Arkose: The copyright holders don't get anything when I rent or borrow a book, CD or DVD or buy one second-hand--why should games be any different? These other mediums have survived quite fine despite the prevalence of libraries and second-hand sales. Wanting to remove the right of resale from a buyer of any product--or require a cut of the profits from such transactions--undermines consumer rights that have been set down in law for a very long time and is driven purely by greed.
Oh yeah,
I completely agree (link is to a rambling blog entry), but that's not the way publishers see it unfortunately. When I said it was an unfortunate downside, I was speaking of that bigger picture, but without so much explanation. I do admit it was a bit vague.
If the publishers feel they're not getting a good deal, I'd imagine they will try to change the way things work to be better compensated. As many of you know, publishers look on resales with disdain. To attempt to make it less desirable to consumers, one tactic is to make additional content available only to the original purchaser and to charge an "upgrade" fee for people who bought the used copy.
I recently saw a post where a Stardock employee responded to someone's concerns that they couldn't get access to patches for a used game they published. The employee stated that it was against the EULA to resale the game, but that Stardock would sell a discounted license to the user so they could get patches. The user politely responded with a variation of , "you can take your offer and shove it".
Edit:
Also while I'm thinking about it: What digital services do allow resales? I know Stardock is touting their GOO DRM as a necessary requisite to offering a marketplace (store credit basically) for user sales, but I don't know of another service (ignorance) that does or will do this.
