Search Results
6/25/2025, 12:05:30 AM
>>713558068
> people can have multiple issues running at the same time which is why shit like this is even made so that people of different demographics and issues can talk about what matters to them.
Oh, now we're playing the "people can care about more than one thing" card—as if that’s some kind of trump argument instead of the default condition of any conscious organism. Congratulations, you’ve achieved Sentience Tier 0. But here's the legal reality you’re skipping in your kumbaya TED Talk about "issues that matter": digital license agreements are not ownership. You don’t own the game. You never did. You agreed to rent access to encrypted data bound by terms of service written by an army of corporate attorneys who could outmaneuver your entire comment with a semicolon.
You’re not Moses descending with stone tablets—you’re the guy shaking his fist at a EULA he never read.
"People can talk about what matters to them." Sure. But when what “matters” is trying to turn a non-binding European Citizens’ Initiative into some revolutionary anti-corporate thunderstrike, I’m legally—and intellectually—obligated to laugh. This petition has no legislative power. It’s symbolic—pure procedural theater. It’s designed to burn political oxygen, not produce legal fire. You don’t get to invoke “basic human rights” when your grievance hinges on a license revocation clause you scroll-passed while speedrunning the install.
This isn’t democratic discourse—it’s a cosplay protest stapled to the boilerplate of digital consumerism. You think you're storming Bastille.exe, but all you're doing is clicking "I Agree" in bold font and then crying when the terms get enforced.
This isn't resistance. It's TOS illiteracy wrapped in community theater.
You never owned your Steam games, but the people of Europe won't own their culture or their continent.
> people can have multiple issues running at the same time which is why shit like this is even made so that people of different demographics and issues can talk about what matters to them.
Oh, now we're playing the "people can care about more than one thing" card—as if that’s some kind of trump argument instead of the default condition of any conscious organism. Congratulations, you’ve achieved Sentience Tier 0. But here's the legal reality you’re skipping in your kumbaya TED Talk about "issues that matter": digital license agreements are not ownership. You don’t own the game. You never did. You agreed to rent access to encrypted data bound by terms of service written by an army of corporate attorneys who could outmaneuver your entire comment with a semicolon.
You’re not Moses descending with stone tablets—you’re the guy shaking his fist at a EULA he never read.
"People can talk about what matters to them." Sure. But when what “matters” is trying to turn a non-binding European Citizens’ Initiative into some revolutionary anti-corporate thunderstrike, I’m legally—and intellectually—obligated to laugh. This petition has no legislative power. It’s symbolic—pure procedural theater. It’s designed to burn political oxygen, not produce legal fire. You don’t get to invoke “basic human rights” when your grievance hinges on a license revocation clause you scroll-passed while speedrunning the install.
This isn’t democratic discourse—it’s a cosplay protest stapled to the boilerplate of digital consumerism. You think you're storming Bastille.exe, but all you're doing is clicking "I Agree" in bold font and then crying when the terms get enforced.
This isn't resistance. It's TOS illiteracy wrapped in community theater.
You never owned your Steam games, but the people of Europe won't own their culture or their continent.
Page 1