Are no-cd patches illegal?

The strange thing is regarding these is some software companies have said to customers having problems to use a no-cd patch :confused:

If i can remember where i saw this will post the link but i remember reading this somewhere on a forum or news page online. So it depends on the company it seems as to whether they allow it or not and what the related problem is.

Some games in the past like Unreal Tournament made the game no-cd after a period of time in the patches, so you didn't need the cd eventually. This would be a better way of doing the cd issue but with piracy would be a slightly risky option.

SCM
 
I think its illegal. And i dont do it. But i am annoyed at my cd drive spinning up every time i insert a game cd/dvd just to play. Can they not sort this? :/ Its too noisy. lol.
 
SCM said:
The strange thing is regarding these is some software companies have said to customers having problems to use a no-cd patch :confused:

It's not an issue if the company itself provides it. It only becomes illegal if it's done by a third party - reverse engineering, decoding, copyright and that all that sort of thing.

Mods, depending on exactly how they are done aren't illegal, especially if they're standalone. Generally anything that alters the original game code without the software companies permission is a breach of copyright.

Jokester
 
Matmulder said:
But surely "Mods" alter the game code too, and they're not considered illegal...?
aye i was just thinking that too...
i've made plenty of mods for my own personal use, but never released any of them publicly... surely by supplying TES games with the Constructors Set is then actively enticing people to break the law?

some mods only add levels to games and such, so i dont think theres anything illegal about them...
but if altering game code, means that the vast majority of mods are illegal... despite many well known game publishers letting people freely release mods, and even supporting them.

perhaps we're just talking about the actual EXE file though?


theres plenty of old games that don't work on XP any more, some of which have been enabled to work by using a cracked EXE file, which has been supported by the publishers... only one that automatically springs to mind is Grand Prix World...

bah, i guess i dont understand, or know, nearly enough about the subject :-/
seems a grey area to me...

personally, i rarely use No-CD cracks/patches... from experience it tends to bork up actually patching the game.
Once the game has been patched with a No-CD, and you use a legitmate patch (to fix bugs) it makes the No-CD patch null and void (since the EXE has changed again).

maybe its just me, but i keep all my games close by to my pc, on a shell and a couple of book cases... most used games tend to sit on top of my PC case in their box... favourite games are on the shell so i can find them quickly and easily, less used ones are on in the bookcases... i never seem to have trouble finding any game.
 
Presumably if the developer supports the use of a 'crack' then it's legal. Since you have been given explicit permission by the copyright owner to use the crack.

Same goes with gameplay mods. The developer has provided tools to allow you to make such mods and they encourage you to do so. Therefore you have permission.

However, back-up copies may be legal (in other countries), but no-cds aren't, as the EULA will state that any modification of game code (which is what a no-cd is)is prohibited.
As said before, EULAs mean nothing. The fact that you have to buy the game before you can read pretty much makes it null and void. It's never come up in court but if it did it would probably be thrown straight out. However no-cd cracks are circumventing copy protection so are illegal anyway if you don't have permission to use them.
 
I play bf2 and I hate it when I'm burning disks etc (no not game copies) then I forget to stick the game disk back in then I have to search for where the wife has put the disk because she tidied up my desk grrrr half an hour later I get to play a game
 
Its against the EULA, which isn't necessarily law.

I read somewhere the other day that the EULA isn't enforceable by law, as it is essentially a contract which you can only agree to after you've purchased software. So if you disagree with the EULA, tough. Or something to that effect.

Grey area imo.
 
Clearcut said:
I'm sorry but that's hillarious. Someone with 312 posts making a statement like that to someone with 4700 posts - 'our forums' :D

Read again! I said our forums, see sig! Meaning the forums in my sig.
 
Jokester said:
It's got nothing to do with the EULA, it's a copyright violation under European law.

Jokester
I'm guessing the only way the EULA can affect the law is if it explicitly say that you CAN use a no-cd crack, since then you've been given permission.
 
They are NOT illegal.

I once broke my CnC Renegade CD and emailed EA to see if they could replace it. They wanted like a fiver or something silly so I said is there anything else I could do. They told me to get a no-cd patch and even told my a place where I could get it from, I can't repeat the site here because a lot of the stuff on it IS illegal!

This later happened again with the Sims 2!

If EA tell me its ok to use one then I don't care what anyone else says, they are legal to use!

Not that anyone really cares anyway but thats for another thread!
 
Last edited:
dbmzk1 said:
They are NOT illegal.

I once broke my CnC Renegade CD and emailed EA to see if they could replace it. They wanted like a fiver or something silly so I said is there anything else I could do. They told me to get a no-cd patch and even told my a place where I could get it from, I can't repeat the site here because a lot of the stuff on it IS illegal!

This later happened again with the Sims 2!

If EA tell me its ok to use one then I don't care what anyone else says, they are legal to use!

Not that anyone really cares anyway but thats for another thread!
If they gave you permission then fine. If you haven't explicitly got permission they are not legal. Just because one company says it's ok doesn't mean it's legal in every case.
 
Psyk said:
If they gave you permission then fine. If you haven't explicitly got permission they are not legal. Just because one company says it's ok doesn't mean it's legal in every case.

Sorry but if the worlds biggest game company gives me a link to a crack download site and said go get one its fine to use, not once but twice, then as far as I am concerned I am allowed to use them on any game I feel like.

At the end of the day though its not like they have the means to check and its not like anyone really cares either.
 
Last edited:
I don't know if everybody else remembers this but there was a situation concerning Far Cry, that is getting it 2 work. I bought the game from a shop and found the only way I could get it 2 play was with the no cd crck. Ironic really :confused:
 
dbmzk1 said:
Sorry but if the worlds biggest game company gives me a link to a crack download site and said go get one its fine to use, not once but twice, then as far as I am concerned I am allowed to use them on any game I feel like.

At the end of the day though its not like they have the means to check and its not like anyone really cares either.

well your naive then. whatever you think, whatever you assume your right are, it is illegal.
 
Under the European copyright directive, and the subsequent amendment to the UK copyright laws, yes they are.

Anything that allows you to bypass copy protection is illegal, whether hardware or software based.

You are, however, legally allowed to make a backup, as long as you don't have to circumvent copy protection to do it.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2003/20032498.htm#24
 
Hiya,
Thats actually a very interesting read :)
However, Section 296ZB:
(1) A person commits an offence if he -

(a) manufactures for sale or hire, or

(b) imports otherwise than for his private and domestic use, or

(c) in the course of a business -

(i) sells or lets for hire, or

(ii) offers or exposes for sale or hire, or

(iii) advertises for sale or hire, or

(iv) possesses, or

(v) distributes, or

(d) distributes otherwise than in the course of a business to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the copyright owner,

any device, product or component which is primarily designed, produced, or adapted for the purpose of enabling or facilitating the circumvention of effective technological measures.

(2) A person commits an offence if he provides, promotes, advertises or markets -

(a) in the course of a business, or

(b) otherwise than in the course of a business to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the copyright owner,

a service the purpose of which is to enable or facilitate the circumvention of effective technological measures.

(3) Subsections (1) and (2) do not make unlawful anything done by, or on behalf of, law enforcement agencies or any of the intelligence services -

(a) in the interests of national security; or

(b) for the purpose of the prevention or detection of crime, the investigation of an offence, or the conduct of a prosecution,

and in this subsection "intelligence services" has the meaning given in section 81 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.

AFAIK, the important part here is A- "otherwise than for his private and domestic use" appears to be saying that they are legal for private, non-commercial usage, and nothing later on appears to contradict that.

To be quite frank though, this is simply a problem with the current method of copy protection- Making the consumer use the CD is a simply ludicrous method when facilities such as the internet and telephone exist. (Perhaps they should allow one or the other?)
It also irritates me even more when games such as BF2 which can only realistically be played online require the CD.

Cheers

-Leezer-
 
Last edited:
The main thing is however, if it is practically uninforcable and you have bought the game. Surely, morally, there is nothing wrong with using a no-cd crack because the only thing it is doing is saving you time :)
 
Back
Top Bottom