Like everyone, you can see the future. Or you don't, but this will not stop you from telling others what the future will be like.
They already changed the refund policy for the eu customers , and they allowed it worldwide . Now everyone can refund any item prior to 14 days uppon purchase But i doubt we'll see reseling bought game anytime soon .
It seem like they removed the region restriction on all my game too . I bought some russian games in the past, and now i can play them without vpn , they are row . like arma 3...etc
And yeah, i'm french . ty for the info
Comment has been collapsed.
It seem like they removed the region restriction on all my game too . I bought some russian games in the past, and now i can play them without vpn , they are row . like arma 3...etc
This is an effect that seems to occur to every "geo-locked" game. The lock seems to get lifted after 3 months. There's no official statement about that, but several users stated that their formerly locked games became playable after this time.
Comment has been collapsed.
+1, it's confirmed that after 3 months locked games get unlocked. I suggest not making a big deal about it though, Valve may just decide to patch it if they see too many users being happy.
Comment has been collapsed.
Jeah, I find a bit odd that they didn't make an official statement about this. Do you think it's some kind of bug?
Comment has been collapsed.
I do think it may have been something like that. Doesn't seem to be intended.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hum, I was surprised, when I realized that one of my games was no longer locked, but I figured, that valve made this "decay-lock", because they think that, after 3 months, their goal with a geolock is mainly achieved - profitwise. Maybe they feared that they would run into new legal issues, if they kept this lock? Hum, I really don`t know. But jeah, could just be a bug. Hope they don't fix it too soon then :)
Comment has been collapsed.
I've bought the uncut version of Wolfenstein for that exact reason.
Only 2 months and 10 days until I can play it. ^^
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe you want to play the german version, in case you can't wait any longer. :P
You can own both in your steam library!
Comment has been collapsed.
Reseling a disc game is ok, because all the game content is in the disc, but about digital games, it's impossible. You can't resell digital games from psn and live and on steam you can't too.
Comment has been collapsed.
but you can buy disc with a game that is on steam, all the game content is still on the disc but you still have to activate it on steam if you want to play it so you cant resell that disc
Comment has been collapsed.
Instead of reselling physical goods, there's still the posibillity of license transfer though.
Meaning: the key and everything with it gets moved from your library to someone else's, with money transfer going the other way. (And Valve being Valve, they can probably find loopholes to ensure "money" means Steam wallet and a % of the fee can disappear into their pockets)
The legalese between the 2 is slightly different, but EU reselling law doesn't see reselling and license transferring as fundamentally different.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm with you, there's nothing wrong with a little education.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sorry, english is not my native language, and I thought it was written that way... I can't edit the poll, but at least I learned something :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Hmm, a foreign language can be a confusing thing. Don't worry about it. Loose is a word too. Like when you say "a loose screw". Just don't lose the loose screw. :P
Comment has been collapsed.
I wouldn't worry about it, a lot of native english speakers spell it that way for some unknown reason.
Comment has been collapsed.
I can tell you that even native speakers get things like this wrong all the time
Comment has been collapsed.
They are selling their products in Europe, so they can be held liable for their business practise.
Comment has been collapsed.
America is not Europe, we have a different stance against corporations here. We do not hold the stupid belief that they are people for instance.
Comment has been collapsed.
Either valve or France could firewall specific IPs. There are ways around it, but it would stop most people.
Alternatively they could require addresses for purchases and block based on that.
There are numerous ways. Each way has workarounds, but they would stop the majority.
Comment has been collapsed.
Its more likely that they would insist valve firewall them. (thereby passing off the cost and responsibility)
There was a similar case where a country effectively made a tech service stop serving them... I wish I remembered the details...
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually they do have legal obligations. Valve targets people in European countries with their business and has taken actions to support those customers, thus they are subject to European laws. It doesn't matter where they are based. It is most commonly discussed in the news when relating to European data protection and/or privacy laws (often related to Google or Facebook), but all laws apply.
Comment has been collapsed.
But if your small business opens office in Luxembourg then your under EU law
Comment has been collapsed.
If you actually target the European customers, you are obligated to also follow all applicable European commerce laws. The only situation where you could ignore the European laws (with the exception of import and export laws) is when they are incidental customers. An incidental customer would be a customer you: don't advertise to, don't offer direct support to on the site (translating the site, stuff like that) and don't actively seek out.
There are quite a lot of companies that make mistakes with that, as American law often allows the state laws of where a company is established to be used instead of where something is sold, but that's not true on an international scale (again, assuming you actually target the international customers).
Comment has been collapsed.
That's incorrect. You can be directly fined by a EU court for violating EU laws even when you are only established in the US. This has happened before, usually against bigger companies (smaller ones aren't usually harmful or significant enough to bother). There is a reason that many US companies are upset over the upcoming new privacy laws in Europe, because they have to follow them as well despite the major overhaul of their systems that would be required.
As soon as you target an international audience, the different laws of all involved countries also apply to you. There are international agreements on this and the US has also signed these, so a US company is not exempt from the "local" national laws. These agreements exists specifically to prevent a company in one country from breaking the laws of another country.
Comment has been collapsed.
France, or the offended party would seek a warrant for your arrest and extradition from the US.
If you break the law of a foreign country and that country has an extradition agreement with the US, then the US if chose to accept the order, would arrest you and arrange for you you to be handed over to the French authorities.
"Surely my government will not act as law enforcement for the EU."
Of course it would.
That's what extradition treaties are for.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nope.
An example being Amanda Knox, who was extradited to Italy.
"Otherwise these treaties would effectively make all connected countries agree to each other's laws, past and future."
Not at all, and with respect that's a crazy interpretation.
First off, there are statutes of limitation.
Second, extradition is considered on a case by case basis.
Third, the extradition treaty would cover the types of crimes that extradition can be pursued for.
But anyway, see how playing dumb and ignoring EU courts worked for Google.
Massive fines and the company faces having their European arm broken up.
Not only that, but any EU citizen can ask Google to remove stories about them from their indexes.
And, seeing as Valve has offices in Europe (and presumably payments are processed there too) - Valve would have to be completely crazy to exacerbate the problem.
Sony, Microsoft, Valve, Apple, can cry all they want the resale of digital rights will happen, in the EU anyway, eventually.
Comment has been collapsed.
Good point, this would be much more effective on a European level for instance. Maybe it would be the same as with BBC's iplayer where it is only available if you're in the UK or use some hassle like VPN.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, they can choose not to show up, be ruled against. and suffer the consequences if they ever step on European soil. There are plenty of CEO's & ex-CEOs around the world that have to steer clear of certain places.
Edward Snowden made the same choice in the opposite direction.
But there are those consumers, companies, regulatory bodies and countries that don't look kindly on fugitives from the law no matter which country.
The American government has also sued alot of people & companies outside of the US. Kim dotCom lives in New Zealand while he is wanted by the FBI.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, it is in a sense. Same as other criminals or scammers that get away without getting caught, they have won also. It's just not sustainable in the long run, you make a mistake and get caught. If it was a public company then the board or shareholders would have a larger say. But at this point Gabe can do what he likes :)
I've got no judgement myself some laws are right some are wrong. Some governments are fair some are not. Every man and his family for themselves :)
Comment has been collapsed.
You're missing my point. You were saying that it doesn't matter what the french government says.
Malian, French or American. Doesn't matter. Follow the law or don't it's every person or corporations decision.
Piratebay serves many people in many countries. There are also more countries that aren't or don't sue Piratebay than those that do.
It's up to valve. Any Goverment can do what they like, it's up to everyone else to decide what they want to do, there are just consequences for every action.
Comment has been collapsed.
Dude, Valve has offices in Europe.
In a European Union country, Luxembourg (probably some corporate tax fiddle).
But Valve would be prosecuted here, have huge fines imposed, and may even find itself the target of a monopoly investigation leading them to be broken up, which is already happening with Google.
Being an American company does not preclude them from having to abide by local laws.
"Edward Snowden made the same choice in the opposite direction."
Wrong.
Edward Snowden fled, initially to China, then to Russia.
Completely different scenario to Europe, seeing as there is no extradition treaty between the US and Russia or China.
Comment has been collapsed.
They choose to pay low taxes by doing their business via Valve S.A.R.L Luxembourg-> then they have to take the consequences.
And European courts give a shit about american government when they freeze valve bank-accounts here :P
Comment has been collapsed.
The same way Apple and Samsung had their own little legal wars over patents in Germany. Corporations here are not people, they are entities, who, if they want to do business in the country, must obey the country's laws.
Comment has been collapsed.
True, but they are a registered corporation in Europe. Whenever I make a purchase on Steam, I pay to Valve Luxembourg.
Comment has been collapsed.
No stupid vegetable option, no vote.
Je ne parle pas français :(
Comment has been collapsed.
Valve's TOS is silly (not taking responsibility for delivering faulty products even though they are the seller) and it needs to be questioned.
Comment has been collapsed.
They've gotten better about it with refunds though, so there's not a huge problem for most users.
Comment has been collapsed.
I can see that some parts of TOS are found non-applicable, resale of games however not so much...
Comment has been collapsed.
They can counter that by saying you have a license to use the software and don't actually own the product. They've made the same argument with boxed games as well.
I would love this to change, but I don't see it happening in this case.
Comment has been collapsed.
I can't think of a time where that policy has ever held true for PC games. No gaming store, at least in my time, has ever bought second hand PC games because of how easy it is to make pirated games, and it was never illegal for them not to do so. I can't imagine the case will be any strong with digital licenses considering they're always bound to an account of some sort which cannot be shared such as Blizzard or Origin.
Comment has been collapsed.
Weird... Translate is failing on that page... So I can't actually read the article.
Unless the lawsuit is very carefully worded, they don't have my chance at winning.
Valve can simply say we are selling you a license, you don't own the game.
That's how its always been with software, you buy a license. It just wasn't as apparent when you had a physical copy of it.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's right, but you could effectively transfer your licence to a third party by selling the physical copy, and I believe the various consumer groups are right in pursuing the ability to do the equivalent with virtual goods too (not sure, but current EU laws may already back them up).
Comment has been collapsed.
Better go sue EA, Xbox Live, PSN Store, Uplay, GooglePlay, and iTunes/Apple while they're at it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Perhaps the difference is that that Valve have an effective monopoly on a large segment of the market now, so they're a good company to start with in order to establish precedence.
Comment has been collapsed.
There are more console gamers (though perhaps not as many use digital downloads) than there are PC gamers, and there are far, far more mobile gamers than there are PC gamers. The numbers are quite staggering ...
For comparison, in 2014, Valve made 1.5 billion dollars, and mobile gaming raked in 24.5 billion dollars. The Chinese alone spent over 9 billion on mobile games last year.
Edit for my terrible formatting skills -_-
2nd Edit: That doesn't even include music and media sales on mobile platforms but it does include pay-per-use services like gambling, etc.
Comment has been collapsed.
By "large segment of the market", I did of course mean the PC gaming market...
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, I knew exactly what you meant, and I see where you're coming from.
Just seems odd to me that they wouldn't toss their line at a much bigger fish if they were trying to establish precedence for digital ownership rights, especially since Valve's already won this battle once in Germany in 2010 (so there's already precedence). Both Apple and Googleplay make several times more money from digital services (and also include several other forms of media), with a much wider user-base, and one that's growing much faster than the PC gaming market.
Valve's a guppy compared to those whales.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think that the console markets have always tended to be their own little segmented closed ecosystems, whereas PC gamers are more used to a completely open market (disclaimer: I speak as someone who never had an interest in console gaming, partly for these very reasons).
Valve's looming monopoly of that segment may be something PC users think worth fighting against, especially when it means losing significant rights that they've always taken for granted.
Comment has been collapsed.
You've said nothing I don't agree with whole-heartedly.
My biggest concern with the whole affair are the long-term effects it will have on the PC gaming market. What's it going to do to pricing, indie developers, smaller publishing houses, etc? In all honesty, I don't want a market full of $80-$100 CoD clones every year from the scant few publishers that can afford to take the hit from re-sales of their products. I'm fine with not "owning" the games I play, as long as it means I have a wide and varied library and price points to choose from .. To put it another way, I don't see them as material goods, I see them as consumables, if that makes any sense?
It's one thing to fight for your "rights" ... but I think this time they just might be shooting themselves in the collective foot ...
Comment has been collapsed.
I think it's fine that there are some people in the world who view games as consumables and some who care about being able to play what they pay for at any time they want in the future (in fact, I might think one way about one game and the other way about another!), and I have no problem with games being sold both ways at different price points.
The issue with Steam is that it's pushing this part of the market too far in one direction and limiting consumer choice.
For the rest of us, there are of course niche retailers like GOG. The publishers can decide for themselves if they care enough to get profits from the consumers who are willing to pay some price for what they value, or force them to resort to obtaining cracked games.
Disallowing licence transfer effectively raises the cost of playing a game for many users.
Comment has been collapsed.
PSN and Xbox Live allow us to resell disc-based copies of games, Steam doesn't. I think that's a part of the reason why they sue Valve.
Comment has been collapsed.
I suppose that there is merit to sue upon, but as a US based company Valve enjoys certain protections and the terminology of most digital media implies that we're really buying a "license" and not actually the content, so you could have a defense there.
Comment has been collapsed.
Wait so they're arguing that you should be able to basically treat Valve like gamestop? Why? Everything is digital, there doesnt seem like there's a point. Valve wouldn't be able to resell "used" games as used, there's no incentive for them to do it. Besides, you dont buy the game when you purchase through Steam, you buy a license to use (unless things are different in EU). You can't sell something you don't own.
Comment has been collapsed.
you have some thing wrong, ther valve's used game would have no card drop compared to new one
XD
Comment has been collapsed.
What if the original owner never got his drops, or only half of them?
Comment has been collapsed.
I think that the theory of license/physical copy is purely rethroical.
The DVD grants you access to a content by "downloading" the content from the disk (wich is an existing object) to your HD.
The license grants you access to a content by downloading the content from a server (wich is also an existing object) to your HD.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not though. Copyright law treats them different. You can do nearly anything you want with something you own, including making a personal digital copy of content you've already paid for. You wouldn't be able to distribute or share the content. A license is more restricted, you can use it as the seller defines. You can download it, sure but you have to use it within the confines of the seller. That restriction doesn't exist with something you own.
Likewise, you can't sell something you lease. If you're renting an apartment, you're not in any position to sell that apartment. You don't actually own it. Any digital purchase you technically don't own either.
Comment has been collapsed.
As I said, the difference is rethorical, owning a physical drive or owning the access to a server is the same thing.
Your example is wrong anyway, if I rent an apartment I can not sell it of course as I can not sell the intellectual propriety of the game BUT in case I have a contract and I don't want to live there anymore, I CAN rent the apartment to a third person that takes my place(at least in the country where I live). And since a license is a life-long rent I can be able to rent it to a third person in the same way
Comment has been collapsed.
I am talking US law, so maybe it's different for you. Most places here won't let you sublet to a third party without written consent. I think therein lies the difference.
Comment has been collapsed.
I didn't knew that in US you could not do that, I taught that in most of the world worked more or less the same. You are right, it may depend on the region where you live, I'm curious about what will happen but probably steam will have to accept european laws, as many foreign companies did before.
Comment has been collapsed.
The only winners in this will be the lawyers on both sides; for sure.
Comment has been collapsed.
i don't think this would ever happen, just think of the amount of lost sales steam/devs/publishers will have...
you buy deus ex next year for $60, play for 2 weeks, resell it for $50. the guy plays it, and resells it again 1 week later for $50.
makes no sense.
not saying it's good or bad, but, no one involved in the game insdustry will let this happen.
and if it ever happens, they will make new laws to protect their sales.
Comment has been collapsed.
And the following year all AAA new releases will cost $100+ to compensate. :D
Comment has been collapsed.
I was just reading a discussion earlier today about high end watch makers doing precisely that every year which causes even used watches to constantly appreciate in value. It likely won't happen but it would be interesting if video games suddenly became investments as well. Though it would also mean that in a decade or two video games would cost thousands of dollars.
Comment has been collapsed.
Imagine selling your full-of-bundles steam account for thousands of dollars in a couple of years $_$
Comment has been collapsed.
Umm...interesting, but I think this group will have a change to win and I kinda agree with Valve, I mean if they will allow everybody to resell their games nobody will use SteamStore again...
And...why am I blacklisted by you? :(
Comment has been collapsed.
I guess it was about ratio, but now we have the nice SG tools to make ratio-restricted GAs... You are not anymore on the naughty list, Darkness II awaits you !
Comment has been collapsed.
They are stingy about region locked game, this moreover.
I think this is very against their policy.
But honestly if selling game through market can be done it's good though, and lessen the trade scam.
Comment has been collapsed.
We dont own games we own licenses to play the games. So there is no case here.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm french and...
meh
It's not the first time that our government try to attack Valve and we still have Steam.
Comment has been collapsed.
I would like that to happen, regardless of the consequences. :D
I don't see a complexity in returning a Steam Game and "compiling" it back into a
Steam Gift/Key or other container that limits its use until further "processed" ...
Yet the problem lies here > digital licenses equal infinite supply and finite buyers
and having buyers purchase something that has already been purchased once > conflict of interest.
Didn't bother looking it up in details > some Microsoft Software can be re-sold legally in Europe
and Microsoft is certainly a bigger fish than Valv, but since entertainment isn't a urgent/important
matter - "they" hadn't gotten their beating yet.
Comment has been collapsed.
If I were valve - I would just stop providing services for France. Users who would suddenly lose all their game libraries would do the rest.
Comment has been collapsed.
First of all - they already got money for games. And second - they can consider, what would take more money - losing the sue, or leaving the market in one country. And, at last - I doubt they would lose this marked either way, if they just stop service for France (not the whole EU zone! only the country where they try to sue) - people would make it possible for them to return. Google did the say couple of times, and every time it ended the same - those who were trying to sue google was begging for them to return.
Also, I don't say it's the only way, and I doubt Valve would do this. I just said, that I would did it "If I were valve".
Comment has been collapsed.
This is only France filing suit. Valve has already won a similar case in Germany in 2010 (giving them precedence). They determined that digital goods aren't subject to the same laws as physical goods. Keep in mind this is one of the countries that was pushing for a refund policy.
Refunds and re-sales are entirely different animals. One transfers ownership back to the original seller/owner, and the other from one third party to a separate third party -- and sometimes multiple third parties over time.
Then consider if you will the potentially adverse effects this could have on the entire PC gaming industry ... the effect it might have on indie developers and smaller publishers alone -- it would drive them out of business. One license could change hands multiple times, completely cutting out all profits for the developers. It would also drive prices up across the board, and push out all but the largest publishers, severely limiting the number of games available to purchase in the first place. Of course, this is assuming France wins the case and the policy is adopted across Europe. The larger picture isn't always as pretty as the smaller one right in front of us.
In the long run, Valve could stand to lose more money by adopting this policy. Sometimes it's better to cut off the foot rather than lose the whole leg. If Valve were to decide to cut France out of the picture entirely (even temporarily), how long before other countries fall in line, realizing the tax money they'd lose from sales? Money is the biggest motivator in the capitalist world. ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
Steam Wallet isn't a "liquid asset" like actual currency -- it's only good for one particular type of goods in one particular place, so Steam Wallet re-sales are highly unlikely, but still possible due to the way refunds are handled. Then again, refunds and re-sales are different. Refunds were put in place for dissatisfied customers, and misleading or non-functional products, which is entirely different from re-selling a fully functional product. If the law does go through, I'm sure Valve will push for your proposed option to cut their losses. It's hard to say what sort of assets this group expects in re-sale, though, as there aren't many details released about the law-suit yet. Will they settle for letting people re-sell games for Steam wallet, or will cash be a required option?
In my opinion, the entire lawsuit is a muscle-flexing measure and won't hold much weight once it hits the courts.
It's all speculation and wild conjecture at this point anyway, so your guess is as good as mine what will happen. Very little is known yet about what's really going on, and this case has been laying around on the back-burner since 2013. I guess we'll see where it goes (if anywhere). Personally speaking, I hope it doesn't go through. I really don't see any good coming of it.
EDIT: if you reply, my apologies in advance for not replying back right away. Have a terrible migraine and need some rest. Good discussion, though. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
I had already looked it up earlier. EU was 40% of the market, NA was 41% as of early 2014 (best I could do on short notice), so about equal for all intents and purposes. No idea why the large difference in bandwidth.
I'm a google-whorelover. As soon as I read the first article I looked up everything I could about the lawsuit and their past lawsuits. There really isn't much out there at all. I also speak French, but yeah .... google translate :P
Comment has been collapsed.
and you have to add that people in Europe also pay more for games because of the $1 = 1€ rule set by publishers :P
Probably already factored in, since I imagine they'd have to convert all currencies to USD for purposes of comparison. It's also only France suing Valve (and Germany's already ruled in Valve's favor).. It's just another case of everyone wanting to dip their fingers in the pie (edit: or in this case double dip)
Comment has been collapsed.
If you're gonna sue Valve over something, sue them for selling game bundles that remove games you already own.
Comment has been collapsed.
Agreed. If you already have the game and buy it in a bundle, then you should get a gift copy.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't care tbh. Big companies get sued every day cause people try to get their piece of the money. I could care less. I'm satisfied with Steam.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nothing will happen as usual
What the article describes in a nutshell (good thing I speak and read french pretty well) is that they are butthurt about the no reselling policy plus they think that Valve is trying to push away all responsibility, pointing out the 77 k accounts hijacked news
Nvm that the two step authentification was EXPLICITLY CREATED AS A RESPONSE TO THIS -_-
Whole article is basically nothing but hilarious misinformed mess, maybe Lemonde should make articles about things they have some knowledge about instead of doing some stupid clickbait tabloid article which is worse in terms of quality than IGN
Comment has been collapsed.
I wonder if this could possibly mean that if the suit is successful, that French Steam users could sell their STEAM Account instead of the games themselves?
Comment has been collapsed.
Roughly here is what they say:
"Unlike physical copies bought in shops, it's impossible to re-sell the digital copies bought on Steam. Even though EU court authorize the re-sell of second hand software.
"Steam points out it's not a purchase but a license concession"
Today if a player loose access to his Steam account, he looses access to all games he paid for.
"Selling prices are the same, and the word "Buy" is everywhere on the platform webpages". says UFC que choisir juror
One of Steam's argument against the reselling: " They tell us technically it's very complicated to implement" The only step taken by Steam is the possibility to refund a game, only under specific conditions.
On the other hand, users have the possibility to create content on Steam but "Steam grants itself a worldwide licence" on these contents. UFC que choisir consider this "a joke", internet users aren't buying the games, but on the other hand Steam can reutilize their creations."
Comment has been collapsed.
I just read that "UFC Que Choisir", a french consumer defense group, has started a legal action against Valve. People who can read french can have a look to this: http://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2015/12/17/revente-de-jeux-dematerialises-valve-assigne-en-justice_4834170_4408996.html
Primary thing is about reselling bought games, that should be possible according to EU laws. There are also concerns about Valve's limited responsability according to TOS, which is not compliant with local laws.
Also sorry for the stupid poll, but at least I did not put any stupid vegetable option !
Oops, I was about to forgot the mandatory giveaway: http://www.steamgifts.com/giveaway/LYGDD/the-darkness-ii (Nota Bene: level 3)
Comment has been collapsed.