Accpet Steam's New EULA or Say Goodbye To Your Steam Account UPDATED

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

8-Bit_Jack:

SUPA FRANKY:
Well... I don't agree with completely shutting down your account, but it's your choice whether to use Steam or not. Using Steam requires agreeing to their TOS. If you don't like it, don't use it. That simple.

Except that you've already purchased those games. You own them.

This is exactly what I've been saying about digital distribution since this whole mess started.

fuck you, valve

I guess you can pirate all your games back if your accoun ever gets shut down?

I am not going to try and defend Valve but they are not the only ones to pull crap like this. Just about every service changed ToS after the big Sony hack and the large class action suits, everyone decided to try and cover their arses with EULA/ToS changes like this.

Anyone remember when Sony wanted to remove the other OS options on PS3s? They basically did the same as Valve, "agree to the new terms or lose your account" or something very similar. It is all bullshit either way. I should re-read the Steam ToS, last time I waded through it there where large sections that they couldn't legally apply in the EU so they had a large list of exemptions. I wonder if they have tried to work around those.

SUPA FRANKY:

8-Bit_Jack:

SUPA FRANKY:
Well... I don't agree with completely shutting down your account, but it's your choice whether to use Steam or not. Using Steam requires agreeing to their TOS. If you don't like it, don't use it. That simple.

Except that you've already purchased those games. You own them.

This is exactly what I've been saying about digital distribution since this whole mess started.

fuck you, valve

I guess you can pirate all your games back if your accoun ever gets shut down?

Yeah, but then if get caught, its still illegal, since you can't show that you own the games
also, be careful, the escapist likes to toss out bans when you mention piracy as anything other than a heinous act akin to murder

Dendio:
This is why Good Old Games advertises their DRM free NO strings attached content

Indeed. I am not a fan of digital distribution for so many reasons and this exemplifies one of them resoundingly. I may not own the rights to distribute, copy, etc, but I did buy the right to own and therefore play the game I purchased. Nearly all digital distribution castrates these rights on the user end SIGNIFICANTLY.

GOG, on the other hand, is pretty no-strings about their wares, they're library is fairly robust and always growing, and there are no idiotic consumer stamping DRM issues at all.

My preference will always be to have a physical copy, and if they try blocking that as EA has for people in the past, kindly hackers can make what is unplayable because of an unrelated forum post, playable once more.

Just because steam TOS say you can't move class action lawsuits against valve, it doesn't mean you actually can't.

TOS like that doesn't hold up in a court.

As a matter of fact, I have no idea why companies do that kind of thing in their TOS, it's useless.

Stormz:

CentralScrtnzr:
This just makes piracy more appealing. If Valve is so afraid of money and fame that they feel the need to screw their customers, it won't go well for them. In fact, I'd like to see a few examples of them doing just that, deleting a customer's library of games, just for all the massive negative press they'd receive. They'd never sell another game ever again.

Valve's fanbase is one of the most loyal I've ever seen, you only need to look at this thread to realize it. They pretty much have free reign to do whatever they want and the customers will bend over and ask for more. I for one am scared of this new trend considering digital distribution is becoming more prevalent. What happens if they get hacked and all your personal info and credit card info get stolen? Having all you're games linked to an account is just asking for trouble. I'll never replace my hard copies of games, and when the all digital future comes, I won't be a part of it. I'll find a new hobby.

You may be right, but that seems complete insanity to me. I can say if just one person got fucked over in this way, or really in many different number of ways, by Valve, they would never ever have from me another sale. Just blows my mind people would put their loyalty to something that takes their money over their own self-interest.

They often have deals at a fraction of the price of used console games. It is hard to be angry with them when they offer such great deals. My advice: whenever you are on the web, be careful. After that, you can have a good time.

Buretsu:

Which is completely overshadowed by the "Because, EA" reason.

Which isn't true, but would change nothing anyway.

Apologetics are kind of silly, especially with corporations.

I like Steam but this is utter bullshit, the Steam rep sounded like a fucking jackass.

DeltasDix:
I like Steam but this is utter bullshit, the Steam rep sounded like a fucking jackass.

He didnt even answer the question. He just threatened him.

It basically read:

"I I dont agree to the TOS for my car can i still drive my car?"

"We can break your car like a twig. We can come at night. And fucking. Wreck. Your car. It can be kindling. We can make into tin cans by friday. We can do that. You want that to happen?"

I doubt the validity of the screenshot. I also doubt that valve employee keeping his job.

I defended steam recently in an argument online. If this is true im going to start recanting my words...

From a logical standpoint i dont really see what valve can do though. Every piece of software has a terms of service. You gotta agree to use it. Its a fact. It stops you from stealing from them llegally. Ever played world of warcraft? Every. Tiny. Update. Edited the TOS to include the new code in the agreement you wouldnt go around stealing shit.

So with steam, they have two options:

Never update steam in any major way to not change the TOS and not need to ask.

Or change the TOS and then ask, those that dont want to agree cant use the software.

Both kinda suck. Its fine at first obviously, the first TOS you agree to (or not) before you buy anything. After that valve has to walk a fine line. Changing TOS results in this shit. Not changing TOS means the software can make no major changes.

BiscuitTrouser:

DeltasDix:
I like Steam but this is utter bullshit, the Steam rep sounded like a fucking jackass.

It basically read:

"I I dont agree to the TOS for my car can i still drive my car?"

"We can break your car like a twig. We can come at night. And fucking. Wreck. Your car. It can be kindling. We can make into tin cans by friday. We can do that. You want that to happen?"

.

That is gold my friend.

I just realised this, if the EU ruled, that people own their games doesn't that mean Steam is not allowed to hold your games hostage?

Zoomy:

Plazmatic:
Gabe himself said that if steam went down permanently, they have a contingency plan for thier customers, saying that you will be able to keep your games.

That statement is inherently worthless. For one thing, does "their customers" refer to Steam users or just people who bought Valve games? As far as I know, Valve does not have ownership of pretty much anything on Steam except a few titles, so will their "contingencies" extend to the third party titles that make up 99% of their inventory? Also, what if the circumstances of the collapse of Steam mean their back-up plans are rendered worthless. Best laid plans of mice and men et cetera.

Thanks for the flame, any way, he didn't use the wordage "their customers" you and your bile spewing cynicism assumed the negative, just like in the rest of your post. He specifically referred the the steam service and steam customers. Also there is the possibility that something could hamper these plans, but again, that's mainly your cynical attitude at play here, including your statement of some wildly unexpected problem is wholesomely irrelevant; unexpected events can mess up any contingency in anyone's scenario. Gabe said that in the event of either the servers suddenly unexpectedly going down and never being able to recover (but steam wouldn't tank in this scenario, they have enough money saved up for new servers in case of this scenario) and in the event of the steam as a service simply coming to an end (Gabe pulling the plug for example).

Zoomy:

Besides, if Steam falls, then most likely so do the servers. What happens when someone wants to change to a new computer? Without access to the Steam servers, how will they re-download the titles they "purchased" on Steam?

Finally to satisfy your need to indulge in reaffirming your own negative view of the world in general, no, you will probably will not be able to access them across computers using steam if steam for some reason is gone permanently ( though Gabe never really talked about this). However, because Steam acts as DRM for most of its games, you wont have trouble simply moving the games over on a hardrive or peer to peer (and if, in the case of some Ubisoft steam games some are using other DRM methods, you'd have the same problems there as you would if steam did work).

Zoomy:

Remember, Gabe also said we'd have Episode Three by Xmas 2007.

Also Gabe Newell is a lying fat fatty who should never be trusted. You happy now?

lowkey_jotunn:

Steam has been around for, what, a decade now? And I've personally never heard of any serious shenanigans on their part (feel free to tell me about any I missed) so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for the moment. Though if this ToS turns into a giant clusterfuck, I'll be right there with my torch and pitchfork.

Most of the complaints against Origin were ones that were prevalent with Steam for the first few years. On top of which, it's literally become true that you're (questionably) signing your rights away. That's really a big shenanigan.

You basically ARE giving them a free pass.

This is an aspect of Steam that never ceases to make me feel uncomfortable. I mean, sure, Valve do a lot of great stuff and all things considered Steam is a fairly excellent service (until you lose internet or they decide you can't play your games); however the fact that they can essentially completely fuck us over -unbelievably- badly by locking us out or deleting our accounts or whatever is chilling. Ugh. I hate having this vague feeling of unease and distrust. It's the one thing that makes using Steam feel like a bad idea.

SUPA FRANKY:
Well... I don't agree with completely shutting down your account, but it's your choice whether to use Steam or not. Using Steam requires agreeing to their TOS. If you don't like it, don't use it. That simple.

Not that simple. People bought games before this agreement was in effect. Games bought on Steam (or even retail ones that just require it to run) are unplayable if you don't want to agree to these terms and a lot of people have a lot of Steam games. Considering the terms were introduced after the purchase has taken place, I can't see how the fuck this can be legal or upheld in any court (not that I see the logic in it working even for newcomers to Steam).

It's as if the car company sold you a car, then said "hey, if you wanna continue using this car, sign this waiver to give up all your rights to sue us". Although again, the mere act of having someone sign a waiver to give up all their rights to legal action in order to use the product is just ridiculous.

Who cares? They can't keep me from doing anything that I have a legal right to. Americans might want to take a look at how they treat simple contracts as laws.

Fortunately, Europeans doesn't have to care about this at all, we can't sign away our rights or overwrite laws.

Captcha: fair play

YeS! I can finally get a refund on that one game I bought on steam! Keeping my eyes open for a class-action lawsuit.

There's a very easy way to play the Steam games you've purchased without Steam--don't even need it installed or to have an account.

It's a form of cracking, kind of, so I won't talk too much about it. But you can play your legally purchased Steam games, even if Steam closes your account.

Steam's new TOS is FUBAR. On the other hand its also designed to inhibit more then anything, like the difference between SWAT and a uniformed cop on a corner. SWAT 'handles' things, the uniform cop is meant to be a visible deterrent. If someone on Steam started a class action suit and enough people signed on, provided they won, an element of it would doubtless be that they either get their account back or receive a full refund. A full refund shouldn't be too hard to come by for either Valve or its consumer because its all basically data and its pretty indisputable given that your account is also basically a giant digital receipt.

The gaming industry has operated in a legal gray zone for decades now because most of its customer base has been children. With an aging demographic still playing video/computer games - something few companies anticipated frankly - they'll soon be brought to heel as their older customers sit up, take notice, and are willing to spend to get fair consumer treatment. The worst Nintendo and Sega might have faced in the 1980s was angry letters from parents. In the 2080's it'll be angry letters from independently wealthy man/woman-child's lawyers. I look forward to that. Steam obviously doesn't.

As I understand it most of these TOS agreements aren't court tested - so to speak - and won't hold water in court either. The mere fact that they use the same same TOS in Europe as they do in North America says it all. These aren't meant to be effective legal tools, just effective deterrent. Deter away for all I care. If I get pissy enough I'll do what I have to do, just like everyone else will. What I like about Steam is that so far they haven't engendered all that much pissiness in me. I hope they carry on the tradition of not being annoying.

Oh, i can comment on this thread but no others. I wonder if i can sue for freedom of speech, restricting and banning your members away like this... Anyway,
"No access to your steam games" eh? Where there is a will there is a way around..

I don't get the "permanently deactivating your account" thing. Maybe lockout all games on your account until you accept, so offline mode won't work, but the permanent thing bothers me. I guess it's the same in the wash, but it feels wrong to me. If you just decide to not weigh in on the issues, and accept that until you weigh in positively, your games are being held hostage, that's... not right, but it doesn't feel wrong. What I'm saying is, even if you disagree, you should always have the option to come back, agree, and continue playing your games.

In other words, unless you do something like steal credit cards, or somehow hack the system to get free games, there's NO reason your Steam Account should be "permanently deactivated" with no hope of a refund or a return to the status quo where you can actually play your games.

For a company that's seems so "pro-consumer", this seems a little strange.

First of all, I am speaking as a former American lawyer, from Maryland, U.S.A. who litigated non-class action lawsuits for about five years before moving on to less stressful things and work weeks that are less than 60-80 hours. Secondly, I have always liked Steam.

I think the whole bother with the class action lawsuit waiver is a tad silly. Class actions do not directly help any singular individual except for the lawyers who bring them, in most instances. They are only permitted because they deter corporations from inflicting wrongs that benefit the corporation greatly in aggregate but spread the harm so diffusely over the populace that it is in no one's economic interest to sue them (remember in U.S., you still pay your own legal fees even if you win unless you have a lawyer who takes a contingency fee. Lawyers only take contingency fees if the expected-work-to-expected-benefit ratio is sufficiently high). So although it deters this sort of injustice, it doesn't really benefit me. Personally. So I don't care. Frankly Steam's offer to pay your legal fees in arbitration EVEN if you lose is something magnificent. So, all in all, I'd say this is a win for the individual consumer.

But there is something scary about this update: basically it is a contract that says that I must agree to ANY CHANGE VALVE might make in the FUTURE to the contract or forfeit forever all the economic value I derived from entering into the contract in the first place. I have little sympathy for the whole anti-EULA point of view. But Steam should not be arbitrarily able to make a drastic change to the contract unilaterally. This is where I see the real problem. If this is upheld, it implies that not only can an EULA be used to waive your right to participate in a class action, but also can be changed by the party with all the bargaining power at any time and you have no REAL recourse except to agree. THAT is scary.

I don't know how an American Court (I suspect it would vary between the States) would come down on this issue. The only Pro-Steam argument I can think up is "the consumer agreed in the original EULA to agree to any changes of any kind we make at any time in the future." Agreement to agree later to anything, huh?

Not so sure.

Crono1973:

Wolverine18:

yuval152:

I already know that I'm just posting news for people to disccuss about.

Help me understand...what is the discussion value of a company using the identical process of every other company?

Maybe you could add some discussion yourself to explain what it is you expect people to discuss. This seems a lot like "the sky is blue...discuss".

Does every other company take away what you have already paid for?

Sony took away the ability to use Linux in their consoles. I know most companies have updates that remove homebrew channels, which can be used to mod games (which is legit in local-multiplayer and single player for a harder or more unique experience) which are free and it's your console, so you should do whatever you want with it. It's not a common thing for a company to take away features or aspects which you may feel you are entitled to because that's what you bought said product for, but it happens now and then. Usually for stupid reasons.

OT: Far as I'm concerned, this isn't that big a deal. I don't see myself getting into lawsuit or legal issue with Valve anytime soon. When I buy games, they are cheap. If I don't like them, I'm either not out much or not too concerned with the issue. If you don't want to accept a change to the TOS that likely won't affect you in anyway and lose access to all your games, have at it, but that seems like raising a fuss about it is just a waste of time.

if you don't agree with the terms and conditions of steam don't use the service. Easy.

742:
i think its shit that theyre doing this. i think its shit that they can do this. but theres been a lot of things on forums talking shit about steam recently and fewer than one would expect talking shit about origin for doing the exact same shit (and then some). i dont love steam, but am i the only one who suspects a 'geurilla marketing'(right term?) smear campaign here? its right in line with the sort of shit EA does every tuesday.

Honestly, I suspect it's less guerilla marketing and more that so many people ALREADY hate EA, and even those that don't usually (except in the really bad cases of fanboyistic cognitive dissonance) don't deny that they play dirty, whereas Valve and Steam have been a darling of the Escapist forums for a long time now.

ResonanceSD:

Did you intend to sue them as part of a class-action? Because if not, you've got no reason to.

By that same logic, there's no reason for Valve to add this sort of clause to the TOS unless they intend to do something that would open them up to a class action lawsuit. You can't call "just in case" for one party and not the other.

Evil Smurf:
if you don't agree with the terms and conditions of steam don't use the service. Easy.

Well, no shit. Did you even bother to read the OP, or did you just not comprehend it? The problem is that if you disagree with steam's abrupt ToS changes, then they take your games hostage.

Meaning of Karma:

Evil Smurf:
if you don't agree with the terms and conditions of steam don't use the service. Easy.

Well, no shit. Did you even bother to read the OP, or did you just not comprehend it? The problem is that if you disagree with steam's abrupt ToS changes, then they take your games hostage.

I fail to see the issue here. I see that people will get upset if their games are taken from them, but you are only buying a subscription to the games and ultimately you don't own them. To keep on having the privilege of playing said games, you buckle down and say yes I accept the terms and conditions.

Is that hard? No

connall:
I just realised this, if the EU ruled, that people own their games doesn't that mean Steam is not allowed to hold your games hostage?

Well, considering the EU already ruled that agreements like ToS and EULA aren't legally binding, I don't see why anyone from the EU really cares. If Valve really does pull a dick move on you, you're covered by several consumer protection laws. It's just everyone else that's fucked.

Next time you try to sign up for something online try hitting the button that you don't agree with the TOS.

This is like every online service since the invention of accounts with passwords.

It's totally not like I could just make sure I had all my purchased games downloaded and THEN delete my Steam account if I had a problem with their new TOS. Oh, wait. I could.

I wouldn't worry too much about it. The courts, at least here in the U.S., don't think too much about TOS, and they've been batted down as not legally binding on several occasions. Since most of the laws are all about interpretation, and interpretation is mostly about precedent, it'll probably stay that way.

Arraxis:
I see a fair few people are accepting of this, compared to when EA did the same thing. So it's OK if Valve does it, but not EA?

Welcome to the Escapist...
*Sigh*
OT: To be honest this does not surprise me and I would not mind If games would not force me to use Steam to play them even when bought a retail

I lament I finally give up. After going around myself and trying to work out a feasible arrangement to make this acceptable, I give up. I have filed an FTC complaint

https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/FTC_Wizard.aspx?Lang=en#last

Against Sony, Electronic Arts, Microsoft and Valve. This cannot be allowed to stand and MUST be brought before higher authority so that it may be evaluated and deemed unenforcable much like all of these ToS modifications cover their asses against.

I wholeheartedly recommend every one to do the same. Even if you accepted the terms and conditions and simply disagree with it. Actually do something to voice that disagreement. File a complaint. This will never be undone if we do nothing to call bullshit on this. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. So show them that this wheel is most certainly squeaking for hundreds of thousands of customers.

Too often we say we are against something and do nothing. This is not much to ask. It would take 15 minutes of your time but together it can actually accomplish something. Do it, ask your friends to do the same. Even if you dont see how it effects you, know it does effect others and do it to protect the rights of people and trust them to know when their rights are threatened.

Seriously. DO IT. THen proliferate this request anywhere you can.

Im yielding my steam account because I will not be bullied into complying with something I cannot be made to agree to. 15 minutes of your time and effort, thats all that is being asked.

viranimus:
I lament I finally give up. After going around myself and trying to work out a feasible arrangement to make this acceptable, I give up. I have filed an FTC complaint

https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/FTC_Wizard.aspx?Lang=en#last

Against Sony, Electronic Arts, Microsoft and Valve. This cannot be allowed to stand and MUST be brought before higher authority so that it may be evaluated and deemed unenforcable much like all of these ToS modifications cover their asses against.

I wholeheartedly recommend every one to do the same. Even if you accepted the terms and conditions and simply disagree with it. Actually do something to voice that disagreement. File a complaint. This will never be undone if we do nothing to call bullshit on this. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. So show them that this wheel is most certainly squeaking for hundreds of thousands of customers.

Too often we say we are against something and do nothing. This is not much to ask. It would take 15 minutes of your time but together it can actually accomplish something. Do it, ask your friends to do the same. Even if you dont see how it effects you, know it does effect others and do it to protect the rights of people and trust them to know when their rights are threatened.

Seriously. DO IT. THen proliferate this request anywhere you can.

Im yielding my steam account because I will not be bullied into complying with something I cannot be made to agree to. 15 minutes of your time and effort, thats all that is being asked.

I wouldnt worry to much about it, their ToS wont hold up in court anyway.

Michael Logan:

I wouldnt worry to much about it, their ToS wont hold up in court anyway.

It has little or nothing to do with how "enforcable" it is. The reason why there should be worry over it is because it is wrong of them to even ask this. These companies keep pushing their consumers and try to bully them into accepting things that hurt them as customers. They will not stop pushing until we as consumers and as a collective illustrate we are capable of pushing back.

Thats why we need to do something about this now while we still have the means to. We are the consumers, we are the one who actually has the power and control in this arrangement. Without us and the money behind us, their products are useless and its long overdue the people actually exercising that control instead of just accepting whatever youre told as acceptable.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked