Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Star Citizen 3.0 License update
Tiamat64
Member RarePosts: 1,545
https://imgur.com/RUnPfk0
"6. Injunction. Because company would be irreparably damaged if the terms of this Agreement were not specifically enforced, you agree that Company shall be entitled, without bond, other security or proof of damages, to appropriate equitable remedies with respect to breaches of this Agreement, in addition to such other remedies as Company may otherwise have under applicable laws."
Dear Chris Roberts or Ortwin or whoever,
I understand that right now you might be filled with hotdog envy over Crytek for hiring Skadden in that lawsuit against you, but that doesn't mean you can just take Skadden's "complicated" cool awesome words of amazing like "injunction" or "remedies" and then throw them around like you know what they actually mean.
Repeat after me. "Just because Skadden used a word does not make it an instant "I win" button if I use it, too."
Thank you.
PS: Threatening to sue your backers for breaking your ToS is both unenforceable and hilariously.... argh, I just can't put this into words. I'm almost convinced that was written that way by a disgruntled CiG employee on purpose after Ortwin shouted at him to add some legalese to the ToS or something.
"6. Injunction. Because company would be irreparably damaged if the terms of this Agreement were not specifically enforced, you agree that Company shall be entitled, without bond, other security or proof of damages, to appropriate equitable remedies with respect to breaches of this Agreement, in addition to such other remedies as Company may otherwise have under applicable laws."
Dear Chris Roberts or Ortwin or whoever,
I understand that right now you might be filled with hotdog envy over Crytek for hiring Skadden in that lawsuit against you, but that doesn't mean you can just take Skadden's "complicated" cool awesome words of amazing like "injunction" or "remedies" and then throw them around like you know what they actually mean.
Repeat after me. "Just because Skadden used a word does not make it an instant "I win" button if I use it, too."
Thank you.
PS: Threatening to sue your backers for breaking your ToS is both unenforceable and hilariously.... argh, I just can't put this into words. I'm almost convinced that was written that way by a disgruntled CiG employee on purpose after Ortwin shouted at him to add some legalese to the ToS or something.
Comments
I think you're attempting to use a potential unawareness of some on how ToS legalese is often put by companies to feed narrative against SC, now for those who do...
If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!
how star citizen of them....
And by taking my money, it means that you agree to my terms
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Every Terms of Service Agreement is draconian in nature, especially when the product is in an alpha or beta state. If you look through the ToS, I bet there is also an agreement to go to arbitration in case of any actions taken and that using the product in any way 'they' don't see fit is actionable.
Whether or not a ToS would hold up in a court of law (or arbitration) is a point of contention in any case, but this is their agreement, of course they are going to put in everything they want, that's the point.
Did you know most electronic storefronts only provide "licenses" to a game or song or movie and technically you don't own it? Did you know they can revoke a specific license or your account at any time without your input or any reason besides 'we felt like it'?
You should read more of these.
I,m always like "oh its this wall of text that no one bothers so lets agree to play the f* game"
I'm surprised that actually THERE ARE people who reading the ToS
If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!
There are also stipulations like misleading information,in other words the TOS can be void if it was worded in a way to mislead/deceive.
Again going on memory,it also has to be reasonably understood,other words,it cannot be worded in a way that nobody could understand it.Then again the argument would be ,why sign something you don't understand,so then again you argue ,it was worded in a way to deceive/mislead me into thinking otherwise.
IMO there is an automatic door opened to mislead and deceive gamer's once these type of business models begin.You NEVER know what is just around the corner,what you THOUGHT the game was going to become might be far from reality,which is why you often see a clause that states "your gaming experience may change or differ from others" or similar to this.
People should NOT be supporting shotty business practices,you are basically allowing them to be crooks,legal crooks.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
It doesn't say anything about taking action against the customers themselves. Even that time they sued that boy, it was something completely unrelated to the Terms of Service (and instead they were suing on copyright grounds).
Terminating the license is a far cry from "seeking equitable remedies". That's why I said that CiG was misusing that term, or alternatively that CiG is really stupid they think they can sue someone over this, which no other ToS states. All other ToS's stop at "They can suspend your account at any time" and don't go beyond that.
Yeesh, I guess legal terms really ARE hard for a lot of people to understand and their seriousness underestimated. No wonder why lawyers make so much money.
It also gives a good explanation why CiG could have broken so many terms of the Crytek license agreement. Odds are they interpretted all that contract "stuff" about remedies and injunctions as something you'd find in any old ToS. Just like lots of people in this thread are doing! Fortunately for those people, they aren't enforceable in a ToS, which is why no other company puts them in there. Those are legal terms with very specific meanings for contracts, but apparently CiG doesn't (and didn't...) realize that.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
I'd speculate and over-analyze that any change was made simply because they have now released something to the general public and they are hedging against asshattery.
Appropriate equitable remedies just means they are judge, jury, and executioner. Rather than legal equities, which would mean that it would have to be taken to court and they wouldn't have a whole lot of immediate recourse without potentially being taken to court themselves. Considering the amount of money some people have thrown in would go beyond the limits of a standard small claims court, they better make sure every I is dotted and T crossed.
If anything, I would be more concerned that the wording might be them buttoning things up to announce what is out there, now or soonish, as the MVP release candidate.
bwwaaahaaahaaaa yeah SC is a real game changer.