• r00ty@kbin.life
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      I think in the case of forced agreements (both Roku not having a way to select disagree and disabling all hardware functionality until you agree, and blizzard not allowing login to existing games including non-live service ones) no reasonable court should be viewing this as freely accepting the new conditions.

      If you buy a new game with those conditions, sure you should be able to get a full refund though, and you could argue it for ongoing live service games where you pay monthly that it’s acceptable to change the conditions with some notice ahead of time. If you don’t accept you can no longer use the ongoing paid for features, I expect a court would allow that. But there’s no real justification for disabling hardware you already own or disabling single player games you already paid for in full.

      It’ll be interesting to see any test cases that come from these examples.

      • ysjet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        The problem here is “reasonable court.” One party in the US has spent decades stacking the courts with unreasonable judges who will agree to anything a corporation hands them.

        • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          My brother in christ, both parties have been doing this for ages. You aren’t looking at the right lines. This one is about wealth, not about party affiliation.

          If you had the money to put safeguards in place to protect you and your stuff in the event something went wrong, you probably would. It would be a mistake not to.

          A simple example is keeping some money set aside as a savings or emergency fund. For rich people, lobbying for more favorable laws, and helping more friendly judges rise up the ranks is a similar thing. Some have went on to make and plan apocalypse bunkers too.

          When you have enough money that you don’t have to worry about spending a certain amount, you just go and do it. Like people not worrying about spending on Starbucks every morning because it’s equivalent to 30 minutes of their time or less.

  • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Hopefully the lesson people are slowly learning is to walk away from these systems.

    • sardaukar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      It’s not that easy. My Blizzard account is over 10 years old - never thought they’d go down hill so much. What’s the solution, to never create accounts online anywhere? Even if a service looks good and you support it, a corporation like Activision can come along and have their asshole CEO infect everything.

      Walking away from my account now means throwing away a lot of money spent on it.

      • WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        What’s the solution, to never create accounts online anywhere?

        Yes. I buy all my games either as physical releases on consoles or DRM-free on PC. If a game requires an account to play, I won’t play it.

        • deur@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          Fuck people who want to play matchmade competitive games I guess

            • reddithalation@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              idk, I’ve had some great experiences with competitive gaming, I don’t think generalizing it all as a cancer is reasonable.