Valve: "We forbid class action suits against us."

[Deleted]

- How is this thread title allowed? it is a blatant lie

- I don't think you realize what this writing actually means, and how it is better for the consumer

I am begging you, elaborate on both of these points please.

As for the title not being a quote that's true, but the title needs to be kept very short and this seemed to be the best way.

[Deleted]

Step back, take a breath and think.

No class-action lawsuits does not prohibit a regular lawsuit. It's not like you agree never to sue them for anything ever.
They are also willing to reimburse your legal costs up to $10,0000.-, provided your claim is not tossed for being frivolous.

They're basically doing this so THEY don't get hit with the lawsuit when an affiliated company does something iffy. Why would they do something like this, suddenly? Well... A certain fiasco regarding a Bioware game comes to mind, also things that happened with a certain Blizzard game in a few countries would've been a good incentive to do something like this.

---------- Post added 2012-08-01 at 12:44 PM ----------

I am begging you, elaborate on both of these points please.

As for the title not being a quote that's true, but the title needs to be kept very short and this seemed to be the best way.

It is technically a lie since you present it as a quote. The way the title is written implies that an official representative of Valve has said this.
It would be the same if I did: Reve: "The title is a lie because it had to be short!"

It could be said this is what you basically said in the spirit of your post, but it's not something you actually said.

[rigoremortis]

My apologies, I felt it was necessary to illustrate I was pointing out the painfully fucking obvious. Next time I will just include pictures.

cool, post a meme and get a ban from the forums, prolly be best for someone of your intelligence level freaking out over something as asinine as this, lol like valve is out to get you!


maybe then we can get posters on the forums who want to have an actual discussion, instead of just being a dick to complete strangers for no apparent reason! =D

[Deleted]

The US justice system is pretty ridiculous if you sue companies so I approve of valves action. Every gaming company should probably do it.

I mean just look at the D3 launch (especially South Korea). You can be in a world of hurt VERY quickly.

So as a company I would take defensive measures (in countries that allow it).

[Deleted]

It is technically a lie since you present it as a quote. The way the title is written implies that an official representative of Valve has said this.It would be the same if I did: Reve: "The title is a lie because it had to be short!"

It could be said this is what you basically said in the spirit of your post, but it's not something you actually said.

If you saw the article, it was written by Valve (they don't give you a name, it just says "-Valve" as author). And Valve in the article says "Most significant to the new dispute resolution terms is that customers may now only bring individual claims, not class action claims". Which essentially means "We prohibit class action suits against us" and they say that, it's not me putting stuff they never said in their mouth.

So essentially yes, official representative of Valve did say this. We don't know which one but I don't think they have a cleaning lady putting up these announcements.

You on the other hand, your example makes zero sense. So the problem is that I paraphrased the saying (for the purpose of the title being short)? I didn't change the meaning of it, I didn't add anything they didn't say. Unlike you, what you posted is just random crap and blatant lie.

[Deleted]

cool, post a meme and get a ban from the forums, prolly be best for someone of your intelligence level freaking out over something as asinine as this, lol like valve is out to get you!


maybe then we can get posters on the forums who want to have an actual discussion, instead of just being a dick to complete strangers for no apparent reason! =D

lol 10 chars.

Infracted

[Kuntantee]

Who cares, good for them. Frivolous lawsuits give a company a bad name (Thanks to the idiotic press "VALVE SUED BY HUNDREDS OVER X! THEY ARE EVIL AND BAD!!!) and cost them millions, if not tens of millions.

My hope is fading for gamer community as concious consumers. I really like to see Valve is fucking their loyal gamers(this situation kinda is), then I wanna see your attitude. I always support customers as I'm one of them, not companies in any case especially if it's class action.

I'm not a Valve hater or something and I buy/play their games. But when it comes to customer rights I don't even give a flying fuck to any company. And I support what people did in South Korea. If you pay a game, you expect to play it on launch not 1 week later. Just before shitstorm even blizzard admitted their servers were weak by adding extra hardware support.

[Tzalix]

ya, but people file lawsuits because they were maimed or horribly injured, permanently disabled, disfigured, had their lives ruined, etc, a video game company makes games to entertain you, the only real argument u can make for sueing them is "the game ruined my life!" but that wont hold up in court anyway, because its not the games' or the companies fault that you're just a lazy piece of shit that wants to blame a video game for your downfalls in life, lol

That's how it works in the EU.

In the US, you can sue a company that makes doors because you got stuck with your jacket in one of their doors.

[Deleted]

And it's not possible to get rich with lawsuits anywhere in Europe. Here the loser only pays for the actual caused damage. Not like the infamous hot coffee mug case or any other where the point of damage compensation is the hurt the company.

[Deleted]

And it's not possible to get rich with lawsuits anywhere in Europe. Here the loser only pays for the actual caused damage. Not like the infamous hot coffee mug case or any other where the point of damage compensation is the hurt the company.

It doesn't make you a millionare but there is some settlement money too, not just paying the damages.

If there were no settlement money then companies would just fuck everyone over by default and only paid in cases where they were sued and lost.

[Drakain]

Well, good luck to them on that.

---------- Post added 2012-08-01 at 03:26 PM ----------

Sounds like an exculpatory clause to me, which doesn't hold up in court. Companies add these to their contracts all the time in the hopes that people will read them and think they can't sue.

Bingo! We have a winner.

[Masark]

What if they add a backdoor which allows you to run any program?
Than a hacker puts in malicious code that steals any personal data off your PC?

Now would anyone ever put in a backdoor? Oh!: http://tech2.in.com/news/pc/backdoor...nerable/339802

You ought to sue Ubisoft, not Valve.

And in any event, class action suits are a non-winning idea for the involved people as a general rule. Assuming you only have need of monetary reimbursement, get thee to the small claims court.

[isuridedes]

I don't really consider this a terrible action on Valve's part. Deplorable as limitations on trial rights may be this is quite commonplace with large businesses ever since AT&T Mobility got their verdict. The other simple truth is that class action lawsuits favor the lawyer over who he represents. Take the Ticketmaster class-action lawsuit that took place a few years ago.

The Lawyer Got: $16.5 Million
The Named Defendants Got: Up to $20,000
The Class-Action Defendants Got: $1.50 credit for each transaction up to a total of 17 to be applied toward future purchases

That's right... the people who took part in the class action essentially got in-store credit. Granted; Ticketmaster had to adjust their policies based on the ruling so that's a great thing. But clearly the Lawyer won here; and every person who signed on for the Class Action waived their rights to an individual lawsuit... for in-store credit.

[Drakain]

The US justice system is pretty ridiculous if you sue companies so I approve of valves action. Every gaming company should probably do it.

I mean just look at the D3 launch (especially South Korea). You can be in a world of hurt VERY quickly.

So as a company I would take defensive measures (in countries that allow it).

Wait, what? Did you just suggest companies should be immune from being sued? I probably read that wrong.

---------- Post added 2012-08-01 at 03:50 PM ----------

I don't really consider this a terrible action on Valve's part. Deplorable as limitations on trial rights may be this is quite commonplace with large businesses ever since AT&T Mobility got their verdict. The other simple truth is that class action lawsuits favor the lawyer over who he represents. Take the Ticketmaster class-action lawsuit that took place a few years ago.

The Lawyer Got: $16.5 Million
The Named Defendants Got: Up to $20,000
The Class-Action Defendants Got: $1.50 credit for each transaction up to a total of 17 to be applied toward future purchases

That's right... the people who took part in the class action essentially got in-store credit. Granted; Ticketmaster had to adjust their policies based on the ruling so that's a great thing. But clearly the Lawyer won here; and every person who signed on for the Class Action waived their rights to an individual lawsuit... for in-store credit.

Well, can't really argue with the fact that lawyers really benefit from class action lawsuits. Well, some class action law suits. If we're talking about overcharge cellular bills you, the injured consumer, won't be getting much on a per capita basis, so yeah. If we're talking about pharmaceuticals or, for example, asbestos then it really depends on how you were injured.

But when you get down to it, notwithstanding the incredibly self serving aspect of many class action lawsuit, they do serve a purpose. Suppose for a moment a single consumer discover a business that provides them a service has been cheating them for about 100 dollars. Can she sue? In theory, sure. She could take it to small claims court, possibly get a verdict. Now suppose that this business has been cheating all it's customers, and let's say they have 100,000 customers. This company is basically stealing 10,000,000 dollars! So what do you do?

I suppose you could notify all 100,000 customers that they company has been cheating them. Of course, that would cost YOU time and money, assuming you could even find out who all those people were. You could sue the company yourself, but your damages are limited to 100 dollar. Do you think the company will have a crisis of conscience and, on their own, inform all of its remaining customers that it's been cheating them? Possibly, but not likely.

Let's assume that somehow you DID manage to inform all those people. Do you think it's desirable or feasible for a company to be sued 99,999 times? Probably not - particularly in light of how overloaded courts typically are anyway.

That's why we have class action lawsuit. It keeps company from stealing, cheating, or hurting a lot of different people and getting away from it because it's cost effective and profitable for them to steal, cheat, or hurt a lot of different people.

They're not nearly has prevalent as people think, they very challenging, and they represent a huge investment for the law firms running them. In every jurisdiction I'm aware of, they also have special procedural rules.

[Dendrek]

i get what you're saying and thats all fine and dandy......but what reason would there be to sue a game company? lol

Perhaps if they do something illegal or that otherwise counters your rights as a customer.

For example, Netflix has just recently settled a class action lawsuit over accusations that they are releasing information about viewer activities (the types of shows and movies people are watching), which if true is clearly against the rights of those consumers. Valve could easily do something similar. Alternatively, they could (as someone else in this thread suggested) delete games from your directory for any number of reasons (which alone could constitute a breach in trust) which could be made worse if they fail to provide proper warning/compensation.

To the arguments: Class action lawsuits are/can be frivolous. Perhaps. But they are also, in many cases, the only means people have to bring their issues to court. Arguing it's ok to prevent them entirely based on the argument "they might be used unjustly or they might have negative consequences" for the company is ridiculous. What about the rights of the customers? The company has rights that supersede the consumers'? That's an interesting world you seem to want to live in.

[semaphore]

Pretty sure it'd be a contract of adhesion.

[rigoremortis]

That's how it works in the EU.

In the US, you can sue a company that makes doors because you got stuck with your jacket in one of their doors.

ya....it really makes me want to move out of the US, lol

[Decagon]

Not sure if it's been mentioned (yes, I'm too lazy to read through 3 pages) but I do believe that Netflix has the exact same wording as Valve does. Btw, thought this might be important:

"However, this Section does not apply to the following types of claims or disputes, which you or Valve may bring in any court with jurisdiction: (i) claims of infringement or other misuse of intellectual property rights, including such claims seeking injunctive relief; and (ii) claims related to or arising from any alleged unauthorized use, piracy or theft.

This Section does not prevent you from bringing your dispute to the attention of any federal, state, or local government agencies that can, if the law allows, seek relief from us for you."

[Needonboots]

EULAs aren't legal documents. The fact that the Supreme Court has upheld that this is legal before is terrible.

[PizzaSHARK]

What if they add a backdoor which allows you to run any program?
Than a hacker puts in malicious code that steals any personal data off your PC?

Now would anyone ever put in a backdoor? Oh!: http://tech2.in.com/news/pc/backdoor...nerable/339802
Here’s the list of games that are known to be affected:
Assassin’s Creed II
Assassin’s Creed: Brotherhood
Assassin’s Creed: Project Legacy
Assassin’s Creed Revelations
Assassin’s Creed III
Beowulf: The Game
Brothers in Arms: Furious 4
Call of Juarez: The Cartel
Driver: San Francisco
Heroes of Might and Magic VI
Just Dance 3
Prince of Persia: The Forgotten Sands
Pure Football
R.U.S.E.
Shaun White Skateboarding
Silent Hunter 5: Battle of the Atlantic
The Settlers 7: Paths to a Kingdom
Tom Clancy’s H.A.W.X. 2
Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon: Future Soldier
Tom Clancy’s Splinter Cell: Conviction
Your Shape: Fitness Evolved

M&M 6 is the only game on that list I would actually feel sympathy for if it resulted in someone getting screwed over. The rest... shit, they deserve it for buying bad games.