Search Results
7/6/2025, 5:27:44 AM
>>714622846
>What rights do game companies have to protect their brands?
picrel is what they typically use to cover their ass.
Also fuckem who cares its a corporation AND they're doing this after throwing the game in the trash so its not really their problem anymore. Ford isn't responsible for you braining yourself on a focus you found in a scrapyard, that's all on you big dog
>Still, mp games are different (see #1 and #2 which would never apply to traditional goods)
this is literally half the point of the initiative you retard, to concretely set out if they're products (in which case remotely removing access is a crime) or a service (in which case the laws and protections are different and the companies will need to start properly providing information about terms and lifespan in advance of purchase)
>What rights do game companies have to protect their brands?
picrel is what they typically use to cover their ass.
Also fuckem who cares its a corporation AND they're doing this after throwing the game in the trash so its not really their problem anymore. Ford isn't responsible for you braining yourself on a focus you found in a scrapyard, that's all on you big dog
>Still, mp games are different (see #1 and #2 which would never apply to traditional goods)
this is literally half the point of the initiative you retard, to concretely set out if they're products (in which case remotely removing access is a crime) or a service (in which case the laws and protections are different and the companies will need to start properly providing information about terms and lifespan in advance of purchase)
Page 1