How does EULA apply to owning a game as an asset?
#1
So, I had this discussion on Discord with several other users about NYAA being taken down. It lead up to EULA where a buyer doesn't actually own the game they are just buying the license to use the game. The copy right holder of a game allows you to buy the license, and purchase of a game. So, in all technicalities doesn't a person actually own the game to physically or digitally do whatever they want with it? Please, someone help me clear this up.
Reply
#2
(May 07, 2017, 01:49 am)Dread_Pirate Wrote: It lead up to EULA where a buyer doesn't actually own the game they are just buying the license to use the game.
That is correct.

(May 07, 2017, 01:49 am)Dread_Pirate Wrote: The copy right holder of a game allows you to buy the license, and purchase of a game.
That is incorrect. You only buy the licence, you do not purchase the game.

(May 07, 2017, 01:49 am)Dread_Pirate Wrote: So, in all technicalities doesn't a person actually own the game to physically or digitally do whatever they want with it?
No. They own the right to use the game subject to the terms and conditions within in the EULA. Those terms may include restrictions on copying.

But bear in mind two things:
1. Every EULA will be worded slightly differently.
2. Whether any given EULA is valid is something that only a Court can decide for sure. And different Courts might reach different judgements.

So you may buy what you think is a game, only to find out that it is actually just a EULA (meaning you don't own the game). But if you did something with the game that the publisher was unhappy about AND they threatened to sue you AND you agreed to be sued THEN the Court might conclude that they were right and you only owned a licence to use OR the Court might decide that you were right and that you actually do own the game.

i.e. Nobody here, or anywhere, can give a definitive answer to your question.
Reply
#3
(May 07, 2017, 02:38 am)Sid Wrote:
(May 07, 2017, 01:49 am)Dread_Pirate Wrote: It lead up to EULA where a buyer doesn't actually own the game they are just buying the license to use the game.
That is correct.

(May 07, 2017, 01:49 am)Dread_Pirate Wrote: The copy right holder of a game allows you to buy the license, and purchase of a game.
That is incorrect. You only buy the licence, you do not purchase the game.

(May 07, 2017, 01:49 am)Dread_Pirate Wrote: So, in all technicalities doesn't a person actually own the game to physically or digitally do whatever they want with it?
No. They own the right to use the game subject to the terms and conditions within in the EULA. Those terms may include restrictions on copying.

But bear in mind two things:
1. Every EULA will be worded slightly differently.
2. Whether any given EULA is valid is something that only a Court can decide for sure. And different Courts might reach different judgements.

So you may buy what you think is a game, only to find out that it is actually just a EULA (meaning you don't own the game). But if you did something with the game that the publisher was unhappy about AND they threatened to sue you AND you agreed to be sued THEN the Court might conclude that they were right and you only owned a licence to use OR the Court might decide that you were right and that you actually do own the game.

i.e. Nobody here, or anywhere, can give a definitive answer to your question.

This may sound counter-intuitive, but seemingly saying I purchased a game from game stop is actually a misnomer? When in reality you only purchased the licensing agreement instead. Kind of makes me wonder why most of society will say "Purchasing" and "Owning" the game itself is even used in the first place.
Reply
#4
(May 07, 2017, 02:46 am)Dread_Pirate Wrote: ...seemingly saying I purchased a game from game stop is actually a misnomer?

Correct.

These days, when you "buy" games or any software you rarely actually buy the game/software. You almost always only buy a license to use the game/software.

(May 07, 2017, 02:46 am)Dread_Pirate Wrote: Kind of makes me wonder why most of society will say "Purchasing" and "Owning" the game itself is even used in the first place.

Partly for historical reasons. For most of recorded history when you bought something you bought it. So that is just what people assume. Digital goods, and licensing, are recent inventions and people haven't gotten used to the new world yet.

Partly because of deliberate deception on the part of the software industry. They don't want people to know that they aren't getting all that they think they are getting so they bury the fact in reams of small print that they know nobody ever reads.
Reply
#5
Wow. I really feel like a dumbass. That's why I buy 90% of my games, and pirate 10% of others. I get why some people vet over conversations involving the legality of the difference between owning and "Using" the rights of a physical or digital good. I wonder how long will it take for the rest of society to catch up?
Reply
#6
Sid's unfortunately got it dead right. It's the result of one of the little revolutions leading to the concentration of wealth in the last decades of the last century--that you don't actually purchase information, but lease it.

Think about that for a minute. That CD someone buys is a purchase of the CD, but only a lease of its contents. And the lessor can even put a whole series of legal qualifications on that, if they so choose. Then they can call it a EULA, and the courts will nod. And you abide by those terms or 1) be fined, 2) be jailed, or 3) get sneaky and quiet about the whole thing.

My first direct experience of this nonsense was a purchase a couple of decades ago of a game. I subsequently found after moving twice and reinstalling that I'd exhausted my rights to download it. I didn't own it at all, when I'd paid full price for it. So I checked out a pirate sight, downloaded it, and realized just how far and deep the corporate ownership of media had entrenched itself thanks to powerful lobbies and people just not caring.

The reason you still hear the phrase "I purchased" or "I bought" referring to media content is because it's the traditional way we operated for literally thousands of years, and because the media giants don't want to bring anybody's attention to just how they've made out like, you should excuse the expression, bandits.

For what little my advice is worth, I'd suggest you tell them quietly in your heart of hearts to go fuck themselves, and in the meantime do carefully as you wish.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Does anyone have this issue with fake torrents Maddhatter69 4 1,933 Aug 23, 2024, 05:19 am
Last Post: stormium
  Does "Avatar: The Way of Water" Require Foreign Subtitles? Mr. Kingsbury 3 1,712 Jun 07, 2024, 13:17 pm
Last Post: RobertX
  Does subtitles on Fmovies work for anyone? ivo700 0 1,215 May 09, 2024, 06:32 am
Last Post: ivo700
  Peter Sunde / Brokep recent interview "No one does tech for good " ProxyDuck 7 3,329 Jan 29, 2024, 19:34 pm
Last Post: lustrous
  Does a Slow HDD mean MUCH Slower Torrenting ? FloodTheWaves 6 7,447 Apr 26, 2023, 13:33 pm
Last Post: maskaw



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)