• DacoTaco@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    10 months ago

    I legit wonder what would happen if this argument is used ( in a professional way by a professional lawyer ) in a court of law. Like, could this legit be argued to be the same?

    • DebatableRaccoon
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      10 months ago

      I don’t see it going well but I’d love to see it happen. “One rule for ye, another for me” and all that

        • Spiralvortexisalie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          NAL but technically speaking Ubisoft would lose because they would be unable to prove that they were deprived of anything or anything was appropriated from them with their current stance. Realistically they would just pivot and find some other nonsense to try, like claiming a theft of their computer server’s processing power everytime a pirated game accessed their lobby or some other nonsense that would barely fly, but fly none the less.

          • derpgon@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            10 months ago

            What if the game was purely offline? Also, how can a pirated game access online lobbies? The last time I pirated a game was because Epic had a BL3 exclusive. And I couldn’t matchmake.

            I wonder who would have to prove what. Ubi, that they missed profit (because you’d want to buy the game and didn’t) or the player (who’d argue he wouldn’t ever buy it anyway).

            • Spiralvortexisalie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              10 months ago

              Well the moving party has to prove their allegations, aka Ubisoft moving to sue you means they have to prove everything they say. Since their stated public position is that they are sole owner at all times irregardless of circumstances, they would be legally barred (estoppel) from arguing that any one could hurt their possessory interest (rights and share of ownership). They essentially would have to shift the argument over, similar to a theft of service argument (not paying a train fare is a crime but you didn’t steal a train or turnstile). The question then becomes what service does ubisoft provide? Online servers that do content distribution seem to be the only thing. If you got it on the high seas you never hit their network, so all I see left with my hypothetical napkin math is all that random network traffic ubisoft games seem to always have (even offline).

            • mateomaui@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              There’s a number of cracked games now with online play enabled, you just need to make a burner Steam (etc) account to use it so your main one with purchases doesn’t get nuked if they catch on.