The point is if the "bad guys" can get the FTC to agree that DRM is good they COULD require it on all software products. Moreover they could codify their concepts of ownership and resale. SD, ICG &GPG would be compelled to comply. Think about that for a minute...

If the GBR is to have ANY meaningful impact on the industry, then this is the venue to tout it - on a national stage in front of the very organization that has real power to change the playing field for consumers.

If DRM is forced on all software products even SD, ICG &GPG products, then probaly the DRM protest will probaly go from verbal protest on the internet to actual protest using physical methods suchs as throwing motov cocktails at EA headqauters for example hell even sending deathreats to the people who made DRM. Hopefully the FTC will have people who have suffered from DRM will have a say. Frogboy, do something, the fate of DRM-free games is in your hands.

Why would he want that?  That would also ban Impulse.  Impulse is a DRM system.  You guys just don't think it is because it's a well-designed system that doesn't inconvenience the original purchaser.

As for the case of DRM being mandatory.  That wouldn't happen- there would be a constitutionality argument there- as that would be a clear violation of free speech.  Also, most likely Stardock would just outsource Impulse in that case to get around any laws.  The US can't regulate international e-commerce.

True but the problem as I see it is lack of information. A game can be sold with no mention of DRM, meaning the consumer doesn't know if it does or doesn't have it. That IMO is wrong - companies should be required to make sure that if their game can only be run if you have internet access, and will need internet access every 10 days or so, then it says so on the game box/case. Similarly if it will install some external program that can damage your computer not only should they let customers know such a program will have to be installed to play the game on the box, but they should also be liable for damages if they have not made the consumer fully aware of the risk of damage from such products. It could be argued that other companies would have an incentive to promote their DRM-free status (meaning that if a game doesn't do this it likely has DRM) but that's usually a second best situation since not all DRM-free companies do advertise their DRM, making it very difficult to tell from a game case/box what DRM the game has.

I strongly believe in consumers voting with their wallets, but it's only possible if they have the choice of who to 'vote' for in the first place! I now know that EA games are likely to come with DRM and so don't buy them, but had I not been reading these forums quite a bit at the time, I would have likely bought mass effect without realising it had such restrictive DRM that would have stopped me from purchasing it had I been aware.

tha t ruling could not affect impulse butcuase impulse is on the internet wich is considered international water. so the next time you buy a product off the internet and you pay more becuase you live in austrailia you have a right to take action what they are doing is ilegal.

Yep. Just a reg code would suffice methinks. Hey, that is exactly what SD uses - what are the odds???

No doubt.

I have sometimes entertained the same consideration. Every time I have been unable to draw any reasonable conclusions.

What?  Spore interferred with your ability to install SP3?  Did you install it through Steam or purchased at retail?

Some people don't care.  I do and haven't purchased it because of that.  Although, it's supposedly DRM-free on Steam now, from my understanding.