Howdy, Stranger!

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

General: FTC Investigating F2P?

12346»

Comments

  • DojenDojen Member UncommonPosts: 134

    Voyage Century Online can cost you $5,000 a month if you want tp PvP. Totally misleading and totally conning rich fools (and some poor ones who are addicts too).

  • Beatnik59Beatnik59 Member UncommonPosts: 2,413

    I say it's about time.

    The very fact that we have so many disagreements about what "Free to Play" implies or should imply shows that we need to establish some criteria from some disinterested entity.

    While they're at it, they also need to look at how online products/services/experiences (which shows again why we need somebody to step in an define what these things are) fall under the Uniform Commercial Code.

    __________________________
    "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
    --Arcken

    "...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
    --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.

    "It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
    --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE

  • TheFurTheFur Member Posts: 96

    Originally posted by ArcAngel3

    Originally posted by TheFur

    @WSIMike

    I know I did a quote on you, but most of that wasn't directed at you personally.  I went to everyone claiming that F2P is misleading and if ALL the content isn't 100% free it isn't free. I don't personally care for a cash shop either, but that doesn't make it an invalid and/or illegitamate business model. And it can be abused like any other business model.

    I see no reason to spend alot of time, effort, and tax payer money to investigate an entire business model. The stickler is going to be the fact that alot of the offenders are overseas and have entirely different laws and standard for business practices. We can try and put political pressure on those foreign governments to change their ways, but I certainly don't feel right pushing our beliefs and standards on the rest of the world. As soon as we do, they will insist that we need to change ours. We have enough problems as it is to start bowing to the beliefs of other contries that are diametrically opposed to ours.

    If you run across a F2P (or P2P)  that defrauds you for money there are appropiate law enforecement agencies that you can report them to. But to think that we have to power to subjectively take control/punish businesses and internet providers overseas means you don't understand law and international law at all.

    As far as the "exploitation" , it is no different than the "impulse items" at your local supermarket or department store. I guess we need a government investigation of the local Walmart.

    again, Most of that original "rant/tangant" wasn't directed at all of your comments. Alot of that was addressing those that were confusing F2P products with a whole company. And many had argued that it isn't free is they sell addtional content (product) as well.

    As for the strawman comments, you didn't really knock out an fact, just expressed your personal opinion.

     Unfortunately many of the F2P games that have caused controversy are products of North American companies.  So, the whole idea that we might be trying to force our worldview on foreign cultures is a red herring.

    name them...

    image

  • ArcAngel3ArcAngel3 Member Posts: 2,931

    Originally posted by TheFur

    Originally posted by ArcAngel3

    Originally posted by TheFur

    @WSIMike

    I know I did a quote on you, but most of that wasn't directed at you personally.  I went to everyone claiming that F2P is misleading and if ALL the content isn't 100% free it isn't free. I don't personally care for a cash shop either, but that doesn't make it an invalid and/or illegitamate business model. And it can be abused like any other business model.

    I see no reason to spend alot of time, effort, and tax payer money to investigate an entire business model. The stickler is going to be the fact that alot of the offenders are overseas and have entirely different laws and standard for business practices. We can try and put political pressure on those foreign governments to change their ways, but I certainly don't feel right pushing our beliefs and standards on the rest of the world. As soon as we do, they will insist that we need to change ours. We have enough problems as it is to start bowing to the beliefs of other contries that are diametrically opposed to ours.

    If you run across a F2P (or P2P)  that defrauds you for money there are appropiate law enforecement agencies that you can report them to. But to think that we have to power to subjectively take control/punish businesses and internet providers overseas means you don't understand law and international law at all.

    As far as the "exploitation" , it is no different than the "impulse items" at your local supermarket or department store. I guess we need a government investigation of the local Walmart.

    again, Most of that original "rant/tangant" wasn't directed at all of your comments. Alot of that was addressing those that were confusing F2P products with a whole company. And many had argued that it isn't free is they sell addtional content (product) as well.

    As for the strawman comments, you didn't really knock out an fact, just expressed your personal opinion.

     Unfortunately many of the F2P games that have caused controversy are products of North American companies.  So, the whole idea that we might be trying to force our worldview on foreign cultures is a red herring.

    name them...

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/04/20/26549.htm

    http://www.engagedigital.com/2010/01/27/microsoft-points-subject-of-class-action-lawsuit/

    And isn't this whole thread about Apple?  These are all American companies with controversy/legal issues related to virtual goods.  No need to look overseas at all.

  • TheFurTheFur Member Posts: 96

    Originally posted by ArcAngel3

    Originally posted by TheFur


    Originally posted by ArcAngel3


    Originally posted by TheFur

    @WSIMike

    I know I did a quote on you, but most of that wasn't directed at you personally.  I went to everyone claiming that F2P is misleading and if ALL the content isn't 100% free it isn't free. I don't personally care for a cash shop either, but that doesn't make it an invalid and/or illegitamate business model. And it can be abused like any other business model.

    I see no reason to spend alot of time, effort, and tax payer money to investigate an entire business model. The stickler is going to be the fact that alot of the offenders are overseas and have entirely different laws and standard for business practices. We can try and put political pressure on those foreign governments to change their ways, but I certainly don't feel right pushing our beliefs and standards on the rest of the world. As soon as we do, they will insist that we need to change ours. We have enough problems as it is to start bowing to the beliefs of other contries that are diametrically opposed to ours.

    If you run across a F2P (or P2P)  that defrauds you for money there are appropiate law enforecement agencies that you can report them to. But to think that we have to power to subjectively take control/punish businesses and internet providers overseas means you don't understand law and international law at all.

    As far as the "exploitation" , it is no different than the "impulse items" at your local supermarket or department store. I guess we need a government investigation of the local Walmart.

    again, Most of that original "rant/tangant" wasn't directed at all of your comments. Alot of that was addressing those that were confusing F2P products with a whole company. And many had argued that it isn't free is they sell addtional content (product) as well.

    As for the strawman comments, you didn't really knock out an fact, just expressed your personal opinion.

     Unfortunately many of the F2P games that have caused controversy are products of North American companies.  So, the whole idea that we might be trying to force our worldview on foreign cultures is a red herring.

    name them...

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/04/20/26549.htm

    http://www.engagedigital.com/2010/01/27/microsoft-points-subject-of-class-action-lawsuit/

    And isn't this whole thread about Apple?  These are all American companies with controversy/legal issues related to virtual goods.  No need to look overseas at all.

    I thought it was F2P models we were talking about. I am unimpressed and unswayed by both articles. The Microsoft one especially was brought by an obvious hack and will most likely be thrown out of court. He seems like nothing than a whiner with more money than sense.

    And what is "Courthouse News? Their "About Us" link doesn't even work. IMO it isn't a reliable site.

    try again.

    image

  • ArcAngel3ArcAngel3 Member Posts: 2,931

    Originally posted by TheFur

    Originally posted by ArcAngel3

    Originally posted by TheFur

    Originally posted by ArcAngel3

    Originally posted by TheFur

    @WSIMike

    I know I did a quote on you, but most of that wasn't directed at you personally.  I went to everyone claiming that F2P is misleading and if ALL the content isn't 100% free it isn't free. I don't personally care for a cash shop either, but that doesn't make it an invalid and/or illegitamate business model. And it can be abused like any other business model.

    I see no reason to spend alot of time, effort, and tax payer money to investigate an entire business model. The stickler is going to be the fact that alot of the offenders are overseas and have entirely different laws and standard for business practices. We can try and put political pressure on those foreign governments to change their ways, but I certainly don't feel right pushing our beliefs and standards on the rest of the world. As soon as we do, they will insist that we need to change ours. We have enough problems as it is to start bowing to the beliefs of other contries that are diametrically opposed to ours.

    If you run across a F2P (or P2P)  that defrauds you for money there are appropiate law enforecement agencies that you can report them to. But to think that we have to power to subjectively take control/punish businesses and internet providers overseas means you don't understand law and international law at all.

    As far as the "exploitation" , it is no different than the "impulse items" at your local supermarket or department store. I guess we need a government investigation of the local Walmart.

    again, Most of that original "rant/tangant" wasn't directed at all of your comments. Alot of that was addressing those that were confusing F2P products with a whole company. And many had argued that it isn't free is they sell addtional content (product) as well.

    As for the strawman comments, you didn't really knock out an fact, just expressed your personal opinion.

     Unfortunately many of the F2P games that have caused controversy are products of North American companies.  So, the whole idea that we might be trying to force our worldview on foreign cultures is a red herring.

    name them...

     http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/04/20/26549.htm

    http://www.engagedigital.com/2010/01/27/microsoft-points-subject-of-class-action-lawsuit/

    And isn't this whole thread about Apple?  These are all American companies with controversy/legal issues related to virtual goods.  No need to look overseas at all.

    I thought it was F2P models we were talking about. I am unimpressed and unswayed by both articles. The Microsoft one especially was brought by an obvious hack and will most likely be thrown out of court. He seems like nothing than a whiner with more money than sense.

    And what is "Courthouse News? Their "About Us" link doesn't even work. IMO it isn't a reliable site.

    try again.

     "Second Life (SL) is an online virtual world developed by Linden Lab which was launched on June 23, 2003. A number of free client programs called Viewers[1][2] enable Second Life users, called Residents, to interact with each other through avatars. " (from the wiki)

    The controversy regarding second life is available on numerous websites.  The client is F2P.  No need for me to try again, and no point if you're simply going to dismiss anything that doesn't agree with your point of view.  You can conduct your own research if you have a real interest.

    And, as I pointed out, this whole thread is about Apple, an American company.  If you want to dismiss the entire thread, that's your prerogative. 

Sign In or Register to comment.