As one of the more disgruntled customers, let me say that I'm not worried about the legality of what is going on. I'm just upset at the way this has all been handled, as I had expected better out of Beamdog. This has been a failure in almost every manner - from production, to customer support, to public relations.
Okay, so next question: how do the laws work if someone in the EU purchases something from an Alberta store? Is the Alberta store required to comply with the EU laws, or is the customer no longer protected because they're going outside the EU for their purchase? Or is there a specific provision that accommodates both?
By default, in the absence of an international treaty, what happens in Canada is obviously outside the jurisdiction of EU rules.
Which geographical jurisdiction applies to international online transactions is a rather muddy area, although I think legal interpretation is generally leaning towards saying that jurisdiction is where the vendor processes the transaction (... and so no, the law in its current state can't really cope with diffuse cloud-based processing). If Beamdog had an office or other physical presence over here, then that'd be within jurisdiction and could potentially be subject to legal process within the EU ... but so far as I'm aware, Beamdog has no physical presence within the EU.
However, if Canada and the EU were to agree a treaty under which each promised to honour the other's consumer rights rulings and each promised to allow transferable jurisdiction to the other's courts in trade disputes ... then yes, an EU customer could apply for a ruling against Beamdog in his local courts and Canadian courts would then be expected to enforce the ruling in Canada (and vice versa if a Canadian customer had a complaint against an EU supplier, of course). The EU is structurally likely to want such a provision, but Canada seems to me unlikely to agree.
So far as I'm aware (having had only a brief glance through the text of the recent CETA treaty), it doesn't contain any such specific provisions, although it does appear to obligate the Parties to continuing discussions on regulatory convergence of consumer rights (that's EU-speak for "everyone must eventually adopt our rules"), so it might later lead to more detailed inter-operability.
However, even if CETA does contain more detailed provisions which I may have failed to notice in my quick glance, it's a good bet that new rules would apply only to new contracts agreed after the treaty takes effect, not retrospectively to pre-existing matters.
So CETA very probably wouldn't be relevant to Beamdog's troubles with the CE Box, although it might (just possibly) become relevant to future products.
As I've suggested before, at least in the U.S., the credit card companies will arbitrate this kind of dispute using their own legal teams. And they side with their customer almost always. File a dispute with your credit card companies, folks. They are experts at this.
I just think it's important to draw a distinction between "this is what we're legally entitled to" and "this is what we think Beamdog should do if they want to make things right."
I agree. Of course.
Nevertheless, I think the clear answer to what Beamdog should do to make things right is to offer refunds to any customers who are fed up with waiting. That seems the obvious "decent thing to do", whatever the technical legalities may or may not be for customers in various countries.
It may not be great PR to have to offer customers their money back ... but it's very much worse PR to refuse to do so when customers feel entitled to the refund. The latter is especially so for jurisdictions (such as the EU countries) where customers are regularly told that they have certain rights, and have therefore built up expectations about what is "normal" (even if not technically enforceable against suppliers from other places).
And for me especially interesting I find: How are the answers to the above questions going to change once CETA comes into effect.
Foreword: this is only an observation. I've been following the CETA trade deal for a while now.
Just from a legal perspective, laws like this generally don't apply retroactively; e.g. the wording may end up being something along the lines of "Purchases on or after the (date of) [no idea what the date will be, it was signed by Canada but still needs to be ratified by the EU] will be affected by the new legislation." However, much of what I've seen so far on the topic has been about import and export on a corporate scale rather than consumer purchases. The vast majority of the trade deal does not target end consumers. There is one portion that details electronic commerce, though.
This chapter covers any business done electronically (e.g. online shopping). It includes rules that ensure that personal information on the internet is protected and that online services will not include customs duties. Canada and the EU also promise to cooperate on issues related to e-commerce, for instance on combatting spam.
ARTICLE 16.1 Definitions
For the purposes of this Chapter: delivery means a computer program, text, video, image, sound recording or other delivery that is digitally encoded; and
electronic commerce means commerce conducted through telecommunications, alone or in conjunction with other information and communication technologies.
ARTICLE 16.2 Objective and scope
1. The Parties recognise that electronic commerce increases economic growth and trade opportunities in many sectors and confirm the applicability of the WTO rules to electronic commerce. They agree to promote the development of electronic commerce between them, in particular by cooperating on the issues raised by electronic commerce under the provisions of this Chapter.
2. This Chapter does not impose an obligation on a Party to allow a delivery transmitted by electronic means except in accordance with the Party's obligations under another provision of this Agreement.
ARTICLE 16.3 Customs duties on electronic deliveries
1. A Party shall not impose a customs duty, fee, or charge on a delivery transmitted by electronic means.
2. For greater certainty, paragraph 1 does not prevent a Party from imposing an internal tax or other internal charge on a delivery transmitted by electronic means, provided that the tax or charge is imposed in a manner consistent with this Agreement.
ARTICLE 16.4 Trust and confidence in electronic commerce
Each Party should adopt or maintain laws, regulations or administrative measures for the protection of personal information of users engaged in electronic commerce and, when doing so, shall take into due consideration international standards of data protection of relevant international organisations of which both Parties are a member.
ARTICLE 16.5 General provisions
Considering the potential of electronic commerce as a social and economic development tool, the
Parties recognise the importance of:
(a) clarity, transparency and predictability in their domestic regulatory frameworks in facilitating, to the maximum extent possible, the development of electronic commerce;
(b) interoperability, innovation and competition in facilitating electronic commerce; and
(c) facilitating the use of electronic commerce by small and medium sized enterprises.
ARTICLE 16.6 Dialogue on electronic commerce
1. Recognising the global nature of electronic commerce, the Parties agree to maintain a dialogue on issues raised by electronic commerce, which will address, among other things:
(a) the recognition of certificates of electronic signatures issued to the public and the facilitation of cross-border certification services;
(b) the liability of intermediary service suppliers with respect to the transmission, or the storage of information;
(c) the treatment of unsolicited electronic commercial communications; and
(d) the protection of personal information and the protection of consumers and businesses from fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices in the sphere of electronic commerce.
2. The dialogue in paragraph 1 may take the form of exchange of information on the Parties' respective laws, regulations, and other measures on these issues, as well as sharing experiences on the implementation of such laws, regulations and other measures.
3. Recognising the global nature of electronic commerce, the Parties affirm the importance of actively participating in multilateral fora to promote the development of electronic commerce.
ARTICLE 16.7 Relation to other chapters
In the event of an inconsistency between this Chapter and another chapter of this Agreement, the other chapter prevails to the extent of the inconsistency.
Much of what is listed is already covered under the multitude of trade deals overseen by the World Trade Organisation. This simply lays it out on a one-to-one basis. From a consumer perspective, I doubt much will change. One main difference will be the import duty on purchases. However, most of the actual details have yet to be laid out. So far, we only have summaries and briefs.
I can imagine it taking a considerable length of time before all the details are set, though. Maybe even years, and, again, I doubt it'll be retroactive.
Of course, another possibility is that Canada and the EU may now negotiate "CETA 2" - the Collector's Edition Trade Agreement, just for Beamdog! Or maybe not.
Much of what is listed is already covered under the multitude of trade deals overseen by the World Trade Organisation. This simply lays it out on a one-to-one basis. From a consumer perspective, I doubt much will change.
Aside from import duty being scrapped, I would imagine the only to 'change' is that you'll get greater clarification on the laws that are applicable (rather than laws actually becoming international; i.e. 16.5(a) "clarity and transparency.").
The majority of the new laws will affect corporate and agricultural deals, not end consumer rights. A side affect may see a reduction in prices for certain imported goods to Europe from Canada (not that we're shipping in a lot of snow and ice, but you get the idea* :P), but that won't apply to digital goods.
(* note: joking aside, Europe does import electronics and chemicals, among other things, from Canada)
I never would have thought that my Tides Of Numenara boxset would make it to me before my SOD boxset but it looks like that is going to be the case. It looks like TTON is shipping out on February 28. Launch day of the game, as it should be. The question now is will SOD actually make it to us within a year of it's release?
On a side note, and from personal experience, it's worth pointing out that the law (of whichever country) does not differentiate between a large multinational (I used to work for one) and a small business (I used to own one). In the case of the former, when I hit a legal problem I simply passed it on to the very highly paid legal department. In the case of the latter, when I hit a legal problem the legal fees forced me into bankruptcy (even though I was in the right, I simply ran out of money before the litigant did).
So, whilst big companies might be seen as fair game, please think twice before pursuing legal action against a small company (unless they have deliberately done you wrong of course).
It sounds like Beamdog is digging in their heals on this and is refusing to budge, which is their right, but at what cost from a customer relations standpoint?
It sounds like Beamdog is digging in their heals on this and is refusing to budge, which is their right, but at what cost from a customer relations standpoint?
We haven't heard anything official from Beamdog, so it's a little early to say they're digging in their heels. The company is shut down until Monday, so we won't hear anything until then at the earliest.
Yes, how dare they not respond while they're not open.
@Dee, they've had plenty of time to respond. It's not like this is a new issue.
They've been out of the office for two weeks, and we're having this conversation today. They get back on Monday. Maybe ask them then instead of assuming their silence is indicative of corruption?
This has certainly been a disappointing experience. I pre-ordered the CE in mid-March. After a slew of controversy came out about the game, my opinion shifted and I decided to cancel on April 11th. I was told that my order was outside of their 14-day cancellation window -- because policies -- and that I was stuck. Had I only known that the product would arrive more than half a year later (and counting ... who knows when it will actually show up), my goodness, I surely wouldn't have pulled the trigger. They also really pushed the product's limited nature, appealing to my sense of urgency, yet it is still available this long after orders began. To say I am unhappy regarding this entire process is an understatement. I should have stuck to my original guns regarding this product. I let nostalgia inform my purchasing decision. I've learned my lesson with respect to Beamdog.
While the office is closed, I've decided to check the subject being discussed on the last few pages of this thread.
For this post, I'm taking taking my moderator's hat off and put all administrative privileges into into the bag of holding.
First of all, as a lawyer I can say that each country has its own legal system, and branches of law work completely differently in different countries. This is why something that is being allowed or disallowed regarding customers' rights in, for example, USA, or UK, or Russia, or Germany, is regulated differently in Canada.
Also, if the customer is from another country (for example, from Italy), then the rules of the seller's country (Canada) are active, except when a different approach is put into a contract.
Don't count on always being able to return a product you've bought, whether it's from a store or the Internet. There is no law that says all sellers must take back an item. It may not matter that you don't like it, decided you can't afford it or found it cheaper somewhere else.
Every seller has a different return policy. Find out what the seller's policy is before you buy. The return policy is often stated on the back of the receipt and/or posted near the cash register; if not, get it in writing on the receipt. Note that these policies may change during promotions and for items that are on sale or are deemed to be "party wear."
Some stores will allow you to bring goods back but will set conditions. Examples are:
No returns or exchanges allowed on personal goods such as pierced earrings or swimsuits Products may be exchanged but not returned for cash back Goods must be returned within a set number of days A credit note will be given instead of money returned Goods must be unused and still have all tags, packaging, etc You must have your sales receipt (although this is almost always required, some stores will refund or exchange without a receipt) A restocking fee may be charged Your province or territory may have legislation that gives you the right to return specific products or cancel specific contracts. Contact your provincial or territorial consumer affairs office for more information."
So, basically each seller sets it's own rules regarding refunds, plus we have to check the rules of the certain territory. This is why I'll quote "Welcome to Alberta – A Consumers Guide to Alberta - Service Alberta", link (Beamdog is from Alberta):
"Can I bring products back to the store?
There is no legal obligation for businesses to accept an item you want to return just because you have changed your mind about it. Businesses don’t have to give a refund or exchange on products unless it is written in their return policy. Return policies are often posted somewhere near the cash register. It is a good idea to ask the salesperson about the return policy before purchasing any item.
If you want to return an item because it is broken, the store may be obliged to offer a replacement for the item, repair it, or return your money. If a manufacturer’s warranty came with the item, the store may refer you to that warranty and suggest you contact the manufacturer directly."
Later in that document there's a link to the Internet Shopping rules by Alberta Government, which state the following:
"You may cancel the contract if you do not receive the goods or services within 30 days of the date specified in the contract. If the delivery date is not specified, you may cancel the contract within 30 days. However, if the company attempts to deliver the goods or services and you refuse to accept them or if you are notified of delivery and no one is there to receive them, this 30-day cancellation right does not apply. If you exercise your right to cancel the contract, the business must return the money paid under the contract within 15 days from the date of cancellation. If the business fails to refund the money after being given proper notice and you did not pay by credit card, you may consider taking legal action to recover the debt."
So, after we have checked both Canada's and Alberta's rules, we go to the seller's rules:
"If you don't wish to wait for a patch and it has been less than 14 days since you purchased the game, you may ask our support team for an immediate refund. After 14 days, all sales are final."
So, again I reiterate - this is said as my personal view based on my own evaluation, it looks like the cancellation of the purchase (including the purchase of the CE) and the refund is indeed available only during 14 days after the purchase.
While the office is closed, I've decided to check the subject being discussed on the last few pages of this thread.
For this post, I'm taking taking my moderator's hat off and put all administrative privileges into into the bag of holding.
@JuliusBorisov , I'm pretty sure all the law you've quoted applies to products that were received by the buyer
The rub here is that the product purchased was never received as purchased by any buyer.
Basically, Beamdog took money for a physical product, and then did not deliver that product to any buyers. That's criminal fraud, not a legal consumer issue.
It sounds like Beamdog is digging in their heals on this and is refusing to budge, which is their right, but at what cost from a customer relations standpoint?
We haven't heard anything official from Beamdog, so it's a little early to say they're digging in their heels. The company is shut down until Monday, so we won't hear anything until then at the earliest.
Unfortunately I have heard an official statement from Beamdog, their support told me that since it's outside of the 14 day return window, I'm out of luck. I highly doubt a Beamdog rep is going to come on here on Monday and change their return policy all of a sudden on the collector's editions. It would be awesome and a very noble gesture to retain good will with their customers, but realistically, I'm not planning on that happening at this point. I will gladly eat crow if I am wrong.
As Julius said, the support people are a third party company working from instructions that were originally meant for digital downloads only. The issue of returns for the CE, though it was mentioned in September, only really blew up over the last few days.
Given that there's only a small percentage of people wanting a return, and there's others who are ready to snap up those boxes. It would be extremely foolish of Beamdog to not make an exception to the return policy for those who are tired of waiting.
As Julius said, the support people are a third party company working from instructions that were originally meant for digital downloads only. The issue of returns for the CE, though it was mentioned in September, only really blew up over the last few days.
Given that there's only a small percentage of people wanting a return, and there's others who are ready to snap up those boxes. It would be extremely foolish of Beamdog to not make an exception to the return policy for those who are tired of waiting.
Thank you for your research, @JuliusBorisov, an excellent clarification of the legal situation in Canada.
Indeed it does seem that Canada's law is very drastically different from the consumer rights situation in the EU, which I was describing earlier. I'm not surprised that it is different, but I'm quite surprised by the extent of the difference.
From what @JuliusBorisov has posted above, it seems to me that @Shandyr's interpretation is correct - Beamdog is apparently under no obligation to deliver the CE Box ever, in spite of having taken people's money!
This is an extraordinary law, practically a "fraudster's charter" - apparently anyone in Canada who sells anything online can simply keep the buyer's money for nothing, if only he can make excuses to keep the customer waiting patiently for 30 days without claiming a refund.
For those customers who live in places with consumer protection laws, this might come as quite a shock! It's actually a pretty strong argument for never buying physical goods online from anyone in Canada.
As @BelgarathMTH has previously suggested, the only redress a customer might have is to make a claim through his credit card company.
@Shandyr and @Gallowglass In my (legal) opinion the article you refer to does not mean that there is no legal obligation for Beamdog to deliver. Although it's not in the article Julius mentioned, Beamdog still is legally obliged to deliver the goods. If Beamdog wouldn't do so, there are probably other ways to redress this issue with other legal actions (unfortunately I'm not well-versed in the way Canada's legal system operates but I suppose there will be legal remedies against negligence on the side of a seller). Just the fact that it is not spelled out in that specific article doesn't mean there is no legal obligation or becomes a " fraudster's charter". This is an article that is for a very specific purpose and in no way absolves Beamdog from their general duty of delivering the goods.
@Shandyr I have no idea how Canadian law works under these kind of situations but in Europe/The Netherlands this is not possible as it would open up avenues for legal action.
Comments
Which geographical jurisdiction applies to international online transactions is a rather muddy area, although I think legal interpretation is generally leaning towards saying that jurisdiction is where the vendor processes the transaction (... and so no, the law in its current state can't really cope with diffuse cloud-based processing). If Beamdog had an office or other physical presence over here, then that'd be within jurisdiction and could potentially be subject to legal process within the EU ... but so far as I'm aware, Beamdog has no physical presence within the EU.
However, if Canada and the EU were to agree a treaty under which each promised to honour the other's consumer rights rulings and each promised to allow transferable jurisdiction to the other's courts in trade disputes ... then yes, an EU customer could apply for a ruling against Beamdog in his local courts and Canadian courts would then be expected to enforce the ruling in Canada (and vice versa if a Canadian customer had a complaint against an EU supplier, of course). The EU is structurally likely to want such a provision, but Canada seems to me unlikely to agree.
So far as I'm aware (having had only a brief glance through the text of the recent CETA treaty), it doesn't contain any such specific provisions, although it does appear to obligate the Parties to continuing discussions on regulatory convergence of consumer rights (that's EU-speak for "everyone must eventually adopt our rules"), so it might later lead to more detailed inter-operability.
However, even if CETA does contain more detailed provisions which I may have failed to notice in my quick glance, it's a good bet that new rules would apply only to new contracts agreed after the treaty takes effect, not retrospectively to pre-existing matters.
So CETA very probably wouldn't be relevant to Beamdog's troubles with the CE Box, although it might (just possibly) become relevant to future products.
Nevertheless, I think the clear answer to what Beamdog should do to make things right is to offer refunds to any customers who are fed up with waiting. That seems the obvious "decent thing to do", whatever the technical legalities may or may not be for customers in various countries.
It may not be great PR to have to offer customers their money back ... but it's very much worse PR to refuse to do so when customers feel entitled to the refund. The latter is especially so for jurisdictions (such as the EU countries) where customers are regularly told that they have certain rights, and have therefore built up expectations about what is "normal" (even if not technically enforceable against suppliers from other places).
Just from a legal perspective, laws like this generally don't apply retroactively; e.g. the wording may end up being something along the lines of "Purchases on or after the (date of) [no idea what the date will be, it was signed by Canada but still needs to be ratified by the EU] will be affected by the new legislation." However, much of what I've seen so far on the topic has been about import and export on a corporate scale rather than consumer purchases. The vast majority of the trade deal does not target end consumers. There is one portion that details electronic commerce, though.
Basics regarding e-commerce:
ARTICLE 16.1 Definitions
delivery means a computer program, text, video, image, sound recording or other delivery that is digitally encoded; and
electronic commerce means commerce conducted through telecommunications, alone or in conjunction with other information and communication technologies.
ARTICLE 16.2 Objective and scope
2. This Chapter does not impose an obligation on a Party to allow a delivery transmitted by electronic means except in accordance with the Party's obligations under another provision of this Agreement.
ARTICLE 16.3 Customs duties on electronic deliveries
2. For greater certainty, paragraph 1 does not prevent a Party from imposing an internal tax or other internal charge on a delivery transmitted by electronic means, provided that the tax or charge is imposed in a manner consistent with this Agreement.
ARTICLE 16.4 Trust and confidence in electronic commerce
ARTICLE 16.5 General provisions
Parties recognise the importance of:
(a) clarity, transparency and predictability in their domestic regulatory frameworks in facilitating, to the maximum extent possible, the development of electronic commerce;
(b) interoperability, innovation and competition in facilitating electronic commerce; and
(c) facilitating the use of electronic commerce by small and medium sized enterprises.
ARTICLE 16.6 Dialogue on electronic commerce
(a) the recognition of certificates of electronic signatures issued to the public and the facilitation of cross-border certification services;
(b) the liability of intermediary service suppliers with respect to the transmission, or the storage of information;
(c) the treatment of unsolicited electronic commercial communications; and
(d) the protection of personal information and the protection of consumers and businesses from fraudulent and deceptive commercial practices in the sphere of electronic commerce.
2. The dialogue in paragraph 1 may take the form of exchange of information on the Parties' respective laws, regulations, and other measures on these issues, as well as sharing experiences on the implementation of such laws, regulations and other measures.
3. Recognising the global nature of electronic commerce, the Parties affirm the importance of actively participating in multilateral fora to promote the development of electronic commerce.
ARTICLE 16.7 Relation to other chapters
Much of what is listed is already covered under the multitude of trade deals overseen by the World Trade Organisation. This simply lays it out on a one-to-one basis. From a consumer perspective, I doubt much will change. One main difference will be the import duty on purchases. However, most of the actual details have yet to be laid out. So far, we only have summaries and briefs.
I can imagine it taking a considerable length of time before all the details are set, though. Maybe even years, and, again, I doubt it'll be retroactive.
The majority of the new laws will affect corporate and agricultural deals, not end consumer rights. A side affect may see a reduction in prices for certain imported goods to Europe from Canada (not that we're shipping in a lot of snow and ice, but you get the idea* :P), but that won't apply to digital goods.
(* note: joking aside, Europe does import electronics and chemicals, among other things, from Canada)
In the case of the former, when I hit a legal problem I simply passed it on to the very highly paid legal department.
In the case of the latter, when I hit a legal problem the legal fees forced me into bankruptcy (even though I was in the right, I simply ran out of money before the litigant did).
So, whilst big companies might be seen as fair game, please think twice before pursuing legal action against a small company (unless they have deliberately done you wrong of course).
From September:
For this post, I'm taking taking my moderator's hat off and put all administrative privileges into into the bag of holding.
First of all, as a lawyer I can say that each country has its own legal system, and branches of law work completely differently in different countries. This is why something that is being allowed or disallowed regarding customers' rights in, for example, USA, or UK, or Russia, or Germany, is regulated differently in Canada.
Also, if the customer is from another country (for example, from Italy), then the rules of the seller's country (Canada) are active, except when a different approach is put into a contract.
Here is what we have for Canada:
According to the Office of Consumer Affairs (OCA), http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/oca-bc.nsf/eng/ca02478.html,
"Returns and Refunds
Don't count on always being able to return a product you've bought, whether it's from a store or the Internet. There is no law that says all sellers must take back an item. It may not matter that you don't like it, decided you can't afford it or found it cheaper somewhere else.
Every seller has a different return policy. Find out what the seller's policy is before you buy. The return policy is often stated on the back of the receipt and/or posted near the cash register; if not, get it in writing on the receipt. Note that these policies may change during promotions and for items that are on sale or are deemed to be "party wear."
Some stores will allow you to bring goods back but will set conditions. Examples are:
No returns or exchanges allowed on personal goods such as pierced earrings or swimsuits
Products may be exchanged but not returned for cash back
Goods must be returned within a set number of days
A credit note will be given instead of money returned
Goods must be unused and still have all tags, packaging, etc
You must have your sales receipt (although this is almost always required, some stores will refund or exchange without a receipt)
A restocking fee may be charged
Your province or territory may have legislation that gives you the right to return specific products or cancel specific contracts. Contact your provincial or territorial consumer affairs office for more information."
So, basically each seller sets it's own rules regarding refunds, plus we have to check the rules of the certain territory. This is why I'll quote "Welcome to Alberta – A Consumers Guide to Alberta - Service Alberta", link (Beamdog is from Alberta):
"Can I bring products back to the store?
There is no legal obligation for businesses to accept an item you want to return just because you have changed your mind about it. Businesses don’t have to give a refund or exchange on products unless it is written in their return policy. Return policies are often posted somewhere near the cash register. It is a good idea to ask the salesperson about the return policy before purchasing any item.
If you want to return an item because it is broken, the store may be obliged to offer a replacement for the item, repair it, or return your money. If a manufacturer’s warranty came with the item, the store may refer you to that warranty and suggest you contact the manufacturer directly."
Later in that document there's a link to the Internet Shopping rules by Alberta Government, which state the following:
"You may cancel the contract if you do not receive the goods or services within 30 days of the date specified in the contract. If the delivery date is not specified, you may cancel the contract within 30 days. However, if the company attempts to deliver the goods or services and you refuse to accept them or if you are notified of delivery and no one is there to receive them, this 30-day cancellation right does not apply.
If you exercise your right to cancel the contract, the business must return the money paid under the contract within 15 days from the date of cancellation. If the business fails to refund the money after being given proper notice and you did not pay by credit card, you may consider taking legal action to recover the debt."
So, after we have checked both Canada's and Alberta's rules, we go to the seller's rules:
From Beamdog's return policy, https://www.beamdog.com/about/returns:
"If you don't wish to wait for a patch and it has been less than 14 days since you purchased the game, you may ask our support team for an immediate refund. After 14 days, all sales are final."
So, again I reiterate - this is said as my personal view based on my own evaluation, it looks like the cancellation of the purchase (including the purchase of the CE) and the refund is indeed available only during 14 days after the purchase.
The rub here is that the product purchased was never received as purchased by any buyer.
Basically, Beamdog took money for a physical product, and then did not deliver that product to any buyers. That's criminal fraud, not a legal consumer issue.
Given that there's only a small percentage of people wanting a return, and there's others who are ready to snap up those boxes. It would be extremely foolish of Beamdog to not make an exception to the return policy for those who are tired of waiting.
Indeed it does seem that Canada's law is very drastically different from the consumer rights situation in the EU, which I was describing earlier. I'm not surprised that it is different, but I'm quite surprised by the extent of the difference.
From what @JuliusBorisov has posted above, it seems to me that @Shandyr's interpretation is correct - Beamdog is apparently under no obligation to deliver the CE Box ever, in spite of having taken people's money!
This is an extraordinary law, practically a "fraudster's charter" - apparently anyone in Canada who sells anything online can simply keep the buyer's money for nothing, if only he can make excuses to keep the customer waiting patiently for 30 days without claiming a refund.
For those customers who live in places with consumer protection laws, this might come as quite a shock! It's actually a pretty strong argument for never buying physical goods online from anyone in Canada.
As @BelgarathMTH has previously suggested, the only redress a customer might have is to make a claim through his credit card company.