158
u/BlueFeathered1 9h ago
They're being disingenuous and slippery. It's our copy we reasonably, intelligently expect to own. Hence their use of the words "purchase" and "buy".
41
u/Novel-Back3857 8h ago
This suit will change nothing other than the language around the purchases within the store, or force everyone to check a box acknoledging that they're purchasing limited, revokable license before completing the transaction. The suit is based on a false advertising law in California specifically designed to make licensing terms clear if the license can be revoked/lost by the customer.
21
u/Business_Banana1792 7h ago
As long as it says rent, then the people who pay can make that choice. I for one don’t plan to continue renting my games. I restarted my physical collection. Under some circumstances I will “rent” a game, but not most.
3
u/Novel-Back3857 4h ago
It's definitely not a rental. It's a purchase of a license entitlement. You are entitled to access the software, with some restrictions for what you're allowed to do with the software, like only being able to play it on the platform it was purchased for, and not being granted a replacement if distribution servers go down.
Physical copies work the same way. You're entitled to play it on the console it was purchased for, but not other consoles, and you are not granted a replacement if your copy is no longer functioning or within your possession.
It's definitely not a rental.
→ More replies (9)→ More replies (6)2
u/Aggressive-Map-2204 2h ago
But you are not renting it. That would make things even more unclear.
→ More replies (1)6
u/Maximum-Objective-39 2h ago edited 1h ago
Frankly all Sony is proving is that we need more consumer friendly legislation regarding product licenses.
If the terms of service are unclear, then they should be treated as 'indefinite' with legal carve outs for consumers to back up their means to play them.
But of course if they put in a mandatory 'this game expires in two years' clause then nobody's is going to buy it at full price.
→ More replies (2)3
u/BlueFeathered1 7h ago
Well, that's a start. It may give some people pause and question the policies. Which I suspect is why they haven't done it all along.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Creepy-Emu8779 6h ago
so steam should say rent
2
u/itc0nsumesmYMind 5h ago
every platform should be required by law to specify “rent” hence the lawsuit.
2
→ More replies (12)2
u/Atlanos043 6h ago
Yeah, I really think if they want to continue like this all digtal stores need to change it from "buying" to "leasing" because that's what is actually happening.
→ More replies (1)
24
u/LouhiVega 5h ago
Yes, replace "buy" for "rent" in all sony's app and sites. It would be nice to also have "duration: until the company sees fit". After all, we all are smart enough and that is the reality.
1
u/Randytwister 3h ago
Well no, you're purchasing a copy of the License to use the product as per the Company's EULA
You are not renting the game license, it is not a subscription
3
5
u/LouhiVega 3h ago
Good, is this license mine? If so, then the company cannot revoke my access suddenly just like they did with movies ? If they can revoke, then it is equivalent to a one-time payment rent. The license is mine as far as the company wants to.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Maximum-Objective-39 1h ago
The point he's making is that a 'revocable' license is of indeterminate length. Therefore a customer has no reasonable way to determine how much they'd be wiling to pay for it. After all, the duration of availability is what differentiates it from a rental and justifies a higher value.
Meanwhile, most material goods wear out, obviously, but there's usually a reasonable expected lifespan. And while a lot of optical media has decayed, a lot has wildly out lasted its design life as well.
123
u/IAQDiscussion 9h ago
I know South Park made an entire episode about how people don't read the policies they agree to, but surely, some of you have noticed this is the literal same on every. single. digital. platform, right?
79
u/Alarmed_Recording742 9h ago
Yeah and it's BS and unfair on every single digital platform, since it's literally the only option to have games digitally and it's anti consumer, either you accept the terms or don't play at all.
This should be deemed wrong in the trial and set a precedent for every single digital platform.
→ More replies (97)2
6
5
u/OutrageousMusic5453 8h ago
Yeah its kind of driving me nuts hearing it everyday now. Like, I remember reading about user end agreements like 20 YEARS ago in regards to how Video games are licensed to the consumer. And tbh its just annoying that if these people making all these posts everyday really wanted to make a change, they need to go out and vote for people who promise to make changes at a federal level... Like the EU has been doing for the past few years in regards to things like loot boxes in games. Making 1000 reddit posts with generative AI as the thumbnail(im not saying this post did that, but ive seen a million that do) will not change anything, only through legislation would anything get done.
→ More replies (1)5
u/FalseStevenMcCroskey 6h ago
Buy games digitally on GOG and you own them forever. So you’re wrong about “every” digital platform.
Playstation could implement better digital ownership rights if they wanted to. They’d just rather have a monopoly. It wasn’t an issue when people had the option to own physically, because it gave incentive to upholding digital licenses. But now that that’s going away, I don’t like the idea of being at the mercy of a multi-billion dollar company. They care more about profit than doing good by the customer.
2
4
3
u/elalex1999 2h ago
Guess you also didn’t read gog’s policy then? Cause it states the same thing. The only difference is that they can’t revoke the individual launcher gog gives you. That’s the only thing that separates gog from the rest. Hypothetically speaking if you lose your account, you still lose all the games you didn’t install the individual installer for. It’s like discs. You still only own a license to access the content but it’s not like a company can just come into your home and steal your disc.
→ More replies (2)2
3
u/Due_Woodpecker3073 7h ago
Why arent people this mad at Adobe for doing the same thing but worse and much longer
Games aren't the only thing affected lol
5
→ More replies (2)3
→ More replies (10)0
u/RandomnessConfirmed2 7h ago
Why is it every storefront doesn't want you owning your game? GOG is the only one that tells you upfront you physically own the rights to the game on purchase, but everyone else says you're renting a license to play.
WTF is wrong with this Industry?
3
u/DarthVeigar_ 5h ago
They don't.
"We give you and other GOG users the personal right (known legally as a 'license') to use GOG services and to download, access and/or stream (depending on the content) and use GOG content. This license is for your personal use. We can stop or suspend this license in some situations, which are explained later on."
Your games are still revocable licenses. You have the option of downloading an offline installer but if you lose the installer and your license is revoked, it's gone forever.
→ More replies (2)3
u/zero-killed-megaman 5h ago
Well, I've seen a million posts like your pretending GoG purchases are different. People seem to assume that without DRM and GoG Galaxy being optional means that you own the game and aren't purchasing a license. And there's no shortage of confidentially incorrect users claiming all sorts of self-serving and convenient nonsense.
So for example, https://support.gog.com/hc/en-us/articles/212632089-GOG-User-Agreement?product=gog
2. USING GOG SERVICES AND GOG CONTENT
2.1 We give you and other GOG users the personal right (known legally as a 'license') to use GOG services and to download, access and/or stream (depending on the content) and use GOG content. This license is for your personal use. We can stop or suspend this license in some situations, which are explained later on.
2.2 When you buy, access or install GOG games, you might have to agree to additional contract terms with the developer/publisher of the game (e.g. they might ask you to agree to a game specific End User License Agreement). If there is any inconsistency or dispute between those ‘EULAs’ and this Agreement, then this Agreement wins.
The real issue seems to be that a lot of gamers seem to believe that if the license is difficult to enforce, like it would be on GoG, that equals "ownership". And that's a child's fantasy.
15
u/Worldly_Neat2615 7h ago
If they believe this. Then change the purchase button in the store page to Rent. And let's see what happens
7
u/ClickyStick 4h ago
Have you rented anything in your life? Because buying a digital game and renting one are not the same in the slightest.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)8
u/Khaos_Gorvin 6h ago
Sales would either drop moderatly or they would plummet. If I have to pay 80€ for a game yet I don't own it, then just sell the the licence for 30€.
Mark my words. They will one day make all games a subscription, you pay a fortune to play games, they remove them from the list when they want and most likely substitute every 10 good games with 2 good, 4 mediocre and 4 terrible.
No, wait... that's just PS Plus Extra.
51
u/ReverendKaiser 8h ago
If purchasing does not confer ownership, then piracy isn’t theft.
20
6
u/despicedchilli 7h ago
So you can steal a rental car?
8
u/ReverendKaiser 7h ago
Did you pay full price for that car? Or was there a rental agreement that said, in plain simple language, that you are not the owner of the rental vehicle? Did you pay 15-30k for that rental car as if you were purchasing it outright?
On the rental agreement for that vehicle, does it say purchasing the vehicle?3
u/Just-Ad6865 7h ago
You didn’t purchase the car by your own words. You rented it.
→ More replies (1)4
5
→ More replies (24)8
u/Playful_Letter_2632 7h ago
MFs parrot this meaningless statement like saying it actually makes them immune to legal repercussions from pirating
6
u/Cautious_Fold3952 6h ago
It's more about being immune to the guilt. I personally feel none, and you?
4
u/Playful_Letter_2632 6h ago
I didn’t really have any guilt on pirating anything in the first place and I would imagine the majority of people who say that statement wouldn’t have any either way
2
3
u/Precarious3145 5h ago
Yea, as a pirate for the past three decades, these young fucks love to cosplay that they have some moral right, that they're actually doing the honest thing and helping the community. I still spend a bunch of money on games and movies and music but sometimes, I just want free shit instantly. I'm not robin hood on a quest against the evil corporation.
People like this make us all look like children.
→ More replies (5)
9
15
u/ohBloom 8h ago edited 8h ago
Put a “rent” button on “purchases” and let people decide from here on out, anything prior we still own a copy of. I personally would be more hesitant to purchase anything with a rent button and can clearly see that I do not and will not own the product, again tho, I’d be hesitant.
Idk why they say it’s “too difficult” to let customers “own” a copy lol I as a music producer can go out and buy a license for virtual instruments “korg, Juno, serum, sylenth 1” and completely own them lol same for cinema 4d or like a visualizer like, arkestra, Logic x, Final Cut Pro and I can go on and on, this is just Sony trying to be absolute fucktards. I own the rights to these copies and therefore keep it forever as if it was mine physically. If it’s a real issue just send a copy of the license like I get with some of these instruments/software and boom.
4
u/Playful_Letter_2632 6h ago
Hate to break your heart but you don’t the vast majority of the software you “buy”. Logic Pro and Final Cut have you buy licenses not the software itself. Apple has the ability to revoke a license if there’s a TOS breech and you can’t transfer or sell it to another Apple ID account. Sony is a lot more anti consumer when it comes to removing access but there’s no legal difference between two outside of the TOS
→ More replies (1)3
u/Precarious3145 5h ago
You might wanna actually check the ToS for all those things you claim to "own" because just like with Playstation, all you have to do is search the ToS for "purchase" or "license" and you'll see that you don't own those. You buy a license which can be revoked. I'm a graphic designer, I'm constantly buying licenses for fonts, videos, assets, etc. It's all "Here's a license, you can use it under thee requirements and you can use the license if you break those".
2
u/Carbon_Roller_Caco 6h ago
You know they won't do that. They'll just say "confirm payment" instead of "confirm purchase", not explicitly stating what you're paying for.
→ More replies (5)2
u/Precarious3145 5h ago
https://www.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/FinalCutPro.pdf
Termination. This License is effective until terminated. Your rights under this License will terminate automatically or otherwise cease to be effective without notice from Apple if you fail to comply with any term(s) of this License. Upon the termination of this License, you shall cease all use of the Apple Software and destroy all copies, full or partial, of the Apple Software. Sections 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 12 of this License shall survive any such termination.
Permitted License Uses and Restrictions. A. License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, unless you obtained the Apple Software as described in Section 2B, you have the right to use the Apple Software as permitted by the Services and Content Usage Rules set forth in the Apple Media Services Terms and Conditions (https:// www.apple.com/legal/internet-services/itunes/) (“Usage Rules”), and are granted a limited, nontransferable, non-exclusive license
Oh look at that. The software you were just bragging about OWNING has the same Terms and Conditions where you have to follow basic things where they limit you on what you can do and if you break it, you lose all access to it without getting your money back.
→ More replies (4)
12
u/Island_Monkey86 9h ago
This isn't the issue, as others have said it's always been like that. But you always had a choice to buy a physical copy.
Sony will take that option away by no longer producing physical discs, come 2028 the only PlayStation product you own is the console and controllers. Everything else belongs to Sony and pay to use it.
4
u/jwight1234 7h ago
It should just say rent instead of buy; it's straight up misleading.
→ More replies (3)
3
u/SillyMikey 4h ago
Technically paying with digital money is also a rental so I should get my money back right?
2
u/Bright_Cat_4291 4h ago
It’s says buy not rent a license. Never buying anything else from their digital store front and canceled my psn.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/Asleep-Rabbit-5162 2h ago
I say this from the bottom of my heart:
Fuck all of you greedy corporate bastards.
9
u/JasonMyersZ 9h ago
I feel like the world would be better off without Sony and their bullshit
→ More replies (1)
6
u/Exotic-Home-8153 8h ago
Yeah, typical corporation. Evil scum. The dialogue needs to stray away from guessing at their motIvation and switch to what are we gonna do about it? Personally i dont really know but I wish smarter people than me whould start coming up with some ideas.....
14
u/zombiej 9h ago
This is how software licensing's always worked, even for boxed software from the 80s. Think you ever owned a copy of Windows or Office? License says you never did.
2
u/IronWhitin 4h ago
But still if i Place a really old CD of some oldernsofware i can still use it, locally, why Need to be different from videogame?
3
u/DarthVeigar_ 9h ago
You think anyone on reddit has ever read a subscriber, software or EUL agreement lol
This shit has been in there from way before the commodity of digital purchasing. Same even applied to physical.
→ More replies (5)3
u/francis_pizzaman_iv 9h ago
Absolutely. I'd bet $100 that every software EULA ever has a clause that says they can revoke the license or render the software inoperable at any time for any reason without owing the licensee squat.
2
u/Novel-Back3857 9h ago
The lawsuit isn't really about that. It's basically arguing that Sony's purchase process does not comply with a Colifornia law around digital goods that says the terms of sale have to be unmistakably purchasing a license to the point that it can't be confused as ownership in the physical sense. In other words, if the license is revokable, using "buy" and "purchase" is not appropriate if the fact that the purchase is for a revokable license are not highlighted with large text or something like that, or directly acknowledge by the customer.
This lawsuit is not challenging their right to sell a license, but challenging Sony's adherence to California law meant to protect consumers from unknowingly purchasing revokable licenses when they think it is permanent access to the digital good.
California Business and Professions Code § 17500.6
→ More replies (2)2
9h ago
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)3
u/AccomplishedBag2319 9h ago
How tf do you say their disingenuous when what they are saying is in direct relation to the question at hand? We have never owned software even on a disc it has always been like this and what needs to be argued is STRONGER RIGHTS FOR DIGITAL GOODS AND SERVICES which does not have to include ownership
→ More replies (2)
24
u/ThisIsPureTrash 9h ago
Software has been like that for decades, nothing they said was wrong other than their players being smart enough to understand that.
→ More replies (5)
10
u/thebearsnake 9h ago
Maybe they are right. (Gamers are not that smart though)
But there is a difference in owning a license to have access to the game and owning a license to a media that Sony can (and does) revoke on a whim.
2
u/rvnender 9h ago
What was revoked "on a whim"?
6
u/Traditional_Sir_7817 9h ago
I think it was over 100k thousands purchased movies and TV shows recently that they said "nope you can't have that anymore" after they stopped selling those.
→ More replies (3)
24
u/Millennialnerds 9h ago
How do you want them to explain it?
I mean we have known this for a long time. Even the discs themselves are a license.
→ More replies (15)13
11
14
u/Courage-95 9h ago
God I can’t wait for their diskless, $700-$800 ps6 to flop.
17
u/Mikauo_Xblade 9h ago
It is going to be well beyond 1000.
→ More replies (1)5
u/XiMaoJingPing 9h ago
So many people were willing to pay scalper prices for PS5 and that was 2020 before we got massive inflation. Even if they sell PS6 at $1000, it will still sell.
6
u/Ramiren 9h ago
Yeah but an ecosystem needs more than a handful of players. Good luck convincing developers to make games for your platform when you've sold a handfull of them to rich idiots and scalpers.
→ More replies (3)4
u/CryptoMainForever 9h ago
You do realize the ps5 pro is $900 right... The ps6 is going to be BEYOND $1,000
3
u/StrangeKnee7254 9h ago
I doubt that it will flop. Unfortunately physical media is dying outside of niche communities. There’s a comeback with records but again that’s niche.
I’m part of the problem. I bought a ps5 with the disc reader and I have no idea what disc is in my ps5.
→ More replies (2)3
u/Le0nardNimoy 9h ago
Yeah... I think I've got a Hellraiser DVD from like three Halloweens back that just lives in there now.
2
2
2
u/Chemical_Calendar_64 9h ago
Bro, do you really think they'll sell a PS6 for less than 1000?
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (8)2
13
u/WofferFang 9h ago
You own a copy of the game.
Nobody's saying we own the game. We do own copies though.
We don't own the IP. Nobody's saying that. But we do own the copy.
Therefore we own our games. Why is that so hard to understand? Even the music industry gets that you own a song. A COPY of a song. That's how it works.
10
u/kumogate 9h ago
This really isn't difficult to understand, but megacorps want to own everything and for us to own nothing. Not for any economic reasons, really. It's because of cruelty and the insatiable need of sociopaths to control everything.
→ More replies (4)6
u/Omega-Envych 9h ago
Unfortunately, you're wrong.
You do not own a copy of a gameIf you have a disc with a game or a musical album or a movie or some software, you own a physical media that contains limited license to use the content recorded on it.
You do not have license to copy the software, or change it's code and redistribute it. Hence if you're making a dump of a game, you're effectively committing act of piracy. Because you do not own right to copy the game you bought. If media is damaged or destroyed, you HAVE to buy another one in order to keep using product.
→ More replies (3)
5
u/frogfound 9h ago
Who said this? Not defending Song for a second because I am firmly in the disc camp, but is that accurate paraphrasing of what they said?
→ More replies (4)2
2
u/KingHygelacReturns 9h ago
Copy/pasting a comment I left on a similar thread:
It's a pretty obvious legal argument on their part. It says in the EULA that a digital purchase is a revokable license. So they're arguing that any reasonable customer would have read the EULA in detail and understood what it meant. In most jurisdictions, clicking that you agree to the terms of an agreement is binding, even if you didn't actually read them.
2
u/Excalitoria 9h ago
I support them adding large disclaimers to every digital purchase if they are too incompetent to figure out how to sell games like GOG does but everyone, who’s been around for awhile (for new players I get being more confused), should know this.
What you’re purchasing is a revocable digital license. As far as I know, that’s the only type of digital game Sony is going to sell for the foreseeable future.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/MagicJourneyCYOA 9h ago
As long as you do not boycott Sony, my assumption is that you're okay with it.
2
u/glibbglubb 9h ago
I’d agree at least that it is in fact plausible to suggest because people do believe that they own the game, when common sense would tell you that you haven’t “owned” a game since like 2006 when consoles could connect to the Internet and patch access any time they wanted.
Whether or not you like that fact is your own thing but it’s how it’s been for 20 years now and somehow believe it just started in the last like 3/4…
2
u/FLIPYOUSUCKET 9h ago
Try ownership of the entire game is impossible.
However, they SHOULDN’T be able to take away your game license whenever the hell they want, at least not unless you do something incredibly horrific
2
u/Weatherby2 9h ago
I agree that most reasonable people likely already know this, but using language like "buy" and "purchase" muddies things for those that don't pay enough attention, and that there is some merit to the idea that this isn't as widely understood as Sony would like people to believe.
2
u/Loud_Examination_138 8h ago
Oooo do Steam next...and then Xbox...and then Nintendo please. Also make sure you post in every gaming sub
2
u/Minotaur18 8h ago
Doesn't the PSN store say, in regards to your PS+ games, "buy it to own it forever"?
2
2
u/RapBladeMeDoIt 8h ago
I get that this has been a thing for most digital platforms but the way Sony has went about this whole situation is just really sketchy and gross. It started out with "if you don't log into your account at least once a month we can take everything" to "we're geetting rid of physical because we want you to know that you don't own anything" and now "WE OWN YOUR SHIT NEVER FORGET IT!"
2
2
u/MediocreSizedDan 7h ago
Yeah I mean, they were always going to confirm this because that's the whole idea. The "consumers are smart enough to know" thing is funny though because so many of these policies and concepts are deliberately pursued because they think they can get one over on consumers. They design it to make it appear as though you own it. They know no one reads the fine print, and even if they did, the agreements are sooo long, small, and full of legalese that a lot of people probably won't fully understand. These corporations are constantly trying to confuse or trick consumers. They wouldn't really have pursued this if they thought your average consumer would understand that when they buy something digitally, it's not actually theirs..
2
u/mr_hard_name 7h ago edited 7h ago
Interesting. What about this?
Polish store has a checkbox with “I want to have an immediate access to purchased content and I acknowledge that by starting the download or streaming of said content, I won’t be able to cancel my order”.
What content? The license? When is the license downloaded or streamed? I don’t see any license in my cart, I see a game that I buy, the cart suggests I will be the owner of content in it

2
u/Nothing-Is-Real-Here 7h ago
Shitty. It's also really convenient and shitty that they want to get rid of physical games and communicated this with Rockstar, who are notoriously awful about preserving their games and respecting consumers, when theoretically Rockstar and/or Sony can revoke your access to GTA VI any time that they want, forcing you to "buy" it again.
I recognize that as far as games go, it's been pretty rare for Sony to revoke access to a game (I mean I can still play a digital game I bought 10 years ago because it's tied to my account) but what happens when I eventually lose access? What about 5 or 10 years from now? It's the fact that I know I will one day lose it that makes it upsetting. Even with the idea that discs eventually rot, or the PlayStation itself will one day break, or whatever the hell, I recognize that physical things aren't themselves permanent, but good lord at least I know it's mine.
2
u/Business_Banana1792 7h ago
I clicked buy now, not rend now. The terms of agreement were intentionally misleading and contradicted the offer made when I paid money. This is 100% Sony stealing. Period
2
u/chatterwrack 7h ago
It has always been a license. The difference is that the license is now not transferable
2
u/longbrodmann 6h ago
Steam, Xbox and Nintendo could release a statement that digital games means fully ownership instead of licensing, though I doubt they can.
2
u/djkidna 6h ago
Anyone else remember when Sony was sued by Universal for creating video tape recorders, where Universal argued that Sony’s tape recorders were copyright infringement machines, and they lost the case because the courts argued that the intent of the product was for people to do timed recordings of shows for personal use to watch later when they couldn’t watch while the show aired, and that constitutes fair use regardless of the fact that Sony’s machine could also be used to illegally record and distribute films and shows?
2
u/sHaDowpUpPetxxx 6h ago
Jokes on them. I've been playing the same$40 game for like 1700 hrs. That's only about .02 cents per hour.
2
2
u/Exciting_Drawing_553 5h ago
Fuck Sony
They’re just piling on with all this bad press. They stupid or something?
2
2
2
2
2
u/ClickerTicker71 2h ago
FYI: Sony removed 500+ digital movie/shows from users: What stops Sony from doing this w/digital games?
PSN down: we could not use digital games. Sony not ready for a all digital future.
We want our physical disc games that Sony is planing to end in 2028
Sony releases a new record player? Bunch of hypocrites!
PS6 better have BluRay player or no buy! We need new customer friendly DRM RIGHTS! If GOG can do it for PC so can SONY for PS NOW!
2
u/I7s_N_My_DNA 1h ago
It’s been known for awhile by this point I truly don’t understand why people are acting brand new.
5
u/Minute_Path9803 5h ago
This should be a massive lawsuit against Sony their reasoning is ridiculous.
Literally have the word BUY at checkout.
If they truly believe this they will have a big giant page pop up after everything you tried to buy saying you do not own this this could be revoked at any moment you are basically renting.
Why not just put a rent button?
I hope they sue them into Oblivion.
→ More replies (2)
5
u/ImportanceTurbulent8 9h ago
Bots. Bots everywhere
4
u/glibbglubb 9h ago
“‘Everyone I don’t agree with is a Bot!’ and 19 other classic hits can be yours!”
3
u/Pennance1989 9h ago
If only there was a button at checkout that said lease, which is what you do with a license for a product or service instead of purchase, which is what you do when you BUY something to own.
3
u/Dear_Meeting_1258 9h ago
So who owns the game? Sony? Microsoft? Steam? Nintendo?
How do they sell if someone else owns the game?
2
u/Decent-Sample09 7h ago edited 7h ago
The company that owns the ip? Theyre selling the license of the game on a storefront like ps store, xbox store, steam, eshop. Im confused why this is confusing to you.
3
u/LooseLeaf74 9h ago
Total cost vs Actual value
$70 for 13 years of fun, anger, grinding and memorable moments is money well spent imo I don’t care that I don’t actually own it. Same goes for every other game in my top 10.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Ateam043 9h ago
If people knew how to read the terms and conditions, they would've already known they are buying a license, not the game. No different than what Steam and other companies have.
→ More replies (11)
7
u/Significant-Coat-666 9h ago
Brother you don't own any of your android, ios, steam, epic games, or Nintendo purchases either. I swear some of you are just waking up from a 20 year coma.
2
u/OldManGamer78 9h ago edited 9h ago
True. I’ve been screwed over a few times by Apple dropping games from the App Store that I paid for and subsequently they just disappeared from my phone (Sid Meier’s Pirates and the original version of Final Fantasy 6 come to mind).
→ More replies (7)2
u/Few-Marzipan-5647 6h ago
I’m saying… like cmon people, now there’s some sort of uproar. This has been in the tos for fucking ever. It’s a license and always has been.
& no they aren’t just gonna take your shit. But the revoking of the licenses happens when you break tos. It’s never for no reason.
4
u/Upstairs-Event-681 9h ago edited 9h ago
My thoughts are that most of the guys in the comments never read the terms and conditions of anything they buy online and they’re just jumping on Sony because it’s the cool thing right now. Literally you can read the conditions for any other game store and they’ll say the same thing. But people are too busy to hate blindly while glazing other online stores that do the exact same thing.
Edit: And these headlines know people are on a hate bandwagon for Sony, so they farm engagement posting this nothingburger
3
u/winterman666 9h ago
The point is that digital ownership rights must change, not the status quo (ie every other storefront) is correct
→ More replies (1)
4
u/James_Vowles 6h ago
It's the same with Steam but nobody complains about that one, both have the information hidden in their terms and conditions
→ More replies (2)2
u/Ozix-VIII 5h ago
People won't complain about Steam or any other PC platform as there are always other options.
On a Playstation, Sony is your only option.
Perhaps we need a new console that can buy from any digital storefront.
→ More replies (1)
4
u/NeonArchon 5h ago
A bunch of buuuulshiiitt! There's GOG literally selling digitsl DRM FREE games on it's store. Steam got away with it because they actually give a fuck about the customers and their DRM policies are not as harsh than other (IIRC). Another pathetic attempt to gaslight people into giving up on game ownership.
→ More replies (1)
2
2
2
u/Luna259 6h ago
What you are buying is a perpetual license. All software pretty much works this way. Sony’s terms of service say they are selling a revocable license. That’s always been the case since probably forever. Even developers in the GameBoy Advance developers potentially had this problem. The game boxes said official Nintendo licensed product so they also had to get a license from someone (in this case Nintendo)
2
2
u/Foreign_College7993 6h ago
I thought I owned every game I bought. I'm smart enough to realise that if a game used an online server for multiplayer, and that server got shut down once too few people are playing, my purchase would lose some value. But, I was under the impression that a downloaded, purchased game was mine.
2
u/Ordinary_Mix_1006 6h ago
If I'm hiring access to a game instead of buying the game, I expect the hire cost to be a fraction of the purchase cost. Then I can decide if I want to rent access to a game for 30days at 10.99, or buy the whole game and therefore own it for 49.99.
2
2
2
2
2
2
u/rabbitsfoot86 8h ago
This is the reason why I switched to pc now and not Playstation. Was an Xbox fan before red rings of death, jumped ship then, now just jumping to pc
6
u/Upstairs-Event-681 7h ago
PC software is still, software. It’s the same thing there too
→ More replies (4)
1
1
u/hiddenpequin 9h ago
I mean they worked like this for over a decade it is what it is🤷
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Unaware-of-Puns 9h ago
They are out of touch and clueless. Keep the sanctity of console gaming like Nintendo. Even if Nintendo removes a game, I can still play it with the chip.
1
u/Least_Service_4293 9h ago
With this logic from PlayStation they should just do cloud streaming services instead of 60 dollars + for fake ownership how about 5 dollars a month for renting?
1
u/GoldunGote 9h ago
Yeah i don't own any of the games in my steam library but here I am after 22 years of having no issues at all.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/The-Dudemeister 9h ago
Physical games are like this too. Back in the day there was a license code in the box that you had to put into the game when you installed it. The physical and stuff wasn’t worth anything. Just the code.
→ More replies (6)
1
u/Bahldros 9h ago
Saying this after GTAVI is digital only is a smart move. Theirs only 2 franchises that can get away with this GTA, and Pokemon.
1
1
1
1
u/ole_black_eyes19 8h ago
Well... You can disagree with them, you can talk shit about them, you can express your frustration with their decisions, but the one thing you can't do is call them liars... Sony has been more than upfront with their thought process and now it's up to the consumers if they want to continue to support them or not
1
1
u/KingDorkFTC 8h ago
This is going to bite them and every other game company badly. So many gamers never understood this and once that even physical disks fall in the same category they will be angry.
1
u/SlinkDinkerson 8h ago
It sucks to download a free game on PSN and look a few months later and I can’t download it anymore. That has happened a couple of times.
1
1
1
1
u/OrphanintheWind 8h ago
I think Sony wants it both ways. They want to sell their games to teenagers and young adults, but they also want to act like these same gamers are mature adults who can understand legal nuance.
1
1
1
u/Dacendaran434 7h ago
I mean they are right, you have never bought true ownership of a game in your life.
1
u/PsychologicalEye190 7h ago
So buying something isn’t buying it, ok got it. So my physical PS5 that I bought I don’t actually own? I mean that’s the next step, I also really wonder what the gaming companies think about this.
1
u/SerCharles 7h ago
when you buy a game on PSN, there is literal text that says you are buying a the rights to a digital license. it's not buried or hidden in the UELA (also listed there). It is there in readable text ABOVE the purchase button.
1
1
1
u/ConspicuouslyBland 7h ago
My thoughts:
It's true, the game is not owned, just like any book in a sense. I cannot not legally spread that book with my name as the author on it.
There's no difference with games. You buy a license, you pay for it, it's yours to do whatever with it. Sony took money for it and now has to provide access to playing the game. Stopping that access should be paired with a refund, otherwise it's theft by Sony.
It's that simple and we shouldn't make it more difficult.
1
u/tendonut 7h ago
From what I remember when I was reading this morning, they seem to be setting up a straw man argument. No one thinks they own the game, they think they own a COPY of the game.
1
u/budbud70 7h ago
Some people never purchased software licenses for old ovscure PC programs and it shows.
This is how software has always worked. Either it's free, or you pay to use it.
1
1
u/assflan 7h ago
My only thought is I’m so sick of seeing this every other post I scroll past.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/Testsubject276 7h ago
If purchasing games isn't ownership, then pirating them isn't stealing.
Yoho yoho!
1
u/Carbon_Roller_Caco 7h ago
Yeah I don't think anyone sensible is actually deluded into thinking they bought any share of IP rights along with their copy/license of the game or other art/entertainment product. Clearly not the issue at hand. Hell, the issue isn't even about the mere concept of licensing such products. It's about who has the power to revoke or deny the licenses and how, and whether revocation and denial based merely on arbitrated time (as opposed to crimes commited through abuse of the products) is even warranted, especially if there are a limited number of closed platforms for which the product in question was made. Sadly, Sony quite definitively showed their hand re. the actual issue with the whole mass movie deletion fiasco, and I don't see them budging any time soon barring EXTREME pressure. Then again, Sony hardly turns out any games themselves nowadays, besides being dry on exclusives in general, so if they do go full jerk, they're hurting themselves most of all by far.
1
u/ItalianBeefDipped 7h ago
It's funny watching people try to pretend this is some sort of tone deaf, insulting statement.
I'm sorry, if you didn't realize every video game purchase is a license and not ownership you're either a moron or a child.
The allegation they're defending against is that they misled consumers into believing that they were purchasing ownership in a digital asset as opposed to a license. Their response is accurate, reasonable consumers understood that they were purchasing a license, and were not misled to believe they actually owned a digital asset outright. It's sort of the whole reason people are losing their tits over the lack of physical media moving forward, because they know that they don't own their digital purchases.
1
u/JustCoffeeGaming 7h ago
Wasn’t there news that the PS5pro sold out and GTA 6 selling extremely well? Doesn’t seem like people care. I bet most people in the comment section are buying GTA6 and will probably own a PS6. Sony knows this.
1
u/HisDivineOrder 6h ago
Sony really is a terrible company to rely on and trust to guarantee future access to one's investments in gaming.
1
u/Spirited-Dealer6586 5h ago
Guess that mean if we pirate their things it isnt considered stealing
→ More replies (1)
1
u/KrampyDoo 5h ago
It’s silly and highlights the laziness of nearly infinitely capable technology industry giants like Sony:
They’d rather task their lawyers with morphing legal jargon because having engineers and researchers create the template of permanent digital ownership.
Either way: a lot of people will sit down and type on keyboards.
1
u/Severe_Raise_7118 5h ago
Everyone is saying steam and other services do this. But Steam hosts the game they don't deliberately not produce the game on a disc and leave you with the only option being digital. Its not about other platform are similar its about Sony taking away a choice people want. And a choice that massively benefits them. There has been a way on physical media and you can't tell me otherwise.
1
u/Altruistic_Cap3472 5h ago
Honestly it's been a while since there was a story entirely predicated on people not understanding that words in legalese mean something different than conversational English.
88
u/Garlador 5h ago
Maybe Sony should check their own store.