EEG News

Controversial Federal Law Rolled Out in Game Piracy Case

Game developers must really be growing up because they are taking a more button-down approach to digital piracy. After years of sitting quietly in the shadow of the music and movie industries, which have taken to filing lawsuits directly against consumers, the game companies have ratcheted up the legal proceedings.

In the last few days, game makers sued 321 Studios Inc. for building its Games X Copy software that allows consumers to make backup copies of games.

The suit is the highest-profile case in the game industry involving the truly awful Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a piece of legislation that imposes highly restrictive rules on the development of new technology such as allowing consumers to make their own backup copies of anything they purchase.

(Editor's Note: I feel compelled to disclose some information. I spent three years at Wired News writing and speaking about how this law was used as a hammer by media companies – and in one instance a printer ink company – to keep competitors from developing new technologies that would be good for consumers, but bad for existing business models.)

Now, the piracy debate has been turned very black-and-white – as if those who support open policies on technology development and consumer rights believe that there should be no rules.

That's decidedly not the case, and when the BBC reported on June 11 that the Federal Bureau of Investigation made several significant arrests in the theft of the source code for Valve Software's much anticipated Half-Life 2 game, the technorati were largely relieved.

This is how the game industry should attack piracy. Pro-active legislation to stifle innovation and restrict consumer rights goes against the foundation that the country is built upon. Instead, we catch and prosecute those who break the law.

Game Piracy Takes Center Stage

Game piracy is on the rise, driven by high-speed networks and increased social activities, according to a new study released by Macrovision (the people who brought you copy protection for VHS tapes).

Of the 2,219 PC gamers quizzed, 52 percent admitted to obtaining cracked software while 33 percent of those reported acquiring 'ISO' files – essentially full CD images with copy protection hacked out. Alarmingly, 15 percent of respondents admitted to acquiring 15 or more pirated games within the last two years.

It's clearly a concern for an industry that claims $3 billion in losses each year to digital piracy; however, I've always been a bit dubious about the price tag attached to such losses.

As a writer and an author, I'm well aware of the need to protect intellectual property – much of my adult life has been spent making a living off IP that I help create. But the numbers bandied about are often not quantifiable (although they make for a kick-ass headline).

Still, there is little doubt that pirate clans roam the digital landscape looking for the next big hack. When I was at Wired News, I received notes from groups looking for press on their latest conquests. Most of the time I ignored them because the story gets old. On occasion, though, I'd chime in

Of course, it's not all doom and gloom according to the good folks at Macrovision. The company has published a white paper called The Impact of Game Piracy and Effective Defense Techniques that offers a solution to this growing problem: game companies should use Macrovision's SafeDisc copy protection and combine that with its Security API digital rights management technology.

While the white paper may have merit, and the solution proposed may indeed be worthwhile, this is clearly FUD at work.

Create Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt around new technologies, and then propose the absolute solution to companies that are too nervous (and maybe ill-informed).

LAN Parties: Copyright Conundrum

The entertainment industry continues its crusade to stifle digital piracy, but for the video game players, the war on theft has left the hardest of hardcore players in the murky grey legal waters.

A college student at Bowling Green University has run into trouble while trying to set up a LAN party, after the university refused to let him schedule the event over fears it may violate copyright laws.

I was casually informed that I had to secure permission from the copyright holders for the games we would be playing. I was quite confused as to why they needed this, and their only answer was that it would be considered a 'public showing of copyrighted work', and therefore I must secure permission. I asked a lawyer about the policy and his best advice was to get a hard copy of their policy and then comply to the bare minimum. The University was unable to provide much hardcopy, but largely referred me to the University rule that all State and Federal laws were in effect.

LAN parties are a fundamental part of the gaming experience. At the largest LANs, thousands of people travel from around the globe in order to hook their computers up against the best players and then duke it our for supremacy. Developers have long encouraged these events because it helps build and maintain the vibrant community needed for long-term success of a game.

Now, it seems, the continued assault on those who illegally share files through peer-to-peer programs has put everyone on tenterhooks. This means that those who put these events on, often with their own money and without expecting a profit, will face yet another hurdle in developing their communities, and gaming companies may suffer as a resuld.