Now we wait until they become unprotected, as will inevitably happen given the tepid, unphilosophical arguments made in "defense" of video games and free speech.

Everyone gets petitio principii wrong.

This means we have a little more time. This is not a "GAMES WIN" scenario. The arguments are nonsense, and will only delay the implementation of the Miller Test in video games.

There is so much wrong here. This is not fundamentally a free speech issue. Free speech only becomes relevant after you establish that the epistemological principles contained in the Miller test are a complete fraud. Then the first amendment comes into play, and everything is fine until someone figures out how to…

The fact that it is unsubstantiated...you give no reason and provide no leads to your argument.

"Still wouldn't justify murdering a little girl for her resources. Nothing could."

Yes, well, thank you for that unsubstantiated emotional assertion. We're done here.

Looks pretty cool. I'll be happy with roughly more of the same.

I have never understood why people say tvtropes is addictive. It doesn't hold my interest.

What don't you understand?

No, that is completely wrong. "Problems like these." As long as the principle is the same, the scale is only relevant as a means of dramatization.

This is ridiculous and useless. First, it's not that hard to determine what the right thing to do is in many of these "dilemmas." Second, in some there is no right answer, because the situation is impossible.

But the law is, as far as I know, and it should be if it isn't, consonant with Sony's EULA. If you say it shouldn't be, then contracts are impossible.

They are using force by fraudulently dealing with Sony.

The essay was about a different concrete issue, but the principle is the same, which is why I recommended it.

Yes, Sony's freedom of contract does supersede your right to use "your" belongings as you see fit, if you agreed to the contract.

Well, most plugs are free, first of all. Second, it's not like I just dropped a link and left. I contributed to the comments here with a comment that is better than any of the others I've seen. Third, the essay is very relevant. You would rather I retype the entire thing in different words and post it as a comment,…

I honestly do not see what you did there...

I implied it wasn't mandatory. Think of it as an intellectual extra credit assignment.

This is not the right thing. This guy is a criminal who is violating rights. He's not arguing to change people's minds, or pursuing by legal means his goals; he's using force to get what he wants and now people are trying to claim noble status for him.