I agree with the sentiment implied by the author, but I would reword it slightly. If you don't have the freedom to share something, you don't own it.

I disagree with the interpretation that it needs to be held physically. Digital ownership is still ownership. I go out of my way to find music on Bandcamp, games on GOG, and rip movies myself using MakeMKV.

I wish I could encourage people to continue embracing physical media but most people value convenience over true ownership. And most companies value market capture and "security" over user rights. In crypto the sentiment of "not your keys, not your wallet" is held a core truth, yet people use 2factor authentication and Passkeys without respecting the same truth. I am not arguing against the use of 2factor, but at the same time certain accounts can not be logged into freely without push notifications in Duo or Microsoft. I still don't see a universal ability to export Passkeys, and I believe that's by design.

I hope laws catch up to modern technology in terms of digital goods. I can't imagine companies choosing to open up their walled gardens otherwise.

▲

nullhole 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> I disagree with the interpretation that it needs to be held physically. Digital ownership is still ownership. I go out of my way to find music on Bandcamp, games on GOG, and rip movies myself using MakeMKV.

Files on a hard disk that you own are still files that you physically own. The only difference between those files and, say, a DVD, is that the encoding is more space-efficient.

▲

AlotOfReading 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The parent's point is that possession of a physical good is a bright line separation. For digital files, there's a huge difference between [Files you own] on a hard disk, and files [on a hard disk you own]. There are files you can put on a hard drive that you don't own and will ultimately kill themselves when specified criteria are met, like DRM'd ebooks.

	▲	nik282000 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I would argue that the files on your hdd that can expire or made unusable by some remote third party are as incomplete as a book that is missing half the pages. For example a keepass file without the password/key-file is incomplete, the same goes for Audible aax files that can not be played without per-user 'activation bytes.' You have possession of the file but you never owned its contents.

▲

trelane an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> The only difference between those files and, say, a DVD, is that the encoding is more space-efficient.

Also that it's (depending on the format) perhaps not illegal to use the content in the file wit any viewer you choose.

▲

jrm4 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I would emphatically not do this, because you're confusing legal ownership with physical ownership and only one can be guaranteed with reasonable certainty.

Honestly, I'm continually surprised at how badly people miss this even as, e.g. Sony et al just take away stuff you "bought."

So, to put directly. Do not reword it, you will screw it up.

You must be able to hold it in your hand.

▲

jchw 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Sony can only take it away because you didn't own it.

I digitally own SimCity 3000 Unlimited from Gog. The copy lives on my NAS. The NAS could break, sure, but so can a CD.

Can I hold it? Well, sort of. The same way I can back up my physical CDs to a hard disk, I can also back up digital things I truly own to a CD/DVD/BD or other media.

As long as the thing I'm holding in my hand is all I need to be able to make use of what was given to me at the point of sale, I see no issue.

On the other hand, Valve, who I think most would agree is a company that has been on the less bad side of digital distribution for the most part, has sold "physical" copies of games that actually still required Steam to install and use. And in that case, from the layperson's perspective, it sure seems like you can hold it, and yet you don't own it.

So IMO this argument just doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

▲

mnahkies an hour ago | parent [-]

When I brought half life 2 there was a lag of about 2-4 years before I could play it for the first time - I didn't read the fine print, and on a dial up connection I couldn't get past the steam client updating in a reasonable amount of time, mind you I was able to download much larger Linux ISOs over time frames of a month+ through resumable downloads.

Not really an issue these days but it certainly was back in the day

	▲	autoexec 32 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Steam's DRM is still an issue today and it means that you have to get cracked copies of most of the games you paid for in your library if you expect to ever own them. I spent some months without an internet connection only to find the steam games I'd been playing offline just fine suddenly refused to launch until I allowed steam to phone home to grant me permission to play the games I paid for. Steam could go out of business at any time and all your games would simply stop working.

▲

thfuran 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

>you're confusing legal ownership with physical ownership and only one can be guaranteed with reasonable certainty.

You mean legal ownership, right? Because people can illegally take your physical belongings.