Depends on your jurisdiction.
As far as I know, that's never been tried in court in Canada, and there's reason to suspect that may not be the case here. (Although I'm not a lawyer, so I may be mistaken.)
You can if you own the Mario game...
... but I just downloaded a 1TB Batocera Switch image to run from MicroSD.
This statistic is misleading. They have no way of knowing what people paid for those games. The "value" isn't just the Steam price.
As many people have mentioned here, most games in big Steam libraries come from bundles. It's pretty typical to get games for, like, $1-2 each in those. I regularly get 8 games for $10, of which I only really want 1. I play the one I cared about and get my $10 worth. There's no "lost value" so long as I got my money's worth from the title I played.
I take an even bigger view: if I buy 10 bundles for $10 each, and get 1 absolute banger (for my preferences) and a few others that are fun for a bit, then I'm happy. I often add 20 new games to my library in a month, and only immediately play 1. That doesn't mean I have "$400 value of games I've never played."
Indeed. As a silly example, I had a Pacman clone game that ran based on CPU cycle speed. I needed to turn the in-game speed setting way down and toggle turbo off to make it slow enough to be playable.
Sad but not surprising that governments failing to fund maintenance costs are leading to service failures. Even less surprising that a conservative government is using the problem they created to privatise profits.
I'm having a hard time having sympathy for someone who was supporting anti-trans bigots, who were accusing teachers of being pedophiles, and (I suppose) attempting a coup. (Hard to take the last one seriously.)
Like... Of course this ended poorly. I'm surprised they paid any of the hydro bill from their camp, tbh.
Sentencing hasn't happened yet; 48 years is the maximum, according to the article.
Whatever the sentence is will be ridiculous since it's just copyright infringement, but hopefully the sentencing goes to a small fraction of the maximum.
I dunno. I think there are enough things named after men.
Maybe a nice neutral woman's name... Like, Anna?
And it's more about preservation and archival, so I think it should be called an Archive, not a library.
Yeah, Anna's Archive. Great name. Let's go with that one.
I don't follow. The Internet Archive only allows 1 copy of each physical book to be loaned at a time. If someone has the book you want already, then you need to wait until their loan expires. It's not like shadow libraries that allow unrestricted DRM-free downloading.
And publishers' profits are rising and don't seem to be at all correlated to library access, so of course nobody is suggesting they should close.
What am I not understanding?
This is really exciting to see. Enshittification is generating increasing backlash against incumbent monopolies, and encouraging more movement toward sustainable open source software.
See Blender, too.
Copyright has completely jumped the shark. There's absolutely no balance between the public benefit of the public domain.
30 years ought to be enough time for anyone to extract any reasonable value from an IP. If you haven't made your profit in 30 years, then let the public benefit from it.
Or at least let preservationists (data hoarders, let's be honest) keep our cultural history alive and accessible for future generations.
Downloading content is almost definitely legal in Canada, and non-commercial digital distribution has never gone to court, so its legality hasn't been established.
I can't find the source, but I recall reading speculation that sharing backup copies between owners of the media is likely legal in Canada but, again, it hasn't been tried by courts, so its legality hasn't been firmly established.
Anyway, with non-commercial digital distribution not having any legal teeth in Canada, it's effectively legal and its literal legality is unknown.