David Jaffe: Used Game Issue is "None of the Consumer's Business"

[ChromeAlchemist]

There is only ONE point that needs to be made in this debate: The First Sale Doctrine [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine] applies to games. Period. End of debate. You can save your breath and go home now.

We had this fight over LPs 90 years ago people. It's DONE. Selling used games is LEGAL. The industry can NOT take that away from the consumer without legislation. I know he's on our side, but Jaffe should look that up.

Do DRM included PC games not infringe on this doctrine, considering certain games cannot be resold as they are worthless after a few installs, and you have to request more? Or is it a case of 'you can still sell it, but who would buy it?'?

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

I think he's saying that people who buy used games shouldn't feel like they're killing the industry. That's what I got from it.

Agreed, but I still can't help but feel like that, that's why I only buy pre-owned games if the discount is steep.

 

[SaintWaldo]

There is only ONE point that needs to be made in this debate: The First Sale Doctrine [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine] applies to games. Period. End of debate. You can save your breath and go home now.

We had this fight over LPs 90 years ago people. It's DONE. Selling used games is LEGAL. The industry can NOT take that away from the consumer without legislation. I know he's on our side, but Jaffe should look that up.

Do DRM included PC games not infringe on this doctrine, considering certain games cannot be resold as they are worthless after a few installs, and you have to request more? Or is it a case of 'you can still sell it, but who would buy it?'?

This debate is pretty much about the used CONSOLE games you see at GameStop and the like. You know, the type of game everyone assumes we are talking about when the topic of used games is brought up. The ones that don't make a copy of themselves to run, and pretty much always require a legal copy to even play. They used to be on cartridges (still are for DS), these days they are on discs. But they are used differently than PC install discs. Console discs and cartridges are perfectly analogous to LPs (single play, non-copying, physically transferable only). Your PC game is not (multiple plays from same source copy, only-copying, multiple transfers from same source possible). See the difference?

And to try and answer your question anyway, IANAL, but I'd bet they cover their asses with a EULA. Some of which will be valid, some won't, but it will cost money for anyone to prove which parts are which. Not directly related to the First Sale Doctrine, but tangential in that it's a copyright related question.

 

[MrGFunk]

There is only ONE point that needs to be made in this debate: The First Sale Doctrine [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine] applies to games. Period. End of debate. You can save your breath and go home now.

We had this fight over LPs 90 years ago people. It's DONE. Selling used games is LEGAL. The industry can NOT take that away from the consumer without legislation. I know he's on our side, but Jaffe should look that up.

What i'm getting from this is that as Saint Waldo says this is the law but games developers are trying to change the law to suit their products and David Jaffe doesn't think we need to be involved or care about it.

I care if the developers are trying to single out and legislate against games consumers even though it seems some want to get shafted (people who refuse to buy preowned, their choice). Maybe David Jaffe should take his own advice and butt out.

If he wants to let them talk it out behind closed doors that's up to him, I'm not going to follow his head in the sand advice.