mod delete this

[ace_of_something]

yeah, delete this. we don't need more of this thread.

 

[genericusername64]

Can we sue about this new users agreement?

 

[WaysideMaze]

This was on the front page yesterday [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/113063-Sony-Attempts-to-Block-All-Future-PSN-Class-Action-Lawsuits]

 

[artanis_neravar]

[a href=http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/09/mandatory-ps3-update-removes-right-to-join-in-a-class-action-lawsuit.ars] Here ya are[/a]

Basically, by using ps3 you can't sue sony for pretty much anything as a class action ever. Like say, if their network goes down and your personal information is stolen.

This has been done several times and you are wrong. The agreement says that you will not be part of a group suit and any issue you have with Sony will be solved through arbitration. The agreement also says that you can send them a letter within 30 days of agreeing to the new terms that with your name and PSN name and you are not binded by this part of the agreement

 

[artanis_neravar]

Can we sue about this new users agreement?

No this is 100% legal and many companies use it

 

[HassEsser]

I can't say I honestly care in the slightest. I think it's rather good, in fact, people jump to conclusions too fast and sue for no good reason.

 

[lacktheknack]

Civil disobedience would happen if they seriously tried to get away with it.

Watch them try to prosecute the users of a ten thousand member mega-suit.

 

[artanis_neravar]

Civil disobedience would happen if they seriously tried to get away with it.

Watch them try to prosecute the users of a ten thousand member mega-suit.

The case would be thrown out it's as simple as that.

 

[lacktheknack]

Civil disobedience would happen if they seriously tried to get away with it.

Watch them try to prosecute the users of a ten thousand member mega-suit.

The case would be thrown out it's as simple as that.

Wow. Well thank goodness I don't use a PS3. If the stars align and they somehow deface/injure/otherwise harm me, I can still sue them.

 

[artanis_neravar]

Civil disobedience would happen if they seriously tried to get away with it.

Watch them try to prosecute the users of a ten thousand member mega-suit.

The case would be thrown out it's as simple as that.

Wow. Well thank goodness I don't use a PS3. If the stars align and they somehow deface/injure/otherwise harm me, I can still sue them.

You could still sue them, you just can't be part of a class action lawsuit, not only that but you are entitled to arbitration, and if none of that appeals to you, you can write them send them a letter (as indicated in the EULA) and then you are no longer included in that portion of the agreement

 

[artanis_neravar]

Civil disobedience would happen if they seriously tried to get away with it.

Watch them try to prosecute the users of a ten thousand member mega-suit.

The case would be thrown out it's as simple as that.

Wow. Well thank goodness I don't use a PS3. If the stars align and they somehow deface/injure/otherwise harm me, I can still sue them.

Double Post sorry

 

[LITE992]

I don't see how this takes away your rights. It stops stupid twats from suing over the slightest incident.

 

[Kopikatsu]

[a href=http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/09/mandatory-ps3-update-removes-right-to-join-in-a-class-action-lawsuit.ars] Here ya are[/a]

Basically, by using ps3 you can't sue sony for pretty much anything as a class action ever. Like say, if their network goes down and your personal information is stolen.

EDIT: Didn't see it from yesterday don't quote me to tell me that.

Civil disobedience would happen if they seriously tried to get away with it.

Watch them try to prosecute the users of a ten thousand member mega-suit.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that AT&T?and indeed, any company?could block class-action suits arising from disputes with customers and instead force those customers into binding arbitration. The ruling reverses previous lower-court decisions that classified stipulations in AT&T's service contract which barred class arbitration as "unconscionable."

Source: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/04/scotus-rules-att-can-force-arbitration-block-class-action-suits.ars

It must be nice to live in a fantasy world where the laws are whatever you say they are.

This isn't taking away your right to sue, they just want to settle cases on an individual basis outside of court.

 

[artanis_neravar]

[a href=http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/09/mandatory-ps3-update-removes-right-to-join-in-a-class-action-lawsuit.ars] Here ya are[/a]

Basically, by using ps3 you can't sue sony for pretty much anything as a class action ever. Like say, if their network goes down and your personal information is stolen.

EDIT: Didn't see it from yesterday don't quote me to tell me that.

Civil disobedience would happen if they seriously tried to get away with it.

Watch them try to prosecute the users of a ten thousand member mega-suit.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled that AT&T?and indeed, any company?could block class-action suits arising from disputes with customers and instead force those customers into binding arbitration. The ruling reverses previous lower-court decisions that classified stipulations in AT&T's service contract which barred class arbitration as "unconscionable."

Source: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/04/scotus-rules-att-can-force-arbitration-block-class-action-suits.ars

It must be nice to live in a fantasy world where the laws are whatever you say they are.

This isn't taking away your right to sue, they just want to settle cases on an individual basis outside of court.

You did actual research, I am amazed and feel compelled to thank you. So,
Thank you

Note: I intended that to be sincere

 

[Khanht Cope]

The link suggests writing to Sony and asking for a signature on delivery. How does one go about this?

Is it through asking the mail service to request the signature at the point of delivery and then return the signature to you?