GameStop Sued Over "Deceptive" Used Game Sales

[Capachinola]

Beyond all the crap that everyone else already said, he's suing over 10 bucks? I dont know, but I think court fees and such will cost heaps more than 10 bucks.

 

[theSovietConnection]

* Gamestop refused to refund the said game when the disparity of content was discovered.

Problem here will be how the 7 Day return policy is taken in court. If they can succesfully argue that they would not take the used game back or refund because of the company policy, the case will be deemed without merit and tossed. Otherwise, you are right, he does have a definite case.

And in response to everyone hoping that this kid wins, hasn't it dawned on you that Gamestop might just use this as another excuse to raise prices in order to "cover the legal expenses"?

*Unrelated quote, just grabbed it because it was the closest

I feel you are misconstruing socialism and fascism, socialism is an economic system and therefore mentions nothing about the government being able to have more control over legal matters like this lawsuit.

 

[Coldman42]

It makes as much sense as the fact that Walmart (or insert favorite "evil" franchise here) can sell items for less than your "friendly local (insert store type here) store" can even purchase the item for. They are a bigger company and can make deals with the publisher/distributor because they will buy millions of copies of the product while most stores will only purchase maybe a dozen.

and it just so happens that they are putting a Wallmart here and it opens at the end of this month. I'll probably only go to it once or twice then not much at all though.

 

[DarkLight523]

God Damn how can people be so retarded to not read the god damn games they buy but go to the trouble of taking on a massive retailer-chain?

Edit:Can Gamestop even be sued for what they did?I mean sure it's deceitful as hell, but who the heck buys a used game for $5 less then a new one?

GameStop can only be sued (successfully) if they independently advertised that the DLC's One-Time-Use code was still available with used copies.

However, if an employee verbally confirmed that One-Time-Use codes were still usuable they would likely win the lawsuit. The burden of proof is lower in civil courts than it is in criminal courts, but their lawyers can still paint a picture of a young man (the plaintiff) just trying to sue for money.

 

[squid5580]

So the morons who don't do the research should be rewarded? He doesn't just not know about gaming, he knows nothing about simple stuff like asterisks. That is something even 10 year olds know about. This guy probably knew and just wants cash.

What are you talking about? Asterisk on the box of the game says you get a code that gives you the DLC. It does not give you the DLC. The customers assumed that what he was told was true, and was, in fact, charged accordingly, and he did not get what he was promised. If I bought a car off of E Bay, and they showed me a picture of the car, brand new and sparkling, and was told that it was in perfect condition, and it showed up without wheels, I am not going to accept the excuse of, "I gave you a picture of a new car, and even if I charged you for a complete car, you should have realized that it might have come without wheels because it is used". The responsibility here is not on the the customer needing to research the latest marketing strategies of the publishers of games they may buy, in order to pick out deceptive, however unintentional, sales practices. The responsibility is on GS being honest with you about what they hand over to you when you fork over your hard earned cash. That's customer service on an absolutely most basic level.

No. It there was an asterisk after the part about the code that said "With Full Retail Purchase Only."

You do know that this is a far stretch right? If I were to buy it used without knowing about Project $10 and not ever been on a gaming site I would ask an employee. Stuff goes missing from used games all the time. I would have taken the case up to the counter and said "I do get the DLC with this right?". It isn't even a question about his gaming knowledge. It is just common sense.

It is absolutely not a stretch to assume that a box that says, "Comes with DLC", comes with DLC. Yes, if they were more up to date on the latest marketing trends in the industry, they could have avoided this mess. The thing about not knowing about something is that you tend to not ask about it, because you don't know about it in the first place. What's common sense is that when you're selling something to people, you tell them what your selling them.

There was a thing of small print saying... oh, just read the above.

Dammit you can't expect someone to do that. This is 2010. We need our mommies to hold our hands for us. We might pull a brain muscle otherwise. And then they would face another lawsuit. I pulled a brain muscle in your store because you expected me to think for half a second. To the courthouse.

 

[squid5580]

How much is he suing for? That is the fundamental point. If its for the price of a full, new retail version of Dragon Age, thats fine; he's stupid but still in the right, technically.

However, if the greedy bastard wants anymore than that then...well let him enjoy his legal fees, he doesn't have a leg to stand on legally; outside of claiming a refund.

Actually, all he should be suing for is the price of the DLC, as that is what he was unable to access. By all accounts, he was able to access the game itself just fine, it was the "free" DLC he missed out on. So, yeah, $15. Totally worth the legal fees.

This is true - but the guy is clearly a Grade-A bellend of awe-inspiring proportions so, ~£30 (or whatever the US equiv is) is worth it just to get him to shut it.

No just NO!!!! This type of ignorance should not be encouraged or rewarded. I personally hope that he loses (which I have no doubt) and then has to pay GS for all their legal fees. Maybe throw in some defamination for kicks.

We need a Judge Judy or People's Court for stuff like this. Who wouldn't want to watch this case?

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

Surely there's no case here?It says on the packaging that the free DLC is only for new purchases so how can this possibly be Gamestop's fault?Cheapskate should have just forked out the extra $5 and bought it new

The weird thing is that it isn't cheap to hire a lawyer or bring a case to court. This guy was really determined to make a quick buck, just like the person who sued McDonalds over hot coffee. Its ridiculous. This world is insane.

Why, oh why, do people always bring up Stella Leinbeck? She had solid grounds for her case. For more information, here's a link: http://www.caoc.com/CA/index.cfm?event=showPage&pg=facts

Why do we bring her up? Because she was in idiot! I read your link and still stand by my verdict. Its hot coffee, I don't care what temperature it's served at, it will burn. Don't be stupid, don't be clumsy, and don't bring it to court. Deal with it and get some aloe lotion!

Same here. She should have had hot MD coffee poured all over her for that case.

You're both fucking giant pricks that apparently didn't read the article, since that was fucking 195 degree coffee that burned the fucking skin of her goddamned THIGHS and CROTCH, and the damage required fucking skin grafting. That means it charred her skin. CHARRED IT. You know, like how a marshmallow does when you stick it into a fire for a second, except this happened slowly. So yes, no matter your defense, your both giant assholes.

No, she is a moron for trying to open like that, in her lap, in a car. Not to mention, she bought MD coffee. Those things alone make me wish it was her brain and not her legs.

Agreed. And so did the court. They reduced her award because they found her partly at fault. As for the non-bolded part, what is it about the Internet that it allows people to think that they should act like pricks, just because they are behind a computer screen.

 

[Nice Person]

This happened to me as well, the best thing I could come up with was to redact the download offer from the box art before I sold it back. But this is much more inventive.

 

[StarCecil]

How stupid. That guy is just greedy. So is Gamestop. They should offer him a job, as he'd fit right in.

Maybe at your local Gamestop, but mine knows not to bother with trying to sell me that which I never buy. I'll buy the disk warranty, as I'm paranoid about the disk, but I treat all disks nicely, so I don't need. I will not buy GI, or the card, so they don't try to sell me either. They know that I'm probably there to pre-order, and they make small talk. Whenever I'm there I normally have a gaming discussion at check-out. I enjoy it.

reading from page 1-3 you have said this 5 time already, should I read on?

Sure, why not? Hey, you asked.

if I was to make an analysis it would be page 1-4 fanboy page 5 epipheny page 6 ---pending
why are you defending GameStop with such a passion? They don't care about you. they never will. they want your money and they want every single penny. Are BioWare even making any money from GS selling their game used? if no then why the hell is that legal? why is me pirating it any different than some tard buying it used for the full price?

Because it has absolutely nothing to do with supporting the store or the company. I want the game, and it's cheaper to buy it used. I buy it used, I save money. That's all. I could pirate it, but I don't want to fiddle with getting it to work/finding a good download/the morality of it. I just want the game.