PSP's PSN DRM cracked: Can we please report on this?

[CZroe]

Remove the DRM from PSP titles purchased from the Playstation Network store:
http://www.tehskeen.com/forums/showt...?threadid=6881

Ignorant people are already starting to claim that removing the DRM is only for pirates, when they forget that you should be able to backup and loan your property regardless of what any EULA says (not tested in courts + First Use Doctrine often over-rides what is printed in software manuals). I'd like it to be reported so that I can point these dim-witts to a respectable anti-DRM site when they claim something so stupid.

My PSP is falling apart, causing me to avoid buying anything on the PSN. Why? Because I may want/need to upgrade to a PSP-2000 "slim & lite" model and I will lose all my purchased content when the old one gives up its ghost. Even if I buy a new one because its analog nub & D-Pad issues get to be too much to bear (not even considering the faceplace detaching/cracking, missing screws, and discolored LCD), it forces me to keep it around for those games instead of refurbishing it (new backlight, faceplate+screws, D-Pad mod, analog nub: ~$20) or selling it for parts/cheap (it still functions!).

I have always been a TRUE "backup" user. I had backup hardware for my GB/GBC, SNES, N64, etc and I still bought and imported all my games. Often, I used them for additional purposes such as translation patches, homebrew, portability through consolidation, etc. I value my PHYSICAL collection and I resist the move to fully digital downloads without a personal right to a transferrable (thus, tangible) copy/license. This new PSP tool is a God-send. I can go ahead and buy Echochrome, a game that will only be available on disc (UMD) outside of The States, and I can share it with friends (loaning) so that they can buy it through word-of-mouth (it's that kind of indie-game). I could only loan them my entire PSP before, which still violates their EULA.

Was anyone else ticked off when they opened thier physical retail version of Crysis and saw "Do not lend this disc" printed on it? Who are they to tell me what I can do with my property? First Use Doctrine applies in the same way that Blockbuster doesn't truly have Weinsein Company DVDs for rent (competitors just have to buy retail copies).

Edit: I meant to place this in the "News" forum. Can a mod/admin move it? Thanks!

[setarip_old]

Hi!

you should be able to loan your property

As it relates to computer media/software/programs, I'm not so sure that you'd find much support for this ("loan") contention, either legally, or in the rules of the Doom9 Forum...

[Shinigami-Sama]

Originally Posted by setarip_old

Hi!As it relates to computer media/software/programs, I'm not so sure that you'd find much support for this ("loan") contention, either legally, or in the rules of the Doom9 Forum...

to be fair
its a hand held device
almost everyone with one at some point goes 'here beat this' and passes it off to their buddy

[CZroe]

Originally Posted by Shinigami-Sama

to be fair
its a hand held device
almost everyone with one at some point goes 'here beat this' and passes it off to their buddy

Exactly. Plus, First Use Doctrine allows me to loan my physical property containing authorized intellectual property owned by someone else. It's why I can loan a DVD to a friend (or borrow it for that matter) or rent it: It's my (or his/her) call. They may say that rental is prohibited, but Nintendo LOST their case against Blockbuster Video over renting NES games while NetFlix, Hollywood Video, Hastings, etc rents Weinstein Company movies despite Blockbuster buying them out for exclusivity. The downloaded DRM is not physical property, but the PSP is and my Crysis disc is. The DRM restricts what I can do with my purchased DLC (Downloadable Content), and it's going to become more and more of an issue as gaming is goes full-steam-ahead into DLC. This tool lets me purchase, download, and play WipEout PulsE on any PSP, but I can already do that because I bought the game on UMD (disc). This particular game was made to sell DLC tracks (the racing-game kind and the licensed musical kind from known groups in the "Electronic" genre) and this tool does nothing for the DRM attached to that DLC, so it still has a long way to go.

I value actual physical legitimate property, so if I can't have that (Echochrome), I demand concessions if I am to give up things I could once do in exchange for DRM. For instance, according to Valve's official documentation, Steam allow me to download and play my Steam games on any PC I use my account with without restrictions. Their documentation did not update when they started enforcing region-protection on games bought in Taiwan (just because they sell cheaper there to compete with piracy and want to discourage exporting isn't my concern). This is just as they also started putting in games that had activation limiting the amount of PCs and user accounts it could be used/installed on (Bioshock)... last I checked (after buying Bioshock and being blind-sided by this), their documentation still had not updated and it STILL encouraged me to install on as many PCs as I use (with my twin brother, we have 5 Bioshock-capable gaming PCs). This was also a problem with the retail boxed copy of the game that didn't use Steam, and a company employee publicly said "Why should your brother play for free?" when someone asked why it wanted to activate on each of the PC's use accounts. Umm, if he passed the XBOX 360 controller to his brother on the console version, would he be committing piracy? Why can't PC users expect the same level of functionality? Since when did we become second-class gamers? They retracted the statment, which just goes to show how misguided it was. To make matters worse, the writing on the box was useless. The same exact writing word-for-word means completely different things on other PC games, even other Steam and Games for Windows games (Bioshock is both). With Lost Planet, it simply means that the retail version is a Steam game that will be stuck on your Steam account. With Halo 2, it means that you can't play multiplayer without activation. With Flight Simulator X, it means that you have a time limit without activation. With Battlefield 2, it means that your product key is registered with an email address. PC makers need to standardize NOW (GFW did NOTHING).

[LargePrime]

Originally Posted by CZroe

Exactly. Plus, First Use Doctrine

Fair Use.Your Original request included a reference to "dim-witts." Help your own case by keeping YOUR facts straight. And you can click on the Fair Use link to get more information.

I think a solid argument could be made that any DRM is wrong and immoral. Remember that supposed "Intellectual property" is a work of fiction created by middlemen to protect their Zero Value Added Humongous Cash Streams.

The argument against lending software is just silly. I can lend whatever to whoever. The whole Idea that I have to delete it from here so it can run there, when 99% of the time it will never be used at all is ludicrous on its face.

It is not about how easy it is. How easy is it to steal a joke? Anyone ever get fined or got to jail for it? Why should anything else be different?

I guess I could make this more comprehensive and interesting, but I am not sure this is the place, so TTFN, and let me know if you would like to take this further.

[*.mp4 guy]

Originally Posted by LargePrime

I think a solid argument could be made that any DRM is wrong and immoral. Remember that supposed "Intellectual property" is a work of fiction created by middlemen to protect their Zero Value Added Humongous Cash Streams.

The argument against lending software is just silly. I can lend whatever to whoever. The whole Idea that I have to delete it from here so it can run there, when 99% of the time it will never be used at all is ludicrous on its face.

It is not about how easy it is. How easy is it to steal a joke? Anyone ever get fined or got to jail for it? Why should anything else be different?

I guess I could make this more comprehensive and interesting, but I am not sure this is the place, so TTFN, and let me know if you would like to take this further.

Well, yes and no, idealy DRM is only a reflection of the copyright laws, so then the question becomes "are the copyright laws good", not "is DRM good". However as it stands DRM is anything but a reflection of copyright law, and for the most part only exists to restrict rights explicitly granted under current legislation.

[check]

Originally Posted by LargePrime

Remember that supposed "Intellectual property" is a work of fiction created by middlemen to protect their Zero Value Added Humongous Cash Streams.

Really? My impression is that DRM is added by the original content producers, such as the RIAA (who represent the music labels), or the MPAA (who represent the movie studios). Suggesting that these people don't "add value" to the product they create seems a little disingenuous.

Unless you are suggesting that these companies are the 'middle men'?

[ChronoCross]

Originally Posted by CZroe

Ignorant people are already starting to claim that removing the DRM is only for pirates, when they forget that you should be able to backup and loan your property regardless of what any EULA says (not tested in courts + First Use Doctrine often over-rides what is printed in software manuals). I'd like it to be reported so that I can point these dim-witts to a respectable anti-DRM site when they claim something so stupid.

It would be one thing if loaning didn't involve making a copy of it. Back in the day you had to hand over the piece of property in order for it to be considered loaning it. But in a non DRM digital world you don't lose anything when you loan it, you simply make a copy of it and give it to your friend. This isn't loaning, this is copying.

My PSP is falling apart, causing me to avoid buying anything on the PSN. Why? Because I may want/need to upgrade to a PSP-2000 "slim & lite" model and I will lose all my purchased content when the old one gives up its ghost. Even if I buy a new one because its analog nub & D-Pad issues get to be too much to bear (not even considering the faceplace detaching/cracking, missing screws, and discolored LCD), it forces me to keep it around for those games instead of refurbishing it (new backlight, faceplate+screws, D-Pad mod, analog nub: ~$20) or selling it for parts/cheap (it still functions!).

Granted that type of DRMing is retarded and should never be used. A decent DRM scheme would allow for deactivation on an old device followed with activation on a new device. A scheme like that would also provide you with the opportunity to sell it as a used content to a third party and transfer it to them, and deactivate it from you.

I have always been a TRUE "backup" user. I had backup hardware for my GB/GBC, SNES, N64, etc and I still bought and imported all my games. Often, I used them for additional purposes such as translation patches, homebrew, portability through consolidation, etc. I value my PHYSICAL collection and I resist the move to fully digital downloads without a personal right to a transferrable (thus, tangible) copy/license. This new PSP tool is a God-send. I can go ahead and buy Echochrome, a game that will only be available on disc (UMD) outside of The States, and I can share it with friends (loaning) so that they can buy it through word-of-mouth (it's that kind of indie-game). I could only loan them my entire PSP before, which still violates their EULA.

Guess you got alot of money on your hands. But what I said above applies. DRM itself is not a bad idea, it's simply the implementation that is bad.

Was anyone else ticked off when they opened thier physical retail version of Crysis and saw "Do not lend this disc" printed on it? Who are they to tell me what I can do with my property? First Use Doctrine applies in the same way that Blockbuster doesn't truly have Weinsein Company DVDs for rent (competitors just have to buy retail copies).

Edit: I meant to place this in the "News" forum. Can a mod/admin move it? Thanks!

Well it's like asking a company to put "give this disc to all your friends and let them install it and copy it and play it without paying for it" on the package. This isn't like the days of nintendo where you had to actually have the original copy when you gave it to your friend. Now you can give it to your friend, he can copy the game onto a CD and then give you back the original.

The biggest problem with digital goods is currently there is no system in place for removing the friends ability to play a game once they return the original. If they can manage that then it would become truly loaning again as only a single machine would be able to play it at a time.

your entire steam/Xbox rant

Steam did it right. The problem with a single game trying to change the way steam operates is ludacris.

The main problem I have with your console to PC comparison is that passing a controller is not the same as installing the entire game onto another machine. Once again you miss the point about loaning/taking turns. When doing so the controller/Game is only in a single persons hands, meaning you both can't play a single player game at the same time. PC's are not meant for in person multi-player situations. You knew that when you built the machine. If you want in person multiplayer support buy a gaming console like the XBOX instead of being pissed off that you can't install the game on 5 machines in your house and play multiplayer.

I honestly don't think I can ever fully be anti-DRM. Yes I am against certain policies. However I do think that companies have a right to determine how the product that they have created is used. If someone doesn't like the way it's laid out for them then simply don't buy the game.

[*.mp4 guy]

Originally Posted by ChronoCross

Guess you got alot of money on your hands. But what I said above applies. DRM itself is not a bad idea, it's simply the implementation that is bad.

DRM is a neutral idea in theory. In actuality however, it is always bad. I think this should be obvious by now.

In DnD terms -
DRM in theory: Lawful Neutral
DRM in practice: Chaotic Evil

Note that I only skimmed the thread, so I might be missing some context.

[ChronoCross]

Originally Posted by *.mp4 guy

DRM is a neutral idea in theory. In actuality however, it is always bad. I think this should be obvious by now.

In DnD terms -
DRM in theory: Lawful Neutral
DRM in practice: Chaotic Evil

Note that I only skimmed the thread, so I might be missing some context.

Correct but I think rather than everyone saying "DIE DRM WE SHOULDN'T HAVE YOU" we should focus more on getting DRM to the point that it is used how intended through proper implementation. That would probably be more effective than trying to get rid of it completely.

[CZroe]

I tried to get back to this thread repeatedly weeks ago but it would throw up "Database Error" every time I logged in. Anyway...

Originally Posted by LargePrime

Fair Use.Your Original request included a reference to "dim-witts." Help your own case by keeping YOUR facts straight. And you can click on the Fair Use link to get more information.

I think a solid argument could be made that any DRM is wrong and immoral. Remember that supposed "Intellectual property" is a work of fiction created by middlemen to protect their Zero Value Added Humongous Cash Streams.

The argument against lending software is just silly. I can lend whatever to whoever. The whole Idea that I have to delete it from here so it can run there, when 99% of the time it will never be used at all is ludicrous on its face.

It is not about how easy it is. How easy is it to steal a joke? Anyone ever get fined or got to jail for it? Why should anything else be different?

I guess I could make this more comprehensive and interesting, but I am not sure this is the place, so TTFN, and let me know if you would like to take this further.

No, it was First-Sale Doctrine which, despite my mistake, was clear in context. It was late at night/early in the morning and I had nearly no sleep for days, so that was a simple slip. You should read up on First-Sale Doctrine if you couldn't recognize it from the examples provided (BBV/NetFlix with Weinstein Company).