Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Vherid]

It is not illegal to borrows someone else's legitimate copy of a game.

Actually it technically is, Or at least was.

[PTTG??]

You're kidding, right?

Fall Out: New Vegas, when compared only to Fall Out 3 (as opposed to the Fall Out series as a whole) was horrible.

Personally, I'd agree with you, but only in the performance department. Frame rates got raped first release, then the unofficial patches appeared, which slightly alleviated the problem, but only slightly. Eventually, the game received it's well deserved official frame rate patch, but compared to fallout 3, it was still slow, and since my main computer isn't up to par with the latest computer hardware, it was slow enough that after 30 minutes, headaches would ensue.

But the game itself was better than FO3 in my opinion, especially after you arrive in vegas, which is practically in the second half of the game.

Regardless of headaches, the game was still a worthy buy for me.

Look at that, you just delete a single pair of tags, and he doesn't look like an idiot.

[forsaken1111]

It is not illegal to borrows someone else's legitimate copy of a game.

Actually it technically is, Or at least was.

Please show me the law which states that allowing my friend to play my PS3 game is illegal.

[Vherid]

It is not illegal to borrows someone else's legitimate copy of a game.

Actually it technically is, Or at least was.

Please show me the law which states that allowing my friend to play my PS3 game is illegal.

Technically it is illegal to lend, borrow or make copies of games.
You don't "own" it. You own the software license to play it. It is against the EULA to lend the game to someone. Letting someone borrow the game forfeits your right to the game. If the company catches you, they could take legal action.


Couple quotes from others on it, I'll try to find the actual law somewhere, or if it's in the EULAs for games rather.

EDIT: Okay the way it works, is most games today are sold with EULA's or other license agreements, and while on the PC you usually have to click to accept them and such, for console games, they are in the manuals so you technically buy and accept them before even reading and knowing about them which is also technically illegal but It's all gray for now. Opening my copy of 360 Black ops the Software License Agreement states

LIMITED LICENSE USE: Activision grants you the non exclusive, non transferable, limited right and license to use on copy of this program solely and exclusively for your personal use. Your license confers no title or ownership in this program.

It depends on the license to see what you can do.

[shadenight123]

which i suppose demonstrates idiocy to new found levels.
I mean, following it by the letter, you CANNOT have a friend come over to YOUR house and PLAY COOP on the same screen.
...this is what i call "politicianese" ...or "advocatese" it's happily ignoreable until you hit court base.
But hey, it's not like the feds will march in as soon as you insert your game in his console...right? we are still in a democracy? right?

[Vherid]

which i suppose demonstrates idiocy to new found levels.
I mean, following it by the letter, you CANNOT have a friend come over to YOUR house and PLAY COOP on the same screen.
...this is what i call "politicianese" ...or "advocatese" it's happily ignoreable until you hit court base.
But hey, it's not like the feds will march in as soon as you insert your game in his console...right? we are still in a democracy? right?

Of course its ridiculous, so many laws are. It's more of a protection against more serious issues. Basically it's like, We're not going to go after everyone who does this because it's ridiculous, but if we do have to go after someone for something, we can say, WE DID SAY DONT DO THIS. It prevents people from pulling a LOL U NO SAY I CANT DO THAT. It's basically a card to pull out when needed.

However if the game supports splitscreen coop, you can do that because that's part of the game, and as the license holder, you are playing the game. That's not the same thing as letting a friend borrow the game, YOU bought the license, HE has access to the software without a license.

[timferius]

I'm no legal expert, but I doubt a EULA would hold up in court. It's not law, laws are dicated by countries/states/provinces. This is a contract, which has to follow the law on it's own. From what I've heard, it's really easy to get thrown out in court, but that's all heresay, as I have no legal background.

[ed boy]

which i suppose demonstrates idiocy to new found levels.
I mean, following it by the letter, you CANNOT have a friend come over to YOUR house and PLAY COOP on the same screen.
...this is what i call "politicianese" ...or "advocatese" it's happily ignoreable until you hit court base.
But hey, it's not like the feds will march in as soon as you insert your game in his console...right? we are still in a democracy? right?

Technically, you're wrong. What it says is that you do not have the right to play it co-op. That does not mean that co-op is banned. I have not been given the right to pick my nose, but that does not mean that picking my nose is banned. All it means is that, since co-op is not something you are entitled to, if they stop you from being able to play co-op (be it accidentally or deliberately), you can't legally claim that they are depriving you of something you should have.

Though, I must admit, applying that to co-op, although within the letter of the lisence, is probably not what they were trying to prevent when including that line.

[shadenight123]

the example i made should be considered as the "extreme" version. i suppose that if a game does have coop section probably it also has a couple of lines which dictates said coop sections. like "if the other coop does not own a copy of this game he cannot make a copy of said game for coop reason or similar similar similar, and he has to forget having played the coop of his game because he might be a communist spy"
or similar level thing.

still, while i understand that making game is a market, there should also be a "limit" to how much it should weight on a player.
i mean, i can understand the general mistrust in the human race, but once you say it clearly "you can't copy this" then that's it. it's five words.
five words.
i understand this would be workeable only in an utopistic society were people were never-ever fags who try to outsmart people, but still, it's five words.
against what? five pages? six?

[forsaken1111]

I'm no legal expert, but I doubt a EULA would hold up in court. It's not law, laws are dicated by countries/states/provinces. This is a contract, which has to follow the law on it's own. From what I've heard, it's really easy to get thrown out in court, but that's all heresay, as I have no legal background.

If you cannot examine the EULA prior to purchase (which you can't, because it's in the manual inside the box) then it will never hold up in court because you have no chance to decline that agreement. My local gaming store will not give you a full refund on a purchased game once it is opened, so you cannot buy it and see the EULA and decide to return it because you don't like that EULA. Legally it means almost nothing.

[ductape]

which i suppose demonstrates idiocy to new found levels.
I mean, following it by the letter, you CANNOT have a friend come over to YOUR house and PLAY COOP on the same screen.
...this is what i call "politicianese" ...or "advocatese" it's happily ignoreable until you hit court base.
But hey, it's not like the feds will march in as soon as you insert your game in his console...right? we are still in a democracy? right?

Of course its ridiculous, so many laws are. It's more of a protection against more serious issues. Basically it's like, We're not going to go after everyone who does this because it's ridiculous, but if we do have to go after someone for something, we can say, WE DID SAY DONT DO THIS. It prevents people from pulling a LOL U NO SAY I CANT DO THAT. It's basically a card to pull out when needed.

However if the game supports splitscreen coop, you can do that because that's part of the game, and as the license holder, you are playing the game. That's not the same thing as letting a friend borrow the game, YOU bought the license, HE has access to the software without a license.

so, this corporation: http://www.gamefly.com/ is breaking the law every day by the millions? I dont think so. Probably what is going on is that legal 'personal" use allows lending, since lending is a way of "using" something.

[Vherid]

I'm no legal expert, but I doubt a EULA would hold up in court. It's not law, laws are dicated by countries/states/provinces. This is a contract, which has to follow the law on it's own. From what I've heard, it's really easy to get thrown out in court, but that's all heresay, as I have no legal background.

If you cannot examine the EULA prior to purchase (which you can't, because it's in the manual inside the box) then it will never hold up in court because you have no chance to decline that agreement. My local gaming store will not give you a full refund on a purchased game once it is opened, so you cannot buy it and see the EULA and decide to return it because you don't like that EULA. Legally it means almost nothing.

Like I said, gray.

which i suppose demonstrates idiocy to new found levels.
I mean, following it by the letter, you CANNOT have a friend come over to YOUR house and PLAY COOP on the same screen.
...this is what i call "politicianese" ...or "advocatese" it's happily ignoreable until you hit court base.
But hey, it's not like the feds will march in as soon as you insert your game in his console...right? we are still in a democracy? right?

Of course its ridiculous, so many laws are. It's more of a protection against more serious issues. Basically it's like, We're not going to go after everyone who does this because it's ridiculous, but if we do have to go after someone for something, we can say, WE DID SAY DONT DO THIS. It prevents people from pulling a LOL U NO SAY I CANT DO THAT. It's basically a card to pull out when needed.

However if the game supports splitscreen coop, you can do that because that's part of the game, and as the license holder, you are playing the game. That's not the same thing as letting a friend borrow the game, YOU bought the license, HE has access to the software without a license.

so, this corporation: http://www.gamefly.com/ is breaking the law every day by the millions? I dont think so. Probably what is going on is that legal 'personal" use allows lending, since lending is a way of "using" something.

You can do any of which we are discussing if you receive permission from the licensee himself.

[Domenique]

I'm no legal expert, but I doubt a EULA would hold up in court. It's not law, laws are dicated by countries/states/provinces. This is a contract, which has to follow the law on it's own. From what I've heard, it's really easy to get thrown out in court, but that's all heresay, as I have no legal background.

If you cannot examine the EULA prior to purchase (which you can't, because it's in the manual inside the box) then it will never hold up in court because you have no chance to decline that agreement. My local gaming store will not give you a full refund on a purchased game once it is opened, so you cannot buy it and see the EULA and decide to return it because you don't like that EULA. Legally it means almost nothing.

Like I said, gray.

But it's still wrong according to the license, and it's also full of ****. I hate copyright laws these days, they are so wrong.

[timferius]

I'm no legal expert, but I doubt a EULA would hold up in court. It's not law, laws are dicated by countries/states/provinces. This is a contract, which has to follow the law on it's own. From what I've heard, it's really easy to get thrown out in court, but that's all heresay, as I have no legal background.

If you cannot examine the EULA prior to purchase (which you can't, because it's in the manual inside the box) then it will never hold up in court because you have no chance to decline that agreement. My local gaming store will not give you a full refund on a purchased game once it is opened, so you cannot buy it and see the EULA and decide to return it because you don't like that EULA. Legally it means almost nothing.

Like I said, gray.

But it's still wrong according to the license, and it's also full of ****. I hate copyright laws these days, they are so wrong.

Just saying, it's not copyright law, it's leaglese written up by the game developer. Game developers do not dictate law.

[Shadowlord]

Not intended to be insulting, but you show me a game developer that makes every tree individually,in a game world of this size and I will show you a bunch people with deep mental issues or far too much time and money.

none insult taken, maybe i should have been more clear. i understand trees are pre-renderedbut there "is" variety among the five/six trees taken, and maybe they are placed in such a way that they look different (like, turned of 78 degrees or similar)

The trees in Oblivion are all procedurally generated using SpeedTree...