Pointing out exceptions doesn't invalidate the rule

I said Denuvo is "often" removed 6–12 months after release. Often means many times, frequently. I have given you examples that this has happened many times, so I'm satisfied with the wording I used.

You said it "usually" lasts 2–4 years. Usually means most of the time. What I said is not incompatible with what you said, but in any case, you've presented no data or evidence that Denuvo is kept for 2+ years most of the time.

There have been well over 150 games with denuvo the last 5 years. 4 games in that time is not "often" by any stretch of the word.

This isn't a good faith argument. You made a claim that has now been shown to be false, and now you're trying to reverse the burden of proof for your claim.

Whatever the pedantic meaning of "often" is in the context of this conversation, one thing is clear, your statement that Denuvo switched to a subscription service is entirely unsubstantiated. If you have evidence to back up your claim then the burden is squarely on you at this point to provide it.

My claim:

Usually removed between 2 and 4 years since 2020

Your claim:

No because here are 4 games from the last 5 years which where removed after ~6 months which means it is often removed before that time.

My rebuttal:

That's 4 games in 5 years from well over 150 denuvo games since 2020. Simple math should tell you that below 3% is not "often".

But somehow that means my claim is false...

It is well known that denuvo DRM is a SaaS subscription software for many years. I'm not gonna entertain your tantrum further for something you can trivially look up and should already know if you where knowledgeable enough to actually discuss the topic.