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

351–360 of 472 posts

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

#351

Post by Forgeties79 »

hdgvhicv wrote: post #343
Forgeties79 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

That reads to me like a hand wavy an excuse for not asking what we can do to make our system more representative of the voters’ will when it should be.

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

#352

Post by lukan »

tshaddox wrote: post #344
vman81 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

But actual piracy has always been about stealing, so maybe it was not a smart move to label the movement after thieves and murderers, while insisting it is not about theft.

Because yes, it is copying. Nothing gets taken away. But when a pirate took a ship and it's gold away, it was gone.

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

#353

Post by xboxnolifes »

anal_reactor wrote: post #215
FitchApps wrote: post #203

So the only "buy" option one has now is to torrent the movie? At least no one is going to delete the mp4 file.

The problem with torrents is that they naturally die when people lose interest.

Same goes for streaming. Torrents die much slower, since you only need a few people to care.

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

#354

Post by RetroTechie »

dcchuck wrote: post #241

Curious what others use to store media for home/remote use. I naively assumed my purchases from [company A] would mean I have permanent/immutable access. Even in the case of access not being revoked, I've found content itself changes over time. Usually related to jokes which have "not aged well" let us say. I'm not here to champion leaving in that content. Or defend nostalgic rewatching. It just feels strange to not…

> Curious what others use to store media for home/remote use.

A limited selection of CD/DVD/BluRay, a large collection of songs in mp3 & other formats (many ripped from CD myself @ some point, others downloaded), a bunch of movies in h264/h265 etc (mostly via torrents).

Books / documentation / retrogames & more on various devices.

Generally when adding anything, I look for replay value. Play/watch/listen once & never revisit stuff I save to /dev/null.

In common between all the above: storage media under my control, and useable offline.

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

#355

Post by mafuy »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #308
MSFT_Edging wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the love of god please understand 80% of people are trying to just get on day by day. They don't give a shit about any of this. They probably don't even realize it's happening. Some subset of them might be hit by this but most just don't care. The point of a government in society is for people who give a shit to guide this kind of thing.

No, I won't understand. These people who don't give a shit, they are the problem . They're the ones who finance these corporations and enable their abusive practices.

They are indeed part of the problem, but you cannot blame them. You have to blame those who caused their situation to be so dire, making them lack support.

These people work 2 jobs, have a young kid, a demented parent or a bedridden sister that need constant support. If they take the time to give a shit about politics, their dependent dies. You don't seem to know how incredibly stressful and exhausting the life of some people is.

Do something about their situation that gives them the time to participate in real life. Don't blame them for trying to survive with all their might, and not go to council hall twice a week.

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

#357

Post by Reason077 »

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…

> ”Revocation should come with full refunds.”

Of course it should. If Sony are not doing that then it sounds like grounds for a class action?

I remember when Google shut down Stadia. To their credit, they automatically refunded everything I’d ever purchased on the platform. Nice little windfall.

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

#358

Post by abustamam »

"If buying digital media isn't ownership, then piracy isn't stealing."

I'm all for buying media. People worked hard on that stuff. They deserve to be compensated.

But if I buy something and then it can randomly be taken away from me at the whims of the publisher or copyright owner or whoever the hell, then I don't "own" that. And if ~I can't~ they won't let me own digital media, I have no qualms over acquiring such media in other ways, given the ongoing war against physical media anyway

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

#359

Post by apparent »

amelius wrote: post #285
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…

Buy only means buy if you can use the product as advertised after breaking all ties with the vendor. Let's not broaden this definition in favor of the vendor.

Can customers continue to use the content Sony is removing from their accounts, if they have previously downloaded it? I assume that "buy" doesn't require the vendor to continuously maintain the content on their servers, to be available for free download, forever.

Of course, customers would also need a way to transfer the content from their existing devices to later-purchased devices. If that is possible now, but becomes impossible later (like if Sony goes bankrupt), then does that ruin the "buy" characterization that seemed legit at the beginning?

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

#360

Post by CTDOCodebases »

chickenpotpie wrote: post #312
thfuran wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plus interest

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.

When people say inflation they normally mean CPI which is a poor indicator for inflation and considering it so ignores the time value of money.

Sellers should be forced to label DRM rentals with specific time frames and penalties for violating these time periods.

The way it is done currently assumes the buyer wouldn't have bought something else that would have gained value if they knew the full terms of the sale. Instead they "purchased" an indefinite rental. Imagine if these selling practices where adopted all across the economy. It would be a mess but somehow we tolerate it because the product is digital.

Post reply on HN