Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Lineage II Addiction Lawsuit Makes It Past the EULA

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the four-little-letters dept.

The Courts 267

We recently discussed a man who sued NCsoft for making Lineage II "too addictive" after he spent 20,000 hours over five years playing it. Now, several readers have pointed out that the lawsuit has progressed past its first major hurdle: the EULA. Quoting: "NC Interactive has responded the way most software companies and online services have for more than a decade: it argued that the claims are barred by its end-user license agreement, which in this case capped the company's liability to the amount Smallwood paid in fees over six months prior to his filing his complaint (or thereabouts). One portion of the EULA specifically stated that lawsuits could only be brought in Texas state court in Travis County, where NC Interactive is located. ... But the judge in this case, US District Judge Alan C. Kay, noted that both Texas and Hawaii law bar contract provisions that waive in advance the ability to make gross-negligence claims. He also declined to dismiss Smallwood's claims for negligence, defamation, and negligent infliction of emotional distress."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I hope his lawsuit succeeds... (3, Insightful)

johnhp (1807490) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446594)

... because if it does, I'll have a killer suit against Burger King for making their food too delicious.

Re:I hope his lawsuit succeeds... (1)

nacturation (646836) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446612)

because if it does, I'll have a killer suit against Burger King for making their food too delicious.

Nah, let's start a class action suit against Slashdot. :)

Re: Class Action Lawsuit... (3, Insightful)

Phrogman (80473) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446692)

Its a good idea when planning a class action lawsuit to ensure that your target actually has any money to be paid out. I think /. likely fails in this regard :P
I am sure its generating some money, but I doubt its huge...

Re:I hope his lawsuit succeeds... (2, Funny)

Robert Zenz (1680268) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446646)

Nah, that would be dismissed immediately, unprovable claim.

Re:I hope his lawsuit succeeds... (0, Redundant)

bakamorgan (1854434) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446654)

then can I can sue wendy for those damn addicting frosties?...damn them then after that I will make a movie become famous so when I get busted for drugs and hookers I can just say oh the fame made me do it then go to rehab while still making a shit ton of money. Since thats how all the clebraties are doing it now a days. After I start to loose fame then I will work my way to suing McDonalds for their damn addicting fries. then repeate the cycle. Sounds good, when do we start?

Re:I hope his lawsuit succeeds... (2, Funny)

dangitman (862676) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446696)

Nah, sue Pringles - they even claim that once you pop you can't stop... but wait, does that legally constitute a warning and therefore relieve them of responsibility?

Re:I hope his lawsuit succeeds... (3, Funny)

Aeternitas827 (1256210) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446764)

I'd say it more likely signals intent; they want the chips to be addictingly good. See also, Frito-Lay's slightly less incriminating 'Betcha Can't Eat Just One' tagline.

Re:I hope his lawsuit succeeds... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33447260)

Then why the fuck are Pringles tubes resealable ?

Re:I hope his lawsuit succeeds... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33447062)

That's just the MSG my friend. The food is not delicious.

Re:I hope his lawsuit succeeds... (0, Offtopic)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447180)

"... because if it does, I'll have a killer suit against Burger King for making their food too delicious."

Small potatoes. I'll sue all owners of a vagina!

Re:I hope his lawsuit succeeds... (1)

Cryacin (657549) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447254)

Small potatoes. I'll sue all owners of a vagina!

Wow, you must have been busy.

Re:I hope his lawsuit succeeds... (0, Flamebait)

ooshna (1654125) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447656)

Yeah like the owners of vagina make money being in the kitchen all day.

Re:I hope his lawsuit succeeds... (2, Funny)

notknown86 (1190215) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447302)

I have a killer suit against Burger King for damages to my toilet.

Re:I hope his lawsuit succeeds... (1)

notknown86 (1190215) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447306)

My toilet has a killer suit against Burger King for damages and gross (really gross) negligence

Re:I hope his lawsuit succeeds... (1)

drsquare (530038) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447682)

... because if it does, I'll have a killer suit against Burger King for making their food too delicious.

Unfortunately the judge would throw the case out as soon as he samples the product.

Big "Uh Oh!" (4, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446640)

Yeah... this attempt is very interesting. A Texas company writing a license agreement in a state requiring any legal claims against them be brought in Texas and limiting liabilities in ways that are expressly prohibited under Texas law? Hrm! Either that EULA came from a boiler-plate that originated from out of state (not a good excuse) or they simply thought they could get away with it and got caught. This is rather like the "new patent troll" story where people are trying to benefit themselves through legal means when they actually have no right to claim such.

I wonder if the pendulum is actually starting to swing the other way now?

Re:Big "Uh Oh!" (0)

daveime (1253762) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446752)

I'm sorry but why is this an issue ?

A company in Lichtenstein or Switzerland can write a contract that is only legally binding in those countries, yet Texas is bigger than both of them.

The 50 odd states of the US all have different tax laws and local government, so why is one not allowed to set terms in contracts that relate directly to the area you are doing business in. Does it have to include provisions for all 50 odd states ?

Re:Big "Uh Oh!" (2, Informative)

erroneus (253617) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447004)

Did you miss the part where some of their Texas-requiring EULA is actually prohibited by Texas law?

Re:Big "Uh Oh!" (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447168)

Do any other states have laws that overrule the jurisdiction clause? If so then it would make sense for the limitation to be there.

Re:Big "Uh Oh!" (4, Informative)

totally bogus dude (1040246) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447038)

Let me quote the post you responded to, with a bit of emphasis

A Texas company writing a license agreement [...] requiring any legal claims against them be brought in Texas and limiting liabilities in ways that are expressly prohibited under Texas law

You're welcome. Have a nice day!

Re:Big "Uh Oh!" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33447084)

A company in Lichtenstein or Switzerland can write a contract that is only legally binding in those countries, yet Texas is bigger than both of them.

And that's why most licenses and contracts include a salvatorius clause that basically states that in case any of the other clauses is invalid/prohibited, all others are not affected. Contracts with end-users usually can't have provisions that determine the court and/or law that has to be applied, it's always the one where the end-user buys the product/lives/uses the service (at least in the EU).

look another US-American idiot! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33446642)

"No it is not my fault, they made me do it by designing the game a certain way" and in the same breath the fucking moron will claim that he has free will because he lives in US-America.

But fear not, the solution will involve lots of praying and other superstitious crap.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33446720)

Oooh, look! Another EuroTroll!

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1, Flamebait)

ChocNut (791621) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446732)

Stop bashing religion. Praying is a form of grace. More good comes from modern religion than you can imagine.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (5, Insightful)

Facebeast (1689358) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446786)

More good comes from modern religion than you can imagine.

War. Racism. Homophobia. Sexism. Indoctrination of children. Rejection of science/reason. Rejection of contraception leading to the spread of STDs.

So what's the good bit? It better be fucking massive.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (4, Insightful)

mcvos (645701) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446856)

Peace, tolerance, acceptance, equality, taking good care of your family, critical thought, responsibility.

I'm sure you can find something in that list that should appeal to you.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (2, Insightful)

Issarlk (1429361) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446898)

Why do you describe buddhism when we are talking about religion?

Re:look another US-American idiot! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33446914)

You're talking about the theocrats that had enserfdomed the whole tibethan population.
The ones who would enact punishments such as gouging the eyes out of peasants
when they revolted. Granted, things are hell in Tibet since China invaded but it was hell
before under the theocracy.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

mcvos (645701) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447250)

Is buddhism not a religion?

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

ZeRu (1486391) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447282)

If most slashdotters think that buddhism should be exempted when religion is mentioned in negative context, why are most of slashdotters atheists instead of buddhists?

Re:look another US-American idiot! (5, Informative)

somersault (912633) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447394)

Buddhism doesn't involve believing in any gods (though some people worship Buddha apparently), so you can be an atheist Buddhist..

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447684)

buddhism is a bit like a hindu offshoot.

there are so many branches of hindu that everyone on the planet could really be considered a kind loose variant of hindu.

hindu is sort of the belief in a soul or spirit, though some branches do not believe in that.

The soul can be in one part, or two parts (duelism and none-duelism)

It could be related to a god, or just be part of nature.

The key aspect is that at some point you want to become one with everything.

This is different from western philosophy that view humans as somehow special/separate, though Christianity went a little way towards humans not being so special.
Eastern philosophies basically say you feel separate but you are not, when will you realise this. And then have a number of ways of achieving that.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (3, Insightful)

vadim_t (324782) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446916)

I can have more of that without religion than with it.

peace: without a religion, many wars cease to exist, since there's no "promised land" to fight over, no divine commands to wage war that would otherwise not be necessary. There's no holy war, and no infidels to conquer or convert, no crusades to wage. Certainly, war doesn't disappear completely if you remove religion, but the amount of reasons to wage it shrinks considerably.

acceptance: of what you mean more specifically? But generally I'm a very "whatever floats your boat" kind of person. I think that all victimless crimes should be decriminalized. Religion isn't very accepting of many kinds of those, though.

equality: The bible isn't big on this, especially regarding women, who for instance may not speak in church (Corinthians 14:34). Religion is very much coming in conflict with equality. For instance, the opposition to gay marriage and ordaining women.

taking good care of your family: I don't think there's been a single society on this planet that thought differently. Of course the standards for what "taking good care of your family" means exactly vary widely, but everybody seems to agree on that it's a must.

critical thought: right. Critical thought and blind obedience are mutually exclusive. Did Abraham exericse a lot of critical thought in pondering whether to sacrifice his son? Now of course he was stopped at the last moment, but the whole event is a show of the complete lack of any kind of thought. When told to sacrifice he does, and when told to stop he does.

responsibility: more details on this is needed, but about the same deal as the family one if I understood you correctly.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (2, Insightful)

TFAFalcon (1839122) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447058)

responsibility: more details on this is needed, but about the same deal as the family one if I understood you correctly.

You can do anything you want, as long as you confess it to a priest later and say you're sorry. If you do that all the consequences go away.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (0)

mcvos (645701) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447204)

I can have more of that without religion than with it.

peace: without a religion, many wars cease to exist, since there's no "promised land" to fight over, no divine commands to wage war that would otherwise not be necessary. There's no holy war, and no infidels to conquer or convert, no crusades to wage. Certainly, war doesn't disappear completely if you remove religion, but the amount of reasons to wage it shrinks considerably.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that religion provides reasons for war. At best, it provides excuses. Politics provides reasons. Abolishing religion and keeping politics is not going to reduce the number of wars in any way.

acceptance: of what you mean more specifically?

Not judging people, not hating them for being different, accepting their shortcomings, etc. Of course this can vary quite a lot by religion, but Christianity's core scriptures are pretty big on loving your enemy, forgiving everything, not taking vengeance, considering all humans of equal value. Radical notions at that time, and in fact, they still are. They go rather against human nature, but I consider them very positive.

equality: The bible isn't big on this, especially regarding women, who for instance may not speak in church (Corinthians 14:34).

In other letters, Paul proposes women for church functions, so it's not as clear-cut as that. It's a popular verse in patriarchical societies, however.

Religion is very much coming in conflict with equality. For instance, the opposition to gay marriage and ordaining women.

Yet lots of churches do ordain women and accept gay marriages. Note though that the position of women was pretty awful in for example ancient Greece, before the arrival of Christianity.

critical thought: right. Critical thought and blind obedience are mutually exclusive. Did Abraham exericse a lot of critical thought in pondering whether to sacrifice his son? Now of course he was stopped at the last moment, but the whole event is a show of the complete lack of any kind of thought. When told to sacrifice he does, and when told to stop he does.

You're confusing blind obedience with trust. Trust is not mutually exclusive with critical thought. The bible contains quite a bit of philosophical works, and at some point commands to "examine all things and keep the good".

You're picking and choosing very specific verses that suit your argument. If you want to do honest criticism, you should read the rest too. And keep an eye on the historical context. (Not something a lot of people are good at, I admit.)

Re:look another US-American idiot! (2, Informative)

somersault (912633) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447436)

You're picking and choosing very specific verses that suit your argument.

That doesn't make him wrong. Would you rather he picked versus completely unrelated to anything he was saying?

I've read the whole of the bible twice btw. God directly started wars in the old testament. That sounds like religion giving reasons for war to me, unless you're saying that the Israelite leaders were just pretending that God said something as an excuse for war? *gasp* Would humans ever do something like that, make up gods and beliefs to control people and get their own way? Surely not!

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

mcvos (645701) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447572)

I've read the whole of the bible twice btw. God directly started wars in the old testament. That sounds like religion giving reasons for war to me,

True. I'm just pointing out that the new testament is quite different in that respect (and does that not count? does negative stuff in the OT mean that the NT can't possibly bring something positive?), and that not all wars are divinely inspired. Most wars where religion plays a role, it's really just an excuse for an Us vs. Them war. It could just as easily be about skin colour, ideology or football teams. People tend not to be very picky when it comes to excuses to exclude people.

*gasp* Would humans ever do something like that, make up gods and beliefs to control people and get their own way? Surely not!

Isn't that kinda what I said? Politics abuses anything as an excuse to get what they want. Abstract concepts are really popular, apparently.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33447648)

"I've read the whole of the bible twice btw"

I actually read the entire bible before bed each night. I find it very soothing.

Yes. I can lie also.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (0, Offtopic)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446930)

Modded: 'troll/flamebait'...

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1, Offtopic)

notknown86 (1190215) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447246)

Modded: 'troll/flamebait'...

Why? Because you disagree?

The arguments above were all valid. If you disagree, you are welcome to make your case.

Religion does NOT get a free pass here. This is NOT the government.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33446994)

Critical thought is frowned upon in religion it is not encouraged. This is practically the definition of faith.

Parroting "evolution is JUST a theory" is not critical thought.

Atheist are perfectly capable of embracing peace, tolerance, acceptance, equality, familial care, critical thought and responsibility. They do this because of a personal ethic, not because they are afraid of the wrath of an invisible monster.

Speaking broadly and drawing from all of the Abrahamic religions; war, racism, homophobia, sexism, indoctrination, anti-reason, and anti-contraception are all practically sacraments.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (0, Troll)

mcvos (645701) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447228)

Critical thought is frowned upon in religion it is not encouraged. This is practically the definition of faith.

Depends on your religion, I guess. Mine encourages critical thought.

Parroting "evolution is JUST a theory" is not critical thought.

It's also not religious.

Atheist are perfectly capable of embracing peace, tolerance, acceptance, equality, familial care, critical thought and responsibility. They do this because of a personal ethic, not because they are afraid of the wrath of an invisible monster.

Speaking broadly and drawing from all of the Abrahamic religions; war, racism, homophobia, sexism, indoctrination, anti-reason, and anti-contraception are all practically sacraments.

You might be more convincing if you demonstrated some tolerance, acceptance and critical thought. The things you mention are all works of people. Things people have done with or without religion. They're products of conservativism and traditionalism, and have very little to do with religion.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447498)

The things you mention are all works of people

And they're all encouraged or glorified in religious texts. Funny that.

Now you are the one who is picking and choosing from the bible to try and support your points, making excuses for all the stuff that you are scared people won't agree with, or perhaps that you don't agree with yourself. I hate how compartmentalised people can be about this stuff, so terrified to consider that the whole of their religion might just be bunk.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

mcvos (645701) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447620)

I don't think you understand what my religion is about. It's not about some verse in Exodus. It's about the NT. It is, in fact, quite explicitly about love. Love for God, and love for your fellow humans.

According to Matthew 22:36-40, the entire bible hangs on that. If parts of the bible don't seem to agree with this, it might be prudent to question your interpretation of them.

That's not picking and choosing, that's sticking to what's important. What the single central figure in the bible personally says it's all about.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447602)

Nope, take another look.

The Bible actively encourages slavery [wikipedia.org] .If 'people' take slaves, or sell their own children to other people as slaves, they're just following what god told them to do.

Homophobia as well, the Bible tells us to put homosexuals to death, it's not the work of 'people', it's a commandment from God.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

mcvos (645701) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447664)

The Bible actively encourages slavery [wikipedia.org] .

No it doesn't. It acknowledges the existence of it, and limits its abuse. Slavery was dead common in all countries in that part of the world at that time.

Furthermore, the new testament makes it pretty clear that to God, a slave is not any less than his master. There's a story where Paul helps the runaway slave of a friend, and sends him back as an equal, rather than a slave.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447200)

"critical thought, "

Except when applied to the superstition itself. The essence of religion is prohibition and submission.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

mcvos (645701) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447236)

The essence of religion is prohibition and submission.

Depends on the religion, I guess. For me, the essence is faith.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447292)

I guess you're a Bahá'í [wikipedia.org] then? It's the only religion I know which pays more than lip service to science and reason, faith in any other religion pretty much precludes critical thinking.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

ZeRu (1486391) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447354)

I guess you're a Bahá'í [wikipedia.org] then? It's the only religion I know which pays more than lip service to science and reason, faith in any other religion pretty much precludes critical thinking.

But it is still a religion and therefore deserves scorn, right? Otherwise why bash religion and/or be atheist if not all religions are same shit in different package?

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447448)

I don't know if that one deserves scorn, I usually reserve 'scorn' for the Bible.

I don't see how any person who claims to know what critical thinking is can base their life around the Bible. Harry Potter is more believable than the Bible and I think the Universal Declaration of Human Rights makes a much better moral code.

If the Bible didn't exist and was just published then nobody would get past the first chapter.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33447344)

Peace

The Crusades, the Inquistions, extremist Islam...

"But that's just people using religion for their own ends!" you exclaim. Fair enough, though I do seem to remember that God decided to drown all of the inhabitants of the world, including all of the animals, except for a dude and his wife and one of each animal of each gender because he felt they were getting too uppity. I'm not sure what the animals, in particular, did to deserve such a fate even if the cleansing of mankind was necessary. Couldn't he have magicked them a snorkle or something?

That doesn't exactly scream out "peace" to me. The Nazis tried something similar with substantially less success and we call it the Holocaust, part of World War 2. (And yup, I just Godwin'd all over the Bible.) And while we're at it, isn't the Christian vision of the end of the world a gigantic war between the armies of the righteous fronted by Jesus and the legions of hell led by Satan, a man tolerated and accepted so much that he was cast from heaven?

tolerance, acceptance, equality

Catholics believe that the only way to heaven is through their Church. Christian but not Catholic? Oopsie. Sorry, you're fucked. They've declared a monopoly.

Pretty much any religion that forms a basis from the Old Testament (all three major world religions) believe that homosexuality is an abomination. Their Holy Book instructs them to believe that women are property--a position that is still reflected to this day in some societies and which was only in recent history rid from the laws of the United States, land of the free and home of the brave. The can also be sold into slavery. In fact while God seems to take great exception to Egypt enslaving "his people" and goes to great lengths to free them, he seems to have no problem at all with the general concept of slavery.

Original sin? That belongs to those filthy women, who just can't seem to keep their hands off the forbidden apple tree. A "crime" for which both she and the innocent Adam are cast forever from Paradise. Is that tolerance? Catholics, to this day, do not allow women to be priests and try as we might, they are still second class citizens in the workforce -- positions that derived their authority from religion. Equality? Acceptance?

taking good care of your family

One supposes that depends on the definition. Islamic women must cover their faces and be escorted by a male relative. I suppose one could argue that's taking really, really good care of their family, but I doubt any enlightened view would see it as such. Selling the women into slavery is rather unequivocally not taking care of them. I'm not sure how one should feel about the incest that believing the creation stories would require either, but I suppose I can't argue too much with it from a "preservation of the species" perspective.

But I'm feeling generous, so I'll give you this one. Taking care of one's family is, for the most part, espoused by religion.

responsibility

If you choose to adhere to one of the religions that believe in some final weighing of souls, perhaps. I'm not sure to what degree it is responsibility if you can escape eternal damnation by apologizing, however. Beyond that we're left to our own devices, which I hardly find worthy of calling a device of religion.

But let's assume all of what you said was completely, unequivocally true. In that case I'm compelled to ask you this: Do you believe in Zeus, sir? The majority of these concepts are not new to the major world religions of today. The originated--often concurrently--in various different and now dead religions, from the Greeks and Romans to the Egyptians to the Norse to the indigenous peoples of any number of secluded islands. Can they really be called an invention of religion?

Re:look another US-American idiot! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33446894)

He said religion not Catholicism.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1, Insightful)

ZeRu (1486391) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446908)

Check The Ten Commandments. Neither of the stuff you mentioned is approved there. Everything you mentioned is a byproduct of abuse of religion. If there were no religion, people would find another excuse to be racists or homophobes. After all, communists also did most of the things you mentioned and they rejected religion.

And don't give me that crap "communism is good in theory, it's the power-hungry people who abused it". The same can be said for religion. As I said, just check The Ten Commandments. Especially those saying that you should not kill, rape or steal.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

vadim_t (324782) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446952)

Slight disagreement: the modern translation is "you shall not murder", not "you shall not kill". The bible certainly contains a lot of killing in it, divinely mandated too. The "you shall not kill" taken seriously would turn christians into buddhist monks that make sure not to harm even an ant, and that clearly isn't happening.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446972)

Remind me again which verse tells me not to murder...I just read the list [biblegateway.com] and it's not there.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

vadim_t (324782) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447022)

here [biblegateway.com]

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447196)

Huh? Where does it say that's one of the Ten Commandments?

The only place in the Bible where it says "Ten Commandments" is Exodus 34:28 [biblegateway.com]

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447538)

Umm.. try counting them up. Those are the Ten Commandments that are being referenced in the passage you linked to.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447686)

The Bible's pretty clear about which words were written on version 2.0 of the tablets.

Exodus34:27: Then the LORD said to Moses, "Write down these words, for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel."

It's also very clear about which set of tablets are the Ten Commandments:

Exodus34:28: Moses was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights without eating bread or drinking water. And he wrote on the tablets the words of the covenantthe Ten Commandments.

I understand that Christians would prefer the other ones to be The Ten Commandments, but wishing it won't make it so.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

ZeRu (1486391) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447396)

Bible is man-written. Ten Commandments are given to Moses by God himself. Therefore they should be put above anything else written in The Bible.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446960)

Read the list again ... it's just the antonyms of the parent post.

PS: You're right about the Ten commandments [biblegateway.com] though.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

TFAFalcon (1839122) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447066)

As I said, just check The Ten Commandments. Especially those saying that you should not kill, rape or steal.

As long as the one you're killing, raping or stealing from isn't one of the hundreds of exceptions also listed in the bible.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (-1, Troll)

ZeRu (1486391) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447256)

But what's so bad about killing people who don't agree with you, after all? Killing all Christians and burning all churches = wet dream of every slashdot anti-theist. Even Dalai-Lama condemned the hatred and fear atheists love to spread.

Even if you don't desire death of every religious person, don't you think that some people deserve to be killed? For example, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh. I'm sure that most of the Internet would gloat joyfully if either of those people die.

If you anti-theists really think that the world would be better without religion, then stop bitching on the Internet and start a war with religion already. If religious nutters and anti-religious nutters would wipe each other as they should, then only normal people would remain on the world.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

TFAFalcon (1839122) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447400)

We don't want to stoop to the same level as the religious.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (2, Insightful)

Dhalka226 (559740) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447542)

With all due respect, stop being a fucking moron. Nobody here has suggested killing all Christians. Nobody here has suggested burning a church, much less all churches. To not only ascribe nonsense to people but declare it to be some sort of sexual thrill for them has to make you one of the most shallow, despicable excuses for a human being I have ever seen in my life. One who obviously has nothing intelligent to say, so he just makes shit up to attack as it pleases him . I'm sure you sleep awfully well at night having defeated your invented evils, don't you? Must be awfully hard to lose an argument when you just decide what the other side thinks and says and declare it to be truth.

For example, Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh.

Are you truly so dense that you can't separate politics and religion? Lots of people hate Rush Limbaugh or Sarah Palin, and it has nothing to do with their religion. It has to do with their politics.

Even if you don't desire death of every religious person, don't you think that some people deserve to be killed? [. . .] I'm sure that most of the Internet would gloat joyfully if either of those people die.

I'm sure many of them would. What the fuck is your point?

All else aside, if you can't understand the difference between not caring if somebody dies or feeling the world is better off for it and actively suggesting they should be killed or killing them... well, I was going to ask how dense you could possibly be but at this point the question is becoming rhetorical.

I would consider somebody like Rush Limbaugh dying to be one of the better things to happen to this country because of the way he simply whips people into partisan furors to serve his own set of interests. It doesn't mean I wish death on him, and it especially doesn't mean I think he should be killed. If he WERE killed, I would expect the person locked in prison for the rest of his life and declare him a murderer, not a hero.

If you anti-theists really think that the world would be better without religion, then stop bitching on the Internet and start a war with religion already.

Yes, because clearly instead of talking about things or making a logical argument ("bitching on the Internet" in your little world) the correct solution is to kill everybody who disagrees with you. Holy hell, you really are a whackjob. Do you honestly believe you're one of the "normal[s]?" Because I have a newsflash for you. You're a fool, as bad as any religious or anti-religious nutter out there.

For that matter, you need to realize that being anti-religion and anti-theist are wildly different things. Believe in god if you want, I really don't give a fuck. Vapor-lock your lips to some religion's ass without thinking thoroughly about it all and what you truly believe, tell everybody they have to believe what you and your buddies believe, and I have major problems with it and with you. And much as I might think the world is better off without you in it, that doesn't cause me to orgasm to the thought of killing you. Sorry to disappoint.

Let me clue you in, since you're obviously too feeble-minded to reach these realizations on your own. People who don't believe in religion, who don't believe in God, who don't believe in an afterlife believe that this is all there is. They don't support running off and killing people to any degree more than believers do (there are bad apples in both groups, naturally). They don't support fucking each other over. They believe you should be good and tolerant toward one another because you don't get a second chance. Making somebody's life miserable is unconscionable when you can't pretend to believe that no matter how long they live, no matter what you do to them, they'll "live" an eternity longer in perfect bliss with their creator. Not believing in eternal consequences doesn't devolve us to anarchy or mass murder. It makes us value life for life itself, instead of as some decades-long test to see how well pleased with you God ought to be.

If you have a problem with that, fine. Just shut the fuck up with your lame-ass, invented attempts to demonize people for it.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (2, Informative)

somersault (912633) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447568)

Killing all Christians and burning all churches = wet dream of every slashdot anti-theist

Don't be such a fucking clown. I think Christianity and all religions have it dead wrong, but I don't want to kill everyone who has beliefs. I can understand and even respect some religious beliefs, and I see that religion does provide positive influences in some people's lives, though on a larger scale it has many negative effects.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

ZeRu (1486391) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447310)

Interesting how I was modded as troll for stating the truth (even if you disagree with my post, remember that slashdot doesn't have a disagree moderation).
And I'm not even a religious person (more like an agnostic), I just wished for you anti-theist folk to look past petty hatred towards religion. But that's something you are apparently uncapable of.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447152)

That's totally unfair. You missed out overpopulation.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447636)

he said modern religion, not old (thousands of years), nor ancient

So, in that case substitute praying for paying.

Stop bashing religion. Paying is a form of grace. More good comes from modern religion than you can imagine.

That works for, scientology, evangluism, capatilism, neo-psudo-comunism, republicanism etc....

Another guy who wants to pin it all on "them" ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33447668)

> So what's the good bit? It better be fucking massive.

You get all of those from atheism, too (witness the nut du jour who threatened the Discovery Channel).

Now that we've established that they're not a religious problem, where do you get off on blaming everybody who believes differently from you for all the problems in the world?

Because if it's fair to tar huge groups of people for the actions of nuts, well, look in the mirror buddy, you just condemned yourself.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33446800)

more good rape?

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447188)

Religions are exclusive, so either all are lies and one is truth, or they are all lies.

There is no reason to respect religion. I don't believe in your imaginary "grace". Prove it exists or fuck off.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447500)

Not true. There are faiths that believe that all other religions/holy books are manifestations of the same god and welcome any of them to speak at their temples (in fact they actively invite them...)

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1, Insightful)

SudoGhost (1779150) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446740)

Praying? Can I sue the Church if that prayer is ineffective? False advertising and whatnot?

The guy suing is almost as stupid as the idiot who sued McDonalds because her coffee was hot.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (3, Insightful)

PieterBr (1013955) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446910)

The woman suing Mc Donalds wasn't stupid. A: she got quite a lot of cash out of it, and B: the reason why she won the case was that was shown that Ms Donalds put profit before safety. http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm [lectlaw.com]

Re:look another US-American idiot! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33447700)

the company that makes my steak knives also puts profit before safety. their products are very dangerous. if you happen to saw one of them repeatedly across your body, it will cause severe damage and pain.

the woman suing mcdonalds perhaps wasn't stupid, but she was a fucking pathetic leech who deserves to be sued by her neighbours, when she isn't home her door is locked, when they try to enter they bang their noses on it.

We are living in a era of diminishing personal responsibility, where everyone is too fucking pathetic to be thinking humans, and blame anything on anyone else. sad.

Re:look another US-American idiot! (1)

meerling (1487879) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446968)

There are millions of people in this country, so there are bound to be a few nutjobs, but I'll admit we seem to be running above average lately...

I wanna sue too... (2, Funny)

ZeRu (1486391) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446718)

Can I sue my company for making me addicted to my job? Because of them, I get up at the same exact time and go to the same place everyday monday to friday where I meet same people and spend next 8 hours doing boring and repetitive stuff. If that's not addiction, then I don't know what it is.

Re:I wanna sue too... (1)

hldn (1085833) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446904)

probably not, but you could sue the world for making you addicted to money.

Eaugh. (2, Insightful)

Securityemo (1407943) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446736)

So this man played a game for an average of just under 12 hours a day, every day, for five years?

Re:Eaugh. (2, Interesting)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446766)

NCsoft should settle and give him vouchers for play time - its about all he deserves, and is better for NCSoft than paying out loads in lawyer fees.

Re:Eaugh. (1)

XAD1975 (1628499) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446868)

It would seem so... Now, what else could have have done during that time? Get out, find friends, make connections, get a job, get a wife and have kids that would, in turn, spend 12 hours a day playing? Damn... again the proof that intelligence is not a requirement to survive nowadays.

Re:Eaugh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33447138)

Damn... again the proof that intelligence is not a requirement to survive nowadays.

Never was. A favoring factor, yes, but not a requirement.

I keep forgetting (4, Insightful)

OrangeTide (124937) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446738)

that we're no longer responsible for our own actions.

Re:I keep forgetting (5, Funny)

Beefchief (808968) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446956)

Don't worry, it's not your fault.

Re:I keep forgetting (1)

c0lo (1497653) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447150)

that we're no longer responsible for our own actions.

The "good": this is why the governments feel the need to step in and protect you.
The 'bad": the govs are made of people equally no longer responsible for their actions!
The "ugly": while your lack of responsibility is potentially punishable, theirs are not.

stupid lawsuit, good ruling (4, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 4 years ago | (#33446796)

It's a stupid lawsuit, but I favor any ruling that weakens the EULA. Those things are near-evil.

Re:stupid lawsuit, good ruling (1)

johnhp (1807490) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447086)

If EULAs were written in plain language, and required that you sign them at the time of purchase, they'd be fine. But all of the "by opening this software" EULAs are bullshit by definition.

Re:stupid lawsuit, good ruling (2, Insightful)

notknown86 (1190215) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447272)

If EULAs were written in plain language, and required that you sign them at the time of purchase, they'd be fine. But all of the "by opening this software" EULAs are bullshit by definition.

They don't do that anymore because people starting reconsidering the purchase when they hit the "first born child" and "immortal soul" clauses...

Re:stupid lawsuit, good ruling (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33447102)

I'd argue that they're full evil - assuming my understanding of contract law is accurate (and it may very well be wrong).

Contract law requires that the terms of the contract be present before someone purchases the good/service. With software, you get hit with a nice big EULA long after the purchase. They want it both ways: They want to restrict what you can and can't do with their software and have contractual protection against breaches, but they don't want the burden of having to tell people that up front and they don't want to have the clauses that indicate what a consumer can do if the contract is breached. You can't even return opened software in most brick and mortar stores, so if you don't agree to their "contract" clauses, you're left with no remedy other than "go fuck yourself."

Contracts are supposed to address remedies for breach, supposing, for example, the company decides unilaterally to change the agreement (they do this all the time), you should be bound by the terms that you agreed to, not the new terms. Most of the time, they won't even let you use the service or software until you agree to the new terms, basically holding your purchase hostage. Of course their "contracts" don't define any remedies there.

Personally, I think this situation is all FUBAR. Right now, they take the parts that are convenient and reject the parts that aren't. I'd love for somebody to get hit with a huge lawsuit so some sanity comes back to this one-way gravy train - or to learn why I'm wrong. Either would be good, because it makes no sense from the way I'm seeing it.

Re:stupid lawsuit, good ruling (1)

sco08y (615665) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447154)

It's a stupid lawsuit, but I favor any ruling that weakens the EULA. Those things are near-evil.

I'm hesitant to gut EULAs.

If you're trying to start a business involving software, you wind up taking on risk, like any business.

Without legal protections, you can still operate, but you take on more risk. You can mitigate this through insurance, but it's expensive.

If you're trying to raise capital, your investors are going to look at how much risk you've got, because more risk means lower expected returns. That means you're going to get less capital.

It won't kill off the business, by any means. But the largely unseen effect will be smaller businesses that just never start, and more domination of the market by big corps.

Re:stupid lawsuit, good ruling (1)

RivenAleem (1590553) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447164)

If by weakens, you mean forces everyone to make a stronger EULA, one that protects them against this kind of lawsuit, then yeah, this is really going to weaken EULAs

Re:stupid lawsuit, good ruling (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447182)

Write out 100 times: My enemy's enemy is not necessarily my friend.

See also: US foreign policy since ... well, pretty much forever.

EULA's are completely invalid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33446832)

So, the EULA has something in it that contract law prohibits it from including. That shouldn't matter, because EULA's have no legal weight anyway. The customers don't sign the EULA, they just click an "agree" button. If they were really agreeing to it, they would have to print it out and mail it in to the company producing the software. Clicking a button can't have the same legal weight as signing a contract.

Besides, Windows installers are all easily hackable. Anyone can change the EULA while installing the software, so that it says "This software is in the public domain". That seems like a much better EULA to agree to - I would be quite happy if the installer was willing to renegotiate to those license terms.

It must be nice! (3, Interesting)

uxbn_kuribo (1146975) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447130)

So basically, he's suing for 3 million dollars over 5 years because he's addicted to a video game? If he won, that would make him the first person to make $600,000 a year playing video games. At 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year, that averages out to $288.46 cents an hour for playing Lineage 2. Most of us will never make that sort of money doing anything, let alone for playing an MMO.

Re:It must be nice! (1)

Muros (1167213) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447184)

Says in the 1st line of the story that he played over 20k hours, so you want to cut that hourly rate in half. I'd still play for that price though.

His parents better watch out (1)

Muros (1167213) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447170)

...declined to dismiss Smallwood's claims for negligence, defamation, and negligent infliction of emotional distress.

One day, these will all be on boners (1)

BUTT-H34D (840273) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447234)

Huh huh. Heh heh. His wood is, like, small. Heh heh. Huh huh.

If this guy wins hands down... (1)

CFBMoo1 (157453) | more than 4 years ago | (#33447526)

Just imagine bigger targets like World of Warcraft.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?