For Omali.. continuing discussion about Auto-Sub

Slapshot1188

Moved from the other thread:

 

Originally posted by Omali

Originally posted by Betel

Sending out a single email with no requirement for reply acknowledgment  is not legally acceptable in my country (or, it appears, his).

 

When  the product was bought there was no mention of activating a sub plan, and I am interested in which MMO's have done this previously as I can't think of any (been playing MMO's since M59).

 

Can you enlighten me please?

Actually, it is legally acceptable, by the following line in the Terms of Service:

"THESE RULES MAY BE REVISED AT ANY TIME. IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO REVIEW THEM OCCASIONALLY TO ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES, POLICIES AND AGREEMENTS PUBLISHED BY STAR VAULT."

Now, most commerce laws would prevent Star Vault from just going "subscription time!" and charging players, but they are allowed to change prices if they give proper notice. In most countries this proper notice is at least 30 days.

This isn't new, and it happens every day to millions of people. Your phone company, cable company, electric, heat, water, and banks have been doing it for years. If you're not the primary bill payer in your house, pay attention to whoever is, for when they get a letter from the ___ company telling them that costs are going up next month. Granted, in most areas utility companies have leeway with what percentage they can raise/lower without requiring notice.

I'll point you to a case in the opposite direction. When Pirates of the Burning Sea went free to play, they had to make a blanket statement over a month before the launch. The launch was delayed, but they still had to make the announcement that the company's pricing plan was changing because of legal requirements.

Star Vault has always had information on the website that there would be a subscription fee for Mortal Online, although the exact amount was not confirmed yet before the subscription policy went into place. There is no chance you could use the "I didn't know there would be a subscription" in a legal situation and get away with it, all the evidence points to the contrary.

Also: Getting a charge-back applied does not mean that what the company was doing was illegal. Credit card companies and banks will notoriously defend their account holders, and in the case of a reversal of charges where the person puts up a decent argument, they will simply reverse the charges and wait to see if the company challenges the reversal. Bottom line, your bank/card company doesn't have the time to fully investigate, and they care more about keeping you as a customer than they do about Star Vault keeping their fifty bucks. What you don't read about is how if the company proceeds with a response via their lawyer, your bank/card company will buckle like origami and send the charges right back to them. Getting a reversal applied does not make it valid.

 1.  Incorrect point regarding TOS.. yes.. they can change the TOS but the changes become active when you AGREE to them by clicking the button.   When a company changes the TOS for a game that you haven't played in 6 months.. you aren't subject to them until you try to login.. read them.. and click accept.   That didn't happen here.  Yes.. a company can change/lower their rates.. that has nothing to do with this situation.  This is a company that unilaterally subscribed all of their pre-order customers who DID NOT agree to a subscription.. EVER.  There was no subscription page.. nothing to select.. no length/payment information.  NOTHING.  As a mater of fact the original TOS stated that people would be subject to a subscription "AFTER CHOOSING A SUBSCRIPTION TYPE AND PAYMENT METHOD"... again.. none of that happened for the pre-order folks.  The sub stuff was added in March 2010 if I recall.. pre-orders were taken in July 2009.

 

2.  The chargeback has NOTHING to do with the card company not having time to investigate.  How it works is that you file the claim and give your stated reasons (in this case it was failure to deliver a working product (DVD) within 30 days of the charge).  The card company sends that claim onto Starvault who has X days to respond.  In my case.. StarVault did NOT respond as per the response I received from my CC.. and thus all charges were reversed and interest credited.   If you have some sort of evidence that StarVault sued my CC company and recovered all the money I would love to see it.  If not.. please do not make stuff up.

 

Originally posted by Betel

SV can put whatever it likes in their TOS, but they cannot trump consumer law in my country. Especially in the case of online transactions which have extra layers of protection for the consumer.

 

The product was bought as described at the time, and that did NOT include automatic starting of the subscription. Any change to the original terms of sale would need to be agreed by both sides or a full refund issued, including interest and penalties if appropriate.  A single email, with no requirement for reply, is not sufficent. Call it old fashioned, but the law requires actual paperwork or exchange of email.

 

As for your example, in my country the utility company cannot just up your payments if you have a standing order with them. They have to ask you to raise them. Though your example does not really apply, as this is a situation where I already have an ongoing payment arrangement with the company - something which was not the case with MO at the time of purchase.

 

Even you are not claiming that the auto sub model was in when many people purchased the game, so I really don't see your case at all.

Your profile has you listed as Madison, WI, yet nothing you've just said matches anything either expressed or implied in the United States legal code. I don't know who is giving you your legal advice, but they should be aware that dispensing legal advice without a license in the US is against the law.

I'll point out this to you, and you can call it a legal loophole or whatever, but it is legal. Star Vault sold you a copy of the game without placing in the terms of service that there was a subscription fee, because at the time there wasn't (closed and open beta were free). However, the terms of service was updated to explain that continued use of the service would require a monthly fee, which would be automatically applied to everyone who had purchased the game and had some form of credit card information on-file. By law, Star Vault has to notify the user, which they did, and give ample time to opt-out (at least 30 days in most countries), which they also did. 

Now here is the fun part in the legal negotiations. By placing the subscription in the terms of service, Star Vault ties the subscription to your account, thereby turning your agreement into a licensing agreement rather than a standard product purchase. As the law pertains to licensing agreements, your only option is to terminate the agreement, which as I stated before the company is legally required to provide said opt-out. Your are not, however, entitled to compensation if the license is terminated by the user due to disagreements over alterations in the agreement or service.

If Star Vault had stated expressly that Mortal Online would not provide a monthly cost, then you would have legal ground to stand on. They didn't, and prior existing material on the website stated quite expressly that the game would carry some form of subscription. Legally, Star Vault could have started at $50 a month. It would accomplish about as much as napalming their own building, but it would still be legal.

Isn't legal trickery fun? This is why lawyers get paid big money.

 

Originally posted by Slapshot1188

2.  The chargeback has NOTHING to do with the card company not having time to investigate.  How it works is that you file the claim and give your stated reasons (in this case it was failure to deliver a working product (DVD) within 30 days of the charge).  The card company sends that claim onto Starvault who has X days to respond.  In my case.. StarVault did NOT respond as per the response I received from my CC.. and thus all charges were reversed and interest credited.   If you have some sort of evidence that StarVault sued my CC company and recovered all the money I would love to see it.  If not.. please do not make stuff up.

Responding to a CC chargeback is expensive, putting a lawyer on the job would cost $500 an hour, and as a result companies don't usually respond to chargebacks unless they are planning on taking legal action against the person invoking them to incur penalties that would cover those costs. For most businesses, responding to a charge-back would cost more than just letting it go and chalking it off as a cost of business. For a company like Starvault, they don't have the funds to spend a few grand chasing after fifty bucks.

 

--------------------------------------------------

I have highlighted the untrue part.   There WAS mention of a subscription in the TOS.. it was also clearly stated WHEN that sub would start.  In specific.. AFTER A SUB TYPE AND PAYMENT METHOD WAS CHOSEN.

 

Yes.. they LATER changed their TOS.. and everything they did after that was fine and dandy... but you cannot just unilaterally decide to charge people who bought a game 1 year prior for a subscription when none of the pre-requisites for doing so were met.

 

 

Also note the line AFTER the one I highlighted about "continued use".  That's just it.. these people DID NOT CONTINUE TO USE THE PRODUCT.  They stopped playing half a year before the TOS was changed....

 

By your logic any company I ever purchased a game to could update their TOS today to state that they are charging $1000 a month sub fee and send me an email stating I was resubbed but could go and cancel if I wanted.  That's not how it works....