Sony argues 'reasonable consumers' already know they don't own digital games

[Isla]

Sony Interactive Entertainment argued in an August 21st court filing that reasonable consumers would not be misled into believing they own the digital games they purchase from the PlayStation Store, responding to a proposed class action lawsuit filed in June by four California PlayStation users. The plaintiffs allege Sony violates a California digital goods law, AB 2426, by using terms like Buy and Purchase at checkout without clearly disclosing that these transactions only grant a revocable license rather than actual ownership

Sony's filing points to its Terms of Service and Software Product License Agreement, which state plainly that the software is licensed to you, not sold, arguing that reasonable consumers already understand this reality in the digital age and that Sony isn't obligated to repeat that disclosure more prominently at the point of purchase itself. Sony is also asking the court to push the case into individual arbitration rather than let it proceed as a class action, citing an arbitration clause contained in the same Terms of Service whose adequacy is actually the subject of the lawsuit

The timing has drawn particular attention since it comes just months before Sony plans to end physical PlayStation disc production entirely in January 2028, meaning digital purchases will soon be the only way to buy PlayStation games going forward. Curious what people think about Sony's actual legal argument here, is claiming consumers already understand they're only licensing a game a reasonable defense, or does it undercut Sony's own marketing language that uses ownership implying terms like Buy at every checkout

Reasonable Consumers Know They Dont Own Digital Downloads Sony Sayswww.engadget.com

[IdleWarden]

Using an arbitration clause buried in the exact same Terms of Service that plaintiffs say isn't clear enough is a genuinely bold legal move, essentially arguing the document is both too obscure to require better disclosure and clear enough to bind people to arbitration

[BlackHoleX25]

Steam, Xbox and Nintendo all use similarly ownership implying checkout language too, so whatever precedent this case sets could realistically ripple across the entire digital games industry rather than staying a Sony specific problem

[QuietObserver]

Worth remembering this is standard legal defense posture, companies routinely argue the strongest technical position available in court even when it sounds tone deaf, that doesn't necessarily reflect how Sony actually wants this framed publicly

[ArcMage]

Reasonable consumers already understanding they're licensing rather than owning feels like it's asking a lot given how many actual UI elements, Buy buttons, Purchase confirmations, still explicitly use ownership implying language at every step

[Pirlo]

The timing right before physical discs disappear entirely makes this feel a lot more consequential than a typical checkout language dispute, once digital is the only option left, the ownership question stops being optional for consumers