eBay

metskid7 · ‎10-18-2017

I am aware that selling a console with access to another user's account is against the ToS of Ebay as well as the developers of said console (Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, etc). I am also aware of how digital access to games works for the newer console generations, in that said games could only be accessed if logged into the account of ownership or if the console in use is designated as the home console. However, consider the following scenario:

-I purchase a console from someone with digital access to games outside of the owner's account. In other words, the console is still marked as the home console. The original owner's various profiles and files are still on the console.

-I wipe everything pertaining to the profiles of the original owner, including any and all account-related information, leaving nothing but the games on the hard drive.

-I then list the console with no reference to said digital games in the title, but do include a bit in the description acknowledging that while such games are included with the listing, they are not guaranteed to be playable as playablity would be entirely dependent on how long the original owner leaves said console desginated as the home console. The buyer accepts this in deciding to make a purchase.

Would the above scenario be acceptable in the eyes of Ebay as well as the major developers since I would not be selling a console with access to the original owner's account nor any information pertaining to his or her activities? Just curious. If anything, I would only use the presence of such games as an additional selling point rather than as a price point, as it would not be right to charge customers additional money for content which would not be guaranteed even with their aforementioned consent.

dtexley3 · ‎10-18-2017

The games are still present and account access may still be open and you are aware of it. You are still breaking the TOS in my opinion. ymmv

Member of the Grumpy Old Man crew

kensgiftshop · ‎10-18-2017

Unless it come with the games already installed when first bought, I would remove them also.

Have A Great Day.

metskid7 · ‎10-19-2017

@dtexley3 wrote:
The games are still present and account access may still be open and you are aware of it. You are still breaking the TOS in my opinion. ymmv

How would account access still be open though? I could understand the TOS being broken for other reasons, but in this case the only reason the games would still be accessible on the console is because said console is designated as the home console (I do understand that this fact alone could be enough to constitute a breaking of the TOS regardless). With all other content having been wiped, there would be no way for a buyer to access nor retrieve said account or any of its information.

metskid7 · ‎10-19-2017

@kensgiftshop wrote:
Unless it come with the games already installed when first bought, I would remove them also.

Well, I often buy consoles from Ebay, and sometimes sellers will either forget to or choose not to wipe the hard drive before shipment. If you're talking about games installed prior to the original point of sale, however, then no, it's unlikely that they would have been present then.

jonathankirkland · ‎10-19-2017

Let alone what could be considered a legal gray area here, let's get it straight that this is morally wrong.

You are alluding to the fact that there is potential these games may be able to be used. This is wrong and should never be a selling point.

You are just asking for trouble by doing this.

metskid7 · ‎10-19-2017

@jonathankirkland wrote:
Let alone what could be considered a legal gray area here, let's get it straight that this is morally wrong.

You are alluding to the fact that there is potential these games may be able to be used. This is wrong and should never be a selling point.

You are just asking for trouble by doing this.

Right, that's what I was thinking. However, it isn't so much that there is potential these games may be able to be played--they would be able to be played--but for how long is anyone's guess. It could be for a week, a month, a year or beyond.

I'm not sure I see the situation being quite so cut and dry, though, since I would be making it explicitly clear there would be no guarantees with regard to the games contained on the hard drive; in fact, I would go out of my way to de-emphasis this fact so that it would be more of a tie-breaker bonus than a purchase deciding factor (for instance, I might only include such information buried within the confines of my item description). Moreover, it's not like potential buyers would be mislead in any way, as they would be consenting to the clearly-stated terms of the transaction at the time of purchase. At the same time, the reality is that it would be nearly impossible for a buyer not to consider such a fact when making a purchase, thereby providing a counter to my original point of contention.

In any event, there's a very fine line between giving consent and a measure of deception here, and being a fairly experienced seller at this point, I could see the potential for extra headache not being worth the trouble involved, the moral aspect of this notwithstanding. Just had to think this one out loud.

jonathankirkland · ‎10-19-2017

@metskid7 wrote:
@jonathankirkland wrote:
Let alone what could be considered a legal gray area here, let's get it straight that this is morally wrong.

You are alluding to the fact that there is potential these games may be able to be used. This is wrong and should never be a selling point.

You are just asking for trouble by doing this.
Right, that's what I was thinking. However, it isn't so much that there is potential these games may be able to be played--they would be able to be played--but for how long is anyone's guess. It could be for a week, a month, a year or beyond.

I'm not sure I see the situation being quite so cut and dry, though, since I would be making it explicitly clear there would be no guarantees with regard to the games contained on the hard drive; in fact, I would go out of my way to de-emphasis this fact so that it would be more of a tie-breaker bonus than a purchase deciding factor (for instance, I might only include such information buried within the confines of my item description). Moreover, it's not like potential buyers would be mislead in any way, as they would be consenting to the clearly-stated terms of the transaction at the time of purchase. At the same time, the reality is that it would be nearly impossible for a buyer not to consider such a fact when making a purchase, thereby providing a counter to my original point of contention.

In any event, there's a very fine line between giving consent and a measure of deception here, and being a fairly experienced seller at this point, I could see the potential for extra headache not being worth the trouble involved, the moral aspect of this notwithstanding. Just had to think this one out loud.

As long as you're willing to accept the fact that this increases your chances for someone to file a SNAD which will cause you to also pay for return shipping then I guess go for it.