The High Court of Paris Rules Steam's Game Reselling Ban is Illegal

Note: Linked article is in French.

Steam's Valve publisher's deal was attacked by UFC Que Choisir.

For Valve, it would only apply to tangible games, not to online licenses.

Admittedly, in the Intellectual Property Code, its transposition refers to a " material copy ", but this provision must be interpreted in the light of these superior rules: the Member States do not have the power to provide for a rule of exhaustion other than that of community exhaustion "Explains the judgment. Problem, Valve prohibits the resale of the account being careful to store in this drawer an" inextricable " tote of information: personal data, data on the player's activity, data on digital purchases, including virtual objects, in addition to a slew of services.

The consequences of such a decision are equivalent to a legal earthquake since it can be applied to any download platform that prohibits this type of operation! Note in passing that the courts considered that these licenses were purchased, not provided by subscription: " Finally, the" subscription "to the" subscription "(of a game) made by the user, which is mentioned in the conclusions of the company VALVE is actually a purchase, the game being made available to said user for an unlimited period.

Same fate for the clauses 1 and 4, which released too generously Valve of its part of responsibility in the use of the passwords and the logins, in particular.

Valve still allowed itself the freedom to interrupt one of these markets, while at the same time declining any responsibility.

In the eyes of the UFC, Valve " requires the user to install the beta software only on a system on which the malfunction of the software would cause no damage.

Valve, electronic money and the obligation of repayment The Steam purse also takes for his rank.

The TGI considers that Valve is here simply issuing electronic money.

An analysis shared by the UFC-Que Choisir, challenged by Valve.

In short, an implicit referral but far too inaccessible to the " average user " and even to the " average lawyer ", claw the TGI. Another annoyance, this time with the heart of the RGPD and the modified CNIL law: installed in the United States, Valve Corporation requires the French player to bring its claims relating to Privacy Shield first before the publisher and then in case of failure , from " a third party supplier " chosen by him.

30 000 euros in damage Just as discarded, the clause that granted Valve an assignment of copyrights, in advance and for the future, of all future creations on its platform.

Finally, the TGI ordered Valve to publish a link pointing to the entire judgment on the home page of steampowered.com, its applications on tablets and mobiles, over a period of three months.

Valve is finally sentenced to 20,000 euros in damages for the damage caused to the collective interest of consumers.

Neither Me Alexa ndre Rudoni, lawyer of Valve Corporation, nor Me Ronan Hardouin, lawyer of UFC-Que Choisir, wanted to answer our questions.