Valve French Fry'd

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

35542

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 85

User Lists: 2

#1  Edited By uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 35542 Posts

If I speak, I am condemned. If I stay silent, I am damned.

That was a pretentious quote from some book that got made into a lot of shitty movies.

Today those words have been put into effect as Valve now must take action, or deal with potentially serious ramifications.

Good for the gamer I guess. Or is it? Probably not.

French court rules Steam games must be able to be resold

Valve co-founder Doug Lombardi says the company will appeal the verdict.

In a court decision that could fundamentally change how Steam operates, European Union consumers have won the right to resell their Steam titles through Valve's digital marketplace. French website Next Inpact reports the Paris Court of First Instance ruled on Tuesday that European Union law allows Steam users to resell their digital games, just like they can any physical product.

Valve's lawyers attempted to argue Steam was a subscription service, according to French publication Numerama. The court, however, rejected Valve's defense, saying Steam doesn't sell games as part of a subscription package. The court went on to say Valve's policy on game reselling is against European Union laws that govern the free-flow of digital goods. In a statement to Polygon, Valve co-founder Doug Lombardi said the company plans to appeal the ruling. "The decision will have no effect on Steam while the case is on appeal," Lombardi added. If the ruling is upheld, Valve will be forced to change its store policy or face stiff fines.

Valve is embroiled in another similar ongoing case with the European Union. In April, the European Commission charged Valve with breaking the Union's Digital Single Market rules. Like in the Paris case, Valve intends to fight the charges. While neither case is close to a resolution, is safe to say the EU is deadset on changing how Valve runs Steam.

Avatar image for Ant_17
Ant_17

12935

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#2 Ant_17
Member since 2005 • 12935 Posts

France has Chinese bots stealing your info so...

But for real, that would be cool to do.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

44598

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#3 mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 44598 Posts

I've always thought that it would be cool if you could trade games or get some sort of credit, but I also knew that was a pipe dream because it just wouldn't be good business.

In short, the consumer would be getting the advantage on the provider and that is no more fair than the provider having an advantage over the consumer.

I am going to have to side with Valve here. You buy the license to play a game, it's yours for life. That's just the way it is and there's nothing wrong with it.

This is a slippery slope as well. What about movies? Music? ebooks? Can you trade those back in too?

Avatar image for phbz
phbz

4721

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 54

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By phbz
Member since 2009 • 4721 Posts

#SaveValve #ProtectTheGabe #ChinaOwnsEpic

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

35706

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 64

User Lists: 0

#5 Pedro
Member since 2002 • 35706 Posts

Its about time. We purchase a license to play the game. These licenses are supposed to be transferable. Steam arguing that they are a subscription service is BS.

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

35706

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 64

User Lists: 0

#6 Pedro
Member since 2002 • 35706 Posts

@mrbojangles25 said:

You buy the license to play a game, it's yours for life.

Until its sold or transferred. This is the reason people can buy and sell physical games. Its simply a transfer of the license to play the game. This court ruling simply applies it to digital content.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

44598

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#7  Edited By mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 44598 Posts

@Pedro said:
@mrbojangles25 said:

You buy the license to play a game, it's yours for life.

Until its sold or transferred. This is the reason people can buy and sell physical games. Its simply a transfer of the license to play the game. This court ruling simply applies it to digital content.

Would you please explain that? Seriously, I am not being facetious.

I always thought that the whole transferable thing was for physical products. Digital is a different story.

I agree that the whole subscription argument is bullshit, though, I don't pay a recurring fee to Valve I buy each game on a per-game basis.

My fear is that they will start charging 200 dollars per game if this is the case.

Avatar image for Gatygun
Gatygun

1634

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 Gatygun
Member since 2010 • 1634 Posts

@mrbojangles25 said:
@Pedro said:
@mrbojangles25 said:

You buy the license to play a game, it's yours for life.

Until its sold or transferred. This is the reason people can buy and sell physical games. Its simply a transfer of the license to play the game. This court ruling simply applies it to digital content.

Would you please explain that? Seriously, I am not being facetious.

I always thought that the whole transferable thing was for physical products. Digital is a different story.

I agree that the whole subscription argument is bullshit, though, I don't pay a recurring fee to Valve I buy each game on a per-game basis.

My fear is that they will start charging 200 dollars per game if this is the case.

Valve got slammed with this before in europe when europe started to modernize there digital rule book. Which resulted in everybody now knowing the refund solution which was also a EU law and a law in most country's that every product should be returnable if person is not satisfied by it.

They also got slammed with that digital goods and products and games that u buy should be sellable.

Then steam pushed a army of lawyer and other slime infested roaches into the mix and they decided to change there digital offering towards permanent renting.

U do not own a game on valve store, u buy the game on valve store for valve to own, then valve allows u to use that account of there's as they see fit. U basically do not buy games.

This was always incredible bullshit and france is striking back at it and basically say big middle finger.

Now valve has three options.

1) ignore and ban france from using steam ( which will result in a complete EU ban soon after it of steam itself )

2) make a new slime way to get through this ruling.

3) start actually provide transferable licenses.

With games now costing just as much as back in the day on digital stores, people should simple be able to transfer the licenses. I should be able to give my buddy my games if i am done with it and the other way around also. Much like physical.

This is also why i hate valve massively, because honestly nothing they did was for the gamers it was all forced into there arse by the EU and they did everything in there power to not lissen towards it.

They also pushed loot boxes in kid games heavily to get those kids hooked on those gamble scandles, and with it wrecked the modding section on the pc solution which made massive amounts of modder quit out of pure greed.

Fak valve.

Avatar image for howmakewood
Howmakewood

5974

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#9 Howmakewood
Member since 2015 • 5974 Posts

Why would this only include valve and not all digital platforms

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

35542

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 85

User Lists: 2

#10 uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 35542 Posts

@howmakewood said:

Why would this only include valve and not all digital platforms

Presumably this same argument can be repeated but on a case by case basis.

Avatar image for ten_pints
Ten_Pints

3938

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#11  Edited By Ten_Pints
Member since 2014 • 3938 Posts

Valve should take a transaction fee though say 30%. I don't see the issue with that.

It's not really Valves problem, they don't make the games.

Avatar image for pyro1245
pyro1245

5380

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#12 pyro1245
Member since 2003 • 5380 Posts

So what's the chance this makes it out of France if it's upheld?

I'd love to see a way to trade licenses.

Avatar image for sancho_panzer
Sancho_Panzer

884

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 Sancho_Panzer
Member since 2015 • 884 Posts

This is the best thing ever to come out of France.

Avatar image for Yams1980
Yams1980

3633

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 0

#14 Yams1980
Member since 2006 • 3633 Posts

I hope this happens in north america. I'm gonna sell off every single game I got in there.

Steam is dead, the Epic Malware store is where its at now.

Avatar image for rmpumper
rmpumper

707

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15  Edited By rmpumper
Member since 2016 • 707 Posts

@Gatygun: fuk valve? How is Steam any different from other game platforms (can you sell your digital copies of xbox and ps games? fuk no) and corporations like Autodesk, Apple, Amazon and Adobe? Non of them allow resale of licenses, why is Valve the only company being attact for this?

Avatar image for npiet1
npiet1

2569

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#16 npiet1  Online
Member since 2018 • 2569 Posts

@rmpumper: That's a good question, I'll guess we'll have to wait and see what comes of this. Either this will bring attention to all the other companies or it won't.

Avatar image for davillain-
DaVillain-

38584

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#17 DaVillain-  Moderator
Member since 2014 • 38584 Posts

While I think there's a discussion to be had surrounding the statement of "If I bought something, I should be able to sell it," I'm just not convinced this is going anywhere. I mean, what about selling music downloads, digital movies, books, etc. Talk about opening up a can of worms.

Avatar image for sancho_panzer
Sancho_Panzer

884

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 Sancho_Panzer
Member since 2015 • 884 Posts

@rmpumper said:

@Gatygun: fuk valve? How is Steam any different from other game platforms (can you sell your digital copies of xbox and ps games? fuk no) and corporations like Autodesk, Apple, Amazon and Adobe? Non of them allow resale of licenses, why is Valve the only company being attact for this?

Yeah, I'm pretty sure Valve wouldn't be the only company affected by this. Personally I think it would be nice to see courts upholding basic consumer rights by testing some of the tick-box "legally binding contract" bullshit companies have been gradually foisting on us with the shift to a digital market.

Avatar image for Ultramarinus
Ultramarinus

1082

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#19 Ultramarinus
Member since 2002 • 1082 Posts

This is a super untimely, dumb ruling that will shaft the consumers as all publishers will carry their games to subscription services and we'll end up owning NO games. Publishers/developers aren't dumb and in 2019, their options aren't as limited as video rental days. They shafted Gamestop, they'll shaft gamers next if this goes through.

Avatar image for ten_pints
Ten_Pints

3938

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#20  Edited By Ten_Pints
Member since 2014 • 3938 Posts

It makes sense you can resell physical goods, because physical good degrade and you have to physically deliver the goods. Digital goods do not degrade or devalue and have zero shipping costs which would mean a game could be bought and resold a million times with nobody losing any money other than the initial sale difference which would damage everyone in the industry.

The only way this could work on platforms like Steam is if they took a cut of the total sale value like they do with publishers.

If not then stores like Steam would have to shut in France, they could not operate under those rules as publishers would abandon digital stores, people would have to log in with VPNs.

Or we could see the return of activation limits, that would be fucking awesome.

Avatar image for ajstyles
AJStyles

1152

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#21 AJStyles
Member since 2018 • 1152 Posts

The consumer always loses in the end. Valve WILL come up with a way to get those losses back.

As much as I would LOVE to resell my digital games, I understand how damaging it is to companies and I feel it would make games worse as they would be forced to use smaller budgets.

You can already tell gamepass is going to cripple Microsoft and games.

Avatar image for rmpumper
rmpumper

707

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 rmpumper
Member since 2016 • 707 Posts

I wonder how GOG is going to deal with this, when EU eventually go after the rest of the companies: buy game > download game > sell the license > keep the game forever.

Avatar image for Macutchi
Macutchi

6905

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#23  Edited By Macutchi
Member since 2007 • 6905 Posts
@uninspiredcup said:

French court rules Steam games must be able to be resold

Valve co-founder Doug Lombardi says the company will appeal the verdict.

In a court decision that could fundamentally change how Steam operates, European Union consumers have won the right to resell their Steam titles through Valve's digital marketplace.

French website Next Inpact reports the Paris Court of First Instance ruled on Tuesday that European Union law allows Steam users to resell their digital games, just like they can any physical product.

the link's in french but if that's accurate difference is i don't have to sell my physical copy through "valve's digital marketplace." i'd need a standardised way to resell games across digital clients. that's a big can of worms to open

Avatar image for ten_pints
Ten_Pints

3938

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#24 Ten_Pints
Member since 2014 • 3938 Posts
@rmpumper said:

I wonder how GOG is going to deal with this, when EU eventually go after the rest of the companies: buy game > download game > sell the license > keep the game forever.

Close the store I would imagine, no publisher is gonna support that.

Avatar image for Zero_epyon
Zero_epyon

13425

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#25 Zero_epyon
Member since 2004 • 13425 Posts
@Pedro said:
@mrbojangles25 said:

You buy the license to play a game, it's yours for life.

Until its sold or transferred. This is the reason people can buy and sell physical games. Its simply a transfer of the license to play the game. This court ruling simply applies it to digital content.

I'd be ok with all digital if I can sell my license when I'm done with the game. I don't understand why they haven't done it. They'd be the facilitator of such a sale and can continue to make money selling the same licenses over and over.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

35542

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 85

User Lists: 2

#26  Edited By uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 35542 Posts

When you're a billionaire and opt to wear a 2.99 T-Shirt that doesn't fit.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

44598

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#27  Edited By mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 44598 Posts

@uninspiredcup said:

When you're a billionaire and opt to wear a 2.99 T-Shirt that doesn't fit.

Pretty sure someone could make a killing by selling "belly shirts" for obese men for 50 bucks a pop. I know I'd buy them. It sucks buying a __XLT shirt only to have the front barely make it over your tummy, but the back covers your ass.

Either way, good for him; no shame, and a billionaire, and no problem talking in front of people. More power to him.

@Zero_epyon said:
@Pedro said:
@mrbojangles25 said:

You buy the license to play a game, it's yours for life.

Until its sold or transferred. This is the reason people can buy and sell physical games. Its simply a transfer of the license to play the game. This court ruling simply applies it to digital content.

I'd be ok with all digital if I can sell my license when I'm done with the game. I don't understand why they haven't done it. They'd be the facilitator of such a sale and can continue to make money selling the same licenses over and over.

Yeah I am curious how the exchange would be handled. Maybe Valve should get ahead of the court ruling and see if they can make a compromise. I mean, the publisher/developer already got their share of the money, so any re-sale value would be strictly Valve's profit to earn I would imagine (unless there is some rule that re-sale profits need to go to publishers too).

Valve is intelligent and creative enough to turn this around to at least be mutually beneficial, if not in their favor entirely.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

35542

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 85

User Lists: 2

#28  Edited By uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 35542 Posts
@mrbojangles25 said:
@uninspiredcup said:

When you're a billionaire and opt to wear a 2.99 T-Shirt that doesn't fit.

On the one hand, he's the stereotype example of poor hygiene poor fashion gamer looking like he's popped out the basement for abit, on the other his not giving a shit is somewhat admirable and even endearing given all the robotic bell-ends that pop out on stage at E3.

Avatar image for davillain-
DaVillain-

38584

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#29  Edited By DaVillain-  Moderator
Member since 2014 • 38584 Posts

@uninspiredcup said:

When you're a billionaire and opt to wear a 2.99 T-Shirt that doesn't fit.

Dear Santa. I want HL3 for Christmas and I'll leave you milk & cookies right near the fireplace :P

Avatar image for sovkhan
sovkhan

1300

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#30 sovkhan
Member since 2015 • 1300 Posts

It's about time, these aberrations get fixed!!!

The thing is gamers mentality defending this shit need to evolve, Companies can enforce things only when the gamers accept these same things!!!!

Seeing how some still defend these practices, i think we are still far away for making these obsolete and illegal.

Avatar image for Icarian
Icarian

1888

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#31  Edited By Icarian
Member since 2004 • 1888 Posts

This is not just Valve and Steam, this includes ALL digital market places for games, ebooks, movies etc. In the same news, court also declared that 14 of Steam's Subscriber Agreement clauses are illegal

Avatar image for Vaasman
Vaasman

13969

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#32  Edited By Vaasman
Member since 2008 • 13969 Posts

I really see no way in which this is a good thing. Consumer advocacy is great but this is kind of decision is archaic and does not consider the nature of a DD market at all.

1. If you want to get rid of a digital game you can already refund it.

2. This will cut into developer sales even more directly than a physical used-game market, where, at the very least, you are reselling a product that is genuinely "used" and could have comparable wear, vs a digital data transfer. For a store like Steam that floods it's page with indies desperate for sales in a saturated market, this only hurts them even more.

3. How does buying a digital game that is "used" even make sense? They're going to have you download a brand new copy of the data even if it's a resale.

4. This only further incentivizes digital storefronts to nickle and dime us by making every store a subscription payment model. I can all but guarantee Steam will drop a sub model on us (or maybe just France) before providing a used-game option, given that it might be the more savvy option of this lose-lose scenario.