This is the only regulation I feel is reasonable. When it comes to luxury goods like video games, it doesn’t make sense to dictate how the product is offered. But by all means insist they’re clear with what the transaction type is.

I can imagine the natural competitive wedge where GOG can say “Buy Game” but Steam has to say “Lease Game” on their buttons.

▲

Zambyte 2 hours ago | parent [-]

This would be case-by-case in Steam. There are some games which really do sell under "irrevocable license to play" (which, short of granting copyright privileges, is about as close as you can get to ownership for a digital product). Other games on Steam do not.

I think it would highlight the differences between publishers / studios more than store fronts.

▲

chrisjj 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> There are some games which really do sell under "irrevocable license to play" (which, short of granting copyright privileges, is about as close as you can get to ownership for a digital product).

Far from it. E.g. excludes resale.

	▲	Zambyte an hour ago \| parent [-]
		For digital products, that would mean copyright privileges. Else there is no definition of "buy" that applies to GOG sales either.