With the end of physical PlayStation games looming, the need for clear digital ownership rights is more pressing than ever.
For its part, Sony believes your rights are very clear: you do not own your digital games, and it’s unlikely you’re stupid enough to believe otherwise. At least, that’s roughly the argument the company’s lawyers are presenting in response to a proposed class-action lawsuit.
Sony argues that its current customer-facing disclosures ensure that “reasonable consumers would not be misled” into believing they actually own their digital games. That’s according to a Game File report (paid article link) citing an August 21 filing Sony’s lawyers made in California’s Northern District.
Yep so all the piracy that goes around isn’t illegal either right?
I don’t think anyone expects that they are buying the exclusive copyright license for reproduction. People just want to own their copies. You know like with books.
We want this for our games: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine
Exactly, a perpetual, transferable, non rescindable license
If I can’t own the game, then you’re not getting my money. Piracy is the only way to actually own it.
Oh, right, so it’s all just one copy that we’re all sharing, then? Here’s an idea in that case: let’s cut out the middleman, and I’ll share my copy of it with all of you for an agreed price.
Free is my first, best and final offer.That’s the nice thing in digital; i own a lossless copy of it. Without your DRM, btw.
I’m 37 I won’t challenge that, I don’t buy digital games until they’re at least 50% off. Most of the time I only buy digital games when they’re 75-90% off.
Now Sony, Nintendo and Steam (mostly Sony/Nintendo) are misunderstanding me. I’ve got so many games to play, so many physical games. I don’t need the latest EA trash, I don’t need the newest boring uninspired PlayStation exclusive.
I’ve got games for many many months to play. I’ve got so many SNES, PS1 and PS2 games to play.
And when I run out I’ve got so many books to read.
American Sony can chortle my balls. I miss PS1, PS2 and PS3 Japanese Sony
I just made a batocera machine for this, it’s great!
A digital file is a physical object and you can make copies for individuals to use. I don’t believe the Sony lawyers are stupid enough to believe otherwise.
If we don’t own games then we should just rent them for a small fee and then when done, cancel service
Wish people could actually have the willpower to effectively boycott anything enough to later. Happens with iPhone every year, they bitch and moan about it being the hand phone, then go buy one.
I boycott a lot, but its a lonely road. Boycotted Amazon for 5 years, makes Bezos the richest man in the world. Give me the feeling that my decisions absolutely changes nothing. But i do it anyway.
if only one person can buy GTA 6, how can more than one person rent GTA 6?
The answer is always the human centipede
Patient gaming in a nutshell.

It’s not Lupus.
Son it’s time we talked about fractional reserve banking
So lets say one person owns it then through the magic of technology everybody else is playing their shared version
Oh really? Then it’s not a store, and it’s not a sale. It’s a leasing office and a lease.
If buying isn’t owning, then pirating isn’t theft.
Jesus pirated a bunch of bread and fish.
Piracy has never been theft
Exactly
Good point. Don’t say we’re buying it. They use the terminology of ownership when you’re paying money.
Actually this is an alright solution.
They should be forced to change the name of their platform if they want to keep using it. They should be barred from using the term “store”.
They can either continue their business model as is, (as “PlayStation Leasing”) or they can change their policy to include full ownership of games and the right to transfer the games they own to other accounts.
But they don’t get to call it a “store” or use words like “buy” or “sale” if that’s not what they’re actually offering.
They should be barred from using the term “store”.
While I agree with the intent, this would definitely be a losing legal argument, since “store” has a long and common history of usage for rental outlets (“hey, let’s go to the video store tonight and rent a movie”). I think that not allowing them to use the terms “buy” and “sale” could stand as a legal argument, since I don’t believe that there are any examples of people using them when they mean to rent something.
(“hey, let’s go to the video store tonight and rent a movie”)
Well that’s interesting. I’ve never actually heard someone call it that. I mean, I get your point, but actually, if anything I think people tended to call it the rental shop.
But then, even at video rental places they at least did also sold things, movies and candy. So even if they did call themselves a store, those rental places would actually qualify more as a store than a digital content distributor would.
Absolutely
Somehow, Blockbuster returned.
Until they change every storefront to say rent instead of buy/purchase/etc I will believe it.
… wait. That’s not obvious. If it was obvious, it wouldn’t be a “Buy now” it would be like a “Purchase License.”
Because thats literally how the rest of the software industry works.
Purchase time limited license
No, it would just be license. The verb “license”; fulfill contractual agreement for limited use of intellectual property (in this case, monetary payment).
You’ve never purchased software in your life, even if it was delivered to you on a physical medium. (Ok well perhaps some of you own businesses and merged or purchased IP entirely but that’s an exception. I’m talking consumers here)
I’ve seen this argument before; that we don’t own our media, just a license to use them because otherwise that would undermine intellectual property. With respect, I can’t see how that is anything but nonsense.
I mean, if you take it to it’s logical conclusion, then I don’t own my paper book laying next to me and that’s ridiculous. Sure I don’t own the IP to it, but it’s my book. I own it. I can do whatever I want to do with it, as long as I don’t violate copyright and other IP rights like trying to sell copies. But I could still do many things, even modify it, sell it on or make a personal copy to replace the old and damaged book.
When I buy a game, it’s my game and I have the right to do all of those same things with it without infringing on the IP rights of the authors/developers/publishers etc…
Trying to equate owning a copy with owning the IP is nonsensical.
On a related note, the only reason we can’t sell our digital games second hand today, is not for legal reasons, but because every store owner is completely incentivized against it and the regulators have not been incentivized enough to demand it.
I don’t think one can just say license without specifying how long it is valid, not sure though. Anyways you are protected by consumer laws, like in my country stuff you buy should work for 5 years - if not, money back. But whatever, I guess the big capitalistic corps get to use the most deceptive form anyways. Tragic how some users even defend the way they try to deceive. Better to GOG and 🏴☠️🏴☠️ what isn’t available there 😊
I think it should be broader than that: “purchase limited license” or “purchase restricted license”.
One thing I’ve noticed is that, while they call it a store, they’ve gone out of their way to not use the word buy. It says “add to cart”, and that there are “purchases”, and that you can “check out”. But it’s been a long time since I’ve seen an actual buy button in any App Store I think they’ve seen this coming for a minute.
On the PS app in the UK it is “Add to cart” and then “Order & Pay”. As you say, they never use the word “buy”.
You don’t by Microsoft 365, you subscribe. But you do buy games. Oh wait…
Sony’s lawyers are dumb af
And, you know, English.
And they would add the dumb word “seat” to it.
They dont need to keep trying to convice me to never buy another Sony/ Rockstar product. They keep giving more reasons though.
Sony convinced me that years ago when they sold me an expensive af dvd camcorder and then they hobbled it so it was unusable unless you edited in their crappy software and exported it through their expensive dongles.
They lost me when they removed basic functionality from the PS3 by update. They lost my dad with betamax.
Also can’t forget when they installed a rootkit on your computer for DRM purposes. Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck that.
I’d say, its your OS fault allowing this.
Most people don’t want their desktop to act like an iPhone.
1.complain about companies abusing rootkit 2. want rootkits so you can play said companies games
Choose one.
I will always choose 1. There is no game on this planet that is worth 2.
This was a music cd. Although people do indeed voluntarily install rootkits to play games.
Should have waited for releasecanidatemax
I always knew but it got confirmed for me about 20 years ago when I bought a 60$ dvd player that could play XviD discs and burned discs with no issues at all, my friend’s 300$ brand new Sony DVD player would not even play some legit DVD’s and refused any burned discs.
The solution seems easy enough, don’t buy or rent anything from Sony until the issue is resolved.
This is fixable if consumers band together. Nobody needs to game on a PlayStation (or play GTA on PC/PlayStation), we need water, food, shelter not GTA6
The solution seems easy enough, don’t buy or rent anything from Sony until the issue is resolved.
This will never work in America. I know people who already bought a PS5 just for this and pre-ordered (!) the game at $1000000 or whatever they’re charging.
All it takes is a large enough chunk. It’s happened before. There was a time of noble humans where we walked upright, and we could easily step back into that world even just one at a time
People are too inundated with what the newest Thing™ is to actually give a shit about living conditions, it seems like. Deep rooted and normalized conservatism about how things are seems to be most people’s modus operandi.
I mean do you care? It sounds like you do. That’s one people right there. So do i. That’s makes at least two of us.
I’m sure there are enough to cause a stink if we drop this defeatism and start with ourselves
This is just the collective action problem in miniature. There’s a thousand different versions of this. It’s exhausting to care about each individual issue so everyone winds up voting for shit they don’t really want with their wallets. And some are oblivious to the problems and don’t read the news or care enough for it to effect them.
The better and likely harder thing is to change our politics. With decent governance, the corporations that do this shit would face real consequences. Government corruption be it in the name of “deregulation” or “free markets” or whatever is the problem.
Our regulators and regulations are toothless, and so we live locked inside a scam society.
I kind of don’t believe in a big “the problem” at least not in a totalizing way, especially if it’s a problem so big people can’t have any impact on it. I feel like there are a thousand of these battlefields, in our personal relationships, working life, civic life, consumer relationships.
I’m not saying tackling your big the problem wouldn’t be a huge help across the board, but we’d still have other problems. Hell maybe some problems are just part of human nature and will be with us forever.
In any case, even if there is one big huge ur-problem from which all problems spread like tentacles we can each only act on an I individual level, so I believe all change starts there—it can’t end there, but there it starts, and from there branches into collective action against the bigger problems in the world.
Does that make sense? I’m not meaning it in a contradictory way. But that negating the importance of individual action can actually disempower people from taking their part in collective action. Like it never gets off the ground because every individual just goes “well I’m just one person, so…”
But that negating the importance of individual action can actually disempower people from taking their part in collective action. Like it never gets off the ground because every individual just goes “well I’m just one person, so…”
Everyone pushes that viewpoint. What’s the real choice here? Let’s just look at this individual issue and pretend it’s not connected to a larger problem of our government being endlessly corrupt and complicit in the non-stop caveat emptor that pervades everything. The choice is don’t buy the fun toy while all of your friends do and every time they talk about the fun toy being fun you either relate to them less or actively become the debby downer that lectures everyone about why you didn’t buy the fun toy.
I guess that was even kind of abstract, but if you’re a gamer and are friends with other gamers they will likely buy this game and play it without you. They’ll have fun playing it without you, and you get the great choice of saying “no i haven’t bought that yet” and being vague and missing out, or lecturing them and risk being categorized as a negative nancy.
Either way your individual choice does little to solve the problem, because other individuals individually ignore it. And honestly, owning games is somewhat inconsequential in the grand scheme of things.
You aren’t individually choosing your way out of these things. Other people exist. And unless you’re Elon fucking Musk, your individual preferences will likely not move the needle.
The only real answers are not individual choices and nagging. They’re collectivism and politics. Sorry for the inconvenience but it’s true.
The people opposing you understand this. It’s why Sony is a corporation. It’s why Republicans need megachurches. Collectivism is the only thing that works.
Edit: Look man I’m here on lemmy and never use Reddit. Reddit still exists. My individual choices do not move the needle.
And lemmy is thriving because individuals like you and me gave enough of a fuck to shift over to this place.
But look if someone wants to buy a game they can just do that. I was speaking more generally, like in spots you feel principled enough hell yeah be that nuisance.
I’m not saying like fixate on individual action or think your one part “moves the needle” but that it’s part of collective action. Like how are you going to find your collective if you aren’t out there showing what you’re about.
It’s like voting. Yeah yeah, it makes virtually no different. 1 half-brick in a sock is worth a million votes. But you’ve still got to pitch in and be one of the little drops. There are multiple borders in the war against working class people and you just do what you can in the ones you’re able to.
PS Just to be clear, none of this is meant in a combative tone. I’m reading this as a friendly back-and-forth.
If there’s a new game, we gotta buy it. I want fifa 2027, it will bring me so much satisfaction over fifa 2026.
Ohhh new ps6 pro? Which is better than my 1000 bucks brand new ps6? We gotta buy it.
/s
Sure, we have to enjoy something and spend some money but I can’t fathom how people keep spending like that.
I think I never purchased any new new device or game less than 4 years before my last purchase of an older device or game of the same type. And some have lasted 10 years, or even more, for an e-reader.
I may be wrong about games but can’t think of one atm.
I think part of the blame is Google’s, even before they turned evil: our average attention span is fucking low, and we only want instant gratification now. We used to need to read, to explore in games, to fail and try again before beating the game, before knowing the answer to something, and then suddenly we could magically get the answers we seeked in a matter of seconds.
It feels to me like speedrunners and challenge-runners of retro games show us how things can be enjoyed way more than just the first playthrough or the second.
They’re enjoying the hell out of a good game, even if old, while most others are seeking the dopamine of new and mostly ephemeral shit.
I am not part of either group, but I want to be part of the first, in some ways, and never the second.
80 or 100. You were way off
don’t buy or rent anything from Sony until the issue is resolved.
Way ahead of you. And I don’t see a point in buying anything from them even if there is a resolution. You don’t own the hardware, the software is a moot point.
yeah I wish people understood the blackout only works if you keep doing it. a company like Sony isn’t gonna panic if people stop playing their games for a week. happy to state I was never interested in their stuff in the first place so I’ve haven’t been giving em money ever. I do wish we could get a bloodborne pc port tho
Nobody needs to game on a PlayStation (or play GTA on PC/PlayStation), we need water, food, shelter not GTA6
At face value this seems true, but I’m not so sure it’s that simple. I know, it sounds crazy, but let me explain.
In life, we obviously need water, food, and shelter. However, we can’t spend our entire lives only drinking, eating, and sleeping. There has to be more to life than that, otherwise it will result in increased suffering.
Without hobbies (yes, gaming is of course a hobby), life would be a lot more dull, and many people would feel it’s less worth living. Decreased leisure time/recreational activities time (like time spent gaming) has been linked to increased rates of depression and increased levels of stress. Both of these things can have a profound negative impact on your health and can even result in death.
So while it seems true, I can’t help but think it’s also a little bit reductionist. It does seem to downplay the essential nature of having hobbies, of having something you actually enjoy doing in life.
Then again, you could argue that you don’t need a PlayStation or GTA on PC/PlayStation to accomplish this since there’s so many other games to play, which is fair. I understand that companies like Sony and Rockstar need to be held accountable for the awful things that they do. I just thought I should point out that leisure, and yes hobbies like gaming, are actually pretty essential in a way, and shouldn’t be downplayed in importance.
I get that this is probably an unpopular take, but I don’t think that makes it untrue either.













