@sciential said:@Jab1235 said:It's just another example of someone lawyering up to reap the benefits of a trivial situation. Boo Hoo he spent $55 on a game and didn't get his code, why should we pay for the court costs of him arguing that he thinks he's entitled to downloadable content for a game. It's not something we should be bringing to courts, it's something we should have common sense about.As much as I dislike Gamestop and most of their practices I hope they crush this guy.He didn't fall and pretend to be hurt so he could take money from a bar or convenience store owner. He sued Gamestop over a practice that - even if it was manufactured in his case - surely rips off at least some of its customers who genuinely fail to realize that the used copy is missing content worth more than the savings over a new copy.Gamestop could be forthright if they wanted to, but we all know that they make more money on used copies. A sticker that says "Does Not Include $10 Multi-Player Access" on used copies of Mass Effect 3 because Gamestop is afraid of another lawsuit is a good thing. You might already know better, but some mother buying a birthday present from a Gamestop clerk who is pushed to encourage her to buy the used copy might not.I agree with you that something does need to change but is it really necessary to bring this up in high level courts? I'm also unclear on if the individual is going to make any money or get any special benefits off of this case? Really if the guy is only doing this to get gamestop to change their business practices then that's great but if he's doing this so he can make some easy money then it's stupid.