Just your normal everyday casual software dev. Nothing to see here.

People can share differing opinions without immediately being on the reverse side. Avoid looking at things as black and white. You can like both waffles and pancakes, just like you can hate both waffles and pancakes.

been trying to lower my social presence on services as of late, may go inactive randomly as a result.

  • 0 Posts
  • 52 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 15th, 2023

help-circle





  • Pika@sh.itjust.workstomemes@lemmy.worldWell respected man
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    13 days ago

    Yeah, this is why I stopped donating to them

    I donated to them for a few years, $20 a year, so not much. And then one year they sent me an email that was very clearly meant to guilt trip me into thinking I wasn’t donating enough to the platform. So I cancelled the contribution instead.











  • This is something I don’t think should be legal under false advertising laws as well.

    When fortnite was super popular, they would release “physical” releases of their cosmetics dlcs. We would have grandmas coming in wanting to get little timmy the game they wanted, and would choose the 40$ DLC thinking it was an actual game when in reality it was a plastic case with a download code in it. We would explain “hey btw just incase you didn’t know, this isn’t actually a game, its 40$ for some skins on a free to play game that they already have”

    9/10 customers would be like “Wait what really? thats so shitty thank you for informing me” and would choose another game from the selection.

    It’s blatant false advertising and super deceptive marketing tactics. A physical release should not be a code to use a license. It should be the actual game.


  • Honestly, in this case I think its time based licensing that is the issue. This would be very limited as an issue as a whole if publishers/creators couldn’t say “yea so you have the ability to sell this, but after X years you lose the ability to host it period”

    Currently big companies like sony can just offload the blame to the license holder saying “yea we cant host it anymore” when in reality it shouldn’t matter.

    Licensing that expire over time shouldn’t be legal. If you bought a license to use a product, you should be allowed to keep that product. Don’t provide updates if don’t want to, but if you paid for the ability to have and use a product (in this case media) it shouldn’t be legal to retroactively pull it without compensation.

    Said compensation should also at minimum be a percentage of the product based off how much it was used, with the overall refund not allowed to go under half the price of the product paid. The fact they can be like “yea we don’t wanna host this anymore but we aren’t going to provide refunds” is ridiculous.

    Being said, I agree with your sentiment. I firmly believe bypassing DRM for a product you bought and have the right to use should be legal. I don’t agree that Ripping a movie that you purchased that has a DRM component should be illegal, just like I don’t agree that removing a DRM component from a game I own should be illegal. If you own the product, you should be allowed to use it how you want. I can understand the exception of distribution(this doesn’t mean I agree with it), because I get it $$$ but the fact I can potentially be charged criminally for ripping a 4k disk, and then putting it on my private media server that only I have access to, is insane to me.