GameStop Sued Over "Deceptive" Used Game Sales

[Bat Vader]

The customer himself is at fault. He should have known the person who owned the game before him was going to use those codes. Also, the back of the box clearly states one time use code only.

It is not Gamestops fault that the customer did not read the back of the box clearly. Perhaps he should have bought the game new instead of used.

 

[Cannorn]

Oh purrrrlease, who doesn't know that 2nd hand games won't usually have valid dlc codes...

*sigh* easy method, Email the dev via the support pages and say I bought this game from x,x shop and it's telling me when I register that "this code has already been used".
They will usually give you the content direct to your account.

 

[kaizen2468]

They should award him the DLC and leave him with his legal fees.

 

[jthm]

Jury Foreman, have you reached a verdict?
We have your honor.
How do you find?
We find the defendant, Gamestop Inc., to be not guilty, but a shit choice for buying your games. Further, we find the plaintiff criminally stupid and hereby recommend he be sentenced to mandatory castration as well as remedial reading classes.

 

[LornMind]

He's got no chance. The box fucking says it. It's his fault for not reading fine print.

 

[SnootyEnglishman]

Stupid person can't read and now has to sue so he doesn't have to admit his stupidity and dumbassery. Oh how i love what this country is coming true.

 

[XT inc]

is it not dead obvious the used copy would have had the one time use code already redeemed?

 

[Sethzard]

The asterisk has screwed him, he has no chance.

 

[SextusMaximus]

It wasn't unforseen. That is why they put in the *. Shouldn't the lawsuit be directed at EA though? It wasn't GS who packaged it. The end result would be the same sure but he might have a chance at some free swag. If EA wasn't bitter about him buying used.

It is stupidity like this that gives "gamers" a bad name.

No, it was gamestop who failed to note that used games wouldn't be able to use the DLC code, the first buyer would be able to.

 

[SilverUchiha]

I also think it is bullshit that gamespot buys games from you saying "Oh we will give you $5 for it" only to turn around and sell it for $40 more.

It's much like the ComicBookGuy in Simpsons who wants to buy the first edition Superman comic issue #1 for a few dollars from unknowing parents cleaning their children's rooms... but worse. haha

 

[asinann]

Even though I don't think his lawsuit is as just as that guy makes it out to be, but still at least people are letting game stop know that what they do is bull. Because even though it was ultimately his fault for not "reading the box", Game stop tricks people all the time into buying used games.

How does it hurt you to buy a used game? If it doesn't work you take it back, if you don't LIKE it you can take it back within 7 days for all of your money back. Do that with a new game and they will give you trade in value. New game sucks, you're stuck with it: used game sucks, you go get another game. This whole thing is a money grab by someone who thinks that he will get money because he is too lazy or stupid to read a box.

 

[swytchblayd]

Can you say... "massive failure"?

Seriously, I know about 90% of the the people in GameStop infested countries hate that place (and many STILL go there because they don't have many other options -.-" ), but suing them because you weren't smart enough to buy it new for five more dollars? Especially if you specifically want the DLC? That's just stupid, especially since most people who buy it would use the DLC codes as soon as they can get online to redeem them, and that means they can't be used again -.-" This kid is just stupid. Plain and simple, stupid.

EDIT: I just want to make it clear that I don't hate used games. I think it's a great way to recycle games that someone doesn't want anymore; hell, most of my library is made up of used games, and some of them are worth more than some modern systems! But I just wanted to state that buying a game that's fairly new (if not BRAND new) to the market used is a bad idea. If it came with the code slips inside (as most do, for authentication purposes), then doubly shame on him for the reasons in the last paragraph. Did he thing someone was just going to let it pass and not use said codes? And if it didn't... then what the hell is he complaining about? No codes = no free DLC. Simple as that.

 

[JWAN]

I don't think he's goona make any money, at all.

He should of said they were racist.

 

[ReverseEngineered]

Project Ten Dollar is "hopefully successful"? Why? Who does this benefit? EA gets more revenue and customers get stuck with not being able to resell their old games or buy used ones. EA can talk about their rights all they want, but customers won't pay $60 for next year's sports game if they can't trade it in for $20 off of next year's game.

I don't know where companies, or the game industry, get off thinking that they can circumvent the first-sale doctrine, but it's there to keep things balanced between producers and consumers. Selling things first-hand-only isn't their right and buying used isn't stealing. The law allows for it for a reason and their underhanded one-time-use shit is undermining the law.

 

[Caiti Voltaire]

Anyone who buys used things that comes with DLC thinking the original person didn't take the DLC and run, is a certified idiot. No seriously, there should be a certificate to identify this particular brand of idiot.

 

[_Cake_]

Dude: Should get 15$ for the dlc.
GameStop: Should be less sneeky.
Bioware: Should make DLC that comes out at/near the same time as the game free. Stop making jump through hoops just to play the games I just PAYED for.