Steam Subscriber Agreement

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by HossHuge

We see the world through different eyes my friend.

I agree. I tend to understand facts and not ideology.

[HossHuge]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

I agree. I tend to understand facts and not ideology.

But morality is an opinion not a fact.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by HossHuge

But morality is an opinion not a fact.

Sandusky would agree.

[Frick]

I'm pretty sure part of the original EULA says they can change it whenever they like it.

And I don't understand why people feel morally superior to companies. The point of the company is to make a profit. It's not charity, and if I'm any judge most of you wouldn't want it to be (since most of you are americans).

In short, whiners gonna whine.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by Frick

I'm pretty sure part of the original EULA says they can change it whenever they like it.

And I don't understand why people feel morally superior to companies. The point of the company is to make a profit. It's not charity, and if I'm any judge most of you wouldn't want it to be (since most of you are americans).

In short, whiners gonna whine.

Hey now Americans are some of the most charitable people on the planet! As a matter of fact we give more the any nation on the planet.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/1..._United_States

https://www.cafonline.org/publicatio...ndex-2011.aspx

[HossHuge]

Originally Posted by Frick

And I don't understand why people feel morally superior to companies. The point of the company is to make a profit. It's not charity, and if I'm any judge most of you wouldn't want it to be (since most of you are americans).

In short, whiners gonna whine.

LOL! You are whining about whiners.

[purecain]

wow... nasty little thread this has turned into...

@HossHuge - i see your point and its a shame others dont... but what can you do...

best not to have a political or moral discussion on a tech forum... it will end badly...

[FordGT90Concept]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Of course. Its a video game service. No need for a class action lawsuit. Its not your F#$king mortgage company for Sh!T sakes.

If the service went down and everyone lost access to their lawfully purchased products for a considerable amount of time, I could definitely see a major class action lawsuit in the works. I think if that were to happen, the EULA would be shreded in favor of consumer protection laws.

FYI, you can't "go offline" on Steam unless you are already online. There is a real threat that this could happen some day.

[Zebeon]

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

FYI, you can't "go offline" on Steam unless you are already online. There is a real threat that this could happen some day.

That is what worries me, what if it goes down for a long period of time, or out of business or they quit supporting it. what happens to all the dollars worth of games that we purchased. You use to be able to play steam games offline... at one time anyways.

[Frick]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Hey now Americans are some of the most charitable people on the planet! As a matter of fact we give more the any nation on the planet.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/1..._United_States

https://www.cafonline.org/publicatio...ndex-2011.aspx

Quite possible, I kinda meant the free market thing. It seems like most of you like that.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

If the service went down and everyone lost access to their lawfully purchased products for a considerable amount of time, I could definitely see a major class action lawsuit in the works. I think if that were to happen, the EULA would be shreded in favor of consumer protection laws.

FYI, you can't "go offline" on Steam unless you are already online. There is a real threat that this could happen some day.

No you can go offline while not connected. Just disconnected my Ethernet and tried it. No worries there. However I do agree with you. If they ever did that no EULA in the world is gonna stop the lawsuits. I have well over 5k (If I paid full price) worth of software with them which takes it beyond small claims.

Originally Posted by Frick

Quite possible, I kinda meant the free market thing. It seems like most of you like that.

Love the free market. Want it all over my face, chest and back! Free market allowed us to give more money to the poor then anyone else in the world.

[erocker]

I wonder how many people "Clicked here to print?"

[FordGT90Concept]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

No you can go offline while not connected. Just disconnected my Ethernet and tried it. No worries there. However I do agree with you. If they ever did that no EULA in the world is gonna stop the lawsuits. I have well over 5k (If I paid full price) worth of software with them which takes it beyond small claims.

Were you logged in before disconnecting ethernet? I restart my computer daily and lose internet connection frequently. If I don't start Steam while I have internet, I can't start it. It fails to log in, gives an error message, and terminates.

If you're logged in before losing internet connection, yes, you can go offline. If you're not logged on, tough luck.

Edit: Just lost internet while playing PAYDAY. No matter what I do, it also results in the second dialog shown here:

Originally Posted by erocker

I wonder how many people "Clicked here to print?"

Don't think it really matters if you can get credit card statements that prove money was sent.

[OneMoar]

this was added to prevent abuse by idiots

this clause was Probably added to prevent the people that got VAC'd or where caught tampering with there/other peoples accounts from going crying to the court over there access being terminated
if at some point valve Fucks up and leaks like CC or paypal info you can bet your ass that the EULA won't save them from a class action because any court worth there hammer will throw the binding out the window in a instant

[Kreij]

When you agree to the EULA that says you will not participate in a class action lawsuit and agree to small claims court (SCC) arbitration you are doing yourself a big favor ... at least in the U.S.

The odds of getting a settlement, that actually is acceptable to you, in SCC is much greater than participating in a class action suit.
People in the U.S. have always had the ability to file a claim in SCC. Most companies do not want to send a lawyer or legal team for defense as it's simply not worth it, and you will win by default (becuase they don't show up). The company will then pay the claim and everyone is happy.

I many, many class action suits, the defending company spends a ton of money on their defense, the courts then rule on an acceptable class action amount (which could be a lot of money), and the participants of the suit get a pittance because it's divided up between all the participants.

When you become a participant in a class action lawsuit it does not cost you anything, but you agree to the outcome and wave all rights for continued litigation against the company, for the specific problem, even if the compensation sucks.

If you make a claim in SCC it will cost you something. This is completely dependant upon where you live and what your state has set forth for SCC litigation. It's usually around $100, give or take, but some states allow SCC cases to be presented for as little as $30.
If you sue a company for $500 the odds of them sending legal council is almost nil. Just to get their lawyer there will cost them more than that. So you pay $100, you win the judgement by default for $500 and you walk away with $400. This is a lot better than getting a $25 gift certificate for new products from the company ... which happens a lot with class actions.

If you decide to sue for a rather large SCC amount, it will go to arbitration. You are not required to have legal representation as you can do that yourself (not a good idea if you have no idea what you are doing), but if you win the claim those costs will be taken care of by the defendant in this case.

SCC and arbitration saves the defending company millions of dollars and the odds of you getting a reasonable settlement is greatly improved.

Do a little homework, and know your rights before you jump all over something because you think it "sounds bad".

Just another little tip from yer Ol' Uncle Kreij.

[xxdozer322]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Just hit "I agree" and that little window will go away.

this. +1

[kalstrand]

Originally Posted by Kreij

If you make a claim in SCC it will cost you something. This is completely dependant upon where you live and what your state has set forth for SCC litigation. It's usually around $100, give or take, but some states allow SCC cases to be presented for as little as $30.
If you sue a company for $500 the odds of them sending legal council is almost nil. Just to get their lawyer there will cost them more than that. So you pay $100, you win the judgement by default for $500 and you walk away with $400. This is a lot better than getting a $25 gift certificate for new products from the company ... which happens a lot with class actions.

I know in some states that the loser also covers the winners court costs, so depending on the state you could walk away with the entire $500.

[DannibusX]

If you read the entirety of section 12 you will see that valve includes a small list of things that will make the arbitration clause void.

It also says that so long as the claim in under 10 grand, valve will reimburse the claimant all monies it cost for the arbitration.

It's a way better clause than any other company had put out.

By all means, don't agree to it if you don't want to, but don't freak out because you didn't read the section in it entirety.

[Super XP]

Doesn't know who came up with this nonsense but it won't hold up in court. They are asking somebody to challenge this agreement. Sign it and game away, this is only to intimidate us gamers from any action.

[1Kurgan1]

Originally Posted by HossHuge

We (Steam and I) already have an agreement. They are changing it without consulting me first and not honouring the original agreement.

When I read that I just have to ask, where? Where in the Agreement you signed previously do you see a statement saying that they will never update their user agreements again? I mean honestly, no company in their right mind would put that in there, and most of the updates they just put out are ones other company's have made us agree to long ago (and I'm sure you have agreed to them at least once before, and if you haven't I guess you don't play any online games).

[Wrigleyvillain]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Sandusky would agree.

Fucking owned.

And, yes, simply having money does not make one inherently immoral or whatever. Bill Gates has recently done-and will continue to do-more concrete good for the world with his fortune than all the idealistic school teachers of all time could ever do. That's not to say the world does not need great teachers as well...

[yogurt_21]

no issues here, clicked agree and saw that window go away. MY id is plenty safe, no one wants it. Even if they did, I'd probabally get the better end of that deal. So it doesn't matter if steam is hacked.


on the game issue, I have no plans on spending money suing over a couple hundred dollars spent over the past decade.

[BumbleBee]

Originally Posted by Zebeon

That is what worries me, what if it goes down for a long period of time, or out of business or they quit supporting it. what happens to all the dollars worth of games that we purchased. You use to be able to play steam games offline... at one time anyways.

Valve has a plan if that day comes. in the event they go out of business they would patch the client to run in offline mode.

[WhiteNoise]

I just clicked agree and jumped into a game.

[BumbleBee]

/moves the Microsoft Redmond portrait on the wall

computer this is Gabe Newell set self-destruct sequence 2 minutes silent countdown code 0-0-0-0-1