Trade Feedback and Suggestion

"

vio wrote:

narp, you didn't pay for a product. you just gave them money and waived all your rights on owning anything in the game by accepting the ToS already. supporting doesn't change the ToS.

you're a supporter, nothing more.

Look up the legal definition. Even MTX is a good. Hence it has by definition to be a product. We're acquiring the single-use license for this skin to use on our characters. Hence we're paying customers and GGG puts itself under all legal obligations coming with that in each country respective to offering their content.

A supporter on the other hand is a person who offers money so anyone, no matter of private person or a company can do something with it. They then are under no obligation legally to provide ANYTHING for it, hence... support, comes with no strings attached.

Also the ToS can't go above the law, it's a layer underneath, hence even if we say 'yes' to any contract regarding it isn't the case... it nonetheless is.

Much like I can write into the contract for a flat in europe that you'll have to let me visit each week to see if everything's alright. You don't have to follow it as it is not legally allowed.

Those ToS are a blanket-contract so they don't need to make one up for every country individually, that's common practice in the software-market for obvious reasons (resource-sink and tackling with ever-changing laws).

"

Kulze wrote:

"

vio wrote:

narp, you didn't pay for a product. you just gave them money and waived all your rights on owning anything in the game by accepting the ToS already. supporting doesn't change the ToS.

you're a supporter, nothing more.

Look up the legal definition. Even MTX is a good. Hence it has by definition to be a product. We're acquiring the single-use license for this skin to use on our characters. Hence we're paying customers and GGG puts itself under all legal obligations coming with that in each country respective to offering their content.

A supporter on the other hand is a person who offers money so anyone, no matter of private person or a company can do something with it. They then are under no obligation legally to provide ANYTHING for it, hence... support, comes with no strings attached.

Also the ToS can't go above the law, it's a layer underneath, hence even if we say 'yes' to any contract regarding it isn't the case... it nonetheless is.

Much like I can write into the contract for a flat in europe that you'll have to let me visit each week to see if everything's alright. You don't have to follow it as it is not legally allowed.

Those ToS are a blanket-contract so they don't need to make one up for every country individually, that's common practice in the software-market for obvious reasons (resource-sink and tackling with ever-changing laws).

omg. lolz @ believing this.

"

robmafia wrote:

omg. lolz @ believing this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUAX0gnZ3Nw

He provides intensive research on the topic for a layman, the only big aspect he#s wrong about is the 'fraud' claim. It's 'only' a break of contract actually.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpgT_EdtAW0&t

Goes deeper into it, he's got a license as a lawyer and explains where the video above is right and where it's wrong.

I'm living in the EU, the EU law states that any service offered in the EU area has to be under EU laws, hence the ToS here is handled different then for instance america (where you would be right with your argument, it's an actual gray-area there unlike many other areas of the world)

Since services and good are clearly explained it means I'm offered a single-use free license for the game to then use it INDEFINITELY, unless breaking contract from my side.
Buying MTX is a secondary contract inside this contract. It's another form of single-use license provided inside the license I already OWN. The free-license gives me no rights by itself, other then the company being not allowed to 'break' the product intentionally or via gross negligence.
The same goes for MTX, though here I'm also immediately a CUSTOMER to the company, this involves the license which is MANDATORY to gain access to the other license therefore.

Hence yes, I OWN a GOOD and I AM a CUSTOMER. Those are legal definitions.

Look it up yourself, otherwise you're falling victim to what you're always saying other do: Namely uttering pure fallacy and garbage.

good luck suing a new zealand-based company owned by a chinese conglomerate based on whatever country's law/precedent you're hoping to use as a basis.

hold your breath, i'm sure it will work!

"

Hence yes, I OWN a GOOD and I AM a CUSTOMER.

FACT: you don't own the game in any capacity and you're not a customer.

"

robmafia wrote:

good luck suing a new zealand-based company owned by a chinese conglomerate based on whatever country's law/precedent you're hoping to use as a basis.

hold your breath, i'm sure it will work!

Gladly my country offers insurance which gets me cost-free through ALL instances regarding that should it ever come to the situation it's needed.

Also, yes, my chances to win are massive since our law purely goes by facts instead of personal decisions, unlike america once again.

Also, even if it would come to such a situation it's most likely not worth the effort for me, so GGG has nothing to fear, though they have from anyone else with knowledge in this regard and too much time.

Also, good luck trying to get up against the law-gears of the EU as a company, if you're sued there you'll either have to follow the steps which are asked for (In this case it would be a full refund for all payments, nothing else, that's what our law states)... or leave permanently, those are the 2 choices given, others don't exist.
My win-chance is actually nearly 100% here. Nearly because it's still a precedent regarding licenses and ongoing services where you pay something while it not being a subscription (hence time-based) license (Which would be an actual service instead of a good by the way).

"

robmafia wrote:

FACT: you don't own the game in any capacity and you're not a customer.

You're right, I don't own the game, I own the license to the game, big difference. That's what I own, important.
Also yes, by paying any amount of money to receive any amount of stuff I'm automatically a customer by definition.

You're really not the smartest to argue about law regarding a country you're most likely not even aware how it works. Just to say.

coming from the one who clearly knows nothing about law.

please post the documents from your civil suit, i'd love to see them.



we both know that ain't happening and that you're full of bs.

edit: lolz @ "country" regarding international law.

further lolz @ backpedaling from "good" to "service"

"

robmafia wrote:

coming from the one who clearly knows nothing about law.

please post the documents from your civil suit, i'd love to see them.



we both know that ain't happening and that you're full of bs.

edit: lolz @ "country" regarding international law.

further lolz @ backpedaling from "good" to "service"

International law isn't a think it's only enforced because the country regards it as something worth enforcing. Whose gonna come and get more for breaking an "international" law? The international police? Country law supersedes it because the country doesn't have to listen to anyone else. You can write a contract that says you get to murder someone who signs it but murder is still illegal.

You can sue them because they operate a server in your country, they would have to give up servers in your country to be able to avoid a lawsuit like that.

"

j33bus wrote:

International law isn't a think it's only enforced because the country regards it as something worth enforcing. Whose gonna come and get more for breaking an "international" law? The international police? Country law supersedes it because the country doesn't have to listen to anyone else. You can write a contract that says you get to murder someone who signs it but murder is still illegal.

You can sue them because they operate a server in your country, they would have to give up servers in your country to be able to avoid a lawsuit like that.

Exactly, at least someone who can read and comprehend law.
That's exactly the case.
Oh, this doesn't only count for 1 server, it would count for ALL servers EU-wide immediately.

and yet, it's amazing that they've withstood all these airtight lawsuits from those in the eu.

oh, wait.

"

robmafia wrote:

and yet, it's amazing that they've withstood all these airtight lawsuits from those in the eu.

oh, wait.

That's because they:

A.) haven't shut down the game (which would be a breach of contract, they need to make it 'repairable' for the end-user, hence unveiling their server-side code)
and
B.) Haven't booted out anyone from their content without any sort of reason. (And if, they simply refunded, which isn't an issue for a company their size)
Which follows
C.) The game isn't in an un-playable state, hence it's not (yet) gone as far as to say it's negligence or actual intent.

I actually don't know how you're trying to combine random lawsuits with one that actually has a fundamental existence which GGG has to look out for in the future, as it can become a reasonable problem if they keep on the same track as they do.

Also, I don't quite get how you don't even know the difference between a service and a good, those are fundamental things to know if your lawsuit even applies at a specific moment and time.