AV-8B COPY PROTECTION CHANGE

ED have in the past specifically stated that the DRM requirement will be lifted in the event that they go out of business.

The problem with that is that once the company is out of business, and it is found that they did not do so, the user has no legal recourse since the company that made that statement no longer exists as a legal entity.

This is like buying a product with a 'lifetime' warranty. If the company selling it ceases to exist then the lifetime warranty is rather meaningless.

ED have in the past specifically stated that the DRM requirement will be lifted in the event that they go out of business.

I am sure they intend to do it and want to do it as of now. Still I recommend to consider a way that already keeps the dependencies to online available servers to a minimum.

To be clear, I am very aware the intention of the new DRM is to reduce the dependencies on Serial numbers (keys) and reduce the hassle with StarForce Pro-Active's hardware activation issues.

If we do not try to get all arguments and discuss it so ED can make an informed decision, now, when should we?

I've seen very little inconstructive ranting in this thread. Most input is valid concerns, opinions and even a lot of constructive ideas. Let's see how ED can use it to optimize the new DRM. :)

Yes, they have, but that actually depends on a lot of things, from the way they go out of business, to the final owners decision, or a lot of unknowns in-between.

I am sure they intend to do it and want to do it as of now.

Of course, that assumes that the owners can either write the requisite code, or have had it already written and can implement it themselves.

A staff that has been informed of the dissolution of their employer is not the most motivated group of people.

EDIT: Just noting that this train of thought, though relevant, is off topic and will likely be deleted.

However in the end we are only the users.

"we are only the users" !?! ... We are the customers. And without customers to buy the product there no need of DRM protection.

Well if this is implemented, 'the man at the door and over the telephone shouldn't' check what I'm doing while needing them as repairman.

So I should vote as long as possible or not at all.

I can live with starforce pro active.

When you travel and play at for example at parents with the account-installation overthere and at home ofcourse and maybe abroad for work in the evenings in the week. Altogether you have 3 - ip's (1 in another country) etc 3 pc's maybe.

Or your LAN-pc connected to some internet. Or abroad you need to wifi connect on the road.

When are you being suspect of accountsharing by ED? Where are the limits while handling accordingly EULA? Is it you to proof something.

What data is collected from your pc to point out you are not the owner of the account? A very privacy demanding thing over the internet.

I already noticed a crashreport being sent to ED with logs and data without agreeing on that(or maybe I did but the screen was black in the crash).

Could this be a reason to do more things beyond just DRM like with starforce? (Analytic, like steam?)

*I'm not implying here of things happens but mere wondering wich doors will be opened with or without the consent of the paying customer.

Wags, I’m already owned most of DCS modules and ready to purchase for Hornet. React ovation every 3 days is not applicable for me at all. Because i’m Working by hitches in field where is sometimes no internet access and my hitch is 30 days and sometimes might be more than 30 days. That’s why your protection system is not suitable for me and I hope there are a lot people who works different places in the world. Most of the time I’m playing game off-line and I hope that you take in consideration my point. Reactivation every 90 days could good decision or other ways of activation could be considered as well. Thanks

Monni Rock, you forgot the Dont use this new DRM at all option, do you think you could get it added to the poll ? or does a MOD have to do that ?

ED have in the past specifically stated that the DRM requirement will be lifted in the event that they go out of business.

Can you link to where an offical ED spokes person said that please (would really re-assure some of us)

I have been working in software companies when things went wrong ... eg

forced close of company, the SW engs were filling out app forms looking for

new jobs and updating their CV's, there were not doing work for the company

There is at the minimum at least one fraud scenario where i see a repeated online verification (at least for a couple of weeks or months, like a karma system) as the only way of protection. Buying modules with stolen creditcard details and setting up a new DCS account, or if a scammer buys one of these anonymous prepaid creditcards and uses that in combinaton with paypal or such to buy DCS modules and after activating the DCS module books the money back. With the onetime activation he's easily gotten himself a free copy of whatever module he desired, without the need to sniff out someone elses account or email data. This is might be the scenario ED is confronted atm with the starforce system.

What might work though, is a kind of karma system (or 'good standing' system) where a new customer has his modules repeatedly verified by internet over the first 30 - 180 days or something (depending for howlong a creditcard fraud claim is valid). Thus once the financial transaction is finally through and ED and 3rd devs. have gotten paid, the repeated online verification is lifted and only happens when you actually go online and/or update.

By the way, the most common scenario i often hear when accounts get stolen is due to the very owns website or companys database being hacked.

I am sure some of you guys are more knowledgable than me or have first hand experience in IT or gamedevelopmen. What protection schemes do you know of that would not require repeated online verification for paying customers, but effectively protect against fraud as described above?

This debate has gotten me really curious as to how a protection design in todays creditcard, paypal, instant payment world could look like!

As I explained in a post, :( in my country the internet is not stable and some times I spend several days without communication.

:thumbup: Therefore, vote 90 days minimum.

Can you link to where an offical ED spokes person said that please (would really re-assure some of us)

 

I have been working in software companies when things went wrong ... eg

forced close of company, the SW engs were filling out app forms looking for

new jobs and updating their CV's, there were not doing work for the company

Not sure about re-assuring thing ;). Realistically, what you described is what happens indeed. This is why even if Viper finds the link (though judging form his overzealous defense of every controversial move by ED I doubt he will), the statement will be hardly relevant anyway IF something bad happens with the company. As Chichlidfan pointed above.

Is it only accountservice I bought with the harrier or do I properly own a licensed copy of proprietary software? Then;

Is the difference my account is serverbased and located in the ED country and therefor will never fall under my local law (country)?

Fortunately ...

Glad that MonnieRock originally created that poll (which has been merged to original previously locked post from Wags) that clearly showed that MANY (kind of) customers might suffer from this Web access constrains ... :worthy:

Now lets see what will happens. I was planning to buy the Gazelle, and maybe one day the F-18 (once they will achieve final and polished status, no beta nor early access for my taste) ... Otherwise, it would clearly be a final show-stopper for me ... :(

I won't accept any internet dependency to use my software.

Fingers crossed.

Just elaborating a bit more on my earlier post and what i would deem an acceptable system that combines the best of both worlds i should hope:

What might work though, is a kind of karma system (or 'good standing' system) where a new customer has his modules repeatedly verified by internet over the first 30 - 180 days or something (depending for howlong a creditcard fraud claim is valid). Thus once the financial transaction is finally through and ED and 3rd party devs. have gotten paid, the repeated online verification is lifted and only happens when you actually go online and/or update. This might help deal with creditcard/paypal fraud in conjunction with the fraudster setting up a new account for each stolen module.

That same inital time period of 1 to 6 months repeated online verificaion should also be applied to new installations of DCS on different PC hardware configurations for existing accounts with honestly bought modules in it. Thus if someone really manages to steal the account of an honest customer then there is a multiple months long period where this irregularity might come to the attention of said customer. For instance, if users could track inside their ED store customer webprofile all their DCS installations plus when and on what hardware configuration a new installation has been activated (and an addtional email notification could be sent as well), then it should be quite easy to catch irregular installations by the user itself and revoke that activation. Thus, there needed to be, as already mentioned, an initial time period with repeated online verification that gives ample time to catch fradulent installations. Lifting of that repeated online verification after x number of weeks/months needed not be happening automatically but could be done by the customer via two-factor authentification if he/she so desires, and always not for the account in general, but for a specific installation only.

I know, this system would kinda suck for someone getting a new laptop, installing DCS and going on a multiple months sea voyage or something shortly thereafter. You needed to get over those inital months before you could enjoy that total offline freedom. But how often do people make a new dcs installation? The question is, should this 'initial period' always restart from scratch if a new module is bought and added to an existing account. I should think that would not be necessary. It kinda dependes on the customers to keep a bit track on there installations and whether something shady is going on inside there account profile as described in the paragraph above.

Anyway, i think this system would combine best of both worlds and give customers their highly valued offline freedom and asure ED to high degree that fraudulent installations can be tracked down and deactivated.

I, for one, could live with this system.

What might work though,...

Overly complex and introduces more points of failure for the consumer. It also inhibits the new player, and they are the ones that most need to be nurtured not inhibited.

Glad that MonnieRock originally created that poll (which has been merged to original previously locked post from Wags) that clearly showed that MANY (kind of) customers might suffer from this Web access constrains ... :worthy:

 

Now lets see what will happens. I was planning to buy the Gazelle, and maybe one day the F-18 (once they will achieve final and polished status, no beta nor early access for my taste) ... Otherwise, it would clearly be a final show-stopper for me ... :(

 

I won't accept any internet dependency to use my software.

 

Fingers crossed.

Iam defo with you on this, I do not want internet dependency in my software

As Monnie Rock created the original Poll, should he not be able to change the poll options ?

eg Add another option, he is current not being allowed to do this, which is odd

Can you link to where an offical ED spokes person said that please (would really re-assure some of us)

I will repost the post here as there is some sage advice in this particular post that begs repeating:

 

After multiple requests to stear clear of the StarForce debate, this will now close. If anybody else has any technical issues that need to be addressed, feel free to ask in the appropriate forum section.

 

Anyone is welcome to browse our Payments and Activation support section for countless examples of ED granting a set of new activations to users who have run out and provide a proof of purchase. ED in no way expects any customer to have to purchase the product more than once. Furthermore, ED has recently confirmed that activation requirements would be removed in the case that the company is no longer able to support the product, such as if it was no longer in business.

 

ED is also not under any obligation, nor in my personal opinion should be under any reasonable expectation to explain all of the factors behind its financial decisions.

 

In general, when forum moderators speak on ED's behalf, they are relaying information which has been previously confirmed by ED staff, either through internal discussion or public postings. However, be careful to take note of the various "IMHO", "I think...", etc., which is a good way to tell a personal opinion, perhaps informed, from official information.

 

Public polls are important and are among the factors ED takes into account when making product decisions. However, polls are not the only determinant. TFC/ED now have 15 years of experience producing combat flight sims and releasing them world-wide, including before piracy was even an issue. It's safe to assume that the company has a good idea of the market potential of this business and is capable of evaluating the market performance of their own products.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=814262&postcount=29

This was incidentally posted putting an end to yet another Starforce DRM rant IIRC here we still are - we’ll get there and things will work out. Just gotta keep our cool :)

As Monnie Rock created the original Poll, should he not be able to change the poll options ?

 

eg Add another option, he is current not being allowed to do this, which is odd

Seems to me the problem would be even if he did add that option, many of us who would choose that have already voted for 90 days because it was the closest choice. I believe a new poll would be necessary :smilewink:

Seems to me the problem would be even if he did add that option, many of us who would choose that have already voted for 90 days because it was the closest choice. I believe a new poll would be necessary :smilewink:

Can votes be changed on the polling system here ?

Yes a new poll would be in order.. asking the more pertinent question

For or against new proposed DRM implementation

Yes a new poll would be in order.. asking the more pertinent question

For or against new proposed DRM implementation

That ship has sailed:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3304775&postcount=1

What possible use is a new poll if a decision has already been made?

Maybe so that ED could see how many people would prefer the old

system to this new proposed one and will people still buy their products

with these new limitations ?

Maybe so that ED could see how many people would prefer the old

system to this new proposed one and will people still buy their products

with these new limitations ?

I am sure that 50 pages of feedback is enough to make that determination :)

If not, they can, as you propose and if they feel so inclined (see EB-1's post above), post another poll.

That ship has sailed:

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3304775&postcount=1

 

What possible use is a new poll if a decision has already been made?

That announcement was posted well before the poll and even before a moderator stated that the phone home period was under consideration.

That announcement was posted well before the poll and even before a moderator stated that the phone home period was under consideration.

Yes, the time-period is under consideration.

The decision to implement a new DRM software however is not.

Yes, the time-period is under consideration.

 

The decision to implement a new DRM software however is not.

Yes. Sorry, I should have followed the conversation better.