9 ms·

With DRM you never purchase _content_. You only purchase a _license_ to access it. Words do matter. I sense possible legal grounds for reimbursments if it wasn

With DRM you never purchase _content_. You only purchase a _license_ to access it. Words do matter. I sense possible legal grounds for reimbursments if it wasn't crystal clear to the layman.

BSDobelix 3y ago
They wrote "previously purchased Discovery content". Should I believe you or Sony's official statement? ;) Anyway, never buy content you can't crack (make it drm-free) or even better, buy drm-free stuff from the start, but if you really want the best service with the highest quality that has the best portability go ask a pirate, it's been the same since 1600.
- aleph_minus_one 3y ago
  > They wrote "previously purchased Discovery content". Should I believe you or Sony's official statement? ;) You should believe that Sony is trying to scam you. :-)
  - BSDobelix 3y ago
    No their legal team would have wrote something like that: Your previous purchased and limited license to consume media from our partner Discovery is hereby revoked as we can written in our EULA (you have accepted that with your first setup of our excellent product THE PS5 super-slim) we love our customers and have a great day.
    - mr_toad 3y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_promise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_promise
- DaiPlusPlus 3y ago
  > Anyway, never buy content you can't crack (make it drm-free) or even better, buy drm-free stuff from the start I agree entirely (in principle), but this isn't an option for certain platforms like the iOS App Store, or download-only games consoles (and I've been burned myself: most notably by EA removing their older games from the iOS App Store: not just them removing the ability to purchase old games, but even for people who had already paid for them to reinstall them (and who actually saves their IPA files? Is it even possible to install IPA files from a PC now that iTunes is dead?) This is something that can only be done by law or something - IIRC, the recent pro-consumer legislation coming from the EU doesn't address "getting-to-keep-what-we-paid-for" - I'm hoping they'll get around to that soon, along with getting protections for data-sovereignty: it's kinda shocking how many popular Apps/SaaS services out there still don't let you export your data.
  - jokethrowaway 3y ago
    You can very well choose different platforms. That's the entire reason I don't buy iPhones or consoles. You don't need EU mommy to regulate the entire industry and make it harder for the next ios / android alternative
    - Nextgrid 3y ago
      You can definitely live like a hermit, but the problem is that more and more things don't have open alternatives. > make it harder for the next ios / android alternative If the regulation prevents an alternative from being malicious I see that as a good thing?
      - aleph_minus_one 3y ago
        > You can definitely live like a hermit, but the problem is that more and more things don't have open alternatives. This site is called "Hacker News", and not "Technology Hipster News". Since you likely are a hacker, you should have a pretty good idea what to do ... :-)
        3y ago
DarkmSparks 3y ago
Pretty sure they are going to have to refund everyone. That has happened with these kind of B2B disagreements in the past, google stadia was the last one I think. https://www.wired.com/story/how-to-get-your-google-stadia-refund/ https://www.wired.com/story/how-to-get-your-google-stadia-re... Although there is probably plenty of others.
- TheNorthman 3y ago
  Read your own article. The byline reads: > Google is taking the unprecedented step of paying back users for all the games they bought on its cloud gaming platform. Google _voluntarily_ refunded their customers. It's unheard of and was, frankly, extremely unexpected. Good for Google and good for Stadia customers.
  - DarkmSparks 3y ago
    In the same article it points out microsoft also refunded their ebooks when they deleted content people bought. Assuming these were sold as a perpetual licence (and by the wording Sony used it looks like they were), by removing the content they are in breach of contract, that gets expensive and messy quickly, quicker easier and cheaper just to refund them. There is obviously some kind of legal disagreement happening between Sony and Discovery, I doubt this is the end of it.
    - londons_explore 3y ago
      Ths smart move is to only refund users who get their lawyer to write a letter.
    - Mindwipe 3y ago
      The terms will have said the license was perpetual for downloads made but only five years for redownload or streaming, as do the terms for iTunes, Amazon Prime Video, Google Play, YouTube's store, Vudu and every significant player in the market.
  - lokar 3y ago
wilg 3y ago
Is this not also true with, say, a VHS tape? In what sense do you "own" it? You aren't legally allowed to copy it or whatever. It's still just a license.
- bluefirebrand 3y ago
  You're allowed to copy a VHS tape, you're just not allowed to distribute copies of VHS tapes. You still own the physical tape itself, and you have a perpetual right to play, copy, and modify the tape as much as you like, for personal use.
  - wilg 3y ago
    My point is that in a physical tape you still only own a license of the content. This is a slightly less restrictive license than digital DRM, and is governed by copyright law, but is still a license.
    - Daneel_ 3y ago
      Of course you can copy it. You just can’t sell that copy to someone else while keeping your own copy too. That’s copyright infringement. I’m not sure what you’re on about with “license” in this context. You own the VHS. Do with it what you like.
      - wilg 3y ago
        There are tons of things you can't do with it. You can't exhibit it publicly. You don't own the movie on the tape! You just own a tape. I am refuting the original poster's claim that "With DRM you never purchase _content_. You only purchase a _license_ to access it." This is true, but is meant to imply there is an alternative. There isn't, a you only have a license to the content in all cases, including DRM-free physical media.
        bluefirebrand 3y ago
        Ok, your original post was ambiguous then because you didn't talk about content at all, you talked about "in what sense do you own [A VHS]", so people explained how owning a VHS is different from licensing digital media. Mostly that your license to the content of a VHS cannot be revoked arbitrarily after you purchase the VHS itself.
nerdawson 3y ago
The BBC got this right when they shut down their online store a few years back. Every customer was offered a full refund.
behringer 3y ago
Oh my bad. I didn't know the store says "License This Movie" instead of "Buy Now" or "Own" on all the buttons.

With DRM you never purchase _content_. You only purchase a _license_ to access it. Words do matter. I sense possible legal grounds for reimbursments if it wasn't crystal clear to the layman.

BSDobelix 3y ago

They wrote "previously purchased Discovery content". Should I believe you or Sony's official statement? ;) Anyway, never buy content you can't crack (make it drm-free) or even better, buy drm-free stuff from the start, but if you really want the best service with the highest quality that has the best portability go ask a pirate, it's been the same since 1600.

aleph_minus_one 3y ago
> They wrote "previously purchased Discovery content". Should I believe you or Sony's official statement? ;) You should believe that Sony is trying to scam you. :-)
- BSDobelix 3y ago
  No their legal team would have wrote something like that: Your previous purchased and limited license to consume media from our partner Discovery is hereby revoked as we can written in our EULA (you have accepted that with your first setup of our excellent product THE PS5 super-slim) we love our customers and have a great day.
  - mr_toad 3y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_promise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_promise
DaiPlusPlus 3y ago
> Anyway, never buy content you can't crack (make it drm-free) or even better, buy drm-free stuff from the start I agree entirely (in principle), but this isn't an option for certain platforms like the iOS App Store, or download-only games consoles (and I've been burned myself: most notably by EA removing their older games from the iOS App Store: not just them removing the ability to purchase old games, but even for people who had already paid for them to reinstall them (and who actually saves their IPA files? Is it even possible to install IPA files from a PC now that iTunes is dead?) This is something that can only be done by law or something - IIRC, the recent pro-consumer legislation coming from the EU doesn't address "getting-to-keep-what-we-paid-for" - I'm hoping they'll get around to that soon, along with getting protections for data-sovereignty: it's kinda shocking how many popular Apps/SaaS services out there still don't let you export your data.
- jokethrowaway 3y ago
  You can very well choose different platforms. That's the entire reason I don't buy iPhones or consoles. You don't need EU mommy to regulate the entire industry and make it harder for the next ios / android alternative
  - Nextgrid 3y ago
    You can definitely live like a hermit, but the problem is that more and more things don't have open alternatives. > make it harder for the next ios / android alternative If the regulation prevents an alternative from being malicious I see that as a good thing?
    - aleph_minus_one 3y ago
      > You can definitely live like a hermit, but the problem is that more and more things don't have open alternatives. This site is called "Hacker News", and not "Technology Hipster News". Since you likely are a hacker, you should have a pretty good idea what to do ... :-)
      - 3y ago

DarkmSparks 3y ago

Pretty sure they are going to have to refund everyone. That has happened with these kind of B2B disagreements in the past, google stadia was the last one I think. https://www.wired.com/story/how-to-get-your-google-stadia-refund/ https://www.wired.com/story/how-to-get-your-google-stadia-re... Although there is probably plenty of others.

TheNorthman 3y ago
Read your own article. The byline reads: > Google is taking the unprecedented step of paying back users for all the games they bought on its cloud gaming platform. Google _voluntarily_ refunded their customers. It's unheard of and was, frankly, extremely unexpected. Good for Google and good for Stadia customers.
- DarkmSparks 3y ago
  In the same article it points out microsoft also refunded their ebooks when they deleted content people bought. Assuming these were sold as a perpetual licence (and by the wording Sony used it looks like they were), by removing the content they are in breach of contract, that gets expensive and messy quickly, quicker easier and cheaper just to refund them. There is obviously some kind of legal disagreement happening between Sony and Discovery, I doubt this is the end of it.
  - londons_explore 3y ago
    Ths smart move is to only refund users who get their lawyer to write a letter.
  - Mindwipe 3y ago
    The terms will have said the license was perpetual for downloads made but only five years for redownload or streaming, as do the terms for iTunes, Amazon Prime Video, Google Play, YouTube's store, Vudu and every significant player in the market.
- lokar 3y ago

wilg 3y ago

Is this not also true with, say, a VHS tape? In what sense do you "own" it? You aren't legally allowed to copy it or whatever. It's still just a license.

bluefirebrand 3y ago
You're allowed to copy a VHS tape, you're just not allowed to distribute copies of VHS tapes. You still own the physical tape itself, and you have a perpetual right to play, copy, and modify the tape as much as you like, for personal use.
- wilg 3y ago
  My point is that in a physical tape you still only own a license of the content. This is a slightly less restrictive license than digital DRM, and is governed by copyright law, but is still a license.
  - Daneel_ 3y ago
    Of course you can copy it. You just can’t sell that copy to someone else while keeping your own copy too. That’s copyright infringement. I’m not sure what you’re on about with “license” in this context. You own the VHS. Do with it what you like.
    - wilg 3y ago
      There are tons of things you can't do with it. You can't exhibit it publicly. You don't own the movie on the tape! You just own a tape. I am refuting the original poster's claim that "With DRM you never purchase _content_. You only purchase a _license_ to access it." This is true, but is meant to imply there is an alternative. There isn't, a you only have a license to the content in all cases, including DRM-free physical media.
      - bluefirebrand 3y ago
        Ok, your original post was ambiguous then because you didn't talk about content at all, you talked about "in what sense do you own [A VHS]", so people explained how owning a VHS is different from licensing digital media. Mostly that your license to the content of a VHS cannot be revoked arbitrarily after you purchase the VHS itself.

nerdawson 3y ago

The BBC got this right when they shut down their online store a few years back. Every customer was offered a full refund.

behringer 3y ago

Oh my bad. I didn't know the store says "License This Movie" instead of "Buy Now" or "Own" on all the buttons.