• jqubed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    You’ve never owned your games. You owned the media they came on but legally you only ever had a license to use the software. Depending on the license agreement (the thing where most people click “I agree” without reading) you had more or fewer rights, such as transfer of license, but the way things work legally ownership of software seems to mean the more of the copyright ownership. Maybe like a book: you own your copy of the book but you don’t have the rights to print more books or make a movie based on the book.

    • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      With physical media those licenses didn’t materially matter though because a contract you can’t read until after a purchase is automatically void in court.

            • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              5 months ago

              Using “updated” terms intending them as their original meaning is not usually the best plan… Like me saying “that’s an awful haircut” but using awful as the near synonym for awesome.

      • jqubed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Which is why those license agreements generally had a clause that if you disagreed you could return the software with all the media for a full refund.

        I’m not saying it’s the right way, just that’s how it’s been structured legally. Of course, in the days of physical media with software that couldn’t phone home it was harder to enforce those licenses if people didn’t strictly adhere to them. The software companies didn’t generally find it worth going after individuals if they found out about violations either. Corporations, on the other hand… I worked once at a media company that Adobe caught running a lot of unlicensed software. The story went that it was so bad at the main office their auditors found a copy of After Effects or something similarly ridiculous on a computer that was used as a cash register in the corporate cafeteria. That was very much worth Adobe’s time and money to get the lawyers involved, and became a very expensive problem for my employer. I wasn’t involved in the problem, but I had to check and clean my local office, where we found about a half-dozen computers with unlicensed software.

        • Aceticon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          It makes no difference.

          They’re trying to impose an obligation or task on a customer after the purchase, even if it’s only the customer having to go through the trouble of getting the refund (which is a task they were not informed about before the purchase).

          If it’s not before the sale it’s void and even in some cases before the sale (for example bait and switch, were you’re mislead with fake contract conditions until the last minute) it’s void.

          The whole point is that they must be clear upfront about any conditions attached when the customer is making the decision to buy and adding any conditions after the sale is not acceptable even if the seller gives options (such as refunds) because the customer has a right to use the product under the conditions at the time of the sale and cannot legally be forced otherwise, including forced to refund.

    • MudMan@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      Owning media and owning the copyright to the media aren’t the same thing. There is a well recognized right to resell and transfer physical media, regardless of what the EULA says. You can’t sell more copies, but you absolutely sell (or gift, or leave in a will) the copy you have. The question here isn’t whether you should have a copyright on your digital purchases, it’s whether your rights to digital purchases should be analogous to your physical purchases.