Posted November 17, 2014
You're all trying your best to talk past each other. :P
When you're talking about "ownership", amok is concerned with legal issues, while you and others are concerned with more practical matters. Personally I'd agree that the practical matters are of greater interest to the average consumer, so arguing about legal issues in these cases comes across a bit like hairsplitting to me, but to amok's credit, he clearly made the distinction between the law and its enforcement, so he's actually aware of what you're talking about, he just refuses the notion that DRM-free games can't have their licenses revoked in a legal sense, just because noone can enforce it. DRM-free means you get to keep your game if you backed it up, but it doesn't automatically mean you're allowed to keep it.
That being said, I don't know under which conditions it would be legal to withdraw a bought license, be it on Steam or on GOG. The problem is that Steam could theoretically enforce it even if the law was not on their side, and then it would be up to you to sue them or just go along with it because it would be too much trouble to prove them wrong.
When you're talking about "ownership", amok is concerned with legal issues, while you and others are concerned with more practical matters. Personally I'd agree that the practical matters are of greater interest to the average consumer, so arguing about legal issues in these cases comes across a bit like hairsplitting to me, but to amok's credit, he clearly made the distinction between the law and its enforcement, so he's actually aware of what you're talking about, he just refuses the notion that DRM-free games can't have their licenses revoked in a legal sense, just because noone can enforce it. DRM-free means you get to keep your game if you backed it up, but it doesn't automatically mean you're allowed to keep it.
That being said, I don't know under which conditions it would be legal to withdraw a bought license, be it on Steam or on GOG. The problem is that Steam could theoretically enforce it even if the law was not on their side, and then it would be up to you to sue them or just go along with it because it would be too much trouble to prove them wrong.
Post edited November 17, 2014 by Leroux