|
|
On September 21 2011 00:01 Woshie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 23:50 Merlimoo wrote:On September 20 2011 23:49 jib117 wrote:On September 20 2011 23:44 Merlimoo wrote:On September 20 2011 23:35 mechavoc wrote:On September 20 2011 23:27 Merlimoo wrote:On September 20 2011 23:24 mechavoc wrote:On September 20 2011 22:59 Merlimoo wrote:
It's astonishing to see the amount of US citizen that really can't be open minded and listen/understand to what we say to them. Just because it's not like that at home, I was thinking the very same thing about the aw shucks he didn't mean to sign it, he is just a kid, it was late, he didn’t have a good night sleep, he didn’t sign with an EU approved felt pen made in France and dipped in Ink from Portugal so it means nothing apologists  If you want to quote, have the honesty to quote everything or signal that it was cut. Congratz! You've level up in "Mainstream media ninja technic"! I apologize I don't think I edited out anything of importance so here is the complete quote. I will Bold the part I removed as I didn't think it had anything to do with his point. It's astonishing to see the amount of US citizen that really can't be open minded and listen/understand to what we say to them. Just because it's not like that at home, Durp! Durp! Maybe it's because I'm not native and that I'm english is really bad... Too bad then.
I will stop this conversation, before I get banned for being too mean in a try to educate people. (edit for spelling) Correct me if I'm wrong. What you are trying to say is: A little girl from nevada, just got 18y old, got kicked out of her home after a fight with her parents. All her dreams seemed compromised and she does not know how to make for a living. She met a guy that propose her a job full of promises, sign a contract that said : "You are going to work in a foreign country for $2 a day in a mini skirt and without health insurance.". Obviously that is not what she wanted in her life and try to void the contract. What you said is, she should honor it, screw her life for a good speech in a vulnerable time ? Really ? I mean: REALLY ??!!?? wtf then... First of all that isn't anything like what happened. This contract was discussed for an extended period of time and the decision wasn't made rashly due to a fit of rage or anger. But regardless if the contract was explained to the girl and she still decided to sign it then yes she committed to that job and should follow through with her commitment. Then, your laws do not protect your citizens. Nothing else to say. Wrong. Because there is min wages, health and safety procedures and a multitude of other standards that the employer must provide/meet for it to be a valid and not be sued/shut down. None of which your example meets.
Provide everything you want. The vulnerable part stays... and I still explain what I wanted to.
|
On September 20 2011 21:47 Ryder. wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 19:46 Apom wrote:On September 20 2011 13:53 Ryder. wrote:On September 20 2011 13:34 Crosswind wrote:On September 20 2011 13:07 Ryder. wrote:On September 20 2011 12:30 Crosswind wrote:
Dear Citizens of the Internet,
It may shock some of you to hear that sometimes 18-year olds are inconsistent. It may amaze you that teams run by people who are largely ex-gamers and self-taught amateur businessmen may not live up to your standards of professionalism. But rest assured - this is not the first time these things have happened, and it will not be the last. Some might go so far as to say that these things happen
all the time.
Hating 18-year-olds for changing their minds or fledgling organizations for lacking professionalism is like hating a dog for chasing cars. Probably justifiable, but ultimately silly.
Smile, and cheer for Stephano, who is a fantastic and promising player, or for Mill/CoL, who are excellent teams giving young players opportunities.
-Cross Dear uninformed citizen of the internet, It may shock you to hear this but at 18 years old (at least where I live) you have full capacity to contract and you are legally bound by the terms you enter into in contracts. ... I mean if you are 18 and you commit murder you are able to be punished as an adult because you ARE an adult. Doesn't matter if you were 17 four months ago, you gotta draw the line somewhere. Sure these acts are different... teams run by people who are largely ex-gamers and self-taught amateur businessmen may not live up to your standards of professionalism. No excuse champ, if you are gonna play with the big boys then you abide by their rules. Ignorance is no excuse. Just FYI, in case you missed it, you just compared an 18 year old going back on a contract, something that it is not even clear is illegal, to murdering somebody. How much of a douchebag are you going to feel like when it turns out that what he did wasn't even illegal, so not only are you flipping out over some amateur hour teams and a kid, but you're flipping out incorrectly? A little perspective here, people. -Cross (P.S. I have no opinion on accountability. But the amount of hate going on for parties involved is disproportionate. You all are making far too much out of a bunch of commonplace, unsurprising events.) As I said, I don't know shit about French law, if they have some dodgy loopholes to help people avoid their contractual obligations good for them. But in most countries breach of contract IS illegal and you are legally obliged to either fulfill the contract or pay damages. Of course the severity of the act is nothing close to murder, why the fuck would you try and act like it is? The point is both of these actions are illegal, and you can't just let one of them go unpunished because it is less severe. As I said I am going by what is law in Australia (as well as a lot of other places). If French law lets you get out of this then fine, but the point I was addressing is that you think it's ok for 18 year olds to renege on their promises because they feel like changing their mind, and that is wrong*. *excluding gay loopholes in French lawEdit: Just because it is a 'commonplace, unsurprising event' doesn't mean there shouldn't be consequences.
I want to say I'm worried that stephano hurt his image by making a silly choice, but I know people will forget in a week. I am kind of disappointed that stephano went back on his word
You can bet your ass future, prospective teams won't though... I'm sure it will factor into their decisions in the future. How aren't you banned for this yet ? :/ Also, people who are saying that you can evade contractual obligations under French law are starting to get annoying. As a general rule, you can't. Someone said you have seven days to change your mind about buying a house : that is true, but is an exception. This provision, known as droit de repentir (right to renege ?), only applies to a set of specific contracts, of which buying a house is one, but Stephano's contract certainly is not. A related clause, known as période d'essai (trial period ?), can be specified in employment cotnracts, but it is not mandatory nor implicit. The only way for Stephano to evade his contractual obligations with coL is if the contract is deemed illegal in the first place. While it certainly doesn't qualify as a proper employment contract under French law (for numerous reasons - coL even somewhat admitted to this), it is designed as an international contract, and it may very well be legal as such, especially under Texan law (which it defines as its ruling law). The last issue here is enforceability. If the contract is deemed legal by the Texan judge (which is very likely), and the French judge deems it an illegal employment contract (which is also very likely), then the contract will be null on French soil. What can be done if, and when, Stephano sets foot in the US, is another matter. Lol trust a french poster to insist I should be banned for that... It was clearly a tongue-in-cheek comment, you really think I should be banned about making a snide joke about French law? Particularly since most people in this thread (excluding the French of course) think that this kind of loophole IS stupid due to the way their respective legal system works... Your post is interesting though, there are a lot of posts ( especially from French posters) say that because of French law he IS able to squirm out of the contract due to this '7 day cool-off period' and there is nothing coL is able to do about it. So it is interesting that you (as a French poster) seem to insist that he isn't able to get out of it. Do you have any special knowledge of law that gives you this opinion? Also why would a French judge classify it as illegal employment contract? (Genuine questions, I am just interested as every other French poster has said that Stephano will be able to get out of this contract). I still think it was inappropriate rather than tongue-in-cheek, but whatever, I'll drop it.
The trial period disposition is actually to the advantage of the employer more than the employee (as I explained in an earlier post). It is certainly not a loophole, and presenting it as such makes you look ignorant of how the whole French labour laws work. Also regarding your personal question : I have recently used a rarer and somewhat more complicated variant of this disposition, known as "période probatoire", against my employer (which once again, is the exception rather than the norm), so I made some research on the subject.
To answer your question, which is more interseting than the two paragraphs I just wrote :
1. As coL said themselves, Stephano appears as a contractor rather than an employee. French law does not recognize the notion of contractors, the only legal status is that of employee. This would lead the judge to void the contract in its entirety, or to requalify it as a CDD (fixed-term employment contract).
2. From what I gathered, the contract is written in English. I don't think that French is mandatory for all kinds of contracts, but it certainly is for employment contracts (source). Stephano could argue that he misunderstood some critical part of the contract or another, due to the language difference. Considering that Stephano has a fairly good level in English, the judge could simply order to have the contract rewritten in French and uphold its applicability (barring other points), but he could also void it entirely.
3. Complexity made an 18-year-old kid sign a contract at 3am withough legal counsel. While any single part of this is not a problem in itself (18 y/os sign work contracts every day, I sign pretty much all of my papers without legal counsel, and certainly agreements can be concluded at 3am), the conjunction of the three makes for something that is not ethically acceptable in France, or most of western Europe really. One of the parties has visibly less power (Stephano is a kid, Complexity is a company led by a lawyer), and signed under pressure (seriously, 3am ? Complexity could certainly wait a little bit). Said party realized its mistake, not after some inexcusable delay, but the morning after. It is *guaranteed* than a French judge would entirely void the contract on that basis. I realize this may be impossible to understand from the US, where you can pretty much sign anything anytime and anyhow (not being judgemental, merely stating facts). But really, there is hardly any doubt on the result of a lawsuit, where Complexity to file one in France.
Now, the other question is, is Stephano allowed to get out this contract ? As you very rightly noted, a significant number of my compatriots (although not all...) have been excessively fast and inaccurate in their discussion of this topic.
1. If the contract is requalified as a CDD, and in the absence of a trial period (which is optional and must be written - it wasn't in this case, so it doesn't exist), it is pretty hard for him to get out. I have never been under such contracts, so I do not know all the details, but I know they are more restrictive than CDIs (no-term employment contracts), both for the employer and the employee.
2. If the contract is requalified as a CDI (this is the type of contract Millenium offered Stephano - it is the most advantageous for the employee), and once again in the absence of a trial period, Stephano could leave in one month (the exact time length may be stated specifically in a given contract, but since the original was not a CDI at all it certainly didn't plan for that option, so it would go by the default of one month).
3. If the contract is entirely voided, well, Stephano doesn't need to get out of it, as he was never actually in it. As I said earlier, this outcome is almost guaranteed in a French court (not that Complexity would like either of the previous two ones either, those employment contracts are guaranteed to bite you in the ass if you do not have some representation in France).
4. Another very distinct possibility would be for the judge to consider the original contract as some kind of image rights contract, rather than a work contract. I really have no idea how those things go, so I can't comment on the consequences, but I mention the possibiltiy for the sake of exhaustivity. However, I find it highly unlikely, because Complexity's contract certainly has the functionality of an employment contract, despite having inadequate form.
|
On September 21 2011 00:04 Ryder. wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 00:01 Merlimoo wrote:
Not the mention that he has previously said to Millenium that he will stay with them.
Even in the US, an oral contract, is a contract. So the Millenium one was beforehand and a work contract is not valid if the employee is already under contract. Case closed. Saying you will stay with them does not make it a contract :/ you need an intention to be legally bound, sufficient agreement on all important terms (consensus) and consideration (both parties need to gain something out of it). Please stop spamming this thread with nonsense :/
Haven't you realized that it is nonsense since page 120 ?
|
On September 20 2011 22:35 rO_Or wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 21:59 Merlimoo wrote:On September 20 2011 21:47 Ryder. wrote:On September 20 2011 19:46 Apom wrote:On September 20 2011 13:53 Ryder. wrote:On September 20 2011 13:34 Crosswind wrote:On September 20 2011 13:07 Ryder. wrote:On September 20 2011 12:30 Crosswind wrote:
Dear Citizens of the Internet,
It may shock some of you to hear that sometimes 18-year olds are inconsistent. It may amaze you that teams run by people who are largely ex-gamers and self-taught amateur businessmen may not live up to your standards of professionalism. But rest assured - this is not the first time these things have happened, and it will not be the last. Some might go so far as to say that these things happen
all the time.
Hating 18-year-olds for changing their minds or fledgling organizations for lacking professionalism is like hating a dog for chasing cars. Probably justifiable, but ultimately silly.
Smile, and cheer for Stephano, who is a fantastic and promising player, or for Mill/CoL, who are excellent teams giving young players opportunities.
-Cross Dear uninformed citizen of the internet, It may shock you to hear this but at 18 years old (at least where I live) you have full capacity to contract and you are legally bound by the terms you enter into in contracts. ... I mean if you are 18 and you commit murder you are able to be punished as an adult because you ARE an adult. Doesn't matter if you were 17 four months ago, you gotta draw the line somewhere. Sure these acts are different... teams run by people who are largely ex-gamers and self-taught amateur businessmen may not live up to your standards of professionalism. No excuse champ, if you are gonna play with the big boys then you abide by their rules. Ignorance is no excuse. Just FYI, in case you missed it, you just compared an 18 year old going back on a contract, something that it is not even clear is illegal, to murdering somebody. How much of a douchebag are you going to feel like when it turns out that what he did wasn't even illegal, so not only are you flipping out over some amateur hour teams and a kid, but you're flipping out incorrectly? A little perspective here, people. -Cross (P.S. I have no opinion on accountability. But the amount of hate going on for parties involved is disproportionate. You all are making far too much out of a bunch of commonplace, unsurprising events.) As I said, I don't know shit about French law, if they have some dodgy loopholes to help people avoid their contractual obligations good for them. But in most countries breach of contract IS illegal and you are legally obliged to either fulfill the contract or pay damages. Of course the severity of the act is nothing close to murder, why the fuck would you try and act like it is? The point is both of these actions are illegal, and you can't just let one of them go unpunished because it is less severe. As I said I am going by what is law in Australia (as well as a lot of other places). If French law lets you get out of this then fine, but the point I was addressing is that you think it's ok for 18 year olds to renege on their promises because they feel like changing their mind, and that is wrong*. *excluding gay loopholes in French lawEdit: Just because it is a 'commonplace, unsurprising event' doesn't mean there shouldn't be consequences.
I want to say I'm worried that stephano hurt his image by making a silly choice, but I know people will forget in a week. I am kind of disappointed that stephano went back on his word
You can bet your ass future, prospective teams won't though... I'm sure it will factor into their decisions in the future. How aren't you banned for this yet ? :/ Also, people who are saying that you can evade contractual obligations under French law are starting to get annoying. As a general rule, you can't. Someone said you have seven days to change your mind about buying a house : that is true, but is an exception. This provision, known as droit de repentir (right to renege ?), only applies to a set of specific contracts, of which buying a house is one, but Stephano's contract certainly is not. A related clause, known as période d'essai (trial period ?), can be specified in employment cotnracts, but it is not mandatory nor implicit. The only way for Stephano to evade his contractual obligations with coL is if the contract is deemed illegal in the first place. While it certainly doesn't qualify as a proper employment contract under French law (for numerous reasons - coL even somewhat admitted to this), it is designed as an international contract, and it may very well be legal as such, especially under Texan law (which it defines as its ruling law). The last issue here is enforceability. If the contract is deemed legal by the Texan judge (which is very likely), and the French judge deems it an illegal employment contract (which is also very likely), then the contract will be null on French soil. What can be done if, and when, Stephano sets foot in the US, is another matter. Lol trust a french poster to insist I should be banned for that... It was clearly a tongue-in-cheek comment, you really think I should be banned about making a snide joke about French law? Particularly since most people in this thread (excluding the French of course) think that this kind of loophole IS stupid due to the way their respective legal system works... Your post is interesting though, there are a lot of posts ( especially from French posters) say that because of French law he IS able to squirm out of the contract due to this '7 day cool-off period' and there is nothing coL is able to do about it. So it is interesting that you (as a French poster) seem to insist that he isn't able to get out of it. Do you have any special knowledge of law that gives you this opinion? Also why would a French judge classify it as illegal employment contract? (Genuine questions, I am just interested as every other French poster has said that Stephano will be able to get out of this contract). Is it a cultural habit to put words in the mouth of others ? Before it get worse, with frenchies vs world none sens, please note that many of "french" posts were just saying that we have some laws that can IN SOME CASES be more protective of the people instead of the corporation, that have an all mighty power in the US culture. And I'm pretty sure that we are not the only ones... Anyway, as such, signing a contract in not the end of the story. Please note, that we (as everybody here) dont know sh** about Stephano's one. So please stop saying that we are sure that he can escape his mistakes. As every balanced human being would think, if everything was done correctly, by no means he can escape this, except the fact that is would be pretty stupid from coL to recrut somebody that does not want to be there. Personal trollish note: + Show Spoiler +
As the US culture is, I think they just want a some financial compensation, for having managed to get a click on a website from a guy far far away...
This has nothing to do with the US and corporations. This has to do with integrity. In the US (not too sure about France) when you sign a contract it is assumed that you did your research beforehand and knew what you were signing to. Once you have given your signature it is confirmation that you have READ, UNDERSTAND, and AGREE to the terms you have signed. This is the way business works, either in a large multimillion dollar corporation or in the smallest independently run store.
The same thing can be said about who wrote the contract, if he doing a contract that needs to be binding by French law, then he needs to do some research about it. In this case, seems like the lawyers didn't.
So if the contract it's void, who's fault is it? The players for not keeping it or the lawyers for making a voidable contract?
IMO, if you sign something you must know what you are signing and honor it. But also, lawyer language can be quite difficult to understand, specially if it's not written in a language that you don't fully understand, like it seems to be the case (Stephano is French and has a limited knowledge of English).
In the end, all three parties should get to a consensus and moving on.
|
On September 20 2011 03:18 Emporio wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 03:16 Jtom wrote:On September 20 2011 03:09 Tennet wrote:On September 20 2011 02:59 Jtom wrote:
Reminds me of the situation with Destiny when Complexity acquired Root. Destiny's situation is different, he never wanted to join coL he only did it for his teammates. My point is that both Destiny and Stephano signed without much thought, or at least their minds were clouded a bit when they were signing. Both left not long after they signed because as soon as they were thinking straight, they realized they didn't want to play for Complexity. The situations are like, the same, but completely different. In Destiny's case, there's no one to sue/blame but Destiny himself just because he didn't want to be in Complexity. With this, there's Stephano, but also Millenium, which is an actual organization, rather than an individual player, that is trying to pull back a player into a different team.
Another major difference here is that Destiny signed, and then requested to be let out of the contract, which Col. then agreed to.
Stephano signed a contract and then simply decided to return to Millenium. At the bare minimum Col. should be seeking legal damages. I doubt they'll keep Stephano even if the contract is enforced. Wouldn't want someone who is that willing to jump ship when there are better players on the market to look into.
|
On September 20 2011 23:24 mechavoc wrote:I was thinking the very same thing about the aw shucks he didn't mean to sign it, he is just a kid, it was late, he didn’t have a good night sleep, he didn’t sign with an EU approved felt pen made in France and dipped in Ink from Portugal so it means nothing apologists
How about, he obviously did not fully wish to sign since he retracted the next day, and he certainly did not ask to engage in such a hurry, and he can make mistakes since he is young and plays starcraft 2 for a living. How can anyone not undestand that flying 5000 km (thats a european distance unit) away from your home is not a decision you take lightheartedly, on which it is reasonable to have second thoughts, even if you signed a damned piece of paper ?
|
The case isn't complicated at all i could have solve it at the beginning of my first year as a law student
Even if i'm french I was glad tha stephano decided to join coL, but apparently, Complexity made stephano sign without even knowing fundamental principal of law, or deliberatly ignoring them,
|
I have a question to you french guys that seem to be all over this thread. Where do you think Stephano will improve more in the future, at a french teamhouse or in Korea playing with the Col korean team?
If Stephano was happy in Millennium, why would he sign with Col in the first place?
|
On September 21 2011 00:05 SnoLys wrote:
In the end, all three parties should get to a consensus and moving on.
That's right, thumbs up
|
Am I righ to think that, after you legally signed a contract, you still have a certain period of time to retract yourself (15 days in France) ?
|
On September 21 2011 00:07 hephaestos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 23:24 mechavoc wrote:I was thinking the very same thing about the aw shucks he didn't mean to sign it, he is just a kid, it was late, he didn’t have a good night sleep, he didn’t sign with an EU approved felt pen made in France and dipped in Ink from Portugal so it means nothing apologists How about, he obviously did not fully wish to sign since he retracted the next day, and he certainly did not ask to engage in such a hurry, and he can make mistakes since he is young and plays starcraft 2 for a living. How can anyone not undestand that flying 5000 km (thats a european distance unit) away from your home is not a decision you take lightheartedly, on which it is reasonable to have second thoughts, even if you signed a damned piece of paper ?
US posters are clear. You sign, you are screwed! Let's make him pay for trying to escape the inevitable!
|
On September 21 2011 00:04 Zalithian wrote:Show nested quote +
Millions of people sign contracts every day without understanding EXACTLY what is you they are getting in. In fact, I would say a large majority of people even committed this act when they signed the contract with Blizzard to play SC2. How angry would you be in Blizzard banned you, or a friend, from playing SC2 without reason? Because they can do that under ToS you agreed to.
I wouldn't consider clicking I accept to play a video game on par with signing a life altering contract, but hey. whatever.
Just by reading my first sentence you can tell the point I am making is this happens all the time in life, in many forms of occupation. The best notable example I can come up with are all the problems with the way credit card companies handle their businesses. Or, you can even look at the latest recession we had in the housing market.
Seriously, people are saying here Stephano should man up and pay for changing his mind a few years after because he signed a document. Legally he may have to. But I believe in coL does pursue this it certainly paints a very unethical picture of their organization.
|
On September 21 2011 00:09 WhiteDog wrote:
Am I righ to think that, after you legally signed a contract, you still have a certain period of time to retract yourself (15 days in France) ?
Isn't it before you actually start the job ?
|
On September 21 2011 00:08 Legio wrote:
I have a question to you french guys that seem to be all over this thread. Where do you think Stephano will improve more in the future, at a french teamhouse or in Korea playing with the Col korean team?
If Stephano was happy in Millennium, why would he sign with Col in the first place?
Legio great point, that is what is getting missed, Stephano is the one losing out on the money, the training in Korea, and the international events.
|
Well from Mill's statement it seems that they have no ground to stand on and are just trying to settle out of court. Hope this ends quickly tho.
|
On September 21 2011 00:08 Legio wrote:
I have a question to you french guys that seem to be all over this thread. Where do you think Stephano will improve more in the future, at a french teamhouse or in Korea playing with the Col korean team?
If Stephano was happy in Millennium, why would he sign with Col in the first place?
Well when you sign a contract you have to precise your main place of living, and at the moment, for stephano it is NOT korea
|
On September 21 2011 00:09 setzer wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 00:04 Zalithian wrote:
Millions of people sign contracts every day without understanding EXACTLY what is you they are getting in. In fact, I would say a large majority of people even committed this act when they signed the contract with Blizzard to play SC2. How angry would you be in Blizzard banned you, or a friend, from playing SC2 without reason? Because they can do that under ToS you agreed to.
I wouldn't consider clicking I accept to play a video game on par with signing a life altering contract, but hey. whatever. Just by reading my first sentence you can tell the point I am making is this happens all the time in life, in many forms of occupation. The best notable example I can come up with are all the problems with the way credit card companies handle their businesses. Or, you can even look at the latest recession we had in the housing market. Seriously, people are saying here Stephano should man up and pay for changing his mind a few years after because he signed a document. Legally he may have to. But I believe in coL does pursue this it certainly paints a very unethical picture of their organization.
CoL has every right to pursue something based on what I know of the situation. I highly doubt they are interested in seizing all of Stephano's assets or anything of the sort. I think they're more interested in proving a point, that contracts are and should be legally binding. This does set a bad precedent for the growth of e-sports, and in general. Unless anyone can prove that CoL's contract was bad for Stephano, I have a hard time giving any credence to examples such as credit card companies, etc. Seems like it would have been a very good deal for him from CoL. Mil and Stephano have not refuted any of it.
|
On September 21 2011 00:08 Legio wrote:
I have a question to you french guys that seem to be all over this thread. Where do you think Stephano will improve more in the future, at a french teamhouse or in Korea playing with the Col korean team?
If Stephano was happy in Millennium, why would he sign with Col in the first place?
I think he would have improved faster with CoL, assuming Mill would not change it's training facilities and shipping policies.
I think Stephano would have made WAY more money with CoL. and basically we are not saying that he should have stayed with Mill.
But flying away from home at this distance, and being immerged in a full english environment can be disturbing, i m sure he has his reasons to stay with Mill.
|
On September 21 2011 00:11 mechavoc wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 00:08 Legio wrote:
I have a question to you french guys that seem to be all over this thread. Where do you think Stephano will improve more in the future, at a french teamhouse or in Korea playing with the Col korean team?
If Stephano was happy in Millennium, why would he sign with Col in the first place? Legio great point, that is what is getting missed, Stephano is the one losing out on the money, the training in Korea, and the international events.
Maybe his sister is sick and does not want to go far away.
Maybe he is afraid of leaving his mom...
The point is, it is his decision!
|
On September 21 2011 00:09 setzer wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 00:04 Zalithian wrote:
Millions of people sign contracts every day without understanding EXACTLY what is you they are getting in. In fact, I would say a large majority of people even committed this act when they signed the contract with Blizzard to play SC2. How angry would you be in Blizzard banned you, or a friend, from playing SC2 without reason? Because they can do that under ToS you agreed to.
I wouldn't consider clicking I accept to play a video game on par with signing a life altering contract, but hey. whatever. Just by reading my first sentence you can tell the point I am making is this happens all the time in life, in many forms of occupation. The best notable example I can come up with are all the problems with the way credit card companies handle their businesses. Or, you can even look at the latest recession we had in the housing market. Seriously, people are saying here Stephano should man up and pay for changing his mind a few years after because he signed a document. Legally he may have to. But I believe in coL does pursue this it certainly paints a very unethical picture of their organization.
To me, it would have been fine if Stephano had actually talked to coL and said hey look, I know I signed a contract but I want to be released because I think I made a mistake. I'm sure coL would have worked with him.
But that isn't what happened. According to coL (and Mill) he ignored his contract, immediately signed a new contract with M+, and then ignored attempts by coL to reach him to discuss this situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
