Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rockstar is selling cracked game copies on Steam

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 259 posts

Re: Rockstar is selling cracked game copies on Steam

#111

Post by PeterisP »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #90
qingcharles wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perjury is only if you make a statement under oath knowing it to be a lie. The DMCA doesn't require you by statute to tell the truth. As long as you tell the truth under oath on the witness stand, if it got that far, then you'd be fine from a criminal prosecution perspective. Of course, you'd probably get counter-sued for a number of civil torts for being a fuckhead.

It does. Each DMCA requires “A statement that the information in the complaint is accurate, and, under penalty of perjury, that you are authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner.”

Especially do note that you could lie on all the other parts of the complaint, such as the issue whether the violation actually occurred, but the one thing that's under the penalty of perjury is whether you're actually representing the copyright owner.

Re: Rockstar is selling cracked game copies on Steam

#112

Post by CapstanRoller »

freejazz wrote: post #91
wongarsu wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A No-CD crack might not be transformative enough to warrant copyright protection as derivative work in the US. But they could sue in a jurisdiction that is more likely to give them a favorable outcome. Handling of derivative works and the minimum threshold for copyright varies considerably between countries.

I don't think people on HN understand what a derivative work is, considering how often I see it referenced incorrectly. You can't make a derivative work without a license. That's why it's derivative. It derivates from the copyrighted work and is therefore within the domain of the copyright and under the control of the copyright's owner. A Harry Potter spin-off about Hermione (I don't know anything about HP, sorry in…

>you cannot sell copies of your Hermione spin-off, because that'd be copyright infringement, because it is a derivative work

But you can distribute it for free, as fanfiction.

Also, a no-CD crack does not contain any of the original work. It's akin to a program that you can use to modify, say, your legally-purchased Harry Potter ebook in order to change all instances of "wand" to "wang"

Re: Rockstar is selling cracked game copies on Steam

#113

Post by PeterisP »

jerf wrote: post #104
Ekaros wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those modifications have a copy-right they do not own...

I've been waiting for ~23 years for the copyright system to grapple with the implications of 1. having a copyrighted work A 2. taking someone else's "patch" (mod/crack/whatever, I call it "patch" as a general term) B and 3. combining them on your local computer to produce a final work C. We techies have been arguing about who has what rights, who can block who from doing what, who's responsible for what, etc. in that…

The general principle of copyright law is that copying/distributing work that combines multiple copyrightable parts requires the permission of every author/copyright holder. Copyright law does not attempt to establish a single owner for any given work, it's perfectly fine with multiple parties having copyright protections over a single work, in which case any of them has a practical veto to doing anything with the joint product, as permission to use 99% of the work isn't sufficient.

For a very common example, let's look at a translated book. Copying and distributing such a book requires separate permission from both the author of the book and the author of the translation; the translation is a derivative work, it's covered by the copyrights of the original book and the author, but the translator also holds independent copyright on the translation in addition to the author's interest.

IMHO a derivative work of a program patched with someoone else's code (no matter how small, as long as it meets the very low copyright law bar of 'the slightest touch of creative input') is quite similar.

But the specific case of Razor 1911 might be disqualified by US copyright law section 103a which says "[...] but protection for a work employing preexisting material in which copyright subsists does not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully."

Re: Rockstar is selling cracked game copies on Steam

#114

Post by baobabKoodaa »

parineum wrote: post #80
baobabKoodaa wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like Razor could sue Rockstar for copyright infringement. That would be hilarious.

What's the copyrighted work here?

Both the original game and the no-cd crack are copyrighted works.

Re: Rockstar is selling cracked game copies on Steam

#116

Post by NoMoreNicksLeft »

anakaine wrote: post #94
NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be permissible, if the "software for the express purpose of bypassing the protections they themselves placed on their software" was their own software. It's not permissible for them to make available other people's "software for the express purpose of bypassing the protections they themselves placed on their software" without the express permission of those other people . Neither statute nor case law sets a…

There is the matter of enforcement, however. If something is completely unenforceable, such as in this case where the owner is using a pirate groups bypass, then it may as well be permissible. It's not expressly permissible, but the perceived breach is also not enforceable, so the argument becomes a moot point. Also, the patches typically had no license terms attached to their usage, or if they did it came in the for…

I'm pretty sure that the lack of license terms doesn't make it a free-for-all, instead it means that there is no possible licensed use at all.

If you pick up a copy of Photoshop and can't find the license for it, you don't get to go down to the street corner and sell bootleg copies. That defense won't hold when you're in district court fighting to stay out of federal prison, anyway.

And while it's true that this will never be enforced, if there are no principles here, then there can be no guilt from illegally copying these games.

Re: Rockstar is selling cracked game copies on Steam

#117

Post by nikanj »

readyplayernull wrote: post #98
tpmx wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably Norway's most long-lived and industrious software export success. Founded in 1985.

Somehow I expected them to be founded since 1911, cracking those Analytical Engines.

It’s 0x777, making fun of all the l33+ 666 groups

Re: Rockstar is selling cracked game copies on Steam

#120

Post by mjg59 »

phpisthebest wrote: post #28
demarq wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cracking was a 90s term for pirating software

pirating software (movies, and music) is a term from the 90's by the MPAA, Riaa, and Games industry in attempting to link the act of simple copyright infringement, a civil non-criminal violation of the law to violent robbery on the high seas... Cracking is a method of removing undesired features or inclusions from software, often licensing controls, or other anti-consumer features. Many many many people "cracked" the…

The use of "piracy" to describe unauthorised publication of a copyrighted work dates back to the 18th century, it's not something the MPAA came up with.
Post reply on HN