eula
Latest
Class action versus IGE
Benjamin Duranske at Virtually Blind kicks off coverage of another virtual worlds lawsuit. In this case, it's a third-party beneficiary contract class action claim (Whew. Try saying that three times fast) against IGE and their alleged actions in World of Warcraft. The plaintiffs allege, basically, that IGE is gold-farming, spawn-camping, devaluing gold, spamming chat, and generally screwing up the experience for everyone else.
Turbine is holding your credit card hostage
MMOCrunch has a customer service horror story up about trying to get their credit card info back from Turbine. After Mike canceled his Lord of the Rings Online account, he tried to get his credit card information off of Turbine's servers, but they told him that if he did that, he would never be able to play his copy of that game ever again. They told him that once he "deactivated the account," he would never, ever be able to reactivate it again.Now, there aren't that many companies out there that will actually delete your credit card information and let you keep your account-- I'm told that NCSoft will let you "remove card" from your account, but that's pretty much it. So Turbine's inability to remove the card from the account isn't surprising. What is surprising, however, is that by deactivating your account, they remove the ability to ever play with that disc's key again. Turbine's LotRO EULA says nothing about canceling your account, either, although it does say that if they "are unable to verify or authenticate any information you provide to us," then they can "terminate your license to the Software."But whether it's legal or not, what's the point of spending $50 on a game disc when, after canceling your subscription, that disc becomes a coaster? Not cool for Turbine to break the game you paid for just because you'd like to keep your credit card information as safe as possible.
PSN License Agreement updated - paving the way for things to come
Sony has recently been sending out emails requesting that PSN members check out the new End User License Agreement. The new, updated, agreement includes a load of new content. Specifically, this new new agreement includes rules and regulations for upcoming PSN features; restrictions on uploading vulgar or offensive content, spreading viruses or posting spam to other users. Obviously, this is most relevent for Home, but can also be linked to other games and services.The updated EULA goes into effect on October the 30th. There has been some confusion with the version number of the EULA, which has been upgraded to 2.0. This has nothing to do with firmware version 2.0 and anyone expecting the mythical firmware update to come at the end of the month is setting themselves up for disappointment. What the new EULA does mean is that more exciting functionality for the PSN is on its way and that Sony are building their legal barriers just in case someone decides to get a bit saucy whilst playing Singstar in front of the PlayStation Eye.
Stubborn ex-customer takes Gateway to court for defective PC
"Me against the world" has taken on a whole new meaning for high school dropout Dennis Sheehan, who has taken Gateway to small claims court in a completely bizarre catch 22-laden case. Apparently, the now 46-year old Sheehan took his stubbornness out on the corporation who sent him a computer that "displayed scattered graphics" fresh out of the box. After the company purportedly refused to remedy the issue, the two have ended up in court where Gateway claimed that clicking through the EULA upon bootup eliminated his right to even sue; au contraire, claimed Sheehan, who explained that the malfunctioning PC wasn't even able to render the text and allow him the opportunity to read it. Interestingly enough, a tentative ruling on May 24th sided with the plantiff and maintained that the case would stay in small claims court, but it looks like finality is still a good ways off for the perturbed ex-customer.[Thanks, Mike]
Vista EULA forbids virtualization
TUAW reader Rae pointed us to this post on the Parallels Virtualization blog, which confirms details of the end user license agreement that came to light last Autumn. Microsoft's EULA specifically forbids using Vista Home Basic and Vista Home Premium with virtualization technologies. This means that if you want to run Vista on Parallels, and want to keep within the terms of the EULA, you'll need to buy either the Business or Ultimate versions, whose EULAs allow for virtualized use. After public outcry, Microsoft did change the EULA at least once before to allow users to deinstall their version from one computer and reinstall it on another. Hopefully, a similar grass roots movement will encourage Microsoft to rethink their stance on virtualization for their lower-end Vista releases.
Quark caves to customer wishes regarding licensing issue
Quark users who upgraded to Quark 7 from Quark 4, 5 or 6 will no longer be denied the legal use of their prior versions after they've installed Quark 7. In a press release issued earlier today, Richard Pasewark, Quark Senior VP of Sales (Americas) and Marketing said "this is in response to customer feedback and is another example of how Quark has fundamentally changed its approach to doing business in the last two years. Customers are thrilled with QuarkXPress 7 and based on user feedback this policy change will help streamline and fast-track the upgrade plans for many customers."So basically since you paid for both versions Quark will let you actually use both versions. Nice of them, eh?Quark counts this move (which never should have been at issue to begin with) as one more feather in their oh-so-user-friendly cap, pointing to other changes they've made in the last 2 years like "Free English-speaking technical support" and "The ability to deactivate and re-activate or transfer a license of QuarkXPress 7 from one computer to another without the help of technical support." Call me old fashioned, but I kind of expect those things to begin with.Still, I give them points for seeing the light on this one. Maybe they'll just stop making boneheaded decisions early on so they don't have to keep "changing their approach" midstream.
Microsoft changes Vista EULA to appease modders; pirates still screwed
Don't ever say that Microsoft doesn't listen to its customers: Following intense backlash against the license transfer stipulations in Vista's EULA -- first we'd heard that only one reactivation was allowed, and then it was clarified as ten -- the software giant has decided to reword the pertinent passage, which now reads "You may uninstall the software and install it on another device for your use. You may not do so to share this license between devices." Bam, that's it -- no limits on the number of transfers and none of that silly major upgrade versus minor upgrade distinction; now you can reinstall Vista ten times a day if that's your thing. As expected, you still have to purchase multiple copies of the OS if you want to run it on more than one machine, but at least now you can tinker with your PC without worrying about running out of reactivations or having to humiliate yourself by begging a Microsoft CSR to give you just one more install. Next step: everyone bitch and moan in the comments about how Vista is too expensive, until Redmond finally relents and starts handing out copies for free when you order a value meal at your favorite fast food joint.[Thanks, Master Devwi]
Vista license to only allow one computer transfer
As if crippling your PC when you're running an unlicensed copy of Vista wasn't enough, Microsoft has now taken to limiting the number of times you can transfer your license legitimately to other computers. Unlike Windows XP, which previously allowed for unlimited license transfers between computers, Vista limits this transfer to a single time. As TechWeb reports, quoting the license for Windows Vista Home Basic (and other versions as well): "The first user of the software may reassign the license to another device one time. If you reassign the license, that other device becomes the 'licensed device.'" Still, as we noted last time, it's almost certainly a safe bet that the most determined folks will figure out a way around this, à la PlaysForSure.
Selling Accounts Part 2: EULA Clarification
In my previous post regarding selling accounts, there were several people who commented on the ethical implications of selling accounts. That wasn't what the post was about, but I feel like there is a myth regarding selling accounts that needs to be addressed.Blizzard allows you to sell your account.You can put it up on eBay and sell it for thousands of dollars. Blizzard is fine with that. If you examine the End User License Agreement on the WoW homepage, it clearly states that as long as you permanently sell, not only the account, but the game disks and manual, you are within your rights as an owner. This is not to say that selling the gold or items within the account is legal, but the account as a whole is yours to do with as you please.
