Do we really own our steam games?

[zfactor]

You do realize I was actively referencing that right?

Well, this is the internet, so I was not entirely sure... Now I am... Also now is everyone else who reads this forum!

 

[googleback]

I try to buy on gog as much as I can, like the other day I bought beyond good and evil on there, even though it was a pound more expensive, I like being able to keep my games, and its annoying that buying it on disc (half the price) would make it almost unplayable because of the fucking drm... so yeah, I prefer discs but I didn't want to buy it on ps2 or gamecube.
ah well, at least with gog you get those extras.

 

[Fappy]

You do realize I was actively referencing that right?

Well, this is the internet, so I was not entirely sure... Now I am... Also now is everyone else who reads this forum!

Gah! It was a trap wasn't it!

 

[Dogstile]

While i'm not sure if i'm allowed to say it (and please mods, just ask me to edit it if i'm not) i'm pretty sure you have the license, which means you can download it, considering you paid for it.

At least that's how I would look at it.

 

[Skratt]

I hope that steam never goes under and doubt that is going to happen anytime soon, but I do worry that a publisher could "pull" a game from the downloads that I have already purchased.

It's bad enough when games are buggy and patches will never be released.

You can do a backup of your steam games and burn those backups to disc. So, if this concerns you grab the games you can't live without and back them up to DVD or CD or removable HDD - or all three.

 

[jaywalker118]

No just a license to use them I think, which pretty much sucks. If I pay for it I should own it.

Wolf in sheep's clothing, that Gabe.

 

[migo]

No. If I remember correctly, I think it it stated some way in the Terms of Service. You technically have no ownership, just a licence to play.

Everything else I was going to say has already been said. :/ Thanks Guise.

Which is why if you buy something on Steam and it doesn't work, they just refer you to the ToS and say they don't have to do anything. That's also why I refuse to buy any non-Valve game off Steam.

 

[veloper]

It's just a license to play the game, for life.
Go for it when they're doing a sale.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Steam is basically a lifetime rental, which has the saving grace that Valve is actually up front about that fact, and honors the idea of a license to use the data, even when it's not good for them. Disc based EULAs, on the other hand, are treated as a license when it's good for the company (E.G., you want to sell your copy, but you can't because it's "licensed") and treat it like a sale when it doesn't (E.G., your disc broke, but you still have a license to it. Too bad, you're going to have to buy another license to legally get access to your data.) There's also the fact that when Steam puts stuff on sale, the lifetime rental winds up cheaper than a weekend rental would be. The only time I buy games on Steam is when they're on sale, because I'm not paying more than $10 for a rental, no matter how long I get to keep it.

 

[Cowabungaa]

You don't own any game you buy, Steam or otherwise, because this:

Just a licence to use them. Nothing else

applies for pretty much every game that isn't freeware, hell almost every piece of software that isn't freeware.

Steam is basically a lifetime rental, which has the saving grace that Valve is actually up front about that fact, and honors the idea of a license to use the data, even when it's not good for them. Disc based EULAs, on the other hand, are treated as a license when it's good for the company (E.G., you want to sell your copy, but you can't because it's "licensed") and treat it like a sale when it doesn't (E.G., your disc broke, but you still have a license to it. Too bad, you're going to have to buy another license to legally get access to your data.) There's also the fact that when Steam puts stuff on sale, the lifetime rental winds up cheaper than a weekend rental would be. The only time I buy games on Steam is when they're on sale, because I'm not paying more than $10 for a rental, no matter how long I get to keep it.

Then again, every game is pretty much a rental in that regard.

 

[subtlefuge]

No.

You've never owned a single game, piece of software, movie, or song that you didn't create in your life.

You own a license, which grants you indefinite usage of said works with certain stipulations. If you owned a game, you would have legal rights to copy, sell, and distribute it.

Sorry to disappoint you, but you should have been upset about this back in '81.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

You don't own any game you buy, Steam or otherwise, because this:

Just a licence to use them. Nothing else

applies for pretty much every game that isn't freeware, hell almost every piece of software that isn't freeware.

Steam is basically a lifetime rental, which has the saving grace that Valve is actually up front about that fact, and honors the idea of a license to use the data, even when it's not good for them. Disc based EULAs, on the other hand, are treated as a license when it's good for the company (E.G., you want to sell your copy, but you can't because it's "licensed") and treat it like a sale when it doesn't (E.G., your disc broke, but you still have a license to it. Too bad, you're going to have to buy another license to legally get access to your data.) There's also the fact that when Steam puts stuff on sale, the lifetime rental winds up cheaper than a weekend rental would be. The only time I buy games on Steam is when they're on sale, because I'm not paying more than $10 for a rental, no matter how long I get to keep it.

Then again, every game is pretty much a rental in that regard.

Possession is nine tenths of the law, and as I explained in the post, disc-based EULAs only treat the license as a license when it suits the company. Everything about the way a physical game sale works suggests a sale, whereas with Steam, there is no argument as to whether it's a sale or not; they're very upfront about it being a lifetime rental, and Valve actually honors their end of the contract (by which I mean the EULA), which is more than I can say for most other companies.

 

[Cowabungaa]

You don't own any game you buy, Steam or otherwise, because this:

Just a licence to use them. Nothing else

applies for pretty much every game that isn't freeware, hell almost every piece of software that isn't freeware.

Steam is basically a lifetime rental, which has the saving grace that Valve is actually up front about that fact, and honors the idea of a license to use the data, even when it's not good for them. Disc based EULAs, on the other hand, are treated as a license when it's good for the company (E.G., you want to sell your copy, but you can't because it's "licensed") and treat it like a sale when it doesn't (E.G., your disc broke, but you still have a license to it. Too bad, you're going to have to buy another license to legally get access to your data.) There's also the fact that when Steam puts stuff on sale, the lifetime rental winds up cheaper than a weekend rental would be. The only time I buy games on Steam is when they're on sale, because I'm not paying more than $10 for a rental, no matter how long I get to keep it.

Then again, every game is pretty much a rental in that regard.

Possession is nine tenths of the law, and as I explained in the post, disc-based EULAs only treat the license as a license when it suits the company. Everything about the way a physical game sale works suggests a sale, whereas with Steam, there is no argument as to whether it's a sale or not; they're very upfront about it being a lifetime rental, and Valve actually honors their end of the contract (by which I mean the EULA), which is more than I can say for most other companies.

But in the end, every time it matters, it's still just a licence, even if it doesn't feel like one half the time. You still don't own it, even if they make you believe it so through the physical purchase and whatnot, you still don't. They just don't bother with that illusion on Steam.

Plus, in essence, Steam is just a distributing program. They offer additional services, but a developer isn't forced to use those. The games you 'buy' from it are still owned by the actual publishers and developers, not Valve. Valve just lets them sell it through Steam, and probably gets a hefty paycheck for doing so.

 

[gigastar]

Well yes, legally we do own the downloaded games as we paid money for access to them.

I dont think Steam will ever go down. And even if it did Valve would be forced to pay up billions to reimburse customers for thier lost property.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

You don't own any game you buy, Steam or otherwise, because this:

Just a licence to use them. Nothing else

applies for pretty much every game that isn't freeware, hell almost every piece of software that isn't freeware.

Steam is basically a lifetime rental, which has the saving grace that Valve is actually up front about that fact, and honors the idea of a license to use the data, even when it's not good for them. Disc based EULAs, on the other hand, are treated as a license when it's good for the company (E.G., you want to sell your copy, but you can't because it's "licensed") and treat it like a sale when it doesn't (E.G., your disc broke, but you still have a license to it. Too bad, you're going to have to buy another license to legally get access to your data.) There's also the fact that when Steam puts stuff on sale, the lifetime rental winds up cheaper than a weekend rental would be. The only time I buy games on Steam is when they're on sale, because I'm not paying more than $10 for a rental, no matter how long I get to keep it.

Then again, every game is pretty much a rental in that regard.

Possession is nine tenths of the law, and as I explained in the post, disc-based EULAs only treat the license as a license when it suits the company. Everything about the way a physical game sale works suggests a sale, whereas with Steam, there is no argument as to whether it's a sale or not; they're very upfront about it being a lifetime rental, and Valve actually honors their end of the contract (by which I mean the EULA), which is more than I can say for most other companies.

But in the end, every time it matters, it's still just a licence, even if it doesn't feel like one half the time.

Plus, in essence, Steam is just a distributing program. They offer additional services, but a developer isn't forced to use those. The games you 'buy' from it are still owned by the actual publishers and developers, not Valve. Valve just lets them sell it through Steam, and probably gets a hefty paycheck for doing so.

Except it doesn't. If the companies actually honored the license, I should be able to snap my disc in half, and be able to regain access to the data which has been licensed to me for little or no cost. Steam does this, but if you go in and buy a game from Wal-mart, you won't be able to do that. Forgetting for a moment that the EULA is questionably legal to begin with -- and every last one of them contains some weasel words at the end that basically mean "if you live in an area with decent consumer protections, nothing in this document is actually binding" -- the companies do not hold up their end of the contract that the EULA supposedly forms, and only treat it like a license when that is more profitable for them than a sale.

 

[Cowabungaa]

Except it doesn't. If the companies actually honored the license, I should be able to snap my disc in half, and be able to regain access to the data which has been licensed to me for little or no cost. Steam does this, but if you go in and buy a game from Wal-mart, you won't be able to do that. Forgetting for a moment that the EULA is questionably legal to begin with -- and every last one of them contains some weasel words at the end that basically mean "if you live in an area with decent consumer protections, nothing in this document is actually binding" -- the companies do not hold up their end of the contract that the EULA supposedly forms, and only treat it like a license when that is more profitable for them than a sale.

You make it sound like regular purchasing is a lot worse than buying from Steam, as they basically screw you over regardless; make it a sale when they profit by it, make it a license when they profit by it. Whatever it is, you'll get the short end of the stick every time. Doesn't seem to be that way with Steam as you describe it, yet you only buy games on sale there.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Except it doesn't. If the companies actually honored the license, I should be able to snap my disc in half, and be able to regain access to the data which has been licensed to me for little or no cost. Steam does this, but if you go in and buy a game from Wal-mart, you won't be able to do that. Forgetting for a moment that the EULA is questionably legal to begin with -- and every last one of them contains some weasel words at the end that basically mean "if you live in an area with decent consumer protections, nothing in this document is actually binding" -- the companies do not hold up their end of the contract that the EULA supposedly forms, and only treat it like a license when that is more profitable for them than a sale.

You make it sound like regular purchasing is a lot worse than buying from Steam, as they basically screw you over regardless; make it a sale when they profit by it, make it a license when they profit by it. Whatever it is, you'll get the short end of the stick every time. Doesn't seem to be that way with Steam as you describe it, yet you only buy games on sale there.

The upside of buying games on disc is that you actually own them, it's a tradeoff; there are benefits to having a license that's actually treated like a license, but I don't put as much value on them as I do the rights that come with owning the copy of the disc that you buy. The weird hybrid thing that happens when game companies don't honor their end of the license, but still expect customers to keep up their part, that's what really bothers me.

Edit: And for reference, I won't pay more than $10 for a Steam game, but I rarely pay ore than $15 or $20 for any game I buy, regardless of format. I tend to stay a few years behind the curve on games, which saves me a bunch of money in the long run.

 

[Cowabungaa]

The upside of buying games on disc is that you actually own them, it's a tradeoff; there are benefits to having a license that's actually treated like a license, but I don't put as much value on them as I do the rights that come with owning the copy of the disc that you buy. The weird hybrid thing that happens when game companies don't honor their end of the license, but still expect customers to keep up their part, that's what really bothers me.

But...you don't. You don't own the piece of software, you can't do whatever you want with it. I still don't see how you actually own that piece of code, even if the EULA is questionable. All those legal cases, torrenting sites getting taken down, new legislation, you name it. And all that jazz seems to apply to software on discs too.

You have a point when you say that they treat it like a sale, they do indeed when they can get more money that way. Same thing counts for the license, if they can get more money that way they'll treat it like that. So again, in the end, whatever happens, it sounds like you as a consumer will get screwed over regardless of the situation.

But again, Valve doesn't own the vast majority of the stuff they sell. They're mainly just a digital distribution platform. Hence why certain games bother with things like Gamespy or Games for Windows Live. You activate them through Steam, but that's it. The publisher could cut that part off whenever they want.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

The upside of buying games on disc is that you actually own them, it's a tradeoff; there are benefits to having a license that's actually treated like a license, but I don't put as much value on them as I do the rights that come with owning the copy of the disc that you buy. The weird hybrid thing that happens when game companies don't honor their end of the license, but still expect customers to keep up their part, that's what really bothers me.

But...you don't. You don't own the piece of software, you can't do whatever you want with it. I still don't see how you actually own that piece of code, even if the EULA is questionable. All those legal cases, torrenting sites getting taken down, new legislation, you name it. And all that jazz seems to apply to software on discs too.

You have a point when you say that they treat it like a sale, they do indeed when they can get more money that way. Same thing counts for the license, if they can get more money that way they'll treat it like that. So again, in the end, whatever happens, it sounds like you as a consumer will get screwed over regardless of the situation.

But again, Valve doesn't own the vast majority of the stuff they sell. They're mainly just a digital distribution platform. Hence why certain games bother with things like Gamespy or Games for Windows Live. You activate them through Steam, but that's it. The publisher could cut that part off whenever they want.

Here's the thing; when you buy from steam, you agree to the EULA as part of the contract of sale, and they really do just sell you a license. When you buy in a store, the only contract made is "If I give you the money, you give me that box and everything it contains." The EULA is sprung on you after the contract of sale is made, and is completely useless as anything but a scare tactic. The upside of this is that the contract made through Steam, like all contracts, grant certain rights and responsibilities to both parties, whereas the EULA in a boxed game is completely useless, and the companies manage to convince many gamers that they're under a contract, all the while ignoring their own end of it, because it's nothing but a useless sheet of paper. As a matter of fact, even boxed games that use Steamworks are probably illegal, at least the way they are currently sold. It's why Valve games are the only games that I always buy straight from Steam; anything else is going to have to be dirt cheap for me to give up my box.

Edit: And to be clear, with a purchase, you own that copy of the game, but like a book, you don't get copyright. The EULA is not necessary for this distinction to exist, because transfer of copyright is a whole different kettle of fish than selling a product; even without an EULA, piracy is still illegal. I shouldn't have to explain this, but copyright arguments have gone in weird directions on this site.

 

[Atmos Duality]

You don't own any game you buy, Steam or otherwise, because this:

Just a licence to use them. Nothing else

applies for pretty much every game that isn't freeware, hell almost every piece of software that isn't freeware.

By that logic, EA, Activision, Sony, or anyone whom you purchased a product from could legally repossess it with no compensation.