The Crow wrote:
While I have also read out the patent application, I can't seem to find any reference on this being used only for some type of "Online Pass", but as clearly stated "as a technique to suppress the second-hand sales and purchase" since "the developers would lose their profits otherwise gained in the first place" from the sale of pre-owned games.
"As a technique to suppress the second-hand sales and purchase, a user may be first required to send a password or the like to a remote authentication server from a reproduction device (game player) via the Internet and the reproduction of content may be permitted only for the device that has succeeded in authentication. However, where the reproduction device is not connected to the Internet, use of the content cannot be controlled. Also, where the connection to the Internet is an absolute requirement, user's convenience may be significantly reduced. Besides, users may communicate to share the password between them and therefore the second-hand sales and purchase cannot be eliminated reliably.''
That is exactly why the Online Pass was created, to create a system of accessibility restriction in anything other than newly purchased software. The only difference here is an embedded RFID on the software/disc, versus the more commonly provided paper voucher with printed code. I mean, do you realize that if GameStop doesn't do their job and guts a new copy of a game to put the case on the floor, neglecting to remove the online voucher or the instruction manual (which may have the voucher code), if that is stolen, they will not replace the code and have to damage out the new software as pre-owned. It's entire existence is the reason why multiplayer gamers would opt to buy in new these days.
I hope I made it clear that all of my statement in my original reply were pulled directly from what I was reading at various outlets, on various forums, etc. The only comments I made that I stand by are as follows:
Gloom & Doom...GLOOOOOOOOM...AND...DOOOOOOOM! I'm speaking farcically here
Seriously, the thing about patents is that they're conceived ideas filed with a CYA mentality. The whole thing is guided hand-in-hand with a corporate legal team wherein an R&D department comes up with some brilliant theory, and in order to protect asset (quite literally), or the theory of projected asset, a patent is filed. I couldn't count on my hands even a fraction of the patents that Sony has filed, let alone any company, that never see the light of day.
I will state, flat out, that if Sony is considering using this for anything other than RFID signatures for accounts in order to enable online gameplay to a user, without the use of an Online Pass Code, then I would be surprised. There is no doubt in my mind that, although they don't have a taste for it, the preowned market is vital to the health and longevity of any platform in this economic climate. Keep in mind, I buy 99% of my games new and only resort to a preowned purchase when it is a case of Out of Print status on a title I seek.
Everything else I discuss was directly pulled from initial analyst impressions, forum users, media outlets, and more. It was more of a summary address for anyone who hasn't been keeping up with this.