Knowing that he can download the game again, without needing to paying it again, from any digital distributor, even if his computer has crashed and his install CD/DVD are scratched isn't a valid benefit for a paying customer?

16. Ignored (SUCCESS).

-Haven't done so yet.  I seem to remember your initial posts on the subject coming very close to if not violating your first point, however I could be mistaken.

-No, but nor does it consist of any of us typing out "reams of reasoning" and you ignoring them for any reason you see fit...which is happening a lot here.

-No, that's pretty much a given.  I just don't think anyone gives a damn, yourself included.

-Define "necessary".  For a retail game, no.  For a downloaded game, I'm inclined to believe there must be some sort of proof of ownership, yes.  There are somewhat better systems, but this is a step in the right direction, and contrary to your own belief, you have not provided an alternative system.  So, generally, no, but there are instances I might agree with it.

-You state that you have details aplenty but you don't state that you have provided them.  Which I suppose is a good thing because if you had it would have made you an outright liar.  Provide details and I'll listen, and offer (hopefully constructive) criticism.  It is true that not much detail has been made available on Goo, but I personally am not as concerned about it as you are, since further details will be available at launch (as always), and, as Brad has stated, some, though by no means all, of the answers to the questions that you are asking either may or will require an NDA.

-No; there are marginal points that you've made that I agree with.  I just want details, which you claim to have aplenty but continually fail to provide.

-Haven't done so.  If you feel I have, point it out.

-Again, so copyright is 120 years.  No one's worried about it.  Not even you.  Stop kidding yourself.  I'm not even insulting you, I'm just being honest.  What's your real beef?  I don't have a problem with you having a problem with it.  If we cared more maybe the rest of us would too.  But no one cares that much.  You do however seem to be stretching the limits of what the public's rights are.

-Show me where I've done it.  I contend that I have not.  All I ask for is details, which you "have aplenty".

-No; I say what I mean.  Again: What's your beef?

-So SD is destroying our culture now?  I'm not cheering.  I understand progress must be gradual.

-Again, the law actually doesn't need to change in this instance, although it would help.  Gradual change through companies can be more than sufficient-except of course for you, apparently.  And if you want the law to change, then go do something to change it instead of finding a scapegoat.

-It's not my responsibility; it's my penance.  It's no one's responsibility, even though they should.  Not enough do, and there are plenty things more important than copyright law, particularly as it pertains to gaming.  Which is why I say you don't care what happens 120 years from now: If you did, you'd be doing something about it, not arguing about it.  What does that say about me?  I don't care enough, either.  So what-I'm human.

-I've read the entire thread, not even skimming.  I dare you to find one ounce of contradiction in my posts.  If you've posted details they're hidden well enough that they may as well be in Zyxpsilish.  (Read one of Zyxpsilon's posts-any of them-to see what I mean.  You practically need a separate translator for it.  No offense, Z.)

[sarcasm]Since I'm not an angel, you must not have enough clauses in your points or enough random reasons (sorry, points-some of them are actually valid) to ignore people's posts.  Might want to fix that.[/sarcasm]

That might help and I think I tried really hard, alas nobody's perfect.

That part I'm entirely hazy about. We know what Stardock tells us, that Goo needs online activation to install and that the content is encrypted. There simply isn't any more information available, certainly not officially and sanctioned and in actue technical detail.

Regardless Goo does things that a simple online activation for updates does not do. I'd like to know what those things are and what they do. I've asked for this but Brad & The Gang choose to keep this a big secret.

@Sole Soul

You'll notice that I talk to you specifically if I do the @thingy or quote your posts. Also please learn to use the formating features provided to you, it would help immensely reading the otherwise unreadable blob of text.

Regardless of how big a wanker I am. I don't trust anyone, and certainly not corportations. It is immaterial weather I provide any details or not. Stardock should clear the air as to what Goo exactly does, then we can talk about it. Otherwise this is just a pissing contest.

Completely unrelated for the my opinion I put out.

I did not hint at any support of the corporates. Just stated the fact, since I have got products that are easy to use and hassle free so far and are not invading my computer functions so far. Now they provided goo, which helps staying hassle free and being noninvasive, and made me able to resell products I don't want anymore with ease, be able to download anywhere with practicly with any client.

Let's see:

As it was a generic list of rules that you called out a number of other people for violating, I felt it would be helpful to establish what did and did not constitute breaking them, by virtue of my previous actions having not done so.

It's not unreadable, it's just long.  Does more whitespace make it easier for you?  I don't feel inclined to redo the entire post because a feature that you think is important wants to be uncooperative with editing a post, regardless of how well it works when writing a post.

Well if no one's perfect then perhaps you shouldn't be quite so quick to dismiss the posts of others simply because they violate one of your rules.  A note about psychoak-you should probably exclude him from at least point #1, as half his vocabulary is 4 and 5 letter words.  I think he may have Writing Tourette's.  However, the rest of his vocabulary tends to make up for it most albeit not all of the time.

As for your lack of providing details: If you had details, and provided them, and the system was better for both the customer and the company than Goo, then, by God, it might actually get adopted in favor of Goo!  (Wait, was this the Goo thread or the Impulse thread?  I'm lost...)  Isn't that what you're fighting for here?  Or did you just want to replace it with nothing?

Then I guess we have nothing to say until April 7th.

That depends on how you define "historically" - while I doubt cavemen cared wether someone copied their cave painting, the idea of copyright appeared almost immediately after the advent of the printing press - 1662 to be exact.

Prety much the same applies to any other rights you have. The concept of rights is more a consensus opinion than natural law.

Allow me to answer for him, since he obviously lacks the balls to state his opinions plainly. His desire is to see an unending stream of media made freely available to everyone, with "greedy developers" constantly cranking out new material despite not being allowed to make any money from doing so. Basically communism of intellectual property. There is no business model, as no one could conceivable make money from this.

So in your opinion, any copyright protection must not only provide free material to everyone, but somehow provide additional benefits? How the fuck do you expect that to work?

Since you are clearly incapable of figuring this out on your own, let me spell it out for you. Stardock games ship with zero copy protection - you can buy one copy and let all your friends pirate off it all you want. The only restrictions ever imposed is if you want access to the updates and improvements Stardock routinely puts out for its games. The ONLY purpose current DRM on their games serve is to limit these free updates to those who can prove they purchased the game.

More importantly, you fail to understand a difference between "people who never buy a game" and "people who will buy a game if there's a good reason to buy it instead of pirating". There's a huge difference, and DRM affects one of them. Take a wild guess at which one is bigger, and more relevant

 Frankly, you fail at 3,4,6,8, and 12. 3 simply because you fail to understand how much of the general public depends on copyright for their livelyhood. Communising a good chunk of the economy is not a good idea.

4 because you think some sort of honor system can work in the real world. If you think people are basically honest, I'll refer you to another area where there is a lot of honor-system mentality; the current tax system. Most people are never audited, so they can pretty much get away with a lot. Of the cases that ARE audited, the vast majority are caught underpaying. Yeah, 90+% of people will cheat if you give them the perceived opportunity. If you can't wrap your brain around that, you don't belong in adult society.

6 because you feel Stardock should give up trade secrets they've spend time and money creating simply to refute one asshat on the internet. Although I give you points for consistency - you expect them to give away everything else they make as well.

8 because you think you really addressed those issues when you didn't. You still have not explained the ethical difference between antishoplifting devices and DRM.

12 because you don't or can't see the damage your position would cause if implemented. Destroyed from one end or the other is still destroyed.

I won't say you fail at 14, because we happen to agree, just not on how that should be applied. I see supporting the rights of the people actually making stuff as something worth defending, and you do not.

It's a straight business decision. The sales that might be gained by appeasing such idiots are not worth the costs of doing so. Of course, EA is hopefully learing they are on the wrong end of this calculation - they are losing more sales from DRM backlash than the DRM is protecting. As in everything, a moderate route is usually the best course of action.

Plus the satisfaction of being able to say the customer is NOT always right, then telling that customer exactly where they can cram it. I wish I had the chance to do that more often.

Stardock should clear the air as to what Goo exactly does and how it does it.

eod, the rest is just pissing contest of opinions

Yeah, that's a mature response. Where's the poorly constructed sign, and the chants with the badly forced rhymes? Learn to protest, noob.

It's for digital distribution you moron.  You're downloading the product off their server.  Your my little pony views on copyright are irrelevant, it's their server.  You have no right to obtain it again.  Giving you access to multiple servers from multiple distributors is a benefit for the paying customer.  Since only paying customers are downloading it from any of the servers, being able to download from all of the servers only affects customers, and doesn't affect pirates at all.

This evil, evil DRM is a change from being able to download from their servers, to... being able to download from their servers and maybe other servers..  Weird, where's something new that's worse than what they've been doing?

They have changed nothing about their stance, gone back on no word.  Rant away at the evils of copyright law and DRM till you turn blue in the face, you have no cause to be yelling betrayal.

You forgot 1, shittard.

I feel insulted, as though my efforts have gone unnoticed.  I probably swear more than anyone else on the forum.  I'd redouble my efforts, but since it all comes naturally, that would be wierd.

Pleased to meet you

Je suis entièrement d'accord.

@Star Adder, Zyxpsilon

Snarky remarks in french. Btw. I'm swiss, yeah fuck you too.

You'll not be laughing about this as absurd when you see your culture being locked in by the content industrial complex. And about this being an attack on the principles industrial economy, you should perceive it as attack when the content industrial complex grabs any right it can get while curbing any benefit the public enjoys.

When your game stops working or your music stops playing and you start asking yourself why you paid money for a shitty disservice to the consumer, I'll laugh. Ohyeah, you fail, too since you seem to believe that what we currently do dressed up as the farce of a digitial economy is a long term sustainable way to treat our culture.

I just needed to log on so I can say...

Calm the fuck down.

I sure hope you don't act that way in public.

Zubaz wins the internets! But you should've used the LoTR troll. They're uglier.

psychoak, you are far better at explaining pyalot's point of view than pyalot.

. . . and with zubaz's suggestion not to feed the trolls any further, I'm out. Cya.

Whatever benefit this thread was meant to have has long since passed.