HMV UK & Ireland CEO Simon Fox has questioned the war being waged by game publishers on pre-owned software sales.

"I think it's slightly odd that publishers should somehow think that they have a claim to profit that a customer might make on a second sale," the exec told GamesIndustry.biz.

"As a retailer all we're doing is providing an intermediary service, just as eBay is, or Amazon is. We genuinely think that actually what it does is enable people to buy new product - and it allows them to trade-in previously-played product to get a credit and put that back into the games market."

He added: "The way we've certainly geared our offer is that it's far more advantageous for the customer not to take cash, but to take a credit that's then used in buying another game. The vast majority of our pre-owned sales are to support new releases."

Fox went on to say that he has some sympathy for publishers, but that it's hard to find a market where the original owner benefits from the future trade of products.

"The fact is, in every case, the manufacturer of whatever it might be makes their profit from the original sale, transfers the IP or ownership to the buyer - and if the buyer then chooses to sell that item, it's up to them. You don't hear book publishers asking for a share of the second-hand book market. I've never heard that. "

A number of the industry's leading publishers have attempted to combat pre-owned sales in recent months by only including access to features like online play in new boxed copies of their games.

EA pioneered the one-time code in the area, implementing its controversial Online Pass across its Sports portfolio.

Ubisoft has publicly supported the idea, whilst Activision has admitted that it wants to "limit the supply" of content in pre-owned games - so that it can take a slice of revenues from second-hand sales.

THQ has been one of the most vocal supporter of the move, having implemented it in UFC and WWE games.

The firm told CVG earlier this year that it believes second-hand sales "cheat" developers out of income.

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/ar ... ?id=268223

'Look, we gave it a fair go, but even notorious price gougers HMV are having a go at us now...'

2nd hand sales DO cheat developers out of money.... but publishers dont care for them

It has always happened as far back as I can remember (10+ years gaming) getting a pre owned copy of Perfect Dark, back then there was no dlc either

This.

You aren't buying the product, it's the licence. There is a difference unless you think it is wise to sell on software you licence but do not own

This is something the industry and I disagree on. I feel perfectly within my rights to sell on my "licence", and TBH I'd welcome legislation to that end.

As things stand it's a legal grey area - English law is still undecided as to whether software is a product or a service - and some legislation to end the ambiguity would do all parties a favour. Personally, I think consumers are more than entitled to sell their software - other markets don't see anything from second-hand sales, so I don't see why software developers are any different.

What about books - you don’t see Penguin going after second hand book sellers, do you? And before you say that it’s different, here is the blurb printed inside of a recently purchased book:



This is boiler plate stuff, but if I wanted to move on this rather odd translation of Zamyatin’s We, I‘d have to ask the publishers permission first. I may own the physical item, but I do not own the material the boom represents, nor do I have the right to sell it to someone else, give it to Oxfam to resell, lend to a friend, etc..

Books and films generally come with a must not be re-sold, lent or hired threat. Bollocks to them and the games producers, the secondhand market is a vital wheel in the economy.

It's different, in the fact that developers can attempt to recover the potential sale by selling DLC, you can't exactly get DLC for a book

They can also see who has bought 2nd hand copies by use online etc

I don't agree with the fact the publishers are kicking up the stink but I can see why. It's just a shame they don't realise that better content and better DLC (such as 0 day DLC) is a better approach to whining and "Project $10"

I agree, why should the games industry have a special treatment. I am sure that this will be tested in court at some point. In the mean time I suspect that it will cut significantly the amount actually spent on games because they cannot sell them. The new Civ game has a pile of problems and I think DRM could be one of them.