Steam, banning players for being generous?

Recommended Videos

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
Gather said:
http://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/fk90z/steam_support_bans_my_account_for_gifting/

Can't help but pray and think it's a hoax but;

http://i.imgur.com/r6zVW.png

A little introduction. During the Christmas sales of 2010, I gifted many non-American users Steam games at the American prices (Steam prices in USD for most games is a lot cheaper than the EUR/GBP price). The non-US person Paypals me X USD (X = the price of the game in USD), and I gift them the game. I did with around 20 people or so. Everyone is happy; the non-US player saves money, and Valve/the publisher is still getting paid for the game. I guess Valve wasn't so happy, however...

Has this ever happened to anyone here who helped European gamers save some cash by gifting them the games for cheaper? I am mainly surprised since I see nothing about it in their ToS, etc. (though I may have missed it). Valve and the publishers are technically not losing anything. Based on my account being banned, do you think the prices are just raised for non-US "because they can"? If it was due to currency conversion, why would they ban me? Just some food for thought...
(Taken from the link)


I think you, and most people responding here, are kind of naive about this. I think this probably has less to do with Valve than the European nations involved. I don't know the specific problems, since there are a lot that could apply, but the bottom line is that there are a lot of reasons why things are so much more expensive in europe, which you can find if you like google the question or whatever. A lot of it basically boils down to bureaucracy, trade agreements, and what goverments think their fair share is. Goverments also tend to conspire to try and export as much as possible to bring in money, while importing as little as possible to avoid paying out money, products coming in from the outside are oftentimes charged heavily to make it so domestic products have an advantage. One of the things about the USA is that we're unusually open to outside products, and it's relatively cheap to bring your stuff into our market to sell. It's complicated but while our prices are relatively low it's at the root of a lot of the complaints about how America produces very little of it's own anymore, and how foreign businesses are ripping American ones to pieces even in our local markets.

At any rate, from the very beginnings of online trade there have been HUGE issues with people using the internet and the boom in postal services (along with the guaranteed privacy of post in most nations) to bypass trade laws and agreements. Right now sales taxes are just starting to catch up with The Internet as not paying tax is one of the big things that helped companies like Amazon get going (at least in the US). There were also massive issues over things like "Second Life" and virtual currencies being run concurrantly with real ones that could be traded for real money reliably.

See, I don't know how much the goverments in question are getting out of this right now. STEAM probably set some kind of international deal with the european nations, and pays money to distribute into those countries which is part of the price. Those prices might also include some built in fees that go to the goverment directly. By going for lower prices internationally the goverment is losing it's cut, and of course they are going to blame STEAM for allowing people to do it.

This kind of logic is at the heart of things like region locked movies and such, to make it more difficult to trade media by backdoor channels so the goverment can both keep an eye on the content and make sure their censorship laws are enforced as much as possible, and also ensure they get their cut of the money based on the rules they set for their market.

I'm guessing what happened was that this guy was rather public about what he was doing, and someone in a position of authority in the EU complained, and by agreement STEAM pretty much has to take action for someone bypassing the system they put in place.

The simple existance of differant systems (european, asian, American, etc...) for online services says a lot. The companies involved don't do it because they want to, it would be a heck of a lot easier to just run one giant site and convert money like Paypal does. But given all the differant regional laws both for content, and trade fees, they have to seperate things to be complaint with each area they want to deal with.

In short, I don't think the issue os Steam's greed, or them being upset over losing money. I doubt they pocket the differance in price. I can be very critical of Steam... and well the entire gaming industry, but this is an issue where I actually don't think they are at fault.

If you don't like prices where you are, you should probably complain to the goverment, especially if the issue is foreign goods being too expensive (most video games probably not being produced in your country). On the other hand this may or may not go anywhere even if a lot of people do it, because there is atually a massive downside to bringing in cheap foreign goods, and it's at the root of a lot of the problems here in the USA.

The game industry as a whole (not Steam/Valve specifically) also bears some responsibility, largely because their price fixing means that even with domestic games that could be sold cheaper in a lot of countries, the price is probably being inflated to match the outside ones coming in, in order to prevent direct competition. The domestic game companies benefitting from this when they sell internationally.
 

Zer_

Rocket Scientist
Feb 7, 2008
2,682
0
0
LadyMint said:
Antari said:
If you were doing it with a large number of people this equates to tax evasion. The difference in prices for the EU games are import taxes. Because Valve/Steam is American. Either they get mad at you, or both governments gets mad at them when tax season rolls around and they add up all the numbers.
Well this prettymuch answers my question. I was curious as to why it would be more expensive outside of the U.S. If this is the reason, then I prettymuch agree that it's tax evasion which is against the law.

I still wonder how they put taxes on digital items. Or why. Just because they can, or because they're using foreign internet travel space to deliver it to the person? I'm only guessing the latter because, having worked for a wireless phone company, I know the whole reason you get charged Roaming is because you're using the mobile phone towers of another company to carry your signal, and your phone company has to pay for that privilege. Is it something similar to this when you tax a digital product?
I doubt it. Governments just need tax money. They'll tax anything they can. They would tax your feces for taking space if they could. (Actually they technically do).
 

Booze Zombie

New member
Dec 8, 2007
7,416
0
0
Kakulukia said:
I'll quote an insightful comment from the link...

gareth321 said:
I wish more people would take a basic contract law class. Unreasonable clauses - primarily clauses which contract out of existing contract law - are unenforceable. Terminating an account which a person has paid for and reasonably expects to be able to use is a violation of the contract. It doesn't matter if Valve includes the clause "we may cancel your account and fuck you up the ass whenever we feel like it*. Neither stipulations are legal, and therefore any consumer could sue for the value of the games. Perhaps even punitive damages, since that would be shady as fuck.
If being banned indeed removes access to your purchased games, it's definitely a lawsuit situation. And nobody would call it frivolous.

But more OT, what this guy did was shady, but I highly doubt it's illegal. Since he bought the game, he owns it, and can sell it to anyone he wants. If Valve wants to fuck non-americans over with their stupid prices, consumers have a right to look for a better price.
I love you for posting that quote. I always thought there were some things in these contracts there were just taking the piss, really.
 

Zer_

Rocket Scientist
Feb 7, 2008
2,682
0
0
Booze Zombie said:
Kakulukia said:
I'll quote an insightful comment from the link...

gareth321 said:
I wish more people would take a basic contract law class. Unreasonable clauses - primarily clauses which contract out of existing contract law - are unenforceable. Terminating an account which a person has paid for and reasonably expects to be able to use is a violation of the contract. It doesn't matter if Valve includes the clause "we may cancel your account and fuck you up the ass whenever we feel like it*. Neither stipulations are legal, and therefore any consumer could sue for the value of the games. Perhaps even punitive damages, since that would be shady as fuck.
If being banned indeed removes access to your purchased games, it's definitely a lawsuit situation. And nobody would call it frivolous.

But more OT, what this guy did was shady, but I highly doubt it's illegal. Since he bought the game, he owns it, and can sell it to anyone he wants. If Valve wants to fuck non-americans over with their stupid prices, consumers have a right to look for a better price.
I love you for posting that quote. I always thought there were some things in these contracts there were just taking the piss, really.
Technically they can stop you from using Steam, since you must connect to their privately owned servers to do so. I don't agree with the clause. Personally, I think they should've just banned him from purchasing anything else on his Steam account, but I doubt they have that functionality.
 

Booze Zombie

New member
Dec 8, 2007
7,416
0
0
Zer_ said:
Technically they can stop you from using Steam, since you must connect to their privately owned servers to do so. I don't agree with the clause. Personally, I think they should've just banned him from purchasing anything else on his Steam account, but I doubt they have that functionality.
It is nice to know that even though they can terminate your account, you can get the entire value of your game library back through the courts. I'd rather not end up in a court, mind you, but if I had to at some point... it offers a measure of comfort and security to know.
 

Zer_

Rocket Scientist
Feb 7, 2008
2,682
0
0
Booze Zombie said:
Zer_ said:
Technically they can stop you from using Steam, since you must connect to their privately owned servers to do so. I don't agree with the clause. Personally, I think they should've just banned him from purchasing anything else on his Steam account, but I doubt they have that functionality.
It is nice to know that even though they can terminate your account, you can get the entire value of your game library back through the courts.
There are always new ways for Steam to improve really. They do have a reputation for being rather good to most of their userbase. When someone "gifts" a ton of games to EU users, I side with Steam for raising the red flag and taking action in whatever way they can. I can only criticize their methods in doing so.

I can also criticize the lack of established resources to help customers stay on top of things like this so they don't get the boot.
 

Booze Zombie

New member
Dec 8, 2007
7,416
0
0
Zer_ said:
There are always new ways for Steam to improve really. They do have a reputation for being rather good to most of their userbase. When someone "gifts" a ton of games to EU users, I side with Steam for raising the red flag and taking action in whatever way they can. I can only criticize their methods in doing so.

I can also criticize the lack of established resources to help customers stay on top of things like this so they don't get the boot.
It's not exactly good PR to pull out the iron fist on some sap who appears to be unaware of the illegality of his/her actions, yeah...

To attempt being objective, I would say that both parties involved preformed an "incorrect" action.
 

Pyro Paul

New member
Dec 7, 2007
842
0
0
chinomareno said:
Pyro Paul said:
Zannah said:
I'm astonished people actually side with steam here, saying "If they want to rip off people that isn't me, sure let them". Way to go people, way to go.
But hey, a gamer social enough to protect fellow gamers from being ripped off is clearly a first rate criminal, and Valve should totally be allowed to light his house on fire.
Tax Evasion is a FELONY.
You Support protecting FELONS that are clearly violating the Rule of Law?

He wasn't being Generious gifting people games in lands far away.
He was Being Paid to Bypass Local Laws and Taxes.
Taxes can't be charged on online purchases due to admin overheads in most countries, few countries have mechanisms for this. This is not illegal in anyway, there are American businesses that buy by proxy to bypass manufacturer's restrictions on exporting. There is no legal recourse manufacturers or publishers can take can take to stop this and the only reason suppliers comply with export restrictions is to maintain supply.

The real problem is though, you are not paying for a product but a license. The license can have completely unfair conditions of use and can be withheld at anytime due to any breach. Spending your money in the US to avoid sales tax is legitimate. Valve could care less as they get a cut of all sales but maintaining regional pricing is a luxury publishers want so they can rip foreigners off on a case by case basis.

This guy either raised too many flags in Steam's system or has done something more he's not saying. If true I think he's done something else.
Wrong.

Value Added Taxes (VAT) was implemented on Online Sales on May 28th, 2003 for EU Signitaries.
any non-EU companies Selling to EU consumers must comply with this law. This includes steam.
 
Feb 13, 2008
19,430
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
The_root_of_all_evil said:
If Valve were actually doing something wrong, don't you think the sharkpit of lawyers standing by for such a juicy company wouldn't tear themselves apart trying to get to them?

Or Blizzard for Battlenet, Microsod for Xbox Live, Sony for PSN, Nintendo for Wiistore?
That's rather specious, isn't it? The real world is rife with instances of corporate entities who have done wrong without suit or have done it for years before any such suit comes up.
Similar argument was used against McDonalds in the Hot Coffee argument, but given that there are bound to be lawyers who would jump at biting into Valve's treasure pot, don't you think that the balance of probabilities is really against Valve being in the wrong on this one?

IANAL, but don't you think that someone will have tried arguing this in court before now? Given the sheer number of potential requests they will have had.

If that particular argument is too specious, how about mobile phones that can do exactly the same thing? If you delete a game from your phone, you have to re-buy it in a LOT of cases.

The main argument that I can see is that you're paying Steam to provide the game, therefore breaking their contract means they don't have to provide you with access to that game. You'll still own the game, just have no means of playing it.
 

Zer_

Rocket Scientist
Feb 7, 2008
2,682
0
0
9_6 said:
Pyro Paul said:
Wrong.

Value Added Taxes (VAT) was implemented on Online Sales on May 28th, 2003 for EU Signitaries.
any non-EU companies Selling to EU consumers must comply with this law. This includes steam.
That's cute and all but the person spending the money purchases the subscription you know.
It's only being linked to another account.
That's also why you'd be getting the censored version if someone in australia or germany would gift you a game.
There is no "selling to EU" happening here.
Yes there is. Even if there's only a chance that it could be interpreted in such a way, Valve did the right thing in covering their own asses.
 

Pyro Paul

New member
Dec 7, 2007
842
0
0
9_6 said:
Pyro Paul said:
Wrong.

Value Added Taxes (VAT) was implemented on Online Sales on May 28th, 2003 for EU Signitaries.
any non-EU companies Selling to EU consumers must comply with this law. This includes steam.
That's cute and all but the person spending the money purchases the subscription you know.
It's only being linked to another account.
That's also why you'd be getting the censored version if someone in australia or germany would gift you a game.
There is no "selling to EU" happening here.
How is Getting Paid through paypal to 'gift' some one a game through steam Not selling?
the method may be diffrent but it still looks and sounds like he is selling games to people.
 

Antari

Music Slave
Nov 4, 2009
2,246
0
0
LadyMint said:
Antari said:
If you were doing it with a large number of people this equates to tax evasion. The difference in prices for the EU games are import taxes. Because Valve/Steam is American. Either they get mad at you, or both governments gets mad at them when tax season rolls around and they add up all the numbers.
Well this prettymuch answers my question. I was curious as to why it would be more expensive outside of the U.S. If this is the reason, then I prettymuch agree that it's tax evasion which is against the law.

I still wonder how they put taxes on digital items. Or why. Just because they can, or because they're using foreign internet travel space to deliver it to the person? I'm only guessing the latter because, having worked for a wireless phone company, I know the whole reason you get charged Roaming is because you're using the mobile phone towers of another company to carry your signal, and your phone company has to pay for that privilege. Is it something similar to this when you tax a digital product?
Don't ask me why, but here, they treat digital downloads as a physical item. Taxed as if you'd brought a physical game across the border. The exact percentages and such I would think are specific to the country involved. But nearly all of them do it. I have a feeling its just because they can track it, they'll tax it.
 

NLS

Norwegian Llama Stylist
Jan 7, 2010
1,594
0
0
This is prefectly "ok" actually. You're cheating the sytem by selling gifts to people.
Yes, SELLING GIFTS is something you shouldn't do, because gifts are supposed to be gifts and not a product freely for you to sell.
Also, the original post says "I am mainly surprised since I see nothing about it in their ToS, etc.", well, he didn't read quite well then.