Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Sony banning Class Action lawsuits in new TOS
Archeminos
Member Posts: 283
http://www.1up.com/news/psn-terms-of-service-prevent-joining-class-action-lawsuits
This has to be illegal somehow...I am very glad I never bought a PS3 now, thats for sure.
"If you want to play our games, you can't sue us if we screw up and violate your rights or get your account or credit card information stolen."
Sounds...shady at the very least.
Edit : Sorry I guess you can still sue them with arbititration if its only YOU who have a problem. If it affects everyone, you have ot do it one at a time....seems like a way to stall court cases and not lose money to me, but then, im not a lawyer.
Comments
I doubt a court would hold that up.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
I dunno, if people don't read the TOS and just accept it as usual, might be legally binding.
Certain sections or the entirity of EULAs can be dismissed by a judge if they're considered too broad, vague, or overly restrictive to the detriment of consumers.
Inasmuch as the consumer has NO negotiating rights in application of the TOS, it is known as a "contract of adhesion" and is, therefore, much more difficult to enforce in court.
Hedonismbot: Your latest performance was as delectable as dipping my bottom over and over into a bath of the silkiest oils and creams.
The Fed should create a tax of $500.00 per day per person under such a eula. Tax them out of the practice.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
I believe that - at least in the US - such a clause is 100% legal and enforcable ever since the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of AT&T Mobility this year.
NY Time: Supreme Court Allows Contracts That Prohibit Class-Action Arbitration
I believe the 2nd paragraph is the most relevant:
"Though the decision concerned arbitrations, it appeared to provide businesses with a way to avoid class-action lawsuits in court. All they need do, the decision suggested, is use standard-form contracts that require two things: that disputes be raised only through the informal mechanism of arbitration and that claims be brought one by one."
Though I will admit, the wording on rulings does confuse me, so I could be wrong.
If you don't trust NY Times, just google "Supreme Court AT&T Mobility" or some variance of. I did not check out all the links, but all I saw are saying the same thing.
EDIT: Grammar mistakes :P
In many legal systems , you if certain parts of an agreement are unlawful (that also mean very uneven) they are not legally binding or just plain unlawful.
There are certain things when you cannot put into deals, this imho is one of them. So this part of agreement will be made void by law, as country law always take precedence over any agreements between sides ,at least where I live.
There are just certain things that a person cannot agree to or /and a things that a company cannot take off responsibility for , so you gen an idea.
So SONY can even write that by signing TOS that consumers agree to give kidneys to them , but that will be null and void.
EDIT: I just read that article and what exactly is written in this agreement. No certainly this won't be legally binding in my country lol. State will never agree that you can write an agreement where you put arbitrary between you and Sony as something that make taking a case to court impossible lol
Its safe to say not everything in the ToS is legally binding, but even if this clause is, there still plenty of ways to do take them to court. Not only that, its a safe bet other mmo's WILL follow the trent.
All EULA's say that. At the very bottom or top of all the legal mumbo jumbo theys hould just have a section called Cliff notes version: We'll do whatever we want and you can't do anything about it! Been that way forever hehe.
Then again just because there's a sign saying "Swim at your own risk" at a pool in a hotel doesn't mean you can't sue and win if someone drowns.
Edit: Even more PS3's just went up on ebay and sold to gamestop lol Sony does such a good job at totally destroying something when something goes wrong, or even right for that matter.
Get used to it. The corporations who really run things will continue to take aware privacty and your rights. There isn't a damn thing you can do it about it either...
Really don't see an issue here. I really don't blame them either after the Class Action Lawsuit they got hit with because of the PSN being down. They are not charging you a dime to play online yes you have an option to pay but you don't have to.
Only reason I have and like PS3 is because their exclusives are better then that of Xbox.
You gotta love it when little kids try to discuss adult topics.
Corporations almost ALWAYS lose in Class Action Lawsuits. All this is doing is insuring that Sony will have the ability to argue each individual case on it's own merits. Too many times juries aren't able to look at things objectively. Even in a case where a few individuals were legitmately wronged, a class action suit can award damages to everyone else who jumped on the bandwagon.
Anyone can put anything in a contract but whether its actually binding is a different story. In any lawsuit you must prove that you have been damaged. If my account was hacked and used to steal my identity I do have a right for reimbursement and compensation especially if I prove it was due to Sony being hacked. Problem with what Sony is trying to do may violate thier responsibilites under various consumer protection laws or rights.
Could you imagine if a car manufactuer put in a contract that by buying the car/truck/boat/motorcycle that any injuries suffered from defective parts made them not liable? ACH!
The other day my xbox live account that had been closed for a year was hacked (from China of course). They purchased microsoft points from a credit card I was told last year could not be deleted from the account. The hackers did not get the full CC info because only the last 4 didgits were showing. Not taking any chances I canceled the cc and ordered a new one and contacted xbox live and notified them of the problem. It took less than 20 min. Microsoft in this case Microsoft really owes me nothing. Although i wish i could charge them for me being pissed off for 30 min LOL. They reimbursed the card Thankfully. In the future I'll purchase Sony or xbox cards with time limits on them in the future. Could I sue them yes, but highly doubt it would go anywhere.
To me its all about making sure that you cover yourself so that you dont have to file a lawsuit.
***Fires plungers at Chinese hackers***
All my opinions are just that..opinions. If you like my opinions..coolness.If you dont like my opinion....I really dont care.
Playing: ESO, WOT, Smite, and Marvel Heroes
Good for Sony all this country has turned into is a sue happy get rich quick scheme. Class action lawsuits cost the consumer they do not cost the company.
Silly Rabbid, everyone knows Bunnies can't sue....
BUT THEY CAN DANCE!
You sir are so correct and deserve a +10 sword of Awesomeness!
All my opinions are just that..opinions. If you like my opinions..coolness.If you dont like my opinion....I really dont care.
Playing: ESO, WOT, Smite, and Marvel Heroes
isnt the thing about class action lawsuits is the Lawyers advertise for people to join in their suit? I mean, this is 2011 you could just post it on any website to go and punch em with an arbitration and get the effect over overburdening their system to the point that you could sue. right? says someone who only knows enough about law to avoid breaking it.
Say hello, To the things you've left behind. They are more a part of your life now that you can't touch them.
It's almost as if the Sci-fi books I read as a kid are coming true!
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Arbitration needs to be illegal.
I used to play MMOs like you, but then I took an arrow to the knee.
Any legitemit judge will bar the "agreement", it's a one way agreement where the user is required to relingquish their (construed) constitutional rights in order to experience an advertised function of the product they purchased.
This is very close to the way the cell phone system works in courts right now, and all the cases are going against cell phone companies in favour of individual consumer rights.
Sic Luceat Lux
Whether it would be enforceable would depend on the jurisdiction that you were in whether it was enforceable or not. Unfortunately for the U.S. it seems that binding arbitration clauses are legal (http://www.givemebackmyrights.com/default.htm).... I'm as conservative as they come and I hate frivolous lawsuits...but this sort of thing should just be plain illegal.
You should always be able to goto a court as the final arbiter of your rights....especialy in cases where there is no provision for BOTH parties to negotiate and agree to the contract.
Honestly with Sony though, I just wouldn't give them the opportunity to screw me that badly. Don't use a credit card or debit card to pay for thier services. Use game cards that you buy with cash....and don't give them your real identity...use a pseudonym...that way WHEN they get hacked you aren't loosing anything you care about.
I just wish you could deal as easly with binding arbitration clauses as easly in things that really matter like employment contracts, buying a home or car, medical treatment, etc.
I suppose if someone really wanted to they could just claim that they never actualy clicked to agree to the EULA and thus aren't bound by it. Let Sony try to prove it was YOU who clicked the EULA and not some-one who hacked thier systems, got your account login info and clicked the EULA when they signed into your acount. With Sony's record it's not like they could make a straight faced claim that they haven't had peoples accounts compromised without thier knowledge.