You have never owned the game, the only have ever owned the medium.
Do you own your PC? Do you have decent storage? DL your games to your hard drive.
It's the same thing. Your PC hard drive is your medium. Re selling was always a grey area, due to you only having a limited license on the use of the data on the medium.
Sure, you have every right to sell the CD/ DVD/ whatever and it's packaging, I guess, but you never owned that game.
In France, though, they do own that game. That is a large part of what this lawsuit is about. The lawsuit is also saying that French consumers own their accounts and the funds in it. We may be used to the crazy bs of not actually owning anything in the US, but I like to hope that eventually our laws will also catch up with the digital age.
I wish them luck then, honestly, because Steam should operate 100% under the same laws as data ownership in general in that region.
How does France handle piracy then in general? I mean, if you own the data 100% and all rights to it there, why is France not the hub of piracy as it's citizens sell or share their fully owned digital property?
I mean, I come from the U.K. and I accepted long ago that I didn't own the song on that vinyl LP, I just owned the disc itself. This is why I could never legally copy and sell it on. I didn't know it was so different over the Channel.
So where is the limiting principle? Are you saying that French laws are irrelevant to mmorpg.com because they're not selling things to consumers?
mmorpg.com has to follow French laws because they choose to operate there. They let French people access their site and they let French people make accounts.
If for example, mmorpg.com started to collect personal data through cookies without consent, they would violate EU privacy laws, and the EU would block them in Europe if they didn't follow the laws.
Facebook is a good example, it can't be accessed in Belgium anymore if you don't have an account. Because Facebook is violating Belgian law on privacy. they're not allowed to track non-Facebook users, so Facebook blocked the site, if they didn't, Belgian authorities would have.
Now let's suppose that a site does sell
things. Do all sites in the world that sell anything have to comply
with all laws in the world because someone from anywhere in the world
could conceivably buy something from the site?
That's right, if you enter foreign markets, you need to follow the rules
of those markets. If you sell things to French customers, you need to
read up on French consumer laws or you could get in trouble.
Quizzical said: A French person in France who goes online to a French web site can still expect to be protected by French laws. But what if he goes to an American web site? He's still sitting in France, but he has digitally left France in favor of an American web site.
He hasn't left France. He resides within the EU single digital market, and he is granted privacy rights and consumer rights within that market.
Foreign websites are required to follow those regulations if they want to do business in that market.
Except that he's now accessing an American web site in the United States that never asked to have anything to do with France. The logical consequence of that claim is that all rules by all governments apply universally to the entire Internet--and that would kill the Internet entirely. If that's not the intended outcome, then what limiting principle is there?
Well, there are American sites that sell to US consumers, and those sites don't need to worry about the EU single digital market, or EU consumer rights, because they don't sell to Europeans.
But if your site sells to Europeans, you are now entering the EU marketplace, and you are required to follow EU and local laws if you want to do business there and sell thing.
So where is the limiting principle? Are you saying that French laws are irrelevant to mmorpg.com because they're not selling things to consumers?
Now let's suppose that a site does sell things. Do all sites in the world that sell anything have to comply with all laws in the world because someone from anywhere in the world could conceivably buy something from the site? That would basically be a blanket ban on Internet commerce. Remember that Valve doesn't have to ship goods to a mailing address; we're talking about purely digital things. If banning all Internet commerce is not the intended outcome, then what limiting principle is there?
I think you understand completely at this point. Look at the repeated examples of Facebook. They are being sued around the world because they are serving customers around the world. They are having to change their policy to address each country.
If you are knowingly serving French customers, expect to follow French consumer protection laws.
You are not thinking your example through - if there is an online site that does not follow the laws, they simply cannot sell in that country. Simple as that. If the consumers deceive the site into thinking they are from a different country, that is the consumers problem. It is not complicated. Your imagining it as a ban on internet commerce is absurd. This is how it already works, and you can see it works just fine. When a company gets in trouble with the law in a country, they pay the fines and change their policy to keep in business.
If you are wondering what happens when a company tries to get by just ignoring the lawsuit, there are not many examples, but the most well known would be MegaUpload. The country pursuing the legal action gets help from the countries that actually have assets to be seized. As we saw (even though the case may be questionable, it is a good example) assets were immediately seized by governments around the world working with the US. You can't shit on the laws of a country and expect the rest of the world to ignore it. You have to respect the laws of each place you do business with.
So is your argument basically, if a customer says, "I'm in France. Do you still want to sell to me?" (This could be implicit, for example, via a credit card address.) And if Valve says yes, then the transaction is bound by French law. And if someone is in France and buys from an American site without making it clear that they're in France, then French law is irrelevant to the transaction? That would make sense, but people have been making far stronger claims than that.
Megaupload and Facebook are whole different cans of worms. With Megaupload, the whole problem was that the company was trying to make money basically off of pirated stuff, so long as they could look the other way and say that they didn't know exactly which things were pirated. That being illegal isn't peculiar to the laws of one or a few countries.
Meanwhile, the entire premise of Facebook is that people don't care about their privacy at all, and will let you take their personal information and sell it to whoever you want in exchange for some kinda cool features that let them communicate with friends. Someone who uses Facebook and then gets upset that Facebook doesn't respect their privacy is an idiot. Even so, idiots have legal rights, too, and people who used Facebook early before they got a reputation for ignoring privacy have a more legitimate complaint.
So where is the limiting principle? Are you saying that French laws are irrelevant to mmorpg.com because they're not selling things to consumers?
Now let's suppose that a site does sell things. Do all sites in the world that sell anything have to comply with all laws in the world because someone from anywhere in the world could conceivably buy something from the site? That would basically be a blanket ban on Internet commerce. Remember that Valve doesn't have to ship goods to a mailing address; we're talking about purely digital things. If banning all Internet commerce is not the intended outcome, then what limiting principle is there?
Actually if mmorpg were selling things they would require anyone trying to buy stuff at mmorpg.com to provide a billing address to make sure they are complying with state laws on sales tax. If they can collect sales taxes from someone in Maine then they can also not sell to anyone who has an EU billing address.
No one is expecting a 100% verified foolproof addressing system, if people want to lie about where they live they can, but they can't expect to lie about where they live and still enjoy all their local consumer protection laws.
So where is the limiting principle? Are you saying that French laws are irrelevant to mmorpg.com because they're not selling things to consumers?
mmorpg.com has to follow French laws because they let French people access their site and they let French people make accounts.
If for example, mmorpg.com started to collect personal data through cookies without consent, they would violate EU privacy laws, and the EU would block them in Europe if they didn't follow the laws.
Facebook is a good example, it can't be accessed in Belgium anymore if you don't have an account. Because Facebook is violating Belgian law on privacy. they're not allowed to track non-Facebook users, so Facebook blocked the site, if they didn't, Belgian authorities would have.
If this site must follow French laws in spite of not selling anything and not knowing where people are from, then you're back in the situation of all sites being forced to follow all laws worldwide. And that logically leads to the end of the Internet.
Or is your argument that they don't really have to follow French laws, but if they don't, then the government of France could try to block people in France from accessing the site?
If this site must follow French laws in spite of not selling anything and not knowing where people are from, then you're back in the situation of all sites being forced to follow all laws worldwide. And that logically leads to the end of the Internet.
If you have a simple homepage with information, or a blog, you're not going to get into trouble.
But the moment you start collecting private data of Europeans or you commercialize your site to Europeans, you'll need to start reading up on laws pertaining to that region , EU citizens are protected under several laws that don't have an immediate counterpart in the US.
Facebook collects private information of people through cookies, even from people who aren't even a member of Facebook (through their ad network), and they violate privacy laws in Europe, which is why the site is no longer accessible in Belgium unless you have an account.
So is your argument basically, if a customer says, "I'm in France. Do you still want to sell to me?" (This could be implicit, for example, via a credit card address.) And if Valve says yes, then the transaction is bound by French law. And if someone is in France and buys from an American site without making it clear that they're in France, then French law is irrelevant to the transaction? That would make sense, but people have been making far stronger claims than that.
Megaupload and Facebook are whole different cans of worms. With Megaupload, the whole problem was that the company was trying to make money basically off of pirated stuff, so long as they could look the other way and say that they didn't know exactly which things were pirated. That being illegal isn't peculiar to the laws of one or a few countries.
Meanwhile, the entire premise of Facebook is that people don't care about their privacy at all, and will let you take their personal information and sell it to whoever you want in exchange for some kinda cool features that let them communicate with friends. Someone who uses Facebook and then gets upset that Facebook doesn't respect their privacy is an idiot. Even so, idiots have legal rights, too, and people who used Facebook early before they got a reputation for ignoring privacy have a more legitimate complaint.
If someone used a VPN and a credit card from a different country to purchase from any site, I cannot see how they could ever be protected under consumer protection laws. It is readily apparent based on the IP address and payment where the customer is coming from unless the customer is deliberately deceiving the business. It is all too easy (and as far as I know quite standard) to limit sales to certain countries. I have used paypal and a VPN to purchase an international copy of a game before, and I would really be SOL if anything went wrong with it. I actually still haven't bothered to play it and probably never will get around to it.
As for the examples, I believe the megaupload stuff was only illegal in the US. My understanding is that the MPAA was the driving force behind the entire thing.
I agree with you entirely about expecting privacy from Facebook being absurd in the US, but in these other countries their privacy is protected, and it makes sense for them to assume it is still protected.
Jumping through the legal hoops of every country they want to serve is certainly difficult for international companies, but it is so profitable that it is worth the trouble.
Sigh. Its simple. If they seel in EU they are under EU law for all those transactions. Yes, they have to abide by local laws. If they did not, why would they charge local taxes etc.? They would sell a hell of a lot more in Denmark if we did not have to pay the 25% danish sales tax an each transaction.
Geometry Dash
3.19 EUR
Subtotal:
3.19 EUR
Tax:
0.80 EUR
Total:
3.99 EUR
I mean, seriously, if they could ignore local law, they would as they would sell more. They can't. End of story. Sorry DMKano.
Someone who uses Facebook and then gets upset that Facebook doesn't respect their privacy is an idiot. Even so, idiots have legal rights, too, and people who used Facebook early before they got a reputation for ignoring privacy have a more legitimate complaint.
The reason Facebook lost their case in Belgium (and probably soon other regions) is because Facebook was tracking users who never signed up to Facebook.
"A Belgian court told Facebook on Monday (9 November) it should stop
tracking Belgians who aren't a member of the social networking site, or
pay a daily penalty of €250,000 for as long as the practice continues.
The ruling comes after Belgium's privacy watchdog sued Facebook, for
placing small files called cookies on people's computers, even if they
had not given permission."
So where is the limiting principle? Are you saying that French laws are irrelevant to mmorpg.com because they're not selling things to consumers?
Now let's suppose that a site does sell things. Do all sites in the world that sell anything have to comply with all laws in the world because someone from anywhere in the world could conceivably buy something from the site? That would basically be a blanket ban on Internet commerce. Remember that Valve doesn't have to ship goods to a mailing address; we're talking about purely digital things. If banning all Internet commerce is not the intended outcome, then what limiting principle is there?
Actually if mmorpg were selling things they would require anyone trying to buy stuff at mmorpg.com to provide a billing address to make sure they are complying with state laws on sales tax. If they can collect sales taxes from someone in Maine then they can also not sell to anyone who has an EU billing address.
No one is expecting a 100% verified foolproof addressing system, if people want to lie about where they live they can, but they can't expect to lie about where they live and still enjoy all their local consumer protection laws.
Actually, in the United States, states can only collect sales tax on Internet transactions if the company has a physical presence in the state. That means that a mom and pop shop can sell stuff online throughout the United States while only needing to be aware of the sales tax laws where they live. It would be basically impossible for such a site to exist if they had to learn the fine details of ten thousand separate sales tax jurisdictions (and yes, it really is right around there) just for the United States alone. That's precisely why Amazon has lobbied to change federal law to allow states to collect sales tax on everything: to drive smaller competitors out of business because they can't handle the complex sales tax laws.
Someone who uses Facebook and then gets upset that Facebook doesn't respect their privacy is an idiot. Even so, idiots have legal rights, too, and people who used Facebook early before they got a reputation for ignoring privacy have a more legitimate complaint.
The reason Facebook lost their case in Belgium (and probably soon other regions) is because Facebook was tracking users who never signed up to Facebook.
"A Belgian court told Facebook on Monday (9 November) it should stop
tracking Belgians who aren't a member of the social networking site, or
pay a daily penalty of €250,000 for as long as the practice continues.
The ruling comes after Belgium's privacy watchdog sued Facebook, for
placing small files called cookies on people's computers, even if they
had not given permission."
They ended up not allowing Belgians to access the site without being logged in. I assume they also do not track anybody that clicks a facebook link but is not logged in.
They are really really big fans of tracking people, they know my name and email address despite me never having made an account, I assume just from people searching for me.
They are really really big fans of tracking people, they know my name and email address despite me never having made an account, I assume just from people searching for me.
Large tech companies know more than people think. They use cookies and identify IP addresses and can follow you through ads from site to site.
Your screen resolution, add-ons, browser number, last update, reveals who you are. Lots of discussion now how to make your PC no longer unique and how to stop letting sites know which add-ons you use. Using No-Script on Frefox brings down your uniqueness, because it's javascript calls checking which add-ones / resolution / browser version you use. It helps you hide.
Here is a test to see how unique you are: https://panopticlick.eff.org/results?&dnt=11&t=11 The more unique you are, the more likely they know who you are and the easier it is to track you. The more you block ads / javascript, the less unique you become, and the harder it is to track you.
They are really really big fans of tracking people, they know my name and email address despite me never having made an account, I assume just from people searching for me.
Large tech companies know more than people think. They use cookies and identify IP addresses and can follow you through ads from site to site.
Your screen resolution, add-ons, browser number, last update, reveals who you are. Lots of discussion now how to make your PC no longer unique and how to stop letting sites know which add-ons you use. Using No-Script on Frefox brings down your uniqueness, because it's javascript calls checking which add-ones / resolution / browser version you use. It helps you hide.
My understanding is that Facebook not only tracks this on their own site, but on every site that has a "like" button. Frustrating.
They are really really big fans of tracking people, they know my name and email address despite me never having made an account, I assume just from people searching for me.
Large tech companies know more than people think. They use cookies and identify IP addresses and can follow you through ads from site to site.
Your screen resolution, add-ons, browser number, last update, reveals who you are. Lots of discussion now how to make your PC no longer unique and how to stop letting sites know which add-ons you use. Using No-Script on Frefox brings down your uniqueness, because it's javascript calls checking which add-ones / resolution / browser version you use. It helps you hide.
My understanding is that Facebook not only tracks this on their own site, but on every site that has a "like" button. Frustrating.
That's right, or ads, Facebook has an ad network similar to Google. That's why the Belgian judge ruled against Facebook, enough evidence was brought forward to show that Facebook is capable of tracking non-Facebook users.
I dont know about reselling digital games, but i do believe if i purchase a game i own it to the fullest. The only games where that doesn't apply is mmos because i understand im paying for a license to play on the company's servers.
That is why i dont buy online only games unless they are specifically mmorpgs. And i stopped buying steam games months ago before my library size gets out of hand.
Outside of mmorpgs, if im going to buy a game and i dont own it even after the service stops, i dont buy it.
So where is the limiting principle? Are you saying that French laws are irrelevant to mmorpg.com because they're not selling things to consumers?
Now let's suppose that a site does sell things. Do all sites in the world that sell anything have to comply with all laws in the world because someone from anywhere in the world could conceivably buy something from the site? That would basically be a blanket ban on Internet commerce. Remember that Valve doesn't have to ship goods to a mailing address; we're talking about purely digital things. If banning all Internet commerce is not the intended outcome, then what limiting principle is there?
Actually if mmorpg were selling things they would require anyone trying to buy stuff at mmorpg.com to provide a billing address to make sure they are complying with state laws on sales tax. If they can collect sales taxes from someone in Maine then they can also not sell to anyone who has an EU billing address.
No one is expecting a 100% verified foolproof addressing system, if people want to lie about where they live they can, but they can't expect to lie about where they live and still enjoy all their local consumer protection laws.
Actually, in the United States, states can only collect sales tax on Internet transactions if the company has a physical presence in the state. That means that a mom and pop shop can sell stuff online throughout the United States while only needing to be aware of the sales tax laws where they live. It would be basically impossible for such a site to exist if they had to learn the fine details of ten thousand separate sales tax jurisdictions (and yes, it really is right around there) just for the United States alone. That's precisely why Amazon has lobbied to change federal law to allow states to collect sales tax on everything: to drive smaller competitors out of business because they can't handle the complex sales tax laws.
You're right, I take that back now that I look closer. While some states are trying to pass laws to tax online purchases even if the business doesn't have a physical presence in the state (aimed almost directly at Amazon) it appears that they haven't actually been very successful.
Quizzical said: A French person in France who goes online to a French web site can still expect to be protected by French laws. But what if he goes to an American web site? He's still sitting in France, but he has digitally left France in favor of an American web site.
He hasn't left France. He resides within the EU single digital market, and he is granted privacy rights and consumer rights within that market.
Foreign websites are required to follow those regulations if they want to do business in that market.
Except that he's now accessing an American web site in the United States that never asked to have anything to do with France. The logical consequence of that claim is that all rules by all governments apply universally to the entire Internet--and that would kill the Internet entirely. If that's not the intended outcome, then what limiting principle is there?
Uhm... NOPE. Your theory works both ways. Where the French buys a game from a US store (which has residence in Luxembourg as well), Steam enters a contract with French person when it's selling the game (or licensing the game for the US bunch ).
Only because there are 2 parties in an international agreement the laws of both parties should be applied (international law 101). For Steam it's the US (EU actually for us because they actually ARE a EU body) law concerning sales regulations and for the French customer the laws concerning customer protection and tax.
If euros don't want their data collected then they shouldn't visit sites outside of their borders. No one outside of the euro borders cares. The worst thing that can happen to this site is the EU or France blocks the site.
...then why is the US so eager to lure us in the TIPP and other trade/copyright agreements..?
If euros don't want their data collected then they shouldn't visit sites outside of their borders. No one outside of the euro borders cares. The worst thing that can happen to this site is the EU or France blocks the site.
...then why is the US so eager to lure us in the TIPP and other trade/copyright agreements..?
probably to sell us their genetically modified 3 eyed fish
"Aucune décision de justice n’interdit la revente sur le marché de l’occasion de jeux achetés en ligne et que le juge européen a même posé explicitement le principe de la possible revente de logiciels, constituent une partie intégrante d’un jeu vidéo. "
I will translate:
No judicial decision forbids the reselling of games bought online, the principle of reselling games has been explicitly denoted as an integral part of a video game by a European judge.
What if it's an MMO/MMORPG - and you can't "buy" the game?
hmm?
I mean if you have a WoW account - that's all you have - you don't own WoW "the game" - you only have access to play on the server.
How can you resell something you don't own?
You own the account, like I said in the OP, this is not just about the games, it is about the accounts, and assets, too.
Under the law, you are allowed to sell your account.
What if the account and all the assets reside on a server that is outside the country, hmm?
It's not so cut and dry.
Again consider it's a Chinese game, on Chinese servers from a private chinese game company that has no assets outside China - no outside country has any right to any assets on those servers period.
Would that private Chinese company sell the game to me and let me play on their Servers? If they do sell it to me, then I am their customer.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Thats not up to European law thats up to the rights holder for the IP of the game. Its in their terms of service of use that you do not own the game nor any of the Intellectual properties or assets of the game you are simply given the right to use them. The IP holder holds full rights to deny your usage as well.
What do you think defines the extend and limits of IP rights within Europe a) Magical fairies, or b) European laws?
Kind of ironic that have them as seperate things, thing have to remember is that its very hard to impose European laws outside of Europe, hence the court case i guess, besides, in 2016 UK will probably leave the EU, and at that point EU laws will have even less influence than ever.
The UK will only leave the eu if stupid uneducated idiots vote for it. Considering how many little middle class towns they are in England , I wouldn't be surprised. If we vote to leave the uk, I bet that Scotland will have another referendum and probably Wales.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
If the cost (and risk) of doing business internationally on the internet becomes too high, every country will have its own set of "internet retailers", which will of course lead to much higher prices for everything, and a much smaller selection of goods offered.
But it's the price of "safety". Your consumer rights will be guaranteed for the handful of items you can affordably buy online in your own country. Buying anything outside your own country will probably be illegal.
Regulation can cut both ways. It can regulate what companies do on the internet, but it's a small step to extend that to what YOU are allowed to do on the internet. Just ask the Chinese how that works out for them...
There are many past examples of US-based MMO's using third-party "partners" to run their game services in the EU. Every single one of those examples showed that the EU players ended-up paying higher prices and often receiving inferior customer service. It's inevitable, the more links in the supply chain, the higher the eventual selling price will be.
QFT. Assuming that this french group manage to pass this law into practice, then it could mean that companies with an online presence are less likely to have a physical presence in countries like France, or support localisations, it would also likely mean that people in France incur additional costs for using online services not also based in France or have to agree to terms that include waiving their right to specific things covered by those laws, you could also get situations like this occurring;
GTA VI NA/USA 50$ UK £40 EU €150
I use the 3 values as its highly unlikely that the UK will be a member of the EU within the next year. As for the increased costs of games, companies rely on individual sales of games to generate revenue, if people in one area can resell games then the initial purchase cost will probably be used to offset future game sales losses. It will probably also mean that games will have on disc DRM and won't run unless the game disc is physically present not to mention, the games would also have to have a form of region locking. It would mean a huge backwards step for the games industry as a whole.
Which major company uses a third party for their mmo in Europe? Turbine used to? Anyone else? Also the main reason this is happening is because mmo companies are tiny and can't cope. Outside of bio ware, blizzard and Bethesda, it seems all other mmo companies are tiny.
dont worry steam is already charging their Euro customers insane prices well above retail prices. I think aaa games cost 60 Euros on steam in Europe which is a joke.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Comments
I wish them luck then, honestly, because Steam should operate 100% under the same laws as data ownership in general in that region.
How does France handle piracy then in general? I mean, if you own the data 100% and all rights to it there, why is France not the hub of piracy as it's citizens sell or share their fully owned digital property?
I mean, I come from the U.K. and I accepted long ago that I didn't own the song on that vinyl LP, I just owned the disc itself. This is why I could never legally copy and sell it on. I didn't know it was so different over the Channel.
If for example, mmorpg.com started to collect personal data through cookies without consent, they would violate EU privacy laws, and the EU would block them in Europe if they didn't follow the laws.
Facebook is a good example, it can't be accessed in Belgium anymore if you don't have an account. Because Facebook is violating Belgian law on privacy. they're not allowed to track non-Facebook users, so Facebook blocked the site, if they didn't, Belgian authorities would have.
https://euobserver.com/digital/131029
That's right, if you enter foreign markets, you need to follow the rules of those markets. If you sell things to French customers, you need to read up on French consumer laws or you could get in trouble.
Megaupload and Facebook are whole different cans of worms. With Megaupload, the whole problem was that the company was trying to make money basically off of pirated stuff, so long as they could look the other way and say that they didn't know exactly which things were pirated. That being illegal isn't peculiar to the laws of one or a few countries.
Meanwhile, the entire premise of Facebook is that people don't care about their privacy at all, and will let you take their personal information and sell it to whoever you want in exchange for some kinda cool features that let them communicate with friends. Someone who uses Facebook and then gets upset that Facebook doesn't respect their privacy is an idiot. Even so, idiots have legal rights, too, and people who used Facebook early before they got a reputation for ignoring privacy have a more legitimate complaint.
No one is expecting a 100% verified foolproof addressing system, if people want to lie about where they live they can, but they can't expect to lie about where they live and still enjoy all their local consumer protection laws.
Or is your argument that they don't really have to follow French laws, but if they don't, then the government of France could try to block people in France from accessing the site?
But the moment you start collecting private data of Europeans or you commercialize your site to Europeans, you'll need to start reading up on laws pertaining to that region , EU citizens are protected under several laws that don't have an immediate counterpart in the US.
Facebook collects private information of people through cookies, even from people who aren't even a member of Facebook (through their ad network), and they violate privacy laws in Europe, which is why the site is no longer accessible in Belgium unless you have an account.
As for the examples, I believe the megaupload stuff was only illegal in the US. My understanding is that the MPAA was the driving force behind the entire thing.
I agree with you entirely about expecting privacy from Facebook being absurd in the US, but in these other countries their privacy is protected, and it makes sense for them to assume it is still protected.
Jumping through the legal hoops of every country they want to serve is certainly difficult for international companies, but it is so profitable that it is worth the trouble.
I mean, seriously, if they could ignore local law, they would as they would sell more. They can't. End of story. Sorry DMKano.
"A Belgian court told Facebook on Monday (9 November) it should stop tracking Belgians who aren't a member of the social networking site, or pay a daily penalty of €250,000 for as long as the practice continues.
The ruling comes after Belgium's privacy watchdog sued Facebook, for placing small files called cookies on people's computers, even if they had not given permission."
https://euobserver.com/digital/131029
They are really really big fans of tracking people, they know my name and email address despite me never having made an account, I assume just from people searching for me.
Even if you block cookies and change IP address, they can still follow you through Digital Fingerprinting. https://wiki.mozilla.org/Fingerprinting
Your screen resolution, add-ons, browser number, last update, reveals who you are. Lots of discussion now how to make your PC no longer unique and how to stop letting sites know which add-ons you use. Using No-Script on Frefox brings down your uniqueness, because it's javascript calls checking which add-ones / resolution / browser version you use. It helps you hide.
Here is a test to see how unique you are: https://panopticlick.eff.org/results?&dnt=11&t=11
The more unique you are, the more likely they know who you are and the easier it is to track you. The more you block ads / javascript, the less unique you become, and the harder it is to track you.
That's how I feel in short.
That is why i dont buy online only games unless they are specifically mmorpgs. And i stopped buying steam games months ago before my library size gets out of hand.
Outside of mmorpgs, if im going to buy a game and i dont own it even after the service stops, i dont buy it.
Long live offline games, and discs too :pleased:
Only because there are 2 parties in an international agreement the laws of both parties should be applied (international law 101). For Steam it's the US (EU actually for us because they actually ARE a EU body) law concerning sales regulations and for the French customer the laws concerning customer protection and tax.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
dont worry steam is already charging their Euro customers insane prices well above retail prices. I think aaa games cost 60 Euros on steam in Europe which is a joke.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.