>California’s Protect Our Games Act, as currently written, would require digital game publishers who cut off support for an online game to either provide a full refund to players or offer an updated version of the game “that enables its continued use independent of services controlled by the operator.” The act would also require publishers to notify players 60 days before the cessation of “services necessary for the ordinary use of the digital game.”How will the wventual shutdown of Steam be handled under this? Will each individual publisher have to provide crack tools for their games? if they don't, how would refunding work? Who foots the bill?
Just like on GOG, all games only require the removal of DRM verification.
Man corpo slaves were super mindbroken over this yesterdayI am fully convinced the same people would be shitting themselves over Steam refunds if they were added today
oh I'm a bill to be I'm a bill to be
It's called "Not have DRM in the first place if you are planning to have it on forever or don't have a solution if you shut down."Realistically, you can't get rid of DRM forever, however, if you make the DRM itself actually temporary and based on time, that would be a step in the right direction.I'd imagine this wouldn't be retroactive or if the game is no longer sold at all ala GFWL shit.
It only applies to games published after the legislation. Game and Steam devs just need to prepare a permanent offline mode to patch in instead of the usual kill switch.
>>738986659>Protect Our Games ActThe POG Act? Really?
Stop asking questions and continue consuming goyim.
Stop Killing Threads
>>738986659>offer an updated version of the game “that enables its continued use independent of services controlled by the operator.”oh the horror
>>738987114Think of all the poor investors.
>>738986659Honestly this whole thing sounds like a sham.
>>738986659Nigger
>>738987114oy vey how will i ever make a shekel as a poor video game publisher if such communism is allowed to pass?? oy gevalt!!
>>738986659Bastard
>>738986659>>738987183Rapists
>>738986659I bet you look at porn all day.
>>738987041I do indeed pog really hard when I see SKG making progressI will own something and WILL be happy
>tripyiffer thinks he's people again
>>738986659>How will the wventual shutdown of Steam be handled under this?Gaben or whoever replaces him will just include steam autocracker in the last update. SteamDRM is so shit it takes no effort to bypass it, they only keep it to sell retarded devs who don't know anything about computers the idea of protection and for GOGshills so they have something to have melties about else they become completely forgotten
>>738986659>>738987225Faggots
>>738986659>The act would also require publishers to notify players 60 days before the cessation of “services necessary for the ordinary use of the digital game.”That's barely worth mentioning at least, even when gatcha go EoS they usually give a 6mo offramp or similar.
>>738987231>>738987235At least my parents are alive...
>>738986659>Guys we got out of committee in a state legislature!Congrats on using spell check I guess? It really is shocking how little you kids understand about procedure. You're celebrating way too early.
>>738987191>>738987207>>738987220>this faggot actually got a 4chan pass for bad shitpostingEmbarrassing.
>>738986659>California’s Protect Our Games Act,>"Our" gamesJesus Christ commiefornia isn't even trying to hide it lol. I knew this whole movement was just commieshit, no wonder EUstan and commiefornia are pushing it
>>738986659Assraper
>>738986659>>738987259Shitface
THREE CHEERS FOR SKG!
>>738987352I wouldn't trust SKG after what he did to that child btw.
>>738987391QRD?
>>738987264>commie commie commie waaah waaah!!!back into the oven with you, you half-baked hook-nosed rat
>>738987416That means the movement is a bad thing!
>>738987391>>738987286>>738987191>>738987207>>738987220
>>738987286>>738987273Ironic shitposting is still shitposting
>>738987416You do know communists were majority jews? And that jews have always pushed marxist agenda?You are falseflagging and trying to attack the free market. This country has been downhill the more socialist policies are pushed, and vidya market will fucking crash. You won't own anything as everything is "our" rather than "your".
>>738987593To be fair, you also have a lot of jews rigging the market in their favour as well and pushing the retarded side of capitalism. It's a game where both sides get played.
>>738987626>you also have a lot of jews rigging the market in their favour as well and pushing the retarded side of capitalismLike Bank of America shilling GTA 6 even though that game doesn't need such push?
>>738987593>owning stuff is communist actuallySorry, I will neither simp for mister Goldberg on the left or mister Goldstein on the right. I will pit them against one another to get every advantages possible for myself.
>>738987715Personally I think SKG will lead to Subscription absed gaming
>>738987235Many Steam games used the SteamAPI for more than just DRM though.Anything that requires an account like default player names and leaderboards, Steam inventory stuff, friendslist integration, games reliant on SteamInput for controller support, save data handling, account linking to third party services like an Activision account etc.Removing all this shit from a game takes actual work, which is why there haven't been proper cracks of games for a long long time now and instead everyone's just using drop-in Steam emulators
>>738987264Is labelling anything that empowers the lower classes and inconveniences the jews as "communism" some kind of pro-communist propaganda campaign you're running?
>>738987784Doubt
>>738987815So what's stopping a Steam emulator becoming an official solution?
>>738987845Then screenshot my post and I can show you that I'm right!
>>738987784People are already getting real tired of all the subscriptions in the rest of the economy. Trying for individual games is basically a slow death sentence.
>>738987593>the free marketMost jewish shit ever. The market can suck a fat fucking dick. The nation comes first and foremost. If the matket does not serve the people and the nation, it must be subjugated and forced into serving. Funny how you fucking faggot retard fake "nationalists" stand in support of everything Hitler warned about the peril of. Nation traitor scum.
>>738987897The Age of the MMO already showed devs that players will pick and stick with one if they really face a huge range of games asking for regular fees
>>738986659Good. You maje it sound so complicated, but it's just going to the line of code where it says "check server" and changing a 1 for a 0
>>738986659>How will the wventual shutdown of Steam be handled under this?We'll have bigger fish to fry if that happens.
>>738987872Because not having unique accounts for everyone on the Steam side breaks a lot of shit.Leaderboards for example. Even with a perfect offline Steam emulator you'd just be entirely reliant on usernames to identify players.Account linking would also not obviously work.Take a look at some of the GOG multiplayer games to see some examples. There's a reason why even they were eventually forced to resort to the "Multiplayer requires GOG Galaxy" bullshit.
>protecting property rights is communismHow the hell did people get twisted enough to believe this?
>>738986659Steam is a vendor and not a video game. When the service ends, so too do all the licenses you have associated with them. That's a whole other can of worms. SKG isn't about that. It's about the significantly more niche issue where your game license is still valid and the game has perfectly servicable single player and/or local multiplayer modes, but the devs prevent you from playing anyway because they shut down their own online servers for the game. It doesn't apply to free-to-play games, games with paid subscriptions, or storefronts (again, Steam).
>>738986659Surprised countries aren't just treating this situation as a blanket regulation for all software purchases, since buying a license for flstudio, photoshop, csp or whatever is the same as buying a license to a videogame.This change will simple force devs and publishers to be more proactive, we should see more SDKs or p2p updates.Don't even know why more studios don't do SDKs, because it let's people set servers up, but then they have to pay costs to maintain them.
>>738986659Oh, good, getting the fucking government more involved with gaming. What could go wrong?Fucking retarded that people are celebrating.
>>738988061Those licenses are subscriptions. Video game publishers want to have it both ways, treating it as subscriptions but advertising it as a purchase. That is not valid.
>>738988091>The government shouldnt interfere when EA fucks meee
>>738988046>s about the significantly more niche issue where your game license is still validDespite what the legally irrelevant Steam EULA says, steam licenses are not subacriptions and as such fall under the jurisdiction of this potential bill.
>>738986659GAMERS WONNEREDCORPOKEKS SEETHE
>>738988061They can't because software licensing in most countries is covered by trade deals done with the USA.Adobe, Oracle, IBM and other large software houses are writing those rules and they're enforced by the US government. Either SKG and similar movements will try carving out an exception (that will be ruled discriminatory by courts due to targeting only a sub-section of the software industry), or they'll perish before this shit even gets anywhere.
>>738988163You were born a boy, you are a man, and you will die a man.
>>738988225Yea and you'll never be a man
>>738986659>or offer an updated version of the game “that enables its continued use independent of services controlled by the operator.”Just re-enable this ol' button and you're good. Some people make it sound like it'd be a massive endeavour or something.
>>738987179>>738987191>>738987207>>738987238>>738987273Mald more, shitbrain lmao.
>>738988297I'M NOT MALDING YOU STUPID FUCKING NIGGER! I AM RIGHT AND YOU WILL SEE! GO FUCK YOURSELF AND DIE YOU NIGGER!
>>738986659Commiefornia is finally doing something good
>>738988317Wow! You sure showed him! /s
>>738988221I think Europe would do well to learn some moves from the Chinese playbook.
>>738988335You're mum are doing finally something good!
>>738986745This is actually pretty funny, unlike all other storefronts all game on GOG already comply with SKG.
>>738988264What exactly would a Destiny 2 LAN game be?
>>738988091You know what the funny thing is, the man who started pushing this shit is now crying about age verification stuff, as if it's not exactly the sort of thing people were trying to warn him about
>>738988401They don't though. Basically all the multiplayer games on GOG require either GOG Galaxy, or for some of the older ones you'll need to authenticate an unique serial key with a master server.They're still just as reliant on third party servers as the Steam versions.
>>738988437Haha! I was right all along!
>>738988415>What exactly would a Destiny 2 LAN game be?Something you play at a big LAN party I suppose. The people behind the game don't need to worry about the logistics of actually getting a game together. With LAN it's up to the players to figure out.
>>738988505Isn't Destiny 2 a literal who game though?
>>738988437>>738988467What does SKG have to do with data breach humiliation rituals?
>>738988379You're mentally i'll
>>738988526Yeah I don't care about it whatsoever. I'm just saying. A LAN option complies with what is being demanded.
>>738988541>what does government exerting power over the technology industry have to do with government exerting power over the technology industrystate power begets more state power, every scrap they are given leads to less ability to fight future power grabs
>>738988526Wait, Destiny had a child?
>>738988505This shit's supposed to be turned into actual legislation. If the developers of Destiny 2 can be fined money by the government for not providing a specific kind of offline experience for Destiny 2 when the game shuts down, then they must also be informed in advance of what exactly they need to be providing instead of just "i dunno just make it offline or something".And it's the exact same problem with every other game. There is simply no way to write a law that encompasses offline requirements for all online games without some massive fucking problems down the line.
>>738988640idk game devs were able to do it for almost a century without issues.
>>738988640>then they must also be informed in advance of what exactly they need to be providingThey are clear of what needs to be provided. The actual method is up to each dev.
>>738988640>This shit's supposed to be turned into actual legislation.And there is nothing ambiguous whatsoever about LAN play.
>>738988578Copyright in itself is a gross abuse of state power. SKG weakens copyright, so it actually decreases state power.
>>738988541You can't make offline games with adult age ratings at all in any capacity if age verification is mandatory. Otherwise if you can play GTA VI without connecting to the internet, a child might play it!
When's the new game dungeon bros... i've already watched the alan wake one 10+ times
>>738988640>for not providing a specific kind of offline experience for Destiny 2Why wouldn't lan play suffice?
>>738988578State power was already basically unchecked and SKG honestly has nothing to do with the global push for deanonymizing the internet. That shit has been going on for years.
>>738988640Everybody disagreeing with you is retarded.
>>738988771what's your favourite GD anon? mine is Mabuus
>>738988640Let players host servers again. Problem solved.
>>738988825Yeah I hate that stupid argument>Don't ever pressure the government to do anything or fix any problems, they might do something you DON'T want them to do instead!>Nevermind that they already do things you don't want them to do anyway>Nevermind that the other side already applies their own pressure>YOU should feel the only moral choice is to do nothing and apply no pressure
>>738988771Whats a game dungeon?
>MMO'sShould be safe, already subscription based. Dunno about this california one though, unless if it allows for private servers without developers dropping the hammer on them, in which case: based.>MMOFPS ala Destiny 2Anything that tries to do what Destiny did and take away content that was paid for to make room for new content should feel the full wrath of the law, no sympathy>F2P shitNo money exchanged no foul. I dunno how this translates to cosmetics/in game purchases or this california bill, so wait and see.
>Steam shuts down in 30 years>I can retire with a six digit refundVery nice
>>738989015Just add LAN.
>>738988701Doesn't this mean ESRB fail to do its job to prevent itself from being turned into a vector for a data breach humiliation ritual? ESRB predated SKG.
>>738988578Corpo power begets more corpo power. This is why you need to organize to build systems and institutions to regulate them.
>>738987815It wouldn't be too hard to just use the tools already there, and just tell people to host their own servers with them. I believe as written there's no obligation for the game to host that side of the game, so long as they give tools to work without it, or host servers on your own to make it work, and it's already very much one size fits all so it'd be easy to emulate, generally.
>>738987920Hitler lost the war on a game of basic economics. He couldn't even get spare tires to the front lines. If they had any economic sense they'd have won.
>>738989069The ESRB only exists to prevent government regulation of video games. If movements like SKG turn into actual legislation then ESRB will have officially failed.After that, it's only a matter of time before further regulation happens, for example regarding violent content.
>>738989112No corporation ever told my children they can't communicate with their friends
>>738989192They do if your kid ever said nigger.
>>738987920The nation is an abstract concept, not a person. It can't do shit to you. You're likely talking about the state, and doing anything for the sake of the state is the most cucked action a human can take.
>>738989156>Hitler lostAnd how do you like the world built for you by the victors? Ginally figured out that they weren't the good guys yet?
>>738989163>The ESRB only exists to prevent government regulation of video gamesSo it's supposed to be hostile to the likes of PEGI and CERO yet never seems to be such?
>>738989192I didn't realize the government banned phones, texting and meeting in person
>>738989262>and doing anything for the sake of the state is the most cucked actionA perspective that can only be born of someone from a state that isn't a ethnostate/nation state. In other words an amerigolem.
>>738989163Ironically enough. By the ESRB's original mission statement. They should be the ones to do what SKG is trying to do through the government. So that the government wouldn't need to do it. Calling it a failure of ESRB might be accurate. But where they really failed was not stopping the industry from killing games in the first place.
>>738986659I have no clue how American politics work, apparently the government does it's own thing but then any state can just make laws that affect their state only?
>>738986659>How will the wventual shutdown of Steam be handled under this?They will just release steam networking servers. That's like the only service they provide that is requires for continued use of the game.It's like when you use online-fix that uses Space War networking, except completely independent of steam.
>>738989314
>>73898804065 years of propagnda and demoralization
>>738989297>phones, textingObvious next step, the propaganda is already everywhere and has been for decades, in huge chunks of the world phones already lost the anonymity battle years ago too, it's a pretty fucking quick step from there to more explicitly age based restrictions
>>738987593Yes, please just ignore that when the current constitution-infringing state of copyright was challenged in the Eldred v. Ashcroft (2003) case (the proposal was to return copyright to truly limited times, to ensure primacy of freedom of speech and to treat copyright as a matter of public trust rather than corporate capital), the majority opinion to uphold the current state of copyright was authored by Ruth Bader Ginsburg.Copyright has always been a vehicle for communists and other interest groups to censor speech in countries that ostensibly have freedom of speech laws, by controlling monolithic publishers who have been granted the right to copy by the state. This was why a lot of publishers in the early 20th century rejected anything that wasn't at least flattering towards commies.>>738987784Subscriptions just aren't viable as a business model unless they are used subversively or to wring extra money out of what is essentially marketing for a product that isn't sold as a subscription.>>738988040It's because of lawyer doublespeak like "Intellectual property" which conglomerates multiple concepts under one umbrella in a way that confuses the layperson and senile boomer lawmaker. Intellectual Property is neither Intellectual work, nor is it Property, but if you want to talk about it with people you need to either use that language or act like a schizo and come up with a new term like Noosphere zoning laws.
If it doesn't apply to subscription or f2p games what does it matter.Only leaves buy to play games like Destiny.And playing offline doesn't necessarily mean much. They can do what some mobile games have done already and release an offline mode where everything is unlocked already to act as a museum/playground. This would fly in the face of why a lot of people play these online games, a sense of lasting progression.
>>738989572I like to call it intellectual monopoly, since that what it's actually is.
>>738986659It is over, communism won.
>>738989607>If it doesn't apply to subscription or f2p games what does it matter.yay, so this all act means more subscription or f2p shit
>>738989852Doubt. In reality compliance with this shit will mean tiny unnoticeable extra costs for the devs, not enough to motivate swapping entire business models away from that fat AAA premium price-tag
>>738989852What is live service if not f2p with a pricetag, since live service games still have microtransactions out the ass anyway.
>>738989852It applies to microtransactions. So if you don't get to keep your gacha skins after shutdown, you get a refund.
>>738987264based. kill commies and bald "people"
>>738989920Here us your all_gacha_skins.png bro, you own that png now
>>738988091Shut the fuck up ferret fucker.
>>738988638Yes, Destiny's Child!
gta6 will be subscription based, mark my words.
>>738988640Not my problem.They can always release the server files after pulling the plug for all I care.>but oh muh lawThere's nothing actually hard about writing it if they involve a good faith expert. There are 500+ pages long laws with volumes of attached rules and regulations, the narrative that it's some insurmountable task smells like some paid shill effort.
>>738989920None of these laws in either Europe or US will include mobile games due to distribution issues. It takes actual work to keep a game available on either the App Store or Play Store due to constant updates and ever evolving rules and hardware/software support.Sideloading is basically non-existent these days and it's only getting worse as time goes by thanks to Tim Epic vs Google setting the new bottom for what level of sideloading is legally required, so there's absolutely no reason to make an offline version of mobile gacha games.
>>738989920here an app that shows all the pngs you bought
>>738990162Availability of the game isn't part of the deal though. Nothing requires devs to make game permanently available for download once service ends.
>>738987247I pity them having you for a "son". You should do them a favor and kill yourself.
>>738988640This is one of those vague laws where all the necessary clarification is "they know what they did". >>738989642The problem is that this then includes trademark.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRi8LptvFZYThis is not intellectual, this is just an outdated and negligently regulated law that enables blackmail and fraud.
>subscription based game>the first month is 60$>following months are 99% off for returning customers and only $0.10>no, you can only buy one month of subscription a timeAnything wrong with my "subscription only" game?
>>738990387Copyright, patents, etc are all the same shit. They're an anti-property monopoly over ideas and concepts. It's a holdover from the renaissance era that's kept around due to blind tradition.
>>738990452Malicious compliance
>>738990452It has to be clearly advertised as a subscription. You can't do the bait and switch "umm, actually, you're buying a temporary license :^)" shit.
>>738990572That is not malicious compliance is anon. It would be more like>releasing server binaries that barely work/subpar to the actual game experienceAnd I imagine it will be a possibility for companies too
>>738990618Sure, sure. I put it on the box. "First month 60$ and 0.1$ per month for rest of your life, wink wink"
>>738990681You’ll actively lose money on that volume of 10 cent transactions.
>>738986659>How will the wventual shutdown of Steam be handled under this?It won't because it doesn't apply idiot
>>738990452>you can only buy one month of subscription a timeyou can allow people to top up multiple months of subscription to make it easier for them. Then when it is time to pull the plug just refund those 10 cents back
>>738986659it's not even retroactiveand not the marketplaces fault eithersteam will be fine as they aren't the ones making a shit game and pulling the plug after sale
Based. We need to fuck corpos as hard as possible.
>>738990891>it's not even retroactive>"hey, you made this game 20 years ago, now give me the server binaries"that would be retarded
>>738986659Publisher gives out a steamless copy of their games after steam gives out the steam key to your account
>>738986659Uh oh, stinky, another double digit pied piper motion.
>>738990939Publisher here, how about no.
>>738988771
>>738990967California here how about paying 900 gozzilion dollars?
>>738986659Good! Don’t get in the frying pan if you can’t handle the heat
>>738990992My point was the law is not about the deal between you and the steam. Most "your" steam games are effectively dead if steam ever goes offline
>>738991030And it's also between the publisher and steam it forces corpos to make their games able to function post always online drm support
>>738986659oh god oh jesus how will we ever figure out how to make a game run without a central server connection it's just never been done before, literally the first thing you do when making a game is wind up some server racks so you know to look for server problems when the game stops workingsomeone please think of the execs those extra 40 manhours (a one hour meeting and some programmer time) is coming right out of their seven figure christmas bonus please have a soul, have mercy on that poor downtrodden lot
Also steam games work offline lol just you cannot access cloud saves
>>738990891Steam has previously removed games from sale and even from users libraries. Mostly shit malware games but they have done it.Other storefronts even more so. GOG has removed several games after users were displeased with those titles launching with online requirements, and most of those games never came back to sale on GOG.Ubisoft is in a financial situation where they might have to seriously considering shutting down Uplay or whatever it's called now. There's a shocking amount of weird japanese online-only DRM platforms that might get shut down at any moment now. Did you remember to migrate the games from your Bethesda Net account to Steam?Platforms remove games and shut down all the time. And if a publisher can get into shit for pulling the plug on a games servers, then so should any third party in-between that the game is also reliant on. Remember GameSpy? Are you still waiting on a GFWL-removal update for Lost Planet and Operation Raccoon City?
>>738986659Gaben has already gone on record saying he'd neutralize steam_api and steamstub globally if Steam ever went under.
I SHOULD GET REFUNDED ON PAYING FOR IN GAME ITEMS ON A GAME THAT STOPPED EXISTING.
>>738989342There's the supremacy thing, which means certain things can't override federal law. Like, our voting age is 18 federally, and states can lower their individual voting ages as much as they want, but can't raise it above 18.
>>738991160>and even from users libraries.such as?
>>738988905Excellent argument
>>738991174>Gaben made pinky promiselmao, do steamies really
>>738991160>from users libraries.When?
>>738988040games are property, they just aren't your property
>>738991209https://www.pcworld.com/article/2918399/more-malware-on-steam-as-game-update-hides-crypto-trojan.htmlThere's been a bunch of malware games released on Steam recently.
>>738991178You can continue to peek under the skirts of all gacha girls you boughted chud, why do you want a refund
So I actually bothered to read it. In it's current form it won't apply to any subscription based game (obviously) or any free to play game. It also goes into effect starting 2027, so it won't apply to any game sold prior to that.So what game will this bill actually save? It won't even save The Crew.
>>738991298Poor people deserve it for playing free games.
>>738991392It will save the next crew (maybe)
>>738991295Now we're working to change that and we know there is only one side that would be upset about it.
Gamers won.
>>738991392It won't save anything. It just means they'll stop making buy to play games.And games with multiplayer like cod will have lan built in but disabled until a future date where they shut off the mathmaking servers. Then they enable lan mode. This is the minimum to comply.
>>738991425>weYou need to go back.
>>738991392Any game released after 2027. What kind of retarded question is that?
>>738991160What the fuck is this retarded fearmongering>Steam has previously removed games from sale and even from users libraries. >even from user librariesLike what?>GOG has removed several games after users were displeased with those titles launching with online requirementsWhich makes sense, GoG is a DRM-free storefront and online requirements are by default, DRM. >Ubisoft is in a financial situation where they might have to seriously considering shutting down Uplay or whatever it's called nowYou'll never guess why or where all these lawsuits and SKG started>There's a shocking amount of weird japanese online-only DRM platforms that might get shut down at any moment now.It's almost like SKG is necessary to keep them accessible and playable after they get shut down>Platforms remove games and shut down all the time. so what?
>>738988108Doesn't matter if they are subscriptions or not. The terminology is a 1 month license that you renew each month, still the same as buying a 3 month license for xbox live or a 1 year license for a VPN, same shit.The video game equivalent is MMO subscriptions and xbox live/PS+/Nintendo whatever. After SKG, multiplayer will likely become a monthly subscription you pay to renew a 1 month license for now that the jig is up and they can't reasonably charge full game prices for a temporary license.
>>738991425>Now we're working to change thatNobody is working to change that, that's not what stop killing games is about at all
>>738991471Yeah they'll move to subscription or F2P models. You're still not going to own shit.
>>738991550Clearly it is, as a first step.
>>738991609No it isntThis doesnt even touch licensing or copyright at all
>>738991471I doubt COD will even need to do that.On PlayStation at least, there hasn't been a new COD released since MWII. Every single other COD and also Warzone are just DLC packs for MWII. If you buy a disc for Black Ops 6 and throw it into an offline PS5, it'll show the MWII game icon and tell you to download the rest.It's why the recent player numbers thing on PlayStation showed that Call of Duty as a whole has millions of players per week, because it's all lumped in as one thing.So a good lawyer could argue that you're not buying entire games, you're buying additional content for the free-to-play Call of Duty HQ which then works across the entire ecosystem (like how you can unlock BO6 weapons in Warzone)
>doesn't apply to subscription based games or f2p games>which are often the games that are most susceptible what a retarded law
>>738986659Makes me so hard seeing publishers shaking in their diapers when they tell their shills to attack gamers hereYou lost
>>738986659SKG and this weird POG thing would have never needed to exist if everything you can unlock in a game is through playing the game
>>738991298>malware games>malwareSo are you pretending to be retarded or do you not see the MALWARE part of your post? Also while the game was delisted from.the store, it wasnt removed from libraries like you said. Nothing in your article says that
I thoughts mutts liked unregulated free market????
>>738991663Why would it? You own the copy you purchased. This is EU law, btw.
>>738991174And how is he going to do that when he no longer owns the company because he's worm food?
Welcome to the future of gaming, this will happen to all of them.
>>738991663>>738991550SKG spammers did a great job at convincing people into believing that this is more than what it is. The mold man doesn't give a fuck about console games, subscription games or f2p and thus didn't bother making this initiative about such games.
>>738991663Paying customers regaining a modicum of control over something they paid for is already a big first step, and the fact that the industry shills are reeling and seething endlessly over it certainly says it's pointing in the right direction.
>>738991901You have a license to use it, the game company "owns" it
>>738988040Yeah it's property of the publisher.You purchased a license to play but did not purchase the game.Behave goyim.
>>738991935>>738991754You cant own or buy a f2p game you fucking retard. This has NEVER been about gachashit and similar garbage
>>738991958>Paying customers regaining a modicum of control over something they paid for is already a big first stepNo it's not, that still all falls under licensing
>>738991910Oh no, not those 70 people.
>>738991935Sure. Just ignore how he said very clearly that he wants the initiative to start small and focused so there would be a lower risk of it being dismissed
>>738987784And it will fail. Gamepass already imploded because they decided to start charging way higher prices and people unsubbed en masse. The model gamepass used was basically the only viable one (where you pay your fee and get access to a bunch of games) because if anybody decided to try to go on their own and people were expected to pay a monthly fee to retain access to 1-2 games, that studio would be filing for bankruptcy very soon. MMOs are the only exception and 1: they're dying, 2: new ones are not being made, 3: everyone who wants to play one is already really deep into their MMO and has no desire to switch. If Microshaft can't make a successful subscription model, nobody can. They've got unlimited resources and two platforms to distribute it on and they still couldn't make it work. Not only does that say to me that's it's not viable, it will say the same thing to other companies considering the idea.
>>738991969The company "owns" the original. I "own" the copy I purchased. This is EU law. >Nuh uh, you licensed it!Stop spreading corporate grifts, retard.
>>738991825Looking on SteamDB, none of the malware games (PirateFi, BlockBlasters and Chemia) have their game files available on Steam.I'm also not seeing any exceptions for malware games in these proposed legislations. It'd be though to even write a perfect and all encompassing definition of what all counts as malicious game software anyways. Does adware count? Spyware? Some games have insane amounts of telemetry and install actual rootkits for anti-cheat, do those count? What about a bitcoin miner?
>>738991910>Bricklandiacouldn't make this shit up
>>738992008They tried to push how they are selling a license. Court denied them, you own what you buy
>>738992008It's still a limit to what licensing allows sellers to do.
>>738992071The company owns the intellectual propertyYou own a license to play it under limited termsThat isn't changing, all that's changing (possibly) are the limited termsCopyright and IP aren't going anywhere
>>738992029Where did he say that?
>>738991550>>738991609Unreal cope. The problem with SKG is that it doesn't solve the real issue, that being copyright law. Game servers going down wouldn't be an issue if you could just privately host them yourself without being sued. IP abuse is far more serious problem, and SKG isn't a "first step" because it doesn't broach the topic of IP at all.
>>738992169>the real issue, that being copyright law.What's the alternative to copyright law?
Reminder that ubislop bent the knee and made the crew playable offlineThey are scared shitless of lawsuits
>>738992169>if you don't instantly dissolves all copyright laws, then it's uselesst. fucking retarded niggers constantly complaining that mothing ever changes.
>>738991754It is unfortunate that subscription games and f2p games are just as susceptible to becoming unplayable, but at least they clearly state what they are. With subscription games you know exactly how long the service you're playing for lasts. And f2p games outside of microtransactions have no upfront cost, so if it shuts down then you as a customer aren't losing any money (provided you didn't buy any mtx, which is a whole other can of worms).One of the main points of SKG and related acts is to stop devs/publishers from treating single purchase games as services when they clearly aren't because they've been in this weird legal gray area for years. The best "worst" outcome for SKG would be forcing publishers to clearly state when these live service games are going to end, because while it might not stop games from getting killed it'll at least finally clarify that these games are actual services with an end date. But with the positive reception from the EU and the result of the POG act I doubt that'll happen at this point.
>>738992146>You own a license to play it under limited termsThat's a corporate grift. Do you know why? Because you actually do own your purchased copy, even if it is digital. Companies argue it's "licensed" so they can get around the first sale doctrine and like a useful idiot sheep (or a paid shill, I dunno) you spread the grift around.>Some software and digital content publishers claim in their end-user license agreements (EULA) that their software or content is licensed, not sold, and thus the first sale doctrine does not apply to their works.
>>738992236More like they are scared shitless of losing the little public face they have. The crew was/would be expempt from whatever law they publish.
>>738992280>Companies argue it's "licensed"They don't argue it, that's just the truth, that's how it's always been, it's not up for contention
>>738992296>company that got themselves banned from japan giving a shit about their public image
>>738991969It's not that simple. This was settled back in 2012 in the CJEU in a case dealing with a one-time purchase of a piece of software with a perpetual right to use (ie, like any normal, physical product). The court found that>perpetual software licenses can be resold>downloaded software counts>contractual terms forbidding resale may not be enforceable against exhaustion rightsYou don't own the IP for the software, but you OWN your copy of it. You do not own a license, you own the software your purchased. You can do whatever you want with it. Alter it, sell it, put it on multiple devices, use it to run doom, whatever. It's yours, it is your property because you purchased it. The limit would be when you start making copies and selling those, as that would be copyright infringement. Your protections stop at your one copy. If you make new copies, that's a different matter. That would apply to physical products as well, if I purchased a piece of art and then photo-copied it and started selling it, that'd be illegal too. Doesn't mean I just have a "license" to look at my painting.
>>738992315Funny how those licenses went from a de facto "as long as you have the copy, you can use the software forever" to "we can disable it for any or all customers whenever we want at our convinience".
>>738992315>that's how it's always beenAnd here's grift 2. This became the narrative AFTER the EU court officially ruled the first sale doctrine does apply to digitally purchased software. Because you actually do own your digitally purchased copy, that's a legal fact.
>>738992258>weird legal gray area You're buying access to a service via a one-time fee, what's the problem?
>>738992169SKG isn't about IP law, it's about making games playable
>>738986659Steam ceasing support would mean the company is bankrupt so that's besides the point.
>>738986659Bit disappointed that it only looks at games, not all forms of software licences. But hey, its something.
>>738987041Noice.
>>738992390You own a license, you can just resell that license or whatever. All that's up for debate is what the terms of the license are. "Owning a copy" is imprecise language, you do not literally own a copy of the data (data can be infinitely copied at no cost), you own an abstract license to use the abstract IP that is the video game. There's lots of things you can't do with software you license >>738992418licensed media has been around for hundreds of years you ignorant fool
>>738992559>licensed media has been around for hundreds of years you ignorant foolYou are either 12 years old or an AI trolling the thread
>>738992019This assumes all 70 are even playing online. The note implies there are offline modes.
>>738992258>With subscription games you know exactly how long the service you're playing for lastsYou believe that the service will last for a long while though, that is why you invest to play on that game. Even if you paid for only one month yet, you are doing that believing the game and your subscription will last beyond that single monthLike would you/people be happy if you subscribe an mmo for a couple months and then company suddenly pulls the plug? You paid for those subscriptions believing that you can continue to pay and play more of it
>>738992648Media has been licensed since the 1800s, look it up
>>738986659>How will the wventual shutdown of Steam be handled under this? Will each individual publisher have to provide crack tools for their games? if they don't, how would refunding work? Who foots the bill?idk that's for them to figure out, not me as the customer I will buy a product and own it, simple as
>>738992679Uh sweaty, Gabe Newell invented media licenses. :3
>>738992318Didn't they try everything to keep elevens happy. It just didn't work
>>738992559The license allows you to one-time activate and authorize a software download for a single account on a specific platform, hence why you can't re-sell your Steam games as the license has already been usedContrast this with the old SecuROM where you bought a copy of a game, it came with 5 activations tied to your computer hardware, and you could re-sell the license so long as there were any activations left. But that experience sucked ass, so everyone voluntarily chose the account-based system instead.
>>738992559>You own a licenseYou CANT own a license, you fucking mongoloid. That's the point: corporates want to sell you licenses to get around the first sale doctrine because you CAN and DO own your purchased digital copy.>licensed media has been around for hundreds of yearsfucking lmao this is why you dont hire Ranjeets and Kumars to damage control for you
>>738992678You would usually get a refund on the unused subscription time.
>>738987041Poggers!
>>738986659>full refundI don't really agree with this unless it's more specific like if a game is discontinued within 6-12 months of purchase (not release). Like if you bought it within 12 months it gets the plug pulled on you, you get 75% the refunds, if it less than 6 months you get 100% refunds. If less than 2 months you get full refund. But if the game has been announced to be removed with very upfront notice it will be discontinued but you bought it anyway, you could invoke the 2 weeks refund. More than a year you can claim 50% refund. Or whatever.But then companies will go like, "damn, it's cheaper to offer refund than an offline package." lol.
>>738992731That depends on the license>>738992759>That's the point: corporates want to sell you licenses to get around the first sale doctrineLicensing is literally the only way you can "own" a video game, there are no other legal alternatives
>>738987041Kek poggers. Based lawmakers
>>738992679Who owns the copyright to the mona lisa? Go ask your chatgpt owner that
>>738992803>But then companies will go like, "damn, it's cheaper to offer refund than an offline package."It's not
>>738992851that was painted in the 1500s retard
>Game is made>game is sold to (you)>game company rakes in money>game company transfers all assets to another (like jobst tries to do) and files for bankruptcy>game is also killed but has to follow the law this bill setsWhat happens in this hypothetical?
>>738992803Currently the text says>(2) Beginning on the date a digital game operator ceases to provide services necessary for the ordinary use of the digital game, the operator shall provide the purchaser with one or more of the following:>(C) A refund in an amount equal to the full purchase price paid for the digital game by the purchaser.
>>738992421I'm not told the specifics of when the service ends.If I pay a lawn mowing service a one-time fee to mow my lawn, I know exactly when the service ends because the area of my lawn is clearly defined.If I pay a one-time fee for a live service game, I have no clue how long the service will last because there's only a vague "we can shut the game down at any time" clause that tells me nothing.>>738992678As a gamer I would be upset that the game is shutting down, but as a customer I know I wouldn't be getting screwed over because it is clearly stated how long the service I'm paying monthly for lasts. If I only subscribed and played for two full months before the game shut down then that's that. I didn't lose any money or have a paid product/good taken away from me. Can't complain there in regards to what I paid for, which was a clearly defined monthly service.
>>738992897Answer the question, you subhuman AI toddler
>>738992930Why are you talking about AI? It's not subject to copyright, it's too old
>>738992828>Licensing is literally the only way you can "own" a video game, there are no other legal alternatives>The Court of Justice of the European Union ruled, on July 3, 2012, that it is indeed permissible to resell software licenses even if the digital good has been downloaded directly from the Internet, and that the first sale doctrine applied whenever software was originally sold to a customer for an unlimited amount of time, as such sale involves a transfer of ownership, thus prohibiting any software maker from preventing the resale of their software by any of their legitimate ownersWould you look at that! You actually do legally own your purchased digital copy!Seriously, I dont understand how your shilling agency stays in business. Fucking Copilot can do a better job than this and its free
>>738992559>"Owning a copy" is imprecise languageNo, it isn't. If anything, owning a license is less precise. The exact terminology in EU law is >a license agreement granting a right to use a copy of a computer program for an unlimited period in return for payment of a fee.A right to a use of a COPY of a computer program. That is what you own. It isn't ambiguous at all, you own that copy. You agree to certain terms about what you're allowed to do with your copy, namely just that you can't make new copies and then sell them, but that doesn't then extend to the idea that because you don't own the IP, the original owner can just do literally whatever they want to your copy whenever they feel like it. That's the issue at hand here and you're trying to muddy the waters by avoiding talking about what's actually going on with video games right now: one-time-purchase copies of software are intentionally being rendered inoperable by the original manufacturer. The EU has already said that EULAs can't just say stupid shit like "we can destroy your copy at any time for any or no reason lol", it doesn't hold up in court, they have already made a decision on this. It just hasn't been applied to video games yet because lawmakers didn't know it was happening until now.
>>738992986I own my games on GOG, and can sue others for using my intellectual property. :3
>>738992928>I'm not told the specifics of when the service endsAnd that's a good thing, because realistically the alternative is super short expiration dates in case the game fails. Where as right now there are still some PS3 games with functional online servers because nobody got around to shutting them down yet.You as a consumer should just assume the plug may get pulled at any time, and if that's not okay with you then don't fucking buy it.
>>738992969I don't understand, you're agreeing with meYou're just making a leap from "you can resell licenses" (precise language) to "you own your copy" (imprcise language that can mean anything you want, what's own? what's a copy?)
>>738992212Literally nothing is better than copyright law. The notion that you can "own" an abstract idea that exists in other people's heads, doesn't suffer from scarcity, and is non-rivalrous is ridiculous. Probably the biggest jew of the modern era.
>>738992986A license is defined. A copy is not defined, neither is ownership. What's a copy? A single copy of the data? Because that's not the case, you are allowed to copy, delete and redownload the data. What you have is a license to do certain things (defined by the license and the law in general)
>>738986659this should extend to all software
>>738992928>customer I know I wouldn't be getting screwed overYou are getting screwed over though. You didn't pay that 5$ for that single month believing that you will only play for that single month. You believed you will likely pay 60$ and play it for a year. If I pay 5$ and the game goes under next month, I would surely feel that I am screwed overI think it is reasonable to expect from subscription only games to release their server binaries after game goes under but unfortunately Ross disagrees
>>738993023>conflating owned copy and intellectual propertyI want to believe you're pretending to be this stupid to derail the discussion but then again, you're brown and do this for a living so....
>>738993057>Literally nothing is better than copyright lawOkLet's say there's no copyright lawI make a game, I try to sell this game, Indians resell the game for 5 cents, I make no money and I have no legal recourse, I go out of business because I can no longer afford to make gamesThis happens to everyone who makes games and all mediaNow the only media you have are small things people make in their spare timeIs this a good outcome?
>>738993148GOG says I own my games and I can sue others for their theft of it.
>>738993031>You as a consumer should just assume the plug may get pulled at any time, and if that's not okay with you then don't fucking buy it.But same argument applies to any online game. Why don't you just not buy The Crew if you are not ok with it?
>>738986659>Commiefornia hates skgMany such cases
>>738993164Yes because at the end of the day:I.Own.What.I.Buy.And you will NEVER be able to change this.
>>738993214You aren't responding to the contents of the post in any wayWith no copyright law there will be no things for you to buy, at least no media
>>738993039>the first sale doctrine applied whenever software was originally sold to a customer for an unlimited amount of time,I know literacy is not your strong point, si I advise you to read slowly. Or get Claude to simplify it for you. It's a cut and dry definiton
>>738993117Any intention of addressing any other part of the post? Like the parts that actually matter? Here, I'll help you out:>what's actually going on with video games right now: one-time-purchase copies of software are intentionally being rendered inoperable by the original manufacturer. The EU has already said that EULAs can't just say stupid shit like "we can destroy your copy at any time for any or no reason lol", it doesn't hold up in court, they have already made a decision on this. It just hasn't been applied to video games yet Sorry, I know I said a lot of words which did give you the ability to only pick and choose which ones you wanted to engage with. I wasn't restrictive enough, and should have completely ignored your bad faith argument and only addressed the actual issue at hand.
>>738993164Why is this always about Indians?
>>738993202I didn't buy The Crew, precisely because I knew about the always online requirements.I've recently been thinking of buying a copy of Diablo IV. A local retailer has PS5 copies of it for 20 euros. But I haven't bought it, because I know it's always online, and I don't buy always online games.And somehow I am able to make these decisions without government intervention required.
>>738993214No you don't. There is nothing to change.
>>738993190>and I can sue others for their theft of it.For stealing your copy? Did they take it away from you such that you cant access it anymore?
>>738993245Yes I read that, it just has nothing to do with what I'm saying
>>738988091Cope corpotranny
>>738993246What's there to address? You're correct, nothing needs to be said
>>738987920The nation wants a free market so suck a fat one commie lmao
>>738988673what vidya were you playing back in 1926 anon?
>>738993164People can already download your game for free. What exactly is copyright law doing in this scenario?
>>738993302Yes actually. That is what the entire thing with the crew is all about. You not being able to play the game you paid for. I'm glad you are finally getting it.
>>738987041
>>738993318>it just has nothing to do with what I'm sayingIt clearly defines what an "owned copy" is. Feigning confusion on this point isnt going to work
>>738993364Steam is more convienent than piracy, and it's legalWith no law there would just be a new Steam where all copies would be sold for 1 cent without the permission of the developer, and it would all be legal
>>738993353Go look up what the word "almost" means you retarded shitskin.
>>738993391So your definition of ownership is simply being able to resell it? THat's it? Because there's lots of things you can't do with games that you "own" that you can do with physicl objects that you own. You also haven't defined what a copy is, or what exactly it is that you own
>>738993385Befitting.
>>738993369Amd the reason SKG is goign forward is because you OWN the copy you purchased. It's not a license that corporates can brush under the rug and argue "you dont own it!" when questioned.Good on you for finally understanding and dismissing the corporate grift!
>>738987264>commieFact-acting reminder
>>738993425>With no law there would just be a new Steam where all copies would be sold for 1 cent without the permission of the developer, and it would all be legalSteam would make no money if they did this. Your entire premise is wrong.
>>738993491>Amd the reason SKG is goign forward is because you OWN the copy you purchased. It's not a licenseLiterally every game you bought has been sold to you under a license
>>738993535You literally just charge the bandwidth costs plus a tiny bit on top, which is in the range of cents, and you make money
>>738993559>Literally every game you bought has been sold to you under a licenseFact check: FALSEYou own what you buy. Even the US court agrees with this and if you disagree with this you're free to take it up to them and argue about it (like that cuckold that proposed it tried to do)
>>738993145Again, as a gamer I'm getting screwed because it sucks to see any game get completely shut down and become unplayable. But in regard to my rights as a paying customer I knew what I was getting into and no contracts were violated. If I paid for 12 full months in advance and the game shut down after playing for 6 months, I'd get a refund for that remaining 6 that I didn't get to use and wouldn't have any money stolen from me.
>>738993559So are books and movie DVDs. Does that make the specific physical copy any less of a person's property?
>>738993483>Because there's lots of things you can't do with games that you "own" that you can do with physicl objects that you ownBecause it's software and intangible, you cant paint on it. Sorry about that. But you can mod and dismantle the code though.>You also haven't defined what a copy is, or what exactly it is that you own>whenever software was originally sold to a customer for an unlimited amount of time, as such sale involves a transfer of ownershipAs I said earlier, your illiteracy and stupidity are not my problem. Get Claude to simplify or translate it. You have to underatand and catch up with your superiors
>>738993654Are you a fucking moronLicensing is the only way video games have ever been sold, and music, and movies, and all media, it's been this way for centuries
>>738993559>Literally every game you bought has been sold to you under a license>>738992280>>738992390Only an indian shill could be stupid enough to argue against a legal finding and court ruling that has been posted and cited several times in the thread already
>>738988578Quick question anon: Would copyright hold any power if there was no state to enforce it?
>>738993692Again I'm not going to argue with this. Take it up to the US court and try to convince them that you are selling a license, just like they tried and failed last week.I understand your frustration but I own what I buy.
>>738993593But no one would do this over just making a piracy site (which already exist)
>>738993674>Does that make the specific physical copy any less of a person's property?I would argue yes because you have less rights as to what you can do with it>>738993683>But you can mod and dismantle the code though.I think you aren't allowed to do that actually, there's laws about reverse engineering, not sure about moddingYou can't call me stupid when you literally can't define what it is you own. Because it's not a "copy" of anything, what you own is a license
>>738993767And piracy is much less convienent than buying it legally
>>738993735The post you quoted says "software licenses can be resold". It's literally calling it a license. Are you fucking stupid?
>>738993758>I own what I buySo long as you're not cracking any copy protection, which is a highly illegal activity
>>738993559bros...my genesis games license expired....they're gonna take my carts
>>738993672Eh, I am not reaching you. My point was you only started playing and paid that money because you believed you could continue to play. That was your expectations. No pays an MMO for a month if they know it will go under next month. The customer expectation is the game and the service will continue to exist in future. Disagreeing with this is disingenuous
>>738993830False again. I can do whatever the fuck I want with the game I bought
>>738993831Wait until you find out your Sega Channel no longer works.
>>738993771>Because it's not a "copy" of anything,It's a "copy" of the "original" that's for sale. I cant believe you're so fucking stupid that I have to explain how digital sales work.
>>738993831>bros...my genesis games license expired....they're gonna take my cartsBut no one is taking the_crew.exe from you. Then what is this initiative is about?
>>738993880>It's a "copy" of the "original" that's for saleand what is it that's for sale?
>>738993827>with a perpetual right to use (ie, like any normal, physical product). Failing the literacy checks pretty hard, huh?
>>738988465Debatably they're worse about this since they intentionally break already functional self hosted options I got armymen from them and all the lan options were completely dummied out
>>738993952Yes, you have a license to perpetually use something. Are you retarded?
>>738993907>and what is it that's for sale?A digital "copy" of the "original" game. Holy shit pajeet how dumb are you?
>>738993535>Piracy sites would make no money doing this. Your entire premise for 5his is wrong.
>>738994005So you think you're buying computer data?
>>738993350The nation wants whatever they're propagandized to want, because most people are retarded.
>>738986659I thought we were supposed to hate california
>>738993997>a license to perpetually use something.>as such sale involves a transfer of ownership>transfer of ownershipYou can stop now
>>738994052What are you even trying to say? You were adamantant that it wasn't a license, now we're agreed that you were wrong and it is a license, why are you still replying?
>>738994028>you think you're buying computer data?LEGALLY speaking, I am buying computer data. It's mine to do with as I please. Again, court ruling.
>>738994108>LEGALLY speaking, I am buying computer dataNo, legally speaking you're buying a license. You can redownload the computer data all you want, you can delete it, you can select it on your hard drive and copy paste it, none of this is illegal because what you bought is not computer data. This was never the case. What you bought was a license
>>738994103>now we're agreed that you were wrong and it is a licenseAnd now you'll argue>it's a license so the company can revoke it at any time because you dont own it!Because that's what you're paid to parrot>their software or content is licensed, not soldAgain, we've established the corporate narrative and why you're so insistent on the license word. Give it a rest retard
>>738994157What you're buying is the copy of the data, the license is what limits what you can do with it.
>>738994203>And now you'll argue>>it's a license so the company can revoke it at any time because you dont own it!No I won't. Are you fucking retarded?
>>738993904Can't play The Crew offline
>>738994226>What you're buying is the copy of the data, the license is what limits what you can do with it.No, you bought a license, you can't "own" computer data because it can be copied indefinitely at no cost
>>738986659>Helldivers 2 offline single player where you have to fight procedurally generated galactic wars all by yourself forever, but you can still invite your friends to your game lobbies FUUUUUUCK TAKE MY MONEY
>>738994157>No, legally speaking you're buying a licenseNo, legally speaking, Im.buying a copy of the product. It's still a digital product and I own it. That's why you spent so long pretending to be confused about what "copy" means. You're just wrong, the legal basis here is irrefutable
>>738994347>You're just wrong, the legal basis here is irrefutableNo it's not. Legally you talk about a license, because copy is misleading and leads people to believe what you believe, that you paid for actual computer data, which is not the case and never has beenYou pay for rights to use an IP, IP is an abstract thing that is merely represented by computer data
>>738994267>you can't "own" computer data because it can be copied indefinitely at no costSee >>>738992969Been over this already.
>>738986659I don't care about online games at all, but I hope this will eventually lead to something curbing the ridiculous "you're buying a license which can be revoked at any time" crap, and forcing platforms to work like GOG. You want planned obsolescence so you can sell the same thing over and over again? Then make sure to offer something of actual value that is better than previously.
>>738994434reselling software licenses doesn't mean you own computer data
You know legally speaking and this is something nobody wants to touch on because it basically implodes all this bullshit is that this non-distinction between licensed and unlicensed software and the separate criminal offense for "bypassing" digital locks means anyone that has used any media whatsoever since like 1995.Which is so obviously retarded anyone with anything remotely resembling common sense knows it's beyond the scope of copyright which, while legitimate, is about the implicit fraud being committed against both parties in the case of bootlegs, or towards the creator in the case of piracy, and explicitly and solely has to do with reproduction and distribution.
>>738994463>as such sale involves a transfer of ownershipclearly it does.
>>738994267US court said no when a activist tried to claim they are selling a license (see pic related)SKG passed and is proceeding as usualAll companies are collectively shitting themselves and preparing to get all their games offline before 2027 endsYou lost.
Why not just sever the undersea cables and Make the Internet American Again™?
>>738994267By that standard, anyone selling or distributing data can't own that data and therefore has no legal right over sales.
>>738994501you own the license, you don't own the datayou don't not own the data either, the data cannot be owned, it is free
>>738994413>because copy is misleading and leads people to believe what you believe, that you paid for actual computer data, which is not the case and never has beenNope! Get Claude to summarize what the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled, on July 3, 2012 in your native language, since you're clearly terrible at english.
>>738994516>US court said no when a activist tried to claim they are selling a license (see pic related)I'm not seeing what you said in the image anywhere>>738994519You have legal rights over the sale of licenses, you don't have rights over the data itself
>>738987041POGGERS
>>738994550>On July 3, the Court of Justice of the European Union in UsedSoft GmbH v. Oracle International Corp. held that a licensor of software made available for download over the Internet may not prevent the resale of perpetual licenses by its licenseesIs that what you're talking about?
>>738994585Please learn english. I'm not going to type it out for you because your AI website cant fetch text from a image
>>738994610Good! Now get Claude to explain the finding that you can resell a product even if it is digital
>>738994705The image has no "US courts saying no" anywhere
>>738994754Why do you read "you can resell software licenses" and interpret it as "I own computer data"? There is no logical connection thereYou own the license, not the data, and you can resell the license
>>738994526>you don't own the dataI do own my copy of the data, yes. That's why the First sale doctrine applies to it.
>>738994759https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtEQXypwmLUHope you can understand english, here it is in audio form
>>738986659If this goes through, what ridiculous measures are publishers going to take to skirt around it? Start up a new company for each game, so they can pretend to go bankrupt with no one to hold responsible once they want to shut it down? Patch the game with bots, and claim that's "ordinary use"? Patch the game without bots so you just explore the backrooms doing nothing, and claim that's "ordinary use"?
>>738994834>I do own my copy of the data, yesSo if you select the data and copy paste, who owns the new copy?
>>738994836Still not seeing US courts saying you aren't selling licenses anywhere
>>738994842All of those would be more effort and cost than just complying with the mandate non-maliciously
>>738994920चिंता मत करो, एक दिन तुम अंग्रेजी सीख जाओगे।
>>738994805>>738994846Maybe this is a language barrier thing, or maybe ownership isnt an actual concept in Hindi. Ask Claude to translate this passage and explain it to you>For the first sale doctrine to apply, lawful ownership of the copy or phonorecord is required. As §109(d) prescribes, first sale doctrine does not apply if the possession of the copy is "by rental, lease, loan, or otherwise without acquiring ownership of it"
>>738994846>who owns the new copy?Still me. I can do whatever I want with my copy, including backing it up and duplicating it. Just like a physical product.What I cant do is sell the manufactured for profit since that runs afoul of copyright laws, just like how physical goods have patent laws
>>738994991>copy or phonorecordthat's literally from the time of physical media where they were sold as physical copieshow do you think it works with digital media? what is the "copy"?
>>738994585>You have legal rights over the sale of licensesYou can't sell licenses for something you don't own and since your argument is that no one can ever own data, the licensing is therefore illegal.
>>738995058copyright does not apply to the data though, it applies to the IP
>>738995060>how do you think it works with digital media?The same way it works with physical media. Also explained in that same court ruling. Ask Claude about it
>>738986659>that guy who bought all of the train simulator dlc
>>738995132>The same way it works with physical media.It doesn't, because there's no such thing as a copy anymoreDigital data exists in a computer and can be endlessly duplicated or transfered, you can't practically "own" it
>>738986659The crushing majority of the steam games can be cracked with a dll file.All steam have to do is provide an official one.
>>738994267In this case we're getting the biggest misleading advertising case in the planet, because the companies put no effort whatsoever in informing the buyers that what they're doing is a lease.Every single store and console manufacturer is getting sued for billions, if this is how you want to play.
>>738995172>you can't practically "own" itYes you do, that's why you can sell it. That's why the first sale doctrine applies to it. That's why companies pulled out the "we're not selling the product to you, we're licensing it so you dont actually own it" excuse I lined out here >>738992280. Is Claude translating this correctly? Or are you unable to understand simple concepts in Hindi too?
>>738993287>And somehow I am able to make these decisions without government intervention required.You could make that argument for any product that the government regulates. Besides which, you don't buy always-online, yet they still exist. You don't buy games that can shut down, yet more and more are being made. The fact is that consumers really can't be trusted to make reasonable decisions in all the areas they make purchases, and companies can't be trusted not to fuck customers up the ass if it means one more cent in profit. "Voting with your wallet" has proven not to be a realistic solution to games being killed off
>>738995326It's not a lease. You have a license, but it's a perpetual license
>>738995339>that's why you can sell it.You can't thoughI can't buy a copy of software, then copy and paste it so now I have two copies, then sell those two copiesI bought a single license, and I can resell that license
>>738995424The word you're looking for is distribute, which nobody is asking for.
>>738995473>which nobody is asking for.what the fuck are you talking about?
>>738987041Steam doesn't just sell games, they should expand it to Protect our Software
This will only impact small indies who don't have the money to support their flopped games forever
>>738995424>You can't thoughThe EU court ruled that yes, you can. >I can't buy a copy of software, then copy and paste it so now I have two copies, then sell those two copiesBrcause selling the second copy you made is copyright infringement which is illegal. You can sell the first copy you purchased to someone else.>I bought a single license, and I can resell that licenseNope, not license, copy. Cant believe you're still trying to mix up the two, as if anyone else is a stupid as you are to fall for it.
>>738992803It's much cheaper to implement an EoS plan at the beginning of development than it is to potentially have to refund millions of dollars
>>738995542>Brcause selling the second copy you made is copyright infringement which is illegal.Why am I not allowed to duplicate my own property that I own and sell it? I own it, after all, it's my data
uh oh corpo melty
>>738995489Nobody is asking for distribution rights to a protected work, which is what you're misconstruing this as semantically.
>>738995367But it's not truly perpetual, is it?
>>738993559When will people understand that calling it a "license" is completely immaterial to whether or not you should perpetually own it
>>738995614I don't care what you're fucking asking for I'm explaining how exactly you own a video gameYou have a license to use an IP
>>738995642True perpetual is illegal but reasonably perpetual is perfectly legal and acceptable.
>>738995642Dunno, that's what this thing is about>>738995663That's what I'm trying to say, retards are saying "because I it's perpetual and i can resell it it's not licensed" when these aren't related in any way
>>738988040That's the trick, not a single person actually believes that. It's all shitposting or pretending to not understand.
>>738995672No, you're playing semantic word games to misconstrue ownership with distribution rights of a protected work, which are two different things.
>>738995601>Why am I not allowed to duplicate my own property that I own and sell it?You can duplicate your copy.You can sell your copy.You cant sell your duplicsted copy because that's copyright infringement. Why? Because you own the "copy", not the "IP" so you are not allowed to make duplicates for sale without permission. You can however, make duplicates for personal use.Hey Claude, can you please use an appropriate hindi insult when the moron asks you to translate this?
>>738995727>That's what I'm trying to say, retards are saying "because I it's perpetual and i can resell it it's not licensed" when these aren't related in any wayFair enough
It is amazing how much SKG shill discourse is just them pretending not to understand things, thus making discourse impossible.
>>738988091This angle is so forced it enters "epic Reddit debunk" territory. Video game age ratings and copyright law are two different subject matter. Also>you should be angry against regulation because regulation bad 11!!!Asbestos is delicious btw.
>>738995768>No, you're playing semantic word gamesThat's LITERALLY what the law is. Words with precise meanings
>>738986659can we get a "Stop Killing OS's" that forces microsoft to continue to provide security updates for windows 7, 8, & 10 next?
>>738995785Shill discourse as in corporate shills here and there, or are you making a retarded assertion that people not being able to have their shit stolen from them at an entirely arbitrary point in the future under a licensing scheme that isn't valid and only held up with the threat of criminal punishment for bypassing a digital lock is some kind of astroturf?
>>738995780>You cant sell your duplicsted copy because that's copyright infringementSo if I copy and paste my installed game, delete the original, and resell the files I copy and pasted, I'm breaking the law? Do I now not own the game?Who the fuck is Claude and why do you keep talking about him?
>>738995820basedsome glowie will argue this is a bad thing somehow>b-but i cant send my malware to the 89 year old boomer that doesn't want to leave windows 8Hell it can be done with no added work. Just bring the LTSC security updates to the consumer version.
>>738995812Yes lawyers are immoral horrendous people and legal eagle is a cocksucking faggot who lied about software ownership because he hopes to get a contract with nintendo.Are you too stupid to realize you've admitted you're lying now?
>>738995910I'm not lying about anythingImagine thinking laws are bad lmao
>>738995820It's not the same thing. Microsoft doesn't stop WIndows 7 from working, it just stops supporting it
>>738988640if the developers want some specific definition they can settle it in the courts after getting fined a bajillion dollars for being snakes
>>738995780What you are describing is a license.
>this game is not available in commieforniacant wait
>>738995820As much as I hate micropenis, you can't force a company to do labor forever, which is what that would entail. SKG isn't asking for endless updates, it just wants one final update that makes the game playable without future developer involvement.
>>738996054>commieGet a new script
>>738991910this is exactly what we want
>>738996054lol yeah bro all those California-based devs and publishers are going to choose to not sell their games thereOver something that takes fuckall extra cost and manpower to comply with no less
>>738996089Why? A lot of stuff is not available in communist countries. Commiefornie fits them perfectly
>>738996054>Lose out on one of the largest customers of AAA slop purchases because you pretend you're so cheap you can't make an EOS planHonestly possible and would be hilarious
>>738988091The government is the public gun.We're pointing the public gun at the companies, and if they don't comply,we're pulling the trigger, with all the horrible consequences that come from it.I wish we didn't needed to use the public gun because it's messy, but we do, otherwise they will make a future where all the files of the game are in a remote server that will be shut down.
>>738995876>So if I copy and paste my installed game, delete the original, and resell the files I copy and pasted, I'm breaking the law?No. You're not.>delete the originalthat's why. Reselling requires you cant access or use the item you sold to someone else since selling it to them means relinquishing your ownership of that item. Deleting your copy is one way to do that.>Who the fuck is Claude Your AI translator. Maybe you're paid to use Gemini instead, I dont know.
>>738996148>We're pointing the public gun at the companiesbiting the hand that feeds you
>>738996071Just make it open source at the end of its lifecycle.
Niggers will ignore that laws can and will be amended or repealed due to political or legislative wills for change and therefore can't be used to advocate for a lack of change of said laws.
>>738996147Doesn't matter as long as it is not china
>>738996172So does my ownership immediately transfer from the original copy the the second copy as soon as I delete the original? Is that how it works?
>>738995982I clearly described a digital copy.
>>738996147>still thinks it is about being cheap or unable to make an EOS planIt is because companies don't want to do it tard-kun
>>738996054oh yeah, just all those little companies based in california like EA, activision, riot, 2K, capcom US, bandai US, konami, santa monica, treyarch, respawn, infinity ward and roblox will promptly move out of the state in order to not comply with something they would much rather skirt around or find loopholes for
>>738996223I mean in this case the corporate shills are trying to say that a law saying>Hey you can't rug pull your customers later (this is already illegal and has been a game of chicken going back for decades)
>>738996195Companies want to feed you nothing while making more money than ever before. That's the trend we're seeing. Companies cannot keep themselves in check because ultimately it all comes down to making as much cash as possible, and then making even more
>>738996054like 8 to 10% of western GAAS revenue comes from california, they're gonna feel it
>>738996258The limitations you describe are because you licensed the software. Like almost every piece of software.
>>738996304they don't need to move out of the state, they just need to not sell there
>>738996297I think that's what he meant
>>738996297>they don't want to do it not because of money in inability>then why don't they>because they don't want towhat the fuck are you talking about
>>738996368source?
>>738996238Your ownership doesnt transfer to the second copy because you own that too. That's why reselling it while keeping your purchased copy is illegal. Pretending to be retarded for gotchas is poor form
>>738995939>Microsoft doesn't stop WIndows 7 from working, it just stops supporting ituntil they maliciously change chrome and steam's code so that it literally doesn't work with 7, you mean.
>>738996142You're actually retarded if you think most shit isn't made available in California.
>>738996403I mean he's kind of making a point, but it's worse than it just not being financially viable, it's that these fags are so out of control they literally do not consider not stealing your shit.
>>738996403They don't want to make it because they don't want people to stay and continue to play "AAA SHIT 4" when they release "AAA SHIT 5"
>>738996437So I can own as many copies as I want but I can only sell one copy, and when I sell one copy I have to delete all my copies?
>>738996373Nope! Because you dont own licensed software in the first place.
>>738996441Chrome and steam aren't part of microsoft though.
>>738996483Exactly. You finally got it.
>>738996379hey, i don't know if you know this, but you cannot do illegal things in places where they are illegal>they can easily avoid the slavery ban by conducting all of their transactions onlineare you fucking stupid
>>738996495Correct. That’s what you are describing.
>>738996448Not yet, but thanks to all their bullshit laws businesses don't want to stay there or work with them
>>738996516my bad you're right, it's google we should be going after for that bullshit.
>>738996195>the hand that feeds youCorpo shills are truly subhuman goyim.
>>738996547Ok, got another question for youLet's say I buy two copies of a game, Copy A and Copy BI install them to C:/Games/CopyA and C:/Games/CopyB respectivelyWhat happens when I sell CopyA? Do I need to delete the CopyA folder? or both folders? or no folders?
>>738996297>It is because companies don't want to do it tard-kunWhether or not they want to or can do it, they'll present the same argument to legal authorities either way.
>>738996562Clearly not. If it was licensed and you cant own it, legalities involving ownership like the first sale doctrine wouldnt apply to it. But they clearly do, so you do own them. QED.
>>738996551It is not illegal to make such games, it is illegal to sell them there. No one will arrest you if you enter california for the charges of "making illegal games!!!"
>>738996483>So I can own as many copies as I wantNot that anon but making copies is technically illegal under copyright laws but its not enforced because enforcing that law is practically impossible. A lot of copyright law works in this way where little Timmy 10 year old drawing Donald Duck on his fridge is technically breaking the copyright law but Disney won't prosecute such cases for purely practical reasons. Which is why its effectively legal.Trying to make profit by selling copies of someone else's IP is prosecuted more easily because its easier to monitor, suing bootleggers is not unpopular and its very easy to establish clear malice in court.
>>738996570Most likely. It'd be hard to ask microsoft to do something about other companies decisions.
>>738986659>f2p game shuts down>provides a full refund of $0>flips you off while shutting down the gamegiving them wiggleroom to continue fucking the playerbase, genius
>>738996434>america tends to have 50%+ revenue for most of those types of games>california makes up around 20-25% of luxury related revenue in the country
>>738996682>A lot of copyright law works in this way where little Timmy 10 year old drawing Donald Duck on his fridge is technically breaking the copyright lawIt's actually not, that's totally beyond the scope of copyright law.
>>738996698Sorry, I don't play f2p. subscription or console games so I don't care.
>>738996698But they can already do that
>>738996768>games are luxuryis it really the case in US? Damn, it really is communism there
>>738996794No he's right, it is breaking copyright law
>>738996651A simple google search disproves your statement. All software is licensed, not sold to the end consumers. Your ignorance doesn’t change that simple, legal fact. Always has been.
>>738996651You're been hung up on this idea that if you can resell it, it's not a license, but you can resell licenses
>>738996597>What happens when I sell CopyA?You have to give up all ways of accessing Copy A since you dont own it anymore. You're clearly smarter than the other jeets itt to make.it this far so I'll let you work out what that means and what you should and shouldnt delete in your example.
>>738996698f2p and subscriptions were never what SKG targeted
>>738996972You are aware that you're making shit up at this point right?
>>738996879>>738996935>As §109(d) prescribes, first sale doctrine does not apply if the possession of the copy is "by rental, lease, loan, or otherwise without acquiring ownership of it".Now let me ask you a question. What exactly, is a "license"?
>>738997051>What exactly, is a "license"?Why don't you ask that Claude guy you love so much
>>738997012I understand your disbelief since you've been lied to all your life, but no. That's exactly how it works
>>738996869Disney probably has the fiscal resources to harass the family, but no, copyright law specifically pertains to the redistribution of a protected work.A crayon drawing of Donald Duck in someone's house is not "redistribution of a protected work".I get you're a shill but this sort of argumentation legally opens every major company to getting buttfucked to death by lawsuits.
>>738997051> A software license is a legally binding contract that dictates how you can use, modify, and distribute a piece of software. Instead of buying the software itself, you are purchasing the legal right to use it under the specific rules set by the developer or publisher.
>>738988091The only reason corpos haven't fully fucked people is because of regulations. You are genuinely retarded.
>>738997179That's not how it works at all, not in digitalYou own a license to use an IPan IP is not the physical thing itself, the physical thing itself is just a manifestation of the IPAnything about "copies" went out the window when people started using computers
>>738991754Because legally subscription games are am actual service
>>738996667>It is not illegal to make such gamesThe law hasn't been drafted yet, neither of us knows whether this will be apply only to CA customers or to all CA businesses. Also, CA alone is 12% of the US population, they'd have to be completely retarded to cut off that entire revenue base just to save a little on EoL procedures.
>>738997051>>738997228Because transmitting a digital file from one device to another inherently involves making a new copy, courts have ruled that this distribution right violates the copyright owner's exclusive reproduction rights.
>>738997189You could post your kid's drawing of Donald Duck on Twitter and then you're distributiing a protected work
>>738991160> Are you still waiting on a GFWL-removal update for Lost Planet and Operation Raccoon City?Yesyou knew exactly what to say to piss me off on this topic which heavily implies you deeply understand the topic and why those examples are actually prime examples of why SKG is necessary
>>738997283Yes? And?
>>738997275>just to save a little on EoL proceduresThat is your assumption of how much they are saving.The law will surely not make it illegal to make such games, it would be retarded to arrest game devs in airport>stand right there criminal scum, you have been making games that doesn't have EOL procedure
>>738991160>even from users librariesThis is only thing relevant and related to SKG
>>738997317Also wrong.
>>738986659Bungie diehards very concerned about what this means for the future of Marathon.Obviously Marathon will be shut down at some point. If this gets the greenlight they'll pull plug early before it takes effect.
>>738997259>Anything about "copies" went out the window when people started using computers>the practical difficulties in enforcing this clause should not be an obstacle to authorizing resale, as they are also present for software which can be installed from physical supports, where the first-sale doctrine is in force.Nice try Kumar, but no. You'd have spared yourself this embarrassment had you read Caude's hindi breakdown properly.
>>738997415People have literally been sued for doing just that
>>738997367They don't arrest anybody, they just fine the hell out of them until they comply. You genuinely have a child-like understanding of the law, why are you even talking about this subject?
>>738997367>The law will surely not make it illegal to make such games, it would be retarded to arrest game devs in airportNo, but they can prevent sales and force refunds until the devs respect the law.
>>738996794>that's totally beyond the scope of copyright law.Its not. Back in the day when cassette tapes were a thing, music industry whined about kids making copies of music cassettes.>>738997189>I get you're a shill but this sort of argumentation legally opens every major company to getting buttfucked to death by lawsuits.Thats the whole point. Copyright laws are pretty strict but majority of it is not enforced because for companies like Disney suing little Timmy would be a massive PR nightmare. Fan art in general breaks the copyright law but IP holders tend to tolerate it because its both free advertising and attacking your own consumers is a bad move. But if the owner of the IP ever demands you to remove all of your fan creations you have to comply because the copyright law is on their side.
>>738997374no it doesn't, only thing SKG cares about is booting up and playing the games regardless of how it was obtained
>>738997458I know you're obsessed with the resale thing but that's not what we're talking aboutWe're talking about what you own, the physical data itself or a license
>>738997489>I'm wrong but you're actually agreeing with me and that makes me rightMan whoever is paying for your retarded ass should get a refund.
>>738997228>Instead of buying the software itself, you are purchasing the legal right to use it in other words>you dont own itAs I stated earlier, if you dont own it, rhe fist sale doctrine wouldnt apply to it. But as it does, you do own it. Therefore, it does not match your description of what a license is. Thanks for proving my point.
>>738993448Please point to the legislation that outlines the specific length of "almost" because "i dunno not a full century but enough of it" could cause confusion.
>>738997628"ownership" is not equivalent to "first sale doctrine"saying it 100 times will not make it correct
>>738997571>Ran out of arguments.Tranny detected. Read copyright law sometime. Theres a reason Nintendo can easily DMCA the shit out of any Nintendo-related youtube video they please, whether the video is monetized or not.
>>738997259>Anything about "copies" went out the window when people started using computersNot really, because the data still has to reside on something physical in your possession. You can have infinite copies on infinite drives, discs or sticks in your possession, and it's effectively the same one copy for you. But you can't transfer the data to something physical in someone else's possession, whether it's over the internet, or moving the physical items themselves.
>>738997628That’s more of a grey atea and holdover from a time when software wasn’t mostly sold digitally. It’s functionally impossible for you to resell your digital copy of a piece of software.
>>738996304Yeah, it is not like there is an ongoing exodus already.
>>738997651>For the first sale doctrine to apply, lawful ownership of the copy or phonorecord is required.A higher authority than your employer said it does so take it up with them.
>>738997803>But you can't transfer the data to something physical in someone else's possessionWhat about cloud storage?
>>738997818define "ownership"
>>738996768>20-25% of game revenue from the US is from Californiasource?>gtavit is a game for black people, of course US will be be at the top
>>738997805>That’s more of a grey atea Nope! Classic corporate cope. The ruling is as clear as day. Of course, if you dont like it, go ahead and sue the EU>It’s functionally impossible for you to resell your digital copy of a piece of software.Because you say so?
>>738997952>The ruling is as clear as day.no it's not
>>738997720>I posted last so I'm right!Nintendo can DMCA anyone because the system on youtube is bullshit and nobody wants to open themselves to litigious harassment from a million dollar corporation.Youtube DMCA take down notices do not follow standard procedure which is why false DMCA strikes have been a problem for like 20 years now.
>>738996321I like the idea of rugpulling poor autists. Artifactschizo's suicide was the best thing ever.
>>738997952If the ruling is clear, why can’t you resell your games on Steam?
>>738998042>Artifactschizo's suicidewhat happened?
>>738997982Thats not true. DMCA can be abused but when Nintendo removes Nintendo-related content they are withing their legal right to do so. Its an extremely unpopular and shitty move but the law does back them up and trying to sue them for it will just make you lose.Game related youtube videos like Let's Plays and streamers are also merely tolerated by game companies because its proven free advertisement for the game. Copyright-law wise Let's Plays are violating the copyright law though.
>>738998082He has to be dead at this point. I refuse to believe in any other outcome. They probably buried him next to Barneyfag.
>>738998228does he not post anymore?
>>738997981Yes it is.>>738998061Because Steam is lobbying against the french ruling that found them guilty for this reason.>French court rules that Steam’s ban on reselling used games is contrary to European lawFunny how an entire army of jeets can be defeated so handily by a simple google search
>>738998262Cherrypicking Google results doesn't actually make you rightLike you've been taking the reselling Oracle lawsuit out of context for literally a hundred posts
>>73898665990% of steam games can have their "drm" turned off with a single changed line in an already existing text file. it's not real drm.
>>738998262>one court ruled so it’s precedent for the whole world somehowLucky for us all that’s not how any of that works.
>>738998245The posts show up, but I think it's just copypasta. Hell, I've posted a few.
>>738998330>No saar you cherrypick saarIt's okay, jeet. Greater men than you have ruled that you are wrong. Just bend down and obey as you always have.>>738998357>Lucky for us Kek. Only a jeet could argue not having a legal ruling support your ownership of your purchased products is a good thing, let alone being "lucky"
>>738987784That's what I fear. They will circumvent the law by saying every game has a subscription of 1$/month.
>>738998551They will fail. There is a gigantic barrier between $0 and $1.
>>738998530>repeat the same flawed argument>call someone indian>repeat 100 timeshave you had your IQ tested?
>>738998664Make it 0.01$ and include 5 years of "subscription" with first month that costs 60$If your game is dead before that, just refund those 1cents back>b-b-but people won't buy into such obvious scamsif that was the case, they would already not buy online only games
>>738998776You'll find that the courts take a dim view on trying to circumvent legislation with bullshit.
>>738998817Yeah, I am sure that never happens.
>>738998673>NO SAAR! FLAWED ARGUMENT SAAR!!Cry harder, jeet. Guess you wont be getting paid today
>>738999007why do you love indians so much?
>>738998896Not in the third world shithole you live in, no.
>>738986659Alright, now there is a +14$ sub for every game. Thanks leftards!
>>738999114>bankrupt retarded devs still searching for the golden gooseSounds great.
>>738999114Cool, so are we celebrating the death of the western gaming sphere now or later?
>>738999114People aren't willing to put up with too many subscriptions at the same time, and there are going to be other publishers/developers that will seize the opportunity to advertise on having no subscription. Besides which, why aren't they already selling every game with a 14 dollar subscription?
>>738987897>people will vote with their wallets on this obvious consecuence to the stupid plan i deviced!Oh nice, but if people can vote with their wallets, why do we need the law for? ;)Dont get me wrong, people should vote with their wallets or get fucked, but this is quite retarded. There are a shit ton of buts and ifs that will fuck up this whole commie shit, and at the end you will be worse, not better, but hey at least troons could score one against the billionaires! The cost will always be passed to the consumer one way or another.
>>738999263now. we are celebrating it now.
>>738999175>>738999263if people can vote (and should) with their wallets then there is no need for this law.
>>738999114>Sega cancelled Super Game because live service isnt profitable Good, let them kill themselves
>>738999382>they’ll just rape you harderOkay, I won’t buy it>just do that nowNo, I’m going to vote for the encroachment of my own rights, and if corporations try to fuck me over on it, I’ll see them bankrupt and STILL advocate for even further encroachment of my own rights.
>>738999452Yet reality has shown that there is a need for this law, else there would be no need for the law in the first place
>>738999382>There are a shit ton of buts and ifs that will fuck up this whole commie shit, and at the end you will be worse, not betterHow so?
>>738999452And if people could vote with their wallets effectively, then no regulations would be needed and we could do away with ingredient regulation, cleanliness standards, and all forms of recall. But they can’t, so I’m going to regulate again, and nobody can stop me.
>>738999497>>738999580Nice, we can agree that people dont vote with their wallets. That means this law will only bring negative consecuences to the consumer. And people wont vote with their wallet out of those.You cant have it both ways.
>>738999482>Okay, I won’t buy itYou will. They will just fuck you harder in different ways and you will slurp that cock afterwards.
>>738999452>>738999382>There's no need for this law! Vote with your wallets!It's unfortunate it doesnt work since a stupid fortnite kid with his mom's credit card can outvote me a thousand times over. Oh well.
>>738999469>meanwhile, Blizzard is printing money with D4
>>738992828>Licensing is literally the only way you can "own" a video game, there are no other legal alternativesthe absolute state of this board
>>738999692The companies have to create an even worse value proposition at an economic point where people cannot absorb the cost. I do not expect them to “vote with their wallet” or any materialist-activist tripe, I expect them to not have the means to support the new exploitative avenue. Companies will die from the material conditions of this decision, not any active choice from the consumer block.
>>738999805Yeah, it's wild how there are now people here who understand how the law works.
>>738999805can you contradict that statement?
>>738999692The industry doesn't compete with each other by offering better choices like they should do, which is why they are getting hit by regulations.
>>738999692>Nice, we can agree that people dont vote with their walletsNo, people definitely vote with their wallets. It's just that consumers often make uninformed or impulsive purchases >That means this law will only bring negative consecuences to the consumer.How?
>>738999703No, I don’t think I will actually. Like, I’ll just not buy the shitty game for three times the price. Sorry? Just not gonna. Unless they lobby to make their game taxpayer funded, and then I’ll advocate against that too.
>>738992916game company A has to provide an offline mode (or otherwise follow the law)unlessit transfers the ip of the game and therefore the maintenance requirement onto the company B that now has to either provide an offline mode or continue the servers
>>738999703How would regulation increase their ability to fuck you over? They can already do all the things you say regulation will make them do, so why don't they?
>>738999978what if the game company B buys the game and then immediately goes bankrupt
>>738999978>every AAA dev just offloads every IPCool, finally they can make an original IP. Sounds good to me.
>>739000039The game will already have been developed with EoS built-in. The point is that the company doesn't need to exist for the game to keep being playable
>>738999114Not +. If they wanna go the subscription route and sell the game as a clear service instead of a product they can already do that, there would be no change. If they have to increase the price of a game to offset the cost of the EOL plan then so be it, but it sure as hell wouldn't be $14 per copy.
>>738999692>That means this law will only bring negative consecuences to the consumer.I for one think being able to play a game I paid money for despite corporate wanting to shut it down is an unconditionally good outcome. But what do I know? Im just a customer that owns my purchases, not a jewish legalese versed americuck
>>739000010Because that extra upfront price is still a good bonus on whatever profit they are getting from microtransactions, hats or game passes. If they think it is not worth to keep that upfront price, they will just ditch it and rely more on other revenue
>>739000145>developed with EoS built-inWhy would you assume so? If they have no intention to make an EoS, they won't
>>739000207I’ll lobby the government to regulate the new avenue of revenue too, assuming they don’t die before then.
>>738998530>Kek. Only a jeet could argue not having a legal ruling support your ownership of your purchased products is a good thing, let alone being "lucky"I’m saying that’s not how court ruling work, you retard. Which is unambiguously true. I didn’t make a value judgement about it. You are delusionally arguing against reality. I hope you are trolling honestly because I don’t want delusional retards to be on my side.
>>739000282>If they have no intention to make an EoS, they won'tBut they would, since the law requires them to provide it. Since the law requires it, and the company presumably doesn't want to go bankrupt, then they'll make a plan for it during development, where it's piss easy to do
>>738986659>steam will be shut downProfoundly retarded understanding
>>739000207m8, the industry won't revolutionize how games are sold just because they're told to provide an offline mode when they kill off their game in a decade
>>739000502>industry won't revolutionize how games are soldin case you are living under a rock, how games are being is sold is already being changed. Games rely more and more on DLCs, microtransactions or f2p shit
>>739000657>Games rely more and more on DLCs, microtransactions or f2p shitand this legislature wont change that
>>739000657Read the rest of the post, yeah?
>>739000683>and this legislature wont change thatYes, it will only accelerate it
>>739000657>>739000694Wait were you agreeing with me? Because I'm for SKG, not against it
>>738994157>legally speaking you're buying a licenseEULAs are not legally binding, sorry Shlomo
>>739000896And?
