Nintendo Doesn't Have To Refund Digital Preorders, According To European Court (theverge.com) 69
A European court has sided with Nintendo's ongoing practice to not let users cancel digital preorders. The Verge reports: According to Norwegian gaming site PressFire, the consumer authorities of Norway and Germany sued Nintendo for not letting users cancel digital preorders purchased from the eShop. The case went to court at the end of last year. This week, the court ruled in favor of Nintendo, meaning it can continue the practice for now. PressFire reports that the German consumer authority has appealed the ruling.
When the Norwegian Consumer Council first formally criticized Nintendo's policy in 2018, it said that Nintendo's policy conflicts with the EU's Consumer Rights Directive, which requires that consumers must be able to cancel online purchases and receive refunds. Nintendo's no-refunds policy is also in place for the U.S. -- in fact, Nintendo states that all sales of digital purchases on the Wii U, Nintendo 3DS, and Nintendo Switch are final -- and Nintendo is the only console maker that doesn't let customers cancel a digital preorder, which the Norwegian Consumer Council noted in its 2018 complaint.
When the Norwegian Consumer Council first formally criticized Nintendo's policy in 2018, it said that Nintendo's policy conflicts with the EU's Consumer Rights Directive, which requires that consumers must be able to cancel online purchases and receive refunds. Nintendo's no-refunds policy is also in place for the U.S. -- in fact, Nintendo states that all sales of digital purchases on the Wii U, Nintendo 3DS, and Nintendo Switch are final -- and Nintendo is the only console maker that doesn't let customers cancel a digital preorder, which the Norwegian Consumer Council noted in its 2018 complaint.
I wonder... (Score:3, Insightful)
if this is enough for people learn some lessons...
Naw... who am I a kidding? There is more than enough world history for all sorts of things from the distant past to yesterday and the only thing people do is repeat history. It's like they just can't help it...
Re: (Score:1)
They shouldn't have to learn lessons, it should be refundable. The basic principal in EU consumer law is that things like they can be cancelled and Nintendo should not have an exception.
This is very bad an I hope it gets reversed or the rules changed.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit. Digital download refunds is not the reason you stopped doing anything in 1994.
Stop lying and tell us the real reason.
Why do people even preorder digital games? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why do people even preorder digital games? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There is a big difference between "pre-ordering" a game several days before launch after seeing gameplay videos and peoples' general reception from a beta test etc. and impulsively pre-ordering based on some hype video with no actual gameplay shown. You still have time to pre-download in that situation, but the prior example is a much more informed choice.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on the series. I'll generally pre-order anything Half-Life or Fallout (or Outer Worlds now) just because I enjoy those franchises so much.
Re: (Score:1)
How was fallout 76?
Re: (Score:2)
Too soon.
Re: (Score:2)
That is a good reason for those with slower internet connections - preloading so you can instantly play is a great reason for the die-hard fans who want to be gaming their favorite release the moment its released.
In the past we called those midnight releases and they were a hug
Re: (Score:3)
In the case of digital downloads, a preorder will allow a pre-download of the game to the console.
When the date turns to the release date, you can run the latest copy of the game straight away. No extra updates, no waiting for anything more to download. That appeals greatly to fans of game franchises.
Re: (Score:2)
More important to most though, means getting out of the starting area fast - avoiding having to compete for mobs, and bypassing any 'this npc/zone crashed due to overloading'.
Some even gave pre-orders a few days headstart.
Re: (Score:2)
Or at least don't complain if you get burnt!
This is the real moral of the story. If you're choosing to buy something without seeing the finished product first, you're risking your money on something that could potentially not be what you're expecting. This isn't really specific to pre-orders, any online purchase you make is based on the images the seller chooses to show you. Reviewers will have opinions but they are just people, too, and they might love things you do not. Even when purchasing in brick and mortar stores, your ability to test anything
Re: (Score:1)
Seems like it's just people trying to avoid being held responsible for their own actions.
Sometimes the situation is structured so that all actions lead to loss. Then it's wrong to say you're responsible. But then, you were stupid for engaging in that situation unless there is a life-and-death compelling reason. Gaming isn't that kind of reason.
Re: (Score:3)
I usually stick to franchises or developers that I trust to ma
Re: (Score:1)
Why no refunds? (Score:3)
Re: Why no refunds? (Score:1)
I donâ(TM)t think thatâ(TM)s the reason because, honestly, I wouldnâ(TM)t expect very nice reviews from people who was denied a refund.
Re: (Score:2)
Because in this case, as soon as you "pre-"order, you can download the game. It isn't a reservation, or a deposit to get a place in line, or anything like that.
It seems reasonable to me. It is exactly like buying the game; it has been delivered, or made available to the customer for delivery.
It would be a return, rather than a "cancellation." And digital content purchases are often not returnable. For reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
If it isn't then it might not fulfill the requirements of a purchase contract and could legally be voided, because it's akin of delivering a product in a non working condition. So what you get is a bunch of data that is useless to the customer. Which is not what they agreed to when they formed the contract. Or did they? I don't know exactly what Nintendo specifies in their contracts. But if they don't specify that you get the game, then it's a very q
Re: (Score:2)
There is no trickery, as the court found, it is a two-stage contract. Those are not in any way banned by the law at issue in the lawsuit. It is normal in a two-stage contract that not everything delivered be immediately usable. That's often the purpose of the contract. Two-stage contracts are important in many business to business scenarios, it would be highly disruptive to ban them through the back door like the court was asked to do in this case.
You don't have to like two-stage contracts, you don't have t
Re: (Score:2)
This is about allowing customers to get a refund in the time frame where they haven't received a functional product.
That is how a lot of things are handles. That is how many crowd funding projects are handled when backers request a refund even if you've already downloaded an early access version of the game. Yet, crowd funding still exists. There's no need for a ban.
Why the hell should Nintendo get special treatment?
Re: (Score:2)
If you allow a "refund" for the completed first stage of a two stage contract, that effectively bans the contract. It is just weasel words to say you can't tie the stages together, but that the contract is still allowed.
In crowd funding, you're not making a purchase, you're making a donation. This is why.
Re: (Score:2)
Does that effectively ban such contracts? No it does not. It's still a billion dollar business.
Amazon has even gone so far to voluntarily offer a 30 day return period.
But somehow for Nintendo pre-orders the rules would be different? Screw that!
If their position is really supported by law and not just because they fooled the court with their bullshit, that law needs to be changed. Otherwise we'll soon enough see other companies us
Re: (Score:2)
From your link:
"...if goods you bought turn out to be faulty or do not look or work as advertised"
I can't tell if you're stupid, or if you're trolling. But in any case, YER RONG.
Re: (Score:2)
I even quoted the "product or a service online or outside of a shop" line of the relevant text portion in the hopes that you'd look up that part and you still manged to ignore that and take things out of context by quoting the "guarantee" only and omitting everything else. Bravo.
So I'll quote the part that directly:
Re: (Score:2)
You thought cherry-picking some words out of an off-topic link made it relevant? Uhm, dude. I can't tell if you're posting drunk or posting stupid.
That says you can return a product, it does not say you can cancel a contract in the first 14 days.
That is never going to apply to two-stage contracts, and making it apply would be banning of the contracts.
It makes no sense to say you can cancel the first stage of a two-stage contract after reaching the second stage. The second stage starts when the first stage i
Re: (Score:2)
That is exactly how law works. You have to follow the entire text unless the other parts clearly don't apply to the case at hand. And single words are often pivotal.
And yes, that means exactly that you can cancel that contract within the first 14 days.
You can read it here in 312g of the German BGB [gesetze-im-internet.de] (use a translator).
And this was a German court that ruled according to German law.
They ruled bad according to what I've learned over 15 years ago in my German contract law minor, by saying
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously your minor degree has caused you to get permanently stuck on Mount Stupid.
I read the ruling. I've tried explaining it. Instead of asking good questions designed to inform yourself, you're arguing, and even saying stupid stuff like, "Are you for real?" Yeah, here I am, a person who can read words and understand them.
Maybe you can find a time machine, and can write a letter to Court warning them they're going to make a wrong decision?
Let me speak slowly for you.
A, two-stage, purchase, contract, is,
Re: (Score:2)
I have resolved the issue by now. It's the exception that I noted in my previous post that is defined under article 356 (more below). If you have other information, please provide them.
For future cases:
Maybe you can link the ruling so that we have t
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not making claims, I'm merely capable of reading the Court's ruling without my inserting bias.
Re: (Score:2)
But what you explained made no legal sense whatsoever. And you kept repeating it like there's some kind of sanctity to a contract.
I don't know how law works exactly where you come from. But in Germany everything that is specified in a contract must still comply with the law. You can't have people consent to something in a contract that would break already established laws. I mean you certainly 'can
Re: (Score:2)
Many others have had lawsuits against them and lost, forcing them to change their policies on refunds.
And that is apparently what it takes to make a change there, a court.
Regular market forces as in voting with your wallet appear to have had no significant effect on such business practices as the number of people who just go along with those vastly outweigh the number of people who are frustrated.
Re: (Score:1)
Regular market forces as in voting with your wallet appear to have had no significant effect on such business practices
Businesses are finally realizing this. That's one of the myths is part of how capitalism conceals its true nature.
--
Capitalism: a system invented by thieves and advocated by bullies
Re: (Score:1)
Market forces can work to a great extend as self regulatory forces without government intervention as long as the market is healthy.
And by healthy I mean there has to be a lot of different suppliers to choose from and a lot of different buyers. When there are monopolies or even oligopolies that rather play along than fiercely compete with each other the system falls apart. And that's the crux here.
The thing with Nintendo is that all their products are highly walled
I bet (Score:4, Funny)
If Nintendo were American, they would have lost in the EU court.
Re:I bet (Score:4, Informative)
Ah yes, yet another person who doesn't know about or doesn't take into account selection bias.
Cases involving European or other non-American companies aren't of much interest to Americans and are thus usually not reported by the media in America. Cases involving American companies often are. Thus American who don't consume non-American media will get the incorrect impression that the EU legal system is dis-proportionally going after American companies. Which is not true.
Re: (Score:2)
He's right, you know.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's more a case of the yanks come over, think these people look like us, so they go to court, yell 'you can't handle the truth' a few times and think that a nice performance should win by default. It would probably help to learn the laws before going to court.
But considering general consumer rights practices in Europe, and a complete lack of detail of the court finding, I'm really baffled on what sort of mental gymnastics they applied to arrive at Ninty not having to offer refunds.
Lastly, no one sh
Re: (Score:2)
And Japanese corporations AREN'T evil?
Re: (Score:2)
Despite what you conspiracy nutbags think the EU courts couldn't give a shit where a company comes from. They aren't in the business of protecting corporations.
In this case Nintendo argued against the performance clause which says if you start to pre-load the game then refunds aren't required. It's a sane ruling which would apply to any company. The problem was the law is stupidly written and this presents a get-out clause for companies.
Best political speech of the decade. (Score:2)
Where can I vote for you?
Preorders should simply be made illegal. (Score:2)
There. I said it.
The only exception allowed, should be, when all rights go to you too, and you get e.g. the source code and everything.
Re: (Score:2)
When it comes to physical media (or any other consumer good), pre-orders are very helpful to the company for planning purposes.
Personally, I think pre-orders for digital goods should be able to be cancelled (maybe 90% refund) but a pre-order for a physical good should be final.
Re: (Score:2)
So you're willing to rip up 250 years of contract law and declare much of daily business activities illegal? Or are you taking the USPO approach of thinking this is somehow special because computer, digital, and therefore unique!
Another completely ignorant post brought to you by BAReFO0t.
The worlds smallest violin (Score:1)
I mean, yeah, this ruling is absurd, and the practice of not refunding preorders is a joke, and Nintendo are scum for not doing it (and for a bunch of other reasons we don't need to get into)...
...But if you're preordering games in 2020 I don't have a lot of sympathy for you. If you're old enough and capable enough to preorder something then you're old and capable enough to know better.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It works for me! You're doing it wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
it works for me! You're doing it wrong...
Right directive (Score:2)
What the imporant thing to take away from this is, is the fact that the European Customer Rights Directive is worth zip, nothing, nada, might just as well not exist.
"Nintendo's policy conflicts with the EU's Consumer Rights Directive, which requires that consumers must be able to cancel online purchases and receive refunds."
That couldn't be clear enough, and still the court said Nintendo doesn't have to provide refunds. You can expect others to follow and violate other 'customer directives' as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Just guessing but:
It's not a purchase. The product literally doesn't exist and won't for months. It's a pre-order.
We use pre-orders as a way to gauge consumer response, and we use the up-front funding in order to bring the product to market, much like an investment, not to supply someone with an already-existing product (like a purchase would be).
It's the kickstarter/indiegogo argument, and hasn't ever really been properly tested in court.
Takeaway: Don't order things that don't yet exist, just to be "fir
Re: (Score:2)
What the imporant thing to take away from this is, is the fact that the European Customer Rights Directive is worth zip, nothing, nada, might just as well not exist.
I once heard that some guy in the process of being arrested had his gun taken from him. So clearly the 2nd amendment is worth zip, right?
Because that's how laws work, a tiny ruling on an edge case invalidates a 25 page law!
What else can we do?
I once heard someone who got out of paying a speeding fine, so just go and ignore all road signs since the road rules aren't worth zip.
Re: (Score:1)
I once heard someone who got out of paying a speeding fine, so just go and ignore all road signs since the road rules aren't worth zip.
Absolutely true. Gun crime rates are skyrocketing here, and there's no 2nd amendment to expedite this. Until we have a society that is willing to spend the money to combat this (be it via social programs or strict enforcement, judicial and correctional services), nothing is going to change. But first we have to rethink whether individual rights should be paramount, and the amount of influence wealth has in exercising those rights.
Chargeback your credit card (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
"We've blocked your Nintendo account because we were notified of a chargeback on your card.
Until you pay X your Nintendo account will be unavailable along with any purchased items or games."
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I guess in that case Nintendo will find even more charges to my card denied.... I'm not goingto pay if they don't deliver.
But in case of the pre-orders... In general, I'm all for the EU customer protection rules, but on the other hand, if people accept any perks that come with pre-order, they have to accept certain risks, too. Otherwise they could just do a regular order. So the key point here is: What did people get in return for a pre-order?
For example, usually by law you are allowed to recall contr