Dead Game News: Response from the European Commission
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 июл 2024
- News going over responses from the EU Commission on the issue of destroying games from members of European Parliament. Also some updates on the campaign towards the end.
0:00 intro
0:27 European Commission
13:06 France
14:09 UK
16:38 Germany
17:27 Canada
17:35 Brazil
17:46 Australia
18:48 What's next
Link to Canadian Petition:
www.ourcommons.ca/petitions/e...
Link to short speech I did for the Pirate Party:
• Speech for German Pira...
Link to full Pirate Party stream on game destruction (all in German):
• #StopKillingGames - Ge...
stopkillinggames.com 
Игры
Thank God Ross is so maniacally devoted to this that he’s willing to wade through the legal trenches.
He's like a ww1 soldier crawling through legal trenches dodging non answers and putting the musket in ubisoft's face
I respect him for doing it immensely and that's why I keep watching. Too often do we see people, let alone gamers, holding their heads in their hands going "that's it we're done", without having even taken a single step to actually try and push back with any kind of initiative.
Do I have hope? Not exactly, because I think it's only with real litigation and the money behind that laws even get minimally tested. But there are still a lot of politicians and legislators out there who see themselves as real affectors behind a democracy, that while we might scoff, would still want to act in ways that keep things moving. Technocrats, basically, but as long as they see themselves as important, might as well push them to put their money where their mouths' like to run.
The worst kind of trenches
hes so stubborn he would break the matrix if he was in it
I don’t even care if this delays the game dungeon or freeman’s mind. He clearly has bigger fish to fry.
If video games aren't defined as good or services then uhhhhh why can't we just steal them? Would it even be theft?
lmao true
@@CanyonF bro nah
We should all join the PIRATEN party then.
@@herbivorethecarnivore8447 No it's actually a valid question legally, the problem here is this is such a legal grey area in everything right now literally having no classification accurately that even piracy cannot be 100% clarified as wrong because the definition of the item is not defined, opinion on piracy itself does not matter in this context.
The big problem is that the online only games tend to be impossible to pirate. It's a nice thought though
One thing I always think about when this comes up: don't label them games. It infantilizes them in the eyes of old politicians. Call it software or digital goods. If a GAME gets shut down, its "oh poor baby, no more donkey kong for you.", if a piece of SOFTWARE or DIGITAL GOOD is no longer usable, it may be taken more seriously as it could be more easily associated with more important pieces of software or goods, like the kind that banks or hospitals use.
*sigh* Can't expect God to do all the work...
Ross already addressed this point kind of when Australian company made a mistake initially with the petition. Labeling games as software lumps into a category that has several different legal complexities already existing and muddies up the waters. Ross actually fought to separate them from the tern.
@@SerbSkiLLz00 Ah, I must have missed that. I disagree with the claim, but at least it has been addressed.
*Joking*: Maybe instead link the concept of 'games' with casinos. Threaten casinos (both taxes and backroom political deals) and politicians around here would not just sit up and take notice, but jump up and run about screaming! They seem to understand that kind of 'gaming' quite well!
It straight up could also be that old people don't understand what a video game is, and how that could be shut down. To them, a game is something like chess, or football, how do you "shut down" games like that? It could be hard for them to wrap their heads around it.
As a citizen of the EU, I am very disappointed by those answers. It was clear made, straight forwards questions and those were indeed non-answers. I expect better EU Consumer protection. I definitely look at the political parties that fail the citizens and make sure they or political parties of similarly values do not get my votes in election days. In this case i look up the political associations of Věra Jourová that provided both those non-answers and see the type of parties they are. I add them to a black list for when election days come.
I can understand the evasive answer on the first point. One could sell access to a video game in a way that is limited in other ways than time and so time limits isn't what defines if it is a good or service. If that is their problem I wish they would just have said the question lacked enough context to be answered but maybe they didn't want to invite follow-up questions.
In general, though, from the replies we've seen so far it feels like governments think there is enough law for a court to make a ruling if a specific case was brought, and so they want the questions settled there instead of in their own offices. Meanwhile the companies bank on that no-one with enough money to spend on lawyers will actually take it that far.
What do you expect... lawyers NEVER give a straight answer to anything ever. While lawmakers are our only recourse, they are also the least useful. I feel only a court of law, and a judge might decide for/against this matter. Good luck suing Ubisoft though... we're screwed basically.
Not really a suprise to me, the commission is the corruptest part of the EU, just remember the Pfizer deal.
Same here. Extremely disappointing. But then again, Greens ain't greens, but gaslighters. So should've expected better.
It's just legal babble to put off an official answer, they wanna kick the can down the road so to speak. We need actual lawyers specialized in this stuff to deliver an answer that the politicians can rely on. That's how these things work. Good thing is that thia really has the potential to blow up and influence the market in a very positive way for the consumer.
As a German, one of the biggest obstacles in my country is the politicians lack of understanding of gaming. It's a big industry but to most of those retirees they are likely still just insignificant toys and therefor low priority. What they need to be made to understand is that such practices of taking away a product from the consumer after it was bought is unacceptable no matter what. Whether the product is a video game, a car or just a PEZ dispenser or something.
Absolutely nailed the most important aspect of this. This goes way beyond Mario or Pokemon or however they dismissively think of video games. Making it so a company can't randomly invent rights for itself after the contract goes into effect and inflict them on the customer is something that most people just assume is the case, but an awful lot of companies over the past couple decades have figured this is a huge loophole in their favor, so making it explicit is the only obvious remedy.
thats pretty much the case in EVERY country. political establishments are utterly dominated by geriatrics who have no understanding of video games whatsoever and view them as meaningless toys. and yes, they are entertainment products, but that doesn't mean that companies should be able to just flout consumer rights and commit the most evil money-grabbing bullshit possible in their quest for endless profits.
This is an actual genuine slippery slope, in the sense that one unregulated industry inevitably leads either to more unregulated industries if that lack of foresight continues (I could see AI technology being a potential example of this happening right now, but we'll have to see how it plays out), or leads to more egregious abuses within that industry now knowing there's truly no repercussions for their behaviour.
Friggin' PEZ dispenser central server shutdowns.
I actually came up with an analogy that might be more relatable to non-videogame players and older people. Though I feel it might still be a bit goofy to be taken seriously, since it also involves a game/toy of sorts:
Imagine buying a board game that requires physical pieces as well as a deck of cards with information/stats to be played. The board game would ship with a deck of cards in the box, thus remaining playable forever as long as you kept good care of it. Except for a later version of the board game, the company swaps out the cards for a QR code to an app that has the cards in it. Now you don't have to shuffle, you can easily customize the deck and even get new or fixed cards. Very convenient... until the app is discontinued years later and the board game you purchased is rendered useless, even though all the physical parts that comprise the game remain in your possession.
In a way, what we're asking is for developers not necessarily to keep the app going forever, but just include a regular deck of cards IN the box so when the app dies the game remains usable.
@6:56: "I'm not a lawyer, nor do I want to be one."
I predecit a "guess I'm now a lawyer" video in a couple of years...
And it because he somehow being sued by someone or something thank to these videos
That would make the second RUclipsr I watch that was forced to become a lawyer.
@@unicorntulkas Who was the first one?
"Well, I ain't passed the bar, but I know a little bit
Enough that you won't illegally shut down my shit"
In that video, he will describe his current efforts as a lawyer, and will remind us that it all delayed the production of The Movie, but it's still happening
Still a huge success. Nobody was talking about this two years ago and now the EU comission is answering questions on it.
The EU commission answers hundreds of petitions like these every day, this isn't uncommon at all.
Ehh they have their lowly staff / soon AI bots to "answer" such questions. And the result of such "answers" is, always, none.
If they wanted, they could legally sell time limited licenses. They deliberately and deceptively do not to avoid losing sales. Besides that, the destruction of culture is disgusting. Look at old jank nobody cared about in it's time. A couple of decades later suddenly it becomes a time capsule to technology, art and designs and culture of the past.
That's the thing, if it was a time limited license, they'd have to say when it shuts down. They don't want to do that, because it could be 2 weeks, it could be 12 years.
@@BottomOfTheDumpsterFireThey'd also be legally obligated to abide by that time. Say they sell a two year license, the game would need to last at least two years no matter what right? Then again this just sounds like giving every game a subscription model.
@@Calvin_Coolage well, also, how does such a licence sale apply to two separate customers, buying the same thing a year apart? that would also provide them problems, such as having to explain why they are still charging the same price to the second customer as the first, or, having to extend the time servers are up, because one person bought the game on the last day.
but that is all, like, customers having rights and stuff, and publishers having responsibilities and obligations, they don't like that idea at all, hence why they love to keep this ambiguous
I think that is the answer really, they sell a game and say that we will support this online until at least YEAR or the DATE published on our site(whichever is later). It would then be up to the company to extend this deadline as the game gets older if they want to keep sales coming in.
So you may but a game with a 5 year End of Life, but on year 3 they release a DLC and extend the EoL for another 5 years to encourage sales.
Open up code. You cannot get code copyrighted as object code UNLESS the code is also given in plain text. After all, JK Rowling still makes a lot of money from the "open source" Harry Potter books and still shuts down "derivative works" by claiming this OPEN SOURCE work, the book, is copyrighted. So opening the code to every single buyer doesn't destroy copyrights (and if you are only secure if you obscured your code, then the code is NOT secure).
I contacted the guy who got lootboxes banned in Belgium, but that was done by applying existing gambling laws to them. While sympathetic his hands are tied on this.
but strictly speaking, this campaign is trying to get existing laws applied to games. The issue is politicians refusing to be tied to any clear definitions. Is a particular game considered a "good" or a "service"? Once that's nailed (i.e. always online games are services, and others are goods), then you can start applying existing laws to them.
Shout out to Snoups4 for the work he's doing in France.
I'm in the UK. For the UK petition, there's certainly no harm in submitting two petitions and your viewers will be happy to sign both. One of them may be automatically closed because the government figures it's too close in content to the other one but we might get lucky.
+1 to this - I don't think there would be much of a problem in arranging two petitions.
Although this impacts almost all consumers it will definitely be easier to get an overwhelming number of signatures and if there are different thresholds necessary for different responses then maximizing potential responses is the priority.
I think if given to viewers as 'exp date is bare minimum for gaas to not be theft, but if you want to go the extra mile getting a classification will mean we don't have to go down similar rabbit holes in the future' you might push more people to sign both than if you asked them to sign one with more ambiguous outcomes or try giving them both equal weight.
Reading through the lines, it sounds like the typical EU law problem: new developments that can't be covered by existing laws and questions asked about these topics end up basically in a 404 law not found issue. Rather than trying to move an entire continent in one go, it would be easier to get something done in an EU-affiliated country so it creates a ready made answer that can then be made to fit for the EU.
Drafting an EU-wide law from scratch, even if people would be willing to do so, would take years if not a decade to see the light of day. Whereas getting something changed in a member country would take a lot less hassle depending on which country you're going for.
The fact that the EU didn't outright say 'no' is the general equivalent of 'possibly, if you give us a better answer'. As far as I know, a lot of digital consumer EU laws have been drafted first in one or two countries in some kind of shape and then adapted for EU law in the years after that, after it was proven that the problem was a real problem and the laws were a real solution.
So don't be dispirited, even if the EU parliament questions don't seem to be very positive. Answers they give are legally binding after all so they can't be too positive about anything immediately if there's no clear law that states yes or no.
I will remind you that the EU made laws about internet cookies and phone chargers well inside of 5 years each, despite, to my knowledge, no member country having laws on the books regarding either. They in fact get regularly criticized for possibly moving too fast on tech laws before they have a full picture of the situation. I'm not saying ambiguity means we're dead in the water, but it shows a level of trepidation that makes action without France and/or Germany very unlikely.
Nothing the EU parliament says is legally binding; and they can't propose or draft legislation anyway. That is the role of the unelected EU commission.
This isn't just an issue in the EU. It's also a problem in the US. Where we have a pre-existing frame work of a legal code, that hasn't been able to adopt new laws for the modern age. Like copyright law (which is a joke, and needs to be changed/rebuilt)
I think you are very right but its still terrible not make it clear in the answer either way, the comission should give a clear answer if they feel unable to do the work from scratch to direct citizens from countries to take proper action.
The US is the same way, generally: For non-partisan issues, Congress largely doesn't want to take on new legislation for new developments without looking at how the states themselves are handling it. Which is why Americans reading this should be concerned with who their local reps are. Those people make bigger impacts faster and could end up shaping national law.
This whole EU episode sounds like you’re negotiating with a dragon. You may only ask questions three, the answers come in riddles, and they could decide to torch everything you’ve got at any moment because they don’t care about your struggles.
Thats how all politics works
Yeah the 3 questions thing immediately made me think of all those ancient myths and legends about oracles or wise men, then I laughed because it reminded me of this Simpsons episode:
ruclips.net/video/Qf3xwmXXDH8/видео.html
Welcome to the EU and how it works!
Ross's perseverance is incredible in this. Only matched by the officials' incredible ability to not give an answer somehow when it otherwise seems impossible to so far
5:55 Gotta love it when the answers to a clearly numbered list of questions is a wall of text with no reference to the original questions, whatsoever.😠
I hate it when people do this. I have had many examples like that, where i send an email at work, with numbered questions. You;d expected to respond with numbered answers for clarity and ease of understanding , but no. In 90% of cases people never do that. Why? It drives me nuts! And to see EU commision doing the same thing is probably evern worse!
Done on purpose, to make their answers even more unclear.
@@excentrik5725 in my experience, I'd say it's close to 100%. It's very frustrating, since you then have to essentially play detective and try to figure out which of the vague phrases relate to the questions, IF ANY.
@@FlymanMS Maybe in this case, it's an occupational habit; it's better to write in vague term to make it easier to back out of, or reinterpret later.
@@neon-rust I dont like that at all, it makes me think they do that intentionally so that if they get caught giving a wrong answer they can say "oh man, it was just a misunderstanding"
I am an IT Professional. Having asked the EU Commission about Game as a Service (GAAS) might not have been the best choice. Since no government has an incentive to define this kind of service in any law. But a GAAS is by definition a subcategory of SAAS (Software as a Service). This is defined by laws, since governments are buying SAAS from companies like Microsoft, Google, AWS etc. I know for sure, they have made precautions to protect governments from being F-d by these companies.
So if you would ask the EU-Commission if purchasing a SAAS for a single one time payment and the party providing the service has not defined or disclosed the duration of the service being provided, by law how long the service has to be provided, or if it can be ended legally by the service provider at will.
I think to this the EU-Commission is far more inclined to give a proper answer. And since Video Games by definition are Software all regulations that apply to SAAS also legally apply to GAAS.
Isn't it curious that the tyrants that are supposed to "work for you" have to be conned in this manner to even consider taking a look at an issue?
The first question was how to determine what they are to begin with. That's not even well-defined whether they are a service right now. Most of them at least pretend to be goods in stores. Only stuff like World of Warcraft is clear on the service portion of the purchase. On the other end of the spectrum, nobody would argue that an old-school Nintendo cartridge is a service. All of the potential SAAS regulation might not even apply to the majority of games in the first place because of this. So there must be some set of criteria to determine when it qualifies as one or the other, but we don't have those right now and these answers didn't give us any useful ones either.
@@jwueller I agree, that regulations regarding SAAS would not apply to most games. Those old NES cartridges are definitely not services.
But the word Service has more than just one meaning, depending on the context. In legal terms it is a question, if these Games are considered a Service or a Product.
But if a piece of Software runs in a cloud, and costumers do not receive a copy of the software, but access to it, in technical terms it qualifies as SAAS. Regardless if a locally installed piece of Software is required to access it or not. Reading the license agreement should give clear answer what it is, that has been sold: Access to the Game or a copy of the piece of software that is a prerequisite for accessing the Game. If this is something that the seller has not made clear the seller is committing fraud. Adobe is being sued for basically this exact thing right now.
But setting the GAAS or SAAS argument aside. The point I was trying to make, that the reason the EU-Commission has not given clear answers to the questions, is because they themselves have no clue what would apply, but only because they don't understand games (or they pretend not to). There are no specific regulations for games, thus there is no clear answer to the questions. But there are regulations for all types of Software, which is a broader term that includes games. So all regulation made for Software also applies to games inherently.
If you ask the EU-Commission, what regulations apply to Muffins. But there are no explicit regulations that even mention Muffins as such. They will not be able to answer clearly. But if you ask them what regulation apply to pastry (I assume a Muffin is considered a pastry), then you get a clear answer, since there are regulations that clearly apply to pastry of any kind.
Also let's not pretend that the EU-Commission is keen on giving clear answers on anything, if they find any loop holes to avoid it in the legal framework, they will obviously be vague and unhelpful. They will not put in the extra effort, that is not required by law. That's how Politics work. You need to go from broader terms to the specific. That way you are more likely to get a proper answer out of them.
This is my opinion on this. I work in IT, and that's where my expertise lies. I am not a lawyer, and have only the understanding on legal proceedings of a - I like to think a well informed but - untrained average citizen. But I know for a fact, that most lawyers have little to no more knowledge of computers, than the average high school student, since I work for a few of them.
The point is that the seller usually can't just arbitrarily choose what they would like it to be. It depends on how it's sold. In the US, the EULA basically always wins, but in Europe they are invalid if they contain unexpected clauses. And if consumers don't expect something to arbitrarily and unilaterally stop working one day, then the product might be required to abide by the regulations for goods, regardless of whether they pretend that it's a service. Just because something has an online component in a technical sense of a service doesn't mean that it actually is a service in the legal sense.
And IMO they should definitely be able to answer the muffin question. No specific law about muffins is required to determine which category of existing regulation they fall under. It's their job to figure out the closest applicable laws. That's the whole point of the question.
Ross went to the darkest depths of reality, the world of law, to help us. That's something I respect immensely.
Laws aren't real.
@@doltBmB They can be real, if someone enforces them :D
@@doltBmBAnime profile pic - argument invalid
Ross and volunteers, Thank you for your hard work.
Seems like having "Ross" in your name turns you into a a protector of consumer rights
Immense respect to those who are fighting for our rights to preserve the arts. Albeit this campaign is mainly constrained to games, it has ramifications to software (of which the majority rely on DRM even if a one time purchase, which will kill the program once the auth servers fail), and films (previously an easily preservable format, with the strengthening of DRM, today it's nearly impossible to legitimately purchase a DRM free movie, the purchase of which is guaranteed to remain under your control forever, rather on the whims of the service its hosted on.), also music, albeit there's more DRM free options there, it can certainly take the path of films too given time.
The reason why it's hard to get a straight answer is because a straight answer would shake up the rules of copyright in our modern world. That's a can of worms few politicians want to even get near.
It's not an easy fight, but a worthy one.
Spot on
That's why I (some others, really) think it's important to "rebrand" this movement as "stop killing SOFTWARE" instead, which has an added bonus of encompassing adjacent movements/protests. We just happened to be experts in the Games Industry, but the bad business practices certainly happens on other places as well.
It is why I return a video work: if it has DRM that stops me making a copy, it is returned and I get a full refund for it. If I get a copy, that copy doesn't have DRM on it, so I can preserve it.
If the corpo wont commit to a hard definition of what they offer, then the gov should force one.
France has veto power, good luck forcing the EU's hand in this.
The customers and common people seem pretty confident of what they are, too bad we don't matter.
@@louiepooh1510
We would matter if people stopped spending money on these types of games.
The lack of understanding by various governments is telling they never had to come up with a solution for this issue before.
Unrelated to the content of the video but man I love Richard Burns' Rally. The skyboxes looked so good for their time.
In my completely non-professional opinion, it sounds like the EU Commission is treating your question as if you are looking at larger scale software suites, such as business software. Since they reference "the contract" and "remaining time" I think they are treating this similar to a company going out and signing an annual contract to use a software suite (i.e. CAD package, Physics Modeling, Graphics Design, etc.).
I would be curious if there could be a follow up question that tries to get them to acknowledge/understand the difference between a business software suite (like a CAD package such as Solidworks) and a commercial off the shelf "boxed" software (such as a video game).
I will watch it anyways Ross you cannot stop me.
I'll watch speedrunners even for games I'll never play. This stream of Ross against the EU is just as good.
ross cant but nature and your genetics can
You and your team are doing amazing ground braking work here, keep up the pressure. I was sad to hear that Brazil so far has nothing happening on this front but it doesn't surprise me. Our government leaves a lot to be desired. I emailed you a while back offering my assistance and just want to let you know the offer is still up. If I can't help over here I started a savings account to add some money to it every month in case financial support is ever needed.
Thanks again for all that your doing man I am sorry you have to take the front on this.
Sounds to me that all those governments are working hard to keep the ambiguity and uncertainty so that these game companies can continue to do whatever the fuck they want.
If they actually stood on principle they would have given clear and concise answers.
It's because most ppl in politics don't have anything with games or it isn't that big part of their life's, so not as important as many other things. And there are still way too many old ppl in politics. Also some companies have a lot of "power" and will use it. Even in my country (witch is in the EU) we see a lot of interference from a couple of sectors, especially when something needs to be changed/tackled.
The EU parliament is ginormous, even compared to chambers like the US Congress. They never commit in those answers because they're afraid it might have unintended ramifications beyond the scope of the question.
On the bright side, France in particular seems to be taking the situation very seriously, which is especially good since that's where Ubisoft is headquartered.
It goes like this:
1. New anti-consumer practice is presented, booed and walked back
2. Reintroduce the practice a while later, sounds like old news now, barely anyone cares, if you care, sue us! (no one ever does)
3. Years down the line this practice is commonplace and prohibiting it now would be unlawful meddling with an important industry, right?
The essence of the issue is that law always gets interpreted in favor of the big players, who also ensure to make it as fuzzy as possible.
When a corporation makes massive profits, it's a private business only answering to its shareholders. Whenever it takes losses, it's treated as public service that needs to be saved using taxpayer money. Every penny of corporate profit is treated as god-given right no one should even think to dispute, while accountability and expenses are just pesky impediments on free trade.
And as long as consumers keep consuming, they totally deserve what they get. Definitely when it comes to non-essential stuff. The option to vote with our wallets is almost always there, and by not exercising it we are effectively forfeiting our freedom. And it's not even inherently wrong - we can be blissfully carefree in return, and apparently on average we feel like it's worth it.
Yes, it's collusion, not ignorance.
I'm convinced that games-as-a-service should ONLY be allowed to be sold as a subscription, where if the servers shut down the subscription ends. One time purchases however should be forever, should not be allowed to be games-as-a-service
If company lets you run custom servers I think it should be allowed. Otherwise gfy (the company, not you)
Publishers would either want that extremely (revenue forever, plus whatever cash shop they make) or not want it at all, because subscriptions would be seen as a thing you could just pick up and then drop forever, potentially losing the company money in the long term
This.
If there's no way to punish the service by cancelling subscription, then there are inherently perverse incentives at play.
I feel this’d backfire almost immediately
@@infectedanimal9830 Well go ahead, tell us. If you feel it and almost immediately would backfire, you must have many and obvious reasons it would do so right now in your head, so tell us.
Second paragraph at 11:09 with the "remaining time" reminds me of these unhelpful support mails/chats where they don't even get your question. They clearly speak about contracts with defined time periods, like your 6-months WoW subscription, because they talk about termination supply. You can't terminate supply for a physical disc after I bought it... I will still have it. So this purely about paid online-services. In the WoW case: you pay for 6 months you have to get 6 months. If they terminate that supply and leave you with e.g. one month short, they have to provide you a remedy and reimburse (that last month).
Some companies even do that if YOU terminate the contract. If I cancel my Amazon Prime they will refund the remaining days; If I cancel my Xbox Game Pass subscription they will refund the remaining days. That's what they offered when I wanted to cancel said contracts a while ago.
So, with that paragraph they didn't refer to the specific case at all and just pulled their copy and paste chatbot answer.
That is just mrs. Jourová for you, friends. I come from the same country as her and I remember her actions during her time in local politics. She is physically unable to give straight answers to anything, let alone give them in any meaningful manner. I personally believe she developed this peculiar skill after being baked by the public and own colleagues basically every single time she did provide some straight answer.
Unfortunately a lot of politicians do this. Some of them learn this because of the position they are in. They have to answer to responsibilities they have. Mostly it's due to their actions that opposition don't agree with.
Our previous PM did this as well and was absolutely godly in it. And we have pussies as journo's as well, so those never come with good questions nor do they keep pushing.
If something had to happen it was on his terms.
And now he has gotten a high position in EU parliament.
Being centrist is a way of thinking. If you voting for them then you just asking them: *Hey, I don't want anything to change too much, so just be there and make everyone frustrated, ok?*
She's just like the rest of the politicians from her country, liars mobsters and con men. And the people are too lazy and subservient to do anything about it.
@@gardareswhat a ridiculous definition of centrism. But with that pfp I am not surprised…
Centrism isn’t just “not left, not right, standing still”, it’s actively embracing multilateralism, stability, balance, fact-over-fiction (i.e. ideologies), consensus, etc.
@@TomJacobW in other words, if leftists, rightists, authoritarians and libertarians are diverse forces, centrists are the part of an amorphous mass of humanity that preventing any kind of move, letting the problems brew. Not to mention that your definition of centrism is fictional and very different from the centrism de-facto.
Btw, nice manipulation of judging people by their profile picture, lol.
Literally just got into an argument with a friend about this. His argument was that it's okay to shut down online games because you should know it can't last forever and he deadass said "internet won't be here forever so why does it matter?"
I get your friends point, but at that point 1) they need to tell me that and 2) based on that information I will not give them money
your effort means a lot, Ross. Thank you for doing this.
You should most definitively push for another petition in the UK after the election.
I am a lot more optimistic you'll get a positive response afterwards, because I'm sure a Labour government is more likely to side with consumers on this than the party of landlords and business owners run by (afaik) the richest british politician of all time!
And you mentioning that the original instigators of the EU question have lost their seats means I'll have to write to their party. I voted for them, their initiative on this was the deciding reason for me. I hope pressure from the electorate can convince at least the pirate party to keep up the pressure on the EU.
I think you are being optimistic with regards a 'Brave New World' being ushered in after the GE. I remember vividly how optimistic we all were after Blair's 1997 victory...that turned to ashes soon enough. And Starmer is no Blair; what he is is a nasty authoritarian by nature (look at his record as DPP), and if you look at the way he lied to become Labour leader (all those broken promises) and now is destroying the Labour Party by intimidating and expelling traditional members on flimsy and deceitful grounds I don't honestly think there will be a lot of change institutionally. Look at the way the campaign is being run, look at the imposition of non-local candidates unwanted by local Labour associations. It doesn't bode well.
Labour is a party of landlords and business owners as well, I'm sure they some % more likely to respond but let's not kid ourselves about labors goals and values
plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
Imagine being this naive... Labour haven't been "for the people" since the 1960s.
Friendly reminder that an NDA (Non Disclosure Agreement) can't be held binding if it asks you to do something illegal. Would guess it'd be the same with EULAs. The corporate country club can't supersede state or national law.
There's a reason why all EULA's have this wording "to the extent of the law".
This lets them bend the game specifications according to law, and even lets them say they clarified it beforehand.
EULA's can't be held binding in the first place. Look up "shrink wrap agreement".
@@CaptainBasculin It is practically worse than that. The EULA is enacted before any law can involve itself. So if the EULA is illegal YOU will have to sue for breaking the law, and the owner of the EULA has deeper pockets and can therefore afford to bury you in debt, all the while every copy of the game is not working because the EULA was acted on and will continue that way until you win your case.
I really like how all these videos have driving footage in them. Makes me feel like I'm in the passenger sheet while Ross is talking about government stuff I wouldn't know how to reply to anyway lol
even mowing down some fences during all that, lol
You are a hero, also the fact that you actually had people in politics and helped them formulate questions is groundbreaking, awesome work
A legend supporting a legend, keep up the good work Ross and Lucia
We Brazilian folks should probably try contacting Kim Kataguiri, he's the one who's been siding with gamers inside Congress.
You should email Ross about this and let him know
He's a conservative libertarian. He isn't going to support the government trying to control what private businesses do.
@@hihihi1q23 Honestly I think our best bet would be to make enough noise for the gov to hear but we are in total chaos right now when it comes to politics and let's be honest most of our politicians are clowns.
I'm worried about two potential end results:
a) Publishers just turning to token subscription models. Pay 1 dollar to play for 3 months, something like that.
b) Have just a super bare-bones version that can work offline, and the rest still requires online. Things like being only able to play the tutorial offline, but the game requires online. Then you can use weasel words to say that the game still works, just some of it doesn't and it's unreasonable to have it all work forever. In practice this will not change anything.
a) I believe even this would significantly impact player counts and sales too. The free to play model is very valuable for companies, getting players invested in the game before they decide to put money into it.
(I can imagine some future where tons of games require 1 cent per month to play, but I don't think it's likely.)
b) This is unfortunately true and seems much more likely. It would be incredibly hard, if not impossible, to define what the "main" portion of a game is in a legal way that applies to all games.
@@Roverdrive_XPerhaps I’m naive, but I think that at least in jurisdictions like the EU (where there is some concept of consumer rights) that you could specify that the game must either be defined as an online service or a digital good, with good requiring the majority of content, as viewed by a reasonable person, to be available offline.
We would still have to vote with our wallets, though, and right now it seems like most are voting for loot boxes and micro transactions.
If either of those are the results, then it's not the end because those are not satisfactory enough to stop the campaign.
Cynisism will get you nowhere in life.
Well Game Pass (et al) are your (a) option already. Stop paying for the Game Pass service, and all your access ends.
IMO copyrights should not be allowed on closed compiled software, only the open clear code that gets compiled. The object code is a derived work, but every licensee of software gets a copy, even if that copy says "all rights reserved", including any derived work, such as compiled code from that source. After all, despite the notes being clearly heard, you still get a copyright strike if you use more than "fair use" amounts of it yourself.
I saw Richard Burns Rally and I was worried there was some weird legal stuff going on with it. That's a great example of a game that will never die. Keep. fighting the good fight, Ross!
I think the quote about authors and books is a good starting point.
"If you have an e-reader on whatever/whichever platform, and you buy a e-book. How long should that copy last?"
So far, it seems like the answer is: "Shut up! Do not worry about it."
If I'm not careful then it would either deeply sadden or enrage me how little people I meet IRL care. It is insane that people just shrug their shulders when made aware that what they just referred to as something they "bought" is really something they borrowed. "That's just how it is, eh?". And then there is it the even more enraging fact that the people whose damn job it is to care cannot even comprehend the problems. ... wooosah wooosha ...
Ross taking on the herculean task of getting through government bureaucracy brings a tear to my eye. I wish I could do more to help but I am in the US where the government doesn't believe in consumer protections...
Limbo?
Oh no
Cycle of guilt again
It never stops!!!
Where am I? This weird dream again, déjà vu!
Ｙｏｕ ｇａｉｎ Ｂｒｏｕｚｏｕｆ
Ｍｙ ｌｅｇｓ ａｒｅ ＯＫ
_
The King of Limbo
It's true that I killed my mentor... But yet I am not his murderer.
Your legs are broken
Your legs are okay
You gain Brouzuf
Maybe expand from games as a service to software as a service.
Then the governments have skin in the game because old infrastructure and office software becoming unusable is a problem that effects them.
They're also the biggest suckers when it comes to getting conned by software manufacturers roflmao
Oh contraire, *every* Ross video is a video you *need* to watch.
Au contraire*
@@LutraLovegood You know, I thought about that when I originally commented, au well then.
@@BMofficialvids Understandable. Have a good day!
*EU citizens:*
The "Pirate Party" is not a joke party. They have seats in some governments and are the third largest party of Iceland.
Voting for them is not a "protest"/"wasted" vote, they are the only party that actually cares about stuff like this.
Well, to be fair, any voting should be smart and if the party (proportional voting, not "winner-take-all") doesn't get enough for at least one seat *AND DOESN'T GET ANY KIND OF COMPENSATION FOR A VOTE* - it's a dumped vote.
For example, voting for Greens in Estonia is mostly dumping a vote due to unpopularity and high electoral barriers. Yet if a party do get enough votes (just 2%) they could apply for government funding aka additional 20 000 - 100 000€/year, even if they don't get any seats in the parliament... But that's only for parliament elections, voting for small parties is useless in EU Parliament elections if your country is small. Literally 14% of votes (enough for a seat) were dumped in the previous elections due to voting for Parempoolsed, KOOS, E200, Greens and others.
=================================
NB!
Please, don't just vote for pirate party if they don't get anything in your specific country. Vote for leftists, socdems, greens, liberals, libertarians, centrists, literally anyone who *can* get the seats and actually represent you at least partially.
@@gardares Ok, first of all I didn't say "EU election", next time you _can_ vote is probably going to be _local government._
Secondly, if everyone thought this way, we would NEVER have new parties enter parliament, in fact we would start LOSING parties until we got in the situation that US and other countries are in now. To quote South Park: A Giant Douche vs a Turd Sandwich. Why vote at all at that point?
Thirdly, again, PP IS in parliament in multiple countries and in Iceland they are a big chunk of it as well. How do you think they got there? Just appeared out of thin air and magically got into parliament with no votes?
And fourth: Since you brought up Estland, let's bring up Sweden in the most recent election: 6/8 parties PROMISED to vote AGAINST Chat Control. What happened? 4 of them ended up voting FOR it instead. Which political side had majority for a PASSING rule? The left side. You should never vote for a party because of its political leaning.
And a bonus: A truly wasted vote is one for a party that don't really need your vote and that you don't fully agree with. One lost vote matters much less for a party with a million+ votes than for a party with 20 000 votes.
@@AQDuck 2. So, what happens if some small party becomes popular and will get enough support to have a seat by surveys? And no, US voting system isn't proportional, it's "winner-take-all", so the only chance to change something is to vote for one of 2 most popular politicians.
3. They were popular enough from the start. Yes, they won seats in their first elections the next year they started a party.
4. Oh, don't worry, at least leftists are more honest and do not tend to be pro-business... in Estonia the new government suddenly found out that there is a huge hole in budget and decided that it's time to raise taxes for *everyone* ... while only social democrats were talking about taxes and they are the weakest party in coalition. Centrists just tend to lie a lot, while rightists are more honest in their pro-business tendencies. We have a whole party of "Rightists" and while they are against "government collection of data on people's private lives" they don't see anything wrong with corporations doing the same thing. =)
And a bonus... it's *BETTER TO HAVE THIS BAD COALITION THEN THEIR FAR-RIGHT ALTERNATIVES*. At least prime minister is good at foreign policy and not just awful in literally everything like guys from EKRE when they were in "EKREIKE" government. For some people Biden was a great vote, better than another term of Trump. Sometimes you should vote the lesser evil if this really changes things dramatically.
@@AQDuck *1984 comment*
1. Unfortunately, I do not have the right to vote at all because I bound by Russian citizenship. Russia doesn't have elections as you know it. As one official put it, it's a "high-budget bureaucracy".
I'm not in a position to donate to you. I'm not intelligent enough to assist from legal standpoints in any way shape or form, but I hope that you know that you're a hero for taking this on. I can't express my gratitude for your braving this. I can't begin to imagine the kind of headaches that this must cause. As someone who put way too many hours into The Crew, this means a lot. Even if it ends up in a loss and goes nowhere, the amount of hell you're raising will surely make a statement that will echo into the next generation of gamers, games, and the artists that created them. Because of you our voices will be heard. You truly are doing the work of the people, and although I'm sure it's already been said, thank you.
Oh no, not the Verbraucherzentrale!
They might even mildly condemn the situation decades after it was important!
The big publishers are doomed!
As always I'm wishing Ross the best in this endeavor. I think it's safe to say he's doing far more than anyone could have asked of him. Over all, I find the news so far encouraging. This all very well could have ended as fast as it started, with the various governments just slamming the door in our face. The fact that anything is happening at any level is a good sign. On somewhat of a side note, Ross mentions having time to resume his regular videos. Which is great, I love them. I just hope he's not feeling pressured into doing so. I'm sure we'd all understand if he didn't return to his usual content until this is all over. On the other hand, if doing so helps him relax, unwind, whatever-have-you, then great. I won't say no.
UK citizen here - out of curiosity I had a look at CEX, the largest used game shop here in the UK, and sure enough they still appear to be selling copies of The Crew, complete with 24-month guarantee. While it's potentially a whole new can of worms, the second hand market may be another angle worth pursuing?
I think it's also important to point out that games like The Crew don't have to be online. The online only functionality was shoehorned into them. Probably to sell future games when the old ones become unplayable, but this is legally unprovable (probably)
There could be emails lying around in some archive mentioning this, but I doubt legal action would go that far.
I’ve been following the development of The Crew Unlimited, and it turns out that a lot of stuff actually is headed by the servers rather than the client’s machine. The Crew *technically* didn’t have to be offline, but converting The Crew from an online to offline game would be an arduous process, even for Ubisoft. The Crew Unlimited relies upon emulating the server rather than converting it to an offline game.
The biggest irony is, that this is probably the most detailed, most researched investigation on the topic, and I can't forward it to political parties because they're probably not going to watch a youtube video. Because they're just so old that they're not taking it seriously as a medium. I don't suppose you have this as a text we can forward / push on social media? Anyway, thanks for your efforts!
there is the website
Who knew Ross has several lawyers as fans😂
Thank you Ross, for continuing to do the agonizing work that needs to be done, even when no sane human being would want to do it. As painful as the legalese must be to dredge through, the fact is that your work in all this is the reason we might have a chance at actually changing an entire industry.
I just want to say thank you to Ross & to everyone helping out! Your efforts are really appreciated.
Honestly, my biggest takeaway from all of this is "it is always ethical to make the lives of corporate and government entities worse, they are ontologically evil and no act against them is immoral."
It's something you "know", but it's still sobering to realize how much the system is stacked in favor of corporations and against regular people. A company can just say "we'll destroy the product you paid for" and then destroy the product you paid for. And instead of that being a clear-cut case you have to push this massive, international campaign in the hopes that something will stick somewhere, and despite the time and effort invested so far nothing concrete has materialized still. When it...should've been a clear cut case.
If there's no "established period of time expected for the `service`" I would agree that we go by "the usual", aka the game is expected to work "forever".
Because before this Games-as-a-Service bullshit, the expectation was that you simply could play "forever". If the service provider doesn't bother specifying a timelimit, "forever" should be assumed. Or at /least/ 10 years.
And as a german I am seriously disappointed that they can't even decide if those games are "goods" or a "service".
Quite outrageous how u mentioned that the Parliament has to answere clearly and precise and then they just didnt 😭
Thanks for the transparency Ross.
Having to go through all of this to just try and even define what a video game even is legally with both members of the EU parliament and lawyers, feels like Kafka in the digital age.
one analogy I just thought of is, if you just bought, lets say, a car, but the company that sold you the car saw that they didn't make enough money selling it to you, so they recall all units, including yours, they refuse to refund the cost, and they blame the recall on people stealing the cars. The people that stole don't care about the recall, they modified their cars to work without issue after the recall. You only find out about the recall when you try to start your car, and it refuses to start. Now taking this back to digital imagine you were to download this "car", would you prefer to buy a "license", or to pirate a working "car"?
This is important and I'm glad it's still being updated.
Unfortunately I'm not as angry as I was a few months ago and I'm worried that more people might've calmed down.
This limbo what we called terms of agreement is what big corpos gets away easily. Never give up, though!
I signed the Canadian petition, you guys got the leader of the Green party to patron... Good job, that is major representation here.
Some of this stuff has gotta be frustrating, difficult, hard work. Thank you for what you are doing for everyone Ross.
Just as a matter of focus, I think the UK petition order should be "retry the original petition", "wait until the petition is supported and acknowledged like the last one, including follow-ups on avoidant answers", and then "launch the expiration date petition". There's a good chance that if both are present for consideration, the idea that it's taken as 'likely' is going to be suggested by the expiration date petition, and that may influence the outcome of the original petition.
That may not be exactly how that works, I'd hope not, but considering the frankly olympic quality gymnastics deployed to simply avoid giving answers to anything, cynicism is peeking around the corner and shaking its head at the simultaneous petitions.
Whatever the outcome is I appload the effort, Ross. I'm glad we have at least a single person concious enough in our industry to try this.
Battleborn, made by Gearbox Software, servers shut down in January 2021, killing the singleplayer as well as the multiplayer. I'll admit that the multiplayer was never really there because it came out at the same time as Overwatch, but I and a few of my friends enjoyed the campaign both in singleplayer and co-op.
It just hit me why this is so important.
When I am 70 to 80 or perhaps even older, I am going to want to play the games that I grew up with. Not just those, but the games from my adult life as well.
This simply isn't going to be possible if games important to me are lost or forced to shut down entirely after 10, 20, 30 years or more.
bro im so glad u popped up and vocalized when you did cause clearly a lot of other people were thinking the same way
you shouldn't be able to just trashbin art - especially when it forms a community around it and becomes interactive
DVDs have a lifespan of 30-100 years, Blu-rays have a lifespan of 100-150 years. That's how long I expect my physical copies of a game to last, barring any physical damage to them. A lifetime. Digital copies I expect to last as long as I or whoever I leave them to in a will maintain a copy of it somewhere on something, so potentially forever.
I think that timing is for end-user-recordable versions of the media. Stored properly, commercially stamped media should last a lot longer (effectively indefinitely, as far as human civilisation time spans are concerned). .... Unless the production process has gone to crap lately, which is also not beyond the realms of possibility, admittedly.
Its honestly amazing how much talk this have awaken in government.
Ross: Spends days with a team of lawyers drafting clear and concise questions about the boundaries between video game publishers and consumer rights in excellent legal speak.
European Parliament Commission response: *bass-boosted "IDK"*
That was one of the most thrilling Ross videos I have seen. I was on the edge of my seat the entire time. Ross had two people in the EU parliament asking questions on his behalf for the future of the gaming industry and actually got back a response that he read out loud. This is honestly more compelling than anything going on in the news right now.
The legal system of the people is becoming more and more irralevant, and this will only bring an even more funnier outcome, as they will go all bankrupt with the side they catter to as they have all lost touch with reality.
And then when all come crashing back down, we will have to stay humble and build it back up, but this time it's the meek that will inherit everything.
Knowing what caused them to fall, it is a must that stay humble, else we are simply becoming what we were fighting.
I've been a big supporter of this campaign but I have this nagging fear......be careful what you wish for. The more I hear, the more I think that the big publishers will just define their games as a service (which they've trying to do for years), sell you access to the game on a monthly sub, and then all of these issues go away. The time period is defined. They can end support whenever they want. I don't think that is what we really want but thats where I think this ends up.
If this happens and people put up with that and continue to buy these products regardless, there's little we can do.
Oh they absolutely want it to be like Netflix, some of them even admitted it (i thought Microsoft or Xbox did). But if they can make it so that even the "live-service" needs to be absolutely clear on how and what, for example like expiration date's, then they have to. And i am sure if we can push a few of these small rules/laws then they will have to work much harder to preserve all of this. And they will hate us for it, because they want to stay in control.
I'd prefer the mask slips off, honestly. Even if we basically just get told "You will own nothing and be happy," at the very least consumers know and the companies that practice that sort of thing can fail appropriately. This limbo state where publishers can sell people products that have hidden, arbitrary expiration dates is completely unacceptable. Either tell the customer up front that he has no rights or sell him a product that doesn't expire; this "have your cake and eat it, too" situation is nothing short of Kafkaesque absurdity.
@@mittensbro But the thing is that these things need small steps before we can get into other steps or even bigger steps to get further. Still there is a large chance that we will hit a wall before we even get that far.
And i think what's best in this is to keep going even if it looks like hopeless. Eventually more ppl keep being moved by this (ofcourse as long as ppl keep hearing about this) and the larger the movement the less they can keep it quiet.
Except they already tried that. After World of Warcraft's initial success, every other game in the early to late 00's had a paid subscription. The three Ross mentioned in the video (WoW, FFXIV, and Eve) are the only ones to have had enough success with that model for it to remain viable, and publishers know it. That's why micro transactions and battle passes became the norm for GaaS; to try and disguise the fact that you're basically paying a subscription
I am legitimately impressed with how far you've managed to take this. Unfortunately the US legislature is so far in the pocket of corporations that there is no way you would have gotten this far. I've always taken a huge issue when corporations and companies that still feel they have any say in how a consumer uses or accesses products we've legally purchased from them. So many corporations are so big now that "voting with your wallet" means nothing now. So many consumers are unaware of the issues and for those that are only a relative few actually attempt any sort of action. In the remote possibility they are held accountable legally, they easily adsorb the fines and just end up doing it again. Often they even take out the financial loss on their lower level employees or find a way to make consumers pay for it by incorporating the loss into the cost of their products. If CEO's and corporate suite executives are not directly held accountable, they're just going to do it again. I hope you teach them why you don't fuck with IRL Gordon Freeman!
The fact that you even got noticed or help from the EU was amazing! Congratulations, you are in the loop.
I am not a lawyer, but those responses from the EC sound like a basis for a lawsuit
It's really cool seeing Ross' efforts actually having an effect. It's no surprise that people from the EP would be more willing to actually engage with something like this. Their positions over the years have often made sense in a straight-forward way. I'm guessing it helps that there is no party discipline in the EP.
In any case, the update is certainly appreciated!
I feel expiration dates is the type of lukewarm response legal systems are most likely to go with, and the impact on the image of the games as presented to the companies' investors would become a huge incentive to make changes.
I'm so grateful you are fighting the good fight and gaining allies. I truly hope more flock to the cause and relieve you of some of the burden
28 second i rush to the video and stop everything, I live in EU and god i want to participate so much.
You'll get your chance as soon as the European Citizen's Initiative launches. Then we can actually make law instead of getting it interpreted.
@@Accursed_Farms Oh I know about it. I am waiting eagerly for that, I will sign it myself but also my several friends and even my parrents will sign it aswell.
@@Accursed_Farms Heartbroken that there's not much I can do to help from the US
9:25 I grew up during the age of the WoW-Killer, that endless parade of MMOs that were offered up as a replacement to WoW, only to go broke and disappear after a year or two. Even as a 9-year-old, I knew that just because a game was sold in a box at the store, that didn't meant it'd still exist next week. Consequently, I've avoided games as a service before that was even a term.
This is really brilliant usage of laws against predators.
Collectively, pirates are holding one of the biggest collections, if not THE biggest collection of digital stuffs worth keeping. Thank you so much for your good deeds! Much LOVE Pirates!! 🙏
I admire the dedication and hope and wish ya luck! The fight for us all
Fellow europeans, remember to vote whenever you are able and eligible. Your lawmakers work for YOU, not the other way around. YOU deserve to have your voice heard. Democracy only works when we actively participate.
That's a naive take; elections are fake, you are their slave, and they feel entitled to your life and property. Why do you think tax cuts are equivalent to government spending in the western economic theory?
Keep fighting the good fight, Ross. Fingers crossed that some sort of precedent will be set and terms will be clearly defined. In the meantime, I'll look forward to watching your regular channel content again.
Thank you for the update. We have our toes crossed for a good outcome
Is there any plans for a donation page to provide funds to the campaign for hiring lawyers for analysis and assistance and other expenses to keep this fight strong? Thanks for all the work you have done through all of this Ross!
I have some connections to newly ellected members. Will see if I can get them to pick this up.
Thank you for being upfront and telling me I don’t need to watch this one. My hero, I’ll be back when you need me
Governments: "Good job, everyone. We've made the legal systems to bring up issues so convoluted, someone would have to be crazy to be able to properly question policy."
Ross: Hey, so, I've been trying to reach you guys about my game's extended warranty...
Wait... so they claim the games are neither goods nor services... That means that piracy isn't a theft. You can't steal something that isn't a 'good' nor 'service'.
Either way, it just showcase the 'good old traditional" EU mode of operation of everything being tied in needless bureaucracy - which means they will attempt to shut it down when it goes through some politicians who are in companies' pocket.
It was more that they can't confirm whether they're goods or services, not that they're neither. From my understanding, whatever they say when answering these questions is legally binding for the whole EU, so it's much harder to get a concrete answer if the subject matter exists in a kind of legal grey area. This is one of the reasons the petition is also taking place in France and Germany (both part of the EU), because legal changes can be made much easier in a single country as opposed to basically an entire continent. Once that's been done, other countries and the EU as a whole, can reference their answer and/or law, and determine if they agree and want to do something similar.
You can't steal something that you can't steal. The Crew is not pirateable irregardless of what label you assign to it.
The only way piracy is even remotely relevant or helpful in solving this probelm is that some EU pirate parties are offering their help in this case
@@1mariomaniac EU is a bureaucratic nightmare - and they have labels and measurements for everything, even if it makes no sense.
I still remember their hilarious idea that cucumbers have a size RANGE, meaning that if one grows large enough, it is legally no longer a cucumber.
Basically what I mean - if they had this classification, they would say. And if games would fall under one of these two classifications, they would also confirm they are still checking.
However, they said nothing - dodged the question entirely - that implies the regulation simply does not exist.
So why did they dodge the question - the rest is as you say - their answer would be legally binding - openly admitting that games lack such classification would open them to a lot of lawyer fun - it would open the gate to undermine a lot of existing regulations and creating tons of loopholes that would be exploited with impunity.
As far as physical media is concerned, it should last as long as the physical copy. I don't see Disney knocking down my door to destroy my vhs copy of beauty and the beast... yet.
The online shit is much harder. Since it could theoretical last for ever, is it per person? In the sense that i have a dvd and can watch it with friends but I own it.
This stuff needs a new category. My book can last practically forever if maintained well, my ebook stored in a distributed server network with multiple copies for error correction will last as long as there is a civilization to maintain it, mabye beyond. That is if we get it treated the same way as a physical book.
As far as digital media is concerned, we are post scarcity. Capitalism has big problems when things are no longer scarce, so good luck convincing them to let you keep things forever.
Our best bet is to have lines in the sand.
Libraries and other repositories must be allowed to archive digital media, even if this means they cannot lend them out till the next line occurs.
Digital media needs a clear end of service date. Be that "at the end of subscription hosting services" such as when an MMO is shutting down, or a copyright end date for games not as a service like with Disney's IP's. If steamboat willy can enter public domain, then so can old copies of Microsoft word.
I'm sure i could come up with more but this gets my point across.
Brazilian law degree here. I have graduated on a thesis about taxes and games, to give you an idea of my passion about this. I'll look into this. I can't file lawsuits because I work for the government, but as a citizen I can do some digging with our protection agencies.
I am writing a theory on the nature of games in the brazilian law that would apply in Europe too, not sure about US/common law countries.
The issue is very complex also because it is an international law problem with treaties on copyright involved.
I'm confident there are two separate contractual objects between four distinct entities involved in games like The Crew. The customer, the store, the rights holder and the continued users (not necessarilythe ones who bought originally). In Brazil the eula is basically null always, as, for example, you can't get your money back if you disagree. Our law doesn't allow contracts to be one-way like this against a consumer. So everything hinges on legitimate expectations and the limits of copyright law, and contract law (for example, you can't contract on behalf or against the rights of a third party).
Anyways, a fun project.
First time viewer. Happily impressed.
On the Stopkillinggames website there’s an email for Brazil I’m sure you could get a hold of Ross that way.
Ross loves puzzle games, and he has decided to take on the biggest puzzle of all; The Law.
not all heroes wear capes
I'm so proud of Gordon Freeman doing this.
based on those answers, there should be demand for new law clarifying this. And in favour of consumers. There is a way for it, since we do have the union. Now it might not be simple, so thank you for pulling forward so far. Let's see where we get. And I hope it clarifies for some what is the importance of voting in EU elections.
PS. yes, it's the EP that choses the EC.
also: you may read the answer as "we don't want to". But usually in such legal exchanges it's rather "we have no legal basis to...". Hence the need to create the legal basis that will require either EC level, or country level solutions.
UK (at least, if not EU) - isn't there any legal "reasonable expectation"? Regarding expiration dates for service linked games.
my concern with expiration dates is that the company will just say it's one year but can be extended. they won't end it on the expiration date if it's still popular and making money, so i feel like the expectation will be short expiration dates that are often extended.