Valve found guilty of breaking australian law

Today, the Australian Federal Court ruled that Valve had made "false or misleading representations in the terms and conditions contained in three versions of its Steam Subscriber Agreement and two versions of its Steam Refund Policy

more info can be found here

this is going to get messy

gabs popcorn

I'm honestly thinking that this is a case of old rules not working with modern situations. As this is software (Games at that) Valve really can't promise that the product will work with your hardware and that quality will be consistent. Software constantly updates and it isn't valve's fault that software that they simply provide access to breaks. Maybe I'm being too idealistic here. Its up to the developer and on the developer to do the quality assurance. Even if valve could beta test every game on steam I don't think they would stop much of the problems even then. If anyone remembers that one game that valve gave updates for even if you went over the two hour mark because of how obviously it was just trying to grab your money. Valve can't have someone playtest the entirety of a game.

1 Like

This has nothing to do with the case against Valve.

It's about Australian consumer law, whereby Australian's are entitled to a refund or return any consumer product of their choosing. Valve needs to respect Australian law. This is not America.

But they are an online service, can they really have a clause in their TOS for every country on the planet? Cause every country has little quirks and there is no lawyer on the planet that knows them all.

Obviously they have to make sure they're following the law if they're going to do business in a country... what kind of a question is that?


So Google should provide access to ALL user data even if the data on the servers in china is not all from their own citizens? Same question applies here, but the difference is that Valve doesn't have a presence in Australia whereas Google does in china. I don't think that Chinas laws (Or any other country) should have access to that information esp. if its from a different country.

That's not a valid comparison.


So the question of whether google should follow Chinese law and grant access to data is not comparable to whether or not Valve should follow Australian law and give refunds and warranties on software that they do not personally own?

They are both on different subjects but the question of legality remains. You can't say that the companies can pick and choose what laws to follow.

Accessing data from another country is completely different from following the laws of the country you're doing business in. In the former case, the laws of the country the data is in come into play.

If there are any, Not only that but there's also the question of whether or not servers that are actually physically in that country are under what rules. And then there is the fact that some Chinese data is in other countries, do they have full access to that even if the country that that data is in prevents seizure of that data? (Asylum for data? :P) This is the prime reason why it is recommended to use out of country (As an american) services simply because other countries are not forced to give the data to the US if they ask for it. Plus what laws trump what and if the laws in AU explicitly say that something is legal but is illegal in another then what do you do? But this is almost off topic.

If you are using a VPN to access Steam does that invalidate this? Theoretically they could still sue you even though you may have blocked access in said country.

Valve is an american company so wouldnt they only have to worry about the laws within that country?
Similar to youtube where it abides US law and rarely, if ever really does it have the need to worry about laws in other countries.

From their media release
consumers were not entitled to a refund for digitally downloaded games purchased from Valve via the Steam website or Steam Client (in any circumstances);
Valve had excluded statutory guarantees and/or warranties that goods would be of acceptable quality; and
Valve had restricted or modified statutory guarantees and/or warranties of acceptable quality.

Valve should just pull out. Let Australia enjoy the protection of an Origin monopoly sans lubricant.


you are evil

1 Like

At least Origin gives out refunds, unlike valve's time trail AOL anyone?

can u give the abridged version?

You don't seem to be grasping the ACCC case against Valve, but that's probably cause you're not Australian I am guessing.

Here's a link of how a proper American multinational does business in Australia
Note the first paragraph of section two.

As a consumer, you may have statutory consumer rights and guarantees that cannot be disclaimed under Australian Consumer law.

It's a simple concept.

1 Like

But Valve isn't Australian. and thats my point. You cannot hold a company that has no physical presence in Australia to Australian laws.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

1 Like