Are you confusing the EULA with the Subscription Agreement? For clarity's sake, I would prefer to define the EULA as the one included in off-the-shelf boxed software products, and the SA as the one Valve uses for all Steam related issues. If you read both, they are not exactly the same.
Your second point is preferred by just about everyone. However, if you read the SA's section 4B, you can see where a potention loophole whereby a change in fees and billing methods can result in the credit card holding footing new charges.
There are differences between this SA and the one your ISP uses. For one, ISPs in most places around the world are regulated (ie: regulatory body, lawyer warfare, class action lawsuits, regulatory fines, etc) and Valve is not, at least not to that extent (instead, it's a slew of software patents, decency laws, and other less stringent rules). In some places, an ISP connection can be considered an "essential service" which entails a lot more legal weight than something which is not. Steam games are not an essential service and would be much more difficult to file against Valve/Steam should you find yourself in one the nightmarish examples I posted.
Credit card companies are not likely to take action except when they feel their reputation is being trashed or a large mass of angry card holders complain. However, with the wording in the SA, it is unlikely card holders will get relief (although the card company will no doubt chuckle over the number of people who don't read "agreements" carefully and then issue a news bulletin to their own card holders encouraging them to be more careful).
I agree with your fourth point and I think Valve does as well. You may see a slow, phased adoption should they go subscriber based. Perhaps similar to cellular phone plans and phase in users with incentives, free months, and credits. I know some gamers loath to read such a suggestion, but Steam is already using incentives via their Bronze/Silver/Gold tiering system.
The fifth point is exactly what many gamers will take, but it's not available on shelves until the Valve/Vivendi disputes are settled. New ATI vidcard owners can get the Bronze package or upgrade that to silver by leaving their credit card to Valve's mercy. But not all gamers will wait. Some may opt to use disposable credit card numbers or gift cards from the major credit card companies.
Exploring the possible issues with the SA isn't blowing this out of proportion. And this issue wasn't in the original EULA that came with your Half Life box. The SA and EULA are butt covers for the companies using them and sometimes step beyond what they were initially intended to do. In this case, it may sap consumer confidence among credit card holders.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems you didn't read the SA. Go back and check it out and you'll find that a chargeback wouldn't occur to begin with.
Are you confusing the EULA with the Subscription Agreement? For clarity's sake, I would prefer to define the EULA as the one included in off-the-shelf boxed software products, and the SA as the one Valve uses for all Steam related issues. If you read both, they are not exactly the same.
Your second point is preferred by just about everyone. However, if you read the SA's section 4B, you can see where a potention loophole whereby a change in fees and billing methods can result in the credit card holding footing new charges.
There are differences between this SA and the one your ISP uses. For one, ISPs in most places around the world are regulated (ie: regulatory body, lawyer warfare, class action lawsuits, regulatory fines, etc) and Valve is not, at least not to that extent (instead, it's a slew of software patents, decency laws, and other less stringent rules). In some places, an ISP connection can be considered an "essential service" which entails a lot more legal weight than something which is not. Steam games are not an essential service and would be much more difficult to file against Valve/Steam should you find yourself in one the nightmarish examples I posted.
Credit card companies are not likely to take action except when they feel their reputation is being trashed or a large mass of angry card holders complain. However, with the wording in the SA, it is unlikely card holders will get relief (although the card company will no doubt chuckle over the number of people who don't read "agreements" carefully and then issue a news bulletin to their own card holders encouraging them to be more careful).
I agree with your fourth point and I think Valve does as well. You may see a slow, phased adoption should they go subscriber based. Perhaps similar to cellular phone plans and phase in users with incentives, free months, and credits. I know some gamers loath to read such a suggestion, but Steam is already using incentives via their Bronze/Silver/Gold tiering system.
The fifth point is exactly what many gamers will take, but it's not available on shelves until the Valve/Vivendi disputes are settled. New ATI vidcard owners can get the Bronze package or upgrade that to silver by leaving their credit card to Valve's mercy. But not all gamers will wait. Some may opt to use disposable credit card numbers or gift cards from the major credit card companies.
Exploring the possible issues with the SA isn't blowing this out of proportion. And this issue wasn't in the original EULA that came with your Half Life box. The SA and EULA are butt covers for the companies using them and sometimes step beyond what they were initially intended to do. In this case, it may sap consumer confidence among credit card holders.