Instalar Steam
iniciar sesión
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chino simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chino tradicional)
日本語 (Japonés)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandés)
български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Checo)
Dansk (Danés)
Deutsch (Alemán)
English (Inglés)
Español - España
Ελληνικά (Griego)
Français (Francés)
Italiano
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandés)
Norsk (Noruego)
Polski (Polaco)
Português (Portugués de Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portugués - Brasil)
Română (Rumano)
Русский (Ruso)
Suomi (Finés)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Informar de un error de traducción
Normas y directrices sobre discusión
Denunciar este mensaje
And right fully so. Especially since there's no real practical way to ensure that the seller has given up and loses access to what they sell.. If I sell my old music CD... but I have a copy of it... then I have basically not given up anything.. And nothing stops me from repeating the process ad infinitum.. Each time I sell I have basically cost the licensed distributors and the producers money.
When games were tied to physical objects soch as cartitdges or CD's (don't laugh, around the time games move to CD's the avg CD held more data than the avg HDD and CD burners weren't a thing. As for cartidges..manufacturing even a bootleg cart costs money , time and manpower. So it was never practical.
BUt to the issue CInedine. You have all computer games are software but not all software are computer games.... and to decide which set of rights, protections and restrictions best suit the producers, distributors and consumers, legally you need to classify something as something else, if that something else has a logical connection and already has the various rules and restrictiocs, etc already defined.
They have no differentiation at the Language level than any other piece of software in existance.
In my eyes, anything that is compiled from a source code, is considered software.
Right...but they aren't the same as Java or Power DVD. They are like a movie in that they are an entertainment medium designed with user interation in mind. The software is what is used to build and run it...but the goal is to experience the product created using those tools. Not to create something with software.
So they are multimedia programs built and run using software. But they are classified a little differently. Labeling them as just software is too general.
Exactly. Software is a wide term. Game is a combination of text, audio, images, video, animation and interactivity. I would say that most similar to this is a movie.
Exactoly. also, in reference to teh transfer of software license that comes from another standpoint. See certain softwares are seen as investments, long term investments the cost of which is offset by the value that will be extracted over time. COnsider Adobe Cs6. That's not cheap and when a company opts to purchase such they expect it will pay off over trime ... years. Now a company can go through many changes over the years. Assets can be bought or sold piecemeal or in whole.
If I own a graphics art studio and I purchase Adobe Cs6 suite. The license is to me. Say 2 years later a PR firm wants to aquire my small business and I say. Okay. I transfer the title and my assets to another company, they are now the license holders.
See how that works now? That's just a small example. Look at your bank... they have losts of of OTS and custom written software licensed in their operation running in the various backends and what not. If they are bought out the license holder for all that software must be transferred.
That is why something legally classified as software is allowed to have license transfer. A GAme on the other hand... is different from those examples isn't it? So in short the same set of allowances would not be pragmatic.
But. They. Are. Software.
Here is the explicit (German) judgement of the case VZBV ./.Valve from 2014.
http://spielerecht.de/wp-content/uploads/LG-Berlin-15-O-56-13-20140121-vzbv-vs.-Valve.pdf
It's always talked about as "software". The reason it failed was because Steam's games are not "locally executable by themselves and instead need a further performance by [Valve], which then are under a non-related further TOS." They basically distinguish between the EULA of the game itself and Steam's SSA (allowing patching and online components which are run via Valve's servers). The Oracle DB was only subject to a single license and was a fully functional product on its own.
Furthermore the question is not "is it software" but "how was it sold". Valve's performance is seen as more as a simple sale of a copy. Since Valve has ongoing costs to keep the copy functional it is not seen as fullfilled with a one-time payment which can be passed down.
It pretty much boils down to what I thought first - how are "games-as-a-service" handled legally.
Firstly if a DRM protected service like Steam allowed the transfer of ownership they could with 99% certainty that ownership was given up. The only way to transfer ownership and keep the game is be keeping the game installed and the old associated account in offline mode indefinitely.
Second, there is nothing stopping someone doing the same practice with copies of Adobe or Office. Yet those types of software have their licences freely transferable. To say (I am asuming you are) that its Okay that I can resell Adobe, but not TombRaider implies fraudulent use of licenses is systemic to gaming. I can say with almost total certainty that MS Office is the most pirated software. I'd also go out on a limb and say Photoshop would have as many more pirated copies as say GTAV.
Corporate piracy is easy with most software not being protected by DRM and often backed by the bosses.
Your example of Selling a game over and over is not only flawed, it is covered by existing laws. Stopping reselling while closing tiny area of exploitation (which is already legally covered) completely destroys consumer rights.
If you resell your licence for a game and keep using it, you're commiting copyright theft.
Keep reselling a licence you don't own, then its fraud.
Both criminal offences.
Having done FAST compliance for a merged company ownership of software requires a clear document trail which could easily be done in a consumer setting.
Youy make it sound like Steam DRM is foolproof. IT's been repeatedly shown that it isn't.
And both have now moved to subscription-esque services. Office 365 and Adobe CC.
I already mentioned why transfer is allowable in the case of regular software because in most such cases the license is not held by a person but rather a corporate entities. Unlike people however corporate entities unlike people maye be disolved, merge with other or be bought and acquired whole or in part by others. So in short the transfer of licenses was left open for that reason because it would be rather annoying to buy out a local or small bank only to find that all you have is a building since all their systems software is non transferable and the data locked up in that software is similarly so.
You're welcome to sell adobe but here's the thing with adobe. Like many pieces of software there is a limit to how many different machines the key can be registered on. I think 1-2 is the typical limit. Now you can buy Adobe second hand from someone but if they've already used their keys twice you're basically screwed. UEven if it's enough to pass the installation the minute you launch the product it will learn that it's invalid and promptly brick itself unless a crack is used or a new valid key is entered.
At least so long as no one in the company blabs to the authorities. In which case there are some rather hefty fines imposed. I think something along the order or 5K per infraction. which means for each illicit copy of the software the company can be find at least $5000. At the corporatle level. If you had an art department with 6 PC's well then that's 30K right there at minimum.
Since I already mentioned this I won't in full but transfer of license need not imply sale of the software specifically. If COmpany A buys COmpany B then they acquire all the assets and licenses held by Company B. The license has been transferred. If COmpany A and COmpany B merge to form a new COmpany C. then COmpany C has the assets and thereby licenses held by both COmpany A and COmpany B. Again this is a transfer of license. In fact more than a few times companies have been purchased by others for the sole purchase of some proprietary technology or software. Marvel's purchase of Ultraverse Comics for their printing tech for example.
You leave open the glaring ommission here. What do you do when dealing with international platforms and distributions. As you've said . This issue is an issue only in Germany and some EU states. Though for the US and Latin America and many Parts of Asia .. it is not...
The question is.. Are games Software... yes,. Are games Multi media. Yes... so which set of rules do you apply. The leftmost in common english is deemed the most prevalent item. Since the term interactive Multimedia Entertainment Software is still a ways off from being properly defined...they've stuck with Multi-media. Because again. It is quite different fromregular software in both it's purpose, use and design.
Sorry to barge in, but this reason is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.
Unless a company goes bancrupt, they always have a legal successor which takes over the burdens, liabilites, and "rights".
Purchase.. Merger, Divestment, Dissolution. These are all possibilities. In the case of Purchase, the licenses , contract duties, obligations are in most cases transferred to the purchaser. Assuming the purchase was for the entire company and not just a part of it.
In the case of Merger the new entity is the legal successor and thusly the licenses transferred to that new entity.
Divestment and Dissolution is also possible and usually comes with bankrupty where the business is split or it chooses to divest itself of certain holdings. Again, where the company splits there are two or more new legal entities created and the license can be transferred to either one or the other. Where it is disolved, Well whomever purchases those assets gains said assets and the license is transferred thusly.
Thought is a little sticky. See when you sell say a computer you're actually not supposed to leave any software on it... unless you are a licensed retailer of said software. You'rebasically supposed to wipe the HDD clean and reformat it as a blank slate. Though in the case of asset acquisition there is a loophole. As said, more than once whole companies are purchased simply for access to their IP, pattents, licenses, contracts, etc.
Hell EA made a business model out of it.
I have described reselling in a number of my arguments.
I have done so because selling is an easily understandable act of transfer of goods from one party to another.
The phrase used in these digital interactive multimedia products is non-transferable.
Lets use Start_Running's example of Company A being bought by company B, then that company being bought by company C.
Company A sells luxury cars and buys a bespoke interactive multimedia product to showcase their new product range from MassiveSoft. Its a VR simulation of driving their upcoming car for their sales people to show potential buyers . They buy 20 licenses (not leases) of the finished product at £1000 each and a £10'000 support contract for the next 2 years. This multimedia product has a non-transfer clause.
Company B is a mass market car maker, they buy out company A to get a patented technology and keep Company A as a brand. A few weeks later MassiveSoft turn up demanding £20'000 for the illegal Licences company B is using. With no legal choice they pay up.
Later that year a graphics driver update stops the software working, and they use the support contact. "No, thats tied to the original licences. Here's our hourly rate, now whats the issue." New support contract is drawn up.
A year later company B realises they're not making enough money from brand Company A and looks a closing the office and staff.
With the new supercar nearly complete the staff band together to create company A2 and rebuy the brand and license the patented tech.
The A2 salesman gets his potential buyer sitting nice and comfortable, helps put on the VR glasses, starts the simulation and the potential buyer see in beautiful stereoscopic rendering the words "INVALID LICENSE"
Highly Hypothetical example is Hypothetical.. Unless the companies act in Britain is that messed up. I mean under all the laws I know. the software vendor does not have a case. Aside from the fact that a company when purchased wholey by another the new company is typically considered to be the same as the former. It's sort of like how changing your name doesn't get you out of any legal contracts you had previously. There's also the fact that the owner company can claim agency over the previous. I.e To be acting as an agent and thusly counts as the same party.
Corporate only concepts, which is why they can transfer software but the general population can't.
Marriage, divorce, death
Unless you have a pre-nuptual contract, when you get married all assets become shared between both parties.
Divorce requires shared assets to be assigned to the individual members.
And Death, on death the assets of the deceased are transferred through probate.
Marriage, divorce, death happen at a considerable higher rate than any corporate Merger, Divestment or Dissolution.