So I just bought a used game from Steam. . .

[Bobbtjoe]

I'm gonna get a refund, meaning that I would have to contact the woman, tell her the situation, and mail back the game all for a measly 20 bucks. http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B0018YXM3Y/ref=dp_olp_used?ie=UTF8&qid=1276134415&sr=8-1&condition=used Look at how many people are selling this game used. :sigh: I not entirely sure it would be worth the effort.

 

[azzaman333]

I would guess the reason that so many are selling E:TW used is because no one in their right mind would buy a game that requires steam activation 2nd hand.

 

[Bobbtjoe]

I got the refund today!

 

[Acronym2]

Yes, there will be no re-selling of a Steam-Powered game. That's a part of the marketing Strategy. You'll have to buy it new every time either on DVD or DLC. (This works great for Steam as Steam-Powered titles get older, they may be the only place left where you can buy. Not that having to subscribe to their service isn't beneficial already!) Since our friend got his money back, one can assume that it is definately not possible to deactivate and transferr ownership of a DVD based Steam game.

Someone mentioned how some of what Steam is doing goes against "Right of First Use" etc., and a few other consumer rights. Well, yes it does but when you agree to Steam's Eula and the games EULA, you effectively modify or waive such rights. If you don't, than the installation does not continue and you do not have use of the product. This is called a "clickwrap" license and it is binding once you haved "clicked" through it to install the product.

I would guess the reason that so many are selling E:TW used is because no one in their right mind would buy a game that requires steam activation 2nd hand.

I persoanlly feel some are selling Empire Total War because it was buggy and (more importantly) many people probably don't yet understand how a Steam-Powered game's licensing works. Empire was the first Total War game to be Steam-Powered.

 

[Airstrike92]

You better contact Steam support: http://support.steampowered.com

But don't expect help. They will force you to take screenshots of your CDs and everything else.

 

[GinandTonic]

Someone mentioned how some of what Steam is doing goes against "Right of First Use" etc., and a few other consumer rights. Well, yes it does but when you agree to Steam's Eula and the games EULA, you effectively modify or waive such rights. If you don't, than the installation does not continue and you do not have use of the product. This is called a "clickwrap" license and it is binding once you haved "clicked" through it to install the product.

Not legal in the EU. There hasnt been a specific case against steam, but this model in general is illegial under EU law. Not to mention that it is almost impossible to sign away your consumer rights under UK law also. Unreasonable contract under contract law - basically whatever the EULA says isnt worth the paper it isnt printed on.

It's actually rather interesting and I'ld love to hear what our resident UK Shylocks have to say on the matter. The precedents seem solid but were clearly not designed for such a situation, so the judges could say just about anything.

 

[Acronym2]

Not legal in the EU. There hasnt been a specific case against steam, but this model in general is illegial under EU law. Not to mention that it is almost impossible to sign away your consumer rights under UK law also. Unreasonable contract under contract law - basically whatever the EULA says isnt worth the paper it isnt printed on.

It's actually rather interesting and I'ld love to hear what our resident UK Shylocks have to say on the matter. The precedents seem solid but were clearly not designed for such a situation, so the judges could say just about anything.

If it is illegal in EU law, why does it continue in practice?

I don't know much about EU law, and I'm not defending Steam. In the U.S. challenges to EULA's usually do not stand in cases where the plaintif has "clicked" through the "clickwrap" license and installed the software. This is interpreted as an acceptence of the terms and conditions of use and is binding as long as the EULA conforms to the standards of U.S. contract law.

More specifically, we are really talking about the added dimension of, with a dvd copy, having to agree to Steam's EULA and using their service as a third party before we even get to our games EULA and installation. (The arguement seems quite invalid with dlc products.)

I am in agreement that there is some legal grey area were it is possible that a precedent could be set.

You better contact Steam support: http://support.steampowered.com

But don't expect help. They will force you to take screenshots of your CDs and everything else.

Hey airstrike, what's all this about?

 

[Akka]

If it is illegal in EU law, why does it continue in practice?

Because it's not challenged.

You'd be amazed at how many business practices are illegal, but either people don't bother to press a lawsuit (you have to be QUITE driven to start a trial against a big corporation for a 20 bucks deal...), or they simply don't KNOW it's illegal (countless mobile phones contracts were completely illegal, but it took years for users to notice).

 

[GinandTonic]

A lot of overlapping issues here. Firstly the EU has ruled, more or less, that windows licences are transferable and microsoft's EULA is irrelevant. In the strictest sense you must have a physical part of the original computer in the new computer, but since any part however trivial is sufficient the ruling was deliberately unenforceable. Post the licence on an expansion slot cover plate worth 20p and the £100 licence is valid and microsoft is in breach of contract if they interfere with the validation or updating. Defacto microsoft have to let the old licences all work in isolation from the machines they were sold with.

Secondly you cannot under UK law sign away your consumer rights. Disclaimers and pre-nups will be noted by the court only in an advisory sense. You got married, doesnt matter what the contract said you got married and the common understanding of the marriage contract is what you signed. Same with a rental contract - it only really has the power to define if you can keep pets or smoke in the house. Since phone contracts are becoming so common they are undergoing the same process and companies are finding clauses kicked out in favour of what would be commonly be understood as the contract.

Unreasonable EULA "clickwrap" have been shot down on all these grounds. Licences are transferable and the EULA doesnt have the authority to override the law in this instance.

Though as I say I'ld love to hear the opinion of a lawyer on this

EDIT -

Though I'ld guess a professional would say something along the lines of "well that is an interesting question Mr Tonic, and one that requires quite some consideration". Which is a more middle class way of kissing your teeth and saying "s gonna cos' ya guv".