Jump to content


New WG EULA coming 15th June 2018


  • Please log in to reply
343 replies to this topic

wasaabi #281 Posted 14 June 2018 - 12:20 PM

    This Dude Abides

  • Senior Moderator
  • 20604 battles
  • 6,213
  • [-1AR-] -1AR-
  • Member since:
    07-15-2012

The Dude abides.

 
Spoiler

 


southerner #282 Posted 14 June 2018 - 12:38 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 13533 battles
  • 1,491
  • [2MEKE] 2MEKE
  • Member since:
    09-01-2013

View PostWarhammer124, on 14 June 2018 - 12:12 PM, said:

A few more questions:

 

- How bad exactly will this new EULA be? Will WG be very arrogant and strict towards its players?

 

-Do ALL players get gold if our prem mm tanks are removed?

 

-Is WG 100% sure this EULA will be implemented?

 

-Do you think I should accept it?

__________________________

Whoah on item number 5. Its not up for any of us to tell you what to do. You have your basic freedom and rights to make up your own mind without prejudice, to freely make up your own mind and to make a choice. Thats all part of being a free adult in a free democracy.


indignatio regis nuntii mortis et vir sapiens placabit ea 

charcoal44 #283 Posted 14 June 2018 - 12:55 PM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 12225 battles
  • 218
  • [NFB] NFB
  • Member since:
    07-27-2014

I just read through this: http://legal.asia.wa...ement-new-aunz/

Seems like they are saying one thing, but then indicating they will something different, as in the below;

 

5. Non-Excludable Rights

5.1 Nothing in this EULA is intended to have or has the effect of excluding, restricting or modifying the application of any applicable law of any local jurisdiction that cannot be excluded, restricted or modified by agreement between us (collectively, "Non-Excludable Rights&quotas.

5.2 Non-Excludable Rights may include rights to replacements, refunds, compensation or other remedies to which consumers may be entitled and that cannot be excluded, restricted or modified under:

(a) Division 1 of Part 3-2 of the Australian Consumer Law (Schedule 2 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010) (Cth); or

(b) the New Zealand Consumer Guarantees Act 1993.

(collectively, "Consumer Guarantees

And then this;

9. Additional Features

9.1 The Resources may permit you to acquire and accumulate rights to certain additional virtual game content, features and functionalities made available by us, including rights to in-game assets and points, virtual items, virtual currency (so-called "Gold&quot or time-limited premium memberships (together "Additional Features&quot, which we grant you a licence to use pursuant to the terms of this EULA.

(i) you agree that you do not "own" the Additional Features and that we have the absolute right to manage, regulate, control, modify and/or eliminate such Additional Features at our sole discretion, in any general or specific case, and that we will have no liability to you based on our exercise of such right;

So, how then do they say the above , when this is in the the EULA;

26. Governing (Applicable) Law and Jurisdiction

26.1 This EULA and any dispute, claim or obligation (whether contractual or non-contractual) arising out of or in connection with it or its subject matter or formation shall be governed by the laws of Australia, unless otherwise required by a law of the country where the user has his habitual residence that is unable to be excluded by agreement.

26.2 We and you submit all the aforementioned disputes to the jurisdiction of the courts of the country whose laws are applicable subject to subsection 26.1.

Can someone please provide some advice on the above, also, I have sent an enquiry to the ACCC regarding the legality of some of the proposed actions.


Edited by charcoal44, 14 June 2018 - 12:57 PM.


Revan #284 Posted 14 June 2018 - 09:15 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 23039 battles
  • 1,833
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    11-13-2012

View Postcharcoal44, on 14 June 2018 - 12:55 PM, said:

I just read through this: http://legal.asia.wa...ement-new-aunz/

Seems like they are saying one thing, but then indicating they will something different, as in the below;

 

5. Non-Excludable Rights

5.1 Nothing in this EULA is intended to have or has the effect of excluding, restricting or modifying the application of any applicable law of any local jurisdiction that cannot be excluded, restricted or modified by agreement between us (collectively, "Non-Excludable Rights&quotas.

5.2 Non-Excludable Rights may include rights to replacements, refunds, compensation or other remedies to which consumers may be entitled and that cannot be excluded, restricted or modified under:

(a) Division 1 of Part 3-2 of the Australian Consumer Law (Schedule 2 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010) (Cth); or

(b) the New Zealand Consumer Guarantees Act 1993.

(collectively, "Consumer Guarantees

And then this;

9. Additional Features

9.1 The Resources may permit you to acquire and accumulate rights to certain additional virtual game content, features and functionalities made available by us, including rights to in-game assets and points, virtual items, virtual currency (so-called "Gold&quot or time-limited premium memberships (together "Additional Features&quot, which we grant you a licence to use pursuant to the terms of this EULA.

(i) you agree that you do not "own" the Additional Features and that we have the absolute right to manage, regulate, control, modify and/or eliminate such Additional Features at our sole discretion, in any general or specific case, and that we will have no liability to you based on our exercise of such right;

So, how then do they say the above , when this is in the the EULA;

26. Governing (Applicable) Law and Jurisdiction

26.1 This EULA and any dispute, claim or obligation (whether contractual or non-contractual) arising out of or in connection with it or its subject matter or formation shall be governed by the laws of Australia, unless otherwise required by a law of the country where the user has his habitual residence that is unable to be excluded by agreement.

26.2 We and you submit all the aforementioned disputes to the jurisdiction of the courts of the country whose laws are applicable subject to subsection 26.1.

Can someone please provide some advice on the above, also, I have sent an enquiry to the ACCC regarding the legality of some of the proposed actions.

 

 The consumer guarantees act here can be vague and it generally resolves in favour of the consumer. Its more spirit of the law than the exact wording.

 

 For example you buy a $2000 dollar TV that comes with a 1 year warranty. The law has something in it to the effect of reasonable expectations so if the TV dies in 2 years time you can argue that the TV should be expected to last longer than 1 year so the seller is still liable for it. Such an expectation would not apply to a $10 T-shirt. 

 

 And you can lay a complaint to the commerce commission. 

 

 It doesn't really cover digital goods in detail as well as EU law does but once again you could lay a complaint along the lines of "I had a reasonable expectation this tank would function as intended and they took my money". Its big on bad faith and goods "fit for purpose" .

 

 For example when Microsoft had that red ring of death thing despite a lot of Xboxes being outside of warranty you should expect an electronic good costing $700 bucks to last longer than 1 year. Microsoft more or less did a product recall and fixed your Xbox if it had a problem in the last 3 years, even then in effect was if you have red ring regardless when you bought it send it in and we'll fix it.

 

 You also have the legal right to ask for a full refund even if the vendor is claiming they only need to repair or replace with an equivalent good even if that good is outside of its warranty (within reason). Basically extended warranties here are a waste of money as they generally fall under reasonable expectations that a car for example won't conk out and die in 3-5 years. 

 

 I had a PS3 stolen and the insurance replaced it with a PS4 which was equivalent since the company they used for insurance claims no longer sold PS3. The insurance company argued that they wanted to give me a free upgrade did not even have to ask (also had some games and an Xboxone go missing). 

 

 Consumer guarantees act also applies to services so even if it was a "rented" digital good you bought if they changed it after the fact you had a reasonable expectation that the service provided would be what you paid for so WG EULA would not apply. The commerce commission is not big on bait and switch tactics for example. 

 

 This is the act here.

https://www.consumer.org.nz/articles...guarantees-act

Note 
"The act’s terms “reasonable” and “acceptable” are deliberately open-ended."

The act applies to services as well as goods so doesn't matter if digital tanks are a digital good or service you have paid money to a commercial entity. Wargaming has accepted that money and by doing so are also covered under contract law. By law a commercial entity cannot opt out. 

 

 So WG EULA legally is screwed either way they can't opt out and either way if digital tanks are a goods or service doesn't matter and it applies to online sales as well. So even a revised EULA that you sign doesn't really matter its not a legal contract if it violates the can't opt out part of the act. And you could complain to the commerce commission and/or do a class action lawsuit or individual lawsuit and WG could also be accountable for costs which means they have to pay your lawyers as well.

 

 Its right there in black and white, also that accounting paper at uni on contracts also helps lol. 

 

 I'm not sure what Australian laws apply but if you're in New Zealand WG EULA can't be enforced when it comes to consumer law.

 

However for other things they can enforce parts of the EULA

 

They can enforce it if you abuse someone online for example as its a reasonable request by WG and the act won't cover non financial codes of behaviour for example. Even constitutional rights to freedom of expression only means you won't face criminal charges and go to jail you can still get fired and banned from the server.

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by Revan, 14 June 2018 - 09:38 PM.

Empowered by the dark side, fueled by pubbie tears. 

wasaabi #285 Posted 14 June 2018 - 09:52 PM

    This Dude Abides

  • Senior Moderator
  • 20604 battles
  • 6,213
  • [-1AR-] -1AR-
  • Member since:
    07-15-2012

Good summary but it is important to note that Section 5 overrides section 9 as it says in 5.1 that "Nothing in this EULA is intended to have or has the effect of excluding, restricting or modifying the application of any applicable law of any local jurisdiction..."

 

In addition, no contract can override any law under most countries legal system, so as long as there is a consumer protection law then the EULA can't change what the consumer protection extends to the consumer.

 

So in essence, particularly in Australia and New Zealand you don't give up your rights to get a refund if, as you mention above, that the goods are not fit for purpose or have been substituted or similar.  Based on that the changes in the EULA shouldn't frighten off players from Australia and New Zealand.  Players from other countries need to make up their own minds on this topic.


The Dude abides.

 
Spoiler

 


TheBudgiesmuggler #286 Posted 14 June 2018 - 10:19 PM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 22883 battles
  • 160
  • [DOGS-] DOGS-
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013

View PostEzz, on 05 June 2018 - 09:51 PM, said:

 

Cheers. And yes, the community has to deal with these people. There's only so many times you can try to help them before simply showing them the door becomes the best option. 

 

Gives me more reason to hang around and annoy people like you...

TheBudgiesmuggler #287 Posted 14 June 2018 - 10:23 PM

    Sergeant

  • Member
  • 22883 battles
  • 160
  • [DOGS-] DOGS-
  • Member since:
    03-18-2013

View Postwasaabi, on 14 June 2018 - 11:52 PM, said:

Good summary but it is important to note that Section 5 overrides section 9 as it says in 5.1 that "Nothing in this EULA is intended to have or has the effect of excluding, restricting or modifying the application of any applicable law of any local jurisdiction..."

 

In addition, no contract can override any law under most countries legal system, so as long as there is a consumer protection law then the EULA can't change what the consumer protection extends to the consumer.

 

So in essence, particularly in Australia and New Zealand you don't give up your rights to get a refund if, as you mention above, that the goods are not fit for purpose or have been substituted or similar.  Based on that the changes in the EULA shouldn't frighten off players from Australia and New Zealand.  Players from other countries need to make up their own minds on this topic.

 

So us ANZ players can expect a reasonable refund in a gold equivalent(lol) for our PMM tanks if the need arises from Wargaming?

wasaabi #288 Posted 14 June 2018 - 10:48 PM

    This Dude Abides

  • Senior Moderator
  • 20604 battles
  • 6,213
  • [-1AR-] -1AR-
  • Member since:
    07-15-2012

View PostTheBudgiesmuggler, on 15 June 2018 - 12:23 AM, said:

 

So us ANZ players can expect a reasonable refund in a gold equivalent(lol) for our PMM tanks if the need arises from Wargaming?

 

The refund would be in the national currency you paid for.  A refund in gold is not a commercial refund, it is an offer to replace one good with another by the vendor.

The Dude abides.

 
Spoiler

 


neokai #289 Posted 14 June 2018 - 11:51 PM

    SealClub Number 9

  • Senior Moderator
  • 36795 battles
  • 7,949
  • Member since:
    06-07-2013

View PostFramFramson, on 13 June 2018 - 04:00 AM, said:

Well, we've established that point of sale protections will typically protect customers in their own countries, but only if those countries have consumer legislation.

 

What I'm asking is if EU law prevents WG from offering these terms in the first place. This question probably turns on the determination of if, under EU law, contracts drawn up by multinationals with European headquarters for customers globally are defined as being required to be valid under EU law. I.E. is a European company allowed to ignore European corporate regulations if they send out slightly different contracts to be issued from regional hubs? That seems kind of wonky, but again, I don't know the relevant case law here.

 

For instance if you wanted to sue Maccas for an international violation across all or many of their global franchise operations at some point, there are circumstances where it would be valid for the suit to filed in the US (and others where, as you say, you would file in the country of the regional offices). And WG is not even a franchise operation like Maccas; Cyprus very clearly exercises a great deal of control over the regional servers and they are vastly more alike in what they offer than they are different

 

As the consumer bringing up the suit you have to argue which jurisdiction holds sway. It's the main reason why I listed the 3 possibilities, because jurisdiction is not a cut and dried issue when it comes to online purchases.

 

The problem with your Maccas argument is that depending on how you word your suit it can be either an ASIA or a Cyprus case. Again, not legal advice, full disclaimer that the following is personal opinion only.

 

If you are suing for changes made to the tank, you could possibly pin it to Cyprus, but your case becomes that much harder. Since you now have to establish that the changes to the tank constitute significant detrimental changes to the original good to constitute a lemon.

 

If you are suing for amendments to the EULA together with changes to the tank, you will probably tango with the local representative instead since the EULA is limited to the geographical region.

 

View PostWarhammer124, on 13 June 2018 - 12:43 PM, said:

 

Hmmm so What are the Philippines consumer laws regarding the rights to ownership of a purchase?

 

Check DTI's webpage for a listing of all the possible laws.

 

For online commerce I guess this is the relevant law. And no, I won't translate that into readable English... (too many chances I can get the legalese wrong)


Spoiler

neokai #290 Posted 14 June 2018 - 11:53 PM

    SealClub Number 9

  • Senior Moderator
  • 36795 battles
  • 7,949
  • Member since:
    06-07-2013
And to drive the point home that catering to a global audience is incredibly complicated and frustrating, Steam has just decided to give users the tools to filter their own content and will stop policing what games appear in their storefront.
Spoiler

FramFramson #291 Posted 15 June 2018 - 12:20 AM

    Major

  • Member
  • 35235 battles
  • 3,163
  • Member since:
    02-22-2015
Well, I think we both know that a lawsuit is unlikely to proceed regardless of jurisdiction. The question is whether a regulatory complaint can be made.

LT-playing masochist. It's too much fun to be a mosquito.


Ezz #292 Posted 15 June 2018 - 03:36 AM

    Major

  • Beta-Tester
  • 60926 battles
  • 34,685
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    07-17-2012

View PostTheBudgiesmuggler, on 15 June 2018 - 12:19 AM, said:

 

Gives me more reason to hang around and annoy people like you...

Annoy? On the contrary, by and large we enjoy trying to help people. If people aren't willing or capable of learning and would prefer to leave that's less of an annoyance but more about feeling sorry for them. Not everyone is cut out for competitive game play after all. 

 

View Postwasaabi, on 15 June 2018 - 12:48 AM, said:

 

The refund would be in the national currency you paid for.  A refund in gold is not a commercial refund, it is an offer to replace one good with another by the vendor.

 

Wonder if WG sea will refund purchases bought on WG NA. 

 


Who the [edited] are you? Get Spoofed! "wouldn't be a proper WG balance change if they didn't [edited] something up after all "

>9000 cynicism brought to you by P2W, RIP Balance and the Cartoon Connection

Currently moderating your English speaking community : AALGMadibaCenturion_NZ, Elite911, Moonbase Patrol Copter 7

R. Pubbie: "why are all PBKAC players so rude, arrogant and nasty? and why do Mods favor them?"


FramFramson #293 Posted 15 June 2018 - 04:37 AM

    Major

  • Member
  • 35235 battles
  • 3,163
  • Member since:
    02-22-2015

View PostEzz, on 14 June 2018 - 02:36 PM, said:

Annoy? On the contrary, by and large we enjoy trying to help people. If people aren't willing or capable of learning and would prefer to leave that's less of an annoyance but more about feeling sorry for them. Not everyone is cut out for competitive game play after all. 

 

 

Wonder if WG sea will refund purchases bought on WG NA. 

 

 

I don't even know what the hell MY situation would be. Playing in SEA but this account has never been on the NA server and I buy everything in Canadian dollars. :popcorn:

LT-playing masochist. It's too much fun to be a mosquito.


Revan #294 Posted 15 June 2018 - 12:06 PM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 23039 battles
  • 1,833
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    11-13-2012

View Postwasaabi, on 14 June 2018 - 09:52 PM, said:

Good summary but it is important to note that Section 5 overrides section 9 as it says in 5.1 that "Nothing in this EULA is intended to have or has the effect of excluding, restricting or modifying the application of any applicable law of any local jurisdiction..."

 

In addition, no contract can override any law under most countries legal system, so as long as there is a consumer protection law then the EULA can't change what the consumer protection extends to the consumer.

 

So in essence, particularly in Australia and New Zealand you don't give up your rights to get a refund if, as you mention above, that the goods are not fit for purpose or have been substituted or similar.  Based on that the changes in the EULA shouldn't frighten off players from Australia and New Zealand.  Players from other countries need to make up their own minds on this topic.

 

Well I am going to wait and see what the options are. My accounts expired and waiting on seeing what the options are. I know I don't want to pay extra for a new tank or have a crap KV5 in tier 10 matches and I have a heap of other pref MM tanks as well. 

 

 They have handed out free tier 8's premiums before (the T34 comes to mind), I don't think a free upgrade without a russian refund is unreasonable. A generous gold buyback scheme would be another and have a KV5 and KV5A model in the game. 


Edited by Revan, 15 June 2018 - 12:10 PM.

Empowered by the dark side, fueled by pubbie tears. 

Warhammer124 #295 Posted 16 June 2018 - 11:27 AM

    Corporal

  • Member
  • 8515 battles
  • 26
  • [GUARD] GUARD
  • Member since:
    10-18-2012
Hey guys its been 2 days since the new eula came out and I was never asked to accept anything. Is this a bug of some sort? cus idk why i didnt have to accept it,.

MagicalFlyingFox #296 Posted 16 June 2018 - 11:28 AM

    Destroyer of Tier 6 CW

  • Beta-Tester
  • 28018 battles
  • 12,978
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    10-03-2012

Maybe they are putting it on hold while they revise it. 

 

Good.


http://www.theuselessweb.com/

 A. Guy on 02 June 2018 - 12:40 AM, said:

Destroyer of Tier 6 CW... says it all about you.


FramFramson #297 Posted 16 June 2018 - 11:40 AM

    Major

  • Member
  • 35235 battles
  • 3,163
  • Member since:
    02-22-2015
I think we will simply get the message later, because usually it comes up for renewal when a patch drops. And our patch is behind the rest of the world, so...

LT-playing masochist. It's too much fun to be a mosquito.


southerner #298 Posted 16 June 2018 - 11:57 AM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 13533 battles
  • 1,491
  • [2MEKE] 2MEKE
  • Member since:
    09-01-2013

Generally when WG says a eula is coming up for renewal on a said date, then it happens. We are normally9 to 12 hours ahead of europe on time zones. So the 15th has come, over in the greenwich time zone. So they could be having another look at it as magicalflyingfox says or they will drop it at some stage as fram says. 

 

I was reading about some players resigning and rage quiting the game in a big way on the european servers, doing a reverse paypal payment as a way of getting their money back. Apparently they ask for a reverse payment and paypal ask why, they say goods not as described and paypal grants the action.

* its more complex than that, but I have to keep it short and condensed on this thread.

 

http://forum.worldof...ssian-ragequit/

 

 

 

Here is the last post on he thread its a very very interesting thread to read

 

Tr0gledyte#38Posted Today, 04:26 AM

Second Lieutenant

 

View PostNUKLEAR_SLUG, on 16 June 2018 - 01:53 AM, said:

 

 So you lied. Knew you would.

 

No lies were told. :) I clearly stated why I believed I should get that money back, at the expense of my account, I informed PayPal that WG would lock my account with 1000+ euro of stuff in it if they refunded me so much as a penny. This might be why I got 100% back for all disputes, not sure. 

 

I explained how, from my perspective, Wargaming is selling virtual goods and purposefully devalues them while at the same time enticing you to buy more virtual goods by releasing more powerful premium tanks. It has become a never ending spiral.

 

Despite a 1000 character limit in the text field I even managed to explain the 3/5/7 template that has been destroying the gameplay experience for the most expensive virtual goods, tier 8 premium tanks, with no sign of WG fixing this or even acknowledging the template issue anytime soon. WG's complete disregard for their community is a problem. 

 

I made a case and I won, rightfully so in my opinion, and I created this thread to let others know this really is an option. You can tell WG you will pay to unlock your account when they get their act together. 

 

As Renesco said, they're about as close to internet crooks as you can get. I'm still curious about that whole tax evasion ordeal.. 


Edited by southerner, 16 June 2018 - 12:02 PM.

indignatio regis nuntii mortis et vir sapiens placabit ea 

TD1 #299 Posted 17 June 2018 - 03:00 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta-Tester
  • 8710 battles
  • 570
  • Member since:
    10-05-2012
Dunno about you guys, but the outrage over the new EULA in Warships is much less than here. There are even two figures I personally know to be reliable posters that even supported the new EULA.

One of them said that this sort of thing has been done with other companies that provide f2p content, and my take on this is that this finally gives them the ability to nerf premium vehicles deemed overpowered without having to worry about customers applying chargeback. You guys think this is bad? Check out the levels of oppresion EA pulled off when Simcity (2013) was still always online- they allegedly banned people for pointing out that there was a fault in the always online requirement.

I'm expecting to be attacked by you guys over this post. Bring it on- I'm going to stick to my apologist ways like it or not.

NameWasStolenStresslevel #300 Posted 17 June 2018 - 05:24 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Member
  • 34256 battles
  • 866
  • Member since:
    01-19-2015
but what if instead of being sued, WG became a good guy and at least buff WELL these tanks and fix tier 8 MM? Thats the reason they are touching only the kv5 (for now), the other pref are safe.

Forum Guy: "All that Marks of Excelence does is to encourage Damage farming over winning".

Me: "YES sir, MOE does encourage dmg farm over winning, just like winning does encourages: YOLO, Camping far back, gold spamming,"world of capping" mindset, OP premium tier 8's purchases, chat rage, platooning to farm win ratio, toxicity, seal clubbing, arty spam etc..... So i guess winning is much more toxic and bad behavior than dmg farming???"  Wait a minute, wow no one has ever thought about that this way??? Then I must be a genius                                                                                                                                                            https://worldoftanks.asia/en/hall-of-fame/vehicles/A100_T49/#wot&w_ts=overall&w_nb=500

         Currently Hall of Fame T49's number 1 in WTR!!! (parameters are *battles +500* and *since 2014's* ranking)





4 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users