Life without Daemon Tools

[Fragilityh14]

Recently having made the transition to free software (as in free speech and free beer) (I am using Kubuntu Feisty 64 bit) I find myself missing the free program (not as in free speech but as in free beer) Daemon Tools, which creates a virtual cd/dvd rom drive where one can mount .iso files which are shown as being their own cd drive. This program, for whatever reason, doesn't work for Linux. I imagine if I got an entire virtual machine within mine (which is reasonably doable) I could run it (but only for files I was running within that). It doesn't appear to be able to run with WINE from what I have seen.

I am told that linux can by default mount cd images, but it doesnt seem to do what I want it to/how I want it to + I simply don't know how to. And the thing is I shouldn't need that in depth of an explanation as I am coming to understand linux, but I would rather ask here so I can actually talk to someone who is a person I know at some level vs. posting on forums I've just signed up at and wanting something from people (plus I always hear large amounts of people in the FSP are in technology sort of fields...and I also have to imagine that in general a lot of people here would be in favor of open source software philosophically and as such both use it and encourage its use?)

This greatly impedes my ability to enjoy free games (neither as in free speech or free beer but as in cd images downloaded with bittorrent)


because the thing is, I simply can't imagine it is actually harder to play illegally downloaded games on linux than it is on windows, so I'm sure I just don't know what I'm doing...

also would anyone here be interested in playing a game of Freeciv or Battle for Wesnoth at some future point?

[J’raxis 270145]

On the command line:—

% mount -t iso9660 -o loop /path/to/cd/image.iso /path/to/empty/directory

And then that empty directory will be mapped to the CD. You usually need to be root to run this command, although `mount` can be configured to allow users to mount certain things, and there's also a program called `sudo` you can look into to give user accounts root privileges to run certain commands.

[Fragilityh14]

I really don't know how I would do anything on Linux without knowing the Sudo command ^_^


would this same basic formula work with images that are proprietary? This game I just downloaded is unfortunately a .nrg..

I'll try this with an ISO though and see if I can get it to work...do I need to create an empty directory to put it in or create a directory?

should it be on /home/brad or on /dev/media?



sudo mount -t iso9660 -o loop /home/brad/Brad Files/game cds/Alpha Centauri/[games-linux] Alpha Centauri Alien Crossfire.iso /home/brad/Alpha Centauri         

and then it just gives me information about the mount command?

[error]

I'm staying out of this.

[penguins4me]

I would suggest purchasing a copy of the game(s) in question.

Freedom doesn't mean you have the ability to infringe on the property rights of others.

[J’raxis 270145]

I really don't know how I would do anything on Linux without knowing the Sudo command ^_^


would this same basic formula work with images that are proprietary? This game I just downloaded is unfortunately a .nrg..

I'll try this with an ISO though and see if I can get it to work...do I need to create an empty directory to put it in or create a directory?

should it be on /home/brad or on /dev/media?



sudo mount -t iso9660 -o loop /home/brad/Brad Files/game cds/Alpha Centauri/[games-linux] Alpha Centauri Alien Crossfire.iso /home/brad/Alpha Centauri         

and then it just gives me information about the mount command?

The empty directory is the "mount point" for mount: where it's going to put the files when it mounts the image. It can be most anywhere; you can put one under your home directory or under /mnt which is where most people put them. You should already see empty directories in there such as /mnt/floppy and /mnt/cdrom; these are used to mount those physical devices.

You need to quote the arguments if they contain any spaces or other special characters such as [ ] | { } \ ; ? * ( ). Read your shell's manpage for the exact list; it differs between shells. Also look in the manpage about quoting and the differences between ' quotes and " quotes.

So, try this:—

% sudo mount -t iso9660 -o loop "/home/brad/Brad Files/game cds/Alpha Centauri/[games-linux] Alpha Centauri Alien Crossfire.iso" "/home/brad/Alpha Centauri"

I don't know what a *.nrg file is, but if it's not an ISO9660 filesystem inside (the standard "CD image"), it won't work. There are other filesystems supported by `mount` (via the -t flag), but I don't know if that one is.

[J’raxis 270145]

I would suggest purchasing a copy of the game(s) in question.

Freedom doesn't mean you have the ability to infringe on the property rights of others.

The Libertarian Case Against Intellectual Property Rights. And "intellectual property" is not property to begin with.

[Lex]

The Libertarian Case Against Intellectual Property Rights

The article above suggests that people still make money even if they give stuff out for free, it does not say how. Can you tell us how the company that made the game you have downloaded will make money if everyone downloads the game for free?

[J’raxis 270145]

The Libertarian Case Against Intellectual Property Rights

The article above suggests that people still make money even if they give stuff out for free, it does not say how. Can you tell us how the company that made the game you have downloaded will make money if everyone downloads the game for free?

Selling subscriptions to accounts on their servers, like a lot of other games do. Selling physical game-related paraphernalia such as books, magazines, T-shirts, and various other "merchandising" schemes.

Although more to the point—you seem to be implying that just because this company has set out on a particular course of action in order to make money, that this automatically makes them entitled to do so. There are all sorts of illegitimate or outright ridiculous ways of trying to earn a buck, and in my opinion, trying to sell copies of bits of data on a little plastic disk is one of them. And it's particularly spurious to conflate property rights with the legal-fiction entitlement to earn money off of copies of information—the "intellectual property" misnomer discussed in the FSF article—in order to label refusing to pay for such copies as theft or an infringement on property rights.

[Fragilityh14]

well, I do think games in general represent someone's hard work and devotion, and I do buy commercial games (Though less for PC than I feel I should and more for DS/consoles) I dont consider downloading their software "Stealing" because my definition you have to be depriving someone of something to be stealing. I would never steal a game from a store both because I would be terrified of being caught so I never steal anything and because it simply isn't a good thing to do, and you're not just stealing their profit of $5 or however much: you're stealing their investment.

An example of this, my former roommates (this story is actually before I lived with them) had been stealing wine from this local grocery store (local to this part of the state at least, I dont know how big of a chain) which was  pretty near the house. Now, I think stealing is way too risky and thus not good, I look at underage drinkers stealing wine or beer as a lot different simply because they are prohibited from buying it. So, one time they got caught and my friend who wasnt actually the one that ever stole got detained, but it was because the woman had seen them the god damn day before.

Well, time goes by, and I am living with these two people (minus the girl who was stealing wine whose room I moved into), well they had put the bottles in this little room and I Was finally recycling them and there was a ton. They still had price tags on, and I found out they had been stealing $60 or $70 bottles of wine (by stealing wine I assumed they meant like $8-$10 bottles like a fucking reasonable person), and I actually got REALLY upset,

"what the hell is wrong with you? Why would you do malicious damage to a local business? A grocery store just a few blocks away which you always shop at. Where do you think that would go to? It would go to pay employees and take the store going and money that they lose from theft will come to be made up by raised prices or lost jobs? How is it possible to have that level of calloused indifference to the environment around you?"

then all of the sudden it was "I didn't know you cared so much about top foods"

It's this whole perception that businesses are inherently oppressive or something, and I was trying to tell them "it isn't like you were going to a grocery store you didn't like and doing it, this is where you shop at, you have a compelling interest in it staying open". (one of my friends was actually banned from the store and it was super inconvenient because I HATE Safeway and generally will refuse to go there)

I should mention there was easily more than $2000 of stolen wine, and the not thought out explanation I got was "sometimes you just want to get drunk and drink something nice..."



as far as downloading software, I intentionally used an example from a 10 year old game, I generally don't download new games. The thing is that when you download it off the internet, assuming you wouldn't go out and buy the game if you were unable to download it, you aren't depriving them of anything since you otherwise wouldn't buy their product and they aren't physically losing something.

Assuming that I buy a game and then own it, I see no reason why it isn't within my rights as an owner of that property (the media) and put it on my computer (which cost me money) and let someone download it with bandwidth which I pay for, especially being as I am not making any money off of it. It isnt like I am standing on a street corner hawking burned copies of games with cracks already on them.

[J’raxis 270145]

well, I do think games in general represent someone's hard work and devotion, and I do buy commercial games (Though less for PC than I feel I should and more for DS/consoles) I dont consider downloading their software "Stealing" because my definition you have to be depriving someone of something to be stealing. I would never steal a game from a store both because I would be terrified of being caught so I never steal anything and because it simply isn't a good thing to do, and you're not just stealing their profit of $5 or however much: you're stealing their investment.

And this gets to the heart of the matter of the difference between property and "intellectual property"—you can make one copy of a piece of software, or a million copies, and you've deprived no one of their original copy. No one has lost anything. The same cannot be said of physical media, and that's why I would consider someone shoplifting a game from a store to be theft, whereas pirating software I do not.

Assuming that I buy a game and then own it, I see no reason why it isn't within my rights as an owner of that property (the media) and put it on my computer (which cost me money) and let someone download it with bandwidth which I pay for, especially being as I am not making any money off of it. It isnt like I am standing on a street corner hawking burned copies of games with cracks already on them.

This is pretty much how I look at it, too. If you actually do buy a copy of one of these games, it's your property because you just paid money for it, and you can do as you wish with it, all the nonsense they try to force on you in the EULAs notwithstanding.

[penguins4me]

And this gets to the heart of the matter of the difference between property and "intellectual property"—you can make one copy of a piece of software, or a million copies, and you've deprived no one of their original copy. No one has lost anything.

However, if only one person bought a copy of a piece of software, say a modern game, and all other users acquired it from that first user, the first user would have to pay an exorbitant price, or the creator(s) would most assuredly not make the sequel if all they had to show for 20+ people working 1-2 years was $50.

If the current system is broken (no argument from me), a workable system should be suggested rather than simply taking something of value without compensation, even if nothing was stolen, since even if nothing was actually stolen, it still doesn't make the act moral.

[J’raxis 270145]

And this gets to the heart of the matter of the difference between property and "intellectual property"—you can make one copy of a piece of software, or a million copies, and you've deprived no one of their original copy. No one has lost anything.

However, if only one person bought a copy of a piece of software, say a modern game, and all other users acquired it from that first user, the first user would have to pay an exorbitant price, or the creator(s) would most assuredly not make the sequel if all they had to show for 20+ people working 1-2 years was $50.

If the current system is broken (no argument from me), a workable system should be suggested rather than simply taking something of value without compensation, even if nothing was stolen, since even if nothing was actually stolen, it still doesn't make the act moral.

The open source model: giving away the software and selling services surrounding it. And, as I'd already said, selling subscriptions to accounts on the company's servers, like a lot of other games do. Selling physical game-related paraphernalia such as books, magazines, T-shirts, and various other "merchandising" schemes.

[penguins4me]

The open source model: giving away the software and selling services surrounding it. And, as I'd already said, selling subscriptions to accounts on the company's servers, like a lot of other games do. Selling physical game-related paraphernalia such as books, magazines, T-shirts, and various other "merchandising" schemes.

Open source is not the same as free software.

Not to mention, the game in question is not free software, nor open source, nor did the folks who created the software in question use such channels, as is their right as the creators. If you do not agree with their decision, you can always exercise the free market option and not use their software (and/or make your own, better version, and distribute it in whatever manner you see fit).

[J’raxis 270145]

The open source model: giving away the software and selling services surrounding it. And, as I'd already said, selling subscriptions to accounts on the company's servers, like a lot of other games do. Selling physical game-related paraphernalia such as books, magazines, T-shirts, and various other "merchandising" schemes.

Open source is not the same as free software.

I'm not sure how this is relevant? Free software is a more specific subset of open source software; I was intentionally referencing the broader group.

Not to mention, the game in question is not free software, nor open source,

Not the point. You asked me for alternative distribution/profit models; I gave several. They can certainly open-source it and convert to such a business model.

nor did the folks who created the software in question use such channels, as is their right as the creators. If you do not agree with their decision, you can always exercise the free market option and not use their software (and/or make your own, better version, and distribute it in whatever manner you see fit).

I don't use their software. Personally, I don't own—nor have I "pirated"—a single piece of proprietary software; if this is going to be someone's business model I want little to nothing to do with them. But I think the concept of proprietary software is illegitimate, as I've already stated in earlier posts, and I have nothing against people who do "pirate" such software.