GOG Launches New Guaranteed Refund Policy

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

Isalan:
-snip

Knight Captain Kerr:
-snipsnip

Amaror:
-snippety

Rob Robson:
-snip again

Clowndoe:
-snip

Thanks everyone, I think I'll get Dungeon Keeper for now but I'll keep the others in mind for future splurging.

Great idea, I've been hoping for this for a long time.

Now all they have to do is remove the "and our support cannot fix the problem" bullshit and I'll be happy.

Because sometimes you are just not in the mood for fucking around and just want your money back.

RicoADF:
Same thing in Australia, if a product doesn't work out of the box then we are entitled to a full refund regardless of what the shoddy EULA says. Funny thing is a few games I've purchased have actually had a sticker on the back saying to ignore the EULA as Australian law overrides it. Heck even the EULA's now seem to recognise this as when I read the PS4's and got to the arbitration part it said that it was only American users that were affected, apparently the rest of the world says no to those clauses.

The EU law goes further than just legally required warranty (which has a minimum term of 2 years here). The 2-week refund right is for any and all online/mail/phone purchases, with no reasons given. Basically, if someone sells you something that you can't immediately touch and take home, you've got the right to simply change your mind (as long as you do it within the first two weeks). It's simply considered a part of fair business practices, and if sellers don't like that, they're free to open a real shop and stop selling products online.
And yeah, the arbitration clauses are usually hilarious. So some legal beagle in some gaming company thinks he can add a clause to a EULA that will tell a foreign court whether or not they have jurisdiction over complaints filed by their own citizens? I wish you good luck with that.
(Reminds me of an attempted court case in germany, in the early days of piracy-trolling. Some joker brought a lawsuit against anonymous in a couple thousand cases in front of the supreme court, just listing a bunch IP addresses, and expecting the court to do all the ground work for him. The reply basically translated to: "Cut that shit out, and if you ever waste our time like that again we'll fine the living hell out of your Law Firm"

The big problem with the quite adequate consumer protection laws in the EU is that companies like Valve get away with breaking them at will, because people would have to sue them. And sue them for every instance, there is no provision that punishments get harsher if a company violated the same law a couple hundred times already. So it's a basic numbers game. Compare the profit for every time they break the law with the percentage of people that actually sue (and the cost of that) and that gives the cost/benefit ratio of breaking the law again. Unfortunately, it's usually very profitable to keep breaking the law and absorbing the (small) fines for the very low percentage of lawsuits that actually happen. (And it's not just media companies doing this)

McKitten:
The EU law goes further than just legally required warranty (which has a minimum term of 2 years here). The 2-week refund right is for any and all online/mail/phone purchases, with no reasons given. Basically, if someone sells you something that you can't immediately touch and take home, you've got the right to simply change your mind (as long as you do it within the first two weeks). It's simply considered a part of fair business practices, and if sellers don't like that, they're free to open a real shop and stop selling products online.
And yeah, the arbitration clauses are usually hilarious. So some legal beagle in some gaming company thinks he can add a clause to a EULA that will tell a foreign court whether or not they have jurisdiction over complaints filed by their own citizens? I wish you good luck with that.
(Reminds me of an attempted court case in germany, in the early days of piracy-trolling. Some joker brought a lawsuit against anonymous in a couple thousand cases in front of the supreme court, just listing a bunch IP addresses, and expecting the court to do all the ground work for him. The reply basically translated to: "Cut that shit out, and if you ever waste our time like that again we'll fine the living hell out of your Law Firm"

The big problem with the quite adequate consumer protection laws in the EU is that companies like Valve get away with breaking them at will, because people would have to sue them. And sue them for every instance, there is no provision that punishments get harsher if a company violated the same law a couple hundred times already. So it's a basic numbers game. Compare the profit for every time they break the law with the percentage of people that actually sue (and the cost of that) and that gives the cost/benefit ratio of breaking the law again. Unfortunately, it's usually very profitable to keep breaking the law and absorbing the (small) fines for the very low percentage of lawsuits that actually happen. (And it's not just media companies doing this)

Over here the law doesn't give a time limit, rather it says that the item must not fail/be faulty within a reasonable expected time frame. So in other words if a $2 kids toy dies a year from purchase it's not covered but a $20000 new car would be expected to work for 5 years without major fault (normal wear and tear/damage caused by driver obviously exempted).

I mostly get my games on Steam, but I should probably throw a bit more love GOG's way. I've had my eye on Temple of Elemental Evil and will definitely get Witcher 3 on GOG.

RicoADF:
Over here the law doesn't give a time limit, rather it says that the item must not fail/be faulty within a reasonable expected time frame. So in other words if a $2 kids toy dies a year from purchase it's not covered but a $20000 new car would be expected to work for 5 years without major fault (normal wear and tear/damage caused by driver obviously exempted).

There are two different types of warranty here, what the 2-year limit says (which applies to consumer items above a certain cost. Other categories like cars or houses have their own laws regulating sales) is when they switch over. Within the first 2 years the warranty that applies means the seller is automatically responsible for any failure unless they can prove it was the customers fault that the item broke. After 2 years, the seller is still liable to provide replacement or refund, however only if the customer can prove that item broke due to a factory fault. (normal wear&tear of short-lived items doesn't count) Of course, in practice that means warranty ends after 2 years, (unless the seller/manufacturer voluntarily offers more. More expensive items usually come with more than 2 years, it's good marketing) you're hardly going to go to the effort to prove that your toaster broke due to a factory fault 3 years after purchase.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.