I've refunded games for being made in 2016 and not DPI scaling on 4k properly. Wonder if this guy did something ridiculous and then tried to refund it, it seems like Valve's reasons are conveniently edited out in this very one-sided post.
I really don't understand what seems to be an intentional disregard for Australians from Valve, in what should be a very clear allegiance in like-minded markets. Perhaps it's simply legalese gone wrong, but I really hope they don't burn bridges in their attempt to avoid the fine in court. I have been a very consistent Steam customer, and it is a truly second to none platform, so to see it go in this circumstance would be a real shame.
> (1) the 2011-2013 refund policy (1 January 2011 to April 2013) (Court Book p 553);
> (2) the 2013-2014 refund policy (April 2013 to 23 July 2014) (Court Book p 555); and
> (3) the 2014-2015 refund policy (24 July 2014 to 18 March 2015) (Court Book p 349).
There were also four witnesses, who contested that Valve did not abide by the Consumer Law regulations.
Anecdata is hardly appropriate as counter-evidence when a judicial hearing has been made. Evidence from both parties was presented, and considered.
The finding was in the favour of those consumers who Valve denied refunds to.
What exactly did they violate? It seems against common logic if they're within the bounds their own website offers here.
They violated Consumer Law.
They aren't bound by the website, but by that which they provide.
They:
* Use AUD prices.
* Accept AU billing addresses.
* Have hardware in Australia
Thus, they sell and operate within Australia, and are bound by the rules that every company in Australia are bound by.
Thinking they can get away with things that the likes of Microsoft and Apple can't, seems rather shortsighted.
Technically, they don't use AUD prices. Everything is in USD, but the prices are regional, so they have specific prices for Australian customers, but charge them in USD.
It's an open question as to whether that is done to avoid currency risk, or to mask the fact that they are, in fact, doing business in Australia.
In Australia "within the bounds of your own website" doesn't hold water. Australian Consumer Law trumps a site's TOS.
An example of where this might have come into play in a reasonable circumstance: No Man's Sky, where Steam had to make an exception to their usual refund policy.
A product being labelled as Early Access doesn't mean crap. It's still being sold, and purchased. So the consumer still has their purchasing rights.
And Consumer Law will always trump anything Steam forces you to sign.
It's important to keep a good balance between consumer protection and productive economy. I think the law is in the wrong here, not Valve in this case. As someone else has pointed out though, this may have been prior to Steam's refund policy being added.
https://help.ea.com/en-us/help/account/returns-and-cancellat...
* Within 24 hours after first launching the game
* Within 7 days from date of purchase
* (If pre-ordered) Within 7 days of game release date
Valve gives to a little more calendar time, but Origin has no play time limit as far as I can tell.
That also doesn't seem to fit within Consumer Law... We'll see how long it takes for this one to come up.