Slashdot Mirror


Sony 'Anti-Used Game' Patent Explored

Sometime in 2000, Sony patented a process that would 'verify a disc as legitimate, register the disc to that particular game console, then wipe out verification data so the disc would be rendered unreadable in other PlayStations'. Despite unrest in the gaming community over this technology, the company has repeatedly stated they have no plans to use it in the PS3. The LA Times explores this persistent debate, examining why Sony developed the tech and why gamers are nervous. From the article: "Whatever Sony's plans, the tempest [over the patent] illustrates the changing nature of ownership as millions of people accumulate vast collections of digital entertainment. Few people realize that when they buy software or music or movies, they are actually buying a license to use, watch or listen. That's why it violates copyright laws for people to sell copies of their music collection." Thanks to 1up.com for the link.

8 of 435 comments (clear)

  1. Re:LA Times apparently unfamiliar with copyright l by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 4, Funny

    When you buy a copyright protected item, you own that particular thing.

    That particular instance of that thing, yes. If you buy a copy of a book, you own that paper and ink and binding glue.

    You need zero license to make standard use of that particular thing you purchased.

    You need zero license to make NON-standard use of that thing either, as long as that use is legal. You can run your brand new copy of "The Da Vinci Code" through a crosscut shredder and use it as confetti, if you like. In fact, I recommend this.

    The only things you CAN'T do by law with a purchased copy of a copyrighted work are those actions expressly forbidden by the copyright law.

  2. Re:LA Times apparently unfamiliar with copyright l by tinkerghost · · Score: 3, Funny

    And the right of first sale has been upheld repeatedly to grant you the right to sell your book - although converting it to confeti might make it a derivative work in which case it's not legal.... Unless it's a parody of the work at that point...
    My brain hurts now ... I'll go kill some pixels before they start liscencing the images so I can only view them once....

  3. Re:Sony would be out of their minds to enable this by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Funny

    Quite. My home has TVs in all four bedrooms and the living room, and quite honestly, the hassle of unplugging the system and all of its cables to move it around is more than a little bit of a PITA (not to mention the issues when different members of the family want to play different games at the same time.)

    That's why when the PS3 comes out, my family intends to buy six (one for outdoors by the pool too). Now, I know that my son and daughter have very different opinions about what makes a great game, as do my wife and I, but there are games that appeal to all of us, and for those games to only work on one of the consoles is going to royally suck. Are we supposed to play it exclusively on the living room console or the pool console? What about late at night? What if some of us want to play the game, and the rest of us want to relax in the living room in peace and quiet?

    In the end, the only solution is going to be to buy multiple copies, and I don't know about you, but I think that's an outrage as it is. It's bad enough that we have to buy seperate copies for use on the PS2-based system we have wired up in the back of both my wife and I's Hummers, for when we're taking the kids out on longer trips. We were thinking of including the Hummers's PS2s as another pair of consoles we were going to upgrade to PS3s when the PS3 comes out, but on hearing this, it sounds like it would be a complete waste of money.

    With gas prices being what they are, the notion we should pay for six (or eight, if we're to include the Hummer PS3s) copies of each game on top of everything else is quite simply asking too much. Where are we supposed to find the money?

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  4. On Not Being Evil by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 4, Funny

    We here at Sony have no plans for being evil or for implementing this technology. We are merely exploring the technology of being evil for academic and esthetic reasons. Do we look like the kind of company that would use technology against our own customers? Don't worry about this. You should only worry about digital rights management if you actually have any digital rights, and you don't.

    --
    Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
  5. Bad news for the PS4 by Goldrush · · Score: 2, Funny

    I doubt it's true. That idea would pretty much destroy a big advantage Sony enjoys, backward compatibility.

  6. Re:Blockbusted by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think we finally figured it out! Sony did this out of the goodness of their hearts for their customers! They hold a patent on a malicious anti-gaming technology specifically so nobody will be able to do it for 20 years. That sounds like something Sony would do, doesn't it?

    --
    Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
  7. Re:LA Times apparently unfamiliar with copyright l by 91degrees · · Score: 3, Funny

    Well... It wouldn't violate copyright law, unless someone has previously bludgeoned your teacher to death in a fixed medium.

  8. Re:Blockbusted by Rakshasa+Taisab · · Score: 2, Funny

    You are way too optimistic. It should be obvious that Sony wants a monopoly on Evil, thus they patent this tech to hurt their competitor; Microsoft.

    --
    - These characters were randomly selected.