TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Sony, Ubisoft scandals lead to California ban on deceptive digital goods sales

311 点作者 BuildWithMason8 个月前

15 条评论

kstrauser8 个月前
This is excellent news! Remember, if you buy a copy of a good, you’re entitled to enjoy it as long as you wish to. If the seller steals it back from you, it’s ethical to acquire a replacement copy.<p>The law may say differently, but you cannot convince me that I don’t own something I bought through a “buy” button. I’ve never seen a book or movie or game or album where the button says “License” instead of “Buy”.
评论 #41666376 未加载
评论 #41670104 未加载
评论 #41670261 未加载
评论 #41666944 未加载
Daiz8 个月前
Extremely welcome legislation, especially since it has an exception for &quot;permanent download that can be accessed offline&quot;, ie. DRM-free downloads. It&#x27;s about time someone actually calls out Big Media on their deceptive practices. As I&#x27;ve been saying for years, it&#x27;s not &quot;buying&quot; with DRM-encumbered media, merely &quot;renting for an undefined time period&quot;.<p>In fact, it&#x27;d be even nicer if the legislation explicitly required rental terminology to be used for anything DRM-encumbered, but well, even as-is, this is an extremely welcome development and I hope legislators worldwide are taking note and plan to follow suit as soon as possible. This kind of victory for digital consumer rights has been long overdue!
评论 #41669666 未加载
Sniffnoy8 个月前
Hm, wonder if the Stop Killing Games campaign (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.stopkillinggames.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.stopkillinggames.com&#x2F;</a>) will be able to make use of this, like they&#x27;re trying to make use of consumer protection law in France...
评论 #41669677 未加载
评论 #41666381 未加载
szastamasta8 个月前
Maybe I have misunderstood the article, but for me it looks like another „cookies” law.<p>They are not proposing to force media companies to make sure you have access to your media forever. Or force them to give you a downloadable copy when they remove media from store. They’ll just replace „Buy” button with „Get Access” or whatever and add some lawyer mumbo-jumbo above it.<p>Looks like a smokescreen to me.
评论 #41667787 未加载
评论 #41667428 未加载
评论 #41668984 未加载
评论 #41667223 未加载
评论 #41668539 未加载
blackeyeblitzar8 个月前
Ownership always had a meaning. Selling things for purchase and then treating it as a limited license is fraud. Even under existing law. How about we hold all these companies accountable for the rug pull?
评论 #41669438 未加载
simoncion8 个月前
If I&#x27;m reading the text of the law correctly [0], this does not go nearly far enough.<p>(b)(2)(A) seems to say that all an entity needs to do to comply with the law is to add a checkbox associated with some text that links to the EULA for the software, and also says &quot;By checking this box, you acknowledge that you have read the EULA and know that access to the software will be revoked if you no longer hold a right to the software&quot;.<p>Most folks are never going to read the EULA, and no reasonable person would expect that a button that says &quot;BUY&quot; would seal a deal that permits the &quot;seller&quot; to unilaterally revoke the customer&#x27;s right to the &quot;sold&quot; software.<p>[0] &lt;<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;legiscan.com&#x2F;CA&#x2F;text&#x2F;AB2426&#x2F;id&#x2F;2966792" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;legiscan.com&#x2F;CA&#x2F;text&#x2F;AB2426&#x2F;id&#x2F;2966792</a>&gt;
评论 #41666140 未加载
robertclaus8 个月前
It does feel like a lot of this enforcement will need to be in the spirit of the law and&#x2F;or general deterrence. I would assume any sufficiently specific law in this space would be fairly easy to find a loophole or workaround for in your UI.
评论 #41666519 未加载
m4638 个月前
I wonder if Steam and GOG will become different.<p>Also kindle.<p><i>&quot;Additionally, it&#x27;s OK to advertise a digital good if access isn&#x27;t ever revoked, such as when users purchase a permanent download that can be accessed offline, regardless of a seller&#x27;s rights to license the content.&quot;</i><p>I&#x27;ve played steam games offline, only to have something expire at some point, preventing the games from launching.<p>No such issue with GOG.<p>This might even differentiate individual games.<p>For kindle, some books (tor?) have a paragraph &quot;this bookis distributed without digital rights management&quot;<p>Could a download of this book differentiate buy vs license?
Me0008 个月前
This is amazing, thank god people are fighting for my rights.
phendrenad28 个月前
I think eventually the games industry will settle on something like music royalties. Game companies will get some amount of money per-play.
pjmlp8 个月前
Great, hope this extends elsewhere.
riiii8 个月前
Imagine writing so awful and unethical software that it triggers law to be created to ban it.
givemeethekeys8 个月前
Do they charge &#x2F; pay sales tax on in-game purchases?
评论 #41666429 未加载
WhereIsTheTruth8 个月前
When you see FUD, you see FUD, but you chose to ignore it, i can&#x27;t be the only one to see it, it&#x27;s in plain text, in the title
991120008 个月前
Did they have to add a label that the goods may give them cancer?
评论 #41670677 未加载
评论 #41669143 未加载