I wasn't arguing against him, I was just pointing out the fact that the level of protection you have is actually dependent on your country. For example, The Poland laws you mentioned aren't available in Australia.

Ah, yeah, I've heard pretty bad things about international prices in general.

But what I was getting at is probably something you could argue on a case by case basis. Terraria was only $10, gave me enough hours to be less than 50 cents per hour, and sold like hotcakes, probably raking in more money than the dev could ever have hoped for.

Every new Call of Duty game is 6x that price, gives an 8 hour campaign, and probably a max of 10 hours in the online mode before you go back to the last edition until the "next popular multiplayer" one comes out, which could be 3 games down the line, ultimately tallying to anywhere from (being optimistic for the average consumer here) $3 an hour. That's at LEAST 6x the cost per hour, and it sells even MORE like hotcakes, and rakes in a higher profit margin than pretty much any other game on the market. You can't even argue that the development costs are that high comparatively because, between Infinity Ward and Treyarch, a new one comes out every year.

So, it's subjective, but in general, games are getting way too expensive.

Or the US. My argument with him was probably due to the fact that I was ignorant to where he lives, so we were arguing two entirely different sets of laws.

Well, in Poland, when something you bought doesn't work, you have three claims (you have to choose one)

1. replace it with working product
2. fix it
3. refund

Even more, if in that case, Valve won't respond to you in 14 work days, it automatically means they accepted your claim and they are obliged to do, what you told.

And again, in most cases, in relations between Business entity and a customer, it's most likely that laws of the customer will apply, doesn't matter if Valve says that only Moon laws apply.

This is the minimum protection that applies to every freaking contract you can ever agree to. If something is not as it states in a contract, you have those three claims.
So if I buy a toster in US and it doesn't work, then US law says FUCK YOU?

I don't believe that ;)

In the US, it's pretty much what's in the Terms of Service. Because, regardless of what laws we do have, we don't have enough laws covering digital goods to cover the fact that whoever has more money to pay better lawyers is going to win.

At least, that's the understanding I get every time a new case about digital rights comes to light.

No, physical goods are covered. The entire argument on my side has been with digital goods.

UNLESS I really don't understand how these court proceedings have happened, or something drastic has changed that all these "digital rights groups" are no longer pertinent, then if Valve says it's non-refundable, it's non-refundable unless they decide otherwise.

To illustrate my OP a little better I wasn't suggesting that developer \ publisher complacency merits busting out game shop windows.

I was pointing out that gaming, as of recent years, has fallen into an anarchy managed by moderation and a give and take honor system.

ie; Purchased a broken release from the developer for $10 but got all of the developer's other releases in a bundle for $1 so no use pouting over the broken one.

'

I kind of agree, And i use the words kind of rather lightly.

It's like eating a chocolate - You can get a average sized high quality chocolate that is at a premium price or a Large chocolate at a lower price that just doesn't have the same crunch. And then there is that chocolate that is overpriced and stale. The high quality chocolate would be games that innovate, the large chocolate is something that will last and the stale chocolate is CoD.

So, even if you don't have separate laws for digital goods (we don't, we have them general for contracts) , you can't use them as analogy?

Well, I know US trial only in theory (books) and fiction (movies), and it does looke like with enough money you can prove before your court that you're a camel, but hell, sucks to be you.

You know, the more you ask questions, the more I don't have answers. I don't know how US law works in theory, in the way it's supposed to. What I do know is that every time someone in the US tries to say "fuck you, we DO own our shit" when related to digital goods, they either get hit with a very serious cease and desist, or they end up in a court case that gets settled in some odd manner like the one I linked before.

If I'm wrong about this, I really, really hope someone corrects me. I'd hate to go on thinking I'm powerless against a written contract that I only agree to in an abstract manner if I'm not.

EDIT: I should mention that this spawned out of a "that would hold up in court" argument, and that's when it spun out to national law. So what I do know is that unless you're about as rich as Bill Gates, chances are you're not going to win the case, because Valve (or EA or THQ or Activision) wrote it, and by playing/buying their game, you agreed to it.

EDIT2: Ah ha! Found it. This article is about the only law I can find that specifically states when a user is allowed to circumvent something such as a DRM on digital goods in the US. As you can see, it wasn't passed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FAIR_USE_Act

EDIT3: About the digital goods thing, I haven't found it yet.

EDIT4: From what I can find, every US consumer protection law that deals directly with goods relates only to deceptive practices. Not refunding someone for a game because it won't run on your system, so long as it does run in general, isn't a deceptive practice. The addition of System Requirements and such are there for exactly that reason.

EDIT5: Last edit. The "great state of California", as Austrian Death Machine put it, which also apparently happens to have the best consumer protection laws, only requires a seller to accept a returned item by law if it is defective. I think we can say that, legally, nothing on most digital outlets is defective. This is also taking into account that I can only imagine, if that's the best, what some of the worst consumer protection laws are in other states. In turn, no, we're not really protected on the internet.

Well lets read the post you quoted

"I have had serious issues with steams Dead Island release and no help from their support, I have DI a pirated copy that works perfectly,"
Well apparently he had a problem with a game and pirated the game so it would work.

"I replaced my purchases with console versions or pirated versions in the case of PC games."
And apparently he pirated games he already bought.

Not seeing where he stated that "I will never again buy a game and will instead pirate them." If you are going to tell someone they need to read more carefully, you should probably ensure that what you think you read is what is really there.

Also, you are stating theft=piracy, but lets look a situation similar to the one you listed. If he had done something like that, when Dead Island didn't work he would have gone to his neighbors and stolen a copy of the game from them, but that is not what he did. Instead he went on the internet and downloaded a copy of the TV of his that didn't work in order to get one that did. The second example is applying his logic to a similar situation, not the first as he never stole anything.

As I mentioned earlier in my post, he only said he pirated games he bought. Either you are an idiot, you were just tired/drunk/not paying attention when you read his posts, are misunderstanding what he is saying because your english is not good, or you are intentionally misrepresenting him.

Also, publishers and developers have everything to do with it if the game is only available on Steam.

Sorry, no it isn't. Even the courts which you bring up recognize that piracy and stealing are not equivalent. In addition I have heard some people in Germany say that pirating a game that doesn't work in order to make it work is perfectly legal if you have bought the game.

Also...once more...the guy fucking bought the game. How does pirating a game one bought suddenly mean "you still don't pay,"?

What's that one quote? "Don't argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."
I'm done with this thread.

I'm not saying he didn't pay, but there is no denying that a lot of people that don't pay and pirate, and there is no excuses for them, because that is theft. I was doing something called generalizing.

Not really. It sounds ambiguous, but i think my interpretation makes more sense. Let's take a look at thefreeonlinedictionary's definition for replace:
re·place (r-pls)
tr.v. re·placed, re·plac·ing, re·plac·es
1. To put back into a former position or place.
2. To take or fill the place of.
3. To be or provide a substitute for.
4. To pay back or return; refund.

What i understood from his statement was that instead of purchasing anymore games he would either buy the console version or pirate it. If you take a look ath the definition above, my interpretation makes sense. And it makes even more sense if you consider the real situation behind it. Why would someone pirate a game that he owns even before testing the version that he bought originally? Why would he bother with the console version if he didn't even test the game he bought on PC? It doesn't make sense. He mentioned 2 games that he bought which didn't work, but that can't be generally applied to every situation, can it? He was just unlucky, the chances of game not working on a PC that meets the minimum system requirements are rather slim (note that i'm not talking about unfinished products that do work, but are buggy).

Ok then. Change my example into something like this: instead of stealing from his neighbor he stole it from the studio responsible for making the game's physical copies. No, i did not say that theft=piracy. Again, learn how to read. And please, learn what an analogy is. I'll help you:
"a·nal·o·gy (-nl-j)
n. pl. a·nal·o·gies
1.
a. Similarity in some respects between things that are otherwise dissimilar.
b. A comparison based on such similarity. See Synonyms at likeness."

An analogy is not used to compare 2 things that are the same. That wouldn't even be a comparison.

Yes, i'm an idiot and my english is not good. Please, throw me more personal offenses if that makes you feel better or "superior" in a game's forum. True, my english is not good. As you can see it is not my native language, i'm sorry for that. I'm sorry if i can't discuss with you, oh superior Lord, because my english isn't good enough. I'm sorry american God.

Of course being a native english speaker makes your arguments much stronger than mine, right? You are an authority here because you're american.

I feel sorry for you, i really do. You are trying to disqualify my arguments because english is not my native language and i do make a few (if not many) grammar mistakes. But yeah, if that makes you feel superior, go for it.

By the way you forgot to call me a troll. That's what people do when they have no more arguments. Go for more personal offenses, please, if that helps your damaged ego.

Yes, of course you are, you have nothing meaningful to say other than personal insults and stupid sarcasm. If you can't deal with a civilized discussion then you can go away.