Sony Patent Could Stop You From Playing Used Games

I'm no fan of this move, but a patent does not guarantee this will be implemented. I'm pretty sure similar moves were made on both the 360 and the ps3, but they never came from implementation. I find it funny that some people flip out and cry about it like its a sure fire thing, or that the idea is new to begin with.

Publishers are pushing for this with or without the hardware to enforce it. Pre-order bonuses, exclusive content codes in the box, and account activitations are all means to the same end: force new game buys. Every big publisher has done this, and every DD service has their hand in this too.
 
Zarathustra[H];1039480143 said:
Isn't the right to resell stuff pretty well established in the U.S. under the First Sale doctrine?

I vaguely remember Autodesk being smacked around by the courts 4 or 5 years ago when they tried to prevent resale of CAD software...
Click to expand...

Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc. was a case in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington regarding the applicability of the first-sale doctrine to software sold under the terms of so-called "shrinkwrap licensing." The court held that when the transfer of software to the purchaser materially resembled a sale (non-recurring price, right to perpetual possession of copy) it was, in fact, a "sale with restrictions on use"[1] giving rise to a right to resell the copy under the first-sale doctrine. As such, Autodesk could not pursue an action for copyright infringement against Vernor, who sought to resell used versions of its software on eBay. The decision was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which issued a decision on September 10, 2010, reversing the first-sale doctrine ruling and remanding for further proceedings on the misuse of copyright claim. The Ninth Circuit's decision asserted that its ruling was compelled by Ninth Circuit precedent, but observed that the policy considerations involved in the case might affect motion pictures and libraries as well as sales of used software.

The net effect of the Ninth Circuit's ruling is to limit the "You bought it, you own it" principle asserted by such organizations as the Electronic Frontier Foundation (or EFF).[2][3]
 
Outamyhead said:
This may damage their actual console sales, as well as the games sales, this is a pure greed move that will backfire.
Click to expand...

Probably not. I mean, look at Xbox live... that was a completely stupid idea (pay to play p2p service!) but people flocked to it. Plus more and more people are getting used to not having resale of games (Steam and games bought from the consoles online stores etc.) and publishers [like Valve] adding "online codes" to disk games hampering it's resale value.

Though they would more likely do like they do now. Sell "online passes" for the different games to unlock it to the consle. So this would likely change nothing. Plus the Xbox is also apparently going to do the same thing...
 
Dan_D said:
Your missing out on some good games then. I like good games. Regardless of their platform. Though I usually find myself playing PC more than anything else by a wide margin.
Click to expand...

Do you really have time to play all the good games, anyway? I sure don't. I used to come home from elementary school and spend 6 hours gaming with friends, but I don't do or want to do that anymore.
 
Dan_D said:
Your missing out on some good games then. I like good games. Regardless of their platform. Though I usually find myself playing PC more than anything else by a wide margin.
Click to expand...

Examples?

Every time I try a console port I wind up being massively disappointed, wondering why I wasted my money on it.

Most console ports have poor graphics, as they are designed for inferior console hardware, but there are some notable exceptions here too. Overall, graphics aren't that big of a deal to me, but it is nice when things look good.

What I notice most is that games designed with consoles typically just aren't fun, and lack good replay value.

Typically when trying out a game designed with the console in mind I feel like its been dumbed down, and doesn't challenge me intellectually, and thus feels uninteresting.

I mean, Metro 2033 was good and all, but compared to the fast expanses and open ended game play of the S.T.A.L.K.E.R series it felt like a childish and silly tunnel shooter.

Battlefield 3 is so pretty, but after having played Red Orchestra for a while, most other FPS games feel dumb and not worth my time.

I got a chance to try Civilization Revolution on the Xbox 360 (or was it PS3, can't remember now) and by comparison to Civ 4 which I was used to at the time, it felt incredibly dumb and watered down.

I tend to buy one or two games a year, and then play them for a few years (because often they are that good) rather than buy lots of games and dedicate less time to them.

My two top games played (by far) in the last couple of months are Red Orchestra 2: Heroes of Stalingrad (2011 release) and Civilization V (2010 release).

If you don't count the Civilization V God's and Kings expansion pack, I didn't come across a single new game that interested me in 2012, so I didn't buy any.
 
GameStop shares fell by 5% today because of this patent posting :rolleyes:

EA, Activision-Blizzard, Ubisoft, Square-Enix, Take2, Zenimax can force Sony and MS to implement these used game locks, or quite possibly have that stuff enabled but not necessarily always used in the console, like region locking and the PS3 (one locked game so far!).

Would be preferable, let low-print run games roam free while the big name titles get get made in the millions flow like predictable cringe-inducing dialogue in a Bioware game anyway.
 
Ahh yes. Because in the eyes of the publisher, you don't own the content you own the license to view/play the content under a strict terms of service. That's what they've been moving towards for a long time.
 
And game companies scratches head as to why more people nowdays use a torrent program and download game for free and crack it to bybass all the bullshit. The honest people that buy the games get screwed over not the crackers/hackers.
 
That Sony has even considered this and has gotten it so far as a patent filing is yet another reason why I haven't purchased a single Sony product in over a decade.
 
Patent going to stop used games? What's a used game?
pirate-fuck-that-shit-meme.png
 
If this happens I will not buy that console. Honestly I find console gaming as a great hobby but my heart lies in PC Gaming. If a console does this to me its not the end of the world because I normally only get console games that I plan on playing with friends who don't PC Game. Their loss not mine lol.
 
Steve said:
Patents like this are idiotic. Restricting a game to one console? What if you have more than one console? Want to play at a friends house? Want to give your used game to a friend? Your console breaks?
Click to expand...

im going to say some thing like that
Sony: To bad.

btw Microsoft as a plan for this in the works as well and would make console game pretty much have the same resale value as PC games which is none
 
Sony just fucked itself on this one. I don't own a PS3 or will be getting a PS4 or whatever they will call it. But if I do the first thing would be for me to mod the console and play free games on torrent now how do you like that Sony? Shit I do that now lol. shhh... its a secret :D Anyway, they push I would push back harder right where it hurts the most...their wallets. Well that's my 2 cents lol.
 
T1125P said:
Sony just fucked itself on this one. I don't own a PS3 or will be getting a PS4 or whatever they will call it. But if I do the first thing would be for me to mod the console and play free games on torrent now how do you like that Sony? Shit I do that now lol. shhh... its a secret :D Anyway, they push I would push back harder right where it hurts the most...their wallets. Well that's my 2 cents lol.
Click to expand...

sounds like theyre not losing anything with you.
 
T1125P said:
Sony just fucked itself on this one. I don't own a PS3 or will be getting a PS4 or whatever they will call it. But if I do the first thing would be for me to mod the console and play free games on torrent now how do you like that Sony? Shit I do that now lol. shhh... its a secret :D Anyway, they push I would push back harder right where it hurts the most...their wallets. Well that's my 2 cents lol.
Click to expand...

So you'd show them by decreasing the $0 you give them, to $0..? I bet this will hit the stock value hard! :p
 
DraginDime said:
Games would have to drop drastically in price before I would accept that.

But the way things are going it probably won't be long before they quit selling games in stores with the push to digital media. I only buy 1-2 console games a year because I prefer to play on my PC mainly.
Click to expand...

Many people I know used to be huge console fans, having all of them and buying games monthly. Let me tell you that in Brazil that's a very expensive hobby. That lasted for a long time, until they discovered Steam. As much as I hate Steam, I have to give them credit for having amazing deals.

These friends almost don't touch their consoles any more. All of them are glued to their notebooks playing a lot of games they wanted on their consoles but the price was too high, and Steam delivered with fair prices. They bought more games and spending even more, but getting more in return. And all of them are very happy with the change.
 
Next step will be having to repurchase a game every time you want to play it. Like an expensive arcade.
 
I hope they do this so it will give me a good reason not to waste any money on the ps4.
 
DeathPrincess said:
Plus more and more people are getting used to not having resale of games (Steam and games bought from the consoles online stores etc.) and publishers [like Valve] adding "online codes" to disk games hampering it's resale value..
Click to expand...

I'm also used to paying $5-$10 for game licences from steam. A game license is different than outright buying the game.

As such a license for use is a lot less valuable then owning a copy, and I'm willing to pay a different (and much lower) price for a license. If Sony thinks I'll pay the same for a license as I do for an owned copy, they can go pound sand.
 
It will probably happen with all console games sooner or later. We PC gamers have had to put up with it for some time,so why shouldn't console gamers get to share the joy?
 
dandragonrage said:
If this happens, I will never buy or recommend another Sony product, even if The Last Guardian comes out on the new console.
Click to expand...

Why do you need this to do that? You already forgot the rootkits they put in to the cd:s etc? BOYCOT SONY, it's plain evil.
 
eclipse said:


Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc. was a case in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington regarding the applicability of the first-sale doctrine to software sold under the terms of so-called "shrinkwrap licensing." The court held that when the transfer of software to the purchaser materially resembled a sale (non-recurring price, right to perpetual possession of copy) it was, in fact, a "sale with restrictions on use"[1] giving rise to a right to resell the copy under the first-sale doctrine. As such, Autodesk could not pursue an action for copyright infringement against Vernor, who sought to resell used versions of its software on eBay. The decision was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which issued a decision on September 10, 2010, reversing the first-sale doctrine ruling and remanding for further proceedings on the misuse of copyright claim. The Ninth Circuit's decision asserted that its ruling was compelled by Ninth Circuit precedent, but observed that the policy considerations involved in the case might affect motion pictures and libraries as well as sales of used software.

The net effect of the Ninth Circuit's ruling is to limit the "You bought it, you own it" principle asserted by such organizations as the Electronic Frontier Foundation (or EFF).[2][3]
Click to expand...

You never own a software unless you had it developed especially for you. Sotware licenses are a right to use and usually are non transferrable.
 
In business use, mind you. Consumer law is totally a different ballpark.
 
Sony's never been the best study of market forces. Betamax, DRM'd CD's, removing Other OS from PS3, banning tons of normal users from their network, and the beat just keeps going on. Sometimes I swear their whole market strategy is centered around the slowest possible suicide.
 
The source of this non-sense is that it sounds stupid to us and could cause a massive flop of new consoles if they try it but it sounds awesome to the board of directors. The BoD won't appreciate how stupid this would be. And when it backfires, they'll make up some excuse to stockholders.

But part of the reason they're trying it is because they view consumers as cattle. And consumers have just as much guilt as anyone else for being considered cattle. People gleefully over pay for cell and data service to have the latest smartphone. They cheer lead the failure of the competing console they didn't buy so they can gloat.

Chances are, they will dial back these schemes at launch of the new consoles and then ramp it back in once the new consoles are declared a success and people will continue to buy the new consoles so they can be part of the crowd.
 
Any move from Sony like this will CAUSE normal honest people to JB their PS4 and begin pirating games.
 
stevedave said:
I think this is the perfect move to get Sony out of the console business.

then Microsoft will merge PC and Console.
Click to expand...

Microsoft already has this.....it's called XBox

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is exactly things like this that is why I refuse to have any Sony product. It's a decision I made years ago and plan to stick to it. I even cringe when I see cameras made with Sony components.
 
Just another reason I do not support the dinosaur that is Sony. What an arrogant company.
 
Huh, the way I read the patent was not that it would use the tag to match disc/console but rather disc/user. That way it would allow a user to play the disc on any console (IE if you have multiple consoles) but would prevent the ability for the disc to be used by a different user.

That said it's still stupid to try and target the used game market in my opinion. Steam has shown you how to sell games that cannot be resold and that's by selling them at a good price. The only game I've bought on Steam that's been more than 20 is Borderlands 2 and I don't regret that because I hold onto good games anyway. I doubt this is ever be implemented but Sony has become such a crappy company (not just PS but even their electronics division sucks currently, imo) that you don't know what they might try.
 
ballistic90 said:
I stopped using Sony products after my brother went through 5 PS2s and my wife went through 3.

It's actually a standing rule in the house where no Sony products are allowed in. It's not too hard to enforce, actually.
Click to expand...

Wow.. 5 PS2's? Pretty sure he's doing it wrong. My original launch phat PS2 got dropped, kicked, vomitted on and it still works great. My PS3 has died once due to an electrical surge doing a thunderstorm that took out the power supply which was a $40 replacement part, shitty belkin surge protectors.
 
IMO they see people willing to do this for PC games (Steam and other DRM'd systems). Generally while yelling "Steam is so great!!" as they give up property ownership rights for momentary convenience.

Why wouldn't they want to do something similar for a console?

It still blows my mind that people will pay $50 or $60 for a DRM'd PC game that they cannot resell or transfer, and can lose access to based on some other company's judgement of them as a person (via banned accounts, online authentication, etc).

I absolutely refuse to do it. If consoles go this way also I'll do what I've been doing with PC games - catching up on old classics. I haven't bought a new PC game in 2 years now.
 
If my game installs to any console and allows me to play from the console without the CD and also allows me to download to any console I want when I log into it, then that's great. If it doesn't then fuck Sony.
 
GreenMonkey said:
IMO they see people willing to do this for PC games (Steam and other DRM'd systems). Generally while yelling "Steam is so great!!" as they give up property ownership rights for momentary convenience.

Why wouldn't they want to do something similar for a console?

It still blows my mind that people will pay $50 or $60 for a DRM'd PC game that they cannot resell or transfer, and can lose access to based on some other company's judgement of them as a person (via banned accounts, online authentication, etc).

I absolutely refuse to do it. If consoles go this way also I'll do what I've been doing with PC games - catching up on old classics. I haven't bought a new PC game in 2 years now.
Click to expand...

Yeah, except it's not the same thing.
Most Computer games require what is called a cd key.
Buying a used game that requires a cd-key is pointless if the original owner is still using that cd-key.

So it's not like Steam or a DRM system is anything new.

The reason PCs have DRMs or Cd-Keys is because its so easy to pirate a computer game. So I can understand why they implemented the feature.

However, Sony gains no such advantage from using this system. In fact they will most likely end up with more pirated games and modded consoles.

Also you can run steam in offline mode so you don't need to authenticate with their server.

And how many people do you know were banned by steam for doing nothing wrong?
 
I don't see how this will work to their advantage. It's going to piss of customers more than anything else.
And watch, someone will come along with tech to wipe the chips so that they play like new. I bet Gamestop would pay a bunch of money for that tech to be in its store.
 
Zarathustra[H];1039480143 said:
Isn't the right to resell stuff pretty well established in the U.S. under the First Sale doctrine?

I vaguely remember Autodesk being smacked around by the courts 4 or 5 years ago when they tried to prevent resale of CAD software...
Click to expand...

They'll find a way around it - they do not hire good lawyers for no reason. Maybe they will say that you are buying it from Japan and First Sale doctrine does not apply
 
B00nie said:
You never own a software unless you had it developed especially for you. Sotware licenses are a right to use and usually are non transferrable.
Click to expand...

Just like the ads that say you own a movie - you don't, you own a license to view the movie
 
I like some of the products Sony makes, but they've always been about proprietary tech and making things most companies include as options. Oh.....you wanted a remote that includes a power off button....yeah, we have one - it's $35.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top