If you don’t retain some kind of actual ownership, they will not be allowed to use terms like “buy” or “purchase” on the store page button. I hope there aren’t huge holes in this that allow bad actors to get around it, but I certainly loathe the fact that there’s no real way to buy a movie or TV show digitally. Not really.

EDIT: On re-reading it, there may be huge holes in it. Like if they just “clearly tell you” how little you’re getting when you buy it, they can still say “buy” and “purchase”.

35 points

Much like California’s other good-sounding laws, the fine print is what gets you on both ends, both in the law and in the EULA you agree to when signing up that’s going to say that all transactions are explicitly a terminable and revocable license.

permalink
report
reply
19 points

A revocable license for a virtual “product” whereupon they absolutely do not give you back your real world dollars if they terminate said license.

There’s no power imbalance in this transaction at all, no siree.

Anyway, I’m all for making backups of things. So you de-licensed me. Big whoop. I still have the file and I can still play it, and nobody can physically stop me.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

I suppose that’s the difference between laws in the US vs the EU. In the US the wording of the law is everything. If you find some absurd loophole due to weird grammar, good for you. In the EU, at least from an outsiders perspective, the law is enforced as it was intended to be, and if you try to fuck around with wording you get fined.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

That’s the thing, though, it’s not a loophole. It’s intentional. It makes a good headline, but it doesn’t really do much.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

That’s probably a better way of putting it. “Pretending to help”

permalink
report
parent
reply
88 points

The power to destroy a thing is the absolute control over it

DRM violates this principle. Atreides forever

permalink
report
reply
5 points

How do you figure? If the DRM depends on them, doesn’t that give them the power to destroy it?

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

DRM infected files mean that you as a consumer don’t own anything. As someome else can destroy it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

If you’re not receiving physical media, and you’re not saving a copy to local storage, then you’re not buying anything. You’re renting it.

permalink
report
reply
36 points

That’s not even the best metric. You save Destiny 2 to local storage, but you still don’t own that either.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

You can buy a perpetual license and then you own it (the license) regardless of storage or possession.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

You can’t just go out and buy a perpetual license for any random thing you purchase.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

That’s great until they decide to stop providing whatever content you licensed.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Just because you bought something and never picked it up it isn’t the stores fault. If you buy a perpetual license to digital code then never download it then cry when the store stops providing the source or updating it sounds like a you problem. Now a SaaS thing is weird. Like what do i do when I own a license for Helldivers 2 and the service turns off. That is like paying a person a lump sum for a service like trash but it is one person and you expect it to last at least 50 years since that person is young and they die next week. Now you are out the money and the service expecting the service would never end

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Do they need “buy” or “purchase”? All they need is “pay”, and nobody would notice.

permalink
report
reply
1 point

I would still imagine that has a very different psychological effect. Nobody wants to click a “pay”-button…

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Shopping cart icon, and “checkout”

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

People will click whatever’s stopping them from the dopamine hit of adding a game they’re probably not going to play to their library.

It’d be even harder to stop someone who actually WANTS to play the game they’re paying for! Lol

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

“get” or “acquire” or “add to collection” or “snag”… or any other vomit inducing roundabout corporate speak

permalink
report
parent
reply
41 points

They will get around it. Instead I suggest that buy buttons should say what you’re buying.

For example: Just “buy” should not be allowed.

“Buy License” or “Rent Game” for games with DRM. “Buy game” where you own your digital copy and can do whatever you want with it.

permalink
report
reply

“Buy game” where you own your digital copy and can do whatever you want with it.

We ain’t ever seein’ that one.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Probably not. Still “buy licence” at least gives us more transparency.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Even better, “buy non-transferable license”, because that’s technically what it is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

How would it work, anyway?

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

GOG

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

Is still only licensing you the game regardless of whether or not you can download it and play it offline without a problem.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

You just repeated the proposal.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Games

!games@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

Community stats

  • 8.9K

    Monthly active users

  • 4.2K

    Posts

  • 88K

    Comments