Pre-owned games suffer legal threat

A fresh question mark hangs over the viability of the pre-owned software market this morning after a ruling in the US Court of Appeal upheld a developer's right to prevent the resale of its software.

Gamasutra reports that Autodesk has successfully won a case in which defendant Timothy Vernor had been arguing for his right to buy and use a pre-owned copy of design program AutoCAD.MCV UK

The above is only an excerpt. You can read the full article here.

Is it on?

Goodbye free market!

It's been nice knowing you.

I wonder if something similar will happen to used cars? :SPandaBear86

Eventually it will.

There is basically nothing stopping them now.

I wonder if something similar will happen to used cars? :SPandaBear86

[QUOTE="PandaBear86"]I wonder if something similar will happen to used cars? :Sjun_aka_pekto

In some years? Exactly the same thing as this AutoDesk software.

Ill probably have to stop gaming then. Atleast modern and just stick to buying as many old games as i can (or PC).

In a year ill probably get 1-2 New full price games and up to 10 used through the year (usually no more than £10). Good thing about the UK is games rapidly drop in prices so i do sometimes buy new games cheap.

The Internet's a far larger threat than this. :s Neither threat is going to work for a while though.

If developers/publishers/licensors want to stop the pre-owned market, all they would have to do is force online authentication/digital distribution. It's been done as early as 2004 with Half-Life 2/Steam, if not earlier. I doubt Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft find it worth the trouble though. If I recall correctly, only 50% of 360's have connected to Live. The other half is far too substantial of a market to abandon without giving incentive to jump in freely. Besides, if they wanted to start doing this, they'd be changing the 'game purchasing infrastructure' mid-gen. Those offline when such a shift happens would be going "WTF!?" when they buy the latest games and would very likely be upset with licensors. Brand/company image is important.

Maybe next gen.

On a slightly different note, as a video game collector, I could easily see this being challenged were this to apply to the used games market right now.

I wonder if something similar will happen to used cars? :SPandaBear86

[QUOTE="PandaBear86"]I wonder if something similar will happen to used cars? :Sshinrabanshou

That is the current state of it yes but it this continues there is nothing stopping them from changing that.

I prefer buying them unused, but I think that i a game is 3 years old then its unfair to pay $50 for it. I mean, if they could be sold used after a year then I think that would be a good solution.

[QUOTE="shinrabanshou"]

[QUOTE="PandaBear86"]I wonder if something similar will happen to used cars? :SJLF1

That is the current state of it yes but it this continues there is nothing stopping them from changing that.

It was bound to happen to be honest.

Damnit, that sucks. Years from now, how will I be expected to find old copies of PS3 games that the developers don't make anymore? Lately I've been looking to buy some old PS2 games that I missed out on during the PS2, GC, Xbox generation such as Metal Gear Solid 2+3, Tales of Legendia and Tales of the Abyss. The only reason I was able to buy those games is because Gamestop sold them used, I wouldn't be able to find them new anywhere. ($3 for MGS2, What a deal! Best 3 bucks I ever spent.)

That's so beyond the realm of plausible it's not even worth speculating on. It's a slippery slope fallacy.

shinrabanshou

Then please tell me what is preventing them in the near future from doing so?

The reality is that is used games will be illegal to sell or buy then DVDs CDs and Books will follow shortly. Then it is only a matter of time before the rest of all products turns into licenses instead.

The only thing that can stop this is if consumers will stop buying the products (licenses) that they are selling (licensing to you) and the companies who is trying this first will simply go out of business.

[QUOTE="shinrabanshou"]

That's so beyond the realm of plausible it's not even worth speculating on. It's a slippery slope fallacy.

JLF1

Then please tell me what is preventing them in the near future from doing so?

The reality is that is used games will be illegal to sell or buy then DVDs CDs and Books will follow shortly. Then it is only a matter of time before the rest of all products turns into licenses instead.

The only thing that can stop this is if consumers will stop buying the products (licenses) that they are selling (licensing to you) and the companies who is trying this first will simply go out of business.

Copyrighting isn't the only form of securing intellectual property, and as far as I'm aware automobile manufacturers aren't largely reliant on it.

This is a win for gaming.blue_hazy_basic

[QUOTE="shinrabanshou"]

That's so beyond the realm of plausible it's not even worth speculating on. It's a slippery slope fallacy.

JLF1

Then please tell me what is preventing them in the near future from doing so?

The reality is that is used games will be illegal to sell or buy then DVDs CDs and Books will follow shortly. Then it is only a matter of time before the rest of all products turns into licenses instead.

The only thing that can stop this is if consumers will stop buying the products (licenses) that they are selling (licensing to you) and the companies who is trying this first will simply go out of business.

Used games will either be legal or non-existent through online authentication/digital distribution, not illegal. Same with movies and music. If licensors can't make the product available to you, then such a licence could be considered illegal as it harms consumer rights without reasonable grounds.

I don't even want to start with books and cars.

The purchase of a car does not and never has entailed the purchasing of a license to any form of copyright material. A manufacturer may hold patents over the engineering, the design, etc. he may hold trademarks on brand names and model names, he may hold copyright over logos. But all these do is serve to prevent anyone else from making the same car. The manufacturer of a car isn't licensing anything to you, they don't even have anything to license to you as far as I'm aware.

Copyright isn't the only form of intellectual property.

shinrabanshou

Right now a car isn't a license but in a few year you might not be able to buy a car you might only be able to buy a right to drive a certain car. The car as a product could turn into a license.

[QUOTE="JLF1"]

[QUOTE="shinrabanshou"]

That's so beyond the realm of plausible it's not even worth speculating on. It's a slippery slope fallacy.

Technoweirdo

Then please tell me what is preventing them in the near future from doing so?

The reality is that is used games will be illegal to sell or buy then DVDs CDs and Books will follow shortly. Then it is only a matter of time before the rest of all products turns into licenses instead.

The only thing that can stop this is if consumers will stop buying the products (licenses) that they are selling (licensing to you) and the companies who is trying this first will simply go out of business.

Used games will either be legal or non-existent through online authentication/digital distribution, not illegal. Same with movies and music. If licensors can't make the product available to you, then such a licence could be considered illegal as it harms consumer rights without reasonable grounds.

I don't even want to start with books and cars.

[QUOTE="PandaBear86"]I wonder if something similar will happen to used cars? :Sshinrabanshou

What I am trying to tell you is that in the near future (10-20 years) you might not buy a car but simply buy a license when you get a new car.

There is nothing preventing Ford or GM to write a contract this has the same content like the AutoDesk contract.

Right now a car isn't a license but in a few year you might not be able to buy a car you might only be able to buy a right to drive a certain car. The car as a product could turn into a license.

JLF1

I really don't see how the car as a product can be "turned into a license." It's a tangible property, what intangible property subject to copyright would the manufacturer be licensing to you in its purchase?

If you want to talk about ramifications then DVDs, CDs and books are likely fallout.

Except it's a speculation with no basis.

I really don't see how the car as a product can be "turned into a license." It's a tangible property, what intangible property subject to copyright would the manufacturer be licensing to you in its purchase?

If you want to talk about ramifications then DVDs, CDs and books are likely fallout.

shinrabanshou

And the AutoDesk copy that this case was based around was an tangible unopened hardcopy but that didn't save it from being a license.

It's easy to turn a product into a license. They just have to change the words in the contract you sign.

[QUOTE="shinrabanshou"]

Except it's a speculation with no basis.

I really don't see how the car as a product can be "turned into a license." It's a tangible property, what intangible property subject to copyright would the manufacturer be licensing to you in its purchase?

If you want to talk about ramifications then DVDs, CDs and books are likely fallout.

JLF1

And the AutoDesk copy that this case was based around was an tangible unopened hardcopy but that didn't save it from being a license.

It's easy to turn a product into a license. They just have to change the words in the contract you sign.

In the purchase of a car you are purchasing the tangible property that is the car. You cannot take that tangible property and "turn it into a license."

What intangible property subject to copyright would an automobile manufacturer be licensing to you in the purchase of a car?

AutoDesk software is an intangible property subject to copyright, while you may physically own a disc as a tangible property, the content of that disc is an intangible property of which you have no ownership, and are simply a licensee.

In the purchase of a car you are purchasing the tangible property that is the car.

What intangible property subject to copyright would an automobile manufacturer be licensing to you in the purchase of a car?

shinrabanshou

Will this mean companies will be legally obligated to continue making copies of games they introduce from now untill the end of time?

How else do I get a copy of Tetris DS, a 5 year old castlevania game, anything from last gen, etc? These are no longer made new. They can ONLY be purchased used.

Unless piracy is being encouraged.

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]This is a win for gaming.testfactor888

there is really no way to tell if this will work out for devs and consumers or bite them in the backside.

people could quit buying games altogether and start hiking (or whatever) as a hobby instead and the added money could make up for the sales they lose or the extra money for devs could mean game drop in price.

i tend to think if you price yourself out of the market you start a trend where less people playthen people move on which leads to even more people finding new hobbies.

The car itself would be the copyrighted property that you would license.

If they can license a hardcopy of an AutoDesk copy then they can just as easily license a car. There is no difference between them. They are both tangible items. The only difference is that one if them are selling the product as a license and the other as a real product.

What in that don't you understand?

JLF1

A Land Rover, in and of itself, isn't and can't be subject to copyright. The engineering and manufacturing process may be protected under patents, the aesthetic may be protected under design rights, the brand may be a trademark.

But when you purchase a car, you are purchasing the tangible property. You aren't licensing the rights to use any of the above forms of intellectual property in any way.

Copyright is designed to protect creative works: literary works, artistic works and expression of ideas. It serves a purpose, despite how people attempt to villify it.

[QUOTE="shinrabanshou"]

AutoDesk software is an intangible property subject to copyright, while you may physically own a disc as a tangible property, the content of that disc is an intangible property of which you have no ownership, and are simply a licensee.

In the purchase of a car you are purchasing the tangible property that is the car.

What intangible property subject to copyright would an automobile manufacturer be licensing to you in the purchase of a car?

JLF1

I think you are the one having severe issues of comprehension here..

[QUOTE="testfactor888"][QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]This is a win for gaming.blue_hazy_basic

[QUOTE="testfactor888"][QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]This is a win for gaming.blue_hazy_basic

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"][QUOTE="testfactor888"] Far from it actually. Most people do not have tons of disposable income. If they are forced to purchase every game new at full retail price they will just purchase less games. Also the used game market was a means of competition that drove some prices to more reasonable levels. This will also increase piracy Personally if this actually succeeds in eliminating the used game market than I am one customer who will likely be taking most of my money elsewhere. I doubt I am alone in that either. They will lose more money than they save with this decisiontestfactor888

Thats **** you get virtually nothing off for buying a game Used as it stands right now anyway. I doubt that a $5 price increase is going to prevent many people from buying a product.

[QUOTE="testfactor888"][QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"] More new games and less used games is a good thing for the industry.cobrax25

Thats **** you get virtually nothing off for buying a game Used as it stands right now anyway. I doubt that a $5 price increase is going to prevent many people from buying a product.

rental game places (like gamefly) are next on the list I think

[QUOTE="JLF1"]

The car itself would be the copyrighted property that you would license.

If they can license a hardcopy of an AutoDesk copy then they can just as easily license a car. There is no difference between them. They are both tangible items. The only difference is that one if them are selling the product as a license and the other as a real product.

What in that don't you understand?

shinrabanshou

A Land Rover, in and of itself, isn't and can't be subject to copyright. The engineering and manufacturing process may be protected under patents, the aesthetic may be protected under design rights, the brand may be a trademark.

But when you purchase a car, you are purchasing the tangible property. You aren't licensing the rights to use any of the above forms of intellectual property in any way.

Copyright is designed to protect creative works: literary works, artistic works and expression of ideas. It serves a purpose, despite how people attempt to villify it.

It's unfortunate that if this becomes total law, you will never be able to play most NES or SNES games legally again unless you had already owned it from decades ago. Nintendo doesn't continue to sell these games (a very small number can be gotten on virtual console), so used is the only way to legally obtain it. This is even worse for last gen games. They arn't generally sold anymore (exception to PS2 games that are still made). So if you ever want to play Wind Waker again, I hope you had bought a new copy about 7 years ago.

This seems to be targeted to stop people from buying used versions of newer games. But will unfortunately kill all legal method of playing older classic games.

rental game places (like gamefly) are next on the list I think

TheShadowLord07

And then gaming will die and the economy will be hurt more in the name of protecting a few multi billiondollar buisnesses.

This still won't change game sales for devs so i don't see the point.

[QUOTE="testfactor888"][QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"] More new games and less used games is a good thing for the industry.cobrax25

Thats **** you get virtually nothing off for buying a game Used as it stands right now anyway. I doubt that a $5 price increase is going to prevent many people from buying a product.

In case you weren't aware, pretty much any modern car is absolutely full of copyrighted software, from engine control systems, in built gps, to remote door locks, so yeah, FEAR, there is NOTHING legally stopping a car seller from pulling the same exact stunt and effectively causing the same problem save you not just blissing rolling over and taking it. I truly hope this gets crushed at the highest level of the courts or things could get very ugly.

DerekLoffin

At which point I would say that the likelihood of it ever happening is still so miniscule that it would still qualify as a slippery slope fallacy. "Watch out or your cars are next" is just scaremongering.

[QUOTE="JLF1"]

[QUOTE="shinrabanshou"]

Except it's a speculation with no basis.

I really don't see how the car as a product can be "turned into a license." It's a tangible property, what intangible property subject to copyright would the manufacturer be licensing to you in its purchase?

If you want to talk about ramifications then DVDs, CDs and books are likely fallout.

shinrabanshou

And the AutoDesk copy that this case was based around was an tangible unopened hardcopy but that didn't save it from being a license.

It's easy to turn a product into a license. They just have to change the words in the contract you sign.

In the purchase of a car you are purchasing the tangible property that is the car. You cannot take that tangible property and "turn it into a license."

What intangible property subject to copyright would an automobile manufacturer be licensing to you in the purchase of a car?

The software that runs your ignition system, fuel system and transmission. Thats software inside an OBD computer that keeps everything going. That is intangible. This is a huge slippery slope. They are basically taking away rights from PAYING customers. The box should clearly state in large bold letters on the front it is illegal to resell a product this way the consumer can judge for themselves if the product is worth licensing.

[QUOTE="PandaBear86"]I wonder if something similar will happen to used cars? :SJLF1

Eventually it will.

There is basically nothing stopping them now.

Nope.

Used cars would be hardware. Games are software.

PS: Oh I see they brought up that cars bring "software". So does a graphic card. I can bundle and sell the graphic card with the support cd. Or my PC with the support CD, since it was just that, "support drivers"

Essentially you're buying the right to use the software, not the format it was written on. Technically at least. So you can't sell a license of a program that was given to you, technically. But seeing that even betas are sold on ebay... this is gonna be haaaaaaaaaard to track.

[QUOTE="cobrax25"][QUOTE="testfactor888"] If more people in general are buying less games due to them being more expensive overall it would mean less profits in the long run for game companies. Honestly I can't prove my theory it is just my own opinion and I am not trying to state it as a cold hard fact. We will just have to see what happenstomarlyn

[QUOTE="DerekLoffin"] In case you weren't aware, pretty much any modern car is absolutely full of copyrighted software, from engine control systems, in built gps, to remote door locks, so yeah, FEAR, there is NOTHING legally stopping a car seller from pulling the same exact stunt and effectively causing the same problem save you not just blissing rolling over and taking it. I truly hope this gets crushed at the highest level of the courts or things could get very ugly.

shinrabanshou

At which point I would say that the likelihood of it ever happening is still so miniscule that it would still qualify as a slippery slope fallacy. "Watch out or your cars are next" is just scaremongering.

[QUOTE="TheShadowLord07"]

rental game places (like gamefly) are next on the list I think

Pixel-Pirate

And then gaming will die and the economy will be hurt more in the name of protecting a few multi billiondollar buisnesses.

(must buy a couple of games before this happen. stupid law >.>).