Their tagline is literally ‘you buy it, you own it’. But does it really grants ownership?

  • InfiniteGlitch@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    18 hours ago

    The only way you truly get ownership over an software or game is through piracy. Any other way in theory (I think?), they can still just take away the game and/ or software from you.

    • illi@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      17 hours ago

      You can download the installer from GOG and then use it to instal as ypu wish, without the need to use GOG from that point forward. It’s the same concept, just without the piracy.

    • leave_it_blank@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      17 hours ago

      And how would they do that? Knock on my door on a Sunday morning, enter and trash my external hard drives where I keep the backup installers?

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      Sure, in the same way that stealing a physical object gives you rightful, legal ownership of that object. Which is to say, not even slightly.

      In reality, the way to have ownership of a copy of a piece of software is to legally obtain it (either via purchase or by being given it for free by someone who has the right to do that, e.g. in the case of Free Software).

      Some entities you buy games from might have the technical ability to remove/destroy your property and might even get away with doing so, but that doesn’t mean it somehow isn’t theft.

      Technical ability != legal right, in both cases.

      • InfiniteGlitch@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        If you refer to Piracy, I’m not even going to debate the whole ‘‘stealing vs not stealing’’. Think however you want about it.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          14 hours ago

          🙄 “Copyright infringement is not theft” is usually an argument I’m the one making, but that’s not the point right now. It was meant to be an analogy, not a strict equating of the two concepts.

          The point is that acquiring something by other-than-legal means, whatever they are and regardless of whether the act of transference was a crime or a civil tort, does not confer legal ownership. That’s just a fact, not an ethical judgement, and isn’t really debatable.

            • grue@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              13 hours ago

              I understand that you’re grasping at straws to avoid addressing the essential part of my argument (which, restated again, is that you can’t receive legal ownership from somebody who doesn’t have the right to give it to you), which is tantamount to conceding the point.