In gaming
A hack is something in game(like cheats), cracking is creating a "crack" that lets you bypass activation, private servers etc.
I reread and it is in terms of whats this is over its hacking. Either way it removes from the value of gameplay, and well as the reputation behind the game.
I have had the misfortune of playing against several of these "hacks" and it made me stop playing online.....
I don't steal, pirate, or distribute copies of copyrighted software other than that licensed for free distribution, but regardless of what any eula says, I'll do whatever the h*ll I want to any software that's running on my computer. The concept that I'm only 'licensed" to use something I can't get a refund for, and that I don't have any right to improve it in any way for my own personal use is just as ridiculous as the idea of an architect telling me I don't actually own my house & I'm not allowed to remodel my kitchen. As far as I'm concerned, I'm only legally bound to whatever terms I agreed to when the vendor accepted my money, and nothing more.Perhaps I'm missing something, but you "never" own "software" someone else created. What companies are doing is selling you a license to use a "copy" of the software. Note the key word being "copy" - meaning the company maintains the sole source (original).
The other keyword is "license" - which is saying you can use our software provided you abide by our rules, basically the EULA agreement.
In short you’re paying is a licensing fee to use said software, and you obviously you can’t use the software without a "copy"
So when someone has copy of the software without paying the licensing fee, it’s considered theft. Sort of like someone having a copy of your social security number and using it without your permission.
My two cents
As much as I would love to believe that we should be able to do what we want with the software we pay for, thats not how life is and right now we can only bend over and take it as nothing in the near future is changing in that regards.
Arguing about it will not accomplish anything.
Software companies seem to think so..
Do software vendors have a right to be compensated for every copy they sell? Yes. Do they have a right to be compensated by people who distribute copies of their software illegally? Absolutely. Is it wrong to create a hack or cheat for a game and distribute if it doesn't deprive the copyright holder of any money? Doubtful. Does a software vendor have a right to inspect my computer and tell me I'm wrong for modifying their product to make suit my purposes. Not A f'n chance.
Ever hear of bait and switch? EULAs basically amount to that.. a form of fraud. I don't agree to anything when I push that button, and neither do millions of other people. I'm just doing what has to be done to get what I paid for.
Most software purchases are non-refundable, but you don't have to agree to anything before they will accept your money. Therein lies the issue. What that means, IMO, any terms added AFTER the time of purchase have absolutely no legal standing. Its a basic legal concept that once terms of a purchase are agreed upon and the service is paid for, the purchaser is under no obligation to abide any further terms to get the service they paid for. Then there is the concept of ownership. Some people think End User License Agreements are artificially created legal hogwash that serve only to deprive the purchaser of the rights of ownership. I'm not a lawyer, but I know enough about the law to know when I'm being ripped off.
The people the pressed charges against wrote a hack that manipulated there servers, the battle.net servers to give them an unfair advantage over the opposing players, hence why it was such a large issue. I am not condoning downloading illegal software or distributing it, but you have a greater change of getting busted if you are receiving than if you are sharing it... This is because if one person is sharing it the can bust everyone who downloads it, were if they bust the one person sharing it they can generate any more supplemental income... Its sad now when the expected revenue for a game also includes fines and fees for piracy and prosecutions.
Activision is the donkey's balls, but I don't get the outrage. They merely banned the users caught cheating (from their servers; it's not like you can't still play private games or singleplayer). The ones being sued, on the other hand, are the guys who created and sold the hacks.
What you do in the privacy of your own computer @ singleplayer is your own business. Multiplayer on the other hand is a different animal. Starcraft 2 comes with a comprehensive editor - have you guys seen it? You don't need to BUY these lameass hacks if you're just messing around for your personal enjoyment: the tools already built into the game let you do practically anything you want to. These hacks are purely for ruining multiplayer. And guess what, when you're playing multiplayer on Activision servers it's not just about you anymore. I may loathe Activision but they're just protecting the multiplayer experience. Cheat all you want in your singleplayer games, nobody cares. However, multiplayer cheaters are pond scum.
Well.. activision does have a right to determine how their own servers are used.. but if anyone is entitled to compensation in a lawsuit for the having their game ruined by cheaters that used hacks, the people who got cheated have just as much a stake in the lawsuit as activision, if not more, and should be entitled to refunds for anything for however much it cost for the multiplayer part of the game.. no clue how much that would be
Quote