In court they would indeed need to prove it was a mistake, which is easily done by showing the real price and their purchase price which means the suing party gets stuck with expenses. The topic here on the price already shows it was a pricing error.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Retailer revoking keys due to price mistake; is this allowed?
- Thread starter TheVoidDragon
- Start date
It is not as easy as that, I have just explained to you why.
And just take a look at how this cases end up in court, unless there is a huge pricing error(like ten times the market value) the consumer always win.
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
Didn't Amazon or someone do exactly that but on a physical purchase of some sort? They sent out something after a pricing mistake, then sent emails asking them to return it for a refund plus a token gesture of a gift card. People were like "lol no".
It's pretty gross that people would be all over this quite clear error so much that it crashes the website multiple times
Actually, in the UK you will get past the cashier. If it's advertised for a price on the shelf then they legally have to sell it to you at that price.
I got a really shitty gameboy colour game for about 1.99 due to a pricing error.
In the end, proving it was a mistake, whether or not it is legal to revoke the keys... is all theoretical, until you make legal case on it. Again, I'm not saying it is legal what they did, nor is really consumer friendly, but you need to ask yourself the question, what do I have to gain by this. In reality nothing was taken from you, the money was reimbursed, you got to keep the free game, and did get an extra 20% discount code for the inconvenience. As you said, you can get Civ VI for 40, so you stand to gain a whopping 15 discount on Civ VI.
I'm also not saying you shouldn't bring to attention GamesRepublic revokes licences in cases like this. You guys did with this thread. I haven't heard of them doing anything like this in the past and I don't think they had any malicious intent with this price. Of course I could be totally wrong.
But, again, have any of you contacted GamesRepublic with your dissatisfaction on how they resolved the issue?
Possible outcomes to the issue
- Start a legal case
- Contact GamesRepublic to try and work out a better solution
- Take the L, avoid shop in the future
- You are satisfied with how they resolved the issue
Not in Belgium. In Belgium, in clear cases of a pricing error like this where it is so far under the standard price, it would be a losing case.
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
This is a misconception in the UK. Of course the store can honour the price if they so wish, but they are not legally bound to do so. But once they've taken your money they can't then ask for it back.
IdreamofHIME
Member
This isn't true. We went though this when ShopTo sent out all those free Vita's and people didn't want to give them back.
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
Ah yes, this was the case I was referring to. "Pwease can we have them back?"..."lmao"
IdreamofHIME
Member
I was mistaken, it was Zavvi not ShopTo. But the people all eventually had to give back to free Vita's.
TheVoidDragon
Member
I remember reading about that, i thought they were asked to give them back but they didn't have to legally.
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
Yeah I just read that. I didn't realise that was the outcome.
Different scenario, though. What they got wasn't what was on their receipt. Whereas here people got what they paid for.
and stores that sell possibly tens of thousands of keys at a loss go out of business altogether.
I don't know the retailer margins on digital games, but seeing how viral this offer went, how many people probably bought one of those licenses, and they'd take a loss of maybe 20$ per customer - they'd need to sell a whole lot of games at full price to recoup from that.
Those customers they just lost? Willing to bet most of them didn't know the site existed to begin with.
I really doubt that:
https://www.wilmerhale.com/pages/publicationsandNewsDetail.aspx?NewsPubId=91329
Two cases in Germany:
- Product sold at a price 10 times lower the market value, Judge ruled in favor of the shop.
- Product sold at half the price of the market value, Judge ruled in favor of the customers.
Two cases in UK:
- Product sold at a price 100 times lower the market value, solved privately between shop and customers.
- Product sold at 3 times lower the market value, company surrendered and gave the reason to customers before judgement.
Another case from Spain:
- Product sold at 15 when its market price was near 300, the shop was santioned with 9200, don't know if they also had to send the item to customers.
https://www.facua.org/es/noticia.php?Id=3651
So, you can see the customer always win unless the princing error is several times the market price.
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
The wrench in all these comparisons is that you're buying a license to a piece of software through Steam, not a physical product. I would hope the courts would still give it to the consumer in that case, but it's still a very different story.
As I understand most software license EULAs, licenses can be revoked legally, though of course users will revolt - see Amazon removing users' illegitimately sold copies of 1984.
There is no clear cut point. So debating whether or not a judge would rule in your favor is pretty moot. There is only one way to find out and I doubt anyone is willing to take that route.
http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/ecc/docs/european_online_marketplace_complaints_2008_09_en.pdf
In contrast to what Belgian lawyers say about the Belgian law, as explained in this Flemish text or what happened in the Netherlands Dutch lawsuit. The law is simply not the same everywhere.
Licenses cannot be revoked legally unilaterally either, they are just another contract on top of the purchase, and people did nothing to get their licenses revoked.
The EU already ruled that software licenses should be treated exactly the same as a physical product.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/07/top-eu-court-upholds-right-to-resell-downloaded-software/
TheVoidDragon
Member
It's unfortunate that people seem to just accept this with digital products. If a retailer sold something, delivered it and then came and took it back without you asking them to that would considered at the very least a bad thing fairly unanimously, but with video games and digital purchases it seems perfectly fine to some people and to some degree the law with the whole license thing.
You are just assuming a judge would admit this case as a pricing mistake that the customer was aware of before purchasing.
The same applies to Germany, UK and Spain, and as I showed you(and the example you provide fits in the same category) for that to happen the mistake has to be pretty huge, which is not the case.
TheVoidDragon
Member
Remember it's also Black Friday, and this 'deal' seems to have gone live at the same time their Black Friday sales began and was available for several hours.
It is disingenious to say a customer couldn't expect it to be a pricing error when the topic here called it out for one. A reasonable customer should have considered it one. As for the mistake not being huge, it was being sold for less than 25% of the price.
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
An argument could be made that the error on the webpage justified the revoking of licenses, as per the gamerepublic eula that I quoted earlier in the thread, but again I am not a lawyer so I cannot say. Their Eula makes no claim to the validity of the game licenses as I read, but it's a limited Eula in general in comparison to Steam or Apple Eula's.
I agree and it's why I am opposed to DRM in all forms. It's the most direct form of consumer power that can be granted in these cases.
Assume the worst of all companies and you'll do all right in the world I figure. Demand power in increments you can actually wield. Thanks GOG and Humble.
I break the DRM on all eBooks I own because of the 1984 incident. I'll never be sorry for it.
You are just assuming the reverse
Your UK examples weren't judged.
The Spain example, the seller was just fined, the buyer only received back their money spent.
75% off is pretty huge for a game released just a month ago.
And still haven't seen anyone saying they contacted the seller to voice their discontent.
But not everybody visits internet forums and are up to date with videogame prices and release dates.
One could just have found the offer advertised on a website or social network as a black friday deal. Some people may have thought the game sold really bad and they are using black friday to give it a deep discount. Etc.
We are not talking about a 1000 product sold a 10, or a 300 product sold at 15. Big discounts are very common in PC games, you just have to take a look at Steam Store right now:
TheVoidDragon
Member
I've contacted them, no reply yet. They know people are unhappy with it. They sent an email to everyone saying "it was too good to be true. The discount for Civilization VI Deluxe Edition was a price bug on our side."
Well, I can see customer service being overburdened due to this isssue... Hope you can work something out with them.
TheVoidDragon
Member
I doubt anything else will happen, unfortunately. They've refunded and revoked the keys from everyone, and given a discount voucher, but that doesn't really make it right.
As i said earlier I'm not that bothered about not getting the game, i am obviously disappointed, but it's more about this just happening in the first place.
I am assuming based on the precedents.
The UK case wasn't judged because Kodak knew they would loose, not because it was the right thing to do. The Germany case was settled in favor of customers.
We don't realy know the output of the Spain case, but a 9200 fine shows that what they did was ilegal.
And again, I don't know why people suppose everyone has to know the real value of games to the extent of thinking a black friday offer is a mistake.
blankempathy
Member
I swear every time there is a price error that ends up with revoked keys I see a thread here or other places that talk about the ethics/rules/laws that may have been violated. Nothing ever comes from this debate and it continues to be repeated after each price mistake incident. It was an obvious price mistake. You win some you lose some. Also their tos says they can't change the prices. Doesn't say anything about all sales being final or them not being able to revoke keys.
LambdaTeos
Member
But not everybody visits internet forums and are up to date with videogame prices and release dates.
One could just have found the offer advertised on a website or social network as a black friday deal. Some people may have thought the game sold really bad and they are using black friday to give it a deep discount. Etc.
We are not talking about a 1000€ product sold a 10€, or a 300€ product sold at 15€. Big discounts are very common in PC games, you just have to take a look at Steam Store right now:
Doom is a bad example, xbox one store has it in discount too around the same price i believe, still, you got a point
SeeNoWeevil
Member
That's not true. They can decline to sell you anything.
blankempathy
Member
Doom has also been on sale multiple times as low as $20 dollars. possibly even lower. Civ vi just came out last month. To think that the deluxe edition would be as low as 16 dollars is ludicrous. Yes maybe a passerby didn't know how expensive civ 6 should be but lets be honest, most people that took advantage of this price mistake im sure knew how deeply discounted it was for being such a new game. This deal got so much attention in a lot of places.
TheVoidDragon
Member
It actualyl does say they're final; it says they're non-refundable once they've been provided. These have been refunded after being provided.
And if you follow the "it doesn't say they can't revoke keys" logic, that means if they had revoked them without refunding you'd think it would be alright as well? After all, if it doesn't say they can't revoke them then that's fine with that logic, and it says they're non-refundable, so....
Oracle Dragon
Member
I guess legality of it is a fair discussion, as in some countries it may be illegal to revoke the keys after point of sale. I'm not sure on which side of the law this would fall depending on the regions involved, but the vendor should have to abide by the correct legal standards.
The ethical concerns of such an event though don't seem to be fair to discuss, unless you also consider weather or not knowingly taking advantage of an obvious pricing error, which could lead to people losing their jobs simply so a few extra dollars could be saved on a video game, was also ethical.
The ethical concerns of such an event though don't seem to be fair to discuss, unless you also consider weather or not knowingly taking advantage of an obvious pricing error, which could lead to people losing their jobs simply so a few extra dollars could be saved on a video game, was also ethical.
Vigilant Gambit
Member
Why does this thread have 5 pages?
I thought it was well-understood that retailers reserve the right not to honor sales made during pricing glitches. Anytime something like this happens, you bite not because the store "has" to honor that price, but because of the off-chance that the store gives you a coupon in exchange for canceling the sale. If they actually honor the sale, that's pretty much the unexpected icing on the cake, or simply taking advantage of the process moving faster than they can stop it (e.g. pricematching against mistakes at a retail store).
There is no basis for legal action here, folks.
I thought it was well-understood that retailers reserve the right not to honor sales made during pricing glitches. Anytime something like this happens, you bite not because the store "has" to honor that price, but because of the off-chance that the store gives you a coupon in exchange for canceling the sale. If they actually honor the sale, that's pretty much the unexpected icing on the cake, or simply taking advantage of the process moving faster than they can stop it (e.g. pricematching against mistakes at a retail store).
There is no basis for legal action here, folks.
blankempathy
Member
Even if it does say they're final we've seen many times that companies will still revoke keys after a sale. And no revoking a key without issuing a refund is not the same as revoking a key with a refund. One makes the transaction null and void. The other is essentially stealing.
Rellik
Member
Read the thread or even just the OP and you will see the sale was final. There has been multiple posts showing that the law here tends to favour the customer in this case.
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
The Eula doesn't really say explicitly, so we are just spinning hypotheticals here until someone takes them to court or they do something even worse.
Until then, refunding everyone, giving them free stuff and a coupon is about the closest thing we get to a win win. The consumer is better off than they were, and gamesepublic doesn't go out of business.
blankempathy
Member
Well then lets see someone do something about it. Tired of all this talk every time this happens. If its so cut and dry then why not move immediately to taking legal action against them?
TheVoidDragon
Member
If they had just not honored them (as in, declined purchases and cancelled orders before giving them out) that would be fine and i wouldn't have made a thread, but they're doing so after the purchase has actually been made and the item provided to customers, so taking it back after it's legally the customers without their permission. That isn't the same as just cancelling orders before they've been carried out. It's note even clear to me if that actually counts as cancelling an order because it's after it's been fulfilled.
blankempathy
Member
This isn't a retail b&m store in person where you have people who can catch these mistakes as a transaction occurs. They have automated systems in place that in most cases send out keys immediately after purchase. Thats why it always takes a while for these issues to be caught. So basically you're saying "tough shit" because the way they have their system set up? That they should lose money? Quite frankly I enjoy getting my product immediately and would hate to have to wait for each order to be validated by a person. And if that means I don't have my price mistake honored then I'm okay with that because sometimes they do honor those mistakes. Especially if they're bigger companies that cane take a hit.
No one would win. The amount isn't worth legal action, even if legal action would favor the consumer, the customer still loses.
TheVoidDragon
Member
They retailer set up the system, they're the one entirely responsibility for it, not the customer. It's not a customers responsibility to keep track of the sellers automated system and if something is right or not.
Besides, self-scan checkouts are a thing in quite a lot of shops, and they aren't always overseen by staff. That's an automated system as well.
Giant Panda
Member
Legally, they're probably in the wrong, especially under a common law contract system.
blankempathy
Member
Oh come on lets not pretend like no responsibility falls on ourselves. We choose to partake in an obvious error that favors us over these companies. Now some morally have no issue with that but lets not act like companies screwing up absolves us our choices made. And self scan falls under the same set of rules as online digital orders and suffer from the same issues as well. Computers fuck up. People fuck up. Sometimes we profit. Its not like people haven't pulled one over on people in order to get their price mistakes honored. Also just because you get your digital item immediately doesn't mean the money is out of your bank already. The transaction was likely still pending for most people. If this were a case of immediate cash for goods transaction with a person itd be cut and dry but its not. Thats why I don't waste energy getting upset about price mistakes not being honored. Its too much of a grey area.
IdreamofHIME
Member
No, they thought (including several gaffers) they didn't have to give them back, but after contacting a few consumer rights advisers they were told they didn't have a leg to stand on legally.
They knew fine well they didn't order Vita's and yet still accepted and kept them. It was basically theft.
The same thing could be applied here in that the people buying the keys knew fine that those prices were insanely low....but i'd still try to argue that's it's fucking Black Friday weekend and rock bottom prices are the norm, so this one low price doesn't actually stand out compared to all the other sales happening in retail at the moment.
TheRedSnifit
Member
Similar threads
- Locked