It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionValve and Ubisoft Fined In France Over Breaching Consumer Law(27 posts)(27 posts)
(27 posts)
Pages:
1
2
This is my favourite topic
Posted September 20, 2018
Both Valve and Ubisoft have run afoul of consumer laws in France, based on their failure to meet France’s laws on refunds on both the Steam and uPlay digital storefronts. The result of this failure is that both companies now have to pay a fine, as well as show a non-compliance warning within the country. These fines amount to a total of €327,000. Valve has been ordered to pay €167,000 with Ubisoft paying €180,000.

https://wccftech.com/valve-and-ubisoft-fined-in-france/
Posted September 20, 2018
Fantastic news, now just make those fines 20x what they already are and hope EA gets fucked by Belgium in their lawsuit then i can go to sleep a happy man.

It's high time they get some punishment for the anti consumer crap they are pulling so we can put it aside and build a better business relation with publishers in future that does not give the gamer the short end of the stick when you decide to buy their games ( i doubt they'll learn anything though) which i luckily haven't done a single time in many years now.

side note: Valves refunds doesn't seem to be that bad though and as much as i like to hate on nearly everything from time to time i don't really see them screwing up on that front as often as other publishers, GOG has a even worse refund system and if it's because drm free that they only refund outdated and broken games it's still shit.

It's just a shame that goverments in the EU has to meddle because i prefer if they never had to get involved in the first place but unfortunately the "big" publishers only understand one language and that is force.
Post edited September 20, 2018 by ChrisGamer300
Posted September 20, 2018
I'm sure Gabe Newell will be slightly annoyed that he has to hire somebody to check his couch for change in order to pay his fine. It's about 0.00005% of his total worth after all...
Posted September 20, 2018
is this the EU Consumer Rights thing? seems like they're being fined a technicality. the thing already makes an exemption for digital content that has already started download or stream. but Steam does give a 14-day refund window if you haven't played it for 2 hours. so what the fuck is this story? the EU consumer rights thing creates exemptions for streaming or downloading. and why isn't ea being fined? their refund policy isn't even as forgiving as Steam's.
Posted September 20, 2018
seems France there's no exemption for digital goods, and the fine is heavily focusing on this idea that Valve and Ubisoft should have expressly informed the user at purchase time that their refund policies were more restrictive due the digital nature of the goods and gotten them to accept a waiver, as well as badge the store page of each title as being sold with refund policy that deviates.
Posted September 20, 2018
avatar
johnnygoging: is this the EU Consumer Rights thing? seems like they're being fined a technicality. the thing already makes an exemption for digital content that has already started download or stream. but Steam does give a 14-day refund window if you haven't played it for 2 hours. so what the fuck is this story? the EU consumer rights thing creates exemptions for streaming or downloading. and why isn't ea being fined? their refund policy isn't even as forgiving as Steam's.
They may not have gotten around to EA. It's unusual for enforcement action to hit every relevant company at once.
Posted September 20, 2018
avatar
ChrisGamer300: [1] It's high time they get some punishment for the anti consumer crap they are pulling so we can put it aside and build a better business relation with publishers in future that does not give the gamer the short end of the stick when you decide to buy their games ( i doubt they'll learn anything though) which i luckily haven't done a single time in many years now.

[2] side note: Valves refunds doesn't seem to be that bad though and as much as i like to hate on nearly everything from time to time i don't really see them screwing up on that front as often as other publishers, GOG has a even worse refund system and if it's because drm free that they only refund outdated and broken games it's still shit.

It's just a shame that goverments in the EU has to meddle because i prefer if they never had to get involved in the first place but unfortunately the "big" publishers only understand one language and that is force.
[1] There is a problem if it can be abused. What stops a person from buying completing within 14 days then refunding to move on to another and rinse and repeat? Can Steam hours usage be a metric? Business could possibly levy a "refund tax" on the current price tag to compensate for possible abusers.

[2] Problems can appear more than 2 hours in, game breaking bugs that prevent completion of a game. I'd rather have GoG's refund system, in case a game is broken.
Posted September 20, 2018
so - how big is gOg's fine going to be?
Posted September 20, 2018
avatar
lumengloriosum: [1] There is a problem if it can be abused. What stops a person from buying completing within 14 days then refunding to move on to another and rinse and repeat?
Nothing. Thats's a buisiness risk, as consumer rights a valued higher than retailer rights in that case. There are people wo order a dress online, wear it on a party and return it next day without ever having the intention to keep it. it's only a few though and as a retailer you are expected to swallow it (of course are can choose to ban people who return to much stuff...).
Post edited September 20, 2018 by hmcpretender
Posted September 20, 2018
avatar
lumengloriosum: [1] There is a problem if it can be abused. What stops a person from buying completing within 14 days then refunding to move on to another and rinse and repeat?
avatar
hmcpretender: Nothing. Thats's a buisiness risk, as consumer rights a valued higher than retailer rights in that case. There are people wo order a dress online, wear it on a party and return it next day without ever having the intention to keep it. it's only a few though and as a retailer you are expected to swallow it (of course are can choose to ban people who return to much stuff...).
Consumer rights should not elevate over Business rights when the Consumer has avenues of unrestricted abuse. Such response to abuse is to raise the price tag as a consequence to cover for the potential % of refunds. As to clothing rates (http://www.whiteboardmag.com/e-commerce-why-and-how-often-customers-sent-stuff-back-survey/) Up to 50% return rates is not small. A retailer should not be expected to swallow what is abusing a product which cuts into their earnings.

And as to banning, how would this be implemented with constant new accounts?
Posted September 20, 2018
avatar
lumengloriosum: Consumer rights should not elevate over Business rights when the Consumer has avenues of unrestricted abuse.
That's up for debate (personally I don't have an opinion on that topic yet).

avatar
lumengloriosum: Such response to abuse is to raise the price tag as a consequence to cover for the potential % of refunds. As to clothing rates (http://www.whiteboardmag.com/e-commerce-why-and-how-often-customers-sent-stuff-back-survey/) Up to 50% return rates is not small. A retailer should not be expected to swallow what is abusing a product which cuts into their earnings.
Of course return rates for clothing are high, but most of that are valid returns. You try them on, they don't fit / don't look as good as on the photo, you send them back. No one would buy clothes online if he couldn't.

avatar
lumengloriosum: And as to banning, how would this be implemented with constant new accounts?
With physical goods you'll need to give a mail address which includes your name. Sure you could make something up, but then you're entering dangerous (illegal) territory. With digital goods it's easier, but then again, I haven't heard of any retailers going bankrupt because of customer rights exploitation. Most customers aren't interested ruining anyone's buisiness.
Post edited September 20, 2018 by hmcpretender
Posted September 20, 2018
avatar
hmcpretender: [1]That's up for debate (personally I don't have an opinion on that topic yet).

[2] Of course return rates for clothing are high, but most of that are valid returns. You try them on, they don't fit / don't look as good as on the photo, you send them back. No one would buy clothes online if he couldn't.

[3] With physical goods you'll need to give a mail address which includes your name. Sure you could make something up, but then you're entering dangerous (illegal) territory. With digital goods it's easier, but then again, I haven't heard of any retailers going bankrupt because of customer rights exploitation. Most customers aren't interested ruining anyone's buisiness.
[1] understood.

[2] Yes, but the question is to what extent is it legitimate compared to taking advantage of. I've heard alot about people using them as one night clothing, but % wise of return rate, I cannot assert.

[3] I won't say retailers going bankrupt, but it does make piracy a lot simpler doesn't it? One simple fee for a cycle of games abusing the refund system to which the refund must be compelled by law with no preventive measures outside ip addresses to pin it down.
Post edited September 20, 2018 by lumengloriosum
Posted September 20, 2018
From what I've understood of this news from other websites, it's not about their refund policy. It's about properly informing their customers their legal rights concerning sales made at a distance and the fact that digital goods are excluded from that right.
They were fined for not properly informing their customers.
By law they're forced to inform their customers before and during a purchase.

This is not actually a French law, but the French interpretation of EU legislation. As such this is valid in all EU countries (and probably countries like Norway and Swiss). So they could be fined for this in every EU country.

Others digital stores might not be included because there weren't complaints about them or because they do have their stuff in order.

https://nofrag.com/2018/09/18/122035/ (French) offers 2 links to the French laws in question.
Posted September 20, 2018
avatar
ChrisGamer300: [1] It's high time they get some punishment for the anti consumer crap they are pulling so we can put it aside and build a better business relation with publishers in future that does not give the gamer the short end of the stick when you decide to buy their games ( i doubt they'll learn anything though) which i luckily haven't done a single time in many years now.

[2] side note: Valves refunds doesn't seem to be that bad though and as much as i like to hate on nearly everything from time to time i don't really see them screwing up on that front as often as other publishers, GOG has a even worse refund system and if it's because drm free that they only refund outdated and broken games it's still shit.

It's just a shame that goverments in the EU has to meddle because i prefer if they never had to get involved in the first place but unfortunately the "big" publishers only understand one language and that is force.
avatar
lumengloriosum: [1] There is a problem if it can be abused. What stops a person from buying completing within 14 days then refunding to move on to another and rinse and repeat? Can Steam hours usage be a metric? Business could possibly levy a "refund tax" on the current price tag to compensate for possible abusers.

[2] Problems can appear more than 2 hours in, game breaking bugs that prevent completion of a game. I'd rather have GoG's refund system, in case a game is broken.
How many people are going to do that though? Return fraud is a thing in the US and yet many companies opt to have extremely liberal return policies. The "local" outdoor gear coop REI used to have a policy of accepting returns no matter how long ago the item was purchased. They did eventually have to end the policy as people would go around to yard sales and buy up old gear for return. Now, it's limited to 1 year, I think.

Similarly the local warehouse store Costco will take things back with very little questioning, this has led to crazy things like dead cut christmas trees being returned for a refund.

Sometimes, the policies do need to be revised, but often times the extra sales you make to customers that are on the fence makes up for the return fraud.

Also, keep in mind that since they have to buy the game in order to return it, the company either gets a low interest loan for that period of time, or they know the money is theirs, and can offer store credit depending upon jurisdiction.
Posted September 20, 2018
avatar
hedwards: [1]How many people are going to do that though?

...

[2] Also, keep in mind that since they have to buy the game in order to return it, the company either gets a low interest loan for that period of time, or they know the money is theirs, and can offer store credit depending upon jurisdiction.
[1] I can't argue percentages, but possibly close to piracy numbers. If a person can pirate it for the sake of just wanting to play a game without paying, I can't see why they wouldn't just abuse the system either. It's not going to be large scale like 50% of the audience. Your examples I would have to argue are irrelevant due to the nature of software being a non-physical medium. Sure some stores get the product back used/abused, but that is a physical material that they can still salvage further down the chain in a discount section or something of the sort. It's not a total loss.

Software on the other hand is license only, refund only, no resale or down the line discount or such. The problem would be relieved by physical mediums, but at the moment there is no way to ensure Digital only cannot be abused by such laws if refunds had legal backing.

[2] The problem is more in relation to the developer/publisher and the store front. Sure Steam can offer store credit for the refunding, it's still going to eat up revenue somewhere which the Storefront must compensate in losses. Combined with a legal lawful backing, economic issues that people use to justify piracy and don't care for keeping a particular game... There's nothing to prevent abusing the system theoretically. Low interest loan would be possible, or possibly a "refund tax" which simply compensates for a 'potential' loss in refunds.

Think about D.R.M. Who funds the anti-piracy measures that pirates keep breaking? You, the payer in the price tag.
Pages:
1
2
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionValve and Ubisoft Fined In France Over Breaching Consumer Law(27 posts)(27 posts)
(27 posts)