Tessera
Folgen

LambHoot

@lambhoot.bsky.social

Video maker. B.Eng. μαλάκας γροίκστερ 🧿🌋🐑 he/him, en/fr 🍁 https://youtube.com/@LambHoot

535 Posts591 Follower156 Folgt
LambHoot@lambhoot.bsky.social · 2w ago

as cool as the new racer looks (it looks really cool!), it doesn’t look half as fast as the og podracer. the speed was so raw. no illusions, no screen-shake. shit was wild.

Chris Chapman@savestate.site · 2mo ago

I own this photo. According to Sony’s lawyers, that means I can’t give it to you. And yet, it’s now yours too*. Turns out it’s fine. * the photo, not the duck. nobody owns the duck. the duck has autonomy.

A mallard, chilling
Richard Moss@mossrc.bsky.social · 2mo ago

This is such a bad faith and fallacious argument from Sony. It's perfectly intuitive to think that you are buying a (digital) copy of the binary data and that that copy should work for as long as you have the compatible hardware. (Text clipped from @stephentotilo.bsky.social's Game File newsletter.)

The gamers said in their June suit that Sony's disclosures have failed to meet California's standards. In its August 21 filing, Sony says they are. It notes that the linked documents state that "you can use a product in the ways described in the license, but do not own the product" and "[t]he Software is licensed to you, not sold." (For context, which you can see for yourself by clicking the above links: Both lines appear hundreds of words into digital documents that are thousands of words long). Beyond that, Sony argues that anyone who pays for a digital game inherently understands that they can't own it because, if they did, no one else could have a copy. This concept appears to draw a distinction between a digital copy of a game and a physical object that only one person can have at a time. Here's how Sony's lawyers make that case:...