Sony makes bold claim about game ownership
Sony’s argument that purchasing PlayStation games only grants a revocable license, not true ownership, has reignited concerns over digital consumer rights and game preservation. Commenters contrast Sony’s record with platforms like Steam and GOG, debate whether terms like “buy” are inherently misleading for revocable licenses, and question why physical-style rights (resale, permanence, offline use) haven’t been extended to digital media. Many see the current model as pushing players toward piracy, regulation, or alternative platforms such as PC and open systems.
Digital “Ownership” vs. Licensing
- Core dispute: Sony argues that buying a digital game is just a license, not ownership, and that licenses can be revoked.
- Many see this as deceptive because stores say “buy” or “purchase,” which in normal language implies a perpetual, non‑revocable right to use a copy (analogous to books, CDs, or cartridges).
- Others note that, in copyright law, you never owned the IP—only a copy or a license—and that this has been true since early EULAs, though that clashes with social expectations.
Why Sony Is the Lightning Rod
- Recent actions: removal of hundreds of “purchased” movies, talk of ending physical media, PS3 store wind‑down, and a long history of anti‑consumer moves (e.g., rootkits, targeting modchip/import sellers).
- Sony also tightly controls a closed console marketplace, making platform lock‑in and switching costs high.
- Some argue it’s hypocritical to target only Sony when Microsoft, Valve, etc. have similar ToS; others say past behavior and current revocations make Sony uniquely untrusted.
PC / Steam / GOG Comparisons
- PC is seen as more forgiving:
- Steam supports offline play and often ships DRM‑free executables; GOG and itch explicitly sell DRM‑free copies that can be backed up.
- Many games on Steam have no DRM at all; others can be backed up and sometimes run via emulators.
- Counterpoint: legally, Steam also sells revocable licenses; in principle it could pull content “overnight,” so the risk exists even if not yet exercised.
Language, Law, and Consumer Rights
- Strong support for requiring honest labeling like “lease,” “license,” or “revocable license,” with clear duration and revocation terms.
- Some jurisdictions (e.g., California, UK) already have disclosure/fairness rules, but enforcement is seen as weak; class‑action waivers complicate things.
- Several commenters want broader reform: digital first‑sale rights, irrevocable or lifetime licenses, marketplace neutrality, and right‑to‑root/repair.
Piracy, Preservation, and Alternatives
- Popular refrain: “If buying isn’t owning, pirating isn’t stealing,” reflecting a moral shift when purchases can be revoked at will.
- Others stress piracy is still copyright infringement, not “theft,” but acknowledge that DRM and revocations push people toward piracy and emulation.
- Preservation efforts (decompilation, emulation) and DRM‑free platforms are praised as the only practical way to ensure enduring access to games.
- Some vow to avoid future Sony consoles, move to PC/SteamOS/Nintendo, or stick to physical media where feasible, though many doubt mass boycotts will hold.