this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2026
633 points (99.7% liked)

Technology

87574 readers
3952 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The relevant section is blunt. "The Software is licensed to you, not sold," the EULA states. "You are granted a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable, and personal license to play or use the Software for your private, non-commercial use on the system or device it was intended for."

The terms also restrict renting, modifying, or obtaining games through unauthorised means. Nothing in there is new, technically. Sony's EULA has always said this. The timing is what makes it land differently right now.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 28 points 1 day ago

Then stop calling the button purchase and call it rent.

This is why the stop killing games movement exists

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 21 points 2 days ago

if buying isn't owning the piracy isn't stealing.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 4 points 1 day ago

Simple solution: Piracy. If they won't sell it to you, then steal it.

[–] Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Arr me hearties.

[–] ScoffingLizard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It says "limited" but does not define what limited is, so you legally paid for nothing guaranteed. You just give them money but they are obligated to give you nothing.

[–] ID10T@programming.dev 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Not that this gives them a pass, but just to clarify the term: “limited” means you’re only allowed to use the software in the specific ways described by the EULA. The whole purpose of the EULA is to define exactly what “limited” means. In contrast, “unlimited use” would indicate that you’re allowed to use the software however you want unless specifically forbidden by the EULA.

“Limited” does not mean that they can just make up whatever they want later and say “well that’s what we meant when we said limited.” The EULA describes the agreement you make, and both parties are bound to exactly what is described in that EULA.

They can decide to change the EULA later and technically you are free to choose whether you want to accept those new terms, but the nasty part is that they can revoke your current license if you decide not to accept their new EULA and you’re just out of luck because you don’t actually own a copy.

TL;DR it’s a shitty deal either way, but I think it’s important to be accurate. They do define what “limited” means or it wouldn’t be a valid license agreement. That does not imply that the EULA is a good one.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 43 points 3 days ago (1 children)

AS A CONSUMER YOU MAY HAVE RIGHTS UNDER APPLICABLE LOCAL LAWS THAT CANNOT BE EXCLUDED, LIMITED OR CHANGED. THOSE RIGHTS TAKE PRIORITY OVER ANYTHING IN THESE TERMS.

So they're saying we should write to our law making representatives and have that changed?

Sounds like a fucking great idea to me.

[–] 3abas@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Yeah, first you have to have representatives that write laws in your favor.

Not only that, but make sure that those laws are enforced

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SnoringEarthworm@piefed.ca 208 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Don't buy PlayStation, got it.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 42 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (31 children)

It's in the EULA for every piece of software, including physical.

If it wasn't, then buying a single copy would legally allow you to sell an infinite amount of copies.

Because that's what actually owning software means.

And video games are software.

PlayStation:

The Software is licensed to you, not sold

Windows 95:

The software product is licensed, not sold

https://www.scribd.com/document/478767349/Windows-95-License-Agreement

I know it's a joke no one ever read them...

But you all really never knew this?

Edit:

Don't make me wheel out the 1980s CRT TV for the class...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up863eQKGUI

There's always been freeware and shareware (yes, they're different) but if you as an individual paid money for software at any point, you've never owned it.

Businesses can't even justify the expense of "owning" basic stuff like Microsoft Office and collectively spend billions. "Owning" software is fucking expensive, and usually means you coded it.

load more comments (31 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ZebulonP@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago

The only solace is at least the majority of AAA games coming out now are so ass that i don't want them anyway.

[–] Hakuso@scribe.disroot.org 53 points 3 days ago

If buying isn't owning, piracy isn;t theft.

[–] Worstdriver@lemmy.world 76 points 3 days ago (17 children)

If buying isn't owning, then piracy isn't stealing.

load more comments (17 replies)
[–] melfie@lemmy.zip 108 points 3 days ago (3 children)

obtaining games through unauthorised means

If games are going to have DRM, collect our data through unauthorized means, and be randomly taken away without our authorization, then exactly what social contract are we upholding?

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 32 points 3 days ago

then exactly what social contract are we upholding

The one where criminals, thieves, scammers, and pedophiles are free to commit whatever crimes they want, as long as they operate on behalf of capital.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] deathmetal27@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] RambleMuffin@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

To be fair, i recall Steam and GOG said that in case of a platform shutdown or if a game from your library is delisted, they can provide you a copy of the game files that you can keep and use.

The Sony policy is much more shady.

[–] Stern@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

in very limited terms I think Valve might fully remove games (like the crypto miner one) from accounts but other then that if you bought it you own it as far as I've seen with Steam. I have transformers devastation which was delisted, and while the achievements won't really show up on my account iirc, and I can't sell the card drops on the market, I can still install and play it fine

[–] LePoisson@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Nah see my other comment. You don't own shit on Steam. In fact the agreement specifically says you may need to use the client and be connected to the Internet in order to even play your games. Like if steam shut down tomorrow and just stopped existing it's very possible they could legally just give you the middle finger and say sucks for you.

IANAL and there's more to it than just the contract you have with Valve as far as the law goes but the way the contract is written you have no ownership of anything on the platform.

[–] bitwolf@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago

I interpret that as Steam covering for some enhittified games on their store that require a constant internet connection.

For example several games I have in my Steam library work fine offline.

But the Megaman Battle Network remake subtly requires an internet connection to start the gamea from the title screen.

Very misleading as the game technically boots offline but you can't leave the title screen.

[–] LePoisson@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The Sony policy is much more shady.

It's not.

There's a lot more in the agreement but this is the start of the licensing part.

Valve hereby grants, and you accept, a non-exclusive license and right, to use the Content and Services for your personal, non-commercial use (except where commercial use is expressly allowed herein or in the applicable Subscription Terms). This license ends upon termination of (a) this Agreement or (b) a Subscription that includes the license. The Content and Services are licensed, not sold. Your license confers no title or ownership in the Content and Services. To make use of the Content and Services, you must have a Steam Account and you may be required to be running the Steam client and maintaining a connection to the Internet.

(Emphasis mine)

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 31 points 3 days ago (5 children)

If you pirate the games, you actually own them and they can't take them away from you. Funny how that works.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Sniatch@feddit.org 6 points 2 days ago

Should change the "buy" button to "rent"

[–] Giggles@lemmy.world 17 points 3 days ago

🏴‍☠️

[–] Sanguine@lemmy.dbzer0.com 29 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Sad really. Been a PlayStation fan since I was a kid. PS1 on Christmas w/ Metal Gear Solid is easily one of my favorite core memories. As with everything else in modern era, these companies have really lost their bearing and the spark / soul that made them cherished through most of our lifetimes.

I've switched to PC gaming long ago so I'm not really in their target audience anymore, but when the day comes that I want a machine for the living room it'll certainly not be a PS.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›