3 ms·

Sony is correct here? If I buy a CD or a cassette or a record, I own the physical media but I only have a licence to the music it contains - not the ownership,

Sony is correct here? If I buy a CD or a cassette or a record, I own the physical media but I only have a licence to the music it contains - not the ownership, and not the copyright. Whether I can play that music as a DJ at an event or on the radio, or remix it as a backing track for another song I'm creating and so on, depends on licencing laws and royalty payments. That was true well before the internet, and it's why Wham! get a huge boost in royalties every December whenever a radio station plays Last Christmas. A separate question is whether Sony can _revoke_ a licence and delete the game off your device again.

barnabee 1mo ago
If I buy a game - i.e. I am on a store page title "Game Name" not "Limited Revokable License for Game Name", and I click "buy", then I expect to own a copy of the game or the right to a copy of the game (in perpetuity), not a limited revokable license to play the game.
- tiahura 1mo ago
  In the US adults are expected to read what they agree to. If they don’t, it’s generally their problem.
  - Kinrany 1mo ago
    In the rest of the civilized world adults are expected to have common sense and be truthful when it comes to formal transactions.
    - tiahura 1mo ago
      Good point. Reading before you sign should be common sense regardless of what country you're in. And, if you don't agree with the terms, you shouldn't click "I Agree."
      - Kinrany 29d ago
        > And, if you don't agree with the terms, you shouldn't click "I Agree." Nah, it's perfectly reasonable to click it if you know you're being transparently lied to in a way that won't hold up in court.
        Kinrany 29d ago
        That is, it's bad that these situations happen and that's why they should be regulated away when possible. But if you can't personally change the status quo, the next best thing is to accept the game and respond in kind.
yakz 1mo ago
The important bit is that you can sell the CD or cassette or record.
- Joel_Mckay 1mo ago
  True, but no additional rights to distribute replicas of the copyrighted music and composer works. Note, if a band does a cover of a popular song, the original music composer rights also don't magically transfer because someone sang a slightly different version. Sony may not be technically breaking any rules, if they disclosed the terms of the copyright are revocable... and not perpetual in the terms of sale. Still a douche move to rip off kids, and burned a lot goodwill with consumers. =3
- frollogaston 1mo ago
  Yes. Not just practically speaking, but legally, you own the disc.
- red_admiral 29d ago
  Which would still apply if the game were sold on a CD-ROM, but needed an internet connection to Sony's licence servers to run. The important bit is that once you bought a music CD, no-one can stop you from playing it?
nalekberov 1mo ago
The difference is that no license holder can force you to give them back. You. Actually. Own. Them. You might think, like, you've had some eureka moment, but it's all corporate BS.
0xcde4c3db 1mo ago
I'm not a copyright lawyer, but my understanding is that you do not own a license when you buy a CD or cassette, you own a copy (strictly speaking, a "phonorecord" in US law). Copyright doesn't regulate the sorts of typical uses that the owner of a copy would engage in, so a license is not required. When you see those warnings on VHS/DVD/Blu-ray that they're licensed only for private home viewing, what they're telling you is that you don't have a license to do anything controlled by copyright such as broadcasting, publicly exhibiting, or reproducing it. Software is significantly more complicated and gets into issues of physical permanence/transience and specific exemptions/limitations to normal copyright law (see e.g. 17 USC 117).
AgingGamer 1mo ago
Yes, Sony can revoke a license. It is right in the terms of the license. We own nothing but the right to access the game so long as the rights holder chooses to permit it. This means I could buy a game on Tuesday and the rights holder could render it unplayable on Wednesday with no recourse. The "Buy" versus "License" question doesn't really resolve this. Sony is right in one sense that we all know we are licensing. What needs protection, probably requiring new or revised laws, is some sort of consumer right to get value out of a game license before the vendor renders it unplayable.
- red_admiral 29d ago
  In the UK at least, consumer contracts have to be "fair", determined as necessary in a court of law: https://www.gov.uk/unfair-terms-in-sales-contracts/unfair-consumer-contracts https://www.gov.uk/unfair-terms-in-sales-contracts/unfair-co... Making the game unplayable on Wednesday might not impress a judge.

barnabee 1mo ago

If I buy a game - i.e. I am on a store page title "Game Name" not "Limited Revokable License for Game Name", and I click "buy", then I expect to own a copy of the game or the right to a copy of the game (in perpetuity), not a limited revokable license to play the game.

tiahura 1mo ago
In the US adults are expected to read what they agree to. If they don’t, it’s generally their problem.
- Kinrany 1mo ago
  In the rest of the civilized world adults are expected to have common sense and be truthful when it comes to formal transactions.
  - tiahura 1mo ago
    Good point. Reading before you sign should be common sense regardless of what country you're in. And, if you don't agree with the terms, you shouldn't click "I Agree."
    - Kinrany 29d ago
      > And, if you don't agree with the terms, you shouldn't click "I Agree." Nah, it's perfectly reasonable to click it if you know you're being transparently lied to in a way that won't hold up in court.
      - Kinrany 29d ago
        That is, it's bad that these situations happen and that's why they should be regulated away when possible. But if you can't personally change the status quo, the next best thing is to accept the game and respond in kind.

yakz 1mo ago

The important bit is that you can sell the CD or cassette or record.

Joel_Mckay 1mo ago
True, but no additional rights to distribute replicas of the copyrighted music and composer works. Note, if a band does a cover of a popular song, the original music composer rights also don't magically transfer because someone sang a slightly different version. Sony may not be technically breaking any rules, if they disclosed the terms of the copyright are revocable... and not perpetual in the terms of sale. Still a douche move to rip off kids, and burned a lot goodwill with consumers. =3
frollogaston 1mo ago
Yes. Not just practically speaking, but legally, you own the disc.
red_admiral 29d ago
Which would still apply if the game were sold on a CD-ROM, but needed an internet connection to Sony's licence servers to run. The important bit is that once you bought a music CD, no-one can stop you from playing it?

nalekberov 1mo ago

The difference is that no license holder can force you to give them back. You. Actually. Own. Them. You might think, like, you've had some eureka moment, but it's all corporate BS.

0xcde4c3db 1mo ago

I'm not a copyright lawyer, but my understanding is that you do not own a license when you buy a CD or cassette, you own a copy (strictly speaking, a "phonorecord" in US law). Copyright doesn't regulate the sorts of typical uses that the owner of a copy would engage in, so a license is not required. When you see those warnings on VHS/DVD/Blu-ray that they're licensed only for private home viewing, what they're telling you is that you don't have a license to do anything controlled by copyright such as broadcasting, publicly exhibiting, or reproducing it. Software is significantly more complicated and gets into issues of physical permanence/transience and specific exemptions/limitations to normal copyright law (see e.g. 17 USC 117).

AgingGamer 1mo ago

Yes, Sony can revoke a license. It is right in the terms of the license. We own nothing but the right to access the game so long as the rights holder chooses to permit it. This means I could buy a game on Tuesday and the rights holder could render it unplayable on Wednesday with no recourse. The "Buy" versus "License" question doesn't really resolve this. Sony is right in one sense that we all know we are licensing. What needs protection, probably requiring new or revised laws, is some sort of consumer right to get value out of a game license before the vendor renders it unplayable.

red_admiral 29d ago
In the UK at least, consumer contracts have to be "fair", determined as necessary in a court of law: https://www.gov.uk/unfair-terms-in-sales-contracts/unfair-consumer-contracts https://www.gov.uk/unfair-terms-in-sales-contracts/unfair-co... Making the game unplayable on Wednesday might not impress a judge.