terms of service
Latest
Google updates ToS, shares your data across its services (video)
You're you, right? Of course you are. If you have an Account, Google knows that too and now, with an updated and streamlined Google Terms of Service, you're even more you than ever before. The company is consolidating most of its more than 70 separate privacy documents into a single Privacy Policy that is so important it gets capitalized. The biggest change? If you have a Google Account, your information will now be shared across the company's many services. Scary? Don't fear -- the company is taking this time to re-iterate its pledge to never sell your personal information, never share it externally and to continue to support the Data Liberation Front. Viva transparency.
New Xbox Live terms of service prevent class action lawsuits against Microsoft [update: opting out not allowed]
You can now add Microsoft to the growing list of companies including anti-class action lawsuit language in their terms of service. Following in the footsteps of EA and Sony, the latest Xbox Live terms of service requires that United States users agree to a "class action waiver." As the language suggests, the waiver bars any user from entering a class action lawsuits against Microsoft, requiring instead that all disputes be solved by "informal negotiation." Should said negotiation fail to solve the dispute, individuals may enter into binding arbitration with the company. Microsoft certainly isn't the first company to add such language to its terms of service, as mentioned above, and it likely won't be the last. The company has dealt with the looming specter of class action lawsuits before, one as recently as 2010. As with other similar terms of service changes, users may choose to reject it by sending a letter (a paper one) to Microsoft Corporation, ATTN: LCA ARBITRATION, One Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA 98052-6399. We've embedded the relevant sections of the terms of service after the break. Update: It turns out that you actually can't opt out of the arbitration agreement, at least not if you want to keep using Xbox Live. Microsoft has informed Kotaku that the ability for customers to reject changes only applies to future changes to the arbitration agreement. From now on, individuals wishing to file a dispute may do so by visiting xbox.com/notice, filling out a form and mailing it – again, an actual paper letter – to Microsoft. Should the dispute not be satisfactorily resolved in 60 days, users can submit an arbitration claim (PDF), an onerous process requiring fees, multiple copies of forms and, not least of all, an attorney.
Mortal Online plagiarizes EVE Online's terms of service
There's always that temptation in high school and college to simply copy someone else's work to get out of writing really boring papers. Still, no matter how great the temptation, it's good to abstain from such activities. While it's not only wrong, it can be extremely embarrassing if you're found out by the teacher and penalized for plagiarism. We guess that someone over at Mortal Online really didn't want to work up an original terms of service (TOS) for the game, as a few sharp-eyed players noticed that the document not only was extremely similar to one in another MMO but failed to replace mentions of its source game. It appears as though Mortal Online took EVE Online's TOS and reworked it slightly -- and imperfectly -- for its own nefarious purposes, as you can see in the graphic above. The TOS has since been changed to eliminate the mention of EVE. This recalls a similar misstep from last year, when Alganon was caught with its pants down after "borrowing" a press release from BioWare. [Thanks to Jokkl for the tip!]
RuneScape is losing the war on bots
We have an expectation of conflicts made up of good vs. evil. What we don't usually expect is for evil to win. But in RuneScape's war against the evil of botting, that appears to be what's happening. In a letter from Daniel Clough, it was explained that despite the development team's best efforts, the war on bots is being won by the botters. The re-introduction of the Wilderness and Free Trade has resulted in an explosion of gold farming and botting that just can't be held back. The letter goes on to urge players to not utilize these services and report anyone known to be using them and outlines the steps being taken to try to beat back the tide. But as Clough puts it, while the staff sinks significant time and money into fighting the problem, it's fighting an opponent whose only business goal is to get back into the game. It's grim news for the game's players, certainly, and it doesn't bode well for the many other games waging the same battles.
The Lawbringer: Mailbag 6.0 and Rogers updates
Pop law abounds in The Lawbringer, your weekly dose of WoW, the law, video games and the MMO genre. Mathew McCurley takes you through the world running parallel to the games we love and enjoy, full of rules, regulations, pitfalls and traps. How about you hang out with us as we discuss some of the more esoteric aspects of the games we love to play? Welcome to another exciting edition of The Lawbringer, where your questions about the esoteric topics revolving around WoW and MMOs potentially get answered, usually if the question is compelling. You know the drill -- ask a question, and maybe I can hash it out or at least point you in the right direction to get things under control. Mailbags are fun, and updates are even more fun. This week, we have a couple of questions from the mailbag and an update to the situation with Rogers Communications up in Canada. Remember back a few months ago, when the Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission demanded that Rogers find a way to stop the admitted throttling of World of Warcraft data because it appeared to be peer-to-peer traffic? Well, the Canadian government wants a plan by Tuesday. More on that in a bit. Questions first, yes?
New PS3 Terms of Service aim to prevent class-action lawsuits, are part of mandatory PSN update
Unsurprisingly, the nearly month-long PlayStation Network outage and related security breach resulted in the inevitable class action lawsuit. And while that's fair game, Sony isn't taking it lying down. The Japanese consumer electronics giant has amended its online gaming service's Terms of Service – that's the giant wall-o-text that consumer have learned to gloss over while hunting for the "Agree" action. Sony's solution: Why, a mandatory system update, of course! The next time users log into PSN, they'll be greeted with the all-too-familiar request to update their consoles; however, this update includes the aforementioned new Terms of Service which, amongst other things, include the following notable enhancement: ANY DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEEDINGS, WHETHER IN ARBITRATION OR COURT, WILL BE CONDUCTED ONLY ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS AND NOT IN A CLASS OR REPRESENTATIVE ACTION OR AS A NAMED OR UNNAMED MEMBER IN A CLASS, CONSOLIDATED, REPRESENTATIVE OR PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL LEGAL ACTION, UNLESS BOTH YOU AND THE SONY ENTITY WITH WHICH YOU HAVE A DISPUTE SPECIFICALLY AGREE TO DO SO IN WRITING FOLLOWING INITIATION OF THE ARBITRATION. THIS PROVISION DOES NOT PRECLUDE YOUR PARTICIPATION AS A MEMBER IN A CLASS ACTION FILED ON OR BEFORE AUGUST 20, 2011. Naturally, this change isn't going to sit well with consumers but it is in Sony's best interest to try any and everything it can to protect itself from retaliation if and when this happens again. Sony's Patrick Seybold addressed the change, saying, "This language in our TOS is common and similar to that of many other service related Terms of Service Agreements. It is designed to benefit both the consumer and the company by ensuring that there is adequate time and procedures to resolve disputes." You can opt out of this easily, by just ... sending a letter? Sony is keeping things simple, and offers this easy opt-out method: RIGHT TO OPT OUT OF BINDING ARBITRATION AND CLASS ACTION WAIVER WITHIN 30 DAYS. IF YOU DO NOT WISH TO BE BOUND BY THE BINDING ARBITRATION AND CLASS ACTION WAIVER IN THIS SECTION 15, YOU MUST NOTIFY SNEI IN WRITING WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE THAT YOU ACCEPT THIS AGREEMENT. YOUR WRITTEN NOTIFICATION MUST BE MAILED TO 6080 CENTER DRIVE, 10TH FLOOR, LOS ANGELES, CA 90045, ATTN: LEGAL DEPARTMENT/ARBITRATION AND MUST INCLUDE: (1) YOUR NAME, (2) YOUR ADDRESS, (3) YOUR PSN ACCOUNT NUMBER, IF YOU HAVE ONE, AND (4) A CLEAR STATEMENT THAT YOU DO NOT WISH TO RESOLVE DISPUTES WITH ANY SONY ENTITY THROUGH ARBITRATION. We'd love to know what kind of postcard you're using for this letter and, as Ars Technica points out, you may want to get signature and tracking service. For more thrilling reading from the new Terms of Service, head on past the break where we've embedded the entire thing, with changes marked in red.
Battlefield 3 won't be sold on Steam; EA claims service 'restricts our ability to directly support players'
EA's big holiday release, Battlefield 3, apparently won't be available via Valve's ubiquitous PC game download service, Steam, as previously hinted. Taking to Twitter and its own forums, EA announced as much with some interesting, if not inflammatory, claims. "BF3 will not be available on Steam as the service restricts our ability to directly support players," the Twitter account says. The forum post goes a bit further in explaining the publisher's position, though it doesn't go so far as to explicitly explain the schism. "Steam has adopted a set of restrictive terms of service which limit how developers interact with customers to deliver patches and other downloadable content," the forum post reads. "No other download service has adopted these practices." As with Dragon Age 2, this is in reference to one specific part of Steam's Terms of Service agreement, which forces games to deliver DLC and patches through Steam rather than through a game-specific client. EA claims this to be restrictive, and thus refuses to sell some titles through the service. It remains unclear why EA -- who, in the past, has offered a variety of games through Steam, regardless of the Terms of Service -- refuses to offer DLC and patches through Steam suddenly, but it certainly appears to be a stance the company is staying firm on. The forum post also notes EA's inclination towards resolving the issue with Valve, saying, "We hope to work out an agreement where Steam can carry Battlefield 3; meanwhile, gamers can pick from the more than 100 digital retailers."
Dragon Age 2 abducted from Steam, EA points finger at 'restrictive' terms of service as the culprit
The mysterious disappearance of Dragon Age 2 from Steam this week, just before the launch of the game's latest DLC, is yet another thorn in the side of EA's relationship with Valve's Steam digital distribution game service. As many had assumed, the game wasn't removed due to the recent (re)launch of EA's own digital distribution service, Origin, but in fact because DA2's latest DLC doesn't play nice with the Steam Terms of Service. As the DLC -- named "Legacy" -- is delivered via an in-game store, rather than via Steam's own client, the game was removed. "Unfortunately, Steam has adopted a set of restrictive terms of service which limit how developers interact with customers to sell downloadable content," EA senior VP of global online David DeMartini noted in a statement. He also pointed out that the game is currently available on a variety of other "major download services," from GameStop to Direct2Drive, and that he hopes "to work out an agreement to keep our games on Steam." It's not clear why EA refused to deliver the DLC via Steam's client, but it appears the company won't be changing its stance just yet.%Gallery-127945%
Storyboard: Red light
When it comes to roleplaying, we've got more than our fair share of elephants in the room. Things we all know are taking place, that fall under the same aegis as the rest of the hobby, but things we don't really want to acknowledge publicly. Partly because you can have good roleplayers, people you know and play with, who have some less-savory elements lurking in the background. It's hard not to notice that a fellow roleplayer is cliquish, isolationist, and condescending... but it's very possible for a friend to be heavily into erotic roleplay (ERP) without you realizing it. And it needs to be talked about. It needs to be addressed, because there's something strange about the entire roleplaying community pretending that it doesn't exist. From a combination of factors -- squick, inappropriateness, and just plain disinterest -- we've allowed a shadow community to grow up in the space around roleplaying, with the tacit hope that if no one mentions ERP as if it were a part of roleplaying, it'll just go away and we can go back to what we were doing before. Before I go any further in this column, I'd like to note that some stuff in here might be squickworthy. It's the nature of the beast. Please tread carefully, and I apologize in advance to anyone skeeved out.
The Lawbringer: Account management and you
Pop law abounds in The Lawbringer, your weekly dose of WoW, the law, video games and the MMO genre. Running parallel to the games we love and enjoy is a world full of rules, regulations, pitfalls and traps. How about you hang out with us as we discuss some of the more esoteric aspects of the games we love to play? Writing The Lawbringer has taught me a lesson in trends. Over the past few months, specific questions are sent to me in topical batches. Sometimes it is a few emails about selling accounts. Other times, I get four to five emails about account security or compromise. May's email topic of choice was transferring accounts to family members. Blizzard is very restrictive about what you can and cannot change regarding your account information. On the one hand, it is your account, right? Shouldn't you have ultimate control over the information you provide for the facilitation of a service you pay for? On the other hand, there is a certain degree of problem mitigation that comes with restrictive change. If Blizzard can control certain aspects of what you do with your account and the information it is all filed under, problems can get mitigated before they appear. Today's topic is really all about damage mitigation.
SCEA transferring 'online services operations, including your wallet and the funds in it' to SNEA on April 1
At CES 2010, Sony's Kaz Hirai -- potential successor to Sir Howard Stringer, if you're just joining us -- introduced "Sony Network Entertainment," a new corporate unit tasked with the expansion of the increasingly vital PlayStation Network architecture. At CES this year, Kaz said 2011 would find Sony "building upon the video, music, game and book offerings on our Qriocity and our PlayStation Network services to deliver a compelling, unique experience for Sony across a wide range of consumer electronic devices." It looks like part of that plan is in progress now with the introduction of SNEA. Some of you may have received an "important message" from the "PlayStation Network team at Sony Computer Entertainment America" in your inbox today alerting you to a rather troubling change: SCEA is giving all of the money in your online wallet away ... ... to Sony Network Entertainment America! "The first time you sign in to your Sony Online Services account on or after April 1," the important message reads, "you will be asked to enter into a new Terms of Service and User Agreement with SNEA." You can take a peek at that new ToS located conveniently at qriocity.com. (Aside: Isn't it cute when Sony pretends that Qriocity is just as important as PlayStation Network?) If your relationship with SNEA starts and stops at PlayStation Network, then nothing really changes for you; however, if you're all about Sony's networked services, having a unified wallet and identity will probably be a convenience. Until they tie your PSN tag to your musical tastes. "Hey xxXSmokezMadBluntz420Xxx, how's that new Bieber album?" [Thanks, KB]
Twitter to developers: we want to own the pipes, water, and faucets, but feel free to make soap
An announcement by Ryan Sarver, a member of the platform team at Twitter, could spell bad news for makers of third-party apps that access the growing social network and new ones looking to get in on the action. In a move that will inevitably cause quite a ruckus among developers and tweeters alike, Twitter has essentially decided that no new apps should be developed "that mimic or reproduce the mainstream Twitter consumer client experience." He goes on to say that existing apps will continue to function, but that the bar will be raised in terms of quality and consistency. Specifically, he cites differences across apps in terminology for core functions like @-replying and trending topics as confusing to users and at the root of the change. According to Sarver, over 90 percent of Twitter users access the service through official Twitter apps, so for many the change won't be drastic. The company hopes developers will shift their focus to other areas of the ecosystem that "focus on areas outside the mainstream consumer client experience" such as publishing tools, curation, and social CRM (consumer relationship management). Still, it's incredibly interesting -- and frankly, disheartening -- to see a Web 2.0 company making such an un-Web 2.0 move. Of course, this could all be part of Twitter's plans to eventually monetize the service, but for now we'll have to take the company at its word, even if that means our choice of clients becomes a little less diverse in the future.
Ask Massively: I am happy when I get to talk about Transformers edition
If people haven't noticed by now, I have fandoms that don't generally intersect with MMOs. So I'm happy to see that the Transformers MMO will be wide-ranging, while at the same time I understand that many of the things I want out of the game will not be happening. Then again, almost none of the things I want dovetails with more casual fans. Considering how strongly Hasbro is pushing the newly unified Transformers: Prime continuity, my vague hopes of seeing something set on Cybertron post-Reformatting are unlikely to come to fruition. (I will still be happier than those people who assume the series peaked 26 years ago.) Leaving aside my personal pet causes, we've got the usual cocktail of questions for this week's Ask Massively, complete with a discussion of the dark art of modding and the far lighter art of inventory storage. If you've got a question for us, you can leave it in the comment field or mail us at ask@massively.com.
Sony files to dismiss 'Other OS' class action lawsuit
SCEA has filed a motion to dismiss a class action brought against the company for its removal of the PS3's "Other OS" feature, which allowed users to install Linux on the system. Sony argues that the lawsuit, a consolidation of seven similar suits filed last spring, fails to present evidence that the company overtly advertised Other OS in its marketing campaigns or on PS3 packaging. Sony's filing also claims that the PS3 warranty, license agreement and the PlayStation Network Terms of Service "specifically provide PS3 purchasers with a license, not an ownership interest, in the software and in the use of the PSN, and provide that SCEA has the right to disable or alter software features or terminate or limit access to the PSN, including by issuing firmware updates," according to court documents obtained by IGN. (Other OS was removed with a firmware update; and users who decline any update are barred from PSN.) Additionally, Sony has requested that the "class" allegations be stricken from the suit because the plaintiffs did not all use Other OS in the same way. In fact, one of them never used the feature at all. With Sony presenting some seemingly solid grounds for the lawsuit's dismissal, it might be prudent for the plaintiffs to call a key witness to the stand when the two parties meet before a judge on November 4. How about ... the United States Air Force?
The Lawbringer: A rookie's guide to the TOU
Welcome to the Lawbringer, Wow.com's weekly guide to the intersection of law and the World of Warcraft. I'm Amy Schley, a new law school graduate and your tour guide through the rabbit hole of contracts, copyrights and other craziness. Greetings again! We're on part three of an examination of the various legal documents to which we must consent in order to play our beloved World of Warcraft. Parts one and two examined the End User License Agreement; this segment will look at the Terms of Use ("TOU"). The first thing you'll notice as you examine the TOU is that it is quite similar to the EULA. This is by design -- while one of the EULA's provisions is to agree to the Terms of Use, the repetition increases the likelihood we'll actually read it. There are quite a few differences, including the code of conduct and the naming policy.
Blizzard to patrol Moon Guard's Goldshire for harassment, erotic role playing
Blizzard announced via the customer support forum that it will take proactive steps to quell some of the unsavory behavior on Moon Guard (US), a server notable for its infamous Goldshire inn naughty shenanigans. After a father posted about canceling his son's account because of the general and trade chats on the Moon Guard server, Blizzard customer service responded in definitive terms -- Moon Guard's Goldshire will be actively "patrolled" by customer service team members. Check out the full Blizzard response after the break.
PS3 Terms of Service updated to reflect possible 3D health risks
Sony Online's Terms of Service was recently updated to warn users of the new dangers that PlayStation 3 poses to them and their loved ones: the harmful effects associated with prolonged viewing of a 3D display. The terms specify "discomfort (such as eye strain, eye fatigue or nausea)" as one of the unpleasant side effects. (Click past the jump to see the full cautionary addendum.) Additionally, the update warns parents of children under the age of six to consult a doctor before allowing them to play 3D games. Why? Because their tiny brains can't handle all the non-stop, in-your-face action that the extra dimension provides. (Also, because it's bad for their eyes, apparently.)
The Virtual Whirl: A brief history of Second Life, 2008-2010 and beyond
This week, we cover the final installment of our summarized history of Second Life and Linden Lab (check out the first installment or the second, if you missed them). It's only possible to cover a tiny fraction of the events that took place in the space we have here, but the highlights paint an interesting picture. We'll be working our way from 2008 to June 2010, and looking at what future directions we expect from there.
Flurry agrees to stop device data collection
Steve Jobs said a lot of interesting things on stage at the D8 conference last night (I'm surprised I haven't seen a t-shirt with "My sex life is pretty good" on it yet), but he did put one issue to rest. Third-party agencies like Flurry Analytics and others who use iPhone applications to track device traffic were in a tizzy over a recent change to the iPhone SDK's terms of service which disallowed them from sending out device identifier information without the actual user's knowledge. They all figured that Apple was making this change because Jobs and company had their own analytics plan coming, and they were unhappy at being cut out of the action. But not so, says Jobs -- he just doesn't want information going out without users' knowledge. In his talk last night, he blamed Flurry specifically for logging data from devices inside Apple's campus, and said that wasn't kosher. Maybe Apple will let Flurry do something like that in the future, he admitted, with the user's knowledge and approval, but not right now. And now Flurry has agreed to comply, says AppleInsider. While the company has been working on strengthening its privacy stance, the CEO agrees that Flurry will back off of sharing the data that Apple doesn't want them to share. Of course, Jobs' statements don't preclude the idea that Apple is looking at implementing its own analytics (he's denied working on phones and tablets at past interviews, and we all know how that worked out), but for now, Flurry is backing down.
Sony slapped with two more class-action suits over Other OS removal
As if one lawsuit regarding the removal of the Other OS functionality from the PlayStation 3 wasn't enough, two more class-action suits have been filed against Sony, reports IGN. Earlier this month, Todd Densmore and Antal Herz (of Georgia and California, respectively) filed a class-action suit against Sony, alleging that firmware update 3.2.1 (which removed the Other OS feature) made various features of the console unusable -- features that the suit claims weren't allowed to be removed without compensation, per the console's Terms of Service and System Software License Agreement. Furthermore, a group of five US citizens filed a second suit in late April, also claiming "lost money" given the removed functionality. Both suits can be found in full here and here (warning: PDF links), and for its part, Sony reps have said "the company does not comment on pending litigation." Potentially, if the first of these two suits were to get anywhere, the implications would be rather large, as the "class" in this case includes "anyone who purchased a PlayStation 3 from November 17, 2006 to March 27, 2010 and folks who continue to own their console as of March 27, 2010."
