EULA Change - Can't Access Tomb Raider

[beddo]

So, a while back I purchased Tomb Raider. I hadn't finished so I thought I'd come back to it. Thing is, it has a new EULA.

Now I agreed to the initial EULA, not this one, but if I don't agree it won't let me play it. How can a company change the EULA after I have purchased the product - which is not a service but in fact a product - and then deny me the right to use it unless I agree?

 

[Slaanesh]

I think it's because you aren't purchasing a product, but a license to use their product or some other legal shit like that.

 

[Ravinoff]

This is something I've been wondering, and something I think it's high time someone bring a lawsuit over.

 

[KarmaTheAlligator]

Well the problem is that you don't have a choice but to say you agree with it, even if you don't. Why don't you, out of curiosity? I was going to say it doesn't matter, but if it's something important...

Captcha: pick up sticks. Thanks, but I'm not playing Minecraft.

 

[beddo]

See in the UK by law you have 7 days to get a refund on a digital product - no matter the reason. Our law trumps any EULA and that's just the way it is. However, this has happened significantly after the purchase, now I could feasibly get a refund because the product has become 'non-functional' within the 2 years or whatever it is that I made the purchase.

Why don't you, out of curiosity?

Simply because I'm fed up. I wonder, what change has some lawyer over at Square made that is trying to take more right away from me?

Sometimes I wish I could just pay extra for these people to leave me alone, I'd happily pay for a non-tracked, filed and sorted experience where my most intimate details aren't sold on for less than a few dollars to some multinational to sell me catnip.

 

[beddo]

On a more serious note, when you started this post what kinda of responses did you think you would get?

I thought it might get some discussion on EULAs, particularly changes to EULA post-purchase and how they're generally bad for the consumer.

The one thing that does surprise me is that you know the correct usage of 'you're', particularly given the considerable lack of wit, over reliance on CAPITALISING words and use on 'Feds' when it's clear that I'm from Britain. While you may be happy to give up your consumer rights, I'm not and I wanted to discuss that, if you actually have a point to make, please do so.

 

[MysticSlayer]

Like it or not, the general way software works is that you are buying a license to use the product, not the product itself (at least from a legal perspective). This can be easily used by a company to justify changing their EULA sometime into the product's lifespan and forcing you to agree to the new EULA. I doubt this nature of software consumption is really going away considering that we are moving more and more towards digital distribution, where we don't even have a physical copy of the product. You can try fighting this for a more consumer-friendly approach, but again, that might be difficult given the greater emphasis being put on digital distribution.

Also, this seems like a silly reason to not continue playing Tomb Raider. It's very simple to just accept the EULA, and no, you won't have to sacrifice your firstborn on an altar to the god of death in order to keep your end of the EULA.

And yes, I have used products where I had to accept a new EULA sometime after accepting the first one, so I'm speaking from experience when I say it is easy. And no, murdering my whole family and drinking their blood has never come up in one of the new EULAs.

now I could feasibly get a refund because the product has become 'non-functional' within the 2 years or whatever it is that I made the purchase.

But it is functional. You're just choosing not to use it on a matter of principle.

On a more serious note, when you started this post what kinda of responses did you think you would get?

I thought it might get some discussion on EULAs, particularly changes to EULA post-purchase and how they're generally bad for the consumer.While you may be happy to give up your consumer rights, I'm not and I wanted to discuss that, if you actually have a point to make, please do so.

But how is it bad for the consumer outside of it being "against our rights as consumers"? Again, it is very easy to accept the new one and it is perfectly functional so long as you accept the new one. Or is there something about this particular EULA that you have an issue with?

As it currently stands, it seems more like you're looking for a reason to whine rather than having an actually legitimate reason to whine.

 

[Doom972]

In most countries, EULAs are not legally binding. You are not signing a contract. It's more of a way for them to say "we told you so and you agreed" If you have certain problems and want compensation. For example: They might say that the game could be made unplayable at any time, which means that if you decide to sue them for making the game unplayable, they could say that they warned about it in the EULA and that you agreed to their conditions.

Because you don't actually sign anything, and don't really have a choice on whether or not to agree (you already bought the product), many courts would dismiss the EULA.

Personally, I just refer to the "I agree" button as the "TL;DR" button. I know that in my country I don't waive my consumer rights by clicking a virtual button, no matter what text is written above it.

 

[Sectan]

I'm not too worried about EULAs simply because I try to shop smart so I won't want a refund, but I don't disagree with you. Most EULAs aren't available until AFTER you buy the game or "service" so how can you be expected to agree to the terms of a service/product AFTER you buy it? Plus you can't return opened games to retail stores so there's that.

 

[Anthony Corrigan]

Return it, Your laws are very similar to ours from what I know and so if they have changed the rules and its now not the product which was advertised you have a right to a refund. It would be interesting to see what came out of an actual case about these because currently no one (even those writing them) knows how the courts in any country will deal with it. We do know that it cant overrule statutory rights, as much as apple thinks it can. They put "all sales are final" in there terms and conditions but that breaches the Australian Consumer Law

I'm not too worried about EULAs simply because I try to shop smart so I won't want a refund, but I don't disagree with you. Most EULAs aren't available until AFTER you buy the game or "service" so how can you be expected to agree to the terms of a service/product AFTER you buy it? Plus you can't return opened games to retail stores so there's that.

That depends on the country, it maybe true in the US but in Australia (and apparently the UK) there ARE reasons you can get a refund. "Not fit for purpose", ie the game is unplayable, "Not as advertised by the retailer, the packaging or there advertising", ie aliens colonial marrines

 

[Strelok]

So, a while back I purchased Tomb Raider. I hadn't finished so I thought I'd come back to it. Thing is, it has a new EULA.

Now I agreed to the initial EULA, not this one, but if I don't agree it won't let me play it. How can a company change the EULA after I have purchased the product - which is not a service but in fact a product - and then deny me the right to use it unless I agree?

Did you have to reinstall it? How do you know the EULA has changed? Steam now partially uninstalls games that are unused for awhile, possible that happened. If so it would make you agree to the EULA again to re-download and install the missing components.

 

[LT Cannibal 68]

On a more serious note, when you started this post what kinda of responses did you think you would get?

I thought it might get some discussion on EULAs, particularly changes to EULA post-purchase and how they're generally bad for the consumer.

The one thing that does surprise me is that you know the correct usage of 'you're', particularly given the considerable lack of wit, over reliance on CAPITALISING words and use on 'Feds' when it's clear that I'm from Britain. While you may be happy to give up your consumer rights, I'm not and I wanted to discuss that, if you actually have a point to make, please do so.

if you're gonna call someone out like that try spelling the word you typed in caps CORRECTLY or you'll end up looking like a total a$$%^&^.

And as for the eula as it has been for a while all you can do is either accept or sell/return the product.
all eulas by the way very clearly state that they're subject to change and i'm guessing you hit the accept button the first time right? Therefore you have accepted any and all changes that may come after the fact.

 

[Tortilla the Hun]

On a more serious note, when you started this post what kinda of responses did you think you would get?

I thought it might get some discussion on EULAs, particularly changes to EULA post-purchase and how they're generally bad for the consumer.

The one thing that does surprise me is that you know the correct usage of 'you're', particularly given the considerable lack of wit, over reliance on CAPITALISING words and use on 'Feds' when it's clear that I'm from Britain. While you may be happy to give up your consumer rights, I'm not and I wanted to discuss that, if you actually have a point to make, please do so.

if you're gonna call someone out like that try spelling the word you typed in caps CORRECTLY or you'll end up looking like a total a$$%^&^.

You should recognize the difference in spelling between British English and American English, otherwise you'll run the risk of looking like an ignorant tool.

OT: I really don't see the problem unless you've actually got to the knitty-gritty of actually reading the darned thing and finding something you take issue with rather than assuming there have been changes that one would find disagreeable. After all, as had already been mentioned, could be you just had to re-agree to the EULA rather than agree to an entirely different one.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this yet, but most EULAs have a standard clause that basically says "you agree that we can change what you actually agreed to at any time without notice." That's with the legalese translated into English, of course.

As for EULAs themselves, they're total bullcrap, and if they're not unenforceable and illegal, they should be. It should be illegal to force a contract of adhesion on someone after the money has already changed hands. If software companies want to claim they're licensing software instead of selling it, then they can have you sign a contract before they ever take your money. Otherwise, it's dishonest.

 

[KarmaTheAlligator]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this yet, but most EULAs have a standard clause that basically says "you agree that we can change what you actually agreed to at any time without notice." That's with the legalese translated into English, of course.

I'm guessing it's because most people don't read them anymore, so they don't know (or couldn't guess from the legalese). I know for sure I don't, because as you said they shouldn't even happen after the money changed hands, and because you can't do anything unless you agree anyway, so no point in not agreeing.

 

[Anthony Corrigan]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this yet, but most EULAs have a standard clause that basically says "you agree that we can change what you actually agreed to at any time without notice." That's with the legalese translated into English, of course.

Actually I doubt that claws is enforceable considering it would breach the statutory right to a refund if a product is "not as described"

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

If you don't live in America, the EULA is not legally binding. So you can sign it even if you don't agree with it without any consequences. That silly stuff only works in the United Corporations of America, where people have given up their rights and freedoms pretty much without a fight. But hey, you can't blame them. Their favorite reality show was on TV at the time.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

Y'know peopel should actually READ it if it bothers you so much. For you know they corrected a typo, wouldn't put it past them.
Person 01: "A word here is spelt incorrectly, did this make it to ship?"
Person 02: "Ummmm... yep."
Person 01: "That's very unproffesional [Person 02]."
Person 02: "Shut the fuck up [Person 01], nobody reads the dang EULA."

 

[terrangray]

Don't EULA's also cover the companies backside and it states what they are doing with the product. So, if they are using your internet connection to collet information for there purposes and to in legalese spell out what product they are selling and who they are?.
Most of it is total bull cockie but the stuff where they say you can't reproduce the product or sell it yadda yadda yadda is pretty enforceable.
Since you bought Tomb Raider itself and the first time you agreed to adhere to the EULA to play it then the fact that they changed or updated the EULA doesn't affect the actual game

 

[viranimus]

How can a company change the EULA after I have purchased the product - which is not a service but in fact a product - and then deny me the right to use it unless I agree?

Simple. They get away with it, because a large enough group of people willingly agree to it without ever having so much as the first thought of the consequences much less giving them a second thought.

You have to see these people for what they are and what they are doing. They are in essence like 13 year old boys with their first girlfriend. They are going to play "baseball" trying to get to first, second, third and home, fully expecting resistance but when they do not encounter it at each step it emboldens them to keep pushing forward.

So its our job as gaming consumers to smack their lil roamin hands away each and every time they overreach because it is clear for anyone to see what happens when we dont. It is akin borderline customer rape.

Even though we like to strive for individuality the truth is our choices are not our own. We have to be mindful of what we do because even with the freedom of choice those choices can and often do infringe on the freedom of choice of others, even if we dont live in a country where we will be directly effected.