I don't see how fair use enters the picture here.
I buy a game with the expectation to be able to use it for
it's intended purpose- the code to play a game. I don't
agree beforehand to do *anything* the box doesn't clearly
disclose. I can't just return games after disagreeing with
a EULA because most retailers won't accept returns for
refund. Their copy protection interferes with my desired
use of the product.
It's reasonable to require some sort of token on the PC to prevent a
program from being used illegally. I just question the wisdom of
making the token a CD or a dongle. Dongles are extremely irritating.
So are CDs, it's a subjective call. Also subjective is
whether it's reasonable to require some sort of token if
they can't implement it any better. Good ideas only remain
good if they can be executed well.
The problem is, short of burning a custom CD for every customer who
buys a program, there's no way to protect it other than to examine
some sort of hardware token that cannot be forged. Even then, the
program must either have special OS privileges of its own that allow
it to directly interrogate hardware (extremely unwise and dangerous)
or it must run on a trusted platform that will allow it to interact
with tokens and will prohibit spoofing. Neither of these is really an
acceptable solution.
I agree with this, but only until it means several pieces of
software require additional bits of hardware or discs. It's
not a reasonable solution (IMO) on a PC which is meant to
run multiple things... most of those things presumably
licensed. We can't very welll extend excuses for game
developers that don't extend to ALL software, and people
definitely don't want to have to fool with a disc every time
they (run the OS, or office, or whatever-else).
I have to make the drive visible in Explorer again, then double-click
on the setup program on the CD. I have autorun disabled because I
don't like to have anything that runs without me explicitly asking it
to run.
I agree. Games are notorious for that, and even some professional
software that should know better (such as Adobe's CS suite of
products) do such things. I consider that vandalism.
.... or simply "unauthorized use of a system", since we don't
agree to let a product do *whatever some coder decides they
want to do* rather than only that expected per the core /
described software function.
I noticed something strange yesterday. In both Microsoft Train
Simulator and SimCity 4 Rush Hour, I see the _same_ mysterious splash
screen, with a picture of a bridge on it, before the games actually
run. I suspect it's some sort of security mechanism but I don't know
how it works. What really worries me is that I don't know what it has
installed. I don't like having things installed behind my back.
If they rquire the game CD, I'd expect they simply check it,
are just an overbloated way of implementing that. Probably
some registry keys or hidden files too, but since those
things are more easily reproducible, are then less
significant.