It's an interesting debate indeed
In one hand I agree having licenses revoked should be the same as having your property removed, and give you the rights of asking for refunds
But in other hands physical goodies mostly have obsolescence, so their digital equivalents shouldn't be treated differently i.e. it's completely fine and legal to have expiring licenses
My solution: Your license should have a fixed expiring date, roughly similar to its physical equivalent, which is the case of gaming should be 20 to 30 years (not specialist in physical media and console preservation so feel free to correct me). In this case publishers could not revoke your license without paying you an equivalent restitution
After that publishers can have the right to revoked your license if they want
The same would apply to store fronts, which would make Steam legally obliged to offer services to make you download your games even if their marketplace ceases to exist
I don't think this will ever happen of course, but sounds fair for me on both consumers, publishers and storefronts side
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
