Stop Killing Games (EU edition) - Moldman vs. Publishers

[autosarcophagy]

Purity testing a pedo out of your movement, or purity testing some retarded jew that's only in the position because he's a nepobaby is not "purity testing to death". Speaking of woke retardation. Taking on an ever growing list of causes is another one. Thats how we went from gay rights to LGBT to LGBTBRAAAPP+. Or how feminism went from supporting rights of women to campaigning for 3rd world rapeapes.
I'm sure you can make a compelling argument why the whole internet thing fits SKG, but it is a much larger and more nebulous cause. SKG was simple and clearly defined, with reasonable bounds. Keep focus on the same objective and force the EU to either accept it, or put to paper jews have a free hand. Don't retweet pedos and don't take on more causes. Now lobbyists can point out that SKG wants to have all sorts of internet laws that are impossible, and therefore all their demands should be denied. If you just say "we want them to stop killing games, nothing more" it is harder for them to deflect and delay. Right now in court the judge said he doesn't have enough to work with regarding killing games (which is why they're at the EU). So pressure the EU to spell it out.

If you just have people milling about taking on more pet causes, going to endless debate groups, and show up at 50 different meetings to talk about compliance. Congratulations, you're just another rudderless NGO moving air.

yes SKG should stick to games and should keep focus on that. but also SKG is a symptom of a bigger problem with digital media or anything digital. that companies think they can change how ownership works because something is digital. digital comes with copyright because code is copyrightable and that makes it so that copyright is now in places were it never was before because everything is getting digitized. digital is not the problem but what they can do now because it is digital. like putting DRM in everything and using stupid consumer unfriendly licenses that should be illegal or at least should kill a company if they try to use it.

 

[Waffle Iron]

but also SKG is a symptom of a bigger problem with digital media or anything digital. that companies think they can change how ownership works because something is digital

Yes, but SKG tying themselves to these larger movements isn't helpful, it's detrimental. The publishers try their damn hardest to convince lawmakers that SKG wants to upend copyright and that therefore their demands are unreasonable. And the SKG goes and ally itself to those people. "We don't want to redefine copyright, digital ownership and licence agreements, we just want games to no longer be dependent on a central server that can be shut down at any time, leaving you with an unfixable broken product." "Also we're buddies with these guys that want to redefine copyright but that's completely separate.".

 

[DefinitelyNotMe]

second idea with the book burning parallel
the reflection in the glasses supposed to be a a burining book in one eye and a a disk case in the second one
maybe a design supposed to include more corporate theme instead of 40k-ish inquisitor?
makes him too badass looking

 

[autosarcophagy]

Yes, but SKG tying themselves to these larger movements isn't helpful, it's detrimental. The publishers try their damn hardest to convince lawmakers that SKG wants to upend copyright and that therefore their demands are unreasonable. And the SKG goes and ally itself to those people. "We don't want to redefine copyright, digital ownership and licence agreements, we just want games to no longer be dependent on a central server that can be shut down at any time, leaving you with an unfixable broken product." "Also we're buddies with these guys that want to redefine copyright but that's completely separate.".

yes SKG should focus on what it is trying to do and should not expand its scope. its not about redefining copyright. license agreements are a choice a company makes. consumer unfriendly licenses should have a reputation so bad companies would not even want to have them. some parts of these licenses should be unenforceable. this will become more important in the future SKG is already a version of this happening.

 

[SIMON THE PIEMAN]

license agreements are a choice a company makes. consumer unfriendly licenses should have a reputation so bad companies would not even want to have them

Shame is a force that is completely unknown in the gaming industry and this approach will not work. In fact any solution that isn't based around a law that says "if you do this your business is going to end up FUBAR" achieves nothing. Even the infamous "vote with your wallet" is nowhere near enough.