纽约宣布游戏所有权法案,要求拥有所有权而非许可
NY announces game ownership bill requiring ownership rather than licensing

原始链接: https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/new-york-rep-announces-game-ownership-bill-that-would-require-consumer-ownership-rather-than-sale-of-licenses-would-also-require-publishers-to-keep-the-game-functional-after-support-ends

众议员里奇·托雷斯提出《玩家权利法案》,旨在通过指示联邦贸易委员会监管游戏所有权来保护玩家。该法案将授予消费者所购游戏的实际所有权,而非可撤销许可,并要求在服务器关闭前提供离线模式。它追随宾夕法尼亚州参议员约翰·凯恩的《保护我们的游戏法案》和“停止杀死游戏”运动。引用的例子包括育碧《The Crew》停服、《NBA 2K25》两年后下架,以及《守望先锋2》取代原版。索尼辩称购买的是许可,而非持久权利。该法案还可能涉及转让权,尤其是实体副本,但细节尚不清楚。倡导者说,盗版往往在无DRM的情况下提供更好的体验。该立法标志着终结游戏行业反消费者做法的重要一步。

Hacker News上的一篇帖子讨论了纽约州一位代表提出的一项联邦法案,该法案将要求视频游戏的所有权而非许可。评论者指出该法案仅已宣布,尚未正式提出,并对其通过机会提出疑问。讨论扩展到更广泛的版权改革、更短的版权期限、DRM限制、离线游玩、游戏保存和数字转售。一些人认为合理使用、更短的版权期限或源代码托管更能保存老游戏。其他人担心仅在线游戏、独立开发者负担、执法以及可能转向SaaS模式。支持者说支持离线、无DRM游玩是可行的,消费者应真正拥有购买内容,而批评者指出许可安排可以透明,数字转售可能扰乱市场。总体情绪混杂:对消费者所有权的兴趣很强,但对可行性、法案细节和实施仍持怀疑。
相关文章

原文

Rep. Ritchie Torres of New York's 15th congressional district has introduced the Power To The Players Act. This new legislation aims to protect consumers by directing the FTC to establish regulations on game ownership to curb anti-consumer business practices. "Under the bill, buying a video game would give the consumer ownership of the game rather than a license to play it," the release says. "Games with online functionality would also be required to provide an offline mode before the servers supporting them are shut down."

Games having an expiration date despite being more expensive than ever has been scrutinized by players all over the world, along with aggressive monetization schemes within the games themselves. Rep. Ritchie Torres isn’t the first to fight for gamers, as Pennsylvania state senator John Kane also recently introduced the Protect Our Games Act, requiring publishers to provide an offline mode, community servers, or a 25% minimum refund. Players want to be able to enjoy their games even if the publisher decides to stop supporting the game, but Sony doesn’t think the players own their games and that they have the right to pull the rug from under them. Sony’s lawyers even recently said in a defense in an ongoing class action lawsuit that clicking on the “purchase” button would obviously not lead the consumer to think that they were acquiring a durable right to use the game instead of a revocable license; basically a one-time rent fee that Sony could take away at any moment that benefits them.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com