Heroes Chronicles added on Good Old Games.com!

[ThunderTitan]

@Bersaglio

But since Ubi bought the rights to the series they can do whatever they please with it... and stripping a decade old protection which was cracked even before the games came out is trivial (although i'm guessing the GoG guys handled that, along with the Win7 compatibility, it's what they do), and well within their rights.

And that's assuming Ubi didn't just ask whoever had the original unprotected file to give it to them, as they own it an no one could legally refuse them.

And neither New World Computing or 3DO exist any more anyway...

[Bersaglio]

Just downloaded GoG version and thoroughly checked it. Hmm.
Only facts:
The manual comes from Clash of the Dragons and in very poor quality. Soundtrack is identical to MP3 folder in the game folder. The main self-extracting archive called 'setup_heroes_chronicles.exe' utilizes Inno Setup Version 5.2.3 and can be unpacked by any compatible unpacker like innounp. Nothing to do with the original games here.
About game executables:
Chapter I.
Warlords.exe is identical to corresponding Cracked exe done by FAiRLiGHT(FLT) release group. The only difference between FLT and GoG executables: GoG removed the FLT title "$ID : KPE2K-SDKCR111-F21L03T2C0L0S000208A2F" from his exe. That's all!
Chapter II.
Underworld.exe is identical to corresponding Cracked exe done by FLT. The only difference between FLT and GoG executables: GoG removed the FLT title "$ID : KPE2K-SDKCR111-F21L03T2C0L0S000211945".
Chapter III.
Elements.exe is identical to corresponding Cracked exe done by FLT. The only difference between FLT and GoG executables: GoG removed the FLT title "$ID : KPE2K-SDKCR111-F21L03T2C0L0S0001F0CF3".
Chapter IV.
Dragons.exe is identical to corresponding Cracked exe done by csir.cjb.net (In my opinion the FLT executable is better. Ask GoG why he did not use the FLT executable). The only difference between csir.cjb.net and GoG executables: GoG removed the csir.cjb.net title "unwrapped with unSafedisc - csir.cjb.net -" from his exe. That's all!
Chapter V.
WorldTree.exe is not identical to original executable. From GoG executable 43 bytes of code have been removed. Why? Ask GoG!
Chapter VI.
FieryMoon.exe is almost identical to original executable. Only CD check (6 bytes) have been removed.
The Final Chapters.
Chapter VII.
Beastmaster.exe is identical to corresponding Cracked exe done by 'Cama of Tribunal' Crackers team for GameCopyWorld (In my opinion the FLT executable is better. Ask GoG why he did not use the FLT executable). The only difference between 'Cama of Tribunal' and GoG executables: GoG removed the 'Cama of Tribunal' title "-razor 1911 rtl-" from his exe.
Chapter VIII.
Sword.exe is identical to corresponding Cracked exe done by 'Cama of Tribunal' Crackers team for GameCopyWorld (In my opinion the FLT executable is better. Ask GoG why he did not use the FLT executable). The only difference between 'Cama of Tribunal' and GoG executables: GoG removed the 'Cama of Tribunal' title " nofear " from his exe. That's all.

Summary. All executable modules (except Chapters V-VI) have been stolen from various crackers and (except only Chapter VI) has nothing to do with the original. Is this LEGAL?!?

P.S. GoG mistakenly put in his self-extracting archive the file Hchron_1.vid from German game release. English file is missing.

[Ya5MieL]

Yes, it is still legal (at least under most law's that I'm familiar with).

Is it a really sloppy edition? If all that you listed is true (and from your post I believe you) then by all means - it is sloppy, lazy, lackluster (add more adjectives if needed) edition but - by no means illegal.

The reason why it isn't illegal is that there is no grounds to claim such thing.

1st ground = original game - doesn't work because they do have the right to publish it and edit it as far as DRM goes.

2nd ground about stealing from cracking groups = there is no law in the world that can judge it illegal based on that. It is a huge oxymoron to begin with. Because the suing party would have to be the one doing the illegal work, and has no grounds on which to claim the "reparations".
Their (cracking group's) work has no copyrights from the moment they decided to illegally edit it.

So all in all, GoG did a cheap, sloppy work of doing these, but when it comes to legality - it is PERFECTLY legal for them to do it, while any cracking group that previously did it is still in illegal waters.

[GreatEmerald]

Interesting that it has a manual to begin with. I don't seem to have any manuals for WotW or CotU.

[Angelspit]

All executable modules (except Chapters V-VI) have been stolen from various crackers and (except only Chapter VI) has nothing to do with the original. Is this LEGAL?!?

If what you report is true, the practice is highly questionable. It's not the first time that publishers "accidentally" reuse cracks, but that would be a little too much.

[Ya5MieL]

Indeed. Even though it still is officially legal - it does have a Bitter-sweet taste if that is true. Overall a good research by Bersaglio.

And i don't like bitter-sweet unless it is Schweppes Bitter Lemon.

[Corlagon]

That's very suspicious indeed. I'm going to post about it at GoG's forum.

[ThunderTitan]

All executable modules (except Chapters V-VI) have been stolen from various crackers and (except only Chapter VI) has nothing to do with the original. Is this LEGAL?!?

If what you report is true, the practice is highly questionable. It's not the first time that publishers "accidentally" reuse cracks, but that would be a little too much.

It's not, if it's their IP any derivative work is theirs too...

[cuc]

The manual comes from Clash of the Dragons and in very poor quality.

Is it the same scan as seen on Replacement Docs here?
http://www.replacementdocs.com/download.php?view.6825

[Bersaglio]

Is it the same scan as seen on Replacement Docs here?
http://www.replacementdocs.com/download.php?view.6825

Sorry but I don't have one from replacementdocs.com
It seems that this project is dead now, if You have the manual from replacementdocs please upload it somewhere and I will compare.

That's very suspicious indeed. I'm going to post about it at GoG's forum.

I doubt that will be an official response from GoG staff...

[GreatEmerald]

Wow, did they just go down or something?

[Slayer of Cliffracers]

So all in all, GoG did a cheap, sloppy work of doing these, but when it comes to legality - it is PERFECTLY legal for them to do it, while any cracking group that previously did it is still in illegal waters.

It's all rather twisted though. As I understand it the cracking group has in fact done the work which the legitimate sellers then appropriate as their own property, meaning they are as a party benefiting from the value added by those who we are claiming did not legitimately do what they did.

Not that I would care too for such capitalistical legal BS. This is how I see it.

You cannot steal without depriving another party of value that is rightfully theirs. As the creators of the software 3DO have a right to the value of the product on the market. Because the market is of a limited scale, to distribute a product without their permission is stealing from 3DO.

However should they cease to distribute a product for whatever reason which they did then it is not stealing to distribute said product; because it does not reduce the value of the product to them if they are not selling the product.

This means that it is quite fine to distribute a product if the owners of the product refuse to or are unable to sell it. It doesn't cost them anything so it doesn't steal from them, while their attempt to destroy the market deprives value from the community so that would be stealing from it.

The problem is what we are seeing here. If someone who actually owns the product decides to start selling again. Further distribution of the product would then obviously be stealing. But what about additional value added in the meantime? Obviously the owner cannot distribute modifications made to the product as if it belonged to them, they can only distribute the original version.

Yet in this particular instance, the modifications made are strictly to facilitate distribution. Without the product being able to be distributed the product has no value. But the ability to be distributed is not the same as the value of the product as such.

Since the changes made are preservative changes, they merely protect the existing value of the product against destruction. They do not compromise the rights of GoG for much the same reason that a firefighter who keeps a house from burning down does not now own the house.

And now distributing the product is stealing from GoG while before it was perfectly fine.

[Daerandin]

It seems that not everyone understands how these things work. 3DO was going bankrupt and sold the rights of the Might and Magic franchise to Ubisoft. Meaning that even if 3DO still existed, they could not create or sell any more Might and Magic games as they sold all rights to the franchise. Ubisoft is now the legal holder of ALL rights to the Might and Magic franchise. That includes all the previously made games in the series. Creating a crack for a game is illegal since it is a modification of the code, only the one who own the rights for the code can allow any modifications.

GOG is now selling the games, that means GOG are a distributor, like any other store that sells computer games. Ubisoft have given GOG permission to sell the games which Ubisoft now legally owns, GOG also recieved permission to sell without drm. That means that GOG may remove the drm. As others have stated, cracks are not legally owned by the cracker since the code modification does not belong to them. If it is so that GOG uses cracks made by others, it's still perfectly legal.

But GOG have obviously done more than just crack the games. My old Chronicles cd's will not play. I can install but not play, and I have been unable to play since I believe it was the first service pack to XP. The games simply would not start anymore no matter what I tried. I tried looking for ways to have it work for a long time, but could find no solution, except finding the campaigs made for heroes 3. I was extremely happy to find them now on gog, fully working on Windows 7.

[Corlagon]

http://www.gog.com/en/forum/heroes_of_m ... _exe_files

There's the discussion I started. We all agree that it's legal (obviously). But it's surprising to see that nobody feels dubious about it, and most of them feel that the practice is fine and dandy. One guy uses a grafitti metaphor to justify the whole hypocrisy of distributing the work of outlaws as official. Somebody even casually mentioned similar cases of this happening with GoG. I argue it's lazy conduct and that it's unsettling that GoG aren't candid about it. And at that point I also lose interest. You, Bersaglio, can take it from here if you like.

I don't care about it personally, since I own the Chronicles, but it's interesting to note that Ubisoft were recently eviscerated when the very same practice became scandal: they released a crack made by the Reloaded pirates to remove their own DRM: http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/200 ... as-patch/1. The same thing happens to GoG and there's barely a note of apathy. It's an intriguing insight into the value of having a good public reputation as a company.

I do point out though that the Vegas 2 incident prompted this response: "Needless to say we do not support or condone copy protection circumvention methods like this and this particular incident is in direct conflict with Ubisoft's policies". If Bersaglio is right, isn't this a repeat of that conflict, just slightly more indirectly?

[ThunderTitan]

What i want from people is to admit that cracks are something useful and that the scene does benefit people that buy games... put that on that GoG thread.

You cannot steal without depriving another party of value that is rightfully theirs.

Pretty sure Robin Hood did fine... and the US when it drove away the indians (hey, they had no property papers for the land)...

As others have stated, cracks are not legally owned by the cracker since the code modification does not belong to them.

Actually if they're german they do (which is why Games Workshop stopped some fans from releasing a fanfilm, as under german law you can't forfeit your copy right even if it's derivative work).

[Bersaglio]

There is another problem associated with the use of cracks. Cracks may not work as intended by developers. Moreover, the probability of this is much more than you think. May simply not work (cracks for Heroes Chronicles: The Final Chapters done by DEViANCE release group for example). Can be partially working. etc etc
In my opinion all cracks done by FLT are good and working as intended but I am not 100% sure. Other cracks used produce much less confidence. Why GOG did not use only FLT cracks in his release? This question is likely to forever remain unanswered.
Think about it.

P.S. FLT has addressed the issue with DEViANCE cracks. Bugfix known as "Heroes_Chronicles_The_Final_Chapters_Win2K_Crackfix-FLTDOX" if someone interested...

[ThunderTitan]

So cracks might have bugs... oh noes, that will totally ruin my experience, coz i'm so used to games being so bug free all the time, as no dev ever releases buggy as hell games....

[Sir Alock]

I bought H3C from GOG games last week. For $9.99 you simply can't beat it. In fact, all my HoMM games I-IV come from GOG. I have every HoMM game on CD/DVD...but to play the games in Windows 7 without many issues is such a treat! Yes...I'll get a dropout every now & again, but not often. GOG rocks bigtime!

[Slayer of Cliffracers]

Pretty sure Robin Hood did fine... and the US when it drove away the indians (hey, they had no property papers for the land)...

The relavance of either case is?

What I was explaining is that from my POV (everyone cheer ) I don't see anything wrong with selling a cracked version of a program that you own even if you didn't do the cracking.

[ThunderTitan]

The relavance of either case is?

What I was explaining is that from my POV (everyone cheer ) I don't see anything wrong with selling a cracked version of a program that you own even if you didn't do the cracking.

Well there is the fact that in some place, like Germany, you can't give up your copyright even if it's for a derivative work, which is why Games Workshop stopped the release of that Warhammer 40k fan film even though they where informed it was being made when the project started and where fine with it up until someone pointed that out.

Although that was pretty cool of them letting them finish and just not allowing them to distribute it legally... that way everyone wins.