|
Octopode posted:In a reasonably similar form as they have described, yes. hahahaha keep on believin' you poor deluded fool you did you also double down on bying more .jpgs in solidarity with crobizzle?
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 17:53 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 14:22 |
|
Octopode posted:They did, actually. Check your email for the weekly update sent out on February 6th, which contains a link to this Pledge Store Update: First, checked my email. Nothing within weeks of February 6th However, I clicked on the link you provided: quote:As we announced two weeks ago, RSI is moving into Europe with the formation of Roberts Space Industries International Ltd. To accomplish this change, we have made a major revision to the pledge store’s functionality, which includes the addition of an international store run by RSI International. As a result of this store change, all backers will be required to accept a new ToS, Privacy Policy, and EULA when connecting to Star Citizen game or pledging through the store (these will vary depending on which store you access.) You forgot the part that states "Changes to the TOS that require agreement must outline the changes." The fact that this is all about VAT and not about removing consumer protection regarding the release date says a whole lot. In fact, it shows more evidence that this was done deceptively- that they intentionally did not provide two things required by the FTC: 1 - Notice that the consumer can disagree with the change and cancel their license/purchase/order 2 - Indication on what was changed in the ToS In addition, this was placed on a separate page. CIG was required to notify all users of the ToS change. They were required to outline what changed in the ToS. They were required to make the agreement to the ToS to be located on the same page as the ToS, to include stating they removed the option for a refund due to a missed release date. In other words, it needs to be clickwrapped- having a checkbox on a different page that says "I agree to the Terms of Service by clicking here" has been tossed out by courts over and over again. You keep burying CIG more and more, and I thank you for it. I figured I'd toss most of this thread today at Derek Smart. I'll be sure to list you as a contributing source.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 17:53 |
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:http://www.beyondthehorizonradio.com/ BluestreakBTHR posted:Where the hell have you been? Same as me, but with a different group of chums retreated away from the insanity. Hell, he's a lot more of a Star Citizen than me atm. Account burned, trashed and full refund better be coming in that 5-10 day timeframe they gave me. So to sum up in the 1,000 posts since I took a nice break from all this: Escapist completely blasts any possibility of this being some psyops poo poo, the ever faithful immediately move their goalposts, CIG trots out their token black guy, not very effective since Sandi also apparently wants shaven vagoos (an unforgivable crime in my eyes), they decide to take the site off archive.org for fear of being called on their bullshit anymore and hoping folks didn't save any screenies from before (lol)... ...thread...never change until the end. CrazyLoon fucked around with this message at 18:10 on Oct 3, 2015 |
# ? Oct 3, 2015 17:54 |
|
sorla78 posted:I am not disagreeing at all, but if you are all about annonymous sources and protecting them from disclosure because they want to remain annonymous, you should never approach any potential sources, publically, via twitter to the world. Especially if you are running with an article later on that uses ex-employees as sources. You're assuming she's one of the anonymous sources, based on absolutely nothing. This is the same philosophy with the SC cult's witch hunt. It's just as stupid as reddit with the Boston bomber debacle.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 17:55 |
|
Octopode posted:Does the service have to include all potential elements to begin the delivery date counter? Absolutely yes, not only that but all the potential elements could be exactly as described, delivered on time and you'd still have 14 days to say, "no thanks, money back please". The reason why Tank Boy Ken will quote something from Germany and I'll quote something from UK and they'll match is that this is European wide legislation. It's a lot simpler to draw up a law covering different languages to stop consumers getting ripped off if they get 14 days to inspect whatever it is and the ability to say no and still get a refund without even having to say why they aren't happy. The EU gets a bad rap for a lot of stuff but on consumer protection it's 1st class.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 17:57 |
Kimsemus posted:So if you're saying that if ISIS sends me a twitter message trying to recruit me, and then sets off a roadside bomb, then it must have been me that did it? Sorry if I'm going to take the opinions of hundreds of companies operating under these principles with many court cases examining the question of digital licensure over your questionable legal expertise, who made an rear end of himself the last time legal arguments were discussed in a Star Citizen thread Fil5000 posted:What would it take to make you think it wasn't going to happen? I ask only because everything I've seen and played so far makes me think if we're lucky we'll get a single player game that's quite fun. I've not seen anything to suggest that the multiplayer stuff is going to be anything other than a mess. I answered this yesterday--a stopping of identifiable progress towards the promised end state.
|
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 17:57 |
|
Kimsemus posted:You really can't attack The Escapist for a lack of qualified or questionable leadership, without attacking CIG, which has blatantly less qualified and questionable leadership. The reason why I brought it up is not because of CIG, obviously there's something off there. But more about the driving motive behind the "investigative" piece from the escapist. Depending on if your goal is pageviews or the wellbeing of employees, backer funds or crowdfunding project, you handle matters very differently. Seeing the parental struture behind this all and the background of the managing editor, I doubt that we have any journalistic standards and principles in place, that aren't set primarily to protect them from litigation but not so much to establish quality journalism.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:00 |
|
Octopode posted:We all have our own version of shitposting. Mine just doesn't involve the same poo poo repeated ad nauseum from six threads ago.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:01 |
|
Octopode posted:Sorry if I'm going to take the opinions of hundreds of companies operating under these principles with many court cases examining the question of digital licensure over your questionable legal expertise, who made an rear end of himself the last time legal arguments were discussed in a Star Citizen thread Octopode posted:In a reasonably similar form as they have described, yes. . You have absolutely no credibility. I also now believe you are not operating at full mental capacity.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:01 |
|
Octopode posted:Sorry if I'm going to take the opinions of hundreds of companies operating under these principles with many court cases examining the question of digital licensure over your questionable legal expertise, who made an rear end of himself the last time legal arguments were discussed in a Star Citizen thread You are just spewing garbage out of your face. Like I know all the normal, well adjusted people here must all be in on a giant conspiracy to discredit CIG and make you feel bad, but really. You've spent now 4 pages writing these super retarded quasi-legal contract law posts and it's poo poo literally coming out of your rear end and blowing brown all over this thread. Which is why no one is agreeing with you and people are actively asking you why you're being so autistic. So stop being so autistic. sorla78 posted:The reason why I brought it up is not because of CIG, obviously there's something off there. But more about the driving motive behind the "investigative" piece from the escapist. Depending on if your goal is pageviews or the wellbeing of employees, backer funds or crowdfunding project, you handle matters very differently. Seeing the parental struture behind this all and the background of the managing editor, I doubt that we have any journalistic standards and principles in place, that aren't set primarily to protect them from litigation but not so much to establish quality journalism. I agree that pretty much all games "journalism" is a joke, but I don't think it detracts that The Escapist article rings true in some ways, and is probably resonating with people and their suspicions, which is why it's gained so much traction, and why Croberts wrote an incredibly long, impassioned reply trying to refute it. Could part of their motivation be getting site traffic? Of course, but no news entity runs itself on altruism alone.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:03 |
|
AP posted:http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comicsandcosplay/comics/critical-miss/14724-The-Kickstarter-Burger Want a burger for $5? Sure, here's a $10, keep the change! <dollar signs in eyes> Hey everybody, step right up! Look at this burger concept art, yours for only $10. Wait, no, $50! Also if you pledge $100 you get free hamburgers for life! Want a burger for $5? Sure, I'll take 5000! Here's $25k! [6 months later, burger stand is now a cattle ranch] What's going on? Where are my burgers? I didn't how to make 5000 burgers. This seemed like a good first step! ... Also I kinda spent all the money on these cows. Wanna invest in a meat processing plant? Want a filet mignon steak for $5? What, really? That seems awfully cheap. Nope, real filet mignon steaks! [12 months later] Where's my filet mingon? Well, I know we asked for $5, but turns out those are really expensive. Who knew?! Here's a can of dogfood instead! Want a burger for $5? Sure, here you go. YOINK! [next panel burger man has run away, burger stand collapses revealing that it's a fake 2d hollywood set]
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:05 |
|
I hope octopode keeps posting, because it's certainly making people annoyed for some reason.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:05 |
OhDearGodNo posted:First, checked my email. Nothing within weeks of February 6th Once you logged in following the ToS change, you were presented with the full new ToS again when you agreed to them, fulfilling the presentation requirements. As for the FTC page you keep citing, once again, that's specifically describing rules for specific deliverable goods and merchandise, not digital licenses, for which the rules are not the same and are much more complicated.
|
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:05 |
|
Kimsemus posted:So if you're saying that if ISIS sends me a twitter message trying to recruit me, and then sets off a roadside bomb, then it must have been me that did it? If you are a journalist and you are working on a piece that builds on information from ex-employees and there might be a very good chance that they insist on remaining annonymous, I think that the better idea is to call them by phone - and not loving tweeting them. Is this loving amateur hour?
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:07 |
|
Truga posted:I hope octopode keeps posting, because it's certainly making people annoyed for some reason. Space Court. Anders is scared.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:08 |
|
Octopode posted:Sorry if I'm going to take the opinions of hundreds of companies operating under these principles with many court cases examining the question of digital licensure over your questionable legal expertise, who made an rear end of himself the last time legal arguments were discussed in a Star Citizen thread LAWRENCE FELDMAN v GOOGLE, INC http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/07D0411P.pdf quote:Users would have had to click onto a hyperlink, which would take the user Requiring the user to click to an entirely separate agreement and consent to it has been legally shown to not confirm assent. The only cases where assent was legally supported is when the clickwrap was directly on the page. For example, when you have to scroll through the actual text and click ok. Also, this is the legal way when ToS is changed: https://www.google.com/intl/en_us/policies/terms/changes/ http://help.soundcloud.com/customer/portal/articles/1380159-terms-and-conditions-changes https://www.facebook.com/about/terms-updates Simply changing a few sentences once every two years (very important ones) does not satisfy a reasonable expectation of assent. On top of this, although the original ToS allowed refunds, if there is one single case of CIG saying "We do not offer refunds" between August 29th 2013 and February 1 2015, they could be held liable as a breach of their own ToS.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:08 |
|
thatguy posted:Annoying people is pretty hard. I'm here to learn from the best. Same
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:08 |
|
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:08 |
|
so from what I've gathered, Star Citizen is basically just EVE with some lovely facebook games thrown in. Why do people want this trash?
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:09 |
|
sorla78 posted:The reason why I brought it up is not because of CIG, obviously there's something off there. But more about the driving motive behind the "investigative" piece from the escapist. Depending on if your goal is pageviews or the wellbeing of employees, backer funds or crowdfunding project, you handle matters very differently. Seeing the parental struture behind this all and the background of the managing editor, I doubt that we have any journalistic standards and principles in place, that aren't set primarily to protect them from litigation but not so much to establish quality journalism. so what specifically about the article do you consider "unethical"?
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:09 |
|
If this is what it takes, I will complete Star Citizen myself and make it real for everyone who stayed strong in their faith.code:
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:10 |
OhDearGodNo posted:LAWRENCE FELDMAN v GOOGLE, INC As for being in violation of the ToS: them being in violation with one individual does not invalidate the ToS for everyone. It's a separate agreement for each customer.
|
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:11 |
|
Cowman posted:so from what I've gathered, Star Citizen is basically just EVE with some lovely facebook games thrown in. Why do people want this trash? dreams my friend dreams and something about wing commander i suppose
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:11 |
|
TOS is just there to discourage people from doing thing. If they go to court, they'll get to do thing 99% of the time, but 99% people don't go to court over . It really is that simple. "I want refund" "A-ha, but you accepted this TOS by logging in" "mkay "
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:12 |
|
Guys I just ordered a pizza and they said it'd be at my house in 30 minutes but I just checked my order because it's running late and now it says to receive my pizza I have to accept an updated TOS which says that they're delivering it in 90 minutes I just want to know what my legal rights are before I proceed.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:13 |
|
Truga posted:TOS is just there to discourage people from doing thing. If they go to court, they'll get to do thing 99% of the time, but 99% people don't go to court over . as i understand it aren't there a lot who went well above whatever minimum price it is?
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:14 |
|
Octopode posted:Once you logged in following the ToS change, you were presented with the full new ToS again when you agreed to them, fulfilling the presentation requirements. Clicking a ToS doesn't waive your customer rights in the EU. Just saying.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:14 |
|
Do you have to pay for each module or something? I saw someone talking about the FPS module being $5 more than they said it would. Are they selling people the "game" peicemeal or something?
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:14 |
|
OhDearGodNo posted:You're assuming she's one of the anonymous sources, based on absolutely nothing. The point that this assumption wasn't made by me, it was made by the brown sea - and obviously that connection was made, I just picked it up and find it extremely unprofessional to approach people that way. If i can see the issues when you are working on a piece that is sourced on statements by ex-employees and you are the editor of that article and you are tweeting an ex-employee that just got fired if he has time for a chat. Well, I don't know, maybe Generation Y has become retarded thanks to social media. What's so hard to actually call these people? Oh, I have to put some time into researching their contact details? She is on loving linked-in as well. So you can direct message her there. NO - let's go the lazy way and use twitter.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:14 |
Truga posted:TOS is just there to discourage people from doing thing. If they go to court, they'll get to do thing 99% of the time, but 99% people don't go to court over .
|
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:15 |
|
Truga posted:TOS is just there to discourage people from doing thing. If they go to court, they'll get to do thing 99% of the time, but 99% people don't go to court over . It's still mind-boggling to see non-EU people argue over TOS like it means something. But having talked with some 'Muricans about it, from what I've heard from their side of things I guess it really loving does in the good ole US of A where the law has kinda gone berserk. Or who the hell knows what it is, can we just go back to arguing about which burger is better maybe?
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:15 |
|
Tank Boy Ken posted:Clicking a ToS doesn't waive your customer rights in the EU. Just saying. take into account that he beleives the game will come out according to crobizzle's vision (whatever that may be at the moment)
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:15 |
|
Dusty Lens posted:Guys I just ordered a pizza and they said it'd be at my house in 30 minutes but I just checked my order because it's running late and now it says to receive my pizza I have to accept an updated TOS which says that they're delivering it in 90 minutes I just want to know what my legal rights are before I proceed. I hope you opted for cash-on-delivery! else not much we can do but eat the pizza
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:15 |
|
Cowman posted:so from what I've gathered, Star Citizen is basically just EVE with some lovely facebook games thrown in. Why do people want this trash? EminusSleepus posted:I hope you opted for cash-on-delivery! I believe so much in the pizza being delivered that I just ordered a second pizza.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:15 |
|
Dusty Lens posted:Guys I just ordered a pizza and they said it'd be at my house in 30 minutes but I just checked my order because it's running late and now it says to receive my pizza I have to accept an updated TOS which says that they're delivering it in 90 minutes I just want to know what my legal rights are before I proceed. Accept and buy pictures of toppings while you wait.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:15 |
|
Tank Boy Ken posted:Clicking a ToS doesn't waive your customer rights in the EU. Just saying. It doesn't in the US either, companies just rely on people being lazy or not having the funds to fight it out.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:16 |
Tank Boy Ken posted:Clicking a ToS doesn't waive your customer rights in the EU. Just saying. Yeah, like I said, the EU / other countries with actual consumer protection laws are a whole different beast. In the US, however, the law is heavily, heavily favored towards "if you agree to something with the merchant you're pretty much hosed."
|
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:16 |
|
Octopode posted:Once you logged in following the ToS change, you were presented with the full new ToS again when you agreed to them, fulfilling the presentation requirements. No, you were presented with a link to the new ToS, with the agreement on a separate page. I just showed you legal precedent to highlight that that does not equal assent. "As a result of this store change, all backers will be required to accept a new ToS, Privacy Policy, and EULA when connecting to Star Citizen game" If customer A never buys anything from the store but logged into the game, the ToS would not apply, nor would agreeing to a new EULA apply to the ToS. It would again not qualify as affirmation. If Customer B melts an existing digital good for another and clicks the ToS, it does not constitute assent as the ToS was located on a separate page as the agreement. All of this doesn't even matter because you still don't understand that the Terms of Service are what the business wants and not what the customer is legally bound by. They can throw whatever they want into the ToS, they can throw things out. However doing so does not indemnify them of liabilities not expressed within, nor does it obligate someone under other local statutes to be bound by them. Just stop because you're wrong by a million lesnicks.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:16 |
|
Octopode posted:Yeah, like I said, the EU / other countries with actual consumer protection laws are a whole different beast. In the US, however, the law is heavily, heavily favored towards "if you agree to something with the merchant you're pretty much hosed." Wrong again. God drat.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:16 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 14:22 |
|
Nice to see so many accredited experts in Games Law itt.
|
# ? Oct 3, 2015 18:17 |