Release sales data to devs affected by recent BD publisher ban.

[The Monk]

Please give all developers the relevant data in regards to sales so they can either refund or provide new working keys for existing customers.
Some of these devs are now relisting and attempting to recharge those who already own some titles for the exact same product. Positive this is against consumer law in my country.
Double charging for an identical product is downright scammy and Steam has the ability to fix this.
Steam , you are punishing the customers, not the now banned publisher for this. Please do the right thing.

[The Monk]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Soren:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

1. It is a potentially illegal practice from my research. At the very minimum I can force a refund. How is that going to help the devs. Lose out three times then, no new sale, no dlc sale and a refund to boot. This is enforceable by the consumer laws in my country.

"Consumer Guarantees: Under Australian Consumer Law, consumers have certain rights known as consumer guarantees. These include the right to a refund or replacement if a product is faulty, not as described, or doesn’t meet acceptable quality standards. If the vendor sold the same product twice intentionally, it may be considered a breach of these guarantees."

From my perspective. I think your interpretation of the law isn't going to pan out the way you want it too. Because you've said earlier you can still play the product that was discontinued from updates. You still are saying you possess the old product, and that it can be played. It just can't be provided online benefits anymore like continued updates and patches because a fork in the developer/publisher.

As well as the hang up of the vendor selling the same product twice. That one probably won't be valid because it's a new vendor in a sense who had the break off from the old vendor because the old one got taken down from Steam.

I understand it quite fine, and I can request a refund under the law. I can argue several points to my benefit, not with you, but with the ACCC. I've been though it several times now so not going to repeat it for the 10th time. I would rather have a replacement but due to steam withholding the info that would allow them to do that, plus the profiteering the devs is now attempting that looks highly unlikely.

I've said all I can say and made my request for the relevent information to be provided, all I can do now is continue to ask the dev to do the right thing so I do not have to invoke AUS consumer law.

[The Monk]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Taebrythn:

i mean Steam is very aware of your country because there was a lawsuit about refunds and they lost. So yeah wait to see what support says and you might have something since you're from that country.

Someone who remembers and is not misunderstanding what I am talking about. It's in wait and see mode now, not much else I can do,

Everyone else who think they know better, maybe look up this lawsuit. I'm not doing it for you.

[The Monk]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Doctor Zalgo:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

For reference from my point of view on how this may be illegal here. I don't have time to do a deep dive and I do not know any consumer law solicitors as I live in a small country town.

"Consumer Guarantees: Under Australian Consumer Law, consumers have certain rights known as consumer guarantees. These include the right to a refund or replacement if a product is faulty, not as described, or doesn’t meet acceptable quality standards. If the vendor sold the same product twice intentionally, it may be considered a breach of these guarantees."

Like I said, I could make an issue of it, but I would rather the devs just swallow the damn bullet and do the right thing.

Steam is obliged to adhere to these laws or they ca not do business here.
They caused this mess by banning the publisher and consequently removing any ability for the devs affected to restore the original products and pages, the least they can do is help rectify it so both the devs and consumers win.

There's no world where you can force the devs to do something they don't want to (even under the ACL, they always have the remedy of a full refund).

No one is trying to. I am trying to get steam to release the info needed for the devs to do the right thing by their consumers. AUS consumer law can't force them to any thing but refund, you are correct, but they do not have the info to know who to refund. Steam would probably have to do it for them, unless they give the sales/license data they would normally have had previous to the banning of their publisher.

[Crazy Tiger]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

I am trying to get steam to release the info needed for the devs to do the right thing by their consumers.

Nobody from Valve will read this. It's a user forum, nothing more.

Doing the "right thing" always depends on the perspective one has. It's not a black & white thing.

You can report things to your local consumer agency, but that's all.

[The Monk]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Crazy Tiger:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

I am trying to get steam to release the info needed for the devs to do the right thing by their consumers.

Nobody from Valve will read this. It's a user forum, nothing more.

Doing the "right thing" always depends on the perspective one has. It's not a black & white thing.

You can report things to your local consumer agency, but that's all.

Maybe true, maybe not.

Correct, I can report to my local authorities. Been said a dozen times now.

You haven't really added anything to this, sorry.

[Crazy Tiger]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Crazy Tiger:

Nobody from Valve will read this. It's a user forum, nothing more.

Doing the "right thing" always depends on the perspective one has. It's not a black & white thing.

You can report things to your local consumer agency, but that's all.

Maybe true, maybe not.

Correct, I can report to my local authorities. Been said a dozen times now.

You haven't really added anything to this, sorry.

This thread doesn't add anything at all, sorry.

The truth is what I said, anything beyond that is just wishful thinking. You can argue on the forum all day long, that won't change anything.

[Start_Running]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

1. It is a potentially illegal practice from my research. At the very minimum I can force a refund. How is that going to help the devs. Lose out three times then, no new sale, no dlc sale and a refund to boot. This is enforceable by the consumer laws in my country.

Nope. Softyware companies been doing it for literally decades. Windows itself does it. When they need to get revenue in they basically just create a new version of windows which is essentially the previous one with a minor face life and stopn updating the previous.

AAdobe did the same thing. COrel, Qualcomm. Again. Been sorta a thing for a while now. A software developer.. unlessthe contract of sale states otherwise, is free to stop supporting a version with update and sell a new version.

You may not like it but that's how it goes.

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

"Consumer Guarantees: Under Australian Consumer Law, consumers have certain rights known as consumer guarantees. These include the right to a refund or replacement if a product is faulty, not as described, or doesn’t meet acceptable quality standards. If the vendor sold the same product twice intentionally, it may be considered a breach of these guarantees."

And those come with certain liimitations as to when one can act on that. I.e you shhould have evoked that right once you found the game was buggy and not to your qiality standards. That you didn't more or less strongly implies that it was of satifactory quality.

And even if it were the case your beef would be with the previous publisher. Not Valve or the current Dev/pub.

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

As-is has nothing to do with it. Nor is is it "what I think or feel" nor is it what you think you are calling me out on :) This decision was legislated years ago and still stands, Steam has to abide by it if I were to make my case. Of course this is all "may" and unless I make a complaint, the result is not yet known. But there is more there than what you claim i am making up.

Understanding how something works allows one to know the outcome of an action before its taken. Like you don't have to guess what the outcome of sticking your hand in a reved up meat-grinder is going to be.

Also 'as-is' forms part of the product description and entails that nothing more than the current state of the product is guaranteed. I.e updates, patches, etcs. meaning you should have taken the buggy games as pretty much all the game was ever going to be and acted accordingly...You didn't.

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

Then consider the more social aspects. Devs double dips, seen as a scammer, as dishonest, untrustworthy and unethical, onus or otherwise.

Except its not the dev double dipping m8. I mean given how the contract with the publisher worked they may not have even gotten a single dip.

Understanding the difference between the developer and a publisher kinda helps.

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

I am not he only one unhappy with the situation, just the most vocal one today, until I need sleep.

WHether or not you're unhappy is ratherirrelevant the reality is the devs have to do what keeps them and their employees paid and operational. It's not unlike triage. SOmetimes you gotta hack the leg off to save the rest of the body.

But if it means that much. simply boycott the new listing. and stick with the old version you still have.,

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

There are so so many ways this can all go wrong for them and threaten the likelihood of still being in business in six months time.

Yup. So the smart thing to do would be to wait and see before buying anything from the devs.

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

You claim they may not have onus, but it'd be by far in their best interests to make it so.

Yeah but at the same time it doesn't help anyone if they bleed themselves dry trying to appease you and others and wind up going under. EIther way y'all ain't gonna see any new updates

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

3. I was replying to the fact that eve comment you made was about early access. I accept that risk as stated, however we get back to consumer law, the devs may not owe me the software but hey may very well owe me money. What is better, a happy consumer willing to buy future dlc and other games the may make or someone who has their name on a blacklist?

You have a time limit to request the refund. If you exceed the time limit, and this is under your own law, then the refund is totally at the otehr party's discretion and charity.

You should have acted in a timely manner.

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

4. And just how many game devs have done that? I'd like to see a precedent otherwise where is the relevance? And I am nottalking about paid engine upgrades (it's been done) or similar as that is technically just an upgrade and not a new entity. Again, a case can be made under Australian Consumer law. Any statement to the contrary is false, despite what the UBI CEO might want us to think.

Happens quite often with console games. and software. And guess what,. Games are software so the precedent is already there/

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

Software companies are not above the law and all can be held accountable. They simply can not do business here unless they are.

And the fact that this has been practiced in your country for literal decades.. should have clued you in that the law may not be what you think it is.

The phrase 'as-is' . always needs to be specially noted. It means that you should assume that what you get ..is it.

[The Monk]

And the fact that this has been practiced in your country for literal decades.. should have clued you in that the law may not be what you think it is.

The phrase 'as-is' . always needs to be specially noted. It means that you should assume that what you get ..is it.

Can't really reply to you entire thread. I don't have the energy to argue every single point. Your entire argument is now moot now as the developer in question is replacing keys as they are made available within the limits of what steam will release to them.


I will say though that you really need to do some actual research about what the ACCC allows me to do. Your info is what is decades out of date.You points about time limits and needing to act faster is completely negated by our laws. They took steam to court, steam lost, I do not have to, if I choose not to, act within the 2hr/2 week time limits. These limits are against consumer rights/guarantees in AUS. This is fact, not fantasy. If I can prove that the item has broken those guarantees, which I can in this case, I am able to get a refund and neither you, steam (who is the vendor, not the dev) or any dec/publisher can o anything about it. It was plastered on every steam store page for months. I've been telling you this the entire thread yet you simply choose to ignore it.

accc.gov.au/media-release/valve-to-pay-3-million-in-penalties-for-misrepresenting-gamers-consumer-guarantee-rights as a primer.

I am out of this thread. The fight goes one, but it has to be done piecemeal from now on I think, and the first win has come today.

[The Monk]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

And the fact that this has been practiced in your country for literal decades.. should have clued you in that the law may not be what you think it is.

The phrase 'as-is' . always needs to be specially noted. It means that you should assume that what you get ..is it.

Can't really reply to you entire thread. I don't have the energy to argue every single point. Your entire argument is now moot now as the developer in question is replacing keys as they are made available within the limits of what steam will release to them.

I don't give a damn about what adobe and window used to do, most of them don't do it now, as you yourself have said, and the fact they did it for decades is no longer relevant as their own business models have changed and the laws surrounding such digital goods have also changed. You are well out of date, sir.

I will say though that you really need to do some actual research about what the ACCC allows me to do. Your info is what is decades out of date.You points about time limits and needing to act faster is completely negated by our laws. They took steam to court, steam lost, I do not have to, if I choose not to, act within the 2hr/2 week time limits. These limits are against consumer rights/guarantees in AUS. This is fact, not fantasy. If I can prove that the item has broken those guarantees, which I can in this case, I am able to get a refund and neither you, steam (who is the vendor, not the dev) or any dec/publisher can o anything about it. It was plastered on every steam store page for months. I've been telling you this the entire thread yet you simply choose to ignore it.

accc.gov.au/media-release/valve-to-pay-3-million-in-penalties-for-misrepresenting-gamers-consumer-guarantee-rights as a primer.

Edit: This was 2017, not 20 years ago. Things have changed, most companies have moved to sub based, not iterative, and the laws are now more updated to accommodate the new digital age..
Another point, if you check the front ACCC page you will see that this year they are specifically focusing on the games industry, so expect more legislation and changes to guarantee my rights.

I am out of this thread. The fight goes one, but it has to be done piecemeal from now on I think, and the first win has come today.

[The Monk]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Crazy Tiger:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

Maybe true, maybe not.

Correct, I can report to my local authorities. Been said a dozen times now.

You haven't really added anything to this, sorry.

This thread doesn't add anything at all, sorry.

The truth is what I said, anything beyond that is just wishful thinking. You can argue on the forum all day long, that won't change anything.

Except you are wrong, the dev has responded in the way I wished, and you need to research consumer law here and gets some facts instead of coming here with imaginary dribble.

Don't bother replying, I am out of this thread now and anything you have said so far has been not only wrong but useless.

[deborahsimpson]

Who is BD or what is BD ?
If you dont like Steam - leave to EG/SGOG

[Start_Running]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย The Monk:

And the fact that this has been practiced in your country for literal decades.. should have clued you in that the law may not be what you think it is.

The phrase 'as-is' . always needs to be specially noted. It means that you should assume that what you get ..is it.

Can't really reply to you entire thread. I don't have the energy to argue every single point. Your entire argument is now moot now as the developer in question is replacing keys as they are made available within the limits of what steam will release to them.


I will say though that you really need to do some actual research about what the ACCC allows me to do. Your info is what is decades out of date.You points about time limits and needing to act faster is completely negated by our laws. They took steam to court, steam lost, I do not have to, if I choose not to, act within the 2hr/2 week time limits. These limits are against consumer rights/guarantees in AUS. This is fact, not fantasy. If I can prove that the item has broken those guarantees, which I can in this case, I am able to get a refund and neither you, steam (who is the vendor, not the dev) or any dec/publisher can o anything about it. It was plastered on every steam store page for months. I've been telling you this the entire thread yet you simply choose to ignore it.

accc.gov.au/media-release/valve-to-pay-3-million-in-penalties-for-misrepresenting-gamers-consumer-guarantee-rights as a primer.

I am out of this thread. The fight goes one, but it has to be done piecemeal from now on I think, and the first win has come today.

WOrth reminding that what valve was fined for was not making it clear that people could request a refund. The courts however did uphold Valve'sm right to refuse refunds.
As said. The laws don't workn the way toy want to believe they do,.

[pckirk]

OP must have stayed in a holiday inn express.. /s