Trainz and DRM

[shaneturner12]

The database/serial system do not need to be integrated. That's just how N3V chose to do it.

Few outside of wikipedia consider serial numbers "DRM". Would it make you happy to state for the record that, for the purposes of this thread (not to mention about 99% of other discussions about DRM anywhere), we are talking about online or phone-based product activation, authorization, etc.? (which I detailed in the original post, BTW.)

If you are going along that line, you could say Windows has a form of DRM as well, as that requires activation and periodic validation.

Shane

 

[KingConrail76]

Bear in mind that TANE is going to be a whole new ball game - with Steam as the means of distribution and DLC sales, who knows maybe even Workshop/Marketplace replacing the current DLS arrangements.

Surprised no one has commented yet on my earlier views regarding N3V's apparent double standards on copy protection of their core products but the veritable free for all when it comes to user content contributions.

"TANE" is NOT a Steam Exclusive, it will be sold and distributed through normal channels; ie Simulator Central, Jointed Rail, Big Box stores, Amazon, etc.

The "Steam Exclusive" is the "free to play" "TWOR" product, which is basically a marketing device to get "gamers" interested in Trainz, enough to buy DLC for TWOR, or to go all-out and purchase TANE.



I am a bit surprised too, that no one seems to be interested in the point about DLS Policy. I suspect Tony will ask that THAT discussion be segragated to it's own thread the same as this DRM discussion was.
-For the record, the reason I will only upload repaints of other peoples content is because of the double standard you mention. If I am not getting paid for my original meshes, neither is N3V, or anyone else.

 

[KingConrail76]

If you are going along that line, you could say Windows has a form of DRM as well, as that requires activation and periodic validation.

Shane

I have NEVER had Windows (on a machine that has no internet access) send me an error that it needs to be connected to the internet to "re-validate" it's authenticity, AFTER being originally registered and activated, or it would no longer be useable. Once and done. And Microsoft is a large enough company, that their "Phone activation" system will more than likely, always be available.

 

[shaneturner12]

You're probably lucky then, or you don't download their updates. It's certain updates that cause the revalidation, and there is a service within Windows that deals with activation and that.

Shane

 

[amigacooke]

Surprised no one has commented yet on my earlier views regarding N3V's apparent double standards on copy protection of their core products but the veritable free for all when it comes to user content contributions.

Isn't that the point though? If content is put on the DLS it becomes free for all.

 

[shaneturner12]

I was thinking that as well. Content on the DLS, as it's offered for free, works on a different system to paid-for content. If a content creator is so concerned about their content being edited, they could always use the privileges container - and guess what, that's a form of DRM in itself as it limits what a end-user can do with a piece of content.

On another front, I feel that the OP is unfairly singling out one type of DRM instead of considering all the different kinds that exist in various forms.

Shane

 

[amigacooke]

On another front, I feel that the OP is unfairly singling out one type of DRM instead of considering all the different kinds that exist in various forms.

'Call back' DRM is the OP's concern which he is perfectly entitled to have reservations about. I have reservations about it myself.

 

[shaneturner12]

Indeed, but I still feel that the issue has been over-inflated, as there are several games at the moment that use similar methods.

Shane

 

[RRSignal]

If you are going along that line, you could say Windows has a form of DRM as well, as that requires activation and periodic validation.

Shane

Like most if not almost all corporate users and system integrators, I have a Volume License Key, which means no activation for XP and no periodic revalidation.

Windows Vista/7 (and, probably, 8) offer a system called Key Management System which also avoids the need to connect to Microsoft, although there is a form of local activation using a local server and each machine must maintain a network connection and all the resource drains that come with it. AFAIK, there is no periodic revalidation.

 

[shaneturner12]

That may be corporate/VLC specific. I know that consumer versions of XP for example have periodic updates for the Genuine Advantage Validation tool, which amounts to periodic validation. As for Vista/7/8, there is still some form of activation/validation involved, but I haven't got the exact details to hand. Some downloads from the MS site for example require validation in order to download the content though.

Shane

 

[RRSignal]

Indeed, but I still feel that the issue has been over-inflated, as there are several games at the moment that use similar methods.

Shane

That's doesn't mean it's not a problem.

Plenty of companies use online/"callback" DRM, and not just for games either, but for books, music, video, etc. And, quite often, the company controlling the activation/authorization process shuts off any new validations, rendering the customer's products unusable and worthless.

Some, like Apple, also use it to permantly tie users to a specific platform. Chris Bergmann (Windwalkr) spoke rather...fondly of Apple's DRM system in a previous thread.

 

[shaneturner12]

I know that, but I can't see anything changing just because of a few users disliking a particular method of DRM. DRM is a fact of life nowadays, as you've admitted in your last post.

I haven't seen any threads from WindWalkr regarding Apple's system so cannot comment on that.

Shane

 

[RRSignal]

That may be corporate/VLC specific. I know that consumer versions of XP for example have periodic updates for the Genuine Advantage Validation tool, which amounts to periodic validation. As for Vista/7/8, there is still some form of activation/validation involved, but I haven't got the exact details to hand. Some downloads from the MS site for example require validation in order to download the content though.

Shane

WGA is not required for XP and is not even included with SP3.

AFAIK, the only update disabled by not having WGA is Microsoft's antivirus/malicious software tool. As the vast majority of corporate users run third-party A/V, this is a non-issue.

 

[shaneturner12]

That's interesting to know, however some non-corporate consumers do rely on Microsoft's antivirus/antispyware product as well as the Malicious Software Removal tool to a certain extent. I see things from a consumer side, not a corporate side, and anyway, most corporate users are usually on a corporate network which handles things like that anyway.

Take it from me, complaining about DRM is not likely to change things. If anything, it's likely to make things worse.

Shane

 

[RRSignal]

I know that, but I can't see anything changing just because of a few users disliking a particular method of DRM. DRM is a fact of life nowadays, as you've admitted in your last post.

I haven't seen any threads from WindWalkr regarding Apple's system so cannot comment on that.

Erm, no, DRM is only going to be as pervasive as customers like you and me allow it to be. Obviously, you've given into the conclusion that it's "just how it is." Seems there are quite a few folks around here who haven't and, worse comes to worst, will leave.

Difference is also is that most folks here are tech-savvy enough to know about DRM, its effects and how its been misused in the past to screw the consumer. The average iPhone or Kindle user doesn't have the first clue as to what they're getting into...although, as mentioned previously, some of the latter occasionally find out the hard way.

 

[shaneturner12]

I can see we are not going to agree on the subject.

I'm not a fan of some types of DRM, but I know when to just leave things as they are. It's also worth knowing that people don't actually own most paid-for (and some free) software anyway, they simply 'lease' it under the terms of the license agreement, and the maker can usually change these at any time. It's the same with DLC content.

Shane

 

[amigacooke]

It's also worth knowing that people don't actually own most paid-for (and some free) software anyway, they simply 'lease' it under the terms of the license agreement, and the maker can usually change these at any time. It's the same with DLC content.

True, but the software I 'leased' for my Electron and Spectrum I can still load up and use even though the companies that coded it are long gone (assuming my Electron and Spectrum still work of course).

However, if having voiced my dislike of DRM, it still gets used, I will use that as another factor in my decision to buy or not. For me it is not a decisive factor.

 

[RRSignal]

I can see we are not going to agree on the subject.

I'm not a fan of some types of DRM, but I know when to just leave things as they are. It's also worth knowing that people don't actually own most paid-for (and some free) software anyway, they simply 'lease' it under the terms of the license agreement, and the maker can usually change these at any time. It's the same with DLC content.

I'm well aware of that, but, while it may be technically true, that doesn't mean we the customers have to hand over to N3V the technical capability to change the rules or to deactivate our purchases whenever they feel like it.

 

[shaneturner12]

Indeed - from what I've gathered, licensing/'leasing' back then was simpler than it is nowadays.

Shane

 

[amigacooke]

I'm well aware of that, but, while it may be technically true, that doesn't mean we the customers have to hand over to N3V the technical capability to change the rules or to deactivate our purchases whenever they feel like it.

In a practical sense, if N3V choose to do that with their software, how can we stop them? In a legal sense, how can we stop them?

Certainly we can refuse to buy the product, ensuring not only will we never lose out on the deal, but that we also never gain on the deal.