I'll give you a condensed version. FSF was founded by Richard Stallman. He's a hacker/programmer who saw the first beginnings of copyright forcing itself on software along with Non-disclosure agreements, which of course was screwing everyone when all he wanted was to make drivers to work properly with a printer that they got and they weren't given the permission due to the NDA.

Also with the company dropping an OS for a newer version which really wasn't that different except the company wanted to make money on a 'new' OS they were making although it mostly just had bug fixes. He fought the good fight, but eventually abandoned it when he was the only one using the old OS.

Seeing how the new OS's were locked, copyrighted and closed source he planned for years in advance to make new versions of all the programs needed in order for an OS so you don't have to accept the horrible licensing rules that they gave. For it to be legal and work for his goal he invented the <span class="bold">GPL</span> (<i>General Public License</i>) which it's intent was to stimulate the growth of free software, to keep it free, and let everyone have the same basic rights across the board. This includes: Running it, copying it, learning from it, and improving it and giving it back out to the public.

Back in the early 1990's he completed his suite of programs, but lacked a kernel. Linus Torvalds during his free time made a kernel which he called Linux. Seeing this and the kernel was compatible and used the GPL license, combined you get GNU/Linux which is a totally free and open OS.

Next up you have xWindows which is a windowing environment which predates M$ Windows. It was highly successful but the license was weak and soon become commercialized and limited. Back at revision 16 i think it became free again and that's what most of the free OS's use for GUI's.

FSF is more than just about a free OS, it's also about retaining rights to our software, basic rights. With DRM coming on the scene they have adjusted the GPL to v3 to avoid Microsoft from gaining control of free software, and educating people on types of DRM; As well as various company's attempts to vilify people who are just trying to get by (like the term 'pirates' used) and guilt trip them into being obedient sheep.

In order to be an example Stallman refuses to use a cellphone or use anything that objects to his personal views. So an encrypted DVD or 'protected' he won't buy, or even accept as a gift.

I'm sure there's more but that's all i can rattle off the top of my head...
Part of this is probably a result of various media not being physical anymore. If you have a book, you can turn it in to Good-Will or a used bookstore, but if everything is digital there's no way to turn that in...

Also doesn't help with WalMart who pushes 'everything is cheap and new' while some of the products are inferrior like pressed wood for their furniture... And when it breaks you're expected to get a new one, rather than get it fixed or give it away.

Wow. A lot of the jargon still goes over my head, but I get the gist. I'll look into them some more. I agree that downloading a game that is still available for sale is "pirating", but something that really, really annoys me is how certain companies have a no tolerance towards emulation or abandonware. We are getting to a point now where certain games and software are getting up in age and the companies that published and developed those games are often obsolete or a shell of what they once were, sometimes name only companies like Atari.

But pirates attack ships, and we aren't attacking ships... And last he or i checked, pirates don't attack using computer software or music...

Also Pirates steal gold and other physical things that actually harm in a real financial and physical way.

No the term pirate is used to guilt trip people and make them seem like criminals for helping their fellow neighbor.

Also understand copyright law has been warped from it's original purpose and intent. With the printing press copyright law was a good thing since when a company printed a book, everyone ended up getting the book anyways. Today's copyright law is only to further fuel corporations that own the copyrighted material.

Fine, not pirate. Though if a company is releasing their game digital only, and you just take it without paying, how would you be supporting anyone, DRM-free, or otherwise.

Just because i acquire a game without paying for it, doesn't mean i won't pay for it later when i get a chance. There's different reasons one might do this, to avoid the crippling DRM that's present and have it play the way it's intended rather that a company 'protecting their investment'. Maybe it's so i can try the game since they haven't offered any demos i could get. Or perhaps i could tell ten of my friends and they like the idea of the game so much they go out and buy it, and the company now gets 10 more sales indirectly by word-of-mouth advertising.

Now if we go to the other spectrum where i never intended to pay for the game, then the company has lost no sales. If they manage to keep me from playing the game, i'll just go onto something else, worse the game technically is less popular and i could bad-mouth the game for it's horrid DRM and insist no one buy it because of it, which could hurt sales. So 10 people who MIGHT have considered getting it, now won't because i made a compelling argument because i wasn't allowed to play it, or perhaps the valid DRM is just annoying and burned them that they are happy to know the DRM exists so they can avoid it (like SecuRom).

Third spectrum. I get the game, i pay for it, but i hate the game Because of the DRM they put in place. There are interesting DRM attempts that are horrible, which make the game unplayable in a variety of scenarios. I know i personally have pool of radiance, but i didn't get a book for the game i got a PDF on the disk. I got a code wheel, but it's a pain to use. So i don't play the game, no matter how good it was for the time i will not recommend it to anyone.

If people like something, they will find a way to donate, especially if you make it easy. There are bands that make music and put it out for free and ask for donations if you liked them. And a few of them do very very well. In ReviewTechUSA's video regarding DRM, he mentions a comedian who put all his videos and his show up on youtube and the internet for free, and he earned something like 3 million in donations. His lawyers said he was crazy.

Come to GOG

IT'S THE FUCKING COOLEST

I like you, and I agree with a lot of things you say, but I just disagree with you on this, at least to an extent. I know this is a common argument, but really, if I can get something for free, why would I pay for it? Even if I give it good word of mouth, what would keep other people from just taking it like I did? I do think it's possible to be successful like that comedian, but that's one man. Not a company of any number of people and the costs that come from marketing, development, and publishing. I mean yea, it's all well and good that people want to support the folk hero for making his work free, and that's admirable. However, I don't think it's realistic for bigger investments. I oppose DRM, sure, but personally my opposition to that comes from the digital revolution. It doesn't bother me that physical media have copy protection, as I can have that disc for as long as it works, and if it breaks, I can buy a new one. I dislike DRM because it prevents me from backing up a digital copy that I paid for. I think you and I are similar, but you're farther on the anti-DRM chain than I. Either way, I appreciate the debate.

Btw, I quit watching RTU after he trashed the Bible. I can tolerate a lot of things, including stark opposition to religion, but he was blatantly disrespectful and I lost all respect for him personally. Not to mention that if you pay attention, all his videos are basically the same: take random headline, talk for 10 minutes about how much he hates the topic. That type of commentary is a dime-a-dozen on youtube.

I feel like a lot of these companies see that entitled behaviour as a good reason to "protect their investment" by crippling their games. It's a circle I don't want to be a part of.

Crippling DRM? Pass. Simple as that. That's the strongest message possible.

I haven't watched the podcast yet but I love Jesse. I remember him giving GOG serious praise in a video he made about Volgarr the Viking, while at the same time likening Steam to a rental service, and how it could evaporate like it's namesake.

I've been a little pissed of about TotalBiscuit of late on the other hand, as whenever he covers a game he no longer mentions if it's available anywhere but Steam. He used to mention GOG, but not anymore, I found it particularly bothersome in his WTF is on Shovel knight. Is he being paid off or something?

Why would anyone donate any money on KickStarter? Why would people offer their seat in a subway when commuting? Why would someone give a sandwich to someone who is hungry alone and cold because they missed their bus and have to wait 24 hours for the next one in order to go home?

We are mostly emotional beings, and we sympathize. We want to see something succeed. I've dropped five dollars to some twenty or so kickstarters with the saying 'good luck hope you do well' and have no other investment than that. I get nothing out of it, not even recognition since it's anonymous at that level.

And not everyone who gets something for free will donate, this is true, but there are donations, it's a real thing, it happens. Logic doesn't work here, 2+2 doesn't equal 4 all the time, sometimes it's 7 or 10 after rounding or seeing how things go.

Here's an example. Perhaps it's bad to say, but someone has to. I downloaded and acquired Space Pirates and Zombies like 6 months ago without paying for it. You know what? I loved it! And i knew if i saw it come up somewhere where i could pay for it, i would. It's come to GoG, and guess what, it's in my library now and i paid for it. Yeah there's probably no reason i HAD to, but i feel glad when i pay for something i enjoyed and gave me a good weekend of playing and wasn't a crappy product.

Yeah, quite a few of his videos are mirrored on AlphaOmegaSin. I generally watch him on stuff that's interesting usually because he isn't trying to lie through his teeth, he's just saying things how it is and his take on things. Some stuff needs to get mirrored the hell out of them (like talking about SOPA/PIPA to get it out there), and some doesn't. I don't watch hundreds of channels, i keep an eye on 4 or so to keep up to date of what's going on, and he's one of them. Don't mean to refer you to a YT channel you dislike :( but off the top of my head his is one of the easiest to find exactly what i'm looking for.
His blogs/vlogs he mentions he's busy going through treatments for colon cancer. He just might not have the same amount of time to do his research (due to pain or just time for himself)...

Yeah i wish he'd cover where they were more often, but 95% of the time he's getting it from steam so consolidating his research is easier if he doesn't have to search several sites...

I stopped watching Northernlion for that. It's always weird hearing TB talk against Steam yet treating it like it's the only outlet.

Maybe I am just more cynical than you are, haha. I just have a hard time believing people will act with other peoples' best interests in mind. I know people do, and it's becoming popular online, look at GoG and humble bundle. Kickstarter is a good example as well. Maybe if these successes become apparent, and with support from people like us, well known, then the bigger name companies will follow suit and realize that DRM-free is a very profitable method of distribution. With the bloated budgets and marketing costs though, I just don't think DRM-free would work. Honestly, would a game like Skyrim make back the development cost on donations alone? I have no idea, maybe it would, but logically I just don't think so. I don't really have a counter argument to your points, other than my personal opinion. With DRM-free gaining steam, maybe we'll get more opportunities to compare the successes or failures of bigger releases. Then we could really know. I mean, didn't iTunes get rid of its DRM on its music? Don't take my position as someone defending the EA's or Capcoms of the world. I'm currently boycotting EA games. I literally can't enjoy a game made by them, knowing how poorly they treat employees and consumers. I'm just a believer in capitalism and free enterprise, so I guess it's hard not to be skeptical of releasing things for free. You know what I mean? It's a new frontier though, this kind of technology; the internet and even video games, so we'll have a chance to influence what happens.

Don't worry about it. I used to be a big fan of his, before he said a few things that personally offended me. I don't often do that, but I felt he crossed a line. I like alphaomegasin as well, but I find him more humorous and I think he is more of an actual gamer.

Maybe... But the required activation through steam makes that an unknown element. We may never know. But with copyright going to be lasting decades and decades, then Bethesda can just wait to get a return on their investment. But DRM-free isn't the same as donate-if-you-want. I would have been happy if the game didn't require a steam activation, but it's that install DRM requirement that has turned me off of it.

Sooner or later this will all play out, and companies that fail will be examples in the future of what not to do, or companies will be doomed to repeat their mistakes.

For the most part, yeah, the FSF campaigns and people getting annoyed at requiring all the headaches to listen to their own music was enough. More likely iTunes was one of the last to change it to DRM-free after everyone else was doing it, and it was hurting them to keep it. I'm not sure...

Yes, "games as services'". I love that, so easy to dismiss. I didn't know about FC4. Too bad, I'd like to play their games (they're made 5 minutes from here), but add that crappy Uplay platform and now mandatory online, and they can stuff it.

By the way, I bought one album on iTunes, two months ago. One song I downloaded wouldn't "activate". Tell me again there's no DRM. Spread the word. Had to reset the purchase, the account, reinstall, change settings, redownload. Took 2 days.