IANAL and could be wrong, but it is not the case that the T’s&C’s we all have to agree to aren’t necessarily legally binding, because people can’t be expected to read and understand them all.
With that in mind, it doesn’t matter what the user agrees to if they have no practical alternative available to them.
There's actually no speculation on this one. There's a fight going on led by Ross Scott of Accursed Farms against shutting down game servers when game requires always online access. Basically lawyers have checked the law in this instance and in USA terms and conditions are GOD. You accepted it and you live with it. Here's the video. I recommend watching that section of video.
I’m in the UK, where the law may be less mental over things like this.
Microsoft is, you have noticed, not from UK. Although I wonder how that will play out. They did move around their company for tax evasion. I think latest was Ireland, then again I think they were smart enough for money to go one side and software to be released by other. It's a complex matter. EU has been able to reign them in somewhat with stupidly high punishments with GDPR. Then again, you are no longer part of that.
They are not, but they do sell products over here, so are subject to British law.
Wrong.
Microsoft can only operate as a franchise overseas. You know this thing called trade law in other countries. Contrary to popular American belief, they are not the center of the world
In civilized countries there is an understanding that noone is reading dozens of pages of terms of agreement, so any clause in there that is unexpected is automatically void. Expecting a software agreement to include rules not to distribute it further, break copy protection mechanisms etc. is normal so those terms are valid. But having all your data stolen is not something to be expected, hence invalid.
I feel bad for that Noone fella. Those are not fun to read.
Try going with that argument to court and see what happens. In USA basically anything goes, whatever is written in there. No matter how weird or against the user. There's a reason why EU's pushing new and shorter terms than can be glanced and read easily.
Which is why the comment you where replying to specified
in civilised countries
The implication beeping that the US is not. Because in a lot of other countries surprise clauses in your T&C's is illegal
Whoever is downvoting this needs to have an encounter with the U.S. legal system, so they find out how little their precious freaking "rights" are worth.
Read the comment and reply to it, you missed the entire point of their comment.
in civilised countries
Yup. But this is Lemmy. People are emotional rather than rational.
Edit: Here's a video I linked in my other comment where Ross is talking about USA law and terms and conditions when it comes to games. He's trying to get publishers to stop killing games once they are out. He basically consulted two lawyers and they both give up on that. It's so atrocious that it's not a matter for law, but constitution.
Nope. All in terms of agreement.
IANAL and could be wrong, but it is not the case that the T’s&C’s we all have to agree to aren’t necessarily legally binding, because people can’t be expected to read and understand them all.
With that in mind, it doesn’t matter what the user agrees to if they have no practical alternative available to them.
There's actually no speculation on this one. There's a fight going on led by Ross Scott of Accursed Farms against shutting down game servers when game requires always online access. Basically lawyers have checked the law in this instance and in USA terms and conditions are GOD. You accepted it and you live with it. Here's the video. I recommend watching that section of video.
I’m in the UK, where the law may be less mental over things like this.
Microsoft is, you have noticed, not from UK. Although I wonder how that will play out. They did move around their company for tax evasion. I think latest was Ireland, then again I think they were smart enough for money to go one side and software to be released by other. It's a complex matter. EU has been able to reign them in somewhat with stupidly high punishments with GDPR. Then again, you are no longer part of that.
They are not, but they do sell products over here, so are subject to British law.
Wrong.
Microsoft can only operate as a franchise overseas. You know this thing called trade law in other countries. Contrary to popular American belief, they are not the center of the world
In civilized countries there is an understanding that noone is reading dozens of pages of terms of agreement, so any clause in there that is unexpected is automatically void. Expecting a software agreement to include rules not to distribute it further, break copy protection mechanisms etc. is normal so those terms are valid. But having all your data stolen is not something to be expected, hence invalid.
I feel bad for that Noone fella. Those are not fun to read.
Try going with that argument to court and see what happens. In USA basically anything goes, whatever is written in there. No matter how weird or against the user. There's a reason why EU's pushing new and shorter terms than can be glanced and read easily.
Which is why the comment you where replying to specified
The implication beeping that the US is not. Because in a lot of other countries surprise clauses in your T&C's is illegal
Whoever is downvoting this needs to have an encounter with the U.S. legal system, so they find out how little their precious freaking "rights" are worth.
Read the comment and reply to it, you missed the entire point of their comment.
Yup. But this is Lemmy. People are emotional rather than rational.
Edit: Here's a video I linked in my other comment where Ross is talking about USA law and terms and conditions when it comes to games. He's trying to get publishers to stop killing games once they are out. He basically consulted two lawyers and they both give up on that. It's so atrocious that it's not a matter for law, but constitution.