EA's Origin to delete inactive accounts
The TOS for EA's new distribution platform, Origin, reveals a plan to purge inactive accounts.
The Terms of Service for Electronic Arts' new digital distribution platform, Origin, reveal that the publisher plans to purge inactive accounts - meaning users may lose their games and DLC.
Spotted by RPS, the clause in question claims that 24 months of inactivity lead to cancelled accounts and 'loss of entitlements'.
'If you have not used your Entitlements or Account for twenty four (24) months or more and your Account has associated Entitlements, your Entitlements will expire and your Account may be cancelled for non-use,' say the terms.
Entitlements are defined as 'paid and free downloadable content, unlockable content, digital and/or virtual assets, rights of use tied to unlock keys or codes, serial codes and/or online authentication of any kind, in-game achievements and virtual or fictional currency.'
Origin, which was announced earlier this year, is Electronic Arts' competitor to services such as Steam and GamersGate - a platform for selling and digitally delivering PC games.
We've contacted Electronic Arts for a comment on the matter, but until then let us know your thoughts in the forums.
UPDATE - 4 Aug 2011
Electronic Arts has issued the following statement to RPS, via EA's John Reseburg.
'The Origin terms of service are designed to protect against misuse of the Origin system. No Origin user who has paid entitlements and/or downloaded games will have their account cancelled or games expired due to extended non-use. The term regarding account cancellation for non-use is designed to guard against creation of non-active accounts for inappropriate reasons.'
Previous Article
70 Comments
Discuss in the forums Replygg EA, gg.
Not being able to combine accounts is much more of a problem, and the store only selling EA games is by far the worst aspect of the service, and that is what will turn customers away.
Actually, in my mind this kind of constitutes theft, but I'm sure things like that do not apply to the likes of EA.
The question is if anyone will be bothered to do that, I would bet it isnt worth the effort if the games are over 2 years old.
Such a shame that BF3 isnt available on steam(unless the position has recently changed)
While I agree that if you've not been on for two years then you never will, EA shouldn't be allowed to do this. Imagine that you only buy BF3 on Origin (which I will be doing if it doesn't come out on steam) and after two or so years you decide to play it again.....Wait you can't. We all pick up games we've not played after a few years and have a go, like theme hospital. Granted these were from before digital platforms like steam, but they shouldn't be allowed to do it. They must have a reason for this stipulation and the question is, would they actually delete these accounts on the dot after 24 months or if its something to do with server traffic etc?
It's not a big ask, although I do agree this stipulation is kinda pointless.
In steam's terms and conditions it says they can close your account at any time as far as I'm aware don't they?
I don't like it already.
The difference is that -- for the majority of people -- Steam don't *behave* evil, rather they're an excellent service that many of us are happy to use.
It remains to be seen whether EA will behave evil or not, and that's not something you can tell by reading legalese. Judging by their enthusiasm in shutting down online services for 2-year-old games, I'm suspicious.
It's not theft, you agree to their conditions when you sign up. I'd like to point out that it's not the same thing as Steam's TOS either, as Origin states that your entitlements will expire and addition to that, your account might get closed, while Steam just might terminate your stuff.
And I never mentioned whether it was right/wrong
Plus EADM had a clause saying you only had 1 year to download your games and yet nothing happened.
Also, already mentioned but we've been talking about this in the forums for the last 2 weeks...
That still doesn't look credible.
If they come back to BT with the same I hope you will say the same thing.
Try this thread.
What?
Like i said when you posted this in my thread, that's just a random blog claiming that EA said something. It's not even an unofficial EA statement, let alone an official one.
"If they come back to BT with the same" assumes that the update on the blog post is in fact based on an actual response from an EA representative who has the authority to make such statements on the company's behalf, which is the part i'm having doubts about.
But the T&Cs cover all this.
"license that can expire at any time" etc etc etc
It's not theft.
Come to think of it. Shouldn't my payment be able to expire at any time as well?
What about rental services? They take your money for a movie/house/car/prostitute and then take the product back as per the terms you agreed on. Is that theft too?
Why do this at all EA? Aside from an evil attempt to get those you have screwed over with this to re-purchase the game? Why even delete an account, not like it takes up a huge amount of data on your servers.
Think EA is just trying to take back the title of most evil publisher back from Activision.
What amazes me is how nonchalant people seem to be around the concept of buying in regard to online services.
Steam don't sell games, that's the whole point.
@Blanx3_Bytex
You've replayed every game in your collection in the last 2 years? You really want to set a precedent of games requiring a repurchase if you didn't give them enough attention at some point?
And this whole fiasco has been public knowledge/arguement since EA started plastering Origin everywhere in E3.
The arguement is the same everytime.
'They shouldn't be allowed to delete my games'
'Steam can delete your account for any reason and when they feel like it'
'Yeah, that only really happens when you have actually DONE something against their ToS'
'24 months? If you haven't played it in that long you probably won't play it anyway'
etc. etc.
You can turn it round and say that EA guarantee you at least 2 years while Valve don't even guarantee you 10 mins.
Either way, I can't see EA going through with it just like they didn't go through with cutting access to your downloads on EADM 1 year after purchase.
Until it happens, it's a non story for me.
It's the pull-the-rug-out-from-under-you thing about online/DLC that makes me spend most of my time playing offline.
I think the outright loss of content you've registered/paid for is cheeky - perhaps they should reset the validity of it, so if you do decide to go back to play something that is magically "no longer yours (if it was in the first place, with the way most company's view selling products to customers)" you can simply re-register it to a recreated account.
...Or better yet, don't delete old accounts in the first place.
Yup this isn't really news, we've bin talking about it in the forum for a couple of weeks
Aye, but they should make it a little clearer that they can do this than to bury it in their terms and conditions. Also there should be a 'rent it now' sign instead of 'buy it now' or 'purchase', that way it'd serve to highlight that it's essentially a right to rent over to use indefinately.
I have games/software from a time before digital distribution and you know what? They can't stop me using it unless they come and break in to my house and take it from me.
...........pretty sure that's called stealing.
In the end I'm not really bothered to be fair, if you don't like it don't use it, simples.
This man has it right:
This is not theft. They are not unlawfully depriving you of goods because you agreed to their terms when you signed up, and their terms give them the right to remove access to those goods. Therefore it is not a criminal matter; it's not even a civil matter, you couldn't sue EA over this because you'd be laughed out of court.
Yeah it stinks, yeah it's low, but them's the breaks. If you don't know what you're agreeing to when you agree to terms, then you have no one to blame but yourself when it comes back to bite you.
I'm not defending EA but you can't call this theft. In fact I think it's downright crappy of them, and I can see no reason for them to do this other than extorting money out of you. Hell I've got games purchased 13 years ago which I still install from time to time.
I would suggest that if your account has been totally dormant for two years you've already lost it.
It isn't anywhere near as black and white as that.
A company can put whatever they want in their terms of service, whether it is legally binding or now will be judged in a court of law.
It is in this case, which is what we are talking about so :p
I doubt I'd ever go for 2 straight years without any gaming unless I fell really ill or something but still this news is so crap, I think this news should be the final nail in the coffin for their origin service.
EA can't be seen as a competitor to steam or any other now because they just killed themself IMO.
I won a free console game (despite not owning one) via Doritos, and was supposed to redeem through these idiots. They have so far refused to acknowledge my entitlement to a free game, and hence cancelled my order, because they 'have not recieved payment'. Payment for a free game? That's a new one to me.
If you buy the retail copy for the same price you're still only purchasing the rights to use the product BUT if you don't use it for 2 years you can still reinstall it and play. To me, the problem is with that distinction, a license should be a license no matter how or where its purchased. If EA (or Steam for that matter) decides to cease Origin operations all of a sudden, they wouldn't exchange online licenses for retail ones and that's an issue.
I hope this doesn't include retail CD-Keys. That would make them the Messiah of everything evil in the galaxy.
Not that I'd want to try fighting EA in court. Deleting inactive accounts, while something users might not like, can be justified and will likely hold up in court, particularly with EA's lawyer army fighting for it.
But it's as if EA really want me to stay away, Crysis 2 was cheaper on Steam than Origin by £5 and when it was pulled it from Steam it was £20 cheaper at my local store so I bought it there anyway. I tried really hard to find a bargan on Origin but failed and then they pull this ****!
Seriouslty EA, you're the up-start in the digital distribution game. You need to be BETTER and CHEEPER than Steam not the other way around. As much as I want to use your service I can't, you failed.
It might be a regional thing but for the UK on the 29th of July games that were on Steam and Origin were as follows:
Cheaper on Origin:
Alice: Madness Returns, Bad Company 2, Sims Medieval, Shift 2, Dead Space 2, Bad Company 2 Vietnam, Bulletstorm, ME2 Digital Deluxe Edition, Spore, C&C Tiberium Wars, Burnout Paradise: Ultimate box, Dead Space, Crysis Warhead, Warhammer Online + 30 days play, MoH, DA: O Awakening, Mirror's Edge, Spore Galactic Adventures, Spore, Creepy and Cute Pack, C&C 3 Kane's Wrath, C&C RA3 - Uprising, Fifa Manager 10, Fifa Manager 09, NFS: Undercover
Same price on both:
Sims 3, Mass Effect 2, DA:O Ultimate, BF2, NFS:HP, Mass Effect, NFS: Shift
Steam is cheaper:
Crysis, Fifa Manager 11, Shank, C&C 4
Like I said:
THEY'RE LEARNING TO LISTEN TO US!!
So, EA expects to have accounts created for inappropriate reasons with paid entitlements and/or downloaded games?
Though it does bring up more questions:
They may just want to change it now, easy way to get this blunder behind them.
How can saying they will close accounts that are not accessed be used as an excuse for shutting down the service if it is not popular? This is a totally illogical statement.
If you realistically think this will ever happen then do not download anything from Origin.
I am sure if you read the Steam Terms and Conditions there is probably something in the small print about how they own your Grandmother but no one has a problem with this.
in the UK those T&Cs constitute an unfair contract and are therefore null and void. they don't mean jack ****.
you wouldnt sell someone a car and then take it back two years later just because the mileage was low would you? oh ****, did i just turn that analogy right round on the *******s?
Time to move along now, nothing to see here.