Sony Network Entertainment International... new name, same bull****

[IanDanKilmaster]

Generally, that is the case, svx.  I'm glad you brought that up.  I keep hearing about a ruling from April by the Supreme Court that says such contracts are legal, but I haven't looked it up myself yet.  I know of a lot of stupid decisions this current SC has done, so I wouldn't put it past them, but I really hope that in particular is just some misunderstanding on the part of paranoid internet video game nerds.

[Chocofreak13]

i doubt that they can keep you out of court. it's like a confedentiality contract: it can keep your mouth shut, unless someone commits a crime.

[IanDanKilmaster]

So, here's some more info on that decision back in April.

So, apparently, it was AT&T that started this legal precedent by forcing arbitration in their own service contracts, and then the Supreme Court enforced it as a legally binding agreement.  What is also apparent is that this another case where the state and federal Supreme Courts have a very different definition of what is "constitutional".  So while the US Supreme Court says forced arbitration is legal, different state Supreme Courts have said otherwise.  So there's that, and there's also the argument that any "legally binding agreement" that requires as little as a button press to agree to, should require less than sending a letter to opt-out of.

[svx]

And America, et al, lets them do this!

Here in Gotham, it's a different story

When Sony's lawyers come, we break out with the Kalashnikovs!

[IanDanKilmaster]

I would love for Batman to make his way to SCEA HQ and shove a size 13 batboot right up Jack Tretton's ass.

[Chocofreak13]

speaking of which, there's a new batman game coming out that looks epic. :3

other than that, it's not like it's something that's required to live. if the contracts bother people that much, they'll switch to a different system. :\

[IanDanKilmaster]

While you have a point, Kari, that doesn't mean there will always be an alternative.  Ever since that SC decision, this kind of legally-evasive contract writing has become a trend.  While certain other big names have thus far avoided it (Microsoft and Valve), EA's anti-class action EULA precedes Sony's.  My concern is, if Sony's "contracts" and others like it are allowed to stand - what's to keep other companies from jumping on the bandwagon?  It's not the end of the world, no, but it could herald the end of any kind of consumer rights.

[Chocofreak13]

if consumer rights end in the console market, people will switch to something else, like computer or vintage games. this will prompt policy changes. :\