Developers rights

[Orogun01]

I hate the ruling that you can resell digital games. Why? Because it's just the push publishers need to turn all games into having access to a service ala Diablo III rather than buying it as property. This isn't a win in the long run.

 

This.

Publishers won't conform to this ruling, it's much more likely they will adapt and overcome. Either by as you say, that they implement service/subscription type DRM or payment model or worse, they all just turn to streaming/clouds instead.

Or they change the license to a timelimited one.

 

And consider the type of DRM that will be required to ensure that the software is gone from your computer.

Heh, one more coffin nail.

[Zoraptor]

I actually have a fair bit more confidence in EU bureaucracy to make sure that loopholes are not exploited than I'd have in pretty much anyone else. They did, after all, force MS of all people to offer alternative browsers to people in the EU and they're past masters of regulatory avoidance. If it were anywhere else it'd be ignored, end-run or immediately relegislated but there's far less chance of that happening in Europe. I can't see them getting away with trying to turn software licences into 99 year leases or stuff that might work elsewhere.

 

As for the DRM, steam* (as an example) already can remove games from your account under certain circumstances, so trading would not require any new functionality, it'd basically just require the ability to 'gift' games you've already played. And as I said earlier, if you're looking to rort the system then 2nd hand games is not a good target both because of the rapid drop in value and, well, for the dishonest there is aleady a well known 'free' alternative to buying 1st or 2nd hand.

[Azdeus]

Hardly, you've got way too much faith in the EU-bureaucracy.

Both Steam and Origin can claim that they are providing an service rather than a licence and probably circumvent this ruling that way. If I recall correctly, Steam already calls itself a subscription, but I have'nt bothered to read through it in a good while.

 

Secondly, if this comes into effect, you can most likely also forget OEM licences for Windows and such. Wich would hardly be an improvement.

 

From what I can recall of the ruling, none of these service providers are actually forced to allow selling through their DRM schemes either, they're just not allowed to forbid trading, neither are they disallowed to regulate the prices of the games either, nor does it say they can't take the majority of second hand sales for themselves.

I.e. you might have to pay Steam/Origin $30 or such as an administration-fee for moving the game through the system.

 

They'll not forbid trading the games, they'll just make sure that either it's not worth the hassle or that they'll go the streaming way of things. I can't see anything good that will come from this, sadly, that publishers won't be able to get around one way or the other.

[Monte Carlo]

I think Zoraptor has hit on something there with a gifting system on Steam.

 

It's like corkage in a bring-your-own wine restaurant. You get to drink your own booze, which is cheaper than buying it in the restaurant. OTOH, you pay a small corkage fee to the house to make up for the privilege. It's a win-win.

 

Steam should be the same, if I want to give or more importantly sell a game I've bought on Steam through Steam it makes sense that the house might want a fair cut to represent their service and infrastructure.

Edited July 5, 2012 by Monte Carlo

[Nonek]

Well i've got no idea how Diablo 3's auction house holds up, not having acquired the game, but that seems to cover certain similar ground as well as the gifting service of digital distribution services. Seems eminently do-able, and mayhap somewhat profitable.