By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Why is it "illegal" to backup my games?

Soleron on 19 March 2011
ssj12 said:
Soleron said:

It's not illegal, unless you circumvent DRM to do it and live in the US, in which case it violates the DMCA. But that's a stupid law, thankfully confined to the US for now, and really should be repealed.


They are making it worse, they are trying to pass a law that if you watch an illegal video on youtube you can be thrown in jail and fined for copyright infringement.

Well it should actually be illegal, same as if you torrented and watched the content.The penalties are far too harsh however; they should be some low multiple of the price and should remain a civil case, not a criminal one.

I'm saying DRM circumvention alone shouldn't be illegal; using that to view content illegally should be.

@twesterm

License agreements on software have very rarely been tested in court. It's not clear that they are a binding legal contract on the purchaser. In cases where the terms restrict copying for personal use, they're probably unreasonable and might be overturned in court if it got there.



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 19 March 2011
twesterm said:
Galaki said:

If it's not illegal, then why it is impossible for me to play from backup without going through modding my system? Which is not what I wanted to do.


They want the system as closed as possible because if they didn't, something like the Dreamcast would happen.  You could simply copy a disc and play it, backup or not, so that's what people did. 

Edited to use the VGchartz numbers for sold not shipped.

 

Dreamcast sold 8.2 million to consumers and 64.80 Million piecs of software.

 

That's an attach rate of 7.9.  Which is I believe is a higher attach rate then all 3 main consoles now... though i may be wrong.

That's not even considering that the fact that Dreamcast was discontinued early!

 

Did people pirate a lot of games on the dreamcast?  Probably... looks like it didn't actually hurt sales though, making that a poor reason for the closed system arguement.



Gnizmo on 19 March 2011
twesterm said:

It's "illegal" (I'm not entirely sure it's actually illegal, I don't know) because when you pay $60 at Gamestop or wherever you're not buying a game, you're only buying a license and that license only allows you to do certain things and puts certain responsibilities on you.  One of those things the license explicitly forbids you to do is copy the content on that disc.

That means the content on the disc is not yours and that license expects you to take good care of your product.  If you wreck your car, Ford is not going to buy you a new car.  If you drop your hamburger, McDonald's is not obligated to give you a new hamburger.  If you drop a plate, Target isn't going to buy you a new one.  If you scratch your disc, Activision is not obligated to give you a new one. All of these assume your own negligence and it's only your fault if you break them.

I'm not trying to say don't backup your games or say piracy is wrong, that's another thread, I'm just saying the reasoning behind it.  It's your responsibility to keep your disc in good working order.  If you choose to do that through backing up, so be it, just know you're breaking some sort of terms of use.

It actually is legal. Fair Use exemptions for copyrighten materials includes back-ups for personal uses. The EULA to that extent is not actually legally binding despite what many might think. This is also why you don't and haven't seen any lawsuits to that effect. The allegations brought up in these cases are violations of the DMCA which forbis circumvention of copyright protection, and distributing copyrighten material which is, obviously, not considered fair use under the law.

As for the greater question of playing them, well that becomes a great deal murkier. Recently it was rules cell phones can be modified in anyway by the owner regardless of what the manufacturer might want. This is restricted to only cell phones mind you. The greater battle has not been fought, and isn't even on the table to be fought currently. The distribution of the materials is what is getting people busted, and circumventing the digital rights management systems. That is why the current Geohotz case is so unbelievably important right now.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229

Khuutra on 19 March 2011
Kasz216 said:
twesterm said:
Galaki said:

If it's not illegal, then why it is impossible for me to play from backup without going through modding my system? Which is not what I wanted to do.

They want the system as closed as possible because if they didn't, something like the Dreamcast would happen.  You could simply copy a disc and play it, backup or not, so that's what people did. 

Dreamcast sold 8.9 Million consoles...

and sold 52.9 Million pieces of software.

An attach rate of over 6.5 games per system for a system that was discontinued so early.


The dreamcast really wasn't pirated to all hell.  I'm not even sure i've ever heard sony once complain about piracy on the Dreamcast.

Actually, Sony got all up in arms about Bleem! on the  Dreamcast, if I remember.

They lost every single rendered decision but kept Bleem in court until they went bankrupt.



Kasz216 on 19 March 2011
Khuutra said:
Kasz216 said:
twesterm said:
Galaki said:

If it's not illegal, then why it is impossible for me to play from backup without going through modding my system? Which is not what I wanted to do.

They want the system as closed as possible because if they didn't, something like the Dreamcast would happen.  You could simply copy a disc and play it, backup or not, so that's what people did. 

Dreamcast sold 8.9 Million consoles...

and sold 52.9 Million pieces of software.

An attach rate of over 6.5 games per system for a system that was discontinued so early.


The dreamcast really wasn't pirated to all hell.  I'm not even sure i've ever heard Segaonce complain about piracy on the Dreamcast.

Actually, Sony got all up in arms about Bleem! on the  Dreamcast, if I remember.

They lost every single rendered decision but kept Bleem in court until they went bankrupt.

Meant Sega... I keep saying sony instead of sega...

Though what's scarier is, using the official Vgchartz numbers rather then the numbers  I could find on the internet....

Dreamcast actually had an attach rate of 7.9.  Which is higher then the sysetms now right I think? (Good ammuntion for the piracy hurt PSP software sales arguements no doubt.  Piracy increased PSP sales.  Just like music piracy increases Ipod sales by about 75%.  Wish I could find that study again.)

 

As for the Bleem thing... yeah.  That's why I'm glad that Geohotz guy is getting donated some money, so he can at least have the sembelence of a fair trial.  I feel like there needs to be some provision in corproate lawsuits where they sue a common person where they can only spend up to so much on legal fees and effort unless the individual spends more.

You see corproations sue people all the time in cases they can't win, just because they know people can't afford it and will be forced to settle before it gets to trial.



Around the Network
Mr Khan on 19 March 2011
Kasz216 said:
Mr Khan said:
Galaki said:

If it's not illegal, then why it is impossible for me to play from backup without going through modding my system? Which is not what I wanted to do.

Just because you're legally allowed to do something doesn't mean the corporation is obligated to make it easy for you to do so. Where they cross the line is when they cross away from "not making it easy," to, "altering or destroying your private property" in pursuit of those goals

If someone says... "You can legally play this Kazoo" then put sthe kazoo in a box and says "It's illegal for you to open this box."

I'd say that has to be a violation.

Someone could bequeath you $5,000 in their will, but bequeath it to you in a safe with an unknown combination. A totally dick move, but nothing stopping that.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Gnizmo on 19 March 2011
Kasz216 said:
twesterm said:
Galaki said:

If it's not illegal, then why it is impossible for me to play from backup without going through modding my system? Which is not what I wanted to do.


They want the system as closed as possible because if they didn't, something like the Dreamcast would happen.  You could simply copy a disc and play it, backup or not, so that's what people did.


Dreamcast sold 8.9 Million consoles...

and sold 52.9 Million pieces of software.

An attach rate of over 6.5 games per system for a system that was discontinued so early.


The dreamcast really wasn't pirated to all hell.  I'm not even sure i've ever heard sony once complain about piracy on the Dreamcast.


Can't imagine why they would complain about it. Nothing but a good thing for them.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229

Kasz216 on 19 March 2011
Mr Khan said:
Kasz216 said:
Mr Khan said:
Galaki said:

If it's not illegal, then why it is impossible for me to play from backup without going through modding my system? Which is not what I wanted to do.

Just because you're legally allowed to do something doesn't mean the corporation is obligated to make it easy for you to do so. Where they cross the line is when they cross away from "not making it easy," to, "altering or destroying your private property" in pursuit of those goals

If someone says... "You can legally play this Kazoo" then put sthe kazoo in a box and says "It's illegal for you to open this box."

I'd say that has to be a violation.

Someone could bequeath you $5,000 in their will, but bequeath it to you in a safe with an unknown combination. A totally dick move, but nothing stopping that.


But you would totally be allowed to break that safe to get it.  Or assuming that safe belonged to someone else, get a court order to force them to open the safe.



Gnizmo on 19 March 2011
Kasz216 said:


But you would totally be allowed to break that safe to get it.  Or assuming that safe belonged to someone else, get a court order to force them to open the safe.


Indeed. The concept here is not all contracts are created equal. EULAs as an example have a horrible track record. The few times they have been tested in court has not gone well as I recall. Contracts can, and routinely are completely invalidated because the law supercedes any dealings the citizens of a country have.



Starcraft 2 ID: Gnizmo 229

Mr Khan on 19 March 2011
Kasz216 said:
Mr Khan said:
Kasz216 said:
Mr Khan said:
Galaki said:

If it's not illegal, then why it is impossible for me to play from backup without going through modding my system? Which is not what I wanted to do.

Just because you're legally allowed to do something doesn't mean the corporation is obligated to make it easy for you to do so. Where they cross the line is when they cross away from "not making it easy," to, "altering or destroying your private property" in pursuit of those goals

If someone says... "You can legally play this Kazoo" then put sthe kazoo in a box and says "It's illegal for you to open this box."

I'd say that has to be a violation.

Someone could bequeath you $5,000 in their will, but bequeath it to you in a safe with an unknown combination. A totally dick move, but nothing stopping that.


But you would totally be allowed to break that safe to get it.  Or assuming that safe belonged to someone else, get a court order to force them to open the safe.

I agree, i'm just saying that if it were in their twisted interest that you not get the $5,000, the donor would be quite entitled to donate as he saw fit within the law, but they cannot utilize legal means to stop you from getting to what's yours, only methods that they can build, hence the safe, or the need to soft-mod



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.