Completely Biased

I have to admit, I am a gamer. I play way too many games for my own good, and because of that I keep my eye on things in the tech markets a great deal. Today’s debate is about whether or not companies should be able to protect thier software at the cost of stability and safety of consumer’s electronics. We will of course be naming a major player in this field which sparked my little red button.

Now, a few people might be asking, “What is StarForce?” It’s a little complicated, so stick with me. StarForce is an encryption tool used by mostly distributors to prevent any copying of thier game disks. (However there are some exceptions by law I want to point out before we are done.) This works by having the StarForce drivers installed covertly on a consumer’s computer, and is used without knowledge of the user untill the key is needed for authorization.

Now, usually I don’t have a problem with copy protection, except when there is an issue involving consumer’s rights. This system installs itself without an End User Liscence Agreement (EULA) and also can open up your computer to various attacks. Now I’ve looked at some more information, and tried to research as best I can, and pretty much it has come back to the same thing, StarForce, although with good intentions ends up tainting it’s purity by those security flaws and hidden installation.

Worse yet is that this company has actively attempted to press lawsuits and investigations on individuals speaking out about this product. For example at BoingBoing.net the author that wrote the peice about the StarForce product recieved an E-mail telling the author that his editorial was meant as “Harrasment“! Now, I don’t know about you, but when it comes to opinions and things like that, I don’t see how any international company should, and has the right to sue someone for opinions that happened to be backed up by fact. The technical specs were outlined by BoingBoing about how exactly this protection works, but in the end it comes down to the question:

How far can copyprotection companies, publishers, and distributors go to protect thier intellectual property, while at the same time destroying consumer’s rights?

I understand this is still an old issue. (BoingBoing’s report is from January), however it is still a major problem even more-so with Sony’s attempt at a protection scheme that installed rootkits (as far as I can tell, it is effectively the same thing as StarForce or has the same result as StarForce, just without the nice image that shows up when validating a key), leaving computers vulnerable.

Debate this, and let me know what you guys think! Should companies have the right to protect thier property, and to what extent? Should consumers have thier consumer rights (such as having one LEGAL backup copy [This is the exception I talked about]) available to them, or infringed on by the need to protect retail products?

*We have disabled comments on all Debate This topics and moved the discussion over to the forums* Click here to discuss.

(The StarForce logo and name are © Protection Technology, 2000-2006. All rights are reserved. This logo is used for only editorial and opinion.)

United States Air Marshals: What do you think thier job is? To act as a police force in flight? To protect civillians in thier rush to get from place to place? Well, with a recent news peice popping up on Slashdot it comes down to an interesting debate over what is the best for the country, and it’s people.

It is reported that multiple United States Federal Air Marshals have been filing fony reports on “suspicious” people for doing ordinary things, such as taking photographs of the skylines when departing from a runway. The Marshals do have an incentive to do something like this of course, which is a various set of promotions, special assignments, and other benifits. Is it fair for US Marshals to take advantage of civillians by reporting them, and adding them to a “possible terrorist” database in order to get more money, or exciting things to do?

I’m actually the donkey in this arguement as Leah, and Josh are both saying this is propoganda, however I take a look at it this way. The Marshals who brought this to the media’s attention have documents showing that there was indeed a quota, and not even that but thier promotions and incentives were based on that quota. They are required to report one individual a month, and sadly we are getting to the point where internal security is not needed as much as external security.

What does the defense have to offer? Nothing but words so far. According to a Denver news source, the administration of the F.A.M.A. has declined interviews, and the like, stating over and over with little physical evidence that there is no quota. They do have a memo written in August 2004, stating there is no quota, but how hard is that to put on paper?

On the other hand, what is more important? Safety, or civil liberties? I stand in the name of the liberties, as I also believe heavily in the quote, “Those who give up liberties for safety, deserve niether.” What good is being fat and complacent if everything you do is directed by the government? This in extreme cases can slowly turn into a THX1138 nightmare.

Big Brother is watching, watching for you to do anything.

*We have disabled comments on all Debate This topics and moved the discussion over to the forums* Click here to discuss.

(Image is © Federal Air Marshal Association)

Almost anyone that is paying attention to video game rights and lawsuits knows about this one man: Jack Thompson. Who is he, and why is he dangerous?

Jack Thompson is a man who is effectively at a constant legal battle with media, not just video games. His first fight came in with rap, against a band called “2 Live Crew” (Wikipedia) when one of thier albums had a large amount of explicit lyrics.

This ended up with the delusional lawyer from Florida depicting himself as
“Batman”, fighting against the band’s front-man who was portrayed as “Joker” to stop him from “peddling obscenity to kids”.

Going further along, he got into a case involving a “Wrongful Death”, in the state of Alabama(?). A teenager, having been arrested, managed to get ahold of a police officer’s firearm, killed the two officers, (rumor says he killed a dispatcher as well), and stole a police cruiser. Now Jack Thompson is prosecuting the video game developers, and publishers for this incident.

Going even more recent, an issue that hit national news: “GTA: Hot Coffee Mod”. This mod contained an explicit ‘mini-game’ that depicted two characters engaged in sexual acts. This was originally hidden in the disk (by having the triggers removed, I’m sure), and not presented to the ESRB. Later, a group of modders, managed to uncover the game from the PC version, and an investigation was launched on Take2, and Rockstar. Take2 claimed the content was created by the modders, however that was proven false by another set of modders that uncovered the same ‘mini-game’ in the previously released Playstation 2 version. The ESRB changed the ratings of all games having the content to Adult Only, and they were subsequently removed from the shelves. (Rockstar has released a new version that removed the content entirely.)

Jack Thompson jumped on this case as well, citing that this was done on purpose to encourage sales to minors and to also again “peddle obscenity to kids.” Of course, most of the gaming industry views what happened as wrong, and the final judgement was that Take2 and Rockstar would not be fined for this incident, but any incident in the future would hit them with an $11,000 USD fine.

Now, Jack Thomspon is attempting to travel around the country and promote laws that remove the ability for minors (Under 18 to buy, play, or see games that contain excessive violence, sexual content, or anything else considered to be unappropriate. This unfortunately removes the right for parents to decide what thier children should watch, play, and learn. As such the ESA (Entertainment Software Association) is constantly suing states that impliment laws like this and have been relatively successfull.

Latest news on this individual states that in a lawsuit of the ESA versus LA Thompson has been barred from entering the lawsuit to testify as someone for the side of LA’s law. (Slashdot) (Most gamers are cheering for this decision.)

What do you think?

Should states be allowed to limit consumption of media in general or just video games specifically to minors?

Should limitations infringe on parental rights?

What is your impressions about John “Jack” Thompson?

*We have disabled comments on all Debate This topics and moved the discussion over to the forums* Click here to discuss.

(Jack Thompson Picture is ©WCPO)