PC Code Stripping - Is It Legal Or Not?

[HardOCP News]

Apparently "PC code stripping" is a big issue in the EU. Who knew?

“Whilst re-selling game keys may well amount to a breach of contract – as such re-selling is almost invariably prohibited by the terms of the corresponding game’s End User Licence Agreement – whether such re-selling is illegal has been unclear for some time," says Harbottle and Lewis associate Nicolas Murfett.

 

[xX_Jack_Carver_Xx]

The user agreement is irrelevant, the US Supreme Court has ruled consumers have the right to sell products they have bought. So suck it.

 

[gamerk2]

The user agreement is irrelevant, the US Supreme Court has ruled consumers have the right to sell products they have bought. So suck it.

But you didn't buy the game, you brought a license to use the game.

 

[ljbade]

Screw copyrights. If I want to save $20 on a new game by buying the Steam key off some overseas website I will do it and FU to anyone who tries to stop me.

 

[Cvar]

If I want a game bad enough I'll pay full retail, if not I'll usually wait until it's on sale to buy it. (but literally game dev's shouldn't whine too much cause I haven't played 75% of the games that I bought)

 

[Dekoth-E-]

But you didn't buy the game, you brought a license to use the game.

Nope, I bought a game. Just because publishers are tying to be greedy fucks and change the rules doesn't mean I'm on board. You get a digital only game, sure you bought a license. Physical game, I bought it, I can resell it and the greedy publishers and their pocket puppet politicians can get fucked.

 

[gossipninja1]

Didn't Germany just pass that Steam and other digital publishers have to allow resell?

I get that the publishers are mad, but the law is not required to prop up their business model.

I don't buy full price digital goods, because a $60 console game has X amount of resale value, whereas a $60 digital good currently has 0, so total cost of ownership would be higher with a digital game.

Add in that a portion of the costs associated with the digital product are non existent and those savings should be passed on to the consumer.

Amazon recently had a big thing about "price elasticity" and how lower margin, higher volume works exceptionally well for digital goods.

Additionally, why is my $60 game purchase used to "subsidize" a $20 Russian copy of the same game? (I recognize market price volatility with regards to equivalent disposable income ala "the grey market") but since digital breaks that barrier, it becomes tougher to convince users they are not getting taken advantage of.

And lastly, The notion that publishers should "get a cut" of the resale is preposterous, even if you want to support the devs. When I sell a bike on Craigslist, I don't have to send huffy a cut.

 

[gossipninja1]

well , can't edit, Germany said it was a no go on resale, I thought someone okayed it via a court ruling recently?

 

[wabbitseason]

But you didn't buy the game, you brought a license to use the game.

Whatever that means. I'll play it whenever I want, regardless of whether the "licensee" thinks I deserve to. I'll sell it to whoever I want when I'm done with it. Anyone who tries to stop me from doing that can go fuck themselves.

 

[Reimu]

Whatever that means. I'll play it whenever I want, regardless of whether the "licensee" thinks I deserve to. I'll sell it to whoever I want when I'm done with it. Anyone who tries to stop me from doing that can go fuck themselves.

The corporations can fuck you far more than the other way around.

 

[Ducman69]

Whatever that means. I'll play it whenever I want, regardless of whether the "licensee" thinks I deserve to. I'll sell it to whoever I want when I'm done with it. Anyone who tries to stop me from doing that can go fuck themselves.

Until they ban the account and make login online only so once the server is taken offline when the game is "end of life", you're SOL and can't play jack.

 

[NastyNative]

The corporations can fuck you far more than the other way around.

We are too many, they could never keep up and they know it.

 

[MrCrispy]

EULA's have never been legally enforceable. Whether a corporation can try to extort and bully money out of you for doing so is a totally different matter, they can do that thanks to our joke of a legal system.

 

[sfsuphysics]

But you didn't buy the game, you brought a license to use the game.

And I apparently agreed to the terms of a contract on something I paid for/paid to use before I got a chance to actually see what those terms were.

Seriously this whole license agreement crap with software needs to be legally neutered. Although I'm sure if courts find the situation I just mentioned as illegal you'll start seeing boxes with legal writing on them (think there are a few that do that actually)

 

[me4get]

The E.U. I effed up

 

[drakken]

Basically what they are saying is that games come with non-transferable license. Which is funny since technically even in the EU, it needs to state that on the box.

What the issue that the copyright owners are using is that only the copyright holder has the right to sell license to use it IP or their authorized vendors. If you re-sell it you are selling a license you did not get from the copyright holder. In the US you have the right of resale but most other countries simply don't have this right. It happens but it is not codified. To be blunt most eula are not enforceable because they put stuff in there that is not legal making the whole thing not worth the paper it is written on. some of them are actually enforceable. Steam's is one of the best one's I have ever seen written. ESO is missing a few things like an option to save a copy for your records but most are junk. But they are not depending on the eula in this case but if you have a legal license to own the item. Basically they are saying that unless you can prove you have a valid license it is stolen goods. In the EU it is on the person with the property not the copyright owner to prove you can legally posse it.