Live data from Hacker News

The case for physical media ownership

dervis.de

101–110 of 392 posts

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#101
It's time we change the economy for digital products and services.

* The current economy is bad: The company that can require or lure the most money from people wins.

* This would be better: The company that is liked by most people wins.

That one change would solve sooo many problems. We could get rid of a lot of laws that wouldn't be needed any more.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#102
post #26

Sony's one sentence notice is pretty grim considering how much money they made from these sales (sorry licensing). From September 1, 2026, due to our content licensing agreements, you will no longer be able to access your previously purchased content from Studio Canal, and it will be removed from your video library. Thank you, PlayStation Store [1] At least in 2023 it was two sentences and then they somehow negotiate…

I purchased it, and you're taking it away? Then either I didn't actually purchase it (despite the word appearing in the notice), or you're stealing it from me. Which is it, Sony?

This isn’t that difficult. You purchased the ability to use it while they let you, and yes, it was in the terms.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#103
post #28

This article is quite right, but there's even more to it than that. Why should we need to hold ANY kind of relationship with the seller/provider of an article we bought? You certainly don't need a bookstore account to buy a paperback book. Nor do they get to keep your contact information. You get your article and a ticket. They get your money. End of story.

[deleted]

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#105
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That argument has been harder to make with time. A couple years ago I made the difficult decision to get rid of some old game copies. I wasn't realistically going to use them ever again, and the sentimental value for me is entirely about the memory, not the media. Part of my steam collection is nearly as old and it is on track to greatly outlast. It is also significantly easier to own and use in just about every aspe…

I'm really worried about what will happen to Valve when Gabe retires. I can see a bean counter making a very convincing case that it's cheaper to go back to Windows and avoid all this Linux reverse engineering gubbins which isn't bringing in an immediate profit, especially when they're giving away all theirs efforts by open sourcing Proton.

Is that how things work at valve? I thought employees do whatever they want and there's minimal structure.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#106

It's time we change the economy for digital products and services. * The current economy is bad: The company that can require or lure the most money from people wins. * This would be better: The company that is liked by most people wins. That one change would solve sooo many problems. We could get rid of a lot of laws that wouldn't be needed any more.

What do you mean by "wins"?

Because if the company is publicly traded, "win" means "value for stockholders", and that doesn't necessarily translate to "liked by customers."

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#107
post #44

I agree with the sentiment implied by the author, but I would reword it slightly. If you don't have the freedom to share something, you don't own it. I disagree with the interpretation that it needs to be held physically. Digital ownership is still ownership. I go out of my way to find music on Bandcamp, games on GOG, and rip movies myself using MakeMKV. I wish I could encourage people to continue embracing physical…

I would emphatically not do this, because you're confusing legal ownership with physical ownership and only one can be guaranteed with reasonable certainty.

Honestly, I'm continually surprised at how badly people miss this even as, e.g. Sony et al just take away stuff you "bought."

So, to put directly. Do not reword it, you will screw it up.

You must be able to hold it in your hand.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#108
post #78
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Goods / services. You probably need a relationship to use a warranty. The tension is that digital goods are somewhere between. Especially when the delivery mechanism is streaming, and/or DRM keys that need to be renewed. Sure, many people want a one-time download with no promise or obligation to re-deliver it in the future. Then again, many people don’t want the burden of caring for bytes for the rest of their lives…

> Then again, many people don’t want the burden of caring for bytes for the rest of their lives and prefer to download on demand. Agree that people want this - but this is an undue burden on the provider side. You have to perpetually maintain and provide access to content FOREVER including all the systems and support staff to auth.

you can do it stop killing games style. publishers can decide to stop access any time they want but they have to give you a drm free download to compensate.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#109
post #105
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm really worried about what will happen to Valve when Gabe retires. I can see a bean counter making a very convincing case that it's cheaper to go back to Windows and avoid all this Linux reverse engineering gubbins which isn't bringing in an immediate profit, especially when they're giving away all theirs efforts by open sourcing Proton.

Is that how things work at valve? I thought employees do whatever they want and there's minimal structure.

Gabe allegedly (nobody knows because it's a private company) owns 50.1%, it's not majority employee owned. It's possible he might turn it over to the employees or some kind of co-op style board but who knows if he's offered the right price by a cashed up investor.

He's got children to consider and could reasonably want to set them and his grandchildren up for generational wealth.

Re: The case for physical media ownership

#110
I think DRM is frankly a lot more of a consumer education/rights thing than some kind of outright evil.

Buy a DVD for X, or "own" a DRM version for YThe issue starts when:

- vendors don't make it clear that they can pull the rug

- or indeed can pull the rug for no reason. A bank can close my bank account, but not for no reason - and they can't hold on to my money just because. It should be the same with DRM-protected assets

- people don't understand the tradeoff they're making. It's like complaining about reckless overspending in credit cards leading to insane interest. Yes, it's partly to do with the product, equally credit cards totally have their use when used responsibly, and a healthy society has people understanding the differences.

Post reply on HN