With the rise of the live-service model, video games have shifted from a product you buy to a service you rent, one that publishers can switch off whenever they want.
And it needs to be, because being specific could run into legal issues, such as if you require the server binaries to be available, you’re now violating copyright. The law should specify the result, not the process to get there.
That’s not specific “the way we bought it” could be argued to require servers to be kept running and no company will take actions to put themselves in a position to get sued.
The way we bought it just requires the server code to be available to run, if does not require any specific company running servers. And running servers is not a suable offense.
I didn’t say it was, but a lot of people are wanting offline access.
Point is it’s not inherently clear with one vision what SKG is. Just like Brexit and any number of dumb things it’s been marketed in a shotgun approach to get as many people on board as possible and coasting on a “well the EU politicians will just figure out what we want”
The problem with Brexit not the lack of clarity, it was that it was a fundamentally dumb idea motivated but dumbness.
It was a bunch of people who blamed every problem on the EU for no sound reason and thus they supported a self harming policy.
This is a situation where the policy is fundamentally sound, it just needs some clarity around implementation details. This is literally how government is supposed to work.
True, but it only got so popular because they had convinced both groups, hard and soft. I have no idea how they managed to convince people that Northern Ireland wouldn’t be an issue.
But back to the real point. Yeah, I thought GDPR would be good, but in practice it’s not changed the cookie/tracking landscape at all. Most places you’d have to send a letter to to get them to removed your data, and most would probably not be able to comply. Meanwhile we now have options that are subscribe (meaning they have legitimate reason to track and monitor you) or accept their ads and tracking cookies.
The GDPR is good and has absolutely changed how things are done. I’ve been involved with multiple companies having to change their European data practices because of it.
I don’t know why you have so little faith in the EU when it’s an actually functioning government that is passing new consumer protection legislation.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
No humor/memes etc…
No affiliate links
No advertising.
No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
No self promotion.
No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
No politics.
Comments.
No personal attacks.
Obey instance rules.
No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc…)
Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
That’s still inherently more specific than ‘that plus nebulous notions of workers rights’.
Also, that’s not nebulous in terms of end user expectation, that’s just nebulous in terms of technical implementation.
And it needs to be, because being specific could run into legal issues, such as if you require the server binaries to be available, you’re now violating copyright. The law should specify the result, not the process to get there.
The law is specifying the end user result. Keep the game we bought available to play in the way we bought it.
Questions about server binaries and copyright are implementation details for companies to work out.
That’s not specific “the way we bought it” could be argued to require servers to be kept running and no company will take actions to put themselves in a position to get sued.
The way we bought it just requires the server code to be available to run, if does not require any specific company running servers. And running servers is not a suable offense.
I didn’t say it was, but a lot of people are wanting offline access.
Point is it’s not inherently clear with one vision what SKG is. Just like Brexit and any number of dumb things it’s been marketed in a shotgun approach to get as many people on board as possible and coasting on a “well the EU politicians will just figure out what we want”
The problem with Brexit not the lack of clarity, it was that it was a fundamentally dumb idea motivated but dumbness.
It was a bunch of people who blamed every problem on the EU for no sound reason and thus they supported a self harming policy.
This is a situation where the policy is fundamentally sound, it just needs some clarity around implementation details. This is literally how government is supposed to work.
True, but it only got so popular because they had convinced both groups, hard and soft. I have no idea how they managed to convince people that Northern Ireland wouldn’t be an issue.
But back to the real point. Yeah, I thought GDPR would be good, but in practice it’s not changed the cookie/tracking landscape at all. Most places you’d have to send a letter to to get them to removed your data, and most would probably not be able to comply. Meanwhile we now have options that are subscribe (meaning they have legitimate reason to track and monitor you) or accept their ads and tracking cookies.
I think you have too much faith in them.
The GDPR is good and has absolutely changed how things are done. I’ve been involved with multiple companies having to change their European data practices because of it.
I don’t know why you have so little faith in the EU when it’s an actually functioning government that is passing new consumer protection legislation.