4 ms·
> You own a license which can be revoked and you - currently - have no recourse. Correct. In USA it’s all thanks to ProCS v. Zeidenberg: https://en.m.wikiped
by beretguy 3y ago
> You own a license which can be revoked and you - currently - have no recourse.
Correct.
In USA it’s all thanks to ProCS v. Zeidenberg:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ProCD,_Inc._v._Zeidenberg https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ProCD,_Inc._v._Zeidenberg
As far as I understand based on reading that wiki if company writes in that license that they can take away your ability to use software then you don’t own software that you buy.
People need to boycott online only, server dependent games.
However, in other countries this may be illegal and needs to be challenged.
- armchairhacker 3y ago> As far as I understand based on reading that wiki if company writes in that license that they can take away your ability to use software then you don’t own software that you buy. I didn’t get that at all? The ruling just states that a company can put a license in their software that you have to open first, and you accept once you start using the software. It doesn’t say that licenses that arbitrarily revoke the software are enforceable.
- beretguy 3y ago> However, this did not lead to a victory for Zeidenberg, because the circuit court held that copyright law does not preempt contract law. Since ProCD had made the investments in its business and its specific SelectPhone product, it could require customers to agree to its terms on how to use the product, including a prohibition on copying the information therein regardless of copyright protections. Specifically this part: “it could require customers to agree to its terms on how to use the product”. Since Ubisoft invested money into developing a game they can legally say in their license “at some point you won’t be able to use this software”, which basically translates to “you don’t own software”.