«

[Eagle of Fire]

I seem to have missed this thread when it got updated.

Hmm. Actually, I can argue with every point here.

1. "You pay for something which doesn't really exist." Oh, it was the same all this time, from the rise of computers. You are paying for information. Not for something that "really exist". Except very small part of free games where you paid for media - cassette or diskette.

Well, that's the whole point. If I go out in a store and purchase a game, I'll have a DVD or a CD and a boxcase. The CD is the medium which "really exist". The data on the CD is exactly the same and that is information as you mentioned... However, if I lose my copy on my computer (or my computer entirely), I still own the DVD or CD and can reinstall everything easily. That's exactly what you cannot do here with data-only property.

2. "If you lose your HD, you lose your property." Hey, if you lose cassette or DVD, you will lose it exactly the same way! Moreover: Steam account will not be lose when your HDD crashed.

Sorry, I cannot lose information on a DVD simply by pouring water on it. Or by using a strong magnet next to it. Breaking unintentionally a CD is something which never happened to me ever in my whole life... Even breaking one intentionally require a fair amount of effort! I believe that's really not the same thing at all.

You are however of course right when you say your account still exist. There is assuredly at least one way to get all those downloads back... But at the cost of time and bandwidth. This specific point is still not really strong for a con, I'll give you that.

3. "What you purchase is not something tangible but rather an idea, the right to use something." And it meant to be this way always. You are buying right to use info - not rights for info itself (and information still immaterial . Media is only... medium. It is way to aquire info, not product itself. And then - what difference between keydisc, manual protection and Steam? It is way of protection that must assure that it's "original" purchase, nothing more. And it can be bypassed exactly the same way as keydisc was.

When you purchase a DVD or CD, you also purchase the right to own the medium you get it on. That, legally, make the heck of a big difference. For once, you can legally make a copy of it because it is a tangible medium and there is already existing laws which allow you to backup data you own for your own personal use. It is not true of intangible data you have on your HD and which is copyrighted. Yeah, I know... Strange and impractical, but still true.

And yes I know too, I'd be surprised any average Joe would ever get caught for such a charge. But it is still illegal as far as I can see.

Also, if you so need of "something tangible", you always can make Steam backups on DVD.

Unfortunately same answer than right above. However, you'd also need to bother with DRM, getting online, etc.

All those really bug me enough not to want to bother. Personal choice here I guess.

Well, if you are feel paranoid, Steam can be turned into offline mode. Surprise!

While it probably helps, I was under the impression that the client still had to run to be able to play the games. Isn't? If so then it is really a stupid mechanism which simply feed on resources for no apparent reason. But then again, that's the whole story of the life of the new Windows platforms too.

Oh, so you blame companies that they can make use of data that you don't need? What next? You will blame trashmen that they make profit from your garbage?

Trashmen cannot find my own personal information in my trash bin. And that makes the whole difference.

Maybe you in particular don't mind having your personal data sent back and forth around, but I do. I would not want people to get their hand on it because, well... It's personal. Thus the name.

Moreover, it is also a question of principle. I do not like the idea that a company "try to save money" on false assumptions. The best example which always flash my mind when I think about this is the music (and gaming) industries pretending they lose billions to piracy each year when in fact they actually have no tangible or even realistic data to base their numbers on. All this because they take for granted that someone who "pirate" one of their product would have purchased it anyways. Which, of course, is a false assumption. The whole thing simply don't sit well with me, at all.

Not enough, as for me. But I can listen for more points!

Well, I could... But I think I'm seeing enough pointless drama around here right now and I'm already getting more than the share I'm willing to. Maybe another time?