In my previous post I had talked a little about what ramifications this might have for the resale of games. There has been considerable buzz around the “Doom and Gloom” of this decision as it pertains to used video game sales. There have been a few articles written about this topic, but the most comprehensive one is on gamepolitics.com.
Rules of first sale
It’s up to the courts to interpret laws, that’s how our system works, but what happens when there are conflicting decisions? That’s the predicament that the Ninth Circuit Court was dealing with in this case. The term “quacks like a duck” are used to describe how they rule on if something is a sale or a license. Basically the content owner decides on the terms on which you can use their product. This type of scenario was successfully used by Blizzard to shut down a bot manufacturer in World of Warcraft.
What came from this decision
Really, what we gain from the court decision are some guidelines to apply to these types of cases. There were no questions asked on the criteria of the product in question. Now there are questions that are asked about the how the license is written, and that is only one component of the process.
Will this affect how the used game market works? Probably not. There are more characteristics of owning a console video game that are like a sale. It’s more about having a copyright on the content than licensing it to the end user. The major exception this is MMOG’s. Users pay a subscription to this, and if they stop paying it, the lose access to the service. If you try to pirate the software or install it against the terms of service your account will be banned.
The moral of this story is DON’T PANIC!
No comments:
Post a Comment