Used game sales are not the same as new game sales or micro-transactions.
Originally Posted by icehotshot
Please explain to me how a game's value doesn't decrease over time. If you don't mean monetary then what do you mean? But you agree it should be worth less money though because the MONETARY value has decreased, yes?
And again, would pay $50 for a copy of doom today? I don't think so. It's does not have as much value today as it did years ago.
I don't mean monetary, I mean the value is the same. As in to a potential buyer, there is zero difference between buying a used copy and a "new" copy when they are distributed digitally and going to be downloaded from exactly the same source
The value does not decrease relative to the current price of a "new" copy of the game, because you're buying exactly the same thing. And no, I don't mean prices won't be different. Of course they will, because resellers just want to get rid of their games.
What I mean is that the product is identical to a new copy, rendering new copies obsolete. In fact, even calling them "new" or "used" is frigging ridiculous, since you'd be downloading a clean install they'd both be "new" copies.
Originally Posted by Senator
Huh? You simply sell the other user your key. Up to steam how they want to remove the old game from your account. Why are you even mentioning accounts? Steam doesn't have to provide anything, sure. But, it would be in their best interest to ensure the game is then removed from your account.
The EU ruling was in relation to single piece of Oracle software, where a third party was buying and selling unused licenses. There is no mention in the ruling that Oracle must go out of their way to support this, just that it isn't illegal as Oracle lost their right to exclusive distribution by making the license agreement applicable for an unlimited period.
It also isn't applied to computer games, and so any ruling by any member state of the EU over allowing the resale of digitally distributed computer games is likely to be very, very different.
Originally Posted by revro
@Cariflex: any way around in EU means, they get fined like MS did over browsers in windows and other things
yes it does. it says they are not to interfere. so if my licence is locked in steam, is valve interfering or not? yes they are. so they must allow resale and to do so they must adapt steam. either to release my steam key so i can resell it or create a market that would compete with their sales.
It doesn't say this in the ruling at all? It just says that the original company must allow the owner of a transferred license to download the content from their servers, so long as the original buyer has rendered his copy unusable.
It says nothing about having to support the resale, or allowing individual re-sales where the license has been tied to a specific account. Given the nature of the case, this would not even have been mentioned. They are only obliged to allow resale, by allowing users to sell their accounts they would be complying with this.
Either way, it's a preliminary ruling that is not aimed at computer game software licenses. If challenged in court the outcome is likely to be completely different.