Under the settlement agreement, VU Games will cease distribution of retail packaged versions of Valve’s games, including "Half-Life"®, “Half-Life 2”, "Counter-Strike"™, “Counter-Strike: Condition Zero” and “Counter-Strike: Source”, effective August 31, 2005.
Additionally, VU Games has notified distributors and cyber cafes that were licensed by VU Games that only Valve is authorized to distribute Valve games to cyber cafes and grant cyber cafe licenses. Cyber cafe operators that were licensed by VU Games have also been notified that any license agreement from Sierra Entertainment, Vivendi Universal Games or any of their affiliates or distributors that may have granted rights to use Valve games in cyber cafes, whether written or oral, is terminated.
Does VU get much from Steam sales? And how well has Steam been doing vs retail copies of HL2?
The cyber cafe change is a biggie too. Sounds like Valve really took them to town…
I know the theory is that when a person buys a game they aren’t really buying the game, just a license to play, but I didn’t realize that the publisher could up and terminate that license with no warning. Are they obligated to refund money on that deal?
Good question. No doubt VU says the answer is no. Valve may agree with them - seeing the chance to get the cafes and game rooms to pay twice for the same copy. The “real” answer probably depends on who gets the better-paid lawyers.
I could turn this into a P&R thread right here, discussing how the only appropriate response to this kind of legal claim involves copious quantities of tar and feathers, and maybe some bullets too.
That legal theory - that you’re in fact just buying a license to use the merchandise - is bullshit and will not survive long-term. People simply do not think that way. If I forked over the cash, and the box is in my hand, it is MINE and I can do whatever the hell I want with it. That’s just the way the human animal thinks. With this precedent, cybercafe owners everywhere are doubtless going to have second thoughts about exactly what licenses they buy, and from what companies, in the future.
So what I’m getting from this is, Valve is getting full rights to distribute their games online, but they lose all rights to distribute them in packaged form at distribution points.
So, quite an interesting little gamble. Valve certainly made a boatload from HL2, but without a steady supply of games on the shelves (most certainly they can’t contract with another supplier to publish something that Vivendi owns physical distribution rights too) can they continue to make the money they made on HL1?
Seems like Valve is betting heavily on the internet distribution side for its past products. I understand there is a new deal they have with activision for new products, but that it may specifically fail to address the “Half-Life” line.
I hope this does blow up into some big precedence setting case that legally kills the “you dont own it, but you are just allowed to use it.” thing.
I suppose the proabbility of any big case happening is directly proportional to Valve’s greed. They could just say, you can contune to use it without buying it again and defuse the whole situation.
Would Valve really let those licenses drop like that, though?
The article only said they’d be terminated, but made no mention that Valve would reinstate those licenses themselves. I have trouble imagining Valve would risk losing out on that much money in future sales.
Can Valve contract with another publisher to put boxed copies back on shelves? HL2 seems to still be selling well at retail judging by its continued presence in top ten sales lists and I can imagine cutting off distribution in August would be pretty premature.
Good question. No doubt VU says the answer is no. Valve may agree with them - seeing the chance to get the cafes and game rooms to pay twice for the same copy. The “real” answer probably depends on who gets the better-paid lawyers.
I could turn this into a P&R thread right here, discussing how the only appropriate response to this kind of legal claim involves copious quantities of tar and feathers, and maybe some bullets too.
That legal theory - that you’re in fact just buying a license to use the merchandise - is bullshit and will not survive long-term. People simply do not think that way. If I forked over the cash, and the box is in my hand, it is MINE and I can do whatever the hell I want with it. That’s just the way the human animal thinks. With this precedent, cybercafe owners everywhere are doubtless going to have second thoughts about exactly what licenses they buy, and from what companies, in the future.[/quote]
the companies that sell these licenses dont even think this way, really, beyond the fine print they don’t embrace the concept at all where it might benefit a consumer. Why am I buying a dvd for 20$ when I already bought alicense for that movie when I got my VHS? MY copy of the dvd should be like the cost of a dvd + packaging, not the full price. Same with UMDs, ‘gold’ editions of games, and ports that don’t change the game beyond whats needed for whatever system it’s added to.
Does it say that? Or does it say Vivendi has lost the rights to get to sell the retail package? While not privy to any inside knowledge, I would say you are reading that wrong.
That’s not at all how I understand this. Instead, it seems like Valve has completely divorced themselves from Vivendi, taking all Half-Life 2 rights with them. There’s nothing that would stop Valve from having someone else release Half-Life 2 into retail in the future.
It will be interesting if this affects the expansion. Heavy rumors have been that Steam would be the only source for the expansion.
That’s not at all how I understand this. Instead, it seems like Valve has completely divorced themselves from Vivendi, taking all Half-Life 2 rights with them. There’s nothing that would stop Valve from having someone else release Half-Life 2 into retail in the future.
[/quote]
Yeah, Valve owned the Half Life IP and VU had been trying to get it back. Since it wasn’t mentioned I can only assumed that VU failed that that Valve retains the IP.
Wouldn’t be the first time. But I have a hard time understanding why Vivendi would agree to such a one-sided settlement. Doesn’t seem like there’s anything in it for them.
And, does HL2 distribution rights being transferred to another publisher mean another publisher can also distribute HL1, Counter-Strike, and Condition Zero?
The problem here is consumers are use to going to a legitimate store, legally buying a product, and easily & legally using that product. Valve is taking that away, giving the consumer nothing of value in return, and you (and I’m saying the Valve you) expect us to be happy and supportive of that? So Vavle screws the publisher, thinks they are screwing pirates (which that aren’t because they’re playing Valve’s product anyway) and screw their own customers. I don’t see the long term win here.
The problem here is consumers are use to going to a legitimate store, legally buying a product, and easily & legally using that product. Valve is taking that away, giving the consumer nothing of value in return, and you (and I’m saying the Valve you) expect us to be happy and supportive of that? So Vavle screws the publisher, thinks they are screwing pirates (which that aren’t because they’re playing Valve’s product anyway) and screw their own customers. I don’t see the long term win here.[/quote]
Rob what are you talking about, you do know this is not about retail copies right? Again, the cybercafes are a monthly license.
And if the “customer” did not buy it through the legal entity that is selling the item, how are they the customer again?
Wouldn’t it seem likely that Valve offered some lump sum of cash to VUG in exchange for the agreement to dismiss all claims and end the relationship? I mean if not, VUG would have given up everything in exchange for nothing come August 2005 and I find it hard to believe they’d do that. :)
What happens to the retail packages come august 31st? They aren’t legal either.[/quote]
No, it is that Vivendi is not allowed to put more valve products out for distribution, this has nothing to do with the legality of copies in the retail channel. On that front, it is simply Vivendi will not be the publisher, Vivendi is currently the legal publisher and all copies are legal. Previously purchased copies are still legal and come Aug 31st, all new copies will still be legal, but they will be coming from a new publisher.
The talk of lisc termination only affects cyber cafes.
Chet
And an article that is a little more clear than the original one posted.
