🌟 Internet Famous Jason Thor Hall / PirateSoftware / Maldavius Figtree / DarkSphere Creations / Maldavius / Thorwich / Witness X / @PotatoSec - Incompetent Furry Programmer, Blizzard Nepo Baby, Lies about almost every thing in his life, Industry Shill, Carried by his father, Hate boner against Ross Scott of Accursed Farms, False Flagger

[Forklift Certified]

but for online multiplayer

Dont be a retard.

Dose not matter the type of the game in question single player or multiplayer. what is matter is the type of commerce and in both cases game sold as a one time purchase which implying a perpetual licensing. And i don't care those dipshit publishers what writing in their EULA / TOS because that thing not the fucking LEX and those shits already running afoul against EU Directive 93/13/EEC, the only reason not enforced because the eu on the past decade were full of boomers who don't gave rats ass about video games.

at the 90's and early 00's private servers was the fucking norm, and SKG not asking for magical rocket science solution costing 6 gajillion shekels, we want the industry to return to the fucking norm !

 

[Drain Todger]

Love my nigga Ross, I feel like his presentation was really well done. I think GAS (teehee) will go away as the attention and money between players is stretched too thin. For example, I love battlefield 6 but I haven’t played it in forever because A. Crimson desert and B. The fomo shit they do like every other shooter annoys and turns me off from wanting to play. I feel alot of people will feel that way, they can’t keep up with every single fucking live service game; the bubble will burst and I think it’s starts with Ross’ SKG project. Good shit mr funny freeman man

This.

Live service games are a disgusting, money-sucking pachinko parlor bullshit business model where publishers compete for the attention of knuckle-dragging morons who buy "skin packs" in a grotesque zero-sum game. The whole conceit behind making everything function like an MMO and require an internet connection on the backend is just to authenticate the player's access to patched-in content that is already on their fucking hard drive. It is exactly like BMW charging a subscription fee for heated seats or whatever. The data is already there.

I'm not in favor of big daddy government solving every problem, but these companies need a regulatory boot in the face.

 

[Perfect Day]

The model can, killing the game does not. This is a problem of their own making. Community servers were the standard from the dawn of the internet, and are still a regular thing today, even in heavily microtransaction games. Anyone can host a CounterStrike 2 server if they want.

There is nothing about a license that somehow excuses deliberately breaking the thing. There is nothing about rights or IP that factors into "this is a server executable". There is nothing legally dubious about letting people run and operate those. There is nothing special about releasing the software. Any potential blockers regarding middleware are developer choice and middleware policy - they can easily remove them, or get permission for EOS operations - I guarantee it'd be a feature within a week that "allowed for EOS use" on any middleware in the industry. Every argument of difficulty on this is entirely a manufactured narrative.

I wasn't thinking about counter strike and you're correct, that is a game that has community run servers and it's a pretty good argument. The issue with this is that counter strike is an old game at this point and whether we like this or not, more modern multiplayer games have moved away from this model. If you look at more recent games they have centralized matchmaking without servers.

I'm not saying that nothing will happened but I have seen people in the thread saying that this is the beginning of a reform for digital media and I don't think that's what is going to happen. I'm a little bit familiar with EU regulators, I know that they usually try to not go against the market. The point I'm making about licensing or about online games is not to attack the initiative, it's to say, if the market is moving in a direction, the EU is not going to go in a different direction. They may try to implement customer friendly rules but not to the extent that it would actually change anything. What I realistically think is going to happen is that we can expect some more transparency on digital services, especially in the marketing and distribution of games and movies and shows. I don't think they are going to make a rule that games need to be server hosted or that they need to be kept online. I might be wrong but I don't see it happening.

Also regarding this point specifically "There is nothing about rights or IP that factors into "this is a server executable". There is nothing legally dubious about letting people run and operate those." The issue is that this will challenged in the EU Court and the EU recognizes that IP rights are protected. So the issue is that if the publisher decides to remove a game that they are making available basically under a license agreement "as a service" (as they say) and you decide to run the game anyway, currently, as the law stands, you would be breaking the law. So what is asked is to change the law. but that would require reversing the current marketing model for digital services which I don't see that happening, but I'm not a regulator so god knows what will happen.

 

[LovisXVI]

The issue with this is that counter strike is an old game

CS2 came out in 2023.

 

[Perfect Day]

CS2 came out in 2023.

Yeah but it's still an old game. The EU is not going to force studio to adopt the CS model of server hosted games when modern games don't do this anymore

 

[Kuritan Deplorable]

So the issue is that if the publisher decides to remove a game that they are making available basically under a license agreement "as a service" (as they say) and you decide to run the game anyway, currently, as the law stands, you would be breaking the law.

This is profoundly stupid, and I'm pretty sure we're just being trolled. Dudes actually saying "Well they put in their terms of service a line, so therefor the law needs to change" - or they could just not fucking put that in there? ToS isn't the law, and the law doesn't say you give up any sort of ownership rights on either the publisher side or the purchaser side by using a piece of software. Not even close, in any universe. So yea, you're either trolling, or your PROFOUNDLY unaware of even the basic concepts underlying what you're talking about.

Yeah but it's still an old game. The EU is not going to force studio to adopt the CS model of server hosted games when modern games don't do this anymore

Right. Absolutely none of these games are in any way modern, and absolutely none of them are tiny teams somehow able to manage this, or huge hits that somehow don't need closed door infrastructure to operate. And this is just what I've got in my steam search.

 

[Perfect Day]

This is profoundly stupid, and I'm pretty sure we're just being trolled. Dudes actually saying "Well they put in their terms of service a line, so therefor the law needs to change" - or they could just not fucking put that in there? ToS isn't the law, and the law doesn't say you give up any sort of ownership rights on either the publisher side or the purchaser side by using a piece of software. Not even close, in any universe. So yea, you're either trolling, or your PROFOUNDLY unaware of even the basic concepts underlying what you're talking about.


View attachment 8889402
Right. Absolutely none of these games are in any way modern, and absolutely none of them are tiny teams somehow able to manage this, or huge hits that somehow don't need closed door infrastructure to operate. And this is just what I've got in my steam search.

I'm not trolling you. I'm telling you that currently EU law recognizes that games can be provided under a license and that's what game publishing companies will argue in court. The point is that these ToS that you are signing are not breaking the law so when you sign the ToS they are binding. You would need to introduce new rules that make it illegal to offer these terms and the EU is not going to do that. Because they have big video game studios and they want to keep them and they want these companies to continue making money, and they want the EU to be attractive for publishers who want to make and release games. So what they are gonna do is: they are going to look at that on the one hand and on the other they are gonna look at consumer rights and they are going to create a transparency obligation and nobody will be happy.

Don't get mad at me it's not my fault that's the way they do it.

 

[emixcjx]

You would need to introduce new rules that make it illegal to offer these terms and the EU is not going to do that. Because they have big video game studios and they want to keep them and they want these companies to continue making money, and they want the EU to be attractive for publishers who want to make and release games.

The EU has done that with things like mandating USB-C on phones / tablets and GDPR. You also just finished saying CS2 is an old game. It seems like you were lobotomized. Time to hang up the keyboard

 

[Perfect Day]

The EU has done that with things like mandating USB-C on phones / tablets and GDPR. You also just finished saying CS2 is an old game. It seems like you were lobotomized. Time to hang up the keyboard

The USB C standard and the GDPR are not comparable in my opinion. The EU is willing to impose standard on manufacturing, That is something that they have done for decades and the USB C rules fall in that category, but it's very minor compared to what SKG is proposing to do. GDPR was a massive change but it only governs how companies are handling our data, it doesn't force companies to make their product available ( a lot of US website blocked EU IP addresses rather than comply). These two things don't indicate that the EU is going to make rules that change how video games are sold in some instances. In any case, it is not something that they are currently planning to regulate so to see any sort of reform would take anywhere between 5 to 10 years. You're talking about ownership of digital goods, that's not something they are going to treat lightly. Before anything happens, they will do extensive consultation with industry professionals and if they feel that it would be detrimental to the market, they will balance this against consumer protection and it is likely to reduce the scope of any potential reform. And who knows what the market will look like in a decade from now. That's the main issue with EU rules, by the time they are enacted they are usually outdated and not that useful. The shortest route would be to rely on existing consumer protection rules to argue that some practices are unfair under the current regime. I'm not sure that Courts in the EU would uphold that because they would have to look at EU directives which currently are designed to protect this business model.

The EU treats things that are sold as either "goods" or "services". Digital products are in a category of their own which is called "digital content" and online multiplayer games are currently generally treated more like services than goods by the regulator and teh courts

 

[TrainWreckWatcher]

Yeah but it's still an old game. The EU is not going to force studio to adopt the CS model of server hosted games when modern games don't do this anymore

You talk like a jeet and come off as a faggot.

 

[Aidan]

The point is that these ToS that you are signing are not breaking the law so when you sign the ToS they are binding.

They're seldom challenged but historically, overbearing software terms of service in the US do not hold up. I imagine the EU would be even less forgiving.

 

[emixcjx]

You're talking about ownership of digital goods, that's not something they are going to treat lightly. Before anything happens, they will do extensive consultation with industry professionals and if they feel that it would be detrimental to the market, they will balance this against consumer protection and it is likely to reduce the scope of any potential reform.

Wow thanks for restating the entire point of this EU commission, dumb fuck.

GDPR was a massive change but it only governs how companies are handling our data,

GDPR affecting how companies structure their ToS was the point of me bringing up GDPR but you're too retarded to catch on. Terms in a ToS are not laws and can be superseded at any point, as showcased by GDPR.

 

[Pvt. Parts]

Also Also.. ! CODE RED CODE RED ! Kronos no longer associated with mald and not a moderator anymore ! Did i have an amnesia ? Because i do not remembering this is noticed here !

(for the newcomers Kronosh was one of Mald hardcore butt buddy who left his day job to be his lead moderator and on an official payroll at PirateSoftware)

View attachment 8872907

Jake on watch list !

Mald: Yeeeeeaaaaahhh, when I read your resume it said you were an actual copyright lawyer. We're gonna have to go ahead and let you gooo...yeeeaaaah.

 

[Hooked on phobics]

I BELIEVE we might have mald, or mald underlings, or at least a dedicated troll in another 4chan thread..

most of those replies are 1 word insults

https://boards.4chan.org/v/thread/737346946

This seems too emotional and uncoordinated to be shills, and I don't think such trolling would be seen as necessary by most.

So chances this is him and / or his cronies trying damage control in the thread, and having a bit of a melty.

This is also seems distinctly different than other threads as this is more defending pirate soft than strictly attacking SKG.

This ALSO tracks for him saying he grew up on 4chan, and a previous time he seemed to get caught posting before because he said "I" when referring to himself in a post saying he wasn't raping ferrets.

its also of note, he only just started streaming today, so its possible he had a melty, took a bit to cool off, then started streaming.

Regardless if its him or not, I felt it was funny enough to mention.

 

[Forklift Certified]

The EU treats things that are sold as either "goods" or "services". Digital products are in a category of their own which is called "digital content" and online multiplayer games are currently generally treated more like services than goods by the regulator and teh courts

Guess what bozo, that's precisely what gonna change. And hopefully EU axing this malpractice when muh "billion dollar company's" fucking over millions of owners of their digital goods !

 

[MaxRankBlizzard]

Mald: Yeeeeeaaaaahhh, when I read your resume it said you were an actual copyright lawyer. We're gonna have to go ahead and let you gooo...yeeeaaaah.

Finally removing this useless faggot from his payroll might be the smartest thing Mald has done in a while..

 

[Cthulus Nutsack]

Good for Ross. The ferret fucker is probably one of the cows I dislike the most. I know there are a lot of lolcows that have done worse things than him but I've never seen a guy be so smug while accomplishing so little. His stupid fucking voice alone makes me cringe

 

[Perfect Day]

Wow thanks for restating the entire point of this EU commission, dumb fuck.

GDPR affecting how companies structure their ToS was the point of me bringing up GDPR but you're too retarded to catch on. Terms in a ToS are not laws and can be superseded at any point, as showcased by GDPR.

Adding insults to every response doesn't make your point more valid, it just makes this thread look bad for people reading it.

And no I'm not retarded I also know what GDPR did. Just because GDPR changed ToS in one regard, that doesn't mean that the EU is going to force ToS amendments in a completely different area. Just because the EU has regulated how personal data are handled, it doesn't mean they are going to intervene and regulate how digital product are sold. Those are different things, the balancing act is not the same. I'm not arguing the fact that ToS can be overridden by legal rules, that's pretty fucking obvious.

Guess what bozo, that's precisely what gonna change. And hopefully EU axing this malpractice when muh "billion dollar company's" fucking over millions of owners of their digital goods !

Digital things are not "goods", they are classified as "content". They are either digital services or digital content but they are not categorized as "goods" under the current framework. Even ebook are not classified as "goods". The EU has functional classifications that are enshrined in hard rules (like directives) which are binding and court precedents which are binding as to the interpretation of EU law. My point is, there is an argument that single player games that do not require online connectivity should be interpreted as a one off sale and treated more like goods than services. If you try to extent this logic to online multiplayer games you would need to change how the law works and interprets these products and this would affect, not just video games, but all digital content. I genuinely don't think the EU is going to do that. How can you say "that's precisely what gonna change" how do you know that?

 

[Perfect Day]

They're seldom challenged but historically, overbearing software terms of service in the US do not hold up. I imagine the EU would be even less forgiving.

They are often challenged and there are many court decisions in the EU that have ruled on these exact issues. This has been an ongoing debate for over two decades. Currently what this initiative is trying to achieve would require either: (1) a different interpretation of the law by EU courts, or (2) a change of law (a new directive partially repealing the current law).

 

[Forklift Certified]

My point is,

Your point is retarded and dumb, already told you EU law make distinction based on the type of commerce under the license sold, it dose not fucking matter if the license itself is a multiplayer horse fucking simulator or a single player Hitler painting jigsaw puzzle.

I bought Helldivers 2 the same way as i bought GTA Vice city, as an one fucking time purchase, advertised as "BUY" not "LEAS" nor "RENT" so based on the commerce its the SAME THING ! Yet if Snoy deciding to pull HD2 plug im royally fucked from my property.

The only reason why this allowed so long not because its leagla, because EU were preoccupied to suck the "refugees" dick rather than care about the issues of ther own citizens.

they are classified

And classification made by humans and can be changed by humans... and now 1,4 million eufag decided to shake down eu law makers to step on the neck of this legal equivalent of redditors "ACKCHUALLY is neither goods or service" bullshit because corporation fucking over their consumer rights !

If you don't understand this 2 fundamentals and keep posting dumb shits im not gonna assume you are a retard im going to know it.