Sony to sell software "license" only, no pre-owned games

[Shifty Geezer]

So the majority of movie studios are publicly traded companies?

Yep

 

[patsu]

I'm not missing the point, because I don't see ANY POINT for... um... that point.

How are aftermarket sales BAD for console developers? How would forbidding it in any way advantage Sony?

Looking from another angle, the point of such agreement could be to forbid retailers from trading used games *by default* (i.e., without Sony's or the publisher's prior written consent).

It does *not* forbid a retailer from approaching Sony to ask for a special contract to trade used games. In this way, Sony (and/or the publishers) can then gain from pre-owned game sales as well. Today, they are totally left out of the loop.

As for consumers trading used games, this is permitted under Fair Use by default.

The possible outcomes are:
(A) The consumer may not be affected, if the retailer decides to absorb Sony's/publisher's margin in each used game sales.
(B) Raise in used game price to cover the added margin

(This is of course just a hypothetical example since we did not hear any official confirmation of a change in reseller contract)

 

[Titanio]

I'm curious, and yes I haven't read the entire thread out of laziness, so forgive me if it's been brought up, but isn't it possible that Sony could be doing this to pressure retailers into giving up a portion of their used sales profits to Sony/the pub? For instance, 2nd hand games are made illegal, but Sony issuses a license program where participant companies are allowed to resell games with a percentage of the profits returning to Sony. So for example, you can sell used games under this license, but have to pay a 10% royalty to both Sony (the hardware manufacturer) and another 10% to the publisher (whoever). Still not a pleasant aspect for the retailer, but probably more tolerable than a straight out ban.

Yep, it's possible you'd have some corporate brinksmanship going on to try and arm-wrestle one side into a compromise.

But since you've skipped a lot of the thread, it's worth point out again that SCEE has pretty clearly denied this is happening.

 

[mckmas8808]

I'm curious, and yes I haven't read the entire thread out of laziness, so forgive me if it's been brought up, but isn't it possible that Sony could be doing this to pressure retailers into giving up a portion of their used sales profits to Sony/the pub?

NO! The answer is no because Sony has publically said that this information is completely false and that the story has no ounce of truth to it.

 

[scooby_dooby]

NO! The answer is no because Sony has publically said that this information is completely false and that the story has no ounce of truth to it.

Learn to read a little more carefully bro. They have not explicitly denied this particular rumour.

 

[Titanio]

Learn to read a little more carefully bro. They have not explicitly denied this particular rumour.

It seems fairly explicit to me..?

"We have definitely not been communicating that," UK spokesperson Jennie Kong confirmed. "It's false speculation. We don't have any further knowledge about this topic - either officially or unofficially, to be frank."

 

[mckmas8808]

Learn to read a little more carefully bro. They have not explicitly denied this particular rumour.

Ummm... okay *looks at quote*

A report from website GamesRadar claiming that it will be illegal to sell used software for the PS3 has been officially denied by Sony today, with a spokesperson telling GamesIndustry.biz that it is "false speculation."

Edit: Damnit Titanio

 

[a688]

Thats correct, as long as my NavNucST3 isn't logged in upstairs, then the downstairs 360 can play the Arcade games. But if I log-in upstairs with NavNucST3 instead of my other one, then they can only play the demos.

The last time I called you out, I was summarily beaten to a pulp in FNR3 and Takendown numerous times in Burnout, so I have no sympathy for outing you,

As I understand it, the game is "matched" to the person who purchased the game AND to the console on which the purchase was made. Any profile on the console on which it was purchased can play the game. The profiles that was used to purchase the game can play the full game on other consoles but others profiles on the non-purchasing console cannot play the full version.

 

[scooby_dooby]

It seems fairly explicit to me..?

she saying she has no knowledge on the topic to speak of, she says they haven't 'communicated' that to anyone, she doesn't say it won't happen.

Here's the statement she made with regards to teh embedded copy protection:
"I would like to clarify that this is false speculation and that PlayStation 3 software will not be copy protected to a single machine but will be playable on any PlayStation 3 console. "

Notice the use of 'will not', a very strong statement. She makes no statement of the sort regarding the licensing, saying simply " We don't have any further knowledge about this"

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

It seems fairly explicit to me..?

Sorry, Titanio, but how so?

The only thing the Sony rep would say is that the original rumor (linking games to a particular PS3) is certainly not something they are going to do and that the current rumor (selling licenses and not product, thereby removal the ability to re-sell), is not something we are currently communicating

Didn't say they weren't going to do it. Didn't say they weren't thinking about doing it.

Only said that they aren't currently communicating about it. They're not talking about it publically. That's all Sony has said.

 

[Titanio]

she saying she has no knowledge on the topic to speak of, she says they haven't 'communicated' that to anyone, she doesn't say it won't happen.

Here's the statement she made with regards to teh embedded copy protection:
"I would like to clarify that this is false speculation and that PlayStation 3 software will not be copy protected to a single machine but will be playable on any PlayStation 3 console. "

Notice the use of 'will not', a very strong statement. She makes no statement of the sort regarding the licensing, saying simply " We don't have any further knowledge about this"

The quote about the copy protection is from last year.

She says it is false speculation and that they have not been communicating this to retailers. Of course it doesn't mean it can't happen in the future, but she is saying it has not happened - that they've told retailers they won't be able to sell used games - which is what the original article reported. Thus if you accept that to be true, the original article was false. Of course, it doesn't guarantee it can't happen, but we're back to square one so to speak.

 

[Mefisutoferesu]

:O

Sorry, guys. I did do a quick look through the thread for rebuttle articles, but I obviously missed it. I have to say though I'm kinda surprised by the amount of FUD being bandied around as of late. Perhaps, just my preception, but there seems to be a good bit of an increase.

 

[mckmas8808]

:O

Sorry, guys. I did do a quick look through the thread for rebuttle articles, but I obviously missed it. I have to say though I'm kinda surprised by the amount of FUD being bandied around as of late. Perhaps, just my preception, but there seems to be a good bit of an increase.

No worries. We still have guys here right now still saying that it could happen. And that's based of a rumor proven to be a lie. If it happens it happens, but it wouldn't be based off of this lie.

 

[Naboomagnoli]

Sorry, Titanio, but how so?

The only thing the Sony rep would say is that the original rumor (linking games to a particular PS3) is certainly not something they are going to do and that the current rumor (selling licenses and not product, thereby removal the ability to re-sell), is not something we are currently communicating

Didn't say they weren't going to do it. Didn't say they weren't thinking about doing it.

Only said that they aren't currently communicating about it. They're not talking about it publically. That's all Sony has said.

"We have definitely not been communicating that," UK spokesperson Jennie Kong confirmed. "It's false speculation. We don't have any further knowledge about this topic - either officially or unofficially, to be frank."

Looks pretty explicit to me.

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

Looks pretty explicit to me.

Then you either don't understand the definition of the word explicit, or you are using the word to reference an idea other than the one that Sony may attempt to prevent retailers from reselling games.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I have to say though I'm kinda surprised by the amount of FUD being bandied around as of late. Perhaps, just my preception, but there seems to be a good bit of an increase.

In a few months a couple new machines will hit the market. Their FUD departments will be in overdrive.

 

[Mmmkay]

she saying she has no knowledge on the topic to speak of, she says they haven't 'communicated' that to anyone, she doesn't say it won't happen.

Didn't say they weren't going to do it. Didn't say they weren't thinking about doing it.

Are you two being intentionally obtuse? The GamesRadar article specifically talked about news from Retailers saying they had information communicated to them from Sony regarding the illegal resale of PS3 software.

High street games shops have been told by Sony that there will be no PS3 pre-owned sections in their stores as it will be illegal for customers to sell any next-gen PlayStation games that they've bought, retail sources have revealed to GamesRadar.

She clearly stated that this message had not been communicated to any retailers and that the speculation was false. What else is there for her to say on the matter?

 

[scooby_dooby]

What else is there for her to say on the matter?

She could say "Sony will not be implenting licensing on PS3 games" simple, just like she said with regard to copy protection.

She debunks the source, but not the content of the rumour.

I'm not being obtuse, just recognizing there's a big difference between "we will not" and "we are not communicating that"

At the end of the day, I would expect this to be false, there's not enough upside for Sony, with plenty of downside.

 

[Mmmkay]

She could say "Sony will not be implenting licensing on PS3 games" simple, just like she said with regard to copy protection.

She debunks the source, but not the content of the rumour.

I'm not being obtuse, just recognizing there's a big difference between "we will not" and "we are not communicating that"

At the end of the day, I would expect this to be false, there's not enough upside for Sony, with plenty of downside.

It is fallacious to assume that the rumour is true because it was not explicitly denied when the source was thoroughly debunked. This despite the fact she clearly stated "It's false speculation".

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

It is fallacious to assume that the rumour is true because it was not explicitly denied when the source was thoroughly debunked. This despite the fact she clearly stated "It's false speculation".

No. It is fallacious to assume that either of us believe the rumor is true simply because we are pointing out the rather obvious fact that she has not explicitly denied it. Which is a direct contrast to her statements on the previous rumor that she did explicity deny.