Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9708521" data-attributes="member: 18">Companies can say whatever they like (within legal bounds) - but it's national law that wins in the end in a specific nation (and EU nations national law must reflect EU law). Period. End of story. That's why so many EULAs and terms within them have been ruled invalid over the years.There's no "omg the company said this so we must ignore national laws!!!". That's not a thing. The closest you can get is a legal system which is favourable to companies over consumers to the point of ludicrousness (which the US approaches at times). If the US suddenly got some cool gamer President and very different lawmakers they could easily make laws that made buy = own in the US, and whilst the heavily pro-corporation SC might try and mess with that, I suspect they'd struggle, if the laws were written well enough.I'm sure they'll still PHRASE it as a licence until the end of time. What would change wouldn't be that (unless the laws specified it, which is unlikely, I think), it would be the actual behaviour of the companies and the way they treated games, particularly when they reached end-of-life. And that's what matters in the end.What would be "hollow" would not be the ruling - it'd be the claim that it was just a "licence". And this isn't that fanciful - EULAs are frequently extremely hollow!</blockquote>