This is solid research, and this evidence is really going to put Sony into an awkward position.
Companies shouldn’t say you “own” a digital product if they can revoke the license at any time. Owning should mean something like when you buy a game from GOG - you get a non-revokable, DRM-free copy you can use indefinitely. Otherwise, you’re really just leasing it.
It’s mentioned on the wiki, but in California it’s illegal to use words like “buy” or “purchase” on the checkout page for licenses like this. They have to show a clear notice that you don’t actually own the product, which is why Steam added a banner on their checkout page.
As soon as they announced all of this I was pretty confident that we’re going to end up getting raked over the coals come the finish. Do they even have lawyers, did they even run this plan past them get their feedback or did they just announce it?
If you say “buy” but it turns out that what you actually meant was “limited license” then at a minimum that is false advertising, and given the fact that they chose to make this change, and it wasn’t something forced on them by third party action, you could even go as far as to charge them with conspiracy to commit fraud.
Oh dear. lol. Perhaps the idiots who wrote that idiotic take on things should have actually done a little research first. It’s so beautiful to see companies make stupid mistakes.
Are they idiots or are they so arrogant they think they can get away with it anyway because everything is for sale and corrupt?
Given Sony’s recent announcements I’m inclined to think that they might actually just be idiots.
I think what’s happening is they’re really panicking because they’re starting to realize that the ps6 is going to be extremely expensive to build, and won’t be an attractive option. So they are cutting costs everywhere they can, but that’s just pissing off the current player base.
Well that’s awkward.
delightfully so
Very curious to see how this plays out
