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

[Deleted]

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

Off the top of my head I guess one might want to sue an online gaming company over bans they feel weren't justified because as far as I know getting banned in one game means you can't play online any other game that uses VAC2. And they could have a case if the ban really wasn't justified.

Or, as I said before, some shady business with refunds if a developer left Steam with all their games that you paid for and Valve wouldn't give you what you expect/deserve.

[PizzaSHARK]

im no expert on Valve, but has there ever been a class action suit against them? i wonder why they decided to change their EULA like this, odd wording.

Probably because Germany's suing the pants off of Blizzard over a botched D3 release. They're covering their asses, and it makes perfect sense.

I wonder if EA will follow suit.

[rigoremortis]

I have already read the information posted and even articles not mentioned here. Thank you for your concern.
BTW: Fix your grammar.

then why post what you did? are you unfamiliar with how things work here in the US? corporations are the ones paying to get laws enacted, they arent above the law, they ARE the law, lol

those bankers we bailed out with billions of tax dollars they wasted werent "above the law" either, so glad they're all in prison......oh wait, lol

---------- Post added 2012-08-01 at 04:48 AM ----------

Off the top of my head I guess one might want to sue an online gaming company over bans they feel weren't justified because as far as I know getting banned in one game means you can't play online any other game that uses VAC2. And they could have a case if the ban really wasn't justified.

Or, as I said before, some shady business with refunds if a developer left Steam with all their games that you paid for and Valve wouldn't give you what you expect/deserve.

no, just no. you signed the EULA, which states its their game and they can do what they want, if they ban you, tough shit, its your fault, even without this lawsuit clause that wouldnt hold up in court as A) its already covered in almost every game companies EULA, and B) its a retarded basis for a lawsuit that would get laughed out of court

edit: theres no real reason an individual would sue a gaming company, the only people that would would be like devs or production companies that had a bad business deal or something go awry with payments, etc

[Pr0ev0lution]

read up on all the changes

they have done it since class action mostly benefits the lawyers and not the consumers, yet on the flip side if you have a legitimate dispute against valve that goes as far as arbitration or small claims court valve will pay all legal costs so long as the claim isn't deemed frivolous or have unreasonable costs not matter if you win or loose.

[Deleted]

Finally, the fact that the US court allowed it doesn't mean too much. The US legal system can overlook or even reverse precedents.

While I don't study US law AFAIK this is VERY rare, generally only happens in cases of great importance where things changed with time and the precedent doesn't reflect current situation anymore ("separated but equal" doctrine comes to mind). This seems to be the oposite, 20th century was pretty much the "class action suit" century and now they are slowly trying to change that.

read up on all the changes

they have done it since class action mostly benefits the lawyers and not the consumers, yet on the flip side if you have a legitimate dispute against valve that goes as far as arbitration or small claims court valve will pay all legal costs so long as the claim isn't deemed frivolous or have unreasonable costs not matter if you win or loose.

Well this is exactly the clause that says it will never happen. But it does look nice up there for people who have no idea.

[Liara]

While I don't study US law AFAIK this is VERY rare, generally only happens in cases of great importance where things changed with time and the precedent doesn't reflect current situation anymore ("separated but equal" doctrine comes to mind). This seems to be the oposite, 20th century was pretty much the "class action suit" century and now they are slowly trying to change that.

Personally I think that such a clause goes against the entire concept of a legal system, exactly because it limits a person's legal options.
If someone decides to challenge that ruling, the US Supreme Court could reverse it if the judges are different and hold a different mind set. Or keep it if they think it's legit.
In any case, it'll require judges with balls to reverse it (just like any precedent).

[Xanjori]

Probably because Germany's suing the pants off of Blizzard over a botched D3 release. They're covering their asses, and it makes perfect sense.

I wonder if EA will follow suit.

But that makes no sense because the EULA wont hold up in an EU court of law.

[Herecius]

As people always do, folks are getting up in arms about pretty much nothing. It sounds sinister on paper, news outlets have been spinning it as sinister... but it isn't.

For starters, a TOS/EULA will only be a minor inconvenience at most for any decent lawyer if actual laws were in fact broken in any given situation, or consumer rights taken away somehow. Believe it or not, federal and state law just so happens to override a dinky TOS/EULA. Sure, a company can claim in court that 'hey, they signed this, and therefor they agreed to blah blah blah,' but a court of law doesn't actually care what such a document says if actual laws are broken. So you, the consumer, are still totally safe if Valve actually goes supervillain and does something heinous.

Secondly, class action suits are some of the worst stuff out there. A company has good reason to actively avoid them and try and push all grievances into small claims; class action suits are huge, expensive, VERY TIME CONSUMING, and benefit almost nobody but the lawyers. They are an invention by lawyers, for lawyers. That is why your mail, right now, may very well be filled (or at some point in the past was filled) with offers from lawyers saying that they want to represent you for any number of nonsensical class action suits. It's not out of the goodness of their hearts, that's for sure.

[Lassira]

EULA's aren't law, they don't hold up in courts most of the time.

Especially things like this, they'd get laughed out of the court room.

[Reeve]

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.

[Liara]

EULA's aren't law, they don't hold up in courts most of the time.

Especially things like this, they'd get laughed out of the court room.

They're contracts, so unless said contracts go against domestic laws and or rights, they'll hold up just fine.

[Deleted]

For all the people going "hurr durr why would you sue a games company?"


Remember not so long ago, when the steam forums were hacked?
Or when the details of millions of PSN customers were stolen?

I think it's perfectly reasonable to take legal action if a company is responsible for improperly safeguarding user details. Unfortunately, Valve has decided you shouldn't be able to do that, because it's not in your best interests.

Happily I live in the UK, where this bullshit wouldn't stand up in court.

[TequilaFlavor]

will this hold up in the EU however?

No, EULAs and all other kinds of prewritten parts of contracts (like "terms of service" or just a "unable to exchange XY" sign) fall under very, very strict and user-friendly law codifications over here, EU-wide.

Basically, if anything in these prewritten parts is "surprising" or "one sided against the user" or "hidden", the whole pre-written part goes straight out the window, with the actual contract still being intact (aka, you don't have to give your product back to the company in return for your money if they tried to "screw you over" with their EULA/terms of service/no exchange-sign - everything is still the same but you can tell them to shove their EULA etc. somewhere else).

[solvexx]

I agree with allowing this.
I do not think that thousands of customers should band together to make a multi million dollar lawsuit.
If your claim was legitimate enough to stand on its own two legs.. then let it be and try for it.

[Liara]

I agree with allowing this.
I do not think that thousands of customers should band together to make a multi million dollar lawsuit.
If your claim was legitimate enough to stand on its own two legs.. then let it be and try for it.

Class action suits are also created when lots of different people have the same issue (whether exactly or similar), in order to conserve time and money.

[someotherguy]

edit: theres no real reason an individual would sue a gaming company, the only people that would would be like devs or production companies that had a bad business deal or something go awry with payments, etc

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

[slime]

They can't simply put themselves above the law.

This exactly. This is lol funny. I hope this gets tested in the near future.

[rigoremortis]

For all the people going "hurr durr why would you sue a games company?"


Remember not so long ago, when the steam forums were hacked?
Or when the details of millions of PSN customers were stolen?

I think it's perfectly reasonable to take legal action if a company is responsible for improperly safeguarding user details. Unfortunately, Valve has decided you shouldn't be able to do that, because it's not in your best interests.

Happily I live in the UK, where this bullshit wouldn't stand up in court.

thanks for the example, the "hurr durr" part isnt needed, as this isnt middle school recess, refrain from the name calling as its childish.

although i dont think this is the reason for adding this to the EULA, since you dont live here in the states, allow me give you some knowledge.....people here sue for just about anything (remember, this is the country where a lady put steaming hot mcdee's coffee between her legs, accidentally squeezed her legs like a moron while driving away, burnt herself, and got 4 million bucks, lol), this is probably more of a safeguard to stupidity than it is to protect themselves in those once a lifetime shitstorms like the PSN incident.

[Deleted]

thanks for the example, the "hurr durr" part isnt needed, as this isnt middle school recess, refrain from the name calling as its childish.

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

[Twiddly]

How is this thread title allowed? it is a blatant lie, and he puts "" around something that is not a quote lol.

---------- Post added 2012-08-01 at 07:39 AM ----------

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

I don't think you realize what this writing actually means, and how it is better for the consumer, but I guess getting swept up in the valve hate is fun to!