Germany makes Valve change HL2 box

[jeff]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <Xns96004A9A9A37gandalfparker@208.201.224.154>, Gandalf Parker <gandalf@most.of.my.favorite.sites> wrote:

>Exactly. Thats why I asked. Im guessing that they are standing on a
>platform of "fee for services and the transfer of such services". I hate
>databases I have to pay to update when it serves me no purpose. That type
>of tacked-on fee does happen alot and does get kicked out in court alot.
>
>Gandalf Parker

There is no essential benefit in Steam for the majority of users... none such
that Steam must be required to play, anyway. Valve can force it on buyers,
but they do so for Valve's benefit, not the consumer's.

 

[jeff]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <Xns96004932B2820gandalfparker@208.201.224.154>, Gandalf Parker <gandalf@most.of.my.favorite.sites> wrote:

>If you disconnect your internet connection, does HL2 refuse to play solo?

Supposedly. But there've been problems. Certainly, HL2 will refuse to play
solo if it's not validated (such as after a reinstall later).


>Or is there a seperate executable that can run the game without going
>thru the steam checks?

None that are legitimate.


>According to the steam site its an online system for distribution of
>patches and upgrades. Its the system they chose to use for that. Im still
>trying to figure out how much forcing to use Steam there actually is but
>Im thinking that you dont have to use it if you dont want the services it
>offers.

IMHO, providing patches that fix bugs, making the game playable, should be
obligatory. It's akin to recalling a defective car... it shouldn't matter who
the original buyer was, the fix for a defective product is still free.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Gandalf Parker wrote:
> "T. Fink" <fink@freenet.de> wrote in news:cuuup8$ge2$04$2@news.t-
> online.com:
>
>
>>alexti wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Kroagnon" <kroagnon@kroagnon.com> wrote in
>>>news:1114slrkq7jb218@news.supernews.com:
>>>
>>>
>>>>No, you have to pay $10 to transfer a Steam account. No joke, direct
>>>
>>>>from Valve. If you don't you run the risk of having the account blocked
>>>
>>>>because selling the game is "against the EULA".
>>
>>Might be interesting if someone here in Germany sues Valve then because
>>EULAs (except when they are outside on the box) are not binding here
>>since they are a belately introduced part of the general contract.
>
>
> That already happened. Thats what started the thread. Hence the sublect
> line of...
> "Re: Germany makes Valve change HL2 box"
>

Nope, the original thread was about that the German organization for
consumer rights demands a change of the package and threatens to sue
them as described in
http://www.hardtecs4u.com/?id=1107046955,31360,ht4u.php (the thread
title is therefore not accurate). What I am talking about is that
someone is not willing to pay the 10$ for the transfer and sues because
he bought the current version without EULA on the outside. Also, I doubt
they will ever put the whole EULA on the box cover, so lawyers may earn
a lot figuring out if extracts of the EULA on the box cover are as
binding as the EULA itself.

Cheers

Torsten



--
Kill Holzmichl!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On that special day, Gandalf Parker,
(gandalf@most.of.my.favorite.sites) said...

> But when its a database
> being kept for someone else (even the government) and has no benefit to
> me then I should gripe about having to pay a transfer fee.

Someone here said, the government can do anything, even if companies
couldn't do the same.

I don't know how cars are registered and licensed in the US, with
insurances?

However, in Germany there is a general enforcement by the government, to
conclude a third party insurance, for every buyer of a car, as cars have
a tendency to run into accidents and cause damages. The government
wanted to ensure that everyone does that, and decreed that the only one
who may issue license plates, are the local authorities, counties or the
town halls of larger towns. So, I have to walk to an officer, hand him
the documents and proof that I concluded said insurance, pay the fee and
get my license, then I walk to the license plate maker, which makes the
plate (which costs extra, and more than the office fee).

It is quite complicated, that's why many car vendors offer to do the job
for you.


Gabriele Neukam

Gabriele.Spamfighter.Neukam@t-online.de


--
Ah, Information. A property, too valuable these days, to give it away,
just so, at no cost.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

jeff@work.com (Jeff) wrote in news:cv2et0$4bq$1@cronkite.cc.uga.edu:

> In article <Xns96004220BB8A9gandalfparker@208.201.224.154>, Gandalf
> Parker <gandalf@most.of.my.favorite.sites> wrote:
>
>>Why would it be cheaper? I do admin work for ISPs and I know that the
>>cost of many things we did was directly impacted by a need to have
>>people updating a database. It didnt matter if it was a cheap thing or
>>a high cost thing. It only mattered how much info, how stable and
>>accessable it had to be, and how often it had to be accessed. So far I
>>havent heard
>
> As far as I'm concerned, said database, like Steam, serves only
> Valve's purposes. not mine. Therefore, any "transfer fees" to update
> that database are just added bureaucracy slyly designed either to
> deter 2nd-hand sales or allow Valve to profit from those sales from
> which they could not otherwise profit.

That all sounds real enough to me. Steam says its a service for providing
patches, upgrades, and support. Which is another way of saying
CONTROLLING patches, upgrades, and support. I also agree that I hate to
pay charges for updating a database which does me no service.

Of course that happens. A lot. Its not illegal. Unless they are caught in
an outright lie or failure to provide whats been promised (or required by
law even if its not promised) then its not likely to change. Thats why I
keep trying to pin down what is and isnt promised here other than the
fact that people dont like it.

>>> And imagine people handing down the game after playing it through
>>> (the single playing mission), from friend to brother, to room mate,
>>> which happens quite often, and should be legal, as long as the
>>> former owners don't play it (ie a pirated copy) any more. You pay
>>> thirty bucks, which is more than half of the original price, only to
>>> allow for more than one person to play it.
>>
>>Of course the "as long as the former owners dont play it" is a good
>>part of the reason behind Steam existing. The "good buddy" copies
>>have always been much MUCH higher than real pirating.
>
> But, in truth, has Steam made this harder or easier?
>
> I submit that, if anything, it's easier... since my "good buddy" can
> install the game and play it offline just as I can if I give him the
> account info. He can patch and update too. The only thing he might
> not be able to do is play internet multiplayer at the same time as I,
> a restriction not unique to Steam either. Not to mention the option
> of using the Steam emulator.
>
> So there is actually very little "reason" behind Steam existing at
> all.

Thats interesting. I hadnt seen anyone say that it was easy to bypass the
"benefits" of Steam.

Gandalf Parker

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

jeff@work.com (Jeff) wrote in news:cv2fod$4ul$1@cronkite.cc.uga.edu:

> In article <Xns96004A9A9A37gandalfparker@208.201.224.154>, Gandalf
> Parker <gandalf@most.of.my.favorite.sites> wrote:
>
>>Exactly. Thats why I asked. Im guessing that they are standing on a
>>platform of "fee for services and the transfer of such services". I
>>hate databases I have to pay to update when it serves me no purpose.
>>That type of tacked-on fee does happen alot and does get kicked out in
>>court alot.
>
> There is no essential benefit in Steam for the majority of users...
> none such that Steam must be required to play, anyway. Valve can
> force it on buyers, but they do so for Valve's benefit, not the
> consumer's.

That I never doubted. Like many services such as warrantys and insurances
and support contracts, there is very little real benefit to the customers.
Its something that can be sold to them as a good thing, and mostly benefits
the seller.

Gandalf Parker

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Chadwick" <chadwick110@hotmail.com> wrote in news:1108660487.794828.89710
@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

> In which case the answer to the ABC question is - you pay Valve $10 and
> they either de-register game B's CD-Key from person A's Steam account,
> or transfer it to person D(the buyer)'s Steam Account. I'm not sure
> whether the $10 gets you a deregistration or a transfer.

Then its a way of managing the CD keys in the database which is required to
know you so that you can play multi-user. They are learning the advantages
that online worlds have in managing keys, and creating a mandatory
situation for the same managment in their game.

Gandalf Parker

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly jeff@work.com (Jeff) Spake Unto All:


>There is no essential benefit in Steam for the majority of users... none such
>that Steam must be required to play, anyway. Valve can force it on buyers,
>but they do so for Valve's benefit, not the consumer's.

So don't play.

WTF is with this entitlement thing you people have going?

If you dont like the terms, decline. Wait for it to hit the XBox or
something.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Jeff" <jeff@work.com> wrote in message
news:cv2et0$4bq$1@cronkite.cc.uga.edu...
> >Why would it be cheaper? I do admin work for ISPs and I know that the
> >cost of many things we did was directly impacted by a need to have people
> >updating a database. It didnt matter if it was a cheap thing or a high
> >cost thing. It only mattered how much info, how stable and accessable it
> >had to be, and how often it had to be accessed. So far I havent heard
> As far as I'm concerned, said database, like Steam, serves only Valve's
> purposes. not mine. Therefore, any "transfer fees" to update that
database
> are just added bureaucracy slyly designed either to deter 2nd-hand sales
or
> allow Valve to profit from those sales from which they could not otherwise
> profit.

Totally agree and this is the point I have been attempting to make. Valve
have created an artifical dependancy on Steam where there shouldn't be one
in the first place thus they have no leg to stand on when they try to
"charge" to transfer a Steam account.

I can understand a (smaller) fee on a game bought through Steam but this is
totally illegitimate on retail.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Kroagnon" <kroagnon@kroagnon.com> wrote in
news:111c2kufp8emp3c@news.supernews.com:

> Totally agree and this is the point I have been attempting to make.
> Valve have created an artifical dependancy on Steam where there
> shouldn't be one in the first place thus they have no leg to stand on
> when they try to "charge" to transfer a Steam account.

All quite true. But compared to what? Any effort to control CD keys, or
upgrades, or copies, or the security of their code (avoiding reverse
engineering) is an artifical dependency in the game. But something along
those lines does appear to be a dependency in that quality of game (eww
that made me cringe since I dont believe they are better. Lets say that
level of disctribution). Any level of control only works for a short while
and then they invent something worse. Complain to them by all means and it
might slow them down. But the only fast response is if you can pin them to
doing something illegal like they did with Steam.

Games which dont do that are easily found as shareware, or freeware, or
open source. And some of those are great games.

Gandalf Parker

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Gandalf Parker wrote:
> "Kroagnon" <kroagnon@kroagnon.com> wrote in
> news:111c2kufp8emp3c@news.supernews.com:
>
>
>>Totally agree and this is the point I have been attempting to make.
>>Valve have created an artifical dependancy on Steam where there
>>shouldn't be one in the first place thus they have no leg to stand on
>>when they try to "charge" to transfer a Steam account.
>
>
> All quite true. But compared to what? Any effort to control CD keys, or
> upgrades, or copies, or the security of their code (avoiding reverse
> engineering) is an artifical dependency in the game. But something along
> those lines does appear to be a dependency in that quality of game (eww
> that made me cringe since I dont believe they are better. Lets say that
> level of disctribution). Any level of control only works for a short while
> and then they invent something worse. Complain to them by all means and it
> might slow them down. But the only fast response is if you can pin them to
> doing something illegal like they did with Steam.
>

I'm not sure I follow this argument _ who did what illegally with Steam?

> Games which dont do that are easily found as shareware, or freeware, or
> open source. And some of those are great games.
>
> Gandalf Parker
>
>
>


--
Walter Mitty
-
Useless, waste of money research of the day : http://tinyurl.com/3tdeu
" Format wars could 'confuse users'"
http://www.tinyurl.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Gandalf Parker" <gandalf@most.of.my.favorite.sites> wrote in message
news:Xns96014EBE41768gandalfparker@208.201.224.154...

> > Totally agree and this is the point I have been attempting to make.
> > Valve have created an artifical dependancy on Steam where there
> > shouldn't be one in the first place thus they have no leg to stand on
> > when they try to "charge" to transfer a Steam account.
> All quite true. But compared to what? Any effort to control CD keys, or
> upgrades, or copies, or the security of their code (avoiding reverse
> engineering) is an artifical dependency in the game. But something along

Multiplayer CD key checks are totally anonymous and don't require any kind
of registration - the server checks to see if your CD key was issued by the
company and that's it. There's nothing to transfer - the game company
doesn't have personally identifiable information about you like Valve does
with Steam. Granted, there's a risk that the person you bought the game from
might still be using the CD key but that risk also exists if you are sold a
copy of HL2 without the Steam account.

> those lines does appear to be a dependency in that quality of game (eww
> that made me cringe since I dont believe they are better. Lets say that
> level of disctribution). Any level of control only works for a short while
> and then they invent something worse. Complain to them by all means and it
> might slow them down. But the only fast response is if you can pin them to
> doing something illegal like they did with Steam.

I don't think it's been as yet ruled illegal but it's only a matter of time
before it is. Hopefully it will be soon enough. Though I don't sell my games
I totally emphasize with those that do

> Games which dont do that are easily found as shareware, or freeware, or
> open source. And some of those are great games.

Shareware games seem to be dead, sadly.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Walter Mitty <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in
news:cv7hl0$vbd$03$1@news.t-online.com:

> Gandalf Parker wrote:
>> Walter Mitty <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in
>> news:cv573k$6u8$00$1@news.t-online.com:
>>>Gandalf Parker wrote:
>>>>"Kroagnon" <kroagnon@kroagnon.com> wrote in
>>>>news:111c2kufp8emp3c@news.supernews.com:
>>>>
>
>> post of a news article. Hence the subject line of "Re: Germany makes
>> Valve change HL2 box". Its the whole basis of the thread.
>
> Yes I know. You're the guy that got involved in an argument without
> even knowing what was on the box right?

Hey if it bugs you then tighten the crosspost on your next response so
that the HL2 thread stays in the groups that apply. Its not my type of
game but apparently the "steam" part of the discussion was deemed
necessary to include it into many different gaming newsgroups.

>> Germany, which has always been in the lead of defense of the gamer
>> customer, has forced HL2 to update their boxes to make it clearer
>> about
>
> Defense? Rules about no "gore"? hardly defence.

mmmmmmm sounds like a personal thing. Thats considered very much "in
defence" of the gamers whether its agreed with or not. And there are many
other areas such as enforcing "rights to make a backup copy" and "rights
of ownership once bought" and "clarity of promise outside of a EULA".
Most of which I dont actually agree with but they are a power force in
user rights.

>> the "features" of Steam because for them a EULA you read after you
>> buy the game is a worthless control. It will surely be an important
>> event as far as all game publishers are concerned because they arent
>> going to want to have different boxes just for sale in Germany if
>> they can avoid it.
>
> A long winded way of saying that it should be clearer on all boxes?

Ahhh thats nice. Yes of course things "should be clearer" on all boxes.
Of course "should be" has little power with corporations so the fact that
german courts actually forced it onto a company is more likely to make it
into the board meetings than some memo about "should be".

>> Of course the companies are doing all of this for their own purposes.
>
> Erm yes. That why these things are there : to defend against cheats
> and pirates.

Well actually I was giving credance to the faction which cries "they are
doing it just for money" which is a rather whiney way to state such an
obvious reality.

>> equally obviously they are going to word everything biased in their
>> own best light. For us to fight things for our own best interests
>> there are two roads. Make lots of noise about things we just plain
>> dont like (weak but still worth doing). Or watch closely to jump on
>> anything which seems to actually stumble over the legal line (much
>> more powerful and immeadiate). Telling the difference between the two
>> can be hard though.
>
> Who is "us"? What is it "we" have to fight?

Well ok then. Gamers. Or maybe "the buying public". Or in this case
anyone who is angry at Steam and feels something should be done about it.

> The only thing the Germans have done is to ask for the internet
> requirement to be made clearer afaik.

Yes. Its a legal response to the fact that it wasnt clear enough under
their laws. In general their laws are much more in favor of the customer
vs the corporation than they are in the US.

So it still comes down to either being vocal about being unhappy at
Steam. Or keeping watch for real violations which can be enforced in more
immeadiate ways.

Gandalf Parker

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Kroagnon" <kroagnon@kroagnon.com> wrote in
news:111f1lch0gf4i12@news.supernews.com:

>
> "Gandalf Parker" <gandalf@most.of.my.favorite.sites> wrote in message
> news:Xns96014EBE41768gandalfparker@208.201.224.154...
>
>> those lines does appear to be a dependency in that quality of game
>> (eww that made me cringe since I dont believe they are better. Lets
>> say that level of disctribution). Any level of control only works for
>> a short while and then they invent something worse. Complain to them
>> by all means and it might slow them down. But the only fast response
>> is if you can pin them to doing something illegal like they did with
>> Steam.
>
> I don't think it's been as yet ruled illegal but it's only a matter of
> time before it is. Hopefully it will be soon enough. Though I don't
> sell my games I totally emphasize with those that do

Not that part but they did get legally slammed in Germany for not making
some things clear on the box. That type of keeping them in line is a good
thing to watch for.

>> Games which dont do that are easily found as shareware, or freeware,
>> or open source. And some of those are great games.
>
> Shareware games seem to be dead, sadly.

Not dead. But it did prove its points both pro and con. It has its
advantages as a distribution system and works well enough for one level
of game. Particularly single developers just starting off and trying to
build a following.

People who complain about tight controls are well off to be reminded that
there is a reason that methods such as shareware are not used for
shelfware-quality games. Basically, any game which has many people
working on its release has a high chance that one of those people is
going to be in charge of providing security of the game. Saying that its
unnecessary to the game is true. But saying that its unnecessary to that
LEVEL of product is wishful thinking.

Gandalf Parker

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Kroagnon wrote:
>
> Multiplayer CD key checks are totally anonymous and don't require any kind
> of registration - the server checks to see if your CD key was issued by the
> company and that's it. There's nothing to transfer - the game company
> doesn't have personally identifiable information about you like Valve does
> with Steam.

To anyone that doesn't already know : Kroagnon is talking through his
ass *again*.

Steam needs to know absolutely nothing about you other than a (typically
anonymous) email address.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 20:15:14 +0100, Walter Mitty
<mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>Kroagnon wrote:
>>
>> Multiplayer CD key checks are totally anonymous and don't require any kind
>> of registration - the server checks to see if your CD key was issued by the
>> company and that's it. There's nothing to transfer - the game company
>> doesn't have personally identifiable information about you like Valve does
>> with Steam.
>
>To anyone that doesn't already know : Kroagnon is talking through his
>ass *again*.
>
>Steam needs to know absolutely nothing about you other than a (typically
>anonymous) email address.

REQUIRING an email address to install and play a purchased PC game
is an implied invasion of customer privacy, since the email is
technically back-traceable. Any attempt at tracking such an email
address back to the current owner to enforce the HL2 EULA is an
actual invasion of customer privacy. Trying to dress a wolf in sheep's
clothing again....... ???

Ummm.... I own BF1942 (just one example of many SP/MP games with
the same properties)... no need for an email address to play SP/LAN/
MP-on-line; just the legitimate CD-Key. Can download the patches and
store on CD.. in case I need to reinstall or transfer to another
machine. Should I wish, I can pre-install multiple copies on my
various computers -- all I need is the legitimate CD-1 in the drive of
the PC that I wish to use when I start the game, either SP or MP.
What could be simpler ?? No need for any Steam- type umbilical
AT ALL. No need for EA/DICE to know anything about me. No need
for a unique on-line account. Can readily and legally trade the
game... Haven't you forgotten (very conveniently indeed) how simple
(and non-intrusive) non-Steam SP/MP games are to install/load
and run ?

Steam is SOLELY there <<<to maximise Valve's profit>>> :--- by
charging exorbitant $$ to download purchasable games and adding
paranoid layers of security and encryption to thwart hackers and
used-game-trades....thus totally pi**ing-off honest customers and
treating Valve's accumulated customer goodwill during the
HL1/CS days like inflammable tissue-paper.

Enjoy your lonely bed-of-nails.

Please say NO to Steam, or any games from developers who
license Steam ( and may call it something different... beware.....)

John Lewis

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis) wrote in
news:42179c9a.11913459@news.verizon.net:

>
> REQUIRING an email address to install and play a purchased PC game
> is an implied invasion of customer privacy, since the email is
> technically back-traceable. Any attempt at tracking such an email
> address back to the current owner to enforce the HL2 EULA is an
> actual invasion of customer privacy. Trying to dress a wolf in sheep's
> clothing again....... ???

Heehee. Your kidding right?

> Ummm.... I own BF1942 (just one example of many SP/MP games with
> the same properties)...
<snip>
> Haven't you forgotten (very conveniently indeed) how simple
> (and non-intrusive) non-Steam SP/MP games are to install/load
> and run ?

Not sure the point here. I have games that require no graphic card, no
money paid, and not even the need to install new software. And other
games that can be downloaded from anyones site then you send the money to
the guy if you decide you like the game.

> Steam is SOLELY there <<<to maximise Valve's profit>>>

And again, your kidding right? That might be true if you got Steam from
Valve. But since its included by a publisher into their games I SUSPECT
that it might have some slight benefits to someone other than Valve

> charging exorbitant $$ to download purchasable games and adding
> paranoid layers of security and encryption to thwart hackers and
> used-game-trades....thus totally pi**ing-off honest customers and
> treating Valve's accumulated customer goodwill during the
> HL1/CS days like inflammable tissue-paper.

Now thats a load of facts. Interestingly worded

Gandalf Parker

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Thusly Walter Mitty <mitticus@yahoo.co.uk> Spake Unto All:

>Steam needs to know absolutely nothing about you other than a (typically
>anonymous) email address.

However, Kroagnon hasn't got his head around the concept that you can
have anonymous email addresses yet, so brace for a tirade about
"giving up anonymity" now.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"OldDog" <OldDog@citypound.com> wrote in
news:aYTRd.15032$911.4081@fe2.texas.rr.com:

> When I bought my house, I had to show them 3 photo ids, a certified
> check, and sign a stack of papers 2 ft high. When I bought my car, I
> had to give them my name and address. When I went to get cable, I had
> to give them my name, address, phone number.... I'm not sure of the
> legal rights, but does customer privacy only apply to certain
> areas/items?

In the military they started handing us these forms to read and sign all
the time about the "privacy act" which specified what can and cant be
asked. STILL we had people all the time saying things like "you cant ask
for my address can you?" or "how come my phone number appears on that
list?".

Gandalf Parker

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

<snip>
> game... Haven't you forgotten (very conveniently indeed) how simple
> (and non-intrusive) non-Steam SP/MP games are to install/load
> and run ?
>
> Steam is SOLELY there <<<to maximise Valve's profit>>> :--- by
> charging exorbitant $$ to download purchasable games and adding
> paranoid layers of security and encryption to thwart hackers and
> used-game-trades....thus totally pi**ing-off honest customers and
> treating Valve's accumulated customer goodwill during the
> HL1/CS days like inflammable tissue-paper.
>
> Enjoy your lonely bed-of-nails.
>
> Please say NO to Steam, or any games from developers who
> license Steam ( and may call it something different... beware.....)
>
> John Lewis
>
I agree with Mr. Lewis' viewpoints. His is the way I see the situation also.
Again, I have been quiet for a long time about this issue while watching all
of the arguments, pro and con. As a legitimate consumer, Steam is intrusive
and wrong.
The German government's response to the mislabeling is the proper course of
action, and I applaud it.
Regards,
John A. Mason

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Gandalf Parker" <gandalf@most.of.my.favorite.sites> wrote in message
news:Xns9603455EC1EBDgandalfparker@208.201.224.154...
> "OldDog" <OldDog@citypound.com> wrote in
> news:aYTRd.15032$911.4081@fe2.texas.rr.com:
>
> > When I bought my house, I had to show them 3 photo ids, a certified
> > check, and sign a stack of papers 2 ft high. When I bought my car, I
> > had to give them my name and address. When I went to get cable, I had
> > to give them my name, address, phone number.... I'm not sure of the
> > legal rights, but does customer privacy only apply to certain
> > areas/items?
>
> In the military they started handing us these forms to read and sign all
> the time about the "privacy act" which specified what can and cant be
> asked. STILL we had people all the time saying things like "you cant ask
> for my address can you?" or "how come my phone number appears on that
> list?".
>
> Gandalf Parker

All I remember when I was in is that they told me, "Young Pup, you have no
privacy!" 😉