• Valve has a new "Agreement Binding Arbitration Clause" and it's not good at all.
    179 replies, posted
So what was your final reasoning then? Sony just finished the PSN debacle so they weren't allowed to do it? Or it's better for the consumer to not even have the option of a class action?
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;37032220]Your points had already been covered previously in the thread. Its your problem if you didn't read the rest of the thread or just missed them. So, I say again, the read the damned thread.[/QUOTE] I'm sorry even after reading the thread I don't quite see how my points were covered apart from learning it doesn't apply to me! Gosh. edit: I presume you mean this thread and not the sony one
[QUOTE=Falubii;37032249]So what was your final reasoning then? Sony just finished the PSN debacle so they weren't allowed to do it? Or it's better for the consumer to not even have the option of a class action?[/QUOTE]They weren't even finished, they were still getting hit with new ones when they changed theirs. And yes, its much better for the individuals if they prosecute on their own than in a class action because they get to have adequate representation in their case and will not get screwed over so badly by the lawyers.
I think Valve's lawyers will probably destroy the consumer in arbitration most of the time.
[QUOTE=Lonestriper;37032259]I'm sorry even after reading the thread I don't quite see how my points were covered apart from learning it doesn't apply to me! Gosh. edit: I presume you mean this thread and not the sony one[/QUOTE]Your entire post was built on the idea that arbitration was the only method, which they clearly point out is not the case and that you can still take them to court. In fact, they'll cover the costs for small claims which would be the case for almost all cases brought against them regardless of who wins, meaning the individual doesn't lose anything to their lawyers. [editline]1st August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Falubii;37032291]I think Valve's lawyers will probably destroy the consumer in arbitration most of the time.[/QUOTE]They can still go to court. They can still file lawsuits.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;37032305]Your entire post was built on the idea that arbitration was the only method, which they clearly point out is not the case and that you can still take them to court. In fact, they'll cover the costs for small claims which would be the case for almost all cases brought against them regardless of who wins, meaning the individual doesn't lose anything to their lawyers.[/QUOTE] So Valve maintain their status of being less shitty than everyone else, good on them
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;37032305] They can still go to court. They can still file lawsuits.[/QUOTE] Taking away a class action lawsuit is like allowing self defense, but only with your feet. You can barely pack a punch without it.
incoming quotes tl;dr valve are asses, not as much as sony and ea though [QUOTE=Maloof?;37028107]So basically it just protects Valve from people being greedy capitalist dicks and saying 'I didn't get this game on x release date I got it the day after so I'm suing you $9999 for emotional damages' and instead facilitates the use of smaller courts and limited (most would say 'reasonable') compensation for whatever has gone wrong? Sounds good to me[/QUOTE] Thing is, it's your right to be a "greedy capitalist dick" and sue in a normal court. Valve is making you waive that right. [QUOTE=Super Muffin;37029128]You said it right here... "That is the most idiotic reason to not be upset about your [B]rights being taken away[/B]" Your rights are hardly being taken away. Read the official notice. They're agreeing to fix the issue and reimburse you, while paying for your legal fees if you still want to sue. (If the suit meets their criteria for viable action.)[/QUOTE] Yeah, they are. Maybe just not the rights you're thinking about. [QUOTE=imasillypiggy;37029467]There were 5 threads about it using the same sensationalist headline. Some people tried to explain how this basically changes nothing but too many people were screaming "Herp derp valve is taking away our freedom". People bandwagon so hard that they don't even bother reading the actual thing they are complaining about.[/QUOTE] It's a matter of principle, really. This won't change much for most people, yeah, and it's a lot less deplorable than the way EA and Sony did it, hell, as a European it won't change anything for me. [QUOTE=lavacano;37029662]I for one refuse to acknowledge such a debate until I see an unbiased source. If someone has a text copy of the old SSA around (doubt it but hey), I can use a diff tool (I'd rather not read through all 13 sections again just to play Spot The Difference).[/QUOTE] As far as I can tell, section 12 is completely new. [QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;37029712][QUOTE]This Section does not prevent you from bringing your dispute to the attention of any federal, state, or local government agencies that can, if the law allows, seek relief from us for you[/QUOTE][/QUOTE] You're still not allowed to file any civil lawsuits. I assume what this part means is that you can still go to the police and have the state sue Valve. [QUOTE=Falubii;37031613] That was 8 months ago. Don't even pretend Valve isn't getting special treatment here.[/QUOTE] Well, they kinda aren't, as Valve isn't trying to prevent litigation outright, they're just making it go through smaller channels. [QUOTE=Glorbo;37031755]I was just looking for that, thanks. In any case, I pretty much think this is bullshit. What if Valve has a similar incident like Sony had and has its users info and credentials leaked? This is a very reasonable case for a class action lawsuit, and they're basically saying "welp, if we fuck up royally, non of that is our fault". It's stupid.[/QUOTE] Well, actually... [QUOTE]However, this Section does not apply to the following types of claims or disputes, which you or Valve may bring in any court with jurisdiction: (i) claims of infringement or other misuse of intellectual property rights, including such claims seeking injunctive relief; and (ii) claims related to or arising from any alleged unauthorized use, piracy or theft.[/QUOTE] I'd say that qualifies as unauthorized use. [QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;37032305]Your entire post was built on the idea that arbitration was the only method, which they clearly point out is not the case and that you can still take them to court. In fact, they'll cover the costs for small claims which would be the case for almost all cases brought against them regardless of who wins, meaning the individual doesn't lose anything to their lawyers. [editline]1st August 2012[/editline] They can still go to court. They can still file lawsuits.[/QUOTE] Only in small claims court. [QUOTE]YOU UNDERSTAND THAT YOU AND VALVE ARE GIVING UP THE RIGHT TO SUE IN COURT AND TO HAVE A TRIAL BEFORE A JUDGE OR JURY.[/QUOTE]
I don't see what it so bad about this. I've seen a few people saying they aren't going to use steam anymore because of it but lots of other companies have stuff like this already. It only stops a class action lawsuit.
Wow the facepunchian devotion to Valve and Steam has reached religious levels meanwhile if [I]anyone[/I] else took away consumer rights in this manner you'd all be going apeshit. Yeah Valve has made some great games and Steam is generally a good platform but unconditional loyalty doesn't benefit anyone.
YOU UNDERSTAND THAT YOU AND VALVE ARE GIVING UP THE RIGHT TO SUE IN COURT AND TO HAVE A TRIAL BEFORE A JUDGE OR JURY. [editline]1st August 2012[/editline] Its funny because we actually should have an option to decline the new EULA and continue using Steam under the old one, at least thats what it's like in Europe, hitting the I agree button to technically be able to doesnt change it either.
[QUOTE=demoguy08;37032963]meanwhile if [I]anyone[/I] else took away consumer rights in this manner you'd all be going apeshit.[/QUOTE] Well, that would be the case. Y'know, if EA and Sony didn't already take away consumer rights in a [I]worse[/I] manner.
[QUOTE=Super Muffin;37027678][B]e:[/B] And as the article failed to mention, [B]TL;DR [/B] So with this agreement update if they screw up they still fix the problem and nobody can serve them a crap class-action "damages" suit. It also prevents large individual lawsuits looking for obscene amounts of money for negligible reasons, while agreeing to respond to problems in a suitable way. If you disagree with the reimbursement Valve gives you, they will pay for your arbitration or a small claims court visit to solve the dispute. Sounds good to me. Valve's official notice: [URL]http://store.steampowered.com/news/8523/[/URL][/QUOTE] So this is just to stop troll cases in America, I'm okay with this.
I'd dread to think logging into Steam one day, finding my entire games library empty, and an update news pops up saying 'Oh no! Everyone's permanantly lost all their games! Sorry!'
More like "Hi we disabled your subscription and we think we have the right to do it because our EULA says so, fuck the EU and it's laws! Have a nice day!"
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37033389]More like "Hi we disabled your subscription and we think we have the right to do it because our EULA says so, fuck the EU and it's laws! Have a nice day!"[/QUOTE] Yeah you're kinda not bound to that clause of the EULA if it's against the law in your country. The EULA even specifically states that that clause may only apply partially in the EU, in which case Valve agrees to skip it completely. As in, as an EU citizen, you can probably still sue them without breaking any contracts. Stop being so sensationalist.
As always [url=http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/08/01/steams-sub-agreement-prohibits-class-action-lawsuits/]Rock Paper Shotgun seems to be better at journalism[/url] then any other game news site out there (even while they're technically a blog and not a news site) because they asked a legal expert. [quote]So in the end, like most of what’s written in a EULA, it’s more about what the company hopes will be law, rather than what actually is. And as ever, until such inclusions are legally challenged, no one has any idea if they’re at all enforceable. Which in Valve’s case will take a group starting a class action lawsuit against them. Law, eh?[/quote]
I personally have no qualms with this.
[QUOTE=Falubii;37031778]Nothing there was taken out of context. If you think something was then by all means point it out. Sony had amended a clause to their EULA that waived the end user's right to file a class action lawsuit. If they didn't agree they couldn't use PSN. If you don't agree with Valve's amendment to the EULA that also waives the end user's right to file a class action law suit, you aren't able to use Steam. Personally, I don't think it's a big deal to add that to the EULA, but there is a pretty obvious double standard on this forum.[/QUOTE] I don't think its so much the context of the posts but the timing Sony had. If I remember rightly it was on the back of people threatening to file a class action against them in relation to the hacking. [editline]1st August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Glorbo;37031932]So what? The timing doesn't change the fact that it's rubbish. They're preventing you from holding them to justice in case they fuck up, and that's just wrong.[/QUOTE] Uh no its not, you don't need a class action law suit for justice. Valve actually set out in their agreement that they will reimburse costs of people who take them to an arbitrator (including a small claims court). [editline]1st August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Lonestriper;37031998]Arbitration is basically a big fuck you to consumers who have a genuine, common grievance. I recall the figures being around 90% of cases being ruled in favor of the company under individual arbitration, as it effectively removes the power individuals have to unite and present their case as more than just an individual problem. It's regressive and unfairly weighted to those who implement it, disallowing people to make a collective and concerted effort is tantamount to suppressing their freedom to assemble, it's like banning unions because 'fuck you' etc. So Valve is going the way of most other video-game giants, essentially allowing them to wipe the slate clean if they deliver an obviously substandard, broken product. The people treating Valve differently than Sony are only kidding themselves.[/QUOTE] But if you read the SSA it says that you can still take it to a court, which will look at things a lot more objectively.
[QUOTE=Jsm;37034718] Uh no its not, you don't need a class action law suit for justice. [/QUOTE] Well you don't need an RPG to defend yourself either, but if you make me fight a tank with my bare hands I will lose. There's no way I can beat a large corporation in court about an individual case.
[QUOTE=Glorbo;37034938]Well you don't need an RPG to defend yourself either, but if you make me fight a tank with my bare hands I will lose. There's no way I can beat a large corporation in court about an individual case.[/QUOTE] You need to work on your analogies. You do realize that most class-actions crash and burn right? Even if you do succeed, depending on the cut for the legal team and the amount of people in the class, you could win less than $1 USD. It's usually a better idea to go the individual route.
But who would want to sue valve? They are such nice people.
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;37028487]When Sony/EA did this, most of FP flipped their shit. Steam does it, it's ok? Please explain to me how in any way at all it's ok that by clicking "I Agree" you just signed away your right to use the justice system.[/QUOTE] Congratulations to everyone who rated me box and DIDN'T READ THE STEAM SUBSCRIBER AGREEMENT. It says, and I quote: [QUOTE=Steam Subscriber Agreement Section 12]YOU AND VALVE AGREE TO RESOLVE ALL DISPUTES AND CLAIMS BETWEEN US IN INDIVIDUAL BINDING ARBITRATION. THAT INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, ANY CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO: (i) ANY ASPECT OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN US; (ii) THIS AGREEMENT; OR (iii) YOUR USE OF STEAM, YOUR ACCOUNT OR THE SOFTWARE. IT APPLIES REGARDLESS OF WHETHER SUCH CLAIMS ARE BASED IN CONTRACT, TORT, STATUTE, FRAUD, UNFAIR COMPETITION, MISREPRESENTATION OR ANY OTHER LEGAL THEORY.[/QUOTE] Just a couple paragraphs down: [QUOTE][B]YOU UNDERSTAND THAT YOU AND VALVE ARE GIVING UP THE RIGHT TO SUE IN COURT AND TO HAVE A TRIAL BEFORE A JUDGE OR JURY.[/B][/QUOTE] [QUOTE][B]YOU AND VALVE AGREE NOT TO BRING OR PARTICIPATE IN A CLASS OR REPRESENTATIVE ACTION, PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ACTION OR COLLECTIVE ARBITRATION, EVEN IF AAA�s PROCEDURES OR RULES WOULD OTHERWISE ALLOW ONE.[/B][/QUOTE] I read the agreement and called out FP's hypocrisy on the topic. Got replies like this: [QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;37028505]You could try reading the thread. Its not that hard.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=legolover122;37028641]Reeeeaaad the threeeeaaad.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=The Baconator;37030582]I love how people think they are clever because they think they found something hypocritical about Steam, but in reality they wrong or misinformed[/QUOTE] I read the thread. Least you guys could have done was read the actual Steam Subscriber Agreement and see that it is exactly like the EA/Sony agreements. I noticed you guys had little to nothing to say about [URL="http://www.facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1202144&p=37031613&viewfull=1#post37031613"]this [/URL]post. Facepunch's hypocrisy is flying high on this topic.
I'm so worried about not being able to get a $5 settlement in a class-action lawsuit against Valve. I'll never use Steam again.
[QUOTE=fenwick;37035730]I'm so worried about not being able to get a $5 settlement in a class-action lawsuit against Valve. I'll never use Steam again.[/QUOTE] Say that when you lose a 5k steam account or something.
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37035916]Say that when you lose a 5k steam account or something.[/QUOTE] If you lost an account with 5k worth of games on it you would not be taking a class action suit against Valve, you would be suing them yourself.
Well what if they shut down like 1000 people's accounts because they idled on TF2 servers or something.
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;37035554]Congratulations to everyone who rated me box and DIDN'T READ THE STEAM SUBSCRIBER AGREEMENT. It says, and I quote: Just a couple paragraphs down: I read the thread. I then read the user agreement, and was amazed by how many of you got it dead wrong. My point still stands.[/QUOTE] And FP will continue claiming that Apple fans are the brainless yes-men without the slightest bit of irony...
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;37036215]Well what if they shut down like 1000 people's accounts because they idled on TF2 servers or something.[/QUOTE] Then they shouldn't have idled on TF2 since Valve has a zero-tolerance? If they have a 5k account they should've thought about the consequences.
I'm so fucking confused why do I need to sue valve, again?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.