There was something that seemed fishy about this thread, but I couldn't put my finger on it.

Until now.

The OP wrote "after I finish them".
HA! Nice try pal, but no one in here actually finishes games! Hell, most of us don't even play them, we just buy them and then hang out in here all day.

I think you are talking about this one: https://www.gog.com/forum/general_archive/is_it_ok_to_share_the_games_with_my_games/post69

TheEnigmaticT said we should treat our games like a book or CD. But it was a long time ago (GOG isn't the same place anymore) and he also said it was a semi-official answer.

Just because you could do doesn't mean you should do, also if you do don't make a public announcement about it.

True, buf for me there are a couple of things against considering them the same as (lending or giving out) physical games:

1. With physical games, it is harder to make perfect 1:1 copies. So if I give a game CD to a friend, I am more assured he won't be making millions of copies of it and sharing to all his friends, or to the world.

I feel that since I bought the game originally, I am responsible that copies of it are not made available to others. So theoretically I might see myself installing a game to a friend's (or rather, family member's) computer, but not at least giving an installer to them that they could easily share around without me knowing about it.

2. Digital games in general are dirt cheap compared to physical retail games of the past so I also feel people should afford to buy their own copies. I recall back when I felt a discounted retail game costing 10€ is damn cheap so that I just couldn't pass it; nowadays paying 10€ for a digital game feels quite expensive overall.

3. Related to the earlier point, digital games are also more easily available. A store doesn't run out of copies of a digital game, so it can't be either that a friend can't easily find the game in stores anymore (hence, in practice the only way he could play it is either pirate it, or borrow it from me).

If some digital game is completely removed from all stores and never coming back (due to license or whatever), then I might see a reason to "borrow" it to some friend who I feel would enjoy it.

But we are moral experts! That has to count to something, doesn't it?

Unless the OP is afraid FBI/CIA/NSA/SEAL/Delta Force will storm in to his house if he gives a digital game to his friend, I am unsure how relevant the actual legal aspect is anyway. When I make decisions in my daily life, I don't think that much "is this 100% legal to do", but do I feel it is against or for my personal moral rules. I care about legality more if I fear there may be consequences to me.

The law certainly gives some common guidelines what is generally considered wrong and what is considered right, but usually my moral rules would go over that. In this case, I wouldn't give a GOG installer to my friends, even if it was legal to do so (it might be legal, but I'd still feel it is wrong).

What if his friends also giving the games to their friends who also giving the games to their friends who also giving ................ ?

Indeed, regardless of the legalities of it, the likelihood of GOG or some game company suing a single individual for giving a game to someone else is ultra slim. The legal costs would be gigantic and even if they won, most people don't have the money to pay any fines or whatever anyway, so the companies never get their money anyway, plus the cases get widely publicized online and everyone thinks the company is a big douche bag for going after a single little individual like that. They probably end up losing a lot of potential customers as a result, so they're generally not going to sue individual people just because it is not economical to do so. They generally are more likely to go after big infringers and people acually profiteering off piracy and that sort of thing.

There was a time where GOG folks actually said on camera that they didn't mind if people shared the games but preferred if someone did that that they would come and buy the game if they liked it. I don't think we would hear them saying something like that publicly nowadays for many reasons, but there is the word of law, and there is what people really do en masse anyway. It's definitely best to always encourage people to buy a copy themselves to both support GOG and to support the publishers that bring their games here, and more importantly to support the concept of DRM-free. :) This is true without even bringing morals or ethics into it also. :)

Always? I don't know.

I would encourage people *not* to buy certain games whose publisher or GOG treats GOG users as second-class citizens.

In the past, I've bought games on the second hand market (and dealt with the DRM, patching, cracking, etc.) just to avoid giving money to some donkeyhole publisher.

as far as I know (I think someone already pointed this out) you can't lend, rent, sell or whatever nothing, that being: music, games, you name it...and we're talking physical formats since the beginning of time

that doesn't mean anyone ever paid attention to that anyways =P

I would agree with you on that. If a game is sold here under not the best circumstances, such titles or even such publishers should be avoided until they do it right. The second class citizens thread and a few others cover the guilty parties WRT that pretty well. :)

I'm not a lawyer, but did work writing Software for the UK legal industry. At the company we had a solicitor on call for any questions we may have for procedure in the software. I've got a better than average understanding of the legal system.

I've spent far too many hours (easily 100's over the last 10 years) collating the laws which govern and protect the consumers rights with software (not the medium its carried on just the software). Below is the complete list of the rights that are currently written in US UK and EU legislations. I know that's a huge wall of text.

Lets go over the finer points And to summarise those laws No I've not made a mistake. After 50 years of software being readily available to consumers (the general public) there is not one single piece of legislation that covers the rights of buyer for software. None, nada, zilch.

There are copyright laws to protect the publisher, contract laws that can kinda be applied to EULA's. Except EULAs, definitely in England, are not contracts.

Everything to do with what you can and can't do with software is bound up on hundreds of previous legal cases as an ever complex case precedence. The two most important for us are Oracle vs UsedSoft and VZVB vs VALVe.

The Oracle case effectively ruled you can resell your license (in the US and EU)
Armed with that VZVB took on VALVe, the case was dismissed because VALVe lawyers convinced a judge that Games might not be software. Case on hold waiting results of other ongoing litigation and until VZVB save enough money to take the multi-billion dollar VALVe corp to the courts again.

Too bad we can't see it.

Yes I remember the situation in EU -- it's possible to resell software, but games might not be software. *sigh*

Yeah but the digital good is tied to the physical good (the plastic disk). And since you really own the disk, you can do with as you like - sell it, give it away, ignore the software and use it as Frisbee or coaster... At least in Germany any "license agreement clause" trying to prohibit this is void (but of course DRM can give you trouble...which is actually in some people's opinion illegal - the publisher has to provide a way to switch ownership).

Of course the right to use the software is tied to ownership of the physical thing - so if you give it away you not entitled to have the product installed on your machine.

Also I think you underestimate the margins in the distribution chain. Most of the money you pay actually goes to the store owners and wholesale. The publishers and devs get only a small fraction of the consumer price.

What I meant with digital goods is the stuff where no physical medium is involved any more, so ownership isn't in any way bound to something "singular", like a disk, or even a sheet of paper (license).

The concepts of pure digital distribution and "ownership" simply don't go well together, because ownership rights are meant for things that are unique or of limited supply. Only one entity can own this patch of land, or this sack of potatoes. Digital products don't have those limits, you can create potentially infinite numbers of copies which are indistinguishable from the very first. So the concept of ownership of the product is pretty absurd.

We have one on call for our soccer moms and their issues as well along with the occasional summer intern.

Basically everything boils down to "You give all of your rights away when you use out product and we can revoke at any time" He's a bit of a cynic.

Here in the US, it's called First Sale Doctrine.

Random Linkie: https://www.aallnet.org/Documents/Government-Relations/Copyright-2/FirstSaleDoctrine.html

Another link concerning software and first sale: http://vondranlegal.com/legal-issues-in-buying-or-selling-software-online-first-sale-doctrine/

games might not be software ?

lol...