C-G's Virtual-Mate?

Visual Novel Community Archive, 2000-2009
#481
quote:
Originally posted by perigee:
GC obviously needs to clarify their explanation, but my understanding was that the registration process somehow associates the game with system information to prevent installation on more than three systems. Giving your ID to someone else is unnecessary. Let the new owner open his own account with his own ID and password. Why wouldn't that work?

Well you are right they do need to clarify and part of the problem is this semi-information blackout and no new news or clarifactions.

In theory it should work, they are a new owner of the game and should have the three slots for themselves while you keep your id and password for other games. Only reason it might not work is they tie the registration of the game into product key code (at least that was my understanding), and maybe somehow that cannot be undone since they are not giving you a new id and password for each game that first registration of the product key code is always linked to that id and password and since the id and password would always be active for other games any one game cannot be de-registered from one id and password set then re-registered to another. Just a guess on my part.

[This message has been edited by SCDawg (edited 10-23-2004).]

#482
quote:
Originally posted by SCDawg:
Only reason it might not work is they tie the registration of the game into product key code (at least that was my understanding), and maybe somehow that cannot be undone since they are not giving you a new id and password for each game that first registration of the product key code is always linked to that id and password and since the id and password would always be active for other games any one game cannot be de-registered from one id and password set then re-registered to another. Just a guess on my part.
"Maybe somehow that cannot be undone" - you lost me there. Why can't it be undone? Your account lists all the IDs of games you own. When you deregister a game, GC removes the ID from your account and it is again available for registration. Any database manager that can't handle that is brain-dead .

Of course it would be possible to abuse the system by buying one game and selling 1/3 shares to three different people, but that hole exists regardless. Besides, the problem of collecting funds from three different people, getting them to share an account and only install on one system each would be too much hassle for pirate resellers.

#483
quote:
Originally posted by perigee:
"Maybe somehow that cannot be undone" - you lost me there. Why can't it be undone? Your account lists all the IDs of games you own. When you deregister a game, GC removes the ID from your account and it is again available for registration. Any database manager that can't handle that is brain-dead
Because they are linked together, when you register the game you set up an id. Yes they should be able to seperate them, but then again it might not be that easy I don't know how to explain it beyond syaing they forever link the id and password to the registration for reasons only known to them.

Maybe it is easier to keep fewer accounts on the system, maybe they pay by the account, so to have one game change accounts costs them more then to have it stay on the same account. I have not clue how the system works so don't know, but it is also easier for them in multiple data bases to keep track that you have this game on two computers then you only ever had it on one, sold it and now someone else has it on three. Once again not sure how to explain this in any way other then it seems easier for them.

I am just basing this all off of their comment of

quote:
You might sell the copy to someone if you choose to, but then you can only register the game on 2 of your computers. (the 3 times registration limit)
Does not sound like you can sell it to a new id or password.

[This message has been edited by SCDawg (edited 10-23-2004).]

#484
quote:
Originally posted by SCDawg:
Any news of this system on them?

From an illegal message on P2P.


quote:
Anonimous
The other thing I want to mention is the virtual-mate system that G-collection
is introducing for its next game Let's Meow Meow and possibly subsequent games. It's basically an anti-piracy software that requires a password and
email and requires onlone connection for the game to start the first time and then online for subsequent use. More precise info on their WWW here

http://www.g-collections.com/index2.htm

Personally, I believe it is not the right approach and may hurt the company
more than protect it


The title was "G-Collection Let'S Meow Meow Have Virtual-Mate Need Online Login To Work, Please Patch To Remove". As i said before, depressing.... [img]http://princess.cybrmall.net/ubb/frown.gif[/img] [img]http://princess.cybrmall.net/ubb/frown.gif[/img] [img]http://princess.cybrmall.net/ubb/frown.gif[/img] [img]http://princess.cybrmall.net/ubb/frown.gif[/img]

[This message has been edited by Italicus (edited 10-23-2004).]

#485

Maybe it would help if I illustrate. Here’s a hypothetical record for SCDAWG’s V-Mate games:

ACCOUNT: SCDAWG1
PRODUCTS:
#123456 (let’s meow meow)
systems: (861234)(861235)(open)
#156872 (hitomi)
systems: (861234 (open)(open)
#123457 (let’s meow meow)
systems: (865138)(892584)(861235)

This shows you have registered 3 VM games, 2 copies of LMM and 1 copy of Hitomi. When you want to sell your second copy of LMM, you notify the V-Mate manager to remove #123457 from your account and make it available for a new owner. The association between you and that copy is erased when you deregister it. I don’t know if this is how the system actually works, but it seems like the simplest way to implement it.

#486
quote:
Originally posted by perigee:This shows you have registered 3 VM games, 2 copies of LMM and 1 copy of Hitomi. When you want to sell your second copy of LMM, you notify the V-Mate manager to remove #123457 from your account and make it available for a new owner. The association between you and that copy is erased when you deregister it. I don't know if this is how the system actually works, but it seems like the simplest way to implement it.
Oh I understand what you are saying and agree it should be easy, but I am also trying to balance what you are saying with what they are saying such as two quotes of their statements below:
quote:
Only one username/password is used to register all V-Mate games. However, the product key will be different for each game. You can use the same username/password that you created for each of your computer. (up to 3)

To answer your question, you will have to give "Adam" your username/password before he can start up the game on his computer.

and
quote:
You might sell the copy to someone if you choose to, but then you can only register the game on 2 of your computers. (the 3 times registration limit)

[This message has been edited by SCDawg (edited 10-23-2004).]

#487
quote:
To answer your question, you will have to give "Adam" your username/password before he can start up the game on his computer.
Well, that seems bogus to me. Why create a permanent link between a game copy and the original owner? I suspect the answer came from someone who doesn't understand the fine points of the system. Another possibility is that they are actively trying to discourage resale of games. If that's the case, then the purpose of V-Mate goes well beyond the aim of stopping piracy.
#488
quote:
Originally posted by perigee:
Another possibility is that they are actively trying to discourage resale of games. If that's the case, then the purpose of V-Mate goes well beyond the aim of stopping piracy.
That thought also occurred to me a while back, the discouraging of resale of games. If they can in one fell swoop stop pirating (for however long it will be slowed) while boosting sales directly from their own site and stopping people from buying a used game from, say me and therefore the money going to me instead of them, then they are doubly successful in finding ways to possibly increase income.

Though if it does go beyond just the point of stopping piracy then is it also going, to maybe only buying directly from their site?

quote:
Originally posted by perigee:
I suspect the answer came from someone who doesn't understand the fine points of the system.
I agree it also seems like the people who they are putting on the frontlines don't fully know what is really going on when it comes to the id and password which might or might not have be sold (given) with the game. Then again that has been the case since this whole process, since the backlash, started, they put people with no or incomplete answers on the frontlines, I pity those people, they are getting the brunt of this backlash.

[This message has been edited by SCDawg (edited 10-23-2004).]

#489

I just scanned my copy of CSMT2 for EULA information, and here’s what I found in the help utility

quote:
About Copyrights
The copyrights of this product are owned by Sekilala and G-Collections.com. This includes the game program, sound data, graphic data, printed matter, and all the accessories attached to this product.
It is prohibited to copy all or a part of them.
It is prohibited to show or distribute the whole or part of this product without permission.
It is prohibited to rent this product out.
It is unlawful to sell this product.
If any violation of these articles is found, we may take legal action.
If they are serious about the clause It is unlawful to sell this product, they are sadly misinformed of legal precedents concerning resale of software products (in the US). My opinion of GC’s business practices has just taken a nosedive.

#490
quote:
Originally posted by perigee:
(...)It is unlawful to sell this product.If any violation of these articles is found, we may take legal action.If they are serious about the clause It is unlawful to sell this product, they are sadly misinformed of legal precedents concerning resale of software products (in the US). My opinion of GC's business practices has just taken a nosedive.
I fully agree with you about the nosedive they are taking and sad to say this is just further proof. Are those are laws in Japan, are they just importing practices without checking first?

In truth I have heard that before, about the resales, though to be honest, not sure if anyone takes it seriously and I have never heard of anyone enforcing such a law if it does exist or pursuing people that resell their games, DVD's, CD's, etc. and to find such people they don't have to look hard, all they have to do is check a site various sites to find a bunch of people reselling.

quote:
It is prohibited to show(...)the whole or part of this product without permission.
This one I find very funny, if you take it to the letter of the rule that means you cannot play the game in front of, "show it to", your wife, girlfriend, friends, etc. Also depending how they define "distribute" it might also include legally bought games being given as a gift to other people. It is rather comical in a say slightly scary way.

[This message has been edited by SCDawg (edited 10-23-2004).]

#491
quote:
Originally posted by perigee:
Of all the problems with the V-Mate system, reselling should be the easiest to solve. All the owner has to do is de-register the game before selling it. GC's database updates its record to show that game #123456 is no longer active. When the new owner receives it, he just reregisters and starts fresh. The game would only be registered to one owner at a time, so what's the issue?

This would work, but unless the system is designed to allow it it's not going to happen. That would be a good thing, though.

#492
quote:
Originally posted by Nandemonai:
This would work, but unless the system is designed to allow it it's not going to happen. That would be a good thing, though.

Good in what way? Someone else has your id and password.

Wow over 500 posts in just about a weeks time.

[This message has been edited by SCDawg (edited 10-23-2004).]

#493
quote:
Originally posted by SCDawg:
Are those are laws in Japan, are they just importing practices without checking first?
Not even in Japan. interesting reading

[This message has been edited by perigee (edited 10-23-2004).]

#494
quote:
Originally posted by perigee:
Not even in Japan. interesting reading
[This message has been edited by perigee (edited 10-23-2004).]
That is very intersting reading, and it does look like they are in the middle of something else they would be best avoiding on both 'sides of the pond'.

[This message has been edited by SCDawg (edited 10-23-2004).]

#495

Here is part of the original statement about the now non-existant patch after one year, does anyone notice anything that shows even then they might not have know what was going on within the statement itself? I put those parts in italics actually.

quote:
We will be releasing a patch file within a year of the game release day for every of our future release. (…) will only be required to sign on to the game via internet for the first few months of the game ownership. (…).

It sounds like even at that point they had no idea what was really possible. Within a year tends to be a lot longer then within the first few months. I know this is moot but I just noticed this when reading over their own BBS and found it interesting.

Of course there was also a funny statement about putting customer service in their first priority or something to that extent as well as hoping to satisfy their loyal customers. Maybe if they get this settled my opinion will change but for now while I believe they are trying to provide good “first priority” customer service at the same time it is very funny for them to make such a statement.

[This message has been edited by SCDawg (edited 10-23-2004).]

#496

Notice the date of that article: 1998. That’s 6 years ago. That ruling has no doubt been settled for some time.

G-collection’s own statements have unambiguously said that you have to give your username/password to a buyer for him to be able to play the game. Whether they have any intention of rectifying this is questionable, but IMO, doubtful.

quote:
It sounds like even at that point they had no idea what was really possible. Within a year tends to be a lot longer then within the first few months.

I’m assuming “first few months” was just an optimistic (read: misleading) way of saying “within a year.”

quote:
It is unlawful to sell this product.

Ok, that does it. G-collections has inconvenienced us, insulted us, and now they are actively trying to take away our rights as consumers? I say we boycott. Not only that; I say we actively boycott, and post this information on as many discussion boards relating to these games as possible. What about you guys? Don’t you think G-collections has gone too far this time? If restricting our ability to sell the product, and also stating that it is illegal to resell their games doesn’t constitute an active move to take away our consumer rights, I don’t know what does.

[This message has been edited by Dark_Shiki (edited 10-23-2004).]

#497

i scanned through some of the manuals of the japanese b-games i own and i notice either some dont talk about selling games, but some did write a warning saying that (this is for japan, of course) “it is prohibited (they didn’t say unlawful) to sell it as an used copy or auction it on the net”. this is from D.C.'s manual. on the other hand, the manual on my copy of kiminozo says it���s “unlawful” to sell it as an used copy.

so i guess it’s another one fo those japanese laws. honestly, i have no idea if this is against the law or not…i mean, there are stores that sell used b-games in japan.

go figure…

#498
quote:
Originally posted by Dark_Shiki:
Ok, that does it. G-collections has inconvenienced us, insulted us, and now they are actively trying to take away our rights as consumers? I say we boycott. Now only that; I say we actively boycott, and post this information on as many discussion boards relating to these games as possible. What about you guys? Don't you think G-collections has gone too far this time? If restricting our ability to sell the product, and also stating that it is illegal to resell their games doesn't constitute an active move to take away our consumer rights, I don't know what does.
I am all for boycotting was going to do so anyway, might try the original Japanese versions for a change.

I also think they have gone too far, especially if the second reason for V-Mate is to limit resells, since in theory the game (password and id issue aside for the moment)can only be resold once or twice, depending how many computers each person puts it on... which come to think of it also raises the question of the password and id issue possibly being another method to discourage resale.

Think about it, a lot might not resell their game simply because they don't want to give out their id and password possible issues of another being able to change the password and locking you out of the other games as one possible fear. That is of course assuming that having to give the password to whoever buys the resale game is what they really meant in previously noted statements.

quote:
I'm assuming "first few months" was just an optimistic (read: misleading) way of saying "within a year."

Yeah but to avoid such confusion, especially with so much going on and (giving them the benefit of the doubt) with a statement that they thought was true at the time, shouldn't they be consistant?

[This message has been edited by SCDawg (edited 10-23-2004).]

#499
quote:
Originally posted by Lamuness:
this is from D.C.'s manual. on the other hand, the manual on my copy of kiminozo says it's "unlawful" to sell it as an used copy.
Isn't that interesting too though, if that statement is what they actually mean it seems as if you wanted to for some reason buy a game new then turn around and sell it new that would seem to be perfectly okay.
quote:
so i guess it's another one fo those japanese laws. honestly, i have no idea if this is against the law or not....i mean, there are stores that sell used b-games in japan.
So even if it is a law it's one they don't seem to enforce.

[This message has been edited by SCDawg (edited 10-23-2004).]

#500

It’s one thing to state that reselling is “unlawful” in a EULA. No one pays attention to those anyway, and U.S. judicial courts have ruled that EULA’s aren’t binding.

It’s one thing to “accidentally” restrict users’ ability to sell their games through crappy program design.

But together, these moves represent a malicious intent by G-collections to infringe on our consumer rights. It’s time to show G-collections that consumers won’t take this threat sitting down. Hell, I think this move is even illegal in the U.S.