this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2023
172 points (96.7% liked)

Technology

59612 readers
3667 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s
[email protected]
[email protected]
L4s
enu
172
The History and Future of Digital Ownership (www.theverge.com)
submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/technology
68 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I'd like to get the community's feedback on this. I find it very disturbing that digital content purchased on a platform does not rightfully belong to the purchaser and that the content can be completely removed by the platform owners. Based on my understanding, when we purchase a show or movie or game digitally, what we're really doing is purchasing a "license" to access the media on the platform. This is different from owning a physical copy of the same media. Years before the move to digital media, we would buy DVDs and Blu-Rays the shows and movies we want to watch, and no one seemed to question the ownership of those physical media.

Why is it that digital media purchasing and ownership isn't the same as purchasing and owning the physical media? How did it become like this, and is there anything that can be done to convince these platforms that purchasing a digital copy of a media should be equivalent to purchasing a physical DVD or Blu-Ray disc?

P.S. I know there's pirating and all, but that's not the focus of my question.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Less shit. You could actually trade your fucking games and would not be limited to one platform

[–] echo64 2 points 11 months ago

you're still limited to one platform, the vendor has to recognise the NFT, and vendors are only going to recognise their own NFT's that they saw value from selling.

there is no benefit to bullshit NFT tokens, unless you are running a ponzi scheme.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Then those games would be subject to Gresham's law LMAO. I would never trust a company that allows transfers between platforms.