this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2025
568 points (99.3% liked)
Games
34591 readers
1577 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here and here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I disagree with the fundamental assertion that software can be owned
And that's completely valid. However, under the current legal framework, that simply isn't the case.
Why are you using a state's laws to determine your own sense of morality?
Personal beliefs and the laws to which you are upheld are two different things. I didn't say I agree with the law. Why are you assuming my personal beliefs?
Because you said what they say is important is more important. That sounds like a subjective opinion to me, not an interpretation of the law.
Well, if they own the IP, under the framework under which we live, their will is factually more important. 🤷♀️
No. Importance is a metaphysical construct, not a legal one.