{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
8/25/2020 3:13:39 PM
68
Any such attempt at a lawsuit would be quickly dismissed. Assuming (the unlikely event) that a lawyer was even willing to take it on, and file it.
Reason:
What Bungie is doing is WELL within their legal rights, and established intellectual property rights law.
What so many gamers don't either understand, or arne't willing to accept is that UNLESS BUNGIE (OR ANY OTHER DEVELOPER) SPECIFICALLY TELLS YOU THAT THEY ARE SELLING YOU THE RIGHTS TO THE GAME?
You don't own ANY of it. Therefore have no basis for any claim regarding what's done with it.
To further seal the fate of any such lawsuit. Anyone who is actually playing the game right now, has already signed a CONTRACT (EULA/SL) stating that you agree that you are buying a LICENSE to the play the game, and do not own part of the game. That you agree that Bungie reserves the right to decide WHAT the game is, and are free to change it without your prior consent.
So the law is on Bungie's side.
The contract---and the terms you agreed to---are on their side.
So any attempt to sue Bungie over this goes into the "frivolous suit" category, and would be quickly dismissed by any self-respecting civil court judge.....and the attorney who filed it would likely get admonished by the judge for wasting the courts time.
English
-
[quote]Any such attempt at a lawsuit would be quickly dismissed. Assuming (the unlikely event) that a lawyer was even willing to take it on, and file it. Reason: What Bungie is doing is WELL within their legal rights, and established intellectual property rights law. What so many gamers don't either understand, or arne't willing to accept is that UNLESS BUNGIE (OR ANY OTHER DEVELOPER) SPECIFICALLY TELLS YOU THAT THEY ARE SELLING YOU THE RIGHTS TO THE GAME? You don't own ANY of it. Therefore have no basis for any claim regarding what's done with it. To further seal the fate of any such lawsuit. Anyone who is actually playing the game right now, has already signed a CONTRACT (EULA/SL) stating that you agree that you are buying a LICENSE to the play the game, and do not own part of the game. That you agree that Bungie reserves the right to decide WHAT the game is, and are free to change it without your prior consent. So the law is on Bungie's side. The contract---and the terms you agreed to---are on their side. So any attempt to sue Bungie over this goes into the "frivolous suit" category, and would be quickly dismissed by any self-respecting civil court judge.....and the attorney who filed it would likely get admonished by the judge for wasting the courts time.[/quote] Oh boy a legal expert too huh? Well the court system exists to challenge and change the law, not enforce it.
-
No. Courts exist to interpret and apply the law, and to act as restraints upon legislative overeach. Legislatures exists to create and change law. If you don’t like copyright law, call your Congressman.
-
[quote]No. Courts exist to interpret and apply the law, and to act as restraints upon legislative overeach. Legislatures exists to create and change law. If you don’t like copyright law, call your Congressman.[/quote] You should probably research the law and court system before you make more false statements about it.
-
Edited by TheArtist: 8/27/2020 8:05:14 AMTake your own advice. In the US, the Legislative Branch makes the law. The Executive Branch enforces the law. The Judicial Branch interprets and applies the law. The only time where the court is involved in challenging a law is when it is perceived as unconstitutional and citizens seek relief by having it struck down. Thus acting as a check and balance upon the lawmaking power of the Legislative Branch. Thus, as I said, if you don’t like copyright laws, contact your Congressman. Because that is the only way—at this point—-you are going to change them. As they impact interstate and international trade, they are quite constitutional and no Federal court would entertain a review and ruling. They would only step in if there was an area of their interpretation that needed clarification.
-
[quote]Take your own advice. In the US, the Legislative Branch makes the law. The Executive Branch enforces the law. The Judicial Branch interprets and applies the law. The only time where the court is involved in challenging a law is when it is perceived as unconstitutional and citizens seek relief by having it struck down. Thus acting as a check and balance upon the lawmaking power of the Legislative Branch. Thus, as I said, if you don’t like copyright laws, contact your Congressman. Because that is the only way—at this point—-you are going to change them. As they impact interstate and international trade, they are quite constitutional and no Federal court would entertain a review and ruling. They would only step in if there was an area of their interpretation that needed clarification.[/quote] You keep saying no court would entertain a case, but that is literally their purpose. You even said it was to interpret the law so it’s like you understand that, but then insist it isn’t true and no court would bother to do their job.
-
I said exactly what I said. Bungie is very squarely within their legal rights. Their only vulnerability is around entering into a contract with minors. But entire industries are in that same position and consumers would be wise to let that sleeping dog lie.
-
[quote]I said exactly what I said. Bungie is very squarely within their legal rights. Their only vulnerability is around entering into a contract with minors. But entire industries are in that same position and consumers would be wise to let that sleeping dog lie.[/quote] No they wouldn’t. Customers should be constantly challenging EULAs and SLAs or else they will become/continue to be just another way that corporations exploit their customers in this country.
-
Waste of time and money....and you should be glad that it would be. Causeif you make it such that people can’t make a living with the fruits of their creative work? That work goes away. The value and enjoyment for you goes away. You’ll have killed the Goose That Laid The Golden Eggs, only to find out that there is no gold inside.
-
[quote]Waste of time and money....and you should be glad that it would be. Causeif you make it such that people can’t make a living with the fruits of their creative work? That work goes away. The value and enjoyment for you goes away. You’ll have killed the Goose That Laid The Golden Eggs, only to find out that there is no gold inside.[/quote] 🤣🤣🤣🤣 They can make a living by making and selling a product. That doesn’t include being allowed to take the product a customer paid for away from them after they paid. You enjoy a hypothetical analogy so let’s have one: Name one clothing store that comes to your house and takes a coat out of your closet because your closet is pretty full and you haven’t worn it in years. If they did and you took them to court to get your money back for the coat and won would that prevent them from making and selling coats?
-
In the interests of fair and accurate debate, I do feel the need to point out that for your coat example to be directly comparable, the person with the coat would have had to have purchased a license to wear it and signed a contract stating the maker of the coat could revoke access to it if they so decided... as opposed to having bought it outright. There are fair points on both sides of the argument. I'm not overly fussed either way as on the one hand, I dont really play any of whats being taken away any more and would welcome better performance and faster load times... on the other its nice to occasionally revisit old missions, wander old patrol areas for a bit of nostalgia. Interested to see how this one plays out.
-
[quote]In the interests of fair and accurate debate, I do feel the need to point out that for your coat example to be directly comparable, the person with the coat would have had to have purchased a license to wear it and signed a contract stating the maker of the coat could revoke access to it if they so decided... as opposed to having bought it outright. There are fair points on both sides of the argument. I'm not overly fussed either way as on the one hand, I dont really play any of whats being taken away any more and would welcome better performance and faster load times... on the other its nice to occasionally revisit old missions, wander old patrol areas for a bit of nostalgia. Interested to see how this one plays out.[/quote] Alright Biels that’s it! You and me right now in death match arena. I agree with what you are saying on the surface, but the point was making wasn’t to try and make an analogy about the SLA. It’s in response to the ludicrous idea that if a player sued and won Bungie couldn’t make a good game anymore. Not that they have made one since Destiny heyoooooooo. That’s what the analogy is about, illustrating the idea that Bungie could make a good game and just sell it, and not sell it then vault it on a whim.
-
I have to wonder whether the game would have been ok on next gen, given that its much beefier than current gen. Then again technical limitations may still have been an issue. I dunno. If we 1v1 though, its Riot Shield only on Nuketown.
-
[quote]I have to wonder whether the game would have been ok on next gen, given that its much beefier than current gen. Then again technical limitations may still have been an issue. I dunno. If we 1v1 though, its Riot Shield only on Nuketown.[/quote] [b]WHEN[/b] we 1v1 it’s Rocket Shields only on NukeDown. Totally hard to speculate, but if it’s a code thing (and it usually is) then maybe the hardware wouldn’t help. One day it will be new engine time.
-
No. No rockets. Only shields. In a cloud of smoke bombs.
-
[quote]No. No rockets. Only shields. In a cloud of smoke bombs.[/quote] Like great Grecian poetry.
-
If you signed a legal document allowing them to take the coat away at any point then they'd be within their rights to come and take it from you lol. Did you think about this? You want to challenge these things? Read them before you make your purchase. If you don't like the terms then you make Bungie aware that you won't support a game that has a ToS outlining them pulling content from the game. Try making a responsible decision before you make the purchase. This isn't on Bungie it's on an entire community that can't read apparently. Anyone taking this to court would be laughed at... IF you ever actually made it to court.
-
[quote]If you signed a legal document allowing them to take the coat away at any point then they'd be within their rights to come and take it from you lol. Did you think about this? You want to challenge these things? Read them before you make your purchase. If you don't like the terms then you make Bungie aware that you won't support a game that has a ToS outlining them pulling content from the game. Try making a responsible decision before you make the purchase. This isn't on Bungie it's on an entire community that can't read apparently. Anyone taking this to court would be laughed at... IF you ever actually made it to court.[/quote] Thanks for joining in the middle of a conversation to try to shift the context of my comment to attack it. They must love you at the strawman factory. Companies creating exploitive SLAs and assuming their customers won’t read them so they have a technicality to site (or in this case for their fans to site as a justifiable excuse to hurl abuse at their customers) when they want to abuse their relationship with their customers is the companies problem, not the customers.
-
I'm not saying it isn't a shady tactic but these SLAs and extremely wordy ToS agreements have been around for a while. As a consumer you have to take responsibility for where you spend your money. Companies are abusing these relationships because the consumer ALLOWS it. I don't see how it's a strawman argument. They put a document right in front of you... you actively choose NOT to read it and agree to the terms... the blame therefore cannot soley rest on the company lol.
-
[quote]I'm not saying it isn't a shady tactic but these SLAs and extremely wordy ToS agreements have been around for a while. As a consumer you have to take responsibility for where you spend your money. Companies are abusing these relationships because the consumer ALLOWS it. I don't see how it's a strawman argument. They put a document right in front of you... you actively choose NOT to read it and agree to the terms... the blame therefore cannot soley rest on the company lol.[/quote] I never said it rests solely on the company. Straw man factory employee of the month!
-
Edited by TH3N0RS3F0RC3: 8/28/2020 6:52:44 PMSays the guy trying to build a legal case against a document he didn't read but agreed to... You the CEO of Strawman Inc.? You also may want to look up what a straw man argument actually is before you go tossing around the term.
-
Edited by TattooedOni: 8/28/2020 7:41:55 PM[quote]Says the guy trying to build a legal case against a document he didn't read but agreed to... You the CEO of Strawman Inc.? You also may want to look up what a straw man argument actually is before you go tossing around the term.[/quote] I’m not trying to build a legal case against a document I didn’t read but agreed to. Try and follow the thread and actually read what I actually said. You continue to attack things I didn’t say. That’s a strawman argument.
-
Ya know you're right! You haven't actually argued a legitimate point in the entirety of this post... my fault i don't know what i was thinking.
-
[quote]Ya know you're right! You haven't actually argued a legitimate point in the entirety of this post... my fault i don't know what i was thinking.[/quote] All of my points were legitimate. You just ignored them to attack me about something I didn’t say. Strawman after strawman. So now being sarcastic doesn’t improve your position, it just further undermines it.
-
They didn’t take away anything that you had any rights to. You may not like it, but that is the law. Your laughter is irrelevant.
-
[quote]They didn’t take away anything that you had any rights to. You may not like it, but that is the law. Your laughter is irrelevant.[/quote] My laughter is relevant, the comments you made were hilarious. This particular shady business practice could use some review by a court. I could care less what the SLA says. The expectation of the company is that players will not read it, and they will have the unjust law to use as an excuse. I hope someone does use the court system to challenge it. Not me. I’ll probably just use the same SLA to get a refund under their terms and move on with my life and play for free.
