As always, the paying user has the worst experience. "Purchase" a show, can only watch on a certain console of a certain brand, no transfers, no backups, then it suddenly disappears from the library and nothing can be done.
If media companies insist on draconian DRM, then they should pay for full refunds to their loyal customers when one day they decide to delist that specific show.
I can understand extreme cases, like some sort of disputed IP where their contact to sell the content turns out not to be with the actual rights holder, resulting in no longer serving the content (with an unconditional full refund). But past that they should be legally required to host the content until the heat death of the universe.
Give it another 10 years, you won’t “own” anything. It’ll be “licensed.” Weird tho. Digital content is endless. But you can’t consume it into extinction; physical things are finite, but we’re like here take it! It’s yours! Call a cop or shoot anyone trying to take it.
Alright, what this looks like is Sony's deal with Discovery to sell and host their TV shows has been removed. From my quick glance there are no games being removed.
Still is BS, and beyond ridiculous. But it was inevitably going to happen at some point.
I am more pissed that I got informed that they are doing this from here instead of being told that I am losing my Myth Busters.
Because it was 2009, I was I kid, and I saw Mythbusters and I said yes. I learnt my lesson when they remove PlayStation Video years ago from PS3, and the PSP. I didn't even know I could re-download it until I stumbled upon it in a menu years later.
I am just hoping and praying that this will not extend to their games. Sony's been pretty good about game ownership to this point, look at those who bought the PT Demo and can still play it.
And this is why I never “buy” media online. If I can’t own the media and enjoy the content whenever and wherever I want, it’s rented. I may be ok with that, but I never let them claim that it was a sale.
It's much the same as creators in Second Life who don't want to sell in the Opensim metaverse. I get where they're coming from in terms of protecting a recurring revenue stream, but if the customer has already paid for the product once, under first sale doctrine, they have the right to continue using it.
In many countries that wont work. The Terms of service need to only include reasonable and expectable clauses, as they are not negotionable.
And "purchase doesnt mean ownership, we take it from you anytime we want" is neither reasonable nor expectable.
Also this should run under criminal fraud imo. The customers were deliberately deceived by the term "purchase" into believing they would be granted ownership.
This won't change until someone sells a yacht to a Senator with fine print that it's only a perpetual license. Then comes back 3 years later and takes the yacht citing the fine print in the contract.
As of 31 December 2023, due to our content licensing arrangements with content providers, you will no longer be able to watch any of your previously purchased Discovery content and the content will be removed from your video library.
We sincerely thank you for your continued support.
I wonder if anywhere in the "purchase" terms they included "while Sony holds the license to distribute."
I hate that "purchases" people make are restricted per platform. If I "purchase" a specific title it should be available on any and all platforms that serve that content. No one should be asked to purchase it on Sony. Apple, Netflix, Amazon, or whatever other shitty streaming service comes out.
As much as I think nfts are fucking retarded, this could be one of the few cases where that stupid digital receipt might make sense.
My understanding was this was the actual intended use case for NFTs. To allow you to properly own a digital item. The fact that it got applied to a stupid fad right out the gate doesn't change the fact that it should actually be used to allow us to own things again.
just got my multi season science fiction show downloaded via the salty seas. apparantly it would cost $50-85 to download or stream from the "legit" vendor. A vendor that bought the rights and closed the ability to access previous seasons. So, not going well for the loyal customers.
Scrolling through the list I can't believe that people actually watch that shit, let alone pay for it.
It's all the kind of crap that people leave used to leave on in the background and to get bombarded with 4 sets of adverts an hour. The direct result of needing to fill 200 channels as cheaply as possible.
Refunding everyone would probably cost Sony less than a million. I'd wager some of those shows nobody has ever purchased.
You don't like it which is fine but no need to call out people who do. My dad loves deadliest catch and has been watching it for years, he records it and then fast forwards through the ad breaks something that's been around 10 years now.
This is why i hate digital only and no more game disc, also battlepass and dlc.
you own nothing but pays the full price for the permission to play and they cant remove access at any time.-
Marvel vs capcom 2 its my favorite game and they removed from store, i know is about licensing but they will not come to my house for the DVD Disc right?
On the one hand, I sympathize with anyone losing access to How It's Made and Mythbusters. But for everything else on that list, that money was already thrown away for no good reason. I'd like to hope the audiences were small or non-existent to begin with.
Sony is doing the world a favor by purging most of that garbage from their service, to be perfectly honest.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but Sony kind of has their hands tied on this one. The shows they’re delisting (or are not able to relicense) kind of get to take their IP off of the system, no?
If they didn't have a licence to host it in perpetuity, they shouldn't have sold it in the first place.
Yes, they should pull it if they legally have to. That's following the law. However, they should refund consumers in full or ensure that they continue to have the media without restrictions.
This has actually always been my reason for piracy. I've always been able to afford games, thankfully, so I've used piracy as a means of demoing games as demos became more and more rare and more commonly and more importantly I've used piracy as a means of preserving games. I have no problems paying for a game if I can also keep it indefinitely and play it forever, and thanks to piracy that is actually possible.
Did anyone actually read the link? Everyone in the thread is talking like they pulled video games. They literally only pulled Disney TV content from like 20 years ago. Now of course that's still crappy but stuff like this has happened for TV content before and it won't be the last time this happens.
We can freak out when they actually do this to video games and not some 20 year old awful reality TV content no one watched anyway.
The point is if they do it for this there is no reason they wouldn't do it to other forms of media. Youre either introducing a strawman argument or missing the point