>>108626024
weirdo corposhills will defend this

not mentioned: the license you explicitly agree to that says you acknowledge all this and are okay with it

File: Capture.png (535.6 KB)

535.6 KB PNG

>>108626140
they do in fact mention it

>>108626140
>>108626179
Have license agreements actually stood up to any legal test?

>>108626319
yes, absolutely. the kind you might be thinking of which are dubious at best are eulas that pop up after you've purchased a product and the ability to disagree is fundamentally out of your hands.

>>108626445
So like these license agreements.

File: file.png (27.3 KB)

27.3 KB PNG

>>108626508
>these license agreements
the game's individual eula doesn't even matter even if they were legal, steam has similar statements saying very explicitly you don't actually own anything, it's sold "as-is," and you're not guaranteed "continuous access" to the content regardless, which every user has agreed to before paying money to buy the game (license the software) in the first place.

the original point really is that if the customer doesn't agree to get fucked then simply do not buy do not buy the game, do not purchase games in digital format, and do not use this particular platform. games are luxury products of the purest kind but apparently consoomers can't help themselves to the point where the law has to bail them out of their own lazy stupidity.

>>108626644
Valve is also being sued by several governments

>>108626024
Natural progression of greed.