this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2026
649 points (99.7% liked)

Technology

87507 readers
3248 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The relevant section is blunt. "The Software is licensed to you, not sold," the EULA states. "You are granted a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable, and personal license to play or use the Software for your private, non-commercial use on the system or device it was intended for."

The terms also restrict renting, modifying, or obtaining games through unauthorised means. Nothing in there is new, technically. Sony's EULA has always said this. The timing is what makes it land differently right now.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world -5 points 1 day ago (3 children)
[–] Hexagon@feddit.it 19 points 1 day ago (2 children)

What buying was supposed to be: owning

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

And if buying isnt owning, that means you're paying 70+ dollars to rent a game that can be taken away from you at any time.. with no refund or recourse.

Would anyone be stupid enough to rent a game for 70+ dollars? especially under those conditions?

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca -5 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

But you've never owned movies or games. Purchasing let's go really far back VHS gave you a license to watch the movie. Always has been this way.

[–] Worstdriver@lemmy.world 4 points 23 hours ago

Coming from that era myself, buying a VHS tape absolutely gave you ownership of that copy of the movie. Same with music, which is why homemade mixtapes were such a popular and permitted thing.

Studios didn't like it, but no one went after the guy with the little vinyl briefcase of 100 different mixtapes for every sort of occasion.

[–] dogdeanafternoon@lemmy.ca 2 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

It’s definitely stealing. I don’t understand why people on here can’t admit it to themselves.

My guess is people here think that stealing is wrong, no matter what. They also think that piracy is moral. Because of that, they incorrectly deduce that piracy isn’t stealing.

Look up any definition of stealing, and it always boils down to: taking something that you don’t have permission to take.

No, this isn’t limited to physical items. Companies steal our data all the time.

I think people need to shift from “Piracy isn’t stealing” to “Fuck the corps, they don’t wanna play fair I’ll steal their shit and they won’t see a penny”

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I know but why do people care. I don't their massive corporations if I'm stealing from them in don't care.

[–] dogdeanafternoon@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 hours ago

Absolutely! Corps can eat a dick

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

It’s definitely stealing

It's definitely denying money to someone who is asking to be paid.

But since they, nor anyone else is affected by the copying activity I don't think it can be called stealing.

How about

“Fuck the corps, they don’t wanna play fair I’ll ~~steal~~ use their shit and they won’t see a penny”

[–] dogdeanafternoon@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

You can make up definitions all you want, it’s still stealing.

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Piracy doesn't fit the definition of stealing, because the owners still have the property.

[–] dogdeanafternoon@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

That’s literally wrong. If I stole all your personal data from your laptop, you’d still have it.

Companies steal trade secrets from each other all the time. That doesn’t mean the knowledge just leaves the other company.

Stop making up definitions and just accept that it’s stealing. Just because it’s stealing doesn’t make it wrong.

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

If you copied all my personal data from my laptop, I'd still have it.

If you stole it I wouldn't.

Companies steal trade secrets from each other all the time.

If you copy a secret then it is no longer a secret, so something has changed for the original owner.

Stop making up definitions and just accept that it’s stealing.

You are the one changing the definition of stealing to try and apply it to piracy.

stealing /ˈstiːlɪŋ/ noun

the action or offence of taking another person's property without permission or legal right and without intending to return it; theft.

[–] dogdeanafternoon@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

We are just going to have to disagree then. If you don’t think non-physical items can be stolen then this conversation is pointless.

Oh yes. Non-physical items can be XXXX.

We are just disagreeing on the word, not the action. I don't believe traditional words (like stolen) are 100% transferable to the digital world.

[–] SolarMyth@aussie.zone 2 points 20 hours ago

The argument goes that stealing involves taking something from someone, whearas pirating produces a copy. If you take someone's car, they don't have a car anymore, but copy their game and now you both have one.

That said, I don't think it follows from "buying isn't owning" that "piracy isn't stealing". Its a pithy slogan that captures a mood, but I don't think it really makes sense.

Your position, I believe, is more coherent: "I don't care if it is stealing". It might not technically be stealing, but its a breach of the terms of the sale that you tacitly agreed to when buying.

Something similar can be said for adblocking. People argue that it is "stealing" because there is a breach of the terms of use, and the ads fund the content. It might not really technically be stealing, but it is simpler to just say "I don't care what it is, I don't feel bad for giant corporations". You can also say this about shoplifting.

[–] Worstdriver@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Open sourcing of operational licenses.