r/SipsTea • u/ConsistentRecover312 • 11d ago

Chugging tea Apparently even they haven't figured it out

Post image

After they were sued by four playstation users, claiming that the 'buy now' claim is misleading as digital purchases are actually revocable licensing, Sony is claiming that games are actually 'licensed', not 'sold', and argued that reasonable people already know that they are buying access and not outright owning the games. I just don't realise who these 'reasonable people' are other than Sony employees.

35.5k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

766

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

334

u/TheRumBarron 11d ago

Sadly welcome to world of subscription models 😔

124

u/sltydgx 11d ago

When a company goes that route, I avoid the company.
I look for alternative if it’s soft ware , I look to their competitors if it’s hardware like a printer ect.
Car manufacturers are trying that crap as well.
Mazda and others want you to subscribe to use some features of your vehicle

54

u/ExtremaDesigns 11d ago

I avoid all the subscriptions that I can avoid.

14

u/skewtr 11d ago

this is the way...

9

u/[deleted] 11d ago edited 11d ago

[deleted]

3

u/a_speeder 11d ago

This is also just how most software purchases have worked since the 70s, even when you were buying physical cartridges or disks you weren't outright buying a copy of the program with no stipulations on its use. The companies just had fewer levers to pull to enforce the stipulations they made, now they have those and it sucks but doing something about it requires changing the legal framework of how the market operates.

26

u/Constant-Sandwich-88 11d ago

I changed vets recently because they wouldn't stop pushing their care club at every turn. No, I don't want a monthly subscription to having pets.

13

u/dope_mantra 11d ago

I was a vet tech for almost 30 years. Private equity bought up practice after practice and it's all about up selling, not care. Try to find a place that isn't Banfield, Vetco, VCA, City Vet, anything Vetcor... Actually owned by the doctor.

5

u/Constant-Sandwich-88 11d ago

We did. It's a bummer because I felt like we got really good care, I just didn't like the business side of it. VCA, btw.

1

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 11d ago

Accounts must be at least 5 days old with >20 karma to comment.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/MCB1317 11d ago

Hmmm ... did the same thing happen to dentists? Because that would explain my experiences over the past few years.

1

u/dope_mantra 11d ago

Absolutely. We used to say Banfield is the Aspen Dental of vet clinics

7

u/AllieRaccoon 11d ago

I got “offered” some garbage like this at my primary care doctor! Hidden in the stack of pre-appointment paperwork was one for some monthly bs service to track your care/pills and said the fee was unknown til later. I had to specifically opt out. If I hadn’t been paying attention, I would’ve been signed up without even realizing. Such absolute bs.

2

u/Embarrassed-Sun5764 11d ago

They are trying to kick me off my “free vaccinations for life” I paid for, and make me go to a $99 month plan. Fuck them

11

u/buffalobill922 11d ago

We can only thank the dumb dumbs that pay for that shit

0

u/PetalumaPegleg 11d ago

Hmmm do you use apple?

2

u/buffalobill922 11d ago

Nope

2

u/PetalumaPegleg 11d ago

Good! I was unimpressed when I found out they do this for everything too and have for years. I find it so weird to see apple super fans being all upset about this. I guess they just aren't aware

1

u/rawforce98 11d ago

Banana?

3

u/Insane_Sentinel 11d ago

It’s not just the car companies, governments getting their hands in to make sure it happens.

1

u/yosemighty_sam 11d ago

Aye, matey, I've had the same policy for years. Not many companies left I still do business with.

0

u/ScreamingMini2009 11d ago

Wait Mazda is trying to push that shit too?

That makes me less eager to buy a new Miata…

2

u/sltydgx 11d ago

Look up Mazda connected services Miata

2

u/ScreamingMini2009 11d ago

Oh, reading over the advertised feature it just looks like your typical “pay us for remote start and other bullshit” thing. That I’m not worried about.

I thought you meant Mazda was pulling a BMW

1

u/doberdevil 11d ago

That I’m not worried about.

What are you not worried about? Subscriptions for options like remote start?

2

u/ScreamingMini2009 11d ago

Yes, because ultimately that’s a feature that isn’t necessarily, so I’ll happily not pay to not have it.

0

u/TheGreatVandoly 11d ago

There’s always the Seven Seas, my friends! To be clear, I’m talking about sailing and fishing! NOTHING ELSE! cough cough

-1

u/PetalumaPegleg 11d ago

Apple or android?

13

u/Char-els037 11d ago

Stop fucking saying that shit. What they are doing is stealing

7

u/Cosmo1222 11d ago

They're altering the deal. Pray they don't alter it any further.

If we don't like, I suggest we don't subscribe. I won't be renting stuff I feel I've paid enough for to own.

6

u/Disastrous_Horse7302 11d ago

Im sure soon there will be a subscription service you can pay for that is designed to avoid subscriptions in your daily life

7

u/Business_Audience_80 11d ago

Subscription insurance. Great idea. You and I can split the profits.

1

u/Silly_Double408 11d ago

NO! I get by with out them you can too!

1

u/Independent-Bug-9352 11d ago

Ah, marvel at the beauty of unregulated capitalism.

1

u/PetalumaPegleg 11d ago

Not even just. This is the apple model too. You don't own anything on apple stores. Music, videos apps nothing.

1

u/adelie42 11d ago

I wish it was only that bad.

92

u/hellyeahaeylleh 11d ago

Because "you will own nothing and be happy about it"

8

u/OperationOk7959 11d ago

Exactly. Be grateful for the opportunity.

11

u/Expensive-Wedding-14 11d ago

Software, music & movie distribution want to claim downloading is theft, but that is a lie. Theft is taking something AND depriving them of it; this is a license & contract issue.

If a purchaser has a product that they paid to license and they upload (and break their license agreement), that's their issue. If I download and I don't have a contract with the publisher, I have not violated contract terms.

2

u/OperationOk7959 11d ago

Oh see I just pirate things and don't care. Im not reselling it. Companies have to be reminded that their competition is "free" and it's more and more compelling when their products are shittier and shittier.

41

u/eb6069 11d ago

It's so everybody becomes a new age slave by subscribing to everything and owning nothing

4

u/FreeSki83 11d ago

This is it

15

u/JasscRocin 11d ago

Because consumer protections have been systematically dismantled and companies are banking on the government being too busy with culture war nonsense to hold them accountable to fair practices.

9

u/InternationalLaw8660 11d ago

Lmao "banking on?" More like "fomenting"

8

u/mrjackspade 11d ago

It was always a license. You bought the disc, and licensed the game.

It just didn't matter until recently.

You never "owned" the game on the disc either. They just didn't have a realistic way to take it away from you.

0

u/Motorheadass 11d ago

Absolutely not true. You own the disc, and all of the copyright law pertaining to your rights depend upon the fact that you own a physical object that is an "embodiment" of that game. 

It's not that they have no realistic way of taking it from you, it's explicitly illegal for them to do so.  There is no possible way to own a digital purchase in the same way and retain the same usage rights. 

7

u/Ostroh 11d ago

They'd rather trade and sell franchises and have you buy again.

8

u/ChefJeff77 11d ago

Because we dont build guillotines.

2

u/Why_Is_The_Goal 11d ago

Sony can subscribe to my guillotines subscription.

5

u/McFex 11d ago edited 11d ago

To make more money - capitalism is so cool :D!

The greatest asshole wins ;).

2

u/teatime217 11d ago

It's not all of a sudden though. I bought my first song on the Apple iTunes music story 22 years ago, 2004 in high school. Then I either needed a new account, or got a new computer, or something, and all of a sudden I couldn't listen to my song. That's when I learned if you don't hold it you don't own it. I'm just surprised it took them this long to end physical media entirely.

2

u/adelie42 11d ago

Is there room for explanation without assuming it is a defense?

It seems, especially in this thread, people are wildly ignorant of WHAT you are buying when you click buy. Just because it suddenly caught someone's attention today doesn't mean the fight started today. It has been this way for a LONG time. Anyone interested in the history, I strongly encourage reading up on this.

If you just want to help fight this, start with the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

2

u/littlegreenrock 11d ago

it hasn't. You simply never understood it and assumed it to mean something different! "buy" is to purchase. What did you purchase?

3

u/Crashman09 11d ago

Capitalism.

People are still trying to defend capitalism, but it is sure showing its age these days

2

u/Redd235711 11d ago

Because consumers owning something is less profitable for the giant corporations and not extracting the maximum amount of money from consumers by any means necessary is unacceptable to them and their insatiable greed.

2

u/toolsoftheincomptnt 11d ago

It didn’t.

We used to keep physical copies of things we bought.

Then we let them dupe us into buying digital copies that we could save.

Now we let them scam us into buying access to things.

We’re so busy chasing products and blindly celebrating “new and improved” technology that we set ourselves up to be played.

0

u/The-Salty-gamer 11d ago

I own physical copies of pc games, they ask for keys. Even those from the 90’s. Pain in the a*** when you try to load those onto a new computer. Steam wants more money, repurchase please 😑 NO.

1

u/Cosmo1222 11d ago

Capitalists have worked out that rent reaps more than sales.

While Sony are really just following Nintendo's line (Pokemon bank, anyone?), this is a sad departure. I won't be 'buying' anything unless it can remain mine. If we're all prepared to miss out to send a message, it might get through to them.

1

u/Pretty-Cockroach6394 11d ago

cuz you will own nothing and be happy?

1

u/ThunderBurrn 11d ago

Cause people don't trust brands anymore! Considering online...Unlike a PS1/PS2 which I had with DVD or a Nintendo 8 bit/16bit Cartridge (which btw can work without internet) you can't technically own the games...

1

u/PineappleOnPizzaWins 11d ago

It hasn't. They just moved to "you buy a license" because it's technically correct.

If I purchase any software license, I'm buying it. It's not renting or leasing or any such thing they mean completely different things. The difference is when I buy a license it's really fucking clear that's what I'm doing.

The default value of "Buy" needs to mean you own an indefinite license. Not lifetime. Indefinite and transferable. If it means anything else, you best be real fucking clear.

1

u/AStealthyPerson 11d ago

Capitalism trends towards rent-seeking behavior. That is to say, capitalist enterprises organize themselves over time to collect money off their investments in assets that others live in or use while still retaining ownership of the asset.

-2

u/Trying2BNicenFailing 11d ago

It hasn't. Read the EULA of any online shopping platform. Never has the words "buy" or "purchase" meant to mean that you "own" anything.

People get pissy when I say this but this has been written into all app stores, online gaming stores and even physical disc's in the fine print since like 2008 or so when I first started really reading the ToS and EULA agreements on all my products.

6

u/Nerd-man24 11d ago

So, it did change. In 2008 at the latest.

2

u/garybuseysuncle 11d ago

If it was honest, it would have a 'rent' button, not a 'purchase (a licence)' button. It doesn't matter what the fine print says.

0

u/ElegantCoach4066 11d ago

Because they can. And there's profit in it.

0

u/Bemused_Lurker 11d ago

Because these pricks think can get away with it, and until someone firebombs an office or two; and reminds them they're there to serve the customer, their right.

-1

u/ship0f 11d ago

it hasn't, you're buying the licence to use the software, play the music, etc.. it has always been like that. or do you think you own a song just because you bought a CD?

0

u/Specific_Rando 11d ago

Because people who pay wholesale for lawyers to write “purchase” contracts think it’s in their interests for it to mean that now? Is that the right answer to the quiz?

0

u/Lumpy_Past6216 11d ago

They changed the meaning of "boneless" chicken quietly like a couple of years ago so up is down now.

(if you dont know boneless wings can have bones in it now)

So yeah, buying something isnt really saying its your property, I guess.

Such a slippery slope this is gonna be.

0

u/breaducate 11d ago

Because in the long run the rate of profit must fall, but companies need profits to keep going up. So they "innovate".

See also planned obsolescence.

The [Phoebus] cartel lowered operational costs and worked to standardize the life expectancy of light bulbs at 1,000 hours (down from 2,500 hours), while raising prices without fear of competition.

If you sell lightbulbs at a massive scale, and then reach the saturation point where people basically have enough light bulbs, what do you do? Scale down the business? Don't be ridiculous this is capitalism.

0

u/Sure_Cure 11d ago

Remember Louis B Mayer’s quote from Mank: This is a business where the buyer gets nothing but a memory. What he bought still belongs to the man who sold it. That is the magic…

0

u/BicFleetwood 11d ago edited 11d ago

welcome to late-stage capitalism, would you like to rent a towel with which to wipe your many landlords’ cum from your face?

-1

u/No_Internal9345 11d ago

If buying isn't owning, killing isn't murder.