DirtyBast8rd
Member
Sign up or get locked out of your account.
No lubrication used.
DUH! If you don't AGREE with their terms and rules, of course access will be denied.
Non issue.
Although some of these requirements are bullshit, it is what it is. An AGREEMENT. Don't agree for whatever reason? Ok, fine. But the gates will close for you.
It's the same with CoD or any other online game. ToS get updated regularly and if you don't agree with the new terms, don't expect access.
Simple.
This sounds like it should be fucking illegal.Every tech company does it, but it's a shitty state of affairs when you can buy something based on certain terms of use, and then be denied access to that thing when the company later decides to change the terms to its own advantage.
It is. EULAs in vast majority will not hold in the court of law, especially in Europe. Companies know that, but they also know they are probably not getting sued because of your OW2 smurfing.This sounds like it should be fucking illegal.
For sure. It's the mafia business model: "Sorry pal, your interest has doubled this week. Pay up or lose access to your kneecaps."This sounds like it should be fucking illegal.
what?OW2 smurfing.
One thing they like to do, in the US at least, is impose forced arbitration as an addition to the user agreement. So if something happens that might once have exposed them to a very expensive class action lawsuit, it will never get to court because all users have agreed to have their cases heard individually by a single arbitrator.Can they also attach your mouth on to another individual's anus if you agree?
We now own nothing, including the games we buy.
For all purposes, we are just getting a long term rental.
This is already since the beginning of video games. I remember the manuals of cd rom games included a page saying you’re only paying for a license to use the product indefinitely until evil corp changes its mind, and maybe it was already during the floppy time era too but I just played games back then without reading manuals .We now own nothing, including the games we buy.
For all purposes, we are just getting a long term rental.
I’m sure you’ll be able to unsubscribe via email in that case, but yes it’s completely stupid and mental garbage.So you can't remove payment info or cancel subscriptions you may have saved/active on your account if you DO NOT accept the new EULA, because to login you must accept it...
STUPID
Certain parts actually might be, especially in EU. Thing is someone would need to challenge it in court first.This sounds like it should be fucking illegal.
I never really knew that so that's good to know.EULA != law
This is why we get at least 10 EULAs threads each year, every single one not understanding that just because a company put something into the contract doesn't make it legal. That goes for all possible contracts, plenty of them have abusive clauses. Companies were fined millions by market regulators for doing just that (banks especially like to put all sort of illegal shit in).I never really knew that so that's good to know.
Imagine if other major parts of culture were handled this way. Being forced to agree to some crippling EULA to listen to a concert or a music CD, watch a movie, or read a book. If you don’t, tough luck, you don’t get to do it.Although some of these requirements are bullshit, it is what it is. An AGREEMENT. Don't agree for whatever reason? Ok, fine. But the gates will close for you.
To play devil's advocate; you don't need music, movies, or games to fundamentally live a life. Might be boring, but you don't need those things. And there are plenty of examples of agreements between performers/media(s) that must be abided or you risk being kicked out. Chappelle has had many shows where he just plain won't allow people to be on their cell phones while he's on stage. People agree to it because they want to watch him perform.Imagine if other major parts of culture were handled this way. Being forced to agree to some crippling EULA to listen to a concert or a music CD, watch a movie, or read a book. If you don’t, tough luck, you don’t get to do it.
Imagine not being able to read most books because you don’t create some proprietary online account. Why do we allow video games to commit this egregious abuse?
As naive as I am, I would think that the legal departments of these corporations would make sure that this shit holds firm against the law.Why on earth would you think just because a company has written something in the User Agreement makes it a law?
Such a creepy ass movie lolCan they also attach your mouth on to another individual's anus if you agree?
That's what any supplier wants you to believe, yes.Even when we bought physical games, we still technically did not own them. The agreement was a license to play the software. not ownership.
That's what any supplier wants you to believe, yes.
In real terms, no.
The problem with that is if you decide you don't agree, the company will take away your access. And if you think "hey, that's against the law" then you'll need to fight in court against an opponent with far greater resources than you.Why on earth would you think just because a company has written something in the User Agreement makes it a law?
This is greatly dependent on the jurisdiction e.g. in the EU the court is much less likely to have a company mandate arbitration. This is also where legal proceedings are not cost prohibitive for regular citizens.The problem with that is if you decide you don't agree, the company will take away your access. And if you think "hey, that's against the law" then you'll need to fight in court against an opponent with far greater resources than you.
Which is why class action lawsuits exist, and because of class actions, companies would prefer that you agree to arbitration before they'll let you use their services.
Tesla did one recently, where some customers tried to put together a class action because of the company's lies about their cars' range, but the case was instantly dismissed because all of those customers agreed to arbitration when they bought the vehicle.
There is very little negative effect if it does not (in fact it's less in the EU, since the concept of punitive damages is very uncommon here), therefore lawyers will push illegal clauses knowing very well the chance of them being challenged is extremely low.As naive as I am, I would think that the legal departments of these corporations would make sure that this shit holds firm against the law.