|
PlayStation 3 vs. Xbox 360, a general talk thread.
|
|
eatsushi
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
11. July 2006 @ 10:35 |
Link to this message
|
LA Times: Sony's copy protection patent resurfaces.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-...ack=1&cset=true
You need to register to acces the entire article bute here's the entire text:
Quote: Furor Over Sony Patent
Technology that could prevent resale of games and other digital goods raises speculation, fears.
By Dawn C. Chmielewski, Times Staff Writer
July 10, 2006
Sony Corp. has patented technology that would prevent its PlayStation consoles from playing used, rented or borrowed video games ? raising questions about whether the electronics and entertainment giant may attempt to redefine what it means to own something in the digital age.
Sony has said little about the technology, patented in Japan in 2000, or how it might be deployed. But speculation over Sony's plans has sparked a furor online as game fans and consumer advocates fret that the company may incorporate it into the upcoming PlayStation 3 console, due to hit stores this fall.
They worry that it would wipe out the $1-billion-a-year market for used games and could even prevent someone from playing their games at a friend's house.
It is not unusual for technology companies to patent innovations and then never incorporate them into products.
Documents filed in April 2000 with the U.S. Patent Office describe a method of copy protection by which the game system would verify a disc as legitimate, register the disc to that particular game console, then wipe out verification data so the disc would be rendered unreadable in other PlayStations.
"Since only titles for which legitimate software has actually been purchased and which have been initially registered in the machine table can be used, resale (so-called used software purchase) after purchase by an end user becomes practically impossible," according to the patent documents.
Although Sony has been vague about its plans for the technology, "I actually think they're toying with this idea," said Michael Pachter, a game industry analyst for Wedbush Morgan Securities.
Pachter said he thought Sony probably would not tighten the software locks on PlayStation 3 games but might employ bolstered copy protection on other forms of entertainment downloaded to the console over the Internet.
"Maybe they'll copy protect movies or music downloads," he said.
Whatever Sony's plans, the tempest illustrates the changing nature of ownership as millions of people accumulate vast collections of digital entertainment. Few people realize that when they buy software, music or movies, they are actually buying a license to use, listen or watch.
That's why it violates copyright laws for people to sell copies of their music collection.
Sony was attacked this year for including software on some of its music CDs that surreptitiously installed itself on computers playing the disc. The software was intended to prevent unauthorized copying. Sony later apologized.
Taking that sort of copy protection one step further would be, in the words of one analyst, "crazy."
"What does Sony get from that?" said John Taylor of Arcadia Investment Corp. "Sony gets a black eye. It doesn't make sense to me."
Several analysts said the patent appeared to principally be aimed at deterring game piracy. Indeed, Sony's patent notes that through the complexity of its copy-protection scheme "manufacture of counterfeit software becomes extremely difficult."
And it's not unusual for technology companies such as Sony to register patents either in anticipation of one day collecting royalties from someone seeking to license the technology or to prevent someone else from deploying it.
"These are all things technologically possible to do in any computing device," said one cryptographer, who requested anonymity. "In the video game business, it would be suicide for someone to do this. It's actually possible Sony filed this because they wanted to keep people from doing that."
Nonetheless, online speculation that Sony would use technological or other means to ban the sale of used PlayStation 3 video games prompted one analyst, P.J. McNealy of American Technology Research, to study its potential effect on the industry.
"While we believe it is unlikely that SNE will ban PS3 pre-owned games from being sold by the same chains that sell new PS3 games, we believe this issue remains under consideration," McNealy wrote in a research note issued June 23.
McNealy estimated that game fans spent about $990 million buying used games, primarily from GameStop or through EBay. Much of that spending ? about $620 million ? is for used PlayStation 2 games.
Were Sony to ban the sale of used games for its next-generation PS3, the effect on independent video game publishers would be negligible, McNealy said.
Used-game sales are a growing source of irritation for game publishers, which receive no proceeds from the resale of games. Executives privately complain that cheaper secondhand games are available for sale shortly after a new game's release; publishers, which give retailers marketing money to promote games, end up competing with discounted versions of their own titles.
Major independent game publishers Electronic Arts Inc., Activision Inc. and THQ Inc. declined to comment.
Meanwhile, used games are a lucrative source of revenue for retailer GameStop, which began reporting pre-owned game sales after its acquisition of competitor EB. Last year, secondhand game sales accounted for $930 million in revenue and $418 million in profit. The profit margin was 45%, compared with 21% for new games, according to Arcadia Investment Corp.
Analysts say used-game sales contribute to the overall growth of the video game market, in the same way that the ability to trade in a used vehicle fuels the new-car market.
"A used-car market creates currency to buy new cars. Same with games. Everybody acknowledges that," Pachter said. "The problem is if the used game is available a week after the new game is out for a $5 discount."
|
dnglebry
Suspended permanently
|
11. July 2006 @ 10:41 |
Link to this message
|
@anub
I know its the same game but when spending $200 extra on a console that will do absolutlely nothing in graphics better than its comp(360) and will only enhance exclusives i would feel like a putz.Madden looked better for xbox than ps2 and guess what ITS THE SAME GAME so whats your damn point? Tons of games that were multiconsole looked better on the xbox than ps2 so this just shows another sony weakness. Some reason in past gen multiconsole games MS can maximize their potential but this go round in the next gen era sony can only do it on exclusives that blows a$$ and is pathetic..Sony fans are just that crazed fans,yes teh ps2 wasa GREAT product but so many people are buying the ps3 because ps2 was good...wrong type of thinking. Sony fans think if it rained yesterday it will rain the next day...not quite true and they are willing to spend extra money blindly. Granted there are educated people such as you and some of the sony fans on these forums but most fans dont have a clue what Blu-ray is or any of the new shat they will buy it cause it has four letters on the console. S O N Y...
As far as f.e.a.r exclsuvie being on ps3 i dont think so but you may be right. F.E.A.R alone may not make people buy the 360 but when the games keep on rolling then thats what will. NO ONE GAME MAKES ANY PERSON BUY A CONSOLE..if you do that your a putz...its the accumulation is my point hence i listed multiple games.
|
Moderator
|
11. July 2006 @ 10:52 |
Link to this message
|
dnglebry gone, thread closed.
My killer sig came courtesy of bb "El Jefe" mayo.
The Forum Rules You Agreed To! http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/2487
"And there we saw the giants, and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight" - Numbers 13:33
|
|