granted limited access to software that can be revoked at any moment.
If it is that, then it may not be called a purchase. Simple.
this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2026
634 points (99.2% liked)
Technology
88034 readers
2573 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Turns out I was granting limited access to my money that can be revoked at any moment.
load more comments
(2 replies)
It should be called renting (or something similar). But then, that would likely mean an expectation of a lower price tag and they wouldn’t want that. Who would rent a game for $80? Even if the rental is a decade or longer. Probably people out there that would and currently do this.
I would agree, but most leases have stipulations that restrict voiding the contract "at any moment". You have to do something to violate the lease agreement most times so this is even worse than renting.
But then, that would likely mean an expectation of a lower price tag and they wouldn’t want that.
In other words, they want to commit fraud with impunity. Because that's what lying about the difference between a sale and a rental is: fraud on Sony's part.
It should just be called License. Put that there instead of the buy button. And clearly visible the minimum expiration date for the license. Reserve the buy button for actual perpetual licenses where not having access to the licensed good is a breach of contract good for money back.
Licenses are a copyright concept, but this isn't a copyright issue. You're buying a copy of a game, and you should own the copy after the purchase (which of course, means the company who sold it to you shouldn't be able to revoke your access at will). That's the part that sony is apparently not willing to do. But copyright-wise, it would be a license either way, so I don't think it's a good idea to confuse people with only tangentially related concepts here.
licenses are a very IT central idea.
I have to buy licenses of Windows, Acrobat, etc.... It lines up with what Sony is trying to say too
licenses are a very IT central idea.
No, that's just the implementation you're most familiar with. Licenses are a copyright idea that IT adopted and made digital. Every physical movie and game you own also comes with a license that authorizes your retail use of it, but forbids your commercial use of it. You can't rent your copy of Shrek out to people, nor can you charge admission to people to watch Shrek at your house, nor are you allowed to make copies of your Shrek DVD and sell them, for example.
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
if buying isn't owning, piracy isn't stealing.
Piracy isn't stealing either way. It's just copyright infringement.
Sadly, catchy slogans don't hold up in court. Better to buy from distributors who don't try to make that claim, like GOG - even if they won't put Nine Sols on the store to avoid offending many gamers.
Sadly, catchy slogans don't hold up in court.
Idk, OJ floated by on his.
No crime where's no judge.
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(8 replies)
If I don't own, I won't buy. Good luck.
Already lost my PS4 collection for not logging in 3 years.
We’re going to need the full story here. What the heck man?? They just delete you if you’re offline for a couple years?
load more comments
(1 replies)
Already lost my PS4 collection for not logging in 3 years.
Wait, seriously?! Damn, that sucks. What kept you off PSN for three years?
The fact you even have to ask that is fucking wild. It shouldn't matter in the first fucking place.
I think they're just curious, not implying it makes a difference
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
does anyone know why Sony is so intent on ensuring that I never become a console gamer and give them money?
like how does this benefit them?
in the short term? It doesnt benefit them at all. it may actually hurt them.
in the long term? Bandwidth is cheap. especially at the scale that companies like Sony, Steam, Microsoft, etc, use it. So sell 6 million copies of a game, 10 extra bucks of profit thanks to no physical media/boxes/shipping/etc, per game.. Thats 60 million dollars in free money.
Plus, because you no longer own anything, they no longer have to invest in storage to keep old games up and running. So as new games release, they delete old games from their servers and from your accounts, So thats less investment they have to make in infrastructure, which is again more free money for them.
I wager Sony would love the day when people pay 100 dollars for a game that gets deleted in 6 months, that they have to rebuy again at full price to play again.
Cause remember, with no physical media, you have nothing but sony's closed garden marketplace to buy games.. Which means no competition for sony, which means no incentive for sales, no lower prices (not that 70+ dollars is a low price for a game 🙄 ), no nothing but take what sony offers you, and liking it.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(15 replies)
🎶🎶oh, the pirate's life's for me🎶🎶
Imagine how well digital games would sell if they showed up in your cart like: 1 x Revokable License for God of War $69 See Terms and Conditions* [Confirm Payment]
- Terms: we will do whatever the fuck we want. Conditions: whenever we want.
There's a reason they say "Buy" instead of "Pay".
It's been going on for generations, but it's no less dishonest for all that. Software sellers write complex EULAs for which the only valid answer is "Agree" because the store won't take an open box back and the software won't install unless we pretend to agree, so even us legitimate software enjoyers are pirates in our hearts. Meanwhile normies don't even think about it that much. Fuck this whole system, but double fuck an online service that says "purchase" but will steal it back later. Fuck that.
load more comments
(5 replies)
It’s a bolder than usual move for Sony to announce the end of physical media prior to a new console launch, and launch this “you don’t own the digital games you buy” campaign at the same time.
The usual easy strategy is first you end physical media sales, let people be content with the idea that they own their digital games at least so that the only thing people think about is the convenience of digital, then after you launch your new console, get everybody locked in, that’s when you launch the “Oh you don’t own these digital games btw” campaign.
The fact that they’re just doing all of this at the same time means they know they won’t lose any money over it because we’re sheep and the consumer just doesn’t care anymore
load more comments
(1 replies)
Going to court to prove they're arseholes. Nice.
If you want to stop it, write to your representatives. EULAs do not override local laws.
If I don't own them, no reason to pay for them ever.
um yeah, that's not hard to prove, you can check my torrent history
People need to stop supporting these companies. Stop buying Nintendo. Stop buying Sony.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Even if they succeed with a weird judge to prove this.... It's not the point. We want to own stuff, so either make "owning" available or we stop buying/renting.
Also, there is the common online sentiment "If buying isn't owning, then piracy is not stealing" and I can't help but believe that this will permiate even deeper into the gaming culture.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I don't need to read the article to know that they're making the same argument as Amazon and Apple. When you "buy" a show on one of the streaming platforms, you aren't actually buying anything except an extended rental.
Then the button should say "rent" and not "buy"
Consumer protections are for the weak. /s
load more comments
(14 replies)
If I won't own them, I'm not buying them. This is them shooting themselves in the feet.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Like when you purchase books for 2 weeks at the library. Simple!
That's why you should buy physical disks. In the worst case you can re-sell them to someone else.
Nothing new. This is the same bullshit legal framework that underpins the entire software industry and extends back to the mid 90s. It's just front-and-center in games now because the industry has transitioned from a growth industry to a mature one wherein producers need to extract more revenue per user and predictably enshittify their platforms to do so.
I've basically decided that I will not buy any game that I cannot play offline. If I do a buy game, I will also pirate it to ensure continued access. If I can't pirate it, I won't buy it.
Fuck em.
Ah I see Playstation seems out of its wild teenage years and is now so overconfident it's poke the bear time!
This should be fun.
With how shitty the owning and freedom situation on consoles is already, this really doesn't change much. People who are still using consoles just don't give any fucks. They happily swallowed the PSN subscription. They will happily swallow the next toad too.
Frankly my dear, I don’t give a damn. Linux PCs will run the vast majority of games and the handful of exclusives that don’t run yet will run on an emulator at some point.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I can prove in home that I don't own any playstation past the 4.
Let's see who loses.
view more: next ›