then exactly what social contract are we upholding

The one where criminals, thieves, scammers, and pedophiles are free to commit whatever crimes they want, as long as they operate on behalf of capital.

If buying isn't owning...

None. Literally none. Just corporate greed

Pirate all Sony games you like to play, maybe even those you don’t. Share. Got it.

It's in the EULA for every piece of software, including physical.

If it wasn't, then buying a single copy would legally allow you to sell an infinite amount of copies.

Because that's what actually owning software means.

And video games are software.

PlayStation:

The Software is licensed to you, not sold

Windows 95:

The software product is licensed, not sold

https://www.scribd.com/document/478767349/Windows-95-License-Agreement

I know it's a joke no one ever read them...

But you all really never knew this?

Edit:

Don't make me wheel out the 1980s CRT TV for the class...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up863eQKGUI

There's always been freeware and shareware (yes, they're different) but if you as an individual paid money for software at any point, you've never owned it.

Businesses can't even justify the expense of "owning" basic stuff like Microsoft Office and collectively spend billions. "Owning" software is fucking expensive, and usually means you coded it.

Yeah, first you have to have representatives that write laws in your favor.

Same. I loved the PS1 and PS2.

It's been easy enough to set up a gaming PC in the living room for both desk and couch gaming (my gaming rig automatically switches to the TV if the TV and receiver inputs are on). Sony exclusives just aren't what they used to be, and I haven't really cared much since the PS2/PS3 era. I sold my consoles in 2012 and haven't looked back, still more games than I'll ever have time to play.

🤣

Old school was "shrinkwrap eula".

When you took the literal shrinkwrap off the box, you agreed.

Then it switched to "use eula" and the box that pops up containing the EULA that says "click to accept" and there's no other option but to accept...

That's the point you agree.

I don't think it's ever been "at purchase" at least in America. Because obviously gifts are a thing and purchasers aren't always users and more importantly users aren't all purchasers

A cracked game might circumvent those popups and/or screens, but I honestly don't know why they would put the effort in or if it would matter. And if it mattered probably varies a lot by country.

Yes it does The only reason that paragraph is there is it's legally required for disclosure.

By the plain text reading, yes. Would be nice to see PS streams fall to 0, but people ignore the terms and Sony doesn't enforce them until they want to. Doesn't matter what any of this BS says until they drag you in front of a judge... I mean private arbitrator... and say "look, plain as day, subsection 18.XXVI.xix D(13a) on page 47 where it clearly says we get to move our VP into his spare bedroom and shoot his dog"

We seriously are overdue for putting limits on so-called consumer contracts.

Afaik this a fairly standard software licensing model. Pretty much all paid videogames are like that, physical or not. Sony just started to act on it in the hopes of making even more moneyz

Not that this gives them a pass, but just to clarify the term: “limited” means you’re only allowed to use the software in the specific ways described by the EULA. The whole purpose of the EULA is to define exactly what “limited” means. In contrast, “unlimited use” would indicate that you’re allowed to use the software however you want unless specifically forbidden by the EULA.

“Limited” does not mean that they can just make up whatever they want later and say “well that’s what we meant when we said limited.” The EULA describes the agreement you make, and both parties are bound to exactly what is described in that EULA.

They can decide to change the EULA later and technically you are free to choose whether you want to accept those new terms, but the nasty part is that they can revoke your current license if you decide not to accept their new EULA and you’re just out of luck because you don’t actually own a copy.

TL;DR it’s a shitty deal either way, but I think it’s important to be accurate. They do define what “limited” means or it wouldn’t be a valid license agreement. That does not imply that the EULA is a good one.

Plus they can't revoke your ability to run it if you keep your PS console offline.

They can absolutely make it so that disk won't load the game though so long as you're connected to the internet.

I have one and every game I own is physical, like every other console I own. Now whether the games are in a workable state in the future without access to patches is another story, but I can lend, sell, trade my games and also never use PSN again if I want. From the state of things, it looks like I won't every be buying another console and I can live with that.

I really hope Linux on ps5 happens in a more native way rather than the USB hacks recently brought to light. I'd love to turn my ps5 into my own device.

To be fair, i recall Steam and GOG said that in case of a platform shutdown or if a game from your library is delisted, they can provide you a copy of the game files that you can keep and use.

The Sony policy is much more shady.

I’ll be interested to see if someone builds a Linux version that runs on the PS5, I installed it on my PS3 but haven’t seen much about that since.