• Cyrus Draegur@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    no. you’re putting words in my mouth. if the distributor wants to stop distributing they can.

    they can take down their servers, they can even cease to be, but it would no longer affect the availability of product they sold.

    • Tar_Alcaran
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Then I don’t think I understand you. Are you suggesting we put millions of full games on a bloxkchain?

      • Cyrus Draegur@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Only the keys need to be stored cryptographically, really, because the game files themselves are nigh inevitably available on torrenting networks. it’s inevitable that people are going to rip backups of all game files for the delicious delights of datamining and as long as enough of them will seed them (which shouldn’t be a problem as long as there’s any INTEREST in a game existing…) that availability never arises as an issue. And if it’s not popular enough to put there, it’ll probably end up on The Internet Archive.

        Would be nice if there were an infrastructural ‘backup of last resort’ such as the library of congress, which is something the LoC already does for other audiovisual media. It’d just be nice if that service were extended to software.

        • Tar_Alcaran
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          So more of a blockchain KMS then? I don’t see how you could construct such a thing.

          The requirements of allowing a publisher control of their game for some time (for example, allowing them to retract some keys when violating the EULA, but not all keys when “unpublishing” a game), but also allowing people to resell keys, which are somehow publically accesible but only for the legit owner, and the owner has to allow third-party acces without publically sharing a private key.

          This is the age-old identity problem with blockchain. It’s all well and good that Bob’s name is written on a smart contract, but that doesn’t remove the issue with how to identify Bob.