http://wegotthiscovered.com/news/valve-accept-steam-subscriber-agreement-disable-account/
So if you disagree with the new TOS your account will be deactivated with no refund.Valve is so awesome.
Although I don't mind accpeting the terms, some people might stop using steam becasue of this.
So what is your opinion about this?
And for discussion value do you it's morally right?and if yes/no then why? and also will this make you stop using steam?
While it's still true that Valve can be sued (in small claims court) it turns out the company does have the ability to limit class actions under the Federal Arbitration Act. Steve Flaeck explains:
"The Federal Arbitration Act entitles a company to preclude class action and the provision is completely enforceable. This is the precise outcome of AT&T Mobility v. Conception; the reality is that the FAA essentially allows all claims, including Civil Rights Act claims in the 5th Circuit, to be routed through binding arbitration on whatever terms specified in the contract.
As steadily reinterpreted by the Court, the FAA enables the creation of private legal systems enforced by the public one. It must be repealed."
I agree, this is a stupid law and it should be repealed. On the other hand, Valve is running a business and if the competition is doing similar things, it's in Valve's best interest to do the same. I'm not a fan of resolving customer complaints through lawsuits in the first place. I would hope that if Valve went downhill in its treatment of customers, or if Steam turned out to be awful for some reason, that people would take their money elsewhere.
This does raise, once again, questions of ownership. For me, the trade-off between actually owning a physical copy of a game vs. just a digital license comes down to convenience. Maybe I should be more bothered by the fact that I'm essentially paying a one-time fee to rent a game forever rather than own it, but I just can't get that worked up about it. It's not in Valve's best interest to screw me out of my games. Same goes for eBooks on Amazon. Yes, there have been occasions when - in Amazon's case at least - some books were removed. This could be problematic. There are plenty of scenarios we could come up with ranging from simple inconvenience to sci-fi totalitarianism that could make us think twice about purchasing anything digitally.
But it's so convenient and simple to use services like Steam or Kindle. That's why they're successful. If they stop being convenient and simple, they'll stop being successful. It's important that we do address the contingency issues - what happens if Valve goes out of business? Do I get a free download of all my games? Do I just lose them? What happens if Amazon is wiped off the face of the earth? Is my Kindle just a hunk of metal and plastic? Are those books I 'owned' little more than digital memories?
These are important questions, to be sure, but it all comes down not so much to the individual companies taking advantage of various rules and loopholes in our system of laws, but to the laws themselves. If the FAA is problematic, it should be repealed. If we need better legal definitions of digital ownership, that needs to be established by the state. In the meantime, both consumers and businesses need to make do with what we've got.
Thanks to PieBrotherTB for the link.
Also Dexter111 is a pretty cool guy:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/9.384228.15233264
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/9.384228.15233362