(cont’d from my previous post) This entire section is worded very broadly in ways that I suspect impose unintended restrictions on GOG users. Some of my specific concerns are highlighted below. I suspect you meant this to cover things like "renting" access to your account or games you download through your account. However, as written, it would also seem to preclude making a review video using footage captured from a GOG game and then monetizing that video on youtube (thus "[using] GOG content... to make money"). Please make this paragraph more specific as to what sorts of non-personal enjoyment uses would constitute a breach of this agreement. Again, this seems like it would capture behaviour that probably wasn't intended. For example, it seems like applying a third party mod or patch to a game would count as "modify[ing]... GOG content", which I'm sure isn't what you had in mind. It seems like this is specifically meant to prevent cheating in online multiplayer situations, so it should probably specifically say so. (You hint at this with the words "unfair competitive advantage", but in my opinion that's not specific enough as "competition" doesn't necessarily have to be directly against other humans, so this could be interpreted as applying to offline play, and I don't think it's any of GOG's business whether I use cheats, trainers, etc. in my offline single-player games.) And before someone points this out, yes, I'm aware that there's no way GOG would ever know about me using offline cheats, and even if they did, it's extremely unlikely that they would try to enforce the Agreement against me for that reason - again, please just accept that I am a crazy person when it comes to precise use of language. :p I suspect that the intent here was simply to create a "cover your ass" clause for GOG in case a user runs afoul of intellectual property law while doing something inadvisable with GOG content. However, it seems to me that this paragraph goes further than it needs to and actually creates (or attempts to create) an enforceable obligation on the part of the user to contact content owners before using their content. I have an issue with this - much of the "fan work" you describe arguably falls under fair use exceptions to copyright law and thus arguably would not require the content owner's permission, and while I appreciate that this is a serious legal gray area, any issues that arise are between me and the content owner and I don't think GOG has any business imposing an obligation on me to ask a content owner for permission irrespective of whether I am otherwise legally obligated to do so. Especially since I think GOG could adequately satisfy its own legal needs here simply by replacing this paragraph with a disclaimer that says something along the lines of "If you wish to make fan works, you are responsible for obtaining any permission that you may require from the content owner in order to use the GOG content in that way. GOG assumes no responsibility for any legal trouble you get into by creating fan content without the necessary permissions."

The Privacy Policy This is just a general comment, but I hope that when you implement these features they will be optional (i.e. that I will have an option to tell the Galaxy client not to tell my friends what games I own/am playing). I don't necessarily want my friends to see my 500+ hours logged on "Barbie Horse Adventures", mmkay?

+1 to you! Good posts with very valid points. :)

*Very* good point. Access to the Galaxy features shouldn't be contingent on automatically divulging private info to third parties. And real-life words have real-life meaning; it's unethical to redefine "friend" as "someone who has access to your private life so if you don't want anyone to know you wet the bed until third grade, you HAVE NO FRIENDS lololol".

Hey ninja, movie for you:

http://www.gog.com/redeem/7AE9556331CC7A16G

Thanks for the offer (I did not claim it - it's a copy of The Gamers Director's Cut if anyone's curious), but did you mean to post this in the Ninja Giveaway thread? This isn't really the appropriate place for it. :p

That was kind of weird. I clicked on it and I redeemed it (thanks, btw); but I'm pretty sure I already owned it. I thought I had found some bug, but maybe I didn't add my own gift copy? Hmm... I don't have an extra on gifts either...

Anyway, thanks again. If it turns out I didn't redeem my own copy, I'll just pass it along for the next one.

I agree that may be cause for concern, but it's also more likely that they mean things like "We have [number of] users, and they downloaded [number of] games, and have an accumulated playtime of [number] hours in the past [timespan]".
Clarification from GOG themselves would be good though.

Not likely I would imagine, despite them being a publicly traded company (so yes, that means it could be bought out). Generally stores like this don't get sold unless they're doing bad though, which i doubt is a problem for GOG atm.

Don't suppose you read french?

Not well enough to interpret legal documents. :p

Can only share the concerns I already see here about what lawyers could do with the wording of the document (though it is nice for users not to be in legalese, of course, but if they'll get the short end of the stick because of it later it'll stop being nice), and about the exact implications of the gifts limit, considering the community that exists here and what happens during sales, and about the lack of limitations of what the additional EULAs may include. But on top of that, of course I'll make all sorts of unpleasant noises and say various words and phrases not suitable for polite company at the fact that regional pricing was enshrined even more in the rules. Once again, not a store I care to support anymore because of that.

About privacy, well, don't have anything on the site I'd mind being made public (and stuff like wishlist and (other) wishlist votes which I would make public if I could, just because why not? ... but first I'd need to be able to even see my wishlist votes myself in one place!). My concern would be about installers or games "calling home", or obviously gathering and sending any system information outside any included in optional and fully transparent bug/crash reports. So that "what game(s) you are playing" raises a red flag...

So I finally had time to read the documents and I will add my voice to the requests about more information about the gifting limit and this user profile thing :-)

Even as I am new, some remarks from my side:

I would suggest replacing the age of 18, in general with Age of consent, as this varies also depending on the contens of the game (here thinking of the US-market with M or R rated games, could be up to 21, unlike Europe, where it is 16 or 18 mostly)

6.1

What about paysafe, do you want to drop it, or is it included in paypal?

6.6

I see a moral problem: As I was travelling quite a bit, and quite often using VPN connections, that ´could´ end up being a problem.

Unless, you see it as an option for you ´GOG´ checking on a case by case basis.

6.7

At least in Germany, you have a 14 days return right on online-purchases, not shure if it applies here. Other countries do have similar standars. But as mentioned, not sure if it applies.

12

You are saying in the title gog content, but are in reality speaking about 3rd party owner rights.

You have a nice mistake there: LOL

So to whome are you (GOG) belonging

Still ROTFLOL........

back to the topic, you might whant to split it up between YOUR work and 3rd party owner rights.

13

You should add a disclaimer, that you are not responsible for links going to 3rd party websites. (legally required in some countries, otherwise you ARE liable by law)

15.2 Termination:

AFAIK Even if the user is at fault, you would need to refund unused ´real´cash, not as mentioned before Store credits.

16.1 little bit to late, but if you even include act of God, then you should have included the end of the world as well :) Y2K and similar......

Privacy Policy

4.2 if you DO store certain information, be aware that this might be illegal in certain countries, which you could avoid, if this personal information is not stored combined with the personal information itself, i.e. IP-address and user-account. You do have the right to check, but YOU would be responsible (and liable) if this information would be missused AFAIR there is a trial going on in front of the European court about this.

7

In certain countries you need the wriiten consent of the party, so suggestion, make a check box about it....

10.2

see above

12.2 see above

just my 2 cents ;)

and I missed one IMPORTANT part:

GOG is not responsible for any damage, injuries or loss of connection to the real world, because the user is getting to connected to his games ;)

(interesting, this did work......)

The idea behind this IS quite commercial, the can use it to get better deals.

I made just before some remarks about this, as it is a tricky question in certain countries. Personal rights

But so long this information is not longer combined with personal data it is legal to use it. If you remove the personal data (like user xyz bought games abc, def ) to just A user bought games abc, def it is not longer your data and they are free to do with it, what they want. Only when it would contain information which would uniquely identify a user, it would be a problem. (too many would´s :P )

once you posted something like that, it is YOUR post and PUBLIC.

Different thing, not really anymore under your control. Especially as you consentet too it being published ;)