• hperrin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    168
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Because you signed (digitally) an agreement that lets them do that.

    Pirate everything.

      • deweydecibel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you have an Android, they are increasingly making it impossible to not use them. They continue to punish users that choose to unlock the bootloader or root, and Google Play Services are an inescapable prerequisite to many apps, regardless of side loading ability.

        • psud@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          “the boot loader is only safe if it is signed by Google”

          How ever did I get out of the '80s with computers with dangerous unsigned boot loaders

        • player2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’ve used F-Droid without unlocking the bootloader or rooting or Google Play services integration. Developers are free to use F-Droid, most just choose not to. Hopefully it becomes even more popular as gplay has more issues.

      • firecat@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        20
        ·
        1 year ago

        Don’t buy games on Steam or Valve Corporation, they make you sign the User Agreement that legally waves your rights and ownership of games.

        • Gestrid@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Actually, Steam is usually one of the best places when it comes to refunds. The process is simple, and they’re willing to make exceptions to the rules. And the company is run by one of the few CEOs in the gaming industry who seem to actually understand gaming.

          • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            1 year ago

            And a large portion of the steam community will be super sad if Gaben retires or passes away. We can only hope it continues to be run as well as it has been over the past 15 years.

          • firecat@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            AU lawsuit against Valve proves Valve didn’t want to refund their customers. Valve is guilty of this violation of Australia law. Many people who used Steam before 2010 tell people they were never given refunds oran option for refunds.

            Valve is not good guys, they fought the Australia government to the very top to not pay or offer refunds. They are greedy.

          • rambaroo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            They literally had to be sued by multiple jurisdictions to even offer refunds. The cult of Valve needs to die.

    • Infiltrated_ad8271@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Read by almost no one, it is interesting because in many countries contracts are considered invalid if one of the parties is not properly informed and still accepts, affirmative consent is legally crucial.
      Everyone knows that EULAs violate it systematically, tens or hundreds of millions a day, but it doesn’t seem to be a matter of interest.

      • CheezyWeezle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        Whenever I see a checkbox or something that just says “Check here to confirm you accept our privacy policy” I think it’s funny because all I am legally agreeing to are the words actually in front of me. Sure, I agree with the standalone words “our privacy policy”. I’m not sure what that does for you, but i guess “our privacy policy” is an acceptable string of words.

      • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Imagine how hard it would be to buy stuff or use free services if you actually had to read and understand the contracts every time.

        Ok, I’ll just quickly check on Google maps what’s south of Mongolia. Oh, I need to read all that before seeing the map? Well, maybe later. Don’t really have the time for that right now.

        If that’s what life was like, laziness would win nearly every time and companies would have hardly any users or customers. Eventually some companies would probably make super short contracts in order to lower the threshold.

        • Infiltrated_ad8271@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I can already see it: “We’ll do whatever we want without accepting any responsibility and we’ll spy on you to monetize it. Click here to accept.”

          It’s a complicated issue, maybe with summaries, requiring affirmative consent only for certain actions, or splitting them up? I don’t know, it all seems messy. But I hope it leaves behind the expectation that we lie by agreeing to sell your firstborn’s soul after reading for hours in legalese.

          #SellYourChildrenWithAffirmativeConsent.

          • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            LOL, that was a brilliant summary about what these contracts usually boil down to. However, they should probably include these things too: “You’re not allowed to do anything cool. If anything goes wrong, it’s always your fault.”

            These brutally honest super short contracts could be fun to read.

      • Auli@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        But we never owned a copy of any software or movie ever. We always had a license to watch or use the copy we purchased.

  • LazaroFilm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    123
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    They’re not purchases, they’re leases.

    Edit: it’s actually that you purchase access to their license of the media.

      • ryven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        40
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Edit: Sorry, meant to reply to the comment above you!

        They’re not really leases either. Leases last for a defined period of time, like “one year,” or they renew at regular intervals, like “monthly.” “Pay up front and we’ll let you keep this license for either forever or until we decide to revoke it without notifying you” isn’t the same thing.

        • atrielienz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Pretty much all the big tech firms have done this. The problem is we only blame the middlemen. We blame Sony or Amazon, or Google or whoever. But the companies providing the licenses for them to “sell” are a big part of the problem. And nobody ever wants to listen when I say this but they should be on the hook too. Like, I appreciate that it’s messed up to have your purchased media shadow ganked. But at the same time it’s fucked up to have the licensing agreements be what they are to start with and that’s absolutely on companies that own the rights to digital media. Who continue to lobby to maintain the status quo.

    • snaggen@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Are they really? Didn’t you press a button that said “Buy”? Just because they want things to be something else, doesn’t mean that the meaning of the words changed.

      • Patch@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve just had a look on the Play Store, and they notably don’t use the word “buy” anywhere that I can see. The button to “buy” the app is just a button with the price on it, and clicking through that it uses the language of “install”.

        Can’t help but think that that’s deliberate.

        • f4f4f4f4f4f4f4f4@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          It does say “Buy” and refers to a “purchase”, but everyone’s arguing semantics; the Terms of Service say that you are buying a limited license to download and use the software. You may have a “one-click purchase”-type option enabled?

    • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      29
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s also a private company and they can do whatever they want on their platform and their property.

      It’s like renting space in an apartment … don’t be surprised if the landlord decides to change the agreements and do things you don’t like. You’re renting things, you don’t own anything.

      • FiveMacs@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You can’t arbitrarily change agreements for renting without consent or lease renewal. At least not in civilized countries.

        • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m not defending or condoning it … I was just pointing out something for what it is. I keep my purchases, rentals and anything paid for to a minimum with services like Google, Amazon or any other cloud or electronic service. They are not purchases of ownership, they are marketed as things that we buy and own indefinitely but in legal terms, they are more or less indeterminate rentals or leases from the company with terms that can be set by the company that controls them.

          I agree, in terms of comparing to an apartment rental, there are more laws because the thing that is involved severely affects a person’s life because we’re talking about a roof over a person’s head.

          But in terms of electronic or digital items or services that only exist online, it’s a lot easier to remove / change / delete them because these actions won’t put you out on the street, make you starve or physically hurt you in any way. We lose the convenience and we lose out on something.

          I’m not belittling any of it, I wouldn’t want to lose anything I paid for either but at the same time, we have to understand that when we sign up to pay for something with a multi billion dollar corporation, we hardly have any rights to anything, agreed to or implied … and if we argue that in court, the one with the most money wins.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Your argument is cargo-cult libertarian bullshit. There are lots of things private entities can’t do on “their property!” Murdering visitors, for example. Fraudulently claiming a sale isn’t really a sale is right up there with that in terms of how clear-cut the rule is.

        What we have here is squarely a failure of the FTC to do its goddamn job. Nothing more, nothing less.

        • laverabe@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think everyone took there comment in the wrong light. They’re not defending Google, but rather pointing out that this behavior should be expected from a for profit company, and thus people should have avoided the situation in the first place. Not that it should be that way, but we live under capitalism unfortunately, and people need to be way more skeptical of these companies.

          Rather than blaming inaction of the FTC, why not just stop using play store all together and encourage people to use Fdroid instead? Companies will never stop abusing ‘e-goods’ , it’s just not going to happen. People should just get beyond ownership and embrace the advantages of free software.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Rather than blaming inaction of the FTC, why not just stop using play store all together and encourage people to use Fdroid instead?

            Because boycotts don’t fucking work and are not a replacement for meaningful consumer protection law!

            I do use F-Droid myself, thankyouverymuch, but I’m not so naive as to think it’s an actual solution instead of a workaround. Even if it’s technically possible to continuously defend yourself from the avalanche of corporate abuse, it’s fucking exhausting. The masses not only aren’t capable of it, but shouldn’t have to be in the first place because abuse should be prevented, not worked around. That’s what government is for!

            This shit about boycotting abusive companies instead of actually regulating them is just as brain-dead as arguing that we shouldn’t have police because we can just hire a personal security detail to follow us around instead.

            Companies will never stop abusing ‘e-goods’ , it’s just not going to happen.

            Not with that attitude. Companies could certainly be forced by the government to stop doing that, but apologists like you are letting government off the hook.

            • laverabe@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Well I personally think the FTC should do more, but until money out of politics, it will never happen. And pending some mass upheaval; that is probably in all reality unlikely as long as people are fed, money will almost certainly never be out of politics.

              So all the more necessity to encourage people to just abandon these profiteering companies.

      • SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Does that single landlord control every apartment in the country? That is Google’s level of monopoly.

  • SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    94
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is rage inducing.

    Imagine if your car dealer was allowed to confiscate your car on a dubious claim such as “it doesn’t meet the latest emissions standards,” but not even telling you that.

    Google needs to be fined twice the value of the apps that it stole from it’s paying customers.

      • SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is so stupid. Why would a company put this much effort to lock down the seat controls, as if they didn’t already exist without limits on every other car? Not even with a toggle? These companies are really trying to destroy the “cars = freedom” association.

          • Gestrid@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            If the motors need to cool down, they need to rethink their motors.

            • barsoap@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              13
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Motors get hot and it’s quite reasonable to not include tons of cooling just so that you can adjust your seat for hours on end.

              That said the implementation is still stupid as time isn’t the right measure to judge motor temperature, motor temperature is. Thermocouples cost fractions of a cent, the motors probably already include one or two as they already have smarts (being hooked up to the CAN bus and not straight voltage). Which would also take care of differing environmental temperatures as obviously the motors are worse at shedding heat when it’s scorching hot in the car.

              • piecat@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                You don’t add cooling, you size the motors to have enough thermal mass and mount them to metal chassis.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Potatoe Potatoh. Point is you size the overall system for quick adjustments, not continuous use. If you can get by with less weight and cost then you do as continuous use does not even begin to appear in the requirements sheet.

            • psud@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              Rethink a motor designed to be used for 5 mins initially then occasionally in future? It’s fine for the design purpose. It’s even fine for the mode where it operates every time you get in the car (where it waits in fully back position, and moves forward when you operate a control)

              Why should they think it to let it be used as a fidget toy?

    • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      One of the most important parts of purchasing a car is the title being signed over and that transfer being registered with the state. You never own the title to an app.

      • Klear@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You don’t transfer title and register a hammer when you buy it. Are you saying you fan’t own one?

    • Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Do you remember the early GE EV1 electric car? Turns out they were all sold under a license with fine print. GE took them back and owners fought hard to keep them. They offered to buy the products outright but nope.

      • SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Why did they want them back so much, and why does this wonderful electric powertrain technology so often come paired with invasive Terms and Conditions?

        • Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          I remember that was always a big question mark back then; was there somesort of safety issue or budget problem? Also, technology has greatly improved since the days of lead acid and NiMh. I think later models dabbled in lithium, but they got less than 100 miles in range.

          Leasing a car is quite common even today and benefits a certain demographic and those who like the latest. That hasn’t changed much since then. The difference in this example was that leasing was the only option, you couldn’t buy outright.

          Still, I commend GM for what they got out the door. It was major headway in the field.

  • Coach@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Because they have more money than you and, according to the US legal system, that’s all that matters.

    • woodgen@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Piracy is never stealing, since you are not removing anything from anyone. This does not include actual piracy, the one with ships and rum.

      • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s true. If I steal 20 copies of some avengers movie from Walmart and give them away on the street, I’ll pay a couple thousand dollars in fines, tops. If I’m caught seeding an avengers movie to one person downloading from me in Serbia, I’ll be fined more money than most people make in their entire lives

    • Ad4mWayn3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Partially agree, because if purchasing == owning (which it should), then piracy is still != stealing

    • Dkarma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      34
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Ok but this isn’t purchasing outright it is basically leasing. It says so in the tos. The issue here is ppl don’t read tos or they don’t care and pay anyway. Ppl like that have zero right to complain.

      Lol everyone of you idiots are proving my point and making tons of idiotic assumptions like I’m anti piracy. Y’all need some logic lessons.

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Amazing how you can talk so coherently with that corporate dick taking up so much space in your mouth.

      • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        1 year ago

        How dare the average person not have the time or attention span to read a 28 page document in legalese that explains what exactly they’re doing

        It’s not like purposefully dense and overlong TOS is a known strategy to hide bullshit that later gets thrown out in court or anything

        • Urist@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          1 year ago

          That person probably also think people who get shot are stupid for not moving out of the bullet’s path. “It is not so hard, it moves in a straight line you idiots”.

        • NotJustForMe@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          So you don’t have time for that? Spend two hours reading stipulations for a service that you might use for a decade or longer? That you might spend thousands of your currency on? What happened to the world. So fast. So furious.

      • d3lta19@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 year ago

        The button to install a paid app literally says BUY. If that doesn’t mean purchase I don’t what else it could mean.

        • Auli@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I can buy a vacation doesn’t mean I own the place I’m going.

          • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            From Wiktionary:

            buy (third-person singular simple present “buys,” present participle “buying,” simple past “bought,” past participle “bought” or (archaic, rare, dialectal) “boughten”)

            (transitive, ditransitive) To obtain (something) in exchange for money or goods.

            “I’m going to buy my father something nice for his birthday.”

            When I search the Play Store for Geometry Dash, and click the lil button that says “$1.99,” I get this page. It sure as shit looks like what I’m about to buy is Geometry Dash, the video game. When I click “Buy,” I’m not at all expecting to “buy” a temporary, permanently revokable license to play the game for now. I’m expecting to own the 1s and 0s that are downloaded to my device. Hiding legalese in the T&C that nobody clicks saying “actually buy means lease” is legal, and it should not be legal, because it’s misleading as hell. They should not be allowed to redefine widely understood words in T&C in a way that misleads consumers into paying for something they didn’t expect to be paying for.

      • experbia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        OK but piracy isn’t stealing it is basically a harmless free copy. The issue here is corporations want to have their cake and eat it too, but to prohibit us all from either having or eating any cake ever. Corpos like that have zero right to my consideration or care.

      • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yeah, okay, except the iTunes and Facebook TOSes are longer than King Lear. Eventually a judge nullified a TOS on the basis that no-one ever reads those anyway.

        Thanks to odious TOSes, the average American commits three felonies a day, violations of the CFAA for which some whistle-blowers and journalists are serving sentences similar to [assassin] Scott Roeder (for the murder of Dr. George Tiller). The rest of us are not serving such sentences but for one officer or official who wants us to disappear.

        In the meantime journalists continue to get charged with such violations, usually when their investigating something embarrassing to current administrations. The EFF has repeatedly raised a stink about this, but hasn’t yet been able to change the law.

        If your kid is under 13 and has social media accounts on specifically kid-friendly platforms (that, themselves teem with predators, salesfolk and law enforcement) then your kid is committing major federal crimes. On the light side, they totally have haxxor cred.

        • Dkarma@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          You 👏 should ,👏 expect 👏 this 👏 it 👏isn’t👏the👏first👏time

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I recall a while back someone did a study that there are not enough hours in the day for an average person to actually read all the TOS documents they’re expected to agree to. The idea that people can or should be responsible for knowing what’s in a TOS is a legal fiction.

        • Auli@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Maybe we should get a GPT started to make short and understandable TOS.

        • Dkarma@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I never said or implied what you assume I’m implying.

          Get some literacy.

      • NotJustForMe@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Some people don’t get how you can separate understanding the logic of something and not supporting it at the same time.

        Don’t worry, that is normal. Im getting laughed at left and right for having my own root-server with all my services running on it, all FOSS.

        Most of them were born with google already existing, it is part of nature. They haven’t seen a giant go down yet.

      • corship@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        44
        ·
        1 year ago

        So if I use your toothbrush to clean my asshole it’s fine cuz it’s still there right?

        • Maolmi@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          55
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you can exactly copy said toothbrush and then clean your filthy bunghole with the copy it is totally fine, yeah.

          • IHateFacelessPorn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            21
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            But the thing they are selling to you is not only the data. Also the right to use it. When a studio makes a game spending millions of dollars they don’t do it so one can buy it for 60$ and others can copy from him/her eh? Try moralizing it as much as you want. (If your being sarcastic sorry about that but doesn’t look like it) Privacy Piracy is stealing, and I am accepting I am stealing. No need to think otherwise.

            • lorkano@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              18
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Sharing pirated content to millions of people is stealing, I agree. But it started differently. You bought the CD and you could lend it to friend, your game worked. Right now you buy games and only you can play it. Which is different with any other form of physical good. I buy a car I can let someone drive it for a day. Why shouldn’t this apply to digital goods as well? That’s how piracy started, because we couldn’t share our goods with friends anymore. Digital companies decided it’s loss for them.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Also, it’s legal to make a backup copy of something you own for personal use. And yet we can’t make backup copies of games even for personal use. I guess we don’t own them.

              • IHateFacelessPorn@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Right now you buy games and only you can play it. Which is different with any other form of physical good. I buy a car I can let someone drive it for a day. Why shouldn’t this apply to digital goods as well?

                Yeah absolutely. Which is something I am completely agreeing of. But the thing is that doesn’t give us the right to steal it or make ourselves think it is not stealing. What I am doing is not buying such companies’ products + pirating if I really need it. But I don’t try to make it seem like how it is not (e.g. as it is not stealing).

                That’s how piracy started, because we couldn’t share our goods with friends anymore. Digital companies decided it’s loss for them.

                I am pretty sure when Napster was a thing music CDs were still a thing as they are now too.

              • 📛Maven@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I don’t know about you guys, but I share my digital games all the time. Steam and Switch have pretty decent share setups.

            • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              Technically you don’t get the copy rights to a book when you buy it either, but you do get that one copy of the book and publishers can’t knock on your door demanding it back. You can even lend it or resell it.

              However as far as respecting the customers rights, game and digital media companies want to set their own terms.

              Is it Piracy to restore access to something you bought and got taken away from you? Well, if it is, I’m pro piracy.

        • mightyfoolish@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sure. I can even spit extra on it no charge if that makes your day. Just download me a clean one afterwards will you.

        • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          No, because you’re still tampering with the original product. That is not analogous to piracy. If you make a perfect 1:1 replica of my toothbrush, and use that to pleasure yourself, I don’t care, because my toothbrush is still in my bathroom untouched.

    • Ad4mWayn3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      's alright sweetheart, you can say it, there’s no longer a megacorporation to shadow ban or lecture you

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Piracy is always justified. I don’t do it because I’m afraid of consequences and my fear of fucking up is greater than my desire to watch TV, but if you’re confident in your abilities, do it. Fuck Netflix, they wouldn’t use your money to make shows you like anyway.

  • space@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Not only that. If you buy an app, you are at the mercy of its creator. If they decide they want to fill it with ads and tracking, or switch to a subscription model, there’s nothing you can do. You can’t rollback updates, you can’t install an older version from the play store. If they decide to remove it from the store, you won’t be able to install it any more.

    • psud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I had one of the flight tracker apps, used it to identify planes passing my work lunch room’s window, and paid $5 for it to get it ad free. Then it went to subscription and made it’s free tier time limited instead of ad supported, so now I don’t use it. I can’t use an old version as it doesn’t work on newer versions of Android

      Edit to add: It’s worth learning how to side load apps. While on a driving holiday in Sicily I was told that it was vital to have the ZTL app so I could know what areas were closed to cars (zero traffic limit), but it was only available on the Italian play store, so I had to download the APK and install it that way

      • SkippingRelax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Zona a Traffico Limitato - buy I like the way you made the acronym work in english :)

        Edit: Limited traffic area, typically only residents, emergency services, deliveries etc.

        • psud@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s it. I was allowed to drive into one as I was booked into a hotel in the zone, I think that’s the slowest I ever drove for more than three metres

    • Piwix@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      On that note, I bought a GIF viewer app’s full version via in-app purchase and about a year later, they updated the app to have ads again regardless and my “full version no ads” app got ads again and now i had to buy a subscription per month to be “ad free” needless to say I uninstalled

        • jbk@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s why Android apps must be signed. Tools can show an app’s certificate hash and if two app versions’ hashes match, they’re equally trustworthy / from the same source. I think APKMirror does this and it’s actually quite trusthworthy.

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The “best” thing is when someone makes legitimately the best application for its purpose (arguably the only good application for it), so you convince your friends to use it because it’s so useful, and then they cram it full of ads and bloat and make it borderline unusable, but your friends won’t switch to a different app (or even leave the app altogether) because it’s the only way they know how to do the thing

      I’m talking about the 5e Companion app on Android. Anyone know any good alternatives? It used to be so good, but then they started adding Unearthed Arcana garbage to it, which almost entirely sucks ass, and when UA gets officially added, they have to add the official version separately because some people have already used the UA version to make characters. I want so badly to switch away from it, but I can’t find any good free alternatives that have all of the content from 5e.

      I wish 5e.tools had a character sheet builder

    • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I got into technology because I loved it. Now, ever bit of news I get I hate it a little bit more. What happened with improving things, sharing information and making the world better?

    • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There are usually archives of versions for most apks for android. App updated to be shittier? Uninstall and install an older version of it from IA.

  • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    1 year ago

    A “purchase” or “buy” option, especially when you get an invoice, should ALWAYS mean ownership of the product.

    A “borrow” or “rent” option is one that you expect to have to return the product.

    Google can’t have it both ways. They either sold people software or they rented it out. Since it was never advertised or marketed as the Google Play Rental Library, they should be forced to give people the products they paid for.

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yup, I’ve said it a million times, it needs to be made flatly illegal to use language that implies ownership if the company has any method of revoking your ownership of that product in the future. These threads always get the same libertarians that show up in discussions about non-functional slack fill saying “it’s not illegal, so what’s the problem?” The problem is that it isn’t illegal. Imagine if Toyota could come grab your car from your driveway, because even though you paid it off, subclause 74 of section G(2) says that the company retains the right to repossess property made by them at any time for any reason. You didn’t read a 200 page contract at the dealership when you bought the car, you just trusted that they wouldn’t fuck you. Toyota would get their ass reamed in court if they tried that, so why are Google and Microsoft and Sony and Steam allowed to do it?

    • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Between this (which happened to me on both Google play and Amazon) and audible audio books not being “mine” unless of course I log in to Amazon etc to get my DRM key, I am starting to reconsider how I obtain my stuff.

      This whole techno serfdom thing ain’t for me.

      • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I am starting to reconsider how I obtain my stuff.

        This is a good thing. I don’t know why modern business models for these companies seem to be intentionally anti-consumer, but people will find other ways to get what they are looking for. And if that means spending money with a more ethical company, or simply pirating, they’ll find the path of least resistance.

        I used to spend hundreds on the Google Play Store, buying apps and music all the time. Then they started playing stupid games, and I haven’t spent a dollar on the Play Store in years. My money goes to someone else.

        • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          At this point I’ve spent $12/mo for 4 years on Amazon music. That’s $576 dollars I could have spent on buying songs or CDs and that’s probably 576+ songs.

          I regret that I’ve streamed all of these years. And let’s be honestly, I rarely branch out to far afield from my favorite songs and artists. Who have probably received less money from me than if I just bought their cd and ripped it like we did 15 years ago. I also have way more storage on my phone than I ever did 15 years ago. I could keep quite a bit of my music synced and enjoy it whenever I want without worrying about data limits or if I’m on WiFi.

          Same goes with half the video streaming services. I watch a handful of shows and movies. I could have bought the ones I watch and never have to worry about “oh man, did they take x off of Netflix? What service is it on now? Ew Hulu, I have to watch ads with that even though I pay”.

          The 0% interest is drying up so these companies are trying to claw as much revenue and profit out of their services as they can and I wonder how many people it’s just going to drive away from it completely?

          I’ll stop watching prime video when they add ads.

          I don’t mind paying for services. I mind feeling like I’m getting shafted and duped every time I turn around. Raising the prices, making the experience worse, removing content, removing features, and then having the nerve to increase the prices by 50% in some cases. Get bent!

          • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I lucked out last year and ended up scoring something like 1000 DVDs for cheeeeaap. Like $100 or something. I ripped them all (minus any duplicates I already owned) and put them on my NAS. No more worrying about ads, data mining, or even internet/service outages ruining my evening.

            I did the same for all my CDs, and while we still do purchase CDs, they are way overpriced.

            But purchasing digital music and movies has become harder since Google Play Music went away. It’s almost too much effort to try to buy digital content these days, and it makes no sense. I want to pay for content, but making it impossible just doesn’t work for anyone.

            Amazon played their first ad for us on Prime Movies today… during a kid show no less. Just disgusting where things have ended up.

            • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              My father in law has thousands of CDs he’s collected over the years that he’d probably let me have.

              And I just found out my local library sells old DVDs and Blu-rays for $.50 each. I should go drop $50 and buy em out. There were some great movies in there and a few that I’ve always wanted to watch.

              This thread just made me realize that I’ve hit my limit of bs with these services. Over lunch, I wrote a script to download yt videos and put them in my Plex library.

              • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                And I just found out my local library sells old DVDs and Blu-rays for $.50 each.

                Holy crap, I need to see if our local library offers something like that. I used to go to their book sales, but never considered that they would be selling movies.

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      As far as im concerned, the equivalent here, should be a raw downloadable file. Much like how music purchases work.

      Anything other than that simply isn’t “buying”

      • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I recall purchasing Photoshop for Android, before it became Lightroom for Android.

        It was as close to the desktop Photoshop as you could get, and it wasn’t cheap.

        Google (or adobe) took it out of the play store, effectively cutting customers off and preventing them from installing it on new devices.

        Fortunately, I was rooted at the time and backed up the APK, which allowed me to use it for years longer and on newer devices. But the experience really had be second guessing whether I should keep “buying” apps on the play store.

        There are quite a few other instances where games and apps I purchased simply disappeared. Such an unethical business model.

          • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            True, but as I recall it was more than just the APK that I needed to backup/restore to get it to work.

            It was so many years ago, so I really don’t remember the details, but the point was without a backup, I’d have lost access to the app I paid for.

  • Pxtl@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    1 year ago

    Honestly, as somebody who really loved the early era of Android gaming, I’m really disappointed how ephemeral it all was between the Play Store delistings and the absolutely atrocious approach to backwards compatibility in the Android OS.

    • atocci@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Seriously, I can’t run a 32 bit game on a 64 bit processor? How is that even a problem on newer phones?

    • yamanii@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yep, I never bought a game again after my CAVE shmups all stopped working when I switched phones, there’s also no way to try and make it work on your phone unlike any other operating system on PC since it’s so locked down, completely dependent on devs to care.

  • TheAlbacor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Good to see more people are understanding how anti-consumer our digital distribution laws are. Sucks they had to find out this way, but people have been warning of this for years.

  • kworpy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    1 year ago

    And these companies think piracy is unjustified. No, it’s just holding out an umbrella in the rain.

    • muh_entitlement@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Piracy is ALWAYS justified! These companies are dead set on robbing me blind. Well guess what: if I never spent a nickel, there’s nothing to rob me of! To the high seas!

  • NotJustForMe@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It’s their accounts, you just have access to them. They can close the whole thing tomorrow.

    I don’t even want to know what will happen when the valve guy retires. A publicly owned (edit: meant to write privately owned) company that could just shut down tomorrow. Many gaming publishers are aware, having their own launchers. Are you?

    I’m telling you, root server, self-hosted everything and FOSS. If you can’t do your things with that, it ain’t worth doing anyway.

    • ObsidianBlk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      To start with, you’re right. Digital distribution in general is volatile for consumers. While I will say that Steam, at present, is leagues better in that you must download the game purchase in order to play it (meaning, you have a direct copy of the game on your hard drive, which will remain there even if the game is removed from the Steam store), it is not outside the realm of possibility that this could change in the future.

      That said, publishers having their own launchers, I’m sorry to say, has absolutely nothing to do with their fears over “the valve guy” retiring (his name is Gabe Newell, by the way), and significantly more to do with making more money. These publishers figure if they can get you, the consumer, to buy their games directly from them, they can make 100%+ of the money, instead of having to pay Steam a percentage for any transaction. Due to the limited scope of these Publisher-run launchers, purchasing a game from them is even more volatile than purchasing from Steam (at least in the current climate), in such that if the Publisher suddenly finds their launcher is not bringing in customers (which, on average, compared to the draw of Steam at present, they generally don’t) publishers could simply drop their launchers and the catalog of games you, the customer, may have purchased from that launcher would go with them… again, yes, this could happen if Steam went down, but presently, pound for pound, the publisher’s launchers are far more likely to fall than Steam will.

      Also… for any of these services (Steam or publisher launchers), you have to download the game locally in order to run them. The games are not streaming as most movie and music content is. As such, once you install a game, you could crack them to remove any DRM attached to them (barring any game that’s strictly online), then, yeah, you can self-host/store these games yourself all you want. If you buy games from GOG they make this even easier for you.

      • NotJustForMe@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thank you for taking the time.

        Those launchers will be installed even if you use steam. You are mixing up store and launcher. The launcher often exists to have a viable game without steam running.

        Saying it has absolutely nothing to do with it is a bit weird. I have bought most of my games on Steam since 2014, yet I have all the launchers.

        Gog is the way to go for non-online games. And all the classics. And yeah, of course, the games often require online components. Not much to be done there. Sometimes, things just die.

        Sometimes, they don’t. I still run a Trackmania server. Glorious.

        So if steam went down, my games with launchers would still work. All others would be a crap shoot, at least until valve releases some offline-steam as a farewell for their customers.

        Or they’ll have to resort to cracks, which could be illegal, or even criminal in some areas of the world.

    • Bayz0r@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      The Valve guy doesn’t run a publicly owned company. But go on, keep spewing.

      • NotJustForMe@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        How does that make a difference? Anyhow, I meant to write privately owned. My mistake.

        • erwan@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The difference is that a hostile takeover can’t happen.

          Unless the founder still owns a majority of the shares, you can take control of a public company without needing the consent of the board (and CEO, founder, etc)

          • BeAware@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            A hostile takeover doesn’t have to happen. If Gaben decides “fuck you all” and decides to close the company, then there’s not a damn thing you can do about it. It’s his company and it doesn’t owe you the privilege of continuing to exist.

            • erwan@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I know it can happen, but that still makes a difference between public and private companies. That’s one risk less.

              Especially for Valve which is a very desirable company for their position as de facto PC games online store.

        • Bayz0r@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah, it doesn’t make much difference, I just commented on the low-hanging fruit of what was clearly incorrect.

          My bigger problem is with your fear-mongering and the gibberish that assumes that self-hosted FOSS solutions are somehow a viable alternative for the majority of users. I’ll pick privacy-compromised convenient products 9 times out of 10 and actually spend my time doing things I want to do, and I’m pretty bored reading all the privacy nutjobs trying to tell me how to do things.

          • NotJustForMe@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            What fearmongering. Being cautious and talking about it is fearmongering now?

            And why shouldn’t privately run FOSS solutions be viable for the majority of users? Millions and millions are doing it.

            That’s like saying that cooking isn’t viable for home-use and that all people should just order their food, trusting that the service holds up their deal regarding quality. If they even follow a standard.

            It is just a matter of lifestyle and how much one values their own authority over things. You seem to be biased in this area, yet I’m sure, in other areas you are doing exactly what you are calling me a nut job for.

            You are throwing opinions out without any reasoning attached.

            • Bayz0r@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Your claim: “root server, self-hosted everything and FOSS. If you can’t do your things with that, it ain’t worth doing anyway.”

              Do you really think I need to “reason” why this is utter nonsense? Fine, here you go. My elderly technically barely-literate father and mother are supposed to self-host their email servers so as not to just use Gmail? Old people who don’t speak English and use Netflix or HBO or whatever to stream movies and TV series are supposed to self host Jellyfin and torrent their stuff? They’re supposed to use OpenStreetMap to find directions around the city instead of Google Maps, because “privacy”?

              Maybe my grandparents should run GrapheneOS.

              Or perhaps you’re suggesting that, since they can’t root server and self-host FOSS stuff instead of using off-the-shelf products, they should just not watch anything other than cable TV, and write letters by hand and post them. And if they need to go somewhere that they don’t know the way to, they should just ask for directions on the street (and hope the person they’re asking doesn’t just pull up Google Maps, since then they’d be using it by proxy!), oldschool style.

              This is not viable, feasible, or possible. “Millions and millions are doing it” tells me you have little understanding of the scale at which modern technology is used. There are an estimated 7 billion smartphones in the world. Almost 2 billion gmail accounts. So the fact that “millions” are using self-hosted FOSS alternatives means… basically nothing.

              Home cooking has been a staple human activity for millennia. It is widespread, it’s a skill passed on from one generation to the next, slowly ingrained in people. And even then, the majority of people are absolutely trash at cooking, can barely cobble together one or two recipes, buy ready-made meals, have others cook for them, order out or go to restaurants. Your “root server, self-hosted everything and FOSS. If you can’t do your things with that, it ain’t worth doing anyway.” could be “buy your own ingredients and home-cook every meal you eat. If you can’t do your things with that, eating ain’t worth it for you” and it would still have been utterly ridiculous despite billions more people in the world having the ability to do it.

              You need to accept that self hosting and FOSS is for a fringe part of the population and suggesting it as the solution to the issues that currently exist with services like Steam or Google or Netflix is counter-productive. Maybe many generations from now it will be possible to have a sizeable amount of people using technology that way, but now ain’t it.

              And by the way, I’ve been on the Internet since like 1998, I went through Napsters and DC++ and I torrented tons and tons of things for years and years. But even for me, the idea of doing what you suggest is absolutely exhausting and not something I really want to find the time to engage in. “It is just a matter of lifestyle and how much one values their own authority over things.”, you say, and you’re right. That’s a much more reasonable stance than your original comment. The truth is I don’t care too much about the authority I have over “my media” or “my data”.

              • NotJustForMe@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Fine. Be that guy.

                Setting up that complicated FOSS stuff took me six hours, ten years ago. With another hour every six months to maintain, if at all, as most things update themselves. And you know what? My parents can use them too, as they are all set up to be multi-user by default.

                You just don’t care. Why argue about it then, trying to make others not care, spreading your ignorance. Even calling me a fearmonger. You being afraid is not on me. It’s your own ignorance.

                Perhaps, just perhaps, you should have taken a minute to learn about the tech you are using. Torrented for years, eh? And now you are the literal jock putting down nerds, because they did learn? And we nerds spent two decades at making it all easy. Installing your own cloud on a root server takes five clicks and ten minutes for heaven’s sake. Installing the root server itself is done in a matter of two hours. They even come hardened out of the box.

                I can’t argue with ignorance. I’ve never talked about replacing each and every technology with FOSS. Just the sensible ones, the ones with money attached. With privacy attached.

                And that is both cheap, and easy to do. And your parents could just hire someone. You know, like hiring a carpenter, doctor, gardener. Have you heard of businesses? You don’t have to spend ten minutes on it.

                FOSS is being used by a fringe part of the population. Why change that, you don’t care. Why should anyone think differently?

                You are strawmanning, adding new topics at will too. I can’t write a book here.

                Feel free to take it as a win. I wonder though, why are you here, and not on reddit? Oh. Right. I would guess: because of your freedom and privacy, right? Did you get banned there? Your comments deleted? So you do care. Just not enough? Just a tiny portion of people use lemmy, after all.

                Where to draw the line? Damn double standards, eh? .

                • Bayz0r@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You accuse me of being afraid. Of what exactly? You’re the one afraid Gaben is going to pull the plug on Steam and other stuff like this. I’m not. You’re the one saying everything needs to be self-hosted FOSS. I don’t care if it’s not.

                  I don’t want to take anything as a win, but I realize now that you are so divorced from the reality in which we live that there’s no point continuing to debate. 80-year olds who can barely afford food should… hire businesses to root their phones and install self-hosted mail servers for them? That may work in some highly privileged places in the world, but do you have any idea what conditions the vast majority of humans on this planet live in? What their priorities are?

                  You say you “never talked about replacing each and every technology with FOSS.” but that’s exactly what you said in your first post and that’s what irritates me and what I take issue with. If your stance would have been “I like to self-host stuff for myself and family and use FOSS. You should look into it, it’s cool and not that hard”, I’d have upvoted you and not batted an eye. But you came in here with the sweeping generalisation that if you can’t root, self-hosted FOSS something “it ain’t worth doing”.

                  I never called anyone a nerd and I’m not sure why you feel like that’s the case.

                  And not that it should matter, but I’m not on reddit anymore since they killed RIF and I a) didn’t like their stance with regards to third party apps and b) can’t stand the official mobile app. Not really because of my privacy, and no I didn’t get banned.

                  Anyway, I accidentally came across another one of your posts on a different topic on here, and now I understand. I’m sorry for having engaged you at all and please accept my sympathies.