surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
I'd give anything to resell some digital games I have on PSN or Steam. Even if I could only collect one dollar a piece, I don't care. I purchased some horrific games that I will never play again that I'm stuck with now.
Holy shit, this has some huge implications, even if many digital services don't lend themselves top resale; the complete override of a EULA in favor of customer ownership is fantastic to hear, and I hope a start to a trend. I wish this mentality would permeate the court system this side of the big pond. Just because we're a service industry doesn't mean we have to be subject to every whim on the digital front because software companies want to insist that we don't even own what we buy.
it would be nice if they set up a system where you can sell your games back to steam based on the price when you bought it.
it's like a 10$/€ off discount card and you end up adding money to buy something which would equal more sales.
i used the discount card comparison because they can't really resell your digital copy....
it's like a 10$/€ off discount card and you end up adding money to buy something which would equal more sales.
i used the discount card comparison because they can't really resell your digital copy....
This ruling means that EA, Valve, Microsoft, Sony, and other digital distribution sites can be sue'd for not offering a method to resell their products. Though the lawsuit would have to be for EU customers only.
With DRM you ARE Paying for a rental, EULA or not the restrictions are in place.
And this is great for the EU, good on you guys. But in America it is unfortunately gotten worse. EULA's didn't use to hold water but nowadays corps pretty much always win and EULA's have been held in court for a good few years now...
It is amusing though as it is largely the argument for the online passes ;p
And this is great for the EU, good on you guys. But in America it is unfortunately gotten worse. EULA's didn't use to hold water but nowadays corps pretty much always win and EULA's have been held in court for a good few years now...
It is amusing though as it is largely the argument for the online passes ;p
Big win for gamers on this one. Many in the industry have touted the digital space as the land of milk and honey, hopefully things like this bring them back down to earth some.
I want to feel this is a good thing, but I feel this is going to accelerate the movement toward games as a service in retaliation. Publishers aren't going to just take this in the mouth.
This is a thing that makes me very happy. I have a feeling Steam will setup a method for trades sometime down the read. I think they're experimenting with items for games trades at this point.
No it does not undermine the fact that you are purchasing a license, it just allows for those licenses to be sold. Good luck with that though. Oh, and you live in the states now Jim. Maybe you haven't figured it out yet but our politicians sell legislation to the highest bidder. This is not a change we will be seeing over here.
This is very good news, and potentially more than a moral victory. Even if there is no practical way to resell digital games, the ruling implies that we own the product instead of merely paying for a temporary license.
As publishers take more and more control away from us, and try to pretend they are "providing a service" (that can be cut off at any time) rather than selling a product, this may (keyword being "may") provide us with a modicum of protection from the more abusive practices down the road.
As publishers take more and more control away from us, and try to pretend they are "providing a service" (that can be cut off at any time) rather than selling a product, this may (keyword being "may") provide us with a modicum of protection from the more abusive practices down the road.
Would allow you to create an account, buy the game, play it, and sell the account, correct? As it stands now this is against the EULA, but this ruling would allow it, right?
Cool. The smallest of the 3 major game market regions has a helpful law. Now what about the other 75% of the game market?
Steam has had another site / organisation with a system running that lets people resell steam games for a while. Valve haven't as far as I know acted to try and prevent this.
@hardy83 It might not as I can easily see corporate lawyers arguing that this applies to "applications" and not "discrete, individual files." It would be like the difference between buying Adobe Acrobat versus an e-book in PDF-format.
@Sephirothx
Don't hold your breath. Apparently the only rights a person can't sign away in the States are the rights to guns and (somewhat) free speech. Still, the ruling may still benefit you. The European market for traditional core games is nearly as big as the U.S market (not just 25% like some guy said) and publishers can't afford to ignore it or its laws.
Don't hold your breath. Apparently the only rights a person can't sign away in the States are the rights to guns and (somewhat) free speech. Still, the ruling may still benefit you. The European market for traditional core games is nearly as big as the U.S market (not just 25% like some guy said) and publishers can't afford to ignore it or its laws.
@NeoShinGundam Actually it should apply. You still made a deal and handed over money. Basically you'd sell your license to listen/read/otherwise consume this file. The problem is that you actually would have to delete all copies of that file you have and thats probably a questionable problem in itself, as in a court case you'd have to prove that you have deleted it? Or would the publisher have to prove you didn't...? Complicate issue there...
Any defacto contract that provides no consideration for the restriction of the consumer rights due the presumptive signee is going to stand for very long under much real legal opposition. Creating a new kind of property and consumer/manufacturer relationship was ALWAYS a stupid pipe dream and a scam that was doomed to fail once consumers found their nuts and ask judges to examine the validity ad strength of theses flaky "screw you, you agreed to whatever we say you agreed to once you bought the game, ha ha ha" auto-contracts. They were already superseded by law, even local laws.
Yay EU!
Now lets just hope that catches on in the states :)
I'm just so tired of the whole ZOMGBBQWTF one sided EULAs. That break down into 50+ pages of lawyer speak for which the gist tends to be "Thanks for your money here is a steaming bag of nothing in return".
Now lets just hope that catches on in the states :)
I'm just so tired of the whole ZOMGBBQWTF one sided EULAs. That break down into 50+ pages of lawyer speak for which the gist tends to be "Thanks for your money here is a steaming bag of nothing in return".
"...this ruling is more a moral victory than a tangible one..."
Currently, but it opens up the possibility. Now, if I lived in Europe and were so inclined, I could contact one of these companies and ask them to transfer my digital game's license to someone else on the basis that I sold it to him or her, and would have a legal backing.
The stupid thing is that content holders could easily turn this into a BUSINESS. Imagine, if you will, EA opening a sort of used digital games marketplace in which they get a 10-20% commission on every sale, and where you have to pay a "withdrawal fee" for your cash, but you can use said cash buying Origin games without additional fees.
Just imagine it; free money.
Currently, but it opens up the possibility. Now, if I lived in Europe and were so inclined, I could contact one of these companies and ask them to transfer my digital game's license to someone else on the basis that I sold it to him or her, and would have a legal backing.
The stupid thing is that content holders could easily turn this into a BUSINESS. Imagine, if you will, EA opening a sort of used digital games marketplace in which they get a 10-20% commission on every sale, and where you have to pay a "withdrawal fee" for your cash, but you can use said cash buying Origin games without additional fees.
Just imagine it; free money.
While this sounds good, I have a feeling that publishers will still limit their games either by ignoring this ruling, knowing it likely will never be enforced, or by implementing some other feature, or by introducing some shifty new legal copy into the EULA.
No matter what it says, you still don't own a digital game. At the end of the day it's a license even if they call it something else. You can't edit the code, so you don't own that, and there's no packaging or physical product, so there's nothing to own there either.
No matter what it says, you still don't own a digital game. At the end of the day it's a license even if they call it something else. You can't edit the code, so you don't own that, and there's no packaging or physical product, so there's nothing to own there either.
THIS.
This opens a lot of options for people to sue the fuck out of EA, and for them to be afraid of it.
Which means, EA will retaliate by making it IMPOSSIBLE to sell digital stuff, or making it EXPENSIVE to SELL your stuff.
Still, this kind of ruling cuts some inches from their digital DICKS.
Justice is slow, but when it works, it's beautiful.
This opens a lot of options for people to sue the fuck out of EA, and for them to be afraid of it.
Which means, EA will retaliate by making it IMPOSSIBLE to sell digital stuff, or making it EXPENSIVE to SELL your stuff.
Still, this kind of ruling cuts some inches from their digital DICKS.
Justice is slow, but when it works, it's beautiful.
I don't know man, this might be worse than it looks. Sure, it sounds good, but I think we'll see one of two responses:
1. Digital download game prices will skyrocket, as digital downloads become more like the physical retail market. You can't depend on sporadic short bursts of low prices to generate revenue anymore. Pretty much the whole structure of Steam/GoG/GamersGate/Desura/Indie Bundles/etc. is gone.
2. Digital retailers sidestep this through various routes:
a. Since the ruling depends on "being sold indefinite access" to a game, digital retailers might move to the subscription or rental route. You won't buy digital games at all anymore.
b. The ruling pretty much states that you can't -resist- reselling. That doesn't mean you have to make it freely available. The exact nature of this ruling is ambiguous, and there are a number of ways of getting around this. Would selling your account count as reselling? if it's a DRM-free game, could you just "sell" the file?
If this is as big as it sounds, I'm actually pretty afraid of what it will mean for the PC. If it can be loopholed or avoided, then this is just a slightly bad ruling rather than anything good or mega-bad.
1. Digital download game prices will skyrocket, as digital downloads become more like the physical retail market. You can't depend on sporadic short bursts of low prices to generate revenue anymore. Pretty much the whole structure of Steam/GoG/GamersGate/Desura/Indie Bundles/etc. is gone.
2. Digital retailers sidestep this through various routes:
a. Since the ruling depends on "being sold indefinite access" to a game, digital retailers might move to the subscription or rental route. You won't buy digital games at all anymore.
b. The ruling pretty much states that you can't -resist- reselling. That doesn't mean you have to make it freely available. The exact nature of this ruling is ambiguous, and there are a number of ways of getting around this. Would selling your account count as reselling? if it's a DRM-free game, could you just "sell" the file?
If this is as big as it sounds, I'm actually pretty afraid of what it will mean for the PC. If it can be loopholed or avoided, then this is just a slightly bad ruling rather than anything good or mega-bad.
Wonder if our Supreme Court in the States will have a similar view? Even for example if I resold a $10 download for $2 back to Xbox Live, and they resold it for $5 I'd be happy. Better than having to delete harddrive space and lose out completely.
This will never pass in the US. But it's nice to at least receive acknowledgement from someone that publishers are deliberately screwing over paying customers.
@killias2
If this is as big as we think it can be, then there will be growing pains. In the short term, maybe there's some issues that everyone will have to deal with, but this is a very good thing in the long run.
IMO, there's as many good possibilities in the short term as there are bad (or inconvenient, as it were), though I expect we'll hear plenty of doom talk from publishers when they realize the promised land they thought they had by the balls isn't as fertile as they thought.
If this is as big as we think it can be, then there will be growing pains. In the short term, maybe there's some issues that everyone will have to deal with, but this is a very good thing in the long run.
IMO, there's as many good possibilities in the short term as there are bad (or inconvenient, as it were), though I expect we'll hear plenty of doom talk from publishers when they realize the promised land they thought they had by the balls isn't as fertile as they thought.
After buying Arkham City yesterday and seeing that the CONSOLE versions of WB games have EULAs, I'm all for anywhere that shoots them down.
This alone will basically spearhead companies to pushing for a digital-only future.
While this can easily work for copies of physical games, and might even absolve the idea of an "Online Pass" being legally viable, but I can't see this really working for digital versions of games, since there's no phsyical product being sold or re-sold, just copies of a single product.
Still, if Valve is our digital future than I'm glad. They are the Nintendo of this decade when it comes to digital-distribution innovation and being pro-consumer with how they handle video game publishing, just like how Nintendo saved the game industry with how it handled the video game crash of the 80's with the release of the NES and it's partners, publishing tactics, etc.
While this can easily work for copies of physical games, and might even absolve the idea of an "Online Pass" being legally viable, but I can't see this really working for digital versions of games, since there's no phsyical product being sold or re-sold, just copies of a single product.
Still, if Valve is our digital future than I'm glad. They are the Nintendo of this decade when it comes to digital-distribution innovation and being pro-consumer with how they handle video game publishing, just like how Nintendo saved the game industry with how it handled the video game crash of the 80's with the release of the NES and it's partners, publishing tactics, etc.
If I'm reading this right I believe what it means is that you can't charge somebody for buying a used game and then not let them activate online unless they pay for it, hence his crying since they now require a new scam and also probably why EA is saying it's going all 'digital', also how about those con-men.
Woo Justice System! There may be no way to actually sell said digital copies but I'll be damned if this doesn't make me happy.
1) This will never come to the United States, (largely) due to Congressional Republicans which are heavily influenced by the corporate media lobbies.
2) Like Jim said, there's no way to sell your digital games, so this is a moot point, unfortunately.
2) Like Jim said, there's no way to sell your digital games, so this is a moot point, unfortunately.
Sterling and the Eurogamer article he sources overlooks an apparently VERY important piece.
"in return form payment of a fee, a licence agreement granting the customer the right to use that copy for an unlimited period, that rightholder sells the copy to the customer and thus exhausts his exclusive distribution right"
The key words are "unlimited period". Publishers and online stores can presumably dodge the whole issue by switching to selling limited duration licenses. Five years, ten years, twenty... As long as it give it a limit, the rightholder avoids losing the right.
So, in effect, this ruling could actually hasten how quickly publishers and stores switch to a limited duration licensing model.
"in return form payment of a fee, a licence agreement granting the customer the right to use that copy for an unlimited period, that rightholder sells the copy to the customer and thus exhausts his exclusive distribution right"
The key words are "unlimited period". Publishers and online stores can presumably dodge the whole issue by switching to selling limited duration licenses. Five years, ten years, twenty... As long as it give it a limit, the rightholder avoids losing the right.
So, in effect, this ruling could actually hasten how quickly publishers and stores switch to a limited duration licensing model.
Would this mean someone like Steam is legally obligated to transfer game licenses for EU customers? Like if I sold my active "key" to a friend, then they would have to provide him with that key... right?
Unless Steam is only based and works under American laws or something, I aint no lawyer so I dont really know.
Unless Steam is only based and works under American laws or something, I aint no lawyer so I dont really know.
To bad this would never work in the US, the Gov has already be sold and bought my corps. Steam already won in court it was rule they did not sell games but a service.
@Baines
That kind of consumer law circumvention would not likely be worth the complications that would arise from doing so. The courts would definitely become involved, and it would be an extremely hard sell to the community (no good in a time of contraction, even the PC market is contracting as far as traditional games are concerned).
I would honestly be surprised to find any publisher willing to take that risk. Stranger shit has happened, though.
That kind of consumer law circumvention would not likely be worth the complications that would arise from doing so. The courts would definitely become involved, and it would be an extremely hard sell to the community (no good in a time of contraction, even the PC market is contracting as far as traditional games are concerned).
I would honestly be surprised to find any publisher willing to take that risk. Stranger shit has happened, though.
I used to buy at least 2 new games every week. I can still do it too. It's funny how the publishers have turned me into a careful consumer, only buying 1 every 2 months or so. Hell, now I have started to collect bluray movies and get more into cinematography as a hobby. Thanks EA! I can't wait till you collapse the industry!
follow
