Software Rental?

Companies are renting Console Games. IMO, this could this be a solution for PC Games and Applications. Post your thoughts and opinions.

.

I guess it would be more like folks copying the software and returning it for a refund.

I have ideas for Renting Software and internet research leads me to believe that it will become popular in the near future.

Any self respecting video store in SA rents PC games alongside their console games. Blockbuster I don't think is one of those places... ;] And seriously, who on Earth is dodgy enough to copy a rented disc and then try and get even -that- little amount of money back???

Erm...lots of people, those who want to own the game and continue playing it...lots and lots of people.

Renting PC games is already possible, where I'm from.
Copying the rented CD's before returning too.
I guess that is why it's not done at so many places.

Agreed. There is a way stop this.

I don't think this should happen, because then we would definietly never get back the Full Install no longer requiring the disk.

People would also really start to crack down on the methods to get through CD checks.

Just use the latest StarForce or TAGES protection on the CD's. End users can't make 1:1 backups of them.

Nothing stopping them ripping an image of the disc and downloading a patch, but not everyone knows where to get such patches.

The only other method is a steam-like program that hooks back to a server operated by the place you rented your disc from.

Again, this can (and would be) cracked, just like steam has been.

That what friends are for! ;-)
No, seriously. Pretty much everyone can make a copy of the protected cd...

There sould be a licence built-in the application, juts like the one in WMV files from places like Movielink...
BTW, can WMV licences be cracked?

And all it would take to get around it is jump all checks pertaining to the licensing.

I think you'll find that most of the people in your computer-folk circle of friends can probably make copies of just about anything. Everyone else, can't.

Could your dad? Could your mom? Neighbour?

There are a lot of computer users out there who wouldn't even know what was meant by the phrase 'nocd patch'. An even smaller potion know what antiblaxx is or does.

99% of the people in my office at work wouldn't know how to copy a TAGES disc. A few of them would know to come and ask me but the rest wouldn't have a clue.

20% of them either have a partner or close friend outside of work who gives them or lends them copies of DVD films.

DVD'sare easy to copy, TAGES protected discs aren't. Point made :)

Yes, yes, depends on which neighbor. In order of left to right from our front door: no, no, yes, yes.

No there isn't.

Yeah they can. Doesn't take more than five minutes of Googling to find Alcohold120% or BlindWrite.

Again, anything not already at hand, is only a short google away. Most people know how to google.

In a recent website poll with more than 5000 people answering the question "Which search engine do you use the most" Google came out on top. The second place was "Other" which got 7 votes. Yahoo and MSN where way down the list.

Ofcourse they can. Everything can be cracked. Just because they can't do it today (in a reasonable polynomial time), doesn't mean they won't be able to do it tomorrow.

FlameDuck: Just to clarify the TAGES thing. You cannot make a 1:1 copy. Nobody has so far succeeded and indeed it is physically impossible to acheive with current CD and DVD recorders. From a recent (week ago) browse of the cdfreaks forum it is clear that the latest versions of the StarForce protection are similarly uncopyable.

You can make a backup and use emulation software to fool the protection mechanism, but a transportable copy is not possible. (i.e., copy will not work on a PC without the emulation software).

Before the emulation software caught up with the latest protections, people had to resort to completely unplugging their optical drives from the IDE bus in order to use the protected software.

The very latest versions of TAGES and SF now detect the emulation software, and further realtime patching software must be used to circumvent this.

All completely DMCA unfriendly of course.

Why would they rent software then?

Sure. But for how long wmv exists? And still nobody can do it... Meaning that it's realatively safe... That means that all is needed is another format of executable (probably interpreted by operationg system itself), built-in licence and internet access.
Not so far away if you ask me...

VMW with DRM protection has been around for a year or so IIRC, and I'm sure it would have already been cracked, if it was being used for something worthwhile.

Here's the problem with that then. You only NEED your optical drive if you're trying to install legal software! A software pirate won't need to have an optical drive installed, and if he does, a hotplugable USB 2.0 or IEEE 1394 one is going to be just fine.

So all they're really achieving is driving people who are fed up with their pointless draconian bull@#!*, further into the realm of illegal software. And since casual pirates (never mind honest consumers) are just as fed up by these things as the hardcore bottomfeeders out there, sooner or later no-one's going to buy software anymore, because buy it or steal it, you'll still have to jump through hoops just to get it working. So you might aswell just steal it, that way you only lose your time, not your money and/or sanity.

Anatoly: Terminator 2 was released as a WMV when they did the special edition DVD. It was on the second disc and was in high-definition (well, higher than DVD anyway) and it was DRM protected.

It is available as an unprotected WMV to download from usenet.

Nobody cares that you can't casually copy DRM protected WMV because there's nothing available as only WMV that anyone wants to copy! DVD's remain the source of 90% of all pirate movies, either after conversion to a more compressed format or after recompression to fit on a DVD5 or even just as a straight DVD9 rip (increasingly popular these days).

Also available, and gaining popularity, are true HDTV downloads. The Matrix trilogy, Blade Trinity, The Lord of the Rings trilogy, Underworld and The Cell to name but a few. All available to download from usenet in 1920x1080 glory.

It really does render your 'nobody has cracked WMV' argument quite moot. With such a proliferation of unprotected high quality video available with relative ease, why would anyone go to the trouble of even attempting to circumvent WMV DRM?


FlameDuck:

The type of person bothered by the fact that they had to disconnect their optical drives are the ones wanting to make a true 1:1 copy of original software. US and UK law is clear on the fact that you can make a copy of your purchased software. What you are not allowed to do is circumvent any inherant protection mechanisms by altering the code by patching, either in realtime or otherwise.

Much had been said about certain manufacturer's CD and DVD recorders that they could actually copy many protected discs along with the actual protection itself thereby requiring that any backup would also, like the original, require the disc to be in the drive during use. This is no longer possible and we are now in a position whereby consumers are prevented from making a legal backup of their original discs.

I totally agree with you, current protection mechanisms are irritating to the average user. I hate having to keep CD's and DVD's handy. I'm an untidy person and discs tend to end up in piles on top of the PC or on my desk.

It is ironic that because of the continual use of the original disc greatly increases the potential for the disc to become damaged beyond readability, they are then the most suitable for requiring a back-up.

For software rental, I'm using a Server-Client Authentication Scheme integrated into the software. Some argue this excludes people from purchasing your software who dont have the internet. Well, my software requires a internet connection for upgrades and other features, not to mention soft distribution. Its the only way I'm going about it.

Still, just because something else is availible doesn't mean that people are not going to steal stuff!
Terminator 2 WMV was encypted with different protection.

For the heck of it? I've seen cracks to things that nobody would ever use or buy or people cracking stuff that had already been cracked and widely available...
People do stuff for fun, you know...

Yes, I know that protection systems are just a pain in the ass, but that doesn't render software rentals impossible!

Just as netflix - how many of their subscribers copy DVDs and rent more insted of watching them? They seem to do buiness quite well, though...

Anatoly: My point is that DRM for WMV is pointless. It may never be cracked. If M$ have implemented it correctly, the only way of removing the DRM would be to write a very kludgy piece of software that ripped the data out of Media Player's buffer whilst it was playing the file on a machine that had a valid license.

Not an easy task in this day and age of memory protection, but possible nontheless. I'm sure this kind of tech will be ubiquitous when Vista is released so perhaps we will see a reduction of piracy.

I doubt it though. M$ have been developing various versions of windows for 10 years (Windows 3.1 and previous versions not included). Windows 95, 98, 2000, ME, XP and 2003 were all pirated before day of release (if memory serves). For those it was applicable to, it was the Corporate version which was released as a copy, circumventing all of M$'s touted anti-piracy features in one fell swoop.

Even recently, with the introduction of Windows Genuine Advantage, they still haven't got it right. Windows Update still works if you deactivate the WGA ActiveX add-in.

As I see it, to kill piracy you'd need to have the following:

Worldwide adoption of IPv6.
Every individual connecting to the internet is issued a static address. Much like your SSN or NI number is unique to an individual, so should your internet address be.
Software requires internet connection to install and when hardware is changed.

Software would also have to communicate with an internal hardware module to ensure continued system integrity. M$ answer to this was the Palladium platform.

Of course, you would have to educate (brainwash) people into accepting such technology. Personally, I don't want it to happen. I want my computer to be doing only what I tell it and not checking up on me. If I want to run pirate software, I want my computer to let me. I'll take the rap if I get caught but the point is I retain the power of choice.

WOW!

My implementation of the Server-Client Authentication Scheme is very simple and requires the user to enter a username/password or registration key first to access other user screens. Its integrated at the core and cannot be bypassed.

The only crack is to know the username/password or registration key. I trust that folks will not be willing to give this information away because its tied to their credit card account.

The result of which being that those who know what they're doing hack the software to bypass these checks and those who don't have to live in a world where their computer decides "what they want you to do today?".

Frank: Your implementation is quite secure but is vulnerable to snooping and spoofing. It also assumes that the legitimate user's PC is secure at time of ordering. They may have a keylogger they don't know about.

Not trying to take anything away from you, I know your technical knowledge of programming and server-client comms far outweighs mine :)

It's the age-old usability VS security debate. Your security is of a level which is suitable for the application. If some of the things I mentioned in my previous post were commonplace, your level of security would be improved without impacting on the user's experience (and without too much extra coding, most likely).

If things like this were built into the OS and were truly secure, all software could inherit security through the use of a standard API.

Whether we agree with the M$ worldview on such security matters is another thing entirely of course. Not agreeing with M$ (and most of us don't) wouldn't invalidate the argument for OS level and hardware level security. I'm sure we would be happy to accept a solution from RedHat or SUSE ;)


Perturbatio: The idea is that such software, if hacked, then fails to run on any computer connected to the internet. Sure, it could be hacked to run on an unconnected computer, but having to disconnect the PC from the internet just to run a piece of pirate software would be extremely irritating.

I can envision there being a future version of Windows that refuses to boot unless connected to the internet. A logical extrapolation of current tech would suggest that pretty much every electronic gadget you can think of will have some sort of net presence. As we are all moving toward 'always on' connectivity, making reliances on such a thing would seem to make sense.

Valve already managed it with their Steam platform. Sure, they got hacked, but by crikey it took a long time for those hacks to become usable. I don't know enough details about the Steam emulator to understand how they managed it, but I'm willing to believe it was Valve's error in design, rather than an error in application.

I'm convinced that a public/private key encryption system where the developer retains secure control of a central issuing server will result in a piece of software that is unusable when connected to the internet (i.e., multiplayer games just will not work). ISTR that the cracked versions of HL2 cannot be used to connect to Steam multiplayer games.

Wait! You're storing users credit card details on your servers? Count me out.

You don't have to disconnect - you just have to block the program from accessing the Internet.

That's a great future. My WiFi card for instacne doesn't get loaded before Windows does. I'd love a future where I would have to have my portable computer patched in for it too boot. Yeah, what a good idea.

Again more draconian measures to counter an insignificant problem. Sparrows with cannons and all that.

True. The order is taken over a Secure Server Connection, hopefully, there is some form of protection there.

Flamey flamey flamey :)

I'm not saying that having to have your PC connected to be able to use it is a good idea now, but in 10 years time it might not be an issue. There may not be any such thing as offline technology.

Your WiFi card gets loaded after Windows because it needs a device driver. Who's to say that the concept of device drivers may be meaningless in the future? Imagine your new Soundblaster, plugging it in and Windows 20XX loading driver info from the card itself. The card may either have WiFi access itself or have some other direct access of wireless networking in order that it can request and install updates from Creative without intervention.

Of course, all this tech would require a lot of security beyond the scope of my tiny little mind. That's why there are security experts out there ;)

As soon as my sound card requires a Hotspot, I am out of the industry, for good!

I hope they do. As a true Windows hater. That would bring the death of Windows one step closer. (Do you know what could happen if there is a broad cast error on the lines, or when there's a malfunction at the providers place. It would be the dumbest thing MicroSoft could do).


Anything, and I repeat ANYTHING that falls under the name "technology" can get broken. Now and in the future. That will never change, no matter how advanced.
That's my motto.

So if you think there's no way to have reason to get off the internet in the future. Then I can only say that you are a first-class dreamer!

They said that 10 years ago too. Try 100. :o>

Ain't nothing wrong with that.

Here where I live (Baltimore area of Maryland), the public library system has loaned out software since around '97.

A couple of assembly NOP applications in the correct places in your executable, and EVERYTHING can be bypassed. This is no different.

Somewhere, some time, the program is still going to make a distinction between "yes" and "no", whether the program is 'authorized' to run. No matter how many checks you have to ensure that an instance is legit, your program has to make a final dicision at some point. Toggling a couple of bytes in your EXE at that place can simply reverse the equation, and make your program choose the alternate path: proceed instead of exit.

Unless you also have some magic uncrackable EXE encryption software too, there will be people bypassing all of your careful planning.

Even Microsoft hasn't been able to prevent people from cracking programs like windows XP and Office, and they have billions of dollars in the bank to throw at problems like this.

Same here. Alas only old titles, though. (Not that there's anything wrong with oldies, but sometimes I like to try a new game before I buy it, and that's not possible). But since it's very easy to copy the CDs, I don't know how long they'll continue that.