2018-11-22 16:46:01

You say that stealing software is not the same as stealing something physical. You're right on only one count. The person you steal software from isn't deprived of that software. If you stole something like a video game cartridge, then obviously that physical object is no longer available for anyone else. I hear you there.
But you are still stealing. When people make intangible objects, that doesn't mean those intangible objects should be freely distributable. If they put a price on said intangible object, they are asking for compensation for their time and effort. Given that these objects sometimes take hundreds or even thousands of hours to create, you are essentially asking for the right to be given free entertainment, no matter the effort involved for its creator. This is unethical and counterproductive.
One person cracking the odd piece of software won't ruin the community and won't even ruin a given developer. The issue is, however, that if we say it's okay to crack, then you would not be the only one doing it. Many, many others would do it as well, and this would have serious negative consequences for the audiogames market.
Put yourself in the shoes of a developer for just a moment. You've poured the last four or five months into making a really awesome game. You decide to ask twenty dollars per copy. Initially, many people buy your game, and you get decent reviews and all that. Then suddenly you find out that a whole pile of people are cracking your game. How would that make you feel?

Now, let me re-explain rule 8.

Rule 8 is a community failure clause. Basically what it's saying is that we have the right to potentially discipline you in a way that differs from what's published if there's evidence of long-term issues and/or a disregard for the rules.
Let's say you know that warnings go away at the rate of one every seven days, so you like to ask for/talk about cracks, say, once a month. If you do this for awhile, and get warnings each time, we're eventually going to say, "Hey, wait a sec. This user knows that without expiring warnings they'd be banned now". So we would consult the team, and if the majority of the team (including one admin) agreed, we'd very likely reach out to you and essentially say something like, "This is your last warning on the subject. You've been warned several times already about discussing cracks. If you do it again, you will be banned". And we would ban you if you did it again, even if you didn't have prior warnings at the time. So we'd be bending the punishment protocol, but only because we had decided it was justified.
It's the sort of thing which is really only meant to protect against worst-case scenarios or against people who find out how to duck and dodge around rules. The majority of the community will probably never even come close to having to deal with it. We'd rather have it and not need it, however, than need it and not have it.

Check out my Manamon text walkthrough at the following link:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/z8ls3rc3f4mkb … n.txt?dl=1

Thumbs up +1

2018-11-22 18:35:56

Also, as everyone has explained the philosophical stuff on cracks so well, I shall explain the more pragmatic/legal stuff. This particular rule is all but required by law for every site to have. To be honest, I would like to see a DMCA system publically published, just for the extra protection. We're small enough where the Mods could cover it, but there should be a channel for DMCA requests aside from the report button. Maybe that's a bit overkill, but it might just save everyone's heads in a pinch. That ramble aside, Copyright is one of those things that's international law, and most IP protection laws are pretty universal across nations anyways. Mostly in the western world, granted, but seeing as that's where I do believe this site is hosted, the webmasters and this site in general I think is bounded to those laws. While I'm not a lawyer, and thusly cannot give legal advice, as far as I understand things, that's the way it is. Ah well. Either way, in the sense of the forum's continued survival, whether developers are forced out because they can't put food on the table, or the forum is forced off the web because the law sees it as a den of piracy, this forum needs rules against cracking for its continued survival.

Thumbs up

2018-11-23 13:19:09

@127, I agree with you that iit is important that the forum survives on and isn't taken down. However, why isn't that reason in the rules?
You should then state something like it isn't only your fault that cracks aren't allowed or something.
And you take the rule seriously? Yes, because else someone could find a lawyer and shut the forum down. That is a good reason.
However, just saying it without any reason makes people think it's just your opinion on cracks which led this rule forward.
Remember, this isn't a personal attack, just an opinion.

Best regards
T-m

Thumbs up

2018-11-23 15:53:24

Remember, it's not just a legal issue. Audiogame developers are a part of this forum. Now, would a developer like cracks of his games publicly going around? Certainly not.

Thumbs up

2018-11-23 16:16:47

Personally, I don't agree with the assertion that without legal explanations it feels like an opinion. That is, of course, my own opinion. lol
the point is, I think it is generally (if not unanimously agreed) that cracking audio games hurts the community far more than it helps. Just look at the developers who have said they hate it and have said how it de-motivates them. If we allowed cracks, it would hurt the forum.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and tell you folks something. I actually have sympathy for people who have, say, cracked Jaws in the past, stuff like that. Sympathy doesn't mean I think it should be allowed on the forum and doesn't mean I think it's totally 100% okay for everyone all the time to crack whatever they want. What I'm trying to tell you is that sometimes we want or even flat-out need things, and the full price (thank you, capitalism) is just not reasonable. So I understand how that works, and in an unofficial capacity I am usually willing to listen to things on a case-by-case basis. I'm not a huge believer in black and white for most things. But here on the forum, and in an official capacity, the only safe stance is an anti-piracy stance.

Check out my Manamon text walkthrough at the following link:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/z8ls3rc3f4mkb … n.txt?dl=1

Thumbs up

2018-11-23 23:18:05

The only one cracks hurt are the developers. I think personally, it should be illegal to sell software, rather than illegal to crack it, if you get banned from as awesome sites as this forum, just for sharing them with the public.

Best regards
T-m

Thumbs up

2018-11-24 01:51:22

@jayde, just don’t waste your breath. Children will always be children, as seen in last post.

Thumbs up

2018-11-24 03:02:02

@128 I can understand that. I do believe the rule right now does state something about this being for legal as well as the philosophical purposes stated, but I wouldn't mind a bit more detail written down on the legal stuff if someone knows enough to be able to write it out. Illegal is illegal, after all. As for the philosophical point, while it is helpful, I don't think it needs to stand as the only reason in this circumstance. Not while a legal argument can be made for the rule. After all, some philosophies tend to find IP laws distasteful. Communism comes to mind if I am remembering correctly.

Thumbs up

2018-11-24 18:23:45

@132, Actually, I'm a teen, not a child. And how do you know that?

Regards
T-m

Thumbs up

2018-11-25 20:47:46

Your a child until your paying your own bills and looking for a job in my book.

This... -- Is CNN'.
Well Ted, it sure looks like there's been uh, quite a bit of violence around here
"aaoh, that violence was terrible'!"
Yeah it was, pretty bad.

Thumbs up

2018-11-26 17:29:53

No, I'm not. But we are way of topic so let's stop this. However, since you mentioned bills, I think bills are blackmail.

Regards
T-m

Thumbs up

2018-11-26 22:09:26

@136, please state, for all of us curious on your reasoning, a logical, knowledgeable, and intelligent reason why:
* cracking should not be a ban-able offense under the forum rules;
* selling software should be illegal; and
* bills are blackmail?
I'll remind you that under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, one of the sections it adds to title 17 of the United States Code, in particular section 1201, says:

(a) Violations Regarding Circumvention of Technological Measures.—(1)(A) No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title. The prohibition contained in the preceding sentence shall take effect at the end of the 2-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this chapter.
(2) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that—
(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;
(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or
(C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
(3) As used in this subsection—
(A) to "circumvent a technological measure" means to descramble a scrambled work, to decrypt an encrypted work, or otherwise to avoid, bypass, remove, deactivate, or impair a technological measure, without the authority of the copyright owner; and
(B) a technological measure "effectively controls access to a work" if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, requires the application of information, or a process or a treatment, with the authority of the copyright owner, to gain access to the work.
(b) Additional Violations.—(1) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that—
(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof;
(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof; or
(C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing protection afforded by a technological measure that effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title in a work or a portion thereof.
(2) As used in this subsection—
(A) to "circumvent protection afforded by a technological measure" means avoiding, bypassing, removing, deactivating, or otherwise impairing a technological measure; and
(B) a technological measure "effectively protects a right of a copyright owner under this title" if the measure, in the ordinary course of its operation, prevents, restricts, or otherwise limits the exercise of a right of a copyright owner under this title.

In other words: You can't "manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof" a program or feature (and so on) that is designed to circumvent systems like activation systems, encryption systems, and so on, without the authors consent first, if the feature was not written by the author (or a contributor to the program) and the author strictly approved the integration of that feature. For example, you can't write a program that decrypts game save files, unless the author either gave you permission to provide that tool, or the author included the tool along with the original program.
There are exceptions, set forth below, and in section 1201 (a)(1)(B):

(B) The prohibition contained in subparagraph (A) shall not apply to persons who are users of a copyrighted work which is in a particular class of works, if such persons are, or are likely to be in the succeeding 3-year period, adversely affected by virtue of such prohibition in their ability to make noninfringing uses of that particular class of works under this title, as determined under subparagraph (C).

(C) During the 2-year period described in subparagraph (A), and during each succeeding 3-year period, the Librarian of Congress, upon the recommendation of the Register of Copyrights, who shall consult with the Assistant Secretary for Communications and Information of the Department of Commerce and report and comment on his or her views in making such recommendation, shall make the determination in a rulemaking proceeding for purposes of subparagraph (B) of whether persons who are users of a copyrighted work are, or are likely to be in the succeeding 3-year period, adversely affected by the prohibition under subparagraph (A) in their ability to make noninfringing uses under this title of a particular class of copyrighted works. In conducting such rulemaking, the Librarian shall examine—

(i) the availability for use of copyrighted works;

(ii) the availability for use of works for nonprofit archival, preservation, and educational purposes;

(iii) the impact that the prohibition on the circumvention of technological measures applied to copyrighted works has on criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research;

(iv) the effect of circumvention of technological measures on the market for or value of copyrighted works; and

(v) such other factors as the Librarian considers appropriate.


(D) The Librarian shall publish any class of copyrighted works for which the Librarian has determined, pursuant to the rulemaking conducted under subparagraph (C), that noninfringing uses by persons who are users of a copyrighted work are, or are likely to be, adversely affected, and the prohibition contained in subparagraph (A) shall not apply to such users with respect to such class of works for the ensuing 3-year period.

(E) Neither the exception under subparagraph (B) from the applicability of the prohibition contained in subparagraph (A), nor any determination made in a rulemaking conducted under subparagraph (C), may be used as a defense in any action to enforce any provision of this title other than this paragraph.

So, in other words, the only way to get around the prohibition I summarized above is if you appeal to the Librarian of Congress. I doubt said librarian would happily make you exempt from the law because you are disabled or because you don't have enough money to pay for the product.

"On two occasions I have been asked [by members of Parliament!]: 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out ?' I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question."    — Charles Babbage.

Thumbs up

2018-11-27 21:57:32

We are getting way of topic. I've already said the reason why cracks should be allowed.
Ok, maybe I went to far by saying selling software should be illegal... I was angry.
But to answer your other question, the government claimes it controls everything and can there for do everything. So why taking money from people when they can just grab a printer and make more of those paper things?

Best regards
T-m

Thumbs up

2018-11-27 22:58:50

@138
Inflation. If money becomes an unlimited resource, it will lose all it’s value. Try this:
If we say you can get 1000 dollars for the original charizard pokemon card, because it is so rare. If everyone had an original charizard pokemon card, you wouldn’t even get a dollar for that thing.
The same will happen with money too and it has happened before with devistating consiquences, so no, they can’t “just” make more money.

“Who is more humble? The scientist who looks at the universe with an open mind and accepts whatever the universe has to teach us, or somebody who says everything in this book must be considered the literal truth and never mind the fallibility of all the human beings involved?”
― Carl Sagan

Thumbs up

2018-11-28 00:18:44 (edited by Ethin 2018-11-28 00:20:55)

@139, correct. Germany did it in the period following World War I, partly due to the Treaty of Versailles; Zimbabwe did it in 2007 to 2009, due to political changes that led to the seizure and redistribution of agricultural land, which led to foreign capital flight; and Hungary did it in 1946, one year after the end of World War II, due to similar circumstances that caused Germany to do it: a result of a requirement to pay reparations for the war that had just ended. And all three countries suffered terribly as a result. In Germany, hyperinflation reached its peek at at least 30,000 percent per month, and prices doubled every few days. It got so bad that people started burning the currency to keep warm because it was less expensive than buying firewood was. Zimbabwe's hyperinflation reached its peek at 79,000,000,000 percent per month. And, finally, Hungary's reached a peak at 13 quadrillion percent per year, with prices doubling every 15 hours. That got so bad that the government issued a new currency for the soul purpose of being able to pay taxes and postal bills. The government may say they have control over everything but really, they don't. If they did, we wouldn't have gangs like the Mophia running around. And 138, you really didn't answer my questions. I understand that your a teenager, but as you age you will come to understand why the things are the way they are and, unfortunately, how powerless you are to prevent or change them. You really wouldn't want to change the way things are anyway; the world is already in a state of almost utter chaos as is.

"On two occasions I have been asked [by members of Parliament!]: 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out ?' I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question."    — Charles Babbage.

Thumbs up

2018-11-28 16:42:40

Truth be told, all of these arguments are just a ringing indictment of capitalism.
Yup, here I go.

So, back in the day, you grew your own food, made your own clothes, built your own home. You almost always had more than you needed for you and your family, and if you were a peasant you probably were treated very, very badly by your lord or other superior because that's often what lords did. Money existed, but you did not absolutely require it in order to make ends meet most of the time. The reason a lot of peasants starved is not because they couldn't produce enough, but because the people in charge of taking care of them did not do an adequate job.
Skip a little bit, and capitalism developed. Workhouses, the printing press, child labour, factories, the whole nine yards. People suddenly had to go to work every day in order to earn pay. This pay was then used to buy food, clothing and other household necessities. You didn't usually build your own home, especially in a city, and in a lot of places you had to rent. You lived or died by how much money you could make, and you could go to prison for things like going bankrupt, failing to pay tax, or faling to pay rent if it went on long enough.
Now you have today's day and age. People believe that going to work to get paid is the only way to live, and unfortunately they're right. Nobody buys their own building materials anymore and nobody owns land free and clear...or rather, few do. Food is grown, true, but most people aren't farmers and simply don't have the space, the means or the expertise, so they pay others to do it for them. Conveniences abound, but every last one of them requires money. You can be fired for missing work too many times, no matter what your reasons. Unions help in this regard, but even they aren't perfect. You can, of course, still go to prison for not paying your taxes if it's severe enough. Of course, the people who have managed to seize control of the large majority of the power (i.e., the money) are able to dictate to the rest of us how much things cost. We have very little vontrol over inflation because many things we are forced to buy are things we cannot or ought not live without. Items are sold at several times their worth and production cost (including the workers who paid them, many of whom are chronically mistreated and abused, I might add), and the net result is that most people,  unless they find a lucrative job, get lucky or both, struggle most of their lives just to keep their heads above water. 99% of the people control 1% of the wealth, and 1% of the people control 99% of the wealth, give or take a little. That's our current capitalistic setup for you.

So why did I get into this?
Because a lot of people think capitalism is right, or necessary, or the least of many evils. I want to debunk those arguments. And yes, there is a point here concerning rules/pirating games and whatnot.

1. Capitalism is necessary because if things were free, no one would work and nothing would get done
Studies have proved that this is largely untrue. People who are given their basic needs (read: not everything they want, but food, shelter, necessities and a bit left over) still very often want to contribute meaningfully to society. Of course, you'll get a few people who want to do absolutely nothing, but they are a minority, and we shouldn't act on those people.
2. All the things we need cost money
Yes and no. 3d printing is a very real technology which is going to do a lot for replication of basic components. Most people own tools that go unused 98% of the time. We waste so much food on this planet that, if properly distributed, we could feed everyone in the world two or three times over, and that's with current technology and faulty agricultural methods. We could provide the entirety of the world's energy needs using sun and wind alone, but geothermal energy is also available (we're working on this, sort of). There are a lot of ways that we could better treat the planet and, incidentally, better provide for all of its inhabitants. Some of them will undoubtedly cost time and money, which is why no one wants to do it. Short-term cost, long-term benefit. Yes, I've studied this.
3. We have to have money. Without money, no one would do anything, and all goods would be meaningless
This is an extension of point 1. Assume for a moment that everyone was provided with free education, free health care, and enough means to either buy or grow the food that they need (it's not as far-fetched as it sounds, I promise). There would still be jobs that needed doing, and those jobs would still give money. The only difference is that said money would no longer be 100% necessary unless you wanted more than food, shelter, necessities and the odd extra. In that world (and here's where I bring it back), game developers might still be asking money for their stuff (ditto artists of all stripes, writers, etc.), but they would not have to. Their money-making would not make the difference between whether they ate or whether they pinched pennies at the end of the month. I know a lot of people - I am among them, in fact - who would happily do things for free if I knew it would provide me no financial imposition and would not hurt me. and if you want present proof of a small piece of this concept, look at Aprone, who makes fun audio games and asks us to pay for a Kaldobsky gamer account only to keep cheaters away. While I suspect he wouldn't flat-out say no to our money, it's clear that Aprone is not out to make a buck. And good for him! Now obviously, some devs are out to get a return for their investment, and in the current climate, that's totally understandable...but it need not always be this way.

In fact, I hope it isn't always this way. I hope we can one day pursue leisures without wondering whether or not we'll eat in three months. I hope for a world where people aren't denied health care because they don't have money, or aren't stopped from higher education for the same reason. It may not come in my lifetime, and most are automatically distrustful of the entire concept, but give it some thought.

And before you go:
1. Food scarcity is a myth
2. Poverty is solvable in most cases
3. Oil and natural gas are slowly killing the planet, and
4. approximately 89% of the world's money (including debts and loans) is virtual, and does not, in fact, exist

Thanks for reading. Sorry if I wandered far afield, but I hope you got something from this, anyhow.

Check out my Manamon text walkthrough at the following link:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/z8ls3rc3f4mkb … n.txt?dl=1

Thumbs up

2018-11-28 17:59:51

@141, you raise very valid arguments. I don't really see your point of posting that though, since I can't really see how it validates, or invalidates, any arguments I, Mads, or tmstuff000 gave.

"On two occasions I have been asked [by members of Parliament!]: 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out ?' I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question."    — Charles Babbage.

Thumbs up

2018-11-28 21:38:39

Here's the reason I posted it. I'm sorry, I thought I was clearer.

We live in a capitalist society at the moment. That means that any attempt to undermine someone's ability to create aheir livelihood is terribly unethical.
If we lived in a more socialist society, a lot of devs probably wouldn't charge for their products or services because they wouldn't have to, or the fee would be nominal, something most people could and would be happy to pay.
It basically highlights the difference between what is, and what I wish for and hope for and strive for. One day, cracking audio games will hopefully not be much of an issue. But we aren't there, we're not even very close right now. And until that day comes, doing it is unethical.
As I've pointed out elsewhere, I have mixed feelings about people in financially compromised situations and the need for certain expensive programs, and the way that sites like Audible will charge you the equivalent of twenty dollars and more for a DRM-protected copy of something they really only need to securely host in a few place. They, and the people who make audiobooks, are probably making money hand over fist, especially given that I'm pretty sure Amazon owns them these days. There's a lot to be said for "I need this and can't pay for it" vs. "I want this and think I should get it for free". And where exactly that line gets drawn is an individual matter. here on the forum we have to err on the side of caution though. And no matter what you want to say about the whole shebang, ripping off independent artists is never, ever, ever a good thing. Not for them, not for us as a community, and not for you in the long run if you get caught.

Check out my Manamon text walkthrough at the following link:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/z8ls3rc3f4mkb … n.txt?dl=1

Thumbs up

2018-11-28 23:00:34

Ah. Yeah, that's definitely true. And even if you do strive for a more socialist society, I doubt it'll happen in our lifetimes. Change, especially with societies as large as Americas, never goes that fast. No, if it ever starts, it'll slowly -- very, very slowly -- trickle through about 3-5 generations before catching on. Or perhaps it never will.

"On two occasions I have been asked [by members of Parliament!]: 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out ?' I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question."    — Charles Babbage.

Thumbs up

2018-11-29 05:08:40

And besides, rolling out a system that major would be a disaster if done too quickly. Oh, one clarification I should ask. Are you advising a more social system (major social safety nets and programs of that sort, while property and production are mostly untouched), or socialism in which the control of production is controlled by the government? Also, as a more on-topic question, how is the rules writing thing going? Any word from the web masters?

Thumbs up

2018-11-29 05:24:42

In the system I'm talking about, a lot of production won't have to be set up the way it is now, as 3d printing will mean that much production will be able to be done by individuals. Property is iffy, but I'm definitely a big fan of things like tool libraries, which are already a thing in some places. (i.e., you pay a nominal fee, and you can rent a tool for a specific time rather than buying your own; just for example, you might have to pay thirty bucks a year, and that's unlimited rentals.) Somebody would obviously have to govern social programs, mind you.

And as far as word about the rules? I haven't heard much from the list lately. It's been pretty quiet. I've also been fairly busy, honestly. End of the semester, and all that. But I'm trying to keep abreast of what's going on. If I hear anything, you guys will know, I promise.

Check out my Manamon text walkthrough at the following link:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/z8ls3rc3f4mkb … n.txt?dl=1

Thumbs up

2018-12-03 17:49:46

as I've said multiple times, tmstuff000 is just being an entitled little kid, and I just say ignore him until he does something stupid, again, and gets banned. Let's just ignore him and let him learn that the world doesn't revolve around him.
O and you never explained why bills are blackmail roflmao!

yo! so I'm working on programing, it's really hard. But I'll tell you where you can contact me if your stupid enough to do so.
Contact information:email: [email protected]
Skype: Brennan Draves
I'm usually found on online games, chatting, and being warned bye admins for talking to much, f**k you admin!

2018-12-04 19:49:45

@147 I know, right? smile

"On two occasions I have been asked [by members of Parliament!]: 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out ?' I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question."    — Charles Babbage.

Thumbs up

2018-12-11 02:25:56

I think you might want to consider basing our piracy rules around the discussion on this topic.
http://forum.audiogames.net/post/394552/#p394552
Either way they need some kind of clarification what ever you take from it, because this just keeps coming up and will continue to.
Just make sure you keep in mind the limitations of a small volunteer staff.

This... -- Is CNN'.
Well Ted, it sure looks like there's been uh, quite a bit of violence around here
"aaoh, that violence was terrible'!"
Yeah it was, pretty bad.

Thumbs up