Concerns Regarding "Steam China"

[orochi2k]

First, here is some background. As recent news, Valve and Perfect World are launching a new store in China which is "separate from the international version of Steam". However, major concerns among Chinese users have risen as it is considered a sign that international version of Steam may not longer availible to any user resident in China (not only those with Chinese nationality.)

Second, here are the questions:
1, Is there anything going to change after "Steam China" launches?
2, Will the same game title on international version of Steam be different from the version on "Steam China" (a.k.a censorship)
3, Will new users be able to register account on international version of Steam? (Historically, You blocked them in CS:GO. Thus, we are concerned.)
4, Will existed users in China keep everything on their account?
5, Will existed user in China still be able to access and buy games/software on the international version of China?
6, Will the payment methods of CNY and game price change after "Steam China" launches?

And finally, as Steam claims to follow "policies and laws" in China. Please respect the following laws when you take your next move with Perfect World:
1, The Real Right Law of the People s Republic of China demands you to respect all our "owned" games in library to be intact. If any one tries to hinder our rights to use our "owned" objects(including games and software), such said person must be stopped.
2, The Contract Law of People s Republic of China demands you follow the original contracts we signed. We buy games, you provide service. Even if it is because a third party (including the great firewall or Perfect World) that makes you no longer able to provide the service. You will still have to honor the contract, continue your service, figure out a way to make up for any lose, provide compensation. (You can sue Chinese ISPs or our government for Great Firewall later.)
3, The Legislative law of People s Republic of China demands you to follow "laws" before "policies".
4, The Business law of People s Republic of China demands both Chinese government and you, as an American company, follows rules under WTO framework.

Please be very careful with your decision as It matters for millions of gamers' life and your reputation.

[Satoru]

north の投稿を引用：

if Steam is illegal in china then yes valve should follow the law to the letter and ban all Chinese IP addresses. it seems morally wrong to allow Chinese gamers to use Steam if it is currently blocked by the firewall.

Yes becaues you know those users wouldnt happen to be using VPNs to bypass the firewall so what exactly are you 'banning'

[orochi2k]

Crazy Tiger の投稿を引用：

orochi2k の投稿を引用：

And finally, as Steam claims to follow "policies and laws" in China. Please respect the following laws when you take your next move with Perfect World:

Except that Valve is honoring those laws, it's just that 3rd parties (irrelevant whether Government or ISP's) are making life hard for Valve to execute that. Perfect World is the only solution to make sure that everything can be done the proper way.

Funny thing is that Chinese friends of mine say that it's publicly known in China that the government blocks Steam. And when I asked them about your OP, they said those laws aren't as demanding as you make them out to be. They said the Real Right law is in regards to property and realty on the Mainland. They also said the Contract law protects both parties and means that when Valve is unable to do business due to restrictions by a third party, for example a block, they're not bound to honor the "contract".

I'm curious why you try to use scare tactics here.

Well, it's just like even if everyone knows someone is a murder while I have no evidence. I can't just put that person in persecution. Same thing here is, I get no evidence which part of government is issuing all the internet blockage. Even those ISPs put quite resistence and accept to take the blame when sued. Thus, I can't just go for the government.

Real Right law protects all properties owned by any Chinese residence as a part of human right, connecting to people not to the location of properties. It's on Section 2.

Contract law also states if a contract can no longer be excuted by any meanings. Then a cancellation shall be enacted which means a full refund of 4 million Chinese steam user's library.

Sorry for my post looks like a "scare tatiics". What people in China found is the news of "Steam China"'s launch may mean the blockage of old Steam is extremly scaring. Will you not, if you know all games in your library will be vanished? And we are talking about 4 million gamers' steam library here. Thus, we react as such. To remind Valve that they also need to consider their 4 million Chinese customers' rights.

[orochi2k]

Satoru の投稿を引用：

orochi2k の投稿を引用：

Here are 2 things:
1, It is called The doctrine of privity of contract. A very common law principle. A contract is not voiding by any 3rd party action except nature disaster.
2, We asked minister of culture if they issued orders to block sites, they denied. Thus, we sued ISPs to unblock some sites. And we won. :)
Now if any one claims Chinese government issued orders to block sites, please provide evidence to us. It will be very helpful. As in China, government's win rate of law suit is merely 66% :P

And again if the government blocks steam, that's not steams fault and thus not a violation of you contract

And again, it's the doctrine of privity of contract. Liability for breach of contract is a no fault liability.

Also, according to international business law, the sellers of products/service have the liability for warrant of defects. Thus, if Steam is selling products that later can be found with legal defection, you are violating contracts.

[AmsterdamHeavy]

So, to summarize, you think valve would be legally responsible for breach of contract if a government bans access to a service, to the point where they are legally obligated to engage ina legal battle on behalf of customers?

No. Your issue would be with your government, as they would be the ones preventing you from accessing said services.

A real world equivalent would be: you have a membership to a gym. The government (for whatever reason, natural disaster emergency) closes all access tot hat area of town. You think you can sue the gym because you couldnt get there because no roads were open.

Get your head out of your bottom.

[orochi2k]

north の投稿を引用：

if Steam is illegal in china then yes valve should follow the law to the letter and ban all Chinese IP addresses. it seems morally wrong to allow Chinese gamers to use Steam if it is currently blocked by the firewall.

According to the agreement China signed when join WTO, China allows citizens to buy products/service from foreign sellers. And the law of China states China respect WTO rules. Thus, Steam is not illegal in China.

There is no law forbids people in China to buy games from stores outside of China. And the law of China states, everything that law does not forbid is allowed.

Firewall has no relationship with laws. It can be considered as part of government policy. However, when policy conflicts with laws, policy must submit to law.

[orochi2k]

AmsterdamHeavy の投稿を引用：

So, to summarize, you think valve would be legally responsible for breach of contract if a government bans access to a service, to the point where they are legally obligated to engage ina legal battle on behalf of customers?

No. Your issue would be with your government, as they would be the ones preventing you from accessing said services.

A real world equivalent would be: you have a membership to a gym. The government (for whatever reason, natural disaster emergency) closes all access tot hat area of town. You think you can sue the gym because you couldnt get there because no roads were open.

Get your head out of your bottom.

Of course I can sue the gym, the contract is between me and the gym.
And then, the gym can sue the government.
This is all according to the law.

And trust me, I will go directly to the government if I can get enough evidence for a law suit.
I may not be brave enough to stand against a tank for some ideologies.
But, at least I will hold a shotgun to guard my own games in my library.....they are all good memories after all.

[Hannibal]

Now we know why we havent seen a new client for steam proper. Too busy catering to China

[AmsterdamHeavy]

orochi2k の投稿を引用：

AmsterdamHeavy の投稿を引用：

So, to summarize, you think valve would be legally responsible for breach of contract if a government bans access to a service, to the point where they are legally obligated to engage ina legal battle on behalf of customers?

No. Your issue would be with your government, as they would be the ones preventing you from accessing said services.

A real world equivalent would be: you have a membership to a gym. The government (for whatever reason, natural disaster emergency) closes all access tot hat area of town. You think you can sue the gym because you couldnt get there because no roads were open.

Get your head out of your bottom.

Of course I can sue the gym, the contract is between me and the gym.
And then, the gym can sue the government.
This is all according to the law.

And trust me, I will go directly to the government if I can get enough evidence for a law suit.
I may not be brave enough to stand against a tank for some ideologies.
But, at least I will hold a shotgun to guard my own games in my library.....they are all good memories after all.

Allow me to rephrase then: "successfully sue"

[Crazy Tiger]

orochi2k の投稿を引用：

Crazy Tiger の投稿を引用：

Except that Valve is honoring those laws, it's just that 3rd parties (irrelevant whether Government or ISP's) are making life hard for Valve to execute that. Perfect World is the only solution to make sure that everything can be done the proper way.

Funny thing is that Chinese friends of mine say that it's publicly known in China that the government blocks Steam. And when I asked them about your OP, they said those laws aren't as demanding as you make them out to be. They said the Real Right law is in regards to property and realty on the Mainland. They also said the Contract law protects both parties and means that when Valve is unable to do business due to restrictions by a third party, for example a block, they're not bound to honor the "contract".

I'm curious why you try to use scare tactics here.

Well, it's just like even if everyone knows someone is a murder while I have evidence. I can't just put that person in persecution. Same thing here is, I get no evidence which part of government is issuing all the internet blockage. Even those ISPs put quite resistence and accept to take the blame when sued. Thus, I can't just go for the government.

Real Right law protects all properties owned by any Chinese residence as a part of human right, connecting to people not to the location of properties. It's on Section 2.

Contract law also states if a contract can no longer be excuted by any meanings. Then a cancellation shall be enacted which means a full refund of 4 million Chinese steam user's library.

Sorry for my post looks like a "scare tatiics". What people in China found is the news of "Steam China"'s launch may mean the blockage of old Steam is extremly scaring. Will you not, if you know all games in your library will be vanished? And we are talking about 4 million gamers' steam library here. Thus, we react as such. To remind Valve that they also need to consider their 4 million Chinese customers' rights.

True, governments cover themselves.

I know it's on section 2, the chattel part. My Chinese friends told me, I forgot a couple of sentences in the previous post due to being distracted, but they basically boiled down to how they seem to think nothing is demanded in a way you put it.
My friends are curious which articles you think invoke the "demanding of respect for "owned" games"and what makes you think you suddenly stop owning the game licenses. Even if you can't acces them, you still own them.

They're also curious what articles you think will be invoked to offer full refunds or to demand that the original contract is held.

I call it scare tactics because you name a lot of laws with words like "demand" without actually going into stuff, by naming articles. It makes it all less concrete. It's a tactic people often use to emphasize what they say.
Personally I'm just curious, btw. Hence why I asked my friends about it. Which is what got me curious why they see things a tad different than you.

[orochi2k]

AmsterdamHeavy の投稿を引用：

orochi2k の投稿を引用：

Of course I can sue the gym, the contract is between me and the gym.
And then, the gym can sue the government.
This is all according to the law.

And trust me, I will go directly to the government if I can get enough evidence for a law suit.
I may not be brave enough to stand against a tank for some ideologies.
But, at least I will hold a shotgun to guard my own games in my library.....they are all good memories after all.

Allow me to rephrase then: "successfully sue"

Yes, under the Contract Law and Doctrine of Privity of Contract.
The gym hold liability to make sure their service has no deflaction. The contract relationship is between gym and customer. Thus, the law suit shall between those 2 parties.

The government order of close up the gym is under government administrative law. The legal relationship is between government and gym. Thus, the law suit shall between those 2 parties.

The customer and the government has no direct legal relationship. Thus, the customer is unable to sue the government directly.

As a conclusion, the customer asks the gym for compensation first. And the gym sue government later.

[AmsterdamHeavy]

..and why would the gym, or Steam, be responsible if the government removes your access?

This is the primary logic point you are skirting around. The business has no liability as they have taken no action to prevent access of services.

Who has taken action to limit access? The government. You are suggesting that the business is responsible for the actions/decisions of a government.

That is not how legal liability works.

[north]

Satoru の投稿を引用：

Yes becaues you know those users wouldnt happen to be using VPNs to bypass the firewall so what exactly are you 'banning'

ban vpn
ban chinese currency
remove chinese language from steam
etc etc
many ways for Valve to help work with PRC government and keep Chinese gamers off Steam until the Perfect World client is released. just saying, they must have good reason for Steam to be blocked by firewall so Valve should help the government and the people by banning them at every opportunity.

[orochi2k]

Crazy Tiger の投稿を引用：

orochi2k の投稿を引用：

Well, it's just like even if everyone knows someone is a murder while I have evidence. I can't just put that person in persecution. Same thing here is, I get no evidence which part of government is issuing all the internet blockage. Even those ISPs put quite resistence and accept to take the blame when sued. Thus, I can't just go for the government.

Real Right law protects all properties owned by any Chinese residence as a part of human right, connecting to people not to the location of properties. It's on Section 2.

Contract law also states if a contract can no longer be excuted by any meanings. Then a cancellation shall be enacted which means a full refund of 4 million Chinese steam user's library.

Sorry for my post looks like a "scare tatiics". What people in China found is the news of "Steam China"'s launch may mean the blockage of old Steam is extremly scaring. Will you not, if you know all games in your library will be vanished? And we are talking about 4 million gamers' steam library here. Thus, we react as such. To remind Valve that they also need to consider their 4 million Chinese customers' rights.

True, governments cover themselves.

I know it's on section 2, the chattel part. My Chinese friends told me, I forgot a couple of sentences in the previous post due to being distracted, but they basically boiled down to how they seem to think nothing is demanded in a way you put it.
My friends are curious which articles you think invoke the "demanding of respect for "owned" games"and what makes you think you suddenly stop owning the game licenses. Even if you can't acces them, you still own them.

They're also curious what articles you think will be invoked to offer full refunds or to demand that the original contract is held.

I call it scare tactics because you name a lot of laws with words like "demand" without actually going into stuff, by naming articles. It makes it all less concrete. It's a tactic people often use to emphasize what they say.
Personally I'm just curious, btw. Hence why I asked my friends about it. Which is what got me curious why they see things a tad different than you.

When the use of owned item is hindered (such as unable to access because of other people's action), according to Article 35, the owner can demand such action to stop so that they can continue to use their owned item normally.

According to the contract law Article 97. If a contract is cancelled, everything shall return to the state before the contract was signed. Thus, in this case, customers take money back, store take game back.

I use lots of laws here because Steam seems like to remove games from China region store because they claim they are"following policies and laws" which I found questionable. Many still remember the incidence of "Hearts of Iron 4"

[orochi2k]

AmsterdamHeavy の投稿を引用：

..and why would the gym, or Steam, be responsible if the government removes your access?

This is the primary logic point you are skirting around. The business has no liability as they have taken no action to prevent access of services.

Who has taken action to limit access? The government. You are suggesting that the business is responsible for the actions/decisions of a government.

That is not how legal liability works.

Again, there lacks of evidence of government's involvement in this (even if everybody knows).
In order to prove Steam has no liability for this, they will have to provide evidence.
And the evidence is what I need to then go for the government.
Without such evidence, they will unfortunately have to hold the liability.

[orochi2k]

north の投稿を引用：

Satoru の投稿を引用：

Yes becaues you know those users wouldnt happen to be using VPNs to bypass the firewall so what exactly are you 'banning'

ban vpn
ban chinese currency
remove chinese language from steam
etc etc
many ways for Valve to help work with PRC government and keep Chinese gamers off Steam until the Perfect World client is released. just saying, they must have good reason for Steam to be blocked by firewall so Valve should help the government and the people by banning them at every opportunity.

Comrade, as you are being quite helpful, please support Party to ban all free speeches in every opportunity.
The Steamcommunity is partially blocked is mostly because people can speak freely here.
The Store itself is not.
But, people are worrying the launch of Perfect World's version may cause the blockage of Steam(and their library). Just like Baidu replaces Google.
Thus, I sent my questions here.

Oh, by the way, you will be banned by party by saying "ban Chinese currency" as it's totally politically incorrect at this moment.