Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Sony PlayStation (Games) The Courts Your Rights Online

New Sony PSN ToS: Class Action Waiver Included 378

rwven writes "Yesterday Sony sent an email to PlayStation Network members regarding a change in the Terms of Service for PSN. When agreeing to this new terms of service, you must waive your rights to a class action suit against Sony. I, for one, will not be agreeing to any such thing. You can view section 15 of the new ToS here (PDF)."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Sony PSN ToS: Class Action Waiver Included

Comments Filter:
  • by Tastecicles ( 1153671 ) on Thursday September 15, 2011 @12:38PM (#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.

  • by girlintraining ( 1395911 ) on Thursday September 15, 2011 @12:41PM (#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.
  • by BaronHethorSamedi ( 970820 ) <thebaronsamedi@gmail.com> on Thursday September 15, 2011 @12:45PM (#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.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 15, 2011 @01:06PM (#37411350)

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

  • by Quila ( 201335 ) on Thursday September 15, 2011 @02:00PM (#37412108)

    It's the one that promotes arbitration over lawsuits, it's the one that preempts state laws on the issue.

    This interpretation isn't really new either, since it was held to preempt in Southland Corp. v. Keating. That was a 7-2 decision.

    Congress declared a national policy favoring arbitration and withdrew the power of the states to require a judicial forum for the resolution of claims which the contracting parties agreed to resolve by arbitration

    That was in 1984. The law needs to be changed.

  • by tgibbs ( 83782 ) on Thursday September 15, 2011 @05:25PM (#37414432)

    Class action suits over consumer products are a lawyer scam. It doesn't much matter whether the alleged product flaw is real or not. The lawyer makes a lot of noise in the media and sues for a ridiculous amount of money, then offers to settle for less than it would cost the company to defend itself in court. The company settles--after all, defending itself in court would just generate more news reports and extend the bad publicity for months, and even if they won, would end up cost them more money than the settlement. All the "members of the class" get a piddly settlement, like a gift certificate for more of the company's products, that is barely even decent compensation for the time it took them to fill out the paperwork. But the lawyer gets a slice of all of those piddly settlements which add up to a nice chunk of change--all for no work other than giving a few press conferences and sending a few letters.

"May your future be limited only by your dreams." -- Christa McAuliffe

Working...