Well, yes, all true.
But I think the point for some people was that they were John Doe in your example and weren’t allowed to resell the car.
As far as I can tell, changing the register account email address means selling your house, your plane and your favourite chair too, not just the car.
And one problem can be that some people are not even aware they don’t have a right to resell. Yeah, they *should* have read the licence. Nonetheless, when you can’t read the licence before buying, it's not really surprising they assume the most frequent rights are granted. I rather doubt just telling them to go elsewhere will alleviate their problems, or even make things better in the future. Which is regrettable, because Stardock is a great company and deserve all the good will it can get. Maybe there is no other way to do things, so ok they are necessary collateral damage. Still, I can’t help but wonder if that could not have been avoided too. Very good is great. Best is even more.
Note that I’m not complaining in any way:
- I knew the content of the licence before buying, and was perfectly happy to accept it
- I never did resale any software I bought, no matter how bad (though I may have brought some back to the store). So I rather doubt I will ever envision reselling great software. I’m keeping my Stardock licences.

Well, while Silverbeacher's example may be a little incorrect, the case he/she is aiming to illustrate *can* happen in software industry, and it is Stardock right, I think, to try and avoid it. And I'm not so sure I would say that someone that got his or her disk lost because, say for example, their notebook batteries took fire really deserve to have to pay again. But that's only my point of view.
And while I, for one, am in no way sure I speak for the masses, I am not urging them to change their policies.
I very much prefer to have no copy protection, no disc to carry, and the possibility to install on my desktop and my notebook and play without having to think in advance whether I should get the CD with me or not.
And I'm still buying new Stardock products and plan to continue to do so as long as they are good.
Beside, given the success of the GalCiv series, one may consider a lot of people like it that way too. I do believe Stardock noticed it too, so perhaps arguments calling the policy insane and leading to a loss of the majority of customers should be a little more constructed and documented for them to listen.
Well, they are great guys as can be seen in the forum, so I'm sure they are listening. But for them to listen as in "being convinced" might take a little more work.
Say, I have a question for you. Would you be ready to pay a premium for being given the right to transfer your ownership? And if yes, how much would that be?

OK, so I just logged onto SDC to see how to go about updating (ie if my registration was to change hands). yes, it is easy and possible to switch that information. now however, if i were to have OTHER stardock products, I would lose the ability to update them. I can understand how this could be an issue to SOME individuals, since you would be losing the ability to update your other legitimate products.

Unfortunately, with today's technology, companies feel the need to take steps to insure that their product and costs are protected. Someone earlier stated the used book market, and how it benefits the book market and why wasn't the game market able to do the same thing? because when my mom gives me her "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows", there is only one copy, and since its in book form, its also not easily copyable. now, as the book market, becomes more digitalized, it may actually become harder to transfer a book to another user since the ability to copy/paste (in simplest terms) is readily available.

the general rule with music and DVD is as such. To have a media copy of a song or movie on your computer, Ipod, or other media-playback device, you must have a hard copy of that said item, or proof of online purchase (if it was a digital purchase). Technically, if you decide to sell your copy of "Blades of Glory" (not that I wouldn't blame you) you are supposed to delete the copy you have on your computer.

games get a lil trickier, especially newer ones. unlike a DVD or a song that requires you to be logged in to reach the next track, some games have either online MP, or later bonuses to registered users (which is what the galciv patches are by the way; since the original game is "playable" (albeit not anywhere as good as later editions), the Courts would NOT rule that users are entitled to the updates), or other such features that make it necessary for companies to protect their interests.

most companies have gone the route of installing and equipping their media with third-party programs that are required for use. In many cases this software can not be removed even if the product is, and also is often known for damaging a person's computer.

i like not having a CD to carry around. I like that I don't have invasive malware on my computer. I like that a company is even debating on actions about these issues.

I guess my sympathy goes out to more those in places that want to play a game like GalCiv II but can't easily (costs), but its not Stardock or another company's fault, and I wish more could be done to accommodate those individuals within reason. but at the end of the day, its a business geared to make a profit, and they gotta do, what they gotta do. all i know, is that as it stands, this particular company is taking a stand that is easy and convenient for me.

I still wish I didn't have one email address for GC2 and one for DA. Makes patching a pain, though that's entirely my fault. I'll likely have a third for Arnor when I get it (taking a wait and see approach after DA- espionage made DA a bit disappointing to me)

To plang75015: They should do it for free as a goodwill gesture for people who are currently using their products (even the most mercenary credit card company doesn't charge a "change of address fee")(nor do most car DMV offices). It should also be free as a way to entice people into making new purchases.

That being said, I suppose a transfer fee of something less than $5 would probably (VERY GRUDGINGLY) pass muster with most gamers.

Side note to (Citizen)Silverbeacher: I have not claimed that I've never misplaced ANYTHING in my life, just that I have every game disk from games I have chosen to keep.(Wan't to by my 3.5" floppies of 5th Fleet?) ..... Also, if your ego can't handle a simple "all wet" comment, you need to develope slightly thicker skin.

Yes, a warning on the box would be nice, I think...Real good deals (like in Win-Win) usually have both parties fully informed. But it's probably a bit late for that particular game.

To Mongo64: Thanks for your answer. Knowing a bit of both software programming and marketing, I tend to agree with you. Doing it "for free" would be a good idea. Of course nothing really is free. Most credit card companies simply have everyone pay a little more to compensate for the costs of address changes. Never mind that changing the address cost a one time development for probably not much more than a few thousands dollars, and 5 minutes work from someone each time you want to change.
What's interesting there is that while I dont want the rights to transfer ownership, I probably still would have bought GalCiv had it cost a few more dollars.
Mind you, I do not *want* to pay to give you the possibility to transfer now that I know. But if nobody had told me I might pay less when not having the right, I would not even have thought of the possibility.
I don't know if it is so for the majority of the other satisfied buyers, but if it is, maybe it's the way to go for Stardock for it's next titles.

Okay, I've been mostly defending Stardock, but here's where I take offense.

Yes you have made money from it, from the original purchase.

Don't like that? Well, tough. Just about everything exists in a second hand market. You could make the same argument for anything, just about.

And indirectly, you do make money on it. There are still quite a few people out there who buy new games, play them for a while, sell or trade them in, and then buy another new one. If they can't trade it in or sell it, they won't buy it in the first place. Game sellers make more money off these guys than the average game, because they are always buying new stuff.

Okay, some of them will buy used as well, but the trade in system still used at many game stores is a testament to the fact that this still works.

One could even argue the legality of not allowing your customers to transfer the licenses that they bought and that they own. I'm not going to bother, and it seems to be precedent that the customers, unlike any other product, have no rights when they purchase a license. (notice I didn't say purchase the game, since I know the difference)

Anyhow, you system isn't a bad one, but it sort of ticks me off when you go complaining about people not giving you money because they want to buy used games. Well boo hoo. It seems a immature attitude, if you ask me.

The risks/problems would apply when someone has gotten a copy with a preregistered serial, by whatever means, and wants to register it himself without the details or involvement of the previous owner. We would have no way to know if one or the other party involved is being dishonest, or if a manufacturing mistake was made, etc. So the situation is better avoided. OTOH, handing off the account can only be done if the seller gives the buyer the login details, in which case there's no involvement on our part, or risk of loss to uninvolved parties.

And by the way, thanks, Kryo, for your answer

This is how i obtained my game (DL) and account. Bought game off ebay, was lucky enough to have a very good seller. We had all details and transfer stuff researched before proceeding.. After transfer I notified stardock of the account transfer. They were very helpful in assisting a smooth switch.

Had it not been for seeing this game on ebay I do think i would have never found this..

In the UK you are allowed to return a product within 14 days if not totally satisfied, and the retailer can resell the item again as "new" again (not sure if north america is the same).
This is what happened to me, I bought Galactic Civilization 2 new and so I had no need in asking for the registed details as it is "new", and when I came to registering it, I found it was already regsitered a few weeks ealrier. Someone had bought it, registered it and then took it back to the store as they wern;t totally happy with it, I then bought it from the store unknowing it had been sold once before. So it is not just used game sales but "new" game sales too that are effected. I cannot think of a way around these kinds of occurance, but I do think Stardock should look at the Consumer rights in various contry's before selling in that country

No copy protection on the retail discs doesn't mean we don't care about piracy.