Support NeoGAF

[KyoZz]

After four years of litigation, the Paris Court of First Instance has ruled in "UFC-Que Choisir" case against Valve Corporation's Steam. The consumer protection association complained of the general conditions of use of the service, which, according to it, contained more than a dozen unfair terms, and in particular prohibited the "transfer or resale of lawfully acquired games".

Is considered abusive the clause below:
"Your Account and related information (for example: contact information, billing information, account history and subscriptions, etc.) is strictly personal. You are therefore not allowed to sell or charge the right to use your account to third parties or to transfer it. In the same way, you may not sell, charge or otherwise transfer the right to use Subscriptions, except as expressly permitted in this Agreement (including the Subscription Conditions and Rules of Use) or authorization. Specific Valve. "

Valve will therefore be forced to "rethink its platform to allow its French users to resell their content"

In particular, the association relied on the principle of "exhaustion of rights" to defend its position. This copyright rule concludes that once a protected product has been marketed, the owner of the rights can no longer oppose its free movement, so that the right of exhaustion has been exhausted. If this rule was valid for physical objects, the question arose for dematerialized products. In addition to the recognition of this rule, the court also confirmed that it was a purchase and not a license in the form of subscription as indicated by Valve for his defense.

The US company still has the possibility to appeal the decision which provides, in addition to the cancellation of clauses, 30 000 euros in damages and the obligation for the platform to publish the court decision on its website for 3 months. A brilliant victory for the association which has in fact removed fourteen clauses of the subscription agreement. They are now considered "unwritten".

Among the other implications of this court decision, Valve will now have to assume responsibility for any damage resulting from the use of beta software and will no longer be able to exploit user-created content, such as "mods" for example.

If this decision only applies in France for the moment, and even if Valve can still appeal, it is a very good step in the right direction and this can encourage other countries to do the same. An official #Hashtag as been launched on Twitter: #LetMeSellMyGames Make your voice heard loud and clear !

Source:
The decision (in French)

https://cdn2.nextinpact.com/medias/16-01008-ufc-que-choisir-c--valve.pdf

UFC Que Choisir (in French)

Condamnation de Steam - L’UFC-Que Choisir fait reconnaître le droit de revente de jeux vidéo - Action UFC-Que Choisir - UFC-Que Choisir

L’UFC-Que Choisir se félicite de sa victoire au profit des « gamers » utilisateurs de la plateforme de jeux vidéo Steam. Par sa décision du 17 septembre 2019 (susceptible d’appel), le tribunal de Grande Instance de Paris a reconnu aux consommateurs le droit de revendre leurs jeux achetés via la...

www.quechoisir.org

Steam : contraint d'autoriser la vente de jeux d'occasion, Valve va faire appel - CNET France

MAJ 20/09/2019 - L'UFC-Que Choisir a gagné son procès face à Valve, condamné à supprimer quatorze clauses abusives des conditions d'utilisation de sa plateforme Steam, dont une interdisant la revente des jeux en occasion. Mais la société n'a pas dit son dernier mot et compte bien faire appel.

www.cnetfrance.fr

 

[Birdo]

Used digital games always have scratches on them and torn manuals. Don't buy them.

 

[zeorhymer]

This means that *any* digital software has to be able to be resold. I wonder how the other companies are going to respond.

 

[GHG]

Used digital sales?

Over publishers dead bodies. This isn't even up to Valve.

 

[eddie4]

I would see Valve just paying some fees and shit and do whatever they want to.

 

[Lionel Richie]

If you can't sell it then you just don't own it. Good for France, at least force some clearer terminology to be employed on the digital space.

 

[Shifty]

Most interesting. I expect some legal ducking and diving to happen, but it's a good precedent to set as far as actually feeling like you own what you buy.

 

[Northeastmonk]

I wouldn't mind selling a few game(s) and then buying new ones. That's a couple afternoons of going through your list and choosing what to sell and what to keep. They could even do a "credit" based system.

 

[Danny Dudekisser]

This uh... could actually be a big deal. Or at least, the start of something significant.

 

[01011001]

honestly, a used game resell feature could be a huge PR move by valve...

implement it worldwide and have a system where you pay a sellers fee (say 5% of what you sold a game for) that goes to the developer/publisher

 

[Bonfires Down]

I would see Valve just paying some fees and shit and do whatever they want to.

Nope, that's not how it works in Europe.

I do think people should have the right to resell their games. On the other hand this would leads to an even greater focus on GaaS, and to linear games moving exclusively to subscription services. I would be fine either way but it would be interesting to see how this shakes out.

 

[rofif]

Used digital? How would that even work

 

[The Bloody-Nine]

Bring it on. If I decide to give up on PC gaming in future it'd be nice to be able to sell my games.

 

[Jigsaah]

People often laughed at the French....

Yea....who's laughing now?

 

[johntown]

While I myself would like this I am sure it will be appealed. Even if it goes into law I think Valve would leave the French market before it would allow/implement this.

I mean technically the content is used and technically since it is digital new at the same time so how does that really even work?

 

[KyoZz]

Keep in mind that Valve as the right to appeal the decision, and that this text has not yet be applied. But as stated, yes, it make a good precedent.

 

[Paltheos]

Most interesting. I expect some legal ducking and diving to happen, but it's a good precedent to set as far as actually feeling like you own what you buy.

I already feel comfortable there. Steam ongoing as a platform isn't a concern of mine so it feels like ownership even if it's actually an indefinite lease.

I'm generally pretty comfortable with the arrangement period. There are allot of good deals on Steam imo.

 

[Fuz]

I'm not sure this is a good thing.

 

[Lupin3]

Used digital? How would that even work

Via a store controlled marketplace? If they can remove/add games from/to your account today, I can't see why it would be a problem here.

 

[AndrewRyan]

This is the feature I've wanted most from digital games. Keep waiting for one of the competing stores to offer it since I'd gladly start using them but they never do.

It could be good for publishers too if they get a percentage of the sale. Also I'd buy more games at full price knowing I could sell them, rather than waiting for the price to drop.

 

[Nightrunner]

Kinda harmful to devs and publishers IMO. What's to stop someone from buying a cheaper used ver. of the latest Indie or AAA game + also seems to be kinda contrary to the whole digital games have long legs philosophy. If this is held up then more and more games will go the GaaS/Mtx route which is gonna be awful.

 

[Griffon]

This would fuck over devs, especially small ones.

 

[jshackles]

Anyone who thinks this won't just end with Valve shutting down access to Steam in France is kidding themselves.

 

[Nightrunner]

Anyone who thinks this won't just end with Valve shutting down access to Steam in France is kidding themselves.

Hopefully there are EU regulations that would prevent that. Maybe someone with more knowledge can chime in?

 

[Kenpachii]

Good this should have happened already years ago in entire of europe. The fact that steam slimed itself out of it by making games permanent lone systems instead of owning them is disgusting and also a reason i will never support steam as platform in the least possible way i can.

Anyone who thinks this won't just end with Valve shutting down access to Steam in France is kidding themselves.

Then they will have to ban entire europe with it and become even faster redundend because this will be pushed out everywhere. Much like lootbox shit. This won't stop this issue from disappearing even remotely.

 

[jshackles]

Hopefully there are EU regulations that would prevent that. Maybe someone with more knowledge can chime in?

Even if it meant pulling out of Europe completely - it'd be a huge blow to Valve of course - they probably would in favor of losing that level of control on people's digital "ownership". Adding the ability for users to sell their games to each other in a marketplace setting (even if Valve and/or the publisher is taking a cut of the transactions) means that publishers will start pulling their games from Steam en masse. Publishers won't want to sell their games on a platform where resell is possible unless they're getting the full cut for doing so (70% or more).

 

[Kenpachii]

Even if it meant pulling out of Europe completely - it'd be a huge blow to Valve of course - they probably would in favor of losing that level of control on people's digital "ownership". Adding the ability for users to sell their games to each other in a marketplace setting (even if Valve and/or the publisher is taking a cut of the transactions) means that publishers will start pulling their games from Steam en masse.

Who the fuck is still going to buy games on there platform even in america as they could be on the chopping block next when everybody loses all there games and access towards it?

Steam would be done for. As u gotta be absolutely idiotic to invest in a platform that can drop you the next day with all your games on top of it.

Massive blow to the company.

Another one will swoop in, not like there aren't enough shops and steam is a relic of the past.

Publishers will still release games with or without steam in europe.

 

[GamesAreFun]

Even if it meant pulling out of Europe completely - it'd be a huge blow to Valve of course - they probably would in favor of losing that level of control on people's digital "ownership". Adding the ability for users to sell their games to each other in a marketplace setting (even if Valve and/or the publisher is taking a cut of the transactions) means that publishers will start pulling their games from Steam en masse. Publishers won't want to sell their games on a platform where resell is possible unless they're getting the full cut for doing so (70% or more).

I disagree; it's no different to the used retail games market. Valve & publishers have gained too much control from digital games, it's about time it swings back towards consumer rights. Even if Valve "abandoned" France, it allows a more respectable digital retailer to sell to ~70 million people. I'm sure Epic or GoG would be happy to step in.

 

[Threeshotgamer]

I understand the case is against steam but wouldn't this apply to every digital storefront? Would hardly seem fair to impose this on Steam and then allow its competitor's to not abide by the same resell policies.

 

[Nightrunner]

Even if it meant pulling out of Europe completely - it'd be a huge blow to Valve of course - they probably would in favor of losing that level of control on people's digital "ownership". Adding the ability for users to sell their games to each other in a marketplace setting (even if Valve and/or the publisher is taking a cut of the transactions) means that publishers will start pulling their games from Steam en masse.

Eh pulling out of Europe is too extreme. They might start using proxies for real currency that they can then control better or opt for a subscription based model instead. The problem here is the difference between physical and digital goods like the lack of depreciation, question of ownership (is it a license or is it effectively MY copy to do with as I please) and transferability-problems which can only be solved by proper legislation pertaining to digital goods which we've been lacking for a while now.

 

[Nightrunner]

I understand the case is against steam but wouldn't this apply to every digital storefront? Would hardly seem fair to impose this on Steam and then allow its competitor's to not abide by the same resell policies.

Yeah if this is upheld it sets a precedent for other digital storefronts as well. That means Epic, GOG whoever it is will have to do the same.

 

[Kenpachii]

I understand the case is against steam but wouldn't this apply to every digital storefront? Would hardly seem fair to impose this on Steam and then allow its competitor's to not abide by the same resell policies.

Mostly they go after the market leader and then later on put rules for everybody else to follow with it. So yes it will need to be applied to anybody else on the digital licensing front.

I can't wait on the valve's reaction to see how they slime themselves out of this again with shit like.

"gift valve a copy" as buy button or something. Those weasels will make up something and steam fanboys will defend it to the end of the earth.

 

[EverydayBeast]

Stuff like this is why gamers went digital in the first place.

 

[zeorhymer]

Yeah if this is upheld it sets a precedent for other digital storefronts as well. That means Epic, GOG whoever it is will have to do the same.

It means EVERYBODY. Sony, Microsoft, Apple, Google, any company that sells digital software.

 

[jshackles]

The only way I see this working is thusly: Games wouldn't be sold from consumer to consumer, only from consumer back to Valve. Basically it'd be functionally equivalent to a "partial refund".

Let's say you buy a game for $60 then play it for 10 hours and finish it and want to sell it. You go to the Steam store page and click the "sell" button and you'll be given an offer of pre-determined value (it might be based on the time played, whether or not the game has gone on sale recently, etc) but it would likely ALWAYS be under 30% (Valve's cut) of what you paid for the game, so the most you could expect to make back from your $60 game would be $18. For the sake of argument let's say Valve offers you $15.

Valve would then either eat the cost of this completely (publisher still gets their full share of your initial sale and are no longer involved in the transaction), or would have an agreement in place with the publisher/developer to absorb some of that cost - which would be chalked up to the "cost of doing business".

You then have the ability to sell your games, just not really in an open marketplace.

If we're talking legally mandated consumer-to-consumer digital game sales, then Steam (and any other digital storefront) becomes unsustainable unless they put a hard cap on the number of copies of each game they'll be selling on Steam. Artificially capping product sales to generate artificial scarcity (along with Valve and the publishers getting a cut of used game sales too) is the only way the entire system doesn't collapse. Also, publisher sponsored digital game sales would probably die completely as a result of this change along with other benefits we currently have like Valve generating Steam keys for their publishers to sell off-site. In this dark timeline, it's entirely possible to go to the Steam store on a game's release date and see "SOLD OUT" instead of a purchase button. But don't worry, soon the resellers will step in and initially start charging exorbitant fees if you want access to that game right away.

Without Valve being able to control the supply side economics of such a system, every digital game sale essentially becomes a "race to the bottom" as users continuously undercut publishers and publishers continuously slashing their digital prices to try and keep up. Because there is no depreciation of the product (a digital game will never get damaged or otherwise stop working) there will be no advantage to "buying new". Publisher revenue projections will literally be "how many games can we support in the current ecosystem" instead of "how many games can we sell" which would be a huge difference - so much so that the larger publishers would almost certainly pull their catalogs from digital storefronts in favor of just going back to selling physical media.

I don't think Valve pulling out of the EU would be a huge leap of logic if presented with this ultimatum.

 

[Holammer]

Used digital? How would that even work

Valve adds a mechanic that allows the transfer of ownership. Badaboom, done. Pretty simple, they already have the infrastructure in place with Steam Market, I wouldn't be surprised if they already have this feature ready to roll out, because this was inevitable to happen sooner or later.

 

[ROMhack]

Any belief in thinking they can skimp on this by adding wording that says you don't own the games? That way you forfeit normal consumer rights or something...

 

[Lupin3]

Kinda harmful to devs and publishers IMO. What's to stop someone from buying a cheaper used ver. of the latest Indie or AAA game + also seems to be kinda contrary to the whole digital games have long legs philosophy.

This has been the name of the game since the very beginning of video games. They are still here today, aren't they?

 

[JLB]

People often laughed at the French....

Yea....who's laughing now?

Da people

 

[Insert Disk Two]

The system should be totally transparent. Want to sell a game? Click on the game in Steam and click a button. Game is delisted from your library and you are supplied with a game code which can be redeemed again. User can resell the game code as he/ she wants.

 

[Nightrunner]

This has been the name of the game since the very beginning of video games. They are still here today, aren't they?

Not really in terms of indie devs and the online economy like Steam, GOG etc. Used digital copies that are 1:1 like new ones will definitely bite into their bottom line.

 

[jshackles]

It means EVERYBODY. Sony, Microsoft, Apple, Google, any company that sells digital software.

I could see all of these corporations going to the French government and saying.... "Wanna play ball, or not?"

I guarantee you that all of these companies (with probably the exception of Sony) have a contract with the French and EU governments that supplies them with operating system software, email, collaboration software, or productivity software that they would revoke in a heartbeat rather than lose digital ownership rights to consumers.

Maybe I'm just cynical though.

 

[Business]

Being able to sell your digital games makes a lot more sense than not being able to sell your digital games tbh.

 

[Pidull]

This would be great if it could come to fruition, more likely publishers will charge a premium to buy games outright while pushing subscription services for "affordability". I can already hear Jim Sterling's hot takes on the PR spin.

"Here at EA our goal is to provide premium games, which is why we now charge a premium price for our groundbreaking products. We also want to give everyone an opportunity to play our titles, which is why we offer the option to subscribe to our monthly streaming service for a low price of $20 per month."

On the plus side, when PT2 gets delisted by Konami, you'll be able to resell it.

 

[Trogdor1123]

Havnty read the decision but we're there comments on them having the right to charge fees for this service? I'd think the publishers would be able to make this instantly entirely uneconomical.

Here come online passes again!

 

[Lupin3]

Not really in terms of indie devs and the online economy like Steam, GOG etc. Used digital copies that are 1:1 like new ones will definitely bite into their bottom line.

While I do agree do some extent, I really do believe it should be within our rights to resell a game, physical or digital. It's still a game we paid for, with the only difference being the physical one costs the devs and publishers more. I think the market will regulate itself since it's really no difference in the end for the consumer. One loses access, another one gains access.

But hey, it's just my opinion. I'm not really qualified to say how this will affect the market in the long run. Personally I don't think it will do much of a difference to me, since I usually by all my games on sale anyway. And I don't live in France.

 

[Nightrunner]

While I do agree do some extent, I really do believe it should be within our rights to resell a game, physical or digital. It's still a game we paid for, with the only difference being the physical one costs the devs and publishers more. I think the market will regulate itself since it's really no difference in the end for the consumer. One loses access, another one gains access.

But hey, it's just my opinion. I'm not really qualified to say how this will affect the market in the long run. Personally I don't think it will do much of a difference to me, since I usually by all my games on sale anyway. And I don't live in France.

The problem here is how it limits revenues for all devs/pubs in terms of how many people actually buy their game. Even if say 40,000 people buy a game on sale the pubs/devs get 70% of that pie and Valve gets 30% (don't know about Sony and Microsoft but I assume 30% as well). Now consider a used digital game that is 1:1 with no degradation-how much would you sell it for and how much revenue would that entail for the devs/pubs.
The problem with this verdict is it will only encourage pubs and devs to pursue more dubious avenues and push GaaS, Mtx and sub based models. You lose out on some of the "long legs" part of putting your game on a digital storefront because of all the used 1:1 copies floating around.
All I'm hoping for is improved legislation with regards to digital goods and licensee/ownership issues. Verdicts like these will probably push gaming more towards the streaming side unfortunately.

 

[Lupin3]

The problem here is how it limits revenues for all devs/pubs in terms of how many people actually buy their game. Even if say 40,000 people buy a game on sale the pubs/devs get 70% of that pie and Valve gets 30% (don't know about Sony and Microsoft but I assume 30% as well). Now consider a used digital game that is 1:1 with no degradation-how much would you sell it for and how much revenue would that entail for the devs/pubs.
The problem with this verdict is it will only encourage pubs and devs to pursue more dubious avenues and push GaaS, Mtx and sub based models. You lose out on some of the "long legs" part of putting your game on a digital storefront because of all the used 1:1 copies floating around.
All I'm hoping for is improved legislation with regards to digital goods and licensee/ownership issues. Verdicts like these will probably push gaming more towards the streaming side unfortunately.

I share your concerns, but I do believe we're already past the point of "it will only encourage pubs and devs to pursue more dubious avenues and push GaaS, Mtx and sub based models" already. Also, I'm not sure this would be a viable solution for smalltime indie devs anyway. I do, however, wholeheartedly agree with you on this one:

All I'm hoping for is improved legislation with regards to digital goods and licensee/ownership issues.

 

[Katsura]

Excuse me sir, do you have a valid license for those used 1s and 0s?

 

[Ownage]

Why would Steam care, they can make profit off the used or new software sale regardless. The publisher can get a cut of the resale. Profit is still there to be made.

Queue Ferengi photos.

 

[Zog]

While I myself would like this I am sure it will be appealed. Even if it goes into law I think Valve would leave the French market before it would allow/implement this.

I mean technically the content is used and technically since it is digital new at the same time so how does that really even work?

Simple, you sell it and you can’t play it anymore. This isn’t hard.