this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2026
209 points (99.1% liked)

Technology

88146 readers
2718 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] dan@upvote.au 49 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

This is solid research, and this evidence is really going to put Sony into an awkward position.

Companies shouldn't say you "own" a digital product if they can revoke the license at any time. Owning should mean something like when you buy a game from GOG - you get a non-revokable, DRM-free copy you can use indefinitely. Otherwise, you're really just leasing it.

It's mentioned on the wiki, but in California it's illegal to use words like "buy" or "purchase" on the checkout page for licenses like this. They have to show a clear notice that you don't actually own the product, which is why Steam added a banner on their checkout page.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 4 points 6 days ago

As soon as they announced all of this I was pretty confident that we're going to end up getting raked over the coals come the finish. Do they even have lawyers, did they even run this plan past them get their feedback or did they just announce it?

If you say "buy" but it turns out that what you actually meant was "limited license" then at a minimum that is false advertising, and given the fact that they chose to make this change, and it wasn't something forced on them by third party action, you could even go as far as to charge them with conspiracy to commit fraud.

[–] veeesix@lemmy.ca 22 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] daychilde@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

delightfully so

[–] daychilde@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Oh dear. lol. Perhaps the idiots who wrote that idiotic take on things should have actually done a little research first. It's so beautiful to see companies make stupid mistakes.

[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Are they idiots or are they so arrogant they think they can get away with it anyway because everything is for sale and corrupt?

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 6 days ago

Given Sony's recent announcements I'm inclined to think that they might actually just be idiots.

I think what's happening is they're really panicking because they're starting to realize that the ps6 is going to be extremely expensive to build, and won't be an attractive option. So they are cutting costs everywhere they can, but that's just pissing off the current player base.

[–] luthis@lemmy.nz 10 points 1 week ago

Very curious to see how this plays out