Wondered what the new terms were about

Can I post the Hitler Gabe pic now and not get suspended?

Steam hasn't even monopolized the PC market, so you idiots who are making that point should just turn off your PCs and go read a book.

But anyway, this enrages me. I've been such a supporter of steam- Owning over 430 video games in my library- and they go and pull a stunt like this. I was pissed about it with my 360, pissed about it with my PS3, and luckily EA licks the shit off my asshole and I wipe my butt with origin's face that I didn't take it personally when they started doing it. Regardless of who's doing it, it's wrong. But how do we draw the line? What steps can we take to ensure this doesn't keep happening, and how do we tell Valve, EA, Sony, and Microsoft- short of throwing our consoles and taking metaphorically pissing on our steam accounts- to fuck off with their stupid greedy corporate bullshit?

I don't know what to do and I feel powerless over it. I've already spent over 1000 dollars on my 360 and games, over 500 on my PS3, and at least a thousand if not more on my STEAM account. I can't just give it all away, I'm trapped. They've literally lured me in and trapped me so I can't get out of it other than to just give it all up and waste the money I spent over the last 5 years.

@Diablos1125 said:

Klepek wants us to get all up in arms...

again

It's absolutely a terrible idea to have one company dominate the PC market as much as Valve does. That said, they do it so well that it's very easy to have faith in them. I guess only time will tell.

Personally I agree with Patrick that we should always be very cautious about signing away any of our rights, but at the same time I'm somewhat opposed to the culture which seems to have developed (in particular in America) towards suing people left, right, and centre for the most trivial of reasons. There will always be times when legal action is the appropriate course of action, I just feel like perhaps these days that action is too often taken for issues which aren't big enough to warrant it.

Guess this is still invalid in europe?

Won't stick in Australian Courts. Class Action suits are defined as a right over here, and you cannot sign your rights away in Australia, even willingly.

Not sure how it will go down in the US.

@Y2Ken said:

Personally I agree with Patrick that we should always be very cautious about signing away any of our rights, but at the same time I'm somewhat opposed to the culture which seems to have developed (in particular in America) towards suing people left, right, and centre for the most trivial of reasons. There will always be times when legal action is the appropriate course of action, I just feel like perhaps these days that action is too often taken for issues which aren't big enough to warrant it.

Well said. Companies are taking these measures to protect themselves from the litigation culture of the U.S. Nothing else.

Doesn't bother me because I live in the UK

Consumer class action lawsuits are an outdated artifact of our legal system. They almost exclusively exist as a way for lawyers to profit from. You get like 6 bucks 2 years after it starts and they make hundreds of thousands. It's not like we're signing the rights away to sue on behalf of our community because a company spilled a bunch of toxic sludge in our water supply.

I don't know how anyone could give a shit about this.

Does anyone know if any of the new TOS affect Canadians? I understand it does affect the USA, and laws in the EU say you can't put this in your TOS, but what about Canada?

Since I live in the U.K. can I not care?

This actually makes me suddenly wary of the Steam system. Not the class-action lawsuit part; I don't live in North America or Europe, so there's very little chance I'll be involved in any class-action lawsuit that makes sense.

But it did get me to thinking that while Steam may not have a monopoly on video game sales, it does have a monopoly on what games I can play now. Most of the games I own were bought through Steam, and if I don't accept the new terms, I will no longer be able to play hundreds of dollars' worth of games that I have legally bought.

That's quite a scary thought.

Didn't the supreme court already rule that class actions was out a few years ago? The America where corporations will have to take responsibility for their actions is apparently unconstitutional.

Juuup:

http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Supreme-Court-rejects-class-action-arbitration-2374082.php

This is what happens when people decide to sue Bioware because they didn't like the ending. Or, or sue Sony because they took PSN down for three weeks. Or, any other of the foolish news stories the make most of us roll our eyes. Cause & effect folks, when you waste the executives of a corporation's time and money enough they will say, "Nope, it not worth teh risk."

@damnable_fiend said:

clever use of that beyond good and evil screenshot.

lmao

This could also mean that Half-Life 3 is coming soon, and they're bracing themselves for the inevitable hate they'll be receiving for the ending they have in mind. Think about it.

The reason why I "shrug" Patrick?? I just don't care to be honest. I have downloaded and paid for the games, they aren't going to take them away.

What would constitute a class action lawsuit?

Thanks for posting this Patrick. Good close as well. The amount of "meh" that goes on in the gaming community when more and more of this is happening is insane to me. Guess what, all those games you BOUGHT on Steam, you didn't buy any games on Steam that's what Valve just told you and everyone else with this move. You leased those games with an option to get screwed. Agree with whatever we feel like putting into our EULA or we make every game you ever purchased from us unplayable.

Some of you may not give a shit about class action lawsuits, hell I certainly don't, but you've completely missed the point. They changed the EULA and if you don't agree with those changes you don't get to play the games you BOUGHT ever again. Think about what happens when one of the EULA changes is something you can't stomach. Money well wasted?

Good luck with that whole "meh" mentality. It's serving society well as a whole right now. Apathy ftw.

Bluuuuuuuuhh. Just bluuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuhhh.

Boooo-urns

The only problem I have with it, is that they are changing the terms of my purchase, after the purchase was already made. At least with the PSN thing, the games I owned would still continue to work.

But also, for me personally, I hate the whole 'class action' lawsuit as I think it hurts as a society and really only benefits lawyers and rarely if ever true victems. So I will sign it if for no other reason than that. I can understand why someone may not like it based on their own experience, but after being involved in a few dealing with a largeautomakers, I would never agree to be part of a class action ever again.

@FiZi:

LOL

I'm gonna go watch that episode right now.

Steam will eventually be replaced with Microsoft's own app store, as you will be able to play xbox-type games on a central console or your win 8 laptop/desktop.

personally i just think this is an asshole move by valve its not really bout wether or not they reimburse u its about the weight that steam carrys in the industry and it seems like that it will open the doors for other companies to stonewall people into agreeing with such terms specially in the digital download market

To anyone freaking out, EULA does not trump the law of the land. Just because an EULA says they will come and kill your dog, doesn't make it legal because you agreed to the it. You have the right to seek damages through law suits. This tactic is solely used to confuse the consumer into thinking otherwise. Law > Contracts.

I'm just happy our Dutch legal system isn't as broken as it is elsewhere. Valve makes some very valid points, and if you look at the whole situation and try to come up with any decent solution the only thing that comes to mind is what an absolute legal mess 'you guys' have created over there.

Sure, the corporations are greedy and will want to hang on to their money no matter what. If that was the only problem it would be very easy to deal with indeed. What most people dont seem to realize is that most consumers are at least as greedy and wouldnt think twice about completely destroying a company if it meant they'd get their hands on a fat check. And then there's the class action lawyers who made it their profession to screw over BOTH parties and usually end up the only winners in this circus.

I totally see where Valve and Sony and the like are coming from, but it will take something more thorough and fundamental to have any resemblance to a lasting solution. You can't just say 'we don't like this, so you can't do it anymore'. Some kind of alternative failsafes will need to be installed... and that's not going to happen anytime soon without the complete legal system getting a thorough shake up.

Evil companies of the world unite!

To fix some misconceptions in this thread (that have been pointed out, but ignored as this will probably be)

1) Arbiters aren't pulled from some magical pool of technically competent people. They're pulled largely from former lawyers and judges, meaning you get the same people you'd see in a court of law. Only guess what? You lose all the regulation and penalties on corruption and have almost no recourse to fight back against problems arising from that as you would in a court of law.

2) Most companies offer to pay arbitration costs in one fashion or another, including many of those identified in this thread as somehow worse than Valve in this clause. Valve may be more consumer friendly than some companies, but they don't sit around saying "how can we make our legal wrangling more consumer friendly?" No, this is a standard thing most companies do and Valve isn't doing anything different, special, or otherwise noteworthy by offering to pay for arbitration should it be required. Not to mention if you actually read the clause they've got a loophole you can drive a bus through to avoid paying it if they so choose.

3) Just because Class Action Lawsuits are less efficient for the consumer doesn't mean they're worthless. Aside from being far more painful to a company than individual lawsuits, they bring more attention to an issue or the severity of said issue that would otherwise be ignored by some people. Furthermore the only cheap alternative to a Class Action Lawsuit is small claims court, but if you actually look up the rules of small claims court in your area they usually say the loser can appeal the ruling. Which means if you win against a company the company can appeal and turn it into a full blown deal where you start racking up huge legal expenses to fight them. Not common, but if enough people start doing small claims against companies they can fight back.

Edit:

Also a great example of how a Class Action can be really useful is in the EU right now. Since the ruling came out that you should be able to resell digital games a Class Action would be one of the best (if not THE best) and cheapest way to sue Steam for not allowing that service. A regular/individual lawsuit would be far less efficient because your average Steam user probably doesn't care so much about trying to sell their games, especially not enough to go to court over it.

dunno why Valve keeps getting free passes on doing crappy stuff? People bitched about Sony losing your passwords when they got hacked, (because they didnt tell us for like a week). But they pulled their system down on their own at much cost to them, fixed it and gave you a ton of free stuff, and they are not even a very internet focused company. MONTHS after it happens and everyone should have been aware of internet hackers, an internet focused company, (Valve) gets hacked, they tell us for months that it was the forums only that got hacked, then it barely gets leaked that actually nope it was credit cards and main passwords as well most likely - they didn't pull service down, just made you change password, and gives us nothing free. Yet Sony was the bad guy? Now this, when it was Sony, even with the opt out choice and it only affected PSN not your games, people BITCHED about it, now Valve does it with no opt out and you cant even use Steam anymore if you say no - yet most people I talk to or read posts by are very "meh" about it? i dont get it? I think people just want to hate on Sony? Valve is kinda messed up except that they give good sales. That doesn't make them "good" in my eyes.

@Mykander said:

To fix some misconceptions in this thread (that have been pointed out, but ignored as this will probably be)

1) Arbiters aren't pulled from some magical pool of technically competent people. They're pulled largely from former lawyers and judges, meaning you get the same people you'd see in a court of law. Only guess what? You lose all the regulation and penalties on corruption and have almost no recourse to fight back against problems arising from that as you would in a court of law.

2) Most companies offer to pay arbitration costs in one fashion or another, including many of those identified in this thread as somehow worse than Valve in this clause. Valve may be more consumer friendly than some companies, but they don't sit around saying "how can we make our legal wrangling more consumer friendly?" No, this is a standard thing most companies do and Valve isn't doing anything different, special, or otherwise noteworthy by offering to pay for arbitration should it be required. Not to mention if you actually read the clause they've got a loophole you can drive a bus through to avoid paying it if they so choose.

3) Just because Class Action Lawsuits are less efficient for the consumer doesn't mean they're worthless. Aside from being far more painful to a company than individual lawsuits, they bring more attention to an issue or the severity of said issue that would otherwise be ignored by some people. Furthermore the only cheap alternative to a Class Action Lawsuit is small claims court, but if you actually look up the rules of small claims court in your area they usually say the loser can appeal the ruling. Which means if you win against a company the company can appeal and turn it into a full blown deal where you start racking up huge legal expenses to fight them. Not common, but if enough people start doing small claims against companies they can fight back.

Edit:

Also a great example of how a Class Action can be really useful is in the EU right now. Since the ruling came out that you should be able to resell digital games a Class Action would be one of the best (if not THE best) and cheapest way to sue Steam for not allowing that service. A regular/individual lawsuit would be far less efficient because your average Steam user probably doesn't care so much about trying to sell their games, especially not enough to go to court over it.

Bumpin' this so more people see it.

Also, this doesn't mean you can't sue the company. You just can't sue them en masse. A large number of people all individually suing the company is totally kosher. And more harmful and costly to the company, too.

Who the fuck would want to sue Valve? They just do things right there.

@tourgen said:

A class action lawsuit for my bike drove Suzuki to issue a general recall on it for the frame. So yeah, I'm not buying the argument that class actions serve no other purpose other than to make lawyers rich. There were hairline cracks in my frame and I got it replaced as a result. Without class action I guess my family could have sued for wrongful death after the frame cracked.

But where's the comparable class action that can be brought against Valve? There isn't a product to recall. They don't develop machines capable of killing or physically harming people. There aren't potential health issues related to using Steam.

The main issues I could see coming up would be related to privacy issues or account/banking issues related to credit card information and the like. And neither of those seem like they are going to be huge issues worthy of a class action. I mean, I know people hate EA and Origin, but honestly I don't see myself caring about anything Origin does that comes even close to requiring a class action lawsuit. So why should I really care?

of course they do this, & continue to do everything they can to strengthen their monopoly. but people dont care, only worship valve, well, most.

The Canadian Supreme court has already said these clauses barring class action lawsuits will not hold up under Canadian law. So good times if you're a Canuck, Americans get the short end of the stick on this one.

Patrick, go out an be an activist or something. Seriously

So I guess if I disagree, I get my money back... Right? Oh no, the evil Valve taking advantage of me just like most other video game companies

So...I STILL haven't agreed to this EULA since steam restarted itself to make me sign this...

I had a few games already downloaded and backed up to my home server. I guess I can't load any of them, without "NoCD" cracks or some other "less than scrupulous" methods. I guess I'm just hosed on other games I downloaded. Sigh

I really liked Steam. I kinda feel like "sheeple" asking the community, is there any way "they" have decided to deal with this. Clicking "Agree" or "Disagree" and going about a different method of game purchasing. GOG, Origin, Amazon.

What about games that require steam? I've heard certain amazon download games use steam for authentication.

I'm cool with this. Private arbitration is always infinitely preferable over having to fight it out in the state's court.