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:
https://www.ourcommons.ca/petitions/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-4965
Link to short speech I did for the Pirate Party:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4KmZz-70bs
Link to full Pirate Party stream on game destruction (all in German):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBtQBB19eNA
https://stopkillinggames.com
Say I go to a furniture store and buy a table. It has a 5 year warranty. 2 years later, it breaks, so I call Ubersoft and ask them to honor the warranty and fix it. If they don’t, then I can file a suit against them, i.e., for breach of contract. I may not even have to file a suit, as there may be government agencies who receive and act on these complaints, like my local consumer protection division.
I’m talking about real things here. Your example is a situation where the US government agrees that a company shouldn’t be permitted to take my money and then renege on their promises. And that’s generally true of most governments.
Supposing an absence of regulations protecting consumers like me, like you’re trying to suggest in your example, then it would be reasonable to assume an absence of laws and regulations protecting the corporation from consumers like me. Absent such laws, a consumer would be free to take matters into their own hands. They could go back to Ubersoft and take a replacement table without their agreement - it wouldn’t be “stealing” because it wouldn’t be illegal. If Ubersoft were closed, the consumer could break in. If Ubersoft security tried to stop them, the consumer could retaliate - damaging Ubersoft’s property, physically attacking the owner / management / employees, etc… Ubersoft could retaliate as well, of course - nothing’s stopping them. And as a corporation, they certainly have more power than a random consumer - but at that point they would need to employ their own security forces rather than relying on the government for them.
Even if we kept laws prohibiting physical violence, the consumer is still regulated by things like copyright and IP protections, e.g., the anti-circumvention portion of the DMCA. Absent such regulations, a consumer whose software was rendered unusable or changed in a way they didn’t like could reverse engineer it, bypass DRM, host their own servers, etc… Given that you didn’t speak against those regulations, I can only infer that you are not opposed to them.
Why do you think we don’t need regulations protecting consumers but that we do need regulations restricting them?
It looks like you believe that EULA rewrite the law; big news: that’s not how things works.
EULA could add something like
…AND, SOMETIME, WE’LL BARGE IN YOUR HOUSE AND TAKE STUFF WE LIKE.
After you have accepted the EULA and they trespass in your house stealing stuff, you know what will happen?
They end up in jail for stealing the same as any common thieves.
[BY POSTING REPLY TO THIS POST, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT ALL YOUR BELONING ARE OWNED BY @alessandro@lemmy.ca. PLEASE CLICK ON THE REPLY BUTTON ONLY IF YOU AGREE TO THESE TERMS]
Jesus christ does it say that? No it doesn’t. Everyone in this thread is constantly making shit up to make it sound like what Ubisoft did is literal murder. Selling things with no warranty is perfectly legal and the government isn’t going to overturn laws because Ubisoft is a shit company. Just don’t buy from Ubisoft! It’s easy!
Most licenses for software sold at retail disclaim (as far as local laws permit) any warranty on the performance of the software and limit liability for any damages to the purchase price of the software. One well-known case which upheld such a disclaimer is Mortenson v. Timberline.
Selling things with no warranty is perfectly legal.
You seems unaware that most countries have consumer protection laws. They cover mandatory warranty, health and security protocols (for physical stuff) and all sort of laws against planned obsolescence, fair competition etc…etc.
Just don’t buy from Ubisoft! It’s easy!
If you’re unaware that Ubisoft is going against consumer laws… well, of course you say so. Make yourself a question. If it’s perfectly legal for Ubisoft to “shut down” phisical videogames you bought in the store: why isn’t everybody doing so?
Make yourself a question. If it’s perfectly legal for Ubisoft to “shut down” phisical videogames you bought in the store: why isn’t everybody doing so?
Say I go to a furniture store and buy a table. It has a 5 year warranty. 2 years later, it breaks, so I call Ubersoft and ask them to honor the warranty and fix it. If they don’t, then I can file a suit against them, i.e., for breach of contract. I may not even have to file a suit, as there may be government agencies who receive and act on these complaints, like my local consumer protection division.
I’m talking about real things here. Your example is a situation where the US government agrees that a company shouldn’t be permitted to take my money and then renege on their promises. And that’s generally true of most governments.
Supposing an absence of regulations protecting consumers like me, like you’re trying to suggest in your example, then it would be reasonable to assume an absence of laws and regulations protecting the corporation from consumers like me. Absent such laws, a consumer would be free to take matters into their own hands. They could go back to Ubersoft and take a replacement table without their agreement - it wouldn’t be “stealing” because it wouldn’t be illegal. If Ubersoft were closed, the consumer could break in. If Ubersoft security tried to stop them, the consumer could retaliate - damaging Ubersoft’s property, physically attacking the owner / management / employees, etc… Ubersoft could retaliate as well, of course - nothing’s stopping them. And as a corporation, they certainly have more power than a random consumer - but at that point they would need to employ their own security forces rather than relying on the government for them.
Even if we kept laws prohibiting physical violence, the consumer is still regulated by things like copyright and IP protections, e.g., the anti-circumvention portion of the DMCA. Absent such regulations, a consumer whose software was rendered unusable or changed in a way they didn’t like could reverse engineer it, bypass DRM, host their own servers, etc… Given that you didn’t speak against those regulations, I can only infer that you are not opposed to them.
Why do you think we don’t need regulations protecting consumers but that we do need regulations restricting them?
It doesn’t. Before you buy the table they make you sign this agreement (which has a typo in it), explicitly stating there is no warranty.
It looks like you believe that EULA rewrite the law; big news: that’s not how things works. EULA could add something like
After you have accepted the EULA and they trespass in your house stealing stuff, you know what will happen?
They end up in jail for stealing the same as any common thieves.
[BY POSTING REPLY TO THIS POST, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT ALL YOUR BELONING ARE OWNED BY @alessandro@lemmy.ca. PLEASE CLICK ON THE REPLY BUTTON ONLY IF YOU AGREE TO THESE TERMS]
Jesus christ does it say that? No it doesn’t. Everyone in this thread is constantly making shit up to make it sound like what Ubisoft did is literal murder. Selling things with no warranty is perfectly legal and the government isn’t going to overturn laws because Ubisoft is a shit company. Just don’t buy from Ubisoft! It’s easy!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End-user_license_agreement
You seems unaware that most countries have consumer protection laws. They cover mandatory warranty, health and security protocols (for physical stuff) and all sort of laws against planned obsolescence, fair competition etc…etc.
If you’re unaware that Ubisoft is going against consumer laws… well, of course you say so. Make yourself a question. If it’s perfectly legal for Ubisoft to “shut down” phisical videogames you bought in the store: why isn’t everybody doing so?
Because people would stop buying their games!
“Because people would stop buying their games!” [makes] “it’s perfectly legal”?
That’s your logic?