<story><title>Playstation is erasing seasons of Discovery shows from customer libraries</title><url>https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/12/playstation-is-erasing-1318-seasons-of-discovery-shows-from-customer-libraries/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jorvi</author><text>I’m fine with digital products being a license, but then &lt;i&gt;they’re a universal license&lt;/i&gt;. Meaning that if I bought the license to play Mortal Kombat via Steam, I should be allowed to freely download it on Xbox and PlayStation too.&lt;p&gt;Right now companies gives us all the disadvantages of both a product and a license.</text></item><item><author>izzydata</author><text>I agree completely. Also in practice there is almost no such thing as a perpetual license as companies can go bankrupt or just revoke your license whenever they want. They should make the exact nature of the agreement known visibly before you spend any money.&lt;p&gt;Eventually prices would have to drop to reflect that you are merely temporarily licensed things. A digital game is not going to be perceived as a $60 value when it is more obviously a temporary license regardless of the length. If a physical copy of a game is valued at $60 that can be sold then a digital temporary license is going to have to be less. In my opinion a lot less.</text></item><item><author>lotsofpulp</author><text>The government should forbid the labeling of “buy” or “purchase” of anything that can be revoked after the sale.&lt;p&gt;If it can be revoked, then it should be labeled “rent”, with the appropriate time frame.  Even if it means businesses have to label it “rent - until an unknown time in the future when we go out of business or drop the license or decide to ban you”.</text></item><item><author>jmclnx</author><text>This is where the US Federal Gov should step in.  But the pols are too busy counting donations (bribes) from these companies.&lt;p&gt;If I buy digital content, I should be able to download it on removal media and use it off-line (esp. in the case with movies&amp;#x2F;music).  I should be able to sell it (which is still legal). But these companies want you to &amp;quot;rent&amp;quot; instead of own.&lt;p&gt;So I never buy digital anything.  No wonder many people head to pirate bay because of the rights they loose.&lt;p&gt;I hope the US Gov (and other govs) wake up to this, but as always donations (bribes) trumps people&amp;#x27;s rights all the time.  (no pun intended).</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>Faark</author><text>Idk, porting isn&amp;#x27;t free, especially good ports. It seems less likely for eg a successful indie game to contract out a port, if all existing owners have to get it for free.&lt;p&gt;It would be very user-friendly and am quite happy to have also gotten some mobile versions on Humble bundle</text></comment>
<story><title>Playstation is erasing seasons of Discovery shows from customer libraries</title><url>https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/12/playstation-is-erasing-1318-seasons-of-discovery-shows-from-customer-libraries/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>jorvi</author><text>I’m fine with digital products being a license, but then &lt;i&gt;they’re a universal license&lt;/i&gt;. Meaning that if I bought the license to play Mortal Kombat via Steam, I should be allowed to freely download it on Xbox and PlayStation too.&lt;p&gt;Right now companies gives us all the disadvantages of both a product and a license.</text></item><item><author>izzydata</author><text>I agree completely. Also in practice there is almost no such thing as a perpetual license as companies can go bankrupt or just revoke your license whenever they want. They should make the exact nature of the agreement known visibly before you spend any money.&lt;p&gt;Eventually prices would have to drop to reflect that you are merely temporarily licensed things. A digital game is not going to be perceived as a $60 value when it is more obviously a temporary license regardless of the length. If a physical copy of a game is valued at $60 that can be sold then a digital temporary license is going to have to be less. In my opinion a lot less.</text></item><item><author>lotsofpulp</author><text>The government should forbid the labeling of “buy” or “purchase” of anything that can be revoked after the sale.&lt;p&gt;If it can be revoked, then it should be labeled “rent”, with the appropriate time frame.  Even if it means businesses have to label it “rent - until an unknown time in the future when we go out of business or drop the license or decide to ban you”.</text></item><item><author>jmclnx</author><text>This is where the US Federal Gov should step in.  But the pols are too busy counting donations (bribes) from these companies.&lt;p&gt;If I buy digital content, I should be able to download it on removal media and use it off-line (esp. in the case with movies&amp;#x2F;music).  I should be able to sell it (which is still legal). But these companies want you to &amp;quot;rent&amp;quot; instead of own.&lt;p&gt;So I never buy digital anything.  No wonder many people head to pirate bay because of the rights they loose.&lt;p&gt;I hope the US Gov (and other govs) wake up to this, but as always donations (bribes) trumps people&amp;#x27;s rights all the time.  (no pun intended).</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>0cf8612b2e1e</author><text>Seems like an easy workaround. Steam sold “Mortal Kombat Alpha”, but PlayStation sells “Mortal Kombat Beta”. Many electronics use a similar strategy to prevent price matching between stores where each market gets a specific SKU.</text></comment>