just tried it, it will not install on my system, yet I have one of the most upto date systems you can get. And, i have had no problems with any other of my games. I run Xp on my gaming machine, vista sucks.

6. Sega, Cannot contract out of any obligation of harm done to anyones system by their Products in the following countries: New Zealand, Australia, and i suspect the United Kingdom.
Law of Torts. Consumer Act, Consumer Gurantee Act, Fair trading Act.

7. Sega cannot Contract out of harm done by any third party to a customers system. Again law of Torts.
See 1932, the Ginger beer Case. I think it's called Morrelli. A third Part owes a Duty of Care.
And in Uk, NZ and I think now Australia, The Courts can lift the "Corporate Veil". Also see NZ 1993 Companies Act.
If they could? We would not have a "Law of Torts". Thats why it exists.

8. A EULA cannot contract out of Consumer law, Fair trading Act, Consumer Gurantee Act of the following countries. New Zealand, Australia, United Kingdom. There are more, but i am not familar with their laws.

9. Most EULA are worthless, or more than worthless. As many countries, either do not recognise them, or they aim to circumvent existing laws. In which by definition is illegal, and null and voids the EULA. Except where dealing with Copyright. Patent law is not wholely recognised as concerns software, But mircoshite is trying to change that by setting small self claimed precedents.

Thoughts.
All these companies know who hack the games, but can do nothing about it without opening themselves up to attack. Because they do not gain from these efforts.
Most gain by reputation, not monetarly.
We are told that we can not resell the game. They are resold EVERYWHERE.
Why? Because we own it. We treated with the price offered, we accepted, they accepted. Contract forefilled.
Any further contract, requires consideration.
Simply warning people not delete a file that say "as you may/can not play or install a game", may not be acceptable to the courts due to consideration being exchanged for a product that should be fit for it's purpose, which is to install and allow us to play our game. Not one to be spied on.
But has yet to be tested.
Reason being, There has to be a system in place to protect the consumer. And any object encroaching upon a consumers rights will be looked at in very poor terms. Espeically one used to identify an individual.
The Manual tells us to Put CD in here, and it will run as long as you have a legal copy of M2TW. It is not working, EULA is breached, EULA Breach Consumer law of atleast 3 countries, Fair trading Act Breached, Consumer Gurantee law Breached. :oops:
EULA = worthless, Null and void, except where dealing with copyright.


EULA
End User License "Agreement". I can't find the End User License "Contract", or the consideration needed to forefill this "contract".
EULA is not made known to the Purchaser at the point of Sale. So does not form part of the sale, or the contract at sale.

An agreement is not necessarily binding? A contract is in regards to consideration being given and recieved.

When was the Last time an End User individual was procescuted?


Anyway, like I said, my questions/thoughts and observations.


fenir

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ramses II CP

My position remains that SecuRom places an unecessary and unusual burden on the purchaser, and I personally won't be buying or recommending Kingdoms until there is, at the very least, a reliable method provided by the game's distributor for the removal of the program upon the uninstallation of the game.

---

That's the key point for me, too. The Bioshock game has come up in this thread as a parallel example. Well, I went ahead and bought that game, because 2K has said they'll release a tool for removing SecureRom after the game is uninstalled.

If CA/Sega said they'd do the same for Kingdoms, then I'd buy the expansion. But so far, unless I've missed something, all we're getting is silence from CA and Sega on this issue. So they don't get my money for the expansion. That's the only way we have, as consumers, to make our voices heard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fenir

Just some thoughts,

1. If SercRom is placing hidden applications on peoples systems, is this not electricity theft? Have you/we agreed to it's use of our resources? The EULA does not give it this right.

2. If the Above is true, then it maybe, that by acting as a trojan, or rootkit which by definition it is, (if it "phones home, then it is also a Trojan), then are they not also in breach of many countries Privacy Acts. No law gives them this right, not even with a defense of self protection.
As any information must have the individuals' "written" consent?

---

I don't have Kingdoms but I am sure that SEGA are not that silly as to not include it in the License/EULA. Are they?? Has anyone read it and is there any mention of it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fenir

4. The EULA, is just that, an agreement. And in many countries, holds no legal obligation, nor legal standing. Except where it confines itself to legal precendent, and copyright law.

---

No! This is simply wrong. It is a license agreement and can constitute a legally binding contract.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fenir

6. Sega, Cannot contract out of any obligation of harm done to anyones system by their Products in the following countries: New Zealand, Australia, and i suspect the United Kingdom.
Law of Torts. Consumer Act, Consumer Gurantee Act, Fair trading Act.

7. Sega cannot Contract out of harm done by any third party to a customers system. Again law of Torts.
See 1932, the Ginger beer Case. I think it's called Morrelli. A third Part owes a Duty of Care.
And in Uk, NZ and I think now Australia, The Courts can lift the "Corporate Veil". Also see NZ 1993 Companies Act.
If they could? We would not have a "Law of Torts". Thats why it exists.

---

What????
The law of Torts is concerned with compensation for personal injury and damage to property. Securom is not going to jump out and hit you nor is it likely to damage your system anymore than other software. Just how many systems has windows damaged yet I don't see a line queueing up to sue them lol...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fenir

8. A EULA cannot contract out of Consumer law, Fair trading Act, Consumer Gurantee Act of the following countries. New Zealand, Australia, United Kingdom. There are more, but i am not familar with their laws.

---

My mistake. Most contracts can't although it doesn't seem to stop them trying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fenir

9. Most EULA are worthless, or more than worthless. As many countries, either do not recognise them, or they aim to circumvent existing laws. In which by definition is illegal, and null and voids the EULA. Except where dealing with Copyright. Patent law is not wholely recognised as concerns software, But mircoshite is trying to change that by setting small self claimed precedents.

---

See above.

EDIT
Can anyone tell me if this crapware has been bundled with patch 1.3? No way I'm installing this patch until I get the all clear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ixidor

blah blah blah cavalry blah blah

---

I know i'm not a mod, but this thread is about securom issues, not the balance of cavalry units. We've been very careful not to get the thread locked so far, so please dont derail it in other directions.

Back on topic - there's an interesting page here, where somebody proposes a rating system for DRM software etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ulstan

"Bioshock/SecuROM also accesses the internet and attempts to bypass firewall permissions at some point during its installation, and installs files in a hidden directory[4] that cannot easily be deleted [5]"

Sounds like a rootkit to me. I find it extremely humorous that it has correctly been identifie as a rootkit by the tool, and then they have to jump around and wave their hands and try to convince you that it's not a rootkit.

I guess that's easier than trying to explain why they think *they* should have the right to install hidden unremovable software on your system.

---

Rootkits, by definition, are pieces of software which attempt to subvert the usual running of an operating system in order to silently run malicious code. Under this definition, the SecuRom installation is not in fact a rootkit, as its existence is well known and easily verifiable. Issues with removal should not cause people to jump up and down screaming 'rootkit' - it may be bad, for some, but it's not necessarily that.

Quote:

---

After reading all this, I have several questions/thoughts and observations.

1. If SercRom is placing hidden applications on peoples systems, is this not electricity theft? Have you/we agreed to it's use of our resources? The EULA does not give it this right.

---

By this justification you could sue every software manufacturer who did not include a specific clause to use your electricity - that is, every single one of them...

Quote:

---

2. If the Above is true, then it maybe, that by acting as a trojan, or rootkit which by definition it is, (if it "phones home, then it is also a Trojan), then are they not also in breach of many countries Privacy Acts. No law gives them this right, not even with a defense of self protection.
As any information must have the individuals' "written" consent?

---

As long as no personal information is transmitted, I doubt it'll have any legal problems at all.

Quote:

---

4. The EULA, is just that, an agreement. And in many countries, holds no legal obligation, nor legal standing. Except where it confines itself to legal precendent, and copyright law.

---

An EULA remains as the only legal basis for any case of this matter until it itself is challenged and a legal ruling given; if you feel it will not hold up in court, it is your right to test that ~;)

Quote:

---

5. A product offered to consumers, must be of reasonable fitness for use.
I just tried it, it will not install on my system, yet I have one of the most upto date systems you can get. And, i have had no problems with any other of my games. I run Xp on my gaming machine, vista sucks.

---

Not a SecuRom issue.

Quote:

---

8. A EULA cannot contract out of Consumer law, Fair trading Act, Consumer Gurantee Act of the following countries. New Zealand, Australia, United Kingdom. There are more, but i am not familar with their laws.

---

Please feel free to give a specific example wherein the SecuRom software breaches that law?

Quote:

---

9. Most EULA are worthless, or more than worthless. As many countries, either do not recognise them, or they aim to circumvent existing laws. In which by definition is illegal, and null and voids the EULA. Except where dealing with Copyright. Patent law is not wholely recognised as concerns software, But mircoshite is trying to change that by setting small self claimed precedents.

---

As I said, it remains until challenged ~:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zenicetus

That's the key point for me, too. The Bioshock game has come up in this thread as a parallel example. Well, I went ahead and bought that game, because 2K has said they'll release a tool for removing SecureRom after the game is uninstalled.

---

Can't we use that tool for Kingdoms ??
Or is it Bioshock only ??

Oh come on... There's no way to change the copy protection mechanism with a patch because the disc just won't have the right format.
1.3 is still SafeDisc protected and for those who want to be sure, I used ProtectionID to confirm it:

Code:

---

Scanning -> F:\Program Files\SEGA\Medieval II Total War\medieval2.exe
File Type : Exe, Size : 21165576 (0142F608h) Bytes
-> File has 1353224 (014A608h) bytes of appended data starting at offset 012E5000h
[!] Safedisc 4.60.000 detected !
[!] protection level: Standard
[!] Possible CD/DVD-Key or Serial Check -> CDKey
- Scan Took : 2.531 Seconds

---

How to get rid of SecuRom?
Write to support@securom and you get following answer:

Greetings.

Thank you for your email. Please be informed that these files in your UserData folder are used to store licence information for SecuROM protected applications. They were created at the first execution of the protected program. Any manipulation in this folder may cause the SecuROM application to work different than expected. These files are not executables themselves and therefore can't affect your system in any way. Nevertheless if you want to delete the folder please follow the instructions below:

1) Open the command line by pressing "Start" and selecting the "Run..." option.

2) Type "cmd" (without "s) and push the [Enter] button on the keyboard.

3) Please type in the following command: rd /s "%APPDATA%\SecuROM" and press [Enter] on the keyboard.

4) Answer Y to the Y/N question and press [Enter] to complete the process.

Please be informed that the User Access Service is used to launch a SecuROM protected in a non administrator mode, and has nothing to do with spyware or any kind of software like that. If you want to uninstall it please follow the instructions below. Please understand that any application you launch that uses User Access Service will restart it.

1. Open a command line window (Start > Run, type "cmd", click OK).

2. Go to the System32 folder in your main Windows folder (e.g. type "cd C:\winnt\system32", then press enter).

3. Remove User Access Service (Type "UAService7.exe - remove", then press enter).

If you have any other questions, please feel free to ask.

The folder should now be deleted. Please understand that any SecuROM application that uses UserData will rebuild these files and folders with future launches.

Best regards,

SecuROM Support Team
SecuROM on the web: http://www.securom.com
or via e-mail: support@securom.com


To delete files that Windows won`t delete see here:
http://ccollomb.free.fr/unlocker/

I have (purchased) copies of all other TW titles and was looking forward to this one, but won't be buying it.

I have no problem with copy protection per se, but on principle, I won't intall software that behaves like this. It makes a game with it an automatic no buy for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nebuchadnezzar

No! This is simply wrong. It is a license agreement and constitutes a legally binding contract.

---

Well that might be true in Australia, but under English Law that simply is not the case.

The contract is agreed and finalised at the counter in the shop where you bought the game. English law states that neither party may then vary the terms of a contract after consideration has been exchanged. Therefore, by implication the EULA which pops -up and asks for your acceptance prior to installation is just noise and is not legally binding on either party.

In fact, if you think about this logically allowing a vendor to vary the terms of their contract with you after you have paid for the product would open a whole raft of potential commercial problems. Therefore, the law is very careful not to allow it to happen.

As I explained before, for the license agreement to be legally binding it would have to be presented, read and agreed to prior to the customer paying for the game.

That is obviously possible if the software is being downloaded off the internet, but for most shop purchases it simply doesn't work like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nebuchadnezzar

What????
The law of Torts is concerned with compensation for personal injury and damage to property. Securom is not going to jump out and hit you nor is it likely to damage your system anymore than other software. Just how many systems has windows damaged yet I don't see a line queueing up to sue them lol...

---

A similar issue came up during the Blizzcon debate and I actually got a ruling on it from the Office of Fair Trading. Their view was that if it can be shown that the supplier has incurred a customer in any unecessary expense or inconvience as a result of their actions, or failure to act promptly and appropriately, then the customer is entitled to claim reasonable compensation and damages for any consequences that arise.

The specific issue here being that HMV were not only liable for the £50 cost game that I purchased from them but all my wasted time and effort in attending the launch and the loss of potential value arising from the fact that the product they sold me was known to be faulty at the time they sold it. It worked out in my case to be just under £200 per copy sold.

I can't see why this would be any different for a company like Play.com who have just sold me a game with a potentially damaging piece of hidden software secreted on the disk. So, I would say that if you can prove any damage or inconvenience has been caused by being conned into loading SecuRom onto your PC then you do indeed have a potential case for damages against the company that sold you the game.

sorry... i`m not going to buy Kingdoms, i just dont want that type of program installed on my computer. :thumbsdown:

Right, I've just spoken to Consumer Direct and they have referred this issue to the UK Office of Fair Trading for a ruling. So, hopefully we will get some sort of official response applicable to the UK in the next couple of days.

If anyone else wants to do likewise the number is 08454 04 05 06 and their website is http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk/.

Obviously, as with the Blizzcon case the more consumers who ring them the more likely they are to take action.

I have also spoken to Play.Com's cunstomer service line and informed them of the situation. They immediately offerred me a full unconditional refund and assured me that they had no idea that the software they supplied included any additional components. I informed them that the matter had been reported to the UK Office of Fair Trading and that I was awaiting an official ruling. I suspect that might have started a small ripple at Play.com which might filter back to SEGA.

Does this Programme try to access your Internet Connection for Spying purposes?

@AirFix - Thanks! DO you know if that will also remove the registry entires that SecuROM leaves behind?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Didz

Well that might be true in Australia, but under English Law that simply is not the case.

---

I do not believe this is the case and I can't see how it would be different in Britain. A sales contract with the shop is a totally different contract regarding its sale. The EULA is a contract to protect the intellectual property (IP) rights of software developers. Check with your consumer body if in doubt.

You are right in one respect that a EULA is a grey area and as yet as far as I am aware has not been challenged in an Australian court.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Didz

As I explained before, for the license agreement to be legally binding it would have to be presented, read and agreed to prior to the customer paying for the game.

---

* Just clicking “I agree” probably binds you to the contract.

* You don’t have to physically sign anything. Some software packages, you may be agreeing to the contract when you remove the shrink-wrap on the package.

* Doesn't matter that you can’t understand licence agreements, onus is on the consumer. You either agree to the terms or you can’t use the software.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Didz

Right, I've just spoken to Consumer Direct and they have referred this issue to the UK Office of Fair Trading for a ruling. So, hopefully we will get some sort of official response applicable to the UK in the next couple of days.

---

I made a complaint to the ACCC (Australian Competition & Consumer Commission) regarding the state of M2TW some time back but I think they ignored me!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alpaca

Oh come on... There's no way to change the copy protection mechanism with a patch because the disc just won't have the right format.
1.3 is still SafeDisc protected and for those who want to be sure, I used ProtectionID to confirm it:

---

Well it does seem obvious in hindsight. Nevertheless can't help feel big brother is watching and feeling paranoid about everything and all b/c of Kingdoms. Well that does it. I'm not buying Ecco the Dolphin.

I dont mind software lurking around, what i do mind is that i cant run kingdoms unless i try about 15 times which takes about 30 minutes, it says im using a backup disk or cant validate in the time limit or something. So back to the shop its going for a refund.

I do use an old creative labs dvd drive but on the box it states dvd rom that can read dual layer disks needed but nothing about the speed.

Swoosh So - try updating your drive's firmware - sometimes that helps in this sort of situation.

"Unable to authenticate original disc within time limit."
SecuROM™ has determined you are trying to start the protected application with a backup copy or clone disc. Please refer to the following procedure to remedy:

Please disable all emulators, insert the original disc and re-try.
If the problem persists, please send a SecuROM™ analysis file to support@securom.com (see "Support Info" section on how to do that).


thats from scurerom website help section! lol i buy a full product and go for help and im told im using a clone disc! btw im not sure what firmware is i have a creative labs 6x encore i believe. Ive never had a problem with it with any game even medieval2 untill now. Pretty rediculous it found the game on the disc well enough to install it but now cant run a damn game unless i spend 30 minutes just clicking a damn exe file.

This is a really foolish move by CA. They secretly install malicious software that can't be removed and makes other programs not function correctly.

This is making CA *lose sales*. Some folks I know have decided that instead of paying CA money for a version that installs a rootkit on their machine, they'll simply download the rootkit free version...for free.

Others (and myself) are simply going to hold off on buying Kingdoms until they fix this issue, and will purchase it as soon as they do.

If no fix is forthcoming, well, there are plenty of other games on there. I refuse to install software on my machine that I do not want, that is going to interfere with programs I do want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swoosh So

thats from scurerom website help section! lol i buy a full product and go for help and im told im using a clone disc! btw im not sure what firmware is i have a creative labs 6x encore i believe. Ive never had a problem with it with any game even medieval2 untill now. Pretty rediculous it found the game on the disc well enough to install it but now cant run a damn game unless i spend 30 minutes just clicking a damn exe file.

---

I had the same problem yesterday with NWN2. It wouldn't run until I turned daemon tools off. Surely I don't need to point out to the SecuROM folks that there are plenty of legitimate uses for disk images.

i tried it also on my new pc with a fresh install of windows xp and just the sims2 installed, same result.
It would be ironic if i had to use a crack to run a legitamite version of the game, ill try again tonight with the most up to date dvd drivers i can find.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sapi

As I said, it remains until challenged ~:)

---

It won't remain on my computer. I have cancelled my order for Kingdoms. I'm not having a rootkit installed that cannot be removed. If CA sees fit to provide a removal tool I'll reconsider, but for now, CA has challenged us and I'm refusing to play their game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swoosh So

Please disable all emulators, insert the original disc and re-try. If the problem persists, please send a SecuROM™ analysis file to support@securom.com (see "Support Info" section on how to do that).

---

This message can mean that you have emulation software (like alcohol or daemon tools) installed on your PC. IIRC Safedisc4 and Securom check for those programs - not that you're using them - just if you have em, and if you do, you cant use your game.

Can people please stop saying CA all the time ??
Seriously, they got nothing to do with this, developers rarely have a say on copy protection.
If you wanna vent your anger, pick the one that did put it on Kingdoms, SEGA.