Ubisoft Steals RELOADED Crack To Fix Its Own Game

Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas 2 has been released exactly 4 months ago and until last week a lot of users suffered from copy protection related problems. To fix those problems, Ubisoft opted to release a copy-protection-removing patch for the game.

This is a bit unusual (especially with Ubisoft's history of restrictive copy right usage) but is it newsworthy? Only if it turns out that Ubisoft used an illegal no-cd crack written by famous cracking group, RELOADED, as a fix for their own game.

The file in question was released by Ubisoft as a fix for the Direct2Drive version of Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas 2. When the file is checked using a hex editor, RELOADED's signature is clearly visible in the file's header.

Ubisoft has since pulled off the file and said that " the matter is being thoroughly investigated by senior tech support managers". Ubisoft UK Community Manager added that "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."

Add new comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Comments

Ubisoft Steals RELOADED Crack To Fix Its Own Game

@ MegagamesDon't write ignorant and flagrantly wrong things like "Ubisoft used an illegal no-cd crack" and pretend like it's news or even remotely correct.No-CD cracks are perfectly legal in every way, and to say otherwise is not only asinine but only announces your own ignorance of the subject.Go back, do your jobs, and correct it.

Ubisoft Steals RELOADED Crack To Fix Its Own Game

knightpress, nocd cracks are not widely accepted as "legal" by game devs. using a cd to play a game is a means of authenticating your copy of the game (if you bought the game, you should have the discs), but that's possible if the game is tricked into going around that process.i remember when hl2 in particular was first released, it needed the disc in the drive to play. valve/steam would perma-ban accounts that were found to have cracked a .exebottom line: discs are a form of copy-protection. saying that bypassing/removing copy-protection is perfectly legal is just plain ignorant.

Ubisoft Steals RELOADED Crack To Fix Its Own Game

"knightpress, nocd cracks are not widely accepted as "legal" by game devs."Unfortunately for the game developers, they don't get to write the law, and thus regardless of whether or not they "accept" cracks, they are indeed legal."valve/steam would perma-ban accounts that were found to have cracked a .exe"That is a denial of service, protected by law as well, and their EULA specifically explains that they can, do, and will deny service to people cracking their game as is their ability to do, however they also have absolutely no recourse in the form of a lawsuit or claims of illegal activities, because neither situation is merited."bottom line: discs are a form of copy-protection. saying that bypassing/removing copy-protection is perfectly legal is just plain ignorant."Actually, it's enlightened, suggesting that copy protection is a public crime as opposed to a civil matter is what is ignorant. You see at the very best copyright law may be infringed for RELOADED releasing derivative works, which even if they lost the case would result in perhaps economic damages at the very most.So anonymous @ 11:47, you have no idea what so ever what you're talking about, and defending the gross ignorance of Megagames for their inane article is equally revolting to your not knowing what you're arguing over.

Ubisoft Steals RELOADED Crack To Fix Its Own Game

Knightpress, NO-CD cracks can be illegal. They can be reprogrammed .exe files that were originally written by the games programmers. If this is true than the hackers are breaking copyright laws. It is illegal to take a program and rewrite it if it is copyrighted. So, if reloaded simply reprogrammed the main .exe file to break the cd/dvd check then yes, it is illegal. If the programmed their OWN .exe file without the use of the original file then that would probably be legal.

Ubisoft Steals RELOADED Crack To Fix Its Own Game

This is an interesting point... copyright laws exist for preventing exploitation of other peoples work. a nocd, a modified version of the exe released "free" and with the only intent to use the original software, is really a violation of copyright? or more something like "bypass of electronic protection system" and s**t like that?

Ubisoft Steals RELOADED Crack To Fix Its Own Game

You guys are fools if you think "Ubisoft" released this...I'd bet some junior(ish?) Ubisoft coder was tasked with fixing the issues, failed, then presented this to his managers (as his own work).His managers obviously didn't dig into the fix itself, either because they trusted their employee (egads!), they were too lazy to do so (gadzooks!), or too ignorant to know how. (zoinks!)Next, I bet it went to testing where I'm sure it passed with flying colours, as most visitors to this site would expect it should... ;)Then, buddy was probably hailed as a hero and awarded the great prize of continued employment at his same salary.Crisis averted! (whoops!)...of course, only until the retard got busted, either because he trusted he hadn't over-looked anything while digging around in the code (egads!), he was too lazy to do so (gadzooks!), or too ignorant to know how. (zoinks!)Mr. Hero is probably getting sued alright... but I really doubt it'll be Reloaded doing it... unless Reloaded is made up of the owners/management/whatever of Ubisoft.. ;pI'm guessing he had to give up that "great prize" too.......of course there's also the possibility buddy is IN Reloaded and thought this would be a fun way to burn a bridge... but, I'm leaning towards scenario (A).=p

Add new comment