PS3 News: GameStop Exploring Possible Reselling Of Digital Content - PS3 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

GameStop Exploring Possible Reselling Of Digital Content

Without used stuff, GameStop isn't half the mega-corporation it is now. Literally.

So unsurprisingly, the company is looking into secondhand downloadable products, as indicated by CEO Paul Raines. However, he does add that at this point, it's "not a meaningful business yet." Said Raines:

"It’s very interesting. There are some technologies out there in Europe, and we’ve looked at a couple that are involved. We’re interested; it’s not a meaningful business yet. Right now we’re not seeing that as a huge market, but I think we’re on the leading edge. There are a few companies, a few startups, out there that we’ve talked to that are doing this."

Raines didn't specifically name the outfits in question, saying he doesn't wish to disclose that information to their competitors. Bear in mind that a European court recently ruled that the secondhand sale of software was protected, so producers can't prevent users from reselling licenses. GameStop, by the way, packed away $2.62 billion from the used portion of their business during the last fiscal year.

Tags: gamestop, digital sales, downloadable games, gaming industry

7/26/2012 8:13:46 PM John Shepard

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous

Comments (11 posts)

Rogueagent01
Thursday, July 26, 2012 @ 10:26:06 PM
Reply

ugh...And people think Apple wants to rule the world.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Raze22
Thursday, July 26, 2012 @ 11:51:51 PM

This is what I always say. Who doesn't want to rule the world?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Friday, July 27, 2012 @ 2:26:29 PM

Microsoft.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Friday, July 27, 2012 @ 2:44:30 PM

I wouldn't want to rule the world. Ugh! What a chore!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Friday, July 27, 2012 @ 7:02:01 PM

My bad u said doesn't. Microsoft indeed wants to rule the world with their business.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Drake_RB3
Thursday, July 26, 2012 @ 10:30:33 PM
Reply

Seems like an April Fool's Joke. Seriously, GameStop?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

DeathOfChaos
Friday, July 27, 2012 @ 1:13:29 AM
Reply

I'm not really sure how you could resell already redeemed online content, but if they do it and the product is cheaper than full retail, what's the problem? People who can't afford the full price of the content will then be able to afford it. People who complain about the whole reselling of used games and stuff just sound like stuck up, rich, and stingy people.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, July 27, 2012 @ 10:44:02 AM

And people who bi*** about the cost of games and demand them for next to nothing simply because they can't afford it, sound like cheap entitlement minded brats. If you can't afford the game, save or don't play. That's always been the way. Don't give me any BS about rich people, games don't cost that much. People spend more on smoking, drinking and coffee every month than they do on games.

Think about the simple fact that developers of a game get royalty fees only from new copies sold. They don't get one dime from sales of used games. Forget about Sony, forget about the publishers (though they hurt too), the developers are the ones that get hurt. Games like Call of Duty sell so well it doesn't matter what happens with used sales, everyone is still making money. But for regular games with regular sales numbers the impact of used sales is far, far greater. Probably the majority of games sold are marginally profitable and every used sale is a player that didn't pay the developer or publisher a penny.

But the thing that really bugs me about your snotty elitist attitude is that you think that because something is too expensive for you, it should be obtained for cheap, regardless of the impact of that. Do you think that torrenting the game is acceptable? Tell me what the functional difference is to the developer and publisher between a gamer that get's a copy of a game via a torrent site, and a gamer that buys a used copy at Gamestop. Go on, tell me. How much revenue does the publisher get from the torrent of the game? How much does the Dev get? Now, how about the Gamestop used game sale? The publisher and developer see exactly the same revenue from that as they do from the torrented copy that someone uses - zero.

So, take off your cheap, entitlement minded blinkers and look at the reality for a moment. Oh, never mind, you won't and you'll tell me I'm a "stuck up, rich, and stingy" person. Funny though, I can't see how I am stingy if I am willing to pay for the game and you apparently are not. Who's being stingy? I'm sure as hell not rich....

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

AcidicCoffee
Friday, July 27, 2012 @ 6:29:58 PM

Highlander -
$60 is NOT cheap, in fact, $60 for many is a pretty considerable amount of money. For some people, $60 could even cause them to starve for a week. You went so far as to call Chaos a snobby elitist, and yet apparently you alone have the right to define what is and what is not a large sum of money. Classic example of the pot calling the kettle black.

I can't completely disagree with you on the subject of used game sales retailers, in fact I think profiting off of used game sales without paying royalties should be illegal.

I don't know if you really could be called a "rich" person. Your attitude however, is definitely that of the stereotypical "stuck up" person. To call somebody who just wants to play a couple games and enjoy life "entitlement-minded" is nothing but being "narrow-minded". As far as I am concerned, there is a certain level of entitlement for each person's happiness. If a person finds happiness and enjoyment in video games, who are you to say that because he is not capable of earning the disposable income to buy the things that bring him this enjoyment and happiness at full price he should not be allowed to enjoy them? Face it, you have no idea what each person's situation is, and while there are plenty of people out there who buy games used and torrent games simply because they are cheap, there are also people who legitimately have no way of affording these games at full price.

Regarding the article:
If game publishers had brains, they'd create their own used game sales business specifically for the games they own the rights to in order to keep the revenue flowing to the developers. From there, they would have a much easier time of arguing that used game sales of their games are illegal and taking away their revenue. As far as digital content, it would be pretty easy for Steam and others to allow the sale of "used" products by revoking the license of the user and then taking a cut out of the sales(Something like 10% for themselves and 10% for the devs/publisher.)

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, July 27, 2012 @ 11:53:50 PM

@acidiccoffee,

1) $60 is not expensive unless you are comparing real games against the POS games on iOS devices. This myth about $60 being this huge expenditure is nonsense, ask anyone old enough to remember how costly games were in generations past.

2) Stuck up? No, not really just fed up with people who think that because their circumstances don't currently allow them to run out and buy a new game every week, they should be able to get them cheaply instead. After all the big corporate publishers are not hurt by used sales...

"If a person finds happiness and enjoyment in video games, who are you to say that because he is not capable of earning the disposable income to buy the things that bring him this enjoyment and happiness at full price he should not be allowed to enjoy them?"

How is that not entitlement thinking? You're basically saying that video game entertainment is something that people are entitled to, after all who am I to say they are not. That is the implicit meaning of what you wrote. You do realize that you don't have to play every game immediately it is released, right? You can wait until it hits a price reduction or two and buy it new, and cheaply. You can also save money to buy the game you want to play. I didn't say that people should not play, I said that they should have some fiscal responsibility and save to buy their games if necessary.

Please, don't try to pull the whole "You don't understand the situation Highlander..." thing. I do bloody well understand. I've been dirt poor in my life more than once. I know exactly how it feels to not be able to afford the latest shiny toys. But you know what, I chose the necessities and not the luxuries. I saved money and bought greatest hits versions, or simply played my older games some more.

3) Used game sales really are a problem legally, and there is no easy way for publishers to go into the used game business without completely rewriting the software licenses that you and I agree to when we buy and use a game. The license to use the game is non-transferrable, you can buy and sell the actual disc as often as you like under the court's interpretation of copyright law. But the license stays with the original purchaser.

Lastly. Used sales of copyright items rely on the fact that a physical embodiment of a copyrighted work deteriorates with use. That deterioration makes the used copy less desirable than the new one. The courts feel that by allowing the resale of used copies of copyrighted works, the incentive to buy a new copy is balanced by the deterioration of the used copy. In other words because the used copy of a book is dog eared and torn, more people are likely to buy a new copy. So the copyright holder is not unduly injured by losing control of the copyrighted work being resold. In the digital realm, there is no deterioration of the copy sold. It's digital, and each and every copy of it is identical and in mint condition. There is no such thing as a used copy of a digital work, unless you actually make it so that a used copy of a digital download gimps it's rendering engine to only render at 480p after it's resold. Digital distribution breaks all of the concepts on which copyright has functioned for many, many decades.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Friday, July 27, 2012 @ 10:33:12 AM
Reply

Not gonna happen. No platform holder is going to allow used content keys to be transferred to and then resold by a third party. One of the fundamental problems with all of this used game BS is that the resale of discs is technically a grey area because you are reselling a physical article. When it comes to the copyrighted and licensed content itself, you can't resell it, the licenses are non transferable. GameStop really need to stop pushing the envelope here because they are really beginning to tread very heavily on the toes of publishers and platform holders alike.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

Did Advanced Warfare save Call of Duty?
Yes, CoD is back on track!
Possibly; it was a positive step.
The jury's still out...
No, CoD is still doomed.

Previous Poll Results