German Court Rules in Favour of Valve, No Game Reselling on Steam

[Hectic Glenn]

You might remember back some time ago that the German consumer watchdog group (VZBV) issued Valve a warning over changes to the Steam EULA back in 2012. It's the second time the issue has gone to the regional court of Berlin, and again the lawsuit has been dismissed.

The VZBV leaned on the principle of the 'doctrine of exhaustion', a concept whereby the copyrighted material is 'exhausted' once purchased by the first owner. Therefore a used computer game could be resold by that individual. The 'doctrine of exhaustion' however was created for physical copies and the VZBV failed to convince the courts it could be applied to non-physical / digital copies.

The judges’ comments at the oral hearing held a few days before the verdict transpired do indicate that they do not consider the doctrine of exhaustion to be applicable to digitally distributed computer games at all.

The issue still seems gray, with laws which haven't kept up with digital distribution, but this is an issue widespread with all copyrighted material. We wouldn't be surprised to see the VZBV come back for a third try later this year. Statement by law firm Osborne Clarke.

 

[Omnomnick]

While this seems like a negative news post, I honestly believe Steam as a platform is better this way. The sales exploitation and devaluing of games which would happen as a result of allowing Steam games to be resold would likely be unbelievably damaging for the PC gaming scene, not to mention Valve as a business.

 

[SpotEnemyBoats]

indeed, less drm is a bad thing for pc gamers.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

It would scare away every major publisher even more. We don't need more Origin/uPlays around.

 

[SpotEnemyBoats]

I think it could've been good, it would force publishers to stop making bad games. Perhaps it would cause another gaming crash if they see gamers returning shit games.

However I believe origin allows returns on some of there games.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

Returns aren't the same as reselling and trading.

 

[SpotEnemyBoats]

Perhaps, but my point still stands.

 

[Aizawa]

no your points dont stand. Why on earth I should ever even consider buying a new game? I would always buy games from other people, because they are cheaper. So developers would get way less money, especially indie devs.
For multiplayer and f2p games this might not be a bad thing, but if they allow reselling, adieu singleplayer games.
The games are cheap as hell anyway on Steam (on sales), so I dont care.
Oh and on Origin you can give the game back within 24 hours or so after you started the game and if you have less than one hour playtime or something like that. When you dont start the game you have 1 week or so I think, yes Steam needs something like that too, but please dont be so stubborn.
I think Valve is already making up for the DRM with a lot of other things, at least for me.

 

[undu]

I don't understand the point that resale would destroy the market. Second hand-sales for consoles exist and haven't killed the market why is this diferent. Piracy also exists and hasn't killed the market either.

What does digital resale have that makes it the boogeyman?

 

[ríomhaire]

While this seems like a negative news post, I honestly believe Steam as a platform is better this way. The sales exploitation and devaluing of games which would happen as a result of allowing Steam games to be resold would likely be unbelievably damaging for the PC gaming scene, not to mention Valve as a business.

I think that it's gross that they're no expectation (or reality) of ownership of digital good across any media.

 

[Aizawa]

I don't understand the point that resale would destroy the market. Second hand-sales for consoles exist and haven't killed the market why is this diferent. Piracy also exists and hasn't killed the market either.

What does digital resale have that makes it the boogeyman?

because most people sell their console games to gamestop for very low money, and gamestop sells that for a lot of money.
On steam though, it would be very easy, just put the games you dont want on the market and let steam do the rest. In real life people are lazy, also some people want games brand new with brand new case and dvd. When its digital there is no difference.

 

[bobtheskull]

Implementing something like this would also make it easier for the people who take advantage of bundle sites, buying up packs of games for a dollar, than reselling them for much more. Humble tried to get round it with the steam link they have going, but if something like this happened, it would pretty much undo that. Would Steam be able to do something like if you sell a game, then you can't have it in your account again? Sounds harsh, but it would be the only way to avoid reselling the same game over and over from picking them up in bundles or sales.

Personally, I like things just the way they are right now.

 

[Aizawa]

yes, and dont forget family sharing. I already share my library with my "family" (friends)
and they play my games when i dont play, easy

 

[Krynn72]

Being able to sell used games is why new games for consoles never go on sale like games on Steam do, or like games in indie bundles. Publishers and developers don't make a single ****ing cent on their hard work when someone guys their game as a used copy. Gamestop and the like make like 80% profit on them, which is why they push their used stuff so much. Claiming this doesn't hurt the industry is stupid. There's a reason why game developers have been closing down and getting bought out by shitgobbling publishers who change their games for the worse, and that reason is that the developers can't make enough money to stand on their own. Used game sales are a huge part of that.

 

[ríomhaire]

Being able to sell used games is why new games for consoles never go on sale like games on Steam do, or like games in indie bundles.

I'm really really not convinced of this. At all. There's a pretty obvious difference between selling a physical good and digital goods: Cost and supply. Digital copies don't run out and the cost of selling them is negligible so you can sell them for as low as you like and make back the costs of the transaction. For a physical copy you have the cost of manufacture and distribution before they're sold to the shops.

And of course that's the thing: They're sold to the shops. The shops then have a finite quantity of product that they've already paid for and need to turn a profit on. In the physical goods side it's Gamestop and Game and Tesco putting the games on sale. They've already paid the publishers and now they have to turn a profit on their goods. If they're doing a 90% discount they're probably selling at a loss, so that's obviously going to be rare and used as a marketing tactic or just to clear something shit off the shelves

But with Steam the publisher's generally have much more control and they can decide with Valve exactly the terms their games are going to be sold under and all the profit goes to them (minus Valve's cut). They can sell for a dollar and still be making a profit. Physical games stores can't do that, used game sales or not.

As an aside: I remember the used PC game market being a good while before Steam came along. If used games sales were the only thing that could stop discounts why the hell didn't I see Doom 3 for 80% two months after release in Game?

 

[Krynn72]

I don't mean 70%+ off type of sales, obviously that's not practical with a retail environment. But consider any other multimedia entertainment. Music, DVDs/Bluray, and the vast majority of physical goods in any store, they always are having some kind of sale going on. Go to Target and find a new Bluray release of Game of Thrones for like 40% off the first week, then it randomly goes on sale throughout the years on top of that. That sort of thing doesn't really happen at all with games. At best you find some place undercutting their competition by like 5 bucks, but the price remains that way until scheduled price drops designed to get rid of new stock, and from then on its strictly used sales. I can go find a brand new copy of a movie that came out 20 years ago in stores, you basically can't find a new copy of a video game that came out two years ago.

"But movies have a big used market in some stores" I hear someone say. True, but its nowhere near as big as it with with games, and somehow places like Gamestop have been able to successfully buy back games at stupidly low costs, and manage to sell those used copies for maybe $5 less than the new version, after only like a week of the game being out. The margins for movies are not anywhere near as good as that. Plus movies have the box office sales, something games don't have.

If publishers could be confident of selling new copies of games for 5+ years, those reselling them would be able to buy their copies off the publisher for cheaper, and then afford to be able to put games on sale like any other physical product gets. As it is now though, publishers have to charge their resellers a lot for new copies, because in a year nobody is going to be buying new copies and the profitability of the game, as far as the publisher is concerned, is dead. This works out in Gamestop's favor, since they get to sell the new copies for a "small" profit, and then in a couple weeks/months they're making crazy bank on used copies. This is to the detriment of both publishers/developers, and consumers. The only ones who profit from used games sales are the people who put in the least amount of work for it.

 

[MindCrack]

No Half-Life 3 for Germans...

 

[SpotEnemyBoats]

no your points dont stand. Why on earth I should ever even consider buying a new game? I would always buy games from other people, because they are cheaper. So developers would get way less money, especially indie devs.
For multiplayer and f2p games this might not be a bad thing, but if they allow reselling, adieu singleplayer games.
The games are cheap as hell anyway on Steam (on sales), so I dont care.
Oh and on Origin you can give the game back within 24 hours or so after you started the game and if you have less than one hour playtime or something like that. When you dont start the game you have 1 week or so I think, yes Steam needs something like that too, but please dont be so stubborn.

That's because you don't want to hear it.

Publisher stomp on consumers rights all the time: 1) look at EA's problems with Sim City, BF4, bioware being bioware, etc.

2) Gearbox releasing memelands 2, aliens: CM and DNF.

you know the rest, the point is too many game dev's get complacent and release shit games. If selling back games makes publishers shit their pants I'm all for it, another gaming crash like the 1980's needs to happen.

I think Valve is already making up for the DRM with a lot of other things, at least for me.

DRM is still DRM, valve can delete any game off your game selection or just ban your account if they wanted. Gabe's "social experiences" sounds like another form of invasive drm.

 

[Vegeta897]

DRM is still DRM, valve can delete any game off your game selection or just ban your account if they wanted.

There are some good arguments against DRM, but this isn't one of them. Do you really think Valve would just take a game away from you for no reason, and then ignore your appeal? You could take legal action against them for not holding up their end of the agreement. Valve would gain nothing but trouble from trying to bully their userbase like that. Bans are made for legitimate reasons, and if you were banned by mistake you can appeal it.

 

[BabyHeadCrab]

Meh, no like button here, but Vegeta said it better than I was able to articulate in my posts.

 

[Tollbooth Willie]

sie sind das essen und i buy used games when the games are shit which is a large portion of the time wir sind die jaeger

 

[Aizawa]

That's because you don't want to hear it.

Publisher stomp on consumers rights all the time: 1) look at EA's problems with Sim City, BF4, bioware being bioware, etc.

They dont stomp on my consumer rights. If they make shit games THEN DONT BUY THEM. Easy isnt it? There are not only EA and Activision in this world...

 

[MainframeMouse]

What does this say about the value of digital goods and is it not at odds with the previous ruling regarding oracle's used licenses.

A ruling like this says your game license has no worth but a business license does. At which point does software become resellable?

While I agree that a used game market on Steam would cause a tremendous effect on Valve and publishers, there is an imbalance that needs addressing.

Can digital games/movies/music be passed on after death? If digital goods have no value after purchase, then how can they have value before?

 

[Aizawa]

What does this say about the value of digital goods and is it not at odds with the previous ruling regarding oracle's used licenses.

A ruling like this says your game license has no worth but a business license does. At which point does software become resellable?

While I agree that a used game market on Steam would cause a tremendous effect on Valve and publishers, there is an imbalance that needs addressing.

Can digital games/movies/music be passed on after death? If digital goods have no value after purchase, then how can they have value before?

just give your son your account when you die, even if its against the law agreement stuff, no one will care xD

 

[MainframeMouse]

Except they will have no legal right to the account or games held with in. Valve can take them away with zero chance of getting them back.

There is a huge gap between law, consumers rights and digital items.

It really is shame Bruce Willis was not taking Apple to court over iTunes.

 

[Vegeta897]

Except they will have no legal right to the account or games held with in. Valve can take them away with zero chance of getting them back.

How would Valve even know who is using the account? It's just a username and password. If you really think Valve would be like "Oh ****, this guy's son is using his account, BAN IT!" then I'm dumbfounded.

 

[MainframeMouse]

No they may not care for the weeks or even a year after. But think 10 or more years.

And yes, disturbingly enough it is possible to collect the type of data through online activity to distinguish one person from another.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/03/11/facebook_likes_are_revealing/
That's one example of data profiling, and that's just based on Facebook likes.






Technology has moved so fast its only now people are having to think of the long term problems.

Sure a copy of HL2 may be unimportant in 10 years from now, but virtual currency or unique items could all be locked up in a future steam account.

 

[Vegeta897]

You're still operating on the assumption that Valve are going to turn into an evil greedy corporation and not give a shit about their users. Show me how Valve has intentionally ****ed over people without chance of recourse. What does Facebook profiling their userbase have to do with Valve wanting to screw people over?

 

[Krynn72]

You're still operating on the assumption that Valve are going to turn into an evil greedy corporation and not give a shit about their users. Show me how Valve has intentionally ****ed over people without chance of recourse. What does Facebook profiling their userbase have to do with Valve wanting to screw people over?

While I agree with you that Valve will likely never do something like this, the argument is that they shouldn't be allowed to do something like that regardless of whether they're inclined to want to do so or not. Its an issue of principle, and I think it is actually an important one.

 

[MainframeMouse]

The point about facebook is how possible it is to discover identify through action and just secretly passing on your account is far from secret.

There was a recent case of a Russian loosing his account. Now his action were suspicious and under money laundering laws Valve where required to react. However the duration of the ban and lack of clear communication from Valve where not aceptable. It is impossible to know if he would have got his account back had he not used tthe media to name and shame.

Once again you need to start thinking beyond the current short term view of Valve and technology. What Valve is now and what it could be in 10 years time we have no way of knowing.

Edit: Thanks Kryn