In a response to a post from the AntiDRM Twitter account, Ubisoft Support has clarified that users who don’t sign in to their account can potentially lose access to Ubisoft games they’ve purchased. The initial post from AntiDRM featured a snippet of an e-mail sent to a user from Ubisoft notifying them that their account had been temporarily suspended due to inactivity and warning that it would be closed permanently in 30 days. Responding to the ominous e-mail, the Ubisoft Support Twitter account stated “We certainly do not want you to lose access to your games or account” and noted that account closure could be avoided by signing in to the account again.

  • ono@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Unless they also refund the price paid for the game, this is theft (or fraud), and should be punished as such.

    • HiDiddlyDoodlyHo@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The problem is that online storefronts all lease (edit: it’s actually license) you the games you own until your account is terminated. I miss actually owning media.

      • ono@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        The problem is that online storefronts all lease you the games

        They license them. (A lease would normally have an expiration, and it would be clearly stated, which does not appear to be the case here.)

        Accepting money and then refusing to honor the terms of exchange, whether it’s an object or a license, is generally called fraud.

        I miss actually owning media.

        Yeah, I think most of us do.

        • thejml@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Correct, GoG is completely DRM free and has the ability to download offline installer packages for all your games. There are even a few scripts out there to do it for you.

          Some of Steam’s content does as well, but not all and it’s hard to tell.

    • Chozo@kbin.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree, this is such a dangerously stupid move by Ubisoft.

      I can only hope that this is just a mistake with an intern on their social account misinterpreting the ToS and that this isn’t something Ubi plans to enforce. But damn, is it a bad look for them. Which is a shame, because they’ve been doing some decent work at improving their image as of late, too.

      • NightOwl@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Seriously. For pirates once a game is cracked there is zero worries of what will happen to my copy? Somewhere they will be able to retrieve the game even if they don’t bother backing it up.

        But, paying customers opt not to do that to rely on official channels for downloads and installs. To punish them and reminding them how inferior their copy of the game is in the long term to the cracked copy is a bad move. It’ll only take losing their game once to lose faith in the platform and not bother buying again.

    • MJBrune@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not. You don’t own the game you lease it with the clause that the storefront can ban/delete/deactivate your account for any reason. This is true for Steam, GOG, Itch, Epic, EA, Microsoft, etc.

      • Something Burger 🍔@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The law is written by capitalists for capitalists and shouldn’t he taken into consideration. EULAs are essentially privately-owned laws. It is theft, plain and simple.

      • zik@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        That depends on the country you live in. In Australia for instance anything that looks like a “sale” must be an actual sale of a product and can’t be something else sneakily disguised as a sale. It’s illegal for services like Steam or app stores to deny you access to software you’ve bought on their platform in Australia.

        That doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened before though.

        • MJBrune@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Hmm yet steam has certainly banned lots of accounts, probably some of those owning games and are citizens of Australia. So clearly there is a clause around it.

  • Ekis@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    People need to realize that you do not own the games that you buy from stores such as Ubisoft and Steam. You are renting these games at best. These companies can deny access to your games at any time they see fit. Whether it’s deleting inactive accounts, a change of policy, business going bankrupt or any act of god.

    This is why I only buy games from stores such as GOG or itch.io where I actually receive a DRM-free copy of the game. It’s mine forever so long as I back it up; which is not hard to do since storage is so cheap nowadays.

  • aksdb@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oooh, I would really like to see that challanged in front of a German court after such a deletion happened. There are so many different legal facettes here.

    • Is the deletion maybe necessary due to GDPR? (they have to keep the minimum amount of data)
    • What’s with the physical copies / codes that were bought. Should they automatically be freed up for re-use once the account that claimed them is deleted? (That would kinda make sense to me.)
    • What about stricly digitally bought games?
    • How far are their ToS valid in our jurisdiction?

    Damn I really hope they do this to the wrong person and rub them the wrong way so they get dragged to court for this.

    • GeneralRetreat@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Data Protection shouldn’t be a relevant issue - at least not in the sense that it forcss them to delete accounts. When you process data under the GDPR, you have to identify a lawful basis.

      I assume that transactions through the eStore would be handled under the contract basis, with the hosting of the game in the library forming part of the contractual relationship. That would enable them to maintain an account for as long as the contractual relationship persisted.

      That basically means GDPR doesn’t force them to close an account, they close an account based on their policies because they choose to. That’ll be based on their T&Cs, so things will fundamentally circle back to whether their T&Cs are legitimate and lawful.

      It is possible that a data subject could potentially raise a claim for damages under the GDPR, on the grounds that the deletion of their account is a breach of contract that amounts to an availability data breach.

    • erwan@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Some companies decide to delete user content not because it’s necessary for GDPR, but because it’s the simplest way for them to deal with GDPR.

    • Flashbert@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      GDPR clearly says, if there is a valid reason for storing your data, they can store it (no timelimit). Like you can store data for invoices etc for 10 years too even when you ask them for deleting your data.

      Iguesseverybody also agreed to it when you registered.

      I do not see any valid reason why they would delete acvounts, like saving 1 line in a database?

    • MJBrune@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Valve has a TOS that lets them do the exact same thing. So it’d be interesting indeed.

  • jcarax@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s annoying enough that Netflix removes my account and watched history, after I go a few months without the service. But I still deal with it a couple times a year. This… this makes me just want to never touch anything Ubisoft ever again.

    • HurlingDurling@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Honestly I think I just have black flag on my goobysoft account and I haven’t plaid it for so long I don’t care if I loose my account, but if I ever want to play that game again and it’s gone, I will pirate the shit out of it

      • jcarax@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s an Assassin’s Creed game, yeah? I don’t know, I tried an AS game at one point, and just couldn’t get into it. I was excited for The Division for awhile, then it released. I wanted to like Far Cry, but didn’t like the mechanics. I really don’t see anything in their recent catalog that I give two shits about.

  • esaru@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Why do people think they are “buying” something when in fact they are “renting”. Everything that’s not in your power is not in your posession, hence it’s not something you have bought. This counts for ebooks with DRM as well as those online games. Amazon and other companies call it “buying” to make people believe it’s equal to real books, games ect. in their posession, and people do believe it.

  • EveryMuffinIsNowEncrypted@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This is why I buy all my games on either GOG or Itch.

    Yes, they definitely have their problems, but at least I can download an offline installer for pretty much any game I buy. Sure, GOG or Itch could still take them down in the future, but they can’t take away the offline installers I have backed up on separate external HDDs.

    • ndguardian@lemmy.studio
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not as familiar with Itch but it works the same as GOG in that you can download the installer and keep it, no special activations or DRM required. Right? Because I definitely love that aspect of GOG. I just wish it had a larger library.

      • EveryMuffinIsNowEncrypted@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I believe it does. I don’t really buy many games on Itch to be honest but from what I understand and from the handful of games I have obtained from there (mostly just free games), that is indeed how it works.

        And agreed. Definitely wish GOG had a larger library.

      • octobob@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I just wish GOG would utilize Proton in a way to incorporate Linux support. It would be a slam dunk for them in terms of their userbase.

  • vegivamp@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The thing is, just like software subscriptions, you aren’t buying a piece of software, you’re buying the right to use it. You can be pretty sure that they have legalese in the eula that says that your right to use the software expires with non-use. I wouldn’t be surprised if they can even let it expire by simple deciding to no longer support it.

    And what do you think will happen if their license servers ever go offline?

    For the longest time I never bought anything digital, but I eventually caved to steam. I still blatantly refuse to join other digital platforms, except gog where I can download the software and it works without any remote server.

    Same for music: I refuse to use Spotify. I buy from 7digital and the like, where I can download either mp3 or FLAC.

    • Chozo@kbin.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wouldn’t be surprised if they can even let it expire by simple deciding to no longer support it.

      That’s one thing, and that’s an acceptable risk everyone takes when buying from an online storefront, IMO. Eventually, they’re going to stop supporting that, and we all kind of accept and agree to that. But this is them cutting off your access because you haven’t played recently. They’re not dropping support for the games in question, so this feels a bit unwarranted. What does it actually cost them to store your game license and save file? Is that cost really offset by the price of the games, themselves?

      And what do you think will happen if their license servers ever go offline?

      If Google Stadia is to be considered precedent, they refunded every purchased game and DLC when they shut down their service earlier this year. I should hope that a similar offering is made from other storefronts should they ever decide to cease operations.

      • ampersandrew@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Eventually, they’re going to stop supporting that, and we all kind of accept and agree to that.

        The hell we do. I’ve stopped buying games that disappear when some server somewhere goes offline.

        • cloaker@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          You accept it by participating. You don’t participate, therefore the comment wasn’t referring to you.

          • ampersandrew@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            I was simultaneously saying that we don’t “all” participate, as well as encouraging others to do the one thing we can to stop the practice.

            • cloaker@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              The comment was referring to people who do participate though. If I make a comment about Australians Americans aren’t supposed to comment their disagreement

              • ampersandrew@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s retroactively deciding your audience. Once again, I’m highlighting that it’s not our only option to endorse the practice, whereas the language of the comment I replied to implied that it is.

                • cloaker@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  No, it’s not. The original comment was specifically referring to it being a risk you accept when buying off steam etc. You accept that by participating. You can protest outside the system but your comment is entirely wrong.