RicoADF said:
Therumancer said:
Actually a lot of this is probably going to come down to how much STEAM wants to play hardball. They are a digital distribution service, and as a general rule returning a digital product is a touchy subject, as nothing prevents you from say playing the game, or simply deciding you don't like it/suffer buyers remorse and then return it. Furthermore while it was a bad idea, STEAM has started doing a big business by selling/distributing unfinished games in alpha and beta states, as much as I agree they shouldn't do that, but it is part of their model now, and they could arguably be made to refund money from nearly every early access title they sold.
You could say the same about physical games since they can be easily copied and returned, the law still requires they be refunded if there's a fault or product doesn't meet advertised features. The fact it's digital doesn't magically absolve them, the fact Apple and Google are both held accountable shows this is not magically immune.
Therumancer said:
The most Australia can do is tell Gabe "if you don't comply, you can't do business here" at which point in weighing that precedent compared to the value of Australian customers (considering the amount of money he could lose here especially if the rulings turn STEAM into what amounts to a free game service due to forced returns) I think there is a good chance he'll just leave. STEAM doesn't have other services on the same level to compete with at the moment.
Err no, what they would do is fine the company and keep fining them until the do comply. Our trade deals with the US means that such fines would be enforced and they would be required to follow our laws, I had to learn about this when I did a business course. In the same way that the US would ask us to close down a pirate website hosted in Australia the US would have to follow through with a request from our nation regarding one of it's companies breaching our laws.
Steam would be making enough money that setting up a refund system for faulty or mislabeled games can be refunded, seriously if EA can justify the cost then Valve can as well. They've just been lazy because they could get away with it, now they've been called out they will have to fix it.
Actually your missing the point. If STEAM decides to just leave, there is nothing for them to fine, they will just choose not to operate in Australia. If they are going to contest this seriously, that is going to be the bottom line.
See, even though you can copy console games and such, the thing is companies like EA, Google, etc.. do more than just operate a digital distribution service for niche products (games), where that is the sum total of what Steam does. Those other companies look a their digital marketplace and figure that even if they take a bath there, or even shut down digital distribution, other things they do in Australia makes it worth while. Gabe just wants to sell the one thing and do it in a specific way though, he takes a bath from distributing games digitally and there is nothing else for him since that's all he does.
Don't get me wrong, I agree with Australia in principle, I just don't think it can force the issue on STEAM if Gabe decides he doesn't want to deal with it. They can't stop Gabe from leaving if he thinks it's not going to be cost effective to follow those laws. If Steam isn't operating in Australia anymore there is nothing to levy fines on. Besides even if Gabe plays hardball back and say distributes anyway one way or another (by making it easy for Aussies to get onto his service anyway), the guy is like crazy rich, and it's nice to point to what laws and trade agreements say, but when it comes to the big corporate types that never really works out. The US and New Zealand have agreements to for example, and look at the crap with Kim Dotcom as I pointed out, legally he should be facing trial in the US, but New Zealand has been screwing around, largely because Kim is rich and powerful. I'm saying this not because it's a good thing, but because I have absolutely zero faith in any governments to keep big business in line. I mean heck, The US can't even get Burger King to pay it's taxes properly, we literally just let it use a Tax Inversion loophole to avoid all accountability by buying a company in Canada and setting up it's new HQs there. It's a different situation that we're talking about, but the point is that when a company gets big enough, it becomes increasingly unlikely to be able to make them do anything they don't want to do.
Look at it this way, STEAM is already making a business out of specifically selling people faulty and messed up games. They call it "Early Access". Despite complaints about how stupid it is to sell bugged and unfinished produced intentionally, Valve keeps right on doing it because they are obviously making money at it. At the end of the day Australia is basically saying "hey you'd have to give refunds on all these games if someone complained" and obviously that's something Valve isn't going to be friendly towards... especially seeing as this is apparently going to court, as opposed to Valve just saying "sorry, we'll follow the law and grand refunds".
As far as companies in the game industry go, Valve is not bad in comparative terms, but it's not angelic either. As a business their reputation has been rather mixed, you hear very diverse things about people's experiences in dealing with them when they have a problem. As Jimquisition has pointed out, it's been shafting people with non-refundable, broken, games for a while now (Jim has gone off on Earth Access and Greenlight several times to my memory) it's a key part of their current business strategy.
I'd really like Australia to win, and heck for their attitudes about treating customers well and giving refunds when it comes to digital products and services to be universal, I'm just a pessimist, and I don't think it would happen. Largely because I can't see what's in it for Gabe, and he's already fighting apparently. If the whole argument about "being decent to your customers" mattered to him on this subject we wouldn't be at this point. That said, I don't know him, and as I've said before, a lot of it could also just be legitimate concern over that system being abused, he doesn't exactly have a lot of other interests in Australia that can make up a loss on STEAM, it's not like other big companies that have their fingers in more than one pie.
Now had Australia waited until Gabe released "The Steam Box" or some of these other physical projects we've heard about for years, it might have more leverage, since Gabe would have more than one interest in Australia's market since he'd be moving hardware too.
Also while it's not politic to point it out, look at all the whining Aussies have done about gaming as well, getting this late, etc... STEAM has done a lot to get Australia more current when it comes to games. Again, what happens if STEAM decides to leave. To your average Australian, what's more important, potential refunds, or losing all of their current STEAM games and not being able to buy more via STEAM? It's not like there is any competition on the same level. If this goes to court, and Gabe decides to play hardball, I wouldn't be surprised if you see lots of Australians begging the government to not enforce the law or grant an exemption specifically so STEAM will stay. That's one of the things that has always scared me about this whole digital distribution idea, the more you use one of these services, the more they have you by the short and curlies.