A Korean fan explains why he hates KeSPA - Page 19

On November 15 2010 14:21 Pleiades wrote:


However, most or all software products have texts somewhere on the packaging/cover that states acceptance of the EULA is required to use the product. Most of the time it is in small print so you have to look at the product more carefully before purchasing it.

As I said before, EULA does not go into effect until you intend to use it. (opening and installing the product)

On November 15 2010 14:27 Pleiades wrote:
I could say the same thing about ignorance of not looking at cover/packaging. I said earlier, if you don't agree to it, don't use it. If you don't agree to that either, take it to court or ask your law maker to change it. Complaining here won't do anything.

On November 15 2010 14:29 Vimsey wrote:

Im quite happy to take it to court since I know that US laws dont apply here.

On November 15 2010 14:31 FrostOtter wrote:

From what I can piece together from various sites, it isn't as cut and dry in the UK as you would like to believe, either.

It seems to just be more legal opinions without any case law.

On November 15 2010 14:23 Vimsey wrote:

That text might work in the US but doesnt fly here. Ignorance of international law isnt an excuse. If you dont agree then full refund should be available should you not agree and blizzards EULA doesnt allow for that.

To give an example if i held a gun to someones head and made them sign an agreement or threat of financial loss (blackmail) it wouldnt be legally binding and that is in effect the same protection being applied here.

On November 15 2010 14:36 Ocedic wrote:


Because buying and using software willingly is like having a gun held to your head to sign a contract.

On November 15 2010 14:23 Vimsey wrote:

That text might work in the US but doesnt fly here. Ignorance of international law isnt an excuse. If you dont agree then full refund should be available should you not agree and blizzards EULA doesnt allow for that.

To give an example if i held a gun to someones head and made them sign an agreement or threat of financial loss (blackmail) it wouldnt be legally binding and that is in effect the same protection being applied here.

On November 15 2010 14:35 Vimsey wrote:
You think you know more about my countrys laws than me? Nice try. We have very strong data protection and consumer protection laws and thats just one european country I know for a fact that there are others that you wouldnt get anywhere with.

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.

On November 15 2010 14:38 Dakkas wrote:


That's a completely horrible analogy

On November 15 2010 14:42 FrostOtter wrote:

I didn't realize that living in your country made you an expert on your country's laws.

As it so happens, I do know a bit about the legal profession, though I am not an expert nor do I know much about contract law. What I do know is that by scanning Google (including your country's Intellectual Property Office's official website) I was able to find that your government is much more ambivalent about what is and is not legal than you are.

On November 15 2010 14:35 Vimsey wrote:
You think you know more about my countrys laws than me? Nice try. We have very strong data protection and consumer protection laws and thats just one european country I know for a fact that there are others that you wouldnt get anywhere with.

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.

On November 15 2010 14:46 Vimsey wrote:

I am undone an american knows more about the law and my consumer rights because of "google". Unbelievable. While you are googling how about you stop by the office of fair trading.

On November 15 2010 14:47 TheRabidDeer wrote:

You have gotten refunds for many games simply because companies dont like to deal with sour customers. They would rather just take the loss of having to sell the game as used than argue with a customer. It isnt really because of consumer rights.

I also fail to believe what you are saying, as they provide a very clear indication of what you will have to agree to, and that you will need to get a battle.net account with its own terms of use agreement. They even provide a way to see EXACTLY what you will agree to by giving a link to the EULA. To me, that just comes down to the consumer being willfully ignorant.

I also like that you arent even citing any sources for all of this, yet claim it as fact. I know that the UK has some pretty crazy consumer protection laws, but I dont think they would protect you this far since nothing is hidden.

On November 15 2010 14:52 Vimsey wrote:
Thats before I get into the many legal EULA cases that have pointed out the how poorly written they are. .

SO You think that if a consumer doesnt agree with a EULA or if the EULA contravenes their local laws they arent entitled to a refund?

On November 15 2010 14:51 FrostOtter wrote:

I didn't say that I knew more, I said that living in your country does not make you an expert and that your own government is not being as definite as you are--

I repeat, I went to your country's Intellectual Property Office site and read what they had to say about EULA, which was a ~150 page report that was not nearly as certain of the position as you claim it is. I'm not telling you your rights, I'm just saying that I'm not going to declare you infallible on British law just because you are a citizen and I am not.

On November 15 2010 14:54 Dakkas wrote:


That has nothing to do with what I said. I said your analogy was horrible