If it came with no downsides, sure. Not being able to play Playstation is a very minor part in life not really deserving any kind of “fundamental rights” based argument, unlike locking people up.
Any terms of service agreement. When legally challenged, they usually do not hold up in court.
Playstation makes you sign one that says you dont get to own the games you pay for and they can take them away whenever. A judge would likely tell them thats illegal, and they have to render services paid.
If it came with no downsides, sure. Not being able to play Playstation is a very minor part in life not really deserving any kind of “fundamental rights” based argument, unlike locking people up.
Do you not have a fundamental right to the goods you purchase?
But you didn’t purchase them, you licensed them conditionally.
Yeah technically, but that only stands until enough people challenge it
In other words, no you do not currently have a fundamental right to that content.
In other words, no not even close to what I said.
Often these little legalese situations are illegal or legally undefined, and the only reason it holds is because no one has pushed against it
Got any similar examples?
Any terms of service agreement. When legally challenged, they usually do not hold up in court.
Playstation makes you sign one that says you dont get to own the games you pay for and they can take them away whenever. A judge would likely tell them thats illegal, and they have to render services paid.
There is a reason the “you behave like an ass, you lose access” part is not usually the one anyone challenges in court.
Okay but hit me with some examples.