Quantcast
Destructoid Japanator Tomopop Flixist
Dtoid Forums now support TapATalk and ForumRunner on your iOS/Android devices. Whoot.

HAHAHA! Sony sued over no-sue clause in Terms of Service photo

Yep.

The new PlayStation Network Terms of Service clause that basically says that users cannot sue Sony after agreeing to use the service has bit Sony in the ass. They're...being sued.

A California man is suing Sony on behalf of all PS3 owners out there that signed up for access prior to the September TOS change. According to GameSpot, the suit alleges that Sony engaged in unfair business practices by forcing consumers to either give up their rights or not use PSN, even after purchasing the PS3 hardware.

The suit says that Sony buried this no-sue clause in its 21 pages of TOS crap and avoided putting it online, even though they had with other updates in the past. It also said that opting out required snail mail, with no other forms of communication accepted.

Hilarious. So much for preventing class-action lawsuits!

[more laughing corgis here]








More gaming stories around the web. Got news? Submit yours to tips@destructoid.com

Dale North is Destructoid's Editor-In-Chief, a founding editor, and specialist in Japanese gaming. An accomplished musician, Dale was reporting from Japan during the earthquakes of 2011. Luckily, he got the fuck out alive and is home in America now with his wife and beloved corgi, Einstein. Dale is also a co-founder of Destructoid's sister anime site Japanator. Likes Corgis, Sega Saturn, PSP, iPhone, Photographic tools. Meet the rest of the team



Post a comment! You can also post a photo below:

Comment with Facebook





Click connect and comment instantly!

Comment with Dtoid





New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds

81 comments | showing # 1 to 50
prev
next 50 comments

Gorescream's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:39
Gorescream
'merica!
jimboxxx's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:41
jimboxxx
Funniest shit HAPPENS to $ony LIKE that dude from Twoand HAlf man lol
Thane Vickers's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:43
Thane Vickers
Necessary evil.
Insanity-Oo's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:43
Insanity-Oo
This is pretty much just desserts for Sony. Hope the guy wins. Any way we can donate to him?

I feel the title and most of this story (except for the last line) is a little misleading; sony's new TOS prevents class action law suits (group sueing). So this guy is well within his rights to sue over it, even within Sony's TOS.
Perpetual Struggle's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:43
Perpetual Struggle
Sony Defense Force incoming in 3, 2, 1...
mix's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:43
mix
STEAM has it, MS has...why no sue them?

I do not see this cranky ass American winning though, it is a free service. Agree to it and use it, or don't.
flintmech's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:43
flintmech
I just want to tell him good luck, we're all counting on him.
Tristrix's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:44
Tristrix
Good for him I suppose but didn't the supreme court already rule in the AT&T case that this is perfectly legit and acceptable as far as the courts are concerned?
llort het's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:46
llort het
Best news in a while. Also inb4 corporate lapdogs start defending the degredation of consumer rights.
Revuhlooshun's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:49
Revuhlooshun
@Tristix - Not entirely. Sony says so, but even they're not fully sure about it. Right in that same section:

"If any clause within this Section 15 (other than the Class Action Waiver clause above) is found to be illegal or unenforceable, that clause will be severed from this Section 15,and the remainder of this Section 15 will be given full force and effect. If the Class Action Waiver clause is found to be illegal or unenforceable, this entire Section 15 will be unenforceable, and the Dispute will be decided by a court and you and the Sony Entity you have a dispute with each agree to waive in that instance, to the fullest extent allowed by law, any trial by jury."

The AT&T case also has to do with if class action lawsuits can be initiated due to state laws. It started because AT&T had to charge a customer $30 in California taxes for a free phone.

For Sony, or any company, to use that as a blanket justification that Class Action lawsuits are illegal is dubious.

Which is why they're all covering their ass.
naninani's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:50
naninani
This will be a major coup if this succeed, seeing as it will require flying in the face of precedent very recently set by the Supreme Court.
Maniac's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:50
Maniac
@mix

Because no one reads the damned things. It just goes to show how much power corporations have over the people.

Oh and Apple and AT&T have one such clause too.
Revuhlooshun's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:51
Revuhlooshun
Or, rather, to my previous post: that companies think they can outright dismiss a consumer's right to a Class Action, not that they're illegal.
CaptainHowdy's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:51
CaptainHowdy
Not bad. Hope this man wins.
LegendPenguin's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:52
LegendPenguin
Goddammit, Dale - the one with the ball on his nose made me laugh.

Huh? There's an article? Oh, ummm...good for them! Maybe.
Football Religion's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:54
Football Religion
Hopefully he succeeds. Fuck these no sue clauses.
Revuhlooshun's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:54
Revuhlooshun
Basically, the AT&T case has to do with jurisdiction of State law with regards to arbitration than it does with Class Actions.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2011-04-27-supreme-court-class-actions_n.htm

Everybody can look at the AT&T case themselves. It's very clear the Court was not saying Sony, or EA, or Microsoft, could do what it is doing.
SebasGR's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 11:58
SebasGR
@mix The thing is, they cant sell you something and then take it away if you dont agree to something new they want to add.

Im also tired of all this "its free" shit. Its not like they dont make money out of it and they do it for charity. Plus, I did pay for it when paying my PS3.
flintmech's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:00
flintmech
@mix

If Sony loses here, that will be irrelevant. If it becomes illegal to implement "no sue" clauses, Microsoft, Steam, and everybody else will be required to change.
naninani's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:01
naninani
I have a feeling this will be like the OtherOS case.
It will vanish for a half-year, then we'll get a small article stating the case was thrown out.
qlum's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:02
qlum
I hope they will win as I find it quite strange that a company may deny people the right to sue them
ScottyG's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:04
ScottyG
BRB, starting a class action lawsuit against Microsoft for doing the same thing.
L3ED's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:05
L3ED
@jimboxxx
WHY d0 yu AlWay$ haV a mes$3d up keyboArd? Or are you just trying to sound like a kewl kat?
naninani's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:07
naninani
Heck, I think MS's is worse. There's an Ars article about how you can't even opt out of that one.
Usedtabe's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:09
Usedtabe
Good, go for MS and EA next. But do it harder.
Red TheHaze Veron's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:09
Red TheHaze Veron
Now let's sue MS and Valve since they have the same thing.
Henriquegds's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:19
Henriquegds
Sony is kinda crazy to think that people won't sue about a clause that makes you can't sue them, people won't be okay with that
pedrovay2003's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:19
pedrovay2003
@jimboxxx

This same bullshit anti-sue stuff was in the last Xbox update, too. In other words, shut the hell up for once.
Trev's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:20
Trev
And I'm sure that California man plans on cutting us all a cheque and isn't trying the same get rich quick bullshit that part was meant to combat.
KilvasKills's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:24
KilvasKills
VIDEO GAMES!
OneRed's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:30
OneRed
Yeah, anyone particularly interested in this stuff should really look more into the AT&T case if they haven't already.

That said, the movement against binding arbitration being used in this manner is actually much larger than I think most realize. I watched the senate hearing on it, and the prevailing mentality was, to put it in simplest possible terms, something to the effect of "seriously, we have no fucking clue how something so unbelievably retarded is protected under the law right now, AT&T literally got away with stealing from my constituency".

All these clauses will enable, as they are being utilized here, is the creation of a series of kangaroo courts. It isn't being hidden, there are no conspiracy theories, its almost too fucking comically obvious.
BoomingEchoes's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:33
BoomingEchoes
Guy's lawyers have no foresight what-so-ever. They need to be going after EA, Microsoft and anyone else who has on of these on their ToA's. The idea should be going after the clause itself and get the laws changes, not to go after a single company who uses it (and yeah, I think Trist is right, AT&T got the supreme court to rule its legality)
TheRedDevil's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:35
TheRedDevil
Sony are getting what they deserve.
tekbunny's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:46
tekbunny
I wish there was another way to make companies stop being dicks other than suing them.
Awetopsy's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:48
Awetopsy
Where can I donate to this guys legal costs? This no-sue clause is Bologna and I hope Sony loses this case.
DtoidBadMrK's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 12:51
DtoidBadMrK
Um...you should probably take another look at the Playstation Terms of Service. They don't say you can't sue. They say you cannot make a class action lawsuit. Sony is trying to avoid class action suits, instead opting to take any suits on a case by case basis. Nowhere does it say you can't sue.

For an "Editor-in-Chief" I'd think you'd check your facts before reporting something.
Icehearted's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 13:00
Icehearted
Well, who DIDN'T see this coming?
TechnicolorDewDrop's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 13:04
TechnicolorDewDrop
Good luck. He probably won't get bery far with his particular case though.
qlum's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 13:10
qlum
The fact that others do it to doesnt mean its something that should be allowed. Luckily we in Europe dont have this (I think)
STRYKIE's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 13:15
STRYKIE
While crying over corporations being.. well, corporate, is the most pathetic shit I've even seen in the industry, I must admit, Sony had this coming to them for the sheer irony and audacity of this little loophole they tied to conjure up for themselves.

@Perpetual Struggle
Hmm, must be having fun with that tumbleweed.
Captain of the Zanarkand Abes's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 13:15
Captain of the Zanarkand Abes
HADERPDEEDERDERPDEETIDDLYTEEDERPDEDUM!
Scuffles's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 13:20
Scuffles
@DtoidBadMrK

Of course they are trying to avoid class action lawsuits, because Class actions are the only type of suit that stands a chance against their nearly limitless legal defense funds. Elsewhere they would just keep people in legal limbo until they run out of money to continue pursuing the case.
OneRed's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 13:22
OneRed
@tekbunny

Listen, all I'm saying is that I have a few MJOLNIR Mk. V suits laying around from my supergenius engineer days if you want to maybe cause a ruckus. If you're fairly short, I'll cut a little breathing hole into the stomach of it so the person whos shoulders you'd need to sit on doesn't suffocate. Power armor is so much more persuasive than lawsuits.

@DtoidBadMrk

Hahaha, this is the beauty of it! The class action suit is typically used to cover large swaths of wronged people without flooding the courts with potentially millions of identical claims. Now, to null the private contract instating binding arbitration, you would have to prove there is no other recourse for anyone, which is, for all intents and purposes, impossible (this was the ruling in favor of AT&T). So basically, punch one person in the face real hard and they can sue you, but punch everyone in the face and your single case opens up the floodgates the way a class action is designed to avoid, which is why a class action would be the only way to go. Except you can't, because you signed away your right to be part of a class action. The more people you punch, the safer you are.

Also, "...instead opting to take any suits on a case by case basis. Nowhere does it say you can't sue. ". There are no suits. Sony pays for a private arbitrator, which they can fire and replace at any time they please, to make a judgement based on absolutely nothing, without any transparency, and without appellate rights afforded. This arbitrator, who is being paid for by Sony, can pull any number from his/her rectal area without any rhyme or reason, and there is nothing you can do about it. This is, of course, if Sony agrees they did anything wrong in the first place, which they're not obligated to do. If you're entering into arbitration with them, then it is inherent that you can't sue, otherwise you wouldn't be entering into arbitration.
mxdirector's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 13:31
mxdirector
Well I don't believe that TOS's are legally binding any way
tekbunny's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 13:36
tekbunny
@onered

You're in luck, I'm almost freakishly small.

Also, I'm digging this idea. Now all we need to do is train some gorillas to throw large barrels on command, scrounge up a couple of dragons, aliens and zombies, and mass produce my health regen prototype device and we can do this thing up right.
Hurricrane's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 13:40
Hurricrane
Good on this guy! Wish i could give him some cash to help with the undoubtedly huge lawyer fees, but I really hope he wins. If he does it could overturn that awful, horrific, and straight up evil Supreme Court verdict. I want to play my games and I shouldn't have to give up my rights to do so.
ley's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 13:41
ley
Those corgi pics made my day.
CaimDark's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 13:54
CaimDark
Talk about poetic justice!
Orcrist's Avatar - Comment posted on 12/20/2011 14:03
Orcrist
Goddamn I love Dtoid's 'Thread-Images'.
prev next 50 comments

Comment with Facebook





Click connect and comment instantly!

Comment with Dtoid





New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds

Comments policy

Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?

Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!