|
No need to be rude, hmm ok I admit they have changed their wording from their games in the past. On my WC3 box it says "The use of this product is subject to the terms of the enclosed EULA". I got the opening thing from microsoft which is their favourite phrase.
They have now changed that to: - "The use of this product is subject to the EULA licence agreement at etc etc."
It still doesnt fly legally though. All I am saying is that a EULA is not binding a legal contract and that you cannot be made to agree with something that isnt legal in the first place. Which is why its wrong to say but its in the EULA because local laws may well override it. Is that so hard to understand?
find me one case where local law overrides EULA.
|
On November 15 2010 20:49 emecee wrote:
can someone just ban this guy?
You make a smurf account just to say this? That's nasty. I hope they find out your real account.
|
On November 15 2010 21:02 Gonodactylus wrote:You make a smurf account just to say this? That's nasty. I hope they find out your real account.
again, stating things with no facts based behind them.
Joined TL.net Saturday, 25th of September 2010
|
Its scary to think we have a very similar organisation here in South Africa called MSSA doing similar things...... its only a matter of time before i guess we are in the same boat unless people stand together against them.
|
On November 15 2010 20:55 emecee wrote:Show nested quote +No need to be rude, hmm ok I admit they have changed their wording from their games in the past. On my WC3 box it says "The use of this product is subject to the terms of the enclosed EULA". I got the opening thing from microsoft which is their favourite phrase.
They have now changed that to: - "The use of this product is subject to the EULA licence agreement at etc etc."
It still doesnt fly legally though. All I am saying is that a EULA is not binding a legal contract and that you cannot be made to agree with something that isnt legal in the first place. Which is why its wrong to say but its in the EULA because local laws may well override it. Is that so hard to understand?
find me one case where local law overrides EULA.
Germany - the system builder edition of windows can only be sold with a new pc according to microsofts eula - german law says you can sell it without one - and it is in fact sold seperately
|
On November 15 2010 20:54 Veldril wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 20:38 Vimsey wrote:On November 15 2010 20:34 TheRabidDeer wrote:On November 15 2010 20:29 Vimsey wrote:On November 15 2010 20:20 TheRabidDeer wrote:On November 15 2010 20:17 Vimsey wrote:On November 15 2010 20:12 TheRabidDeer wrote:On November 15 2010 20:10 Vimsey wrote:On November 15 2010 16:01 Dakkas wrote:On November 15 2010 14:55 Vimsey wrote:
[quote]
Providing now extra input or reason why, cheers. In your example, you imply that you are forced to sign a contract/agreement against your own free will, that you don't have the choice of not signing it upon threat of physical violence. If your example was to apply true here, it would mean that Blizzard are forcing you to agree with the EULA by threatening you with damage to your persons (either physical or legal) if you don't agree with purchasing the game and installing it. Last time I checked, I have not heard of any cases of Blizzard suing people for not buying the game You cant run the game without "agreeing" to the EULA, You have to give another option for it to be legal. Your other option is to decline. Or do you seriously mean to imply that you should be given the option to decline and still run the game? I hope not because that is the same retarded argument that the other guy used earlier in the thread... and he got completely demolished How many places do you know that openly offer a refund if you have. 1) Opened the game. 2) Registered the account key. Its not impossible to get your money back but not easy either. Also a parallel I would draw would be UK banks a few years back that openly sold their customer data to advertisers/marketeers when they put in just such implied agreements into their contracts. You cannot do that anymore. Once again, since you are blind: "IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY CALL (800) 757-7707 TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE." Also, you can not register the account key without a battle.net account, which has its own EULA that you must agree to. PS: I thought you were saying earlier that you had gotten many game refunds because you claimed that the UK had laws that protected you? EDIT: Ah yea, found it: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168895¤tpage=19#365"I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs." That telephone number is American from the american website. Yes I have, most dont know their rights and as I said before banks in this country used to have such privacy policy with the option of not opening an account with them. It is not legal.. Well, thanks for making me look up the EU policy "IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT, YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO INSTALL OR USE THE GAME. IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY ARRANGE TO RETURN THE GAME TO YOUR RETAILER, OR YOU MAY CONTACT BLIZZARD BY EMAIL AT WOWBILLINGSUPPORTEU@BLIZZARD.COM TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE, AND YOU SHOULD DELETE THE SOFTWARE PROGRAM IMMEDIATELY." Same policy, but an email instead of a phone number. But opening the box means you have "agreeed"to it before you have had the chance to read it. Their words not mine. As I said it contravenes the data protection act with the option of returning the product. You cant do that either. No, I think it doesn't mean that. It means if you read the EULA within 30 days and decide you don't agree, you can return the product with a full refund regardless of box's condition. Regarding that would EULA will upheld or not, I think it depends on case to case. The case with the size of Blizzard is on another level of what are you trying to argue here.
Yes I suppose so but "agreeing" to it by not returning it doesnt imply that its legal. If Blizzard breaks local laws by following their EULA and passing on my private information then I do have the option of reporting them for breaking the data protection act I dont suspect I ever will though or that they will pass on my information to just anyone. Its really sad that its got this far v Kespa.
As you say their case of Blizzard v Kespa is different and I have no clue as to how Korean law will view the tournament licence rule. I hope that Blizzard come out on top because it seemed to me Kespa was trying to become a monopoly. Thats my perception of what went on, not sure if thats how others view it..
|
On November 15 2010 20:55 emecee wrote:Show nested quote +No need to be rude, hmm ok I admit they have changed their wording from their games in the past. On my WC3 box it says "The use of this product is subject to the terms of the enclosed EULA". I got the opening thing from microsoft which is their favourite phrase.
They have now changed that to: - "The use of this product is subject to the EULA licence agreement at etc etc."
It still doesnt fly legally though. All I am saying is that a EULA is not binding a legal contract and that you cannot be made to agree with something that isnt legal in the first place. Which is why its wrong to say but its in the EULA because local laws may well override it. Is that so hard to understand?
find me one case where local law overrides EULA.
The privacy policy in the EULA contravenes the UK data protection act.
|
The argument about starcraft being a sport and therefore public property is just so blatantly wrong it just makes it seems an argument born out of desperation as a last resort. The comparison with football just makes it worse. This is because football has never been a private IP, but Starcraft is. This means that the SC brand has an OWNER (as in... Blizzard) and that owner is entitled to have a say in uses of their IP that generate funds.
If football had a private creator, I'm pretty sure FIFA would have to pay that creator for the use of their IP, that's not the case however, too bad for KeSPA. If this was a local issue Blizz would definitely win a lawsuit against KeSPA, I dunno about an international lawsuit though.
|
If you want a final say, then... not all EULAs are legally enforced or bounded.
EDIT- I only say this because some software EULA do have clauses that state they are not liable for any damages once you open the product.
Most courts do consider a EULA to legally bind you to them at first, because they recognize it as a contract. That's if you agree to the EULA.
However, these contracts are typically not enforced, since common law dictates that all terms of a contract must be disclosed before the contract is executed. This is applied if you opened the product and did not agree to the EULA. In Blizzard's case, they offer you a refund within 30 days of purchase.
The other part of enforcement of EULAs is how you use the product whether you agreed to it or not. If you agreed to use the product, then your use of it is limited by the EULA and how much liability the company has upon you. If you don't agree and/or violate the EULA and infringe on the IP rights of the company, then it can lead to legal action from them.
|
On November 15 2010 20:55 emecee wrote:Show nested quote +No need to be rude, hmm ok I admit they have changed their wording from their games in the past. On my WC3 box it says "The use of this product is subject to the terms of the enclosed EULA". I got the opening thing from microsoft which is their favourite phrase.
They have now changed that to: - "The use of this product is subject to the EULA licence agreement at etc etc."
It still doesnt fly legally though. All I am saying is that a EULA is not binding a legal contract and that you cannot be made to agree with something that isnt legal in the first place. Which is why its wrong to say but its in the EULA because local laws may well override it. Is that so hard to understand?
find me one case where local law overrides EULA.
Don't know about the USA, but EULA has no binding power what-so-ever in Sweden beyond the actual software. For example, if you break Microsofts rules and flash your Xbox 360, they can legaly ban you from Live since that's a service they are offering, they can ban you for any reason they want, so the actual EULA doesn't even matter. If I'm allowed by law to do something with a software, no EULA is going to take away that right, the national law far supercedes any random document a company makes me sign.
|
I dont care for legal stuff but blackening Nada for walking away... he's like a saint. This one is already a proof enough to see who are bad guys here.
And denying comunication of any sorts between progamers and Blizzard... you dont do that kind of stuff unless you are totally wrong and desperate.
|
I've seen some call Kespa 개스파, which means "Dog/Bitch-spa." Pretty cool way to deride, actually.
|
On November 15 2010 21:31 Vimsey wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 20:55 emecee wrote:No need to be rude, hmm ok I admit they have changed their wording from their games in the past. On my WC3 box it says "The use of this product is subject to the terms of the enclosed EULA". I got the opening thing from microsoft which is their favourite phrase.
They have now changed that to: - "The use of this product is subject to the EULA licence agreement at etc etc."
It still doesnt fly legally though. All I am saying is that a EULA is not binding a legal contract and that you cannot be made to agree with something that isnt legal in the first place. Which is why its wrong to say but its in the EULA because local laws may well override it. Is that so hard to understand?
find me one case where local law overrides EULA. The privacy policy in the EULA contravenes the UK data protection act.
It seems like most of it requires your consent/authorization.
+ Show Spoiler +"Who collects, processes and uses your information?
When you visit a Blizzard site and you are asked to provide information, you only share this informa-tion with Blizzard except where clearly indicated to the contrary. Some services are, however, pro-vided in conjunction with affiliated companies, and for the provision of these services, Blizzard may share your personal information with its affiliated companies, in particular Blizzard Entertainment SAS in France and Blizzard Entertainment Ireland Limited. If a company other than Blizzard receives your personal data, you will be notified before this operation takes place. In any case, the transfer of per-sonal data to another company will only be carried out with your express authorization.
The information you enter on forms on Blizzard’s websites will only be sent to Blizzard once you have clicked the "Send" or the "OK" button. You can halt the transfer of data at any time by quitting the form screen, i.e. by closing your web browser prior to clicking the "Send" or the "OK" buttons; no in-formation will then be sent to Blizzard.
Please bear in mind that message boards and Internet sites linked to our sites could obtain some of your personal information. We would remind you that Blizzard's Privacy Policy does not apply to these message boards or to these other sites, as we have no control over their activities.
How your personal information could be used?
The personal data you submit to Blizzard allows us to process your orders, and provide you with the game, customer, and technical support services, and, if you wish, to inform you of our new products, updates and/or competitions, promotional offers and special events.
With your consent, we can also send your personal information to other companies or organisations who offer products which may be of interest to you.
In addition, you personal information can be displayed within the Real ID feature, should you decide so.
Finally, we can use your personal data to generate internal statistics for marketing, consumer profiles or demographic research, etc. to tailor our products and services to satisfy your requirements. Our aim is to better understand and serve our clients. "
Blizzard EU private policy
For the last part, Blizzard might be exempt from the Act from this:
+ Show Spoiler +33 Research, history and statistics. E+W+S+N.I.
(1)In this section— “research purposes” includes statistical or historical purposes; “the relevant conditions”, in relation to any processing of personal data, means the conditions—
(a)that the data are not processed to support measures or decisions with respect to particular individuals, and
(b)that the data are not processed in such a way that substantial damage or substantial distress is, or is likely to be, caused to any data subject.
(2)For the purposes of the second data protection principle, the further processing of personal data only for research purposes in compliance with the relevant conditions is not to be regarded as incompatible with the purposes for which they were obtained.
(3)Personal data which are processed only for research purposes in compliance with the relevant conditions may, notwithstanding the fifth data protection principle, be kept indefinitely.
(4)Personal data which are processed only for research purposes are exempt from section 7 if—
(a)they are processed in compliance with the relevant conditions, and
(b)the results of the research or any resulting statistics are not made available in a form which identifies data subjects or any of them.
(5)For the purposes of subsections (2) to (4) personal data are not to be treated as processed otherwise than for research purposes merely because the data are disclosed—
(a)to any person, for research purposes only,
(b)to the data subject or a person acting on his behalf,
(c)at the request, or with the consent, of the data subject or a person acting on his behalf, or
(d)in circumstances in which the person making the disclosure has reasonable grounds for believing that the disclosure falls within paragraph (a), (b) or (c).
Data Protection Act 1998
|
Let's look at the actual EULA here. I got the EULA of BW from my BW manual and copy EULA of SC2 from US and EU sites.
Starcraft: Broodwar EULA point 12:
+ Show Spoiler +Miscellaneous: This License Agreement shall be deemed to have been made and executed in the State of California and any dispute arising hereunder shall be resolved in accordance with the law of California. You agree that any claim asserted in any legal proceeding by one of the parties against the other shall be commenced and maintained in any state or federal court located in the State of California, County of Los Angeles, having subject matter jurisdiction with respect to the dispute between the parties. This License Agreement may be amended, altered, or modified only by an instrument in writing, specifying such amendment, alteration or modification, executed by both parties. In the event that any provision of these License Agreement shall be held by a court or other tribunal of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable, such provision will be enforced to the maximum extent permissible and the remaining portions of this License Agreement shall be remain in full force and effect. This License Agreement constitutes and contains the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersede any prior oral or written agreements.
Starcraft II US EULA point 17E and 18 (http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/legal/sc2eula.html):
+ Show Spoiler +
17
E Location.
If you are a resident of the United States, any arbitration will take place at any reasonable location convenient for you. For residents outside the United States, any arbitration shall be initiated in the County of Los Angeles, State of California, United States of America. Any Dispute not subject to arbitration (other than claims proceeding in any small claims court), or where no election to arbitrate has been made, shall be decided by a court of competent jurisdiction within the County of Los Angeles, State of California, United States of America, and you and Blizzard agree to submit to the personal jurisdiction of that court.
18. Governing Law.
Except as otherwise set forth herein, this License Agreement shall be governed by, and will be construed under, the Laws of the United States of America and the law of the State of Delaware, without regard to choice of law principles. The application of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods is expressly excluded. For our customers who purchased a license to the Game in, and are a resident of Canada, other laws may apply if you choose not to agree to arbitrate as set forth above; provided, however, that such laws shall affect this Agreement only to the extent required by such jurisdiction. In such a case, this Agreement shall be interpreted to give maximum effect to the terms and conditions hereof. Those who choose to access the Service from locations outside of the United States and Canada do so on their own initiative and are responsible for compliance with local laws if and to the extent local laws are applicable
SC2 EU EULA point 17:
+ Show Spoiler +Miscellaneous.
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws applicable in your country of residence. In the event that any provision of this License Agreement shall be held by a court or other tribunal of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable and/or invalid, the remaining portions of this License Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. This License Agreement constitutes and contains the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any prior oral or written agreements; provided however, that this License Agreement shall coexist with the Terms of Use, and in the event of a conflict between this License and the Terms of Use, the terms of this License Agreement shall govern and supersede the Terms of Use. Sections 5, 13, 14, 16, 17 and 18 hereof shall survive the termination of this Agreement. I hereby acknowledge that I have read and understand the foregoing License Agreement and agree that by clicking "Accept" or installing the Game I am acknowledging my agreement to be bound by the terms and conditions of this License Agreement.
So for BW, the legal process will be held in California (Los Angeles) using Californian law.
For SC2 US; if you are US resident, the legal process will be governed by the Laws of the United States of America and the law of the State of Delaware and held in the court of Los Angeles (if I understand it correctly).
For SC2 EU; the legal process will be held and in accordance to each country's law. So the legal process in the and outcome in the UK might not reflect of what would happen in Germany.
|
On November 14 2010 17:07 Pleiades wrote:
Of course not all EULAs are legally-bound, but they are a contract you make with the company/developer.
Technically they arent conrtacts and arent legally bound.
Clicking yes != user signature accepting the contract.
Maybe when they add a requirement of a user digital signature it would be a fully legal signed contract but right now there is a slight chance of wining in court against such EULA.
|
It's rarely a good idea to discuss an ongoing case. There is a reason even professional law council's disagree on what's right untill the judgement. You can never be sure.
E: What constitutes acceptance to an offer (an hence an agreement) is diffrent in diffrent legal systems. You also have to take local consumer protection into account.
|
Wow that was an awesome read to say the least. As if I didn't despise KeSPA before... I now wish I'd never have to support them in any way again.
|
On November 15 2010 15:39 Gonodactylus wrote:
And for all those people claiming esports players have no IP rights under law; no kidding! What country has an esports law? IP was an idea that grow out of a certain moral view and only later on it was turned into law by the corporations themselves as they went along and it became beneficial. If you are going to protect IP rights why do it only for the big shot corporations and not for the small man. It's immoral. I never claimed that it was already legally so or not. I only claimed that about EULA's which has many cases associated.
listen to this man.
|
when contracts are up do you think these pplw ill stay with kespa, I wouldn't. From reading this Kespa sounds evil.
|
i think it doesnt seem that illogical that kespa shouldnt have to pay blizz to profit from sc1 tourneys (if played on LAN and not bnet). i guess this is why blizz got rid of LAN support and is making bnet mandatory to stop this from happening.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
