this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2023
721 points (99.5% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54577 readers
239 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

As always, the paying user has the worst experience. "Purchase" a show, can only watch on a certain console of a certain brand, no transfers, no backups, then it suddenly disappears from the library and nothing can be done.

If media companies insist on draconian DRM, then they should pay for full refunds to their loyal customers when one day they decide to delist that specific show.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 18 points 11 months ago (5 children)

Discovery Entitlements Affected Titles

As of 31 December 2023, due to our content licensing arrangements with content providers, you will no longer be able to watch any of your previously purchased Discovery content and the content will be removed from your video library.

We sincerely thank you for your continued support.

Thank you,

PlayStation Store

[–] [email protected] 13 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Turns out you people didn't actually purchase it.

I wonder if anywhere in the "purchase" terms they included "while Sony holds the license to distribute."

I hate that "purchases" people make are restricted per platform. If I "purchase" a specific title it should be available on any and all platforms that serve that content. No one should be asked to purchase it on Sony. Apple, Netflix, Amazon, or whatever other shitty streaming service comes out.

As much as I think nfts are fucking retarded, this could be one of the few cases where that stupid digital receipt might make sense.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

My understanding was this was the actual intended use case for NFTs. To allow you to properly own a digital item. The fact that it got applied to a stupid fad right out the gate doesn't change the fact that it should actually be used to allow us to own things again.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 months ago

NFTs don't solve the actual problem, which is that paying money doesn't legally come with a warranty for accessability of the thing you bought. The law should guarantee the right to access anything purchased or marketed similarly for a given period of years with the right to either a Refund or a DRM free download option if said access is no longer offered for any reason, and mandatory cultural preservation of said media as a precondition to legally profit off of it or enforce copyright using the court system

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)