Please note: This is not a rant - I know that in an emotionally heated debate, some readers might perceive it as one, but this is not my intention. I'm trying politely (if a bit desperate) to get an answer to my question, and to describe a state of affairs that strikes me as particularly dissatisfying. The matter should become clearer in the post, unfortunately it has to become a rather large one for this, for which I apologize in advance. The essential question follows at the bottom of the post, in boldface.
On Aug 14th, I asked
some questions. I got contradictory answers from two community members. The 2K community manager did not clarify (or reply in any other way). The last time that he showed up in this thread at all was more than three weeks ago, with
this post.
Four days later, I replied to an already existing discussion with
another post about a similar issue, and asked another question. This post was immediately removed from this FAQ due to the
no discussion in this thread rule, and put into a
second, non-stickied thread. In this second thread, discussion is actively discouraged by the
first post of the community manager:
please refrain from trying to answer other people's questions or start discussions about things other people have posted.
The community manager himself hasn't shown up in this second thread since
this post from more than six weeks ago.
Meanwhile, factually wrong information is piling up in the FAQ thread and does not get removed, I've also refrained from correcting it since I was afraid that this would count as "discussion" again.
I still have my question. I'm unsure whether it's okay to write this post here, but between a forum rule not to open new threads on Steam, a thread where "discussion" posts will be moved away from, and a thread where discussion is discouraged in the first post, I really don't know what to do. I'd like to state that this state of affairs is pretty dissatisfying.
Anyway, here's the question I'd still like to have answered by an official source:
As a collector who often plays games a long time (sometimes decades) after they have been released, and often a long time after their publishers and developers have ceased operating, it's important to me that I keep control over my purchase, i.e. I can't accept a situation where a game that I bought becomes inaccessible due to events not under my control. Such an event would be (for example) Steam ceasing operations (I know that they seem to go strong right now, but so have Atari, Microprose, or Lehman Brothers, so it's not out of the question, especially in a business as volatile as the video games market, where companies lasting more than 10 years are the exception.) In such an event, if Steam's validation servers are taken off-line, I won't be able to reinstall and play the game I purchased anymore.
This issue is known to Steam and 2K, and both parties have stated that they would "presumably" remove the game's DRM in such a case, so that their customers can still use it. However, this is a very vague statement, and it's not legally binding by any means. If push comes to shove, I'd have to depend on a then-bankrupt company that already has my money, to keep a vague promise and remedy the situation. It's of course possible that such a promise is kept - but it's also possible that a statement like this one gets issued: "We would have liked to remove the DRM of your games, but due to contractual obligations with our old and new business partners, we regret to inform you that we are not in a position to do so."
Therefore, I'm asking whether Steam and 2K acknowledge a legally binding obligation to remove the DRM from their customers' games, should the validation servers become unavailable.
I have checked the licenses of both Steam and 2K, and so far it doesn't seem so.
From the
Steam License:
C. NO GUARANTEES.
VALVE DOES NOT GUARANTEE CONTINUOUS, ERROR-FREE, VIRUS-FREE OR SECURE OPERATION AND ACCESS TO STEAM, THE STEAM SOFTWARE, YOUR ACCOUNT AND/OR YOUR SUBSCRIPTIONS(S).
From the
Take2 EULA:
Any implied warranties prescribed by statute are expressly limited to the 90-day period described above.
Since this concerns me due to the reasons stated above, I repeat my question:
Is it true that, should Steam become unavailable, there is no legally binding clause in either (Steam / Take2) license that prevents them from simply abandoning their customers, and leave the customers with a DRM that doesn't let them activate their purchased games anymore?