Long document full of legal language than can only be truly comprehended by those with Legal Training isn’t at all the same as BIG FAT TEXT INDICATING IN A SIMPLE WAY THAT THIS IS NOT A PURCHASE.
Absolutely, in the absence of actual Pro-Consumer Regulatory Obligations, the whole “Agreement” is a valid way for sellers of digital media such as Steam to legally cover their asses and not actually saying to prospective buyers the true nature of what they’re buying.
It is, however, not a means to help a purchaser make an informed purchase, rather it’s a way for Steam and other such stores to, in the current legal and regulatory environment, legally get away with doing the very opposite and obfuscate the true nature of what the purchaser is purchasing.
Think about it this way: if the intention of Steam was to be honest and make sure purchasers were making informed purchases, then why not inform purchasers upfront in the product page in a simple way that what they would be buying was a REVOCABLE LICENSE rather than ownership of a PRODUCT, and even explain the difference, rather than hide it in a long document that requires Law training to fully understand?
That is not informing the potential buyer in a simple way, that’s hiding the information in a different page, one which is a long text made up of legalese which one need Legal Training to fully understand.
You’re just making my point.
You know what would be a simple, obvious, honest way of in that page of telling the purchaser that they’re buying a license?
To the left of the discount and the price put the text “BUY A LICENSE FOR:”
“Strangely” Steam chooses not do any such thing or similar and instead chooses to “inform” buyers with a link to a different page which is a wall of legal text.
I’m not really arguing against your point either though. I’m just saying it’s there. But I agree it can and should be clearer. I’m agreeing with you. 😉
nobody said otherwise. It’s pointless to be arguing that point. It’s like saying, google can monopolize the smartphone market because they have allowed that themselves in the terms of service, and people clearly agreed that and more
You agree to the service or don’t use the service.
if it were so simple. it can be done with pure entertainment services, but nowhere else.
But it should be clearer for the dumb dumbs, definitely.
Congratulations, you just called everyone dumb dumb who simply just has so little time and energy after work that they literally can’t read the terms and follow the updates to all the terms, or else they wouldn’t get to use the services.
“subscriber agreement” makes no sense when you press a “buy” button and you pay once, not continuously. going by that, it just makes sense that a subscriber agreement is not in effect, because there is no subscription, or you would be paying for a continued subscription at regular intervals
Long document full of legal language than can only be truly comprehended by those with Legal Training isn’t at all the same as BIG FAT TEXT INDICATING IN A SIMPLE WAY THAT THIS IS NOT A PURCHASE.
Absolutely, in the absence of actual Pro-Consumer Regulatory Obligations, the whole “Agreement” is a valid way for sellers of digital media such as Steam to legally cover their asses and not actually saying to prospective buyers the true nature of what they’re buying.
It is, however, not a means to help a purchaser make an informed purchase, rather it’s a way for Steam and other such stores to, in the current legal and regulatory environment, legally get away with doing the very opposite and obfuscate the true nature of what the purchaser is purchasing.
Think about it this way: if the intention of Steam was to be honest and make sure purchasers were making informed purchases, then why not inform purchasers upfront in the product page in a simple way that what they would be buying was a REVOCABLE LICENSE rather than ownership of a PRODUCT, and even explain the difference, rather than hide it in a long document that requires Law training to fully understand?
But yeah, I definitely agree with you in general. You have perfectly valid points.
That is not informing the potential buyer in a simple way, that’s hiding the information in a different page, one which is a long text made up of legalese which one need Legal Training to fully understand.
You’re just making my point.
You know what would be a simple, obvious, honest way of in that page of telling the purchaser that they’re buying a license?
“Strangely” Steam chooses not do any such thing or similar and instead chooses to “inform” buyers with a link to a different page which is a wall of legal text.
I’m not really arguing against your point either though. I’m just saying it’s there. But I agree it can and should be clearer. I’m agreeing with you. 😉
nobody said otherwise. It’s pointless to be arguing that point. It’s like saying, google can monopolize the smartphone market because they have allowed that themselves in the terms of service, and people clearly agreed that and more
🤷♂️
Agree to disagree that it’s pointless. You agree to the service or don’t use the service. Nobody is forcing your hand at buying video games.
But it should be clearer for the dumb dumbs, definitely.
if it were so simple. it can be done with pure entertainment services, but nowhere else.
Congratulations, you just called everyone dumb dumb who simply just has so little time and energy after work that they literally can’t read the terms and follow the updates to all the terms, or else they wouldn’t get to use the services.
I haven’t even read it, but I still understand it because it says subscriber agreement.
🤷♂️
“subscriber agreement” makes no sense when you press a “buy” button and you pay once, not continuously. going by that, it just makes sense that a subscriber agreement is not in effect, because there is no subscription, or you would be paying for a continued subscription at regular intervals