Agoraphobic PS3 Owner Sues Sony over PSN Ban

[squid5580]

I can see the kids point if he does have those medical illnesses but $55,000 is pushing it, just get yourself re-instated on PSN and don't exercise your "inappropriate behavior" any more.

Exactly.

Also, those disorders don't cause people to behave like pricks, so it's his own damn fault for getting himself banned.

Whoah back it up. If I got perma banned and not having a medical disability would I be able to get reinstated? It just blows me away that everyone wants equality when it benefits them but once you are faced with the cons equality is no longer acceptable.

 

[shMerker]

The one thing about this story that's kind of interesting is the lost points thing. If they really do reserve the right to flush your wallet if you get banned they should really change that policy to a full refund. This sort of hostility toward customers is a mistake on Sony's part.

 

[NotAPie]

Would you guys do the same if you were in his position ?

...
I woulden't sue?

I dunno. If a person can get rich because they spilled hot coffee in thier lap and got burned why not take a shot? Although it would strictly be for monetary gain and would have nothing to do with the principle.

I know what you mean but...
Yeah but if it was me in the situation theres plenty of other things to do for social interaction, no need to sue because you'll lose to a big company like Sony.
Or maybe I'm just Stupidly Nice.

 

[FluffX]

So... What did he do to get banned for?

 

[KSarty]

Freedom of speech doesn't extend to private property. I am fully within my rights to kick you out of my house if you say something I don't like. Well PSN just happens to be private property, obviously owned by Sony. They can ban you for whatever they damn well feel like banning you for and it is perfectly legal. This tool better lose his lawsuit.

 

[squid5580]

Would you guys do the same if you were in his position ?

...
I woulden't sue?

I dunno. If a person can get rich because they spilled hot coffee in thier lap and got burned why not take a shot? Although it would strictly be for monetary gain and would have nothing to do with the principle.

I know what you mean but...
Yeah but if it was me in the situation theres plenty of other things to do for social interaction, no need to sue because you'll lose to a big company like Sony.
Or maybe I'm just Stupidly Nice.

Or you are honest. This is a blatant abuse of the system for monetary gain (unless of course he was banned for no good reason). Then again I just read through thier Code of Conduct and it is brutal. It doesn't excuse the fact he signed it but wow.

 

[midpipps]

I could see refunding the money but to ask for 55,000 is just crazy. Also reading through the lawsuit it looks like they are really trying to just get this settled out of court. They even threw in the whole the plaintiff requests a jury for any proceedings pertaining to this suit. Which basically means sony gets to spend time and money to sit through juror hearings etc etc. or settle out of court. I wish the US had better laws against stupid law suits.

The worst part is even if sony does go through the whole court thing their is no way they can coutersue for lawyer prices etc because the news and public would be all over them for taking a kid with diseases to court. This is loose loose for sony. I really hope this gets thrown out without any money to the guy.

 

[zahr]

Man, I wish I could get all my bans revoked (and I get banned from a lot of sites) just by complaining about equality.

 

[pantsoffdanceoff]

So I can sue a female for not having sex with me because they are withholding something from me that makes me happy? Cool....

 

[pirateninj4]

1. While he may suffer from many disabilities, there is no reason why he can't control himself and keep himself from acting like a dick online (We can only assume he was behaving inappropriately). He may have severe OCD, but I don't see how that lets him act like a dick (again, assuming that's why he was banned)
2. There are plenty of other social sites that are not PSN where you can communicate online without crowds.
3. First Amendment bullcrap argument again. You signed Sony's Terms of Service, they are a privately owned company, centered in Japan no less, therefore your American rights do not transfer online. Not to mention screaming profanities (again again, this is the easiest thing to assume) kind of abuses your 1st Amendment rights. Your rights end where mine begin.

While I sympathize with him slightly for his disabilities, that's obviously just a trick to gain sympathy from the Jury or Judge or whatever. Pointless lawsuit is pointless.

All this except the sympathy. Get help for your problems or fuck off. Playing video games is not a suitable alternative to real human contact.

 

[SaintWaldo]

If the guy genuinely suffers from those afflictions, that's truly unfortunate -- but not carte blanche for him to act like a dick. That said, I'd like to see what got him banned.

The suit doesn't specify, just says he was banned for behavior while playing Resistance online. What's interesting, though, is that he's also accusing Sony of stealing. He's deposited money into his PSN wallet, but since he's been flat-out banned from the PlayStation Network, he has no way of using the money, or of getting it back.

The EULA when transferring money to your online wallet states that it's a one way transfer no matter what. Also, I'm positive the EULA lays out what will get you banned. If he was posting on a forum, that's Sony property and they can ban who they like, just like The Escapist does (thankfully mind you). If he's braying into the mic in Resistance games (something I've actually had happen) or spewing racist/dogmatic invective and he got multiple complaints for ruining everyone else's fun, that's also covered by the EULA.

And kids, when we write about alleged first amendment cases, is it wrong to point out the simple fact that the first amendment covers GOVERNMENT actions regarding speech, not PRIVATE actions? No, it is not wrong, so please start doing exactly that. In the US, where that amendment applies, you have no right to say anything on my property I don't like, and I have a perfect right to eject you. That is not a first amendment issue at all. Sony reserves the right to refuse service. So should anyone else.

I predict this suit will be a total loss for the kid.

The part I agree with you most on, Susan, is that the appeal to sympathy by divulging his agoraphobia should not be a blank check to be a measurable jerk in any forum. I'm guessing he wouldn't have lasted long around here.

 

[Rigs83]

He's screwed because he agreed to the User license which pretty much says they can to what ever the hell they want and you have no recourse because you hit the "I Agree" button. Facebook does it too with photos and user created content.

 

[Rigs83]

If the guy genuinely suffers from those afflictions, that's truly unfortunate -- but not carte blanche for him to act like a dick. That said, I'd like to see what got him banned.

The suit doesn't specify, just says he was banned for behavior while playing Resistance online. What's interesting, though, is that he's also accusing Sony of stealing. He's deposited money into his PSN wallet, but since he's been flat-out banned from the PlayStation Network, he has no way of using the money, or of getting it back.

The EULA when transferring money to your online wallet states that it's a one way transfer no matter what. Also, I'm positive the EULA lays out what will get you banned. If he was posting on a forum, that's Sony property and they can ban who they like, just like The Escapist does (thankfully mind you). If he's braying into the mic in Resistance games (something I've actually had happen) or spewing racist/dogmatic invective and he got multiple complaints for ruining everyone else's fun, that's also covered by the EULA.

And kids, when we write about alleged first amendment cases, is it wrong to point out the simple fact that the first amendment covers GOVERNMENT actions regarding speech, not PRIVATE actions? No, it is not wrong, so please start doing exactly that. In the US, where that amendment applies, you have no right to say anything on my property I don't like, and I have a perfect right to eject you. That is not a first amendment issue at all. Sony reserves the right to refuse service. So should anyone else.

I predict this suit will be a total loss for the kid.

The part I agree with you most on, Susan, is that the appeal to sympathy by divulging his agoraphobia should not be a blank check to be a measurable jerk in any forum. I'm guessing he wouldn't have lasted long around here.

Exactly.

 

[esperandote]

did he get banned from all psn or just resistance? from the forums or the game also?

 

[Danny Ocean]

I don't think this is going to work. If only for the EULA that everyone is meant to read, but nobody does.

Hell, he could've already sold himself and not known it, just by accepting that EULA.

 

[ElephantGuts]

That's bullshit. There are tons of other ways to socialize with people other than PSN. Has he ever heard of a computer?

And just because he's disabled doesn't mean he's exempt from following the rules.

 

[Pendragon9]

*Fanboy mode on*
Just buy an Xbox
*Fanboy mode off*

*fanboy mode on* You want to make his fear of crowds WORSE?! *fanboy mode off*

But yeah. He's fighting a losing battle. He acted inappropriately, thus he got banned. It's all in the fine print he agreed to upon buying and signing into the PS3 network.

 

[matsugawa]

Everyone has a right to their opinion, and everyone deserves respect for that, but only if that opinion is expressed responsibly.

Without knowing what statement got the guy the boot, it's tough to formulate a real opinion here, but considering that he's taking legal action against SCEA, chances are it's more than just a little misunderstanding.

Another thing that bugs me about this: the lawsuit mentions Chron's Disease along with all his other issues. Chron's disease is a digestive disorder; it has nothing to do with social interaction. While they're at it, why don't they throw in that hangnail he's got as well?

Look, if I sound cruel, bear in mind I have a roommate who's on disability for anxiety disorders of her own (she's also got depressive issues and even a digestive disorder), and she uses World of Warcraft as her social venue. I know she'd be devastated if she were ever banned, but she knows that when something is more-or-less your only real means of social interaction, you tread lightly and respect that venue.

You have a right to free speech, and so does everyone else.

 

[Low Key]

So the guy was banned for being an asshole on one of his only means of socialization? Sounds like a moron who burns his bridges to me. He shouldn't be acting inappropriately if he needs his PS3 to communicate. It's like getting fired for harassing people at work. I can't file a lawsuit because my former employers took away my only means of income.