Sony Wants to Ban Pre-Owned Games

SAMAS · Post by **SAMAS** » 2006-05-24 11:10pm

[PS3] Sony makes moves to stamp out lucrative second-hand market
Words: Matt Cundy

Wednesday 24 May 2006
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.

It seems that Sony is planning to adopt a licensing system that will mean gamers won't own the PS3 titles that they've paid money for. Instead, they will only be purchasing the licence to play the game and that the software itself will still be Sony property - meaning that the disc won't be the customer's to sell.

We assume that the thinking behind this move will ultimately be to stop PS3 games being resold several times - which currently snatches potential sales away from Sony - and to counter the impression in consumers' minds that games are only really worth their pre-owned price and are not worth buying new.

When we contacted Sony, it issued us with the following statement: "We have made all of the official announcements at E3 and cannot make any further comments at this time. We will be announcing more news running up to PlayStation 3's launch."

...Tha HELL?

Chardok · Post by **Chardok** » 2006-05-24 11:14pm

Hmm....Not that I NEEDED another reason *NOT* to buy a PS3-but...you know...fuel for the fire.

*Checks off unbridled greed from the list*

The 360 is looking better and better and better.

Seggybop · Post by **Seggybop** » 2006-05-24 11:15pm

There's no way that's going to stand up legally.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2006-05-24 11:15pm

Sony doesn't want this to go to court. They might not realize it, but they don't. If this went to court, their precious EULAs will get flushed down the drain.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-05-24 11:17pm

Seggybop wrote:There's no way that's going to stand up legally.

You'd be surprised. Thanks to a the corporate whores in the US government, software producers have won concession after concession after concession, up to and including the passage of laws which are blatantly unconstitutional. Until someone challenges this bullshit all the way to the Supreme Court, it will stand. And who has the resources and willingness to go toe-to-toe with the software industry's army of lawyers for that long?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-05-24 11:19pm

Alyeska wrote:Sony doesn't want this to go to court. They might not realize it, but they don't. If this went to court, their precious EULAs will get flushed down the drain.

Unless they adopt the tactic of simply outlasting and outspending their opponents in court: something that a large corporation like Sony can easily afford to do. What needs to happen is somebody with deep pockets challenging Sony. But remember, it won't be just Sony; it will be the RIAA and the MPAA. All of these people agree that you don't really own a copy of a movie, game, music CD, or program when you pay for it; you only buy a license to use it, and that license can be restricted by whatever arbitrary terms the seller wants to put on it. This has been their collective position for quite a while, and they would all fight to defend it.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2006-05-24 11:20pm

In the United States, EULAs (which this particular issue will almost certainly fall under) are almost always thrown out of court. Only two courts ever consistently rule in favor of EULAs while the rest bitchslap the companies. Common judge statements go like the following.

Contracts of adhesion
Unconscionable

Sony really doesn't want this to go to court because when they loose (and they will), it will release the flood gates. I wonder if Sony realizes how shallow this bluff is.

Noble Ire · Post by **Noble Ire** » 2006-05-24 11:23pm

It's almost like they don't want anyone to buy their system...

Mad · Post by **Mad** » 2006-05-24 11:31pm

Noble Ire wrote:It's almost like they don't want anyone to buy their system...

5,000,000 people would buy it if it was a toaster with no games. Or so Sony says:

1UP wrote:We have built up a certain brand equity over time since the launch of PlayStation in 1995 and PS2 in 2000 that the first five million are going to buy it, whatever it is, even it didn't have games," Reeves told Computer and Video Games in an interview.

KrauserKrauser · Post by **KrauserKrauser** » 2006-05-24 11:42pm

My first reaction to the thread title was a big "Well, fuck them, they can kiss my white ass."

My reaction after reading the article, "Well, fuck them, they can kiss my white ass.....and lose market share and millions of dollars while doing it."

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2006-05-24 11:45pm

It should be noted that Games Radar have been UNABLE TO CONFIRM their claims and several sites like GameSpot are doubting them.

Take with a grain of salt.

If true, such a move would be a massive boost for publishers and developers which do not profit from the lucrative and damaging retail trade in used games. In fact, many publishers are furious that they have to spend support money on consumers who have not actually contributed a dime to the company's coffers.

In turn, it would be a catastrophe for retailers, which make a significant proportion of margin from used games. Consumers would likely be less than overjoyed.

Sony, which is refusing to comment on the story, does have a patent on technology which would tie a piece of software to an individual piece of hardware. But technology and desire are not the only parts of the puzzle. Whether the company would be prepared to take on retail, consumer goodwill and, most likely, the U.S courts, is another matter.

One expert in retail law told Next-Gen.Biz, "Sony can theoretically sell a license to play the game, but the user would have to acknowledge acceptance of the license. You've seen this when you install software on a PC. I'm not sure that the license agreement is enforceable if the licensee doesn't agree to it.

"Also, even if the agreement is enforceable, it's hard to preclude subsequent sale of the disc. The consumer could theoretically agree that he doesn't own the right to transfer his license, but why couldn't he sell the medium that held the license (the disc)? Sony can't enforce the agreement against a third party, as it lacks privity with the third party.

"Stated differently, I don't believe Sony can keep someone from selling a disc, even if they create a license agreement. The only way that this can truly be effected is to require registration of the disc with a specific PS3 console. Sony has a patent on such a technology, and could render a disc unplayable once registered. That would accomplish their goal (if they really have such a goal). In summary, I don't believe this is real."

A senior games publishing source told us, "Sony and the rest of us would love to put an end to this damaging trade, but actually making it happen looks like a fight that's beyond even Sony. I can't see it happening, but i hope I'm wrong."

Another senior manager at a third party publisher said, "I know that Sony is very upset about the used games market. But this story seems a bit far-fetched."

Also, it should be noted that this is exactly the way PC games are now. Notice the lack of used PC games at GameStop.

Captain tycho · Post by **Captain tycho** » 2006-05-24 11:48pm

Damn you Praxis, I was going to post that.
Still, I wouldn't have been surprised if this was true. If the PS3 succeeds, it'll be despite all this bullshit.

Nephtys · Post by **Nephtys** » 2006-05-24 11:51pm

It's not like anyone's going to buy a PS3 with pre-owned games anyway, until 2 years down the line.

Edit: Also, that's another reason to stop by EB for PC games. There's plenty of PC pre-owned there.

Praxis · Post by **Praxis** » 2006-05-25 12:02am

Nephtys wrote:It's not like anyone's going to buy a PS3 with pre-owned games anyway, until 2 years down the line.

Edit: Also, that's another reason to stop by EB for PC games. There's plenty of PC pre-owned there.

Huh. My local EB doesn't have pre-owned PC games either. Only new.

Nephtys · Post by **Nephtys** » 2006-05-25 12:04am

Praxis wrote:
Nephtys wrote:It's not like anyone's going to buy a PS3 with pre-owned games anyway, until 2 years down the line.

Edit: Also, that's another reason to stop by EB for PC games. There's plenty of PC pre-owned there.
Huh. My local EB doesn't have pre-owned PC games either. Only new.

If there's only a few pre-owned PC titles, or mainly older ones, they may stash them in a back room. Go ask if they have any and they'll probably haul out the box.

Dillon · Post by **Dillon** » 2006-05-25 12:20am

1UP wrote:We have built up a certain brand equity over time since the launch of PlayStation in 1995 and PS2 in 2000 that the first five million are going to buy it, whatever it is, even it didn't have games," Reeves told Computer and Video Games in an interview.

What a smug asshole. Even if I didn't already doubt that I'll ever get a PS3, because of the price, this moron just cemented it. Just to prove him wrong.

lPeregrine · Post by **lPeregrine** » 2006-05-25 01:32am

Praxis wrote:Also, it should be noted that this is exactly the way PC games are now. Notice the lack of used PC games at GameStop.

That probably has more to do with cd key issues, and not wanting all their used-game customers coming back an hour later demanding a refund. With PC games, it's a lot easier to buy the game, burn a copy, keep the cd key, and trade in the original cd while still being able to play the game. And then the next owner gets screwed when they find out their cd key is in use, producing one very angry customer.

CDiehl · Post by **CDiehl** » 2006-05-25 01:45am

If true, such a move would be a massive boost for publishers and developers which do not profit from the lucrative and damaging retail trade in used games. In fact, many publishers are furious that they have to spend support money on consumers who have not actually contributed a dime to the company's coffers.

Like I give a crap if they made a shitty deal with Sony. Why should the consumer be punished? Let them be "furious" with whoever they have negotiating for them for screwing up.

In turn, it would be a catastrophe for retailers, which make a significant proportion of margin from used games. Consumers would likely be less than overjoyed.

If this is so, I'd like to believe the retailers will boycott the PS3 over this foolishness, but I'm not willing to bet on it.

Sony, which is refusing to comment on the story, does have a patent on technology which would tie a piece of software to an individual piece of hardware. But technology and desire are not the only parts of the puzzle. Whether the company would be prepared to take on retail, consumer goodwill and, most likely, the U.S courts, is another matter.

First, I give it two weeks before someone cracks that piece of technology once the PS3 comes out. Second, this plan's going to go over about as well as the music industry trying something analogous with a CD.

Edit: About the 5 million units of the PS3 that Sony thinks they are guaranteed to sell, even assuming they move that many, it's going to take much more than that, both in hardware and games, to make them a profit. If they piss off everyone but the 5 million theoretical lemmings they imagine will pay for this, they're seriously up a shit creek. Losing money and building goodwill is one thing; losing it by pissing off gamers is another.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-05-25 01:46am

By the way, it's USED GAMES, not "pre-owned" games, goddammit. I hate fucking marketing doubletalk. "Pre-owned" makes it sound like the previous owner somehow improved the product for you.

Arthur_Tuxedo · Post by **Arthur_Tuxedo** » 2006-05-25 02:27am

This is just another mis-step from Sony at a time when they can't afford to have any more of them. Still, despite the unfortunate wording of redefining a game purchase as buying a license, I can't quite condemn it completely. After all, why should retailers be able to sell a company's games without the company making a dime?

Nephtys · Post by **Nephtys** » 2006-05-25 02:40am

Arthur_Tuxedo wrote:This is just another mis-step from Sony at a time when they can't afford to have any more of them. Still, despite the unfortunate wording of redefining a game purchase as buying a license, I can't quite condemn it completely. After all, why should retailers be able to sell a company's games without the company making a dime?

They already made their money with the initial purchase, likely at full price. If one gets tired of fighting historically-accurate Giant Enemy Crabs, why not resell it to others? If selling used is hurting a company that badly, it's not the re-seller's fault.

Post by **weemadando** » 2006-05-25 04:28am

Wow. Sony just won't stop kicking themselves in the balls will they?

WyrdNyrd · Post by **WyrdNyrd** » 2006-05-25 04:56am

How long before Sony utterly fuck themselves over?

On the one hand, they're a spectacularly huge company with widely divergent interests and investments. They survived the crash-and-burn of Betamax, a failure that would have sunk any one of thousands of lesser companies.

On the other hand, a long-standing and persistent culture of disdain (at best) towards your own customers surely cannot be sustained indefinitely. Unlike, say, Microsoft, Sony does have competitors.

Isana Kadeb · Post by **Isana Kadeb** » 2006-05-25 05:11am

That Wii is looking better and better...

Lost Soal · Post by **Lost Soal** » 2006-05-25 06:10am

It seems that Sony is planning to adopt a licensing system that will mean gamers won't own the PS3 titles that they've paid money for. Instead, they will only be purchasing the licence to play the game and that the software itself will still be Sony property - meaning that the disc won't be the customer's to sell.

Where have I heard this line before? Oh yes, thats right. Windows. This exact thing is in their own EULA, and has been for years. IF Sony have suggested this for games, its not anything new and I doubt that the courts would strike it down.