4 ms·
Yes, when you pay to use a copy of copyrighted work, you're not owning the work in the sense of obtaining the right to redistribute. That is completely separat
by kazinator 1mo ago
Yes, when you pay to use a copy of copyrighted work, you're not owning the work in the sense of obtaining the right to redistribute.
That is completely separate from the question of whether you are buying your copy to permanently use, or just renting it temporary.
Conflating the two concepts is either sophistry, or stupidity.
- tombert 1mo agoI have to admit that I'm pretty impressed that GOG has managed to convince a lot of the big brand-name players, (including Sony! [1]) that a DRM-free way of distributing games can be viable. If there's no DRM then there's nothing stopping you from keeping a backup on your own that they can't take away. [1] https://www.gog.com/en/game/god_of_war https://www.gog.com/en/game/god_of_war
- MayeulC 1mo agoYou are buying a copy though, and would be expected to have the right to resell it. So digital stores go out of their way to "license" the copyrighted work instead of selling you a copy. I have been thinking about this lately, and figured that another difference with classic media was the "live service" model, where games receive updates. You can't take for granted that a copy comes with updates, so I guess that as a middle ground, publishers could license updates (and online multiplayer) & sell copies of the game. Sell your copy, fine, but if you want updates or multiplayer, you have to purchase a subscription again. This would make more sense to me, but may be difficult to communicate and implement.