this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2026
540 points (99.3% liked)

News

39080 readers
1578 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

With the end of physical PlayStation games looming, the need for clear digital ownership rights is more pressing than ever.

For its part, Sony believes your rights are very clear: you do not own your digital games, and it's unlikely you're stupid enough to believe otherwise. At least, that's roughly the argument the company's lawyers are presenting in response to a proposed class-action lawsuit.

Sony argues that its current customer-facing disclosures ensure that "reasonable consumers would not be misled" into believing they actually own their digital games. That's according to a Game File report (paid article link) citing an August 21 filing Sony's lawyers made in California's Northern District.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 28 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Actually this is an alright solution.

They should be forced to change the name of their platform if they want to keep using it. They should be barred from using the term "store".

They can either continue their business model as is, (as "PlayStation Leasing") or they can change their policy to include full ownership of games and the right to transfer the games they own to other accounts.

But they don't get to call it a "store" or use words like "buy" or "sale" if that's not what they're actually offering.

[–] Cricket@lemmy.zip 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They should be barred from using the term “store”.

While I agree with the intent, this would definitely be a losing legal argument, since "store" has a long and common history of usage for rental outlets ("hey, let's go to the video store tonight and rent a movie"). I think that not allowing them to use the terms "buy" and "sale" could stand as a legal argument, since I don't believe that there are any examples of people using them when they mean to rent something.

[–] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

("hey, let's go to the video store tonight and rent a movie")

Well that's interesting. I've never actually heard someone call it that. I mean, I get your point, but actually, if anything I think people tended to call it the rental shop.

But then, even at video rental places they at least did also sell things, movies and candy. So even if they did call themselves a store, those rental places would actually qualify more as a store than a digital content distributor would.

[–] Cricket@lemmy.zip 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I understand that it was likely not the same in every English-speaking place (rental shop makes it sound like you may be in the UK?), but it was very common usage in the US. It was also used this way even for video rental places that pretty much did nothing else other than rent videos. I don't know what the origin of this usage was though.

The point that I'm making is that in the eyes of a theoretical jury or judge, this example would be an easy way to demonstrate that "store" didn't imply that you were actually buying the items in it. Like I said, I agree with the intent, but just don't think it would fly legally. But who knows, I'm not a lawyer!

I do sincerely hope that if it were to come to the point where a court agrees that consumers are not actually "buying" the items, that they will force the vendors to stop using the terms "buy", "sale", and "purchase". But who am I kidding, that probably won't happen.

[–] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Oh no, I'm from the US, East Coast. I've literally never heard anyone say rental store. But that's fine, doesn't really matter.

You could still be right, it would probably be possible to convince a judge that this is just common usage. That said, it might be worth trying anyway. You never get any change if you don't try. And we have the slight advantage of being right.

[–] Cricket@lemmy.zip 1 points 10 hours ago

I see, it could be a West vs. East Coast US thing. Although the example I was talking about was "video store", used very casually between friends and relatives, etc.

Thanks a good point. Worth trying it anyway!

[–] Lydon_Feen@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago