Is renting Lego:RB just to import unethical?

[SirDrexl]

My guess is code in the manual and one-time import. We were lucky with the RB1 import being cheap, I'm guessing not so much for now on, heh

I never thought you were supposed to be able to just sell off your copy of RB anyway. I know people will point to the export key, but I thought that was a nominal charge for people who remained owners of the game. I figured that using codes in the track packs and the Lego game was a way of stopping people from getting a cheap export from a borrowed copy.

Then again, I haven't heard any official position on this. If someone from Harmonix came out and said "oh sure, that export key covers the songs, no matter how you got the disc" I stand corrected.

[kiggidykev]

Just to expand my thoughts a little more: RB2 had that one-time use code for the 20 Free Songs, Beatles has a code in the manual for some as-of-yet-unknown reason

Stands to reason that LEGO will have a one-time use code. Otherwise I'm guessing a ton of people will just rent it to get the songs, and that would cut into the profits of the game severely.

[C-Pr0mpt]

How about you just read the threads on the same topic regarding RB1 and save us another 100 threads for this game.

[princeofcups]

Unethical? What's with the angsty guilt trip. If HMX let's you do it, then it's silly not to. If they don't want you to do it, then they'll make it technically impossible.

[Jglaubman]

They aren't going to have the export be like RB1. By the time RB1 was exportable, RB2 was coming out. They weren't going to make much more profit from RB1. They are not going to do this when LEGO comes out. My guess is a one time export code like ACDC.

[CONAN9845]

It's certainly in their best interest to have one time downloads per disc, and it's CERTAINLY in the best interest of the developers of L:RB to have one time downloads.

[Alright_Computer]

There was a similar discussion not so long ago asking pretty much the same question about RB1. As I recall, that one didn't end well and eventually diverged into personal attacks and silly arguments about semantics.

Naturally, I'm already popping the popcorn for this thread.

[BStu78]

Yes, that would be unethical. The additional licensing fee is likely negotiated on the basis of assuming that people purchasing the export key are legal owners of the game. Circumventing that would be unethical whether you can get away with it or not. Its frankly disturbing that so many people here will gladly confuse "able to get away with" and "ethical".

[DaronMalakianXVII]

Unethical? What's with the angsty guilt trip. If HMX let's you do it, then it's silly not to. If they don't want you to do it, then they'll make it technically impossible.

I agree.

[DookieMan]

I'm guessing it will be a one time code, to avoid what happens with RB1. Unlike RB1, you'll be able to export it as a brand new game. You might wanna buy it, use the code, and sell it stating that you used the code?