|
|
 |
View previous topic :: View next topic |
|
| Would you purchase Rebirth if Steam is required... |
| Just for activation |
|
9% |
[ 207 ] |
| For activation and updates |
|
61% |
[ 1376 ] |
| I would never use Steam if it was the last surviving games platform |
|
26% |
[ 589 ] |
| If Steam required periodic log-ins to check your install |
|
2% |
[ 56 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 2228 |
|
|
|
|
|
Author |
Message |
|
|
|
|
|
EmperorJon
 
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6665 on topic
Location: Leicester
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
elexis
Joined: 01 Jan 2007
Posts: 310 on topic
|
 Posted: Tue, 29. Jan 13, 02:00 Post subject: |
   |
|
@fox jumps
What was the exact reason for wanting to terminate your account?
Is removing credit cards the only reason?
What country do you reside? (European Union?)
I just want some context before I attempt to respond to your admittedly heavily opinionated trivia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BAD_POOL_HEADER
Joined: 08 Dec 2012
|
| Posted: Tue, 29. Jan 13, 02:16 Post subject: |
|
|
| the old one wrote: |
| I see all the usual suspects jumping to steams defence as if it was the holy grail.If some one wants to cansel an account they should do it,as they have his details and credit card number so if they got hacked and his credit card details were stolen i think steam woul be up the creek without a paddle,the old one |
Actually I believe this not to be the case for two reasons.
Firstly, as Cycrow states, you can very easily remove stored credit card information without having to delete the account and secondly I'm fairly sure that Steam does not even store your full credit card information on their servers anyway, just the last four digits for ID verification purposes (hence why fox jumps is being asked for that info)
Instead billing information is stored locally on your own computer so unless you get hacked your info is safe and it doesn't even store it locally unless you tick the checkbox telling it to.
| fox jumps wrote: |
A lot of you defenders of the Steam faith need to take a chill pill and re-read my post.
My post was merely meant to post some trivia on what happens when you create a steam account and to point out factually that steam support have confirmed to me that once you have created an account, you do not have the right to terminate it. |
When you purchase a game what you're generally actually purchasing is a perpetual single-user licence to use that software as it states in the on-disk EULA.
Similarly, when you purchase something from Steam, you're again only purchasing the indefinite right to use that software for personal use so what you're asking Steam to do by demanding they permanently remove your account beyond recovery is to revoke the indefinite licence that you have paid for which would be infringing your rights.
By instead agreeing to only 'indefinitely disable' your account you still retain the right to reactivate your account at a future time so your already purchased personal licences are still available to you. Whether you choose to exercise that right of course is your decision. Effectively then by declining to delete and instead offering to mothball your account Steam is fighting to protect your consumer rights.
Irony much? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roger L.S. Griffiths
Joined: 12 Mar 2004
Posts: 5760 on topic
Location: United Kingdom
|
| Posted: Tue, 29. Jan 13, 03:19 Post subject: |
|
|
@ foxjumps: Did you not read the EULA for the Steam account before you created it? (Specifically clause 10.B.)
| Quote: |
B. Termination by You.
You may cancel your Account at any time. You may cease use of a Subscription at any time or, if you choose, you may request that we terminate your access to a Subscription. However, Subscriptions are not transferable, and even if your access to a Subscription for a particular game or application is terminated, the original activation key will not be able to be registered to any other account, even if the game or application was purchased in a retail store. Access to Subscriptions purchased as a part of a pack or bundle cannot be terminated individually, termination of access to one game within the bundle will result in termination of access to all games purchased in the pack will be removed from the account. Your cancellation of an Account, or your cessation of use of any Subscription or request that access to a Subscription be terminated, will not entitle you to any refund, including of any Subscription fees. Valve reserves the right to collect fees, surcharges or costs incurred prior to the cancellation of your Account or termination of your access to a particular Subscription. In addition, you are responsible for any charges incurred to third-party vendors or content providers before your cancellation. |
_________________
Roger (aka [SRK] Mr^Rabbit)
"Understanding is a three edged sword... your side, their side... and the Truth!" - J.J. Sheriden, Babylon 5 S4E6 T28:55
"May god stand between you and harm in all the dark places you must walk." - Ancient Egyption Proverb
"How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time." - Unknown |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eladan
Joined: 07 Jan 2006
Posts: 5276 on topic
Location: Sunshine Coast, Australia
|
| Posted: Tue, 29. Jan 13, 04:05 Post subject: |
|
|
| BAD_POOL_HEADER wrote: |
| When you purchase a game what you're generally actually purchasing is a perpetual single-user licence to use that software as it states in the on-disk EULA. |
<Sigh> Can you please stop posting this stuff as if it's universal truth? The jury is out on sales vs license on software, as it is on the general legality/enforceability of EULAs.
_________________
My X3:Reunion Scripts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BAD_POOL_HEADER
Joined: 08 Dec 2012
 |
| Posted: Tue, 29. Jan 13, 04:56 Post subject: |
|
|
| eladan wrote: |
| BAD_POOL_HEADER wrote: |
| When you purchase a game what you're generally actually purchasing is a perpetual single-user licence to use that software as it states in the on-disk EULA. |
<Sigh> Can you please stop posting this stuff as if it's universal truth? The jury is out on sales vs license on software, as it is on the general legality/enforceability of EULAs. |
Indeed it is still out, so until a definitive legal precedent is set as the end user agreeing to the licence the developer is offering you remain obligated to comply with any terms and conditions that are presented if you wish to use that software. You remain fully within your rights of course to decline the obligation of those conditions if you feel they are not to your satisfaction and not use the software.
What you do not get to do is agree to be bound by those conditions with no intent to comply with them and still have the use of the software.
Last edited by BAD_POOL_HEADER on Tue, 29. Jan 13, 04:57; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A5PECT
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 3512 on topic
Location: NJ, USA
|
| Posted: Tue, 29. Jan 13, 04:57 Post subject: |
|
|
| eladan wrote: |
| BAD_POOL_HEADER wrote: |
| When you purchase a game what you're generally actually purchasing is a perpetual single-user licence to use that software as it states in the on-disk EULA. |
<Sigh> Can you please stop posting this stuff as if it's universal truth? The jury is out on sales vs license on software, as it is on the general legality/enforceability of EULAs. |
It's the only thing we have on paper.
It's as close to the truth as we can get at the moment.
The question is at what point will we be driven closer.
_________________
"If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eladan
Joined: 07 Jan 2006
Posts: 5276 on topic
Location: Sunshine Coast, Australia
|
| Posted: Tue, 29. Jan 13, 05:14 Post subject: |
|
|
| BAD_POOL_HEADER wrote: |
| What you do not get to do is agree to be bound by those conditions with no intent to comply with them and still have the use of the software. |
Yeah, and we've had this argument before as well.
Until either the courts decide that EULAs are universally valid, or I can meet a EULA with my own team of lawyers, and be able to negotiate the terms instead of having said agreement thrust upon me with no recourse except to completely forgo my choice of relaxing, I'll continue to consider EULAs to be unfair and invalid.
I'm not interested in revisiting the argument. I'm perfectly at peace with my decision, I'm not breaking any laws, and as far as I'm aware, I haven't even breached the terms of any of these so-called EULAs, so I don't want to hear any self-important sermons.
My statement stands - EULAs have not been ratified as legal, and spouting the language of an EULA as unqualified truth is garbage.
_________________
My X3:Reunion Scripts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roger L.S. Griffiths
Joined: 12 Mar 2004
Posts: 5760 on topic
Location: United Kingdom
|
| Posted: Tue, 29. Jan 13, 06:16 Post subject: |
|
|
Regardless of if the EULA is valid in explicit sales terms, it can be considered a binding contract at time of installation.
Typically as part of the installation process for commercial software it requires you to tick a check-box confirming that you agree to abide by the terms of the EULA.
If you do not agree to those terms you have a choice, not install the software and return it to the supplier in exchange for a refund OR agree to the terms and continue with the installation.
As for the question of ownership, whether you are talking about a digital instance of the software that you are only permitted to run on one computer at a time or an instance of physical media with similar restrictions you are still only talking about a "license to use".
This license is "owned" by you (at least in the EU) but if you do not comply with the terms of said license after agreeing to them by installing and using the software, then in legal terms you are in breech of contract which would either effectivly invalidate said license or leave you open to being sued for breech of contract.
_________________
Roger (aka [SRK] Mr^Rabbit)
"Understanding is a three edged sword... your side, their side... and the Truth!" - J.J. Sheriden, Babylon 5 S4E6 T28:55
"May god stand between you and harm in all the dark places you must walk." - Ancient Egyption Proverb
"How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time." - Unknown |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eladan
Joined: 07 Jan 2006
Posts: 5276 on topic
Location: Sunshine Coast, Australia
|
| Posted: Tue, 29. Jan 13, 10:41 Post subject: |
|
|
| eladan wrote: |
I'll continue to consider EULAs to be unfair and invalid.
I'm not interested in revisiting the argument. |
_________________
My X3:Reunion Scripts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Roger L.S. Griffiths
Joined: 12 Mar 2004
Posts: 5760 on topic
Location: United Kingdom
|
| Posted: Tue, 29. Jan 13, 10:47 Post subject: |
|
|
| eladan wrote: |
| eladan wrote: |
I'll continue to consider EULAs to be unfair and invalid.
I'm not interested in revisiting the argument. |
|
If you are not interested in revisiting the argument then I suggest you refrain from such provocative wording such as your initial response to BPH. 
They are correct in what they said regardless of your personal opinion on the fairness of the terms.
_________________
Roger (aka [SRK] Mr^Rabbit)
"Understanding is a three edged sword... your side, their side... and the Truth!" - J.J. Sheriden, Babylon 5 S4E6 T28:55
"May god stand between you and harm in all the dark places you must walk." - Ancient Egyption Proverb
"How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time." - Unknown |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
quase
Joined: 06 Mar 2008
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Tue, 29. Jan 13, 12:52 Post subject: |
|
|
| Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote: |
@ foxjumps: Did you not read the EULA for the Steam account before you created it? (Specifically clause 10.B.)
| Quote: |
B. Termination by You.
You may cancel your Account at any time. You may cease use of a Subscription at any time or, if you choose, you may request that we terminate your access to a Subscription. However, Subscriptions are not transferable, and even if your access to a Subscription for a particular game or application is terminated, the original activation key will not be able to be registered to any other account, even if the game or application was purchased in a retail store. Access to Subscriptions purchased as a part of a pack or bundle cannot be terminated individually, termination of access to one game within the bundle will result in termination of access to all games purchased in the pack will be removed from the account. Your cancellation of an Account, or your cessation of use of any Subscription or request that access to a Subscription be terminated, will not entitle you to any refund, including of any Subscription fees. Valve reserves the right to collect fees, surcharges or costs incurred prior to the cancellation of your Account or termination of your access to a particular Subscription. In addition, you are responsible for any charges incurred to third-party vendors or content providers before your cancellation. |
|
While I find Fox reaction a bit exaggerating (canceling the whole account), I can still understand where he his coming from. What I cannot understand is the reaction towards Fox in this thread, while he is actually only trying to practice his granted rights on Steam. What I find quite hilarious is, that according to Fox, they won't even let you practice your only consumer-right left for Steam on your property which would be to burn it to the ground and destroy it. So in summary, Steam actually grants you no rights at all. Why do they care if I destroy MY property by canceling MY account?
Have you tried giving back a Steamgame because you deny accepting the EULA? It is not working, simply because you won't have access to even buy a game until you accepted the EULA in the first place and an activated game can of cause not get returned. You "accepted" an EULA which I would like to remind is a single sided contract favouring Steam/Valve, the publishers/developers, a contract that has the clause that they can change it any time for no reason to whatever they like, a contract that actually grants you no consumer-rights at all. Not even the termination of the contract is possible if you listen to Fox story.
How can anybody think that such a contract is valid in any court over the world and how can anybody think that enforcing such a contract by a private company (Valve) is within the legal options? Where are we, the Wild West, Outlaw-Internet-Country, the right of the stronger, everybody can make their own laws by simply writing it in an EULA and enforce it with the right of domestic authority? I doubt so, they should not have the power to enforce such a contractual situation in the first place! There is a presumption of innocence in our rights systems (although in the last years it is hollowed everywhere, e.g. the anti-terrorism-acts), so why are they entitled to threat me like a would-be-criminal too?
So my conclusion was, that as long as they do not hand out my purchased property (the license and software) or at least make me independent from their account-binding software-client (with the help of standalone-installers and updates), I will not do business with companies like Valve, EA, Ubisoft or others that have a similar approach.
_________________
Someday, somewhere, today's empires are tomorrow's ashes.
Last edited by quase on Tue, 29. Jan 13, 13:26; edited 2 times in total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eladan
Joined: 07 Jan 2006
Posts: 5276 on topic
Location: Sunshine Coast, Australia
|
| Posted: Tue, 29. Jan 13, 13:24 Post subject: |
|
|
| Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote: |
| They are correct in what they said regardless of your personal opinion on the fairness of the terms. |
Random post on the net with the same opinion as you is not proof that you are right.
:EDIT:
Here is the best link I could find on the current state of play (at least in the US, other places haven't even had landmark cases in this area that I'm aware of.) I'll concede that with big content lobbying hard for their interpretations on digital media, the battle is an uphill one, but nothing is yet set in stone. Your insistence on parroting the message that big media favours must be very gratifying for them, but it's hardly helping the general public keep the rights they should have.
_________________
My X3:Reunion Scripts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
quase
Joined: 06 Mar 2008
Location: Germany
|
| Posted: Tue, 29. Jan 13, 14:21 Post subject: |
|
|
| eladan wrote: |
| Roger L.S. Griffiths wrote: |
| They are correct in what they said regardless of your personal opinion on the fairness of the terms. |
Random post on the net with the same opinion as you is not proof that you are right.
:EDIT:
Here is the best link I could find on the current state of play (at least in the US, other places haven't even had landmark cases in this area that I'm aware of.) I'll concede that with big content lobbying hard for their interpretations on digital media, the battle is an uphill one, but nothing is yet set in stone. Your insistence on parroting the message that big media favours must be very gratifying for them, but it's hardly helping the general public keep the rights they should have. |
A good read. I felt relieved once again to read that there are at least still some people that share my view on things. If you look around the Internet, you have to have the impression that the propaganda of the content industry worked really well for transporting the message that their view of the situation is the best. For them of course it is, as they remain in total control of the content they sell and it is a great way to maximise profit by eliminating the competition of second hand sales.
Sadly I have the feeling that the lobby of the content industry in politics will make way for their view and establish the necessary laws sooner or later. See for example the current ruling that circumventing the SIM-lock on mobile phones is now illegal in the USA.
We the people have no say and no chance to do anything against it. Sure you could vote for another political party and hope they change it, but they will soon be bought by the lobbyists as well. You could choose for not consuming, but that will not help if all media/content will fall away from the first sale doctrine. It would be a shallow and joyless life without any media or content. Let's hope we will not see such a doomsday development.
_________________
Someday, somewhere, today's empires are tomorrow's ashes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
elexis
Joined: 01 Jan 2007
Posts: 310 on topic
|
| Posted: Tue, 29. Jan 13, 14:30 Post subject: |
|
|
@quase, we are still losing the fight in a lot of places. Take the last week for example.
- The US voted to remove the law that prevented unlocking mobile phones from restrictive carriers and their contracts from being illegal.
- The International Telecommunications Union voted to make the propriety (thus needing licence to use) H.265 format the video compression standard for high-resolution video, despite open alternatives being available and ready for use thanks to the likes of Mozilla and Google.
It's definitely a case of 3 steps forward, 2 steps back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search