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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 even
Even

118

Forum Posts

23

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By Even

@TruthTellah said:

More than a response to the recent PSN outage, this is probably a direct response to the recent US Supreme Court verdicts in Walmart v. Dukes and AT&T v. Concepcion.

Both verdicts reaffirmed the legality of anti-Class Action clauses, and AT&T v. Concepcion maintained that Mandatory Arbitration clauses like this were legal. These rulings just came down in the last few months, and so, Sony most-likely saw that these added clauses will indeed hold up in any court in the United States. That is why they are focusing on the US for the moment. They know it won't face any legal challenge, as the verdicts so directly defend clauses like these.

The only surprising thing here is that they include any opt-out at all; they are not required to do so. Personally, I disagree with the Supreme Court decisions and dislike clauses like these, which are far too common today, but as far as US law goes, they are now quite legal and enforceable.

@Buckfitches The new TOS changes mean a lot. TruthTellah is right on the money. The Supreme Court strengthened arbitration in AT&T vs Concepcion and Sony is now taking full advantage of that. Patrick's article is showing you how to retain your class action rights.

Class action lawsuits are there to punish companies that "fuck-it-up-big-time", and the pro-corporation trolls sitting on the Supreme Court have now made it more difficult to go that route.

Avatar image for foggen
Foggen

1181

Forum Posts

2010

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Edited By Foggen

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.

Avatar image for zakkro
zakkro

84

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By zakkro

Man, this is fucked up. On the other hand, I have enough problems to worry about, so I really don't care.

Avatar image for weggles
WEGGLES

737

Forum Posts

4

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By WEGGLES

PSN account, is that like... my username or is there an account number?

Avatar image for lockwoodx
lockwoodx

2531

Forum Posts

6

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By lockwoodx

Sony decided to use Snail-Mail because they know the Government will close down the postal system before the opt-out deadline is up, making the decision for you in their favor. Evil companies will be evil, and sheeple will be sheeple.

Avatar image for arkasai
arkasai

734

Forum Posts

120

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By arkasai

Isn't this semi-proof that Sony is fully expecting a massive security failure that would mobilize lots of class action suits? Despite making all manner of statements ensuring customers safety is top notch. It speaks to Sony's confidence level in their own security, if they can't protect users, they'll at least take steps to protect themselves from their users.

Avatar image for phantomzxro
phantomzxro

1613

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By phantomzxro
@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.
Avatar image for little_socrates
Little_Socrates

5847

Forum Posts

1570

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 16

User Lists: 23

Edited By Little_Socrates

I'll be writing a letter. Currently not a PSN user, but was planning on rejoining to play Uncharted 3. Sad, because I'd also been intending to play LittleBigPlanet 2, and it's unfortunate that it'll take work to do this.

Avatar image for piropeople13
piropeople13

411

Forum Posts

9

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By piropeople13

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

Avatar image for bruce
Bruce

6238

Forum Posts

145

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 1

Edited By Bruce

Wrong form of "its," Patrick.

Avatar image for kosayn
kosayn

545

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By kosayn

In time, these click through EULAs will be struck down as unlawful, or forced to a twitter-like character limit. The way they are currently operating is contrary to the spirit of actually making an agreement between two parties. Press X or read 5 pages and send a letter - that's ludicrous.

If lawsuits are a matter of interest to you, I would recommend watching the Hot Coffee documentary. People have the right to sue because often disputes seem very different to each party based on their perspective.

Avatar image for duder_me
Duder_Me

321

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Duder_Me

Do I care? Do any of you seriously care about this? No? Good :)

Avatar image for gutbomb
GUTBOMB

67

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By GUTBOMB

@Buzzkill said:

Just popped on while I was taking a break from studying for a Physics test, and you provided a much needed laugh.

Thank you sir

Avatar image for thenexus
thenexus

383

Forum Posts

643

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 5

Edited By thenexus

Nice work.

Some people may not be fussed by this but Sony is trying to prevent any legal action against them at all as legally as they can. They know you and me taking legal action separately will get us know where.

What is worse is what this means, Companies basically blackmailing you into wanting to use their services. What else will they try and include in their TOS?

It is like Game boxes telling you that you agree to the terms and conditions by breaking the seal. The Terms though are inside the box!

Avatar image for mjll
MJLL

18

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By MJLL

@Afroman269 said:

I don't use my ps3 enough to care about all this but I think I'll send in a letter anyways. Thanks for the heads up, Patrick.

Couldn't have said it better.

Avatar image for swoxx
swoxx

3050

Forum Posts

468

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By swoxx

@Buckfitches: I was only kidding around, you know.

Avatar image for thor_molecules
Thor_Molecules

792

Forum Posts

10

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Thor_Molecules

@Swoxx: If you have a valid lawsuit against Sony, this clause isn't going to do anything to stop you from suing them.

People are grossly misunderstanding what Sony is actually doing here and just assume they are being wronged in some way, and the way this article is written only adds fuel to the fire.

I still remember Jeff saying that this website was strictly about videogames, not about companies, business or flamewars.

Avatar image for optimalpower
optimalpower

264

Forum Posts

331

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By optimalpower

Good job Klepek, thanks for the heads up.

Avatar image for nakiro
Nakiro

88

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Nakiro

You guys sound like you're about to cry, maybe along with those stamps buy some tissues as well.

Avatar image for thesoutherndandy
TheSouthernDandy

4157

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By TheSouthernDandy
@phantomzxro
@Buckfitches said:

So, as plenty of commenters have already pointed out by now, the TOS changes actually mean very little, and surely aren't worth the sensationalist fear-mongering and all the hateful comments. Last I checked, this wasn't Destructoid or Kotaku just yet.

I usually like your articles a lot, Patrick, but you do seem to get a little carried away on matters like this. First Nintendo gets a string of blatant flame-articles because they have the NERVE to show off a new optional peripheral, and now Sony's next on the cutting block? I'm all for informative articles, but stop writing them like the sky is falling, it reflects poorly on the site, in my opinion.


I could not agree more i don't know what the big deal is, because this really does not mean alot its just sony covering its butt. I believe it did say if both parties agree you can still  collectively sue. Sony just don't want a million angry hacker just sueing over linux just for the heck of it.  For most other normal case it will not change how you want to sue sony if that is your thing. But i agree on patrick he's a cool guy an all but he is throwing the hate on sony and nintendo pretty hard of late.
You two are just ADORABLE
Avatar image for swoxx
swoxx

3050

Forum Posts

468

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By swoxx

It only does no lawsuits

Avatar image for mcshank
McShank

1700

Forum Posts

920

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By McShank

@White_Silhouette said:

I know I choose not to play my PS3 online until sony changes the policy.. I'm also going to write a politely worded letter to any devs of PSN games that I want to play. Telling them they have lost a potential sale due Sony's current EULA

Everything you just said will be laughed at by sony and the dev's.

What is wrong with this? Did anyone get hurt in any way during the hacking? No.. No one did. Why are people so Butt hurt about this? Its not like Origin's EULA which is complete trash. Did anyone on here actually try a collective sue during that time? Did anyone even try to sue them at all on here? (I am not bitching about the letter, I am bitching about people being so butt hurt that they are getting angry about a new Agreement that has a loophole..)