EU Rules You Can Resell Downloaded Games

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[DarkSoldierX]

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/07/03/crikey-eu-rules-you-can-resell-downloaded-games/#more-114473


Interesting. I wonder how steam will react.

[Unkn0wn]

I love the fucking EU court of justice, they are like the BOSS of Law. Most badass court in the world.

[Smokaz]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, I bet steam will circumvent this by saying they are just renting out the ability play the game indefinitely, not the right to the game itself.

[Unkn0wn]

Haha good point, Smokaz is valve's lawyer?

[Smokaz]

Just read Steam's EULA

[Smokaz]

Also: welcome to the age of DLC and halfassed initial releases

[nikomas]

AmPM... "Heading"? lol

[Unkn0wn]

I Love how some groups in America try to restrict the rights of gamer's, but the EU tries to give full rights. I think it just goes to show who is awesome, and who sucks as they say they are free.

If you're referring to SOPA, there's also ACTA to which EU member states are signatories. Fortunately however, the EU parliament voted not to ratify the treaty and as such it will not go into effect. It's a good day for EU institutions, that's for sure.

Restrictions on what you can and cannot do is the opposite. It's like saying you are "Free from firearms ownership" in your country. That is the opposite of free. Same goes for your freedom of speech/expression, which for instance, does not exist in Germany or France.

The whole freedom debate is pointless anyway. US citizens have never been truly 'free', even though it's been their idiom for decades if not centuries. Nor will they ever become free, since true freedom implies absolute choice and absolute choice without pure equality (as in all humans are 100% identical in every way, are raised identical, etc) is impossible. To think that some sort of libertarian state would somehow offer absolute freedom is naive. At best libertarianism will offer you more relative freedoms, freedoms which will arguably come at a cost. Unless you are going to tell me that certain freedoms are guaranteed/taken away 'just because' in modern society.

We can argue gun laws all day, but I don't think any European citizen experiences these gun laws as a 'loss of freedom. It's similar to how 'freedom of religion' is filled in differently across the atlantic, to Europeans 'freedom of religion' means to be free OF religion (while also being free to believe in what they want), i.e a true division between church and state. But in the US that freedom only means that people can believe in what they want, without forcing the state to be unbiased. (And it's clearly not, in the US church, Christianity, and state are still very much connected) Surely I could claim that one can not be truly 'free' as a muslim or jew in a state that favours Christianity?

In any case, I think an in-depth study would clearly indicate that the EU Court of Justice is unmatched in it's progressive attitude towards human rights and liberty. In a sense, she even creates laws with her rulings, laws that would have otherwise never existed due to a lack of political consensus both on the national as well as on the EU level.

If corporations can be people, why can't states be? How some people can not see some things are better left to the state than to the free market is beyond me. In addition, something as abstract as 'Freedom' is a stupid argument to oppose an improvement in health care, or any improvement to society overall. Efficiency, cost, etc on the other hand ARE meaningful arguments, and will actually enable a debate. But it's disgusting that the same people who 'protest' the 'loss of liberty' with 'Obamacare' are still condoning the to this day still existent Patriot Act. (And so many other infringements of liberty) The intellectual dishonesty in the American political debate is sickening and is truly unworthy of the 'world's biggest democracy'.

[PonySlaystation]

I wish I could resell my steam games.

I don't see why Steam have such a strict policy against it. If people could resell games then they would be able to trade in their game for half of the price they paid for it for credit in the steam shop, then Steam can sell the game for full price. Everyone wins.

[Smokaz]

We had a exhange here, and then someone had to start trolling the US eirr players. GJ

[nikomas]

Unknown... you do political debating a lot? That was some mighty fine writing there 

[nikomas]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, I bet steam will circumvent this by saying they are just renting out the ability play the game indefinitely, not the right to the game itself.

I don't think that would hold up, if they are willing to rule and make this law in the first place I'm pretty sure a "Lifetime Subscription for a 1 time payment" would equal a full licence sale if it would go to court, from what I read that would still count as a resealable licence. Not an expert by any means, but I'm pretty sure about that.

[AmPM]

Unknown... you do political debating a lot? That was some mighty fine writing there 

He's a poli sci major...aka, waste of space corrupted politician in the making =)

[nikomas]

He's a poli sci major...aka, waste of space corrupted politician in the making =)

Well not yet anyway, as far as I could see being european, all he said there was quite correct

[Mysthalin]

Only truly libertarian state in the world is Somalia.

Look how that one's turning out.

Libertarianism is retarded, end of.

[PonySlaystation]

You don't have to derail into politics, this is an interesting subject matter.

[Nug]

Ron Paul 2012

[Unkn0wn]

He's a poli sci major...aka, waste of space corrupted politician in the making =)

Not all politicians are corrupt, just like not all corporate people are schmucks (Though no doubt the majority are). It's really just a matter of making your system watertight, i.e the US is an excellent example of what happens when you don't come down on unlimited lobbying. EU politicians aren't allowed to just accept money from firms, they also don't need corporate money to run their campaigns since the party sponsors the campaign for the most part. These are all small 'regulations' that go a long way in preventing politicians, who like most humans can otherwise not be trusted anyway, from abusing their power and just generally turning corrupt.

And you guessed it, just like we have protect politicians from themselves, to ensure that they continue serving the public interest and nothing else, we also have to protect the majority of the populace from itself. I don't want to sound condescending but I think history has shown that people need a state, they need order and they need laws. It's just a matter of ensuring that the atate that governs them is as fair as it can possibly get. (Which by now in the US is obviously not the case)

You don't have to derail into politics, this is an interesting subject matter.

Law and politics are closely linked, so I wouldn't call it a derail. :p

[Vermillion_Hawk]

He's a poli sci major...aka, waste of space corrupted politician in the making =)

I swear AmPM, you are like the embodiment of stereotypical America.

[Spartan_Marine88]

I swear AmPM, you are like the embodiment of stereotypical America.

I believe they call it Indoctrination.