3140 réponses à ce sujet

[Bcuz]

darth_lopez wrote...

DownyTif wrote...

darth_lopez wrote...

A lot.

I assume illiteracy allows 100% crit.

Modifié par Bcuz, 04 novembre 2011 - 12:19 .

[Wintermist]

Origin still hasn't done anything suspicious on my computer. Perhaps they patched it out.

[billy the squid]

Gatt9 wrote...

@billy the squid

The difference here is,  prove it was me who agreed to the terms.  Prove that the person who agreed wasn't under 18.  That makes this a whole different case from anything prior,  where two parties exchange goods under clearly mutually agreed on terms with full knowledge that both parties were legally able to enter into the agreement.

EA can't prove that.  EA can't prove who signed the contract.  EA can't even prove who played the game.  EA can't prove that the party who agreed was legally able to do so,  nor can EA claim that the parties should have known,  since there's no precedence for a video game scanning your tax files and your phone files.  EA can't prove anything.

Previously,  EA's fallback was Copyright law,  even though they couldn't prove you agreed to the EULA,  they could prove that you violated Copyright law.  They can't do that now,  there's nothing that gives them the fallback right to scan your tax files.

Initally whoever bought the game has formed the contract with EA and is as such liable for the acceptance of the terms. There is also the Third Party Rights Act which covers third party involvement in contracts. If the individual is a minor, but if the product has been bought by an adult the the adult still remain liable as they formed the contract by purchasing the game. In addition there exists Guardian ad litem, who is responsible for the actions of the minor. EA don't have to prove who accepted the EULA, only that it was accepted by the end user who ever that maybe, it is increadibly wide ranging.

Simply by purchasing the item a contract has been formed, via Offer, Intention to create a Legal Relationship, Acceptance and Consideration if those criteria are met it consitites a contract with the party. Neither are both parties required to mutually negotiate the terms of a contract for it to be valid nor do the terms of the contract have to be known, only that the terms exist and are accessible to the purchaser. These would be standard terms of business or a contract of adhesion, It is simply unworkable to allow all contracts to be negotiated individually. You could try it, but no business would ever accept it.

The recourse that can be used is to argue that the terms are in breach of Statute, Case Law or void for uncertainty principles. The formation of the contract and its legality are seperate from the enforcablity of the terms, contracts can be considered to legally bind parties, but certain terms can be severed if they are found to be unfair/uncertain, without rendering the contract void.

The problem of the scanning is that it is not reflective of the terms of the EULA the broadness of the terms potentially renders it void for uncertainty along with the potential breaches of the Data Protection Act. If one did not accept the EULA then one is in automatic breach of the copyright legislation as you are not licensed by the licensor to use the IP. The origin issue is not one of copyright or illegality of the contract based on acceptance, it is based on the enforcability and validity of the terms and whether they are infact void under statute, uncertainty principles or case law.

[Bogsnot1]

billy the squid wrote...
Another rather murky area is EA's ability to change the contract whenever they like, given the stipulations for time in the EULA, technically they can as it is their contract, but you accepted to use the product based on the previous contract, not this one. So, the contractual relationship ends, or there is renegotiation, but there won't be as it is a contract of adhesion. So, we are left with accept the contract or you have no license to use the product, it works out better for EA in that case than the consumer.

That where the EULA's fail under the provisions of contract law in many countries. A contract is a legally binding document to which both signatories agree to a particular set of condition. Neither party cannot change said contract without the express agreement of the other party. Nor can they make agreeing to the revised contract terms a requirement for providing fixes for faulty products. In other words, they cant sneak a changed EULA in with a patch or service pack.

EA can change the EULA as much as they like, but if I dont agree to it, then the old EULA still stands.

[billy the squid]

Bogsnot1 wrote...

billy the squid wrote...
Another rather murky area is EA's ability to change the contract whenever they like, given the stipulations for time in the EULA, technically they can as it is their contract, but you accepted to use the product based on the previous contract, not this one. So, the contractual relationship ends, or there is renegotiation, but there won't be as it is a contract of adhesion. So, we are left with accept the contract or you have no license to use the product, it works out better for EA in that case than the consumer.

That where the EULA's fail under the provisions of contract law in many countries. A contract is a legally binding document to which both signatories agree to a particular set of condition. Neither party cannot change said contract without the express agreement of the other party. Nor can they make agreeing to the revised contract terms a requirement for providing fixes for faulty products. In other words, they cant sneak a changed EULA in with a patch or service pack.

EA can change the EULA as much as they like, but if I dont agree to it, then the old EULA still stands.

Yep, the warranty stipulations in British law can't be undercut by a contract, although the contract can provide more if it wants, the same with preventing legal recourse, you can't do that. The old EULA issue is because it is based on the premise that they accepted the contract on those terms, for that Item. New contractual terms form a new contract between the existing parties or if both parties agree to the alteration which you do by accepting the new EULA.

On the patches or service pack it would have to be detrmined if it would come under the statute for warranties. If it did then it would come under the existing EULA, and no new EULA should be required to accept it, although they try and force it through in many cases. DLC i believe is a different matter as it is a new product, so technically I believe it requires a new contract or an amendment to the existing contract, to use in conjunction with the old product, but it is true you don't have to accept the DLC.

[darth_lopez]

DownyTif wrote...

@darth_lopez
I won't quote you, too big hehe. There is indeed a lot of sense in what you are saying. A side note for Impulse: I've been a user of Impulse in the past when it was owned by Stardock, but since the sell, I've not used it. And I'm not bound to GameStop... I buy where it's cheaper. If I require Impulse to play a GameStop game, well they will loose a potential customer in me.

I didn't know that about PB and to be honest, the only game it came with is CoD4. I don't play online except for CoD4. But I'll look into it, since I don't like the scanning fact.

For other softwares, you usually know it's gonna scan. When you install an antivirus to scan your computer, well, you know it will do it.

I should clarify, because I haven't really said it in other posts, that I'm not against the fact that Origin scans files. I'm against the fact that it scans everywhere where it doesn't belong and that you can't stop it unless you close the application, which result in closing the game you want to play. For a game like ME3, when you only want to play SP, why would I need Origin to scan my HDD to be sure I'm not cheating? Why would Origin need my personal info for that? Why would I need Origin?????????

And also, why Steam is capable of giving a great user experience, without scanning you personal files?

Like i said i'm not defending origin(it's an evil little thing) and here we have some common ground i suppose, there's no reason that it should scan all of your files but at least EA has teh courtesy to let you know it's gonna happen(and as far as i know this is not overtly illegal in the US) I just think the anger/rage against Origin would be better spent assualting all similar products(except for Anti-virus stuff..cause well it's their job and they make the world safer and we all make stupid mistakes sometimes and they suddenly become necessary) than specifically origin

as far as Steam Having a fully capable offline mode, and not actively scanning everything(though still scanning your "Personal files" it's not like games aren't "personal files") i never said Valve was made of fail like EA for the most part, they certaintly didn't think it through too far when they added that nice 2 year limit to inactivity...yes i realize how many days that is and realize it's 2 YEARS it's the principle of the thing i buy my haird dryer and if it sits in that corner and collects dust for 2 years before i use it that's what it does damnit >.<. I'm not sure if origin has an offline mode and frankly i would just hope Bioware carries enough wait they can swing ME 3 with out origin (they probably don't though EA being the publisher) i digress though.

In anycase perhaps it's brand loyalty on my part But Steam, and thereby valve, knew what they were doing they knew who they were marketing too and they know us and what we like. WHy do you think it is that DA2 and Crysis 2 were pulled from Steam? supposedly because of a dissagreement regarding DLC Distribution Steam wanted everything distributed through or at least available through steam for ease of access in comparrisson to the current system we are all too familiar with. Steam is for the Gamers 1st and their incredibly full personal money vaults 2nd. It just so happens that this decision was both Great PR for Steam and if successful would've made more munzies, however it's made EA look like an **** more than it already did. Steam will eventually have it's revenge ^^. Mostly when origin tanks cause it only sells EA games and no indie devs want to be called sell outs by launching products on Origin or Uplay(which is also a store)

I only used steam to compare teh 2 policies which are lets face it mostly identical, except what info it is they store exactly. I don't keep any particularly precious stuff on my gaming rig it's about 670GBs of games and probably another 200MB of papers written in german for german classes. So i don't care too much if it scans my junk but i can see why it would be bothersome, and i really don't condone it the fuss would just be better directed at the Whole practice and Furthering Consumer Privacy Rights on teh internet in the US than it would just on ME 3 (which will likely be on origin lets face it Valve did not release TF2 or CS without steam Why would EA do otherwise with origin?)

[darth_lopez]

SalsaDMA wrote...

darth_lopez wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

darth_lopez wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Modify? No.

Eliminate. EA needs to eliminate Origin.
 

well that would be preferable but it's not gonna happen now is it?

Depends on the customer response. 

Yes, cause ubisoft comopletely erradicated Uplay(they didn't thsi is sarcasm though they have been retroactively taking it away in a few cases), good call you certaintly know your VIdeo Game Current Events

If PC sales suddenly crashed for EA and Origin was shown to be the cause? You could bet your rear that they would need to take drastic steps. Investors would have their backs flogged if they didn't act on it.

Solution: Cut off the PC market. It doesn't rake in as much money as the consoles (as is apparently already the case if the numbers someone showed before were correct refering to BF 3 sales). Even there's no Precedent for your prediction in the PC market Uplay stills exists and is still used as a DRM even though i'm certain Ubisoft had a decline in sales I am one of those very unhappy customers with them. GR.FS might also still release with Uplay, HAWX2 still utilizes it i already brought up the from dust debocle and there's still some others that have it. Similarly Windows live is still around on the PC even though i'm sure that momentarily caused a dip in sales. You can try to find a situation where decreased sales actually affected the outcome of such a client on PC but i doubt you will find a good example as all the big names are still here.

[darth_lopez]

ColorMeSuprised wrote...


I understand what you are talking about. It's actually sad that it has gone so far with out much protest and suddenly it hits EA with full force, but you have to admit that EAs try was quite shameless.

I'm against Steam and I'm against permanent internet connection - actually, I'm against internet on my gaming pc and these programms/publisher FORCE me to use a internet connection i do not WANT to use. Two years age I didn't even HAVE internet and I couldn't play any game that needed a connection. And I'm sad that it goes further in this kind of direction.

Privacy laws in Germany are really strict and most people take these laws serious. If you want to break them, you have to be prepared for an onslaught. But only if it concerns more than just "one" community (in this case gamers).

Personally i'm not against steam It's just a distributor mostly (it has an offline mode that works nicely) and most of the games you can buy through it didn't require internet connectivity until recently where we see more and more Big name Pubs shooting for this style (Possibly most well known Ubisoft) But it's something that needs to stop. 
but yes we stand united in that we are against this sorta thing but wish the flames were fanned towards the general situation rather than just EA.

also in regards to privacy laws, I'm not sure how well we enforce those in the US they tend to be important here and we often taken them seriously when they are physical but digitally i don't know where we stand on it. However i do know with in the last 2 years congress was supposedly making a law that promoted Consumer privacy rights on the internet but from teh way origin acts i'd doubt it's being enforced or is as detailed as it needs to be.

[darth_lopez]

Gatt9 wrote...


Here's the thing.  EA reserves the right to collect data on you and your computer,  EA reserves the right to sue you for anything found on there,  but EA bars you from sueing them for searching your computer.

Further,  we still have the original problem,  EA's scanning every file.  What happens when that data gets breached,  and remember,  Lulzsec hacked them maybe 6 months ago.  Remember,  we're talking about a program that'll scan tax files and everything else.

Yes and while i'm against the Principle of them scanning everything i'd rather see it opposed on a alrge scale than on this one. Thus why i tried drawing attention to the EULA and teh Similarity to steam(though steam is awesome) to hopefully get people to think about what exactly they should be fighting against here the fact that Origin Scans everything or the fact that Multiple Programs out there Store Information from you, even if it's minute, despite my disregard for directory information i just think it's silly that directory information is some how not personal information most of the time... And on teh subject of computer hackers What hasn't been broken into recently that stores this sorta stuff? PS3 networks were, Nintendo had a breach these forums had a breach more stuff had a breach etc... Again this is being blind to the real problem and Focussing too much on one thing that's proliferating the problem.

We agreed it's not the EULA but the Action and we've seen that Multiple things repeat this action and are allowed to get away with it Why should origin be any more evil then steam and their storage of your personal information (even if i don't mind steam storing my personal information) Or Uplay, or Windows Live, or anything really (except antivirus) My point is either we must agree to trust everyone Or we must redefine what exactly it is we are trusting them with and Get this Ragefest focused in the right direction.

As far as punkbuster goes,  I don't play multiplayer games.  It means nothing to me.  It's not scanning anything of mine.  But every EA game will scan everything on my computer.  Also,  IIRC,  Punkbuster only scans what's present in RAM at the time,  not the harddrive.

thank you for edumacating me. I'm rather glad what i heard about PB was likely blown out of proportion liek i said i never read their Eula because i trusted a program packaged wtih what i paid for.

[darth_lopez]

Bcuz wrote...


I assume illiteracy allows 100% crit.

stop showing them my hand !

also my stream of text is over now >.>

[Metalrocks]

steam might scan some of your files, but at least not stuff it shoulndt. then if steam would scan everything like origin does, the outrage would be the same like now. i still prefer steam over origin. i have more trust in valve then EA.
i just hope bioware and EA can find a solution about ME3.

[Lumikki]

Metalrocks wrote...

steam might scan some of your files, but at least not stuff it shoulndt. then if steam would scan everything like origin does, the outrage would be the same like now. i still prefer steam over origin. i have more trust in valve then EA.
i just hope bioware and EA can find a solution about ME3.

Actually steam transfer data what it should not, out side you computer too. Example many other not game related program names what's in you computer. There is not even single reason for game company do this.

How ever, here is the issue. If player is playing single player game, transfering ANY information, even related games, it's still break of privacy. Because while game company is very interested game related information, company still can't take it from players computer without permission of the computer user. This means example what graphics card I use, game company can't even take that information out of my computer without my permission.

It's the different between game software checking my hardware to function and transfering that information out of my coumputer to some game company. Wanting to know something doesn't give someone to permission break someones else privacy. You allways need permission, when you enter someones private zone.

Now game company can use external softwares as they games distripution channel, that is they right. How ever, they can not break the consumers privacy rights anyway. Just because some stupid consumers doesn't understand this, doesn't make it okey.

In Finish laws it says, in statistics Act laws, what is about data collecting. Chapter 2 and moment 4, google transalation from finnish, that:

by Finnish laws...

Provision of information for statistical purposes is voluntary, unless subject to disclosure is required by law.

This means we don't have to give our information to others, because it's voluntary, unless it's required by law of the country to give it up. There is no law that requires us to give our computers information to private foreigner game company. Also something to been voluntary, the subject of data collection has to have ability say YES and NO for it. This laws does bind even our goverment as what they can collect.

Now question about EULA acception, is question about rules of how to use software and permission to use the software. Company can't legally force people to give up they privacy in some softwares EULA. Because EULA is ment for use of that software, not as question to accept or deny data collection. At least when the software is not defined as data collection software. It's game and consumers should expect game to be game. Not some data mining program.

Then there is the forceful bind of spyware and game togather to go around the issue. This makes it illegal, because consumer can't say NO to data collection and say yes to play the game.  Basicly saying the company is abusing meaning of EULA as trying to go beoynd it's rightful use. As trying to force two very different question in one question.

1. Do you want to play the game and accept rules of game software?
2. Do you allow data collection from you computer in this data collection software?

You can't just ask this, like they are one and same question. You can't just by pass laws, like one question will cover everyting.

Modifié par Lumikki, 04 novembre 2011 - 06:52 .

[Dariuszp]

My friend play Battlefield 3 without Origin. What ****ty EA could not do - pirates did. They made a crack that allow you to play Battlefield 3 without Origin.

For the rest - I don't buy ANY EA game that require their spyware to install. Simple.

[Ghost-621]

Dariuszp wrote...

My friend play Battlefield 3 without Origin. What ****ty EA could not do - pirates did. They made a crack that allow you to play Battlefield 3 without Origin.

For the rest - I don't buy ANY EA game that require their spyware to install. Simple.

Exactly. ****** off EA.

[Wintermist]

Without EA we would miss a lot of good games. I have nothing against any of the publishers or developers. If people don't like it, just don't buy the games. It's not like they're forcing them on you.

[Lumikki]

Wintermist wrote...

Without EA we would miss a lot of good games. I have nothing against any of the publishers or developers. If people don't like it, just don't buy the games. It's not like they're forcing them on you.

I don't think you get it. I make metaform so you can understand the issue.

--- Metaform ----

You buy TV from shop and they come to install it in you home. Now they don't just install the TV, but they also install camera in same room so they can watch what you are looking from TV. They do not sell TV's without the camera.

You point is, Don't buy TV if you don't want others watching you from camera. It's not like they are forcing you to buy the TV.

Our point is, by law it's guaranteed that when I buy TV, they can't also break my privacy with camera. Point been they are forcing camera to everyone who's buying the TV. That's illegal.

---- Metaform ends -----

Same situation in here with Origin client. To play games they are forcing ability collect data from our computer. There is laws agaist this and we try to remind the game company about those laws, because it's break of OUR privacy what is protected by LAWS.

Modifié par Lumikki, 04 novembre 2011 - 09:56 .

[MarauderESP]

Wintermist wrote...

Without EA we would miss a lot of good games. I have nothing against any of the publishers or developers. If people don't like it, just don't buy the games. It's not like they're forcing them on you.

this is a example:

well u see, lets put that there are abaut 500000 pc gamers that are against this...... let say ea release 4 games a year..... from those 4 games the 500k want to buy 1 of those games but wont do it becouse spy..origin issue, so the games tend to cost us 60€ x 500000 = 30000000€ , uhmm that seem to be a lot of money, or maibe they think they can afford to lose that sum becouse what they are going to get selling our info compensate it....

in any case i dont trust ea for forcing a spyware on my system to play a game, so i hope BW tell them at least let the sp campaing of ME3 free of origin <_<

[Wintermist]

Well, I've been monitoring my Origin for a long long time now, and it hasn't scanned anything. Whatever I read about it they seem to have taken out by now. It's up to you to decide what to do. Me, I'm gonna be playing Mass Effect 3 no matter what.

[MarauderESP]

Wintermist wrote...

Well, I've been monitoring my Origin for a long long time now, and it hasn't scanned anything. Whatever I read about it they seem to have taken out by now. It's up to you to decide what to do. Me, I'm gonna be playing Mass Effect 3 no matter what.

fair enough, that is your choice and i respect that, mine is if they force origin on my retail copy for sp campaing then i wont be playing it, but now they add mp to me3 and for mp ull need origin, so give option if u want to play mp install origin if not u cant play mp, and ill say sure no mp anyway im not going to use that..

PS.: the program start scaning when u start installing, then will do it again when ur playing or when they send the signal, or never do it again but that is not the problem, the problem is that is scanning things that dont belong to ea or origin, if they want to know something they can ask...... but that will be too troublesome, is better entering sneaky and get what they need..

[Mister Mida]

Wintermist wrote...

Without EA we would miss a lot of good games. I have nothing against any of the publishers or developers. If people don't like it, just don't buy the games. It's not like they're forcing them on you.

If EA would close shop this very moment I wouldn't shed one tear. They had a good thing going with all the LotR games they made (with exeption of Conquest which sucked when I checked it out). And that was the only reason I bought EA games back in the day. After that I only played the underdeveloped Brütal Legend, and they had to buy Bioware to 'make' me buy their games.

I've yet to see a good game of them these days that's developed in-house, and not made by imported devs like Bioware.

Modifié par Mister Mida, 04 novembre 2011 - 11:00 .

[Shermos]

Why has this thread gone on for 59 pages? As I posted earlier, ME3 isn't even likely to require Origin to play, only activate, which I think most of can deal with.

It's either going to require Origin or it won't. There's no sense ****ing about it until we see what actually happens. If you want to do something slightly constructive about it, Why not write a letter to EA or Bioware voicing your concerns and dissatisfaction.

[Sethan_1]

Shermos wrote...

Why has this thread gone on for 59 pages? As I posted earlier, ME3 isn't even likely to require Origin to play, only activate, which I think most of can deal with.

It's either going to require Origin or it won't. There's no sense ****ing about it until we see what actually happens. If you want to do something slightly constructive about it, Why not write a letter to EA or Bioware voicing your concerns and dissatisfaction.

The thread continues because a lot of folks who want to buy ME3 find a requirement for Origin in its current state to be a deal-breaker, and Bioware/EA has not definitively said yet whether it will be required.  There is a hope that a strong showing here will get them to make a decision in the direction of less offensive DRM.

[Trekfanboy]

I ... HATE ... Origin.

I bought three games on sale via Origin earlier this year and since those purchase dates I've STILL been unable to play the games. I've downloaded updates, contacted Origin support, and visited multiple forums asking for help. The end result is that Origin still doesn't work.

Some suit-wearing idiots at EA who never play games decided they didn't like Steam and wanted to do their own online game delivery service. Unfortunately, it sucks. Steam isn't perfect, but I've NEVER been in a situation where I was unable to play a game because of a problem with Steam for more than ONE day.

The only thing that Origin is doing is killing online EA sales of PC games. If a PC game isn't available via Steam it isn't going on my computer(s). I've pre-ordered ME3 for the Xbox 360 but if EA doesn't offer ME3 on Steam then I won't get it for the PC.

It's sad, because I bought BOTH the PC (via Steam) and Xbox 360 versions of ME and ME2 and I bought both the PC and Xbox 360 versions of all the DLC ... so EA is only going to make half as much potential revenue from me by using Origin.

[Dariuszp]

Or just shut up all and install EA spyware

[marstor05]

tis true unfortunately, i'm erring more and more to just buying ME3 on the PS3. The horror stories we are hearing and experiencing with Origin just make it a no go on the pc.