Trade Feedback and Suggestion

you keep calling 'it' a license.

lolz


rambles for pages insisting he has a valid legal complaint. can't even figure out what his complaint is or if it's a good/service (protip: doesn't even know what the "it" even is). now claims he isn't suing, making his multipage lawsuit ramblings even more relevant and sensible.

"

robmafia wrote:

you keep calling 'it' a license.

lolz

Yes, because it is.

YOu have a license for the software installed on your PC, the Client. You aren't allowed to change it, you aren't allowed to sell it for your own profit and so on. Hence License.

The access to the server on the other hand is a Service, they can make you pay for stuff there, that's only the server-structure though, this is also handled via a license, though nonetheless is a service as it's 'borrowing' a good (their servers) to provide a function.

The MTX on the other way once again is a good, provided to you... under a license, a single-use license.

"

Kulze wrote:

"

robmafia wrote:

you keep calling 'it' a license.

lolz

Yes, because it is.

thinks he's suing for a free license for a f2p game.

gold.

lolz.

"

Kulze wrote:

The access to the server on the other hand is a Service, they can make you pay for stuff there, that's only the server-structure though, this is also handled via a license, though nonetheless is a service as it's 'borrowing' a good (their servers) to provide a function.

The MTX on the other way once again is a good,

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

undertands it's a f2p game that exists on ggg servers. understands that's a service. IMMEDIATELY CALLS AN MTX ON SAID SERVER A GOOD!

"

robmafia wrote:

"

Kulze wrote:

"

robmafia wrote:

you keep calling 'it' a license.

lolz

Yes, because it is.

thinks he's suing for a free license for a f2p game.

gold.

It would be a lawsuit regarding the bought content (MTXC, Stash-tabs etc) inside the game actually.

Since the groundwork to use those things wouldn't exist without access to the game the basis has to be provided.

It's the same concept as a mobile-phone producer giving selling you their phone with a specific OS on it, then a year in they simply destroy the OS. The aren't allowed to do that as you wouldn't be able to use your phone, nonetheless you bought a physical good, but also a free-license (which is a digital good) when buying a phone.

As much as they can't come and take away the phone you actually paid for, they also can't go and make it impossible to use unless stated you'll only have it on it for 'X' time. They HAVE to keep it in a working order or refund the phone.

"

robmafia wrote:

also, software is usually/almost always a SERVICE.

additionally, this isn't about the game, but the ability to use THEIR SERVERS.

IT'S A SERVICE.

ffs.

what does the ToS stand for? terms of GOOD?

you don't know good/service, yet you're going to win a lawsuit against tencent? hahahahahahaahaha

Umm it is you who doesn't understand. First off most video game's TOU are not even valid. Many games are sold before the TOU is even shown to the gamer. Meaning money, and sell of goods happen. And than a TOU is brought up, and said you now have to accept this before playing.

A TOU isn't even legal for the most part. Just people think it is. Just like how cell phone companies try, and void warranty on a phone if a sticker was removed. Also not legal.

Another reason a TOU isn't legal is because it changes after a sell happens. So in example of POE you buy stash tabs. Later GGG change the TOU. They don't let you play the game anymore until you agree to the new TOU. Locking you out of stash tabs you already paid for. Or in other words holding them hostage until you agree to the new TOU. All of witch is illegal to do.

The only reason it still goes on is because no one has really challenged it in a court of law. I mean hell it is game. Not something that there life depends on. Just because it is an industry standard doesn't make it right or legal.

You realize GGG/Tencent can be sued for many things. And being F2P doesn't mean they are not in the wrong. It is clear from all your statements you have no Idea how the laws written. Or how this or most businesses actually run. And what they are liable for.

You only sound like a white knight trying to stop an update to how trading works.

...wrong.

tell me more about how the server/access is a service, but the mtx (hint: CODE ON SERVER) is a good.

please continue.

"

robmafia wrote:

...wrong.

tell me more about how the server/access is a service, but the mtx (hint: CODE ON SERVER) is a good.

please continue.

You'll never understand. Or at least pretend not to. Why should I even bother?

"

robmafia wrote:

...wrong.

tell me more about how the server/access is a service, but the mtx (hint: CODE ON SERVER) is a good.

please continue.

Once again, position is of no importance for a license.

The way it is handled is of importance.
Using the structure (which is pyhsical, a good, in possession of somebody else) is a service.
The code provided the me to use the MTX on the other hand is a good, I am the OWNER of the SINGLE INSTANCE of this code. The INTELLEGCTUAL PROPERTY of the CODE is THEIR PROPERTY still. Discerning here is very important.

Also yes, TheLockedGuy is right. Hence here in the EU Microsoft was sued several times by now and lost, paying millions after millions. Why? They sold a non-free license of their OS together with pre-set PCs and treated them like time-limited licenses, hence a service while actually providing a good.

So we got a few wins in this direction already, costing a company hundred millions on repercussions.

"

TheLockedGuy wrote:

"

robmafia wrote:

...wrong.

tell me more about how the server/access is a service, but the mtx (hint: CODE ON SERVER) is a good.

please continue.

You'll never understand. Or at least pretend not to. Why should I even bother?

...are you kulze's other account, or something?

"

Kulze wrote:

"

robmafia wrote:

...wrong.

tell me more about how the server/access is a service, but the mtx (hint: CODE ON SERVER) is a good.

please continue.

Once again, position is of no importance for a license.

WAT

"

Kulze wrote:

The way it is handled is of importance.
Using the structure (which is pyhsical, a good, in possession of somebody else) is a service.
The code provided the me to use the MTX on the other hand is a good

false.

"

Kulze wrote:

I am the OWNER of the SINGLE INSTANCE of this code.

lolz!

false!



please tell me more about this FREE license (good!) for a f2p game that your totally valid lawsuit is based upon!