Topic: Stardock's DRM called GOO = coming April 7th to Impulse (see Reply #8)

[MysterD]

Stardock is creating their own style of Copyright Security / DRM to try and get more major publishers possibly join Impulse.
 

On Friday, Stardock CEO Brad Wardell revealed to Edge that his company is developing a non-intrusive copyright security solution for external publishers.

The initiative came in the wake of The Gamer's Bill of Rights, which implores game makers to ditch obnoxious copy protection methods. Stardock has been an advocate of non-intrusive copy protection for years, selling commercially successful games such as Galactic Civilizations and Sins of a Solar Empire that have no copy protection.

But as Stardock approached major publishers to agree to the terms of the Bill, they were still unwilling to go DRM-free.

Wardell said, "While Stardock doesn't put copy protection on its retail games, the fact is that most publishers are never going to agree to do that.

"So the publishers are telling us, 'Put your money where your mouth is. Why don't you guys develop something that you think is suitable that would protect our IP, but would be more acceptable to users?'"

"We're investigating what would make users happy to protect their needs, but also provide some security for the publishers. ... We're actually developing a technology that would do that."

Wardell didn't divulge which piracy-fearing publishers had suggested Stardock take on the task.

He did say that one goal of Stardock's security solution would be when a consumer buys a PC game, that game, or technically the license to play it, belongs to the consumer. Often, DRM methods only allow a certain amount of installs on a certain amount of machines. "We want that license to be yours, not per machine. ... It's not your machine buying the game. It's you."

Wardell said he's exploring a system in which if a customer loses the physical copy of a game, he or she would be able to re-download the game by simply matching up a previously-registered e-mail address. "If my license is attached to my [e-mail] account, let me go online and download the whole game later."

Wardell argued that if a publisher wants a user to jump through a security hoop, that user should get something in return.

He steered away from the idea that Stardock is developing a DRM solution (presumably because of the baggage the term carries with gamers). Asked if Stardock is creating a method of "DRM," Wardell replied, "The problem with 'DRM' is that it's so loosely defined. ... Stardock's products use activation, and I wouldn't say that it's DRM. We're just verifying if you're real customer."

The CEO said that Stardock has looked to its community to ask what kind of security measures are acceptable and which ones are not. "It should be completely invisible to the user."

DRM has been a hot topic as of late, the most recent case being EA's highly-anticipated PC game Spore, which implemented protection technology from SecuROM. One customer filed a class-action lawsuit against EA over the game's DRM.

Despite Wardell's distaste for intrusive DRM, he said that filing a lawsuit is going a bit overboard. "Publishers should have the right to be stupid if they want. That's their right. And it's the right of the consumer to choose not to buy."

He vouched for the huge faceless corporations that sometimes seem to be oblivious to the plight of the DRM-afflicted gamer.

"It's not that these publishers are DRM-happy. They're not completely in love with it. It's just that there aren't very many alternatives."

[idolminds]

"So the publishers are telling us, 'Put your money where your mouth is. Why don't you guys develop something that you think is suitable that would protect our IP, but would be more acceptable to users?'"

I sorta think they've "put their money where their mouth is" by not having copy protection in the first place.

DRM has been a hot topic as of late, the most recent case being EA's highly-anticipated PC game Spore, which implemented protection technology from SecuROM. One customer filed a class-action lawsuit against EA over the game's DRM.

Despite Wardell's distaste for intrusive DRM, he said that filing a lawsuit is going a bit overboard. "Publishers should have the right to be stupid if they want. That's their right. And it's the right of the consumer to choose not to buy."

Maybe he wasn't given the whole story on that lawsuit. It wasn't like "OMG this game has DRM I'm gonna sue!" They sued since the game doesn't tell you that its installing SecuROM, and uninstalling the game leaves SecuROM on your system. Which I feel is completely legitimate.

[MysterD]

I sorta think they've "put their money where their mouth is" by not having copy protection in the first place.

Agreed. I really like the NO-DRM thing Stardock has going on. I really hope for their very own games, they stick to that NO-DRM part, myself.

Though, some other publishers won't put their games on Impulse b/c of that NO-DRM clause. Probably EA and Ubi are among two of those, I'd bet.

I think if say Stardock can come up with something better and more acceptable for DRM (than say Securom Internet Edition and StarForce) that every other big name publisher would want to use for their games and most importantly that PC gamers find very acceptable for DRM, I'd really like to see what Stardock can come up.

I had no trouble with older Securom disc version protection. But, I'd really love to see Securom Internet Edition go the way of the dodo, myself. Activation is annoying, but I really hate the install limitiation part, more so than anything when it comes to this protection. Worst of all, if it really does attack Ring 0 and those Securom drivers cannot ever be removed by the user with a set of tools or cannot even be removed after a PC hard-drive reformat, it just need to go away -- like NOW.
 

Maybe he wasn't given the whole story on that lawsuit. It wasn't like "OMG this game has DRM I'm gonna sue!" They sued since the game doesn't tell you that its installing SecuROM, and uninstalling the game leaves SecuROM on your system. Which I feel is completely legitimate.

Agreed 100%.

[Xessive]

I'm willing tp out up with Online activation/registration so long as it's not restricting. A good example of how it's done is The Witcher EE update: you register your game online to prove you own it then you may install the update. That's reasonable.

I like that they acknowledge that it is I, a person, who purchases a product not my machine, therefore I should have access to the software I purchase regardless of the machine I use.

I wish that's how the PS3 worked.

Alongside that idea they could set up online profiles with limited space for savegames (kinda like an online memory card).

[Cobra951]

I'm not.  When I commented on the gamer's bill of rights, I mentioned this as a deal breaker.  You don't call Ford's home office periodically to get permission to drive your car.  It's a conceptual barrier.  There is no workaround other than removing it.

I very much agree about who it is that buys and owns a software product.  It certainly isn't my computer.

[MysterD]

I'm willing tp out up with Online activation/registration so long as it's not restricting. A good example of how it's done is The Witcher EE update: you register your game online to prove you own it then you may install the update. That's reasonable.

Yes, I think that is reasonable.

If you want to run Witcher or Witcher: EE as is as you bought it (out the box), I don't think you should have to activate your game -- since it is a SP game and all. You want to play 1.0, even when there's possibly newer versions out there? Fine. Just boot it up; avoid the Net.

But, I think, if you want the patch updates, yes -- online activation/registration checks does make sense b/c you will have to hit the Net to get the Patch, anyways. So, that's fine and logical.

I like that they acknowledge that it is I, a person, who purchases a product not my machine, therefore I should have access to the software I purchase regardless of the machine I use.

Agreed.

[MysterD]

I'm not.  When I commented on the gamer's bill of rights, I mentioned this as a deal breaker.  You don't call Ford's home office periodically to get permission to drive your car.  It's a conceptual barrier.  There is no workaround other than removing it.

For a SP game, activation is annoying. I tolerate it, but I don't care very much for it.
For MP, it makes sense to have activation -- b/c you have to hit the Net to play a MP game.

And yes, activation should be REMOVED when a game is OLD and not selling too many copies anymore. The point of DRM is to (try to) stop people from stealing a game at its $40 or more price; so instead, people go out and buy it. When a game gets cheap and old, pirates are going to be busy trying to pirate what's new, not what's old -- so why keep the limitations now?

[Xessive]

I'm not.  When I commented on the gamer's bill of rights, I mentioned this as a deal breaker.  You don't call Ford's home office periodically to get permission to drive your car.  It's a conceptual barrier.  There is no workaround other than removing it.

I very much agree about who it is that buys and owns a software product.  It certainly isn't my computer.

I didn't mean periodical. Just the on the first installation. Your analogy exemplifies just how ridiculous that would be.

This is the one thing I like about Steam. It doesn't matter what PC I'm using it always works without interrogating me or preventing me from installing it on a hundred PCs. I think Stardock are going to end up with a solution that essentailly works like Steam, by logging in with your e-mail address to confirm.

[MysterD]

Stardock's own DRM brew has been revealed.
It's called GOO (Game Object Obfuscation).
Coming April 7th to Impulse.

Stardock's DRM Goo
   
[Mar 25, 2009, 1:09 pm ET] - Share - 20 Comments
Stardock unveils their promised plans for Game Object Obfuscation (Goo), a system they feel is a more elegant alternative to current Digital Rights Management, especially for downloaded games. Goo will be part of the launch of Impulse Reactor phase 3 on April 7, offering a way for publishers to protect their games from piracy with a one-time online activation:

    PLYMOUTH, MI, March 25, 2009 – Stardock announced today that the forthcoming update to its digital distribution platform, Impulse, will include a new technology aimed to pave the way to solving some of the common complaints of digital distribution.

    The new technology, known as Game Object Obfuscation (Goo), is a tool that allows developers to encapsulate their game executable into a container that includes the original executable plus Impulse Reactor, Stardock’s virtual platform, into a single encrypted file.

    When a player runs the game for the first time, the Goo’d program lets the user enter in their email address and serial number which associates their game to that person as opposed to a piece of hardware like most activation systems do. Once validated, the game never needs to connect to the Internet again.

    Goo has a number of unique advantages that developer Stardock believes both gamers and developers will appreciate:

    1. There is no third-party client required. This means a developer can use this as a universal solution since it is not tied to any particular digital distributor.
    2. It paves the way to letting users validate their game on any digital distribution service that supports that game. One common concern of gamers is if the company they purchased a game from exits the market, their game library may disappear too. Games that use Goo would be able to be validated anywhere.
    3. It opens the door to gamers being able to resell their games because users can voluntarily disable their game access and transfer their license ownership to another user.

    “One of our primary goals for Impulse Reactor is to create a solution that will appeal to game developers while adhering to the Gamers Bill of Rights,” said Brad Wardell, president & CEO of Stardock. “Publishers want to be able to sell their games in as many channels as possible but don’t want to have to implement a half-dozen ‘copy protection’ schemes. Game Object Obfuscation lets the developer have a single game build that can be distributed everywhere while letting gamers potentially be able to re-download their game later from any digital service. Plus, it finally makes possible a way for gamers and publishers to transfer game licenses to players in a secure and reliable fashion.”

    Because Goo ties the game to a user’s account instead of the hardware, gamers can install their game to multiple computers without hassle.

    Goo will be released on April 7 as part of the upcoming Impulse: Phase 3 release. Stardock also expects to be able to announce multiple major publishers making use of Goo in April as well as adding their libraries to Impulse.

    Impulse is poised to exceed one million customers in the next week despite only being launched nine months ago.

    To learn more about Impulse, visit www.impulsedriven.com.

[scottws]

That sounds much more reasonable than virtually anything this side of CD-keys.