Gatt9 wrote...
psiasterisk wrote...
SalsaDMA wrote...
Courts don't act unless someone press charges, and pressing charges costs alot of money when you are moving against a company like EA.
Didn´t the US supreme court recently rule that class action lawsuits could be contractually excluded, as they are (at least they were the last time I read it) in the english version of the EULA?
That, paired with the high cost of an individual lawsuit against a corporation like EA, would mean that an american customer would practically have no way of suing in the case of transgressions.
We're back to square 1 again though.
First, EA has to prove who signed the contract, and that it was legal for them to do so. Since it's completely impossible for EA to prove who signed the contract, the clause is worthless. Everyone and their grandmother will claim their 8 year old relative installed it, and clicked "I agree", and since EA can't prove otherwise, the clause is void.
Further, the whole thing is destined to backfire on EA even if we assume the clause is true. Everyone just has to file in their local courts, and EA goes bankrupt. If all 5 million people who bought Battlefield 3 file, EA has to send an attorney to every hearing. 5 million court cases, x lawyer fees plus travel expenses means EA is done. Even 100,000 people filing would be sufficient to wipe out all profit.
That's before we even talk about what happens if people start filing internationally.
Because all it takes is one person to file, and for the court to find that EA's search is unwarranted invasion of privacy, and we'll see more than sufficient civil suits to bankrupt EA.
Which is going to happen in the near future when the whole thing gets hacked, because let's be serious here, Lulzsec hacked Sony a half dozen times, hacked Bethseda, hacked Bioware. Someone else hacked Steam this week. It's not going to take long for Origins to be ripped apart.
This doesn't end well for EA no matter what, whether it's death by governments burying them, or death by customers burying them, if they don't axe Origin in it's current incarnation, they're dead.
I sense we have been here before haven't we.
I have already explained, with some of the associated case law, that only acceptance is required in unilateral contracts such as this, EA does not have to prove who accepted it, only that it was accepted, which was done by clicking on okay when installing the game. Much in the same way property owners are liable for the acts which occur on their property, in the case of minors. Or EA can also simply check the origin account it is linked to, the owner is directly responsible should they choose to proceed against them personally.
The assertion that one must be present when signing a contract has been rendered irrelevant, as such an obvious work around, would not be allowed by any legislative system or court from simple matters of expediency to causing all contractual negotiations on a practical level to fall apart.
You do not file in local court, you are bound to undergo arbitration, if the independent arbitrator determined that the stipuation of the contract are void or the entire contract is void you will recieve damages for either breach of contract or under Tort. If the contract is subsequently voided, technically then you can attempt legal action, but since you will already have been awarded damages and/or costs, it is likely to be seen as a flippant action with no bearing and dismissed as such.
EA will also not bear the costs, arbitrators and courts have the power to allocate cost orders to either party, so you will potentially bear the cost of the legal actionif you loose, both your own and EA's costs, doesn't seem like EA will have to declare insolvency under your chapter 11, simply because millions of people made flippant cases. Again work arounds which you have stated have already been seen off easily, the practical application and function of the law and legal system is very different from how you think it functions.
Much of what you have said seems way off the mark when it comes to real world practical application of law and the functioning of the legal system. EA's real issues are the Data protection Act 1998 in the UK which is our version of the EU's data protection laws and the Unfair Contract Terms Act. From what I know of the US legal system it seems rather friendly to large Companies, EA's EULA is not fool proof, but the methods that you have sugested have an absolutely insignificant chance of working and are more likely to get you slapped with a wasted costs order rather than doing anything else.
Modifié par billy the squid, 13 novembre 2011 - 04:37 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
)
