Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Happy to pay what a game is worth (Score 1) 323

by Yonan (#40654113) Attached to: EA Outs <em>Battlefield 4</em>, Plans To Charge $70 For New Games
Price points to me are irrelevant and should be for any semi-intelligent buyer. Look at the product, look at the price and see if it's worth it. I'd be happy to pay $200 for a game that was worth $200. BF4 however I doubt I'll pick up even at $10 as that series (and CoD) have been downhill since BF1942 and CoD4. However I'm not naive enough to think that most people will take that stance. Many people happily go to get fleeced at a local, highly over priced store rather than shopping for physical copies online, or getting a digital copy - ie. steam specials. The more EA gets hammered pulling silly stunts like this the better it'll be for gaming as it's bound to sink in sooner or later that they're being idiots. "Here's the same thing we sold you last year, but you get to pay an extra $10 on top of what you paid last time, whooooo!!!"

Comment: How will this play out now? (Score 5, Informative) 155

by Yonan (#39741637) Attached to: Australian ISP Wins Case Against Movie Studios
The two main courses now of action seem to be: the media companies start offering media in a reasonable format in a reasonable timeframe at a reasonable price, or they lobby government and pursue backroom deals. The first is supported by many and has been proven to work fairly well with PC games by Valve with Steam, and iiNet has said it would be happy to help with this. The second however is much more in character, despite having been proven fairly well to not work.
The Courts

+ - RIAA's Bid to Stop Jammie From Objecting Fails->

Submitted by
NewYorkCountryLawyer
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "The RIAA's motion to prevent Jammie Thomas-Rasset from objecting to evidentiary problems with the RIAA's copyright registrations has been denied. The decision by Judge Michael J. Davis (PDF) held that 'The Court's Order granting a new trial in this matter granted an entirely new trial on all issues. The fact that Defendant did not object to Plaintiffs' evidence of registration in the First Trial does not preclude Defendant from putting Plaintiffs to their burden of proof on this issue in the retrial.' Judge Davis rejected the RIAA's contention that he could take 'judicial notice' of the validity of the registrations, since 'judicial notice' doctrine is only applicable to matters which are 'not subject to reasonable dispute'."
Link to Original Source

"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices." -- William James

Working...