Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ...
7
8
9
  1. #161
    Brewmaster DieFichte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Confederaziun svizra
    Posts
    1,293
    Quote Originally Posted by Injin View Post
    Because you still understand something of your own cogntion to refuse to buy, the problem remains at blizzards end.
    Well, you should be forced to read the EULA/ToS before you are able to buy a game from any company, you have to finish your reading by filling out a test that checks if you read it and understood it. If you are not able to understand the ToS/EULA a represantive will be sent to you that explains it and make sure you know what you are doing. The monthly fees for WoW will go up to 30€ and if want to play without going through these points, well, you get a shirt that says "Fuck the EU" and can leave.

  2. #162
    Quote Originally Posted by Magpai View Post
    I guess this is where our fundamental disagreement lies then, because if 1 million people have a EULA presented directly to their face and 999,975 people ignore it, then I think it's the 999,975 people who are defective. I'll admit I count myself among them, but then again you don't see my blaming the gaming companies for it either.

    Still, you didn't answer my question. How is deciding not to buy the product not a perfect solution to avoiding getting screwed by unknown terms and conditions?
    Because humans are what they are and attempting to change all humans is basically pointless. Changing the law to work around common practice is simply more sensible.

  3. #163
    Quote Originally Posted by Injin View Post
    Not so. If literally millions of people behave a certain way, that's the norm. Sorry that you don't like it.

    And people don't. Why are you so immune to evidence on this issue?
    This has nothing to do with me ignoring evidence. It's about me not agreeing with the assertion that a behavior being "the norm" makes the people who participate in that behavior free of responsibility. You're either not understanding that or you're straw manning because you have no answer to it.

    If I invented a vaccine that failed to work on 95% of people I gave it to, whose fault would it be - mine or theirs?
    Another terrible and irrelevant analogy. Whether a vaccine works has nothing to do with the recipient's choice. Consumers are CHOOSING to not read the terms and conditions. A better analogy might be if I were a company that had developed a vaccine for a disease and posted advertisements for it, but the majority of people chose not to get it, and then the ones that caught the disease after NOT taking the vaccine sued me for "not getting them to take it".

    Is there anywhere, other than in this rather odd argument you've got going on, where overwhelming failure to get people to do something is the fault of the people and not the person trying to get them to do that something?
    Name almost any activity that people are encouraged to do for their own good but don't. Save money for a rainy day. Wear seat belts. Study for exams. Do their homework. Refrain from smoking. I could go on all day.

    ---------- Post added 2013-02-22 at 07:10 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by huth View Post
    Because humans are what they are and attempting to change all humans is basically pointless. Changing the law to work around common practice is simply more sensible.
    Changing the law to put more burden on the responsible party to a contract to account for human stupidity is not "sensible". Just imagine for a second that it were the other way around: that companies refused en masse to honor their agreements, and then used the "everyone else is doing it" excuse. They'd be laughed out of every court. Or, since you seem to think this requires laws more complicated than those enforcing voluntary agreements, that the government passed laws regulating gaming companies' behavior in some way and the companies just all decided to ignore them. I suppose you think changing the law to remove those regulations rather than enforcing them would be more sensible as well.

  4. #164
    Herald of the Titans Injin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by Magpai View Post
    This has nothing to do with me ignoring evidence. It's about me not agreeing with the assertion that a behavior being "the norm" makes the people who participate in that behavior free of responsibility. You're either not understanding that or you're straw manning because you have no answer to it.
    It does make them free of responsibility.
    Another terrible and irrelevant analogy. Whether a vaccine works has nothing to do with the recipient's choice. Consumers are CHOOSING to not read the terms and conditions. A better analogy might be if I were a company that had developed a vaccine for a disease and posted advertisements for it, but the majority of people chose not to get it, and then the ones that caught the disease after NOT taking the vaccine sued me for "not getting them to take it".
    Ok, if you invented a diet book which you claimed would make anyone thin, and 95% of people who read it were still fat bastard, who would have failed - you or them?
    Name almost any activity that people are encouraged to do for their own good but don't. Save money for a rainy day. Wear seat belts. Study for exams. Do their homework. Refrain from smoking. I could go on all day.
    And in all of thoses case, it's a failure of those who are trying to get people to change, not the people who aren't changing.
    http://secretgl.wordpress.com/

    Guild Blog for <Debonair> EU, Zenedar.

  5. #165
    Brewmaster DieFichte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Confederaziun svizra
    Posts
    1,293
    Quote Originally Posted by Injin View Post
    Ok, if you invented a diet book which you claimed would make anyone thin, and 95% of people who read it were still fat bastard, who would have failed - you or them?
    No if it would be a real analogy, the company releasing the book would state in an official paper that the book wont help everyone, and you have to agree to it to buy the book. If it not works, you can sue the company, but it won't really hold.

    Quote Originally Posted by Injin View Post


    And in all of thoses case, it's a failure of those who are trying to get people to change, not the people who aren't changing.

    So let's go with the alternative, Blizzard abandons all that is ToS/EULA. They can't ban now everyone from their service, neither for cheating nor for anything. (Let's get on with racism in trade chat, all day every day)
    But the good thing, you can play on a private servers, so you don't have to put up with that, and don't even have to pay blizzard. But then, why would blizzard do that?
    Last edited by DieFichte; 2013-02-22 at 07:19 PM.

  6. #166
    Quote Originally Posted by Injin View Post
    It does make them free of responsibility.
    Asserting this would imply that one could get out of the terms of any legally binding contract simply by not reading it. Courts all over the world have said very clearly that this is not the case. Willful ignorance is not a valid legal defense.
    All this complaining is simply further proof that Blizzard could send each and every player a real-life wish-granting flying unicorn carrying a solid gold plate of chocolate chip cookies wrapped in hundred dollar bills, and someone would whine that Blizzard sucks for not letting them choose oatmeal raisin.
    Quote Originally Posted by DeadmanWalking View Post
    If your guild demands you slip into an elephants butt and force yourself out in a regurgation then you can't blame Blizzard for supplying the elephant.

  7. #167
    Brewmaster DieFichte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Confederaziun svizra
    Posts
    1,293
    Adding to the diet book analogy, there is a difference if the product fails or not, in case of the book, the product fails, that's not the case for WoW, and if it were the case, you can just stop paying/playing.

  8. #168
    Quote Originally Posted by Injin View Post
    It does make them free of responsibility.
    Not in any credible court in the modern world. Keep repeating it til you're blue in the face if that's what you feel like doing though.

    Ok, if you invented a diet book which you claimed would make anyone thin, and 95% of people who read it were still fat bastard, who would have failed - you or them?
    Still not applicable. We are talking about people who DID NOT DO as they were directed by the company. If those 95% read my instructions for becoming thin (analogous to Blizzard's instructions to you to read the terms) but never actually followed those instructions (analogous to consumers not reading the terms), then their failure to become thin is still their own fault, not mine.

    And in all of thoses case, it's a failure of those who are trying to get people to change, not the people who aren't changing.
    Well that's a pretty stupid viewpoint on individual responsibility then. "My bad behaviors are the fault of the people who tried and failed to get me to change."

  9. #169
    Brewmaster DieFichte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Confederaziun svizra
    Posts
    1,293
    Quote Originally Posted by Magpai View Post
    Well that's a pretty stupid viewpoint on individual responsibility then. "My bad behaviors are the fault of the people who tried and failed to get me to change."
    Let blizzard enforce change! Oh wait I don't actually want that.

  10. #170
    To those claiming that EULAs and other similar agreements are not valid under EU law, can you please link the applicable court decisions or some form of legislation establishing that. I have not been able to find any such provision, regardless of country. I have found numerous cases where an EULA has been deemed invalid because of narrowly defined circumstances, but it seems that companies have simply altered the wording or the agreements to comply with the court rulings. But based on what I have found, saying that all or nearly all EULAs are unenforceable under EU law is an exaggeration of the actual legislation and court decisions pertaining to such documents.

    I simply refuse to believe that companies worldwide would spend thousands upon thousands of dollars drafting complex legal documents that they know are unenforceable. Every single form of major software produced contains an EULA. Surely if they are as clearly legally unenforceable as some of you are claiming, either the companies would stop creating them, or at the least someone would have challenged their continued inclusion as part of the software license granted you upon purchase.

    Edit: Even Crytek, a German company, has an extensive EULA for all of their games. Surely a company based in the country most often cited as having invalidated EULAs would be aware of the laws of their own native country, if such laws existed.
    Last edited by Gurbz; 2013-02-22 at 07:46 PM.
    All this complaining is simply further proof that Blizzard could send each and every player a real-life wish-granting flying unicorn carrying a solid gold plate of chocolate chip cookies wrapped in hundred dollar bills, and someone would whine that Blizzard sucks for not letting them choose oatmeal raisin.
    Quote Originally Posted by DeadmanWalking View Post
    If your guild demands you slip into an elephants butt and force yourself out in a regurgation then you can't blame Blizzard for supplying the elephant.

  11. #171
    Herald of the Titans Injin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by Gurbz View Post
    Asserting this would imply that one could get out of the terms of any legally binding contract simply by not reading it. Courts all over the world have said very clearly that this is not the case. Willful ignorance is not a valid legal defense.
    There are contracts whoch you can get out of by not reading them. Private parking for one.

    Just saying.

    ---------- Post added 2013-02-22 at 07:58 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Magpai View Post
    Not in any credible court in the modern world. Keep repeating it til you're blue in the face if that's what you feel like doing though.
    That can change. Doesn't change the argument.

    Still not applicable. We are talking about people who DID NOT DO as they were directed by the company. If those 95% read my instructions for becoming thin (analogous to Blizzard's instructions to you to read the terms) but never actually followed those instructions (analogous to consumers not reading the terms), then their failure to become thin is still their own fault, not mine.
    But it is your failure to get them to follow on what they have read. It's up to you to persaude people to do what you want, always.


    Well that's a pretty stupid viewpoint on individual responsibility then. "My bad behaviors are the fault of the people who tried and failed to get me to change."
    Who said anything about labeling behaviours good or bad? if you want to persuade others, it's on you. End of story.
    http://secretgl.wordpress.com/

    Guild Blog for <Debonair> EU, Zenedar.

  12. #172
    ITT Injin thinks that a lawyer and a notary should have to come to your house and hold your hand while you read and sign the EULA.

    Seriously, they can't present the EULA in any better way. It's not a failure in presentation because people are too irresponsible to read what they are agreeing to.

  13. #173
    Brewmaster DieFichte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Confederaziun svizra
    Posts
    1,293
    Quote Originally Posted by Injin View Post
    Who said anything about labeling behaviours good or bad? if you want to persuade others, it's on you. End of story.
    Only to amuse myself, what would you propose Blizzard and other companies should do, as their methods of persuasion fails obviously!

  14. #174
    Herald of the Titans Injin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by DieFichte View Post
    Only to amuse myself, what would you propose Blizzard and other companies should do, as their methods of persuasion fails obviously!
    No idea. Not my concern, what we know for an absolute fact is the current system doesn't work.
    http://secretgl.wordpress.com/

    Guild Blog for <Debonair> EU, Zenedar.

  15. #175
    Brewmaster DieFichte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Confederaziun svizra
    Posts
    1,293
    Quote Originally Posted by Injin View Post
    No idea. Not my concern, what we know for an absolute fact is the current system doesn't work.
    What's the downside of the current system anyways? I don't even see it fail.

  16. #176
    Quote Originally Posted by Injin View Post
    No idea. Not my concern, what we know for an absolute fact is the current system doesn't work.
    The current system works fine. A majority of people being idiots and not reading what they're signing when it's clearly presented does not constitute a failure.

  17. #177
    Pandaren Monk Zogarth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,955
    Well Blizz have gotten in trouble before despite of their EULAS and stuff. Like when in South Korea they were sued for servers going down all the time at launch, and the suers won that.

  18. #178
    Brewmaster DieFichte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Confederaziun svizra
    Posts
    1,293
    Quote Originally Posted by Zogarth View Post
    Well Blizz have gotten in trouble before despite of their EULAS and stuff. Like when in South Korea they were sued for servers going down all the time at launch, and the suers won that.
    Yeah Blizzard def got in trouble, one time in 20 years with a playerbase that is beyond most other companies. Their ToS/EULA must be a total failure.

  19. #179
    Quote Originally Posted by Nevski View Post
    What you're saying is circular though in light of my question.

    The very point of the question concerns whether the inability to transfer that license is unconscionable.

    Saying that you're only granted a license to their IP doesn't affect that inquiry.
    Take it for what it's worth, but "unconscionability" is not a major practice point. As most BARBRI contract instructors will tell you, if it appears on the MBE, it will almost certainly be as a wrong answer.

    There's nothing to shock the conscious of the court in learning that you have not been allowed to retain control of characters you make in a program designed entirely by the other party for use solely within the other party's game. You have a bilateral contract with Blizzard; you give them money, and they give you access to the game subject to the agreed upon conditions, i.e. the EULA.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •