Choking the golden goose?

[SackAttack]

So apparently, the top dog over at Sony Computer Entertainment, Ken Kutaragi, has filed for (and evidently received) a new patent. Now, I don't take issue, exactly, with what the patent (http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=/netahtml/search-adv.htm&r=1&p=1&f=G&l=50&d=ptxt&S1=%28Kutaragi.INZZ.+AND+Sony.ASNM.%29&OS=in/Kutaragi+AND+an/Sony&RS=%28IN/Kutaragi+AND+AN/Sony) is trying to accomplish. You've got piracy issues, that's a pretty good way to solve them.

On the other hand...there's no confirmation that Sony is going to do this with the PlayStation 3, but if you read the description of the hardware this patent would be used on, it sounds an awful lot like a games machine. Maybe they're filing the patent to protect the idea in case somebody else tries to create a copy-protection scheme like that.

But if they actually use it?

You wouldn't be able to rent games, borrow games from a friend. Hell, if you ever found yourself in a situation where you had to replace the system, unless Sony also had some way of resetting the registration, you'd be on the hook for your games all over again, too.

I don't know that the effect on rental and used game stores would be devastating, as Sony isn't the only game in town, but it would certainly be a substantial loss of income.

Unless, y'know...people who might've bought a PS3 shy away because they can't rent or borrow games, or purchase used games to play on the system.

The flip side of this is, and I know I may be in the minority on this viewpoint, but I have to think that the only stores that would carry a product like that would be stores that don't rely on specialty gaming income. EB and GameStop would be suicidal to try to put something like that at the foundation of their business.

Circuit City could get away with it, Best Buy maybe could do it too, and Wal-Mart could, but I think those might be about the only major players in the industry that could carry a product like that and suffer minimal harm, because rentals and used games just aren't a significant part of their revenue streams (if they factor in at all).

I'm hittin' the hay, but I'm curious to see what the general take on this is here.

To sum up: I don't have a problem with Sony taking measures to prevent piracy on their platforms, but I can't imagine that a step like this would be remotely good for their business.

It would be kinda like, y'know, installing malware on the PCs of their legitimate music customers. Oh...wait a sec...

[Airhog]

If people can create mod chips allowing you to bypass copy protection on the PS2 and Xbox, then people will reverse engineer this product too....

[Icy]

Also don't forget that the mod chips are what give a huge sales boost to a console system. I see it everytime, a new console is released, a few hardcore players buy it, after some months the mod chip is released for that console so you can play with pirated games and then boom, the sales get a huge increase. My friends are console freaks, but they only move to the new system once the mod chip is released. Who suffer from this are the games companies not the console vendors.

Another sample now related to satellite TV. Some years ago, the first Spanish satellite TV released his product. They had a basic subscription, a full subscription and ppv events (mainly sports and on demand movies). The basic subscription was not so expensive but nobody was used to pay for TV in Spain so the subscriptions were too low. After some time, somebody released a fake card that you could progam and plug in your decoder so only paying the basic subscription you could enjoy like paying the Full one plus all the ppv events. That boosted theis subscriptions to put them as the main TV company in Spain. Did they fight against that? no, once everybody had that pirated system at home, and were used to watch that channels, they raised the basic monthly subscription price so they got a huge income boost. Once they were the kings of the TV market, they started to fight against piracy but in this case, piracy made them to grow like they never thought.

Of course i'm talking about Spain that is the 2nd or 3rd country in Europe about piracy... not something to be proud of.

[Celeval]

In addition to used games, and renting; this also prevents:
- Upgrading a system! We had an "old-style" PS2 and upgraded to a slimline. Wouldn't work anymore. In the same vein, kills the concept of backwards compatability.
- Bringing your copy of Madden/DDR/whatever to a friend's house to play in a multiplayer/party setting
- Multiple gaming systems in the same house sharing games (i.e. Johnny has a PS3 in his room, and there's one in the family room)
- WTF happens if your machine breaks?

[Daimyo]

Also don't forget that the mod chips are what give a huge sales boost to a console system. I see it everytime, a new console is released, a few hardcore players buy it, after some months the mod chip is released for that console so you can play with pirated games and then boom, the sales get a huge increase. My friends are console freaks, but they only move to the new system once the mod chip is released. Who suffer from this are the games companies not the console vendors.

That's not true. The console makers actually sell the game consoles at a loss and make their profit off 1st party games and license fees paid by 3rd party developers. I'm sure you can find exact numbers somewhere, but I imagine they need around 3 game purchases with each console purchase to make profit.

Because of this the whole business model of console gaming depends on piracy being difficult. It doesn't have to be impossible, but it at least has to require some physical modifications or risk of destroying the console to keep the average joe from doing it.

The other thing that complicates the situation is that now in the United States it is illegal to "reverse engineer" copy protection schemes unless you meet a fairly narrow exemption (academic researchers, etc). There is a great book Hacking the Xbox that covers a lot a lot of the legal and business isues around reverse engineering and priacy.

[gstelmack]

And we all know that Sony has a great track record (http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/internet/11/10/sony.hack.reut/index.html) when it comes to copy-protection schemes...

[kcchief19]

I think this may be much ado about nothing. If you look at the full document, the patent application was dated in 2000 and has documentation going back to the 1990s. I don't think this sounds like anything terribly new.

Also, the description doesn't sounds like it would necessarily do the things you're saying, Josh. The descriptions seem to suggest that the unit would be capable of determining whether or not it was a registered disk. That would seem to imply that it is a detection system that would verify that it was a legitimate disk and not a pirated or reproduced copy. How that verification of registration takes place is a good question. Would each original game disk have registration encoded on it that could not be transferred to a pirated copy or would this require that game systems be connected to the Internet.

On the other hand, considering that Sony has shown signs of venturing anti-consumer behaviors such as producing music CDs that won't work on older CD players or in many car CD players, I wouldn't put it past them to do something stupid. But I think selling non-transferrable products would put them at a competitive disadvantage.

[gstelmack]

kcchief, it sounds like it's actually burning something onto the disk. You stick a new disc in, it doesn't find the code, so it burns one on the disk, locking it to that machine. It specifically states that it kills off the used software market, which implies killing off upgraded machines without SOME mechanism to tag the used machine to look like the old one.

[Anthony]

this basically guarantees that i won't purchase Sony's nect-gen system if this is implemented. i don't ever pay full price for games, rather, i trade in used games. i don't believe in having a huge library of games. at any one time i'll have at most 3 games, 4 if i have 2 different consoles (which i won't do anymore).

[Greyroofoo]

and I'm sure sony will sorely miss your business

[Celeval]

Also, the description doesn't sounds like it would necessarily do the things you're saying, Josh. The descriptions seem to suggest that the unit would be capable of determining whether or not it was a registered disk. That would seem to imply that it is a detection system that would verify that it was a legitimate disk and not a pirated or reproduced copy. How that verification of registration takes place is a good question. Would each original game disk have registration encoded on it that could not be transferred to a pirated copy or would this require that game systems be connected to the Internet.
That's what I originally thought, too - but read the end of the patent app, it talks about it in more straight English; specifically about reading the code off the disk, saving the code to the player unit, then removing the code from the disk via magnets or some other technology (making it unplayable anywhere else).

[Kodos]

If they did this, it would be a simple matter of going with the 360 instead.

[SackAttack]

I think this may be much ado about nothing. If you look at the full document, the patent application was dated in 2000 and has documentation going back to the 1990s. I don't think this sounds like anything terribly new.

No, but the PlayStation 2 was already released in Japan by the time it was filed, so it looks like one of those forward-thinking things to begin with.

Also, the description doesn't sounds like it would necessarily do the things you're saying, Josh.

When this pulse sequence and the verification data match, the main unit determines that the disk is a legitimate disk and stores a portion or all of the code characteristic of the title that has been read out in the COCT, and then the pulse data on this disk is deleted by a deletion device. The deletion mechanism in this case may be the application of a strong magnetic force using a magnetic head incorporated into the disk chucking part, etc. In this way, the pulse data on the disk is erased and becomes unascertainable, but the title information is newly registered in the COCT, and the main unit thereafter shifts to normal operating mode. On the other hand, if the contents of the pulse signal and the verification data prepared for each disk do not match, or the pulse itself cannot be detected, the main unit determines that the disk contains illegitimate software such as pirated software, and after performing the desired positioning, display, etc., halts subsequent operation.

In short, you buy a disc, you put it in the machine. The machine verifies that the code is present, locks the code to the system, and wipes the code so the disc can't be reused. You could try renting PS3 games, and it would even work - for the first person to play the game. Everybody else? Bupkis.

By means of the present invention as described above, the following effects are obtained. Since only titles for which legitimate software has actually been purchased and which have been initially registered in the machine table can be used, resale (so-called used software purchase) after purchase by an end-user becomes practically impossible. When data recorded on a disk is illegally copied in full, since the exact pattern of the verification data cannot be recreated, the manufacture of counterfeit software becomes extremely difficult, and simple copying to a recording medium becomes meaningless. By embedding pulse data, verification data, verification programs, and specific codes in a disk by separate methods, the level of difficulty of counterfeit software manufacturing can be greatly increased. In particular, by switching in multiple stages of disk rotational speed and changing the verification data for each production lot, counterfeit production becomes close to impossible. In this way, since the commerce in used software and counterfeit software can be drastically reduced, legitimate software can be forcefully protected and a healthy software commerce market can be maintained and developed by the present invention. Moreover, by viewing the COCT on the software supplier side using the main unit communication function, marketing data that is useful for future software development and sales can be obtained with good accuracy.

Bolded Kutaragi's own words here for emphasis. The application suggests that they are taking deliberate aim at the used games market, since they aren't getting any resale kickbacks off of those games.

The second part is more disturbing - it combines DRM with spyware, after a fashion.

The descriptions seem to suggest that the unit would be capable of determining whether or not it was a registered disk. That would seem to imply that it is a detection system that would verify that it was a legitimate disk and not a pirated or reproduced copy.

Well, yes and no. The disc gets registered to the machine, not to some central clearing house. A "registered disc," for the purposes of this technology, is a virgin disc - one that has never been used before. The use of the disc is what registers it to the console table, and renders it useless to anybody but the purchaser.

It certainly makes piracy difficult. At the same time, it obliterates the purchaser's fair use rights under the Copyright Act of 1976, and wipes out the rental/used game market for the system.

Plus, as somebody pointed out, backwards compatibility becomes a problem. The system might still be able to play PS2 and PS1 games, if they build something in to allow the system to recognize those games for what they are, but PS3/4/5 etc? Probably not.

How that verification of registration takes place is a good question. Would each original game disk have registration encoded on it that could not be transferred to a pirated copy or would this require that game systems be connected to the Internet.

No connection required for verification. Basically, a particular type of data would reside on the disc, and the system would check that sector to see if the pulse data exists. If it's there, the disc is legit, and the system ties that code to itself before wiping the code from the disc so that no other machine can use it.

The patent does imply connection to the internet, however, for Sony marketing to be able to track what games are purchased and played on the system. It's in that last paragraph.

On the other hand, considering that Sony has shown signs of venturing anti-consumer behaviors such as producing music CDs that won't work on older CD players or in many car CD players, I wouldn't put it past them to do something stupid. But I think selling non-transferrable products would put them at a competitive disadvantage.

Agreed that it would put them at a competitive disadvantage. I think at this stage in the game, though, they're just arrogant enough to think that they can do it and the market will let them get away with it.

[Kodos]

I prefer the PS brand over Xbox, but this would make me switch my preference real quick.

[Glengoyne]

I was really thinking this was going to be a masturbation thread.

[Anthony]

I was really thinking this was going to be a masturbation thread.

hee hee...ditto.

[Noop]

what of these things doesn't belong? meat, eggs, wife, blowjob........give up? yea i picked wife, but that was wrong, its blowjob cuz you can beat your meat, you can beat your eggs, you can beat your wife, but you can't beat a blowjob!

[sterlingice]

Also don't forget that the mod chips are what give a huge sales boost to a console system. I see it everytime, a new console is released, a few hardcore players buy it, after some months the mod chip is released for that console so you can play with pirated games and then boom, the sales get a huge increase. My friends are console freaks, but they only move to the new system once the mod chip is released. Who suffer from this are the games companies not the console vendors. That's not nearly the case here. Modding is still only for the most hardcore of fans and there are millions of buyers who don't go that route. The giant bumps in sales happen when a price drop occurs or a new system is released (i.e. the slim PS2 or GBA SP) or a huge new game comes out (ie DS sales saw a huge bump when Nintendogs came out).

SI

[sterlingice]

In short, you buy a disc, you put it in the machine. The machine verifies that the code is present, locks the code to the system, and wipes the code so the disc can't be reused. You could try renting PS3 games, and it would even work - for the first person to play the game. Everybody else? Bupkis.

The second part is more disturbing - it combines DRM with spyware, after a fashion.

Well, yes and no. The disc gets registered to the machine, not to some central clearing house. A "registered disc," for the purposes of this technology, is a virgin disc - one that has never been used before. The use of the disc is what registers it to the console table, and renders it useless to anybody but the purchaser.

It certainly makes piracy difficult. At the same time, it obliterates the purchaser's fair use rights under the Copyright Act of 1976, and wipes out the rental/used game market for the system.

Plus, as somebody pointed out, backwards compatibility becomes a problem. The system might still be able to play PS2 and PS1 games, if they build something in to allow the system to recognize those games for what they are, but PS3/4/5 etc? Probably not.

No connection required for verification. Basically, a particular type of data would reside on the disc, and the system would check that sector to see if the pulse data exists. If it's there, the disc is legit, and the system ties that code to itself before wiping the code from the disc so that no other machine can use it.

The patent does imply connection to the internet, however, for Sony marketing to be able to track what games are purchased and played on the system. It's in that last paragraph.

Agreed that it would put them at a competitive disadvantage. I think at this stage in the game, though, they're just arrogant enough to think that they can do it and the market will let them get away with it.
Well, this seems a really doom-and-gloom view of this scenario. There are quite a few things discounted never mind that patent filings by gaming companies are often misinterpreted (re: all the Nintendo Revolution controller speculation).

One, Sony isn't necessarily doing this. You don't think Microsoft would be flooding the gaming press with "rumors" about this if there was some concrete proof? I'm not saying it's not possible, but I really need a major outlet to be reporting this as a fact and it being confirmed by Sony or by a third party who doesn't have a vested interest (i.e. not Microsoft).

Two, there could be a pretty simple way around the rental problem. There could be a default "rental" code that allows anyone to play kindof like region-free DVDs versus region coded DVDs. Sure, this could easily be cracked by modding pirates, but in this country, the goal isn't so much to prevent it, as it's not possible but to make it cost ineffective so that, for the vast majority of (people cost of unit + risk of jail + knowledge cost) > (cost to not pirate). Modding isn't nearly what it is here that it is in other parts of the world.

Thirdly, by that same token, reverse compatibility is easy to make work on this. Sure, there's a code burned on the disc, but nothing says the next generation machine has to even read it or do anything with the data. It could just read the code and ignore it. I doubt there's a huge worry about pirating PS3 games for the PS4 much like there won't be much worry about pirates of PS2 games in a year. The big games will have already been made into Greatest Hits to squeeze those last few bucks out of them.

Those are two really simple solutions to the aforementioned problems. But that brings us back to the used games problem. Eb and Gamespot are already looking danger in the face as they have a risky business model- no longer do they have their devout hardcore gaming clientele for new games. They rely on used games ludicrous profit margin to keep them afloat and they merged (technically a buyout, I think) to remove their primary competition. However, now Best Buy and others are getting into the game, seeing it as an opportunity but they are in their infancy. But, the point is, there aren't a lot of businesses who rely on the used game business.

As for the consumer, this is a much bigger blow. Lots of gamers I know do the "buy a new game, trade it 2 weeks later". Personally, I just wait for games to go on sale because I like keeping the games. But I understand this other mentality and there are a lot of gamers who do that. This is who would really be hurt by this.

That said, if it is true, it's just another really risky (re: stupid) move for Sony this generation along with putting the system out late and bundling the new expensive Blu-Ray technology and passing the costs along to the consumer. Particularly if they put marketing spyware on there. This is just asking for consumer feedback.

Wanna do a point/counter point for GN? ;)

SI

[SackAttack]

Well, this seems a really doom-and-gloom view of this scenario. There are quite a few things discounted never mind that patent filings by gaming companies are often misinterpreted (re: all the Nintendo Revolution controller speculation).

And some patents never get used. They're just there to establish ownership of the idea. I understand that. My hope is that Sony came up with the idea, but chooses never to use it.

One, Sony isn't necessarily doing this.

Oh, I agree that they may have developed the technology and choose not to use it, but the description in the patent application makes it pretty evident that this isn't, say, DRM for music CDs or computer software. It has specific applications for a gaming console.

You don't think Microsoft would be flooding the gaming press with "rumors" about this if there was some concrete proof?

I think if MS had concrete proof, we'd be seeing litigation over disclosure of confidential trade secrets against some individual or another. But they wouldn't need to do anything, anyway. Just look at the reaction from PS loyalists like Kodos - float the possibility, and let everybody else come to the conclusion. Carrot, mule.

I'm not saying it's not possible, but I really need a major outlet to be reporting this as a fact and it being confirmed by Sony or by a third party who doesn't have a vested interest (i.e. not Microsoft).

Nobody's reporting it as fact. What's fact is that the patent application has been filed, the patent has been granted, and the technology, as described, has applications in the console market. I'm putting 2+2 together. What remains to be seen is whether I'm coming up with three, four, or five.

Two, there could be a pretty simple way around the rental problem. There could be a default "rental" code that allows anyone to play kindof like region-free DVDs versus region coded DVDs. Sure, this could easily be cracked by modding pirates, but in this country, the goal isn't so much to prevent it, as it's not possible but to make it cost ineffective so that, for the vast majority of (people cost of unit + risk of jail + knowledge cost) > (cost to not pirate). Modding isn't nearly what it is here that it is in other parts of the world.

Okay, but here's the other half of that. As I interpret it, the reason for deleting the code is two-fold. 1) It ensures that other units can't play that copy of the software, but 2) it removes the possibility of the code being duplicated later on, should that become a possibility.

If the "rental code" is persistent, and somebody figures out a way to get that information onto a piece of copiable media, then suddenly the rental outlets are a prime source of pirated material. Right this second, it's not a vulnerability, but it is a potential Trojan Horse in their fight against piracy.

Thirdly, by that same token, reverse compatibility is easy to make work on this. Sure, there's a code burned on the disc, but nothing says the next generation machine has to even read it or do anything with the data. It could just read the code and ignore it.

Read the patent application again. When the game containing the code is first used, the system wipes the code from the disc after registering it to prevent future usage. Any future machine, therefore, would not be able to identify the code on that piece of software. It wouldn't be there to identify.

I doubt there's a huge worry about pirating PS3 games for the PS4 much like there won't be much worry about pirates of PS2 games in a year. The big games will have already been made into Greatest Hits to squeeze those last few bucks out of them.

True, but the question is how to direct the hardware to distinguish between legacy games lacking the code, and contemporary games (pirated/rental/borrowed) lacking the code. That's what obviates the backwards compatibility. Unless you have a way to instruct the machine that certain types of codeless games are okay, and certain others aren't, then anything lacking the pulse data code (that isn't registered to the system already) is effectively a coaster.

Those are two really simple solutions to the aforementioned problems. But that brings us back to the used games problem. Eb and Gamespot are already looking danger in the face as they have a risky business model- no longer do they have their devout hardcore gaming clientele for new games. They rely on used games ludicrous profit margin to keep them afloat and they merged (technically a buyout, I think) to remove their primary competition. However, now Best Buy and others are getting into the game, seeing it as an opportunity but they are in their infancy. But, the point is, there aren't a lot of businesses who rely on the used game business.

You're right, but you're taking the unilateral step of removing a revenue stream from your retail partners. Is that good business? I'm not familiar with case law on the matter, but I have this vague idea that I remember the courts ruling that (in the case of Wherehouse Music and some other places), second-use CDs were permissible, and that end users had the right to relinquish their licenses to other individuals. If it applies to the copyrights as they pertain to music CDs, the same would hold true of game software, I'd imagine.

As for the consumer, this is a much bigger blow. Lots of gamers I know do the "buy a new game, trade it 2 weeks later". Personally, I just wait for games to go on sale because I like keeping the games. But I understand this other mentality and there are a lot of gamers who do that. This is who would really be hurt by this.

And so would the industry. The end user isn't going to triple his game spending just because Sony's cutting out the used game/rental market. He'll go play the game on his friend's PS3 instead, or wait for somebody to figure out a way to play pirated games on the system. In the meantime, unless they do as you've suggested and create a "rental code," Sony has just deprived themselves of rental income in the name of attempting to inflate original POS transactions. They don't get a cut, so far as I know, of used sales, so maybe they're targeting that more aggressively than rentals, but the end result is that they hurt the consumer, who - if the music industry is anything to judge by - is not going to suddenly buy twice or thrice as many games to make up for what he can't play via those three outlets any longer.

That said, if it is true, it's just another really risky (re: stupid) move for Sony this generation along with putting the system out late and bundling the new expensive Blu-Ray technology and passing the costs along to the consumer. Particularly if they put marketing spyware on there. This is just asking for consumer feedback.

I think they're anticipating feedback along the lines of "Please, sir, may I have some more?"

Wanna do a point/counter point for GN? ;)

Sounds good, but I can't run it until early next week, since that's when I'll next have the time to write it!

[Kodos]

Just look at the reaction from PS loyalists like Kodos - float the possibility, and let everybody else come to the conclusion. Carrot, mule.


Was I just called mule? :confused:

[sterlingice]

Just look at the reaction from PS loyalists like Kodos - float the possibility, and let everybody else come to the conclusion. Carrot, mule.
Was I just called mule? :confused:
Well, either that or carrot. ;) But I think mule :p

SI

[SackAttack]

Just look at the reaction from PS loyalists like Kodos - float the possibility, and let everybody else come to the conclusion. Carrot, mule.


Was I just called mule? :confused:

Not you specifically. More like the public at-large. Dangle a carrot ("You can still play borrowed and rented games on our system!") and watch the defections.

Keep in mind that a large percentage of buyers don't even play the machines. They buy them for little Johnny, and because little Johnny doesn't have money of his own, any game purchases come out of Johnny's Mom's pocket, and she'll want to limit the amount she has to spend.

"But Mom, rental games won't play on this machine! You HAVE to buy it for me!"

All she'll understand is that it means another $60 out of her pocket that she doesn't want to pay. So she'll buy a 360 instead, where she can keep litttle Johnny pacified with cheap rentals.

[Anthony]

Not you specifically. More like the public at-large. Dangle a carrot ("You can still play borrowed and rented games on our system!") and watch the defections.

Keep in mind that a large percentage of buyers don't even play the machines. They buy them for little Johnny, and because little Johnny doesn't have money of his own, any game purchases come out of Johnny's Mom's pocket, and she'll want to limit the amount she has to spend.

"But Mom, rental games won't play on this machine! You HAVE to buy it for me!"

All she'll understand is that it means another $60 out of her pocket that she doesn't want to pay. So she'll buy a 360 instead, where she can keep litttle Johnny pacified with cheap rentals.

LOL, i really love how he pulls these (unsubstantiated) scenarios out of his ass. he does it all the time.

[Airhog]

Agreed that it would put them at a competitive disadvantage. I think at this stage in the game, though, they're just arrogant enough to think that they can do it and the market will let them get away with it.


Sorry, but this is totally not true. sony's only real breadwinner right now is their gaming market. their walkman line has suffered tremendously since the Ipod, and their T.V. business is only strong in the US. They simply cannot afford to lose out in the console market.

[SackAttack]

LOL, i really love how he pulls these (unsubstantiated) scenarios out of his ass. he does it all the time.

What can I say? I have a talent.

You, on the other hand, have a talent for being an egotistical, self-masturbatory jackass with all the "charisma" of a slime mold.

Takes all kinds.

[SackAttack]

Sorry, but this is totally not true. sony's only real breadwinner right now is their gaming market. their walkman line has suffered tremendously since the Ipod, and their T.V. business is only strong in the US. They simply cannot afford to lose out in the console market.

I'm not talking about Sony the parent corporation.

I'm talking about Sony Computer Entertainment, their gaming arm. I reailze there's a tendency to mix the two up, but they are separate businesses.

Parent Sony may understand that they need to protect their gaming business. On the other hand, they may see this as a vital way to do that.

They've been plenty arrogant over the last five years. This is no different, it's just that it's arrogance on such a grander scale that it's hard to believe they'd be capable of it.

[Anthony]

no, EA has been arrogant.

[SackAttack]

no, EA has been arrogant.

That's not a mutually exclusive proposition, you know.