@Hasuess@Smear_Sys@PlayStation I’m the idiot? You are the one parroting ”muh videogames” on a comment specifically talking about Canal Studio’s movie licenses. Prime example of a false equivalence
@Smear_Sys@Hasuess@PlayStation Adhominem. How am i being dense when he keeps dragging videogames into a discussion about Canal Studio’s movie licenses? They aren’t the same. If anything it’s you being ””dense”” as you say.
@Hasuess@Smear_Sys@PlayStation Retard learn how to read. It’s illegal to keep showing Canal studio’s movies if they end the license. You don’t own any of your game on steam either don’t see many cry about that?
@Hereje_de_salon@Soymaxxing12 Are you cigans retarded? So called ”average person” is modelling in the meds. It says more about how chopped meds are than nordics. 😭
@Hasuess@Smear_Sys@PlayStation How is that relevant to the fucking comment about Canal Studio’s movie and tv licenses? Theyre not the same, nor comparable. Equating the 2 is fallancious.
@Smear_Sys@PlayStation Gish Gallop fallancy combined with Proof by Verbosity. Yet my point still stands UNrefuted. The best you and others could do is cry about games, on a comment CLEARLY talking about Canal Studio's movie licenses.
@BowiieDavidson@Smear_Sys@PlayStation What you said was a strawman. I'm still waiting for an actual rebuttal to the specific matter i had typed. CANAL MOVIE LICENSES if you had misread
@TheSquadrongod@Smear_Sys@PlayStation Bla bla bla. It's in the fine print and ToS that you don't own a single movie you buy. Nobody uses "Rent ∞". If sony would continue using Canal movie licenses it would be illegal and they could sue Sony.
@BowiieDavidson@Smear_Sys@PlayStation Strawman. Both the fine print and ToS makes it clear those contents (551 StudioCanal movies) were temporary. Studio Canal never renewed the licenses with Sony and so it would have been illegal to keep them. As i said, go cry to the core of the issue.