Slashdot Mirror
GameStop Sued Over Lack of DLC For Used Games
Absolut187 writes "According to IGN, 'A lawsuit filed earlier this week against retailer GameStop says the company is "deceptively misleading" its customers into believing a used game purchased from the store comes with all packaged downloadable content advertised on the box. This content, however, is only made available for free to those who purchase the game new, as the code to access the content can be only used one time.' I personally don't have a problem with publishers charging for DLC. IMHO, you put in the effort to make it, you have the right to (try) to charge whatever you want. I have the right to take it or leave it if I don't find your price fair (same goes for the main game). But what about the used game market? Should publishers be allowed to destroy the used market for their games by including 'free' DLC with a one-time use code? Should the copyright doctrine of 'first-sale' have any effect here? Or is it up to the consumer (frequently children) to realize that the product will have a reduced resale value due to the one-time nature of the DLC code? Is this any different from the use of unique 'CD-Keys' that are required for online play (e.g. for Blizzard games since 1997 or earlier)?"
paypal sided with you? then you're certainly correct. QED.
Imagine if you weren't allowed to use roads because a bus company complained about your driving 3 times. --skunkpussy
Google told me that it's the Democratic Leadership Council. Must have to do with those MMORPGs or something....
DeLorean Car.
/me peers into his crystal ball....
Balls of crystal? I'd have gotten a less fragile implant.
Free Martian Whores!
You have now. Nice to meet you.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
moar like "gamestop sued over lack of battletoads" amirite?