Search Results
7/18/2025, 6:40:37 AM
>>715767065
Ross is clearly autistic. He feels very passionately about something that A) not a lot of people care about and B) has 0 effect on all but those with his particular brand of autism. That's autism to a T
However, his autism is correct. From a legal standpoint he should win, even in the US if someone who was rich enough gave enough of a fuck to bankroll a solid case against the billion-dollar corps. Courts here (dogshit legal hell) operated on precedence, and what a "reasonable person" would do/think. And a "reasonable person" would believe that when they purchase a game, they aren't renting it for a few years. When you buy a toothbrush, is it reclaimed after a few months? When you buy a fleshlight, does the company come rip it off your dick when they no longer see the purchase as equitable? No, so why should a video game? Why would a reasonable person assume that? Other than "because that's the way it is, because we're all cucks who let it slide." Also EULAs have 0 credibility in court lmao so don't even bother with that argument.
However, think about the ramifications of if that legislation passed. You would NEVER want to release a game in those markets unless you were 10000% sure it would not fail. You release the rights to the public to carry on the game and that infringes on your copyright. Which weakens your argument for copyright infringement for all cases monetizing the product. You can't let one person copy your product and another one not, for no other reason than "we ran out of funding for that game". You effectively forfeit the rights to any game that fails at some point. EA is the only multiplayer developer that survives, and by selling dogshit. It would annihilate indies making multiplayer games.
Source: I share an adjacent brand of autism as the balding man
Ross is clearly autistic. He feels very passionately about something that A) not a lot of people care about and B) has 0 effect on all but those with his particular brand of autism. That's autism to a T
However, his autism is correct. From a legal standpoint he should win, even in the US if someone who was rich enough gave enough of a fuck to bankroll a solid case against the billion-dollar corps. Courts here (dogshit legal hell) operated on precedence, and what a "reasonable person" would do/think. And a "reasonable person" would believe that when they purchase a game, they aren't renting it for a few years. When you buy a toothbrush, is it reclaimed after a few months? When you buy a fleshlight, does the company come rip it off your dick when they no longer see the purchase as equitable? No, so why should a video game? Why would a reasonable person assume that? Other than "because that's the way it is, because we're all cucks who let it slide." Also EULAs have 0 credibility in court lmao so don't even bother with that argument.
However, think about the ramifications of if that legislation passed. You would NEVER want to release a game in those markets unless you were 10000% sure it would not fail. You release the rights to the public to carry on the game and that infringes on your copyright. Which weakens your argument for copyright infringement for all cases monetizing the product. You can't let one person copy your product and another one not, for no other reason than "we ran out of funding for that game". You effectively forfeit the rights to any game that fails at some point. EA is the only multiplayer developer that survives, and by selling dogshit. It would annihilate indies making multiplayer games.
Source: I share an adjacent brand of autism as the balding man
6/22/2025, 3:33:05 PM
>>508328890
like i said it seems like they're counting on muhammed to descend from the heavens and split the strait exclusively for them
i'm not convinced but we'll see
like i said it seems like they're counting on muhammed to descend from the heavens and split the strait exclusively for them
i'm not convinced but we'll see
Page 1