Download games and DLC free to be sold on

European citizens now free to re-sell digital downloaded content they have purchased due to EU regulations.
Publishers are not allowed to prevent users selling on purchased content or licenses. Even if those users agreed to terms and conditions (EULA) not to do it. The EU law overrules those conditions and restrictions.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-07-03-eu-rules-publishers-cannot-stop-you-reselling-your-downloaded-games
This should lead to PSN games and content and DLC being sold on Ebay etc totally legally. Once a system is in place to enable the transfer I suppose, may need some legal hacking in order to achieve it? If not that then anyway the publishers own websites such as Sony PSN may be forced to allow new users to download the OLD licenses which they purchased second hand.

Yeah, Valve and EA won't exactly roll over on this.

Meh, it's only the EU.

Also, no such thing as legal hacking in this context. You can't break the T&C's just to satisfy some EU ruling that is going to be fought until they retract this ruling, which they will.

The transfer system "hack" was just my idea to how it might be done, but as I say the publishers themselves might have to make it available on their own websites, or they will have to find some way to allow a transfer of license. Either that or DLC/Download games may be banned from sale in Europe. I think the whole point is that content must be able to be resold as a matter of law?
It's either that or a user is allowed, by ANY non criminal means to re-sell their property. The publisher saying the license remains property of the publisher is overruled by EU law for example. In other words anything the publisher creates regarding rules is overruled. If publisher encrypts the content or licenses then they are fair game to be cracked, it's not illegal. As the content AND license is owned by the user once it has been purchased, no matter what the publisher says.
That's how I read it.
Although the ruling may open a new route to piracy, that's up to the publisher to deal with, hence why I think they themselves will provide it on their own websites to new 2nd hand users in order to control the licenses. Obviously owning the content with freedom to sell does not entitle the user to make multiple copies of it or distribute those copies. It's about selling one item to one other user, and the seller no longer has that "item".

How do crazy laws like this get passed? Does some law maker regret spending a fortune on Call of duty expansion packs and wants to off load them for some cash back?

How and why would a company that uses a method which main purpose is to create revenue(extending gameplay is so far beyond the main reason or it would be free) reverse engineer that method and leave them selves open to losses?

Get ready for $79.99 games if this takes off world wide people......

DLC and download games may get more expensive now, but when you are done you can recoup that expense by just selling it. Just like a boxed game. But this time instead of having to sell it really cheap you can sell it just 0.1% cheaper than the publisher,(depending how many other used DLC are available for sale of course,market demand..) as basically it's always new being digital. Until the publisher adds new extra content to the game/DLC in which case that is also better for the user as they get more content quicker than the old system...
I doubt prices will get higher anyway as they are already set at a maximum the customers can afford. Publishers will have to adapt. I would guess publishers could publish micro DLC every week or even every day, a continual and refreshing paid for content that out-paces the used market for reselling.
Maybe this is the beginning of pay as you play streaming....
The ultimate solution for publishers, no more owned games.
Damn, maybe it's not good for us.
Hopefully there will be a middle ground.

The odd thing about this is in some respects it brings DLC in line with "physical" media such as CDs, DVDs, BRDs etc. which obviously *can* be sold on (does this new law include music also?)

The odder thing is that digital content is so very much easier to copy, and sell on over and over. Seriously, there needs to be some sort of enlightenment around the laws regarding digital content, on a worldwide scale. Just don't ask me to figure it out, my head hurts, so i'll go rip some soothing music from some place

Thats interesting. I bet the industry will not be pleased with that.

They are already trying to kill the pre-owned games market now with EA/others locking down online play for people who have bought a pre owend games, and in the future potentially making games work on one console/PSN/Live I.D.

Yeah good point, surely this directly counters that kinda thing? That seems a good step to me, I never liked this gradual move towards us being granted a licence to play a game but never actually "own" it, or at least own it but it would be useless to anyone else.

OK perhaps most software works on this basis now but we should at least be able to sell this "licence" onwards by putting games up on eBay or whatever. That feeds variety, development, and healthy competition. Locking us into a game or franchise we might never play, I think, will make the industry stagnate rather than blossom.

I think the whole idea of telling somebody that they can not re sell something they bought is criminal. Our societies and economies are founded upon trading between people and communities and have been that way for 1000s of year. Now when it suits them they restrict the trade of goods!!

Its funny how our online data is bought and sold on a daily basis without our permission and yet I can't tell anyone to stop, where is my cut in that, and I did not even sell my data in the first place but many companies use it and profit out of it. That's another subject though for another time.

They really do take the piss! pardon my french.

I'm thinking about this some more now, will DLC necessarily have to be in the form of a transferrable file which can be copied and transferred (or sold) to other devices? Where does that leave content like GT5 DLC? OK better example, Forza 4 DLC? Surely if it is sold on, it will have to prevent the original owner from somehow using it?

Perhaps it's actually a slightly retrograde step, attempting to treat DLC in the same way as physical media in the form of an "original game", but DLC is almost always in the form of pure data, which can potentially be copied, duplicated, exploited.

Its going to be a huge headache for both games makers and consumers. Its suppose to give the consumer power over the purchase and the freedom to resell, but to implement sounds like it will be a mess, and almost impossible.

LaBounti

How do crazy laws like this get passed?

Click to expand...

Are you serios? This is a good laws. You can sell your car, retail game, door and other things.

The companies DON't have the right to say what you have to do with your bought product.

Maybe the publisher are smart enough to integrate a system for that.
Whats the problem? Do you send message with your PSN or XBL Acc?

You can just trade or gift the DLC Key to other acc. It's that simple. No problem with the security.
The system would deactive your key and activates the key for the other user.

The customer would have a few options for example

1. gift the content

2. trade the content
2.1 trade the content and recieve PSN money.
2.2 trade the content and recieve real money.
2.3 trade the content and recieve content.

europe is great!

I can see major issues with people selling in game items. Like the pre order bonuses for GT5 and MMO in game characters and items.

Laws about these sorts of things need to have their own court of tech savvy Judges and lawyers. People that don't see the whole picture can easily misword something that he doesn't realize may have major implications.

I don't see this being a good law to have passed at all.

It might be tricky to sort out.
But however it's done it will mean we can buy Motegi track cheap if you buy from someone who paid full price and doesn't want it anymore.
I am interested in buying cheaper than retail DLC for GT5.....

Publishers could use old tricks, like requiring users to write a letter in the post to some address asking for a license key to be posted to them etc once authentication has been made of used DLC purchase. Making it loads of hassle. But alternatively there is a publishers website that makes it instant transfers for used DLC, payments deposited instantly and DLC activated in real-time, for only 30% commission which the publisher takes for the "service transaction", not the content itself...
loopholes etc.
Expect a used DLC official marketplace soon.

Tyger

The odd thing about this is in some respects it brings DLC in line with "physical" media such as CDs, DVDs, BRDs etc. which obviously *can* be sold on (does this new law include music also?)

The odder thing is that digital content is so very much easier to copy, and sell on over and over. Seriously, there needs to be some sort of enlightenment around the laws regarding digital content, on a worldwide scale. Just don't ask me to figure it out, my head hurts, so i'll go rip some soothing music from some place

Click to expand...

Actually, you can already buy/sell "used" digital music on sites like https://www.redigi.com/. They have a perfectly legal (and apparently fool proof) system for selling the digital music.

Although I consider myself a collector of video games and never sell them, I think it's would be a step in the right direction to have a proper system and marketplace set up for this. I'm sort of surprised Valve haven't actually jumped on it yet, They are probably in the best position to launch this type of service.

ch3ng

Are you serios? This is a good laws. You can sell your car, retail game, door and other things.

The companies DON't have the right to say what you have to do with your bought product.

Click to expand...

Quote was taken out of context but...Those are actual things.. apples to oranges. on top that's not my concern.

You are missing my biggest point, It's going to increase the price of content to recoup potential losses. That includes DLC, not just the game. You like seeing studios close because they didn't make enough money on a game?

It's good news to cheap gamers who do not want to support the gaming industry. Not the person selling it..... I own every PS3 game I ever bought, I have no desire to sell them. This will do nothing but increase prices for gamers who buy new. No one will buy games/DLC and the whole industry will shrink with studio after studio shutting down. Its bad now imagine when prices go up. Ok maybe that was a bit far but its just my thinking.

CMvan46

I don't see this being a good law to have passed at all.

Click to expand...

Exactly, when you don't evaluate the law it seems like a good idea to do nothing but make money by selling content you paid for. But you have to consider everything before assuming its a clear and good idea for industry.

I love video games and I would hate to see it fail or struggle from a business stand point because of some law.

BlisteredHand

I know what you say are assumptions and they are good ones but anything is possible from this. But right now it doesn't look like a good thing for Steam or similar services. Console can easily eliminate Digital down loads if they find its just not profitable if no one wants to buy it new...

This should include Mobile games on Iphone and Android, now its just going to get nutz when Apple can't make a trillion dollars on apps anymore when people are flooding to ebay to get that $0.99 game for $0.50.

LaBounti

Quote was taken out of context but...Those are actual things.. apples to oranges. on top that's not my concern.

You are missing my biggest point, It's going to increase the price of content to recoup potential losses. That includes DLC, not just the game. You like seeing studios close because they didn't make enough money on a game?

It's good news to cheap gamers who do not want to support the gaming industry. Not the person selling it..... I own every PS3 game I ever bought, I have no desire to sell them. This will do nothing but increase prices for gamers who buy new. No one will buy games/DLC and the whole industry will shrink with studio after studio shutting down. Its bad now imagine when prices go up. Ok maybe that was a bit far but its just my thinking.

Click to expand...

I think this clearly highlights the issues with how the industry as a whole operates. If something like a used game market thriving can unhinge the entire industry, that suggest to me that a very poor business model is in place. Plus lets take into consideration that a lot of studios/publishers are already tinkering on the edge of disaster (like THQ for instance) without these concerns.

The movie industry is doing okay, yet we have dvd/bluray/digital that can be purchased used or rented from a physical store or online store even (ie. Itunes).

I'm not too concerned about prices being raised. The publishers know there is only so far they can push the price on a product before they see a significant impact on their sales figures. They will have to look to other methods to recuperate any losses. Sometimes it's almost necessary for these types of catalysts to every so often come along and help the industry evolve a little.

@LaBounti, How come itunes music still exists then if ReDigi sells it second hand?
Seems they can co-exist. Because that's exactly what happened before digital download and DLC was even invented, games were new and 2nd hand on the market.

Going back to ReDigi, seems like even they are still aware of the Piracy involved..
"If a copy of a previously sold file reappears on a seller's computer or synced device, and the seller fails to delete it after notice from ReDigi, the seller's account with ReDigi may be suspended or terminated. ReDigi does not snitch, but it makes it difficult for users to infringe copyright law in this manner. ReDigi helps provide the knowledge and tools for its users to understand and comply with copyrights."

So it's obviously easily done to sell thousands of itunes music you own , but still keep it. It just you can't sell it twice to ReDigi. What happens when the new owner gets told the previous owner still has the file, does the copied sold file count as stolen meaning buyer has to give it back to police and lose money or does the original file untouched count as stolen.. The mind boggles.

Extra comment:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-07-03-gmg-eu-resale-ruling-will-shake-up-the-digital-distribution-market

Today's eye-catching ruling that publishers cannot prevent gamers reselling downloaded games will, in the long-term, "shake up the digital distribution market", according to one affected online shop.

Green Man Gaming boss Paul Sulyok told Eurogamer that the Court of Justice of the European Union's ruling is "very disruptive", but insisted that in the short-term little will change.

The EU today ruled that "an author of software cannot oppose the resale of his 'used' licences allowing the use of his programs downloaded from the internet". The Court said the exclusive right of distribution of a copy of a computer program covered by the license is "exhausted on its first sale".

It means that gamers in European Union member states are free to sell their downloaded games, whether they're from Steam, Origin or another digital platform - no matter what End User License Agreement has been signed.

One important part of the ruling dictates that if you resell a license to a game you have to make your copy "unusable at the time of resale".

The two biggest digital games platforms, Steam and Origin, currently do not facilitate this, and there is no directive in the ruling forcing Valve and EA to do so. But Sulyok believes all it will take is for one consumer to enforce his right to the resale of a game - and thus be required to make his copy unusable - for the two heavyweight companies to be triggered into action.

"Medium term, I think some first acquirer somewhere is going to push this through, because it's the kind of thing the community does, and it's their right to," he said. "There will be a first case against one of the platform holders.

"The result of that is a foregone conclusion. So they will have to facilitate that. This will shake up the digital distribution market. Long-term there are some important implications and this is very disruptive.

"Both Origin and Steam would have to facilitate some kind of method whereby a consumer could revoke the activation of that key and then pass a brand new key onto a third part."


Also, the ruling suggests that if you've bought a license for a game, you're within your rights to download it from the publisher's website.

"The major platform holders are the ones that will be significantly impacted by this. If in Europe legally they are bound to give people the rights to be able to switch off a game and pass a token or a digital code on to a third party, that's a very interesting proposition.

"It's only one step away from being in a situation where a first acquirer says, I would like to have the rights to do this and I have the right to do this, therefore your system should facilitate it. It does link together."

Both EA and Valve will be keen to avoid this situation, and with good reason. Sulyok can see a future where a secondary market emerges in which third parties buy keys from the likes of Steam and Origin and sell them on to gamers with huge discounts.

"The classic technique of deep discount, short time limited discounts, all of that will be slightly skewed now, because you don't want to have a deep discounted game that can then be sold on elsewhere," he said.

"The secondary market then cuts in and then what will happen is the same sort of thing as you've seen in the high street whereby a supermarket chain puts a fantastic discount on a product for consumers and all the other high street retailers trot down to the supermarket to buy them to stop them."

Green Man Gaming employs a system whereby customers can download games, play them then trade them in to offset the cost of their next purchase.

"When we do this we like to ensure publishers benefit from the resale of the digital product," Sulyok said. "All of our publishers who are on a trade-in contract benefit on a per transaction base every time that game is sold."

Under the new ruling, publishers would not be entitled to any money from a resale - and Sulyok admitted that if Valve and EA were to employ a system similar to GMG's trading, it could severely impact his business.

"It will be an interesting conference call that Steam will have with Origin first thing in the morning, when the West Coast wakes up," Sulyok concluded.

This, while at first I thought was great, will most likely turn out to be A Very Bad Thing. Think about it, how can digital distributors and publishers get around this? How about a timed subscription fee to a service like Steam? Then how can software know that you're no longer licensed to use it? Ever more draconian DRM.

Also, how on earth will this work? Software doesn't degrade over time or with use like any physical item does, so why would used software be cheap? It would be identical to a 'new' copy, so there's no reason for it to be cheap.

Seriously, as good as this sounds for us you can be sure that those who lose money on used game sales will be hard at work trying to figure out a way around this, and I'm pretty sure it'll be much, much worse than what we have now... I can imagine a Diablo 3-style 'always online no matter whether you're playing with others or not' DRM becoming the new standard, which in turn could accelerate the development of cloud gaming systems (because then everyone would have to be online all the time anyway so no one can complain about it).

Ok guys,
First this ruling does not yet concern digital games.

it was a ruling between Orcale and usedsoft, and to some extend MS and softwarebilliger.de.

Secondly, it clearly states that timed lisences are excluded, which to some extend could include online gaming as the servers will get shut down.

Thirdly, for this to come into effect for gaming, someone need to request their rights in, whether from Steam or EA, that can take some time, or can come very quickly.

4dly, the article states a good propostion for games,
You sent your serial in, you get a new one that can be sold. This will render your copy (serial) invalid. The new buyer can than with that code request a new download and, or serial.

There is a lot of mixing up, hyposthesis in this thread.

The ruling states clearly some things that here do not seem to have been fully understood. Read the ruling!

Also next time search before opening a thread that already exists