5 ms·

Maybe I have misunderstood the article, but for me it looks like another „cookies” law. They are not proposing to force media companies to make sure you have a

Maybe I have misunderstood the article, but for me it looks like another „cookies” law. They are not proposing to force media companies to make sure you have access to your media forever. Or force them to give you a downloadable copy when they remove media from store. They’ll just replace „Buy” button with „Get Access” or whatever and add some lawyer mumbo-jumbo above it. Looks like a smokescreen to me.

dgoldstein0 2y ago
They'll either have to change the text in which case digital good sales will be more honest, or they won't want to change the text and therefore will actually commit to letting us download and keep our own copies without interference. Both sound like wins to me. Just TBD which variant ends up more common.
- szastamasta 2y ago
  You see, I just don’t think more honest wins us anything. I’ve seen too many „We value your privacy” popups already.
  - beretguy 2y ago
    What do you mean? What do privacy pop ups have to do with this?
    - szastamasta 2y ago
      It’s just like with cookies. I believe that lawmakers were honest and really wanted for companies to limit amount of tracking in the web. What we did get instead is a lot of „we value your privacy” popups and 5 pages of checkboxes to check if you don’t want to be tracked. I just think that this will end up the same way. Nothing really changes, but we’ll just get more useless „lawyer talk” in more and more license documents to click on.
      - throwaway48476 2y ago
        Instead of hidden sleaze it's now very much in your face.
      - beretguy 2y ago
        > I just think that this will end up the same way. What will change is that I will know not to buy games that don't have "Buy" button.
  - beart 2y ago
    I think the old adage, "don't let perfect be the enemy of good" applies here. Some battles are fought one excruciating step at a time
wodenokoto 2y ago
> make sure you have access to your media forever. No, they are trying to make sure that companies don't tell you something is yours that isn't. > They’ll just replace „Buy” button with „Get Access” or whatever and add some lawyer mumbo-jumbo above it. Forbidding that would require forbidding rentals.
diggan 2y ago
> They’ll just replace „Buy” button with „Get Access” or whatever and add some lawyer mumbo-jumbo above it. Sounds like exactly what is needed? Consumers currently think they're buying something when they click a button that says "Buy", when in reality they're getting temporary access to it. Forcing companies to use clear language might change consumer behavior, or it might not, but at least it's no longer explicitly misleading.
- phendrenad2 2y ago
  Not to pour cold water on anyone but consumers will be just as confused by "get access", because they'll expect that they'll have access indefinitely (which us not guaranteed and this doesn't change that).
nkrisc 2y ago
That’s the point. It’s a step in the right direction. This law is aimed at preventing deception at point of sale. It doesn’t target business practices.
ZaoLahma 2y ago
Mentally it's not too difficult to throw $60 at a digital "Buy" button, but it's much harder to throw those $60 at a "Get access" button. I wholly welcome a change like this, even if it's just wording on the button. One thing to worry about, perhaps, is how it might make it easier for companies to remove things that we have "Gotten access" to as it would be explicitly stated that we don't actually buy anything.
- beretguy 2y ago
  > One thing to worry about, perhaps, is how it might make it easier for companies to remove things that we have "Gotten access" to They are already doing it. The Crew is a good example. We are not losing anything here.
  - ZaoLahma 2y ago
    Yes, but up until now it's been (very) rare. At least for games. I fear that companies will view a change like this as a door opening wider to remove digital content as they please. Or perhaps worse, only offer strictly time-limited access with a "well, you're getting exactly what you asked for" view of it.
    - beretguy 2y ago
      It's not rare at all. It happens all the time, everywhere. There are hundreds of games nobody can play anymore because servers got shutdown.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- ben-schaaf 2y ago
  > Mentally it's not too difficult to throw $60 at a digital "Buy" button, but it's much harder to throw those $60 at a "Get access" button. This is especially true when a large number of games do have a buy button. "Get access" stands out as not being the same as buying when you've bought the rest of your game library.

dgoldstein0 2y ago

They'll either have to change the text in which case digital good sales will be more honest, or they won't want to change the text and therefore will actually commit to letting us download and keep our own copies without interference. Both sound like wins to me. Just TBD which variant ends up more common.

szastamasta 2y ago
You see, I just don’t think more honest wins us anything. I’ve seen too many „We value your privacy” popups already.
- beretguy 2y ago
  What do you mean? What do privacy pop ups have to do with this?
  - szastamasta 2y ago
    It’s just like with cookies. I believe that lawmakers were honest and really wanted for companies to limit amount of tracking in the web. What we did get instead is a lot of „we value your privacy” popups and 5 pages of checkboxes to check if you don’t want to be tracked. I just think that this will end up the same way. Nothing really changes, but we’ll just get more useless „lawyer talk” in more and more license documents to click on.
    - throwaway48476 2y ago
      Instead of hidden sleaze it's now very much in your face.
    - beretguy 2y ago
      > I just think that this will end up the same way. What will change is that I will know not to buy games that don't have "Buy" button.
- beart 2y ago
  I think the old adage, "don't let perfect be the enemy of good" applies here. Some battles are fought one excruciating step at a time

wodenokoto 2y ago

> make sure you have access to your media forever. No, they are trying to make sure that companies don't tell you something is yours that isn't. > They’ll just replace „Buy” button with „Get Access” or whatever and add some lawyer mumbo-jumbo above it. Forbidding that would require forbidding rentals.

diggan 2y ago

> They’ll just replace „Buy” button with „Get Access” or whatever and add some lawyer mumbo-jumbo above it. Sounds like exactly what is needed? Consumers currently think they're buying something when they click a button that says "Buy", when in reality they're getting temporary access to it. Forcing companies to use clear language might change consumer behavior, or it might not, but at least it's no longer explicitly misleading.

phendrenad2 2y ago
Not to pour cold water on anyone but consumers will be just as confused by "get access", because they'll expect that they'll have access indefinitely (which us not guaranteed and this doesn't change that).

nkrisc 2y ago

That’s the point. It’s a step in the right direction. This law is aimed at preventing deception at point of sale. It doesn’t target business practices.

ZaoLahma 2y ago

Mentally it's not too difficult to throw $60 at a digital "Buy" button, but it's much harder to throw those $60 at a "Get access" button. I wholly welcome a change like this, even if it's just wording on the button. One thing to worry about, perhaps, is how it might make it easier for companies to remove things that we have "Gotten access" to as it would be explicitly stated that we don't actually buy anything.

beretguy 2y ago
> One thing to worry about, perhaps, is how it might make it easier for companies to remove things that we have "Gotten access" to They are already doing it. The Crew is a good example. We are not losing anything here.
- ZaoLahma 2y ago
  Yes, but up until now it's been (very) rare. At least for games. I fear that companies will view a change like this as a door opening wider to remove digital content as they please. Or perhaps worse, only offer strictly time-limited access with a "well, you're getting exactly what you asked for" view of it.
  - beretguy 2y ago
    It's not rare at all. It happens all the time, everywhere. There are hundreds of games nobody can play anymore because servers got shutdown.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
ben-schaaf 2y ago
> Mentally it's not too difficult to throw $60 at a digital "Buy" button, but it's much harder to throw those $60 at a "Get access" button. This is especially true when a large number of games do have a buy button. "Get access" stands out as not being the same as buying when you've bought the rest of your game library.