Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 472 posts

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#341

Post by NopIdoN »

Razengan wrote: post #92
goldenarm wrote: post #20

IANAL, but is it illegal to have a "Buy" button that is just a disguised "Rent" button? If not, should we change the law?

Unrelated, but that is such an unfortunate acronym.. There's no way the people who perpetuated it didn't know what they were doing I propose, let's see.. Definitely Isn’t Legal Doctrine, Obviously or.. Based Only On Basic Speculation perhaps Consult Official Counsel, Kindly or more succinct, This Isn’t Trained Solicitor Advice

be utterly mercenary when helpful interlocutors suggest trusting legal expertise

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#342

Post by hdgvhicv »

nicce wrote: post #320
chickenpotpie wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plus interest makes no sense and is unnessary. Adjusting for inflation is so the person can buy the same movie at today's prices. At that point, the person is made more than whole already because they got to see the movie for free and they can chose to get it again.

If they are able to prove it somehow transparently that movie was watched at least once, reduce the amount of renting it based on the time when it was bought. Is that fair? Return the rest with inflation adjustments.

No it’s not fair.

They've stolen the property. It’s not “fair” if you replace it, let alone only replace it with a lesser than value as “it was second hand”.

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#343

Post by hdgvhicv »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #159
ikekkdcjkfke wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remember that the power is always with the people. We can enact any law we want

Unless you’re in, say, Ohio, where the government will simply overrule decisive mandates with years of procedural nonsense https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2026/03/31/ohio-republican-la...

The government is selected by the people.

If the people decide to elect a comedian with a dustbin on their head, they can do. That apples to Chicago as much as Clacton

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#344

Post by tshaddox »

vman81 wrote: post #24
goldenarm wrote: post #20

IANAL, but is it illegal to have a "Buy" button that is just a disguised "Rent" button? If not, should we change the law?

They'll argue you're "buying" a license that they can revoke when they feel like it. My feelings on the matter have been summed up by someone else more clever than me as: If buying isn't owning, then piracy isn't stealing.

Piracy has never been stealing. If you get into trouble with the legal system for piracy, it's for copyright infringement, not larceny.

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#345

Post by tshaddox »

goldenarm wrote: post #20

IANAL, but is it illegal to have a "Buy" button that is just a disguised "Rent" button? If not, should we change the law?

This is always a cute proposal, but what are people expecting to happen? If such a law actually rolled out with strong enforcement, all the buttons would just change from "Buy" to "Rent", which wouldn't meaningfully improve access to and fair usage of media.

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#346

Post by apparent »

throw101010 wrote: post #314
apparent wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've wondered how they'll draw the line on this. If Amazon or Apple has a buy button and it means you get to have ongoing access to the content for as long as Amazon/Apple is around, then for a 30 year old person there's a decent chance that's as good as buying the thing. But if it's hazier, as in the case of Sony's revocation based on losing rights in later years, then you're obviously not getting the same thing. Ho…

What makes you think that this is "as good as" buying when the original post itself demonstrate clearly that it's nowhere close to actually buying something? Is there something in Apple or Amazon terms which say they can't under any circumstances deprive you of accessing the content you have bought with their "Buy" buttons? I don't see why you are trying to assign a difference between them and Sony here? We have word…

I said "a decent chance that's as good as buying the thing". If these mega companies stick around and continue to offer access to the content, then it is as good as buying it (arguably better if you don't have to store it and can download onto many devices over decades). But note that this was all preceded by "a decent chance". There is also a chance that it won't turn out to be as good as buying, if the company goes under, gets out of that line of business, or loses access to the relevant rights.

One important question, which I don't know the answer to, is whether Sony is nuking stuff from your devices. If not, then they could claim that you bought the thing and can keep using it on your existing devices. If you can move the content from a PS5 to a PS6 in 5 years, then arguably it's fine to say you "bought" it. But if they're wiping the content from your local devices, then you've definitely not bought the thing.

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#347

Post by Nevermark »

nicce wrote: post #320
chickenpotpie wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plus interest makes no sense and is unnessary. Adjusting for inflation is so the person can buy the same movie at today's prices. At that point, the person is made more than whole already because they got to see the movie for free and they can chose to get it again.

If they are able to prove it somehow transparently that movie was watched at least once, reduce the amount of renting it based on the time when it was bought. Is that fair? Return the rest with inflation adjustments.

When you buy an option, you don't deserve a refund for not exercising the option.

On the other side, a user that watched a movie 1000 times should not get less compensation.

All users are being impacted exactly the same way (loss of future access), so should be compensated the same way.

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#348

Post by danlitt »

Nevermark wrote: post #307

Revocation should come with full refunds. That would: 1. Balance the revocation economically, for both parties, while leaving the decision to the "seller". 2. The trade becomes the time-value of money vs. the time value of access. Inherently fair. The seller nets interest, and the inflation drop on the original price. What an accountant would come up with, yet automatic. 3. Provide users the remunerative recourse for…

This presumes that it is reasonable for a seller to remove the capacity in principle to buy the digital good. They might refuse ever to sell a copy again, and only permit renting it. Since copyright grants a long monopoly this opens up scope for crazy market distortion - you could, for instance, delete the Beatles discography from the entire world until the price doubles. This tends not to happen, but there is nothing preventing it, and it seems inherently wrong.

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#349

Post by lukan »

tshaddox wrote: post #345
goldenarm wrote: post #20

IANAL, but is it illegal to have a "Buy" button that is just a disguised "Rent" button? If not, should we change the law?

This is always a cute proposal, but what are people expecting to happen? If such a law actually rolled out with strong enforcement, all the buttons would just change from "Buy" to "Rent", which wouldn't meaningfully improve access to and fair usage of media.

It would create consciousness about the whole affair and not just in some nerd circles, but in the general population. People know the difference of buying and renting and they will be enraged if found out they have been scammed.

Re: Sony deletes more movies from the accounts of people who ‘bought’ them

#350

Post by nirvdrum »

trencedamp wrote: post #227
JauntyHatAngle wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I can't say I know anyone IRL who has any interest in leaving PlayStation As a counterpoint to that. Most of my 30+ year old dad gamer friends (all of us are the type to own a PC, switch and ps5 pretty much) all are considering whether this will be our last sony generation as most of us are either physical copy people or suspect the pricing will be bad without a second hand market to compete. I don't think there is…

Part of what I've always hated about consoles is the inevitable push toward an entirely new generation of hardware when the current hardware is more than capable. The best games I've played in the last year would run on a PS4 and probably even a PS3 with a little optimization, yet we're already at the "end" of the PS5. It's so disingenuous. We should be squeezing everything we can out of the wonderful hardware we hav…

Microsoft already switched its release support to the "series" model. There are still big games coming out on PS4. With the PS6 expected to be very expensive, we may very well see games simultaneously released on the 4, 5, and 6. We may be moving away from discrete console generations. Older consoles still have a massive library you can cycle through as well.

Yeah, the console companies want to be profitable, but consumers are pushing for new stuff, too. I don't care a whole lot about graphics improvements, but going from HDDs to SSDs was a huge improvement and worth the upgrade for me. And software engineers as a whole have long favored requiring new hardware over optimization for current hardware. I hope the great electronics crunch will curtail that.

Post reply on HN