Microsoft Joins Bandwagon to Block Class Action Lawsuits

This is going to happen with every company you do business with. While you may still have some legal recourse, no matter what you supposedly agree to, recent legislation weakening the ability of citizens to initiate class action lawsuits has lead to this (and class action lawsuits, where you get a $1.50 credit on your next purchase from the company that wronged you while the lawyers get $17,000,000.000, are another problem themselves entirely).
 
Essentially, every company you do business with wants you do be forced to use an arbitration service to decide the outcome of conflicts rather than the legal system. Arbitration services selected by the company. Paid for by the company. On contract with the company. With a specific interest in continuing said business relationship with the company.
 
Also, the EULA with this update is ridiculous. I held the right stick down non-stop and timed how long it took to scroll through the whole thing from start to finish. It took FIVE FULL MINUTES of scrolling.

I'd express my displeasure but there's no way to do so without sounding like Uber Frosh.....

@N7 said:

@Snapstacle said:

@Three0neFive said:

Sony does it, "holy shit what the fuck its the end of times fuck you". Microsoft does it, "meh." Gamer logic.

The difference is that Sony does it when there are MULTIPLE CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS to avoid being sued.

Maybe you should try thinking

@Rappelsiini said:

@CL60 said:

@BRNK said:

@CL60 said:

Who cares?

You and your apathetic ilk are the reason shit like this flies.

WHO CAAERS IF UR TRADING UR RIGHTS AWAY, IT E-Z.

@Rappelsiini said:

@CL60 said:

Who cares?

Why are you okay with MS taking away some of your rights?

Because it quite literally doesn't affect me and pretty much everybody else. So I really don't care.

Well it literally doesn't affect me as far as I know (I live in Europe so that shit doesn't fly here). But I will never be OK with being forced to give away my rights - regardless if I'm going to use it or not (and let's be honest probably not).

But do you really feel that no one should pay any attention to this?

The only people who should be outraged are employees of Microsoft. Being outraged because "they took our rights away!!!" is just stupid to me. Because I guarantee 99% of everybody complaining has never, and WILL NEVER file a lawsuit with a company like Microsoft so it doesn't really affect you at all. And when they do actually file a lawsuit, it's just a stupid lawsuit that wont ever go anywhere.

So I feel absolutely no reason to feel outraged about something that I really don't care about. I'm never, and the majority of people will never sue a company over something like Sony getting hacked or something similarly stupid as a reason to sue a company.

Sony does it, "holy shit what the fuck its the end of times fuck you". Microsoft does it, "meh."
 
Gamer logic.

@CL60 said:

The only people who should be outraged are employees of Microsoft. Being outraged because "they took our rights away!!!" is just stupid to me. Because I guarantee 99% of everybody complaining has never, and WILL NEVER file a lawsuit with a company like Microsoft so it doesn't really affect you at all. And when they do actually file a lawsuit, it's just a stupid lawsuit that wont ever go anywhere.

So I feel absolutely no reason to feel outraged about something that I really don't care about. I'm never, and the majority of people will never sue a company over something like Sony getting hacked or something similarly stupid as a reason to sue a company.

I'm sorry, but that is terrible justification for not bothering to give a fuck. This is the same attitude as people who say, for example, "If you don't have anything to hide, why do you care about the Fourth Amendment? I have nothing to hide, so I don't care about my privacy or the Fourth Amendment. In fact, I don't ever expect to commit a felony, so I don't even care about the right to due process and the right to face my accuser!".  Just because something doesn't or won't impact you directly doesn't mean it should just be dismissed. Martin Niemöller had a little something to say back in the day about what happens when people only take a stand on things that directly and immediately impact themselves.

lol @ people who demonized sony for doing it, assuming that every other gaming company wouldn't follow suit.

Important to note that EU residents can ignore this and are not effected as with sony's EULA shenanigans.

I think it should be law that if you're required to send a company anything through the postal service that can easily be done online, their agreement should have to be physically mailed to you, signed, and sent back, as well, with your service being continued until you can get it sent in. Let's see how they like not only the hassle, but the hundreds of thousands they'll spend in postage.

As far as I can tell this doesn't appear in the Australian terms of use, can anyone confirm?

 As if those agreements were legally binding I'll agree and when and if the time some still sue their ass.  Last I checked I'm not an employee for that matter. 

I hope Gamers Opt Out gives us a Microsoft option soon.

As has been stated already, you can still sue these companies as an individual should you find yourself in such unfortunate circumstances. This change is to prevent the class action prosecution lawyers from making out like bandits and the millions of clients getting 25 cents each, which you would agree isn't worth your time.

Bottom line: They do this to protect their money from class action Lawyers.

I shouldn't be surprised by this...Sony got away with it so MS might as well. From a corporate standpoint I get it but it still sucks. Whether you're planning on never suing has nothing to do with it.

@TheInsider said:

As has been stated already, you can still sue these companies as an individual should you find yourself in such unfortunate circumstances. This change is to prevent the class action prosecution lawyers from making out like bandits and the millions of clients getting 25 cents each, which you would agree isn't worth your time.

Bottom line: They do this to protect their money from class action Lawyers.

It's sad that I had to get this far in the comments before someone figured it out.

@dudenextdoor said:

Important to note that EU residents can ignore this and are not effected as with sony's EULA shenanigans.

Same with Canada. The supreme court has set precedence against this.

None of these can be actually binding. They can hold it against you in court, but you are perfectly within your rights to take any company to court if you want to. It's call democracy.

Legally, these are usually thrown out of court since its' pretty much agreed upon that no one reads the agreement.

Class action lawsuits are usually abusive to major companies anyways and divert money from actual useful things.

This doesn't stop you from suing Microsoft if they actually do something personally against you.

I don't see any problem with it.

This shit is still illegal in Québec. Fuck yeah, tabarnak!

@gbrading: it's called a Republic

Did anyone see the latest Pach-attack? He makes some valid points about class action law suits. He basically says that in cases like this, the lawyers are the ones to get any real money and the plaintiffs really don't get much at all. I really don't know what the furor is really.

See, lawyers? Slimy shit like this is why people hate you so much.

@Three0neFive said:

Sony does it, "holy shit what the fuck its the end of times fuck you". Microsoft does it, "meh." Gamer logic.

This!

Most people don't start class action lawsuits to make a shitload of cash. You guys are missing the point: They start them to tell companies "Quit fucking up or we'll cost you a lot of money."

@Three0neFive said:

Sony does it, "holy shit what the fuck its the end of times fuck you". Microsoft does it, "meh." Gamer logic.

As someone who still doesn't have his XBL account working after the FIFA hack thing, I disagree with this stance.

@tmek said:

@Brackynews I don't see how sending them an opt out letter protects me. Regular postal mail is not tracked. How would I know Microsoft received my opt out? What proof would I be able to offer to show that I sent the letter at a latter time?

That is what I'm thinking too. How do you prove you opted out via snail mail? It would be your word against 50 Microsoft lawyers. Why is it even legal in America for a company to waive a customer's rights with the click of a button but the customer is not afforded the same ability to opt out. If you want to use our product you must first agree that we have no responsibility to our product. WTF

The unfortunate thing is this is largely a result of a nation that sees it as a necessity to create a lawsuit over everything. I'm not advocating what Microsoft is doing here, but there's something to be said for trying to find some way to reduce the ridiculous burden put on US courtrooms for endless frivolous lawsuits.

The larger problem here is what defines a "Neutral Arbitrator" because it's highly unlikely that the average Xbox 360 owner can afford any sort of legal consultation, it's likely that Microsoft would supply this "Neutral Arbitrator" which would create a conflict of interest. Who are you going to side with when you're supposed to be neutral, but one side is writing you a paycheck?

To everyone saying that they will never be the beneficiaries of a class action lawsuit: I've personally been involved in at least three, and got a fairly reasonable amount of money from the combination (over $1500). One was from a previous employer systematically not paying people for overtime, and two were from credit cards fraudulently charging customers. In each case, the amount of money I got paid would not have made it worth my suing as an individual (there's no way you are getting a lawyer for small change like this), but in each case I was glad to have the money, and glad that the company didn't get away with what they were doing. Even if lawyers made out like bandits in each case, I'm slightly better off than I would have been without class action lawsuits, and the people who still work at that company and have those credit cards are MUCH better off. Now, that doesn't mean that you will be part of such a lawsuit, but it's not implausible, and it's also not implausible that you will benefit from the threat of such lawsuits by companies reforming their practices.

In truth though, individual consumers don't get much from class actions whereas lawyers get stinking rich from them.

lucky im still useing the dashboard from 2 updates ago ...

@Procyon27 said:

Par for the course really....this is one of the many drawbacks of living in a country controlled by huge corporations. I am not saying it's right, but that is the nature of the Amurika that we live in.

While I can agree with the sentiment, is there any point whatsoever in spelling America like that? At least "U.$.A" makes some degree of symbolic sense.

@Procyon27: That doesn't mean we should accept crap like this! Or that we can't change it! People need to realize that, in the end, it doesn't matter how large the corporation or how hard the goal seems to be. Our voices can be heard, and we can make a difference. Write them. Say no! Make yourself heard and let it be known that in America, individuals can make a difference! Maybe this will only be a first step for many us, but it also could be an important one. Make the most of it.

bucking fitches! I noticed that too. Lame...

It's crazy how it is not legally possible to enforce this in the UK and isn't in our terms of use at all,

Where are your rights? Why aren't your governments putting a stop to this quite blatant breach of your rights?

In Canada supreme court has set a preliminary precedence that this is NOT legally acceptable in Canada. So you should be fine, but opt out anyway just to be sure.

Case was Seidel v. Telus Communications Inc. for your googling needs

Dont care. Wouldnt sue. Unless the Xbox self-destructed, killing my family and burning my house down, I can't foresee a reason that I would want to help put money in the pockets of lawyers over a video game console. If they do something so awful that I feel litigious, I would hurt them in a much more satisfying way and just never buy their products, again.

I guess I have an letter to send tomorrow. This is a god awful awful trend.

In truth though, individual consumers don't get much from class actions whereas lawyers get stinking rich from them.

I cringe a little every time somebody posts an inflammatory "I hate Patrick" comment. Both because he doesn't really deserve it and because my name is also Patrick.

@Airickson said:

@Procyon27 said:

Par for the course really....this is one of the many drawbacks of living in a country controlled by huge corporations. I am not saying it's right, but that is the nature of the Amurika that we live in.

Hard to say if it's the large corporations or all the damn lawyers. At the end of the day, I guess the end result is the same.

Actually one of the draws of alternative dispute resolution (Arbitrations/Mediations/Private Trials, etc.) is the reduced legal fees and costs. Lawyers make more on a case going to court with massive billables.

@Lnin0 said:

@tmek said:

@Brackynews I don't see how sending them an opt out letter protects me. Regular postal mail is not tracked. How would I know Microsoft received my opt out? What proof would I be able to offer to show that I sent the letter at a latter time?

That is what I'm thinking too. How do you prove you opted out via snail mail? It would be your word against 50 Microsoft lawyers. Why is it even legal in America for a company to waive a customer's rights with the click of a button but the customer is not afforded the same ability to opt out.

You're perfectly right that sending it doesn't matter, what matters is the postmark date once they receive it, and the possibility that they might choose to ignore any requests that are not received by post. I'm not suggesting you should have actual faith that the system works the way you'd like it to, I simply answered a question for someone from out of country. And mentioned for interest's sake (with citations) why the Post Office is treated by the law as special compared to a "courier or agent". FedEx isn't a better option.

If you want a record that you actually mailed it, and a record it was received, that's precisely what registered mail is for, and you'd do well to use it if you're concerned. I trust you don't imagine an e-mail read receipt would hold up in court any better? Or perhaps a "technical glitch" in the dashboard that results in some "digital opt outs" being lost, or a database being corrupted? "So Sorry, Says Major Nelson"? Nope. The Post Office doesn't give a damn about what you're sending, only that it gets there.

Sending my letter tomorrow morning.

Sony is the only company to publicly discuss the change, explaining it was only responding to a recent Supreme Court decision that allowed AT&T to prevent employees from engaging in class action lawsuits.

We're only responding to finding out that we can get away with fucking you by trying to fuck you. We need this in order to stay competitive in the fuck market. Furtherm-- **RROD**

At least it's not a problem in the UK. Anyway, I'm off to find a job...

Yeah, this is a load of horseshit you have to actually mail them or you pretty much have to run the xbox offline. It still has the desired effect, though, because 99.999% of users won't ever read or care about the waiver, and just accept it and not even look into opting out. The remainder is...guess what? Not really going to be worth representing in a class action suit. Microsoft wins either way.

@SuBsTaNcE said:

It's crazy how it is not legally possible to enforce this in the UK and isn't in our terms of use at all,

Where are your rights? Why aren't your governments putting a stop to this quite blatant breach of your rights?

Because U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!

@Kaps said:

In Canada supreme court has set a preliminary precedence that this is NOT legally acceptable in Canada. So you should be fine, but opt out anyway just to be sure.

Case was Seidel v. Telus Communications Inc. for your googling needs

Awesome.

@Snapstacle said:

@Three0neFive said:

Sony does it, "holy shit what the fuck its the end of times fuck you". Microsoft does it, "meh." Gamer logic.

Yea because it is more widely known that you can opt out of this time. Common sense.