I’m pretty sure this is in response to a recent California bill that forces digital storefronts to disclose if it is a license you are getting. Otherwise the storefront is not allowed to use words like “buy” or “purchase”.

https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/26/24254922/california-digital-purchase-disclosure-law-ab-2426

[–] cybermass@lemmy.ca 50 points 1 month ago (2 children)

10/10 law can we please get this in Canada too?

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Better yet, can we just get a law that makes it so when we buy something we own it?

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

I mean that's what the California law is.

If you buy it you own it, but we aren't buying the games.

A law that says they have to let us buy it instead of license it would be nice though.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 94 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (7 children)

If there's an offline game you love and play all the time, consider buying it again on GOG.com.

[–] Aphelion@lemm.ee 54 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Soon, GOG and all other storefronts will state that you're purchasing a temporary digital license for any game who's publisher uses an EULA that states you don't own the game. This is due to the recently signed California law that forces storefronts to be transparent about the publishers EULA.

https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/26/24254922/california-digital-purchase-disclosure-law-ab-2426

[–] TommySoda@lemmy.world 44 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

But also with GOG you can download the installers and play offline. It's literally one of their big selling points. It's less convenient than things like steam, but you can do whatever the hell you want when you buy it. So in that regard, it literally is a purchase. Or as close as you can get with digital goods.

[–] Blaiz0r@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 month ago (5 children)

Depends on the game, they still sell DRM games which are limited in being able to be downloaded freely

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] null@slrpnk.net 5 points 1 month ago

you can do whatever the hell you want when you buy it

Mmm, not quite.

And I point that out because Lemmy is a very FOSS-friendly place where that sentiment is actually true.

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 32 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

https://x.com/GOGcom/status/1844752098145038435

[–] tehmics@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago (3 children)

But GoG provides it DRM free, so you can always play what you've downloaded til the end of time. It's as good as piracy in that way.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

That's not GOG works. Get your offline installers.

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 30 points 1 month ago (7 children)

On a legal level, it is how GOG works. They still only sell licenses. You just have the loophole that their installers and the games installed by them will work regardless.

load more comments (7 replies)

[–] Voyajer@lemmy.world 28 points 1 month ago (6 children)

https://support.gog.com/hc/en-us/articles/212632089-GOG-User-Agreement?product=gog

Check 2.1, GOG is the same.

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

If I back up a DRM-free installer what's the difference?

[–] radix@lemmy.world 24 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Legally, it's still a license, it's just effectively impossible to revoke.

Edit to expand on this: A truly offline forever-purchase of physical goods can be re-sold. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine (this is the US-specific version, other jurisdictions may have similar doctrines).

American legal concept that limits the rights of an intellectual property owner to control resale of products embodying its intellectual property.

A digital "purchase" is usually non-transferable, even from GOG. It can't be removed from your own HDD once you download the installer, but there are still restrictions attached on what you can do with it, even if those are limited and hard to enforce.

[–] TheEntity@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Just like any game ever sold on a CD.

[–] xapr@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 1 month ago

Technically, probably yes, but you can buy old, opened games on eBay. I doubt you can do the same with GOG games. Digital media is much harder if not impossible to resell.

[–] fushuan@lemm.ee 8 points 1 month ago

If you back up the folder of a steam installed game that doesn't need steam to run, what's the difference?

Owning the copy in a legal sense doesn't affect most of the userbase tbh.

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] tacosanonymous@lemm.ee 23 points 1 month ago

I would say, if you’ve purchased, just get a free version.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 1 month ago

Nah fuck all that, you own the game already. You pirate it.

[–] Retro_unlimited@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Also don’t forget to download the offline installers from GOG. I spent all of last week doing that

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] Allonzee@lemmy.world 64 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

If only there was a Girl who was Fit that could, I don't know, Repack this situation, thus saving us from it...

[–] ninth_plane@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago

Hey thanks for describing this hypothetical situation, I pay Steam for a lot of game licenses so I've lost touch with the current philosophy of hypothetical alternatives.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] zoostation@lemmy.world 54 points 1 month ago (5 children)

Before Steam you bought a physical disc and it didn't matter that you technically only purchased a license, the disc was yours and nobody was coming to your house to take it away if the publisher started fighting with the developer or whatever.

[–] Deestan@lemmy.world 67 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

True, with some modifications:

Some games had online activation built in. Some games would simply not install on a second or third machine without getting permission from the publisher.

Regular CDs have a lifespan of 5-10 years, shorter if not stored ideally. Almost all games had sophisticated mechanisms to prevent backups being taken.

Even if you could take a backup, record associations and publishers lobbied to make it illegal and punishable by severe fines in many countries.

Sony shipped fucking root kits on their CD that would hijack your PC and screw with backup software. EA shipped CDs with autoexexuting software that would actually delete CloneCD and other CD copying software and prevent new installes from working. My copy of Sims 2 came with that bullshit and OH MAN I was not happy about it.

[–] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 28 points 1 month ago

Sony shipped fucking root kits on their CD that would hijack your PC and screw with backup software.

Worse, this thing from Sony was on music CD's and not even games.

The Sony Rootkit debacle is one of the reasons that I still will not do business with Sony in any of its guises, for any reason, no matter the price. And believe me, I have a long memory.

[–] _bcron_@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago

Some games would simply not install on a second or third machine without getting permission from the publisher.

I remember binning DDR2 RAM on a test bench back in the day and Windows deactivated itself after about a dozen times lol

[–] MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I've got CDs I've had for 25+ years and they're still fine

[–] Deestan@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Yeah good ones allegedly last 200 years if stored correctly. Cheap ones are 5-10. 20 can be expected for quality CDs stored correctly.

But no matter the claimed quality, it's a gamble. Our local library had a lot of 10-20 year old CDs that had developed microbubbles.

5 years is low range for CDs, but common enough that you should be taking backups for anything you keep longer.

[–] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Don't conflate a mastered CD with an aluminum data layer with a recordable CD-R or CD-RW, which use organic dyes that have a significantly shorter lifespan.

A properly manufactured CD can last 200+ years if it's stored in a dry environment free of UV exposure and high levels of moisture.

Even a quality CD-R can't really be expected to retain all of its data integrity for much more than 10 years.

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 38 points 1 month ago

Thanks, new California law!

[–] FelixCress@lemmy.world 37 points 1 month ago (5 children)

The answer is to introduce law which would force digital products to be owned, not licenced for non commercial users.

[–] cttttt@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

I think the answer was to introduce a law which would force digital market places to clearly describe what users are paying for, for folks who weren't around during the controversial time when Steam and Xbox Live Arcade came out and can't grasp the concept; folks who didn't observe the reality before and after this shift.

Even though it was abundantly clear already, this is what the California law is all about.

If, with this clear explanation, you still want to merely get a license to use games via a service, you should be able to do it.

Valve isn't doing anything wrong: far from it. Steam is awesome and I understand that one day, it could all go away and with it, all the games I have access to.

I also understand that, at any time, Valve may decide that they don't want me to use Steam anymore, or that someone may hack into my account and I won't have access anymore.

Finally, I get that even now, things that I could do with physical games; I can't do with my Steam library (eg. Easily play a game on my Steam Deck while someone also plays another game on my desktop, or sell a game disc that sits on my desk).

I understood this when I reluctantly signed up to Steam to play Half Life 2 back in the day when it was a complete dumpster fire of a buggy mess of a service. But it has improved so much since then.

Hey, do you, but I don't see what the big deal is. We've already protested that Steam was a bad idea, and Valve was literally the devil, but it's actually turned out to be objectively more convenient than any alternative to play games, and it's no longer Valve forcing us to install Steam to play their games. Practically the entire industry has shifted, plus there are now alternatives (besides piracy) like GoG. Hopefully this law causes more competition in that DRM free space.

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] GrammarPolice@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Hey, at least they're clearing the air a little bit

[–] Chozo@fedia.io 14 points 1 month ago

Isn't this only because it's soon to be legally required in California? I don't think they're doing this out of the goodness of their hearts.

[–] yamanii@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago

The amount of comments on social media that I saw of people surprised by this means this really wasn't something the average person knew about, it's natural to think if you paid for digital content it should've the same rights of physical. Though reselling will get messy.

[–] kindenough@kbin.earth 10 points 1 month ago

"EA, play the license".

We all know here that you don't own anything on Steam or any other client with DRM. Duh...

B this shit should be illegal, I buy a product, game, license whatever you call it, it is mine. This farce of consumer protection... "do you understand the words coming out of my mouth!?....License!!'. Yeah we do, let us own our purchased games.

[–] Emerald@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If the game is FOSS, does this warning still show? 🤔

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments