Night Dive goes ahead and fixes both games and then instead of releasing the full games, they sell a patch/installer, which contains absolutely no copyrighted code. Explain that this patch/installer will work any copy of the game, you just have to find one [wink, wink].
People get the games patched for modern systems, Night Dive gets to keep 100% of the profits from selling the patch and there's not a damn thing that any of the companies can do about it, since selling a patch/installer for a copyrighted piece of software isn't illegal.
I'm trying to figure out why people are so surprised at this. Microsoft, for example, does the same thing with Windows. If you swap out too many pieces of hardware, you get locked out and need to re-validate your registration. They even have an API for doing this check. Apple does a similar thing with their UUID, but they only tie it to the cryptographic chip on the motherboard and don't care about the peripherals. They can do that because they control the entire platform.
In other words, there's no privacy violation going on here; EA doesn't really track what hardware you're using -- they just have your registration hashed against the serial numbers reported by your main hardware components, and when the hash changes, your registration fails. Contacting them can likely get it re-enabled, just like with MS.
Annoying draconian DRM? Yes... but not a privacy issue.
And if China accused you of breaking one of their laws in a U.S. company you owned, I'm certain you would gladly walk directly into the PRC's court, right? I'm sure a country who's legal history includes the logic of "if you weren't guilty, you wouldn't have been accused of being guilty" will give you a fair trial.
Either way your entire idea is stupid. He is on legal bail in New Zealand, one of our closest allies. If the USG had legal grounds to require extradition, he would be here. He's about as likely to get a fair trial as Edward Snowden would. If you think the U.S. courts aren't influenced by political pressure you are horribly naïve.
If Night Dive wants it badly enough, they could file a declaratory judgment action against all three putative rights owners in federal court. "...if you make the game and it turns out we do have those rights you'll be facing legal action from us" should be enough of a legal threat to establish the court's jurisdiction. Then the studios would have to put up or shut up.
Unfortunately at least one of them would probably turn out to have at least some of the rights and once they were sued over them, they're probably not going to want to cut a deal with the company who sued them, so the outcome is the same.
I have CD versions of both games, and there are patches available online to remove the CD-required DRM. They're both still quite playable, and probably work fine in comparability mode.
When I installed NOLF on my old system, I had to downgrade my Nvidia drivers by several versions to get the graphics to display correctly. All of the NPCs were white and all of the textures were used in the wrong locations (road signs for floors, sky for walls, etc). I had the same problem with Aliens vs. Predator II.
For NOFL2, I had to use an even older driver. The graphics glitches weren't as game-stopping as the first one, but parts of the ground would change based on your viewing angle and/or whether you were using the flashlight.
In fact, I've had graphics problems with practically every Lithtech game I've played.
Not back then you weren't. Back then when you googled Securom you came up with approximately "jack" and "shit". And that's if you knew to google Securom at all, because EA and whoever else used it didn't bother to tell anyone who bought their product that it was included at all, let alone could interfere with anything on one's computer.
I think one of the issues is that politicians end up taking positions on issues only after being elected that they never took positions on before elections. I don't recall a politician running for office claiming they will expand and extend copy protection laws. I don't recall politicians running for office claiming they will do more to spy on Americans and invade our privacy. Yet, only after being elected do they suddenly do stuff that most voters will disapprove of. By then it's too late. There is no way for voters to know what a politician will do after being elected based on what they say before election. If only they were transparent about their future plans before being elected instead of leaving certain things out.
Well, its been three days, so I will accept your lack of response to my question as a note of agreement then - or at least an admission that you have no come-back - or, as is more likely, that you simply never read that far. :)
I have just cancelled my TWC service after receiving my first bill. I have a work order from March 1 which states clearly "Total Monthly Charges 135.49" There's fine print about taxes and fees - no problem. Should have worked out around $160/month after the junk fees. The "best" offer the retention person could offer was $170 before equipment charges, fees, etc. and this would include a downgrade of my internet service bandwidth. I was told that there was fine print in my work order explaining that existing services were in addition to the quoted 135.49.... I produced the 4 page work order contract and asked where this could be found in the document. We agreed it was not spelled out in this document at all and I made a decision to place the order based on the quoted price. I was then told that in spite of that fact, the price/program they offered me in the order didn't exist so there was no way the could honor that price. This is clear bait-and-switch. I invoked another clause in their fine-print and cancelled service prior to hitting the 30 day mark. I have no desire or need to recoup damages but I would gladly offer my work order dated March 1 2015, my monthly bill of March 26, a voicemail left on March 27 by the TWC customer service rep and my personal testimony in support of this effort. Since I am certain TWC records the calls there was a 40 minute call in which some interesting remarks and acknowledgements were made by their representative. Not only was I sold under false pretense but TWC's competitors are losing subscribers unjustly.
I'm sure there's a way to identify hardware changes without specifically identifying what the hardware is... but I doubt that's happening here. Instead, this looks like EA is making me pay to contribute valuable market research that they can use for leverage against hardware makers. Combine that with the linked payment and other data they collect and there's a pot of saleable consumer information as well.
How are they not offering games for free or paying developers decently with all of this extra revenue they can rake in off their users?
Yes Rights Holder, I would've paid you a second time for something I already own because the Win98 VM I currently use for older games gets the job done but GOG is steadily eliminating the need for it.
What Win98 VM do you use? None of the ones I looked at seem to support any kind of hardware acceleration for the graphics. Or if they do, that information is buried deep in the docs somewhere. It seems that most VMs are optimized to only run XP and newer with all the bells and whistles and Win9x gets the short end of the stick.
The Socratic method is a form of inquiry and discussion between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to illuminate ideas. Asking the question starts the process of the method.
Could you please show me where I stated that net neutrality is a Straw Man fallacy? A straw man is a common reference argument and is an informal fallacy based on false representation of an opponent's argument. To be successful, a straw man argument requires that the audience be ignorant or uninformed of the original argument, i.e. which is lack of competition of broadband providers. Nothing to do w/NN.
"The Rapporteur will have no real powers to demand information or enforce recommendations."
But then I got corrected in my believes. Because the only reason either state, UK or US, wouldn't vote against a person like is if that person does have no power at all.
Which of course means that the quote " Two countries particularly affected by the surveillance conducted against them, Germany and Brazil," are totally fine with being played and spyed upon by the US and UK.
If anyone doubted the fact that at least one of those countries aka Germany is deeply nested in the...behind, butt, ass or whatever is politcly correct of the US then now is the time to rethink your point of view.