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

31–40 of 259 posts

Re: Rockstar is selling cracked game copies on Steam

#31

Post by gamblor956 »

thereisnospork wrote: post #26
mabbo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't own the no-CD crack. So technically, they are selling software they pirated.

They are also (arguably) selling software written/designed/intended for the express purpose of bypassing copyright protections, which as I understand is in and of itself a no-no under the DMCA regardless of underlying ownership. I ANAL of course. edit: per the sibling comment the crack might not be included, so this might not apply.

a no-no under the DMCA regardless of underlying ownership

The "regardless" part is wrong. It is permissible for the owner of the software to include software for the express purpose of bypassing the protections they themselves placed on their software. Why would you think that the software owner isn't allowed to do that?

Re: Rockstar is selling cracked game copies on Steam

#33

Post by h2odragon »

capableweb wrote: post #16
h2odragon wrote: post #5

could the NoCD crack author do a DMCA takedown on these games now? Would it even need to be the author issuing such a request?

You need to either be or represent the copyright holder. I'm 99% sure most warez groups have no interest in exposing themselves to any legal systems when it comes to what they do.

If I say I represent such a group, then; is it likely that anyone will disagree? DMCA cases seem to be about who has the scarier looking letterhead anyway.

To whom would I have to prove or disprove my standing to take Rockstar games down, I wonder? Does Steam have any right to refuse such a request just because it's patently absurd?

Re: Rockstar is selling cracked game copies on Steam

#35

Post by dylan604 »

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…

my favorite use was for software that required a USB dongle. if you lost the dongle, you lost access to the software. there is not "back up" option. so the cracking community came up with a way to emulate those dongles. the obvious abuse followed. we used the software for legit 1:1 installs to physical dongle on blade servers where all of the dongles could not be installed

Re: Rockstar is selling cracked game copies on Steam

#36

Post by NoMoreNicksLeft »

capableweb wrote: post #16
h2odragon wrote: post #5

could the NoCD crack author do a DMCA takedown on these games now? Would it even need to be the author issuing such a request?

You need to either be or represent the copyright holder. I'm 99% sure most warez groups have no interest in exposing themselves to any legal systems when it comes to what they do.

You need that in the sense that it would be a legitimate notice.

No requirement such as that is part of the DMCA, and there is no penalty in statute for making illegitimate notices.

Re: Rockstar is selling cracked game copies on Steam

#37

Post by PrimeMcFly »

thereisnospork wrote: post #26
mabbo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't own the no-CD crack. So technically, they are selling software they pirated.

They are also (arguably) selling software written/designed/intended for the express purpose of bypassing copyright protections, which as I understand is in and of itself a no-no under the DMCA regardless of underlying ownership. I ANAL of course. edit: per the sibling comment the crack might not be included, so this might not apply.

Even if the crack was included it wouldn't apply.

Re: Rockstar is selling cracked game copies on Steam

#38

Post by PrimeMcFly »

ezconnect wrote: post #8
justsomehnguy wrote: post #3

https://nitter.unixfox.eu/__silent_/status/16983459248402968... Who could have thought what a company with billions of revenue would use the cracks from RAZOR1911 for IP they are selling to the end users? Shocking!

Does RAZOR1911 have a legal way to have a share of revenue since they are using his hard work?

They are not entitled to anything. Rockstar can use their crack as much as they want.

Re: Rockstar is selling cracked game copies on Steam

#39

Post by kolanos »

robbiet480 wrote: post #4
Reubend wrote: post #2

Could we get some more context than this tweet (which doesn't really explain what's going on)?

The game shown here, Midnight Club II, required the CD to be in the drive to play it. With the advent of Steam and companies releasing older games on Steam, they needed a way to bypass that check. Bypassing a CD (commonly called No-CD) was a very common crack/DRM bypass back in the day. Rockstar didn't want to bring up old source code and find someone who understood it enough to remove the check, so instead they just…

Did Rockstart have to license Razor1911's cracking software?

It would be ironic if Rockstar was in violation of Razor1911's copyright.

Re: Rockstar is selling cracked game copies on Steam

#40

Post by NoMoreNicksLeft »

gamblor956 wrote: post #31
thereisnospork wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are also (arguably) selling software written/designed/intended for the express purpose of bypassing copyright protections, which as I understand is in and of itself a no-no under the DMCA regardless of underlying ownership. I ANAL of course. edit: per the sibling comment the crack might not be included, so this might not apply.

a no-no under the DMCA regardless of underlying ownership The "regardless" part is wrong. It is permissible for the owner of the software to include software for the express purpose of bypassing the protections they themselves placed on their software. Why would you think that the software owner isn't allowed to do that?

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 lower limit on the size of software that is protected by copyright... but if there were a lower limit, then it is clearly down towards the hundreds (or even dozens) of bytes. The crack certainly doesn't sit underneath that lower limit.

It'd be like purloining just one source code file, including it in your commercial software and relying on the defense "hey, it was only a few hundred lines long".

Post reply on HN