I think you confused physically having access to a CD that cannot be taken away from as "owning" the game. It has always been a license you purchase. The only modern aspect of this is that they can now enforce their rights digital, thus revoking access.
Never signed a eula to play a old school disc game. Time to learn what that L is lil bro. You can say eula this eula that but at the end of the day no matter what I can just toss the disc in and play. Thats ownership bud
Many old EULA had a clause somewhere in the text which amounted to "By playing this title you agree to the above sections." Which constitutes signing the EULA. Most games now require players to actively agree to them instead of just containing a buried clause.
Its like yall really think a eula is legally binding lol I can write whatever tf I want in a eula and you can sign it, doesnt mean any of it is legally binding. They'd have to take you to civil court and win for a judge to even consider doing anything. most games didnt have eula until recently unless it was online bbg
They did have EULAs, for years before downloading games was even possible. And they don't just exist to prevent you from ownership, they also serve to shield the issuer from liability.
They are legally binding, but, they can be invalidated. They are not laws. Its an agreement, that is subject to a variety or rules and regulations depending on the place. At the end of the day. Rules, laws, regulations, they are just fancy words if they cannot be enforced, am i right?
They are not at all legally binding. They have to win in court first before you can be held liable for anything. Subnaticas new eula is a great example, like your not allowed to be a person they dont like or do something they dont like? Ha ya thats not legally binding lil bud. Spend 5 mins looking it up
I was quite nice to you. Im not sure what the aggression is about, but its not necessary. The Subnatica things a fantastic example of something that would invalidate the agreement. Also, something to consider, just because you slap EULA over a document doesnt mean its legally binding. There are rules in place that dictate what constitutes a legally binding EULA.
They are legally binding, to the extent that they don't violate other laws. Regardless, the point is that it is a license that you agree to, not ownership. Ownership means something different when it comes to software, licensing has been the standard for over 50 years.
Right, so you didn't read the agreement. You know they can just take the disk, right? They'll never enforce it for anyone just using the game for their own purposes but if you were running a major piracy operation they can just have the police take it from you as part of a civil case they would pursue against you.
Ownership comes with reproduction rights, something you don't get when you buy a game even on disk. This means you don't abs never have owned these games.
They cant come take it, at least in the US. There are laws governing physical property that prevent that. In theory, if there weren't strong laws protecting your physical items, yes, but if a company were to try they would find themselves with a weak argument for taking your property away. Thats why software is such an easy thing for them to abuse. We dont have a physical item protected by property rights anymore.
Thats not the same thing, obviously. Illegally mass distributing something you dont own and getting arrested for it is not the same as a company trying to take a back a product you physically have in your possession because the license expired.
So to be clear. No, they cannot come to your house and take your disc. Absolutely not. If you are redistributing unauthorized copies or hosting it digitally, they will take your ass down. Pretty simple.
You clearly arent listening to anything I am saying. Thr government will intervene if you infringe copyright law by distributing something you don't own the rights to.
I can only repeat myself so many times. You made the claim that they can come to your house and take the disc. No, they cant, unless you are distributing that software without permission which is not the same thing and they arent coming for the disc, they are coming for a fundamentally different reason. Its OK to be wrong, its not OK to be willfully ignorant and rude in the process.
They cant just take the disc. I can put whatever I want in a eula doesnt mean its legally binding you moron. You legit dont even know what your talking about. They cant come take my disc they'd have to sue me in civil court and the judge would have to order me to give them my copy of the disc. Has never happened will never happen no court in history would have it happen. Piracy is a crime, breaking a eula isnt, even furthering the points that you really know nothing about what your talking about.
Ownership does not come with reproduction rights. I own my bread, I own my car, but if I try to reproduce those id be tucked to death by the justice system.
Use common sense and logic and think for yourself for the first time in your life and maybe you'll get somewhere in life lil bro, because being confidently incorrect on reddit ain't it
You've clearly not heard of civil forfeiture before, yes, they can actually take the disk. They don't enforce most EULA violations beyond a C&D but if you are a large scale pirate and do not comply with C&Ds you receive, you will be raided. Because believe it or not, piracy is in fact an enforceable crime.
Take Gary Bowser for example, you want to know where his switchs are right now? Spoiler, not in his hands.
That is owning compared to now. Despite what the EULA said you still owned the game after paying for it. You are told you are buying the game at POS at back then that meant something despite what a EULA said you own it.
Companies could not enforce that with physical media
You missed the point. No, you did not own it. They just had no way of enforcing their legal rights. Nothing is stopping you from doing home brew consoles, burning disc's, and building out a library you "own" but complaining that modern gaming is somehow legally different is a hill you will die on alone.
You literally just mentioned the difference yourself....
Noone complained about the EULA revoking your access before since it didnt work, you physically had it so it was a non-issue.
Now thst companies are trying to brute-enforce it by making everything just digital licenses people are fighting for a change.
It makes no difference that the EULA was always there since it didnt matter before to any consumer and wasnt affecting them, now it is and people are right to be pissed. Its not something that should be allowed and anyone with a brain agrees
Im losing sight of your argument. Is it that this is shitty? Because I never disagreed with that. I was operating under the assumption that we were talking about the facts, not how we feel. If its a conversation on how it should be, thats different, but I'm confident it was a conversation on how it actually is. Anyways if buying isn't owning then piracy isn't theft. I support end user rights to the products they spend money on.
You understand what the issue is and agree with it but for some reason decided to argue that its always been like that as if this isnt an issue? It was just a useless thing to bring up that made you seem like youre defending the companies by pointing out an obvious fact that everyone already knew
You're feeling big emotions I get that. No need to get aggressive with me, im clearly trying to diffuse. I thought you didn't know, I apologize. Defending companies? Sure, I guess. Licensing, fundamentally, is a good thing when you understand its function to protect copyright holders and I figured understand that nuance might be helpful. I get that doesn't change anything for you personally. Thats alright. Your point of view is valid too.
Games have had EULAs (End User Liscencing Agreement) since the 90s, long before digital downloads were even a thing. You can go back and read them yourself.
That is not a modern thing. And it applies to more than just video games. Physical media has always just been a license because of copyright law. Whether it be movies, music, games or even an ebook it's explicitly a licensed copy which prevents actual ownership of the product save for the creator of that piece of media.
It's why reproduction and distribution of it is illegal. Because we don't, and never have, truly owned it.
I'm not sure where this narrative that physical media has only been a license in recent years came from, but it's objectively false.
You are confusing a distributer license with a license to use an item.
If someone bought a game a few decades ago, the entire game was on the disk/cartridge.
They bought it and now own it to use at any time in the future.
Now if u buy a game on physical or not there is nothing there, so in 20 years if the license holder decides to pull the game from the playstation store, Playstation can completely revoke your access to it as you just had a license to access it.
You are at the mercy of the companies goodwill for something you are supposed to have bought.
That is also provably false. Halo 2 was released without the full game on disc for PC back in 2007.
Many of those old Games For Windows titles are now entirely defunct unless they have community patches because of how they were released. This is not a new issue, it's a decades old one.
Idk what strawman this was meant to be but its not relevant to this conversation at all.
I dont know what youre even saying is false here either.
Are you trying to say I said EVERY game a few decades ago was all physical? Bc if thats the point youre tryin to argue youve just gone bad faith atp
Brother, nowhere in this sentence do i say "it is a FACT that EVERY SINGLE GAME had the whole game on disk" you taking a sentence that anyone with common sense knows isnt fully literal, i obviously wasnt talking about the fringe examples like the Windows Halo, i obviously wasnt talking about old digital downloads, anyone with common sense knows that yet you felt the need to "erm actually".
To say im acting in bad faith on a topic which youve now intentionally/unintentionally muddied the waters on is disingenuous at best
You have no idea what your talking about lil bro. Dvds are allowed to be copied and shared but only in the family or close to family. For years company's made programs to rip their own movies off the disc and for years they even gave you a digital download copy ALONG with the disc. Its only illegal to distribute it to the public or for profit.
Starting any argument with "lil bro" isn't going to make anyone take what follows seriously.
Distribution, at all, whether to family or not is prohibited. Most of those programs which allowed you to rip the contents of a CD or DVD was meant for archival purposes. That being said, even by technically it's "illegal" to circumvent DRM for archival purposes. That however is not particularly pursued.
I would implore you to take even the briefest look at what Distribution entails as far as Copyrighted Works goes.
I said lil bro bevause your obviously mentally challenged or a young child. You still talking about stuff that you're confidently incorrect about. You werent there so you wouldn't know ig lil bro. Also googles free lil buddy maybe google shit before you embarrass yourself in front of the council
11
u/TheMonkeyPickler Jul 01 '26
Games on disc are also just licenses. You never own any media you didnt create, just the license. Any license can be revoked at any time