Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Restitution for NGE, what I'd like to see
ArcAngel3
Member Posts: 2,931
First of all, giving a refund for the expansion, apparently under duress, was a good first step.
As many can see, however, this doesn't seem to have addressed people's sense that an injustice was done that hasn't been fully held to account.
Addtional steps I'd like to see would be the following:
Since people resubscribed to the entertainment service based on ToOW marketting, and since the game that was advertised only existed for 2 weeks after it was purchased, any subscription fees beyond 2 weeks should be refunded. Anyone who would not have resubsribed had they been duly informed of the NGE game changes, should receive their money back. I believe the minimum subscription time is one month. The advertised features and items didn't even last that long.
That all this debate about a EULA serving as a defense for fraud allegations be put to the test in criminal court. Let a judge decide if the NGE made the Trials of ObiWan expansion a bait and switch scam. Let a judge decide if the EULA is an adequate defense to selling something under false pretenses.
That SOE and LA officially apologize for withholding information about the planned deletions until after receiving money for the expansion.
That SOE be compelled to have their EULA comply to all consumer rights legislation where the service is used. If statments in the EULA contradict consumer rights laws, they must be removed, not excused in legalese.
I think that would do it for me 
Comments
nge go's and pre-cu comes back in first off.
two we are all given money for our time wasted in playing pre-cu before the cu came out.
players union that says yes or no on whatever $OE does.
fanbots and known fanbois are banned for flaming and berating us vets over the years.
a full on sorry from $OE for stealing our game and our money from us.
raph koster hired back along with any pre-cu devs that can come back.
smed is arrested and faces trial and could face jail time for his crimes.
this is what i believe gamers ever where want. and this trial will show that we will no longer be pushed around any longer. we are the ones that run gaming and mmo's not some dev or fool in a suit.
Read the eula here - It's not a debate.
Account has been stolen, why would someone want to steal my account?
fishermage.blogspot.com
Frankly, the only thing I would want out of this would be what naturally comes with court proceedings - discovery. A collection of evidence that would, in fact, give us a window into the events and decisions that lead up to the NGE. Once those became public knowledge, SOE wouldn't have to be ordered to apologize...they would pretty much have to as a matter of saving what little reputation they have in the industry.
Wouldn't really matter if the veterans lost or won at that point. Money awarded wouldn't bring our game back. They would not bring back the PreCU. And frankly, there would never be forgiveness on either side. The differences and distrust are too great. But still, we would know the truth and know that even is the legal system is powerless to put SOE back in line - the more powerful tool of public pressure and opinion would grant us the satisfaction of SOE's public apology or at worst, their sins being revealed to the world without the speculation.
If EULA's are so ironclad, how come no software company in history has ever sued anyone over a violation of one, using that alone as their allegation (ie: not tying it to law, such as in software piracy which is a violation of copyright law)?
Simply put EULA's are the biggest scam there is. It's a one sided, unilateral, non negotiated contract that explicitly says it can be changed at any time but not by you.
I can sign a contract with you and even have it witnessed and notarized that states that you may shoot me dead in exchange for you paying me $1 million dollars. If you then shot me dead that contract, even though it was negotiated, signed, and properly witnessed, and I'd received specific compensation for permitting you to shoot me (money) would not be able to use that as a defense against a charge of murder.
Note that with a EULA, SOE doesn't even have my signature, much less documentation of witnesses.
Contracts DO NOT trump law. If SOE and LEC broke the law (and I believe they have) with regard to how they handled the NGE, then the EULA isn't going to protect them even if they had the signatures of all their victims on it (they don't) and proper documentation of witnesses (they also don't). Contracts are valid only when they comply with contract law whereever it is to be in force, and when they specify legal acts for legal compensation.
If SOE/LEC broke the law, even if their EULA was a valid contract (it isn't) it would be immediately null and void.
That is exactly what I'd want out of it too... There is SO much that would be learned in discovery... Insight into who, what, when, how decided to do the NGE, the haughty contempt that SOE and LEC had for their player base, etc would be priceless.
It would be information that made public would be sufficient ammo to blackball everyone involved from the MMO industry for all time.
This information would also have to be disclosed by SOE and LEC, as the core allegation made against them would be that they planned and started developing the NGE in secret, while telling us that the "CU was here to stay" and even going through the motions of improving our existing game, which was done deliberately to keep us around so as to use our sub fees NOT to develop our existing game, but a new game (NGE) that they already assumed would cause us to quit.
That, my friends, is fraud.
If EULA's are so ironclad, how come no software company in history has ever sued anyone over a violation of one, using that alone as their allegation (ie: not tying it to law, such as in software piracy which is a violation of copyright law)?
Simply put EULA's are the biggest scam there is. It's a one sided, unilateral, non negotiated contract that explicitly says it can be changed at any time but not by you.
I can sign a contract with you and even have it witnessed and notarized that states that you may shoot me dead in exchange for you paying me $1 million dollars. If you then shot me dead that contract, even though it was negotiated, signed, and properly witnessed, and I'd received specific compensation for permitting you to shoot me (money) would not be able to use that as a defense against a charge of murder.
Note that with a EULA, SOE doesn't even have my signature, much less documentation of witnesses.
Contracts DO NOT trump law. If SOE and LEC broke the law (and I believe they have) with regard to how they handled the NGE, then the EULA isn't going to protect them even if they had the signatures of all their victims on it (they don't) and proper documentation of witnesses (they also don't). Contracts are valid only when they comply with contract law whereever it is to be in force, and when they specify legal acts for legal compensation.
If SOE/LEC broke the law, even if their EULA was a valid contract (it isn't) it would be immediately null and void.
same could be said vice versa...if the EULA is not as ironclad as you claim it is....then how come noone has ever sued SWG for the NGE, WoW for it's expansions (arguments could be made in gear being made obsolete in hours of grinding for rep, dungeons, etc), games for adding new classes which changed the overall schemata of pvp, pve, etc, and so on and so forth.If it wasn't ironclad, challenge it....but you won't
<-- Miagi's alt cause god forbid you don't conform to the masses and have legitimate questions
"A SWG veteran is someone who thinks their opinion matters more than others - It doesn't, their just deluded" - Wepps
I have always wondered what you mean by this, I think you mean 'they're' and not 'their'. I would think that your insult would be more effective if you bothered to spell or apply grammar correctly.
"A SWG veteran is someone who thinks their opinion matters more than others - It doesn't, their just deluded" - Wepps
I have always wondered what you mean by this, I think you mean 'they're' and not 'their'. I would think that your insult would be more effective if you bothered to spell or apply grammar correctly.
Agreed.
Akevv Ostone
No Longer SWG Free
Illegal wars? Global warming? Homelessness? Chemical pollution? Child slavery?
Nope. A video game.
This anger simply can't truly be about SWG. I implore you... talk to someone about what's really in your heart.
Peace
Now, my point about the money in the paragraph above. How many rangers do you know that would have continued their subscriptions had they not been led on by a Revamp promise that came with documentation? How many would have forked over the cash during the time that the NGE was being developed had they known their time and money invested in the game would amount to nada because their very profession (the core reason for their playing that character) was deleted. No options - just gone. The money paid in subscriptions being used to fund development of the very thing that would rob them their hobbies.
I still to this day have yet to hear one person justify that bait and switch. And this time, there is proof. Correspondence and documents of the Ranger revamp and the oh soo permanent proof of NGE being without Rangers.
Your post is both thought provoking and original. We have never before seen such arguments in this forum.
Your post is both thought provoking and original. We have never before seen such arguments in this forum.
Definately makes a change then.
Account has been stolen, why would someone want to steal my account?
Now, my point about the money in the paragraph above. How many rangers do you know that would have continued their subscriptions had they not been led on by a Revamp promise that came with documentation? How many would have forked over the cash during the time that the NGE was being developed had they known their time and money invested in the game would amount to nada because their very profession (the core reason for their playing that character) was deleted. No options - just gone. The money paid in subscriptions being used to fund development of the very thing that would rob them their hobbies.
I still to this day have yet to hear one person justify that bait and switch. And this time, there is proof. Correspondence and documents of the Ranger revamp and the oh soo permanent proof of NGE being without Rangers.
Bingo. Civil and criminal law often come down to who can afford to use the system to the max, and who can't more than right and wrong, or the law even.
Just because OJ got off doesn't mean that Nicole and Ron weren't murdered, in other words.
Quite true. I mean since the matters you listed above are also so near and dear to your heart, one can only imagine that you took a break in your schedule as a UN Ambassador to come into this video game forum and let us know thats what we should be writing about here.
/sarcasm off. I normally don't respond to posts like this but I am tired of the rubber stamping of this argument. The same logic could be used on any number of things. Angry about the new zoning ordinance? Get over it because there are homeless in your home town. The neighbors come in and steal your lawn mower? Give it a rest - the local factory is dumping pollution into the streams.
I am afraid the point of life is the pursuit of happiness. True there are greater causes out there but you know that still does not mean that you should stop fighting for your own personal happiness. I doubt anyone of us of here can say they have given up eating out because rice and ramen noodles help them pay for the funding they send to help displaced refugees. Its a video game forum about people who are pursuing their happiness via online game play.
hey OP, while I applaud your efforts, I must bring you back to reality.
They only need to provide you access to their service. That is what your $15 a month pays for. Every single MMORPG I have played has had "Game Experience May Change During Online Play" in some way or fashion on the box and/or in the EULA. From that point forward, the law is on their side. Nothing we can do or say changes that.
Fear not fanbois, we are not trolls, let's take off your tin foil hat and learn what VAPORWARE is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporware
"Vaporware is a term used to describe a software or hardware product that is announced by a developer well in advance of release, but which then fails to emerge after having well exceeded the period of development time that was initially claimed or would normally be expected for the development cycle of a similar product."
I am afraid the point of life is the pursuit of happiness. True there are greater causes out there but you know that still does not mean that you should stop fighting for your own personal happiness. I doubt anyone of us of here can say they have given up eating out because rice and ramen noodles help them pay for the funding they send to help displaced refugees. Its a video game forum about people who are pursuing their happiness via online game play.
Problem with your logic, though, is that you have yet to do anything about it. This is easily the 50th time i've seen this exact same post re-hashed. "Here's what SWG/SOW needs to do to make me happy...". or "Lets take SOE to court over their EULA". Ok... so do it. You aren't going to get results posting on forums. I can whine and cry to my friends about how badly i want to ask out girl X, but until i actually sack up and do it, i dont have the right to whine and complain. Seems like you have enough folks that you could get together a class action suit. Sit down with a lawyer for a bit, see if you have a case and DO IT.
Pursuing happiness... yes.
Complaining about lack of happiness.... no.
After you read the EULA, you may want to read this article about two other company's whose EULAs were not legally binding and therefore struck down.
You see, there really are laws about how you can market goods and services to people, and you really can't ignore them by writing yourself a permission slip to do so and calling it EULA.
"Part of the problem is that EULAs aren't negotiated; they are simply agreed to. There is no discussion between the user and the vendor. You click "Yes" to use the software on the vendor's terms or look elsewhere. I understand the interests of the company here, but it is hard to think of this kind of mass-market contracting as a bargaining process.
The tide may be turning. Earlier this year, a California appeals court struck down a mandatory arbitration clause in T-Mobile's EULA. In that case, Gatton v. T-Mobile, the court decided that, because the agreement was written by a party with superior bargaining strength and the customer was given no ability to negotiate—just a simple yes/no choice—the contract was unconscionable. To which I say: Well, duh—what took so long?
Another decision that should be of particular concern to PC Magazine readers was handed down recently in New York State. Blue Coat Systems had decided it could contractually forbid customers from criticizing its products. It did so by inserting an "antibenchmarking" clause into its EULA. Seems it didn't want any customers comparing its proxy servers with the competition's. The state attorney general's office filed suit, at which point Blue Coat quickly settled, paid a small fine, and removed the clause from its contracts. Amen.
I wonder what kind of EULAs we have violated by benchmarking products that come into PC Magazine Labs. Turns out we published a review of VMware Workstation without the company's approval, as required in its EULA. Yeah, sorry about that, guys.
Common sense tells me that EULAs are pitiful excuses for fair contracts. It is time for consumers to have a choice that extends beyond "yes" or "no." Note to lawyers: All EULAs are unconscionable.
Dan Costa"
Also, if you read SWGs EULA, and understand it, which I do, there are statements that inform the consumer that portions of the EULA contradict state consumer protection laws, and are therefore not legally enforceable.
Also, marketting a service they were planning to delete, and withholding that information from the public until after money was received has lead to fraud allegations. The Criminal Code certainly supercedes any EULA in my jurisdiction.
So, it may just be you who have been misled to the point that you honestly believe you have no rights, and can therefore be exploited by unethical coporations. See the post above for an indication that this era of consumer ignorance and coporporate exploitation is coming to an end.
I hope that's all helpful. I certainly found all of this information very enlightening as I began to question what SOE supporters have been saying, and actually do some research.
You have to understand, some people have an awful lot to lose by being honest with you at this point, but I'm not one of them, thankfully.
Hmm, you assume much. I have done several things about it and what I post isn't baseless whines nor am I sitting back "whining" without action. Let us start taking the legs out of your assumptions.
1. What I want:
I don't want SOE to bring back my game. I know this is not possible because they lack the knowledge about the old system and as it is a dying system - there is no reason to throw money into it.
I want simply want 1 of 2 things. Either SOE owns up to the fact that what they did was wrong or that the rest of the world never forgets that what SOE did was wrong.
2. What have I done about it?
A. I have made my point on quite a few sites, in quite a few threads telling people. Holding debates. Not simple troll slams but well thought out posts. I do so with reasoning and not with hostiliy. Not once have I been banned from this or any other site because of what I posted.
Why forum and game sites? Because they are full of people looking for a game. Wanting opinions and willing to discuss mmorpgs. Is it effective? I would argue that it is and its the best thing I can do with the the time and money that I have. Our reminders and lack of subscriptions are quite visible on that wonderful little subscription chart that gets flaoted around here so much.
B. I started my own site for a profession that was taken away. There the history cannot be swallowed by the web. There I reunite former Correspondents and guild members. I help reunite the ranger community so that we can find other games that we enjoy. There I promote things that I cannot mention here that help me get the game back that I loved. I am literally everywhere talking to everyone involved in those projects. I am actively using the site to unite communities and inform them of how they can help.
C. I am currently testing in one of those projects. I am one of the lead bug posters and test rigorously. I post on other forums occasionally when there is a need for more testers. And when the nearing grand test of them all comes about - I assure you I will be there as a Ranger.
D. I have not paid SOE another dime since they took away Ranger after leading me on. I haven't even logged in for a trial. Why should I become a stat for a game that rewarded me with deleting who I was while lying to me that they were fixing my profession?
3. What I can't do
I think I mentioned this before in several other posts. The court system takes money and time. I have an insufficient amount of both to take up a court battle. I logged my 4 years and XX,XXX amount of dollars winning my case and making my stand so I know more than most of what it takes today.
Many lawyers shy away from taking on corporations the size of Sony let alone should the matter of contention be something that is being left to be hashed out between larger companies who can afford to battle it out and that is what is happening. People are waiting for a precedent to be set in the court system by such a battle and then the flood gates open up.
Class Action Lawsuit? I would tack my name on it should it come about. I would promote it like any cause I undertake. In the meantime, I am here to remind you that some of us vets don't just sit there and whine as you put it. Doing something is a war on many fronts.
After you read the EULA, you may want to read this article about two other company's whose EULAs were not legally binding and therefore struck down.
You see, there really are laws about how you can market goods and services to people, and you really can't ignore them by writing yourself a permission slip to do so and calling it EULA.
"Part of the problem is that EULAs aren't negotiated; they are simply agreed to. There is no discussion between the user and the vendor. You click "Yes" to use the software on the vendor's terms or look elsewhere. I understand the interests of the company here, but it is hard to think of this kind of mass-market contracting as a bargaining process.
The tide may be turning. Earlier this year, a California appeals court struck down a mandatory arbitration clause in T-Mobile's EULA. In that case, Gatton v. T-Mobile, the court decided that, because the agreement was written by a party with superior bargaining strength and the customer was given no ability to negotiate—just a simple yes/no choice—the contract was unconscionable. To which I say: Well, duh—what took so long?
Another decision that should be of particular concern to PC Magazine readers was handed down recently in New York State. Blue Coat Systems had decided it could contractually forbid customers from criticizing its products. It did so by inserting an "antibenchmarking" clause into its EULA. Seems it didn't want any customers comparing its proxy servers with the competition's. The state attorney general's office filed suit, at which point Blue Coat quickly settled, paid a small fine, and removed the clause from its contracts. Amen.
I wonder what kind of EULAs we have violated by benchmarking products that come into PC Magazine Labs. Turns out we published a review of VMware Workstation without the company's approval, as required in its EULA. Yeah, sorry about that, guys.
Common sense tells me that EULAs are pitiful excuses for fair contracts. It is time for consumers to have a choice that extends beyond "yes" or "no." Note to lawyers: All EULAs are unconscionable.
Dan Costa"
The problem with both of those cases is that neither of them touch on the main facilities that make up an EULA. They attack minor aspects of them that hardly relate to the actual product. Gatton received the right to a trial as opposed to an arbitration. That doesnt mean the actual case vs the heart of the EULA will be won. BCS is just retarded. They attempted to silence end users of their products. There's no way that will hold up. It, once again tho, had nothing to do with the actual product.
You've proved that minor aspects of EULA's can be faulty, but you'll be taking on the parts of SOEs EULA that relate to the heart of the product itself. I would imagine that's going to be MUCH more difficult to fathom given the way they've structured it. I wont say you will or wont win, but bringing these up as precedence is shaky at best.
Quite true. I mean since the matters you listed above are also so near and dear to your heart, one can only imagine that you took a break in your schedule as a UN Ambassador to come into this video game forum and let us know thats what we should be writing about here.
/sarcasm off. I normally don't respond to posts like this but I am tired of the rubber stamping of this argument. The same logic could be used on any number of things. Angry about the new zoning ordinance? Get over it because there are homeless in your home town. The neighbors come in and steal your lawn mower? Give it a rest - the local factory is dumping pollution into the streams.
I am afraid the point of life is the pursuit of happiness. True there are greater causes out there but you know that still does not mean that you should stop fighting for your own personal happiness. I doubt anyone of us of here can say they have given up eating out because rice and ramen noodles help them pay for the funding they send to help displaced refugees. Its a video game forum about people who are pursuing their happiness via online game play.
O.k. what the heck, a little bit of information about me. I used to work for a government ministry that gave me the task of finding missing children. Find them I did, all but one. They weren't in very good shape when I found them though, I can tell you that much, but I'll spare you the details.In light of my work, I became aware of legislative gaps that were putting children at risk in our communities. I wrote papers to the government with input from police services and probation and parole, and was asked by the current government for a document on my findings.
After many years of research and advocacy we now have one of the best pieces of legislation ever drafted in this country that will give us a number of tools to deal with criminals that prey specifically on children.
So, that was my "day job." Now, I'm a professor and researcher only, and leave the front-line stuff to the next generation.
While I was doing this, guess what I did to relax and get energized for the next day. Yup, played SWG. You know who played it with me to relax after a stressful day job? A good friend who's a police officer, another good friend whose an E.R. doctor, and many who serve in the armed forces.
These folks paid for a service in good faith and formed an virtual community. The trouble was, what they paid for was taken away, in the case of the NGE, the day after their money was accepted. More trouble was that their virtual community was dismantled. More trouble was that when they tried to say something about it, they were systematically silenced, abused, or disparaged by the company that took their money under false pretenses and dismantled their online community.
So, my last consultation on significant legislation is now finished, and I'm very please with the result. I'll be done marking exams soon, and will have time off this summer.
I plan to take some of this time looking into the legislative mechanics that have allowed SOE to think they can take people's money under false pretenses. It's not as important as what I do in my "day job" admittedly; that's why I haven't done anything up to this point, and that's why I plan to do something about it on my time off.
Pointing to greater evils doesn't mean that no wrong was done, and it doesn't mean that allegations of fraud should be ignored either. This issue may be number 103 on my list of things to do, but it still deserves to be on the list.
After you read the EULA, you may want to read this article about two other company's whose EULAs were not legally binding and therefore struck down.
You see, there really are laws about how you can market goods and services to people, and you really can't ignore them by writing yourself a permission slip to do so and calling it EULA.
"Part of the problem is that EULAs aren't negotiated; they are simply agreed to. There is no discussion between the user and the vendor. You click "Yes" to use the software on the vendor's terms or look elsewhere. I understand the interests of the company here, but it is hard to think of this kind of mass-market contracting as a bargaining process.
The tide may be turning. Earlier this year, a California appeals court struck down a mandatory arbitration clause in T-Mobile's EULA. In that case, Gatton v. T-Mobile, the court decided that, because the agreement was written by a party with superior bargaining strength and the customer was given no ability to negotiate—just a simple yes/no choice—the contract was unconscionable. To which I say: Well, duh—what took so long?
Another decision that should be of particular concern to PC Magazine readers was handed down recently in New York State. Blue Coat Systems had decided it could contractually forbid customers from criticizing its products. It did so by inserting an "antibenchmarking" clause into its EULA. Seems it didn't want any customers comparing its proxy servers with the competition's. The state attorney general's office filed suit, at which point Blue Coat quickly settled, paid a small fine, and removed the clause from its contracts. Amen.
I wonder what kind of EULAs we have violated by benchmarking products that come into PC Magazine Labs. Turns out we published a review of VMware Workstation without the company's approval, as required in its EULA. Yeah, sorry about that, guys.
Common sense tells me that EULAs are pitiful excuses for fair contracts. It is time for consumers to have a choice that extends beyond "yes" or "no." Note to lawyers: All EULAs are unconscionable.
Dan Costa"
The problem with both of those cases is that neither of them touch on the main facilities that make up an EULA. They attack minor aspects of them that hardly relate to the actual product. Gatton received the right to a trial as opposed to an arbitration. That doesnt mean the actual case vs the heart of the EULA will be won. BCS is just retarded. They attempted to silence end users of their products. There's no way that will hold up. It, once again tho, had nothing to do with the actual product.
You've proved that minor aspects of EULA's can be faulty, but you'll be taking on the parts of SOEs EULA that relate to the heart of the product itself. I would imagine that's going to be MUCH more difficult to fathom given the way they've structured it. I wont say you will or wont win, but bringing these up as precedence is shaky at best.
I won't say I will or I won't win either, but I'm convinced this EULA issue needs to be challenged and clarified to prevent future consumer exploitation. That's my goal, to prevent consumers from being knowlingly misled and thereby exploited in the future.
People that pay for a service to relax and enjoy, should be able to do just that. They shouldn't have to stress about being lied to and having their money taken under false pretenses. They also shouldn't have to put up with all the frustration of a broken product either, but that's a secondary concern.
P.S. My main point in reponding to Sam though was that EULAs certainly are debatable. They are currently the subject of much debate, and some legal action that has gone in favour of consumers. His statement that there is no debate is inaccurate and misleading. I can't say I'm surprised by that, but I remain disappointed.
Now, my point about the money in the paragraph above. How many rangers do you know that would have continued their subscriptions had they not been led on by a Revamp promise that came with documentation? How many would have forked over the cash during the time that the NGE was being developed had they known their time and money invested in the game would amount to nada because their very profession (the core reason for their playing that character) was deleted. No options - just gone. The money paid in subscriptions being used to fund development of the very thing that would rob them their hobbies.
I still to this day have yet to hear one person justify that bait and switch. And this time, there is proof. Correspondence and documents of the Ranger revamp and the oh soo permanent proof of NGE being without Rangers.
So get those "200,000+ disgruntled veterans" together and file a class action. Go on, prove to us all the might of the SWG vet. Oh, yeah, that's right. You really have none of this "power" you guys always claim to have.In other news, Big Bird discovered to be, in fact, a man in a giant costume. Disgruntled SWG vets enraged and threaten to boycott.
You know, i've heard the "Never Forget" phrase applied to a few things in my lifetime. The holocaust... 9/11... basically some of the biggest tragedies in human history.
and now we're applying it to the SWG NGE...
Seriously? That's not at all a bit too far?
EDIT: i apologize ahead of time if anyone takes offense to the references. I just believe "never forgetting" something should be reserved for truly important events in the course of one's/a peoples life/lives.