1) They never claimed this.
2) They never said SD-published games will use Goo.
3) They rolled this out as competition for SecuROM, et al.

Given the above, I'm starting to be boggled by the responses. You'd rather publishers who want to put DRM on their stuff keep using SecuROM everywhere? Isn't Goo a much better alternative to it?

This isn't "Stardock is going to be using Goo". It's "Stardock is creating Goo so other publishers/developers have an alternative that's easier on the consumers than the existing DRM schemes".

DRM is not going away. Most publishers are far too rooted in the practice. Stardock is small enough (and it's private) that it can get away with it. Publishers with rights holders can't. But I'd rather they use Goo to do it, than SecuROM.

Understand what's on the table before going to complain about it like it's the next apocalypse. It's amazing how much crap a company can catch for actually listening to people and rolling out viable alternatives to help.

Gamers: We hate SecuROM rootkits, installation limits, activation limits for resale.
Stardock: Okay, we'll make something for publishers to use that doesn't have any of that.
Gamers: WTF? Stardock DRM? Traitors!!!!

It's my understanding that GOO is going into Elemental.  I don't have a source as I don't remember where I read it so I could be mistaken.  Perhaps it's as a proof of concept for other publishers, in which case that's just good business strategy (even if it causes the loss of a few anti-DRM customers).  If it's because of some expectation that DRM does any good or serves any real purpose though then boo to Stardock.

Well, I responded in the other thread - Brad very specifically said the user deactivation feature will be used in Elemental to allow for ownership transfer on resale. Not that the DRM scheme will be used in Elemental.

There is a difference And yes, by that wording it pretty much is a proof of concept.

If some people are anti-DRM whiners, it is not without reasons... the Goo system is based on impulse who work only with windows ( forget MAC OSX, Linux, Solaris system )... and you need the Microsoft Internet Explorer for make Impulse work ( forget the other browser )... The point is that these Goo system will exclude a lot of potential customer...

By the way, we have no problem to pay for something we want... and why in the hell we need to do some work for something that we pay !!!

If a piece of software need to be protected, until now, the best method for the customer and the software creator was the Dongle system... specialy with the new dongle type having a cryptoprocessor and some of the software code on it... it is machine independant, it is very secure, it is transferable, and easy to use for the customer...

In any case, soon of later, pirate will break any system of protection... so, the protection will become only a problem for honest customer !!!

So, I havent understood completely this GOO DRM. 

- Does it add some sort of personal digital signature to each of the player's game binaries?

- If that is the case, in what ways is this "binary with your name on it" system prevent unauthorized copying?

Meaning, buy the stuff or get away from those of us Honest enough to encourage whomever we please.

I use to not care about what DRM was on what; I buy a game and it worked, that was the way it was. Then, since 2004, I've been locked out of quite a few of my legitimately purchased games (paying hundreds of dollars I almost didn't have) due to DRM issues. I have never wanted nor needed anything for free; I only want what I paid good money for to actually work without jumping through dozens of hoops before doing a big song and dance. As for being a "narcissistic zealot", I have helped a lot of people in my life at my personal expense. Hardly a "narcissistic zealot".

Frogboy-

    I'm not saying that GOO isn't a big improvement over other recent forms of DRM.  It absolutely is.  The one thing which gives me pause is that servers that need to be running in order to re-install the game. 

If stardock were to go under, be acquired, or something of that nature, the servers could be shut down, and I could end up loosing access to the products I paid for.

I'm not saying you intend for this, or even haven't planned against it; valve has publicly committed that if Steam ever gets shut down, they will release mechanisms for gamers to keep all the games they purchased on steam. 

But looking at examples provided by microsoft, "do no evil" google, and the MLB- all of them chose to shutter DRM-based digitally distributed products, and consumers who had paid for products lost ability to access them.

Looking at what happens when companies go under, they may have had the best of intentions, but shutdowns are messy, and it is very common for commitments and promises to go unfulfilled when companies shut down.

I also understand that there are good reasons for you to implement DRM... but I'm still going to keep applying pressure for a "more ideal" solution.

GOO looks pretty close to being ideal.  If you were to tell me that GOO is set up so that all you needed to do was to email "key" files to users owning products with GOO DRM, and they could use those keys to re-authenticate their products, then you might have the problem licked- all you'd need to do would be to send a bunch of emails in the event of a shutdown- that wouldn't cost much time or money.

If not, it's an improvement, but not perfect yet.

GOO is a good thing relative to what is out there.  But so is getting hit in the head with a whiffle bat instead of being hit in the head with an aluminum bat.  I would rather not get hit in the head at all, though if I have to make a choice I'll choose the whiffle bat over the aluminum bat.

Except you didn't read up on what Goo does.

One of the things Goo does is work to eliminate the problem you just described.  A game that uses Goo can be made to be downloaded from any service that has that game, not just the one you bought it from.

If some of you guys would actually read what Goo does instead of assuming anything attached to "DRM" is baaaad you wouldn't say things like the above.  It's not a long press release:

https://www.stardock.com/about/newsitem.asp?id=1214

Goo has a number of unique advantages that developer Stardock believes both gamers and developers will appreciate:

1. There is no third-party client required. This means a developer can use this as a universal solution since it is not tied to any particular digital distributor. 
   


2. It paves the way to letting users validate their game on any digital distribution service that supports that game. One common concern of gamers is if the company they purchased a game from exits the market, their game library may disappear too. Games that use Goo would be able to be validated anywhere. 
   
   
3. It opens the door to gamers being able to resell their games because users can voluntarily disable their game access and transfer their license ownership to another user.
   

With GOO:

Are you encouraging the practice with that obvious statement?

Or is it, again, that Piracy tactics however adaptative they may get won't stop anyone from distributing unhackable products for a given period in such a manner that a balance sheet shows stable closing figures?

I'll say it once more, i have no respect for thieves. They're in a brain jail tough enough to just go by us in total indifference while we CAN ignore what they do, did or will.

Unless.

The pain becomes insupportable (pun, intended).

So disregarding your individual opinion on DRM, this is a hot topic and a lot of us are not happy with it. That's what you (Stardock) get for doing DRM, and that's what you'll continue to get more and more.