Tunisia '43

[E]

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl
Note that the guy has purchased two of everything, a play copy and one for his collection.

Are he and I the only folks on the planet who operate this way?

I get one copy of half of what I want. *grin?* But I'd love to have the money to do that. Especially with the prices that some out of print board wargames garner.

[rahamy]

ORIGINAL: Hertston

ORIGINAL: rahamy

Sure, 15 years in the industry of supporting the products above and beyond any other company lends no credibility... JT was releasing upgrades for the Battleground series after he left Talonsoft & supports HPS titles now too. Sure, no precedence there... what ever guys...

No, it doesn't add the slightest bit of 'credibility' or any precedent, because it has no relevance. You do not seem to understand the issue. Is is not whether JT (or whoever else has made the same claim or similar) would want to issue DRM removing updates - nobody disputes that - but whether they would actually be able to do so.

Let me outline a possible scenario. Developer John Doe's company is wound up at the petition of it's creditors and a liquidator appointed. The liquidator discovers that the primary assets of the company are the games it has developed and are selling (note these belong to the company, not John Doe the individual). Tasked as he/she is to recover the maximum amount of money for creditors, the liquidator investigates the possibility of selling the rights to those games to another publisher for the maximum sum possible. In the meantime, John Doe would have as much legal right to release a no-DRM patch for those games as you or I have to release one for those same games tomorrow. The liquidator would only consent to such a release if he/she were certain it would not reduce the value of those assets.. and the very fact that John Doe thought DRM necessary in the first place is likely to be strong evidence that it would do just that.

You assume there are creditors, which there aren't. Its a zero debt operation. One of the benefits of the digital age.

To E, "Phone Home" implies a connection to a server each time the application is launched - it phones home to get permission to run, like the SES software does, to my knowledge - this is a standard definition I have seen many times. A single connection to an Activation Server does not fall into the same category.

Going to leave this discussion at this point, because y'all are just looking for a punching bag, which I'm not interested in being. But I truly believe nethier I nor JT deserve the constant negative comments and assumptions that keep coming up on this & the Wargamer forums. And yes, history does matter, its a measure of ones character and a good basis on what to expect in the future. If it wasn't companies wouldn't do background checks, etc.

PoE - that is simply an awesome collection wall...wish I had the funds, and the time, to even start to have that!

[E]

ORIGINAL: rahamy

To E, "Phone Home" implies a connection to a server each time the application is launched - it phones home to get permission to run. like the SES software does, to my knowledge - this is a standard definition I have seen many times. A single connection to an Activation Server does not fall into the same category.

This is where we disagree, at best. If you _honestly_ believe that, I apologize for my earlier comments (granted that you need to tow the company line, but I've found you usually try to play it straight enough in the past). But you are dead wrong if that is really _your_ belief.

Simply put:

Any program that can't be used/run/installed without an internet connection -->is<-- a phone home scheme. No matter what a company would like to call it.

[sabre1]

I personally don't buy from Battlefront, or any company that has a phone home scheme. I didnt' buy Civ V for the same reason, and I have every other Civ game. I have several "old" JT games. I don't see any new ones at this time entering my collection due to the DRM requirements.

I bought Empire of Steel, simply to show my support for getting rid of the DRM requirements, and show Battlefront, that I support those decisions. I don't even like Empire of Steel, but that is another story.

I just bought two physical copies of "A World Divided", and the old/new "Combat Command DF". I like physical copies that I own.

If others like leases, then lease. It's a choice.

If computer wargame companies start this IMHO resrictive scheme, then I will find another hobby. I am NOT addicted to computer wargames. I like them, but I don't NEED them.

[Fred98]

I too would never buy software that requires internet access everytime I use it.
&nbsp;
-
&nbsp;

[rahamy]

ORIGINAL: Joe 98

I too would never buy software that requires internet access everytime I use it.

-

And that's the point - an Internet connection IS NOT required for any use past the first time.