Court Rules Sony Can Change PlayStation Terms of Service

[HobbesMkii]

Sony's TOS update is in even murkier waters, because it's actually a contract they're foisting upon you, the consumer, after you've purchased the product in order to keep using the product you've already purchased.

Wrong. The TOS is about accessing a free service you didn't pay for, didn't purchase, and don't therefore have any legal right to - its an extra by every single understanding of the word. As such, restricting you from accessing it if you don't agree to the TOS is not in any way unethical or illegal.

You're right, thanks for correcting me.

 

[Tohron]

Dunno, the phrasing there seems to indicate that they can sue over the altered ToS denying their class-action-lawsuit ability in the event that something happens where losing the right to file such a suit could result in them losing damage claims.

So Sony may have achieved nothing by their alteration in the first place.

 

[Scars Unseen]

Sony's TOS update is in even murkier waters, because it's actually a contract they're foisting upon you, the consumer, after you've purchased the product in order to keep using the product you've already purchased.

Wrong. The TOS is about accessing a free service you didn't pay for, didn't purchase, and don't therefore have any legal right to - its an extra by every single understanding of the word. As such, restricting you from accessing it if you don't agree to the TOS is not in any way unethical or illegal.

Are we talking about the free service that is required for updates that allow you to play new games? Because if so, that makes it a whole lot less cut & dry, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Donald Anzalone]

All the ToS really says is don't be an asshole and you're good to go. Not really sure where people are getting "rights" from. It's you're "decision" to purchase a product. If you don't want it then don't buy it. simple as that. I use my gaming system as a gaming system. It does what it's intended. I could give two shits about ToS cause i'm not an asshole as stated earlier.

Good day.

 

[ElPatron]

All the ToS really says is don't be an asshole and you're good to go. Not really sure where people are getting "rights" from. It's you're "decision" to purchase a product. If you don't want it then don't buy it. simple as that. I use my gaming system as a gaming system. It does what it's intended. I could give two shits about ToS cause i'm not an asshole as stated earlier.

Good day.

Hint: You usually only read the ToS when you already bought the product.

Another good hint: If you don't agree, the shop won't give you a refund

 

[Delock]

You know, one of the biggest problems I have with EULAs and ToSs is this: The contract is one way, despite the fact that one could easily see why it shouldn't be.

In short, the idea of EULAs and ToSs should be the idea that the company in question is creating an agreement between you and it. They agree to give you the service in question within reason (such as not allowing you to copy it, or being able to perform maintenance, yada yada) and you agree to obey the rules of this service. This also means that it is indeed a service then, that if it is a game being promised to you, and you have paid your money and created an account that you be able to have access to it so long as your account obeys the rules.

In addition, if you are supplying information, the privacy policy should also act as the agreement that yes, that company is indeed responsible for its security. This should be common sense, but as anyone who was victimized during the PSN attack, or is one of the many daily hacked Xbox account owners, etc. this doesn't seem to be the case.

TL;DR All companies with EULAs, ToSs, Privacy Policies, etc. need to recognize that those things require them to hold up their end of the bargain, not just the signers.

 

[wooty]

Well well, this is 3 things I've learnt today that I already knew would happen.

Sony getting the green light to do what its already done, ME3 getting "closure" and Kenny Dalglish saying that the squad is fine and playing well *cough*BULLSHIT*cough*. Colour me shocked.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Just another brick in the wall that is the oncoming State Corporatisim. Because capitalism simply was not sufficient enough to only be a economic structure, it now has to be a system of government too. It saddens me to see people still have not stopped this sort of nonsense. When exactly was it that branches of the government forgot that the only reason they exist is to do what is in the best interest of the people.

I believe, and I stress believe, that this is the natural evolution of Capitalism. Capitalism needs a reboot.

A hard reset by any chance?

 

[cookyy2k]

So basically you won't be able to sue Sony because you can't prove now that Sony will do anything that will make them liable to lawsuit? Makes perfect sense yo. >.>

Now im gunna file a lawsuit that says I can't ever be arrested for bank robbery because banks can't prove I might rob a bank in the future.

But should you rob a bank you will be arrested in the same way that if this guy faces financial loss due to sony's wrongdoing in the future then he can sue them. The ruling just says that Sony have done nothing wrong and he can't sue them based on predictions of the future.

Kenny Dalglish saying that the squad is fine and playing well *cough*BULLSHIT*cough*. Colour me shocked.

Biggest shock is he's still sticking around, he's usually done a runner by now when things don't go his way. As a Blackburn rovers fan I really wish they'd stop giving points to everyone around us, it's making it hard to avoid relegation.

 

[Epona]

Just another brick in the wall that is the oncoming State Corporatisim. Because capitalism simply was not sufficient enough to only be a economic structure, it now has to be a system of government too. It saddens me to see people still have not stopped this sort of nonsense. When exactly was it that branches of the government forgot that the only reason they exist is to do what is in the best interest of the people.

I believe, and I stress believe, that this is the natural evolution of Capitalism. Capitalism needs a reboot.

A hard reset by any chance?

Maybe it will come to that.

 

[viranimus]

When exactly was it that branches of the government forgot that the only reason they exist is to do what is in the best interest of the people.

How exactly is it in the interests of "The people" that this guy be allowed to waste taxpayer money clogging up the courts while he tries to argue he should be allowed to have his cake and eat it too?

Its not having your cake and eating it too, its having your cake and telling the baker to fuck off when he steps in when your halfway through eating it and tries to force you to sign a waiver that if that if you become ill from eating it hes not responsible.

It is an incredibly important use of time and resources to try to stop the progress of state corporatization at every step. This is clearly illegal process of having a product you own suddenly change and force you to waive your legal rights if you wish to continue fully using the advertised features you bought the product for. This is being made legal by how easy it is to buy a judge when your profit margins are in the billions. This only hurts the consumer, It only helps protect Sony for having to pay for their mistakes, How exactly is this NOT in the interest of the people because if this ruling does not get overturned all it does is sets the stage to encourage Sony to do it again.

If I misread you I am sorry and ignore what I said, but It really sounds like your trying to suggest that Sony has a right to demand that you waive your rights to hold them accountable if they fuck up by withholding advertised features of the product they sold to you until you agree to it.

 

[Sprinal]

Hmmm... if this keeps heading the direction it is at present for much longer. Then the only thing we'ed be missing from ending up in a dystopic cyberpunk world would be the technology; and I can see that arriving farily soon.

 

[cookyy2k]

When exactly was it that branches of the government forgot that the only reason they exist is to do what is in the best interest of the people.

How exactly is it in the interests of "The people" that this guy be allowed to waste taxpayer money clogging up the courts while he tries to argue he should be allowed to have his cake and eat it too?

Its not having your cake and eating it too, its having your cake and telling the baker to fuck off when he steps in when your halfway through eating it and tries to force you to sign a waiver that if that if you become ill from eating it hes not responsible.

It is an incredibly important use of time and resources to try to stop the progress of state corporatization at every step. This is clearly illegal process of having a product you own suddenly change and force you to waive your legal rights if you wish to continue fully using the advertised features you bought the product for. This is being made legal by how easy it is to buy a judge when your profit margins are in the billions. This only hurts the consumer, It only helps protect Sony for having to pay for their mistakes, How exactly is this NOT in the interest of the people because if this ruling does not get overturned all it does is sets the stage to encourage Sony to do it again.

If I misread you I am sorry and ignore what I said, but It really sounds like your trying to suggest that Sony has a right to demand that you waive your rights to hold them accountable if they fuck up by withholding advertised features of the product they sold to you until you agree to it.

What ruling exactly? All it says is this guy has suffered no financial loss by signing the ToS and cannot assume that he will, this means if does the court would hear it.

 

[viranimus]

What ruling exactly? All it says is this guy has suffered no financial loss by signing the ToS and cannot assume that he will, this means if does the court would hear it.

The ruling is the dismissal of the case. And in doing so, this now exists as a legal precedent for Sony to fallback on making it that much more difficult if even possible to overturn.

This case was particularly relevant because it was a class action suit designed to block Sony from doing this. However now that it has been dismissed the only recourse is now an appeal, or individuals filing separate suits, which to sony would be little more than swatting flies which is exactly what Sony wants, and exactly what this change in its ToS is designed to give them the ability to do.

 

[Scars Unseen]

Sony's TOS update is in even murkier waters, because it's actually a contract they're foisting upon you, the consumer, after you've purchased the product in order to keep using the product you've already purchased.

Wrong. The TOS is about accessing a free service you didn't pay for, didn't purchase, and don't therefore have any legal right to - its an extra by every single understanding of the word. As such, restricting you from accessing it if you don't agree to the TOS is not in any way unethical or illegal.

Are we talking about the free service that is required for updates that allow you to play new games? Because if so, that makes it a whole lot less cut & dry, as far as I'm concerned.

If its an actual requirement for the game, as opposed to for a patch, then the appropriate update is usually on the disc itself.

Is it? That's weird, because my PS3 has always made me update online whenever I buy a game that requires the latest firmware. As long as I can get firmware updates and game patches(which I see as a professional obligation, even if isn't a legal one), I couldn't care less about PSN access. With very few exceptions(Dark Souls being the only one I can think of), I don't play online on consoles.

If I can't get even basic functionality from my equipment without signing away my legal rights... well I guess Sony doesn't need my money that bad in the next generation. It's not like I buy many console games anyway(and haven't since the PSX)

 

[samsonguy920]

As far as I am concerned, there are more people getting bent out of shape over this than there really needs to be. I go through this thread and I can practically swim through the sense of self-entitlement I see here. There is no benefit to anyone but the lawyers for a class action lawsuit. The plaintiffs have zero guarantee of seeing what they want, they won't even see much of a financial reward. Think of a lottery jackpot that 200 people all win on. Yay, you won! Enjoy your 2% share of the jackpot. That you later have to pay taxes on.
The defendants stand to lose from the bad press, but they don't have to pay the money out all at once. They can probably recover their loss in no time.
Arbitration can actually be a plus as it gives you personal face time with the company, and a chance to air your grievance. True you may get ruled against and get zip monetary reward, but that doesn't mean the corporate people you talk to won't listen.
There are pros and cons to both. But when you consider the number of people who have a legitimate complaint and the number of people who just want to sue, you see a big difference there. Consider that Sony is mostly motivated to do this because of the PSN fiasco, and the overwhelming number of people who felt it was better to blame Sony for their online withdrawals than to instead use that time constructively. As far as I am concerned, Sony is the biggest victim out of that affair. The self-entitled people and the hackers who brought PSN down can all go to hell.
Access to PSN is not a right and it is not even a privilege, though it should be considered one. It is a product you are not paying for, it does not constitute an investment, and it does not run your life. If it does, then maybe you really need to seek some psychological help.

 

[viranimus]

No. You do not own the Playstation Network. You own the Ps3, and thats the extent of it. They can dictate how you use your Ps3 to interact with their network.

Your exactly right, you dont own the PSN. you own the PS3, however this patch can make it so that the software you bought to play exclusively offline and not attached to the PSN unplayable because of mandatory software contingencies from individual PSN firmware updates.

Ill give you an example. Dark Souls utilizes network access for extra features. If you did not agree to having your PS3 fully updated, you will not be able to access portions of the content of the game you bought. However, we will not focus on that even if its utter bullshit because free network play IS a selling feature of the device.

But I digress, The problem is, that Dark Souls requires a certain level of PSN firmware to even be playable. I Repeat, if you want to play the game you bought in a single player offline capacity you have to update your firmware. Now, the firmware the game requires does not require the patch that forces you to waive your legal rights in order to get the patch, however if you try to update your firmware directly via PSN, you will be given the newest most up to date patch which includes the waive your legal rights provision. Thus Sony is doing MUCH more than dictating just how you access their network, they are dictating how you utilize your hardware as well as non proprietary software. That is exactly what is wrong, That is WHY this needs to be fought because this has to be stopped because its already out of hand.

EDIT: As it is stated in another post. Usually if a game requires a firmware update, much like Dark Souls does, it is included on the disc. However as development goes on, Games will pass the threshhold of the "sign your freedom away" patch, and place that patch on disc along with whatever higher level patch is required. So say if Sony screws up from there, you installed the update via the disc, and the disc never bothered to tell you (outside of the wall of text) that this is the patch that includes the "sign your freedom away" patch, and you have to sue Sony for their screw up and they need to see the PS3 to validate it, you have without actually agreeing to the ToS, agreed to the ToS simply by virtue of having the patch that included that provision installed on your PS3.