Backups of Games (Rant)

[tecoyah]

Okay......This pisses me off. I tend to make a backup of every disk I buy, DVD or CD. So my Son puts a scratch the size of rhode island in Morrowind making it useless. No problem says I, get the back-up copy....continue to play. Freakin' copy protected , cant get a crack to run, bastard somebitches.
Now I must buy the freakin' game again.......end of rant.

[SecretMethod70]

This is precisely why it's important to fight DRM which limits ones ability to do this. If they can't find a way to protect their copyrights that doesn't involve preventing me from doing what I'm prefectly legally allowed to do, tough shit for them.

I'd look a bit harder...perhaps even contact the publisher and complain. It's a long shot, but maybe if you send in the scratched disc they'll replace it. Just gotta complain loud enough

[Pellaz]

Originally Posted by SecretMethod70

I'd look a bit harder...perhaps even contact the publisher and complain. It's a long shot, but maybe if you send in the scratched disc they'll replace it. Just gotta complain loud enough

Generaly speaking, a lot of publishers are willing to do this. Some of the more devilish ones want you to provide your upc, original cash reciept, damaged disk, video of events leading up to said damage, fingerprints, and various dna samples however.

If you go this route, *call* them, be polite, explain your situation calmly to the idiot on the the phone. When said idiot says you need all that crap, explain to them that you didn't keep all that crap, and you're really upset that you can't play the game anymore because of the accident. Next, said idiot will tell you no dice, and that's when you get the gm/sup whatever, and re-explain it all to him, probably with good results.

The downside is that between mailing the disk back to them, and them probably charging you shipping to get the replacement, and Morrowinds age, you probably wouldn't save any money as opposed to buying a brand new copy for 10 bucks or less.

[irateplatypus]

that might work for a game that you *may* be able to find at another retail or is still in a company's inventory... but for most game that have been around long enough to get scratched or ruin this isn't the case.

in a legal sense, are we purchasing the only the materials in the box (game manuals, promo items, disc) or are we also purchasing the right to utilize the creativity and effort put into making the product?

if it's only the physical goods we are buying, then we really have no right to back up our software... afterall, we're just buying a shiny round thing that we are told is encoded with a particular pattern of microscopic indentations.

if we're buying the right to use ideas/creativity etc. of the game, then it follows that the medium is simply the method of delivery of what we're really buying. we should then be able to use it in whatever format we need.

[SecretMethod70]

irate, that is indeed the question, and the problem. Over the years, companies have wiggled their way around so that they could have it both ways, depending on what is convenient for them at the time. Nevermind the fact that it's not consistant in the least bit.

[hulk]

I think the general consensus is that you buy the license to use the software on one computer at a time. Same sorta deal as to why you buy site licenses etc for graphics apps and OSes, just smaller =). If you read most EULAs (you know, the whole heap of text that everybody just skips past on installation), you'll find something of the sort mentioned.

[Derwood]

I would like someone to cite a source saying that backing up CD's, DVD's or game discs is in fact legal. Just because the software and hardware is available to do it doesn't make it legal.

[Pellaz]

Originally Posted by Derwood

I would like someone to cite a source saying that backing up CD's, DVD's or game discs is in fact legal. Just because the software and hardware is available to do it doesn't make it legal.

I just read through the Max Payne 2 EULA, and for that, at least, it's not apparently. In fact, the EULA reads as if they are doing you a FAVOR by not making you destroy your install disk after you've installed the game on your hard drive :/

[Dragonlich]

Well, where I come from (the Netherlands), you are *allowed* to make a backup of your discs. However, you don't have a *right* to make backups. I.e. if you can't make a backup because of copy-protection, that's tough luck.

On the other hand, if a copy protected disc is damaged, and the company that made it then refuses to send you a replacement disc, I see no reason why you shouldn't get a copy from a less legal source. You paid for the license to play the game, so you should be able to play it, one way or another. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, I'm allowed to download games as long as I own the original. But of course, it could be different for you guys... (Hell, according to Dutch law, I can legally download any piece of music, as long as it's for personal use...)

[cyrnel]

Derwood,

Do you mean "Legal" or "something the publishers want you do do"?

Software alliances are generally against any copying, be it piracy or fair use. Essentially the same as other media interests: printed, audio, or video. Fair Use came about as a common sense exception for when copying is legal even if the media companies would rather it wasn't. Media interests have been trying to reverse that decision for years and managed to cloud the issue with the DMCA. They continue on other fronts and may complete the picture with DRM, once it's entrenched. The DMCA and DRM together effectively make Fair Use impossible to practice legally. I expect eventually the pendulum will swing back again, hopefully before everybody with a library of scratched DVDs takes to the streets hunting for publishing executives.

[irateplatypus]

i think that, given how many people this effects and its widespread ramifications, there should be a settled legal policy on this that is easily understood/enforced. there is too much confusion... especially if people are going to be prosecuted for it.

personally, i think that people should be allowed to have a working copy of the software for as long as they care to use it. the physical medium in which the software is transferred is worth nothing next to the expense of the purchase. therefore, it seems reasonable to me that the purchaser is indeed buying the intellectual property contained in the data... not just the materials (which have neglible independent worth). if the medium the distributor chooses is inadequate for long term storage of the consumer's purchase, then allowances should be made for the consumer to retain their investment.

of course this would lead to abuses in some areas. however, i think the rights of the consumer should take precedent over a manufacturer's attempting to exploit the weaknesses of software mediums at this time. if we give up the rights to retain the value of our software purchases now (when we do have legitimate grievances with its durability) those rights will never be regained without making criminals of those who seek to maintain the value of what they've already bought, forever tilting the balance of power away from the consumer in software distribution.

i think many of us first think of games when considering this issue, but i think the business end of the software industry has a stronger case. some applications are used in businesses for nearly a decade before they are updated to a newer system. imagine a business that relies on a certain printing/accounting/networking package that is no longer found on the shelf or supported by the software company. if their original disks go bad after 10 years or so (a likely occurence) then they are up the creek without a paddle. there is no way they can recover their programs in the event of a total system crash or switching to a brand new system. why should the business accept such a potentially crippling risk because the software publisher refuses to allow backups of software they are no longer selling anyway?