This is so depressing. People do this shit for muh vidja gaems but won't do anything like this for privacy or the tech overlords ruling the world.

>>105753668 (OP)
Weren't we at like 450k when his recent video released?

>>105753856
KF lit the torch on this again with pic related. It's being spammed on /v/ too.

>>105754150
basado

>>105753668 (OP)
Yeah bro make more internet petitions, I'm sure this will change anything KEK Go sign it and show everyone how angry you are! Vote harder!

what if they just... dont listen and dont care about le petition thoughbeit

>>105754179
>>105754194
>t. doesn't understand how ECI works

>>105753668 (OP)
I didn't sign it, because i loath the EU and everything the EU ever did to me was a negative.
If you think that pic related won't find a way to abuse it, when you give her a mandate to revamp how digital products are sold, i commend your naivety.

But in general, i support it, but not via this globohomo bullshit.
Games are like a total separate special thing, where rules barely apply.
Buying a product for it to get shutdown on command of the manufacturer, whenever he feels like it, is so ridiculous. You wouldn't accept this anywhere else.

>>105754231
i think you don't understand how it works

>the commission is required to talk about it :^) for a minute
We got this shit during CoViD, multiple times. All we got was "yeah, we talked about it :^)".

>>105754231
Vote harder eu cuck

>>105754194
Then you know that you tried everything and buy the new Blizzard game with a good consciousness, knowing that you can't do anything and just HAVE to accept those bad conditions now, and don't have any other choice than to buy it, because daddy government didn't tell you not to.

>>105754266
>i think you don't understand how it works
Then explain to everyone how it works.

>We got this shit during CoViD, multiple times. All we got was "yeah, we talked about it :^)".
Which ECI are you talking about in particular? Right to Cure didn't got enough votes.

>>105754278
>say something stupid
>gets called out
>*autistic screeching*
kek, lmao

>>105754278
it's the corporate bootlickers that get cucked.
they were screeching when the EU mandated USB-C as well.
soon smartphones will be mandated to have user replaceable batteries and they'll be bitching because they won't have to buy a new iPhone when their battery dies.

>>105754365
Kys swedecuck

>>105754365
>Then explain to everyone how it works.
If you reach a million signatures, the commission has to talk about it once.
That's it.

>>105754374
Wrong. Also your anger only undermines your argument.
People who aren't full of shit do not need to get angry to make a point.

>>105754384
Yeah, talk. Which could take just 1 minute then everyone says to fuck off because they have to bring in more shitskins and hand them out more gibs.

>>105754365
>>105754430
The most successful ECI to date was the "One of Us" CDI against abortions, it collected 1,896,852 signatures.
Are abortions forbidden now?
What happened was:
>The commission decided not to submit a legislative proposal
And that is it.

>>105754456
Also
>The One of Us initiative subsequently sued the European Commission, arguing, among other things, that the Commission's refusal to act was not properly argued, and that the commission's failure to submit a legislative proposal deprived the co-legislators of the EU, the European Parliament and the Council, of the possibility to take a stance on the successful ECI. The lawsuit remained unsuccessful

So yeah: Fuck you!
That is what you get: A big Fuck You.
This whole mechanism of the ECI only exists to play pretend and then to humiliate you as much as possible if you ever fall for the ruse and believe you get more than an: "we talked about it"

>>105754456
Europeons clearly didn't voot hard enough. Sucks to suck, better luck next time.

>>105753856
Ross finally responded to that streamer that said all that wrong shit, and apparently in that time the streamer had been in so much drama that everyone came to get their pound of flesh. You had like two videos from Cr1tikal in support of it and trashing the streamer for being an egomaniac who can't admit to being wrong. Got us like 250k signatures in less than a week though.

>>105754365
How about the "End the Cage Age" ECI, that wanted to forbid caged farming for certain cattle?
Achieved 1.4 million signatures.
The Commission "talked about it" and said that "we will do something about this before the end of 2023"... and then they simply never did anything.

Again, the people who run that ECI sued the Commission. Again, nothing happened.
>The action aims to hold the European Commission to account for failing to deliver its promise to publish proposals to ban caged animal farming before the end of 2023.
lmao

>>105754365
How about the "Stop TTIP" ECI?
It was against the globohomo plan to merge the American and EU market to one big supranational entity ruled over by unnamed judges.

It was a HUGE subject. The EU Commission simply didn't allow the ECI to register in the first place.
They the organizes sued them.
And the European courts just held them on for three years.
The Trump came to power and he canceled TTIP.
Two years later the Europea courts finally said: "yes, this ECI is allowed, the Comission can't reject that"... at a time when it was all already long over.

The whole ECI process is a process of the EU Commission SHITTING INTO YOUR FUCKING MOUTH AND TELLING YOU TO SWALLOW.
You HAVE to go to court, and the courts WILL shit on you even harder to make you know who the fuck your master is.

>>105754150
wtf gonna make my whole family sign

>>105754456
>>105754492
>christcucks got told to fuck off
Nothing burger.
Of course ECI doesn't mean that anyone can make any law they want, assuming they get 1kk votes. This is not how lawmaking work, this is not direct democracy. ECI has similiar power to the parliament in this case, it requests the commission to consider a new law or regulation.

>This whole mechanism of the ECI only exists to play pretend and then to humiliate you as much as possible if you ever fall for the ruse and believe you get more than an: "we talked about it"
If that's true, then why do the very next ECI after "One of Us", the one about water and santitation resulted in bunch of directives?

>>105753668 (OP)
I'm over here hating modern auto matchmaking so much that I haven't even owned any games affected by this. If you can't host community servers I'm just not interested in your game, sorry.

>>105754456
>>105754658
>abortion rights and entire economy changing petitions didn't get acted on
man maybe because those are bigger issues than shit like video games or cattle farms that the EU governments would have a lot more thoughts on than just 2 million random euros
>cattle one
european farmers are insane and if you slightly piss them off they will drive their big expensive tractors into cities and throw shit everywhere until you capitulate to them

>>105754573
>Again, the people who run that ECI sued the Commission. Again, nothing happened.
The legal action is ongoing. Also they gave bunch of deadlines that go up to 2027 IIRC. The 2023 was just for preparing the proposal, which they failed to do so and that's why there is an ongoing legal action.

>>105753668 (OP)
i kind of agree with piratesoftware on this one (even though i dont like him normally), its a stupid idea.

You cannot just "easily" make a game server self hostable. It may take months for some complex infrastructures to reprogram & package into a thing users can run on their own. Not to meniton going through and removing / stubbing dependency functionality.

>>105754667
>i ideologically disagree with the notion that nobody should earn money from harvesting aborted embryos, so its alright that it failed. I am even laughing at it!
>>105754689
>farmers are a large lobby, so it would fail anyway

well... what is the logical conclusion?

>>105754667
>why did the basic-bitch ECI, run by EU politicians themselves, that achieved far less signatures, result in make-pretend legislations that don't change anything?
We will never know that.

>>105754667
>Of course ECI doesn't mean that anyone can make any law they want
So this post is right: >>105754384
They only have to "talk about it" once?
Correct?

>>105754775
>>i ideologically disagree with the notion that nobody should earn money from harvesting aborted embryos, so its alright that it failed. I am even laughing at it!
This was about abortions, not about just making money per se.

>>105754762
It's not even about the programming. It's licensing. AAA titles are legal chimeras.

>>105754830
i would almost argue thats a pro for the movement tho becaus games studios shouldn't do that in the first place IMHO

>>105754762
The petition was about having an end-of-life plan.
Basically, they shouldn't be able to rugpull you.

There is no need for porting it to different architectures or making it singleplayer or anything.
Even EA is very lenient on that. EA didn't hunt down the people who ripped out GameSpy of their games, when it shut down, to keep them playable.
And that's what basically would happen. Just without legal grayzone that requires the publisher to "tolerate" it.
The real change to developing games is, that you can't use a third party service anymore than limits your license.
But that is an issue for future games, that still have the power to negotiate their third party licenses.

The petition is well thought through in that aspect.

>>105754827
It was about:
>establish a ban and end the financing of activities which presuppose the destruction of human embryos, in particular in the areas of research, development aid and public health
It was about harvesting embryos for financial profit.
You are in favor of killing babies to harvest stem cells. That's alright. Your opinion.
And you think that Democracy should end and different rules should apply, when it is about someone who you disagree with.

That is your legit opinion. At the same time you shill for the EU.
I can't say that i am surprised. You are ideologically consistent. Other people would call your stance "evil".

>>105754916
And what are the requirements for an end of life plan?

>Mutts don't understand European culture again

>>105754916
>The real change to developing games is, that you can't use a third party service anymore than limits your license.
>But that is an issue for future games, that still have the power to negotiate their third party licenses
i feel like you're underplaying how big of a ask this is, also coding their servers from the getgo so they aren't too dependant on internal systems or have anything hardcoded.

Consider something like league of legends, its game server is somewhat intertwined with an external server / system that manages your actual account (like your actual league account you register via a website). You'd have to stub & rewrite connection functionality in the game server to all of the sudden generate player IDs on its own. The client would also have to be modified to allow connecting to other servers.

I wouldn't say its impossible but i'd estimate its at least 2-3 months of work in most complex cases. I suppose if the law is limited to large games that have sold lots of copies (like 50k+) it'd be fine since they've made so much profit they can afford this cost.

>>105754812
>So this post is right
I don't know if they can manage to fully discuss it and prepare a response in literally 1(one) meeting. But they are not obligated to accept any law that gets 1kk votes of course.
Imagine that the abortion law would be forced to be accepted. It would quickly result in a counter-initiative to ban it, and it would easily reach 1 million votes. This would result in pointless back and forth and would necessitate much higher target for ECIs to be accepted. That's why commission is responsible for making the decision and making the law, not any random group of million citizens.
ECI is a procedure for citizens to start a law making process, not to make law. European Union is not a direct democracy. No country is.

>>105754965
European culture is bringing in shitskins and niggers and giving them free homes and money while natives slave away for their handouts. I love european culture so much bros, so cool

>>105754984
>i feel like you're underplaying how big of a ask this is
I know that very well.
Had some issues with Vivox myself.
Those third party products with very restrictive licenses fuck you over. If you use them, because it is less effort, they will fuck you over down the line.
They are also known to suddenly change. That third party bullshit is restricting on what platforms you can run already. And they drop platform support on will.
Like Vivox decided to simply drop Linux support. Not talking about only the client here, but server side as well.
So if you are a developer and you bought into that scam, you now either move your whole backend infrastructure to Windows servers or you rip that out of your game.
GameSpy is another example. EA didn't shut down all those games. That third party did.

Forcing third parties to offer proper licenses - or not use them anymore - isn't a bad thing.
Think about how Unreal Engine took off. The same thing would happen with those as well.
Vivox isn't a thing anymore, developers switched to WebRTC solutions.
Creating a financial incentive to kill off those third party leeches is good for everyone involved.

>>105755043
in about 100 years or so those shitskins & niggers (or their descendants) will boost the economy greatly however. Unironically.

>>105755017
keep lying to yourself and keep saying the same thing, but with different words
>a procedure for citizens to start a law making process
yeah, sending an email to a politcian is also a "procedure for citizens to start a law making process".
That is how powerful the ECI is. It's as powerful as sending an email.

>>105755060
Based so fucking zased, gdp chart must keep going up!!!

>>105753668 (OP)
>People do this shit for muh vidja gaems
I feel like there are adults refusing to grow up complaining about something as..... unproductive as video games, so I can't see whether this campaign will work or not
>but won't do anything like this for privacy or the tech overlords ruling the world.
they have done that, it's called open source
this method is clearly different from petitions, and some have had success
>>105754679
>>105754762
this anon gets it, a good online game should have a self hosted or community managed server
otherwise the game is not worth it
or just play offline games from the start
>>105754830
if it is a license then it should be an open source license, or nothing at all

>>105755085
>gdp chart must keep going up
unironically.

i also dont give a fuck about a slightly higher crime rate for a few decades, again im actually being unironic here. Its better long term.

>>105753668 (OP)
>privacy
>tech overlords
This issue is entirely in your hands. You do not need to petition big daddy gubbermint only so you can deny your own responsibility.
Do not buy their products.
Do not use their services.
Do not choose comfortable solutions over security.
Check out as much as you have to to avoid being part of the problem.
>inb4
but I need my social media and my amazon and emonay and shit

>>105755043
My country is over 99% white.
How white is your country?

>inb4 trying to dodge the question

>>105755068
>It's as powerful as sending an email.
There are 700k signatures.
If each one of those 700k people would send and email or tweets (EU politicians are obsessed with twitter) to a random EU politician.... do you think this would achieve more or less?
I think it would achieve far more.

The ECI is unironically a great tool for politicians to completely ignore the will of a huge part of the population.
It's like giving a dog a ball to play with, so that he stops annoying you.

>>105755068
>keep lying
Point out one(1) lie in my post.

>yeah, sending an email to a politcian is also a "procedure for citizens to start a law making process".
>That is how powerful the ECI is. It's as powerful as sending an email.
This is obviously false. Your politician doesn't have to do anything about your email. ECI does require response though.


It's pretty ironic to call me a liar and then write such an obvious lie in the very next sentence lmao.

>>105753668 (OP)
the overwhelming majority simply doesnt care for privacy issues and no matter what you do you will never make them care so its pointless
this petition on the other hand can open the doors for all kind of ownership claims in software and "digital goods"
I see literally no reason to not support it and hey maybe someone does another petition if this one works

>>105755164
>i am not lying, i am just framing it with different words

>Your politician doesn't have to do anything about your email
Just like the EU Commission doesn't have to do anything about your ECI that you waited ONE YEAR for.
>it requires a response
You would be surprised just how easy you get a response from a politician if you simply send them a mail.
And that response will be actually sincere. While the ECI response is a dishonest non-response.
Just because there are words, doesn't mean that they have any meaning.

>>105755060
check Minnesota twin studies, even with good education their native deep processing will still be subpar and not capable of the same value added output

>>105753668 (OP)
>this is so sad
>shows a picture without explanation
I assume this is some kind of petition, unfortunately I will never sign it because you didn't post a link or tell me what the fuck it was for

>>105755043
Why do Americans think Europe is a country?

>>105755164
I once had a common issue with a government institution.
We have a mechanism to petition the parliament, and they are required to response if you get enough signature (the ECI was built upon this preexisting national concept).

I sent an email to a politician who is in opposition.
Surprise: Any random opposition member of parliament can ALSO send requests to the government that they are required to answer.
He made a request to the government about this, citing me as anonymous source.

I achieved more with one email than i would have achieved with a petition of 6 gorillion signatures.

>>105755221
Why do Europeans think that the EU is the same as the European continent?
Why do we call the EU as "Europe"?

>>105755139
It used to be 99% as well, not it's less than 90
>>105755221
Fuck you germcuck/nordcuck

The Crimea bridge is the largest bridge of Europe, Moscow is the largest city of Europe and Russia is the country with the largest ownership of land in Europe.

>>105755213
>some probably flawed study from 1979
europeans & africans (or any other homosapiens) were not seperated long enough to a real differences in cognitive ability.

>>105755280
>enough to a real differences
*enough to HAVE a real difference

>>105755060
Based GDP enjoyer.

>>105755306
Why didn't the 100+ million butthurt belters, who joined in 2004, increase our GDP?

>>105755258
You couldn't point my country on a map lol. :S

>>105755194
>Just like the EU Commission doesn't have to do anything about your ECI that you waited ONE YEAR for.
This is false. They have to discuss it and prepare a response.

>You would be surprised just how easy you get a response from a politician if you simply send them a mail.
But they do not have to. This is in contrast to ECI where the commission has to respond.

Therefore your claim that it's the same is wrong.

>>105755306
thats the GPD % relative to the world, countries like china & india have made insane strides in those years, causing the european share to be lower (amongst other reasons).

>>105755337
>they have to send me a response!
This go pointed out already before >>105754384
And this guy asked you for a plan when the thing happens that you now admit would happen >>105754194


Reminder that at that point, you attempted to imply that the petition will lead to legal measures.
>>105754231
>YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND IT
Clearly he did.
And you admit that now.

>>105755306
>>105755339
if you lookup US GDP share you'll see it went down as well even though you take in nowhere near as many immigrants as europe

>>105755280
>flawed
how exactly? We have many other twin studies since then reproducing the results, even across cultures, we have studies of ethnic Chinese growing in China and US ffs
it's undeniable, remember that website that's now gone, metafact or something, where actual scientists came to answer questions and they had a score system for true/false/likely true/false? Well they had lots of G factor questions and it was undeniable in their consensus and evidence provided that it was inheritable

sorry but you have to actually reason, use words if you want to be taken seriously

>>105755233
>Surprise: Any random opposition member of parliament can ALSO send requests to the government that they are required to answer.
This is not a surprise. I literally said so few replies up this chain.

>I achieved more with one email than i would have achieved with a petition of 6 gorillion signatures.
No, you archived the same thing. That's the whole point of ECI. It's so citizens can request the commission to consider new registration in the same way parliament does so.

>>105755280
the differences are from founding populations and they're genetic

>>105755250
>Why do Europeans think that the EU is the same as the European continent?
I am an European and I do not think this.

>Why do we call the EU as "Europe"?
NTA, but I very often see americans talking about some specific German law as if it applied to whole EU or Europe for some reason.
This is a very common mistake.

>>105755339
It's not a zero sum game, the Chinese print their own money but their accelerated growth is indeed export driven as a matter of gaming the ledgers but they want this because it's not just fast for GDP, it's fast for technology acquisition.

>>105755339
>everybody else progresses while we stagnate
Yeah, i do have an issue with that.
You aren't supposed to stagnate.
You aren't even supposed to stay the same! The technological progress is supposed to make your rise by itself, without you having to do anything for it.

Why didn't the 100 million butthurt belters progress?
Why are some random Chinese poor fucks able to strive, but the butthurt belters simply... never do anything at all... they produce nothing, they develop nothing, they just exist, demand gibs and leech of us.

>>105754150
>>105754666
>>105754169
>retarded rekieta a-log with a 3k visitor website that enter the SKG the last week
vs
> 15 mil. sub youtuber + 3 mil. sub youtuber + a bunch of 1 mil. sub youtuber
jersh is busy touching the rekieta poo so that he can have content for his show.

>>105755389
I am European and everybody thinks this.
If you say "Europe" here, it is an euphemism for the EU.
It is the default.
If you talk about actual Europe, you have to specify that you mean the continent.

Also i am old enough to remember that it wasn't like this years ago. It is a recent thing.

>>105755397
>Why are some random Chinese poor fucks able to strive
because they have a bigger population, so if they gain a slightly higher GDP it accounts for a massive increase in worldwide share, which is exactly my point with why its good for the economy to let immigrants in. The more people your country has the better. As long as you can manage crimerates & wealthfare until they integrate & start giving you profit back.

>>105755359
>>they have to send me a response!
>This go pointed out already before >>105754384
What? They do have to send a response. https://citizens-initiative.europa.eu/_en

>And this guy asked you for a plan when the thing happens that you now admit would happen >>105754194
No, this guy asked what will happen if they ignore the ECI. If that happens then the organizers take them to the European court. Just like it happened with the cage one when they missed the deadline.

>the petition will lead to legal measures.
[citation needed]

>>105755370
>if you lookup US GDP share you'll see it went down as well
The US has the same share of the world wide GDP as in 1994.
The EU has 40% less than in 1994.
DESPITE HAVING DOUBLE AS MANY PEOPLE NOW. THEY ADDED OVER TEN COUNTRIES IN THE MEANTIME.

>>105754255
I fucking hate democracy and women as leaders.
I almost hate it as much as I hate blacks and jews.

>>105755451
When the other anon said that the Commission is just going to talk about it, and you said that "you don't understand how this works"... what exactly did you mean?
Did you want to imply that this actually has the chance to change something?
Or did you actually always know that you will only "get a reply", but refused to say it?

>>105755431
>I am European and everybody thinks this.
Given large enough group, chances that a statement is universally agreed upon goes to zero. This is obviously false.

>If you say "Europe" here, it is an euphemism for the EU.
Not in my country. If you refer to EU you generally just say "(the) Union" and when you say "Europe" you mean the continent.

>>105755091
>if it is a license then it should be an open source license, or nothing at all
Mentally ill

>>105755493
>When the other anon said that the Commission is just going to talk about it, and you said that "you don't understand how this works"... what exactly did you mean?
My post(>>105754231) was in response to >>105754179 and >>105754194. >>105754179 claimed it's just a regular online petition and >>105754194 said they don't have to listen or do anything. Which is obviously wrong because ECI is not really a typical online petition and they are obligated to listen and respond. The anon who said they are just going to talk about it(>>105754384) posted few posts after I made my own post. 105754384 is bigger than 105754384. He is obviously right, they are only legally obligated to listen and respond, not to accept any proposed law, which is something I have said so multiple times ITT.

>Did you want to imply that this actually has the chance to change something?
Yes there is.

>Or did you actually always know that you will only "get a reply", but refused to say it?
Unless they accept it. Then you might get new directives(like with the water one), or at least you can get a chance to get them to court if they fail to take further legal action if they fuck it up(cage example)

>>105755591
>to take further legal action
*to take further action

>burger hours

>>105754515
Based

>>105754150
Extremely based

I saw a thread on here and thought it was just going to stay at that. Glad to see that I was wrong.

>>105754255
>and everything the EU ever did to me was a negative.
How does having more privacy affect you negatively

>>105753668 (OP)
>>105754150
It wont pass. PirateCHADware has won.

>>105755625
The EU invaded my privacy, it did the DSA, it required ISPs to store meta data and it did those whole CoViD passports.

But hey, some guy on the TV told you that the EU is defending your privacy, so it is like that! Just don't look at the actual measures they did!

>>105753668 (OP)
They're doing this mostly to fuck with a ferret fucker ego thing.

>>105755855
NTA, but GDPR and especially right to be forgotten are pretty great privacy-wise.
It's a shame that for every good directive there is couple of bad ones.

>>105755944
I delete cookies in my browser. So the GDPR made my live worse.
It is now harder to survive without cookies than before, because you always get those portals and banners. The internet is now practically WORSE for people who care about their privacy.
It's a classic backfire.
>right to be forgotten
Only works if you are a roastie that wants to hide her past as a porn whore.
Completely worthless in any other aspect.

>>105755855
I don't watch TV but I see americans seething at the GDPR

>>105756128
I don't.
People seething about the GDPR are 99% Europeans.

>>105756128
>the person who i dislike dislikes this thing, so i have to like it
you are braindead

>>105756143
Wrong

>>105756166
Not my point. Americans are seething since their companies are suffering from not being able to spy on us.

>>105756121
>I delete cookies in my browser. So the GDPR made my live worse.
The cookie law and GDPR are different directives.

>Only works if you are a roastie
>implying only roastie need the right to be forgotten
Troll detected.

>>105756143
>People seething about the GDPR are 99% Europeans.
Majority of people who seethe GDPR do not even know what GDPR even is. Like >>105756121
I personally do not see anyone complaining about GDPR in my country, except for scam callers because people use GDPR to remove themselves from their lists. It is universally quite liked.
However I did see quite a lot threads complaining why do muh large US corpos need to pay fines for violating user privacy to EU. It's pretty funny to see them so brainwashed to be upset over this.

>>105756297
YOU don't know what the GDPR is.

Now just after we finished with the
>you just don't understand how ECI works (pro tip: it's exactly like you say)
we get the good old
>actually, that EU law that is used to discriminate against small internet companies and massively benefits big platforms, is good for your privacy!
Imagine being confronted with the DSA and you cope by saying: "some are good, some are bad".
You are braindead.

>>105757100
>YOU don't know what the GDPR is.
Then explain to everyone what GDPR is.

>that EU law that is used to discriminate against small internet companies and massively benefits big platforms, is good for your privacy!
[citation needed]

>>105757100
>Small businesses just need to violate your privacy and big businesses never do that

>Bought a game in Europe.
>Launched it.
>A pop-up window appeared.
>Confirm the loicense consent (Accept/Decline).
>Clicked ‘Accept’.
>Provide your ID to continue (Accept/Decline).
>What? Clicked ‘Decline’.
>You’ve been reported for suspicious activity.
It's good to be european citizen.

>>105758559
why is Cletus/HIVan "humor" always the same shit /int/ jokes from 2012-2017

>>105758559
>>Provide your ID to continue (Accept/Decline).
Good thing you can now get the publisher investigated and fined for millions.

>>105758559
No game producer is required to collect ID. You got scammed by some jeets.

>>105754515
Those who are wrong are gamers who believe they "buy games", and not access to play games under specific conditions explained in EULA.

I LOVE VON DER LEYEN
I HAVE A PICTURE OF VON DER LEYEN ABOVE MY BED
IF WE WOULD HAVE ELECTIONS, WHERE YOU COULD VOTE FOR THE EU LEADER, I WOULD VOTE VON DER LEYEN
THANKFULLY, WE CAN'T VOTE ON THAT AND IT IS DECIDED BY SMARTER PEOPLE THAN I AM, AND THE SMART PEOPLE WANT VON DER LEYEN
I DON'T CARE THAT VON DER LEYEN MADE SECRET DEALS WITH PFIZER

>>105754150
>sign to make a furry mad
The only legit reason.
If you sign it because you expect it to change something, you just get yourself scammed. But signing to make a furry mad? I can do that!
It's at the same time shitting on the EU. In fact, this should become a common occurance now.
I want ecelebs to fight out their dramas by launching EU petitions.

>>105758631
How do you prove that you arent a minor who is attempt to unlawully access the game loicense, huh?

>>105758685
It doesn't matter. Privacy protection applied to both minors and adults alike.
Also wasn't it you that got asked to send ID by some """game""" you bought? You are an adult, are you?

>>105758685
That would already need to be proven before you can purchase the game on a marketplace. Currently that's only done by asking for you to input your DOB.

>>105755591
>105754384 is bigger than 105754384
it would appear to me that these two numbers are, in fact, equal

I actually believe that EU politicians are stupid enough to make it happen. After all, they have law that requires to disable "AI recommendations" on websites.
They can literally write "stop killing games" into law and they won't care how it's implemented. Each company will try to interpret it their own way, which is what's happening now with cookie banners.

>>105758879
It seems so. I meant 105754231 and 105754384

>>105753668 (OP)
>for privacy
Quick tip about this, the people more interested in fucking over you're privacy aren't the corporate CEOs, but the politicians mandating xray scanners at airports, putting backdoors at encryption algorithms and mandating backdoors and storing information so the police can ask for it massively.
Have in mind that the EU is the principal actor right now going against their citizen's privacy, specially if they enact the new pajaporte they announced recently.

Europeans can sign here:
https://eci.ec.europa.eu/045/public/#/screen/home
No account and no login needed, takes only a minute. I signed, because fuck the companies. They import workers from India and undercut natives so forcing them to kneel is only fair.

>>105754666
She has such an erotic dicksucking face

>>105758899
Cookie banners exist because of vague definitions of "data" and "data collcetion". Literally everything that your browser sends falls under that vague definition of "data". From your phone number, to IP address. It was never the intent, but it is what it is.
Now what do you think will happen when they pass the law with "end of life plan for games" words without definitive explanation what it means?

>>105759039
Cookie banners exist because you need explicit consent to use tracking and advertising cookies. GDPR and data protection is different directive.
If your website doesn't use cookies or use cookies for basic functioning of the website you do not need any banner.

>>105758924
Both the companies and the government want to erode your privacy but for different purposes. They often ask each other for help. None of these two are your friend.

>>105758924
>people more interested in fucking over you're privacy aren't the corporate CEOs, but the politicians
It's both

>>105759039
>Literally everything that your browser sends falls under that vague definition of "data".
And that's why the law talks about PII instead :)

>>105759081
>Cookie banners exist because you need explicit consent to use tracking and advertising cookies
Wrong.
The cookie law doesn't give a shit about tracking or advertising. It is about collecting data as a whole, independent of the intend.
>If your website doesn't use cookies or use cookies for basic functioning of the website you do not need any banner.
That is a different thing that contradicts your previous sentence. "Only needs consent for tracking and advertising" is different from "Need consent for everything that isn't required for basic functionality".
Now be in awe about how vague "basic functionality" is. What is basic functionality? Is this up to every judge to decide individually?
Guess what this led to? Right: Everybody gives you a banned, no matter if they track you or not.

But you know this.
Because you only have to exist and use the internet to know this.
Do you only see those banners on websites that sell your data, or do you see them on every single wordpress blog and hobbdy website?

name one EU law that has been beneficial to people rather than having the opposite effect
i'll wait

>>105759995
>It is about collecting data as a whole, independent of the intend.
Collection of PII. Data as a whole does not matter.
>"Only needs consent for tracking and advertising" is different from "Need consent for everything that isn't required for basic functionality".
What is something not considered 'basic functionality' for websites as a whole besides 'tracking and advertising'?
>What is basic functionality? Is this up to every judge to decide individually?
The whole point of judges is that they interpret the law and how it is applied to each case. If it wasn't like this we wouldn't need defense lawyers since you could not argue that some law does not apply to the defendant since everything is crystal clear. That's how two lawyers can look at the same case, use the same laws and come to widely different statements.
Of course you could argue that laws should be so precise that there is no room for interpretation but then laws would need to be changed every single time some new tech or mechanism comes out.
Example: We had multiple threads on this board now about wifi signals being used to track the movement of people. Now we would have to change the law to state 'An ISP or anyone with access to a wireless access point may not use it to track how many people are present, where those people are in the house and where they are moving to.' Oops, you forgot to include that your ISP also shouldn't sell what kind of activities you do at home. Guess now it's time to change the law a second time, making sure you include another edge case. How many months is that going to take? 24? Some change might affect multiple laws at once. Now the legislative body needs to work even more and there is no actual benefit to regular people.
So what are website owners supposed to do? Wait for rulings of judges to see if their behavior is correct, hire some consultant you can sue if you lost in court because of his consulting work or simply not track users of your website.

>>105753668 (OP)
>eu niggers want to implement age id checks for the whole internet
>no petition
>but muh vidya games from 2000s are dying!!
>petition
cattle will stay cattle when occupied with their shitty toys

i remember some news about some EU country that "banned" loot boxes, and how valve easily bypassed it by showing the random item before opening the box. kek.

>>105760383
Common USB charge port

>>105760418
2000s vidya didn't use to die, that's a modern invention

>>105760477
garbage. Now everything have filmsy ports

>>105753668 (OP)
Nigga was /v/ not enough? Go back.

>>105760418
The point of this type of petition is to force the EU commission to talk about and consider the subject
If they're ALREADY talking(and probably agreeings) with a subject it would be pointless to even begin
Fuck you think it was gonna do, force something into law?

>>105760694
>Live service games are modern invention
Yes? You subscribe to the service, that's the whole purpose of product.

"Stop killing games" attitude is like going to barbershop and taking away scissors with you. It's a illusion that you are entitled to something because you have made a purchase of a service.

>>105760854
Just because there is a fraction of single player experience in a live service game, it doesn't mean you entitled to it after the end of service.

/g/ is full of fags shilling digital ID, blame yourself (statistically)
Start one about privacy, you cant, if you tried to advocate for privacy in any way politically you'd be dissapeared in every country, in places like US/EU/UK/Australia/etc especially.
The digital ID mandate by the UN/WEF/etc is rolling out on time as planned and theres nothing to stop it.

>>105760868
>>105760854
Sure, As long as its advertised in every commercial and product cover that: "Warning: Buying will only allow you to use this piece of software, not own it, for a limited time defined solely by the service provider," in big letters and voiced, in case of commercials, for accessibility.

>>105753668 (OP)
Somehow I missed this, just signed it, girlfriend is signing it rn

itt: amerimutts refusing to believe that not every country is a dictatorship run by has-been TV star

>>105754515
he wasnt wrong, he was LYING

>>105758559
>Bought a game in America.
>Launched it.
>A pop-up window appeared.
>Confirm the loicense/TOS/EULA consent (Accept/Decline).
>Clicked ‘Accept’.
>10 years later get serve food poisoning at a restauraunt and get hospitalized
>Turns out below min wage underage working in the kitchen pissed on your food thinking it'd be funny
>Sue them
>Sorry, 10 years ago you bought this game from our related company and you agreed to never bring any legal case against us
>Get no money as a result
>Go into 100k debt because private health denied coverage
>Die
>It's good to be american citizen.

bump

>>105764328
he shall make a video about it, mostly to dunk on that furry manlet that pretends to be a sw developer.

>>105760854
>You subscribe to the service,
Then why does it say 'buy'?

>>105764550
Potæto potato, just consoom.

>>105753668 (OP)
700K REACHED!

>>105764328
pewds is the man (actually and 100% unironically)

>>105758684
yeah. for what it's worth null knows the internet well.

>>105753668 (OP)
PirateSoftware will get the last laugh when the EU will do nothing except provide a statement about how they're glad that people care, how we need to hold corporations accountable, but it's not a priority for us at the moment (and never will be).

so depressing, people actually doing something about something they care about, oh no

>>105760854
>You subscribe to the service, that's the whole purpose of product.
Poor zoom zoom thinks "service" and "product" are the same thing. Many such cases.

>>105768403
just... don't play a game you don't want to support? then you won't be emotionally attached to it and you won't care if it stops working.

how is closure of live service games is a concern for EU people? 90% people simply don't care about your bing bing wahoos.

>>105768536
I already don't buy "live service games", no need to project here.

It doesn't need to be a concern to 90% of people, it needs to be a concern to at least 1 million of adults in the EU. It's the most popular citizens' initiative, so clearly there's some level of "concern" involved.

Europeans will never do anything unless an American tells them to

Ross is such a treasure in the way how he doesn't want anyone to go after Thor and considers the current boost to have undone the damage that was made. He no longer cares for the guy trying to sabotage the one-chance project which is hurting his own profit from dealing with it (by not having time to delay videos yet again). The worst part is how Thor keeps touting simple misunderstandings as his extremely strong core beliefs. Just say any government authority is bad. Making up long winded slippery slope fallacies are just tiresome.

It isn't government overreach to build an end of life plan as part of planning the development of a video game, where it would be much easier and cheaper than jury rigging some shit at the end of its life.

>>105768644
that's not how "democracy" works. you can't just shove down everyone's throats some stupid law most of people don't even care about just because some 1% of infantile freaks want it to happen.

>>105768773
Ross is an actual guy. I don't care about the slop he's trying to protect in the slightest, but I do want him to succeed in this.

>>105768773
>he doesn't want anyone to go after Thor
Then why does he compiled a video of Thor's negative reactions to "easy win" and idea to exploit politicians, and presented it without context as if Thor is just insulting Ross ? Look dishonest and malicious to me.

>>105768828
If the initiative gets the number of votes needed, it may very well work. It all remains to be seen.

>>105768891
he just wants the initiative to pass and doesn't want some fag talking it down just because he can.

>>105768891
He ignored the issue until it had made too large an impact. Considering little correlated with what the SKG actually stood for and wanted he cleared up the points that were blatantly wrong and misunderstood. He's not interested to debate where they go apart, only where he is misrepresented. I don't know what sort of crucial context would make any of Thor's opinions on the matter seem good tho.
Ross strongly dislikes youtuber drama so this only came about because it seemed necessary to not be walked all over by a false narrative gaining traction. He thinks the opportunities he might be getting to further SKG needs a clean and mature front to not scare businesses off rather than being known for shit flinging videos back at the slightest provocation. If it comes down to that then I'll need to hear why that happened from him. Right now it's just one thing that came very late into it all.

>>105753668 (OP)
>stop killing games
such a bad name for an initiative.
Algorithms dont like words like killing so this dumbass is likely shadowbanned.

>>105770044
Stop unaliving games

best case
>companies are forced to stop taking away my gaymes
second best case
>this kills the entire AAA industry

either way I come out on top. Don't care, play Quake mods.

>>105771260
fathomably based

>>105771260
>play Quake mods.
But I like HL1 more :(

>>105771468
Honestly just play any game that has mods.

None of them are modern games anyways, and if they are: they are indie devs in which case you horseshoe back to being based.

>>105771499
Lately I've been really digging FOSS recreations of popular games like Luanti. I hope we'll get some more of the evergreens like Terraria and other simple, endlessly replayable games.

>>105753668 (OP)
WOW! A bunch of people signed an online petition. This will surely do something and not be completely ignored.

name 1 games that worth "preserving"

i dont care for some Ubislop racing game desu

>>105771522
in EU we have actual laws
if the petition goal is reached it will go in front of the EU parliament

>>105771539
So... where's the petition that seeks to free EU from burger vassalage?

>>105754762
This entire issue is and will always be about copyright and anyone bashing on pirate has zero clue about IT.

>>105768773
>It isn't government overreach to...
If I am a painter, and you are forcing me to not use specific tools or colors then you are absolutely overreaching.
If I am a game producer...

>>105771612
It's not a copyright issue and never was. There is no need to open source your games, you simply need to provide runnable server binaries and you could easily comply with all of the demands given from the initiative.
>But muh third party libraries
If you can't use them and comply with the law, don't use them. Seek alternatives.
>But no alternatives
Perfect, you just found a massive market niche and your company could make obscene amounts of money by becoming the industry standard for all online games accessible to EU citizens. This is basically like you're creating a new unreal engine and there's no other usable engine around.

>>105771633
Code that you produce for your employer is copyrighted. You have zero legal rights towards my copyrighted material. Same way if I asked for the official recordings of a song they would tell me to pound sand.

>>105771662
>The law will target the individual developers and not the publishers who are actual legal entities in the EU.

>>105771555
Write that again without sounding like a schizophrenic and in an objective way and put up a petition about it
Quite surprising the amount of anons complaining about there petitions for X but not for Y when it's open for any EU citizen to make it
But I guess it goes without saying most are just lazy retards who love complaining about shit but not doing anything about it, ironically just like those they complain about. Except actually no, arguably dumber because the case for most is just they plain dont give a shit.

>>105753668 (OP)
It's at 760k already

>>105771662
>Code that you produce for your employer is copyrighted
yes...by the company, not you. You dont own the code you write while working.

If you thought that was the case then you're gravely mistaken lol

>>105771680
>when it's open for any EU citizen to make it
That should gave you a hint and who's angered. It isn't picrel

>>105771676
>There have and never will be any one-man firms or games in the existence of civilization
>It is okay to ignore copyright laws if it's employed against someone I do not like
Oh wait...
Go to sleep you are beyond retarded.

>>105771697
>Game studios must be the exception where copyright does not apply
You do understand how retarded you sound?

>>105771700
>>There have and never will be any one-man firms or games in the existence of civilization
Then who will be targeted? Right, the company. Being a single person does not excuse you from law after you've created a game so complex it simply can not run without company-hosted servers.
>>It is okay to ignore copyright laws if it's employed against someone I do not like
It still doesn't impact copyright law. You do not break copyright by releasing your own binaries.

>>105771715
what the fuck are you talking about, schizo?

>>105771722
>It still doesn't impact copyright law
Do you have reading comprehension problems or are you just pretending to be retarded. Code is copyrighted, do you even understand the implication of code not being copyrighted?

>>105771748
>Code is copyrighted
Correct
>do you even understand the implication of code not being copyrighted?
Do you think you don't have to follow laws because of copyright? Will you go up to the judge and say
>Your honor, you can't use the CP on my device against me as I created it with own daughter and sharing it with the court was a violation of my copyright

>>105753668 (OP)
Go make a petition for privacy then, faggot
If you can't be bothered then you're part of the problem

>>105758659
Cool. Let's change that maybe? I don't see the issue. Don't use "Buy" or "Purchase" if I am "Renting" or "Leasing"

>>105753668 (OP)
Anon, some people dedicate their entire lives to screeching about “muh privacy” and “muh free software”, but at a certain point, the product itself has to be appealing. You cannot blame a person for not being as excited about Emacs as their favorite video game.

>>105754762
>You cannot just "easily" make a game server self hostable.
Explain how multiplayer videogames (other than MMOs) worked for the entire 90s and 2000s.

>>105771830
back then we had white people

>>105771830
im not sure what you mean.
I'm saying you cannot easily take an existing game which depends on certain network dependencies & environment and turn it into a one click binary file anyone can just run on their machine to self-host (or built it into the client).

You CAN do it but it takes work is what im saying, like at least a few months in complex network setup cases.

>>105771886
No one said about existing games or the law being in effect immediately. Even if that were the case, you could leave the servers running until you have made all the necessary changes.

>>105771797
And if we're "Renting" or "Leasing", then make it explicitly clear exactly when our access will expire. "When we fucking feel like it, for any reason we deem appropriate" is not sufficient.

>>105771886
Yeah, it can be done and an industry worth trillions of dollars can figure it out. But honestly, there's really nothing in the initiative that says it would behave retroactively. That would be insane if they were anyways because it would kill a lot of small companies, but it's not like the EU acts rationally in most cases so we'll see what happens.

Mostly this is a future-facing problem: new tech stacks will have to be developed, and we can stop pretending we need centralized servers to play whatever ubislop comes out this year just because they sell $45 skins

>>105753668 (OP)
Okay Anon, go start a campaign then. If you really want to start a big political movement for maintaining online privacy and breaking up big tech monopolies then go do it.
Nobody will start something because you whined and cried about it like a little bitch. Nobody is going to start a campaign for you. If you care about it, go fucking do it yourself. Otherwise, you are the reason nobody is doing anything about it.

>>105754762
It isn't retroactive, and absolutely your future game should not exist if it was designed with completely disregard of players purchases after you stop caring about it, if it can't be maintained by anyone, it should not exist. That is just theft with extra steps

>>105755306
>>105755465
why are americans such shameless manipulators? jfc

EUROBROS LET'S GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

>>105758659
Commerce law worldwide says no.

>>105771797
https://www.theverge.com/2024/10/11/24267864/steam-buy-purchase-license-digital-storefront

and how will this help "stop killing games"?

>>105754515
>>105754515
>Cr1tikal

The pedophile who has no real opinions and self projects a lot?

>>105772965
What's wrong with being a pedo?

>>105753668 (OP)
It's difficult enough to get people to do so much as this and they fucking wanted it.

>>105772965
>pedophile
Don't make him sound based, Cr1tikal is a chicken legged faggot

>>105753668 (OP)
That's because indicating interest can affect whether games get made, but no amount of petition signing will change who rules the world.

>>105753668 (OP)
Our privacy is in our own hands OP. There are alternatives in 90% of areas.
>>105754150
>He's a furry too
Damn, Good thing I signed way back.

>>105772965
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVxGmkk_3bw
he's a fag

>>105771886
Just publish the APIs or specs and the community will take it from there.

>>105753668 (OP)
Bread and circus, ever heard of it?
That's when people started going against tranny shit too.
If you come to man's fun, escapism and living that's when shit gets real, always did.

The “Stop Killing Games” movement is missing the point on purpose. It makes a lot of noise about saving games and keeping them playable, but it refuses to talk about the real issue. The problem isn’t just that games get shut down. It’s that copyright law and digital licensing let companies take away what you paid for, and nobody can stop them. Instead of challenging that, the movement pushes for half-measures that sound good but fix nothing. It ends up protecting the system by pretending the symptoms are the disease.

>>105773760
A furry with a ferret fursona who specifically runs a side business of 'ferret rescue'
Make of that what you will

>>105775039
>companies take away what you paid for, and nobody can stop them. Instead of challenging that
uh, hello, retard? what exactly do you think this petition is trying to do? did you read the proposal? did you watch any of Ross's FAQs?

>>105772358
You now realized hat Western Europe used to have a higher GDP than the US ever since the Vietnam war.

It all changed when the EU added all those butthurt belter leeches...

>>105775039
>The “Stop Killing Games” movement is missing the point on purpose.
The purpose being... getting the initiative to pass and having the chance of actually achieving something? Instead of going against copyright law and digital licensing like some delusional schizo? Fucking wowee.

>>105753668 (OP)
>will do this for muh video games
you retard. this shit was failing after 9 years of toiling from ross until the ferret fucker in chief made one retarded shitpost on twatter because he couldn't help himself.

>>105771700
>It is okay to ignore copyright laws if it's employed against someone I do not like
yes. infact I cant think of a single situation where copyright law being infringed isn't a social good after this long of corruption

>>105753668 (OP)
even if this law got implemented, every game studio would just start _explicitly_ stating that you're only buying a limited time license (and they'd probably low ball it to 5 years or something just to be safe), not a perpetual one. By doing that they can bypass this law because they haven't technically sold access to anyone after that time limit.

Pretty much every game studio would rather do this then implement self-hosting features.

The only way to combat this is to make non-perpetual game licensing illegal, which is pretty extreme & will never ever happen realistically.

>>105776210
>that you're only buying a limited time license (and they'd probably low ball it to 5 years or something just to be safe), not a perpetual one
and their sales would literally not be affected by doing this either btw, if you think so you're a moron.

>why wouldn't it?
for the same reason people are fine with paying 60€ for a game now

>>105776210
That would be a massive improvement already!
>you buy a license for four years
nice, now you HAVE the legal requirement to keep the game functioning for that time.
Currently they can shut down a game within a month, if it doesnt go the way they would have liked, and you can do nothing about it.

>>105776224
People are willing to buy games bcause of the feeling of making a collection, even if in all likelihood they will play the game for a week and forget about it. If companies had to either commit to OSing their server code OR explicitly tell you that the game is an n-year rental, the ones that did the latter would be fucked in sales.

>>105776210
Imagine how honest it would be, if in every store on every game, you would get a label:
>You buy a license to play this game till: 31.12.2025
It would be a label of quality. The higher the duration, the more you know that the game is good.
Label says only one year? You move on and buy something else instead.
Label says forever, because they can just make it offline playable? Now that is worth my money.

>>105776549
>People are willing to buy games bcause of the feeling of making a collection
uh, no mate. collectionists are an insignificant minority and you know it. vidya sales are driven by kids/manchildren who want the shiny new thing that all their friends/favourite streamers are playing *right now*. as soon as new slop comes along nobody cares about the old slop, not in any significant way when it comes to sales. that's why decade old games being killed is largely seen as a non issue by consoomers and a sensible thing to do by the publishers.

point being, even if some people are dissuaded by a sticker on a 9.5 year old game that says "game will stop working [in 6 months]", that won't have any significant impact on the overall sales, hence no incentive for the publisher to let the game live.

I just realised I can fill in the petition TWICE. I have two European passports despite not living in Europe.

Where I do bet money that the EU Commission won't do anything meaningful regarding this petition?

>>105776978
Probably polymarket

>>105776877
They may be a minority, but they are not an insignificant one. Becaue they don't need to play all the games they own, they own the largest number of games of anybody. Anyone else thinks: "will I really get my money's worth out of this purchase" and, as you say, only buys games that are already really popular. The collector thinks "this game looks cool, I'll buy it". Failing to appeal to this market would be devastating for a number of games companies.

>>105754255
>I didn't sign it, because i loath the EU and everything the EU ever did to me was a negative.
Wow how unhinged. Did not read past this line because you just KNOW its from a shizo.

>>105777345
The kind of companies that would be devastated by not catering to that minority market don't put out games with remote killswitches in the first place.

>>105776978
There is nothing to make, this is a digital services and copyright issue, not something unique to gaming.

>>105777497
>he's still going on about it

>>105777365
This.
How can someone possible hate his hecking wholesome unelected supranational child-fucker rulers?

>>105777947
We are not talking about US though.

>>105754179
Ackshually, in the EU we can force the Commission to at least consider modifying legislation, or at the very least refuse to do so publicly.
https://commission.europa.eu/get-involved/engage-eu-policymaking/european-citizens-initiative_en

Every country should have a similar mechanism.

>>105754255
She is evil incarnate.

>Buy game from walmart
>Go home
>box has a download code for game
>download game and get hit with copyright agreement saying my game will expire at some point in the future
>return game to walmart
>no refunds for opened games
>money stolen

Even if the only thing that comes from this is a mandated expiration label for online games I'd be happy. Currently you have no warning at all that you might buy a singleplayer game only to have it be literally uplayable a year later when they shut off the servers.

>>105753668 (OP)
A petition for privacy / removing tech overlords would never get made into law because
1. the boomers in power don't know anything about technology
2. the government benefits from the abuse of your privacy and get paid off by the tech overlords

>>105775310
Trying to force developers to continue supporting dead games. That's what it literally says.

>>105775566
The purpose being pretend politics. You realise petitions are negotiations with legislators, they will always try to bargain. Shoot low, win nothing.

>>105778308
>force developers to continue supporting
Thanks for confirming you're a mouth breathing retard. You can go kill yourself now, bye bye.

EU is the textbook example of a fascist state in action.

>>105778320
It's far less "pretend politics" than your pipe dream of a copyright-free world. The initiative as of yet still has a chance of achieving something tangible.

>>105778450
That's what the petition says.

>>105754194
Then it doesn't matter and you just don't buy the games anyways?

>>105778472
Having principled arguments will always be superior to a cheap 'but muh vidya gaems' even if it is ambitious.
Even this specific problem can be solved much more effectively. But of course the idiot that started it had to be an idiot and outsource the entire thinking process to future legislators.

It's a joke. It will be laughed out of the EC.
I know because this is my world. I have submitted countless of reports to the Directorate-General for Competition.

>>105778498
https://youtu.be/DAD5iMe0Xj4&t=2163
bye bye, retard

>>105778498
That is literally the exact opposite of what the petition says. The petition says that the developers have to sunset games in a state that they're playable by the owners. The developers don't have to support the game at all once it's dead, it just has to be in a playable state.

>>105778603
This is not what the petition says. EU legislators will not talk to the guy, EU legislators will not watch hours of videos of him trying to weasel out of his responsibility of writing an admissible petition after the fact.

It's a joke. Let it be a lesson.

>>105778643
"The guy" being Ross? Yeah there's absolutely a chance they won't, he's not an EU citizen so his input is not necessarily relevant. Good thing the initiative is being led by actual EU citizens though, who the EC WILL have to talk to. Ross is just the figurehead, not the entire initiative.

>>105778632
Which means? There is no definition given in the petition.
It reads as, support the game, ad infinitum. This is how EU legislators will read it.

The intention is reasonable. I don't disagree with the premise. My problem with the petition is that none of that intention is motivated in the petition.

>>105778553
Your theoretical "superior" idea doesn't mean jack shit. Go ahead and start your own petition to upend copyright law, let's see how effective it is. Oh wait, you already did and have first hand experience of being laughed out of the EC. Good job, I guess.
>outsource the entire thinking process to future legislators
Almost like it's their job or something

>>105778685
I have first hand experience in dealing with European institutes, I don't propose silly ideas that get laughed out of the room.
And yes, it's their job. They just don't like doing their job.

>>105753668 (OP)
>People do this shit for muh vidja gaems but won't do anything like this for privacy or the tech overlords ruling the world.
you're free to start a petition. oh, that's right, you won't do shit.

>>105778683
>Which means? There is no definition given in the petition.
Obviously not. Why would there be? The demand of the initiative is very simple, it demands that the products players purchase be playable after the support for the game ends. It's then up to the EC and the gaming industry to figure out a reasonable legal framework that binds the developers to meet that demand.

Forcing developers to support a game forever is one solution I suppose, but it would be quite unreasonable for EC to make that a legal requirement when other options exist.

>>105754255
>I support it but not this way.
>the other way: sitting on his ass

>>105778661
Seems very fantastical to believe the European Commission will initiate some sort of negotiation between relevant parties.
They will 'respectfully' accept the petition and do fuck all.

>>105778731
It's not a petition, it's a citizens' initiative, and they have a legal obligation to address it. It's possible I suppose that they'll wipe their asses with it, but that would degrade citizens' trust in the system significantly.
https://citizens-initiative.europa.eu/how-it-works_en

>>105778719
Because you're supposed to spoonfeed them. A story is for the public. A conclusion is for legislators.
I write laws, I analyse laws. If you are a member of the European Parliament, and your draft is not legally coherent, it won't even be accepted.

>>105778683
Actually the petition makes it clear the objective is all games should have a sunset policy and "turning off the game" should be illegal.

>>105778767
You should look into the history of ECI's.

>>105778780
Ok? It's not the purpose of an initiative to write a law, it's to bring attention to an issue.

Why are you so insistent on attacking your strawmen? The initiative is not legally binding, and it's vague on purpose. That doesn't mean they can toss it out.

>>105778784
Which sometimes is completely just. Remember, the European Union considers profit and revenue to be legitimate interest.

>>105778462
>stop attacking corporations you fascist!

>>105778814
Sure. That's why there should be a discussion, and the conclusion they arrive at is somewhere in the middle of the two conflicting interests.

>>105778804
I'd just rather see something better, you know, genuine improvement. Because I care.
Give them an offer they can't refuse. Don't tell them the system is wrong, tell them why the system is wrong.

>>105778825
Well I have good news for you, that's exactly what the initiative does.

>>105778823
Do you realise you can't fight it at that level?

>>105778835
Yeah? I'm just a supporter, I have no interest or time to engage in a lengthy arm wrestling competition with legal teams of multibillion dollar companies.

>>105777947
you forgot 'nigger-importing'.
yeah who could hate them, right? that's crazy talk

>>105778814
A sunset policy and making it illegal to turn off games does not incur future costs on the developers. What this means is games should be designed to 1) allow self-hosted servers and 2) be run offline. A game like Call of Duty should never require the developer's servers to function, every lobby should be able to be self-hosted.

MMOs can be the single exception to this as the purpose of the game is the MASSIVELY MULTIPLAYER part with no practical or reasonable expectation to self-hosting but I think it could be reasonable to have a tax credit to MMOs that release with open-source self-hosted server options.

>>105778720
>the other way: sitting on his ass
how about not buying the product or even better how about you stop playing video games since you are 40 you pathetic loser?

>>105778910
I always find it ironic when people like you post on 4chan as if you're the optimizing every minute of your life for productivity.

>>105778825
>tell them why the system is wrong
It's wrong, because it's reasonable to retain something you bought. Doesn't get simpler than that.
>Give them an offer they can't refuse.
What do you think this is, some kind of mobster racket?

>>105778935
>as if you're the optimizing every minute of your life for productivity.
there is a difference between posting in this shithole for 5 minutes once a week and revolving your life around playing video games. Everybody procrastinates once in while but there's a healthy limit and I'm 100% sure that adult that worry this much about video games are basically man child.
Also they are without a doubt opening a window so politicians can abuse this in the future in unforeseeable ways.

>>105778910
Majority of people already don't buy or play vidya games, let alone live service ones. This might come as a surprise to you, but "not doing anything" doesn't do anything. Just like going on an Albanian clamshell engraving forum to say "I won't sign it because muh globohomo" also does nothing. You are not FaggotSoftware, you are far less than that.

>>105778896
And how do you codify this? You realise you can't just have loopholes for specific cases like that. They will be abused.

>>105778999
Why are you making it sound like it's somehow embarrassing to have a hobby you're passionate about? It could be painting miniatures, or extreme sports, or firearms, and I'm sure most of us would be against manufacturers removing access to those things that their customers already paid for. This is about consumer rights, not video games.

Politicians always have a tendency to abuse whatever systems they find themselves in. So, your solution is to ignore them and let them to their devices without trying to interact with the systems provided or voice concern when things aren't going the way you want them to?

>>105778999
There's a big gap between 5 minutes and revolving your life around something binary thinker. Also I sincerely doubt you only spend 5 minutes here given the timestamps just to the replies you made thus far. :)

>Also they are without a doubt opening a window so politicians can abuse this in the future in unforeseeable ways.
As opposed to developers purposely making games that self-destruct in a live-service multiplayer environment exploiting people's need for approval and FOMO to sell them colored 2D textures packed in gambling boxes for the price of a full game which they can only do because you cannot mod the game and host your own lobbies? You do realize this is one of the reasons why League of Legends have such strict anti-cheat tech right, because people were modding their locally game to access skins only they can see. And you talk about exploitation...

Also you seem to care a lot about politicians regarding games which you think are dumb. Why are you posting again?

>>105778845
And I am the person who has to put out these kinds of fires.

>>105779085
Ok. Do your job then.

>almost 100k today
What happened? Piediepie made a video or something?

>>105779085
Why didn't you stop them from enforcing removable batteries?

>>105778999
Yes, Anonymous, everyone of these 840k people who took 30 seconds to sign the initiative is a smelly basement dwelling NEET who does nothing but play vidya all day. I bet you're glad you never signed it, lest you become associated with that ugly crowd! Good on you, pal

>>105779104
i've no idea but i know for a fact ross is getting his dick sucked tonight

>>105778954
The government is a mobster racket.

>>105779104
He did tweet and voiced his support. Asmongold and moist critical have been doing a lot more imo, for the past couple of days they've been putting out long videos regarding the topic.

>>105778683
Why are you pretending to be retarded? Games worked just fine without online requirements years ago. Internal builds regularly have LAN compatibility that gets removed at launch. Plenty of mmos can be locally hosted. Building a game with these capabilities has always been easy and just requires the devs to release those tools after they shut off their servers.

>>105779071
why don't you do something more worthy, faggot?
like taking action against the EU so it cannot bypass local governments and impose their will on millions of people or the parents right to educate their kids as they see fit or your right to freedom of speech or the ever growing entanglement of the state/market that results in endless corruption.
But no, here you are worried about your slop game and you know why? because you are a child in a mans body.
this will be your biggest achievement in your life and when you think about it, its absolutely pathetic.
kys

>>105779199
EU does bad thing therefore you shouldn't try to make it do a good thing?

>>105779151
Can you read?

>>105779233
It seems to me he can read just fine. You're saying that infinite support is the only solution when it's not, and anon is pointing that out to you. Just like I pointed it out to you earlier but you ignored the point.

>>105779118
i bet that if you ask a normal/chad looking guy with a gf if he signed this, his response would be
>what are you talking about?

yes anon, at least 90% of people who are worried about this are fat losers.

>>105779199
>why don't you do something more worthy, faggot?
what i do or don't do is not your problem
>like taking action against the EU
because i don't live in the EU and also because i'm not your lapdog
>here you are worried about your slop game
not in the slightest. i just like Ross Scott and want him to win this thing he started
>this will be your biggest achievement in your life
i haven't even signed the initiative you projecting cretin, lmao

>>105779253
Never wrote that. Stop arguing in bad faith.

>>105779274
You did.

>>105779217
exactly, well said, because then they can say
>we did a good thing therefore people need us
you think they wouldn't say that? also retards would think this is true.
let this cancerous organization die already. they are bout to give you a little candy after all the assfuckery they have done and you are gonna be like
>ahh yes, this is the reason they must continue to rule, le based EU

>>105779292
Read it again.

>>105779308
I did. You're saying that infinite support is the only solution, when it's not.

>>105779299
So instead of a reasonable approach and a potential practical benefit we should just ignore the entire political entity and wish it would just disappear?

>>105779326
Yes it is. Read it again

>>105779326
I'm not saying anything like that.

>>105778999
>there is a difference between posting in this shithole for 5 minutes once a week and revolving your life around playing video games.
If you have to skew things this blatantly then you never had an argument to begin with.

>>105779326
That's exactly what it's saying.

>>105779343
>>105779345
No, it is not. And yes, you are. You are saying that the EU legislators will read it that way, therefore it is the only solution. Which is false, you have no idea how the legislators will interpret it and there are other solutions that are more elegant and more appropriate.

>>105779254
>if i go out in the streets and ask any of the 390 million people if they're one of the 850 thousand people, suprisingly, most of them will say "no"
>unattractive people are more likely to have sedentary/solitary hobbies
>i am anonymous, more news at 11

>>105779341
Yes. Doing anything is even worse than doing nothing.

>>105779359
I know since it's my job. You should stop trying

>>105779369
Well, you're wrong. Inaction doesn't lead to benefits, it only leads to more abuse and exploitation.

>>105779359
Never said anything about solutions.

>>105753668 (OP)
What is this about? Please give me some context.

>>105779385
Ok, I'm done going in circles with you.

Infinite support is not the only solution or the only interpretation of the initiative. Especially when it's explicitly stated in the initiative itself that it's not what it's aiming to accomplish.

Go away now.

>>105779410
This is my thread. Leave it.

>>105779076
This is why nothing ever gets done, hand-wringers like you don’t show up to solve problems, you show up to make sure no imperfect solution ever gets tried. MMOs do have a definition: multi-scaled, always-online server architectures with persistent, shared entities across clients, designed for dozens players in a single environment. That’s clear enough to carve out a narrow exception but ultimately irrelevant because the solution is forcing a Rent button on games that have no day-one sunset implementation.

And even if you're worried about loopholes, they’re easy to close. If a game can be shut off remotely, it must be explicitly and unavoidably labeled as such. Day-one sunset implementation is defined as: "Does the game's core features as advertised work without a central server?"

For example, if a game has no day-one sunset implementation it must:
- Never use the words "Buy" or "Own", it must be labeled "Rent."
- Clearly display the exact deactivation date beneath the Rent button. Yes, this will make them gnash their teeth, that's the point.

Developers know the “Rent” label is a death sentence for sales, so they'll move mountains to avoid it.

You’re misunderstanding my position: I'm not trying to preserve the status quo, I want to dismantle it. The live-service model is often built on exploitation. League of Legends manipulates match quality to push skin sales (just one more game). Call of Duty has patents that use killcams to showcase paid skins and encourage purchases. These systems aren’t just manipulative, they’re abusive. Many of them should be outlawed.

>>105779442
>oy vey! the initiative might actually pass! shut it down!
fucking hilarious

>>105779443
Nobody would buy a game with an expiration date. That would kill games

>>105779341
>wish it would just disappear?
no, we put the effort like this one, into it.
Games already have an Eula that usually says they can stop the service at any time, if you disagree, don't buy. Companies should have the freedom to sell shitty product if they want to as you should have the freedom to not buy. anything more than that is the state gaining a power that shouldn't have.
imagine giving more power to the state because you wanted muh child video game forever.
People usually don't understand freedom and they only like when it favors them and are willing to completely give it up to have so they can have retarded things like this one.
If video games don't say anywhere that the product has expiration date, then with the current law you can sue them and that would work as precedent for future cases.

>>105779442
oy vey

>>105779381
There's no "trying". Most of us can only sign once and don't know anyone. If it's so pointless, then why does it bother you so much that someone spends 30 seconds doing it? Really makes you think

>>105779463
Well gee whiz anon they better make their games sunset then.

>>105779351
you think people don't revolve their lives around video games, where have you been? look around
in my work there's a guy who always rush out at closing time at full speed. once i asked him why was he so anxious to get home so quickly. his answer?
>i want to play video games
no gf, malnourished, no social skills, shitty studio. just sad

>>105779364
so you agree, good

>>105779470
>Games already have an Eula that usually says they can stop the service at any time, if you disagree, don't buy.
Ok? I don't particularly care if they shove a disadvantageous agreement in the players' faces when people can just declare that such practices are illegal. I don't even play live service games, but I have no argument against this approach.
>Companies should have the freedom to sell shitty product if they want to as you should have the freedom to not buy. anything more than that is the state gaining a power that shouldn't have.
I disagree. If I purchase a firearm, I expect the firearm to be in a working state and that it won't harm me when I use it. I have no problem with a legal body enforcing this standard.
>imagine giving more power to the state because you wanted muh child video game forever.
It's not giving the state any more power. They have that power already, it's just taking power from the company and handing it to the consumer.
>People usually don't understand freedom and they only like when it favors them and are willing to completely give it up
Sure. But this is not one of those cases.
>If video games don't say anywhere that the product has expiration date, then with the current law you can sue them and that would work as precedent for future cases.
Except that is hardly enforced. And even if it were, I would prefer to have the games as copies that I own permanently, and not as a service.

>>105779532
what's really pathetic is that you watch him and post here about it
you think people don't revolve their lives around 4chan but there's a guy on 4chan that posts gossip drama about his coworkers saying how pathetic they are, pretty pathetic really

>>105779442
It's afraid.

>>105779560
>I disagree. If I purchase a firearm, I expect the firearm to be in a working state and that it won't harm me when I use it. I have no problem with a legal body enforcing this standard.
if the firearm you buy says it has certain attributes then it must satisfy that, if it doesn't you have the right to sue them. it is like that and it should be like that, nothing new here.
>it's just taking power from the company and handing it to the consumer.
its not. its state intervention in the market. the company sells a product, the product has specifications, they must be met. if you don't like the specification don't buy if you buy and the product don't satisfy them, you can go to the state for retribution. it is already like this.

>Sure. But this is not one of those cases.
>It's not giving the state any more power. They have that power already, it's just taking power from the company and handing it to the consumer.
this pretty much proves my point. you want the company to no longer have the freedom to sell anything they want and you are willing to let the state rule over what can be sell and what not.
you prob think your freedom as a citizen is separated from companies freedom and therefore companies having less freedom means you have more. well, bad news, it is not like that.

>>105779797
>if the firearm you buy says it has certain attributes then it must satisfy that, if it doesn't you have the right to sue them. it is like that and it should be like that, nothing new here.
Why would I prefer a situation where I'd have to hurt myself with a firearm and then sue the company when I could just have the government ensure that all firearms in the market are safe for their users? In what would would the first scenario be preferable?
>its not. its state intervention in the market. the company sells a product, the product has specifications, they must be met. if you don't like the specification don't buy if you buy and the product don't satisfy them, you can go to the state for retribution. it is already like this.
Why would I want that? I want to have protection as a consumer. If I purchase a product, I want the product to be mine, and I want the product to be safe to use. The government has the power to regulate the market to protect consumers, I don't mind if they use that power in the consumers' favour.

>this pretty much proves my point. you want the company to no longer have the freedom to sell anything they want and you are willing to let the state rule over what can be sell and what not.
Yeah, I don't mind if they don't have the right to piss in my mouth and call it rain. Even if they demand I sign an EULA that legally defines it as rain.
>you prob think your freedom as a citizen is separated from companies freedom and therefore companies having less freedom means you have more. well, bad news, it is not like that.
It is like that, actually. And that's a good thing.

>>105779470
>imagine giving more power to the state because you wanted muh child video game forever.
it's not giving more power, it's seeing if it can put the power it already has, towards something that a fair number of people can agree would be a good thing to do.
>Companies should have the freedom to sell shitty product if they want to as you should have the freedom to not buy
companies already sell shitty products. the only problem is they're not advertised as shitty, they're adverised as better than they actually are. in some cases this kills people.

are you gonna read every EULA of every "live service" you buy? are you gonna buy a testing kit for every tool and spare part to make sure it meets the advertised ratings and doesn't kill you or set your house on fire? no you're fucking not. does that mean it's fine for chinks to chink you and for the jews to jew you? you seem to think that yes, it is, because you've been watching a fuckload of Milton Friedman clips on youtube lately and are convinced that any gubmint intervention is bad by default.

>>105779855
>when I could just have the government ensure that all firearms in the market are safe for their users?
>ensure
seriously anon? the magical government is gonna make sure all firearms never fail. why didn't we think this before? its so obvious.
lets make a law to make the planes never fall from the sky again and the boats to never sink and the shoes never break. You are a fucking genius lol.

my point is, when you buy anything, there is a contract in between. that contract must be honored. if you don't like it just don't buy.
also for things that can lead to fatal accidents there are special standards and laws that are specifically crafted to handle those cases.
now you want to make a specific case for fucking video games so companies are forced by the state to do something with a completely irrelevant product.
there is a world of difference between the two and the second should not happen. Companies should have the freedom to sell a product that can expire whenever they want assuming they informed their customers before buying.

>>105779883
>and are convinced that any gubmint intervention is bad by default.
I'm the other guy arguing against him and in all honesty I'd agree that this IS a good default to have. It's just that the default assumption is not always correct, and sometimes government regulation is a necessary evil.

Maybe if we lived in an anarchy it would be a different question, but the companies are more than happy to lobby in the government to push laws and regulations that benefit them. It's only fair that sometimes the citizens do the same.

>>105779941
>seriously anon? the magical government is gonna make sure all firearms never fail. why didn't we think this before? its so obvious.
Yes. What the fuck do you think CIP is? For the record, a substantial chunk of firearms imported from yankland don't even pass basic CIP tests and get sent back as failures.

Sure, there's a contract between the seller and the purchaser. I have no problem with the purchaser being allowed to define the contracts through legal means.

>Companies should have the freedom to sell a product that can expire whenever they want assuming they informed their customers before buying.
I disagree. I'm more than happy with there being state enforced warranties and refund periods, or permanent ownership that the company can't retract at will.

>>105779443
I want to work on solutions, not just point my finger at something and yell "fix it!"
Your proposal, whilst stupid, is already more useful than this entire 'call for action' will ever be.

>>105780007
alright, get to work and go fix whatever they're pointing at

>>105780022
I am.

>>105780007
You'll never say why it's stupid because you're just a faggot contrarian.

>>105780054
Because it's not analogous to renting. I thought that was quite obvious.

>>105780066
If you make payment for something you do not own and the conditions are temporary, then it's called rent, you can choose to think of "rent" as for a house but that's not the only proper use of the term. You may also call it "lease" but I think "rent" has a more negative connotation and effectively creates the death mark on games designed to die. Next time be better with your uhm ackshully and don't base your definitions on what mommy and daddy do with the apartment.

>>105780158
You purchase lifetime access to the game. Lifetime being, just as with warranty, for the lifetime of the game.
For live service games the problem isn't that your access will be revoked at some point. That's a given. Rather, it's about the proposition being unclear during the purchasing decision. This is the big problem, it's impossible for people to know what they're buying.

And such the analogue exists with warranty. And it's one of the solutions. Create a period of guaranteed service.

>>105780327
This is outrageously weasely, I can't believe you actually wrote this unironically. What is the EA executive writing replies in the thread now? You're right, the lifetime of the rental agreement, glad you agree with "Rent" because I think it was a very smart idea and requires very little legal framework.

>For live service games the problem isn't that your access will be revoked at some point. That's a given.
Not really and the reality is they want you to believe it's the "lifetime" of the game which could be forever or it could be tomorrow. ;) And you didn't even counter what I said, having it say "Rent" and labeled expiration date is at best a semantic change and given you don't seem to care what words mean anyways, shouldn't matter to you at all unless you're someone who is benefitting from ambiguity.

>>105780364
Just like how products don't last forever, games don't last forever. You don't rent a shirt until it wears out.

Live service games are unique in that they are both intellectual property that can be copied and shared, but also have a limited lifespan.
The main difference being that their lifespan isn’t tied to wear and tear, but controlled by the publisher. A controlled lifespan that is rarely disclosed at the time of purchase.

I’m criticizing how unclear it is. Calling it a rental might be emotionally satisfying, but the real problem is the lack of transparency and guaranteed service terms. Just like with warranty, you can set a legally mandated service period.

>>105780479
>Just like how products don't last forever, games don't last forever.
The technology to make games without remote killswitches, as has been the norm until the 2010s, is just not there yet...
Get used to owning nothing, goyim.

>>105780479
I don't rent my shirt, I own it. It falling apart from use doesn’t change that. Also I can treat my shirt well, I can even put it in a glass case and it will last indefinitely.

A live service game, on the other hand, is pulled off your shelf by the publisher no matter its condition, that’s not wear and tear, that’s revoked access. So yes, it is a rental, thanks for agreeing with the Rent button concept, as I said, it's a good idea.

If you agree that the lifespan is publisher-controlled and rarely disclosed, then “Rent + expiration date” isn’t just emotionally satisfying, it’s the exact fix you just described.
If you’re rejecting the label while agreeing with the mechanics, maybe you’re just a contrarian and you can stop replying.

>>105780575
Your argument relies on ownership. You never 'owned' the video game. It's not your intellectual property. My point was to show that even physical goods degrade over time. It wasn't to argue whether shirts are better than video games.

If the core of your argument is about intellectual property, great, that's what my point has been the entire time.
If the core of your argument is about ownership, however, I'm afraid you just don't make sense.

>>105780879
He has owned the video game, the publisher of said video game has just revoked his access to his property. This needs to be regulated, and the practice of destroying video games stopped.

>>105780933
So if I cancel my Netflix subscription I should retain access to the films and programmes I've watched?

>>105780946
If he has purchased movies and shows within the Netflix service, yes.

>>105779990
>I disagree. I'm more than happy with there being state enforced warranties and refund periods, or permanent ownership that the company can't retract at will.
well, we disagree. you are willing to allow state micromanagement of society because you love those little details. that's a no for me, i'm more practical, i just don't buy shit i don't like because i know the state is gonna fuck up more than benefit society.
Don't mix video games with guns tough, its a stupid comparison. the second obviously requires regulation as well as drugs, food and all sorts of vital products/services that could mess you up.
Also you think that if companies are not forced to offer 'warranties and refund periods, or permanent ownership' they never will, which is wrong.
you remind of that meme of a guy with a narrow vision, only able to see the benefits but completely blind to the negatives.

>>105780879
No matter how you slice it your analogy is dumb. Digital goods don't "expire" or have "wear and tear" it's all arbitrary. Without effort from the developer to make it that way, games don't suddenly stop working. At best it would make sense in talking about games from Windows 95 not working on Windows 11 and calling that natural deterioration over time. And I absolutely do "own" my DRM-free GoG game download, I can put it on a USB drive and install it on every computer I own if I choose. I'm not trying to reprint the t-shirt which your dumb IP argument would also apply to but NO ONE said this, you are bringing it up. No, I don't have the right to go to a factory and get reprints of my Spider-Man red t-shirt. That doesn't mean I don't own the shirt...

>If the core of your argument is about intellectual property, great, that's what my point has been the entire time.
That has nothing to do with anything said so far, stop writing random things.

>If the core of your argument is about ownership, however, I'm afraid you just don't make sense.
You are the one who clearly is confused what "owning" things made. But tracks given "rent" befuddled you and you never actually refuted by counterpoint so now you just make these flaccid random tangeant points because you can't help but write noise to feel smart. You are replying to the wrong person and I would've thought getting whupped on "Rent" would've told you to find a different thread to sound smart in.

>>105780967
>well, we disagree. you are willing to allow state micromanagement of society because you love those little details. that's a no for me, i'm more practical, i just don't buy shit i don't like because i know the state is gonna fuck up more than benefit society.
It's not micromanagement of society. It's setting the rules straight so that the game is fair.
>Don't mix video games with guns tough, its a stupid comparison. the second obviously requires regulation as well as drugs, food and all sorts of vital products/services that could mess you up.
I will mix video games with guns, cars, movies, shirts, hygiene products, circus tickets and whatever else. The rules should be the same regardless of the product being sold or service offered.
>Also you think that if companies are not forced to offer 'warranties and refund periods, or permanent ownership' they never will, which is wrong.
I don't care if some of them do it voluntarily, good on them. I'm still happy to force all of them to do it.

>>105780879
I own my copy of the videogame in the form of a DRM-free installer, which is stored in my ZFS array and (for the sake of argument) will never degrade. Same for the album I bought off Bandcamp and downloaded in FLAC. The publisher/label cannot take this away from me. Meanwhile, you're here giving it the whole brainwashed zoomer delusion "games don't last forever, they have a limited lifespan.... like shirts!" Then you throw in the muh intellectual property strawman, yeah go fuck yourself dude

>>105780969
The entire discussion revolves around live service games. Don't move the goalposts to any type of video game.
You’ve consistently tried to oppose every point I make, regardless of whether it’s reasonable. That tells me this isn't about the argument, it’s about being adversarial.
Probably because you realised just how stupid you sound when you argue that purchasing lifetime access to a live service video game is the same as renting.

>>105781027
That's not ownership. You don't 'own' digital data. You hold a license to access or use it, under specific terms. Storing a DRM-free installer doesn’t grant you full rights over the game’s intellectual property, nor does it let you distribute, modify, or commercialize it.

What you’re describing is possession of a copy, not legal ownership of the work. There’s a difference, and pretending they’re the same doesn’t make it true.

If you’re done screaming about “zoomers” and shirts, we can talk like adults. If not, this conversation’s already beneath both our time.

>>105781044
>The entire discussion revolves around live service games
No, it doesn't. It never did. It revolves around all video games that publishers can revoke access to. Live service games are a part of the discussion, but not the entire scope of the conversation.

It doesn't matter if you purchase a copy of an MMO, or a live service arena shooter, or a single player only DRM always online product. In all of these cases, whenever you purchase a copy, you must be able to retain access to said content regardless of the machinations of the developer or publisher. That is the point of the initiative.

>>105781076
See, adversarial.

>>105781044
>The entire discussion revolves around live service games.
yet you're the one trying to make the discussion about intellectual property instead, cunt

>>105781066
It is ownership. You do own digital data. There is no access license, you are just being withheld access to your own property. This is the point of the initiative, to set the record straight and establish regulation that makes it impossible for companies to revoke your access to your property.

Intellectual property rights are a separate question and outside of the scope of the initiative.

>>105781100
Because it is.

>>105781044
That's not what I was arguing and you've missed the plot. Live service games cannot be owned because they have a "lifespan", so any words implying ownership should not be allowed, you do not "buy" skins you "rent" them. Skin rentals should also have a posted expiration date. You're the one trying to change what I'm trying to say Mr. Pirate Software.

>>105781104
Are you Ross?

>>105779883
>are you gonna read every EULA of every "live service" you buy?
how difficult is to feed the EULA to an AI and ask whatever you want? it would take you like 30 seconds to know for how long you are gonna have access to your slop

>are you gonna buy a testing kit for every tool and spare part to make sure it meets the advertised ratings and doesn't kill you or set your house on fire?
again, we are talking about video games, not a fucking defibrillator. Items that could lead to serious injuries or death definitely deserve special regulations. are you being this dishonest on purpose or you are just stupid? can't you see they are in completely different categories?

>does that mean it's fine for chinks to chink you and for the jews to jew you?
by 'jew you or 'chink you, i guess you mean to sell you something of bad quality? if so, there should be serious consequences for selling products that could lead to death or serious injure like i said before and this applies to every company.
if you are buying some unimportant shit and it stops working after a month then you never buy from them again. I've bought chink shit in the past but no longer because is shit. i didn't the state to intervene and protect me.
also if you buy anything, that could put your life at risk, from chink or pajeets you are retarded and deserve to die.

>>105781130
Are you Pirate Software?

>>105781066
Okay so there's no problem labeling it as Rentals then, we're in agreement! Thanks anon that's an even easier change!

>>105781121
I'm not that nonce, thank god.

Fine, here's a good analogy:
You don't rent video game because you don't rent a ticket to the theatre either.

>>105781151
You do rent access to the venue for the duration of the performance, and it's clearly labeled in the ticket exactly when your access expires and what the conditions for revocation of your access are. Such as for example, disruptive behaviour.

If you purchase a recorded video of the performance, you own the video and nobody should have the right to revoke your access to it regardless of whether you own it in physical form, or on some digital distribution platform.

>>105781151
Ticket has a definition, dumbass. Ironically it's also just a tighter definition of rental in the context of "rented access to an event".

>>105781138
No, but I agree with him up to the point where he starts rambling about neoliberal fantasies about middle grounds.

>>105781183
>No, but I agree with him
Then you can eat my entire ass. The whole thing.

>>105781175
>>105781179
holy shit this is funny

>>105781011
>I will mix video games with guns, cars, movies, shirts, hygiene products, circus tickets and whatever else. The rules should be the same regardless of the product being sold or service offered.
>I don't care if some of them do it voluntarily, good on them. I'm still happy to force all of them to do it.
ok buddy, our discussion ends here. we just have different vision on the role of the state and how much power and interference it should have in society.
you are clearly the kind of person that sees society divided into many groups and the only way to make your group better is to step on other groups. we share very different views.

>>105781192
I believe donkey is a bit too gamey, no thanks.

>>105781195
>you are clearly the kind of person that sees society divided into many groups and the only way to make your group better is to step on other groups.
When the companies see and regard their customers as cattle to be exploited, it's hard to adopt any different kind of a worldview.

>>105781215
hes right tho

>>105781215
they want your money, do you find this to be unbearable?

>>105781136
When you understand time=money any scam is violence and a form of slavery, you are robbing someone of their time. Just because someone didn't get physically harmed does make your form of fraud better. Take that to your AI and smoke it.

>>105781263
Yes. They should be paying me instead.

>>105781276
bad faith

>>105781281
Nigger, abo. Pot, kettle.

>>105781274
>time=money any scam is violence and a form of slavery
lol, should i tell the police about the guy who skipped a green light and forced me to stay 2 more minutes in my car and therefore i was a slave for a while and slavery is outlawed and i want him to go to prison for making me his slave. just stfu

You are buynig a product, a video game, an online video game. any person with more than 50IQ knows they are not gonna keep the servers into eternity so they have to inform you somehow what is the lifespan of the service. they do it in the EULA.
>I'm nOT GonNA ReAD ThE EuuuLa beCaauSe Slaaavery

>>105781350
>ny person with more than 50IQ knows they are not gonna keep the servers into eternity so they have to inform you somehow what is the lifespan of the service.
Everyone understand this, the point of the initiative is to make it impossible. Either they can continue the service infinitely, or they can enact some kind of an end-of-life plan that makes it possible for customers to access their property without needing to interact with defunct company servers or other verification processes.

>>105781350
Well the context of this is fraud so your first point is poorly made. Someone making me wait at a light is not fraud but it could get them arrested if they did it long enough, so really you didn't make a good point at all and do it even longer making it impossible to move my car, it's literally false imprisonment.

The crux of this is you, for some reason, despite believing their practices are perfectly okay are completely against properly labeling next to the Rent button an expiration date. If it's good enough for the EULA it's good enough for the Rent button. :)

>>105781375
and i tell you again, i do believe that if companies want to sell an online video game that will have their servers shut down after two years and they will not release the game, so it will effectively end, they should be able to as long as they put it in the contract.
if i make a video game and i want to keep it online for one year and i clearly tell my customers what is going to happen, i should be able to do it and take the game to my grave for it to never be played again. fuck you

>>105781417
And I have no qualms about making it impossible for you to do that.

Now, let's have a round of pachi pachi for the hachi hachi.

>>105781402
expiration date is already visible if you take like 1 minute to look it up. also some of them don't have an expiration date but more like 'when we want', which is also valid.
If you don't think that a mandatory 'rent button with expiration date' (which is already in the EULA) for online video games is micromanaging of society by the state then i don't know what it is.

>>105781520
>bro they wrote it on page 101 section 12 subsection 3.1 that's clear enough
Clear enough for the EULA, clear enough for the Rent button. The only reason to be against this is you believe that you will lose sales.

>>105781642
you can send the text to an AI and have it explain it to you.

>The only reason to be against this is you believe that you will lose sales.
no, its because i don't like to humor politicians into micromanaging society

>>105781679
Why should I need to feed an EULA into an AI to see if I'm being facefucked in the contract I'm forced to accept before I get to pay a game I already purchased? How is that beneficial to me?

I would rather there be some legislative framework that sets the rules so that the publisher of a video game cannot insert clauses in the EULA that make it possible for them to facefuck me in the first place.

>>105781724
>Why should I need to feed an EULA into an AI to see if I'm being facefucked
because you want to know for how long is the support going to last, no?

>the publisher of a video game cannot insert clauses in the EULA that make it possible for them to facefuck me in the first place
i don't know, what do you consider 'facefuck me'?

>>105781813
>because you want to know for how long is the support going to last, no?
Why should I need to know that? Even if the support is discontinued, I should be able to retain access to what I paid for.
>i don't know, what do you consider 'facefuck me'?
Losing access to my property.

>>105781679
Or you can write next to the Rent button the expiration date and save the AI. :)
protip if a contract requires an AI to understand it's not enforceable.

>>105781832
you paid for temporal access to a service, which was written in the contract.
don't like it? i guess you should have read the contract, lol

>>105781945
>you paid for temporal access to a service, which was written in the contract.
No, I paid for a product that included an access to a service. When support for that service ends, I should still retain access to the product.
>don't like it? i guess you should have read the contract, lol
No, I guess I should go sign a citizens' initiative that aims to make the practice illegal. Which is exactly what I did.

>>105781109
no it's not
the discussion is "am i allowed to retain my copy of the game in a functional state indefinitely"
not "do i own the rights to the intellectual property conveyed in my copy of the game"
neck yourself faggot

>>105781852
>protip if a contract requires an AI to understand it's not enforceable.
not required

>>105781971
sorry buddy, you are not entitled to other peoples property and you don't and will not have the power to tell them how to make a product other than speaking with your money. enjoy your gacha slop while it last