I see people on here talking about using them from time to time & I think it would be nice to have them for a couple of my games. That being said... can I use them without fear of facing jail time or a ginormous fine?

There are always two stories to every subject, but from my own point of view, No-CD 'patches' are basically mods for the game.

Mods tend to change things, and the No-CD patches, which aren't really patches, are just changed exe / dll files.

They are perfectly legal unless you tend to sell them with the game (without making a deal with the dev / pub), distribute the whole game with them for free or something else.

EDIT: In the end, they are just clean ways to remove the DRM out of the game, nothing more.

One more thing to note is that people sometimes have interesting opinions related to the very naming of the things... Many times you can see an 'unofficial patch' doing something to some game, and also removing the DRM in the process, and people tend to like that. But other times they bitch and cry that a simple 'crack' removes the DRM 'illegally'.

General idea is they are a violation of the EULA to create and illegal distribute, but not illegal to use in the US since they fall under the "modification for compatibility purposes" exemption of the DMCA. It's a bit of a catch-22, since someone has to commit a crime in order for you to do something that is perfectly legal to do on something you legally own.

They're not a modification for compatibility purposes. They're a modification to evade a technical means of access control. That makes it the crime of piracy to create one, and the reprehensible act of freeloading to use one.

But the worst that is likely to happen is you'll get refused technical support, because you're using something that isn't the original game, or banned from the manufacturer's forum.

Actually, they are a modification for compatibility purposes when copy protection prevents you from running that software on certain systems, for example, on Linux through Wine. It is not a crime of piracy to create one, piracy requires you to illegally make available an entire product that you do not have the rights to distribute (however some cracks that are distributed as full executables could be classified as piracy). They are only a violation of the EULA because most EULAs have a "do not modify" clause in them. There is absolutely nothing freeloading about buying a game then cracking it simply so you don't have to keep putting that CD in the drive every time you want to play.

Not quite, there's an exemption in cases where the individual using the patch can show that he or she would be adversely affected by the DRM when engaged in otherwise non-infringing use.

On top of which, first sale doctrine dictates that it's your copy, you can do whatever you like with it, regardless of whether or not the company approves.

Beyond that, no-CD cracks tend to be important in cases where one wants to use a lawfully created backup.

The legality of no CD cracks depends heavily on the EULA of the game.

Most EULAs these days basically say "you can't do anything with this game but play it in the manner we intended." In that instance, on a technical level, it is a violation of the EULA, which is supposedly a legally binding contract, to use them.

From a moral level, however, there is nothing wrong with a no CD crack, so long as you:
1) own the game already.
2) keep your copy of the game once you no longer need the CD.
3) do not pass the no CD crack, and your install disc, around to your friends so they can all install the game too.

It's very unlikely that downloading the cracks will get you in any form of trouble, aside from, as mentioned, costing you access to tech support. But, if you need support, your first step is reinstalling the game, so you do that and try again, if there's no issue, install the crack, if there's an issue after the crack.. get an updated crack. If there's an issue on a clean install, without the crack, guess what? you have tech support!

Your actual real fear in finding cracks, is malware disguised as a crack. Make sure to only get your cracks from sources you trust, and always scan for viruses. Some cracks will show false positives, always check those that come up positive out further before proceeding.

Now, I know the US legal system is fucked up, but I doubt it's fucked up enough to land you in jail for using a patch. Rofl.

See, the problem here is you're trying to drive a truck through the eye of a needle.

The exceptions hedwards mentions are narrow. ALMOST ALL No-CD cracks are meant for one purpose only, and that is piracy. All this talk about the morality of using cracks and the validity of EULAs obscures that.

Mere convenience is not a justification like the need to use a backup or make the software compatible with recalcitrant hardware. Using no-cd cracks for convenience encourages pirates.

And software is not necessarily subject to first sale doctrine. The landmark case, Vernor v. Autodesk, was overturned in favor of Autodesk.

In practice, unless you're cracking software for other people's use, it's unlikely that the owner would even find out about it.

That being said, there are exemptions and the Librarian of Congress adds to them ever few years. The DMCA isn't supposed to trump fair use, nor is it supposed to be used as a club to require people purchase new copies of software they bought and still possess copies of.

That being said, the US judicial system definitely is screwed up and anything can happen.

Even if there is an illegal use for a crack, that does not make all uses of cracks illegal. You are simply making an emotional argument against them, not a legal one. The same types of arguments are also used for things like gun control, i.e. guns can be used to kill people, therefore guns should be illegal, but at the same time, guns can be used for perfectly legal acts, like hunting. Cracks are really no different in this respect. Yes, people use them for piracy, but people also use them for perfectly legal reasons, like all my Windows games that I run on Linux.

That's where it gets messy, technically speaking in a case like that Vernor ought to have sued Autodesk for fraud.

More than that though, the proceedings are still ongoing as far as I can tell. And ultimately, that particular opinion only applies to the 9th circuit, not to the rest of the country at present. Those courts often times do get it wrong because they're not supposed to be setting precedence. Which is why that one was so mind boggling.

As for the intention aspect, it doesn't matter, software of that sort is protected under the 1st amendment protections for speech. Backing up software would be a substantial non-infringing use as would the ability to run the software without having the disc in the drive.

At the end of the day, I doubt very much that the prosecutor's office would bother bringing a case like this up where there's no actual piracy going on. At most this would be a civil matter.

That being said, no company in its right mind would sue somebody for using a non-CD patch or violating the EULA in this sort of way, there's just way too much to lose if they lose the case.

The overwhelming majority of the uses of cracks is piracy, and none of the means used to produce cracks are anything other than outright copyright infringement. Every argument that trivializes the use of cracks gives aid and comfort to pirates.

This is very different from the situation with guns, which are produced and sold lawfully (though often recklessly).

Doesn't matter if it is a majority, that old Betamax decision still applies AFAIK, in this case there's a substantial non-infringing use for it. The cracks themselves are typically created in other nations so the legality of the creation is hardly relevant to the discussion.

OTOH, we got to get teh evilz p1r@tez b4 they get us. !!11!!11eleventy one!!!

GOG uses cracks, its not like GOG are being pirates or something.

Just like with torrents, most use them for piracy, but still, it is a great technology that is also used for legal stuff too.

At the OP: Look at it this way. If you want a game to bother you with spam about the disc not being inserted in the drive, forget about 'no-cd' patches.

If you want to just double click the icon and play the game, go to GCW, find the right version of the game, download the exe, and replace the original one.

On a personal note, I ALWAYS crack my digitally purchased games, that way I won't have to bother with activations and similar crap.