Something went wrong. Try again later

Giant Bomb News

328 Comments

Sony's Asking You to Waive Your Rights, But You Have Options

Keep your legal rights by sending a letter--we even made a template! Plus, a lawyer questions whether this will even hold up.

Agreeing toPSN's new Terms of Service waives certain legal rights, unless you mail a letter.
Agreeing toPSN's new Terms of Service waives certain legal rights, unless you mail a letter.

UPDATE: Some users pointed out this wouldn't apply worldwide, as laws are in place elsewhere to protect consumers from this. Kotaku Australia confirmed it won't apply to Europe or Australia.

ORIGINAL STORY: When I booted up NFL Sunday Ticket to watch the Chicago Bears on Sunday (which worked fine this week), Sony asked me to agree to an updated Terms of Service to access PlayStation Network. Standard stuff. We blindly agree to these things all the time, but this time, it's different.

Sony is asking you to waive the right to collectively sue them, and instead resolve any disputes individually through another process called arbitration (read: outside of the courts).

Sony has not revealed why it's implemented this change, but it's easy to guess it's in response to PSN security imploding back in April, exposing the personal data of 75 million PSN accounts. It was a total disaster.

Within days after admitting PSN had been compromised, the company had been sued, that time by 36-year-old Kristopher Johns of Birmingham, Ala, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Below is the legal excerpt causing a stir, but you can read the entire updated Terms of Service right here.

"Any dispute resolution proceedings, whether in arbitration or court, will be conducted only on an individual basis and not in a class or representative action or as a named or unnamed member in a class, consolidated, representative or private attorney general legal action, unless both you and the Sony entity with which you have a dispute specifically agree to do so in writing following initiation of the arbitration. This provision does not preclude your participation as a member in a class action filed on or before August 20, 2011."

If you don't agree, you cannot continue to play games online. That's a hard bargain.

The reason people bring class action lawsuits against companies runs under the the same principles governing unions: power in numbers. One person's going to have a tough time staring down a giant corporation, but if thousands or millions of people are speaking together, there's a chance it'll listen. Having the discussion happen behind-closed-doors doesn't help matters.

This effectively cuts group action off at the knees.

Sony's likely buried the opt-out option in this update to discourage anyone from opting-out.
Sony's likely buried the opt-out option in this update to discourage anyone from opting-out.

"This really sort of sucks because it is doubtful that any individual could afford to sue them," explained Washington attorney Thomas Buscaglia, who specializes in games. "Not sure how enforceable it will be, but I think it it would be really cool if gamers started to circulate a form opt out rejection of these terms and mailed them in."

As it turns out, there's an opt-out buried in the Terms of Service, but if you've already signed off on the updated Terms of Service, you need to act quickly; Sony's built a countdown into the agreement itself.

"If you do not wish to be bound by the binding arbitration and class action waiver in this Section 15," reads the Terms of Service, "you must notify SNEI [Sony Network Entertainment] in writing within 30 days of the date that you accept this agreement."

Tick, tock. Tick, tock.

To retain your right to participate in class action lawsuits, you must send the company a letter with your name, address, PSN account and a "clear statement that you do not wish to resolve disputes with any Sony entity through arbitration." Once you have that letter prepared, print it out and mail it here:

6080 Center Drive
10th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90045
Attn: Legal Department/Arbitration
Attn: Sony Legal Department: Dispute Resolution

I'll even make things easier: here's a document I created you can use as your personal template.

What happens next isn't clear.

Sony has provided all 75 million and counting members of PSN a clear way to maintain their existing rights, but by asking everyone to agree to ditching those rights in order to continue using PSN and asking them to mail a letter to keep them, they've ensured most will have given them away. That's assuming the majority of users are even aware something substantive has changed; how often have you seen an email full of legal mumbo jumbo, pretended to read it, then quickly deleted it?

That said, Sony's move could run into problems, regardless of whether you send in a letter or not.

"This is certainly not standard practice by any standards...in fact it may well not be enforceable," said Buscaglia. "Time will tell on that one. The US Federal Trade Commission and various state consumer protection agencies could have a problem with it. Also, some courts might not allow it to be enforced due to existing state court precedent."

Even if this move wouldn't hold up in court (ironic!), it may scare off anyone from trying, which would make it a success.

As Buscaglia said, time will tell. In the meantime, maybe you should go buy some stamps.

Patrick Klepek on Google+

328 Comments

Avatar image for deactivated-5e49e9175da37
deactivated-5e49e9175da37

10812

Forum Posts

782

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 14

Patrick, I really appreciate how you can write a news article without being overbearingly strident.

Avatar image for elusionar
Elusionar

326

Forum Posts

7

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 7

Edited By Elusionar

That option is called Xbox!

Avatar image for chromaticpanther
ChromaticPanther

66

Forum Posts

25

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By ChromaticPanther

Waivers of this sort have a precedent of being largely ineffective. I would assume that a scale like this, and with EULA's being so notorious for people blindly agreeing, would make this particular waiver even weaker. Not to mention that it asks you to basically waive a fundamental right. Without the ability to make lawsuits against large companies like Sony society loses one of its most important checks and balances against wide sweeping companies such as Sony.

PS, I am not American nor do I endorse idiotic lawsuits for hot coffee or anything similar to this. However I do believe that civil cases against corporations are extremely important to society and can be used effectively. Although I am a bit of a socialist, so take my opinions with a grain of salt.

Avatar image for jmrwacko
jmrwacko

2537

Forum Posts

50

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By jmrwacko

@Axleisbored said:

@BenderUnit22 said:

I'm not American, so the concept of suing people and/or companies as I please still sounds ridiculous to me.

i AM American and that concept sounds ridiculous to me too.

The threat of lawsuits forces a company to honor its contracts. In other words, if you weren't able to sue people and/or companies as you please, Sony could take your money and then close your account for no reason, and there would be nothing you could do to stop them. You can't just take someone up on blind faith to honor a deal you've made with them. That's why so many people are victims of fraud on sites like craigslist.

AKA stop pretending you're better because you're European, Canadian, or Australian. Last time I checked, rule of law exists in most parts of the world.

Avatar image for redsox8933
RedSox8933

2501

Forum Posts

398

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

Edited By RedSox8933

I agreed to it without reading it a couple days ago...is there any way I can take that back? This is just one step closer to that South Park episode actually coming true.

Avatar image for impendingfoil
ImpendingFoil

587

Forum Posts

23

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By ImpendingFoil

I don't have any plans to ever sue Sony nor do I think I ever will. However, it doesn't hurt to opt out of something like this and take a few minutes out of my day to do so.

Avatar image for thephantomstranger
ThePhantomStranger

569

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

As far as I can tell the practice in of itself should be focused on and not how much we hate other people on Giant Bomb because they didn't understand the whole situation. Many of you guys stated that this site is turning into Kotaku of Destructoid because people freaked out over this and not over other TOS issues from other industries perhaps instead of yelling at the top of your lungs about how right you are and how dumb everyone else is you could just explain the whole situation in a much more calm and dignified manner. For many people this is the first they've heard about this kind of clause so ofcourse they'll freak out at sony if they aren't aware that many other companies are doing this. Your essentially freaking out at them for freaking out at something that based on all the information they have is perfectly reasonable to freak out about. This said perhaps Mr. Klepek should have researched this piece a little further or at least make an update to the post itself explaining the reality of the situation...

Avatar image for obinice
obinice

312

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By obinice

Europe may be off the hook, but I'm still glad I don't own any Sony products.

OH, except an old DVD-ROM drive. Shit. It's watching me.....

Avatar image for tourgen
tourgen

4568

Forum Posts

645

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 11

Edited By tourgen

@Cyrisaurus: Don't pretend to speak for the average gamer. I have entered into class action lawsuits over a few products in my time and I will reserve the right to do so in the future. One particularly nasty one was for frame cracking on my 2006 GSXR. It's my right to take someone to court when they don't hold up their end of the bargain and I will make use of it. Just because you want to be a pushover doesn't mean everyone is.

Avatar image for go_diego_go
go_diego_go

41

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By go_diego_go

@phantomzxro: @phantomzxro said:

@wickedsc3 said:

@lordgodalming said:

Why are people making such a stink about this? The EULAs for Valve and iTunes, for example, are way more intrusive than the PSN's. And anyway, if millions of people's credit cards got stolen again, the company would be held responsible again. Simple as that.

And you made us a template? Articles like this are pure fear-mongering. I love GB, but Mr. Klepek brings down the whole site.

How is it fear-mongering exactly? He simply reported on a change of the TOS in reaction to Sony latest breach. Knowing most people just simply agree to those TOS he is doing his job reporting it.

The thing you clearly don't realize is that Sony might be responsible for the money they lost, good luck on making your house payment, car payment, car insurance, cell phone bill, and others when you just lost all of your money in your checking because Sony got hacked again.

I'm sure it would take Sony longer than a month to get everyone's money back so missing those payments would cause your credit to drop. Now how is Sony going to make up for that? They are not going to. That is something you have to settle in court and good luck going up against Sony by yourself (which is what you are agreeing to in this tos) in court with no money, because they just lost it.

i think you anwsered your own question because your statement is textbook fearmongering. How many people were reported who lost money because of the sony hack awhile ago. You can't name any because there were none to my knownage or not alot of people to make a fuss over. Sony offers free ID theft service and this agreement does not stop you from sueing sony for this. This is in place to slow down class action lawsuit for people who like to create them for the fun of it. any suit on sony will still be taken to court and if both parties agree class action lawsuits can still happen. so this does not really change anything, that is why this can be fear mongering because it shocks readers without giving them the full story.

The idea that because Sony provides a service to help you because of a failure of Sony does not mean that Sony has you best interest in thought.

The issue here is that Sony is asking you to give up a legal right on the basis that should a problem arise, Sony would like the upperhand in the suit. Whether or not you as a customer ever exercise the right is none of Sony's business. The belief that because the news of lost consumer money was not all over the news it did not really happen is preposterous. There is really no way to know. So once a customer has had their card taken and credit destroyed, said customer has to spend a considerable amount of time to get their credit back (can take years) as well as try to find out why it happened. And after all this they were able to link it back to Sony, because of this revision the customer no longer has the right to find other like-effected people and join together to hold Sony accountable.

Your answer simply gives up to Sony, it holds the lazy belief that if it is not on the web it didn't happen. You want to be David facing the Giant with nothing but a sling. Fine. I would rather have the option of bringing a team to the fight.

Avatar image for kinarion
Kinarion

391

Forum Posts

1657

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By Kinarion

This sort of contract is not remotely enforceable, as your lawyer friend mentions. If PSN goes down again, expect a rash of suits from good lawyers who know their way away around contract law way more authoritative than this.

Avatar image for thekbob
TheKbob

153

Forum Posts

18

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By TheKbob

At the end of the day, it's a video game system that happens to play netflix too. If I have to update to watch my netflix, I will. I also like playing things like Demon's Souls or inFAMOUS.

Sony's a drag, Microsoft has ludicrous requirements, and if Nintendo actually offered some sort of online product, then it'd be effed up too, I bet.

Hey, even Steam has some bad points.

Huzzah...?

Avatar image for north6
north6

1672

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By north6

@piropeople13 said:

GOOD WORK PATRICK. I'll send my letter in tomorrow. Thanks for the excellent investigative journalism.

this

Avatar image for spoonman671
Spoonman671

5874

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Spoonman671

No thanks.  I'll never need to be part of a frivolous lawsuit against a video game company.

Avatar image for darthorange
DarthOrange

4232

Forum Posts

998

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 19

Edited By DarthOrange

You can still sue in mass even if you agree. Why? The right to assembly is a constitutional right that supersedes all other agreements. Kind of like state law in California says you can smoke weed but federal law says you can't. The feds can arrest you at any time for smoking in California, even if the state law said it was OK.

If Sony's Terms of Service said that you were allowing Sony to take you and make you there slave, they still couldn't do it, even if they have a document saying that you agreed because Federal law states slavery is illegal.

Avatar image for rvone
RVonE

5027

Forum Posts

8740

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Edited By RVonE

@jmrwacko said:

@Axleisbored said:

@BenderUnit22 said:

I'm not American, so the concept of suing people and/or companies as I please still sounds ridiculous to me.

i AM American and that concept sounds ridiculous to me too.

The threat of lawsuits forces a company to honor its contracts. In other words, if you weren't able to sue people and/or companies as you please, Sony could take your money and then close your account for no reason, and there would be nothing you could do to stop them. You can't just take someone up on blind faith to honor a deal you've made with them. That's why so many people are victims of fraud on sites like craigslist.

AKA stop pretending you're better because you're European, Canadian, or Australian. Last time I checked, rule of law exists in most parts of the world.

Yes, but the fact that Rule of Law exists in many parts of the world doesn't mean it is implemented everywhere in the same way. I can't just go around suing companies or people as I please but that also doesn't mean that companies might "take my money and close my account", as you put it. There are different ways to enforce the law that don't involve everyone suing everyone. Then again, it means "bigger government" and it is my understanding that Americans aren't too fond of that idea.

Also, Rule of Law doesn't actually mean anything in practice; it is not a universal principal. Case in point: The USA is one of only a few first world countries that hasn't ratified the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and as such denies the ICC's authority and jurisdiction; you know, because it doesn't mesh well with some US policies.

So how about that article that Patrick wrote, huh. Fascinating...

Avatar image for swimmi34
swimmi34

39

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By swimmi34

Hurricane Patrick defending the people!

Avatar image for yellowgameboy
yellowgameboy

7

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By yellowgameboy

So... this means that i should never log on and Update my ps3 in exchange for losing my rights... lol fine by me i already downloaded Castlevania SotN and Final Fantasy 8 il never need psn again MUHAHAHAHA!!!

Avatar image for gunslingernz
gunslingerNZ

2010

Forum Posts

300

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By gunslingerNZ

While this is an incredibly misguided move on Sony's behalf I really doubt whether a Court would uphold those terms.

Avatar image for theiceman
TheIceman

3

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By TheIceman

"law suits" should be spelled correctly "lawsuits" in the document btw

Avatar image for dblueguy
Dblueguy

39

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Dblueguy

That agreement will never hold up in court and Sony knows it. It's only there as a deterrent for the biggest part of their consumer base which would believe it.

Avatar image for subyman
subyman

729

Forum Posts

2719

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By subyman

Like others have said, it won't hold up in court. Most lawsuits go to arbitration first anyway, but if it is not sorted out they go to court.

Avatar image for habster3
habster3

3706

Forum Posts

1522

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By habster3

Who cares? Suing Sony would be retarded anyway. I mean, what could we possibly sue for? Video games making us unable to function in the outside world? Losing eyesight due to standing in front of the TV? Yeah, those issues are our faults, not theirs. Then again, knowing the American people I live around, of course having the right to sue everyone and everything for the most trivial reasons is absolutely necessary :P

Avatar image for mewarmo990
mewarmo990

862

Forum Posts

1131

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By mewarmo990

It's just a matter of time until someone sues Sony over forcing users to accept this new Terms of Service...

Avatar image for thor_molecules
Thor_Molecules

792

Forum Posts

10

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Thor_Molecules

@ThePhantomStranger: It's no use explaining when the article itself is written in such a inflammatory and snarky manner.

Everyone will get upset over nothing, argue in the comment section, and we will all forget this happened within the week.

It's not like the Steam EULA, Origin's Terms of Service or Xbox Live Terms of Service are any better. People just don't read them.

Avatar image for lnin0
Lnin0

192

Forum Posts

80

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 5

Edited By Lnin0

Sony is not a company - Sony is a person and we are all bitches.

Avatar image for halfsunkboat
HalfSunkBoat

112

Forum Posts

170

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By HalfSunkBoat

This isn't really that big of a deal to me. I never planed on suing sony anyway.

Avatar image for chiefmegadeth666
CHIEFMEGADETH666

118

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 4

Edited By CHIEFMEGADETH666

Everyone knows that if you want to play a real Live service, you play Xbox live!
End of story

Avatar image for xaviersx
Xaviersx

168

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By Xaviersx

Lawsuits have there place. It's not like companies ever don't harm or put in harms way their consumers . . . some believe a sucker is borne every minute. So don't play that a company won't. Now, there may be too many lawsuits. Fine, I kind of agree, but really don't waive your rights to your rights whether you'll exercise them or not, especially if pointed out to you beforehand. You may one day click okay on the line where they can enter your home with no due course through the courts or the presence of the law . . . a raid of sorts.

As for class action, yeah, you could waive being a part of a class action lawsuit, but can Sony waive users from banding together to work on an individual's case, supplying material support and testimony as per say a consumer guild? It aint a class action Sony just classy people :)

Avatar image for wickedsc3
wickedsc3

1044

Forum Posts

51

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By wickedsc3

@habster3 said:

Who cares? Suing Sony would be retarded anyway. I mean, what could we possibly sue for? Video games making us unable to function in the outside world? Losing eyesight due to standing in front of the TV? Yeah, those issues are our faults, not theirs. Then again, knowing the American people I live around, of course having the right to sue everyone and everything for the most trivial reasons is absolutely necessary :P

We could sue if next time they get hacked and our money actually does get stolen, we will not be able to make our payments of things like house payment, insurance, car payment, ect... Causing us to have bad credit.

Avatar image for 234rqsd2323d2
234r2we232

3175

Forum Posts

2007

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 16

Edited By 234r2we232

This is part where you sell your PlayStation and buy that Gamecube you've always wanted.

Also...

Avatar image for evilspants
evilspants

50

Forum Posts

84

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By evilspants

Yeah, waving your right to sue is of question, but that doesn't bother nearly as much as the fact that PSN was down and we were unable to play games online in the first place. They didn't exactly handle that situation with a gold standard.

Avatar image for wickedsc3
wickedsc3

1044

Forum Posts

51

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By wickedsc3

@phantomzxro said:

@wickedsc3 said:

@lordgodalming said:

Why are people making such a stink about this? The EULAs for Valve and iTunes, for example, are way more intrusive than the PSN's. And anyway, if millions of people's credit cards got stolen again, the company would be held responsible again. Simple as that.

And you made us a template? Articles like this are pure fear-mongering. I love GB, but Mr. Klepek brings down the whole site.

How is it fear-mongering exactly? He simply reported on a change of the TOS in reaction to Sony latest breach. Knowing most people just simply agree to those TOS he is doing his job reporting it.

The thing you clearly don't realize is that Sony might be responsible for the money they lost, good luck on making your house payment, car payment, car insurance, cell phone bill, and others when you just lost all of your money in your checking because Sony got hacked again.

I'm sure it would take Sony longer than a month to get everyone's money back so missing those payments would cause your credit to drop. Now how is Sony going to make up for that? They are not going to. That is something you have to settle in court and good luck going up against Sony by yourself (which is what you are agreeing to in this tos) in court with no money, because they just lost it.

i think you anwsered your own question because your statement is textbook fearmongering. How many people were reported who lost money because of the sony hack awhile ago. You can't name any because there were none to my knownage or not alot of people to make a fuss over. Sony offers free ID theft service and this agreement does not stop you from sueing sony for this. This is in place to slow down class action lawsuit for people who like to create them for the fun of it. any suit on sony will still be taken to court and if both parties agree class action lawsuits can still happen. so this does not really change anything, that is why this can be fear mongering because it shocks readers without giving them the full story.

Not fear mongering he gave them the whole story. Sony changed there TOS, its not his job to educate people on the laws.

Avatar image for spandexmonkey
spandexmonkey

9

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By spandexmonkey

We'll probably see more companies (not just in gaming) begin using language just like this after the last round of SCOTUS rulings. Expect more binding arbitration and anti-class action provisions. This consumer remedy will go the way of equal time laws I suppose.

Avatar image for branthog
Branthog

5777

Forum Posts

1014

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By Branthog

This is nothing new. There has been significant legislation in the past decade to curtail class-action lawsuits. While Class Action suits usually only really benefit the lawyers (they get a huge amount of the settlement as well as any unclaimed awards after a certain grace period), they are important in slapping the wrist of companies, when necessary. And not just as consumers, but as employees in some cases.
 
The result, I suppose, would be that we'll just see a lot more individual law suits. Let's see a corporation deal with 15,000 individual suits instead of one huge one.
 
Also, the arbitration thing is common. Employers and companies you do business with have increasingly included clauses that state you waive your right to sue and instead must seek arbitration. Guess who does the arbitration? A third party. That the company you're complaining about pays. It is in their best interest to side on behalf of the corporations, to continue their client-base.
 
And, of course, just because a company says you waive the right to something doesn't mean you do. Companies make stupid claims all the time and the only effect is that they stop ignorant people from following through on anything, because they say "well, gosh, XYZ Inc. said I waived that right by stepping foot onto their property".

Avatar image for demarcon
demarcon

297

Forum Posts

886

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Edited By demarcon

@Bats said:

*snip*

Completely agree with you. I don't intend to sue Sony, but if they have another data leak you can bet your ass I'm hopping on that bandwagon of people filing a class action lawsuit. I don't intend to get anything for it if it does happen, but I intend to help in making Sony pay out the ass. The amazing thing to me is how stupid Sony thinks most of their customers are to keep trying to do this shit.

If I ever do update my PS3 again, I'll be sure to mail the letter.

Avatar image for phantomzxro
phantomzxro

1613

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By phantomzxro
@go_diego_go said:

@phantomzxro: @phantomzxro said:

@wickedsc3 said:

@lordgodalming said:

Why are people making such a stink about this? The EULAs for Valve and iTunes, for example, are way more intrusive than the PSN's. And anyway, if millions of people's credit cards got stolen again, the company would be held responsible again. Simple as that.

And you made us a template? Articles like this are pure fear-mongering. I love GB, but Mr. Klepek brings down the whole site.

How is it fear-mongering exactly? He simply reported on a change of the TOS in reaction to Sony latest breach. Knowing most people just simply agree to those TOS he is doing his job reporting it.

The thing you clearly don't realize is that Sony might be responsible for the money they lost, good luck on making your house payment, car payment, car insurance, cell phone bill, and others when you just lost all of your money in your checking because Sony got hacked again.

I'm sure it would take Sony longer than a month to get everyone's money back so missing those payments would cause your credit to drop. Now how is Sony going to make up for that? They are not going to. That is something you have to settle in court and good luck going up against Sony by yourself (which is what you are agreeing to in this tos) in court with no money, because they just lost it.

i think you anwsered your own question because your statement is textbook fearmongering. How many people were reported who lost money because of the sony hack awhile ago. You can't name any because there were none to my knownage or not alot of people to make a fuss over. Sony offers free ID theft service and this agreement does not stop you from sueing sony for this. This is in place to slow down class action lawsuit for people who like to create them for the fun of it. any suit on sony will still be taken to court and if both parties agree class action lawsuits can still happen. so this does not really change anything, that is why this can be fear mongering because it shocks readers without giving them the full story.

The idea that because Sony provides a service to help you because of a failure of Sony does not mean that Sony has you best interest in thought.

The issue here is that Sony is asking you to give up a legal right on the basis that should a problem arise, Sony would like the upperhand in the suit. Whether or not you as a customer ever exercise the right is none of Sony's business. The belief that because the news of lost consumer money was not all over the news it did not really happen is preposterous. There is really no way to know. So once a customer has had their card taken and credit destroyed, said customer has to spend a considerable amount of time to get their credit back (can take years) as well as try to find out why it happened. And after all this they were able to link it back to Sony, because of this revision the customer no longer has the right to find other like-effected people and join together to hold Sony accountable.

Your answer simply gives up to Sony, it holds the lazy belief that if it is not on the web it didn't happen. You want to be David facing the Giant with nothing but a sling. Fine. I would rather have the option of bringing a team to the fight.


once again you are giving me a story in which you can't prove i'm not saying no one was affect i'm just saying many people are using this as a reason to give sony all this heat when they were not affect or even know anyone who was affect.  For the most part Sony has done its job to make good on this and If your ID or card info was taken i don't think you will have a problem with sony helping you on this matter. So you are creating a story that can't be proven yourself. I don't think you will have a problem sueing sony for all the money their worth if an extreme case like that was to happen, and rightfully so. But don't you find it strange that sony has gotten sued more for removing linux then people info being hack from sony.  The reason is many people are going overbroad with trying to sue sony for anything.  
 
But i'm not here to try and defend sony i think they learned from their mistakes and made good on it. If you feel different that is fine by me, because sure a company looks out for themself but there is a check and balance also because they need customers to make money so they have to take care of their customers if they want money, so most companies are not trying to screw over their customers or at the very least not out in the open. like i said this is only in place to weed out bogus class action lawsuits, if you really have a case i'm sure a judge would be happy to throw this out if they deem it worthy.
Avatar image for ocdog45
ocdog45

712

Forum Posts

125

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By ocdog45

This pissed me off so much. you know what i did. I got rid of my ps3 and got me a 360 for the family. soon to get a PC for my gaming. that company is a joke.

Avatar image for andtheworld
Andtheworld

40

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Andtheworld

I still find it cute that everyone is so upset when it was pointed out again and again that this changes jack shit and is in fact implemented in almost every major service you guys use, such as, I dunno, Valve or iTunes - hell, I'm sure that Microsoft has it as well.

But then again, reason doesn't seem to be heard around these parts.

Avatar image for radioactivez0r
radioactivez0r

949

Forum Posts

95

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 1

Edited By radioactivez0r

Personally I could stand to see a lot fewer class action lawsuits, considering the don't accomplish much, make lawyers richer, and end up with all entitled parties getting $3.24 or a free hamburger of their choice.

Avatar image for xeirus
Xeirus

1729

Forum Posts

418

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

Edited By Xeirus

@phantomzxro said:

@go_diego_go said:

@phantomzxro: @phantomzxro said:

@wickedsc3 said:

@lordgodalming said:

Why are people making such a stink about this? The EULAs for Valve and iTunes, for example, are way more intrusive than the PSN's. And anyway, if millions of people's credit cards got stolen again, the company would be held responsible again. Simple as that.

And you made us a template? Articles like this are pure fear-mongering. I love GB, but Mr. Klepek brings down the whole site.

How is it fear-mongering exactly? He simply reported on a change of the TOS in reaction to Sony latest breach. Knowing most people just simply agree to those TOS he is doing his job reporting it.

The thing you clearly don't realize is that Sony might be responsible for the money they lost, good luck on making your house payment, car payment, car insurance, cell phone bill, and others when you just lost all of your money in your checking because Sony got hacked again.

I'm sure it would take Sony longer than a month to get everyone's money back so missing those payments would cause your credit to drop. Now how is Sony going to make up for that? They are not going to. That is something you have to settle in court and good luck going up against Sony by yourself (which is what you are agreeing to in this tos) in court with no money, because they just lost it.

i think you anwsered your own question because your statement is textbook fearmongering. How many people were reported who lost money because of the sony hack awhile ago. You can't name any because there were none to my knownage or not alot of people to make a fuss over. Sony offers free ID theft service and this agreement does not stop you from sueing sony for this. This is in place to slow down class action lawsuit for people who like to create them for the fun of it. any suit on sony will still be taken to court and if both parties agree class action lawsuits can still happen. so this does not really change anything, that is why this can be fear mongering because it shocks readers without giving them the full story.

The idea that because Sony provides a service to help you because of a failure of Sony does not mean that Sony has you best interest in thought.

The issue here is that Sony is asking you to give up a legal right on the basis that should a problem arise, Sony would like the upperhand in the suit. Whether or not you as a customer ever exercise the right is none of Sony's business. The belief that because the news of lost consumer money was not all over the news it did not really happen is preposterous. There is really no way to know. So once a customer has had their card taken and credit destroyed, said customer has to spend a considerable amount of time to get their credit back (can take years) as well as try to find out why it happened. And after all this they were able to link it back to Sony, because of this revision the customer no longer has the right to find other like-effected people and join together to hold Sony accountable.

Your answer simply gives up to Sony, it holds the lazy belief that if it is not on the web it didn't happen. You want to be David facing the Giant with nothing but a sling. Fine. I would rather have the option of bringing a team to the fight.

once again you are giving me a story in which you can't prove i'm not saying no one was affect i'm just saying many people are using this as a reason to give sony all this heat when they were not affect or even know anyone who was affect. For the most part Sony has done its job to make good on this and If your ID or card info was taken i don't think you will have a problem with sony helping you on this matter. So you are creating a story that can't be proven yourself. I don't think you will have a problem sueing sony for all the money their worth if an extreme case like that was to happen, and rightfully so. But don't you find it strange that sony has gotten sued more for removing linux then people info being hack from sony. The reason is many people are going overbroad with trying to sue sony for anything. But i'm not here to try and defend sony i think they learned from their mistakes and made good on it. If you feel different that is fine by me, because sure a company looks out for themself but there is a check and balance also because they need customers to make money so they have to take care of their customers if they want money, so most companies are not trying to screw over their customers or at the very least not out in the open. like i said this is only in place to weed out bogus class action lawsuits, if you really have a case i'm sure a judge would be happy to throw this out if they deem it worthy.

Christ the stupidity spewing from your mouth is pathetic......... I honestly can't tell if you're trolling or just really are that stupid.......

Avatar image for sopranosfan
sopranosfan

1965

Forum Posts

35

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 8

Edited By sopranosfan

My wife was part of a class action lawsuit against Lowe's and she got a check for $0.42. The postal service literally made more off of the suit than she did but I am sure the lawyer that filed it now has a new Porsche or something from the lawsuit. Class action lawsuits suck for the people suing.

Avatar image for dash
DASH

87

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By DASH

I have to just say, Patrick is doing a great job with the news.

Avatar image for buckwatters
buckwatters

149

Forum Posts

365

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By buckwatters

I would get outraged, but I just don't care enough. Unless a company harms me, I really have no impedance to sue them.

Avatar image for deactivated-5865c6a5c9438
deactivated-5865c6a5c9438

544

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Thanks Klepek!

Avatar image for yukoasho
yukoasho

2247

Forum Posts

6076

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 7

Edited By yukoasho

@Foggen said:

Note also that small-claims filings are exempt. That means you could sue them yourself for 5 grand and win due to them not bothering to show up.

Pretty much this. I always laugh at class action lawsuits, because only the lawyers make money.

Take 'em to small claims, get a few grand, there you go.

Avatar image for spekingur
spekingur

174

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By spekingur

@atomic_dumpling said:

@Peanut said:

@Vegetable_Side_Dish said:

@lordgodalming said:

Why are people making such a stink about this? The EULAs for Valve and iTunes, for example, are way more intrusive than the PSN's. And anyway, if millions of people's credit cards got stolen again, the company would be held responsible again. Simple as that.

And you made us a template? Articles like this are pure fear-mongering. I love GB, but Mr. Klepek brings down the whole site.

In this case, this.

Agreed. This kind of sensationalist approach to news of this nature feels very Fox News to me.

You pay for this, mind you. Maybe you guys should force the issue more vocally - customer is always right.

No, he is not. He should always feel he is right if you want to sell him something but this claim that the customer is always right is pure BS.

Avatar image for spekingur
spekingur

174

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By spekingur

@lordgodalming said:

Why are people making such a stink about this? The EULAs for Valve and iTunes, for example, are way more intrusive than the PSN's. And anyway, if millions of people's credit cards got stolen again, the company would be held responsible again. Simple as that.

And you made us a template? Articles like this are pure fear-mongering. I love GB, but Mr. Klepek brings down the whole site.

Are you telling us that the EULAs for Valve and iTunes hold a similar clause of waiving your rights to use them? Because that's what this is about - not 'intrusiveness' of the EULA.

EULAs and TOS's are however large pieces of legal documents that we take near to no notice of. Who knows, you might have agreed to some EULA that says that they can take your firstborn and put it in to slave labor in a slum factory in India. You'd be pretty livid if they enforced it - no matter the legality of it.

Avatar image for praab_nz
Praab_NZ

281

Forum Posts

160

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Praab_NZ

@Cyrisaurus: Wait, so you dont want to sue Sony now so you never will in your entire life?

It's a bit more than saying 'Well I'm never going to sue a company', its saying 'This company will never do an injustice towards me that warrants a law suit in my entire lifetime'

Avatar image for bigmike
BigMike

59

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By BigMike

@Doppelgamer: Thanks man, I was just wondering myself.