Oh, Come on

Copy protection and antipiracy are and were also one of the intentions of any DRM system. Always. The only thing that happened is that around year 2000 there was a Label for it (DRM)

the only way to make it clear - define what you mean by DRM. what is DRM?

Digital Rights Managements.

But I am talking about Copy protection specifially

And Copy Restriction and Antipiracy measures are one type of DRM, not only but also.
Those anti copy measures were much more evident in the past with the physical media for games or Music but if you want more specific examples in digital media like ebooks, we can talk about systems like the Adobe DRM, which protects duplication and copying of their works.

Really, not recognize this is being lost in semantics

no, you have said what the abbreviation DRM stands for, but not defined what it is. or are you saying that DRM = copy protection?

if you want to talk about what is or is not DRM, then the first thing you need to define what it is, mark out the demarcations. if you cannot then it is a pointless discussion as you will only talk past each other using different (and personal) definitions

As I said above copy protection is "one" form of DRM, (not only but also) and in the past it was "the DRM"

Again, the definition is just that, the method to protect and manage the digital legal rights of a product and there will be different methods depending the thing. No subjective definition needed

Really, the only pointless discusson is when someone does not want to read a previous message above.

What did I miss? haha

It is a anti piracy mechanism. All copy protection mechanisms and also DRM are meant to prevent pirating. DRM won't stop you from copying files, they just are unusable on another system without the means to unlock the access.

But let's just assume that it's the other way around and every anti piracy mechanism is a way of DRM.
If we got the original version of a game with it's manual as pdf, should we then complain about DRM being in it if the game at startup would require to type a word from that manual or use a code wheel? Or would we say: "Cool, now THIS is retro!"
Should we complain, if it came with a serial number that is provided to us via text file?
What if the game requires a registry entry automatically created by our installers? I mean ... it still requires it. You can't just copy the installation directory to another computer and play. Shoud we complain about that?
Do we complain about Dark Forces? After all the game requires a ID file on a drive that is specified to be the CD-ROM drive. It's easy to fake that but the check is there. Should we remove this game from GOG because it has DRM? Mind you that this file does not contain any game resources, it's only there to check if the CD is in the drive. Is this DRM? Should we complain?

The main problem is, that the term was defined including a certain type of technology (digital licencing) but then used for all means to achieve the same goal. The goal existed of course already before the term was created.

If we leave the technology out of the discussion, then every game per se DRMed. Because when you buy and when you install, you accept the conditions not to make copies of the game for others. And unless you are a dirty liar and a thief, your promise will keep the game from getting copied (unless someone hacks into your computer). YOU are the copy protection since you are a honest person who sticks to his or her word.

The Irony is Microsoft Pirated almost everything they ever sold.

The problem is that I did read your previous post, and this one as well. Aparet from some very vague and obtuse statments, there is no clear definition of what DRM is. so far all we have is:

- one the aims is anti-piracy? (this is not a definition of what something is, but rather a goal of that something)
- it involves some sort of copy protection? How? but it is not only copy protection, so what more is it? does any and all form of copy protection = DRM?
- it "manages digital legal rights"? what does this mean? digital rights of what? how does it do this? is data protection acts DRM? should not rights or legal processes be protected?
- it involves some method or methods? What kind of methods? how do they work?

That's the case for a sound file in Windows 95 which was created without the licence for it's codec, but I am quite sure they actually bought most of what they later changed and sold (like an early version of the IBM operating system).

Both Apple and Microsoft very legally got 'inspired' by what Xerox had (the Xerox management didn't realise that they hit the Jackpot and lost everything as a consequence) and visited their offices often, Apple up to a point where they actually got parts of the code for the Xerox Alto and used it for Mac, while Microsofts programmers worked with a black box pattern, they got tasked with what should be the result, but developed it on their own.

edit: But are you referencing to something specific? What did you have in mind?

This is an easy one: any ownership check (no matter how it's done) that restricts your ability to install or play a game, or access some features of the game.

So that includes anything from serial keys to authenticated central servers for multiplayer, up-to client-tied game achievements or skins. Even old things like secrets in the game paper manual are included with this definition.

Of course using this definition you can see that there can be no such thing as a DRM-free game on a store with a mandatory client (like Steam or Epic), because it requires an ownership check for the game installation, even if there is nothing to prevent playing the game once it is installed.

And that means that a lot of GOG games apply DRM to at least some features, mainly multiplayer. But a DRMed multiplayer mode does not prevent the co-existence of a DRM-free multiplayer mode alongside it.

Feel free to discuss this definition of course, but in my opinion this is the most useful way to define DRM because it focuses on what is done, not on how it's done.

No, No it's not. DRM is copy protection. I's not new. I'm sure people like to think things are newer than they are, but DRM is nothing more than a markiting department project that obviously got one gullible person. Telementry is just Telementry and isn't DRM. This is litterally the dumbest thing to dig your heels in about.

Both steam and epic have games that are just files you download, there is no installation as such, and so there is also no ownership check after the download. by your definition here, that makes them DRM free, even though you used a client to download them.

by the way, I agree with a lot of your definition here. I would like a seperation between physical and digital ownership check, though.

The client is just an installation method, no matter if mandatory or not. GOG performs a ownership check when you want to download offline installers, on both web client and script utilities like gogrepoc. You can't download them if you don't own the game.
That makes the first installation of GOG games just as DRMed as the one of Steam games.
You can also downlad Steam games and then back them up as zips. "Installing" from these zips will work without a client.

So ... the installation generally is not counted when the question rises if a game is DRM protected or not. If a Steam game can be started without further licence checks, then it is considered to be DRM free just as GOG games are.
The difference is that with a Steam game you never know in advance before buying it without consultings forums.
GOG has the policy that the single player part of a game - with exception for some unlockable extras - must be playable while offline without a client running.
If that doesn't work .... you have seen what happened to Hitman.

Actually you can copy DRMed games and media files. You just can't execute or play them without taking further measures, where copy protection actually aims to make it impossible to copy the medium as a whole. The Ms Windows store applications stored in a encrypted directory are a modern example of copy protection. Copy protection can be used additionally to DRM. All physical/digital copy protection and DRM however have the same goal: to prevent piracy.

It will work Or it won't.

The manually backup of an Steam game is not a feature, but a workaround. Everything in this life have a workaround (except death and taxes :P)
A crack also makes a game runable without Steam Client/Steamworks etc if needed, but it is not an intended feature but a workaround.

Yes, A launcher is basically an installation method, and if it is just that way I agree with you. But In the Steam case (DRMFree after installation or not) I can't agree. The Launcher will always be mandatory, it's the ownership check by default if what you want is something official and supported from Valve.