Posted October 01, 2009
bansama: Then don't buy games. As you'll be "renting" games whether you buy them from GOG, D2D, Impulse, Steam, GamersGate, Greenhouse, any number of the smaller DD sites or retail.
Really now, are you so bothered by the comparison of some DD sites to rentals that you're ready to be completely disingenuous about the whole matter? You know quite well the differences between the various options in buying games with regards to how it can impact a buyer's access to games as time goes on. You're also quite aware of why some folks draw the comparison of certain DD services to rentals. If you have an issue with some aspect of that comparison then address it, but drop the vague FUD already. Or perhaps you're just gearing up for another "you're not actually buying anything" spiel, in which case we can certainly dance that dance again, although if memory serves last time you simply stated that you "couldn't be arsed" to actually defend or explain your position on that matter.
bansama: You may pay for your DRM free license to a game, but you still don't own it. The IP holder does. Technically, unless the IP holder specifically gives you permission, you can't sell your license to play the game to a third party -- of course, like any number of silly little laws, such as "jay walking" such a DRM free license can't be enforced. Still, like those laws, it doesn't change the legality of the IP owners rights. It also doesn't change the all important fact that you do not own that game at all.
Thus, you're still basically renting your game from an IP holder who is unable or unwilling to enforce the terms of the licensing agreement they ask you to accept when you install the game.
Thus, you're still basically renting your game from an IP holder who is unable or unwilling to enforce the terms of the licensing agreement they ask you to accept when you install the game.
Really, if you're going to keep claiming this then please back it up. Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus put the kibosh on the attempt to lock down copyrighted works in this way back in 1908 (at least for those of us in the US). If a specific law has been passed since then that explicitly goes against this ruling, or if there's been a more recent ruling overriding this precedent then please enlighten us, otherwise simply your word that copyrighted works aren't actually sold really doesn't count for much.
Post edited October 01, 2009 by DarrkPhoenix