Sony is Sony is about to delete Mythbusters, Naked and Afraid, and tons of other Discovery shows from PlayStation users’ libraries even if they already “purchased” them.

So, if you bought a DVD licensed by Sony, can they now legally enter your house and take your DVD?

Or can Sony have some sort of DRM that prevents the DVD from playing when Sony loses the license agreement?

I’m just trying to reconcile how digital purchases can be subject to license terms changes, while a DVD apparently can’t be.

  • ridethisbike@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not accurate at all. If I buy a Blu-ray or a DVD that can’t be taken away from me… But if I “buy” a movie online (namely from a streaming service) my access to it can be removed at their discretion. It’s happened plenty before, and as mentioned elsewhere in this thread, is happening again on PlayStation.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      What they have the practical power to do and what they should be legally entitled to do are entirely separate things. You can’t infer that just because a thug got away with breaking your kmeecaps, his protection racket must’ve been legal.

      • ridethisbike@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not saying it’s right, but this is what happens when you’re sold a physical item compared to the license to view an item, which is what we’re now being sold. It’s bullshit, but to say what you did in your op is categorically incorrect.

      • chayleaf@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You’re right in thinking law is moral, because morals have a historical character, and a class character, much like laws, and are shaped by the ruling class. However, because you ignore class, you can’t properly analyze what “law is moral” means. For example, copyright is moral in capitalism, because it “protects artists’ rights” and “copying is stealing” and whatnot. Lobbying is moral, because the entire parliamentary system is set up with the goal of letting the rich “invest” into the political “marketplace of ideas”.

        However, the fact law is moral under capitalism doesn’t mean the law is “eternally” moral. Capitalism is harming humanity, so it must go, alongside its morals. You are right that in the future, copyright won’t exist. However, for such a change in the political superstructure, according economical changes are required. Until capitalism is gone, there are no reasons for copyright to magically disappear, and a billion reasons for it to keep existing.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          For example, copyright is moral in capitalism, because it “protects artists’ rights” and “copying is stealing” and whatnot.

          It’s more like: despite the lip service capitalists give to the almighty “Free Market,” they’ve never met a monopoly they didn’t like. And copyright is literally nothing more than a government-granted monopoly.