I tend to agree with you, but it just seems like Steam would need a way to prevent people from abusing the system. I don't just get to ignore laws when they co

I tend to agree with you, but it just seems like Steam would need a way to prevent people from abusing the system. I don't just get to ignore laws when they conflict with my goals. I mean, that's kinda the point of laws, right? I'm sure Steam can avail themselves of whatever legal mechanisms ozzies have for fraud in general or w/r/t returns in specific. If Steam is, in fact, obligated to honor a return with no legal recourse, even in cases that they still classify "abuse," then that is exactly the point of the statutory consumer protection. Just because they call it abuse doesn't mean the Australian people agree. They might be able to convince the government that what Valve perceives as a weakness in the boundaries of consumer protection is, in fact, against the public interest. They're also free to leave the market.