dylanjosh Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14948701 Sony is preparing to ban gamers from the PlayStation Network (PSN) unless they waive the right to collectively sue it over future security breaches. The firm has amended PSN's terms and conditions and users have to agree to them next time they log in. The move comes months after a string of hacking attacks compromised over 100 million accounts of the PlayStation Network subscribers. It is, however, possible to opt out of the agreement within the next 30 days. Gamers will now have to try to resolve any legal issues with an arbitrator picked by Sony, before being able to file a lawsuit. The new clauses, dubbed "Binding Individual Arbitration," state that "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 action". The re-written terms and conditions are being presented to gamers when they log in, but some have questioned who will notice the changes. Tech news site The Register wondered who would notice the small print outlining the opt-out terms, and not simply click the "agree" box having scrolled all the way down. Those that want to opt out will have to send a letter to Sony's Los Angeles headquarters in the US. Once they do, the subscribers will be able to keep their right to file a class action lawsuit without any need for arbitration. But before subscribers have a chance to opt out, they will still be required to agree to the new terms the next time they log into their accounts. Otherwise they will not be able to use the online services. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmage Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 That is why MP gaming sucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
playstation Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 That is why MP gaming sucks to even update the firmware or game patch u have to go online .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CM Sunny Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 & hear abuses wether you win or lose SP/SRPG/JRPG ftw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueelvis_RoXXX Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 good to see that someone can read the entire TOC... i hope M$ doesnt make a move like this or it wud be ruined .............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aftrunner Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 Classy move. The last debacle was fantastic as it was. Now you cant even sue them if they do something worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphabeta Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 The question is whether this is applicable in India. Apparently in EU, no company cannot force to sign aways rights you have, specifically in this case being the right to sue the company. The retarded Supreme Court in the US decided it is legal for companies to force arbitration on their customers instead of allowing them to sue, hence the new change. I think Sony are scared that there might be a class action suit over the PSN breach and stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karooo Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 Lol nice. Sad little Americans can't sue for little things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HundredProofSam Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 This sets a bad precedent. If more companies start enforcing these policies, how will the average American make a living? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteWolf Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 ^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wario Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 Meh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
playstation Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 This sets a bad precedent. If more companies start enforcing these policies, how will the average American make a living? they make a fortune many times........i heard from relative that over there a lady asked for a hot coffee and she was served very hot one...it fell and she got burned a bit...she sued them...and in the case the company said she asked for hot coffee and we gave her....and she pointed out that a hot coffee upto a point to drink it ....and this was hot beyond drinkable point and it was literally enough to burn skins.........i think she got some million for it....it is a long time back.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphabeta Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 they make a fortune many times........i heard from relative that over there a lady asked for a hot coffee and she was served very hot one...it fell and she got burned a bit...she sued them...and in the case the company said she asked for hot coffee and we gave her....and she pointed out that a hot coffee upto a point to drink it ....and this was hot beyond drinkable point and it was literally enough to burn skins.........i think she got some million for it....it is a long time back.... It was actually McDonalds that was sued. When I first read about it, I thought to myself "wtf". But apparently the lady suffered pretty bad burns - second degree or third degree. So it finally made sense to sue. The problem over there is that the compensation is ridiculous - it kind of makes sense for businesses to protect themselves. Hence you have some really interesting safety labels even on everyday products. I don't think Sony should worry too much about India though, our compensations are pretty paltry. EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants - link to article about the hot coffee case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRMNTR Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 It was actually McDonalds that was sued. When I first read about it, I thought to myself "wtf". But apparently the lady suffered pretty bad burns - second degree or third degree. So it finally made sense to sue. If I can recall correctly, this is what forced McDonald's to put the 'Contents inside are hot' label on the cups -- thus avoiding any further lawsuits like these. PS - She won the case 'cause she was able to convince the court that she was suffering from stress/depression and what not due to the spill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jigsaw Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 does this mean i should buy BF3 for the 360 then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sackboy Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 No lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 does this mean i should buy BF3 for the PC then? fixed for the correct answer.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jigsaw Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 fixed for the correct answer.. 1 honest kill on consoles is better than the cheap 100 kills pc-gaymers get /pipebomb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
playstation Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 It was actually McDonalds that was sued. When I first read about it, I thought to myself "wtf". But apparently the lady suffered pretty bad burns - second degree or third degree. So it finally made sense to sue. The problem over there is that the compensation is ridiculous - it kind of makes sense for businesses to protect themselves. Hence you have some really interesting safety labels even on everyday products. I don't think Sony should worry too much about India though, our compensations are pretty paltry. EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants - link to article about the hot coffee case. yea that was the one...thanks for pointing out...yeah i was taken back to when i heard that...amazing how it works there...in india we cannot think like that... If I can recall correctly, this is what forced McDonald's to put the 'Contents inside are hot' label on the cups -- thus avoiding any further lawsuits like these. PS - She won the case 'cause she was able to convince the court that she was suffering from stress/depression and what not due to the spill. waha ka judge mental pain bhi samjh ta hai.... does this mean i should buy BF3 for the 360 then? already stopped using this kya. http://assets.thatblognetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/sony-wireless-headset.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRMNTR Posted September 17, 2011 Report Share Posted September 17, 2011 waha ka judge mental pain bhi samjh ta hai.... October 1998: A Terrence Dickson of Bristol, Pennsylvania was leaving a house he had just finished robbing by way of the garage. He was not able to get the garage door to go up since the automatic door opener was malfunctioning. He couldn't re-enter the house because the door connecting the house and garage locked when he pulled it shut. The family was on vacation. Mr. Dickson found himself locked in the garage for eight days. He subsisted on a case of Pepsi he found, and a large bag of dry dog food. He sued the homeowner's insurance claiming the situation caused him undue mental anguish. The jury agreed to the tune of half a million dollars. One of the many stupid cases! US -- the land of weird! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.