Quote Originally Posted by Gregger View Post
Personally, I am shocked at the amount of people who seem to be willing to throw their own consumer rights and the first sale doctrine under the bus in order to help giant corporations like EA make even more money than they already are. Every other company in the world that deals in non-perishable goods has to deal with used sales, why do video game companies think they are such special snowflakes?
I totally disagree with technology that makes games harder to resell, but I do understand the frustration of the development studios (there *are* other studios besides EA out there). Gamestop is strongly eating into their profits - if a single copy of a game gets sold 10 times at Gamestop, the developer makes money once and Gamestop makes money 10 times. That hardly seems fair - Gamestop is just serving as a bloated middleman, and plenty of people are more than happy to throw game studios under the bus to save $5 on a game (after 'selling' some other game back to Gamestop for a fraction of what they originally paid).

Like I said previously, this patent really isn't going to go anywhere. It's probably as much defensive as anything else, preventing Nintendo or Microsoft from doing something similar without paying license fees. In a perfect world, if there were a way to preserve first sale doctrine and cut Gamestop down to size, then I'd be all for that.