Valve/Steam sued in Germany over 2nd Hand Game Sales

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  02 February 2013
Well looks like my previous comments about rights and the future we're creating didn't take that long to happen after all.

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthr...010#post7514010
 
  02 February 2013
Originally Posted by Shesul: Except it isn't. And no, you cannot do whatever you want with it - see darthviper107 answer about that.

Software you use in Steam isn't yours. You pay for a service that stores your games in the cloud and allows you to download it as many times as you want and play it. You don't like it, i don't like it, but that's the reality. I find the spirit of "i don't agree, change yourself for my whims" an example fit for that thread about mediocrity.

I don't give a damn about Valve, but i find ridiculous that people think they actually have the right to dictate how a perfectly legal business that so far hasn't been dishonest or done wrong to their customers has to bend down to their antiquated minds. We all traded our games cartridges or sold our card games to friends when we were young. The world is different, business models changed.

You don't like, don't buy. I also don't agree that on ITunes a song from a good artist has the same 99cent price than a justin biber one. I don't agree that Apple products should cost as much for what they offer, I also don't agree astrologists should be allowed to exist because they rip of people ( i hope no contest on that right? ), that tobacco is bad for your health, mcdonalds is crappy food, but until the day you stop having the freedom to give those money or not, it is all your choice and i don't see the justification in suing them. No-one is to blame but you for joining in. You knew how it worked beforehand.

Lately the videogames industry has become the easy target of cowards that can't handle go after the real issues. But i understand. It's easier to persecute friendly Gabe Newell than go after the gun industry, the corrupt politicians or sleezy bankers. Those can bite back, nerds are softer targets

Hey, i think kickstarter and crowdfunding in general should pay heavy taxes for the amount of cash that is being "donated"/received like the rest of working people have to. I don't agree. I have the right to get equality. If my mooching neighbor not only doesn't work, gets free money from the internet and doesn't even have to pay taxes, it goes against my rights! Right guys?! Lets pick up the righteousness armor and sword of truthiness and see you with the rest of the crusaders at the gate!


You just don't get it. You keep coming back to believing that whatever the developer/publisher tells you is true, must be true. They can spout ANYTHING they want in their EULA or TOS or whatever, it doesn't override laws in a specific country. It doesn't make it legal! You can sign any contract between two people, and if it breaks the law, the contract aint worth shite! Look at non-compete clauses in employment contracts. Those things aren't worth the paper they're written on, and have been shot down time and again in the courts. EULA's are no different. Germany is trying to say that in THEIR country, you can't sell a game to an individual, and then in small text somewhere, say that you don't own that software, you're just leasing it. I for one applaud them. I hope this whole system burns to the ground, and they have to remake it from the ground up. It's even possible to spend thousands on a piece of graphics software, and not be able to resell that software if you no longer want to own it. Who's greedy here? Me for wanting to resell something I purchased for thousands of dollars, or A******k for saying I don't actually own that software I paid thousands for?
 
  02 February 2013
Originally Posted by spurcell: You just don't get it. You keep coming back to believing that whatever the developer/publisher tells you is true, must be true. They can spout ANYTHING they want in their EULA or TOS or whatever, it doesn't override laws in a specific country. It doesn't make it legal! You can sign any contract between two people, and if it breaks the law, the contract aint worth shite! Look at non-compete clauses in employment contracts. Those things aren't worth the paper they're written on, and have been shot down time and again in the courts. EULA's are no different. Germany is trying to say that in THEIR country, you can't sell a game to an individual, and then in small text somewhere, say that you don't own that software, you're just leasing it. I for one applaud them. I hope this whole system burns to the ground, and they have to remake it from the ground up. It's even possible to spend thousands on a piece of graphics software, and not be able to resell that software if you no longer want to own it. Who's greedy here? Me for wanting to resell something I purchased for thousands of dollars, or A******k for saying I don't actually own that software I paid thousands for?


Haven't YOU got it!! I mentioned this ages ago and again in this very thread, but he is one of millions that has been brainwashed, you know like when you did you 2x tables at school, say it enough times and it sticks. Thats what companies have done. Ain't nothing you're or me, gonna tell them that will change those years of repetition. Sad days.
 
  02 February 2013
Originally Posted by cojam: Haven't YOU got it!! I mentioned this ages ago and again in this very thread, but he is one of millions that has been brainwashed, you know like when you did you 2x tables at school, say it enough times and it sticks. Thats what companies have done. Ain't nothing you're or me, gonna tell them that will change those years of repetition. Sad days.


Sad days indeed. You either have issues understanding plain English or are so brainwashed with your radical hippie ideas that you failed to read what i bothered to write. I never said anything about the EULA besides the fact that if you are a client of those businesses, its because you read it and agreed to it. I never said it was legal or illegal, other people in the thread talked about that part, i don't care about that. I care about people acting like innocent victims when they contribute to the problem.

I said you accept it because its a condition to use the services. You signed that deal, you declared you accepted their terms, independently of what they are, and nobody forced you to.

So if you come spewing freedom and rights BS rhetoric after you made that deal with a clear conscience you either are: a)stupid b)illiterate c)dishonest d)an innocent child who wants to play games and doesn't care e)all of the above . The part about the EULA legality is another issue, but your acceptance and will to join knowing something fishy may going on makes you as guilty as them. They may treat customers as criminals, but you join because you want to. You don't get a moral escape from your responsibility by saying they are the big bad wolf when its no longer convenient and you want a cheap buck by reselling. If enough people didn't join in maybe they changed their model for a better one. Legal battles don't work in that, people/customer behavior does.

But this is becoming too pointless, i had enough of this in the 90's when MS and Windows was considered "the devil's work" by the same kind of uneducated speech. So you're right, I'm wrong. Lets be happy and make art.
 
  02 February 2013
Shesul -

I cant vouch for your country of origin, but in the UK when we go to the local Game store or Supermarket, we are not asked to sign a contract or agreement when we pay for our games, cd's or dvd's. I imagine Germany is the same. We take the case to the counter and we hand over our money. No agreements to sign or boxes to tick or salesman reading out contracts. This is the same with food and other items too. It is seen as a simple sales transaction in the same way as it has been for decades. The consumer does not get a chance see if he or she have bought into rental like agreement. Also in the UK, anything purchased online is subject to a cooling of period off period too - something denied to us when we purchase (?) software.

So how does your opinions square with these thoughts? Are we still 'in the wrong?' or do you still feel we should like it and lump it regardless of consumer rights laws. Have you not got a few games you would like to sale on? You cant even 'give' it away!!

Once again, no laws are asking to be changed as your posting seems to be suggest. This wouldn't be done in a court anyway so you really need to get a grasp of the basics before you become so emotionally attached to your opinions.
__________________
Posted by Proxy
 
  02 February 2013
Well, on any game you install you have an agreement that you have to agree to, it's not something there when you initially buy something (unless you buy a digital copy) but it's still in the game. It's not something you are required to be informed of before you buy a game.

For digital stuff, this will come down to whether they decide that you actually own the game or are paying for a service/license
__________________
The Z-Axis
 
  02 February 2013
Originally Posted by darthviper107: Well, on any game you install you have an agreement that you have to agree to, it's not something there when you initially buy something (unless you buy a digital copy) but it's still in the game. It's not something you are required to be informed of before you buy a game.

For digital stuff, this will come down to whether they decide that you actually own the game or are paying for a service/license


And this is the problem.

This agreement is after you have paid money. A contract is binding at the point of payment. If I find something I don't like and refuse to 'sign' it, I cant even get my money back because many stores refuse to give refunds on copyable media.

I bought Skyrim on disc and found I had to install via Steam. The moment I had opened the box I was screwed.

This practice needs tidying up. Full stop.
__________________
Posted by Proxy

Last edited by grrinc : 02 February 2013 at 06:43 PM. Reason: small edit plus spelling correction.
 
  02 February 2013
Wow, this is the most insane conversation. I'd swear you guys were talking about nuclear arbitration and not getting a couple of bucks back on an old game. I mean seriously. Some of you are talking about Valve like they are some evil entity, sticking it to the customer, snatching their greasy money from your clenched fist. Valve, the same company who gives away more content, empowers more developers, and actually pay fans and hobbyists for making assets for their games. And then someone threw in GWBush? The reason DRM didn't exist in the Clinton years is because it was not possible technologically speaking. Could you imagine trying to sign in to your Steam account on a 14.4 modem back then, ludicrous. And then the other side acting like someone is slapping Lady Liberty in the face because a court dares to test whether a consumer protection law is being followed properly. Jeeze guys, it's only Tuesday. At least wait for hump-day.

Personally, I'm a huge fan of Valve because they have demonstrated time after time how much they care for their userbase. I mean come on, they released for free their in-house production software including the source for one of their shorts. Companies just don't do that.

HOWEVER, while I don't ever sell or trade in my games, see my Atari cartridges, and this argument has no effect on me whatsoever I can see that others would. If there is a legal mandate for customers to have the ability to do so then so be it. Let us wait and see.

Either that or Steam services will be discontinued in Germany. Flame on!
__________________
HMC: Model Collection
WIP: Harris Nut House
WIP: WarCraft Troll
wyattharris.com Dig it!
 
  02 February 2013
Originally Posted by Shesul: I said you accept it because its a condition to use the services. You signed that deal, you declared you accepted their terms, independently of what they are, and nobody forced you to.


Wrong, again, does not matter if you sign, that does --- not --- make it legal.

Any thing you sign, any contract, anything, has to have a basis in law, ever heard of "precedence", thats the first time it goes to court, and the judges - decide if it ok. Not you, not the company, the judge.

Or maybe you've never heard of "duress". And you could in a Court argue duress, as you've paid for the service, and then and only then are shown the terms of the service.

Or do you think if they said, "and you have to give us your first born child" as part of the terms, that you'd be obliged to.... really.

That's not hippie bs, nor is it saying a company is evil, those are silly arguments, mine above, and the argument put forward by Germany, are a matters of law... Big difference.
 
  02 February 2013
Originally Posted by cojam: Wrong, again, does not matter if you sign, that does --- not --- make it legal.


Not really, since i didn't say that. I'm going to make this my last post of this thread because I'm obviously failing to reach my point across, so here it goes in the simplest form as possible:
Let me start by stating this:

1- EULAS don't have legal binding .
2- I agree 100% this is a cloudy topic that needs a legal answer.
3- I never said it has legal binding or that i agree the prohibition of sharing and resell of any digital asset you buy.

I talked about you, as an adult, responsible and likely law abiding citizen that agrees to get himself into a deal that he knows it has some dubious rules and apparently conflicts with his moral and rights. Instead of boycotting the product you still buy it. What moral right do you have to complain it after?

Lets go to a super extreme example : you buy dope and end up in the ER because the guy sold you some nasty chemical mix. Do you go sue him after? No. Because you were actively doing something wrong and you still did it and half the blame is yours.

In this case you're not doing anything wrong, but you are still buying something you know how it works, its limitations, what it won't let you do, and you STILL do it. The legal part is their fault, the moral issue is yours alone.

I hope it got clearer. Now i got to go back to work. By the way, i asked my boss (studio director) what he thought about this and his answer was perfectly clear: "I think its great they can resell their games, as long as they pay the due taxes for it, provide invoices and the hosting themselves. If they aren't up to that trouble...well, too bad." (we don't even put copy protections the games we make because its a useless cost these days)

As the above sir said, full stop.
 
  02 February 2013
Quote: Wow, this is the most insane conversation. I'd swear you guys were talking about nuclear arbitration and not getting a couple of bucks back on an old game. I mean seriously. Some of you are talking about Valve like they are some evil entity, sticking it to the customer, snatching their greasy money from your clenched fist.


Quoted for agreement.

I personally think applying 2nd hand commodity logic to a digital file is a strange argument in itself, its not like you ever "owned" anything you could even touch. With physical games you do at least own the packaging, manuals and other physical attributes, there is an artifact there which happens to also carry digital information this "artifact" has nothing to do with anyone else and can easily be sold. Unlike steam, which is obviously a service.
 
  02 February 2013
Originally Posted by Shesul:
I talked about you, as an adult, responsible and likely law abiding citizen that agrees to get himself into a deal that he knows it has some dubious rules and apparently conflicts with his moral and rights. Instead of boycotting the product you still buy it. What moral right do you have to complain it after?
.


You are now just being pedantic aren't you? What a laughable summary of what you supposedly meant. And way to go with assuming only adults buy media. 'Moral rights' indeed.
__________________
Posted by Proxy
 
  02 February 2013
Originally Posted by conbom: I personally think applying 2nd hand commodity logic to a digital file is a strange argument in itself, its not like you ever "owned" anything you could even touch.


Interesting, yet, there are many laws passed on something you cant touch, cant see, and dont own. Air.

I must (re)read "The merchant of Venice" again.
 
  02 February 2013
Originally Posted by cojam: Interesting, yet, there are many laws passed on something you cant touch, cant see, and dont own. Air.

To be fair to the argument, air is some you can touch and see, and even own. You touch it every day, just swing your hand fast enoguh to feel it. You see it if you heat it, it distorts. You can own a tank of compressed air, it is a commodity. You cannot copy air thus duplicating it.

Information, on the other hand, can be copied virtually freely, virtually infinitely times and it is truly intangible.
 
  02 February 2013
You wouldn't want that logic applied to your 3D work though, saying that since you can't touch it you don't own it
__________________
The Z-Axis
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.