So, can EA be sued?

[bigbadjesus]

Is there any legal recourse the people who bought BF 2 and 2142 have? I'm just curious, if anyone has read the terms. I think if there were, it'd be pretty easy to get a class action suit going. They're basically saying "fuck you, we're too lazy" to everyone who paid for these games. I am pretty upset about the affect this will have on BF2142, not so much BF2 because I only play PR and apparently the PR devs will release an update with a fix. The same can't be said about bf2142.

[DeltaFart]

Thats a pretty big thing to be swinging around, and I'd be careful about that. This also isn't a PR related topic, by my opinion.

[AncientMan]

No, they're quite safe legally. Besides, it would be GameSpy that you would be suing, and the User Agreement that you agree to when you create an online account says that they can discontinue services permanently at any time without notice.

Online services don't last forever, neither will PR's replacement services. Just have to either work around it or move on.

[Truism]

I'm actually not so sure they are. It's basically an untested part of the law, but the western legal principle as it applies to virtually all other commercial agreements is that any contract entered into after the transaction for goods and services has been completed (ie. any agreement you sign AFTER paying for something) is void.

I would actually be very interested to see a test case for video game EULAs such as this where the goods paid for are so severely limited by an agreement entered into after the transaction was completed. If the same legal principle prevents a dry cleaner from waiving their liability for damage to your clothes on their receipt after you've paid, I struggle to see how a video game developer waiving their liability to provide fully functional software is waived by an EULA after you've paid.

[hiberNative]

are you willing to dish out millions on a lawyer to match EA's and risk losing over "just a game"?

[Sgt.BountyOrig]

What are you hoping to be awarded, the price of the game back?

[gigiben]

As much as I know, you can ask on origin live help for refunds or discounts for other games, they're really nice fellas over there so if you'll be kind and pleasent you'll be greatly rewarded .

[JohnnyPissoff]

Man I hate to play "Devil's Advocate" here 'cause I loath EA with their ultra mercenary fat cat capitalistic attitude, but suing EA for breach of promise or failure to deliver is just mumbo jumbo. I haven't read a game EULA in quite awhile but I seem to recall their addressing online play as your (the licencee) responsibility. And the game key as providing proof of licencing only. Much like Microsoft Windows. I mean you couldn't sue MS if the internet went down. You could still use windows just like you can still use BF2 without browser support.

So basically the "butt" of this is; this isn't a laundry or groceries it's an intellectual property (something created from pure brain power). Via international intellectual rights laws which applies to software as well as music or movies, you're only buying the rights (licence) to use the property (BF2) not to actually own it.

[matty1053]

Online services don't last forever, neither will PR's replacement services. Just have to either work around it or move on.

Yeah.... I agree.



I know this is off topic.... but what about ARMA 2 online and stuff? It says

"powered by gamespy" in the top right hand corner of Server browser.

[Spush]

I know this is off topic.... but what about ARMA 2 online and stuff? It says

"powered by gamespy" in the top right hand corner of Server browser.

BI already said that they're making a workaround for steam works. That includes OFP, ARMA 2, and ARMA 2 OA.

[matty1053]

BI already said that they're making a workaround for steam works. That includes OFP, ARMA 2, and ARMA 2 OA.

Thanks Spush! ♥

[<account detail removed>]

Almost anybody can be sued. However, a player lawsuit against a publisher for not investing in the infrastructure to keep a game's online service working is unlikely to be successful.
If you actually read the EULA that is always included with a video game, it pretty much says that the publisher can do whatever they want, whenever they want, and you are sol. Sometimes it even says that online services can cease at any time.

On the other hand, the lawsuit stockholders filed against EA management for willful misrepresentations about BF4 before it was released is legally very solid. It actually fits the definition of "securities fraud" very nicely and could actually result in prison sentences if it came before an honest judge & jury.

[Truism]

Nah, I'm no lawyer but I think you've missed the grounds you'd probably sue on, which is that the EULA wasn't a binding contract because you'd already purchased to goods at that point. With the EULA invalid, the software would be viewed as a product unfit for intended use and the onus would be on the provider to rectify the deficiency. It could potentially set a precedent for games having to provide for true third party hosting, since that would allow individuals to ensure the product functions fully.

[CR8Z]

Anybody can be sued for anything. Such is the legal system. They could probably be sued for something unrelated, but as ever in our justice system, it comes down to who has the better lawyer.

I think it would be great to sue them for breach of contract, if not just to get the price of the game back, but to lay out a framework for future games, and what the consumer can expect for online play after the purchase of a game.

[<account detail removed>]

the EULA wasn't a binding contract because you'd already purchased to goods at that point

Actually there is a legal disclaimer on the retail box (and I assume on Steam/Origin) that says you have to agree to the EULA terms to operate the product. Your purchase is a de facto acceptance of the EULA terms and I guarantee any judge will throw out the lawsuit on those grounds alone.

[Spec]

Anybody can be sued for anything. Such is the legal system. They could probably be sued for something unrelated, but as ever in our justice system, it comes down to who has the better lawyer.

I think it would be great to sue them for breach of contract, if not just to get the price of the game back, but to lay out a framework for future games, and what the consumer can expect for online play after the purchase of a game.

Has a contract actually been broken?

PR won't be able to host the server forever, either. Neither will PR2 or any other game, and I'd rather not that all Devs of all games ever have to fear being sued simply for being unable to meet the unrealistic expectation of knowing beforehand how long their online services will be available or even to host them forever.

It is only natural that an online game has a limited life span, except for peer to peer hosted games. I don't think anyone can seriously expect things to be any different.

[CR8Z]

I'm not suggesting that any contract was broken, but that anybody can sue for anything. If a lady can sue McDonalds because they served her hot coffee, and she won a $2.86 million dollar settlement, certainly EA can be sued because somebody can't play their game anymore.

Hell, a burglar can sue a homeowner because they had a slip/fall hazard under the window that they used to break into the home! There are literally dozens of these cases here in the US.

I am only suggesting that as a consumer, it would be nice to know what the "shelf life" of the game I'm buying is. A lawsuit might force this issue.

[bandwevil]

That's more of a case of wonderful media reporting on skewed/incomplete information more than frivolous cases being out of hand or anything.

The Liebeck case involved coffee hot enough to cause third degree burns (NSFL gross image warning) and several days in a hospital. She asked for the $20,000 hospital fees to be covered to which McDonalds offered only $800 - leading to a court case that resulted in a final payout of under $600,000.
Haven't heard anything about the burglar story but I assume it's equally skewed or potentially fake altogether.

Not saying that a lawsuit is entirely out of the picture, but the court system is a lot more organized and realistic than most people seem to believe.

[CR8Z]

I don't want to re-litigate any court cases, or even debate the inequities, perceived or unperceived, in the justice system, but simply state that anyone can sue anybody for any reason.

In this case, I think a lawsuit, however unjustified, might prompt the publishers to adopt a more standardized policy in how they support their content online and into the future.

[Gracler]

If you like throwing money away you could make a lawsuit against them, but it would be more realistic to vote for the right people that are able to create the laws surrounding software declarations. Like food has to have there "best before" written on it the same thing should be printed on games that are dependent on some kind of service.

If publishers where forced to print that on the box it would hurt the games in the bargain bin, but people that go out and buy new games probably won't care if there new game is set to expire in 2020, but they would then know what they are buying into and what to expect.
If however the publishers service provider decide to shut down early you should be able to get a refund.