why make it easy for them? It is something which should be combated against, not accepted. Close one gap, then try to close the second one. I refuse to accept illegal and harmful actions as a given without trying to stop it. But that's just me, I guess.... And I would not mind if my favorite hobby was 'clean' and not tainted by money laundering and fraud schemes. At least try to make it difficult, not easier.

"some legitimate users" says it all, in my opinion. It should be all or nothing. As long as it creates a market where whose who are not within the "some" can operate, it needs to be dealt with. It s a bit like saying your just a little bit pregnant or little bit dead.

no, it is because it is a grey market with monies. Which means it may not be quite illegal in the eyes of the law, but it sure is unethical.

What good is revoking a key if the game has no DRM?

The obligation is not to commit fraud, not to not use a legal service.
Selling second hand goods unethical now?

Also, just re-read this: amok: "some legitimate users" says it all, in my opinion. It should be all or nothing. As long as it creates a market where whose who are not within the "some" can operate, it needs to be dealt with. It s a bit like saying your just a little bit pregnant or little bit dead.

That makes no sense. You can not be a little bit dead because being dead is a definite state of being that applies to a singular individual.

Now a market, or a population can and does have varying degrees of criminality, which is not entirely the fault of the existence of a market.

What good is a legal compass when legality is not anchored in ethicality?

Ethical and legal are different things.

Besides, I'm not even convinced that the selling of second hand goods is unethical. I would a agree that fraud is, but you are implying the not buying directly from the dev is unethical, while others might just call it business.

Again, the codes are not always stolen.

I don't know how it works with Humble, but I'm thinking about stores where games get added to your account (which is kind of DRM) and unaware users (more about this below). And in Humble you get Steam keys too?

If you buy a key you think is legit and redeem it, only to have the game removed from your account later, that's your loss and probably you won't buy again from the same reseller. You might have backed the game up before having it removed from your account, so you can still play it, but still you become aware that the reseller is shady and I don't think you'll risk to buy more from them.

Maybe I'm utterly mistaken, but the problem must be mostly these people buying keys without knowing they might have been acquired fraudulently. That's users who were just looking for good deals and came up with a reseller in Google, gaming websites or whatever, not knowing where the key might come from.

The other ones, those who know what's going on and could possibly purchase a key and hurry to download the game before it gets removed from their account, do they really exist? I think those guys would save themselves all the hassle (and money!) and just download a torrent.

Perhaps you'll better understand after you have found yourself in a moment of dire need, desperately hoping for someone to help you.

If you do receive help, I can assure you that it won't be from someone who is merely concerned with legality.

Or just not buy the game if it isn't all that good, which probably hurts sales as much as anything.
That has nothing to do with the selling of games.

Closing down a legal site because an Indie Dev isn't making much in sales just shifts the 'dire need' over to the owners of the business you just closed. Real ethical.

I think most, if not all, of the people buying from resellers tell themselves that it's OK because they've paid some money to someone. But we all know perfectly well that the resellers don't care if the money goes to the people it should go to. And neither do their customers.

Your understanding of law is as bad as your understanding of ethics. Not being illegal is *not* the same thing as being legal. Not at all.

"I have gained this from philosophy: that I do without being commanded what others do only from fear of the law."

Aristotle

That's what I mean, most people think it's ok. Remove games from their accounts when a key has been fraudulently acquired at some point, and next time they'll find other ways to purchase their games, most surely not from a too-cheap-to-be-good reseller.

So you can't legally close G2A, but you can try to restrict their business to a strictly legit one. And let's see what fraction of their business that represents.

Problem is that's an industry-wide effort. Developers and partners must be able to revoke a key whenever any of them say they got a transaction charged back.


Edit: After reading amok's last post, forget about "restrict their business to a strictly legit one". Leave it at "restrict their business, period". There's no legit business in re-selling any key.

An used product key is the same as buying a pre-owned game that has never been oped or played, which happens all the time. Technically the re-selling of physical copies is illegal - do you oppose that?

The sale of these goods may mean that the Devs don't get paid, but that's tough really. I don't lose any sleep when I buy a sealed game form eBay, or if I buy a few SNES carts from a yard sale rather than buying emulated versions on the Wii (or whatever those crazy kids play now).

Like I said, ban credit cards if you think it will solve the problem, the service is clearly being abused.
I have openly said that the sale of most second hand goods is considered a grey area by law, however the setting up of G2A is no more illegal than eBay or other such sites. By your thinking charity shops and second hand retailers of all entertainment media should be closed.

I buy second had games from stores and yard sales all the time and would buy a legit unused game code if I knew it had purchased as part of a bundle or otherwise legally and not with a stolen card. I don't feel condemned by that, or intimidated by appeals to authority.

People will always have differing views on the sale of used games etc, but credit card fraud is clearly stealing and wrong without a nasty little grey area. Closing down a publicly used service because of a grey area that courts have debated and allowed the sale of used games, in my opinion, seems like a massive over reaction.

Although, an interesting point of debate with some worthy opponents.

People have a remarkable talent for rationalizing bad behavior. To whatever extent that is "thinking", it's dishonest thinking.

amok: But you can do your best to remove it by removing the conditions for it, or do your best to minimise it. In my oppinipn, there is no single ethical key to be bought on G2A (as there is not a "second hand market" for digital keys, it do not exist) , and therefore the premise it is built upon is flawed. Take it from here what you will.

The conditions for physical media and codes are more or less the same in reality, so the debate over their re-sale is likewise much the same.

Actually this is not illegal. There has been court rulings on this matter, and it is different from digital goods. In the eyes of the law in most countries today, what you are selling is the disk itself - but the license follows the medium. In digital it is different, as there is no medium the license can follow.

This is due to physical mediums having a limited life span. which why a second hand can work for physical. The market is limited by physical constraints of the medium, whereas in digital there is no constraint, be spatial or time. In these cases, I do not think it is unethical, as this is not against any ToS or laws. And G2A do not sell them anyway.

However, selling a bundle key is, selling keys gained from credit card fraud is, selling keys gained from giveaway is, selling bulk keys from sales is, and these are the keys G2A sells.

The premise it is built on is flawed, it is not only credit cards. Removing credit card only removes one aspect of it, it is still a grey market.
see my post above.