Bioware bans player from playing DA2 for posting ill remark on Bioware forums [Archive]

Von Paulus

March 11th, 2011, 18:55

And the answer of the moderator was great.

Please review the EA Community Terms of Service, particularly sections #9 and #11. There are two levels of enforcement here:

1. BioWare community bans are forum-only and can be for as little as 24 hours. These bans should have no effect on your game, only your ability to use all the features of this website/community. these bans are handed out by BioWare Moderators as the result of our travels around the forum and/or issues reported by fellow community members.

2. EA Community bans come down from a different department and are the result of someone hitting the REPORT POST button. These bans can affect access to your game and/or DLC.

Because the BioWare community now operates under the same umbrella as all EA Communities, community members here have all explicitly agreed to abide by and be governed by both sets of rules. Consider it an added incentive to follow the rules you say you're going to follow.

If there are further questions or concerns, please send them to me via private message. Thank you.

End of line.
I just love this thank you and End of line. It's pure arrogance and tyrannic.
I'm considering not buy anymore from EA/Bioware .

Alrik Fassbauer

March 11th, 2011, 18:55

Well, I rather believe it is like this :

The check is there with each connection.

If you don't connect to the internet while playing, then there is no check.

At least regarding Dragon Age 1.

In my case, I have my "gaming PC" completely disconnected from the internet. I only connect once or so in a month for getting the newest microsoft and otherwise updates.

Which means that I'm playing completely offline.

My main PC, however, is constantly connected - if I wish to.
I could just unplug it as well.

Twotricks

March 11th, 2011, 19:02

And the answer of the moderator was great.

I just love this thank you and End of line. It's pure arrogance and tyrannic.
I'm considering not buy anymore from EA/Bioware .

Thought of buying DA2 crossed my mind long time ago.

Now I am happy It never happened.

Only bummer is that EA also publish DICE - Battlefield 3 ;(

Alrik Fassbauer

March 11th, 2011, 19:08

There is an interesting side-discussion embedded within the comments - just a snip :

abhishek says:
March 11, 2011 at 2:14 pm

Yes, 4chan is indeed ‘trolling’ (if you can call it that) the game’s user review score on Metacritic en masse, as you can see here

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-ii

Just yesterday or the day before, 500+ user reviews showed up which all rated the game around 0 to 2 and dragged the user rating down to 2 or 3.

hishadow

March 11th, 2011, 19:08

I got a duplicate thread but I'll repeat myself. Bioware is now nothing more than "lipstick on a pig" whose name is EA.

And the answer of the moderator was great.
…
I just love this thank you and End of line. It's pure arrogance and tyrannic.
I'm considering not buy anymore from EA/Bioware .
Regardless of whatever the user did that this originated from, the magic clause that's relevant for everyone is:
2. EA Community bans come down from a different department and are the result of someone hitting the REPORT POST button. These bans can affect access to your game and/or DLC.

dteowner

March 11th, 2011, 19:33

I wonder if they could do that after a purchase. I know physically it's easy—I'm talking the legalities involved.

blatantninja

March 11th, 2011, 19:37

Well, remember now that you don't purchase anything anymore, you license it. That gives them a lot more leeway. Reminds me of the case where AutoCAD stopped someone from selling an old copy on eBay.

DoctorNarrative

March 11th, 2011, 19:50

Still terrible but it bears repeating that they are only stopping him from registering a game to a banned account. He could make a new account and register the game to that one.

dteowner

March 11th, 2011, 19:50

OK, but could they revoke a game license based on unrelated (forum usage isn't part of the game license) events? If so, would a refund be required? Seems like a legal nightmare that they're setting themselves up for, all to control something that could easily be dealt with via forum naz...errr....moderators. ;)

TheMadGamer

March 11th, 2011, 20:01

I really disagree with the idea that EA can ban a player from playing in single player mode.

Actions like these are the reasons why I shy away from digital distribution and requirements to be connected on-line to play a single player game.

These companies get the tiniest of power and quickly behave very draconian.

Ban this guy from multi-player modes... fine I have no issues with that, too many jerks on the internet as it is. But ban a player from single player mode, that crosses a line.

Gorath

March 11th, 2011, 20:37

It's about time a publisher does this to a customer whose father is a lawyer. ;)

SAGO

March 11th, 2011, 21:29

suprised at this?

no lulz, no criticism, no swearing and only good, honest and true opinions! biowear can only benefit from positive praise, criticism is trollin'.

basicly, something like this foram but only that it has a vidya gayming publisher behind it, pulling the strings, instead of nobodies.

GothicGothicness

March 11th, 2011, 22:28

the funniest thing is this person is going to download a crack, and be able to play with less hustle then the other customers who legally bought the game.

coaster

March 11th, 2011, 22:48

This whole thing is looking like a real internet shitstorm, what with Inon Zur's comments about the game being rushed, the banning incident, the metacritic reviews…Bioware are probably just keeping their heads down for now. Their forum is absolutely chock full of scathing criticism.

How much of this is tribal internet behaviour which will blow over, and how much will actually translate into fewer sales than DA:O will be the interesting part. I suspect they won't care too much unless their bottom line is affected.

Twotricks

March 11th, 2011, 23:08

Which is funny , seeing how reputation is more important than ever. And Bioware was a company that thrived on their good reputation.

How many times i heard the comment "Its Bioware, so it will surely be good game"

To throw such good reputation away... Very bad move

JDR13

March 11th, 2011, 23:14

xSamhainx

March 11th, 2011, 23:17

The story made all the more ominous by the fact that the entire RPS page is completely blanketed, background and all, in DA2 ad.

Hawke is coming for you, lol

Von Paulus

March 11th, 2011, 23:17

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/13/index/6477707/

:)

Corwin

March 11th, 2011, 23:23

As someone who has an intense dislike for EA, I REALLY hope someone takes legal action over this!! :)

aries100

March 11th, 2011, 23:26

Here's the thread that Bioware via Stanley Woo has left opened to discuss this:

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/6465725/6

Stan also said in one of his posts that this all happened after the office was closed. And he actually stayed in the office until about 11PM Bioware time to try to sort all this out.
And as Stan said in the quoted post from him, some gamer (or ea representative?) hit the report button - probably not knowing anything about the consequences. Not having read the thread myself, I understand there's also some homophobic comments in the (now closed and defunct) thread?

Also, if you're going to be mad at anyone company, be mad at EA, Not Bioware. In the linked thread there are posts worse or at the same level of worse than the words used by the user which has now been locked out (banned) for 72 hours. As a fellow gamer, I can sympatize with him, however in a thread made by him, he accepts the 72 hour ban.

He says that he can't access any of his games now http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/6459941/ [There should be a newspost about this, too, made by Dhruin] So what he's saying is that he can't access any DLC or loginto DA: Origins. But, as I understand it, Mass Effect 2 and DA: Origins can be played offline.

The problem with this is that EA apparantly can ban (lock out) any player/gamer from any of EA's game - for something they said on a forum. I can certainly see the frustration here and also understand how it feels. The big question, however, if the server authentication also checks form other things than game ownership in DA2. [When you play and are connected to the internet, a game authentication check is performed each time].

Anyway, Chris Priestly has now made this post:
(source: http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/6465725/48 )

Here is my official response. You will likely see this picked up on news sites soon enough.

EA strictly enforces the code of conduct at Social.BioWare.com. If a player violates the rules by using profanity, they will be temporarily banned. Unfortunately, there was an error in the system that accidentally suspended a user's entire account. Immediately upon learning of the glitch, EA restored the user's macro account and apologized for the inconvenience.

Problem now seemed to be solved. However, I'm not entirely sure about this 'accidentally' thing. More likely, it was 'an error' built into the software which they first only now has been aware of and this has now been fixed.

And again, Bioware did not ban the user's account, EA did. However, I'm also sure that if this site and other gaming media sites like RPS hadn't made this issue a public one, and a matter of PR, this would have gone unnoticed for a few days.

Drithius

March 11th, 2011, 23:34

I've sorta not been bothering with DA2 news the past few days, and have never really followed Bioware forums since my NWN days.

But all this… and seeing how Paulus' linked post got closed as, presumably, many other anti-Bioware threads… well, this goes beyond the growing disappointment I've had in Bioware games for the last few years. It's just pathetic.

I think I might just forget about DA2 altogether and not even bother with the goty package that I had been considering waiting for.

Hopefully Obsidian fills the void in the marketplace for RPG's.

coaster

March 11th, 2011, 23:42

OK, so EA backtracks on this specific issue, fair enough. The bigger concern is the state of the game itself which sounds pretty unattractive at the moment. Silly flashy animations, dumbed down dialogue, enemies spawning from empty air, copy pasta locations, rushed soundtrack, inconclusive storyline (with the suspicion that a more conclusive ending will be supplied by DLC).

Of course this is mostly hearsay…but other than the demo (which some people say is typical of the game, others say unrepresentative) how else does one judge a game before buying?

Alrik Fassbauer

March 11th, 2011, 23:49

By reading, reading, reading, reading reading ... And at the end of the day computing all of this data into your own opinion.

That's how I do it.

The demo is about 80 % of my personal opinion, but other sources also play a huge role in this "opinion finding process", as we call it here in Germany.

Twotricks

March 12th, 2011, 01:11

UPDATE:

Wow, well here’s a crazy update. After being repeatedly told that he was intentionally locked out of his EA games because he broke the rules on the BioWare forum, and that this was in accordance to the Terms Of Service that he’d agreed to, this morning’s internet famous man, Arno, has just been told that it was in fact a mistake.

He received an email from EA’s Senior Director of Customer Support, Boyd Beasley, explaining that his “inappropriate language” meant he had received a 72 hour ban from the BioWare Social Network, but that,

“Unfortunately, there was an error in the system that accidentally suspended your entire EA account. Immediately upon learning of the glitch, we have restored the entire account and apologize for the inconvenience this may have caused while accessing other areas of the EA service.”

So there you go then. A strange one indeed, after he was told by both EA’s live support, and the moderator who locked the thread discussing the matter (who declined to speak to us), the opposite. But good news for Arno, who can finally play the game he’s paid for.

------------

PR shitstorm.

And you thought they dont care about reputation.

To late, genie is out of the bottle

TheMadGamer

March 12th, 2011, 04:12

This is all way too complicated for a game. I won't be buying this anytime soon if at all.

Dasale

March 12th, 2011, 04:42

Lol it's unsane, player is necessarily right, I quote him:
PS: Don't really know where to post this, since I'm unable to post in the technical support forum because I don't have an activated game. Figured it may get more attention from the mods here anyway. And pm'ing Chris Priestly is just sort of rude.
PSS: No trolling and no flaming. I knew what I did was wrong, the mods were right to suspend me, but being unable to play a game you bought seems a little steep.
You hate and flame a game and company and after whine because you get banned? Not to mention it was a clear error from EA, not on purpose, the purpose wasn't to not allow the user use the account for registering and using stuff.

You all are gone too crazy about and against DA2, Bioware and EA, that is incredible. Hey wake up it's just gaming. You don't enjoy, don't play, that simple. And start any crusader for a game is….

About having the signature edition, for sure you could cancel it or any pre order. I canceled easily my Steam order few days before release (in my country) and after the 8, and bought a box of the signature edition version in shop after release date. Clearly because canceling an order of SE was possible. So people spiting their hate all along and that didn't cancel are just lacking of coherency, again it's just a game and you have the full right to not play it. But also took conclusion on the game from the demo that was clearly limited, well I won't comment more.

Drithius

March 12th, 2011, 05:48

You can go ahead and ban a putz from a forum or possibly even an online game if he or she is disrupting other players. You cross the line when you ban them from playing single player as well, in a game they bought and paid for. I don't buy this B.S. PR coverup personally; as stated earlier in the thread, EA apparently thinks they have the right to do exactly what ocurred - it was no simple "error in the system".

<snip>
Please review the EA Community Terms of Service, particularly sections #9 and #11. There are two levels of enforcement here:

1. BioWare community bans are forum-only and can be for as little as 24 hours. These bans should have no effect on your game, only your ability to use all the features of this website/community. these bans are handed out by BioWare Moderators as the result of our travels around the forum and/or issues reported by fellow community members.

2. EA Community bans come down from a different department and are the result of someone hitting the REPORT POST button. These bans can affect access to your game and/or DLC.

Because the BioWare community now operates under the same umbrella as all EA Communities, community members here have all explicitly agreed to abide by and be governed by both sets of rules. Consider it an added incentive to follow the rules you say you're going to follow.

If there are further questions or concerns, please send them to me via private message. Thank you.

End of line. .

End of the line indeed.

azraelck

March 12th, 2011, 07:04

It is highly disturbing to me that EA has decided that they can deny a player access to the single-player game that they paid for, at their (EA's) will. What's stopping them from locking out BC2 or the new MoH when the next one comes out? What about blocking players from playing DA:O, in order to force them to purchase newer games?

What's stopping them from requiring a "license renewal fee" to play older EA titles? Nothing. There is absolutely no stretch of common sense that allows this situation to occur. There is absolutely no reason for a legitimate copy of a game to have to "check in" or connect online at all for a offline-only single player mode. Much less check in to see if the Fuhrer has deigned to allow you to play said game.

Banning or suspending that user for being an *** on the forums is well within reason; blocking that user from accessing a single player game that has no business requiring an internet connection just to play every time, is not. It is not acceptable at all.

It amounts to willing grand scale fraud. When I pay for a game, I expect to be able to play it. I may get banned from individual servers online due to my actions, or may not, but I still expect that I can play the game aside from those instances. EA has decided that they do not have to allow any of that, that even a brand new copy bought legitimately can be blocked from being used, with no recourse from the purchaser.

This is the same situation as GM deciding to shut down any car that has been paid off, using On Star (which they can do very easily, as it has been integrated into the vehicle's systems. They even advertise it as a "feature"); in order to force you to trade in for a new model. Instead, I'll go buy a Dodge.

EA just went on my do not buy list. And Bioware along with it. And this time, they won't come back off it. In 15 years, I bought only one EA-published title; Dragon Age: Origins. I won't install that ever again, and it will be the last time EA receives a dime from me.

Quite frankly, the FTC needs to step in and put a stop to this abuse of customers. If not, then the PC market will end up in the hands of indies; which it's fast heading to now. It's increasingly hard to justify a purchase when I'm forced to install viruses, and now don't even have the ability to play my game if they publisher decides they want me to buy a new one. Why buy when I know, for a fact, that it is unplayable?

JDR13

March 12th, 2011, 07:44

Not to mention it was a clear error from EA, not on purpose, the purpose wasn't to not allow the user use the account for registering and using stuff.

And you know this how…?

@azraelck- Thou speaketh many truths.

azraelck

March 12th, 2011, 09:11

@azraelck- Thou speaketh many truths.

I'm sick of the crap going on in the games industry today. The companies put out complete and utter garbage and blame pirates for low sales. So they continue to put out complete and utter garbage and on top of that abuse their customers, punishing them for actually buying the games. Then they blame hackers for lost sales.

While I just upgraded my PC, I'm not really much of a PC gamer anymore. Given that the newest FPS I have is Call of Duty: United Offensive, and the newest RPG installed is Eschalon 2, old games and indie games are basically my exclusive area. I'm not a console gamer either; my Wii sits untouched for months at a time, and all my other systems and games are in a few massive totes, packed away for whenever I feel like hooking them up. I traded in my PS3 after they took away the Linux support.

I'm going to have to take a headcount now, and see if there's actually any mainstream publishers left I'll buy from. Maybe Atari, except that other than Ghostbusters they haven't released a good game since... hmm... back about 18 and 25 or so. And Ghostbusters for the PC, boxed copies at least, also included a virus like all EA and Ubisoft games. Steam didn't, which is why I bought it through there (I love Ghostbusters, it's the third time I've bought the game). The PC version also was stripped of features compared to the console ones, though it did have superior controls and better graphics. And of course, it's still Ghostbusters.

Though to be fair, this is not isolated to the gaming industry. Movies are just as bad, as are music CDs. Quite frankly though the consoles can have all the EA and Activision and Ubisoft and other crap. Legitimate companies will step in and fill the gap; where there's a market, there's someone to fill it.

DoctorNarrative

March 12th, 2011, 09:31

Good on them for reversing it. I don't believe them that it was an accident, but obviously someone high-up realized it was over the line, perhaps legally, and they made a quick change.

Good call.

Dasale

March 12th, 2011, 10:20

Well ok perhaps it wasn't an accident like they pretend after. It's still a flow of hate that say nothing good about current time.

DArtagnan

March 12th, 2011, 12:00

DoctorNarrative

March 12th, 2011, 12:39

There's nothing more appealing than buying a game you can lose access to playing, because you happen to voice your opinion about it openly.

I wonder when the average consumer will start considering that to be ok. I mean, it seems the average consumer is ok with pretty much everything else these days, so it's only a matter of time before having access to what you bought is considered a privilege you have to earn.

The mass acceptance of Steam already shows customers are willing to put all their eggs in a basket a company can take away. All you have to do is foster a good company image like Valve has and people will hand over they keys to their house. The issue here is that EA has not fostered that kind of trust and reputation.

BillSeurer

March 12th, 2011, 15:27

Guys, you haven't "bought" a computer game (or probably any computer software) in like 20 years. Don't you read those *license* agreements that come with them? We lost this battle long ago.

DArtagnan

March 12th, 2011, 16:44

Guys, you haven't "bought" a computer game (or probably any computer software) in like 20 years. Don't you read those *license* agreements that come with them? We lost this battle long ago.

Call it what you will, but having access to the game has been the standard for singleplayer games upon purchase for as long as I can remember.

DArtagnan

March 12th, 2011, 16:46

The mass acceptance of Steam already shows customers are willing to put all their eggs in a basket a company can take away. All you have to do is foster a good company image like Valve has and people will hand over they keys to their house. The issue here is that EA has not fostered that kind of trust and reputation.

Yeah, and I'm amazed that people think so well of Valve, especially considering their overt greed in terms of pricing.

But that's just the way it is, I guess.

Dasale

March 12th, 2011, 16:48

There's nothing more appealing than buying a game you can lose access to playing, because you happen to voice your opinion about it openly.
It's like that there are rumors, it's quite clear that the guy that got banished gone quite more far than only saying his opinion clearly. There are many thread with many post listing flaws right or wrong and concluding the game is a total crap and Bioware a traitor. They don't get banished for that.

It's also quite stupid to choose Bioware/EA forums to lost control and civility. There's ton of other forums for that, like here or even more welcoming with such posts, the codex.

I wonder when the average consumer will start considering that to be ok. I mean, it seems the average consumer is ok with pretty much everything else these days, so it's only a matter of time before having access to what you bought is considered a privilege you have to earn.
For this point I totally agree that there's a problem, it's a problem it's even been possible even if this is in license agreement. I'm not sure such stuff is fully legal.

But if you consider players sort of sheep nowadays, myself I noticed quite more that the level of hate has rise significantly those last 2 or 3 years. All this hysteria about a game makes no sense and for me the sheep are those that get grap into this, just on base of a demo, looks like a a crowd madness except it's a virtual crowd, which is quite singular.

DArtagnan

March 12th, 2011, 16:57

It's like that there are rumors, it's quite clear that the guy that got banished gone quite more far than only saying his opinion clearly. There are many thread with many post listing flaws right or wrong and concluding the game is a total crap and Bioware a traitor. They don't get banished for that.

It's also quite stupid to choose Bioware/EA forums to lost control and civility. There's ton of other forums for that, like here or even more welcoming with such posts, the codex.

It's not about being banned. It's about not being able to play the game you paid for - which is why it's essential to point this specific thing out.

As for what's stupid - to use your word - I think you've got that covered in general, but I don't think it's productive to talk about here.

For this point I totally agree that there's a problem, it's a problem it's even been possible even if this is in license agreement. I'm not sure such stuff is fully legal.

But if you consider players sort of sheep nowadays, myself I noticed quite more that the level of hate has rise significantly those last 2 or 3 years. All this hysteria about a game makes no sense and for me the sheep are those that get grap into this, just on base of a demo, looks like a a crowd madness except it's a virtual crowd, which is quite singular.

Why are people hysterical only when they disagree with you?

Have you considered that because you really loved Dragon Age, it doesn't mean that everything by Bioware related to Dragon Age is necessarily good or right - and that voicing complaints against it doesn't have to mean you're hysterical?

Dasale

March 12th, 2011, 17:06

I agree the banishment from forum shouldn't have an effect on game and bonus bought. That was my point with:

For this point I totally agree that there's a problem, it's a problem it's even been possible even if this is in license agreement. I'm not sure such stuff is fully legal.

For the hysteria it's the insistence people put in spiting their hate. I bought Dead Space, hate it, post once or twice about it, not more and removed the game, that's it and after I had better thing to take care of. The hysteria is about coming again and again spite how the game is a crap by judging only on a limited demo. It's possible that hysteria isn't the right world, let say instead over overeaction and pointless aggressive posts.

For about knowing what the game is, no you won't have any argument to justify the demo is enough for that.

EDIT: For the highly disappointed fans, well ok… but from a demo, and even its giving too much importance to a game or a series in this case. And yes it's overreaction, and this doesn't justify all the level of hate and persistence I have seen those last weeks, and even less about a demo, but not even about a full game.

Gorath

March 12th, 2011, 17:34

Guys, you haven't "bought" a computer game (or probably any computer software) in like 20 years. Don't you read those *license* agreements that come with them? We lost this battle long ago.

Careful! You shouldn't apply US standards to other countries. ;)

People in many EU countries bought (or maybe even still buy) their software. In Germany for example a contract is only binding if it is known at the time of the purchase. Both parties have the same information and both agree to it. This means the EULA would have to be printed on a part of the box the customer can access without breaking a seal. Complicated stuff, but the point is: It's not necessarily valid just because the publisher writes it.

Dasale

March 12th, 2011, 17:44

Careful! You shouldn't apply US standards to other countries. ;)

People in many EU countries bought (or maybe even still buy) their software. In Germany for example a contract is only binding if it is known at the time of the purchase. Both parties have the same information and both agree to it. This means the EULA would have to be printed on a part of the box the customer can access without breaking a seal. Complicated stuff, but the point is: It's not necessarily valid just because the publisher writes it.
The viscous part of it is when you register the game it ask you validate the Eula so I'm not sure that if you do it, that even in Germany the Eula is still invalid.

A point is that not every clauses will be considered legal, but what's legal or not is tricky and it's even more tricky if you try get a refund.

In the case of the forum case it's quite possible that the ban itself would be considered illegal because it involved the removal of the rights to use something bought. The problem here for EA would be to justify the ban is justified with the consequence of removing the rights to play the stuff bought.

DoctorNarrative

March 12th, 2011, 18:22

There is a big difference between technically buying a license but owning the software outright for all intents and purposes and a company having total control over your access. I don't know what the point of "technically it was always a license" is... we all know that, the point is they now have the power to enforce that license when they never did before.

Alrik Fassbauer

March 12th, 2011, 20:47

What's stopping them from requiring a "license renewal fee" to play older EA titles?

There is kind of a proverb out there, saying :

"Why do they do it ?"
"Because they can !"

And besides of this stuff : What I hate - personally - most, is, that companies use license terms and make them so as if they were valid in any country.

This is not at all the case, since different countries have different laws,
but the companies just do as if they were right (and this means : as if the terms were right in favour to them) in any case, in any country …

And with the constand use of these terms which rather read like U.S. license terms based on U.S. laws applicable in ANY country in the world - they do get people used to them.

No-one asks whether they are ACTUALLY applicable. The people get so much used to them like cows to grass - and they just don't even think anymore of the possibility that they could actually ue the companies if they were violating actual, country-specific laws.

I call this "judicial imperialism".

Corwin

March 13th, 2011, 05:21

I'd love to see someone take on a EULA in a court of law; it would shake up the entire industry I'm sure!!

Tragos

March 13th, 2011, 10:37

EULAs available only after buying the product are not valid at least here and probably in many other European countries.
EA never stops to amuse us , i think i read about hidden securom in DA2 that acts like a rootkit (hides) ... HAHA . On the "inappropriate language" topic to put it simple if EA was Mubarak they would have probably nuke the protesters and lock their ashes in dungeons.
I think the guy probably did it just for the bitching, it takes 2' to get a crack and save yourself all the registration /activation bullshit.
Bioware doesn't take criticism , after all they are more famous for their lockdowns rather than their games , i LOLed into wetness when they tried to patch musical theme 's composer statement that the game is rushed with the glorious "there are bugs in the music" HAHA damn those out of tune violas.

Alrik Fassbauer

March 13th, 2011, 12:48

I'd love to see someone take on a EULA in a court of law; it would shake up the entire industry I'm sure!!

I agree. There's so much stuff in them ... I just can't understand they are trying it in the first place ...

kalniel

March 13th, 2011, 18:15

Someone already tried to see if the EULA held up in court. It did for the most part:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7645059.stm

hishadow

March 13th, 2011, 19:16

Someone already tried to see if the EULA held up in court. It did for the most part:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7645059.stm
This is US law btw. The scope is also different since it concerned DMCA.

Alrik Fassbauer

March 14th, 2011, 12:30

Yes, this country-specific laws thing … There's currently a battle going on between LucasFilm and the original sculptor of he Stormtrooper helmets - in the UK.

According to British (and German) law, the sculptor holds the rights to what he or she sculpted.

Not so in the U.S. : There, everything seemingly automatically becomes property of the company you work for.

And the sculptor of the Stormtrooper helmts is a british guy, as far as I know - and the movies were filmes in th UK anyway.

So, both parties are batling eacjh other for many years now, and depending on where they do it, they win. The sculptor usually wins in the UK, LucasFilm usually wins in the U.S. … And so far they've not been able to stop him from selling his sculpts : The Stormtrooper helmets. He just in't allowed to call them so.

This is as far as I know it.

DoctorNarrative

March 14th, 2011, 14:45

There is also a big difference between an MMO, which is much more obvious as a service, and a singleplayer piece of software.

blatantninja

March 14th, 2011, 15:11

According to British (and German) law, the sculptor holds the rights to what he or she sculpted.

Not so in the U.S. : There, everything seemingly automatically becomes property of the company you work for.

To clarify that, in the U.S. if you are paid by a company to create something, unless otherwise specified, the company retains the rights to it.

An example was the Bratz dolls. Apparently the guy that designed them originally designed them and pitched them to Mattel while working there. Mattel passed on the idea, and he eventually went off and started producing them with MGA entertainment. The court found that the creator, Carter Bryant, had been working for Mattel when he developed them, never got the rights for them and ruled in Mattel's favor. It's been reversed on appeal now, but it's not clear if the entire ruling will stand or just if the damage award will get redone.

Intellectual property is a very tricky part of the law.

Alrik Fassbauer

March 14th, 2011, 15:18

blatantninja

March 14th, 2011, 15:26

Yes, it is.

Horrible, in my eyes, because it becomes more and more complicated.

And more and more lawyers live off this complicatedness.

Maybe that's why it has become so complicated in the first place ? ;)

Yeah, its definitely one of the worst areas of the law in terms of bureaucracy and cost. The whole software/hardware patent process is absurd in this country (not sure if any other countries are any better). My best friend is software development VP for a large hardware company and he told me once that when they have their strategic planning sessions, one of the main go/no-go points is an estimation of the inevitable IP lawsuits that will follow and whether the cost of defending those makes the project even worth it. Very sad state.

dteowner

March 14th, 2011, 17:10

blatantninja

March 14th, 2011, 20:33

I read over the weekend that there's a proposal gaining speed to revise US patent law to "first filed" rather than "first created". Won't solve everything, but might take a small bite out of the legal monster.

That seems like it would make it worse, but then maybe I just don't understand the legal jargon.

On the original topic note:

Steam user violates subscriber agreement, loses $1,800 in games (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/03/steam-user-violates-subscriber-agreement-loses-1800-in-games.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss)

What happens if you violate Steam's Subscriber Agreement and you have a library of games worth nearly $2,000? As one user learned, you'll lose access to all of those games.

The user in question, who has a total of $1,794.52 worth of games on his or her Steam account, decided to ask how much another person might pay for such an account. "Obviously I don't want someone to pay $1,800 for my account," the gamer wrote on Reddit. "I'm looking at money of course, not full price considering I bought most of them on sale, but maybe we can come to some sort of deal...Of course if someone actually takes me up I'll be removing my credit card information from the account, along with my friends list."

That was a month ago. A little more than a week ago the user was unable to connect with Steam, and was later informed that the account had been disabled for violating the Steam Subscriber Agreement, which explicitly states "you may not sell or charge others for the right to use your account, or otherwise transfer your account." And according to this e-mail chain, the ban is permanent.

In a later Reddit post, the user claims he or she was simply "asking how much someone would pay for a profile like that" and that the account was never actually sold or traded. However, the intention to sell was clearly there, as another post reads "I WAS 'trying' to sell my Steam account on r/gameswap, but that was over a month ago, you can't even access the post now. What pisses me off is that they waited an entire month, up to last night, before disabling my account. They didn't even send me an email [explaining] why it was disabled, I was just logged off of Steam with no warning."

Ars has contacted Valve for comment and will update the story if we hear back.

HOLY CRAP

Drithius

March 14th, 2011, 22:09

There is no reason an account (Steam, MMO, or otherwise) cannot be sold or traded other than that of greed on the part of the company in question. Why allow a user to sell another person your used goods when they can buy them new directly from you instead?

It's just another example of the "Digital Age" double standard. A consumer would never stand up for something like this with actual material products. Imagine a person trying to sell their used Chevy and having it impounded by GM instead.

Lucky Day

March 15th, 2011, 00:28

I read over the weekend that there's a proposal gaining speed to revise US patent law to "first filed" rather than "first created". Won't solve everything, but might take a small bite out of the legal monster.

At this point that would be way too radical a change in US Patent law. The status quo would be up in arms and besides "first filed" to me has always just seemed way to easy to abuse.

It's just another example of the "Digital Age" double standard. A consumer would never stand up for something like this with actual material products. Imagine a person trying to sell their used Chevy and having it impounded by GM instead.

After I bought a copy of the gold box on sale and didn't get another copy of TFT2 with it I learned a harsh reality of heavy handed DLC policies. I think after what happened to this guy I'll pay the extra for a disk copy whenever I can.

Corwin

March 15th, 2011, 07:15

If Steam did that to me, they'd be hearing from my lawyers ASAP; theft by any other name is still theft IMO!!

DoctorNarrative

March 15th, 2011, 07:49

That seems like it would make it worse, but then maybe I just don't understand the legal jargon.

On the original topic note:

Steam user violates subscriber agreement, loses $1,800 in games (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/03/steam-user-violates-subscriber-agreement-loses-1800-in-games.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss)

HOLY CRAP

Steam has been closing accounts for years based on similar things. I guess this one is getting extra attention because of the Dragon Age 2 thing the day before. In any case Valve reversed it to save face, but I wonder if they will reverse all the others. Probably not, unless those people get "uppity" with the media as well.

Dasale

March 15th, 2011, 08:44

Steam has been closing accounts for years based on similar things. I guess this one is getting extra attention because of the Dragon Age 2 thing the day before. In any case Valve reversed it to save face, but I wonder if they will reverse all the others. Probably not, unless those people get "uppity" with the media as well.

Well are you certain of it? There's a huge difference between a big collection of game I'll never replace and one game and few DLC I could borrow at end anyway so I don't really care.

I'd say this Steam news frightened me a bit and the EA counter part didn't bother me, well apart for the larger point of view, where they want bring us.

DoctorNarrative

March 15th, 2011, 08:47

Well are you certain of it? There's a huge difference between a big collection of game I'll never replace and one game and few DLC I could borrow at end anyway so I don't really care.

I'd say this Steam news frightened me a bit and the EA counter part didn't bother me, well apart for the larger point of view, where they want bring us.

Yeah, Steam have always banned accounts for suspicion that they were sold or otherwise traded hands. They also ban you for doing a credit card chargeback at any time or sometimes for modifying game files in a way that could make them playable without the client.

I myself got my Steam account banned for "suspicion of account transfer." I got it back by sending them pictures of my boxes and product keys, but it was a pain in the ass.

human_male

March 15th, 2011, 22:18

I dont' think they have any right to prevent someone playing their game when they've paid for it.

It seems like a flimsy reason to ban someone as well. I was banned from a forum once because I mentioned another website. I did not mention it's name or post a link, I said "I read on another website" (or words to that effect) and received a warning from a moderator who posted a link to the rules. The rule in question was pretty standard… not allowed to post links or promote other websites ect. But I'd done neither.

So I replied to the mod and pointed this out to him, and the next time I tried to log in I found I'd been permanently banned. He'd even left a snide little note about "doesn't believe the rules apply to him." But the thing is I'd been warned for breaking the rules, I got banned for questioning the mod.

What made this all the more sickening was it was a health forum for depression sufferers. For all that guy knew he might have been cutting me off from my only lifeline.

I still regret to this day that I didn't write to the website explaining the situation and pointing out what a genuinely petty, trumped up little twerp that guy must have been.

Now I tend to get angry whenever I witness moderator heavy-handedness.

Jaz

March 15th, 2011, 22:21

Now I tend to get angry whenever I witness moderator heavy-handedness.Okay, I'll wear kid gloves.

human_male

March 15th, 2011, 22:22

Okay, I'll wear kid gloves.

You guys are cool. You'd hardly notice you're even here.

human_male

March 15th, 2011, 22:24

As for Bioware I think I'm done with them. I hate the way (in my opinion) they've spoiled Mass Effect and Dragon Age, and the big Star Wars game is an MMO.

I'm done with them.

Jaz

March 15th, 2011, 22:31

Ah, it was a bit different back in the days of RPGDot.

[semi-OT]This reminds me of when I was banned from a forum I once moderated. I had no idea what had happened. When I contacted another mod he told me he'd been kicked as well. As it turned out, our Admin had lost his marbles; he had suddenly started to call posters names and fired the whole team in absentiam. I remember being quite mad at him back then… I even suggested to poison his dog ^^. [/semi-OT]
Now go back to discussing the Bioware forums ban. Nothing to see here. Move on.