Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

French court rules Steam should allow resale of digital games, Valve will appeal

Blaine

Cis-Het Oppressor
Patron
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
1,874,662
Location
Roanoke, VA
Grab the Codex by the pussy
It's inherent in that specific good sold by that specific vendor, yes. Another vendor may sell a similar good that is allowed to be traded after purchase.

I'm afraid it isn't. "Inherent" is synonymous with "intrinsic"; the tradable/non-tradable status of the good in this hypothetical isn't intrinsic, but is by definition extrinsic—that is, a quality that isn't inseparable from or essential to the good, but rather one that can be altered by the vendor.

You aren't the first person I've run across who's fuzzy on the concept of intrinsic vs. extrinsic. Nice try, though.

The notion that non-tradable status is an inherent quality because the vendor says so is especially funny when one considers that consumers can often find ways to trade or sell such digital goods anyway, whether the vendor wants them to or not.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2018
Messages
50,754
Codex Year of the Donut
It's inherent in that specific good sold by that specific vendor, yes. Another vendor may sell a similar good that is allowed to be traded after purchase.

I'm afraid it isn't. "Inherent" is synonymous with "intrinsic"; the tradable/non-tradable status of the good in this hypothetical isn't intrinsic, but is by definition extrinsic—that is, a quality that isn't inseparable from or essential to the good, but rather one that can be altered by the vendor.

You aren't the first person I've run across who's fuzzy on the concept of intrinsic vs. extrinsic. Nice try, though.

The notion that non-tradable status is an inherent quality because the vendor says so is especially funny when one considers that consumers can often find ways to trade or sell digital goods anyway, whether the vendor wants them to or not.
Is there a reason you've misdirected the argument?
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2018
Messages
50,754
Codex Year of the Donut
It's inherent in that specific good sold by that specific vendor, yes. Another vendor may sell a similar good that is allowed to be traded after purchase.

I'm afraid it isn't. "Inherent" is synonymous with "intrinsic"; the tradable/non-tradable status of the good in this hypothetical isn't intrinsic, but is by definition extrinsic—that is, a quality that isn't inseparable from or essential to the good, but rather one that can be altered by the vendor.

You aren't the first person I've run across who's fuzzy on the concept of intrinsic vs. extrinsic. Nice try, though.

The notion that non-tradable status is an inherent quality because the vendor says so is especially funny when one considers that consumers can often find ways to trade or sell digital goods anyway, whether the vendor wants them to or not.
Is there a reason you've misdirected the argument?

Because you can resell it or give it to someone else anyway by providing them a pirated copy. So the contract is not self enforcing, even if they institute DRM to try to prevent you from doing so.

So digital goods require IP protection laws and enforcement to be able to be sold at all. And if IP protection laws are reasonable and considered minimal, then consumer protection from unfair some types of unfair contracts can also be considered minimal and reasonable.

In a purely free-market environment with no enforcement of laws like you are talking about people would just pirate games available as digital downloads.
In the absence of IP protection laws DRM would simply be more invasive.
I hope you enjoy using Rockstar's new RockstarOS to play their games.
 

Perkel

Arcane
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
15,810
The level of retardation in this thread is reaching stratosphere and soon will reach moon. It is amazing watching so many people absolutely cucked.


"but this will kill game market !!!!!!!!!"
On PC right now you can pirate almost anything within minutes. So the idea that used games market will suddenly kill industry is retarded. Consoles right now have used coppies and console market is bigger than PC market and yet no one complains.
We lived through physical times and game industry grew and nothing was wrong with it when we traded used games.
Many pirates simply will move to cheap original coppies. In fact used games and piracy is only reason why gaming market is worth this much today. Without both gaming market would be 10 times smaller as games would not be as popular. Best example of that is me, i moved from pirate games when young to buying used copies and new.

"everyone will go subscription!!!!"
No they will not go into subscription model because:
a) this court rule directly addresses fake subscription model where you pay one time and you are "subscribed" to game. So games like Destiny are fucked as they are not considered subcription games.
b) no one is willing to pay for 100s of games in monthly pay subscription. So there goes developers/publishers moving to true subscription model.

"But Steam and rest will not do business in Europe !!!"
Lol as if they will do that when half of their sales come from Europe.
It would be like cutting their own faces.
 

Blaine

Cis-Het Oppressor
Patron
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
1,874,662
Location
Roanoke, VA
Grab the Codex by the pussy
Is there a reason you've misdirected the argument?

Your failure to produce a rebuttal doesn't mean that the argument has been misdirected.

In fact, the state of being on track is an inherent quality of my side of the argument. Why? Because I produce my side of the argument and have declared it to be so.

In the absence of IP protection laws DRM would simply be more invasive.
I hope you enjoy using Rockstar's new RockstarOS to play their games.

Yet there are laws protecting intellectual property, companies do rely on actual contract law rather than on self-enforcing agreements, etc.

This ideal you have of a pure free market economy untouched even indirectly by laws and regulations is nothing but a phantom. It doesn't exist, and never will exist.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2018
Messages
50,754
Codex Year of the Donut
J_C
steamvalve_0187-630x420.jpg
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2018
Messages
50,754
Codex Year of the Donut
Your failure to produce a rebuttal doesn't mean that the argument has been misdirected.

In fact, the state of being on track is an inherent quality of my side of the argument. Why? Because I produce my side of the argument and have declared it to be so.
It's misdirected because it had nothing to do with the original argument.
I'll take this as you admitting you're stupid and incapable of following an argument.

Yet there are laws protecting intellectual property, companies do rely on actual contract law rather than on self-enforcing agreements, etc.

This ideal you have of a pure free market economy untouched even indirectly by laws and regulations is nothing but a phantom. It doesn't exist, and never will exist.
See above, I'm not the one who started the argument about the free market.
 

J_C

One Bit Studio
Patron
Developer
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
16,947
Location
Pannonia
Project: Eternity Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath
I just found that after I tagged you. But you realise that it is a ot of sales from Europe, don't you? No company will say No to market as huge as that.That's almost the third.
It has shrunk every year, and will continue to do so as third world countries grow. I'd be surprised if it was 10% by 2030.
For multi billion dollar business, 10% is still a lot. These businesses are fighting over 1 or 2 percents, when it comes to market share.

It has shrunk every year, and will continue to do so as third world countries grow. I'd be surprised if it was 10% by 2030.

10% is still better than 0%
Not when it costs more than that to cater to them.
It almost costs nothing, when you look at the scale of the business.
 

Blaine

Cis-Het Oppressor
Patron
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
1,874,662
Location
Roanoke, VA
Grab the Codex by the pussy
It's misdirected because it had nothing to do with the original argument.

It did, and the threads of the argument can easily be traced back through the preceding posts, but then again:

I'll take this as you admitting you're stupid.

...you are a big fan of "because I said so" and arbitrariness. Companies' digital goods are inherently untradable because they say so, the person you're arguing with is stupid because you say so, and now you can declare yourself the winner of the argument and grand poohbah of the thread because you say so.

Your notion that a free market economy can essentially exist in vacuum is completely retarded, by the way. It's some of the dumbest shit I've ever had the privilege of reading on this website, and I've been watching people work overtime to produce dumb shit here for almost seven years.
 

passerby

Arcane
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
2,788
You've got it backwards shill. A government is protecting the rights of people to sell what is theirs. You're the one begging the government to intervene and stop people from doing that.

No, governent is dictating that a certain product can't be offered for sale anymore - a lifetime subscription to access an individual game with no transfer right on an online service.
It's a market overregulation, that probably force it into more consumer unfriendly business practices, that so happen are perfectly fine according to our laws.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2018
Messages
50,754
Codex Year of the Donut
It's misdirected because it had nothing to do with the original argument.

It did, and the threads of the argument can easily be traced back through the preceding posts, but then again:

I'll take this as you admitting you're stupid.

...you are a big fan of "because I said so" and arbitrariness. Companies' digital goods are inherently untradable because they say so, the person you're arguing with is stupid because you say so, and now you can declare yourself the winner of the argument and grand poohbah of the thread because you say so.

Your notion that a free market economy can essentially exist in vacuum is completely retarded, by the way. It's some of the dumbest shit I've ever had the privilege of reading on this website, and I've been watching people work overtime to produce dumb shit here for almost seven years.
The absolute fucking irony of you being retarded and trying to redefine what free market means then getting butthurt when I point out you're a retard — and then going on to say that free markets simply can't exist.
Just admit you don't know what a free market is and move on already.
 

RegionalHobo

Scholar
Joined
Oct 2, 2018
Messages
294
The level of retardation in this thread is reaching stratosphere and soon will reach moon. It is amazing watching so many people absolutely cucked.


"but this will kill game market !!!!!!!!!"
On PC right now you can pirate almost anything within minutes. So the idea that used games market will suddenly kill industry is retarded. Consoles right now have used coppies and console market is bigger than PC market and yet no one complains.
We lived through physical times and game industry grew and nothing was wrong with it when we traded used games.
Many pirates simply will move to cheap original coppies. In fact used games and piracy is only reason why gaming market is worth this much today. Without both gaming market would be 10 times smaller as games would not be as popular. Best example of that is me, i moved from pirate games when young to buying used copies and new.

"everyone will go subscription!!!!"
No they will not go into subscription model because:
a) this court rule directly addresses fake subscription model where you pay one time and you are "subscribed" to game. So games like Destiny are fucked as they are not considered subcription games.
b) no one is willing to pay for 100s of games in monthly pay subscription. So there goes developers/publishers moving to true subscription model.

"But Steam and rest will not do business in Europe !!!"
Lol as if they will do that when half of their sales come from Europe.
It would be like cutting their own faces.

Nah, i don t pirate most of the time because i have the money and steam is just easier to use, easy updates, downloads, etc. If you make a steam '' used '' market you can bet your ass i will use it instead of buying it new. You know, the original gaben argument about piracy and service?
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2018
Messages
50,754
Codex Year of the Donut
I just found that after I tagged you. But you realise that it is a ot of sales from Europe, don't you? No company will say No to market as huge as that.That's almost the third.
It has shrunk every year, and will continue to do so as third world countries grow. I'd be surprised if it was 10% by 2030.
For multi billion dollar business, 10% is still a lot. These businesses are fighting over 1 or 2 percents, when it comes to market share.

It has shrunk every year, and will continue to do so as third world countries grow. I'd be surprised if it was 10% by 2030.

10% is still better than 0%
Not when it costs more than that to cater to them.
It almost costs nothing, when you look at the scale of the business.
Yeah, a company would never leave a European country due to overregulation
https://digiday.com/uk/google-news-spain/
Oh, and we can't forget GDPR — when companies simply started flat out blocking EU users because it was cheaper than catering to your laws :lol: https://gdpr-shield.io/
TBH I hope Europeans go through with this. I hope you keep overregulating everything to the point where you've made your own equivalent to China's great firewall and we don't have to deal with europeans on the internet anymore.
 
Last edited:

Blaine

Cis-Het Oppressor
Patron
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
1,874,662
Location
Roanoke, VA
Grab the Codex by the pussy
...and then going on to say that free markets simply can't exist.

I didn't say that free markets can't exist.

91876f00b7.png


I said that they can't exist in vacuum. Why are you deliberately misquoting me? Well, actually, you did a fine job of quoting me; you simply chose to ignore the "in vacuum" portion of that sentence, since your "rebuttal" doesn't work without the omission.

Your on-paper, ideal-only delusions bear little resemblance to a free market in practice and are totally moronic, as I pointed out earlier.
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2018
Messages
50,754
Codex Year of the Donut
...and then going on to say that free markets simply can't exist.

I didn't say that free markets can't exist.

91876f00b7.png


I said that they can't exist in vacuum. Why are you deliberately misquoting me? Well, actually, you did a fine job of quoting me; you just subsequently ignored the "in vacuum" portion of that sentence.

Your on-paper, ideal-only delusions bear little resemblance to a free market in practice and are totally moronic, as I pointed out earlier.
A free market doesn't mean a market with no rules or regulations.
You're attempting to redefine it simply because you say it can't exist.
 

passerby

Arcane
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
2,788
I was hipotetising about reselling keys on ebay, scratch that, Steam already has a functional marketplace, if it goes through, they'll demand to allow trade of used games there and if transaction cut would be prohibitively high they'd be taken to court over it too.
 

passerby

Arcane
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
2,788
Yeah, that would be a way out and would change nothing since it's already possible and happening in practice. It's not what the good samaritans that took them to court are after, thought.
 

FeelTheRads

Arcane
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
13,716

Wow, a difference of 5 percent! America best! Europe worst! *tear of an eagle*
29% is close to a quarter. And I'm guessing 34% is close to a half, right? :lol:

What an braindead cocksucking cretin.

Comparing physical goods to digital goods is asinine. It's a pain in the ass to resell physical goods(go check the flea market thread), it takes two clicks to resell digital goods.

Ah, so laws and rights should be based on how easy it is to do something.
Kwantards and their "best justice".

Ah yes, the corporate shill. Tell me, what would happen to medium or indie studios if half of their profit or 25 percent of their profit is resold in low prices in the market? What will happen to studios that only make singleplayer games?

Aww, poor indie studios and their shovelware. :(

I don't know where you go those numbers, by the way. But if they'd lose this much profit, it means that their business was only sustained by people buying things they didn't like or never used.
And I don't see how anyone can see this as a good thing. Well, except developers, of course, who can just make whatever shit garbage and keep afloat because of constant sales and bundles because people are stupid and buy shit just because it's cheap.

So yes, actually, corporate shills. The entertainment industry gets more free passes to shit on customer rights than any others. It's hardly only about digital sales. Let's not forget how you can't return opened software. Why? Because of corporate shills and corporate lobbying, that's why.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom