Sony 'Anti-Used Game' Patent Explored

Sometime in 2000, Sony patented a process that would 'verify a disc as legitimate, register the disc to that particular game console, then wipe out verification data so the disc would be rendered unreadable in other PlayStations'. Despite unrest in the gaming community over this technology, the company has repeatedly stated they have no plans to use it in the PS3. The LA Times explores this persistent debate, examining why Sony developed the tech and why gamers are nervous. From the article: "Whatever Sony's plans, the tempest [over the patent] illustrates the changing nature of ownership as millions of people accumulate vast collections of digital entertainment. Few people realize that when they buy software or music or movies, they are actually buying a license to use, watch or listen. That's why it violates copyright laws for people to sell copies of their music collection." Thanks to 1up.com for the link.

there's a reason so few realize the rules

[yagu]

From the summary: "Few people realize that when they buy software or music or movies, they are actually buying a license to use, watch or listen. " Well, duh. Staying current on ever-shifting rules is virtually impossible.

And, lest any defenders of "paying for license" jump in, the rules whether they be the actual rules themselves, or how the providers are choosing to enforce them are shifting.

If in fact in the past they really did sell only the license to play, watch, etc., there was a wink and a nod for those who owned the games should they choose to sell their games at some point. Now under increasing pressures to maximize profits every stone is being turned for ways to eke out more profits.

The electronics industry is seemingly insane with their obsession to beat down their consumers. Case in point, we just upgraded all of our cell phones, none of the really worked that well, and the only real options included cell phones with camera builtin.

We did have a blast the first day with the phones, and even found a couple of trick ways to get our own customized dial tones to the phones without paying for downloads. But, aha, Verizon was on to those tricks, didn't mention the surcharge for sending pictures to each other (actually they at least strongly implied within the "plan" we could send pictures back and forth free ad nauseum), and we found lots of nasty little extra charges to the tune of ~$20 ... all within the one week pro-rated new-phone period.

This was such an annoying and unexpected treatment, we've all pretty much retired the cameras for any use at all... Too bad, it was kind of fun, and I'd have been willing to even look at pricing plans, had they not sucked me in without any heads up.

Treat the consumers with respect, and honesty. Ninety-nine percent of them will treat you with money! (The other one percent you really don't (or shouldn't) give a shit about anyway.)

So...

[LordEd]

what happens if my playstation dies and I buy a new one? Do I get free replacement disks, or do I go buy a console that isn't a slot machine for games?

Sony would be out of their minds to enable this

[grapeape]

With the overheating and lens problems of the 1st and 2nd generation consoles from Sony, doing this could and probably would become their worst public relations nightmare. Also cant forget homes with more than one console, I have had 2 ps2's in the house at one time, and still have two GC's one for the kids and one for me, do they really expect me to buy two copies? They might as well have labeled this one "Patent For Future Class Action Suit". Of course I would love to see them try it, since a good bitchslap has been months overdue for them. I give 2 weeks after release before the first lawsuit fly.

Could this be bypassed?

[Elros]

Would some sort of hack to bypass the check/overwrite be possible. I realize that we have no example to work on, but I highly suspect that if Sony were to put this in a console, it would get bypassed in no time.

Re:Blockbusted

[chrismcdirty]

It also means you'd have to re-buy your game collection every time your console died.

Re:Blockbusted

[Rob T Firefly]

Good point. Also, if we think the reviews scene is clogged with thinly-veiled ads nowadays, how much worse would it get if the reviews really were the only source of info? Say hello to slews of paid-off game journalists, "official" shill magazines in the vein of early Nintendo Power, fake spam blogs, and employees posing as players on message boards. Nothing would be a trustworthy source of reviews anymore.

Re:PSO Anyone?

[shadowcabbit]

Incorrect on both counts. PSO v1 tied the game's serial number to the DC for online play only. You could rent and resell PSO as many times as you wanted as long as you didn't want to play online. However, if you did purchase the game used with the intent of playing online, you could call Sega and have your disc serial reset. They discontinued the service at some point before PSO v2 came out.

Re:Blockbusted

[Anonymous Coward]

Or alternatively it creates a market for arcades, much as there were when there was little more than Space Invaders. Then if after playing a game there you like it, you go to the kiosk, they burn you a copy, and you can take it home and install it at home too.

Digital distribution is the future

[Spades_]

Sony probably won't implement something like this as it seems that downloaded content is the future. Xbox Live, Nintendo Online, Sony's online component are probably all test beds for the future development of digital distribution like how Steam distributes it. That way each game is locked to an account (registering the console online?). Probably not this generation of consoles, but the next generation... and possibly how all software will be distributed.

Flagship vs. flagship

[SuperKendall]

Actually the $500 PS3 is most proper to compare against the $400 360 - because all models of the PS3 ship with an HD. There is no reason for a GAMER to buy the $600 PS3 over the $500 model - you can play 1080p over a component connection, and a gamer does not need a media card reader for loding pictures from the beach trip!

The $600 model is more the "Home PC model", not so much the "Premium Console Model" That's a function already held by the $500 model which is why that is the proper model to use in any comparison, just as you have to talk about the $400 model of the 360 because everyone is going to buy the HD even if they do not buy the premium model.

If the $600 model included any feature which was mandatory for a gamer to own I would feel differently. Sony was smart though and didn't offer a $400 crippled version of the PS3 which would lead developers to wonder how much of the market would own a hard drive.

Good Thing it Wasn't Used on the PS1

[aplusjimages]

I had a PS1 one it first came out, then I sold it, but had some of the games sitting around, so later I picked up the PS1 again. If Sony had implemented this technology, then I would have to go and buy the games all over again. The only way this technology would work is if the technology was cheap enough to be that disposable.

A car loan is a lien

[Migraineman]

The bank doesn't own your car. You do. The bank has a lien [reference.com] against it. The bank does't want to own your car ... they just want to take it from you when you fail to pay the loan.

The lien exists such that you can own the car, and such that the county/state/fed government may tax you appropriately (which is actually the reason a lien exists.) The gub'ment wants your money, and they can't take it from *you* by trying to tax a bank located in another state/country. But that a completely different (but related) rant ...

Ultimately, the publishers wish to control distribution. They make a buck if they do, and get squat if you bypass them. They want to make it illegal to transfer ownership of a work (be it a book or a cd or a DVD) without getting a cut. The states will probably support them because financial transactions involve taxation. The problem arises when your audio CD is conveyed to you as "property." You have certain rights regarding property, and those rights include the ability to transfer title to the property to someone else. Publishers would like nothing better than to convince the gub'ment that the audio CD is merely a container, and the copyright on the information within should devalue the owner's property status to that of licensee (because the container and information are inseparable, or some crap like that.) Subsequently, you will become a felon because you sold your non-transferrable audio CD to someone else. Of course, this cuts both ways, and your momma becomes a felon when she buys you a Metalica CD for your birthday (she bought it, but can't legally transfer title to you because she bought it and the license would be non-transferrable. Right?)

The **AA-types want "property" status in order to complete the initial sales transaction, but they want your ownership status to magically change to "licensee" at some point when it's financially convenient. They can't have it both ways ... yet. We had huge "civil rights" issues in the 1960s in the US. I expect that the next big social upheaval will be over "information rights."

right of first sale

[bugi]

Why do they get to use technological measures to circumvent a long established principle of fair use?

They have right of first sale only. Any interference with that should be grounds for civil damages. In this political climate, it won't be of course, but it should be.

Fair use is a limited monopoly. One of the limits is fair use. Fair use is as much a part of copyright as the part the enforce so vigorously.

Thing is,

[mliikset]

it's legal to sell your music collection or any part of it, as long as you don't retain a copy of the sold material/content. So a legal option that I could normally exercise with my property (the collection) is disallowed. I heard that Garth Brooks thinks we should pay licensing when buying used recordings, he wasn't getting my money the first time.

I'm guessing that the price on these crippleware CDs or DVDs will be significantly cheaper than the 'anybody can copy this' versions.

                                Muahahahahaha.

Sony is ignoring gamers

[DiEx-15]

It seems to me that Sony is forgetting what gamers want and is trying to push what they think gamers want. I strongly feel that Sony will lose the next gen battle because of all these mistakes they are making before the system comes out. These mistakes break even the simplest rules of game development.

As a student in game design I can tell you some of these mistakes are costly. For example, denying a gamer the right to test before buying is a major mistake. From what I know as both a gamer and as a future game designer, I can tell you that is the fundamental right and selling strategy. Most game players do rent before buying and if they are denied that right, then the system will be marked for death. Microsoft and Nintendo have been big on this idea, so Sony should be smart enough to understand this too. Also with the system costing so much, to be unable to rent games on this system will be a fatal mistake.

Sony needs to wake up and realize they have some problems on their hands before it costs them the race. Past success means nothing if this machine comes out as is. The way it stands, Nintendo is getting the golden goose to lay its golden eggs on its lap thanks to Microsoft's acknowledgements and Sony's bumbling nature.

Sony talking of "used game sales and piracy"

[ofcourseyouare]

If you want a statement from a Sony exec which suggests that indeed they may be considering blocking used-game sales, check out this from last week's story "Sony Talks PS3 E-Distribution Initiative"...

"As part of Sony's plans for the launch of its next-gen PlayStation 3 console later this year, the company has started planning the PS3 E-Distribution Initiative...Gamasutra got a chance to talk to the project's John Hight... (who said) "On the business side, it also lowers our cost of sales and eliminates inventory risk. It should help curtail used game sales and piracy."

The way he puts it in this interview - "curtail used game sales and piracy" - implies that used game sales and piracy are kind of the same thing without actually saying so. Perhaps preparing the ground for the big change...

Re:Blockbusted

[tomhudson]

FTFA:

register the disc to that particular game console, then wipe out verification data so the disc would be rendered unreadable in other PlayStations

1. register the disk to that particular game console - attack # 1 - if the registration data is saved on the console, disabling the write function works.
2. If the registration data is saved to the disk, attack # 2 - re-write the verification data to the disk, and delete the registration data
3. registration data that isn't unique would allow people to share disks - attack # 3 - mond the boxes so they all give the same registration data.

There's NO foolproof scheme, and Sony should learn that. Even a dna sample won't work - "Here, you want to play my disk - here's a strand of my hair for the dna checker"