Come now, you don't need something fancy like lockpicks to pick most Masterlocks.

This is allowed because the DMCA sucks. It specifically calls out that circumventing copy protection is a violation. This also means that any company that adds protection also is able to effectively deny your right to make a backup copy.

This doesn't apply to physical goods where ownership actually has meaning.

Probably not, but that's because the lockpicks are not digital and hence not covered by DMCA

they're* 😉

You know, like FG.

These John Doe suits are used because they are anonymous. They use them to get subpoenas to demand their information from their ISP. voices38 has said that everything is fine, though, on their reddit account.

Truth, though none of this has ever been "piracy", except to the greedy fucks that bankrolled that bullshit back when.

FWIW, that campaign used the music and typeface illegally. 🙄

Yeah thought that as well, there probably is a good reason they resort to that. Seems a bit desperate. Good.

the company claims that the accused bypassed its Anti-Tamper technology in at least 26 PC games and is seeking monetary damages as well as a court order that would prevent further tampering of its DRM

Considering that the main product they shill obviously doesn't work, I wouldn't keep my hope up on them figuring anything out

They could be working on both, but it's a seriously bad look anyway. Companies should switch off autopilot mode and stop using Denuvo.

I don’t think so because the accused isn’t jailed, but I’m just a guy on the internet so I could be wrong.

You are cracking a game and use Discord? Haha there's always a new lesson to be learned kiddo

That is such a stupid expectation ngl and the fact that I hear it is stupid too,

If I write a letter to my friend and send it via snail mail, my expectation is not for it be taken open read by some random guy and go through it, innit?

Yeah, how does that work?

You send a summons through the mail to... anywhere?

By using the law to circumvent the privacy of the account holder.

I probably shouldn’t comment as I haven’t read the article (SHAME) but my assumption is this is the first step to compel platforms the cracker may have used to providing identifiable information on them.

Oh, that's easy. You have one of your rent-a-cops grab a random dude off the street, beat a confession out of him, and then sue that guy.

I think I understand the approach.

Pro-consumer data/service companies have privacy policies where they don’t share someone’s info. The sole exception is when that person has used those services to break the law. The suit may have the intent of establishing that fact so said services consider providing the user’s info.

Here's a Wikipedia article about it in the US.

Just tell the courts AI was used to crack the denuvo and AI being able to do that isn't copyright infringement. 😏