By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Embedded Chips May not be Sony's only Anti-Piracy/Second-Hand Solution

huiii on 03 February 2013
Corey said:
I don't mind if they use this to combat piracy, because much like this gen the file sizes required is just not worth it.

Don't screw over used games though, there have been so many times when there was no other option but to buy a used copy especially for games that came out early on in the gen and are not in production anymore.


That's what digital is going to be for. Sony has been pushing day 1 digital hard and the whole Vita library is available digitally.

Though i do agree, they shouldn't screw over used games.



Around the Network
chris_wing on 03 February 2013
kain_kusanagi said:
VGKing said:
kain_kusanagi said:


In what world do you live in where you have to send a check to a bunch of manufacturers after a garage sale?

When I buy something, ANYTHING, it's my property. And I get to do anything I want with my property. I can keep it forever, give it away as a gift, sell it, trade it, modify it, smash it with a hammer, burn it in a toaster, etc. My property is mine. The company that sold me my property has no rights to it once I've paid and left the store.

Should Ford get a peice of the action every time a 69' Mustang gets sold to a new owner?

Should Micheal Bay get 10% of a scratched up used copy of Pearl Harbor sold at a flea market?

Should Van Goph's family get a check every time one of his paintings changes hands?

Should Hasbro make money everytime a collector buys a G1 Optimus Prime on ebay?

The answer is the same for video games, NO! Activision should not get a cut if I sell my Call of Duty to  friend and EA shouldn't get a dime if I sell my copy if NHL 94 for the Sega Genesis.

When you buy something it's ownership transfers to you and you alone. It is 100% yours.

Publishers have spent that last 10 years tricking people into believing that they retain rights to the stuff they sell to their customers. They think they can make video games into a service like TV or XM radio. They think everyone will just role over and say good I'm glad your making more money and I don't own anything I pay for anymore.

Don't let them fool you into thinking that they deserve more money than what they sell their games for. They sold it to you and that's the end of the deal. Contract complete. Services rendered. They got their money and you got your game. You don't own them anything else.

I think technically they are selling you a licence to use the software, not the software itself.  I agree that the copy you buy should be YOURS period/ hardstop/ end of discussion/  But Sony thinks they still own your copy & you're just using it.



HokageTenshi on 03 February 2013
Corey said:
I don't mind if they use this to combat piracy, because much like this gen the file sizes required is just not worth it.

Don't screw over used games though, there have been so many times when there was no other option but to buy a used copy especially for games that came out early on in the gen and are not in production anymore.

but don't you know publishers and developers doesn't earn a single cent from that? its only the retail shop who earn extra for selling pre-owned games, so whats the difference between this and piracy...??



kain_kusanagi on 03 February 2013
chris_wing said:
kain_kusanagi said:
VGKing said:
kain_kusanagi said:


In what world do you live in where you have to send a check to a bunch of manufacturers after a garage sale?

When I buy something, ANYTHING, it's my property. And I get to do anything I want with my property. I can keep it forever, give it away as a gift, sell it, trade it, modify it, smash it with a hammer, burn it in a toaster, etc. My property is mine. The company that sold me my property has no rights to it once I've paid and left the store.

Should Ford get a peice of the action every time a 69' Mustang gets sold to a new owner?

Should Micheal Bay get 10% of a scratched up used copy of Pearl Harbor sold at a flea market?

Should Van Goph's family get a check every time one of his paintings changes hands?

Should Hasbro make money everytime a collector buys a G1 Optimus Prime on ebay?

The answer is the same for video games, NO! Activision should not get a cut if I sell my Call of Duty to  friend and EA shouldn't get a dime if I sell my copy if NHL 94 for the Sega Genesis.

When you buy something it's ownership transfers to you and you alone. It is 100% yours.

Publishers have spent that last 10 years tricking people into believing that they retain rights to the stuff they sell to their customers. They think they can make video games into a service like TV or XM radio. They think everyone will just role over and say good I'm glad your making more money and I don't own anything I pay for anymore.

Don't let them fool you into thinking that they deserve more money than what they sell their games for. They sold it to you and that's the end of the deal. Contract complete. Services rendered. They got their money and you got your game. You don't own them anything else.

I think technically they are selling you a licence to use the software, not the software itself.  I agree that the copy you buy should be YOURS period/ hardstop/ end of discussion/  But Sony thinks they still own your copy & you're just using it.


It's just like any other copyright material. I own the copy, but not the original. That does without saying. I think you and I agree though.



KHlover on 03 February 2013
HokageTenshi said:
Corey said:
I don't mind if they use this to combat piracy, because much like this gen the file sizes required is just not worth it.

Don't screw over used games though, there have been so many times when there was no other option but to buy a used copy especially for games that came out early on in the gen and are not in production anymore.

but don't you know publishers and developers doesn't earn a single cent from that? its only the retail shop who earn extra for selling pre-owned games, so whats the different between this and piracy...??

 

It was bought once (they received their moneyz), after that they no longer have any distribution right for that particular copy nor do they have the right to hinder you from distributing your copy (at least in the EU)



Some useful VGChartz tweaks

Member of the "An Unbiased Review" Database team

Around the Network
HokageTenshi on 03 February 2013
KHlover said:
HokageTenshi said:
Corey said:
I don't mind if they use this to combat piracy, because much like this gen the file sizes required is just not worth it.

Don't screw over used games though, there have been so many times when there was no other option but to buy a used copy especially for games that came out early on in the gen and are not in production anymore.

but don't you know publishers and developers doesn't earn a single cent from that? its only the retail shop who earn extra for selling pre-owned games, so whats the different between this and piracy...??

 

It was bought once (they received their moneyz), after that they no longer have any distribution right for that particular copy nor do they have the right to hinder you from distributing your copy (at least in the EU)

yes i know that, but even when there are still available stocks on the shelves, many people will buy the pre-owned since its cheaper, that is why we see quite many games have no strong legs after released just one or two weeks later...



chris_wing on 03 February 2013
HokageTenshi said:
Corey said:
I don't mind if they use this to combat piracy, because much like this gen the file sizes required is just not worth it.

Don't screw over used games though, there have been so many times when there was no other option but to buy a used copy especially for games that came out early on in the gen and are not in production anymore.

but don't you know publishers and developers doesn't earn a single cent from that? its only the retail shop who earn extra for selling pre-owned games, so whats the difference between this and piracy...??

If the publishers are really upset about back-catalog games being sold in the aftermarket & not getting any money from that market place maybe they should step up and offer back-catalog games for sale themselves.  If they won't provide the product themselves they can't bitch at gamestop or your local pawnshop for doing what they themselves can't be bothered to do.

The difference between this and piracy is with online piracy you are making a new copy.

"Yes i know that, but even when there are still available stocks on the shelves, many people will buy the pre-owned since its cheaper, that is why we see quite many games have no strong legs after released just one or two weeks later..."

If the game isn't good enough to warrant the original purchaser keeping it more then a week or two, & for stores to be flooded with returned product, that's kind of the developers fault.



bonkers555 on 03 February 2013
VGKing said:
Have a universal system for locking out content for second-hand games. If you want to unlock lets say, the online portion of Battlefield 4 then just do quick $10 "microtransaction".

Make it easy and not as annoying as an online pass.

I agree with this. In the long run this $10 microtransaction will make you more money then selling a new copy for discount $20 price.



My Video Games Collection/Set-Up.

kain_kusanagi on 03 February 2013
VGKing said:
kain_kusanagi said:
VGKing said:
kain_kusanagi said:
Can you imagine how outraged people would be if you a book could only be read by the first reader or a car wouldn't drive unless the driver bought the car new?

I have nothing against anti-piracy technology, but it should NEVER infringe on our ownership rights.

If Sony wants to make sure that the game in the PS4 is a legit retail product that's fine with me. If Sony locks a game to the first buyer I will have a big problem with that. I've owned every Playstation console, but if Sony takes away my right to do with my property as I wish I will have a hard time justifying making room on my TV stand for the PS4. The same goes for MS and Nintendo.

It's bad enough that even retail PC games will lock a registration key to the first user and I often will buy a console port instead of the superior PC version to avoid that nonsense.

Don't punish me for buying your games, punish the pirates for stealing them.

Of course they won't. The whole point of an anti-piracy or DRM system is to MAKE MONEY. If anything, this would work the same as an online pass by locking out features of a game such as online multiplayer.

With piracy the publishers/developers get no money from your illegal download. The funny thing with used games is that Gamestop gets your money instead of EA/Ubisoft..etc whoever makes this game.  That's just wrong IMO. I'm not against re-sellling your old games but there should be systems in place for publishers to earn money from used games.


In what world do you live in where you have to send a check to a bunch of manufacturers after a garage sale?

When I buy something, ANYTHING, it's my property. And I get to do anything I want with my property. I can keep it forever, give it away as a gift, sell it, trade it, modify it, smash it with a hammer, burn it in a toaster, etc. My property is mine. The company that sold me my property has no rights to it once I've paid and left the store.

Should Ford get a peice of the action every time a 69' Mustang gets sold to a new owner?

Should Micheal Bay get 10% of a scratched up used copy of Pearl Harbor sold at a flea market?

Should Van Goph's family get a check every time one of his paintings changes hands?

Should Hasbro make money everytime a collector buys a G1 Optimus Prime on ebay?

The answer is the same for video games, NO! Activision should not get a cut if I sell my Call of Duty to  friend and EA shouldn't get a dime if I sell my copy if NHL 94 for the Sega Genesis.

When you buy something it's ownership transfers to you and you alone. It is 100% yours.

Publishers have spent that last 10 years tricking people into believing that they retain rights to the stuff they sell to their customers. They think they can make video games into a service like TV or XM radio. They think everyone will just role over and say good I'm glad your making more money and I don't own anything I pay for anymore.

Don't let them fool you into thinking that they deserve more money than what they sell their games for. They sold it to you and that's the end of the deal. Contract complete. Services rendered. They got their money and you got your game. You don't own them anything else.

It's fine if you believe that, but if I was a developer and Gamestop was getting 50% of my revenue, I'd be pissed.

Like I said before, I'm not against buying second-hand games. Software works completely different from software. These are 2 completel different things.

50% of the revenue? What are you talking about. Gamestop buys their stock from a distributor. They don't just put a publisher's games on the shelf and send the money back when it sells. They take a risk every time the buy millions of copies of a game. The publisher sells their stock it gets distributed and they pay the developers based on a contract. If the game sells a ton or doesn't sell at all doesn't affect the developer unless there was a bonus for it selling well.

If you're talking about used game sales, then you are not just misinformed, but you're are very confused. Used game sales are no different than used anything sales. It's a natural part of the market and all markets deal with it just fine. Used car sales don't stop Ford and Chevy from making new cars. Used movie sales don't stop Hollywood from making new movies. Used record sales didn't stop the Beatles from making new music, that was all Yoko Ono.

There is no different between software and books and movies and music or any other copyright material. I buy it and I own the physical media and can do what I want with it. I'm only limited from infringing the copyright which has nothing to do with selling the physical media.



VGKing on 03 February 2013
kain_kusanagi said:
VGKing said:
kain_kusanagi said:
VGKing said:
kain_kusanagi said:
Can you imagine how outraged people would be if you a book could only be read by the first reader or a car wouldn't drive unless the driver bought the car new?

I have nothing against anti-piracy technology, but it should NEVER infringe on our ownership rights.

If Sony wants to make sure that the game in the PS4 is a legit retail product that's fine with me. If Sony locks a game to the first buyer I will have a big problem with that. I've owned every Playstation console, but if Sony takes away my right to do with my property as I wish I will have a hard time justifying making room on my TV stand for the PS4. The same goes for MS and Nintendo.

It's bad enough that even retail PC games will lock a registration key to the first user and I often will buy a console port instead of the superior PC version to avoid that nonsense.

Don't punish me for buying your games, punish the pirates for stealing them.

Of course they won't. The whole point of an anti-piracy or DRM system is to MAKE MONEY. If anything, this would work the same as an online pass by locking out features of a game such as online multiplayer.

With piracy the publishers/developers get no money from your illegal download. The funny thing with used games is that Gamestop gets your money instead of EA/Ubisoft..etc whoever makes this game.  That's just wrong IMO. I'm not against re-sellling your old games but there should be systems in place for publishers to earn money from used games.


In what world do you live in where you have to send a check to a bunch of manufacturers after a garage sale?

When I buy something, ANYTHING, it's my property. And I get to do anything I want with my property. I can keep it forever, give it away as a gift, sell it, trade it, modify it, smash it with a hammer, burn it in a toaster, etc. My property is mine. The company that sold me my property has no rights to it once I've paid and left the store.

Should Ford get a peice of the action every time a 69' Mustang gets sold to a new owner?

Should Micheal Bay get 10% of a scratched up used copy of Pearl Harbor sold at a flea market?

Should Van Goph's family get a check every time one of his paintings changes hands?

Should Hasbro make money everytime a collector buys a G1 Optimus Prime on ebay?

The answer is the same for video games, NO! Activision should not get a cut if I sell my Call of Duty to  friend and EA shouldn't get a dime if I sell my copy if NHL 94 for the Sega Genesis.

When you buy something it's ownership transfers to you and you alone. It is 100% yours.

Publishers have spent that last 10 years tricking people into believing that they retain rights to the stuff they sell to their customers. They think they can make video games into a service like TV or XM radio. They think everyone will just role over and say good I'm glad your making more money and I don't own anything I pay for anymore.

Don't let them fool you into thinking that they deserve more money than what they sell their games for. They sold it to you and that's the end of the deal. Contract complete. Services rendered. They got their money and you got your game. You don't own them anything else.

It's fine if you believe that, but if I was a developer and Gamestop was getting 50% of my revenue, I'd be pissed.

Like I said before, I'm not against buying second-hand games. Software works completely different from software. These are 2 completel different things.

50% of the revenue? What are you talking about. Gamestop buys their stock from a distributor. They don't just put a publisher's games on the shelf and send the money back when it sells. They take a risk every time the buy millions of copies of a game. The publisher sells their stock it gets distributed and they pay the developers based on a contract. If the game sells a ton or doesn't sell at all doesn't affect the developer unless there was a bonus for it selling well.

If you're talking about used game sales, then you are not just misinformed, but you're are very confused. Used game sales are no different than used anything sales. It's a natural part of the market and all markets deal with it just fine. Used car sales don't stop Ford and Chevy from making new cars. Used movie sales don't stop Hollywood from making new movies. Used record sales didn't stop the Beatles from making new music, that was all Yoko Ono.

There is no different between software and books and movies and music or any other copyright material. I buy it and I own the physical media and can do what I want with it. I'm only limited from infringing the copyright which has nothing to do with selling the physical media.

 

I completely get where you're coming from and I respect your opinion.

From a consumer's I would side with you. If I was a publisher, i would want to take advantage of this new technlogy out there letting me profit from second-hand sales.