Birbla

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • yay suing Sony! I think that countries should start disallowing hardware sales where the user doesn't have the root key. We are not renting the hardware, we are buying it.
    by georgehotz
  • I don't see the point. It's a private, for-profit entity that controls a walled garden platform that they invented, developed and commoditized. It was always a walled garden, never advertised as anything otherwise. All video games have been a license to play since the days of Pong, unless explicitly indicated otherwise. We never owned the actual software and by buying the game, we agreed that our access to the software could change at any point in the future. Does this lawsuit hope to upend ~60 years of contract law?
    by glitchc
  • I'm too small brain to understand the whole monopoly in my own business aspect. Because they are not arguing about game exclusivity, you can buy the same game most of the time on Xbox, Switch, PC (and if not that's an entirely different story) but the fact they want to buy on that platform (Playstation) but from a different store (not Sony). Can't wrap my head around that logic.
    by thrownawaysz
  • I watched the English version video and it seems to have nothing to do with "Stop Killing Games".

    I wish them well, but ... just stop buying Play Station? I can understand strong consumer protection for food, medicine, healthcare, basic services, utilities. But ... video game consoles? If you don't agree with "Sony tax" ... stop being a stupid sucker and don't buy their products?

    by dpc_01234
  • So McDonald's has a monopoly on the Big Mac? Because you can go to Burger King (Xbox) or KFC (Switch) or Sonic (PC) as well but this group is arguing they want to have a Big Mac but not from McDonald's? Or actually McDonald's doesn't have a monopoly because you can technically buy a Big Mac from Uber Eats or Doordash?
    by unpopularopp
  • While I'm all for sueing Sony, and digital games cost more than physical games sound wrong and shouldn't happen, I feel like they focus on the wrong thing to sue Sony for. Like someone mentions in this thread, this feels like sueing McDonalds for having a monopoly on Big Mac, and only sell Big Mac in their stores. I don't know what the alternative solution to this problem is, but this doesn't feel right to me. For me, I would rather focus on digital rights and access.
    by yuerino
  • Going digital was inevitable, i'd rather focus on making digital ownership better than fight to restore discs or game codes to 3rd parties
    by tumidpandora
  • If people actually read the claims... it's about fair business practices, this is why they are suing Sony:

    > ... In the EU, it is forbidden for large companies to abuse their position to make more profit at the expense of consumers. Yet Sony does not fully abide by these rules. > > If you buy a digital game or in-game content, Sony will only ensure that you can do so through its own PlayStation Store. Sony keeps the market to itself in this way and can keep prices artificially high. This way you pay more, without getting anything extra in return. This is called the “Sony Tax.”

    This is not a lawsuit about Sony "taking away my discs", it's something like "Sony allegedly used its control over the PlayStation ecosystem to restrict competition in digital distribution, allowing it to keep prices artificially high and harm consumers".

    by braiamp

Explore Birbla archives