I have argued countless times that physical games are where my camp is laid, and I’ve done so because often these lead to the best deals for consumers. However, that may be about the change for some, possibly all. In 2015 a pro-consumer group, UFC Que Choisir, brought a case against Steam: The only major digital storefront for PC users aside from GOG. The results are almost in, and it doesn’t look good for smaller indie developers.

As reported by French sites Next Impact and Numerama, the pro-consumer group won their case, initially filled in the District Court of Paris back in 2015. The group cites Steam’s own subscriber agreement, that under European law there is a case for the resale of games. This is something one can do with physical releases, however, not digital as you almost don’t own the content but instead house it on your hard drive for some time.

From personal experience fighting with lawyers, I have learned to always seek precedent for your argument; something UFC Que Choisir did. The ruling came down to a 2012 European court ruling in that states (paraphrased), “digital goods transferred from user to user implies the trade of rights ownership.” In plain English, if you are trading something (i.e commerce) you are trading the goods and the rights of the product, whether digital or physical. This now means there is a second precedent court ruling to cite across Europe and a ruling against Valve, owners of Steam.

This now means that Valve can no longer refuse the right to re-sell games on their storefront. However, Valve argues that while that would be the case, their subscription agreement cites your purchase as that, a subscription. Under Valve’s definition of your purchase, your one-time purchase is a subscription and thus can not be transferred under any circumstances.

This is not the only case that Valve/Steam has lost to UFC Que Choisir. The French court also indicates that fourteen of the clauses in the subscription agreement can not be enforced in Europe. The main two clauses that can not be enforced are your Steam wallet and damages suffered by users due to software on the Steam storefront. In particular, the latter can be in beta and still require Valve/Steam to take responsibility.

The former, however, is in the case that once you leave the platform (Steam) and your Steam Wallet still has some money in it, Valve can not retain that wealth. If you request that you are reimbursed for the remainder of your Steam Wallet, Valve can not refuse under European law. Though, if Valve are still holding steadfast that they are beholding to the law as they see it and ultimately refuse to abide by the court’s ruling, they will be fined 3,000 Euro a day for six months (500,000 Euro total). A splash in the pond for Valve.

While this does seem like certain success for UFC Que Choisir, they also state their intention to continue fighting for consumers against other companies. However, Valve has yet to appeal, at the time of writing, and according to Doug Lombardi, Marketing director at Valve, that’s what they plan to do. Lombardi told PC Gamer: “We disagree with the decision of the Paris Court of First Instance and will appeal it. The decision will have no effect on Steam while the case is on appeal.”

That being said, there is no word on how these changes would be implemented if Valve loses the appeal. The first cause for concern is a return to Valve’s 2015 returns policy. Upon the first release of this new program, there was a concern that smaller, shorter, and often indie games would screwed over by this new system. One could argue that this would be the case if Valve are to now be the hub of digital game resales. One could see a new short release being resold for 75 percent of the price.

Phenixx Gaming is everywhere you are. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.