Well, for those of you who run into these problems there's always another way. You're moving in a legal gray zone, so to speak, though. Stardock really should make this clear on their website.

There's no real legal gray area here. If I buy a washing machine from my neighbor, the manufacturer/store has no obligation to offer me warranty or support services. While you have the rights of first sale to re-sell your own copy (but only your copy, and only once), you can't transfer your warranty/service plan. Stardock has no obligation to extend support indefinitely down the line to whoever the game passes to.

I have a very simple solution actually very simple. Stardock should charge $9.95 to re-register the game to the new owner. I'm glad Stardock did not use Starforce and like others I would not have touched this game with a ten foot pole.

I think offering a discounted serial number for used copy purchasers is fine.

The problem people are running into is, imo, unfamiliar territory. Most* game companies use CP and have for a long time. Everyone is used to CP instead of serial number security. If serial numbers and no re-sell had been used from the dawn, it would not even be a question.

Frankly, I am glad to see a company moving in a new direction and with it's sucess, hopefully in a few years (cough) this will be common knowledge.

I would rather have a game I can't resell than to have one with draconian copy protection.

That being said, I disagree with the EULA about resale. I should be able to re-sell ANYTHING I bought through legitimate channels. I am certainly not talking about piracy here (where you make a copy and sell the original). I am talking about an honest resale of a game.

For example is my situation. I bought the game (at a store) but had quite a bit of trouble running the game because my computer has a graphics controller and not a video card. I had no idea of the differences between the two. I am not a computer guru, nor do I have the desire to have to learn a new carreer just to play a game. Fortunatly I was able to get a new computer (was needed anyway) so system requirements are no longer a problem. But in absence of that, I would re-sell the game to someone that had a computer that could handle it. Being denied the ability to re-sell a good game I can't use because of my computer is like kicking someone when their down. You can't afford the game at walmart? awww, TFB for you.

The argument that they didn't make any money from the resale is moot. They made their money from the original sale, why should SD care who is playing the game as long the CD was obtained through non-pirated methods. It just seems to me their position regarding resale flies in the face of how SD handles everything else regarding this game.

If I did have to dump the product, I certainly would take whatever measures were necessary for the new ower to be able to get it going (email SD to reset the number, whatever) but that is me. I know most people would not go that extra mile. If they did, none of this would be necessary. Damn Terrans. Can't trust them with a postage stamp.

I realise both positions appear conflicting so in a nutshell, I understand why they are handling it this way though I don't necessarily agree with it. Anti-piracy measures and the legitimate re-sale of a product are two seperate issues that have been combined, sadly so.

I am not asking SD to reverse their current position. Just that they keep an open mind for other possible solutions for future games. Right now it flies, but lands like an albatross. It's a good idea that needs a lot of refining, imo.

I suppose I don't really understand the issue. If I was going to legitimately sell the game, I'd clear out my account info & characters and stuff, and send the logon along with the CD/serial. What stops someone from doing that?

Why is everyone up in arms over this? Its not as though this is a new concept. MMORPGs are exactly the same way. You can't sell your copy to someone else, becuase you're already registered with that serial.

This information is presented in-full during installation. By continuing installation, you are agreeing to the EULA (which are fully enforcable in North America, btw) and its terms. If you don't like the terms, you can return the product to your point of purchase. Technically, you could even install the game and as long as you didn't register it with us, could still sell it to someone else, etc. and we would not know.

However, once someone takes the step of registering their specific copy of GalCiv II with us either via the website or activation, you have made a solid commitment to your specific serial number. As I have said before, it is not easy or trivial for us to alter those records in our system and it's against our license regardless. This is where we draw the line. It's more than fair.

For what it's worth, a license for software is a contract between the purchaser and the software company (or a company the software company has contracted in one way or another to "sell" its product), so unless the contract (EULA) explicitly states that the license is transferrable, it isn't.

This is why Stardock's method of distribution is ideal, you can't get the "latest" version of the software without registering on their server, but there is really nothing whatsoever stopping you from making an illegal copy, downloading an ISO, upgrading to 1.0x, or whatever.

Would you play 1.0X if you could? I wouldn't, not when I could play 1.11, because despite its imperfections it is far better than 1.0X or 1.0. This basically turns the CD version and 1.0X into a sort-of demo version, though I doubt it was intended to be. Personally, I used a pirated copy to try out GC2, because no matter what the price in some stores, it is too high for software I may not like at all. It turned out to be so good that I paid the FULL price for the game right from the website ($45US) in order to always have the latest updated version. I don't play GC2 much anymore (I will likely pick up playing it again after a few months), but I've gotten my money's worth out of that $45 - 100's of hours of entertainment for less than the price of 4 movie tickets or roughly a dozen movie rentals.

Post #42 (what irony) exactly summs it up as I see it.

I hate seeing "disposable" software. However, small fees for transfer of license (or a new serial) is generally acceptable - especially where it's considered goods.

I for one agree with this policy. I worked in a game store part time for a while and people would come in, mostly teenage boys, and brag about how they do not pay for PC games--just pirate them. The results, PC game sales are down because of the user is being stuck with awful protection software that mucks up there machines. My feeling is that these people do not buy anyway, not it they can steal, and that StarDocks approach on behalf of the legetimate user needs to be applauded here.

So buy the game NEW. That way you vote for this game design philosophy by giving some monetary award to the developer and encourage this style of game development. This is a good thing people.

I am 42 and I have been buying/playing and selling my old PC games for twenty years and IMHO GC 2 is the best sci-fi 3x game I have played in a VERY long time.

But, this attitude by Stardock bothers be quite a bit. I get this crap from Sony, Microsoft, etc (ex. unable to make my LEGAL a back up due to encryption because of 11 year-old pirates, etc). Now I have to put up with it from small outfits as well?

Frankly, at this point, if Stardock released GC 3 tomorrow and it is twice as good as GC2 I am not sure I would purchase it because I am so disgusted with companies screwing their LOYAL customers and defending this attitude by saying it is "legal" or they are "just protecting themselves".

(IOW: Ya' know that small group of vocal people that you talked about in those meetings that you might lose as customers when chose this strategy... That's me.)

My (only) two cents,
GG