General Category > Blog

You don't own that game you bought (Copyright)

<< < (2/3) > >>

ratty redemption [RIP]:
agreed, that was very interesting, although i'm not surprised by any of it since i remember reading those type of eula's at least a decade ago.

kat:
TBH.. whilst the EULA's *have* been there, I think the recent outcome mentioned above with respect to Autodesk and the eBay guy has probably given sway to the likes of Microsoft to take a much harder line on what constitutes the 'product' a consumer purchases (just what are we buying?).

The one big issue the author of that T3 article didn't mention (no-one else has either from what I've read/seen)... is that in order for MS to 'manage' the kinds of licensing privileges they are to grant users, their products have to be tagged and bagged. In other words, they system *requires* fixed identifications with respect to who has what - MS will know the who, what, why, when, where of product usage - the only options in that instance are as always with this type of rights management, we either use and accept what that means, or not use it and become Luddites.

Again it's hard not to think conspiratorially on matters like this but the games press typically neglect to either point these issues out, make them a none-issue or ignore them outright despite their being genuine concerns of consumers.

The big issue I have with these sorts of systems is that from a broader point of view, they actually dis-empower the user, giving them false choices - you can have any colour you like as long as it's one we provide for you.

ratty redemption [RIP]:
good points, and that a hobson's choice isn't it?

kat:
Yep that's the one.. was a toss up between Hobson's, Morton's or Buridan's ass. True story. ;)

ratty redemption [RIP]:
he he.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page