Comment on Wiki Documents at Least 44 Instances in Which Sony Says You Own Your Games
Kolanaki@pawb.social 1 day agoLike, you are kinda right in one way, but there’s a difference between owning the intellectual property vs owning a thing.
It should be understood by most people that they are not buying the IP. They do, however, expect to own the product they paid for.
The company is trying to equate owning the IP to owning every copy of the product they sell. This is some bullshit, and everyone knows it.
AnimalsDream@slrpnk.net 15 hours ago
I appreciate that you took what I said in good faith. I don’t know if I’m just failing to properly convey - I understand that when, say, you purchase a physical book, you own that thing. That’s because it is a thing, your one copy, a finite object. You do have limited rights to resell it too.
But what I’m trying to get at is, within copyright law as it exists now (and pretty much ever so far), even though you own that physical object itself, because it is bound with a copyrighted work, in a sense you actually do not even own that book. it’s because when you purchase a copyrighted work, what you have done in the eyes of the law is that you have purchased a limited use license. Your rights with that book are still restricted by that copyright.
I’m not trying to say that’s how things should be. I just think it matters to understand how things really are, if we’re inclined to want to change them for the better. Courts are not going to be able to go far enough to create the kinds of reforms that are wanted in the Stop Killing Games movement. It’s going to need new legislations.
Kolanaki@pawb.social 15 hours ago
Yes, but the restriction on that ownership is the ability to reproduce and sell it. People want the same freedom to keep their copy of it, without access to it because it’s a digital media that only exists in an ethereal form as data on a server, being taken away. We want our copy to actually be ours, physical or not.
I agree it needs new legislation to rephrase all the legalese that confuses the definition of “ownership,” so there is a clear legal distinction between the ownership of the IP and the ownership of a consumer’s purchase of a copy of some media.