Stop Killing Games (EU edition) - Moldman vs. Publishers

[Coolio55]

'Bonjour miseur, zis game cannot be published in ze EU because it does not comply with ze SKG law blah blah blah...' Just like the GPDR, just like all the stupid standards the EU uses that nobody else does, etc., etc.

I'd actually be pretty satisfied if that happened. Keep in mind, that includes shit like FIFA and CoD.
Either companies stop killing games or normies start getting weaned off of slop.

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

jannies are out of rope to tardwrangle him to the corpo cocksucking thread, pls be patient.

in my defense, I was not aware of the existence of that thread
I came here to share a video pertaining to Ross and SKG, and another time to share the complaint that was submitted to the EU against Ross and SKG

 

[GhastlyGhost]

You can't have it both ways
If the state is just a "tool" with no vector of its own, then why are people afraid of it? Why do politicians compete for control over it? Why does it crush peaceful action unless you ask permission first?
A rope doesn't jail people. A rope doesn't enforce monopolies. A rope doesn't kill.
It's not passivity, it's direction. That is will. That is a structure with inherent consequences.

You call libertarians "useful idiots" for refusing to touch the whip. But if the only way to win is to become the hand that lashes, what exactly are you preserving?
The refusal to initiate force isn't irrelevant, it's a line in the sand against a world where every "tool" becomes soaked in blood and euphemist cope

You dipshit, the state's a loaded fucking gun. Completely inert on it's own, but deadly in the hands of the ill-intentioned.

 

[Tayto]

is an attempt to fix an anti-consumer landscape that only exists because of prior government interference

The problem was actually caused by a 1950-60s(?) American court ruling (can't remember the specific case) that effectively made any care for consumer rights a suable offense as it apparently violates the fiduciary duty boards have towards investors. It's that all-consuming fiduciary duty that has seeped into every facet of near every globe spanning corporation and made them so fucking insufferable. America based companies (meaning most big companies) have a court mandated duty to fuck over consumers as hard as possible.

America is great in many ways, but it's profound lack of consumer rights or advocacy is a problem that has affected the entire planet, to the point where we're having to beg EU fucktards to step in & fix a problem America created.

 

[Maniacal Foreigner]

You have a complex framework of philosophical writings designed to absolve yourself from action and personal responsibility.

Nobody in this thread has read Hoppe and it fucking shows.

 

[Spud]

Nobody in this thread has read Hoppe and it fucking shows.

Have you?

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

Nobody in this thread has read Hoppe and it fucking shows.

Hey, what about me? Not only have I read Hoppe, I know the man in person, we were actually writing some emails just this morning
You're not wrong though. The "has read Hoppe : has not read Hoppe" ratio on people talking about libertarianism in this thread is terrible

The problem was actually caused by a 1950-60s(?) American court ruling (can't remember the specific case) that effectively made any care for consumer rights a suable offense as it apparently violates the fiduciary duty boards have towards investors. It's that all-consuming fiduciary duty that has seeped into every facet of near every globe spanning corporation and made them so fucking insufferable. America based companies (meaning most big companies) have a court mandated duty to fuck over consumers as hard as possible.

America is great in many ways, but it's profound lack of consumer rights or advocacy is a problem that has affected the entire planet, to the point where we're having to beg EU fucktards to step in & fix a problem America created.

The issue isn't fiduciary duty. It's perfectly possible to serve shareholders aggressively *without* criminalizing game preservation or banning community-based restoration efforts. The problem isn't investor preference, it's state enforcement
What makes these behaviors insufferable is not that companies try to maximize profit, it's that they do it via legal privileges (copyright, licensing mandate, anti-circumvention law, etc). That's not "market failure", these things are cages that are only there because the government imposes them
Like, the EU isn't stepping in to fix a USA problem. It's the same architecture in control, just in a different language. It's a different zookeeper that installs a lock that may, in this aspect, be softer

 

[The Tall Man]

We get it the state and force is evil and the market is good.
Go and make an Ancapistan Book thread and talk about Hoppe, Mises and Rothbart in there.

Thank you very much.

 

[Peasant]

The problem was actually caused by a 1950-60s(?) American court ruling (can't remember the specific case) that effectively made any care for consumer rights a suable offense as it apparently violates the fiduciary duty boards have towards investors. It's that all-consuming fiduciary duty that has seeped into every facet of near every globe spanning corporation and made them so fucking insufferable. America based companies (meaning most big companies) have a court mandated duty to fuck over consumers as hard as possible.

The primacy of the shareholder is something we're going to have to fix before we can heal our society. The all-consuming demand for growth (or the illusion thereof) is what drives so many of the ultimately self-sabotaging decisions made in the business world.

 

[Waffle Iron]

Humanity started in anarchism. But somehow 99.999% of humanity nowadays is living in a state rather than a tribe or stateless society. The moment the state is abolished, new people move into the power vacuum to replace the state. That's how the maffia came to be. And in a stateless society you have even less freedom. Your ass is owned by the local strong man or your tribe. For example in early Rome the state would judge conflicts between people from different families, but within a family the pater familias would have full authority. He could kill someone within the family and the state would not interfere, because that was a familial affair.

Either way big companies like to ream my ass, so I don't mind using the state to ream them back. What else is the EU going to do, spend their time figuring out how to import more muslims?

 

[George Lucas]

The problem was actually caused by a 1950-60s(?) American court ruling (can't remember the specific case) that effectively made any care for consumer rights a suable offense as it apparently violates the fiduciary duty boards have towards investors. It's that all-consuming fiduciary duty that has seeped into every facet of near every globe spanning corporation and made them so fucking insufferable. America based companies (meaning most big companies) have a court mandated duty to fuck over consumers as hard as possible.

America is great in many ways, but it's profound lack of consumer rights or advocacy is a problem that has affected the entire planet, to the point where we're having to beg EU fucktards to step in & fix a problem America created.

I sure would like to know what this great so-called consumer protection actually affords in Europe because in my experience it is sorely lacking. Something as basic as a refund is a pain in the ass to get in Europe and often all you will be offered is a voucher. Meanwhile getting refunds is quite easy in the U.S. and if the merchant is uppity a few clicks on my credit card app will reverse the charge. We also have this thing called ‘fair use’ which is effectively non-existent in Europe.

 

[XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG]

Humanity started in anarchism. But somehow 99.999% of humanity nowadays is living in a state rather than a tribe or stateless society. The moment the state is abolished, [...] Your ass is owned by the local strong man or your tribe. [...]

People didn't move from "anarchy" to "states" because the state came in and somehow solved violence. They moved because the first gang to lock down a river valley with tax collectors became the state
This fantasy where warlords fill the vacuum after statelessness is backwards. Warlords are the state. Not only is there a spooky scary skeleton inside of your body right now, you are also currently being ruled by a warlord.

[...] I don't mind using the state to ream [companies] back. What else is the EU going to do [...]?

When you say "I don't mind using the state to ream them back", you're not challenging the domination you hate, you're just begging to be the one holding the whip for once
If and when your ass is getting reamed by corporations, why don't you ask who gave them the strap-on?

 

[LovisXVI]

For the love of God I don't want to see some yammering about the foundations of Neolithic state formation in the thread about how Ubisoft and EA are dickheads for selling faulty products.