Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Taking legal action against The Secret World

13468916

Comments

  • huskie77huskie77 Nowhere, NEPosts: 354Member
    Originally posted by Weretigar

    I brought up the first statement only because it's even more silly to think that tos=god in mmo's. Did you know Aeria games has changed their tos 10+ times since the first time i've signed it and no ones ever told me about it? Is it legal to change A signed contract after it's been altered? No to all of them ohh yeah that's because TOS is not A LEGALLY BUINDING CONTRACT WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERMENT. 

    It IS legal to change the contract as often as they want. Each time you sign the new one, you negate the old one. You can choose not to agree to the new one and you lose access to the software.

    The case you cited in South Korea is a great example. It was not over the TOS, but rather sales and refund policy.  Blizzard has a NO REFUND policy, which was what South Korea stepped in to address. South Korean law has a consumer protection caveat that states that refunds must be given for any product that has a defect not caused by the consumer. Blizzard's server woes caused that defect and therefore their policy was superceded by the laws of the nation.

    Contracts may not supercede the laws in the country of either party. Interestingly enough, counter to layman speculation, when one element of a contract is voided, the whole contract is not itself void.

    image
  • SiveriaSiveria Saint John, New BrunswickPosts: 1,200Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Derros

    Caveat freaking Emptor, YOU bought an unproven product, YOU knew the history of funcom, YOU took a gamble and lost.  What do you want funcom to do?  continue to persue a failed monitization strategy just so you could "get your monies worth?"  What, did you want them to do what TOR did with thier F2P model?   

     

    What are you gonna do, hire a lawyer to get $83 (factoring out the months you already played) back?  With all the lawer fees and court fees and stuff, you'd be lucky to get back $15. 

    Actually with what they cost per hour, he'd prob lose all he would have gained after hiring a lawyer for 1-2 hour(s). so its really not worth it. But still, if you buy a lifetime sub in any of todays themepark mmo's I just laugh my ass off.

    Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:

    A. Proven right (if something bad happens)

    or

    B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)

    Either way, you can't lose! Try it out sometime!

  • minttunatorminttunator ViimsiPosts: 131Member
    Originally posted by rwyan

    As a lifer, I'm GLAD funcom made this move.  The game was so lively upon launch and I'm looking forward to seeing more players in game.

    You still get the content for free.... you just have to buy it with the points you will now get... for free!  So yes, there is now an extra step but I feel like I've been fairly compensated. 

    Yeah, most sane lifers seem to be pretty happy with this - we're still getting all the content, but it seems likely we'll have some extra points left over as well (assuming the average content update costs less than 1200 points), which we didn't have before. :)

  • besteverbestever prescott, AZPosts: 732Member
    QQ fest 2013. This will help the game and get more people to check it out and you want to QQ about the lifetime sub which your still gettting. Wow people these days. I just don't get it. You will never ever have to buy a dlc ever and have some funcom points left over. Man get over it.
  • ThillianThillian BratislavaPosts: 3,143Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Tjed
    Originally posted by banzai014
    Originally posted by Roxtarr
    Re-read the Terms and Conditions you agreed to and you may find you have no ground to stand on.

    The EULA means nothing in Europe

    This is interesting.  Any reading material that you could link?

    Just shows the OP knows jack***t about legal issues.

    EULA is binding in Europe as well and a common legal practice. Of course EULA, or any other Terms and Conditions, cannot be in violation with legislation of the given country, but everything else is binding to all Parties.

    REALITY CHECK

  • ReizlaReizla AlkmaarPosts: 3,294Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Roxtarr
    Originally posted by banzai014
    Originally posted by Roxtarr
    Re-read the Terms and Conditions you agreed to and you may find you have no ground to stand on.

    The EULA means nothing in Europe

    So there are no Terms and Conditions for players in Europe?  How can you plan an MMO without agreeing to terms and conditions?

    Well, there are, but most crap that's written in any EULA is not valid within the bounderies of the EU. And if OP lives in the EU I think he even has a fair chance on succeeding with his claim since FunCom is a EU company, bound to the same EU laws...

    AsRock 990FX Extreme3
    AMD Phenom II 1090T ~3.2Ghz
    GEiL 16Gb DDR3 1600Mhz
    ASUS GTX970 3x HD monitor 1920x1080

  • aslan132aslan132 Tampa, FLPosts: 378Member Uncommon
    Forewarning this is going to sound trolly, but i certainly dont mean it to be. That being said, anyone who bought a "lifetime subscription" and expected the game never to be B2P or F2P was delusional. Its a fantastic game, but this was always going to happen. Would it be any better if it were a year from now? Or 2? Doesnt matter when it happens, it was ALWAYS part of the plan. There has never and will never be any reason to get a "lifetime anything" that has to do with such a changing industry. No MMO will stay unchanged for a "lifetime". Least of all a single player, story driven game.
  • SiugSiug TallinnPosts: 1,236Member Uncommon
    I have a lifetime sub nut I don't feel shafted. As long as I get my monthly points and items plus CS discount I don't see the problem. Maybe the area of monthly subs is over and people prefer other pricing models. Personally I prefer P2P anytime but if most players don't like it I have to adapt.
  • theoneandonlytheoneandonly londonPosts: 102Member

    best B2P model on a market

    well whiners will still whine

  • WhitebeardsWhitebeards TokyoPosts: 778Member
    Originally posted by Teala
    See, it is for this very reason that lifetime subs are worthless.

    TSW life time isn't worthless. Inform yourself please. I ended up buying GM pack yesterday because it is a great deal. Infact life time subscribers got even a better deal with new changes.

  • SiugSiug TallinnPosts: 1,236Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Whitebeards
    Originally posted by Teala
    See, it is for this very reason that lifetime subs are worthless.

    TSW life time isn't worthless. Inform yourself please. I ended up buying GM pack yesterday because it is a great deal. Infact life time subscribers got even a better deal with new changes.

    Cannot predict the future but so far I can agree. At least for me it does not look like a bad deal. 

  • CaldrinCaldrin CwmbranPosts: 4,533Member Uncommon

    You will not get anywhere taking legal action.. it would probally not even get into most courts.

    At the end of the day they are providing a service and they chance change said service whenever they want. Gon on OP try and sue them and waste your time LOL.

     

    To me it seems like a decent deal and I brought the game and subbed for a few months..

  • BurntvetBurntvet Baltimore, MDPosts: 2,936Member Uncommon

    For those that say EULAs are binding: not so.

    In the US at least, software and other media EULAs have been repeatedly found to be legally defective on several points, mostly relating to contract law, but also veering into areas of consumer protection and "first use/fair use" of media.

    One thing the software industry has been doing, is settling quietly with people who do file suit. Very rarely do these kinds of cases go all the way to verdict and there is a very good reason: the software companies are scared shitless of the ramifications of possible verdicts.

    On the few occasions EULAs have gone to verdict, they have almost uniformly "lost" and found defective on one or more points.

    One I do recall is with Autodesk and some guy trying to resell copies of Autocad, which supposedly violated terms of the EULA. That one did go to verdict and the company lost, huge.

     

    The only reason people think EULAs are binding, is because they are rarely challenged. (Not many people are going to sue over a $60 video/comp game.)

     

  • hfztthfztt GlostrupPosts: 839Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Reizla
    Originally posted by Roxtarr
    Originally posted by banzai014
    Originally posted by Roxtarr
    Re-read the Terms and Conditions you agreed to and you may find you have no ground to stand on.

    The EULA means nothing in Europe

    So there are no Terms and Conditions for players in Europe?  How can you plan an MMO without agreeing to terms and conditions?

    Well, there are, but most crap that's written in any EULA is not valid within the bounderies of the EU. And if OP lives in the EU I think he even has a fair chance on succeeding with his claim since FunCom is a EU company, bound to the same EU laws...

    Well, I still dont think it will help in this case. What EU law provides is a protection against using EULA's to give the user worse conditions that the base law provides them. So if this somehow breaks some EU law, sure it will help, but if not teh EULA stands.

  • SlechtvalkSlechtvalk ElsdorfPosts: 33Member

    First, when an EULA is not conform with any law, its not valid

     

    In europe an EULA is only valid when beeing known before buying.

    An EULA during Installation, so after you bought the product, is not valid.

    http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endbenutzer-Lizenzvertrag

     

    An its the same within european law. So every upcoming EULA During Installation is not valid in the eurpean union.

    The same is with changing EULA.

    Unkown to me is what happens if you have a P2P with monthly subscription, i think this is seen different, because you have the option to cancel the service.

     

    The main usage is, if you have to pay for something, then during your payment made licenses are ok. But you pay in a shop, so the first time you see the EULA is not when using your keycode, you normally face it when you launch first time. and this is normally after your payment, and thats what i makes illegal.

     

    so in this case you can only check if your payment as lifetimer gave you priviliges you now dont have any more.

    not having made a good deal with lifetime is something different i think.

  • ChromeBallzChromeBallz LeidenPosts: 287Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Roxtarr
    Originally posted by banzai014 Originally posted by Roxtarr Re-read the Terms and Conditions you agreed to and you may find you have no ground to stand on.
    The EULA means nothing in Europe
    So there are no Terms and Conditions for players in Europe?  How can you plan an MMO without agreeing to terms and conditions?

    Clickwrap agreements (such as EULAS) are not binding in Europe. This is because such things have to be signed and agreed upon [i]before[/b] the payment is made (ie, the sales contract is signed).

    Since these 'terms and conditions' cannot be viewed or agreed upon before buying the game (boxed in any case), it is deemed pretty much useless, pointless and illegal in Europe.

    Companies can put in all the clickwrap agreements they want but unless they are made available before you pay for the product they are simply not legally binding or valid. Furthermore, changing the terms of the agreement is completely illegal without consulting all parties involved, companies do not get a free pass to change it one-sided as much as they like. This applies to 'normal' contracts aswell, let alone clickwrap agreements which aren't even legal in the first place.

    Playing: EVE, TERA, BDO
    Played (more than 1 month): WoW, GW2, L2, WAR, AoC, DnL, GW, LotRO, EQ2, TOR, CoH, STO, TSW
    Tried (trial, up to 1 month): EQ, UO, AO, EnB, TCoS, Fury, Ryzom, EU, DDO, TR, RF, CO, Aion, VG, DN, Vindictus

  • muffins89muffins89 Yakima, WAPosts: 1,306Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ChromeBallz

     


    Originally posted by Roxtarr

    Originally posted by banzai014

    Originally posted by Roxtarr Re-read the Terms and Conditions you agreed to and you may find you have no ground to stand on.
    The EULA means nothing in Europe
    So there are no Terms and Conditions for players in Europe?  How can you plan an MMO without agreeing to terms and conditions?

     

    Clickwrap agreements (such as EULAS) are not binding in Europe. This is because such things have to be signed and agreed upon [i]before[/b] the payment is made (ie, the sales contract is signed).

    Since these 'terms and conditions' cannot be viewed or agreed upon before buying the game (boxed in any case), it is deemed pretty much useless, pointless and illegal in Europe.

    Companies can put in all the clickwrap agreements they want but unless they are made available before you pay for the product they are simply not legally binding or valid. Furthermore, changing the terms of the agreement is completely illegal without consulting all parties involved, companies do not get a free pass to change it one-sided as much as they like. This applies to 'normal' contracts aswell, let alone clickwrap agreements which aren't even legal in the first place.

    you're assuming funcom's eula/tos is considered a clickwrap agreement.  i can read wikopedia too.  it comes down to how the judge see's it.  it's pretty much case by case and testimony would play a major part in the decision.  not all eula's are null and void in europe.  otherwise they wouldnt exsist in europe.

    I think the prostitute mod corrupted your game files man. -elhefen

  • MagnetiaMagnetia SydneyPosts: 1,029Member Uncommon
    I'm thinking about getting TSW because it's b2p now XD

    Play for fun. Play to win. Play for perfection. Play with friends. Play in another world. Why do you play?

  • TenkouseiTenkousei BrusselsPosts: 72Member Uncommon

    As far as i know purchasing the game itself doesn't yield immediate acces to the game. One needs to set up a subscription.

     

    In that sence, TWO sales are being done:

    1) purchasing the software (a license to use the software)

    2) Purchasing the use of an online service.

    As far as i can remember, before setting up a sub, one needs to agree to the terms and conditions (see the judicial doctrine concerning standard contracts) so one could argue that despite everything, the EULA is being presented to you for reading BEFORE you purchase the service and is as such valid.

    Also: using wiki as a valid judicial source ... /facedesk.

  • evilastroevilastro EdinburghPosts: 4,270Member
    Originally posted by banzai014

    This leaves players with existing subscription time and lifetime subscribers in the lurch. In this new model, players that purchase the box price have full access to the game in its current state. Players can then subscribe for $15/month for 1200 Funcom points ($10 in real money) that expire after 6 months needed to buy future DLC (slated to be released in monthly installments costing $5-10),  a fluff vanity item of the month, an xp booster item and a 10% discount on the item shop. Existing subscribers are being switched to this plan for the remainder of their subscription time, without a refund option. Remember that these subscribers also had to buy the game box in the beginning.

    Everyone has to buy the box, its B2P, not F2P. Existing subscribers can stop paying at any time, yes there will be some crossover, but they are amply compensated with the abovementioned items.

    This is not what subscribers paid for. 

    It is exactly what they paid for... access to the game... and more than what they paid for - in game currency and items.

    The deal they signed up for has been changed without their consent or prior knowledge. The terms of agreement have been pulled out from under them. Subscribers paid for access to updates ("DLC") but also access to the game itself. In the P2P model you simply could not log in if you were'nt subscribed. Now that you can get full access for free, the value of the subscription has been cheapened.

    Which is why noone is getting charged for subscriptions anymore unless they want to.... you paid for access up until this point, which noone else had access to unless they were paying. If Maccas has a 5 dollar burger, then lowers the price to 2 dollars for a deal, they dont have to compensate everyone who ever purchased the burger before the difference in price. You agreed to pay that amount and it wasnt a problem until others could get it for less, get over yourself.

    The services subscribers get with the B2P model are worthless. $15 per month for $10 worth in limited time points, whereas a B2P player can buy DLC each month for cheaper ($5) and have exactly the same access to the game. $15 (sub per month) > $10 (in virtual Funcom monies) > $5 per month for DLC you need to keep up with other players.

    Subscribers also get an XP boost every 16 hours, a free item every month and discount in the shop..... so overall they get a much better deal if they are going to spend the 10 dollars in the shop each month.

    I feel that the subscription option is only there so that they don't have to refund people with existing subs and of course lifetimers. The sub has no value and is a ripoff. A sub gave players both access to new content and to the game itself. Since everyone has access to the game now for the box price, the sub has lost part of its value and so people with existing sub time should demand a refund. I would really like to know what a lawyer's legal opinion of this change would be.

    His opinion would be that you dont have a leg to stand on, since Funcom holds all the rights to everything in the game. Lifetime subscribers still have access to the game forever with no additional fees needed. Subscribers still have the experiences they had prior to this change.

    I have contacted Massively and MMORPG.com suggesting they write an article investigating the legal implications of TSW's B2P change or otherwise recommend me a lawyer specializing in this area that I could talk to. I hope this way we can get something started moving forward and clarify exactly  what legal recourse existing subscribers have. My demands are fair: I only ask that players get the option of having their extant subscription time refunded, since the subscription service has so wholly changed from what they originally intended to pay for (i.e. which in large part was paying for access to the game itself).

    Why on earth would a company that is having to lower the entry cost into a game to make profit, then go and refund all past profit. Get a grip and stop being so selfish. Getting more people into the game is a good thing, and lifetimers who like the game still get a very good deal.

    Pretty much every MMO I have played except WoW and Rift have gone F2P (or B2P in this case). SoE didnt pay me for the 5 years of EQ2 I paid for before it went F2P. Stop being rediculous and grow up.

     

  • SlechtvalkSlechtvalk ElsdorfPosts: 33Member
    Originally posted by Tenkousei

    As far as i know purchasing the game itself doesn't yield immediate acces to the game. One needs to set up a subscription.

     

    In that sence, TWO sales are being done:

    1) purchasing the software (a license to use the software)

    2) Purchasing the use of an online service.

    As far as i can remember, before setting up a sub, one needs to agree to the terms and conditions (see the judicial doctrine concerning standard contracts) so one could argue that despite everything, the EULA is being presented to you for reading BEFORE you purchase the service and is as such valid.

    Also: using wiki as a valid judicial source ... /facedesk.

    If you buy online maybe you are right, but not when buying a boxed version.

     

    this is some part of that:

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d54ff9e6-c515-11e1-b6fd-00144feabdc0.html

    "The ECJ, however, said that resellers like UsedSoft were not bound by license agreements banning the resale of software licenses."

     

    so ask yourself why you are not bound to license agreements in europe ;) this is made for downloaded and boxed software, so it depends on when you have been shown the license.

     

    there hasnt been someone yet who claimed against eulas in europe, why should you until today, you are not bound on agreements wich come during installation. i ignore them.

     

  • FdzzaiglFdzzaigl Somewhere in nowherePosts: 2,309Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Roxtarr
    Originally posted by banzai014
    Originally posted by Roxtarr
    Re-read the Terms and Conditions you agreed to and you may find you have no ground to stand on.

    The EULA means nothing in Europe

    So there are no Terms and Conditions for players in Europe?  How can you plan an MMO without agreeing to terms and conditions?

    You are overestimating the importance of terms and conditions. If an agreement was unreasonable to begin with or the party who offers you the agreement gives themselves the right to pretty much ignore any of YOUR rights or to change things one-sidedly, then that agreement is null because it is unbalanced.

    Now, I don't know anything about TSW's plans, but if the OP is right in his statements, that does seem very unfair.

     

    Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!

  • Crazy_StickCrazy_Stick Privacy Preferred, NCPosts: 1,059Member
    This is kind of silly OP. You don't have a case. I get that you are mad the game is now buy to play but you are set to get more return value through the shop than you spent on a GM membership over time by a long shot. At least this way the game survives and you don't end up with nothing. It was your choice to buy into it and if you are not happy, then well TOUGH.
  • SlechtvalkSlechtvalk ElsdorfPosts: 33Member
    Originally posted by Tenkousei

    Also: using wiki as a valid judicial source ... /facedesk.

     can you explain me why? wikipedia normally shows the source of information, so if the wikipedia itself maybe wrong, you can find your solution with that sources listed there.

     

    i am german, i am sorry not to find an english version of our law, should i post the german articles. do you think you will get easier behind our law system?

     

    http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bgb/BJNR001950896.html#BJNR001950896BJNG023401377

     

    §§305-310 BGB for germany.

  • ElsaboltsElsabolts Greencastle, INPosts: 2,594Member Uncommon

    " He who does not file suit goes hungry "

    image

13468916
This discussion has been closed.