mgh,I can't answer for Ron, but I can say that based on a unique issue and message that ASA throws at the user and that they then write to us about, it happens 1-2 times a week. So since the release of ASA, that translates into between 50-100 additional sales. This of course is not saying that this is out of 100 pirates. This is out of the pirates that chose to purchase ASA.

That reminds me of what they did with batman arkham asylum...You can see it in it's entirety here:http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=95030

Well if you're confident

That reminds me of what they did with batman arkham asylum...You can see it in it's entirety here:http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=95030

A quote from the link you gave Peter."The problem you have encountered is a hook in the copy protection, to catch out people who try and download cracked versions of the game for free. It's not a bug in the game's code, it's a bug in your moral code."Luv it!! :( I take it this type of 'hook" or trap is not as easy to code as it might seem otherwise presumably all developers would do this to cripple their software if it is cracked? It seems a good solution if it can be done?

That reminds me of what they did with batman arkham asylum...You can see it in it's entirety here:http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=95030

Very chuckleworthy. :(

I don't think everything is up to the developers. Sure, the 'lock on the door' is our responsibility.... however, just like in any other situation where someone sees a crime being commited... it's up to the community to do something as well. Speak up, speak out.

I know where you are coming from Ed and under normal circumstances such speaking up and speaking out would be expected to get the desired result but in the case of global pircacy it seems to have limited effect. That's the problem. Our notions of what we think should work are wrong. We need to adjust how we approach the problem to meet the new dimension of problems that the internet and its global distribution brings. But there is a way that developers can speak out to their wayward customers if not the pirates. At the risk of boring you with yet another long post and death by analogy :( ..see what you think of this scenario. Imagine a city in riot. The rioters throw bricks through shop windows and the shopkeepers wares spill out all over the footpath. Along come the looters. These otherwise law abiding citizens would never throw a brick through a shop window and would always pay for their goods, but under circumstances in which the goods are there for the taking and the likelylhood of being caught is so remote some (but not all) good citizens become looters reasoning that it is no different to picking up a $10 dollar note they see lying on the footpath. At about this stage, the police or national guard are called in and draconian measures are instituted to shoot looters on site. A few are killed, but many run and hide. Law and order is returned. For those of you who don't quite get the analogy, the rioters breaking shop windows are the pirates cracking code and the looters are the many otherwise law abiding citizens downloading cracked software. In the analogy, the sheriff rides into town with his posse, a few judicial executions are carried out and law and order is returned. The analogy to the piracy problem seems to work up to a point but it fails about the time the sheriff and his posse apply draconian measures and start shooting on site. The reason is that the digital wares that spilled on the footpath are being looted all over the world, not just in the local area of the shop. So the next logical step is to employ a digital sheriff and posse. Along comes deep packet inspection (DPI) technologies. Unfortunately, the technology is too invasive and since the problem is a global one, governments don't have the stomach for peaving off their voters to save some foreign corporations profits. It's using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. So then, shopkeepers put up bars or pull down rollers on their windows to make it harder for the rioters but, next time, rather than bricks and rubbish bins, the rioters will use crowbars and pickup trucks to tear down the shop keepers new security. Eventually, the security on the shop is so tight that even legitimate customers can't get in without quite invasive or convoluted technologies being applied. Potential customers are turned away. It's not a good outcome for anyone. As I have stated before, DPI is not an acceptable solution because even though we may have a disgust for looters, they are not the enemy, but rather opportunists. Remove the opportunity and they play no further part in the game. Ron and Jim as developers are taking the fight directly to the pirates even though they are aware that their new secuirty measures may only go so far before the pirates use stronger techniques to pulldown the new measures. It's a bit like an arms race but in the absence of a workable and effective sheriff and posse, they are doing what they can to protect their IP. They are not trying to make it everyone elses responsibilty. But no matter how good their efforts Ron and Jim know they will not stop piracy. The shopkeeper keeps running and throwing down rubbish bins to hinder the pirates progress but the pirates will keep chasing.So what else can the shopkeeper do. If we return to the analogy for a moment, he could take the rioters on and shoot at them to protect his goods, equivalent to planting viruses on file sharing sites, but there is a real danger the shopkeeper could get badly hurt. One mistake and it's all over. He is better to remain out of the way while the cracking is going on. He can't really stop them because like rioters, the motives for what they do often defy common sense. So the next week after the riots have quelled and law and order has returned, our shopkeeper strolls around the area as everyone is cleaning up. He is surprised to see some new shops have sprung up selling all manner of goods and at very cheap prices (illegal file sharing sites). Most of the goods are spoiled in some way or are past their best buy dates or are sold without product knowledge, with no assembly instructions and no guarantees or aftersales support. There is a risk that customers could be harmed by some of the goods or get very sick (viruses may be present and shonky installers could corrupt hard drives). He recognises goods that are his. He angrily approaches the other shopkeeper who agrees to take those goods off his shelves, but the next day they are there again. He calls the police and after some considerable time, effort and cost he finally gets this errant shopkeeper put in jail. But his euphoria over such a positive outcome is shortlived when he finds another three shops have sprung up and he recognises one of them as the same shop with a different owner (The TPB story). Dejected, our shopkeeper goes back to his own shop wondering why there is no justice in the world. One of his customers comes in the store and he thinks he has seen her at that 'other' shop. He berates her for being short sited and lacking in morals. He never sees her again. The shopkeeper wonders where she buys her goods now.Finally,losing money, customers, and his hair, our entrepreneurial shopkeeper decides to give it one last pitch before he packs the whole thing in. He sets up shop right next to that other shop and knowing that the law is on his side in this one, he slanders the other shopkeeper and his shonky wares to any customers who are prepared to listen. He points out the pitfuls of buying that mans' products and the hazards it could present to the consumer. And then like a street performer or a cockney salesman in the markets of east London, when he has an attentive crowd, he pitches the virtue of his products and the added value they present to the consumer. Rather than staying a way in disgust, our shopkeeper has gone to where his wayward customers have gone and appeals to their good sense, morals and general desire for quality that buying his products will bring. But our shopkeeper is not alone. Soon his colleagues set up there shops and stalls near the errant shopkeeper. It has a strange affect. More passing trade appears to be attracted to the site and while the errant shopkeeper is still there flogging his shonky goods at ever decreasing prices, he is no longer the major player on the scene. He can't be defeated, he will always be there but in the eyes of even the less discrimatory customers, his reputation as an onseller (or gifter) of high quality merchandise has been badly dented along with his 'market share'. Terry

Sorry... not buying it.Not one bit.If it were up to me... anyone who stole my work would lose a hand... at the least. What I make isn't a necessity for anyone's life. Because of that, there can be no justification for stealing it.

Terry, we agree that the analogy is long but the possibilties of moving next door to illicit shopkeepers in order to offset their illicit activities by offering potential customers an honest alternative may have merit in the imagination but might not have the desired effect in reality.Consider a few "what if" scenarios based on your analogy..What if the honest shopkeeper had bullet and shatterproof glass windows and locks along with a trigger which recognized an attempt to enter and was wired in such a way as to cause his wares to sort of self destruct little by little until rendered utterly useless for its intended purpose.The rioters would think they had something of value to redistribute until low and behold not only the original but the distributed wares were rendered unfit and unusable.The best analogy might be the exploding dye in a bank bag which renders the stolen cash unfit and unusable for its intended purpose. In addition the dye marks the offender long enough to locate his whereabouts if the shopkeeper wishes to pursue legal options.The most important part of such a system is to actually render the wares unusable in any case. :(

Terry, That world sounds like Mad Max ;)I was hopping you

Terry, That world sounds like Mad Max ;)I was hopping you

There's an incentive I guess.Terry

Classic British understatement. :(

That is information is confidential and frankly none of your business.

As you can't give a number let me give an estimate - 5 (5%).The Business Software Alliance (BSA) publishes annual estimates of world-wide piracy. http://global.bsa.org/idcglobalstudy2007/. John Gantz, director of research for IDC, which conducts the studies for the BSA, said that perhaps one of 10 unauthorized copies might be a lost sale. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/19/technolo...rtner=techdirt)The BSA survey covers business software for which there is a real need, which may be expected to be bought if it cant' be pirated. Even so only 10% of the pirate copies represent a real lost sale. Given that no one needs add-on software, it's reasonable to assume that in proportion even less add-on software would be bought if uit can't be pirated. Given that the possible range is 0% - 10%, then 5% seems a reasonable estimate, although it could vary by, say, a couple of perentage points.

Without revealing sales information that shouldn't be public, I'll state that the BSA 'estimate' is inaccurate. It's way, way... oh... absurdly low. The reason? I suspect it's because we don't sell business software but rather entertainment software.

Without revealing sales information that shouldn't be public, I'll state that the BSA 'estimate' is inaccurate. It's way, way... oh... absurdly low. The reason? I suspect it's because we don't sell business software but rather entertainment software.

I agree BSA's estimate seems inaccurate. Russell Carroll is the Director of Marketing of Reflexive, the game developer which sells entertainment software. He said "As we believe that we are decreasing the number of pirates downloading the game with our DRM fixes, combining the increased sales number together with the decreased downloads, we find 1 additional sale for every 1,000 less pirated downloads. Put another way, for every 1,000 pirated copies we eliminated, we created 1 additional sale ."http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=173501 in a 1000 is 0.1%. That makes my estimate of 5% way, way... oh... absurdly high.

Yet again you select a product that has significantly larger sales volume than any FS addon would ever have. That's not apples to apples.

The discussion is moot as broad estimates cannot possibly apply in this cottage industry. Too many variables. :(