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.

        • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          And if buying isnt owning, that means you’re paying 70+ dollars to rent a game that can be taken away from you at any time… with no refund or recourse.

          Would anyone be stupid enough to rent a game for 70+ dollars? especially under those conditions?

        • Auli@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          But you’ve never owned movies or games. Purchasing let’s go really far back VHS gave you a license to watch the movie. Always has been this way.

          • Worstdriver@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Coming from that era myself, buying a VHS tape absolutely gave you ownership of that copy of the movie. Same with music, which is why homemade mixtapes were such a popular and permitted thing.

            Studios didn’t like it, but no one went after the guy with the little vinyl briefcase of 100 different mixtapes for every sort of occasion.

      • dogdeanafternoon@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s definitely stealing. I don’t understand why people on here can’t admit it to themselves.

        My guess is people here think that stealing is wrong, no matter what. They also think that piracy is moral. Because of that, they incorrectly deduce that piracy isn’t stealing.

        Look up any definition of stealing, and it always boils down to: taking something that you don’t have permission to take.

        No, this isn’t limited to physical items. Companies steal our data all the time.

        I think people need to shift from “Piracy isn’t stealing” to “Fuck the corps, they don’t wanna play fair I’ll steal their shit and they won’t see a penny”

        • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          It’s definitely stealing

          It’s definitely denying money to someone who is asking to be paid.

          But since they, nor anyone else is affected by the copying activity I don’t think it can be called stealing.

          How about

          “Fuck the corps, they don’t wanna play fair I’ll steal use their shit and they won’t see a penny”

              • dogdeanafternoon@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                That’s literally wrong. If I stole all your personal data from your laptop, you’d still have it.

                Companies steal trade secrets from each other all the time. That doesn’t mean the knowledge just leaves the other company.

                Stop making up definitions and just accept that it’s stealing. Just because it’s stealing doesn’t make it wrong.

                • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  If you copied all my personal data from my laptop, I’d still have it.

                  If you stole it I wouldn’t.

                  Companies steal trade secrets from each other all the time.

                  If you copy a secret then it is no longer a secret, so something has changed for the original owner.

                  Stop making up definitions and just accept that it’s stealing.

                  You are the one changing the definition of stealing to try and apply it to piracy.

                  stealing /ˈstiːlɪŋ/ noun

                  the action or offence of taking another person’s property without permission or legal right and without intending to return it; theft.

        • Auli@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I know but why do people care. I don’t their massive corporations if I’m stealing from them in don’t care.

        • SolarMyth@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          The argument goes that stealing involves taking something from someone, whearas pirating produces a copy. If you take someone’s car, they don’t have a car anymore, but copy their game and now you both have one.

          That said, I don’t think it follows from “buying isn’t owning” that “piracy isn’t stealing”. Its a pithy slogan that captures a mood, but I don’t think it really makes sense.

          Your position, I believe, is more coherent: “I don’t care if it is stealing”. It might not technically be stealing, but its a breach of the terms of the sale that you tacitly agreed to when buying.

          Something similar can be said for adblocking. People argue that it is “stealing” because there is a breach of the terms of use, and the ads fund the content. It might not really technically be stealing, but it is simpler to just say “I don’t care what it is, I don’t feel bad for giant corporations”. You can also say this about shoplifting.

  • Sanguine@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    2 months ago

    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.

    • tomkatt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Same. I loved the PS1 and PS2.

      It’s been easy enough to set up a gaming PC in the living room for both desk and couch gaming (my gaming rig automatically switches to the TV if the TV and receiver inputs are on). Sony exclusives just aren’t what they used to be, and I haven’t really cared much since the PS2/PS3 era. I sold my consoles in 2012 and haven’t looked back, still more games than I’ll ever have time to play.

      • 7101334@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        3rd’d, sort of. Too young for PS1 but Sony consoles have been my primary since PS2 days. I’ll probably be switching to PC next week.

  • Rob T Firefly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    2 months ago

    license to play or use the Software for your private, non-commercial use

    Does “non-commercial” mean all those people who make money by playing games on a monetized livestream, posting monetized gameplay videos, or playing e-sports for prizes are filthy pirates?

    • deathbird@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      By the plain text reading, yes. Would be nice to see PS streams fall to 0, but people ignore the terms and Sony doesn’t enforce them until they want to. Doesn’t matter what any of this BS says until they drag you in front of a judge… I mean private arbitrator… and say “look, plain as day, subsection 18.XXVI.xix D(13a) on page 47 where it clearly says we get to move our VP into his spare bedroom and shoot his dog”

      We seriously are overdue for putting limits on so-called consumer contracts.

      • MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah they leave those non commercial lines in there so they have the “legal backing” to shut down anyone that’s causing them problems.

      • Simulation6@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Is that the subsection that is in the locked filing cabinet with the sign reading ‘beware of leopard’?

  • HerbGrower@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 months ago

    Sony can go fuck themselves. Honestly if they are going to make purchases this restrictive then I guess I won’t buy them anymore.

    • absquatulate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Afaik this a fairly standard software licensing model. Pretty much all paid videogames are like that, physical or not. Sony just started to act on it in the hopes of making even more moneyz

  • ScoffingLizard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 months ago

    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.

  • ZebulonP@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 months 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.

  • gdtf@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    One thing I’m sure is that I’ll never buy a Playstation again. Even if they backtrack.

  • atrielienz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Pretty much all software EULA’s are like this. Anything you “buy a license for” certainly. Same as it ever was.

    • zod000@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      I have one and every game I own is physical, like every other console I own. Now whether the games are in a workable state in the future without access to patches is another story, but I can lend, sell, trade my games and also never use PSN again if I want. From the state of things, it looks like I won’t every be buying another console and I can live with that.

      • NOPper@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        I went this route as a compromise with my PS4 years ago. Even imported some harder to find games over time. Then the drive died and I discovered Sony ties some hardware ID on it to the serial number of the motherboard and restricts service to “authorized repair shops”. So fuck all of that, I’m sticking to PC 100% and pirating the hell out of exclusives for emulation down the road. My backlog is impossible to complete anyway.

  • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    True. I don’t own any Sony games. But that’s because I don’t buy Sony games in the first place. Not because I got rug pulled.