|
On June 25 2011 03:31 Di3s3l wrote:
My opinion, these accounts were paid for, they should have the rights to do whatever the hell they want with them. Blizzard sells their product. Now it's in the hands of the consumer, he has the right to do whatever he wants with it.
Yeah that's what those Sony hackers thought. But sadly for them, that wasn't the case.
|
On June 25 2011 03:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2011 03:17 splinter9 wrote:On June 25 2011 03:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 25 2011 03:14 splinter9 wrote:On June 25 2011 03:12 Gnax wrote:Poll: Who is stupid?Blizzard (173) 75% People who complain about something they all agreed to when they bought the game (58) 25% 231 total votes Your vote: Who is stupid? (Vote): Blizzard
(Vote): People who complain about something they all agreed to when they bought the game
I'm trying to make sense of what the majority of people think here. seriously fuck off with reading the agreement no one does that. Secondly it not even valid in a lot of the world. That's not an excuse to break the ToS. In general, ignorance of the law is not an excuse to break the law. yeah when your dealing with murder or something serious. This is a game. If me and my son need to buy two seperate accounts to play it should be well known, not two lines in a 10 page article of crap. No, it's in reference to all legal issues. All legal matters are "serious" to some extent, especially once you've committed a crime. You're still responsible for reading the agreement. Do you do it? Nah, it's a waste of time. Unless you actually do something that's expicitly written not to do. (I highly doubt you've read the entire Constitution, and certainly not every criminal has.) And besides, HuK and TLO were blatantly streaming and it was known that they were sharing an account, so it's going to be much easier to tell that they're breaking the ToS, as opposed to you sharing an account with your son. You and your son still legally shouldn't do it, but you probably won't get caught if you do. They got caught.
Since when is ToS law?? this is news to me. Tommorow im going to design a women s purse in the ToS I will clearly state any women wanting to buy my purse must sleep with me. Why didn't i think of this earlier?
|
Blizzard even allows account sharing in tournaments, look at the GSTL or MLG. Blizzard is slowly turning into what everyone hates about activision.
|
On June 25 2011 03:33 vrok wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2011 03:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 25 2011 03:25 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On June 25 2011 03:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 25 2011 03:14 splinter9 wrote:On June 25 2011 03:12 Gnax wrote:Poll: Who is stupid?Blizzard (173) 75% People who complain about something they all agreed to when they bought the game (58) 25% 231 total votes Your vote: Who is stupid? (Vote): Blizzard
(Vote): People who complain about something they all agreed to when they bought the game
I'm trying to make sense of what the majority of people think here. seriously fuck off with reading the agreement no one does that. Secondly it not even valid in a lot of the world. That's not an excuse to break the ToS. In general, ignorance of the law is not an excuse to break the law. ToS isn't law like you are saying. Ignorance of such agreements has been a good argument in court in the past. It depends on the specifics of the case. Interesting. Then why have ToS at all? Because naive people like you believe in them regardless.
I'm pretty sure naivety =/= acceptance of legal contracts. I'm pretty sure it's more of an acknowledgement of agreement. But sure, if we're just arguing semantics now...
Or you won't ever get a job if you think those things are for sissies who can't *stick it to the man*.
Either way, I'm done. Enjoy your day, guys 
|
soooo many people account share, there is no possible way to stop it.
This is a non-issue. They simply called TaKe because they knew people would blow this out of proportion, and it would get a lot of coverage. Now people know blizzards stance on account sharing, and some people will buy additional copies of the game now.
Blizzard wins, the end.
|
This about does it for me. Everything is tied to your account, so by locking down an account Blizzard is effectively stealing from its customers. If there is only one ladder option, nothing short of hacking should result in account action. I'm going to use my SC2 account for smurfing, griefing, monobattles, and the occasional random 4v4. I'll play BW when I want a serious, well-designed game, at least until Blizzard gets its act together.
|
Thats stupid why don't they call Select, he advertises that he will ladder an account for you if you pay him. Why don't they threaten everyone else who does account sharing...its very common, and this is a stupid way to treat top players.
|
On June 25 2011 03:36 Gnax wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2011 03:31 Di3s3l wrote:
My opinion, these accounts were paid for, they should have the rights to do whatever the hell they want with them. Blizzard sells their product. Now it's in the hands of the consumer, he has the right to do whatever he wants with it. Yeah that's what those Sony hackers thought. But sadly for them, that wasn't the case.
It's not the case, when you can throw almost an infinite amount of money at a problem like Sony did. Which in itself is wrong on so many levels...
|
This is pretty silly. Sen used SoftBall's account for months and I don't think he had any trouble.
|
On June 25 2011 03:20 chickenhawk wrote:Show nested quote +
So what? It is true that customers have a say in it, but rules are rules, when you buy the game, you agree to use it in line with the Terms of Use. It feels really silly and small to me aswell to really go ahead and warn the progamers about it, but if it has to be done, it has to be done. Hating Blizzard for it is sillier than their approach about account sharing.
TOS in europe = illegal Any contract you sign after you have bought something in europe is illegal! No one show me the TOS when i bought it, they only show me when i tryed to play the game. THEREFORE it is ILLEGAL.
http://wow.joystiq.com/2010/08/11/the-lawbringer-a-rookies-guide-to-the-eula/
http://wow.joystiq.com/2010/09/02/the-lawbringer-a-rookies-guide-to-the-tou/
http://wow.joystiq.com/2010/08/17/the-lawbringer-rookies-guide-to-the-eula-part-2/
http://wow.joystiq.com/2010/06/21/the-lawbringer-new-battle-net-tou/
http://wow.joystiq.com/2010/03/09/the-lawbringer-euro-ver-my-head-contract-law-edition-page-2/
Here are some posts I have found in WoWinsider, written by a senior law student, who examines the ToS, EULA and all that good jazz.
Especially the last one makes it clear that ToS and EULA for Europe is binding aswell, as there are different EULA and ToS for both versions, though almost practically same (with some small differences) as the author has said. It is about World of Warcraft, but I don't think it would be really different from SC2, as both of them involve Battle.net accounts.
|
To anyone complaining, welcome to the legal world!
You can argue that you bought the product, or that the account is yours, or the account is Blizzard's, or that you merely bought rights to play the game, or that they own the intellectual property, or you do, and so forth to end of the world. In the legal world, the more vague, unspecific, or arbitrary a binding agreement is (such as the Terms of Service or End User License Agreement); the more it favors the party that did not write it. And as such, there can be no double standards in a legal contract or you nullify your own agreement.
Whether the intentions are legitimate or malicious, they have to be approached the same way. Sorry that TLO was having good intentions and only wanted to help a friend out, but any grey areas does not work in the favor of when Blizzard may actually need to push legal action on a person who did so for malicious reasons instead.
Blame humanity, and blame the legal system.
|
Treating everyone equally, but at the same time: how petty :/
|
On June 25 2011 03:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2011 03:33 vrok wrote:On June 25 2011 03:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 25 2011 03:25 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On June 25 2011 03:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 25 2011 03:14 splinter9 wrote:On June 25 2011 03:12 Gnax wrote:Poll: Who is stupid?Blizzard (173) 75% People who complain about something they all agreed to when they bought the game (58) 25% 231 total votes Your vote: Who is stupid? (Vote): Blizzard
(Vote): People who complain about something they all agreed to when they bought the game
I'm trying to make sense of what the majority of people think here. seriously fuck off with reading the agreement no one does that. Secondly it not even valid in a lot of the world. That's not an excuse to break the ToS. In general, ignorance of the law is not an excuse to break the law. ToS isn't law like you are saying. Ignorance of such agreements has been a good argument in court in the past. It depends on the specifics of the case. Interesting. Then why have ToS at all? Because naive people like you believe in them regardless. I'm pretty sure naivety =/= acceptance of legal contracts. I'm pretty sure it's more of an acknowledgement of agreement. But sure, if we're just arguing semantics now... Or you won't ever get a job if you think those things are for sissies who can't *stick it to the man*. Either way, I'm done. Enjoy your day, guys
Yeah, leave the forum when your argument falls apart and you look like an idiot. Please get off this site.
User was warned for this post
|
On June 25 2011 03:12 Gnax wrote:Poll: Who is stupid?Blizzard (173) 75% People who complain about something they all agreed to when they bought the game (58) 25% 231 total votes Your vote: Who is stupid? (Vote): Blizzard
(Vote): People who complain about something they all agreed to when they bought the game
I'm trying to make sense of what the majority of people think here.
I really like this poll, Gnax really seems to know his stuff!! not........
"people who complain about something they all agreed to when they bought the game"
nope, you agreed on it when you instealled the game AFTER you bought it, that's a big different
|
On June 25 2011 03:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2011 03:33 vrok wrote:On June 25 2011 03:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 25 2011 03:25 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On June 25 2011 03:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 25 2011 03:14 splinter9 wrote:On June 25 2011 03:12 Gnax wrote:Poll: Who is stupid?Blizzard (173) 75% People who complain about something they all agreed to when they bought the game (58) 25% 231 total votes Your vote: Who is stupid? (Vote): Blizzard
(Vote): People who complain about something they all agreed to when they bought the game
I'm trying to make sense of what the majority of people think here. seriously fuck off with reading the agreement no one does that. Secondly it not even valid in a lot of the world. That's not an excuse to break the ToS. In general, ignorance of the law is not an excuse to break the law. ToS isn't law like you are saying. Ignorance of such agreements has been a good argument in court in the past. It depends on the specifics of the case. Interesting. Then why have ToS at all? Because naive people like you believe in them regardless. I'm pretty sure naivety =/= acceptance of legal contracts. I'm pretty sure it's more of an acknowledgement of agreement. But sure, if we're just arguing semantics now... Or you won't ever get a job if you think those things are for sissies who can't *stick it to the man*. Either way, I'm done. Enjoy your day, guys
it is NOT a legal contract in the terms of the continental legal system.
|
its a joke but still, dont turn thsi into another add LAn thread. for everyone who still says add LAN you clearly dont understand why we dont have it.
i find it odd that Blizzard calls someone about it? thats really weird
|
On June 25 2011 03:28 Modernist wrote:
I don't get why it's so hard for people to understand this.
- Sharing accounts is against the ToS.
- Huk laddered on a Grandmaster account that was not his.
- Blizzard is holding a tournament with a prize of thousands of dollars which is based on Grandmaster rankings.
It's fairly easy to understand. Blizzard is well within their rights to do what they did.
Why is it hard for you to understand that blizzard's ToS attempts to impose extraordinary control on a product their consumer bought? Blizzard isn't enforcing their ToS against normal players i.e. account sharing, and they're pretty aware its widespread. A lot of players probably won't ever agree to it, and still play. I don't even think this has anything to do with account sharing or their stupid ToS.
|
On June 25 2011 03:37 pig-dude wrote:
This about does it for me. Everything is tied to your account, so by locking down an account Blizzard is effectively stealing from its customers. If there is only one ladder option, nothing short of hacking should result in account action. I'm going to use my SC2 account for smurfing, griefing, monobattles, and the occasional random 4v4. I'll play BW when I want a serious, well-designed game, at least until Blizzard gets its act together.
Oh, people should have seen this coming. You don't begin tethering purchases into a single account unless you plan on doing that. The only reason you haven't heard more about it is that Valve only bans people on Steam for obvious violations, and when they make mistakes, they kiss and make up and offer free games and apologize and beg until everybody is over it.
|
This may have been said, but HuK playing on TLO's account helped him stay in GM and get up to the top 2. This makes it unfair for other players trying to get into GM and reduces the legitimacy of the rankings.
|
This argument was brought up many times ages ago but theres a little white box on the SC2 cover that gives a mini TOS and link to the full version so you're clearly able to read it before buying. Blizzard covered their ass in Europe, they're not some idiotic company with no knowledge of the world market.
I can not read the complete TOS in the store, it is to presented to me when I am going to buy it. Therefore it is illegal. mini TOS is not the TOS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
