Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

New EU laws effect EA, Origin and further SWTOR?

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > General Discussion
New EU laws effect EA, Origin and further SWTOR?

Ancaglon's Avatar


Ancaglon
07.06.2012 , 03:20 AM | #31
For online games, you are not so much buying "the game", or even the right to use the software, you are buying a service. So, SWTOR revenues certainly won't be impacted by this.

EA's single-player games probably WILL be impacted, but probably not much more than the existing second hand games market -- they could even make some money on that by allowing resales between customers and taking a cut of the revenue, which would have the second benefit that there will be much less customer service issues about people complaining they've been ripped off.

Ras_Elased's Avatar


Ras_Elased
07.06.2012 , 04:14 AM | #32
For all the brainwashed Eula lover, the Eula is a contract between two entities and in the European law hierarchy a contract is at the bottom meaning that it can be made void if it violates whatever superior law that exists.
If in the eula is written that i don't own my game but the law says i do, then Ea or Bioware or whoever owns the hut is going to pay a very hefty fine if they keep trying to forbid me to resale the software i have bought, just like Aplle is going to pay 900k Euro for ignoring a sentence about Cs and he is going to be forbidden selling his crap if they keep ignoring the sentence.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/12..._italian_fine/

DiabloDoom's Avatar


DiabloDoom
07.06.2012 , 04:20 AM | #33
Your account is EA's property not yours.

Fornix's Avatar


Fornix
07.06.2012 , 04:38 AM | #34
Quote: Originally Posted by DiabloDoom View Post
Your account is EA's property not yours.
That is just what EA lets you believe, however, show any law stating it be so. EULA's are not definite. EA could place in a paragraph stating that your first born child will be sacrificed if you revoke your subscription within 12 months, it won't matter as it has no legal grounds. Same goes for companies claiming accounts are their property rather than yours.

More and more legal systems in Europe are actively looking on extending regulation regarding digital property, of course in their own interest as well, concidering as to how digital transactions of digital goods can go hand in hand with taxations.

Most probably we'll see more and more companies going down a similar path as what Blizzard does with DIII. Real money auction houses along, in addition to character selling options.
Member of <Helix>

Phenyr's Avatar


Phenyr
07.06.2012 , 04:42 AM | #35
Quote: Originally Posted by DiabloDoom View Post
Your account is EA's property not yours.
This is about the game not the account. The software itself has nothing to do anything with any avatar, progress what ever the previous owner did before selling the software.

The law itself has a good point, I bought something that makes it mine. Buy a brand new car but cant sell it because it still belongs to the manufacturer that pretty much does not make any sense.
Gentlemen....gentlemen!!! Save it for the Holodeck

Arlbo_Nabbins's Avatar


Arlbo_Nabbins
07.06.2012 , 04:48 AM | #36
Quote: Originally Posted by Fornix View Post
That is just what EA lets you believe, however, show any law stating it be so.
That would be contract law, the contracts with mobile phone companies work in the same way. You may own the phone, the number and the SIM card but your account is with the provider and if you don't pay you don't get to make calls.

DiabloDoom's Avatar


DiabloDoom
07.06.2012 , 05:14 AM | #37
Quote: Originally Posted by Phenyr View Post
This is about the game not the account. The software itself has nothing to do anything with any avatar, progress what ever the previous owner did before selling the software.

The law itself has a good point, I bought something that makes it mine. Buy a brand new car but cant sell it because it still belongs to the manufacturer that pretty much does not make any sense.
That's great, go try and sell your game without a registration key. That key is linked to your account, which you and only you has agreed to license it. TBH this law isn't applicable to online games such as this. EA own the servers, and therefore own everything contained on those servers, you may go ahead and sell your disks or digital download, but until EA implement a method giving the ability to also transfer your registration key in the sale selling your game will be pointless. Sure you can take it to court, if your rich enough, I doubt any EULA would will hold up but is it really worth it?

Ras_Elased's Avatar


Ras_Elased
07.06.2012 , 05:30 AM | #38
Quote: Originally Posted by Arlbo_Nabbins View Post
That would be contract law, the contracts with mobile phone companies work in the same way. You may own the phone, the number and the SIM card but your account is with the provider and if you don't pay you don't get to make calls.
Unfortunately, this comparison makes no sense since you can subscribe another contract with another company and still use the same phone and sim, in many cases the same number. In some countries in Europe, if the phone company doesnt allow you to keep your number while changing provider they can be sued, and many were.

Quote: Originally Posted by DiabloDoom View Post
That's great, go try and sell your game without a registration key. That key is linked to your account, which you and only you has agreed to license it. TBH this law isn't applicable to online games such as this. EA own the servers, and therefore own everything contained on those servers, you may go ahead and sell your disks or digital download, but until EA implement a method giving the ability to also transfer your registration key in the sale selling your game will be pointless. Sure you can take it to court, if your rich enough, I doubt any EULA would will hold up but is it really worth it?
Then you have not understood what the sentece stated, The company that makes you buy a software must introduce a way so that you can sell it again and make it usable by others. That means that in the future either the software will not be sold anymore or it will not be sold in coutries that have such laws or that they will have to find a way to make the software work everytime for different users.
Imo. a good way would be a multipurpose subscription that covers infinite games so that you only buy play time and you can divide it with as many games as you like and Steam/Origin would work very well with it.
In this way they would still own subscribers and they could still sell softwares.

Hunny_Bun's Avatar


Hunny_Bun
07.06.2012 , 05:36 AM | #39
As a lawyer I have always found end user license agreements (EULAs) to be deeply amusing. Of course no one reads them. I don't read them. Judges don't read them. No one in their right mind would read one.

This just seems to be a fairly sensible ruling by the EU to open up secondary markets.

There are implementation problems where you can't currently sell your game on because how would you actually do it? The next step would be for someone (some party) to sue the likes of Steam for loss from preventing sale (when they clearly now have a duty to permit or facilitate sale). Then the developers would all change their products to facilitate onward sale.

Secondary markets are generally good for economies and consmers. I'm not sure how this would impact SWTOR as the 'game' is freely available anyway, what matters is the account and the playtime. But it would seem to follow that accounts must be the property of the user and not the developer (regardless of what any EULA says).

ZORG's Avatar


ZORG
07.06.2012 , 05:48 AM | #40
Quote: Originally Posted by GnatB View Post
To be honest, I don't see a significant difference between used game sales and piracy.

The ruling is talking about Oracle, IIRC they make database software/server stuff. If you sell your copy, you are actually giving something up. If you still want to do database/server stuff, you still need another copy.

Games are, IMO, experiences. They are basically consumables that don't actually get used up when consumed. Once you've played through a game, that's it. You're done. You've consumed the experience. It holds no real value for you anymore. No utility.

I tend to think that *if* this legislation stands, and is applied to games, we're going to see more and more games, even single player ones, switch to some form of subscription/rental model. IMO since game's aren't utility but are consumed, IMO used game sales will eventually make actually selling games untenable.
I agree. Lets say I have a windows server 2003 and I purchase a new server with version 2008 on it to replace the 2003 version. I should be able to sell that server with the microsoft license as well. The new owner could register that COA with there business.

However a game is like a bottle of booze once its used up its gone. I can nolonger get a buzz from it.

Granted because of game trade ins companys have used ONLINE access keys. Most new games come with it. So If i were to take my CE edition to gamestop they could take the discs back and accuire a new online access key to go with it from Bioware. Or perhaps the existing access key gets invalidated and the account completely wiped for the new gamer. However I dont think that would happen either because bioware would want to hold your account and charachters for a time in hopes you return to the game.
Fear leads to Anger
Anger leads to hate
HATE leads to suffering