Log in or sign up to comment
328 Comments
Posted by Brodehouse

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

Posted by Elusionar

That option is called Xbox!

Posted 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.

Posted 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.

Posted 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.

Posted 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.

Posted by ThePhantomStranger

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...

Online
Posted 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.....

Posted 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.

Posted 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.

Posted 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.

Posted 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...?

Posted by North6

@piropeople13 said:

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

this

Posted by Spoonman671

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

Posted 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.

Posted 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...

Posted by swimmi34

Hurricane Patrick defending the people!

Posted 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!!!

Posted by gunslingerNZ

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

Posted by TheIceman

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

Posted 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.

Posted 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.

Posted 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

Posted by mewarmo990

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

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.

Edited by Lnin0

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

Posted by halim51

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

Posted by CHIEFMEGADETH666

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

Posted 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 :)

Posted 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.

Edited by 234r2we232

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

Also...

Posted 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.

Posted 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.

Posted 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.

Posted 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".

Posted by Xtrminatr

@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.

Posted 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.
Posted 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.

Posted 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.

Posted 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.

Posted 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.......

Posted 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.

Posted by DASH

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

Posted 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.

Posted by blaakmawf

Thanks Klepek!

Posted 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.

Posted 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.

Posted 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.

Posted 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'

Posted by BigMike

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