Any other topic I would agree …
Any other topic I would agree …
Wondermark has had some great ones over the years.
Without knowing anything of your history this question looks like its asked in bad faith.
If the question is legit then type “sealioning” into a search engine and read a few of the results.
Then with that knowledge reread the rules and they should be pretty clear.
The fact emulators are faster than the real hardware, can you blame them?
This is a problem Nintendo has had a few times before, choosing weaker hardware makes it much easier for other platforms to match and outpace them.
My first time playing Pokemon was emulating Pokemon Red on PC. For some reason they put it in Australian stores around a month after the US release so emulation was the only way.
Similarly GBA was playable on PC very early in its cycle. DS/3DS was a bit less attractive because of it screen layout and inputs but that kind of quirk aside underpowered handheld hardware is just asking for emulator support.
The bill text is concise and surprisingly readable.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB2426#99INT
They will either need “affirmative acknowledgment from the purchaser” of their rights or provide a “clear and conspicuous statement” clarifying the buying a digital good is a licence situation.
They provide this definition:
“Clear and conspicuous” means in a manner that clearly calls attention to the language, such as in larger type than the surrounding text, or in contrasting type, font, or color to the surrounding text of the same size, or set off from the surrounding text of the same size by symbols or other marks.
For “affirmative acknowledgment” my guess is something like PlayStation does currently might become common. Every time I checkout their purchase button is disabled until I tick a checkbox with this statement:
I request immediate access to my purchase and acknowledge that I will not be able to cancel my purchase once I start downloading or streaming the content.
Both of these scenarios should be displayed as part of the checkout flow, not hidden away in the ToS/EULA.
Square Enix also bought Taito so they had titles from the Bubble Bobble, Space Invaders, Double Dragon, Chase H.Q series on Sega Consoles.
Not currently supported but it looks they they are actively scoping the feature with the intention of implementing it soon.
Sure, repartitioning works too.
At the end of the article it has a list of actions they have taken using the trademark.
Some of the actions listed at bottom of the article seem like over reach:
In 1996, an Australian company Hero Marketing Pty Ltd applied for a trade mark, opposed by DC Comics and Marvel and eventually cancelled the trade mark.
The villainous IP comic excerpts are cute but in common usage its been a genericized term forever.
The fact they both shared the trademark offers an argument that it was a genericized trademark from day one. After all if one thought they would win the argument that it applied only to their products they would have taken it exclusively for the competitive advantage.
You install your own windows? Do you really know if the pre-installed windows gets deleted?
This one seems to be easy to manage. Formatting the disc seems easy to do.
Yeah they manage both distribution methods.
I’m just highlighting at least one example where they have regrettably left the standalone as a 2nd class option.
I had a situation with The Saboteur.
When installed manually with downloaded installers it had configuration issues, IIRC it was limited to 1280x720 and the in game option to modify it didn’t work.
But when installed with Galaxy it defaulted to 1920x1080 and the in game options worked.
At that point my game was working and I didn’t investigate further so I don’t know if it was downloading different installers, or performing post install tweaks to my game config, but from a functional perspective the game was broken when not using Galaxy. Ideally whatever the “magic” was it should be included in the standalone installers!
I had a think about this scenario and I think that if Steam was going to present this argument they would need to document and support this workflow. At the moment the fact that it sometimes works is more of an accident than anything (essentially it’s all just files on a disc and sometimes the files still work if you move them somewhere else).
But if they document that you can transfer the install data to another location, and identify which titles that applies to? Then I can see a reasonable argument that they qualify.
This article seems to say that it covers only digital items that have an always online requirement.
https://www.gamefile.news/p/california-ab2426-crew-call-of-duty
So i think offline games don’t need the warning, but online games, steaming movies, etc do need the warning.
Edit:
I looked a bit further and found the bill text:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB2426#99INT
(4) This section does not apply to any of the following:
[…]
© Any digital good that is advertised or offered to a person that the seller cannot revoke access to after the transaction, which includes making the digital good available at the time of purchase for permanent offline download to an external storage source to be used without a connection to the internet.
This exception clearly allows for user downloadable installer for a game with offline functionality. But consoles, steam, etc where you don’t get a standalone installer, they look like they will need the warning on all titles.
Some videos are linked from here but they don’t have Howard The Duck
It can be interesting to see the questions that make it to hot questions.
Its a little sample of the various communities.
In Australia they’ve bumped it from au$25 (with periodic discounts to au$12.50) to au$60.
Thats a 140% increase!
I’m getting interesting results with this:
https://www.google.com/search?q=tech+industry+watchdog
I think naming a particular tech vendor is likely to get different results compared to using generic terms.