Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

cancel ×

378 comments

Time to go for a class action suit. (5, Insightful)

joaommp (685612) | more than 2 years ago | (#37410938)

Time to go for a class action lawsuit for trying to make us waive our right to a class action lawsuit. Sony can burn in hell.

Re:Time to go for a class action suit. (4, Insightful)

Moryath (553296) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411010)

All it takes is one good judge to declare that crap unconscionable and unenforcable. ESPECIALLY since it's blatantly a try to protect their asses after setting off multiple class-action suits that are already on the books in which the only possible outcome is Sony getting their asses handed to them in court.

Re:Time to go for a class action suit. (1)

joaommp (685612) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411104)

No need to declare that crap unconscionable and unenforcable. It's enough to declare that crap. Period.

Re:Time to go for a class action suit. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411504)

It's a matter of translation. "Unconscionable and unenforcable" means "crap" in Legalese.

Re:Time to go for a class action suit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411106)

All it takes is one good judge to declare that crap unconscionable and unenforcable.

Like mediation?

Re:Time to go for a class action suit. (5, Informative)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411206)

All it takes is one good judge to declare that crap unconscionable and unenforcable. ESPECIALLY since it's blatantly a try to protect their asses after setting off multiple class-action suits that are already on the books in which the only possible outcome is Sony getting their asses handed to them in court.

One good judge? Nope, it'll take 5 of them. And they'll have to sit on the Supreme Court.
Because on April 27th 2011, five trolls on that bench decided that contractual clauses saying you won't join a class action lawsuit trump your rights, even if your state specifically says that such rights can't be tossed aside by some corporate fuck.

Re:Time to go for a class action suit. (1)

sosume (680416) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411516)

Depends on your country. In the EU it's impossible to sign away these rights and including such terms will effectively void the contract. Bring it on, Sony!

Re:Time to go for a class action suit. (2)

augustw (785088) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411576)

They don't void the entire contract (nor render it voidable), they just invalidate the violating clause.

Re:Time to go for a class action suit. (5, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411342)

Where are you going to find a good judge?

Re:Time to go for a class action suit. (4, Informative)

meerling (1487879) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411454)

Last time I checked, judges all used to be lawyers before moving up, so... ummm... I'm kind of making your point, aren't I.

Re:Time to go for a class action suit. (1)

zero.kalvin (1231372) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411436)

I'm amazed how companies can get away with such shit! Is this even legal ?

So... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37410940)

I, for one, will not be agreeing to any such thing.

So... you're going to cancel your PSN subscription?

Re:So... (2)

ge7 (2194648) | more than 2 years ago | (#37410980)

He doesn't have to cancel it. The terms say you can write to Sony that you don't accept that part, and it's ok.

Of course, here in Europe our laws are saner and this kind of behavior is forbidden by laws. You can't sign off your lawful rights.

Re:So... (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411016)

No problem. Waive your right to a class action suit, and everyone who has been affected next time they do something can take them to the small claims court. I'm sure Sony will be happy to send legal representatives to a few hundred thousand courts around the world. Or lose by default if they don't...

Re:So... (1)

DanTheStone (1212500) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411072)

Not going to happen - you have to agree to binding arbitration, rather than going to small claims court.

Re:So... (2)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411402)

I very much doubt that that is legal. And, if it is, Sony will have to either turn up at the small claims court to contest their jurisdiction, or appeal later.

Re:So... (1)

rveldpau (1765928) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411244)

The terms say that you can opt out of the arbitration binding, not the class-action lawsuit section.

Re:So... (2)

rveldpau (1765928) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411296)

Actually, I am wrong, I missed that it does say the class action waiver as well

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411148)

No he's going to pay $60 USD per year for XboxLive. So much better! </sarcasm>

Re:So... (1)

ActionDesignStudios (877390) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411246)

That's what I did. I sent them an e-mail to have mine cancelled now and have the funds in my wallet refunded.

Re:So... (2)

rwven (663186) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411344)

I simply won't be buying anything again from PSN.

Re:So... (1)

Anrego (830717) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411510)

Pretty much this.

I already own the PS3, and am going to try and get as much enjoyment out of it as I can (with the games already installed and playable without logging in)... but will be the last thing I (knowingly) buy from Sony.

I have no illusions that this will go noticed. Even if the entire slashdot crowd stopped doing business with Sony, I doubt they would notice. And of course outside the geek community, very few people are aware of these issues, or if they are aware, don't care. Remember, for the vast majority of customers who's personal data and CC info was leaked, the biggest concern was that the network was down.

Re:So... (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411612)

"Stolen" != "leaked"

so let me get this right... (4, Interesting)

Tastecicles (1153671) | more than 2 years ago | (#37410960)

in order for you to enjoy gaming on PSN, you must first agree to a EULA which automatically waives your right to enjoin a Class Action against Sony should their network be compromised again!?
Are they expecting their network to be compromised again??
Is this legal??

Sony, you are a bunch of deluded fuckheads.

Re:so let me get this right... (5, Insightful)

tysonedwards (969693) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411032)

It is surprising how a company that used to be regarded as the highest quality whatever-it-was-trying-to-sell can now have the level of respect usually afforded used car salesmen.

Re:so let me get this right... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411102)

Actually, I think used car salesmen are more highly regarded than Sony is.

Re:so let me get this right... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411440)

True. I never bought a used car with a rootkit.

Re:so let me get this right... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411356)

Hey, come on now. They're not that bad. The used car salesmen, I mean.

Re:so let me get this right... (2)

xMrFishx (1956084) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411084)

I believe in England EULAs aren't Legal & Binding, so this sounds a bit dodgy to me. You can't just lose your rights because of some wall of text.

Re:so let me get this right... (2)

uglyduckling (103926) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411200)

It's not legal, you can't put terms in a contract like that, there's no way that would ever stand up in court.

Re:so let me get this right... (5, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411394)

Of course you can. If you hire enough lawyers almost anything is legal. Notice how no one at Sony has gone to jail for hacking thousands of computers with their rootkit. However, if I just hacked one Sony computer, what do you expect would happen?

The US government plainly does not care about the law, or its citizens. All they care about is pleasing powerful corporations and well connected individuals.

Re:so let me get this right... (3, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411418)

It's not legal, you can't put terms in a contract like that, there's no way that would ever stand up in court.

Sadly, I don't think there's enough established case-law and precedent to make that a guaranteed thing.

For example, SCOTUS has ruled [wsj.com] that they can force you to arbitration ... so as long as SCOTUS figures the rights of companies trump yours, I fear what you say might not be true.

Re:so let me get this right... (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411350)

It it legal for a minor to enter such a contract?

Could be worse... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37410972)

Could be worse -- they could be forcing you to wave your right to Ass Action!

Re:Could be worse... (1)

what2123 (1116571) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411046)

That would be terrible1111 Eleven

South Park "CentiPad" anyone? (1)

Vernes (720223) | more than 2 years ago | (#37410974)

Not sure what else to say, the title actually captures it all.

iTunes ToS (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37410982)

That's nothing. Apple's iTunes terms of service includes a provision that prevents you from suing if you get AIDS while using or designing one of their products.

HAHA, oh Sony... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37410988)

You're like the racist grandpa who doesn't know when to shut the hell up.

Waiving your rights... (4, Interesting)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411008)

Okay, sooo... who's up for a mass individual filing of, oh, say, 20,000 lawsuits? we'll see how well that works when the courts choke to death on paperwork and reconsider that whole "class action" thing being allowed to be thrown out.

Re:Waiving your rights... (1)

esocid (946821) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411270)

It doesn't matter. You can sign away all of your rights as a citizen to any company's ToS, but I can guarantee that no court in the respective country will find that document legally binding. Try as they might.

Re:Waiving your rights... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411508)

It doesn't matter. You can sign away all of your rights as a citizen to any company's ToS, but I can guarantee that no court in the respective country will find that document legally binding. Try as they might.

They already did, US Supreme Court, as a previous poster mentioned.

http://www.khlaw.com/showpublication.aspx?Show=4466

Re:Waiving your rights... (5, Funny)

Kohath (38547) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411272)

Okay, sooo... who's up for a mass individual filing of, oh, say, 20,000 lawsuits?

About 12 people.

Re:Waiving your rights... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411290)

Okay, sooo... who's up for a mass individual filing of, oh, say, 20,000 lawsuits? we'll see how well that works when the courts choke to death on paperwork and reconsider that whole "class action" thing being allowed to be thrown out.

Well according to section 15 you'll have to give them 60 days notice and participate in their arbitration process first...

Re:Waiving your rights... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411324)

Except all those people won't be able to afford their own lawyers. And thus the good old US American value of "no money, no rights" gets upheld.

Re:Waiving your rights... (2)

king neckbeard (1801738) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411530)

perhaps we should get a helpful lawyer to give DIY instructions.

Cool story, bro (0)

Legal.Troll (2002574) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411044)

You can opt out of the waiver for the price of a stamp.

But that would be less fun than calling the wahhhhmbulance.

Re:Cool story, bro (3, Insightful)

Anrego (830717) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411292)

The fact that you can agree to it by clicking a button, but waiving it involves letters and stamps and writing is very telling.

Obviously this is on purpose. They could very easily have an extra button (or website somewhere) to opt out, but by requiring users to mail in a letter... they are banking on the fact that most people won't bother (and they are probably right).

Re:Cool story, bro (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411602)

So? That's how the world works; it's not some new-fangled corporate conspiracy. If you care about the right at all, $0.41 and a few minutes will be nothing to you. Hell, even to file a lawsuit, which is your legal right, you have to pay a filing fee and send all the appropriate papers to the appropriate places.

What Sony is primarily banking on, IMO, is that most of their users were not substantially harmed by the recent outage and data leak, or do not feel they were harmed, or both — and have no intention of suing, either individually or as members of a class, and no intention of seeking dispute resolution.

Sony is completely within their rights to include this provision in their TOS, and they have provided a very reasonable means to opt out for people who feel this is a serious issue.

—Legal.Troll (only allowed to post once per day on my account)

At what point... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411056)

...is Sony going to be buying back my PS3 after renegging on all the deals and claims made when I purchased the thing?

Re:At what point... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411264)

Never, because part of the terms of your purchase forfeited that responsibility.

This sounds retarded. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411066)

Don't you just have to click a button to "agree to terms of service"? Cant you just claim that your PS3 was plugged in and the neighbor kid clicked "I agree".

I am not a contract lawyer... (3, Interesting)

BaronHethorSamedi (970820) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411068)

Maybe there's one floating around here that could comment on whether this might be deemed unconscionable? [wikipedia.org]

Seems to me Sony is spontanteously forcing users to renegotiate their use contract in a decidedly one-sided fashion. Yes, yes, all EULAs fall into that category, but this seems more like an ongoing service agreement--you've been using PSN for some time, Sony steps in and says, "Hey, if you want to keep using our network, you need to surrender an important right." Just the sort of important right that could put an individual consumer on more even footing with a multinational corporation in asserting his/her entitlements under contract.

Re:I am not a contract lawyer... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411434)

Arbitration provisions are generally enforceable. Unconscionability is a matter of contract law, which varies by state. In New York, to be unenforcable due to unconscionability, the provision must reflect both "procedural" and "substantive" unconscionability at the time it is made. In other words, one party must have used its superior bargaining position to somehow trick or "surprise" the other party into accepting a term which was unexpected or out of the ordinary, and the term itself must be unreasonably oppressive to the party that was tricked or surprised into accepting it. An example of an unreasonably oppressive arbitration provision would be a requirement to use a particular arbitration body that required a $1000 fee for all parties involved in the arbitration, where the customers in question were only complaining of goods worth $500.

I fairly doubt Sony's term would be held unenforceable, at least in NY. They warn you about the new arbitration clause in big red bold underlined text on the first page of the EULA. That would seem to dispense with any "procedural unconscionability" objections. Additionally, if you win the arbitration, Sony covers your legal costs, and Sony even provides in the EULA that if you wind up having to engage in arbitration outside your home county, against your preference, they'll pay the additional costs you incur by having to arbitrate out of state.

This is to say nothing of the provision that actually allows you to OPT OUT of the arbitration provision, making this even more of a non-story. All told, I'd say this will be enforced if anyone ever tests it in the courts.

—Legal.Troll (only allowed to post once per day because Slashdot fucktards mostly have an irrational hatred of the law and lawyers)

Re:I am not a contract lawyer... (2)

zoward (188110) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411578)

Thanks for weighing in.

Re:I am not a contract lawyer... (1)

zeroshade (1801584) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411618)

Generally, the hatred most Slashdotters have of the Law and Lawyers is not irrational :)

Re:I am not a contract lawyer... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411502)

Or just refund the price of all licenses to use their software that has been purchased in the past, since this is a renegotiation of a previously agreed upon contract. And we don't own their software, just the right to use it. So if they want a contract renegotiation, they need to refund everything that has ever been spent... under the previous contract of course....

Arbitration (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411080)

You're not agreeing to not sue, you're agreeing to settle out of court via binding arbitration instead.

Re:Arbitration (2)

SlippyToad (240532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411310)

That's agreeing not to sue. Agreeing to do something other than suing is agreeing not to sue. Words mean what they mean, and sticking some weasel words on to the end of the words that already mean something doesn't negate those meanings. It just means you, Mr. Sony Representative or whoever the hell you are, don't like what the words mean. So you're trying to re-define them.

How did basic comprehension of words and sentences become so degraded?

can i return my device? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411098)

if i don't agree with the new EULA, can I return my PS3? Seriously, I don't agree to their NEW terms. Therefore some of the features of the device are no longer available. They have rendered it not fit for purpose.

Re:can i return my device? (1)

Tastecicles (1153671) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411540)

I don't care it's AC, mod parent UP!

Denmark (5, Informative)

JavaBear (9872) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411108)

The law in Denmark is a bit funny on this, which may be why I haven't seen this mail yet.

Basically you can not waiver your law given rights in a contract, if the contract (ToS) contains such demands, it pretty much invalidates the entire contract...

Re:Denmark (1)

Splab (574204) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411548)

Actually, not entirely true.

There are some weird circumstances where you can waive rights, even stuff that is very close to breaking grundloven. Take TV3 survivor or any of the other "reality" TV shows, there has been cases where people have basically been slaves and unable to get out of the contract.

However, class action lawsuits are a very new phenonemen in Denmark and perhaps Sony isn't even aware of this posibility yet in Denmark? Secondly, no one knows if it's good to run a class action case here yet, I think there is only a handful been given the go-ahead; personally I'd rather take them to court myself here in Denmark since a lawsuit here isn't the same kind of moneysink as it is in the US.

Re:Denmark (1)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411586)

I'm quite certain this clause wouldn't be legal almost anywhere; taking away the right to join a class-action suit that could very well be targeted at the contract's owner is such a basic right that I doubt any US judge would allow it, and in most non-US countries we have actual rights and EULAs cannot take away rights already given by laws, EULAs can only extend them. Atleast here in Finland no matter what you do, if you click on "agree" online or if you go to Sony's offices and write "I agree" in person, you still cannot give away such rights.

Opt Out (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411118)

RIGHT TO OPT OUT OF BINDING ARBITRATION AND CLASS ACTION WAIVER WITHIN 30 DAYS. IF YOU DO NOT WISH TO BE BOUND BY THE BINDING ARBITRATION AND CLASS ACTION WAIVER IN THIS SECTION 15, YOU MUST NOTIFY SNEI IN WRITING WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE THAT YOU ACCEPT THIS AGREEMENT. YOUR WRITTEN NOTIFICATION MUST BE MAILED TO 6080 CENTER DRIVE, 10TH FLOOR, LOS ANGELES, CA 90045, ATTN: LEGAL DEPARTMENT/ARBITRATION AND MUST INCLUDE: (1) YOUR NAME, (2) YOUR ADDRESS, (3) YOUR PSN ACCOUNT NUMBER, IF YOU HAVE ONE, AND (4) A CLEAR STATEMENT THAT YOU DO NOT WISH TO RESOLVE DISPUTES WITH ANY SONY ENTITY THROUGH ARBITRATION.

You have the ability to opt out (5, Informative)

ThinkWeak (958195) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411124)

FTFToS:

RIGHT TO OPT OUT OF BINDING ARBITRATION AND CLASS ACTION WAIVER WITHIN 30 DAYS. IF YOU DO NOT WISH TO BE BOUND BY THE BINDING ARBITRATION AND CLASS ACTION WAIVER IN THIS SECTION 15, YOU MUST NOTIFY SNEI IN WRITING WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE THAT YOU ACCEPT THIS AGREEMENT. YOUR WRITTEN NOTIFICATION MUST BE MAILED TO 6080 CENTER DRIVE, 10 TH FLOOR, LOS ANGELES, CA 90045, ATTN: LEGAL DEPARTMENT/ARBITRATION AND MUST INCLUDE: (1) YOUR NAME, (2) YOUR ADDRESS, (3) YOUR PSN ACCOUNT NUMBER, IF YOU HAVE ONE, AND (4) A CLEAR STATEMENT THAT YOU DO NOT WISH TO RESOLVE DISPUTES WITH ANY SONY ENTITY THROUGH ARBITRATION.

You just have to go through the pain-staking task of writing them via snail mail and don't forget to keep a copy of your tracking receipt.

Re:You have the ability to opt out (2)

matt_lethargic (1420947) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411236)

So all we have to do is write to them and then we still have the right to use a class action against them the next time they give away* our details. Have I got this right?

Re:You have the ability to opt out (1)

ThinkWeak (958195) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411326)

IANAL, but I think that's right. Otherwise you'll have to take them to court individually for leaking your information.

Re:You have the ability to opt out (3, Insightful)

v1 (525388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411614)

The problem is, if only say 2% of the people that click Agree actually send that mail, (and that'd be a very optimistic number) then those 2% are the only ones that can engage in a class action suit. And with such small numbers, getting class status will be impossible. And Sony knows this. So there's no point to it, sending that letter is a waste of time unless you are trying to opt out of arbitration instead of class action, and intend to hire a lawyer.

Opt-out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411132)

If you want to stay on PSN but you don't agree, you can opt out. The directions ask for a clear statement about arbitration, but not about class actions, so it's a little puzzling - do you opt out of both by following the directions? If you add something about the class action waiver, are you then not following directions and therefore losing your right to opt out?

From the ToS:

RIGHT TO OPT OUT OF BINDING ARBITRATION AND CLASS ACTION WAIVER
WITHIN 30 DAYS. IF YOU DO NOT WISH TO BE BOUND BY THE BINDING
ARBITRATION AND CLASS ACTION WAIVER IN THIS SECTION 15, YOU MUST
NOTIFY SNEI IN WRITING WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE THAT YOU ACCEPT
THIS AGREEMENT. YOUR WRITTEN NOTIFICATION MUST BE MAILED TO 6080
CENTER DRIVE, 10TH FLOOR, LOS ANGELES, CA 90045, ATTN: LEGAL
DEPARTMENT/ARBITRATION AND MUST INCLUDE: (1) YOUR NAME, (2) YOUR
ADDRESS, (3) YOUR PSN ACCOUNT NUMBER, IF YOU HAVE ONE, AND (4) A
CLEAR STATEMENT THAT YOU DO NOT WISH TO RESOLVE DISPUTES WITH
ANY SONY ENTITY THROUGH ARBITRATION.

Re:Opt-out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411192)

well, you don't actually HAVE to do that, because a clause like this is illegal in the first place. you can't waive your legal rights. this will never hold up in court.

Re:Opt-out (4, Informative)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411512)

well, you don't actually HAVE to do that, because a clause like this is illegal in the first place. you can't waive your legal rights. this will never hold up in court.

The Supreme Court of the United States on April 27th, 2011, said it was legal in a 5-4 decision.

Srsly? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411134)

I cant believe this legal. What is stopping them from just making us sell our souls through a EULA.

Re:Srsly? (1)

slackbheep (1420367) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411514)

Financial incentive.

Re:Srsly? (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411550)

"I cant believe this legal. What is stopping them from just making us sell our souls through a EULA."
They just haven't though of that yet. Now you let them know and the cat is out of the bag.

Just a guess (1)

zennyboy (1002544) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411144)

I'm pretty sure they could not prevent a class action using a EULA, however if you then sue them in a class action, they can then ban you from PSN (SEN) for breaking the EULA... Therefore removing all the 'trouble makers'.

Just a thought...

Re:Just a guess (1)

fortfive (1582005) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411278)

You can, in fact, waive any right to make use of the Courts. Personally, I find the term distasteful, but less unconscionable than the clause at issue in the Supreme's recent ruling (ATT was it?) that it was not unconscionable to require binding arbitration on the issue of whether a binding arbitration clause was unconscionable.

If this was emailed I failed to get it (1)

gubers33 (1302099) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411154)

I think there was a software update a few days ago when I played Madden for the first time, I didn't read the it as usual. Whatever I have my individual suit I can use after the class action suit wins.

My coupon! (2)

Kohath (38547) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411168)

I'm really going to miss that coupon for 50% off a Spongebob theme that we were going to get in that settlement. I earned that coupon because Sony could have warned me 10 minutes earlier about my credit card info possibly (but almost certainly not) being stolen.

Lawyers will get $3 million in fees, of course.

Re:My coupon! (2)

Anrego (830717) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411386)

Dunno if this is a troll or not, but I'll bite anyway.

The notification thing, which you've underplayed substantially, was only part of the problem.. the rest was negligence in guarding the data in the first place.

The point about lawyers getting most of the money, with the actual victims ending up with some kind of token compensation definitely stands though.

Re:My coupon! (0)

Kohath (38547) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411574)

Three things about that:

1. Sony was the victim of a crime.
2. Security is relative. It can always be increased. Criminals have shown they can circumvent almost any security measure. You've cited zero facts to back up your claim that Sony's was negligent.
3. I have never seen any credible indication anyone besides Sony was harmed by the security breach. When was the stolen info used against anyone besides Sony? If you weren't harmed by the loss of the information, then why should you be compensated for harm that did not occur? (People were hurt by the downtime though. When crooks blow up a bank, it's inconvenient for the folks who can't transact business there during repairs.)

Thank you Ontario! (5, Informative)

rveldpau (1765928) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411216)

Ontario, Quebec and Alberta actually have legislation that prevents such a clause, which renders Section 15 invalid. This is mentioned in an article about a BC consumer filing a lawsuit against Telus, see this [www.cbc.ca] . I haven't tried to track down the actual legislation that prevents these clauses, but CBC tends to be fairly reliable.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice.

Re:Thank you Ontario! (1)

iplayfast (166447) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411352)

Wish I had mod points. +Informative +Insightful

Re:Thank you Ontario! (1)

MikeBabcock (65886) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411592)

Proud to be Canadian again :)

I don't understand why folks still buy Sony... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411224)

Quality, nope
Price, nope
Customer satisfaction, nope

I started saying "WTF" with memory stick.
My wife was considering starting a business modeled after an arcade she saw that included PS3, xbox, and wii, and the moment we worked selling off hours compute time on the PS3 to local universities, Sony locked out alternate OS.

Re:I don't understand why folks still buy Sony... (1)

trum4n (982031) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411426)

You wife is apparently awesome. Just thought you should know.

That's ok - go get em! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411232)

So they don't want class actions - no problem. Individuals get paid out a LOT more on an individual suit rather than having the share a settlement with everyone in a class action. Nice try, Sony - you just cost yourself more $.

Well why not? (1)

Xelios (822510) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411260)

Honestly, why not try it? Either the courts will allow it or they won't, from Sony's point of view all this means is they've gained one possible avenue of defense against future class action suits. Maybe they'll get some bad publicity out of the deal, but it's not as if things could get much worse for them in that regard.

Many agreed (1)

LordAzuzu (1701760) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411284)

I'm afraid that many agreed without even reading the changes in the terms of service.
Few people read the countless pages you should read in these situations, and the worst is that you just can't say "no" and go on using your product as usual...

Right to opt out (1)

drb226 (1938360) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411334)

If you actually read section 15, it includes instructions for how to opt out of the waiver: send a letter to Sony HQ. Now, let's be honest, this is absolutely retarded. It would be 1000x easier for the customer if there were a web-based way to do this. Send an email. Check this checkbox. Whatever. It seems apparent that Sony feels obligated (legally, perhaps, definitely not morally) to provide this option, but they want to provide it in such a way that the absolute minimum number of customers will take advantage of it. I'd love to see statistics on how many people actually send an opt-out letter.

Re:Right to opt out (2)

Beorytis (1014777) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411490)

It would be 1000x easier for the customer if there were a web-based way to do this.

They must have learned this trick from the banks: On one hand they will charge you a fee for getting paper statements instead of electronic delivery, but then they send a privacy policy and require you to mail in a form if you don't want them to share your information with marketers.

Re:Right to opt out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37411604)

That's precisely why everyone with a vested interest (I avoid buying/using Sony products, so it's all the same to me) needs to get off of their asses, write a letter, and send them some certified mail. That way they have their receipt, and then Sony gets to go through the manual process of opening/sorting all of the mail (which they probably aren't prepared for if it comes in in vast quantities). The apathy in this country kills me - so much positive changes could happen if people did slightly more than the "bare minimum"...

In Pennsylvania (1)

trum4n (982031) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411408)

It's impossible to wave your rights to protest legally. So yea, their contract is invalid in PA. I believe it's also illegal federally in America. AT+T tried it when they changed their name to Cingular and then changed a bunch of peoples prices. They claimed that we were bound my contract to whatever they wanted to do. We threatened to them. They said we can't do that, its in the contract. Local judge said he would happily take it on, citing that it's illegal in PA to have such terms. If i find sauce on this law, i'll post the link, but i'm at work, so don't hope.

Re:In Pennsylvania (1)

sexconker (1179573) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411562)

Supreme Court.
April 27th 2011.

"We don't give a shit about your rights. Binding arbitration and anti-class action clauses are fine, EVEN IF YOUR STATE SAYS OTHERWISE."

Re:In Pennsylvania (1)

trum4n (982031) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411622)

Yea i heard about that. I'm not sure that Sony bribes as hard at AT&T.

Exclusions and Opt-Out (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411452)

Exclusions from Arbitration.

YOU AND THE SONY ENTITIES AGREE THAT ANY CLAIM FILED BY YOU OR BY A SONY ENTITY IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT ARE NOT SUBJECT TO THE ARBITRATION TERMS CONTAINED IN THIS SECTION 15.

RIGHT TO OPT OUT OF BINDING ARBITRATION AND CLASS ACTION WAIVER WITHIN 30 DAYS.

IF YOU DO NOT WISH TO BE BOUND BY THE BINDING ARBITRATION AND CLASS ACTION WAIVER IN THIS SECTION 15, YOU MUST NOTIFY SNEI IN WRITING WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE THAT YOU ACCEPT THIS AGREEMENT. YOUR WRITTEN NOTIFICATION MUST BE MAILED TO 6080 CENTER DRIVE, 10TH FLOOR, LOS ANGELES, CA 90045, ATTN: LEGAL DEPARTMENT/ARBITRATION AND MUST INCLUDE: (1) YOUR NAME, (2) YOUR ADDRESS, (3) YOUR PSN ACCOUNT NUMBER, IF YOU HAVE ONE, AND (4) A CLEAR STATEMENT THAT YOU DO NOT WISH TO RESOLVE DISPUTES WITH ANY SONY ENTITY THROUGH ARBITRATION.

I apologize for the capitalization, but this is how it appears in the PDF.

Terms of Service Agreement [sonyentert...etwork.com]

You have to be realistic:

The successful class action lawsuit demands a major investment in time, money and legal talent. It moves through the courts slowly. The return to any individual claimant is often quite trivial.

My boycott of sony products persists (2)

iplayfast (166447) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411468)

I've not bought any sony products since they removed the other OS option from the ps3, and I must say they've lost a bunch of money from me. Didn't look at any monitors, tvs, cd or anything else with the hated label.

apparently I'm not alone.
http://wololo.net/wagic/2011/04/24/64-of-users-ready-to-boycott-sony-products/ [wololo.net]

Cry some more. (1)

GnomieHomie (1931380) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411474)

It's sad people are complaining about something like this. Obviously filing class action lawsuits is high on your priority list in life if you care so much about something that means so little to you. Get over it and care about more important things than complaining about something that barely affects you. So many other things to care about and enjoy than legal garbage all day long.

go ahead and agree. (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411484)

You cant agree to give up the right to sue or the right to a class action suit. EULAS have zero enforceability when they put silly crap like this in there.

My son accepted (1)

David89 (2022710) | more than 2 years ago | (#37411588)

He's a minor and therefore the contract is invalid
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...