Originally posted by Spathotan If all you people can put this much time and effort, into making these post and knowing everything about the judical system and the EULA/ESRB, then why arent you the ones taking SoE to court instead of here bitching?
Because nobody has a real case.
OMG, they killed my game. I'm calling Cochrane.
Shuting down one game, and bringing up what most people here consider crap, under the same name is an insult and abominable tactics.
But going to court, against Sony!, is a completely different matter.
What I'm saying is exactly that. Even with my layman's understanding of basic IT law, I know there is no case. Not one that wouldn't involve insane ammounts of money for no real gain.
SWG is not big enough, and everyone in business knows extremly well that SW license is free cash and merchandising rip-off. Take it any way you want, no matter what kind of a fan you are, but that's what it comes down to.
2. Persuing such a legal course is both expensive and time consuming [especially if you expect the company to drag the process out]. In addition, even if you win you could loose depending on what your objective is [ie revenge or getting a game / product back].
They only need to drag it out for 1-2 years.
In this time, they would scrap SWG anyway, or come out with new version. At this point, the free publicity generated would allow them to use the new revenue from SWG 2 to show how compassionate they are, and they'd pay off the "damages", refunding everyone for purchase of original copy by sending them two free 3-month station passes. The losses incured through that would be severly outweighed by the good press generated.
Microsoft tactics. When they were ordered to pay millions of dollars a day, they said they do not have the cash. Instead, they paid the government in their own products. So in (1997?-2001? forgot exactly when it happened) they paid this fine off by giving the state an equivalent of cash ammount in copies of Windows 3.0, Windows 3.1, Microsoft Word 1.0 and Microsoft Word 2.0, and similar. Clever, wasn't it?
It sounds great, so great in fact, I pitty those who canceled - Some deluded SWG fanboi who pities me. I don't like it when you say things. - A Vanguard fan who does too. 09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0
Let me give you an example of what I am talking about. A few years ago I fell down a flight of stairs and tore up my knees. Was in a bed for 6 months and a wheelchair for a year. This happened at work so I was entitled to Workmen's Compensation.
Now Workmen's Compensation has set laws regarding what insurance companies have to pay and not pay. They pay 70% of the weekly wages, all medical, and a reward at the end based on the disability of the individual. The reward is a calculation based on the percentage of the disability afterwards.
Medical consisted of 3 surgeries and 4 months of rehab. The biggest problem being that the insurance fought me tooth and nail on every single point. Forcing me to go to court just to get a MRI.
I went before the judge and according to the laws I was supposed to get a little over $8,000 for a final reward. Instead the judge, after reviewing my case, gave me 4 times that along with keeping my medical open with the insurance company. So no matter what happens in the future with my knees I am covered.
The reason the judge went beyond the law was in part because of the insurance company being screwy. If they had handled it normally I wouldnt have gotten squat I believe. But it shows no matter what the laws or contracts say a judge can go beyond them.
And it is quite possible when we get our day in court with SOE a judge might see it and realize all that SOE did violates the contract and find in favor of those suing SOE. We dont know. A judge might sit there and say "SOE did nothing wrong by what I see here. I find in favor of the defendant." or he/she might say "Eventhough SOE has a EULA stating they can change the game, I find their tactics to be quite underhanded and dirty. I find in favor of the plantiff."
No such thing as an ironclad contract. Believe what you want. But it doesnt exist.
Originally posted by kaibigan34 And it is quite possible when we get our day in court with SOE a judge might see it and realize all that SOE did violates the contract and find in favor of those suing SOE. We dont know. A judge might sit there and say "SOE did nothing wrong by what I see here. I find in favor of the defendant." or he/she might say "Eventhough SOE has a EULA stating they can change the game, I find their tactics to be quite underhanded and dirty. I find in favor of the plantiff."
No such thing as an ironclad contract. Believe what you want. But it doesnt exist.
Kai
Then what?
You win the case.
Do you ask for damages? $10k for each subscriber? For which period? Pre-cu? Pre-pub 9? Pre-pub 6? Pre-NGE? Pre-NGE2? Pre-pub 12.1? Everyone? Per account?
Do they get ordered to put the old servers back up? How do you regulate that they are online? How do you enforce that they put same number back again? Is it subscription based? And since the trial ends in winter 2008, how good will a game developed in 2002/2003 still look?
I have no problem suing them. But what would you ask? Refund on original box, or the whole subscription? How would you prove your ownership? How about gamecards? Credit cards will have expired by then.
Yes, lawsuits can be won. But serious question. What would you ask in return?
Lawsuits against SOE are as pointless as playing SWG atm. lol anyone who actually sues a company about a game is in need of psychiatric treatment, i'm sorry. ITS A DAMN GAME. STOP PLAYING IT.
Only wasting more money trying to win a case YOU WILL NOT WIN.. Only making yourselves (Plaintiffs) look more idiotic and foolish. Think of the money you could be using to try other games. Grow up and MOVE ALONG........stop wasting your parents money to carry on with a useless gesture of defiance. As for myself, I am just saving my dough for a future MMO that looks worth a hoot. One will come along sooner or later.
Need that MMO fix? Just post on forums its cheaper..... Most MMo are just like each other atm.
Originally posted by Rekrul Originally posted by kaibigan34 And it is quite possible when we get our day in court with SOE a judge might see it and realize all that SOE did violates the contract and find in favor of those suing SOE. We dont know. A judge might sit there and say "SOE did nothing wrong by what I see here. I find in favor of the defendant." or he/she might say "Eventhough SOE has a EULA stating they can change the game, I find their tactics to be quite underhanded and dirty. I find in favor of the plantiff."
No such thing as an ironclad contract. Believe what you want. But it doesnt exist.
Kai
Then what?
You win the case.
Do you ask for damages? $10k for each subscriber? For which period? Pre-cu? Pre-pub 9? Pre-pub 6? Pre-NGE? Pre-NGE2? Pre-pub 12.1? Everyone? Per account?
Do they get ordered to put the old servers back up? How do you regulate that they are online? How do you enforce that they put same number back again? Is it subscription based? And since the trial ends in winter 2008, how good will a game developed in 2002/2003 still look?
I have no problem suing them. But what would you ask? Refund on original box, or the whole subscription? How would you prove your ownership? How about gamecards? Credit cards will have expired by then.
Yes, lawsuits can be won. But serious question. What would you ask in return?
Doesnt matter what you win. The point is you won. Personally I would force SOE to make a public apology to all subscribers of all their games along with the immediate termination of Smedley. Lastly 6 months of free station access to all current station subscribers.
Originally posted by blingblade Lawsuits against SOE are as pointless as playing SWG atm. lol anyone who actually sues a company about a game is in need of psychiatric treatment, i'm sorry. ITS A DAMN GAME. STOP PLAYING IT. Only wasting more money trying to win a case YOU WILL NOT WIN.. Only making yourselves (Plaintiffs) look more idiotic and foolish. Think of the money you could be using to try other games. Grow up and MOVE ALONG........stop wasting your parents money to carry on with a useless gesture of defiance. As for myself, I am just saving my dough for a future MMO that looks worth a hoot. One will come along sooner or later. Need that MMO fix? Just post on forums its cheaper..... Most MMo are just like each other atm.
And that is exactly the additude that allows companies like SOE and EA Games to get away with the tactics they use. Because of people who think nothing can be done or refuse to fight back. They count on people like you to not only refuse to fight back but also to put down anyone who does try to fight back.
Originally posted by Rekrul Originally posted by Spathotan If all you people can put this much time and effort, into making these post and knowing everything about the judical system and the EULA/ESRB, then why arent you the ones taking SoE to court instead of here bitching?
Because nobody has a real case.
OMG, they killed my game. I'm calling Cochrane.
Shuting down one game, and bringing up what most people here consider crap, under the same name is an insult and abominable tactics.
But going to court, against Sony!, is a completely different matter.
What I'm saying is exactly that. Even with my layman's understanding of basic IT law, I know there is no case. Not one that wouldn't involve insane ammounts of money for no real gain.
SWG is not big enough, and everyone in business knows extremly well that SW license is free cash and merchandising rip-off. Take it any way you want, no matter what kind of a fan you are, but that's what it comes down to.
You hit the nail on the head, that was the hidden message in my ignorant post. Even if everybody that is angry were to gather enough cash for a big lawyer or whatever, Sony would win no matter what, or like somebody else has said prior to this, will just hold the case in limbo. Its a hopeless battle, which is why ive gotten over it quite awhile ago and just use the whole thing for amusement.
"There's no star system Slave I can't reach, and there's no planet I can't find. There's nowhere in the Galaxy for you to run. Might as well give up now." Boba Fett
Originally posted by Tauceti Originally posted by Spathotan If all you people can put this much time and effort, into making these post and knowing everything about the judical system and the EULA/ESRB, then why arent you the ones taking SoE to court instead of here bitching?
Because;
1. This is a geneveal discussion on views and what could happen.
2. Persuing such a legal course is both expensive and time consuming [especially if you expect the company to drag the process out]. In addition, even if you win you could loose depending on what your objective is [ie revenge or getting a game / product back].
3. This is simply a way to vent...lol
IMO,
Tauceti
Yea that is another big matter here besides cost. What exactly would these people ask for? Pre-cu rollback? Pre-cu servers? Refunds for all the time they played? Or would they just play the innocent victim card and ask for X amount of cash for "pain and suffering"?
"There's no star system Slave I can't reach, and there's no planet I can't find. There's nowhere in the Galaxy for you to run. Might as well give up now." Boba Fett
Originally posted by azhrarn Originally posted by Spathotan If all you people can put this much time and effort, into making these post and knowing everything about the judical system and the EULA/ESRB, then why arent you the ones taking SoE to court instead of here bitching?
Bitching is free. Taking a corporation the size of Sony to court is prohibitively expensive. Even were every disatisfied former player of the game to miraculously find some way to unite, each giving $100 for each account they'd held, this money would not be enough to do the job. Realism is ugly, and realisticly, there would be no winning such a lawsuit, even were the facts and terms more concrete and accessible. Money is the hinge on this thing. Private citizens are at a severe disadvantage, and companies like Sony bank on that. Literally.
Read my two post above this for some other comments. Also along with everything that has been said by you, me, Tauceti and Rek, they would also have to deal with Sony being an overseas company, Japanese. Would the trial be held in Japan, or America, different laws apply in given location.
"There's no star system Slave I can't reach, and there's no planet I can't find. There's nowhere in the Galaxy for you to run. Might as well give up now." Boba Fett
Originally posted by Spathotan Originally posted by Rekrul Originally posted by Spathotan If all you people can put this much time and effort, into making these post and knowing everything about the judical system and the EULA/ESRB, then why arent you the ones taking SoE to court instead of here bitching?
Because nobody has a real case.
OMG, they killed my game. I'm calling Cochrane.
Shuting down one game, and bringing up what most people here consider crap, under the same name is an insult and abominable tactics.
But going to court, against Sony!, is a completely different matter.
What I'm saying is exactly that. Even with my layman's understanding of basic IT law, I know there is no case. Not one that wouldn't involve insane ammounts of money for no real gain.
SWG is not big enough, and everyone in business knows extremly well that SW license is free cash and merchandising rip-off. Take it any way you want, no matter what kind of a fan you are, but that's what it comes down to.
You hit the nail on the head, that was the hidden message in my ignorant post. Even if everybody that is angry were to gather enough cash for a big lawyer or whatever, Sony would win no matter what, or like somebody else has said prior to this, will just hold the case in limbo. Its a hopeless battle, which is why ive gotten over it quite awhile ago and just use the whole thing for amusement.
You dont know. You just think.......... Your opinion is..... But you dont know for sure. That is my point. I have seen Ironclad Contracts be torn apart by a judge that hated corporations and I have seen a contract not worth the paper it was printed on pass by easily. Doesnt matter what the contract/EULA/TOS/etc says. All that matters is the situation involved.
I took on Blizzard. Warcraft II destroyed my video card. I had several licensed techs back me up. And eventhough you have that EULA that says they are not responsible for any damage guess what? I got a new video card from them. 2 years after the fact but still I did beat them.
A company was putting out new computer products every year. Once a new product was released they would scrap the previous product. Meaning no more support. One guy got tired of it and formed a group that got a class action suit against the company. Eventhough the company was doing nothing illegal the judge found for the group and the company was forced to completely "debug" a previous product before working on the new one. Cost them alot. Cant remember the company offhand for certain but I believe it was Apple.
You can take on corporations and win. That is one of the good things about the USCA. The little guy can make a difference. Only problem is small minded people who think everything is impossible or beyond them so they refuse to try and think its cool to put down everyone else who wants to try. Personally I think its because they are afraid the other person who tries might actually succeed and make them look foolish for not trying. But that is just my opinion.
There are currently several suits against SOE. Several class actions and most because of the NGE. I am not apart of any of them but I would sign my name if one of them contacted me. I dont know if they would win or not. I am 50/50 on the subject. Depends on who hears the cases and who is representing.
But the bottom line is none of you know for certain what would happen. You can throw all the legal jargon you want. You can quote the EULA til your fingers bleed. None of it will matter. What will matter is what the people in that courtroom do. If any of them ever see a courtroom. Another thing is many corporations will try to settle out of court first. That way there is minimal to zero publicity.
You know though, im sure the scope of EULA can only take them so far. I bet that a lot of it wouldn't cover all the huge changes they have made to the game. I don't think a lot of it would hold up in court if people challenged it. You know they can only change the content so much before it would border on a bait and switch type deal, or at least thats what I believe.
Doesnt matter what you win. The point is you won. Personally I would force SOE to make a public apology to all subscribers of all their games along with the immediate termination of Smedley. Lastly 6 months of free station access to all current station subscribers.
Kai
Not to you.
But it would matter A LOT to the attorney team, that would accept and win the case. No office, that would dare take on Sony, would do it pro-bono.
Apology is all fine, but words are cheap. They don't pay a 1-2 year litigation. Even if you do win, your costs are not 0.
Also, the only people that can remove Smedley, are the stock holders. If the stock performance were to drop, and this were directly traced back to him, he'd be probably forced to resign.
However, SOE's revenue did not drop. As a matter of fact, it has improved, due to cutting the slack out of their operations. Merging maintanance between SWG, EQ and EQ2 has surely netted them quite a few savings, in both terms of employment as well as fixed costs.
And still, even if Smedly is such a bad boss, when was the last time you heard that an evil boss got sued out of a privately owned company? Possible the one he almost founded. Nothing would keep people of this world happier, than the ability to sue moronic superiors. So far, no such law has been passed.
Doesnt matter what you win. The point is you won. Personally I would force SOE to make a public apology to all subscribers of all their games along with the immediate termination of Smedley. Lastly 6 months of free station access to all current station subscribers.
Kai
Not to you.
But it would matter A LOT to the attorney team, that would accept and win the case. No office, that would dare take on Sony, would do it pro-bono.
Apology is all fine, but words are cheap. They don't pay a 1-2 year litigation. Even if you do win, your costs are not 0.
Also, the only people that can remove Smedley, are the stock holders. If the stock performance were to drop, and this were directly traced back to him, he'd be probably forced to resign.
However, SOE's revenue did not drop. As a matter of fact, it has improved, due to cutting the slack out of their operations. Merging maintanance between SWG, EQ and EQ2 has surely netted them quite a few savings, in both terms of employment as well as fixed costs.
And still, even if Smedly is such a bad boss, when was the last time you heard that an evil boss got sued out of a privately owned company? Possible the one he almost founded. Nothing would keep people of this world happier, than the ability to sue moronic superiors. So far, no such law has been passed.
With all the cases against SOE now there is obviously enough attornies out there willing to work pro-bono. No way its all rich SWG players footing the bill. As for me I have an attorney friend who already said he would take the case should I ask. His info is the same as I said before. Anything is possible in a court of law. But I dont want to clog up the other cases against SOE right now. Dont need their attornies using alot of cases as an excuse for more time.
As for getting Smedley taken out as CEO. He is an elected officer of the company. He can be removed. There is a soft drink company, fastfood company, and oil company all lost their CEOs thanks to suits against the company.
Anyway in closing. Anything can happen in a court of law. Maybe good or bad. You dont know. You could have the best case in the world and lose because the judge hates your tie. Or you could have the worst case possible and win because the jury is sympathetic to you. You never know. Anyone who says "You wont win!" or "You will win!" knows absolutely nothing about law and are talking out their rumps.
As for getting Smedley taken out as CEO. He is an elected officer of the company. He can be removed. There is a soft drink company, fastfood company, and oil company all lost their CEOs thanks to suits against the company.
Were they "evil"? Or did they screw up?
Enron lost entire management due to billion dollar fraud. The company went down because of it. Yes, courts were involved, but not because they would be evil.
Smedley is elected. And if it turns out he caused damages to the company, he would have been removed.
But having a pro-bono going against Sony is unlikely. Even if they choose to work for free, what happens if they do lose? Who will pay then?
There's plenty of people who would want to sue. But despite what the gamers say, SOE's business side is completely different that what can be read on the forums. And this isn't some random defense of their practices, but there's more to SOE than just SWG. And if it so be, Smedley's time will come.
Secondly, we have know idea what the true exit polls from the CU or NGE are; only what SOE reported and since it has pretty much been proven that SOE has low creditabilty with the majority of it player base and even professional reviewers, the exit poll are suspect. However, the fact they had a large number of people leave after the CU and even more after the NGE it is more likely that most didn't approve of any of the changes. Now you could argue how one interpets request for change and how thos changes can be implement; a wise company would have done a better job of listening to it player base and interpeting request for change which SOE hasn't done. Also, a wise company would have realized what has happen a revert back to the model that was more successfull than it's current system.
Only SOE has subscription numbers. And business decisions, even if poor, are not illegal. This is a matter of violation or false advertising. This is what makes it a decidively different matter.
Exit polls were conducted, records are kept. Whether they would stand in court is hardly a question. It's the material on which the decisions were made.
If *Car Maker* conducts a poll, and determines that people want only 2 seats in a car, then said car maker goes out of business after public backlass for turning their favorite SUV into a two seater is not an illegal afair nor a violation of any laws. SWG went through a change of brand. They are no longer a MMORPG. Similarly, a restaurant may transform from 5 star culinary experience into a goth nightclub, while still retaining the same name. How they pull it off, or whether they incur the wrath of gastronomic comunity is another matter, but it's not illegal.
This has little to with SOE or SWG. I'm merely discussing this from legal perspective. Remember, SOE did not just blindly do what they did. They confirmed and tested every single aspect of the change from legal, financial, strategic and cooperative point of view with regard to all aspects, both Sony, SOE, LEC, as well as other federal and state laws. It's what majority of their company is set up to do.
No sane company in US would dare ditch disabled players, if they had a single legal point that would stand in court. They would not risk making such changes if it would violate their own policies, or any of corporate legislation.
The only thing you could do here, is a class action lawsuit, that would dispute the extent to which a product may change. But these are extremly long-winded, expensive up-the-hill battles. And they would have some incredibly nasty side-consequences, hurting US markets most.
If such a lawsuit would be made, every single time an online game provider would make a change, they would face a court trial. You changed color on my +5 helmet of enchanting, lets sue. You removed the tree outside of Lake of Sorrows, lets sue. You changed font in login screen, lets sue.
There's many many discontent and above all oportunistic people out there, who would give (sometimes literaly, and of their own action) their left arm, a finger or one testicle if they could make some money through court litigation. And this is happening daily.
The most I think SWG is guilty of is a "bait and switch" when they did ToOW. Promising rewards in the game that would either never be released or be taken out almost immediately was definetly an unethical business decision, and borders on promising somebody one thing, then giving them another once they've paid money. $OE got caught with their pants down on this one, which is why I think they offered a refund.
As far as EULA's, I'm actually not aware of one actually being upheld in court. (though i would tend to think they would be.) Though it's also because we are in relatively new territory in regards to these kinda things, so there really isn't too much precedent. Though bait and switch they were clearly guilty of, but since they offered a refund, they are now basically insulated from that charge.
In short, enough with the talk of legal action, it ain't happening. The only thing that is going to get Sony's attention is if the market reacts negatively towards Sony in the future because of such shady business practices. in other words, increase the hate lol jk.
Originally posted by kaibigan34 Originally posted by Rekrul
Doesnt matter what you win. The point is you won. Personally I would force SOE to make a public apology to all subscribers of all their games along with the immediate termination of Smedley. Lastly 6 months of free station access to all current station subscribers.
Kai Not to you.
But it would matter A LOT to the attorney team, that would accept and win the case. No office, that would dare take on Sony, would do it pro-bono.
Apology is all fine, but words are cheap. They don't pay a 1-2 year litigation. Even if you do win, your costs are not 0.
Also, the only people that can remove Smedley, are the stock holders. If the stock performance were to drop, and this were directly traced back to him, he'd be probably forced to resign.
However, SOE's revenue did not drop. As a matter of fact, it has improved, due to cutting the slack out of their operations. Merging maintanance between SWG, EQ and EQ2 has surely netted them quite a few savings, in both terms of employment as well as fixed costs.
And still, even if Smedly is such a bad boss, when was the last time you heard that an evil boss got sued out of a privately owned company? Possible the one he almost founded. Nothing would keep people of this world happier, than the ability to sue moronic superiors. So far, no such law has been passed. With all the cases against SOE now there is obviously enough attornies out there willing to work pro-bono. No way its all rich SWG players footing the bill. As for me I have an attorney friend who already said he would take the case should I ask. His info is the same as I said before. Anything is possible in a court of law. But I dont want to clog up the other cases against SOE right now. Dont need their attornies using alot of cases as an excuse for more time.
As for getting Smedley taken out as CEO. He is an elected officer of the company. He can be removed. There is a soft drink company, fastfood company, and oil company all lost their CEOs thanks to suits against the company.
Anyway in closing. Anything can happen in a court of law. Maybe good or bad. You dont know. You could have the best case in the world and lose because the judge hates your tie. Or you could have the worst case possible and win because the jury is sympathetic to you. You never know. Anyone who says "You wont win!" or "You will win!" knows absolutely nothing about law and are talking out their rumps.
Kai
Highly doubtful a lawyer would work pro-bono. Nor would he achieve much fame doing such work pro-bono. IT law is something that is not the easiest thing to navigate. The judge would most likely in most cases defer to corporations, since the game was billed as an open ended evolving game. Whether or not you like the changes is not something for a judge to decide, but the consumer in paying or not paying.
Not to mention imagine the impact such a move could have on the IT market as a whole. Even things as simple as hotfixes or patches one would have to worry about being sued. Talk about killing any chance at a small time company making an MMO. How about people suing Microsoft because they don't like SP2 or something of the sort? (granted a lot of people hate Microsoft, but hating is not the same thing as being criminal.)
How many IT professionals here actually think suing $OE would actually be a sound move? Any of them developers who want to get sued for patching a product, since technically it changes the product? Rekrul seems to be an IT proffessional, or a lawyer with a bit of IT law knowledge. Same with a few others who have doubted this.
And kai, the fact that there are lawsuits against $OE about the NGE means absolutely nothing other than some boneheads think they can win a case. Not to mention it's not a judges job to rule guilt or innocence based on whether or not he likes the company. When deciding damages one can take into account their character, but not in deciding guilt or innocence. Such a view of judges creates a society where frivilous lawsuits are a way of life. The one against $OE would be exactly that.
Comments
OMG, they killed my game. I'm calling Cochrane.
Shuting down one game, and bringing up what most people here consider crap, under the same name is an insult and abominable tactics.
But going to court, against Sony!, is a completely different matter.
What I'm saying is exactly that. Even with my layman's understanding of basic IT law, I know there is no case. Not one that wouldn't involve insane ammounts of money for no real gain.
SWG is not big enough, and everyone in business knows extremly well that SW license is free cash and merchandising rip-off. Take it any way you want, no matter what kind of a fan you are, but that's what it comes down to.
In this time, they would scrap SWG anyway, or come out with new version. At this point, the free publicity generated would allow them to use the new revenue from SWG 2 to show how compassionate they are, and they'd pay off the "damages", refunding everyone for purchase of original copy by sending them two free 3-month station passes. The losses incured through that would be severly outweighed by the good press generated.
Microsoft tactics. When they were ordered to pay millions of dollars a day, they said they do not have the cash. Instead, they paid the government in their own products. So in (1997?-2001? forgot exactly when it happened) they paid this fine off by giving the state an equivalent of cash ammount in copies of Windows 3.0, Windows 3.1, Microsoft Word 1.0 and Microsoft Word 2.0, and similar. Clever, wasn't it?
You just have to love big business. "They care"
Did I mention heir lawyers eat children?
Shayde - SWG (dead)
Proud member of the Cabal.
It sounds great, so great in fact, I pitty those who canceled
I don't like it when you say things. - A Vanguard fan who does too.
09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0
Let me give you an example of what I am talking about. A few years ago I fell down a flight of stairs and tore up my knees. Was in a bed for 6 months and a wheelchair for a year. This happened at work so I was entitled to Workmen's Compensation.
Now Workmen's Compensation has set laws regarding what insurance companies have to pay and not pay. They pay 70% of the weekly wages, all medical, and a reward at the end based on the disability of the individual. The reward is a calculation based on the percentage of the disability afterwards.
Medical consisted of 3 surgeries and 4 months of rehab. The biggest problem being that the insurance fought me tooth and nail on every single point. Forcing me to go to court just to get a MRI.
I went before the judge and according to the laws I was supposed to get a little over $8,000 for a final reward. Instead the judge, after reviewing my case, gave me 4 times that along with keeping my medical open with the insurance company. So no matter what happens in the future with my knees I am covered.
The reason the judge went beyond the law was in part because of the insurance company being screwy. If they had handled it normally I wouldnt have gotten squat I believe. But it shows no matter what the laws or contracts say a judge can go beyond them.
And it is quite possible when we get our day in court with SOE a judge might see it and realize all that SOE did violates the contract and find in favor of those suing SOE. We dont know. A judge might sit there and say "SOE did nothing wrong by what I see here. I find in favor of the defendant." or he/she might say "Eventhough SOE has a EULA stating they can change the game, I find their tactics to be quite underhanded and dirty. I find in favor of the plantiff."
No such thing as an ironclad contract. Believe what you want. But it doesnt exist.
Kai
You win the case.
Do you ask for damages? $10k for each subscriber? For which period? Pre-cu? Pre-pub 9? Pre-pub 6? Pre-NGE? Pre-NGE2? Pre-pub 12.1? Everyone? Per account?
Do they get ordered to put the old servers back up? How do you regulate that they are online? How do you enforce that they put same number back again? Is it subscription based? And since the trial ends in winter 2008, how good will a game developed in 2002/2003 still look?
I have no problem suing them. But what would you ask? Refund on original box, or the whole subscription? How would you prove your ownership? How about gamecards? Credit cards will have expired by then.
Yes, lawsuits can be won. But serious question. What would you ask in return?
Lawsuits against SOE are as pointless as playing SWG atm. lol anyone who actually sues a company about a game is in need of psychiatric treatment, i'm sorry. ITS A DAMN GAME. STOP PLAYING IT.
Only wasting more money trying to win a case YOU WILL NOT WIN.. Only making yourselves (Plaintiffs) look more idiotic and foolish. Think of the money you could be using to try other games. Grow up and MOVE ALONG........stop wasting your parents money to carry on with a useless gesture of defiance. As for myself, I am just saving my dough for a future MMO that looks worth a hoot. One will come along sooner or later.
Need that MMO fix? Just post on forums its cheaper..... Most MMo are just like each other atm.
You win the case.
Do you ask for damages? $10k for each subscriber? For which period? Pre-cu? Pre-pub 9? Pre-pub 6? Pre-NGE? Pre-NGE2? Pre-pub 12.1? Everyone? Per account?
Do they get ordered to put the old servers back up? How do you regulate that they are online? How do you enforce that they put same number back again? Is it subscription based? And since the trial ends in winter 2008, how good will a game developed in 2002/2003 still look?
I have no problem suing them. But what would you ask? Refund on original box, or the whole subscription? How would you prove your ownership? How about gamecards? Credit cards will have expired by then.
Yes, lawsuits can be won. But serious question. What would you ask in return?
Doesnt matter what you win. The point is you won. Personally I would force SOE to make a public apology to all subscribers of all their games along with the immediate termination of Smedley. Lastly 6 months of free station access to all current station subscribers.
Kai
Be a sheep or a lion. Its your choice.
Kai
OMG, they killed my game. I'm calling Cochrane.
Shuting down one game, and bringing up what most people here consider crap, under the same name is an insult and abominable tactics.
But going to court, against Sony!, is a completely different matter.
What I'm saying is exactly that. Even with my layman's understanding of basic IT law, I know there is no case. Not one that wouldn't involve insane ammounts of money for no real gain.
SWG is not big enough, and everyone in business knows extremly well that SW license is free cash and merchandising rip-off. Take it any way you want, no matter what kind of a fan you are, but that's what it comes down to.
You hit the nail on the head, that was the hidden message in my ignorant post. Even if everybody that is angry were to gather enough cash for a big lawyer or whatever, Sony would win no matter what, or like somebody else has said prior to this, will just hold the case in limbo. Its a hopeless battle, which is why ive gotten over it quite awhile ago and just use the whole thing for amusement.
"There's no star system Slave I can't reach, and there's no planet I can't find. There's nowhere in the Galaxy for you to run. Might as well give up now."
Boba Fett
Because;
1. This is a geneveal discussion on views and what could happen.
2. Persuing such a legal course is both expensive and time consuming [especially if you expect the company to drag the process out]. In addition, even if you win you could loose depending on what your objective is [ie revenge or getting a game / product back].
3. This is simply a way to vent...lol
IMO,
Tauceti
Yea that is another big matter here besides cost. What exactly would these people ask for? Pre-cu rollback? Pre-cu servers? Refunds for all the time they played? Or would they just play the innocent victim card and ask for X amount of cash for "pain and suffering"?
"There's no star system Slave I can't reach, and there's no planet I can't find. There's nowhere in the Galaxy for you to run. Might as well give up now."
Boba Fett
Read my two post above this for some other comments. Also along with everything that has been said by you, me, Tauceti and Rek, they would also have to deal with Sony being an overseas company, Japanese. Would the trial be held in Japan, or America, different laws apply in given location.
"There's no star system Slave I can't reach, and there's no planet I can't find. There's nowhere in the Galaxy for you to run. Might as well give up now."
Boba Fett
Wow this thread got a little off topic .
1# Darth vader does use his lightsaber during live events
2# Rek is right there is no case
3# What tactics does Sony use that are against the law ?
(cant use bait and switch , they offered refunds )
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
OMG, they killed my game. I'm calling Cochrane.
Shuting down one game, and bringing up what most people here consider crap, under the same name is an insult and abominable tactics.
But going to court, against Sony!, is a completely different matter.
What I'm saying is exactly that. Even with my layman's understanding of basic IT law, I know there is no case. Not one that wouldn't involve insane ammounts of money for no real gain.
SWG is not big enough, and everyone in business knows extremly well that SW license is free cash and merchandising rip-off. Take it any way you want, no matter what kind of a fan you are, but that's what it comes down to.
You hit the nail on the head, that was the hidden message in my ignorant post. Even if everybody that is angry were to gather enough cash for a big lawyer or whatever, Sony would win no matter what, or like somebody else has said prior to this, will just hold the case in limbo. Its a hopeless battle, which is why ive gotten over it quite awhile ago and just use the whole thing for amusement.
You dont know. You just think.......... Your opinion is..... But you dont know for sure. That is my point. I have seen Ironclad Contracts be torn apart by a judge that hated corporations and I have seen a contract not worth the paper it was printed on pass by easily. Doesnt matter what the contract/EULA/TOS/etc says. All that matters is the situation involved.
I took on Blizzard. Warcraft II destroyed my video card. I had several licensed techs back me up. And eventhough you have that EULA that says they are not responsible for any damage guess what? I got a new video card from them. 2 years after the fact but still I did beat them.
A company was putting out new computer products every year. Once a new product was released they would scrap the previous product. Meaning no more support. One guy got tired of it and formed a group that got a class action suit against the company. Eventhough the company was doing nothing illegal the judge found for the group and the company was forced to completely "debug" a previous product before working on the new one. Cost them alot. Cant remember the company offhand for certain but I believe it was Apple.
You can take on corporations and win. That is one of the good things about the USCA. The little guy can make a difference. Only problem is small minded people who think everything is impossible or beyond them so they refuse to try and think its cool to put down everyone else who wants to try. Personally I think its because they are afraid the other person who tries might actually succeed and make them look foolish for not trying. But that is just my opinion.
There are currently several suits against SOE. Several class actions and most because of the NGE. I am not apart of any of them but I would sign my name if one of them contacted me. I dont know if they would win or not. I am 50/50 on the subject. Depends on who hears the cases and who is representing.
But the bottom line is none of you know for certain what would happen. You can throw all the legal jargon you want. You can quote the EULA til your fingers bleed. None of it will matter. What will matter is what the people in that courtroom do. If any of them ever see a courtroom. Another thing is many corporations will try to settle out of court first. That way there is minimal to zero publicity.
Kai
Kai
Not to you.
But it would matter A LOT to the attorney team, that would accept and win the case. No office, that would dare take on Sony, would do it pro-bono.
Apology is all fine, but words are cheap. They don't pay a 1-2 year litigation. Even if you do win, your costs are not 0.
Also, the only people that can remove Smedley, are the stock holders. If the stock performance were to drop, and this were directly traced back to him, he'd be probably forced to resign.
However, SOE's revenue did not drop. As a matter of fact, it has improved, due to cutting the slack out of their operations. Merging maintanance between SWG, EQ and EQ2 has surely netted them quite a few savings, in both terms of employment as well as fixed costs.
And still, even if Smedly is such a bad boss, when was the last time you heard that an evil boss got sued out of a privately owned company? Possible the one he almost founded. Nothing would keep people of this world happier, than the ability to sue moronic superiors. So far, no such law has been passed.
Kai
Not to you.
But it would matter A LOT to the attorney team, that would accept and win the case. No office, that would dare take on Sony, would do it pro-bono.
Apology is all fine, but words are cheap. They don't pay a 1-2 year litigation. Even if you do win, your costs are not 0.
Also, the only people that can remove Smedley, are the stock holders. If the stock performance were to drop, and this were directly traced back to him, he'd be probably forced to resign.
However, SOE's revenue did not drop. As a matter of fact, it has improved, due to cutting the slack out of their operations. Merging maintanance between SWG, EQ and EQ2 has surely netted them quite a few savings, in both terms of employment as well as fixed costs.
And still, even if Smedly is such a bad boss, when was the last time you heard that an evil boss got sued out of a privately owned company? Possible the one he almost founded. Nothing would keep people of this world happier, than the ability to sue moronic superiors. So far, no such law has been passed.
With all the cases against SOE now there is obviously enough attornies out there willing to work pro-bono. No way its all rich SWG players footing the bill. As for me I have an attorney friend who already said he would take the case should I ask. His info is the same as I said before. Anything is possible in a court of law. But I dont want to clog up the other cases against SOE right now. Dont need their attornies using alot of cases as an excuse for more time.
As for getting Smedley taken out as CEO. He is an elected officer of the company. He can be removed. There is a soft drink company, fastfood company, and oil company all lost their CEOs thanks to suits against the company.
Anyway in closing. Anything can happen in a court of law. Maybe good or bad. You dont know. You could have the best case in the world and lose because the judge hates your tie. Or you could have the worst case possible and win because the jury is sympathetic to you. You never know. Anyone who says "You wont win!" or "You will win!" knows absolutely nothing about law and are talking out their rumps.
Kai
Enron lost entire management due to billion dollar fraud. The company went down because of it. Yes, courts were involved, but not because they would be evil.
Smedley is elected. And if it turns out he caused damages to the company, he would have been removed.
But having a pro-bono going against Sony is unlikely. Even if they choose to work for free, what happens if they do lose? Who will pay then?
There's plenty of people who would want to sue. But despite what the gamers say, SOE's business side is completely different that what can be read on the forums. And this isn't some random defense of their practices, but there's more to SOE than just SWG. And if it so be, Smedley's time will come.
Exit polls were conducted, records are kept. Whether they would stand in court is hardly a question. It's the material on which the decisions were made.
If *Car Maker* conducts a poll, and determines that people want only 2 seats in a car, then said car maker goes out of business after public backlass for turning their favorite SUV into a two seater is not an illegal afair nor a violation of any laws.
SWG went through a change of brand. They are no longer a MMORPG. Similarly, a restaurant may transform from 5 star culinary experience into a goth nightclub, while still retaining the same name. How they pull it off, or whether they incur the wrath of gastronomic comunity is another matter, but it's not illegal.
This has little to with SOE or SWG. I'm merely discussing this from legal perspective. Remember, SOE did not just blindly do what they did. They confirmed and tested every single aspect of the change from legal, financial, strategic and cooperative point of view with regard to all aspects, both Sony, SOE, LEC, as well as other federal and state laws. It's what majority of their company is set up to do.
No sane company in US would dare ditch disabled players, if they had a single legal point that would stand in court. They would not risk making such changes if it would violate their own policies, or any of corporate legislation.
The only thing you could do here, is a class action lawsuit, that would dispute the extent to which a product may change. But these are extremly long-winded, expensive up-the-hill battles. And they would have some incredibly nasty side-consequences, hurting US markets most.
If such a lawsuit would be made, every single time an online game provider would make a change, they would face a court trial. You changed color on my +5 helmet of enchanting, lets sue. You removed the tree outside of Lake of Sorrows, lets sue. You changed font in login screen, lets sue.
There's many many discontent and above all oportunistic people out there, who would give (sometimes literaly, and of their own action) their left arm, a finger or one testicle if they could make some money through court litigation. And this is happening daily.
The most I think SWG is guilty of is a "bait and switch" when they did ToOW. Promising rewards in the game that would either never be released or be taken out almost immediately was definetly an unethical business decision, and borders on promising somebody one thing, then giving them another once they've paid money. $OE got caught with their pants down on this one, which is why I think they offered a refund.
As far as EULA's, I'm actually not aware of one actually being upheld in court. (though i would tend to think they would be.) Though it's also because we are in relatively new territory in regards to these kinda things, so there really isn't too much precedent. Though bait and switch they were clearly guilty of, but since they offered a refund, they are now basically insulated from that charge.
In short, enough with the talk of legal action, it ain't happening.
The only thing that is going to get Sony's attention is if the market reacts negatively towards Sony in the future because of such shady business practices. in other words, increase the hate lol jk.
Kai
Not to you.
But it would matter A LOT to the attorney team, that would accept and win the case. No office, that would dare take on Sony, would do it pro-bono.
Apology is all fine, but words are cheap. They don't pay a 1-2 year litigation. Even if you do win, your costs are not 0.
Also, the only people that can remove Smedley, are the stock holders. If the stock performance were to drop, and this were directly traced back to him, he'd be probably forced to resign.
However, SOE's revenue did not drop. As a matter of fact, it has improved, due to cutting the slack out of their operations. Merging maintanance between SWG, EQ and EQ2 has surely netted them quite a few savings, in both terms of employment as well as fixed costs.
And still, even if Smedly is such a bad boss, when was the last time you heard that an evil boss got sued out of a privately owned company? Possible the one he almost founded. Nothing would keep people of this world happier, than the ability to sue moronic superiors. So far, no such law has been passed.
With all the cases against SOE now there is obviously enough attornies out there willing to work pro-bono. No way its all rich SWG players footing the bill. As for me I have an attorney friend who already said he would take the case should I ask. His info is the same as I said before. Anything is possible in a court of law. But I dont want to clog up the other cases against SOE right now. Dont need their attornies using alot of cases as an excuse for more time.
As for getting Smedley taken out as CEO. He is an elected officer of the company. He can be removed. There is a soft drink company, fastfood company, and oil company all lost their CEOs thanks to suits against the company.
Anyway in closing. Anything can happen in a court of law. Maybe good or bad. You dont know. You could have the best case in the world and lose because the judge hates your tie. Or you could have the worst case possible and win because the jury is sympathetic to you. You never know. Anyone who says "You wont win!" or "You will win!" knows absolutely nothing about law and are talking out their rumps.
Kai
Highly doubtful a lawyer would work pro-bono. Nor would he achieve much fame doing such work pro-bono. IT law is something that is not the easiest thing to navigate. The judge would most likely in most cases defer to corporations, since the game was billed as an open ended evolving game. Whether or not you like the changes is not something for a judge to decide, but the consumer in paying or not paying.
Not to mention imagine the impact such a move could have on the IT market as a whole. Even things as simple as hotfixes or patches one would have to worry about being sued. Talk about killing any chance at a small time company making an MMO. How about people suing Microsoft because they don't like SP2 or something of the sort? (granted a lot of people hate Microsoft, but hating is not the same thing as being criminal.)
How many IT professionals here actually think suing $OE would actually be a sound move? Any of them developers who want to get sued for patching a product, since technically it changes the product? Rekrul seems to be an IT proffessional, or a lawyer with a bit of IT law knowledge. Same with a few others who have doubted this.
And kai, the fact that there are lawsuits against $OE about the NGE means absolutely nothing other than some boneheads think they can win a case. Not to mention it's not a judges job to rule guilt or innocence based on whether or not he likes the company. When deciding damages one can take into account their character, but not in deciding guilt or innocence. Such a view of judges creates a society where frivilous lawsuits are a way of life. The one against $OE would be exactly that.