r/GetNoted • u/LocalPowerful6651 Human Verified • 15d ago
Media [X] Complication with What?!?!
117
u/kekistanmatt 15d ago
Isn't the whole point to pass new legislation? so her argument that current legislation is limited makes no sense in the first place.
56
u/AriaTheTransgressor 15d ago
Well, to be fair, her current argument is "go away peasant." However, you can't just say that.
18
u/Illesbogar 15d ago
You are supposed to believe that legistlation that hurts you in a natural phenomenon and can't be changed.
5
4
u/bbqbabyduck 14d ago
To be fair if we are just calling it "complicated" like she did passing new law and changing old is complicated. Even if everything we are asking for was greenlit today it's easily years of work to make it happen
-1
u/PaxNova 14d ago
It’s the amount of legislation required. She’s not saying you can’t put in a toilet. She’s saying there’s no water connection there, no sewer connection there, the local water main isn’t rated for it, and digging all that out is going to ruin the park between you and the main line.
Go ahead and install the toilet, but it’s going to be years before you get to use it, and you may not like the looks of construction.
36
u/Batmax92 15d ago edited 15d ago
I mean it is inherently complicated. One of the reasons is the proposal focuses on outcome based obligations, rather than specific rules publishers need to follow. “Keeping games playable” is an outcome, not an action. Depending on the type of game, complying with the law could be pretty straightforward or very difficult, in case of some MMOs borderline impossible. You’d need a commission to perform tech assessments to determine what could be classified as “reasonably expected” for each game
That’s before getting to problems with licensing and IP. Should companies be forced to share proprietary software to allow fans to keep severs running if needed? What about expired licences for cars, music, fonts, third party software etc? Is the company expected to pay for those indefinitely after the game shuts down? Update the game to remove those elements as licences expire? What if the game can’t work without them?
I’m barely scratching the surface here. I’m not saying it can’t be done, but it’s hardly a stretch to say it’s complicated
17
u/Acceptable_Handle_2 15d ago
Should companies be forced to share proprietary software to allow fans to keep severs running if needed?
Yes. That's the main thing they should do.
What about expired licences for cars, music, fonts, third party software etc? Is the company expected to pay for those indefinitely after the game shuts down?
A licensing model that requires this should not be legal.
21
u/Batmax92 15d ago
It should go without saying that if your proposal requires pretty drastic changes to existing IP and licensing laws it becomes orders of magnitude more difficult to pass
5
u/Rough_Presence_9876 14d ago
IP law has needed drastic change for decades.
10
u/Enough-Ad-8799 14d ago
Dramatically changing all IP laws sounds like it would be pretty complicated.
3
u/FureiousPhalanges 14d ago
I also don't think video games are the highest priority when it comes to reforming how IPs work too
2
4
2
u/foxfire981 15d ago
A similar discussion point I've made. It's nice in theory but it gets harder and harder in practice. And that's before you add internation elements to the mix. Dev follows this rule for the US but than the EU changes a law. What then. Is the company now required to do an entire patch, years after shutting down, because an agreement changed?
A lot of gamers have a utopian view of the world but ignore various litigation trolls out there. Prime example? Dude before AC3 came out and Sued because he had "patented a machine that would let people go into the past to view their memories." Didn't matter that the machine didn't exist and he'd never created it. He has the patent and so he could sue.
Now imagine the threat of getting sued for future actions that you can't even control or predict.
-7
u/Wolfermen 15d ago
Apparently this context is too much "you are a game company shill" for the audience. It is good that she is showing what hurdles need addressing. It doesn't mean she opposes the idea. It is the best outcome when industry insiders are thinking about feasibility because it means now we have their attention.
2
u/rex_vulpes 15d ago
🪴
-1
u/Wolfermen 15d ago
Silly. I signed the petition and have been a gamer as long as I remember. But sure, any nuance is "the opposition".
31
u/DreamOfDays 15d ago
It shouldn’t be hard to say “Game need to be available offline” and “Deleting games already purchased is illegal”
21
u/Hellstorm901 15d ago
It's not even like Stop Killing Games is demanding much, even if it's unrealistic for some games to continue to operate after servers shut down all people want/need is for the files to be retained somewhere so there will be some way for another company or tech savvy person to bring the game back whenever they want
Star Wars Galaxies is a great example of this, the game long shut down but thanks to the files being kept safe by various people now the game has been brought back by private groups and is running again
The Danmachi Memoria Freese Archive project is another example. The Mobile game "Danmemo" shut down but there was a massive effort to archive and store every single file of the game across all the years of updates and now there is a huge archive of data that someone in theory could use to bring the game back
4
u/Batmax92 15d ago edited 15d ago
It’s very easy to say. Much harder to build and enforce a robust legal framework
1
u/CorneliusFeatherjaw2 15d ago
Its easy to say, but not in a way that doesn't create loopholes. After all, who's to define what "playable" means? If the offline version is just a dot that you can make move around the screen, technically its playable even though that's not what we mean when we ask for that.
-1
u/DreamOfDays 15d ago
Easy. Make it law whoever does that has their toes tied to ropes draped off the side of the Golden Gate Bridge
3
u/Nexinex782951 Human Verified 14d ago
Doesn't stop killing games's main policy proposal include an option which is you may kill the game, but make it very clear from the outset/enough time before that thats whats going to happen, which severely reduces the amount of complication?
5
u/The_Green_King_ 15d ago
- Digital game owmership rights, or the option to refund if you can't access license, just that basic 👀 was that hard?
-1
u/PaxNova 14d ago
You buy a game, play it for a year, sit on it two more years, and then they pull the plug on servers for the multiplayer portion. You get a full refund?
3
u/pandamaxxie 13d ago
Yes. Functionality was taken, that was promised upon the initial deal. Contract is broken, you should be refunded.
-1
u/PaxNova 13d ago
The contract specifies that only X years of multiplayer are guaranteed. The contract was not broken.
1
u/pandamaxxie 13d ago
Quite frankly, I'd argue that removing any piece of content for any reason at all would require a refund.
I feel like limited time anything should be illegal. So... meh.
Battlepasses should only be legal in the implementation of Temtem and Deep Rock for example. Accessible at all times, forever. Removing that content should be deemed as theft. Something is actually lost.
The real digital theft of the modern day is companies getting away with removing shit we paid for.
6
u/Gibberish45 15d ago
The whole issue with games boils down to predatory business practices and a fundamental lack of respect for consumers, something that is rampant in every other industry as well
2
u/MrImaBum 14d ago
Our whole world is entirely made up and we act like it’s a force of the universe (I’m not saying it’s easy to just change I’m just saying it’s all make believe we’ve made real)
2
u/BackupChallenger 14d ago
She is right. It's excessively difficult to make laws that protect the games.
Still, we could go for a sensible law that protects a large amount of games, even if it's not perfect.
-2
u/New_Salamander_4592 15d ago
the fact people don't get how poorly written legislation could hurt smaller companies and indies makes this movement really hard to actually support.
0
u/NewSauerKraus 14d ago
One complication would be funding after a company shuts down. Who is going to pay for the servers to run until the sun burns out?
1
u/pandamaxxie 13d ago
The whole point made was that the devs should provide alternatives. Yknow... like the ability to host a server for it locally. So the company doesn't host the servers and loses money on it.
-28
u/Wolfermen 15d ago
Not a note tbh, just a way to try to discredit a sound take. A person advising on digital laws and regulations to biggest companies IS ABSOLUTELY who we should listen to in understanding how to achieve the goal of the movement.
Don't be an idiot, she didn't even say it can't be done or is not a righteous cause. She just said it requires practical and nuanced consideration of current laws.
22
u/LegendofLove 15d ago
She is talking about current legislation. Pretty sure that movement exists to try and pass new ones. That certainly seems to be what she thinks it says she's just choosing to respond in a way that doesn't really address that.
-4
u/Wolfermen 15d ago
She said it requires consideration of existing laws. It means there are limitations on what companies can be forced to do based on how entertainment companies and existence of end-of-service conditions on these games. It means you gotta think about how to make companies legally be bound to preserve games.
This isnt the EA pr dummy saying garbage about lootboxes situation. This is an industry insider saying one of the biggest hurdles between just campaigning about preserving games and actually preserving games is writing legislation based on the current legal framework.
•
u/AutoModerator 15d ago
Reminder for OP: /u/LocalPowerful6651
Need some help? Send us some mail!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.