I like GOG, but this is just weasel-words to take advantage of the ignorance of the public. Whether you receive the installs directly or not, you still don't own your games, you are just licensing them, same as Steam.

This doesn't tip the scales into the "this is wrong" territory for me, but I do think this kind of word manipulation exploiting an unknowledgeable public is a little bit slimy.

edit: I had a bit of knee-jerk reaction to the sensationalism of the headline; what GOG actually says is fine and doesn't imply anything beyond licensing in my eyes.

[–] Vintor@lemm.ee 12 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

I don't think "weasel words" is the right term here.

You own the GOG games like you own a book you bought, and like you don't own a DRM-crippled book, even though you might be entitled to read it under certain circumstances. The difference between downloading an installer and downloading a game on Steam is, the installer will continue to work even if GOG folds or decides they don't like you anymore. But if Steam blocks your account, all the games you bought are gone, and Steam is fully in the right to do so since you don't own their games.

[–] cadekat@pawb.social 14 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

That's not true. You still only receive a license to play the game, you do not own it. Directly from GOG's website:

We give you and other GOG users the personal right (known legally as a 'license') to use GOG services and to download, access and/or stream (depending on the content) and use GOG content. This license is for your personal use. We can stop or suspend this license in some situations, which are explained later on.

Practically this means you cannot resell your GOG installer in the way you could resell a physical book.

[–] Rolive@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

That's fair I guess. But you can keep a backup of your GoG games in case the server goes down. With Steam that isn't possible.

[–] cadekat@pawb.social 4 points 16 hours ago

Absolutely. GOG has a much better license and distribution model, but it's still a license.

[–] Gestrid@lemmy.ca 5 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I think OP is saying that, while you can buy a book to read it, you do not own the copyright to that book. They're saying it's basically the same idea with GOG.

The illustration does break down, but I think their point still stands.

[–] Imhotep@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

You can resell, trade, give, lend a book you bought. You're just not allowed to do the same with any copies you've made. At least where I live

[–] Gestrid@lemmy.ca 2 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Like I said, the illustration does break down.

[–] Imhotep@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

There are no products for which you get the IP because you bought one unit. Edit: IANAL, there might be.

Not a book, nor a car. So I don't see how that's relevant.

Sorry if I misunderstood your point.

[–] Vespair@lemm.ee 1 points 13 hours ago

I don’t think “weasel words” is the right term here.

I agree with you. GOG's wording is fine, I was hasty in my reaction.

load more comments (12 replies)