Valve is being sued by the French Consumer Association!

Link

The UFC-Que choisir’s decision to pursue a legal case against Valve comes after they took a very close look at the subscriber agreement, which most likely agree to without actually reading. In particular they found five things that seemed to go against currently accepted norms, and that might even be against the law in the EU, and even the US.

The agreement prevents us from transferring ownership of our games after they’ve been claimed and downloaded. That action is actually explicitly legal in most areas of the world. Some might have large game collections with titles they no longer play, or never played, so why wouldn’t we be allowed to gift those (even after being claimed) to the recipient of our choice.

The second issue is that of Valve declining any responsibility should they get hacked and your personal information getting stolen. They of course aren’t responsible if you’re account itself gets compromised, but they’re also apparently shifting all responsibility, even on a corporate hacking attempt, onto the consumer.

They’ve also noticed that you’ll have no ownership of your user-generated content that are sold or hosted on Steam through the workshop. There are apparently lines in the agreement that give Valve full rights to everything that’s in the workshop.

Another issue is that of the Steam Wallet, where if your account is closed, for whatever reason, you’ll be unable to transfer any remaining funds that you might have left there, into your bank account. The transfer of money is apparently only one-way.

Also, and very concerning from a legal standpoint, is the application of consumer laws specific to Luxembourg to all EU residents. Not all EU countries carry the same standard of consumer rights, so this is not necessarily legal per-se. One can’t defend a Luxembourg law in France, where that law doesn’t even exist.

In response to these clauses that have been found, this consumer advocacy group has taken legal action against Valve in order to try to effect positive changes. If they have sound legal arguments, Valve could even be financial liable. It’s very interesting that it’s only now that such issues are being taken up against Valve, though the subscriber agreement has remained largely unchanged for some time, though being updated in June of 2015.

Read more: http://wccftech.com/valve-being-sued-by-french-consumer-association-over-subscriber-agreement/#ixzz3uk0HpAXj

Finally! Someone is trying to take a stand with Valve's shady practices!

Can't say I'm terribly excited, primarily because it will be years before an appellate court hears the case and settles any potential controversy, and Valve could always settle by altering its ToS, assuming that's what this group is after. It'd also be useful to have a copy of the advocacy group's complaint to grasp their arguments, though the language barrier doubly precludes meaningful discussion.

Digital license has never been transferable. Not on Steam, not on PSN, XBL or Nintendo eShop. Making them transferable will likely diminish the quality and quantity of all future Steam sales, since the absence of a used game market was a big part of why Steam sales are sustainable and desired by devs. I think this is just a case of the consumer association lacking understanding for the medium and being delusional about it.

With that being said, I do agree that Steam wallet should be refundable in some form, similar to regular Steam refund system of games.

In other words, don't sell to the French, that's all they'll accomplish. Aside from non-transferable licenses, there can be complications. If they want to look into those that'll be interesting. For instance, like the case of the people hacked on PSN, there's no recourse in getting refunds without jeopardizing the state of ones digital library. I'd fully support such cases being challenged in court if Steam does this too.

Yeah, let's just allow people on a digital platform to sell "used" games for a reduced cost and allow our profit margins to go out the window.

Valve could easily remedy this, allow them to resell their games but only for a price that greatly exceeds their retail cost so they're impossible to sell, boom, roasted.

Instead of actually allowing them to sell it through Steam. They give those people a code, then those people can do whatever they want with that code, but that code can only be used after a period of time of issuing it. Steam already allows for family sharing anyway, right?

This is the problem with digital services. All of them including PSN and XBL have been known to put questionable things in their user agreements.

PSN had that thing where if your account gets hacked, they ban you if you try to get your money back or something. And MS with the DRM thing.

This extends to all digital services outside of gaming as well. They're so new, there aren't many legal fairness standards in place and companies try to push the boundaries on what they can get away with and how they can exploit us.

This is why I still buy discs whenever possible. Downloading is convenient, but takes away a valuable consumer right.

Could you clarify what "MS with the DRM thing means"?

Not sure what exactly you are referring to. Seems like you are fabricating a negative for XB Live that doesn't exist. MS will actually take responsibility if XB Live is hacked.

Back to topic. I'm all for consumer rights. It's great there is an organization out there that wants to fight for the consumer.

This thread makes me sick.

I like Steam as much as the next guy, but they have pointed out a lot of shortcomings with their business model that shouldn't be there. You, the consumer, stand only to gain from changing these portions of their ToS and implementing these features, and yet you shamelessly defend a company's anti-consumer practices out of a misplaced sense of loyalty.

Why do gamers act like hostages with stockholm syndrome? Why do they act like these companies are their friends and that they care about them? They are businesses whose only goal is increased profits. I have massive respect for Valve implementing some pro-consumer systems, such as refunds, but they are a business and their goal is profit. They are not some idealistic, utopian group of philanthropists who want to help you. Refunds exist because Valve understands that good customer service is about building loyalty with a good product; they have increased sales and profits, and that's why they did them.

Stop acting like these companies are your friends.

lol, you could at least wait until I gave you clarification.

I was referring to what they wanted to do with the Xbox One and DRM pre-release. The plans they dropped because of the backlash when they realised the the features would be bad for business.

Sure it's a bit different on a different scale, but my point relates to how they would have liked to control their content digitally and the fairness to us.

Even now, they do have DRM. I've noticed certain games/content isn't available to me is XBL isn't online with the Xbox 360.

The problem is, there isn't established standards and legislation protecting the consumer and their rights on the internet. So all digital providers are free to write their own rules and abuse their consumers.

I remember once I bought a game on steam that said it was a "single player" game in the description and it turned out to be multiplayer only. The guy I contacted acted like he was doing me a fucking favour giving me a refund and that 'it was a one time deal'. That's not how it works. Anywhere else if someone misrepresents the product, I am well within my rights to ask for a refund, and they are legally obligated to provide it if the description isn't met or the product doesn't meet the standards of reasonable workmanship.

I live in the UK, it doesn't matter if Valve is American, by having a British variation of their website/store page etc, they are actively involved in commerce in the UK and they must do that within the boundaries of our law. And that goes for every country they sell products in.

anyone who snubs the issues in the OP is a mindless drone. It benefits us greatly for these issues to be resolved for the whole world.

I would gladly relinquish my right to sell my game in a price gouging industry (where places like Gamestop makes billions) if it means I can pick up games 4 to 12 months later at half off or greater than at release.. I rarely ever pay anywhere close to full retail for games now a days due to sites like g2a and just overall big sales..

Yup, I still prefer retail discs whenever possible.

@sSubZerOo: That's because you're a Valve fanboy. A cultist, that's what I call Valve fanboys, they're a denomination of the Hermits/PC master race in worshiping the false idol Gabe Newell.

So you give up your rights as a consumer for the benefits of Steam features that are useless, and for the sake of steam sales?

Being able to sell your digital licenses would pretty much be the death of the digital market for games. It's wonderful as a customer, but lets be realisitic here. Now with refunds on steam, I think the balance is pretty good between costumer and corporation rights.

With the steam market, being able to withdraw money from it to your account would probably be a nightmare legally, taxes, different banking systems etc.

Hilarious.

You do realize that most PC games these days use Steam even if you buy the disk, right? So his point is a very solid one. If the game you are going to buy will be using Steam (or forces you to), you might as well get some great savings while you are at it.

I think them shafting responsibility if they get hacked is bullshit.

These are really valid points. I hope Valve get rekt for such anti consumer policies.

Pretty much this. One of the reason why publishers are starting to put their games on PC because there is no used game market there.