|
If you were like many other Steam users who logged on this morning to play some games before work or as a daytime activity, you saw that Valve recently updated their Terms of Services and required a new acceptance in order to use their Steam cloud video game service. However, what caught my eye about this one was a bold-type font regarding a new "Section 12" that read:
SECTION 12 CONTAINS A BINDING ARBITRATION AGREEMENT AND CLASS ACTION WAIVER. IT AFFECTS YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS. PLEASE READ IT. IF YOU LIVE OUTSIDE OF THE UNITED STATES, SOME OR ALL OF SECTION 12 MIGHT NOT APPLY TO YOU.
I, personally, was a bit hesitant to accept the terms without reading them fully, and I found several articles that filled me in on the details.
http://www.joystiq.com/2012/08/01/valves-updated-steam-subscriber-agreement-bars-class-action-law/
If you're like most people, when Steam started up this morning you noticed there was an extra pop-up prompting you to click a button that says "I agree" a few times, and you did this without reading much into what you were consenting to. Turns out you don't actually "own" your left hand anymore. Oh, well.
Actually, it was an updated Steam Subscriber Agreement altering the legal options available to customers. First, Steam customers may no longer bring class action claims against the service, mirroring similar moves by large distribution and publishing companies, including Sony and Microsoft.
"We considered this change very carefully. It's clear to us that in some situations, class actions have real benefits to customers," Valve explains. "In far too many cases however, class actions don't provide any real benefit to users and instead impose unnecessary expense and delay, and are often designed to benefit the class action lawyers who craft and litigate these claims."
Individual claims will still be allowed, though Valve has now instituted a required process that channels these claims to arbitration or small claims court. Valve will reimburse the cost of arbitration under a certain amount, provided the arbitrator deems the claim isn't frivolous nor the expenses unreasonable.
Valve is also opening an office in Luxembourg "to better serve our EU customers and partners," who will sign an EU-specific SSA.
Hey, at least you still own your left hand.
So, do you think Valve is overstepping their bounds here by banning users from joining together in class action lawsuits? Or do you believe that they have a legitimate point, that class action lawsuits rarely benefit the individuals, and that individual claims will still be processed and recompensed?
EDIT woops poll mixed around yes and no, adding new one
Poll: Should companies stop users from joining class action lawsuits?No, they help protect user's rights (144) 57% No, but I trust Valve not to abuse this power (82) 32% Yes, they rarely ever help out the individual (27) 11% 253 total votes Your vote: Should companies stop users from joining class action lawsuits? (Vote): No, they help protect user's rights
(Vote): No, but I trust Valve not to abuse this power
(Vote): Yes, they rarely ever help out the individual
|
I already have my gripes and issues with Valve...I think this was yet another step in the wrong direction for them.
|
I agree with their statement that many class action lawsuits are brought forth by lawyers for the purpose of making themselves money and without much regard to actually helping consumers.
However, this type of clause is probably unenforceable. None of your poll answers address this opinion.
|
Russian Federation325 Posts
Imagine people do class action lawsuit and judge says "lol you've selected a checkbox on the internetz no lawsuits plzkthx". Does it work like that?
|
Unless Steam stole from me, used my credentials in a illegal way, or do anything illegal, they are still bound to the U.S. Law, no matter what the fuck has been signed.
Can you get someone to sign something allowing you to kill them, and then not get charged with murder? Nope.
|
I looked up the legality of this in Canada, and it isn't legal in at least 4 provinces, untested in the other 6. This was specifically tested in British Columbia and the supreme court supported the individual's right to sue, either as a class action or otherwise.
|
Agree to terms online by checking a box is about as binding as signing a document without having to show ID, theirs no proof its something you did.
|
lawyers making rules which will be disputed so they can make a living arguing about them. I despise bureaucracy.
|
God I love that so many people think "class action lawsuit" is the same thing as any lawsuit. You can actually ban class action lawsuits with the tolaa class action lawsuit, legally, in the ToS. You can not ban "suing Valve", as so many seems to think.
|
Legal rights being made illegal through a digital contract. I think you actually could sue valve for this.
|
Would Valve be allowed to include a statement in the ToS forbidding individual claims as well? Just curious about how far they can go with this sort of thing. The article makes it seem like they chose to allow individual claims.
|
class action doesn't exist here...
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
I wonder how much consumers actually benefit from class action lawsuits. From what I've seen, payouts are always rather meager. Would love to see the breakdown of payouts (amount paid by the corporation / amount paid to lawyers / amount paid in legal fees / amount paid out to consumers)
|
Terms of Service is not a legally binding contract. Also a judge can ignore a legally binding contract.
This is pretty obvious and the courts do notice these tactics and ignore them.
|
Well if it turns out to be an abusive tactic to screw customers I'm sure that we can petition for legislation to remove it. I'm not going to pitchfork them until they actually do something terribly wrong.
|
My theory, for what it's worth:
One only need look at the at the almost commonplace attacks against credit card databases, and the recent attack on the Sony/Playstation Network online service, as proof that breaches are a real threat.
As DotA 2 ramps up in popularity, the amount of personal data they hold will grow. This personal data includes credit card information. Yesterday, I saw 65,000+ people online for DotA2, and it will grow from there. People will go after their database - they went after Sony. Think about it, why else would there be a class action lawsuit against Valve? It's not like they're going to release some bad software update that frags everyone's computers.
In fact, haven't they been breached once before, ie Gabe's apology letter? (Source needed ofc).
IMHO Valve is smart to head this off at the pass, but they could probably go about it a better way, such as specifying in plain language "class action lawsuits related to data theft and breaches of security even when best practices for electronic security have been followed."
Strange update though... a little extreme. Such is the world we live in, I suppose. Either way, Valve still has my trust and respect. This won't stop be from using Steam or purchasing their games and services.
|
On August 02 2012 08:38 Rybka wrote:
My theory, for what it's worth:
One only need look at the at the almost commonplace attacks against credit card databases, and the recent attack on the Sony/Playstation Network online service, as proof that breaches are a real threat.
As DotA 2 ramps up in popularity, the amount of personal data they hold will grow. This personal data includes credit card information. Yesterday, I saw 65,000+ people online for DotA2, and it will grow from there. People will go after their database - they went after Sony. Think about it, why else would there be a class action lawsuit against Valve? It's not like they're going to release some bad software update that frags everyone's computers.
In fact, haven't they been breached once before, ie Gabe's apology letter? (Source needed ofc).
IMHO Valve is smart to head this off at the pass, but they could probably go about it a better way, such as specifying in plain language "class action lawsuits related to data theft and breaches of security even when best practices for electronic security have been followed."
Strange update though... a little extreme. Such is the world we live in, I suppose. Either way, Valve still has my trust and respect. This won't stop be from using Steam or purchasing their games and services.
they'd never say that because they can't know for sure that the bold part will be true.
They don't need to get a high tiers decision to have bad security (ala Sony) but inviduals error can be enough and you don't want to be sued because one of your employees screwed up big time.
|
On August 02 2012 08:41 sAsImre wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2012 08:38 Rybka wrote:
My theory, for what it's worth:
One only need look at the at the almost commonplace attacks against credit card databases, and the recent attack on the Sony/Playstation Network online service, as proof that breaches are a real threat.
As DotA 2 ramps up in popularity, the amount of personal data they hold will grow. This personal data includes credit card information. Yesterday, I saw 65,000+ people online for DotA2, and it will grow from there. People will go after their database - they went after Sony. Think about it, why else would there be a class action lawsuit against Valve? It's not like they're going to release some bad software update that frags everyone's computers.
In fact, haven't they been breached once before, ie Gabe's apology letter? (Source needed ofc).
IMHO Valve is smart to head this off at the pass, but they could probably go about it a better way, such as specifying in plain language "class action lawsuits related to data theft and breaches of security even when best practices for electronic security have been followed."
Strange update though... a little extreme. Such is the world we live in, I suppose. Either way, Valve still has my trust and respect. This won't stop be from using Steam or purchasing their games and services. they'd never say that because they can't know for sure that the bold part will be true. They don't need to get a high tiers decision to have bad security (ala Sony) but inviduals error can be enough and you don't want to be sued because one of your employees screwed up big time.
Well said.
|
It's unenforceable. You can't make someone give up their ability to join a class action lawsuit.
It's really simple logic. By bringing up a class action lawsuit, the plantiffs are asserting Valve breached some kind of agreement, or harmed them in some way. How can Valve enforce a contract that, in all likelyhood, the plantiffs would be asserting they had broken? Makes no sense.
|
I doubt this clause is even legally enforceable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
