Valve Found Guilty of Breaking Australian Law

[Doomslayer]

Not sure what it mean in the long run but only time will tell.

Link to the story

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/valve-found-guilty-of-breaking-australian-law-with/1100-6436074/

 

[WYP]

doesn't really matter now as Valve do have a returns policy now and allow refunds.

 

[Doomslayer]

This link is saying it's a newer one tho

http://www.kotaku.com.au/2016/03/valve-found-guilty-of-breaching-australian-consumer-law/

 

[WYP]

yeah, but the case applies to an issue that doesn't affect consumers now. All this really serves to do is lose valve and get lawyers some money.

Steam users now have refunds, but don't think that this case is going to help anyone any further.

 

[Doomslayer]

Then why are the stories dated from the 28th & 29th of March so to me this is new not old

It sounds like we weren't getting refunds

 

[WYP]

Then why are the stories dated from the 28th & 29th of March so to me this is new not old

It sounds like we weren't getting refunds

it is because Steams refund policy is only a year old and it takes a long long time for consumer issues like this to get through court.

They are guilty as they did not have a refund policy/option at the time the case against them was started. While they have a refund policy now, it still does not mitigate the fact that they didn't when this case was started.

 

[Kushiro]

Its just some people with way too much time/greed. Steam has conditions for a refund set out which are more than fair enough.

I feel ashamed that this is coming out of AUS. Tryna move the A to the end....

 

[WYP]

Its just some people with way too much time/greed. Steam has conditions for a refund set out which are more than fair enough.

I feel ashamed that this is coming out of AUS. Tryna move the A to the end....

This court case started before Steam's current Refund Policy was put in place. This case is about Steam not having one in the past when the case was filed.

Just because Valve made a refund policy since they were first taken to court does not mean that they were not at fault in the first place where the case applies.