German Consumer Demands Diablo 3 Package Disclose DRM

Upset about the horribleness of Diablo 3′s always-on DRM system? You’re not alone. Even developers hate it, or at least, schemes like it. And now it seems it’s getting real, at least in Germany. Gaming Blend has brought us the news, courtesy of a translated article from the German magazine PC Games, that the German consumer advocacy group Federation of Consumer Organizations is going to town on Blizzard over the practice.

The Federation demanded at Blizzard comply with an order to repackage the boxed version of Diablo 3 with the full disclosure that the game requires a persistent Internet connection in order to work. As of today’s date, Blizzard has yet to comply. Further, the Federation insists that customers should have been informed about game-breaking problems Blizzard should have foreseen. As (a very bad translated section of) the original article puts it:

Know the prospective buyer must already exist before you buy, can be used under what conditions a software Whether a permanent Internet connection, a compulsory registration of an Internet platform, including the related access to a game or downloading additional software: All this is material information that the consumer must be given before buying software.

The matter may end up going to court, and hopefully, Blizzard will lose. It would be another welcome blow against the attempt by publishers to convince consumers that they only rent the things they purchase.

Via Game Politics

Join the Conversation   

* required field

By submitting a comment here you grant GameFront a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/web site in attribution. Inappropriate or irrelevant comments will be removed at an admin's discretion.

1 Comment on German Consumer Demands Diablo 3 Package Disclose DRM

Daretoask

On July 23, 2012 at 3:40 pm

Interesting Article, I had not heard about that before today. Wow, I used to read that magazine when I was younger, I have really gotten old. :-)

@ Ross: If you need the aforementioned section translated properly, let me know.