The only “digital” I download, is something that I can put on my personal storage. If I can download it to Nintendo Switch and then move it to USB or SD card, then I can clone the sd card and therefore I own it. (immediate usage might be different, and they may chose to delete if it is put back on the Switch. But I still own it, I just need to find an alternative method to use it).
Same goes with games/movies/whatever. If I can download it and store it on my NAS, I own it.
If you are paying for “digital” but you cannot acquire a copy of it, then it is NOT “Digital” it is streaming. You are paying for the privilege of using some services’ electronic library, but you do not own anything on it.
I’ve been watching this argument lately, and its amusing. The whole Sony thing about Discovery (or whatever it was) has nothing to do with ownership. You were paying to access a library that Sony curated. Sony dropped the contract with the other party, and chose to tidy their library. You just have access to it, because they let you. You do not have any ownership whatsoever, you signed a T&C that says Sony curates the library and they can do what they like.
People seem to have a hard time using words like “content”, “streaming” and “digital” vs “electronic copy”, “local digital copy” and “DLC”; and then confuse "ownership and “content access”.
The only “digital” I download, is something that I can put on my personal storage. If I can download it to Nintendo Switch and then move it to USB or SD card, then I can clone the sd card and therefore I own it. (immediate usage might be different, and they may chose to delete if it is put back on the Switch. But I still own it, I just need to find an alternative method to use it).
Same goes with games/movies/whatever. If I can download it and store it on my NAS, I own it.
If you are paying for “digital” but you cannot acquire a copy of it, then it is NOT “Digital” it is streaming. You are paying for the privilege of using some services’ electronic library, but you do not own anything on it.
I’ve been watching this argument lately, and its amusing. The whole Sony thing about Discovery (or whatever it was) has nothing to do with ownership. You were paying to access a library that Sony curated. Sony dropped the contract with the other party, and chose to tidy their library. You just have access to it, because they let you. You do not have any ownership whatsoever, you signed a T&C that says Sony curates the library and they can do what they like.
People seem to have a hard time using words like “content”, “streaming” and “digital” vs “electronic copy”, “local digital copy” and “DLC”; and then confuse "ownership and “content access”.