Removed by mod
Interestingly enough in this case only one thing is wrong:
You
Removed by mod
I think what they’re saying is the meme makes logical sense even if both things are wrong. The contrapositive (a logical equivalent) is “if piracy is stealing, then buying is owning”. That’s a statement that I bet you agree with and it means the same thing.
Removed by mod
Nothing is stolen in digital piracy.
Removed by mod
Then “buying is owning”. I think you think I’m making a disagreement when I’m just trying to clarify the statement.
Removed by mod
No. You’re wrong. It cantn’t.
So, it is good what they did?
there will be a high-profile class action lawsuit, lawyers will get paid. those that ‘bought’ content that got deleted will get a $10 voucher for more digital content.
When it comes to lawsuits, companies just look at it from a economic perspective.
How much will it cost to do nothing
How much will it cost to do something and pay for the change and pay off customers as little as possible.
They don’t care about what is right or wrong, what is moral and what is not, what laws to follow and what laws to break … all they care about is either saving money or making money.
If they could justify crushing hundreds of little puppies because it could save money for the company … they’d do it and launch a marketing campaign to tell us all that it is acceptable.
Would the puppy crushing machine be next to the orphan crushing machine? The company will need to at least one to maximize profit.
Its not their fault, why dont you ever think of the shareholders!
If there was a way to maintain or increase profits by running both machines … they’d run both machines
btw: do you type faster aroused or when flaccid?
Ha! Every one of their customers agreed to an arbitration clause and, I bet, even protects Sony from this exact situation.
Remember you don’t own anything. Just a license to use the media however they see fit.
Piracy ftw!
This is how most digital media works. You’re not buying the media, you’re buying a license for the media. Unfortunately, usually there’s a clause in the EULA about how the license can be revoked at any time.
You’re right, but that is a bullshit system that can easily disenfranchise the customer, and people are right to be upset about it.
Well yeah, this behavior was completely foreseeable. Obviously you could take to the high seas, but if you want to legally own a copy of media, buy a physical copy.
Yeah. Its worth remembering that tv/movies tend to have MUCH stricter distribution rights. Generally speaking, a purchased game is available for the lifetime of the service (whether it is playable depends on backend stuff). Whereas, if Discovery says “Get our sexy walrus off your service” you lose it instantly*
Its one of the reasons that I generally don’t see the point in buying “digital media” outside of special circumstances. I am either going to “rent” it (either pay a rental fee or have a subscription) or get the blu-ray (… if available).
*: Fun “fact”: This is speculated to be why Sony’s backwards compatibility is such a mess. During the PS1 and PS2 era, they likely were making distribution deals closer to music/movies than the (modern) video games. That is why you have such insanity like the digital version of Tomba 2 (I think) only being playable on a PSP, not a Vita or a PS3. And other weird ass messes because of how distribution rights and contracts were passed around. Whereas Microsoft “started” with software licensing agreements and have a LOT more flexibility for the XBOX/PS2 era.
