@Sepewrath: huh. I’ve paid for legal opinions before. Not worth much of the individual can’t stand by their interpretation. Maybe they’re covered for gross negligence then... I’ll see if the same applies in my country. 😂

@CyberEarth: there you have it. 🤷🏻‍♂️

@bdrtfm: I’m not saying you can’t do what you want with it. But there are some things people can’t sell you above board. I’m not saying Sony will win, but they will have a strong case to make against people replicating those panels DESIGN in any colour scheme. But, what I think really DOESN’T matter. I don’t know what the written laws are surrounding that specific practice so 🤷🏻‍♂️ (Again, we’re talking replicating the design of something, not making panels that look completely different) But do I think there is anything wrong with you specifically for buying panels you’d like to see on your ps5? Nope.

I wonder if he means launching a game on gamepass? Because if the game has been out for a year or more, and sales have trickled down to nothing, going on gamepass could provide a major boost. Or if you’re working on a sequel? Put the original on gamepass to get awareness for it. There are tons of benefits to that model that could make sense for devs.

Also, Getting a larger install base to sell cosmetics and DLC, not having to worry so much about marketing budget. Anyways, I don’t think it would make sense for an in demand game to launch on gamepass unless you’re a Microsoft studio, but for everyone else? There’s probably something that’ll help sell your products somewhere down the line.

@flatovercrest: Phil Spencer has said that some games go on to sell loads once it rotates out of the service 🤷🏻‍♂️

@BeefoTheBold: it’s to cover the subsequent legal fees.

@analgrin: it already is in a thong 🤷🏻‍♂️

@bdrtfm: that’s different. You’re applying something over the original product. The analogy is more like someone making exact replica iphone shells you can put the components of another phone into. No one’s ever sold PS4 shells, or Xbox shells. Just skins. Again, I’m not saying I agree with Sony’s positioning, but they would have a very strong case to make against dbrand or anyone else who follows suit. They might lose that case, but something tells me that changing a texture you can only discern with your face against the material doesn’t count as a distinctive feature.

@Sepewrath: better or not, you do need to have legal grounds to sue. I’m assuming Dbrand has gotten legal counsel and a legal opinion drawn up. If Sony were to sue, dbrand would pay for the legal defence obviously, and if they lose, they could easily turn around and use the insurance coverage of whomever wrote the opinion.