Apparently Sony is sick of class action lawsuits, so........They're banning us from doing them!

[Whateveralot]

Most EULA's will probably include ammendment clauses, saying that the terms of use can be changed at any time. They have it for bank accounts, credit cards etc, I have no doubt Sony will have similar terms. Because you have to click I Accept, you are legally bound by the EULA.

So, pretty much, when you buy a game and mess with the installer so you don't have to agree with the TOS / EULA and still get it installed, you're not doing anything illegal? I mean, you havn't agreed, so you can mess with the software all you want.

Just being hypothetical here, though. I know it's probably neigh (if not) impossible to change software like that.

 

[LilithSlave]

Japan doesn't have a good history of caring for it's workers or ethical business practices. They're an Asian country with a strongly capitalist belief and a right wing, nationalist tendency.

So bad business decisions by companies like Sony do not surprise me. They are high in the hierarchy and they expect people do be okay with that. Instead of seeing themselves as dependent on customers, they see themselves because of their position, as adults who make the big decisions, and they expect the children, their customers, to accept submissively.

Japan likes a fanboy, Japan wants a fanboy that sees a company as more than itself. Not just the worker, but the customer, too. It's a sad fact. And Japan would never question this mentality, because it has made them a world power. One of the things that their self esteem as a nation relies on.

 

[Arina Love]

i don't care. i don't plan to sue and never will be. Don't like EULA? Don't buy Sony products, simple.

 

[Tony2077]

meh i don't care as long as they don't stop me from playing the games i like. keep throwing around bs lawsuits and more companies will do this and find a way to keep it

 

[Nami nom noms]

Oh yes, all the customors are their partners. what with the frothing hate you get from this community for them, and we're supposed to be one of the better forum communities.

Besides, people didnt read very well cause it only says that you cant sue as a group. Now its going to be as an individual case by case thing, which... actually sounds like a better idea to me for both parties involved. You get to potentially win more suing the company solo then splitting up a class action suit, and as sony you can pay less cause the area of damage is targeted specifically to one person.

True, but these positives assume you can win. The biggest draw for Sony to push this is if you DO want to pursue legal action, you have to sue them yourself. Meaning you have to pay for your own legal fees. And considering the size of Sony as a company, have fun trying to beat the massive legal team they can throw at you because they have the money to do so, unlike the average consumer.

And as I recall, the Supreme Court recently ruled in a similar fashion with the whole Walmart not treating its female employees as equals.

This is not a new concept in law and to be honest they're basically spelling out what already exists for most areas.
Do you know how others get around limitations such as these? They form cause groups and support an individual who will help their cause. Basically, only that individual can sue, but there's nothing stopping a team of people funding that person through the court process. Nor is there anything to prevent them from doing that for one person, winning, then funding the next. And then the next, and the next, and so on.

It makes things harder but if something is serious enough it will not prevent sony from getting sued. (If anything it would make the claimants more organised).

 

[the-kitchen-slayer]

Personally, this sounds to me like Sony attempting to buy breathing space to bail the boat out from all the lawsuits aimed at them as of late.

Kinda funny to watch the reactions to it though, I must say. Seriously, it only affects you if you want to sue Sony, and seriously, who here wants to do that?

 

[Yopaz]

It's actually not unheard of that companies have a anti-sue clause for contracts between them, employees or customers. However I don't think that's valid in the case of a screw-up that can be blamed on the company such as the PSN breach. I am no lawyer, but I think the details here are a bit off in any case.

 

[Strain42]

I honestly say good for Sony, I think it's important for them to cover their asses when it comes to stuff like this.

Does anyone remember all the people who tried to sue WoW when they had announced downtime on the servers? The only people worse than the ones going for the lawsuit are the people who are in support of them for doing it.

Sony wants to find a way to protect themselves from pointless frivolous lawsuits, I support them. I'm not saying this is the best way for them to do it, but if it works for them it works. Let's see what happens and just try to keep calm about it.

The only way this affects any of us here are if some of you were planning some sort of lawsuit against Sony in the near future (I would hope not)

 

[wooty]

Doesnt bother me really, ive never considered suing anyone, theyve never done anything to me to merit being that anal.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Honestly people wouldn't care if they put pimping your ass out on the nearest street corner in the EULA, and it would be about as legally solid as these whole shenanigans.

And yes they only mention class action lawsuits because they are the only ones ever capable of winning.

 

[Lunar Templar]

And the final nail in the Sony Coffin gets rammed home!

Oh please, the average gamer can't tell an consumer hostile EULAs from their own ass. Partially because they don't read them, but this will do absolutely nothing to their player base.

In the average gamer's defense, who actually DOES read the EULA? I mean come on, they are designed to be deliberately confusing and are written in legalese and doublespeak, which requires you to have at least a masters degree in law to even get your head around.

*Slowly raises hand and looks around*

I do, mainly becaus of how funny it gets.

If I recall, Blizzard has (or had) a clause stating that in the event that a Meteorý hits their offices, they are not responsible for WoW going down.

Or that Apple forbids you from using your iPhone to work on nuclear devices

well crap, NOW how am i gonna build my 'totally impractical nuclear dooms-day device' with out an iPhone to act as a trigger, and take over Canada!! *epic evil laugh here*

but yeah, pretty sure it won't hold up in actual court

 

[sivlin]

I'm unsure how this really effects anyone. In my opinion, most class action lawsuits sue over things that the majority of the people "represented" would not have actually sued for. This brings to mind the Google Buzz lawsuit which did not effect me at all. Similarly, I have lost nothing based on the security breach at Sony... and I'm doubting a single person on this forum lost anything either. If someone started actually USING my credit card that they acquired from Sony's breach - then I would be into suing but I think that should be an individual case.

 

[Dracowrath]

Why don't they just add a section to it saying "Please don't sue us, we're working really hard kthx"

 

[gNetkamiko]

And the final nail in the Sony Coffin gets rammed home!

EDIT: And they're the ones that landed the final blow on that nail. >=(

 

[Kopikatsu]

And the final nail in the Sony Coffin gets rammed home!

Oh please, the average gamer can't tell an consumer hostile EULAs from their own ass. Partially because they don't read them, but this will do absolutely nothing to their player base.

In the average gamer's defense, who actually DOES read the EULA? I mean come on, they are designed to be deliberately confusing and are written in legalese and doublespeak, which requires you to have at least a masters degree in law to even get your head around.

*Slowly raises hand and looks around*

I do, mainly becaus of how funny it gets.

If I recall, Blizzard has (or had) a clause stating that in the event that a Meteorý hits their offices, they are not responsible for WoW going down.

Or that Apple forbids you from using your iPhone to work on nuclear devices

They have to. EULA's literally must contain EVERYTHING. If it isn't in the EULA, then they can be sued for it. So no matter how outlandish it may seem, they're just covering their own ass.

Which is more a failing of the legal system that they actually need to do that in the first place, but I digress. Common sense has no place in law.

OT: I don't see a problem with this, even if it is legal. So you just have to sue Sony on an individual basis, big deal. This is probably to give them some breathing space (Because they get class action lawsuits ALL THE TIME. Usually about stupid things.), and also so that they can just pay off individual people who want to bring it to court without any kind of uproar.

Is it even possible to settle a class action suit outside of court? I've never heard of it being done...

 

[Robert Ewing]

Is this sort of... Diplomatic immunity? Only much, much less cool.

Also, I'm quite angry at Sony over this. -75 relation points.

 

[beniki]

Well... okay then.

Sounds like a bad move though. It discourages the casual wannabe hotshot lawyer from wasting the companies time with something frivolous.

But the first serious class action suit will just bull doze through it. Any judge faced with the prospect of hundreds if not thousands of individual cases, each with the same lawyer, will just over rule the contract as wasting the court's time.

And then precedent is set against it forever, with maybe a few deflected cases at the cost of bad publicity.

And those cases would probably be cheaper than getting a judge for a bigger case annoyed at you...