I'm pretty positive there is an acceptance click, which means skyrim could in face enforce their EULA, at least moderately(I know several people who fought the EULA that Squeenix used in conjunction with FFXI, and they(They being Squeenix) lost miserably, it was a guy on Allakhazam forums from over in the U.K. He got every bit of information he was pursuing them for, and even posted it and the legal document he got stating he had won the case and the judges ruling and specification as to why). So, while a EULA can be enforced, it doesn't necessarily mean it WILL be enforced, and in the case of no clicking "I accept", which is almost always the case with console games, it would add that much more weight to any actual legal proceedings. There is a lot of difference between theoretical, and actual application. EULAs are mostly a scare tactic to ward off 90% of cases, but the people who are really serious about going against them, often get it to court and win.

While I'm no law expert myself, the ignorance of copyright law shown by some posters in this thread is somewhat appalling...

That said, it's also exactly the reason why copyright laws are outdated and in need of updating - since with the advances in technology which makes it so easy to copy/share stuff, the "masses" have become used to doing things that they emotionally don't consider/don't want to be "abuse", but are still considered abuse by the companies/current copyrights. And these things are impossible to truly stop/police (especially on a free internet). Copyright may, eventually, even become largely pointless/not legally binding.

However, that is not the case yet....and obviously companies/most creators have a vested interest in seeing that a no-copyright future does not occur. Thus the easier it becomes to violate copyrights, the more restrictive they're going to try to be over their intellectual property...whether you think it's morally right or not. As mentioned...vote with your wallet, and when available, with your political vote.

Btw, software/music etc are NOT the same as tables, bicycles, or cars. You do not copyright cars. You get types of patents. Yes they have the same/similar purpose in mind (protection of intellectual property) but it's a totally different process.

For most games, you own access to all the content on the disc, the disc, the case, the phsyical manual and the ability to play the game. You just down own the content that's on the game, so legally you can't do what you want with that content and can't entirely use the content how you want to use it (putting video on YouTube and getting money for it..etc). With my console games, if I was to talk my Xbox offline, I could play pretty much all the stuff I wanted that didn't require online access and the developers could do nothing about it. Since Bethesda made an error with Skyrim, you can do the same there. Of course you won't be able to use any mods or get any updates but hey it's possible so they can't prevent you from playing the original game either unless they do it right away off the bat.

Most developers won't say you can't use their product though, that drives away business and they're not evil people. The copyright laws are there so you can't say you made what they did and get away with selling it without repercussions.

Consoles shouldn't go the way of the "Developers are allowing you to play this and can tell you when or when you can't" because we like our freedom to play what we want when we want to play it. I don't know how bad it will hurt their business since most people like to lie down and get walked upon but I for one won't go for that. I won't buy a game in most instances if the license doesn't allow me to play with the content when and how I want to and most of the games I own, do let me do that (even if the developers didn't want that to happen).

When it comes to MMO's then you are really buying access. Console games shouldn't be come like MMOs. Once you buy the game that static content should be yours to play how you want it, law (if you live within it of course) binds you to only being able to play (and not "do" anything you want) with it and that's how it should stay.

If they tie the game to your console. Consoles are going to become just like steam and just like steam if you get banned you will not have any access to your games.

Greg

i see an argument going on, with regards to tos/eula.

when i buy a game, i most of the time dont have access to their tos/eula until after i cracked opwn the case and put the game in, if i disagree to their terms i cannot get a refund, the retailer wont take it back. basically, i either play it and accept their terms or i dont play it and loose that $70 i paid for it (roughly $70 w/tax). there is a grey area here, because they (the retailer and publisher), have my'money and wont give it back. so now i am entitled to doing whatever i want with the disk. hell, if i want to make backup copies i can, it only makes economic sense that i do so i dont end up spending another $70 unnecessarily. i can let me friends borrow it, or i can resell as used. theres nothing wrong with any of these. maybe its different because im not in the us?

theres a grey area that the publishers dont want to work on, their loss. they make no proper attempt to fix it, they are obviously wanting the cash then leaving you in the dark... the publishers loose this one.

now, with regards to digital distribbhtion, its possiblt to share, or yes it is. come on guys were educated and have access to resources, dont get ur panties in a twist, lets let them do what they do and then wait for gamers to exploit it. i mean, isnt that the main skill in gaming? learning to explloit?

for the record, i dont have the time and equipment to make backups. i do share alota my games and use my friends game. ive been doing it since i was a kid. lol sharing is not going anywhere. sharing is caring

You've got to one of the main issues.

EULA's are a joke. Customers just bending over and taking them is an even bigger joke. The entire idea of purchasing a license and accepting that just stinks. Only with the rise of digital distribution have EULA conditions been more readily enforcable. No surprise that piracy is still rampant either. Angering and restricting customers is foolish at best, they'll find ways round it or they'll loose custom. If there were a crash in the industry due to them trying to tighten the noose would I feel bad for the publishers? Not in the slightest. If developers and publishers were shut down I'd hope they at least learn their lesson to quit angering customers. Look at gog.com they have a positive relationship with their customers. They don't shackle or tie them up in restrictions and they do rather well because of it. They're looking long term and they're doing it in a sensible manner.

I haven't read the whole thread, but if this ends up being true they will end up losing more money from me. I can't get onto Xbox Live very easily. I have an older, nonwireless Xbox 360 first of all. Second, we have a slow connection that sometimes drops out and, third, since my Xbox is nonwireless I have to either drag the TV upstairs or run wires down to the TV.

Also what if you want to bring a game over to a friend's house to play? Or what if you just want to borrow a game from a friend for a week to see if you like it before you pay $60 for it?

Yeah I understand the distinction. I was just being dramatic. When people start talking about the legal rights and the fine print I just joke around.

Yeah, I got that you were joking. Just be careful how you use that cover art. <---oh, and by the way, ™.

Here I was getting disgusted with how PC gaming turned out with steam and origin what ever else they come up with so I thought to myself well I still got console gaming. I started on console gaming stoped about 12 years ago went to computers, but whats the point if it turns out like this article. Im fudged. Well I still got 12 games I really like I guess I can play the rest of my life. Yes, im being a little melodramatic, but you have to see the irony.

Oh yeah. Here is another thought for those companies. I know a lot of people who cannot get Internet because they cannot afford it OR have dial-up because nothing else is supported in their area.

If games requires internet crap to work then these people are left out because of that issue, and I am one of them. I am stuck with Dial-Up. Nothing else works here and don't have the money to move out. I am missing out on Halo online-multiplayer and other sweet XBL stuff...

So, I am also against anything that makes games require internet. The only games that should require internet should be MMOs, like WoW and RS...

Agreed. If the game has any single-player portion at all, whatsoever (though I suppose one could argue that MMO's can be a "solo affair" as well...), it shouldn't require an internet connection to play it. It's just dumb.

Oh, and just because we're talking about being locked out of content because you can't acces the internet and this always rattled my cage; if it's just me and computers playing a versus match, don't bloody well put it in the multiplayer section (Call of Duty: Black Ops <.<)! Why do I need to be connected, so I can play against computers? Am I streaming their A.I in real-time as I play?

Actually, MMOs can easily be solo player.

Err...

Massively Multiplayer Online = solo player (i.e. singleplayer) ?

Your logic is fail.

Playstyle, I liked to do a lot of things solo back when I dabbled in MMORPGs.

when I played WoW many times it was just me as a Dwarven hunter & my polar bear

When I played RS, I turn off all my chats and just go around doing quests and killing stuff on my own and imagine the other players aren't around.

Also, when I played RS Classic, there were only like 6 other players in my world thus making me pretty much alone about 98% of the time. MMOs can become solo-able, just gotta remove PvP stuff from it then tada.

^{I have been video gaming since the Atari, ive been with it almost from the beginning. My first games spaceships where a few blocks that shot little specks for bullets or lasers and people were maybe a circle with a few stick appendages. From the Atari I stepped up to a NES, then Snes, then a Ps1 didn’t make it to ps2 but switched to computers. Ive watched as graphics got better and better over the years. For a while I thought Virtual reality games were going to take over, I blame that on watching the Lawn mower man, it never happened. I sure hope the things this article suggests will happen stay rumors. I do not like having my pastime plugged in, watched, and controlled by any one but me.
You know just a few years ago if any one would have said something like this might happen id have laughed at you.
I am curious what some other peoples first consoles were?}

Once more, corporations are showing their ineptitude at understanding the free market. Once more, they're trying to choke the so far only legal competition they have out there in order to fully establish a monopoly. A competition which has been around since ownership and trade was ever conceptualized. Soon they'll try to buy legislature to reinforce the already ridiculous one-sided copyright, monopolizing the products even more. Hell, while you're at it, why don't you ask for direct, unlimited access to our bank accounts and wallets? Maybe force us to sign off our rights as a human being in legalese fine print EUPA, put us in "Endorsed Market Camps" where we'll buy all our products from you and only you, transferred to other EMCs as you war and connive with other corporations.

The second hand market has been the only legal thing that has kept the quality and prices to what is considered acceptable. We sell and buy second hand games because the quality is crap, the retail price too high, or we just don't see ourselves playing it anymore and gets rid of it in a sensible way. Corporations see this "unfair" competition as a doomsday threat and restricts us even further with more DRM from the ninth circle of hell as if the present DRM wasn't enough. We don't like it so more of us turn to piracy. Now that that plan has royally screwed up they decide to restrict us even more with a "silver bullet" in the head.

Guys, you've already tried the stick. Using a 4x4 isn't going to help.

It's like they don't want to be on the free market. If anything, these companies should be filed with massive anti-trust lawsuits. Protect the second hand market through law. It's the only, final competition that can be used against monopolies.

@toga that's pretty much my gaming history as well save for I also dabbled in some of the pre-windows computers (vic-20, a tandy & a sinclair)

Intellivision and a Commodore computer...early '80s.

I'll make sure to ask your permission if I ever quote you in my signature.

Certainly. It's a standard form. I can email it to you and you can just fill it out and fax it back to me.

Looks like I'm sticking with my 360. Hope fallout 4 comes out before these consoles do

You are in a company, you need to install 780 copies of MS office, Windows, with a few copies of SAP, Creative Suites, over some selected machines, then not to mention the 80 servers with 50 more virtual servers and terminal consoles that need to have different clients and CAL certificate installed.

You don't expect to go order that amount of disc to install them right? Digital distribution has been there since the boom of networking, and with popular AD policy and many other distribution solutions, software are easily pushed to target machines readily through your physical cables, or wireless if you feel masochistic enough. Before network distribution, we engineers carry only one disk with same site license key to install software on client computers. Without EULA, it's a joke that stinks in so many levels.