Recent content by SF_Bahamut

"Evolution put the foreskin there for a reason, deal with it. " Appendix.

It's not my theory. It's not my opinion. I'm applying what the authority on this matter has dictated. That's where we differ. You WANT one outcome to be true and are trying to find the evidence to say that it is. I'm looking at the law from an unbiased viewpoint and am finding meaning from what...

I don't post here very often. I joined the site in September of 2010 and only made one post prior to the ones I've made here. I didn't plan on sticking around, I had just seen what you said about the first sale doctrine and knew about the case that contradicted it (which some might not have...

Convenient? What are you talking about? The case set a precedent that is directly relevant to the topic. That was the point of posting it. The case itself has nothing to do with Sony, pre-owned games, or DRM, but the principle applies here. "Licensed, not owned" was the point. The Court's...

The topic is about Sony. Look at the three components of what makes software a license as determined by the Supreme Court. Sony's plans fit all three.

You obviously didn't check out my link. Go ahead, read up on it. I'll wait.

What am I missing? I linked you to an article talking about how the authority on this says, no, this isn't true. Who are you to tell them otherwise? Someone who doesn't WANT it to be true? You *wanting* things to be a certain way doesn't make them so.

A game isn't a physical object. What it's stored on is.

Actually, your purchase IS nothing more than one for a license, physical or digital. If a comparison helps... when you buy a hammer, you own the hammer. When you buy a game, you don't own the code.

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/09/10/210243/Court-Says-First-Sale-Doctrine-Doesnt-Apply-To-Licensed-Software Fortunately, we're seeing restrictions on the first sale doctrine.