When someone sells their particular copy they are not making any new copies. Copyright does not limit what non-copying acts an owner can do with their copy. I can toss a book I buy into the fire, and neither author nor publisher can stop me on any legal grounds.Same when I sell it: There is no copying taking place, so copyright does not enter into the picture.
The problem with these one-time codes tied to service accounts is that they are inherently non-transferable, while the box will still say on the front "contains DLC code" which after it has been used becomes a lie, should you sell your copy.
Google EULA and "unenforcable". Basically, if you do not have the option to read and accept it before making the purchase it is unenforceable. So the box stating that you need an EA account to play also needs to state that the account is not transferable.
Well, you could always go to Good Old Games and buy the old games all over again...:)
(Personally, I did just that - on sale of course - simply because it is far less stressful to let them do all the majick to make it run on modern machines instead of me. Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri ftw.)
I go into GameStop, I see a game box on a shelf, I take it down, and hold it in my hand. That is a physical good! If the game publisher did not want the rules for physical goods to apply he would only have sold it in electronic form - there are plenty of avenues to do that.
This idea that the physical good is just a medium for licensed content is a bluff where the content industries are trying to "have their cake and eat it too" as you say: They want the benefits of physical goods combined with the benefits of electronic content, but don't want any of the drawbacks of either. First Sale doctrine is one of those. Why should they get away with it?
Make up your mind! They are different verbs meaning different things. Making illegal copies is not stealing, it is not baking, raping, sleeping, golfing or driving either. It is simply making unlicensed copies. Yes, it is illegal as is stealing, but two acts being illegal do not make them the same act. Otherwise you could charge a shoplifter with treason (both being illegal)...
If all Wii games disappeared tomorrow, I would not shed a tear because I do not have a Wii and thus do not buy games for it.
But I am sure that those who do buy Wii games would miss them.
There may be child molesters who buy games from Steam. Are you, a Steam user, in that boat as well? No? Then do not so easily drag in "cheaters" as some loaded term for second-hand sellers.
You are not entitled to success in business. First Sale has been a "doctrine" for a hundred years, there is no manufacturer of physical goods that should be stupid enough not to take "losses" (as if) from the second-hand market into the business case study. You are not guaranteed an income from whatever you make, there is no duty from the consumers to buy your game.
The ONLY way you can avoid second-hand sales of physical goods is not to make physical goods! Use the Steam/PSN/XBox Live Marketplace model. Cheaper, too.
I mean, you also "lose" money when a consumer buys a competing title - do you think the makers of Battlefield 3 feel they should compensate those poor makers of Modern Warfare 3 for "stealing" their customers?
And what about a subsistence farmer in India, with no computer to play the game and no knowledge of the game maker or his game? Does he owe anything? He is also a lost sale!
Yes: They want all the advantages of selling physical products (scarcity driving prices up) plus all the advantages of selling binary data licenses (zero copying cost) but whine when these advantages also come with drawbacks, like that pesky First Sale doctrine.
They used to have factories in America. That was back then Macs cost twice as much as PCs because the PC manufacturers had moved its manufacturing overseas. Despite that they failed to meet demand because there weren't enough American workers around to make them.
Also killing a worker and makeing it look like a suicide is not the way to go.
Because if you promote boycotting Apple while continuing to buy HP laptops, XBox consoles, Cisco routers etc you are just being a doubkle-standards-wielding douchebag.
Sounds like a Repiublican-voting MBA's wet dream. Remember how Reagan handled a air controller strike? He fired all of them and used military air controllers.
To the subsistence farmers that go to live in the dorms (like students are expected to accept) for a year while working hard (a Chinese trait) for a year or so, it is great income compared to what they get back home.
Apple has become so attached to FoxConn in the media that when workers at a Microsoft XBox plant went to the roof and threatened mass suicide, it was "the Apple manufacturer" then, too...
Prices and wages are local by necessity. If they get 10% of an American salary in absolute terms, but also pay 10% of American prices for their goods, then there is no real issue. FoxConn workers are relatively well paid, especially when you consider that these are migrant workers whose option is the subsistence farming their families are doing back home, helped by the remittances from the factory worker.
Same as any other device maker, try playing a non-Sony-approved game on the PS3.
- Taking down applications from the App Store and including versions in iOS
Such as?
- Spurious litigation and anti-competitive lawsuits in Germany and Australia
What is so spurious about it? They feel their IP rights are being violated, and are acting accordingly. Maybe the laws should be changed, but for now they are what they are.
- CarrierIQ, GPS tracking privacy gaffes
Far less serious abuses than those discovered in Android phones, but I guess you overlook that.
- Planned failure just after warranty period (ever since the original pod)
Okay, now you just entered hateboi conspiracy territory.
I think it's because Apple does the UnAmerican thing of generating a profit, while the other manufacturers like HP and Cisco finds way to make profits "go away". So the others have the excuse that they don't have the excess cash on hand.
After all, with its federal minimum wage, strong unions etc., USA is more of a Worker's Paradise than top-down bureaucratic China.
Tim Cook does not own the company, he answers to the shareholders. So unless most shares end up in the hands of those that care... well, you get the picture.
Why do you think that paying FoxConn better would automatically mean the workers get better pay? I for one haven't heard of any business contracts where a buyer gets to decide what the money they pay the seller i used for.
Slashdot Mirror
When someone sells their particular copy they are not making any new copies. Copyright does not limit what non-copying acts an owner can do with their copy. I can toss a book I buy into the fire, and neither author nor publisher can stop me on any legal grounds.Same when I sell it: There is no copying taking place, so copyright does not enter into the picture.
The problem with these one-time codes tied to service accounts is that they are inherently non-transferable, while the box will still say on the front "contains DLC code" which after it has been used becomes a lie, should you sell your copy.
Google EULA and "unenforcable". Basically, if you do not have the option to read and accept it before making the purchase it is unenforceable. So the box stating that you need an EA account to play also needs to state that the account is not transferable.
Well, you could always go to Good Old Games and buy the old games all over again... :)
(Personally, I did just that - on sale of course - simply because it is far less stressful to let them do all the majick to make it run on modern machines instead of me. Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri ftw.)
You're talking about the sale of physical goods.
I go into GameStop, I see a game box on a shelf, I take it down, and hold it in my hand. That is a physical good! If the game publisher did not want the rules for physical goods to apply he would only have sold it in electronic form - there are plenty of avenues to do that.
This idea that the physical good is just a medium for licensed content is a bluff where the content industries are trying to "have their cake and eat it too" as you say: They want the benefits of physical goods combined with the benefits of electronic content, but don't want any of the drawbacks of either. First Sale doctrine is one of those. Why should they get away with it?
stole (or circumvented)
Make up your mind! They are different verbs meaning different things. Making illegal copies is not stealing, it is not baking, raping, sleeping, golfing or driving either. It is simply making unlicensed copies. Yes, it is illegal as is stealing, but two acts being illegal do not make them the same act. Otherwise you could charge a shoplifter with treason (both being illegal)...
If all Wii games disappeared tomorrow, I would not shed a tear because I do not have a Wii and thus do not buy games for it.
But I am sure that those who do buy Wii games would miss them.
There may be child molesters who buy games from Steam. Are you, a Steam user, in that boat as well? No? Then do not so easily drag in "cheaters" as some loaded term for second-hand sellers.
SO FUCKING WHAT!
You are not entitled to success in business. First Sale has been a "doctrine" for a hundred years, there is no manufacturer of physical goods that should be stupid enough not to take "losses" (as if) from the second-hand market into the business case study. You are not guaranteed an income from whatever you make, there is no duty from the consumers to buy your game.
The ONLY way you can avoid second-hand sales of physical goods is not to make physical goods! Use the Steam/PSN/XBox Live Marketplace model. Cheaper, too.
I mean, you also "lose" money when a consumer buys a competing title - do you think the makers of Battlefield 3 feel they should compensate those poor makers of Modern Warfare 3 for "stealing" their customers?
And what about a subsistence farmer in India, with no computer to play the game and no knowledge of the game maker or his game? Does he owe anything? He is also a lost sale!
Yes: They want all the advantages of selling physical products (scarcity driving prices up) plus all the advantages of selling binary data licenses (zero copying cost) but whine when these advantages also come with drawbacks, like that pesky First Sale doctrine.
Nonsense, plenty of geeks are anti-Apple enough to start pretending that not buying Apple is because of some boycott.
Then they sit down to play a game on their XBox 360 connected to a Cisco router, while watching for Facebook updates on their HP laptop.
Your typo is fitting: Compared to starving as a subsistence farmer, getting factory work for a salary is "appealing".
They used to have factories in America. That was back then Macs cost twice as much as PCs because the PC manufacturers had moved its manufacturing overseas. Despite that they failed to meet demand because there weren't enough American workers around to make them.
Also killing a worker and makeing it look like a suicide is not the way to go.
Well, that was a well-founded accusation. Witch.
Because if you promote boycotting Apple while continuing to buy HP laptops, XBox consoles, Cisco routers etc you are just being a doubkle-standards-wielding douchebag.
If China increased wages and prices to American levels, you would just make the poor even more poor. And all goods even more expensive.
It's all just numbers anyway. 10% of wages, 10% of prices.
There is a limit to how much clout America can pull in China until the invade and occupy the bloody country, I guess.
Yeah, Apple should spend of its $13 bn net income to improve conditions while Cisco gets to keep its miniscule $9 bn net income to itself.
Sounds like a Repiublican-voting MBA's wet dream. Remember how Reagan handled a air controller strike? He fired all of them and used military air controllers.
To the subsistence farmers that go to live in the dorms (like students are expected to accept) for a year while working hard (a Chinese trait) for a year or so, it is great income compared to what they get back home.
Apple has become so attached to FoxConn in the media that when workers at a Microsoft XBox plant went to the roof and threatened mass suicide, it was "the Apple manufacturer" then, too...
I think we should take the money from all the rich Americans and air-drop it over the poor in China! That is obviously the solution!
Prices and wages are local by necessity. If they get 10% of an American salary in absolute terms, but also pay 10% of American prices for their goods, then there is no real issue. FoxConn workers are relatively well paid, especially when you consider that these are migrant workers whose option is the subsistence farming their families are doing back home, helped by the remittances from the factory worker.
- Walled gardens, vendor lock in
Same as any other device maker, try playing a non-Sony-approved game on the PS3.
- Taking down applications from the App Store and including versions in iOS
Such as?
- Spurious litigation and anti-competitive lawsuits in Germany and Australia
What is so spurious about it? They feel their IP rights are being violated, and are acting accordingly. Maybe the laws should be changed, but for now they are what they are.
- CarrierIQ, GPS tracking privacy gaffes
Far less serious abuses than those discovered in Android phones, but I guess you overlook that.
- Planned failure just after warranty period (ever since the original pod)
Okay, now you just entered hateboi conspiracy territory.
I think it's because Apple does the UnAmerican thing of generating a profit, while the other manufacturers like HP and Cisco finds way to make profits "go away". So the others have the excuse that they don't have the excess cash on hand.
After all, with its federal minimum wage, strong unions etc., USA is more of a Worker's Paradise than top-down bureaucratic China.
Apple does not pay their salary, FoxConn does. Apple can add $20 to the price to pay FoxConn more, but will the workers see any of that added payment?
Tim Cook does not own the company, he answers to the shareholders. So unless most shares end up in the hands of those that care... well, you get the picture.
Put it in Detroit, Home of the Car, whoops I mean Unemployed American?
Why do you think that paying FoxConn better would automatically mean the workers get better pay? I for one haven't heard of any business contracts where a buyer gets to decide what the money they pay the seller i used for.