Open any gaming PC, and chances are the blue icon of Steam is sitting right there on the desktop. Not hidden, not optional, but almost expected. Over time, Steam has gone from being just another launcher to becoming the default storefront for PC gaming, almost like a built-in part of the experience. The Monopoly Nobody […]
I disagree that is legally no different, if you used a “grey” market seller to obtain access in a way gog deemed illegitimate then you never had license to use it. If you had a legitimate licence then using it after say gog terminated you account, you would still have legitimate license to use the copies you already downloaded despite gog not providing their services to you.
I was just using it as an example for what happens, because it’s the only times something like this has happened. Still, according to their user agreement, they sell you a license through them (so the publisher licenses the license to GOG and they then issue a license to you to access the game), which means that on account termination you lose it and any right you had.
To be clear, I don’t think “ownership” matters that much usually, since data is not a finite resource, but there’s a few cases in which it does, for example: you can’t sell or lend the games or you can’t legally host a tournament or other public events unless you get another license that allows you to do so.
Anyways, my point is that the GOG’s DRM free policy is good, but to me feels meaningless and more like a marketing gimmick and the laws on these things are unfairly against the user. What is meaningful for preservation tho is their “Preservation Program” through which they maintain older games to keep them working on modern systems (which includes fixing legal issues that prevent them from being sold)