"For privacy, Origin is the same as Steam" WRONG!!! -Updated

[SoldierC4]

*sigh*

A lot of "who cares". I care, you should, and your lack of willingness to care sends a message to companies like EA that they'll probably get away with their next trick, too. Apathy is certainly nothing to be proud of.

So, aside from the fact that EA's TOS, as I keep repeating, causes the signer to lose their ability to engage in a jury or class action lawsuit (and just to add insult to injury, they reserve the right to press such a suit against you if you compromise their IP), have you noticed the list of things for which they can take away your ability to play games?

It isn't limited to what you do on their message boards. Or in their games. If you have disk mirroring software, that could be enough. (And if you've installed certain perfectly legal disk utility software suites, you may have disk mirroring software without even knowing it.) If you talk about the "jeep bug" on the Escapist, that could be enough. They could even ban the people responsible for the "face map import" software some are using as a work-around for the recent bug in Mass Effect 3, even though they're suggesting it as a work-around themselves. (I will note that they haven't done this, but there's nothing to prevent them from doing so, nor would the programmers have any significant redress if they did- they're in violation of the forbiddance to "Modify or attempt to modify any file or any other part of the EA Service that EA does not specifically authorize you to modify" and possibly "Upload any software or Content that you do not own or have permission to freely distribute" as well.)

Assuming nothing nefarious occurs on that line, one might also simply want to consider that your software profile might also be used for "marketing", including data about which games they might choose to withhold or withdraw from other online services like Steam, or which games with an online component they can most effectively shut down servers for. Also which non-EA games you're playing so they know which titles' features they should be attempting to rip off in the next generation of sequels.

Annnnd they might modify their ToS at any time, and throw you out of your games if you try to opt out. Which you won't, because they aren't obligated to tell you when you do.

I can go on...

Funny thing, you telling me what I should care about, as if your opinions instantly mean that everyone sees the world as pessimistically as you. I know very well what they could do, I also know what they have done, and it's very easy to infer where EA would draw the line. No, I don't worry about it, I choose to go with their ToS, which has nothing in it that actually causes me to think that I might be threatened. If I feel they change something that crosses the line, then I will stop using their service, and I'm old enough to accept the consequences of the actions I take.

 

[black_knight1337]

*le snip

-Snip-

So yea, you just proved my point, my point isn't that they gather data, this was a given AGES ago, everyone knoes Origin, as well as most other programs gather data. However here is a big diffrence between when you say "They take ALL of your hardware and software information." Which is bias talk translating to "They steal ALL the personal info on my machine". No, just no, look at what you posted. All the info you posted on what they take is fairly regular information for data gathering. They may take on a whole a bit more then some programs, but it still isn't that much. Under that EULA they can't keylog you or steal personal files, they can only look at what programs you have.

-Ip
*Needed for basically anything web based

-Operating System
*Required for the software to run

-Hardware Specifications
*Basic info needed for running software, extra data gathered on this is generally
unimportant, NEVER heard anyone complain about this

-Peripheral Devices
*Probably the most intrusive thing on here, they can see what type of keyboard or mouse you are using, or if you use a iPhone or Android (Note they say "unique device IDs or other device identifiers" not info on the device)

-Installed Software
*Installed software, at least to me this isn't intrusive, Steam does this, never bothered me

-Software Usage
*So they can see you install/uninstall software, and they can see if you like to use Chrome or Firefox, this isn't to large of a difference from installed software, except they get to know if those programs you installed are actually being used (as opposed to say if you had installed Steam, but never use it, they'd be able to tell the difference) because looking at just what is installed doesn't tell them much in terms of demographic software use.

-General Account Information (That's a given no matter what program)
-Network Media Access Control Address and Connection
*More network information
-General Origin Feature Usage

If they don't take all of it then please tell me what isn't being taken. Now lets get something straight here, which also happens to be the entire point of this thread, is that Steam does not do this without your express permission. With Origin you install the program and they just start taking your information. Compare this to Steam now. When you install Steam of course there is general information that they monitor (same as every program of this nature) but when it comes to their monthly surveys of your software and hardware it is optional. So with Steam you are given the choice of giving them your data, with Origin however you are forced to give them the data or go without all of their games.
I find the information that Ea is taking to be personal information. It monitors what I am using my computer for. This is something I should know, but no-one else should. I would be ok with this if we were actually given a choice on this matter without losing all of their services. But with Origin this is not the case so until they actually give us this choice then I won't even consider touching Origin.

 

[ph0b0s123]

Other software has a root around your system, but does not send the data collected without your permission each time, this includes Steam.

What... what? did you even read my last post, like even a little? Or have done any research whatsoever. You give permission when you agree to the EULA of most software, Steam and Windows does this, you have to opt out or data collection is automatic after installation, I've never met someone who said they had been asked to send data by Windows or Steam. The only exception is things like data crashes, or certain programs that ask about data collection separate from the EULA.

So like I said AGAIN, Origin is only different in that the only kind of "opt-out" you can have is by uninstalling. Which they are completely entitled to do as it is their software, if you don't like it, you uninstall it. End of story. Sorry if you feel that they should change something that is completely in their right to do. Perhaps if enough people think it's a serious issue and EA sees it's affecting their sales, they will choose to change it, but there have already been countless countless topics about this and I lost all patience for the whining months ago.

Yes, I did read the post and have knowledge on the subject. I am still waiting for you to backup your assertion that Steam and Windows do exactly what Origin does. You keep on saying the do the same things because they are covered by similar EULA's, but give no details or evidence to back it up.

It does not matter that they have similar EULA's that give them leeway root around your system and send the detail back, because only Origin is unique in making that a mandatory part of their service.

Again prove me wrong. I will even give you some help. Windows looks around at your system to suggest updates as part of their windows update system. But guess what it still is not like Origin as you can turn it off and get the updates as manual downloads without Microsoft saying you then cannot use their OS / software.

So really unless you can backup your assertion that other software acts the same as Origin on this issue, you don't have a leg to stand on.

 

[LiquidSolstice]

It's funny to me how the same people who would complain about their PC's hardware specs being sent to a server somewhere are also people who use Facebook, who use any Google service, who pretty much use the internet in any shape or form.

Someone is always collecting data on you. Get the hell over it.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

You do understand what the fuck "data collection" is and how it differs from "silently install rootkits", right?

Yeah. You do understand that most, if not all, of these points have already happened in one area or another. If he's talking about Worst Case, then that's all at once.

But, don't let me stop you condemning something without evidence.

 

[LiquidSolstice]

But, don't let me stop you condemning something without evidence.

Irony at it's finest.

If your post is meant to be sarcastic, then fair enough, I fell for it. If not, my opinion doesn't change.

 

[redisforever]

It doesn't have to do with the fact that they do that, it's just the principle that you should be allowed to opt out if you so choose. Personally, I'm getting ME3 for Xbox, so I don't have to bother with Origin.

I agree with that. That's why I got Battlefield 3 on PS3, not PC. I'd love to get it for PC, but I really don't want to deal with Origin. If they released it for Steam, with a small part of Origin included, like chat, friends, and multiplayer, like Quantum of Solace and GFWL, then I'd consider buying it even, but no option? Really not going to end all that well.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

my opinion doesn't change.

That is why you fail. Perhaps you should look back at your recent posts where you repeatedly deem anyone who disagrees with you "immature" and wonder where your evidence is.

You seem to be missing the idea that hypothetical situations rely on exaggeration of known situations. Perhaps you can come back then and conduct yourself in an orderly manner with counter-proposals instead of simply relying on condemnation of others.

It's very easy to sit there in your pants being rude to people. Less easy to look at others posts with reasoned debate.

If you were looking for evidence, have a look at my posts. I've been collecting information for 6 months now, while dealing with a variety of sock-puppets.

 

[LiquidSolstice]

my opinion doesn't change.

That is why you fail. Perhaps you should look back at your recent posts where you repeatedly deem anyone who disagrees with you "immature" and wonder where your evidence is.

You seem to be missing the idea that hypothetical situations rely on exaggeration of known situations. Perhaps you can come back then and conduct yourself in an orderly manner with counter-proposals instead of simply relying on condemnation of others.

It's very easy to sit there in your pants being rude to people. Less easy to look at others posts with reasoned debate.

If you were looking for evidence, have a look at my posts. I've been collecting information for 6 months now, while dealing with a variety of sock-puppets.

I'm supposed to dig through your posts to find proof of your claims? I don't have a news subscription to what you post on this site, just saying...

I'm very much aware of what hypothetical situations require. Your so-called points borderline on hyperbole.

At any rate, your exaggerations don't make any sense in this situation because you made the completely illogical jump from "we're collecting information" to "we're going to install software on your computer".

 

[DoPo]

On the other hand, EA isn't likely to sue you; they'd probably just take away access to the games you paid for (as a first step if nothing else).

Yeah, I know :/ It's a dick move on their part but it's within their rights to do so... Or at least isn't not illegal.

Oh, and if memory serves, EA put in that bullshit "You can't sue us; it must go to arbitration chosen by us first" clause (meaning you won't get what you want anyway) that Sony was also parading around. I question how effective that might be since that basically slams the door on everything but criminal charges.

Out of curiosity, did your legal expert say on what terms it would be rejected?
The one I'm thinking of is Unconscionable/Unreasonable claims; or alternatively an existing conflicting law.

Unreasonable claims. The terms of the contracts should be within reasonable limits. And he's not a legal expert...or I don't really know if he is. He is, however, the guy that gave us lectures on legal issues in the software industry, so I suppose, I could call him "legal expert" on those grounds.

Anyway, if term(-s) in the contract are outrageous, they will not hold up in court. An example he gave me was the following: if you went to work for a company, you could have a clause in your contract saying "When I leave, I will not work for a competitor for at least a year". Now, "competitor" could be sketchy but, if not specified, it's usually a company in the same field and in the same area.

So, I guess what you should get out of this is not to worry, if somebody pulls a "ha-ha you don't know what you agreed to" on you. Just slap them with that - "unreasonable claims" to shut them up.

Well, this has nothing to do with EA in this case but it's still something worth knowing.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Yeah, I know :/ It's a dick move on their part but it's within their rights to do so... Or at least isn't not illegal.

Hmm, if that's so, then EA could effectively run a legal hustle. So much for consumers' securities.
I doubt they would do so overtly, or regularly, because it would create so much negative PR, that it would kill business. 1 or 10 people getting fucked out of their money can be marginalized and rationalized as outliers in the grand scheme of things. Hackers and colossal assholes deserving of such do exist. Fuck over 100, 1000 people, others will start to take notice.

..Or perhaps in the instance where the so-called "justification" for the ban is outrageous on its own, and verifiable. Like the guy who got banned for someone else swearing via quote on their forums.

So, I guess what you should get out of this is not to worry, if somebody pulls a "ha-ha you don't know what you agreed to" on you. Just slap them with that - "unreasonable claims" to shut them up.

The problem is taking them to court to begin with. The cost of legal fees is certainly going to exceed the cost of the games you lose if they pull that bullshit to begin with; even if you bought 1000 USD worth of games, you'd still have to win against the inevitable stall-tactics EA would employ to drown you in legal fees. (of course, if you actually did win and didn't settle out of court as you'd likely have to, they would have to take the black eye in legal fees, even if the actual damages in claims is relatively puny. Small wonder lawyers and bankers rule everything.)

This is why I emphasize securities and fair play with explicit terms to begin with, and to at know who you're dealing with. My "professional" opinion of EA is that they are a ruthless business, and it's foolish to implicitly trust them. When a business stabilizes a service investment, the natural course of action is to turn the thumbscrews. Even Steam did this when they moved from a bi-weekly DRM authentication to a daily authentication.

I could rave all day about how stupid I find it that people trust them blindly, but that accomplishes marginally less than actually trying to inform them about exactly what it is they're getting into.

Then again, this is the third time I've re-read the Origin EULA just to point out this same problem on this same freaking topic. The futility of the matter is not wasted on me.

 

[ph0b0s123]

It's funny to me how the same people who would complain about their PC's hardware specs being sent to a server somewhere are also people who use Facebook, who use any Google service, who pretty much use the internet in any shape or form.

Someone is always collecting data on you. Get the hell over it.

As has been said repeatedly to anyone making this false equivalency. Please tell me the services you mentioned that get all the software and software usage details from you system as Origin does, as mandatory part of using said service. That's the thing people are pissed about, the thing you forgot to mention, not your hardware details, but the software details it collects while routing around your system. Please back up your assertion that the other services you mentioned do the same thing.....

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

I'm supposed to dig through your posts to find proof of your claims? I don't have a news subscription to what you post on this site, just saying...

Then you hardly have any claim to call me ill-informed if you cannot check my knowledge.

I'm very much aware of what hypothetical situations require. Your so-called points borderline on hyperbole.

They ARE hyperbole. That's what the person I quoted asked. Again, you couldn't be bothered to read that.

At any rate, your exaggerations don't make any sense in this situation

Again, that's why I referred to the quoter.

because you made the completely illogical jump from "we're collecting information" to "we're going to install software on your computer".

Completely logical jump given that's how Apple, Facebook already do this - and did you miss that you're installing their snooper on your computer?

If you're going to make wild, fatuous claims about my posts; I suggest you read them and the context they are made in first. Rather than just dismiss perfectly reasonable people as immature because they don't agree with you.

 

[DoPo]

So, I guess what you should get out of this is not to worry, if somebody pulls a "ha-ha you don't know what you agreed to" on you. Just slap them with that - "unreasonable claims" to shut them up.

The problem is taking them to court to begin with. The cost of legal fees is certainly going to exceed the cost of the games you lose if they pull that bullshit to begin with; even if you bought 1000 USD worth of games, you'd still have to win against the inevitable stall-tactics EA would employ to drown you in legal fees.

Ah, sorry, I didn't phrase that properly. In fact, I realise now how wrong it can be taken. I didn't mean EA - I meant that there are a some EULAs, Terms and Conditions, and so on, who throw in something outrageous just to show people that nobody is reading them. There was one website (I forget which one) that changed the T&C to include "If you agree with this, we own your soul unless you contact us about it, in which case we'll give you a [small gift of some sort]". That sort of thing. People can be really smug about "Yeah, you didn't read what you agreed to", so if you tell them "unreasonable claims" that would shut them up.

That's what I meant there. So it wasn't related to EA at all, just a random bit of info.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Ah, sorry, I didn't phrase that properly. In fact, I realise now how wrong it can be taken. I didn't mean EA - I meant that there are a some EULAs, Terms and Conditions, and so on, who throw in something outrageous just to show people that nobody is reading them. There was one website (I forget which one) that changed the T&C to include "If you agree with this, we own your soul unless you contact us about it, in which case we'll give you a [small gift of some sort]". That sort of thing. People can be really smug about "Yeah, you didn't read what you agreed to", so if you tell them "unreasonable claims" that would shut them up.

That's what I meant there. So it wasn't related to EA at all, just a random bit of info.

Well, I could generalize my point using EA as an example here in regarding unreasonable terms, and the cost to enforce them. Most individuals cannot afford to, nor would not want to engage in legal battle, and companies shouldn't be putting terms into their contracts that they know are clearly illegal, unconstitutional or otherwise outrageous.

In the case of jokes in EULAs/Contracts, well, I'm not trying to be a killjoy here, but in order for there to be fairness in a transaction over a service, there needs to be securities laid out in clear writing. Legal contracts aren't games, even if they are for games.

Finally, if an EULA isn't legally enforceable (which is not a guarantee; I can name many game-service contracts that have been upheld in court), why bother with one in the first place?

 

[Stukov Wolfwood]

Collection and Use of Information
By using Valve's online sites and products, users agree that Valve may collect aggregate information, individual information, and personally identifiable information, as defined below.

Oh snap! That actually looks very similar to EA's policy and is not optional, with the exception of seect third party participation!

nice quoute out of context.

AS DIFINED BELOW.

if you take part of the message out it can have a totally diferent meaning. for example, here is a quoute of "you" out of context

.... every time .... i just wait to see someone.... post.... me...

would you kindly post the entire document or are you only going post the part that makes you sound on the right?

 

[DoPo]

Well, I could generalize my point using EA as an example here in regarding unreasonable terms, and the cost to enforce them. Most individuals cannot afford to, nor would not want to engage in legal battle, and companies shouldn't be putting terms into their contracts that they know are clearly illegal, unconstitutional or otherwise outrageous.

In the case of jokes in EULAs/Contracts, well, I'm not trying to be a killjoy here, but in order for there to be fairness in a transaction over a service, there needs to be securities laid out in clear writing. Legal contracts aren't games, even if they are for games.

I fully agree, reasonable limits should be put on contracts, as well. Heck, my neighbour who lived on the floor below me has always been an example for me in that regard. He made money, lots of money, by lending other money to people with ridiculously unfair contracts. I think that is called "usury" in English.

At the very least, the law should allow us to punch people who do bad contracts.

Finally, if an EULA isn't legally enforceable (which is not a guarantee; I can name many game-service contracts that have been upheld in court), why bother with one in the first place?

Because they can. I'm pretty sure that's a possible explanation. If they can do it why not. They can flex their muscles and throw some intimidating stares, metaphorically speaking. Also, as you said, they can still take you to court about it. And they can afford far better lawyers than you. They can possibly do it as a sick amusement, just to see how much their lawyers can troll you. And if they win, the better.

In the end, what would EA lose out of it? Would it make people hate them? Ha-ha, that's a laugh, people hate them now but they still buy their stuff and install Origin. EA may just be trying how far they can stretch the thing before snapping.

 

[jpoon]

I love being spied on, it means better games!

/sarcasm

Some people just have that kind of attitude. Fuck EA, they do not have the right to spy on me. Thus why I always espouse getting a crack for any and every EA game and break that piece of shit Origin software.