EA calms Spore forum threat outcry

By Robert Purchese Published 25 September, 2008

Blames an "over-zealous" outsider.

EA has been quick to distance itself from a Spore forum moderator who threatened account bans for openly discussing the game's controversial SecuROM DRM.

"These comments are absolutely not true or in-line with EA's moderation policy. They were made by an over-zealous community volunteer who does not work for EA," the publisher told Kotaku.

"Anyone who looks at the boards will clearly see that DRM and other issues are freely discussed on the Spore forums, alongside other topics about the game."

One of the topics being discussed follows the lawsuit filed against EA for the use of the SecuROM software.

This claims that EA failed to tell customers about the separate, stand-alone SecuROM program that must be installed in order to play Spore.

And once "secretly" installed, alleges the lawsuit, the program cannot be removed from the "command and control center [sic] of the computer" unless the hard drive is wiped, removed, or reformatted. The program apparently also transmits information back to EA when the user goes online.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (34) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • cyacomini #1 3 years ago

    The registry contains many secrets - it's not too hard to find the keys you need to tweak!

  • Darkedge #2 3 years ago

    "They were made by an over-zealous community volunteer who does not work for EA"
    hmm I smell bovine excretions.

  • lambtron #3 3 years ago

    "They were made by an over-zealous community volunteer who does not work for EA (anymore)"

    Fixed.

  • booner #4 3 years ago

    Wow, even the mighty Banhammer is overruled. That's some serious power they have at EA.

  • DFawkes #5 3 years ago

    You can uninstall it, but not if you use any SecuROM games, and a suprisingly high number of games use it. No-one noticed since they didn't enforce set numbers of install.

  • kangarootoo #6 3 years ago

    Maybe this thread can be less full of stupid than that other EA DRM thread.

  • Darknight #7 3 years ago

    kangarootoo, where's the fun in that?

  • saku_luk #8 3 years ago

    It depends on what version of securom is used, there are old versions that will only check for DVD in your drive and will not send any data to for example EA back.....its the only DRM I might accept, since it makes avarage Joe not able to copy game and give it to someone for free. But still it should not install like it does now.

  • 4thVariety #9 3 years ago

    Griefing has become a game of its own, a Massively Multiplayer Forum Game of some sorts. The serious wave of complaints will start in a few months when people will sell Spore on the used market or lend it to friends. But then again, isn't that what DRM is really all about? Preventing used sales and rentals.

  • kangarootoo #10 3 years ago

    How to remove securom after you have uninstalled the game with which it was supplied.

    [link url=http://xperiencexp.blogspot.com/20 06/02/how-to-remove-securom-user-access.html
    ]http://xp eriencexp.blogspot.com/2006/02/...[/link]

  • Skywise #11 3 years ago

    Only a tiny margin of the games I own are illegal, but these copy protection measures are taking it too far imo.
    I don't want to install spyware to play games, period. In future I will get illegal versions of games whenever they are better to use.

    I understand the piracy problem but it can be fixed in different ways. Just give users 1 account and let them log in online before they can play. That way you can still trade the game or give your account details to friends so they can check it out.

  • Dynamize #12 3 years ago

    Are we going to end up in a situation where honest consumers who want to vote with their wallets to endorse developers' games end up buying a boxed copy, then going to the torrents to download the same game and avoid the awful DRM?

    I have to admit I'm finding the (ludicrously tortuous) concept more and more attractive. Not having to worry about uninstalling, or upgrading the PC. Like the good old days when none of this crap was an issue.

  • Thunderbolt #13 3 years ago

    'Are we going to end up in a situation where honest consumers who want to vote with their wallets to endorse developers' games end up buying a boxed copy, then going to the torrents to download the same game and avoid the awful DRM? '

    But then the company will sue you for piracy - so its lose - lose for the consumer

  • Dynamize #14 3 years ago

    Yeah, that's the enormous fly in the ointment. I was just thinking that, were I to do that, my conscience would be clear. Being prosecuted would obviously be a massive fail, but morally I'd be fine with myself.

  • Darren #15 3 years ago

    Although I'm opposed to DRM restrictions that limit how many times I can reinstall my games, I have nothing against SecuROM personally as I don't believe it uses "valuable resources" on my PC as some have claimed, it is only ran when I play games that use it, i.e. Spore, BioShock and several others. Certainly I've not had any mishaps with installing SecuROM games either although the Colin McRae Rally 2005 disc checking routine used to take too bloody long, something I fixed by downloading a NoDVD patch. Personally I think the outcry over SecuROM is a bit O.T.T. - it's like everyone's in on hating it because it's the "cool" thing to do.

  • Darren #16 3 years ago

    @DFawkes - I'm sure I've uninstalled SecuROM before... it was for Colin McRae Rally 2005 I believe... the instructions on how to do so where on the SecuROM site itself, along with a warning that the game would not run without it (which is fair enough). I think the uninstallation process was as simple as typing SecuROM -u, something like that. It certainly did the trick and removed it though.

  • Thunderbolt #17 3 years ago

    Dynamize,

    You would also have to keep your games forever because if the lawyers come a knocking you would need proof that you legitimately bought those games
    Edited by 1 at 25/09/08 @ 16:03

  • davc4 #18 3 years ago

    SecuRom is a complete travisity of a program especially the newer versions,

    1. It installs itself into the root 0 portion of your machine where system files are kept:- Thus preventing deletion of the program
    2. It changes windows to disallow the deleteion of 16 bit files thus not allowing you to delete it

    Now what it can do

    1. If you have multiple disk drives on your computer it *MAY* prevent you from using your disk drives.
    2. If you have any program such as Roxio etc. then these will be prevented from working
    3. It can send packets of data out to both the host and the manufacturer undetected from your machine.
    4. It can disable firewall systems in your computer

    That is the extent of my knowledge but clearly this is not a piece of software you want on your machine it would be completely different if SecuRom was uninstalled after you uninstalled your games etc. but this is not the case SecuRom is left on your machine and only if you know about it can you take steps to remove it from your computer.

    SecuRom is a disgrace.

  • Thunderbolt #19 3 years ago

    Saying that I want to play Spore

    But I think I will wait because like the Sony root-kit disaster I can see EA doing an about-face on this once lawsuits start.

  • Darren #20 3 years ago

    All those people saying that they refuse to pay for software with DRM and will instead download them illegally... here's a sensible, moralistic idea... why not buy the game but install the illegally downloaded DRM-free pirated version. That way you're getting the game you want but at the same time you're still supporting the industry by paying for the games legally. ;)

  • JohnnyWashnGo #21 3 years ago

    @Darren

    Whilst your suggestion would look like the right way to go, reward developers, avoid DRM and all that, it fails to send a message to the publishers that you do not want DRM in your software.

    As long as you pay your money, you give them the false impression that installing crap onto your computer systems without your knowledge is a legitimate business practice.

    The best and most effective way to let them know that you will not accept DRM is to not buy their product. You could even write to them to explain why you did not buy their product. In this economic climate all businesses are trying to keep hold of their customer base and if a sizeable portion of their customers don't buy their product, cripppled software in this case, they will soon be doing their utmost to help you out.

    I am glad I an exclusively Linux these days, its gives me the best excuse to not play Windows games ;)
    Edited by 1 at 25/09/08 @ 16:03

  • Darren #22 3 years ago

    @JohnnyWashnGo - The thing is though that by choosing not to buy the game, all you're doing (assuming you're moralistic and won't download stuff illegally) is depriving yourself of the games. I don't think EA really care that a few thousand people object to the protection a game uses, not when the game sells a million copies anyway as SPORE has already done and Mass Effect did before it. I'm sure the forthcoming Command & Conquer Red Alert 3 will also sell over a million copies despite EA saying that it'll ship with SecuROM protection too.

    I can't really speak against SecuROM as I've never had any issues with it but I do think that EA are within their rights to use every means they have to prevent their software from being pirated by the masses. So long as those methods don't inadvertently affect my PC in any way then I'm fine with that.

  • kangarootoo #23 3 years ago

    "You would also have to keep your games forever because if the lawyers come a knocking you would need proof that you legitimately bought those games"

    Well isn't that what you would have to do if you played the games from disc, and planned on doing so forever?

    What you really mean is that you need to keep the disc for as long as you plan on playing the game. Why would it be any other way?

  • Thunderbolt #24 3 years ago

    "You would also have to keep your games forever because if the lawyers come a knocking you would need proof that you legitimately bought those games"

    What I implied was if down the line and years later EA decides to prosecute anyone who downloaded Spore off a torrent. And using the logic of downloading the game to counter-act the DRM but bought the game too. You will have to keep it as proof otherwise you will be liable for piracy. You cant trade it and whether you still play it or not is immaterial. The burden of proof or something like I think.



  • stephen #25 3 years ago

    Surely the burden of proof would have to be on the prosecution? Therefore they would have to prove you didn't pay for the game.

    Keep your receipts!

  • smelly #26 3 years ago

    Games developers have been using securom for decades.

    This OTT nonsense naming it the root of all evil is stupid.

    "securom broke my computer" and all that nonsense - when it's probably been on your pc for years without you even knowing about it.

    And as to say "game protection CAUSES more piracy" and all the other nonsense people spout. I know loads more people who pirate pc games than console games. The reason? It's easier to pirate pc games BECAUSE consoles have GOOD protection systems on them. If Spore had NO copy protection at all, i can gaurantee the average joe bloggs in an office will have it copied for all of his mates like we used to with cassette tapes in the playground. So to say it does "no good" is just nonsense.

    Sure it'll NEVER stop the "hard core" pirates.. but it WILL stop mass-piracy.

    Mass piracy where it becomes so easy that everyone and their dog is doing it is bad.. remember the dreamcast?

  • space_ace #27 3 years ago

    i guess you have the right to mention drm three times? :)

  • WJF #28 3 years ago

    "200 million discs protected since 1997." - SecuROM website

    Yup, over a decade

  • BlueDot #29 3 years ago

    1997...hmmm...funny, was about the same time as I mostly stop buying PC games. Championship Manager and Civilization, that was about it.

  • Emth #30 3 years ago

    "You would also have to keep your games forever because if the lawyers come a knocking you would need proof that you legitimately bought those games"

    This is highly unlikely. Unless you are stupid, or a regular distributor of illegal torrents there is an utterly miniscule chance of action ever being taken against you. Most of the action taken so far seems to be against US citizens for music related file sharing.

    It's like drugs, no one cares about the every day user, it's the dealers that the police want. Of course the problem (from the 'authorities' standpoint) with torrenting is everyone is a dealer at least a little bit ;)

  • actionfitz #31 3 years ago

    that 'lawsuit' is an interesting read.

  • neems #32 3 years ago

    If you download and install a pirate copy of Spore, you are still installing SecuRom on your system. This is why pirate games require cracks to play them. I am sure there are ways of circumventing the copy protection, but it will still be there, and you can do it just as easily to a retail copy as a pirate one.

  • Psiloc #33 3 years ago

    "control center [sic] of the computer"

    Best use of [sic] ever.

  • BobsUncle #34 3 years ago

    Yay for consoles!