Sony PSN class-action lawsuit ban prompts... lawsuit Sony is being sued over its insistence that it not be sued. The consumer electronics giant is the subject of a new lawsuit filed with the US District Court for Northern California, Gamespot reports. The complaint alleges Sony engaged in unfair business practices by seeking to prevent users from launching class-action lawsuits …
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/legal/livetou
IF YOU LIVE IN THE UNITED STATES, SECTION 18.1 AND ITS SUBSECTIONS, CONTAIN A BINDING ARBITRATION CLAUSE AND CLASS ACTION WAIVER. THEY AFFECT YOUR RIGHTS CONCERNING THE RESOLUTION OF ANY "DISPUTE" (AS DEFINED IN SECTION 18.1.1 ) BETWEEN YOU AND MICROSOFT. PLEASE READ IT.
18.1.6. CLASS ACTION WAIVER. YOU AND MICROSOFT AGREE THAT ANY PROCEEDINGS TO RESOLVE OR LITIGATE ANY DISPUTE, WHETHER IN ARBITRATION, IN COURT, OR OTHERWISE, WILL BE CONDUCTED SOLELY ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS, AND THAT NEITHER YOU NOR MICROSOFT WILL SEEK TO HAVE ANY DISPUTE HEARD AS A CLASS ACTION, A REPRESENTATIVE ACTION, A COLLECTIVE ACTION, A PRIVATE ATTORNEY-GENERAL ACTION, OR IN ANY PROCEEDING IN WHICH YOU OR MICROSOFT ACTS OR PROPOSES TO ACT IN A REPRESENTATIVE CAPACITY. YOU AND MICROSOFT FURTHER AGREE THAT NO ARBITRATION OR PROCEEDING WILL BE JOINED, CONSOLIDATED, OR COMBINED WITH ANOTHER ARBITRATION OR PROCEEDING WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF YOU, MICROSOFT, AND ALL PARTIES TO ANY SUCH ARBITRATION OR PROECCEDING.
They only bought the PS3, PSN is a free to use online service that is not part of PS3, and has it's own T&C which you are free to accept or decline, your choice....
Microsoft's online service also has exactly the same T&C (worded slightly differently, but amounts to the same)
Ever used a T-Mobile phone? Guess what, identical T&C even the wording... (i'm guessing same legal company)...
www.t-mobile.com/Templates/Popup.aspx?PAsset=Ftr_Ftr_TermsAndConditions&print=true
"CLASS ACTION WAIVER. WE EACH AGREE THAT ANY DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEEDINGS, WHETHER IN ARBITRATION OR COURT, WILL BE CONDUCTED ONLY ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS AND NOT IN A CLASS OR REPRESENTATIVE ACTION OR AS A MEMBER IN A CLASS, CONSOLIDATED OR REPRESENTATIVE ACTION. If a court or arbitrator determines in an action between you and us that this waiver is unenforceable, the arbitration agreement will be void as to you. If you chose to pursue your claim in court by opting out of the arbitration provision as specified above, this Class Action Waiver provision will not apply to you. Neither you, nor any other customer, can be a class representative, class member, or otherwise participate in a class, consolidated, or representative proceeding without having complied with the opt out requirements above."
How in the hell is it legal to block class-action lawsuits?
We really are so screwed, our democratically elected representatives really are just corporate sock-puppets. Thankfully, the EU parliament has at least some balls and this is why we really need a european union, to defend us from these corporate leeches.
I'm surprised that between the EU and the USA, we can't control their tyranny to some degree.
afaik Class action lawsuits are a concept that only exists in US law anyway.
Most european versions only extend the concept to Consumer Rights organisations, which is not quite the same thing as they are effectively a single legal entity.
Having said that Im majorly surprised the T&C's are legal - the only person who should make a rule on whether a complaint should be part of a class action should be a judge. I wonder what the precedent is for including Anti-Class action T&C's and if/how its been challenged.
Is this irony? The EU parliament has balls? Since when? They don't have any power to go with those balls, all decisions are made by the European Council, an unelected body of 'elders' filled by appointment. The EU parliament is a charade to impart the belief that the EU is a democratic institution.
Besides which, 'class action' is an American invention, you do not get it in non-US common law countries. In the UK however, a consumer contract which wilfully throws away consumer rights like that would be considered unenforceable under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations Act.
because any idiot will jump aboard the free classaction train incase they get a freebie out of it.
There is nothing stopping you suing Sony as in individual for whatever you may think they have done, however you will have to hire and pay for a lawyer to do so.
That's the way it should be. And that's why the European legal system isn't totally fucked up like the American one....
The only people complaining about this, are lame American freetards.
"By clicking agree you are acknowledging that Sony may sew your mouth to the butthole of another PSN user. Sony and its subsidiaries may also, if necessary, sew yet another person's mouth on to your butthole, making you a being that shares on gastral tract."
Always read the T&C!!!
Surprisingly class action waivers appear to be enforcable in the US, though in many cases a challenge may be warrented :
http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/142598/Banking+Law/Enforceability+of+Class+Action+Waiver+Provisions+in+Commercial+Contracts
I say surprisingly as it would appear to limit access to legal redress. At some point T&Cs need looking at. I don't believe that any of these companies think it's reasonable for customers to have to read (and understand) a T&C agreement. If you stood in a mobile phone shop and went through the T&Cs before a purchase they'd probably kick you out in any case.
.
My PS3 breathed it's last back in November but I've decided not to replace it due to Sonys high handed treatment of its customers. This on top of their poor customer service record and the way they killed Lik Sang a few years back have been enough for me.
You don't get to restrict peoples right to complain just because you've fouled up. They should be spending time and money securing their networks, not on lawers to protext their asses.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
