Sony, along with several other big companies, has recently tried to institute a “no sue” clause in the terms of service agreements for its consoles.
To oppose this, some people are, yes, trying to sue them over their “no sue” agreements.
According to a report on GameSpot, a man in Northern California is leading a suit, filed in November, which alleges “Sony engaged in unfair business practices by forcing consumers to either give up their right to file a class-action lawsuit or give up access to the online gaming network they effectively paid for when they purchased the hardware.”
While this sounds a little crazy, remember, the legality of these “no sue” agreements is highly questionable, given they seemingly strip away many Americans legal rights, so he may just have a case.
Sony sued over terms of service update [GameSpot]
Weresmurf
Wednesday, December 21, 2011 at 8:08 AMLove it :) hope it becomes a class action :D
SirSplatterfest
Wednesday, December 21, 2011 at 10:26 AMWhy? The only ones who win in class action is the lawyers, the people they represent get nothing!
Sam
Wednesday, December 21, 2011 at 11:30 AMBecause money is the only worthwhile thing in this world. siiiigh.
LOTUK
Wednesday, December 21, 2011 at 8:41 AMI hate what Americans can (and do) sue for. But in this case, I whole heartedly hope this one succeeds.
You can’t have a contract which says we’re not responsible for this and that, but if we forgot anything, we’re not responsible for that too.
David
Wednesday, December 21, 2011 at 9:00 AMAgree LOTUK, I totally don’t understand how you can be forced to sign away your natural rights to use a product. I am not a lawyer but I suspect these clauses will be laughed out of court. The companies know this but it is in they’re interest to give it a shot. The upshot of never being held responsible for anything, EVER is a pretty big incentive.
Shane
Wednesday, December 21, 2011 at 9:08 AMI think they know it’s unenforceable, but if it acts as a deterrent to even one over-litigious mouth-breather, it’s worth the effort.
NegativeZero
Wednesday, December 21, 2011 at 11:05 AMUnfortunately the reason they’re all putting this stuff into their EULAs is that it has been held up in court.
Also, what the clause says is not that you can’t sue them, but that you cannot file a class action against them and any dispute has to be settled via binding arbitration, which is where the company hires a third party arbitrator to sort it out, generally a very one-sided thing heavily stacked toward the company. It’s dodgy but it’s legal.
Of course this sort of crap would never fly in Australia, where you can’t sign away rights like that.
4len
Wednesday, December 21, 2011 at 10:13 AMI agree with the consensus on this, I usually cringe at the general sleu of Suing in America, but THIS is pretty much bullcrap…. GO TEAM!
allanon10101
Wednesday, December 21, 2011 at 11:45 AMWhilst I disagree with the level of suing that foes on in America, I feel they should not have to give up the right to do so in the event a reasonable cause comes along just for the purposes of being able to use a particular product. That’s one area I know for a fact the Australian system has it right.
Best of luck, guys