(Valve closes EU branch and that's it. ) This would likely be false, as they would still have to follow EU laws, if they sold from US. It would however make it harder to sue.
Also: However, once you start downloading or streaming the content you may no longer withdraw from the purchase, provided that the trader has complied with his obligations. Specifically, the trader must first obtain your explicit agreement to the immediate download or streaming, and you must explicitly acknowledge that you lose your right to withdraw once the performance has started.
So they add checkbox to checkout "I acknowledge that service starts immediatly" and that's it.
No wait.... they already do have you accept terms where it's written.. So this changes nothing.
Comment has been collapsed.
legal laws > terms of service.
basically if Valve puts any checkbox or anythinng into TOS or EULA that is against law you're not bound by it even if you agreed to mentioned terms of service.
EDIT: after further research - this law does not apply the moment you start download, as put in LAW itself not only Valve terms of service. Still it can be legally discussed if you made a purchase and did not download/stream content then this checkbox can be considered against the legislation, hence does not remove your right to demand a refund. The moment you start downloading the game you're no longer qualified for refund thou.
Comment has been collapsed.
"Specific information requirements apply when you buy digital content online, e.g. when downloading or streaming music or video. Before you make the purchase, you must also be informed how the content operates with relevant hardware/software (interoperability) and about its functionality, including whether any geographical restrictions apply to the use of the content and if private copies are allowed.
You also enjoy the right of withdrawal within 14 days from concluding the contract for online digital content. However, once you start downloading or streaming the content you may no longer withdraw from the purchase, provided that the trader has complied with his obligations. Specifically, the trader must first obtain your explicit agreement to the immediate download or streaming, and you must explicitly acknowledge that you lose your right to withdraw once the performance has started."
Sample story:
Lucrezia wanted to watch a movie online on a video on demand website. Before paying, a pop-up window appeared indicating that she must consent to the immediate performance and acknowledge that she would lose her right of withdrawal once the performance had started.
Lucrezia ticked the corresponding box, and was then directed to the payment page. Having paid, the movie started to stream and she was no longer entitled to withdraw from the contract.
On Steam:
I agree to the terms of the Steam Subscriber Agreement (last updated 3 Jul, 2013.)
By clicking "Purchase" you agree that Valve provides you immediate access to this digital content and that therefore any possibility of a withdrawal from this purchase ends – the purchase is final.
Comment has been collapsed.
reading now, but please see EDIT ;) I based my first comment on topic only ;)
after read: "By clicking "Purchase" you agree that Valve provides you immediate access to this digital content and that therefore any possibility of a withdrawal from this purchase ends – the purchase is final." like I said before - this part seems to be opposed to actual legislation, hence is not valid. Because if you agree to TOS that is against the law the actual TOS does not apply. as stated in legislation you lose your right to withdraw once the performance has started. Before you start downloading the game, streaming movie etc performance hasn't started, thus you should be allowed a refund whatever they put into the checkbox you're supposed to click.
Comment has been collapsed.
Considering it's immediately added to your profile (games owned) and some games have third party sites that check this for permissions etc., some even on steam community.
Valve could argue that you've already received a service before even downloading.
Thought, this could very well be denied in court unless Valve/Devs can show you used those services. I'm no legal expert.
Comment has been collapsed.
so valve is pulling their typical law loopholes like always (tax thing?) why can't they do similiar refunds to gog and origin? they have it running for long time now and havent heard of any abuse
edit: nvm read the whole thing, it wont change much, potentially 14 day refund if you dont download buy yeah.. thats w/e
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not loophole, it's protection for merchants from bad customers. (download game & request refund)
Origin can do refunds only because they are publisher, in fact if you buy non-EA games from there, you won't get refund. (Yes, Origin sells non-EA games too, even Steam-keys).
GOG is great example on trusting on customer, to not do bad. (I think, smaller userbase helps on that)
Comment has been collapsed.
it's actually not so bad, not good either, but has it's pros - especially for broken games you preorder. Just don't launch them on day0 hour0, wait few hours or a day, see first reviews, if it turns out to be a shitty lazy port locked to 720p 30fps with glitches, frame drops etc, ust request refund before you start downloading the game.
Comment has been collapsed.
Mentioned document specifies downloading or streaming indicating what is ment under the terms of performance. I'd argue that access to platform on which you can experience it performance alone, without accessing goods themselves would not be performance in itself, but well - I'm not a legal expert myself. But I think that if you buy a game licence, or generally any licence - be it game, software, movie or music the actual usage of bought product should matter, not acces to some connected platform. As you already have your steam account and your steam client before purchasing the next game, it's hard to argue that your performance starts the moment you add new game to platform you already had access to. You have same access as you had without purchasing the product. So performance itself should start the moment you connect with actual bought licenced content itself + like starting a download.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, but what if it doesn't require downloading & streaming? It's really hard to say whatever license is a service (compare to in-game funds, DLC included on disc, etc.). (Steam instantly downloads licenses to your computer, which could be used to play game in offline mode, by copying files from a friend, far fetched, both theoretically possible :P).
Comment has been collapsed.
then steam should implement a form of authorization that prevents you from bypassing the system, instead of trying to bypass the laws themselves. Because what if you never had those files, never played the game and decided for a refund that you deserve both legally and morally in this case (it was an impulse buy, you saw a reviews and changed your mind, publisher updated system specifications and you no longer meet them etc) - this way they're prohibiting you your legal rights because they assume you may try to cheat to bypass their system. And it doesn't matter if you try it or not - it's their job to implement better system that you cannot cheat instead of denying users their legal rights just in case they may try to game their system ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
If system specifications were wrong it would'be clearly eligible for refund:
"Before you make the purchase, you must also be informed how the content operates with relevant hardware/software (interoperability) and about its functionality, including whether any geographical restrictions apply to the use of the content and if private copies are allowed."
I agree that unplayed games should be eligible for refund. And even if you played and game isn't as described (Steam doesn't really do good job on this). Also even if you bought from third party (GMG, GG).
Edit: What I mean, depending on how you interpreted the law, in most cases this may not affect your ability based on Valve's interpretation of what service is, unless you're willing to go to court over it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh, I missed that - it's very good change - especially as in late 2014 with all new next gen games we were given false or no game requirements multiple times (like Evil Within changing it's requirements few days before release, new Metal Gear announcing official requirements just hours before launch or FF XIII updating that it will require 60GB download and disk space instead of previously announced 12GB after release itself).
Comment has been collapsed.
Too much text below your comment, so I won't bother to read, so this might have been said already:
It doesn't matter if Valve closes their EU branch, cause as long as they sell "goods" in (most of) Europe, they are bound by commercial law there. And they won't stop selling to Europe, so why on earth would they give up around half their income?
In any case, if I know my Valve history, they will find a way to get refunds to work (almost) without anyone exploiting it. For instance they can eliminate achievements for refunded games, make trading cards tradable only after the two weeks are up, and similar things.
Comment has been collapsed.
Updated my post on closing EU branch.
In previous cases getting cards haven't affected, I suppose Valve wouldn't care. There was game, which allowed auto-refunds (Colin McRae Rally) and I hear people buying it just to idle & sell cards before getting refund.
steamcommunity.com/app/287340/discussions/0/35219681832396773/
Comment has been collapsed.
I imagine they will limit the amount you can do this within a given time period to combat that. though not a perfect system, everything can be abused by someone.
Comment has been collapsed.
Part of the contract: "However, once you start downloading or streaming the content you may no longer withdraw from the purchase, provided that the trader has complied with his obligations"
Doesn't seem to be allowing you to play the game and then return it.
Comment has been collapsed.
You don't actually have to download a game to get the cards from it.
Comment has been collapsed.
14 day full refunds without question? That doesn't sound right. Surely there has to be a reason for refund. I know in Australia for example you're entitled to a refund or replacement if there's a valid reason for it, including goods not fit for purpose, goods of unacceptable quality, not what was advertised etc.
Comment has been collapsed.
Buy preorder to get bonuses (like price cut or bonus DLC or whatever), but don't start game right away. Wait few days for reviews to pop out. If they are good DL gaqme, if they are bad request refund before you've attempted to download the game.
Comment has been collapsed.
indeed. Got screwed over too many times preordering something just because it was 10-20% off before release day just to find out iit's a shitty not-working port that I will have to wait several weeks-months to eventually get patched/modded into playable state.
Comment has been collapsed.
he's dont know anything about this, just try to be smart...
Comment has been collapsed.
Why on earth would you read the store page of the game you want when you can just blindly buy it and then cry on the internet if you don't like it?
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd like for there to be law/s in place to allow us access to multiple copies of games owned by the same account.
For example, because of various bundles, I think my account owns Super Meat Boy possibly 5 times over. Would be great to harvest those and give them to people who don't own it yet. Since I've paid for every copy, I've always thought it was shitty that overlaps go to waste.
Comment has been collapsed.
You haven't paid for every copy, you've paid for 5 different bundles that contain Super Meat Boy. Every single one of those bundles stated that they are only for your own personal use as well.
Comment has been collapsed.
personal use is any form of "non-commercial" use - including giving it away to a friend or some stranger on the internet. Even trading it away as a physical person (not a company thou) is personal use. Bying it for purpose of reselling in your store, renting for profit, or in case of movies/music streaming publicly or in your commercial area (like using unlicenced music in your own bar) is a commercial use.
Comment has been collapsed.
I paid for a bundle of games, so divvy it up how you like, but no matter how cheap they made it, I still paid for every single game in the bundle, in multiple bundles. Super Meat Boy hasn't been a free giveaway, at least not that I ever took advantage of.
What you say, is like buying a box of Lucky Charms cereal, and saying that you only paid for the marshmallows, but you didn't pay for the grain pieces since they just came in the same box.
Nope, you paid for every component of that product.
Comment has been collapsed.
you're right that you should be allowed to do with your purchase what you like as long as it's for personal use, you're wrong however that you paid for every single game. you paid for a bundle, a package, thus got a discount. But any legal rights (like refund for example) applies then to whole package, not just single items it includes. To put it ibnto context: If you but 3 items on promo "3 for 2" and paid 33% less because of that, each item is still separate (because you could choose between what these 3 items will be), hence you can pursue your legal rights for each of them separately. On the other hand if you buy a "Package" of predefined products X, Y and Z it's considered and a single item and you may pursue your legal rights only considering whole package, not every item alone.
Comment has been collapsed.
Refunds are good, but your reasoning is ridiculous OP. Impulse buying is never good and researching before buying is always a better decision. I always do it and it never spoiled anything for me. Pre-ordering is just plain dumb and people who pre-order deserve whatever game they get. They're just feeding corporate greed because pre-orders make no sense in digital world, there is no limited supply like in retail stores.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yep, pointless hope. Us consumers are still being and will continued to be bent over - and well, you know the rest - by corporations. Coming soon to a Steam client near you - pay the taxes Valve actually had to pay and was dodging all this time by using their sneaky Luxembourg SARL with it's 3% VAT (while lying and pretending EU's higher prices for games had to do with the high VAT rates of various EU countries) for them! Here's another fun prediction: gifting restricted for 30 days, "to improve the gifting process and make it more secure and we swear, it's all for you guys, customerguys, promise!"
Comment has been collapsed.
you're wrong here. Any legisklated law overwrites any TOS you agreed upon. If something in TOS is aghainst the legislated law the thing that applies is this law, not TOS.
However in this case you will be able to return the game ONLY if you didn't play it or even didn't started downloading it. The moment you start download you are no longer eglible for a refund.
Comment has been collapsed.
can be useful for preorders - grab preorder at preorder sale (10-20% off) with preorder bonus content/DLCs just don't download on launch - wait few hours or a day for first reviews, if it turns out to be shitty glitched port with 720p 30fps lock crashing every 20 minutes - request refund, if it turns out to be good - DL it :> You gained all preorder bonuses while avoiding risk usually associated with preordering games ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
All the posts above mine have dealt with the mentality of "buy beat refund" and the counter to that (refund goes poof after downloading). So I won't join the crowd queueing up in front of the dead horse.
But I sense a huge problem implementing this together with Steam Family Sharing. So a user who shares his account with a family member buys a game and puts it, undownloaded, in inventory. By Steam Family Sharing operation though, anyone who has his library shared will be allowed to download and play it.
If Steam is going to stop the refund because of this (especially if the original purchaser didn't know what was going on), he's going to be really mad. But if Steam lets the refund go through, I predict a huge rise in "accounts for rent" / "family sharing to accounts for rent" and even more possibility of people getting scammed along those lines.
What do you guys think?
Comment has been collapsed.
Good point on the disabling, but I don't know whether that would ruffle users' feathers too. It could seem like a 'penalty' under the legislation: download before 14 days, get SFS; not download before 14 days, SFS removed. I think some of the more sharklike ones in Legal may start circling if Steam appears to be penalizing users' privileges outside of the purchased game itself... because in theory, once the license to play the game is purchased, under the T&C of SFS it rightfully is 'yours' to share legitimately among SFS accounts.
I think the second option of insisting that the primary downloads it first may also be a problem because some people are unable to download all their games (for example, my toaster space requires me to play all I want out of a game, then clear local data to make space for the next). Or different preferences - as in the oft-quoted example, Dad would download games which could be higher than NC16 and Junior would want Portal 2. Surely Dad doesn't have to keep Portal 2 on his computer just for Junior's access?
Ultimately, I hope Steam really goes over all the issues before release. I lost a lot of confidence in them after this sale, when writing to Support about an issue I had received only generic copypasta replies and in the end they just closed the ticket in my face without an explanation.
Comment has been collapsed.
there is no law legislation regarding family sharing - it's steam own system they are not forced to implement, thus they can make whatever changes they want to it including timed limitation for example. All it takes for them is to update TOS for family sharing timed disabling and you click agree and you have no legal right to complaint.
Comment has been collapsed.
According to some posts it says you can no longer get a refund once the download begins. But if this were not the case, then yes you would be able to do so, but not often. If you do it too often odds are they'd not allow you any more refunds.
Comment has been collapsed.
you're wrong, even double wrong ;) first there won't be "not the case" as it's said straight in this legislation that any download/streaming will revoke your right to refund, second - as it's not just some "nice policy" by steam, but a law forced upon them it doesn't matter how many refunds you can or cannot do. if you're eglible for a refund seller cannot deny you your rights before "you refunded too many times in the past".
Comment has been collapsed.
Double wrong? First off I was just pointing out what was stated by others. Secondly, if you're abusing the system then yes they can deny it. Its called fraud. If you play the entire game then request a refund, and do this constantly, there is clearly intent. So you in fact are wrong.
Comment has been collapsed.
if something is requested by legislated law, provider cannot deny you it no matter how many times you decide to use this right. And it's not the fraud, it's your given right.
And LEGISLATION ITSELF says how it will be impossible to "play the entire game" - as said before by me and many other, only people who say otherwise in this topic are ignorants who didn't read anything in topic or on the matter and comments based solely on OP, who is wrong (not giving all the facts) and you who refuse to take these facts into consideration before you post.
Also as much as some ppl may believe Gaben is a god, if he wants to operate in EU he must respect the laws. Ofc he can try to fing loopholes in these laws, like Steam did with Luxemburg tax, but if Steam actions/TOS/EULA will be directly opposed to laws (limitting use of refund, which is provided by legislated laws) it will simply not be allowed. End of Story.
Comment has been collapsed.
Valve seriously needs to start towing the line or go fuck themselves.
Comment has been collapsed.
16,340 Comments - Last post 12 minutes ago by schmetti
18 Comments - Last post 33 minutes ago by pb1
82 Comments - Last post 36 minutes ago by Gyhulhu
20 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by RhoninMagus
40 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by wigglenose
135 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by ashtwo
33 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by ACWraith
27 Comments - Last post 2 minutes ago by CurryKingWurst
47 Comments - Last post 8 minutes ago by dragon099
1 Comments - Last post 17 minutes ago by PolarKing
905 Comments - Last post 21 minutes ago by thed4rkn1te
749 Comments - Last post 28 minutes ago by alexfirehouse
883 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by RhoninMagus
83 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by kolja300314
That means all digital sales are privy to 14 day full refunds without questions to those in the UE. This also means consumer protection is likely to spread across other countries like the US, Canada, Australia, NZ, ect, as market trends over the years can be compared between nations.
This is good for both consumers and developers because people are going to more likely to take the plunge without having to spoil many aspects of the game for themselves while trying to research it in order to be sure it is quality.
Although this system is open for abuse, it will evolve and abuse will be harder to pull off. Overall I believe this is a net win, for people will be more likely to impulse buy and try new things. Developers will be more likely to try new things for people will be less likely to regret their purchases.
Just imagine, all the people who bought CoD, or Dayz, or Colonial Marines, they could have instead of being made upset, turned around and gave their money to a developer who they felt deserved it more. CoD lied about dedicated servers, Dayz lies about being in a playable and testable state, and Colonial Marines lied about almost everything. All of those games would have rightly suffered monetarily.
Source:clicky
Also check this
Comment has been collapsed.