No, because they're licenses, not purchases. Your phrasing is incorrect as far as I am aware.
You have had a license for years. The thing is, at any point the license rules can be changed. You are unable to use lawsuits (at least class action ones) to try to dispute a change in the rules, if I understand correctly, and your options will never be anything but "agree to any change that is added or lose several hundred dollars worth of licenses".
Compare this to say, a console game or CDROM PC game of yore. Do console games and CDROM PC games come with the old software license phrasing that just says it's a license to use the software? My guess is that this is/was standard, yet with console and old PC CDROM games, you -probably- do not have a constant threat of "agree with new demands that can be changed at any time, or lose access to your entire collection of games".
The reason people are presumably OK with this is that Valve in general has not seemed to have super evil intentions. If they stick with that, then it's OK, but it does seem a little scary. To take it to a silly extreme, wouldn't it now be legal for Valve, if they decided their bandwidth costs were too high, to change the license agreement and say "everyone must now pay us $30 per month or decline the license agreement, losing access to all games without refunds"? I see literally nothing legally stopping them from doing that, even though it's obviously ultra unlikely.