French court rules Steam should allow resale of digital games, Valve will appeal

[Dexter]

I see a lot of dogmatic consumer rights and ownership talk. But have you actually tried thinking through the consequences of this decision on the market? Are you even aware that in a digital market there is no difference between a used and a new product? Have you maybe wondered what consequences that would have on the market? I'll leave you a hint: the consequences wouldn't be positive for the consumer. But the companies could easily get away with it and fuck you in the ass because of this decision.

A hypothetical/imaginary future apocalyptic scenario that has to first a) materialize b) be accepted by consumers and c) be as bad as you make it out to be is not a valid reason to forfeit your basic consumer rights and ownership over the things you buy.

More importantly, why would you trust companies that you believe would lead to said future as a consequence of this/out of spite with upholding your consumer rights over the courts in the first place, and why would they forgo ushering in said future anyway if you willingly give up all aforementioned things, given that they're apparently dealing with a used washrag they can just step on?

Also, you didn't answer the questions.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

ARE MY VIDEO GAMES BEING DETAINED?! ARE THEY UNDER ARREST?! I HAVE CONSUMER RIGHTS!

 

[Sentinel]

I see a lot of dogmatic consumer rights and ownership talk. But have you actually tried thinking through the consequences of this decision on the market? Are you even aware that in a digital market there is no difference between a used and a new product? Have you maybe wondered what consequences that would have on the market? I'll leave you a hint: the consequences wouldn't be positive for the consumer. But the companies could easily get away with it and fuck you in the ass because of this decision.

A hypothetical/imaginary future apocalyptic scenario that has to first a) materialize b) be accepted by consumers and c) be as bad as you make it out to be is not a valid reason to forfeit your basic consumer rights and ownership over the things you buy.

More importantly, why would you trust companies that you believe would lead to said future as a consequence with upholding your consumers rights over the courts in the first place?

Ah yes, as we all know, it's very hard for consumers to accept changes that hurt them. As exemplified by yourself. And all those brave people who stopped microtransactions and $70 digital games. Such admirable strength to fight corporations.

Who said I trust them? I don't buy their games, and I literally just said they'll fuck you in the ass with subscription models on top of microtransactions because of this court decision. If you like buying and owning games so much, I don't know why you support a decision that'd motivate companies to stop selling you licenses altogether and move on to subscription models.
I don't trust the courts because, as is evident, the courts are clueless in matters of lacuna, and will just wing it based on analogy, which can be very difficult to do in cases like this.

 

[Haba]

they'll fuck you in the ass with subscription models on top of microtransactions because of this court decision. If you like buying and owning games so much, I don't know why you support a decision that'd motivate companies to stop selling you licenses altogether and move on to subscription models.

CONSEQUENCE for CUSTOMER RIGHTS.

It is your fault. For having too many rights.

You should give up a few rights, maybe then the corporations will let you have your licenses.

Just say "PLEASE MR. CORPORATE OVERLORD" as you bend over.

 

[MajorMace]

US Foreign lobbies and the EU, an everlasting love affair.

The very fact they sent one of these disgusting lobbyist at Brussels means they'd get hurt by such a ruling.
And one has to be quite deluded if they believe they'd fuck their customers over. That's the complete opposite of Valve's business strategy.
They'd lose money on second-hand selling, broken prices etc. Basically the stuff we already see with serial-keys reselling but tenfolds.

The great losers would remain the devs, as they've always been in this industry, since the value of their work would yet again dive.
Which is the main problem of UFC que choisir, they only care about the consumer, and give little fuck about the producers in their epic quest to take down the evil corps/merchants.

I do not like the idea of owning only an access to something, especially with no garantee that this access will survive its platform. But I'd rather have that than an even worse environment for the devs.

PS : quit the bullshit about digital goods and reselling. Valve themselves completely support and encourage it, as long as they have full control over the transaction channels (ie. tf2, csgo and dota markets of cosmetics).
However they present the transactions of cosmetics, it's obvious you don't "own" them anymore that you own the games, yet it's perfectly fine to dispose of them, since they concern valve games.
The thing they fear with such a rule has nothing to do with the difference between physical and digital goods and whatnot, and everything to do with them not having such monopoly on their own items.
You guys keep forgetting one of the key aspects of the rule : people should be allowed to get their steam wallet money back.
Again, Valve wouldn't care in the slightest if they were assured to keep the funds, that's all they're interested in.
However if they were forced not to, they wouldn't suddenly go after their customers with an agressive pricing, that's nonsense.

 

[YldriE]

A French court ruling on 17 September in a case brought by the French consumer group UFC-Que Choisir against Valve found that purchasers of video games on Valve’s digital platform, Steam, are permitted to resell them. This ruling contradicts established EU law and should be overturned on appeal.

Frexit when?

Under EU copyright law, the “exhaustion doctrine,” which applies to physical goods and extinguishes a copyright owner’s right to distribution after the first sale, does not apply to digital goods.

Maybe laws are completely outdated and it's time to make new ones for the digital age? I swear, each time something like this come up, we see endless overthinkings of what kind of horse a automobile should be classified as. Ruled by dead people indeed.

 

[Black]

I'm over here on my high horse smugly smirking at you guys who still care about this industry one way or the other

 

[anvi]

I'm over here on my high horse smugly smirking at you guys who still care about this industry one way or the other

I feel like that too, mostly. Mainstream gaming is a travesty, but outside of that there are still lesser known gems. I just have to settle for 1 a year. I've been really disappointed with the indie revolution though. It had some good ideas and a few games I enjoyed, but mostly it is doing weaker 1 man versions of what a small team made with a decent budget in the 90s.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Ah yes, as we all know, it's very hard for consumers to accept changes that hurt them. As exemplified by yourself. And all those brave people who stopped microtransactions and $70 digital games. Such admirable strength to fight corporations.

Who said I trust them? I don't buy their games, and I literally just said they'll fuck you in the ass with subscription models on top of microtransactions because of this court decision. If you like buying and owning games so much, I don't know why you support a decision that'd motivate companies to stop selling you licenses altogether and move on to subscription models.
I don't trust the courts because, as is evident, the courts are clueless in matters of lacuna, and will just wing it based on analogy, which can be very difficult to do in cases like this.

So we have nothing to lose because companies already act as if we don't own the games either way because they see us as wimps, so they would move to subscription regardless of how much we kick and scream if they thought it would be profitable.

 

[Black]

I've been really disappointed with the indie revolution though.

Indie revolution went about as well as the crpg revolution.

 

[anvi]

I still have some hope in it though. I mean, KOTC, Fall of the Dungeon Guardians, Aarklash Legacy, and Blackguards, are about the only RPGs I've really enjoyed since the 90s and I probably wouldn't game at all if it wasn't for things like that. And I think there will be more along those lines, just gotta get used to not many a year.

But the excitable side of me wished they would make millions and then make a sequel in CryEngine. Then I settled for a more realistic idea of them making a sequel in Unity with a small team of talanted people. And now I am seeing the reality that at best a sequel will be mostly the same thing all over again. But more realistically they will cut some cut corners, or can't afford to make a sequel at all.

 

[Archibald]

This was a fascinating thread. People arguing that it is good that we have less rights, because THINK OF THE CONSEQUENCES is surreal.

 

[Neanderthal]

Hey don't trivialise it, if this law passes we might get a shit load of decline for years and years...so usual I suppose.

 

[passerby]

This was a fascinating thread. People arguing that it is good that we have less rights, because THINK OF THE CONSEQUENCES is surreal.

It's like with commies that regulate market so everyone can get everything they consider essential, untill it's impossible to earn more than it cost to produce, so most just stop producing and people in the most fertile country in South America starve.

Literally same shit. No one is arguing you shouldn't have right to own and sell things you buy. It's your side is the one which wants to take away other people economic freedom to offer a certain type of service, which you are free to not participate in like FeelTheRads for example.
So leaving aside the fact we believe in opposite moral principles, we also show you the practical argument. But you are like, fuck consequences and your right to profit and sustain the business, "muh" right to get my money back after I'm done with your creation is all that matters.

Then you'll have a few nice years when games will be super cheap, or almost free if you use the second hand market, after which you'll have to leave gaming, or pay monthly streaming subscriptions. Just like people in Venesuela had a nice decade of welfare and now are starving.
But your rights are important, because you are good poor people and the other side rights are not important, because they are evil corporate shills that exploit you by offering you their services, which you are free to decline, surreal indeed.

 

[Dexter]

It's like with commies that regulate market [...] people in the most fertile country in South America starve.

Literally same shit.

Just like people in Venesuela had a nice decade of welfare and now are starving.

The right to own a product you buy with your money is literally the same shit as Communism and people starving in South America/Venezuela!!!

Surreal indeed.

 

[Parabalus]

Dexter Please explain to me in what world is the French ruling a good thing for consumers.

They unironically think that everything would go on as normal except there would be a used game market.

Steam leaving EUrope completely would be a great addition.

 

[Steamboat Willie]

Hey don't trivialise it, if this law passes we might get a shit load of decline for years and years...so usual I suppose.

How much more can this shit industry decline? There's got to be a bottom to it eventually.

 

[mogwaimon]

This was a fascinating thread. People arguing that it is good that we have less rights, because THINK OF THE CONSEQUENCES is surreal.

I think that's a gross misinterpretation, at least where my arguments were concerned. I don't think it's 'good' that we have 'less rights', but as things stand right now the potential consequences could be worse for the consumer than the status quo, that's all I'm saying. I don't know about you, but I was there for horse armor, I was there for TF2 lootboxes, I was there for the first season pass, and right now we're all watching the Epic Games Store. History has proven in this industry that, when given an opportunity, the corporations can and will find ways to exploit less principled consumers for a quick profit while dragging the more aware consumers along 'kicking and screaming', as someone put it earlier. Honestly I hope that if the ruling goes through, I'm proven wrong, would be a great fucking day but I'm not going to hold my breath for it.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Dexter Please explain to me in what world is the French ruling a good thing for consumers.

They unironically think that everything would go on as normal except there would be a used game market.

Steam leaving EUrope completely would be a great addition.

Likely will have to when the EU rules that reviews are hate speech and only the EGS is allowed to service the EU.

 

[Steamboat Willie]

I think that's a gross misinterpretation, at least where my arguments were concerned. I don't think it's 'good' that we have 'less rights', but as things stand right now the potential consequences could be worse for the consumer than the status quo, that's all I'm saying. I don't know about you, but I was there for horse armor, I was there for TF2 lootboxes, I was there for the first season pass, and right now we're all watching the Epic Games Store. History has proven in this industry that, when given an opportunity, the corporations can and will find ways to exploit less principled consumers for a quick profit while dragging the more aware consumers along 'kicking and screaming', as someone put it earlier. Honestly I hope that if the ruling goes through, I'm proven wrong, would be a great fucking day but I'm not going to hold my breath for it.

Subscriptions/Streaming will be the future regardless of this ruling. It happened with music, it happened with TV/movies, it will happen with video games. It doesn't matter that you and I don't want it. The zillion faggots playing Fortnite will go along with it without a care in the world.

 

[Sentinel]

It's threads like these that make me realize how naive people are. People unironically fully believe that companies would ever let them sell digital games and that the prices of games would decrease. People in this very thread actually think companies will not circumvent such a ruling.

I'm starting to agree with a lot of people that say consumers deserve everything they get - half of them don't care and go with the flow, and the other half that do care are mental midgets unable to realize when they're truly being fucked.

 

[passerby]

Exhaustion clause was created for selling a physical medium ( of a significant material value at the time of the law creation ) containing an IP.
Steam is selling a copyright license, under condition that a copy that user will create will be for personal use only. Memory storage device that will contain the software belongs to the user and the copy of the IP is transmitted onto it and does not exist before.
Technically it's like recording a movie from a TV broadcast on your own device, which is allowed under copyright law for personal use only.

So, the only way a court can rule this way, is by following popular sentiment, generated by emotional intuitive response, for political reasons, instead of logic and law.
Also no one is stopping any company from offering a license and service that allows passing ownership of the license.
So it's not about enforcing consumers right, neither granting them new ones. It's about denying economic freedom to offer a certain type of service.

Subscriptions/Streaming will be the future regardless of this ruling. It happened with music, it happened with TV/movies, it will happen with video games. It doesn't matter that you and I don't want it.

There is literally no difference in experience quality between streaming and local media with music and tv/movies, so majority of customers actually prefer it this way.
Gaming is an interactive medium and streamed experience is inferior. It's also a medium that some people like to play with creatively by modding for example.

So while majority of gaming would move to streaming, it would be a distant future and there could be always a niche market, for higher quality, or user modifiable experiences.
Such ruling would accellerate the former and shrink the market size of the latter.

 

[Steamboat Willie]

So while majority of gaming would move to streaming, it would be a distant future and there could be always a niche market, for higher quality, or user modifiable experiences.
Such ruling would accellerate the former and shrink the market size of the latter.

Sure, you can still buy music on CD and vinyl today, too. But 75% of the market is streamed now.

 

[passerby]

As I said gaming is not fully comparable, there is almost zero demand for purchasing individual digital sound tracks. Physical media is more like collectors thing by now, people want to own pretty boxes.

With games the experience with a software running fully on a local hardware is significantly different than game as service, or streaming.

 

[Steamboat Willie]

With games the experience with a software running fully on a local hardware is significantly different than game as service, or streaming.

Most people won't even notice or care about the difference. As long as their normieshit plays well enough for them they'll be happy.