• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Gamers Bill of Right petition

quit pre-ordering shit.

quit buying shitty console ports.

quit buying games you know are going to suck ass, but you wear rose tinted nostalgia glasses.

quit expecting every game to be the next 'next'.

quit being a lackey.

quit buying horseshit if you hate horseshit.
 
Consumer protection laws for software should come from congress. Like how we have lemon laws for cars.
 
Krenum said:
lol Gamers Bill of Rights?


The Entitlement Generation strikes again!


Here is an idea, if you don't like someones product, don't buy it. It works really well. ;)
Click to expand...

Hardly just this generation, it's been going on for quite some time now.
 
After the Gamers Bill of Rights get passed can we work on the Fatties Bill of Rights?
I mean c'mon...it should be against the law to only offer the McRib for such a short amount of time right!?!?!?! :confused::(:mad:




:rolleyes:
 
XvMMvX said:
There is Plague Injected, nothing to refute the point just more nonsense.

Broken Record eh? Pot... Kettle... Black...
Click to expand...

You only post to say the exact same shit about PC gamers, on a PC gaming forum. Hence, broken record.

And I've refuted you a dozen times before.
 
Plague_Injected said:
You only post to say the exact same shit about PC gamers, on a PC gaming forum. Hence, broken record.

And I've refuted you a dozen times before.
Click to expand...

And ironically, he comes off as way more of a d-bag than these "elitist PC gamers" he and others are always harping on about.
 
MavericK96 said:
And ironically, he comes off as way more of a d-bag than these "elitist PC gamers" he and others are always harping on about.
Click to expand...

Indeed.

For the record, I think this petition is a bit dumb. I can certainly understand someone getting frustrated enough to create one, given that we now often pay $60 for a "service platform" rather than a full-product.
 
This is one of the dumbest things I've ever seen.

Please stop denigrating the Bill of Rights. Please stop confusing people as to what a "right" is. Our actual rights are under siege as it is.
 
NeghVar said:
If EULAs are the major hurdle to my petition, then how about this one to limit the power of an EULA and ToS.
Limit the power of EULAs and ToS
Click to expand...

"I propose that no EULA or ToS shall override or trump civil rights, copyright laws or consumer protection laws." They don't. EULA, TOS, and other contracts don't have the ability to override law.

"The consumer has the right to return any software for a full refund if they do not agree with the EULA." Consumers already have this right, but only if the EULA was not available until after the purchase was made. Because of this Microsoft started putting the EULA on the outside of the box, and for digital downloads you always have to agree to the EULA before they take your money.
 
Copyright Law
Chapter 1
Section 117
Subsection C-1

(c) Machine Maintenance or Repair.—Notwithstanding the provisions
of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner or lessee of a machine to
make or authorize the making of a copy of a computer program if such copy is
made solely by virtue of the activation of a machine that lawfully contains an
authorized copy of the computer program, for purposes only of maintenance or
repair of that machine, if—
(1) such new copy is used in no other manner and is destroyed immediately
after the maintenance or repair is completed;

In other words, to buy a single copy and use it on a system for maintenance and the then uninstall it to use on another system for maintenance is permitted.

When I worked for a PC sales and service shop, we bought SpySweeper and after our third install, we got a message that the key was now invalid due to too many activations. I called Webroot and explained the situation and quoted the copyright laws. I was then told that by agreeing to the EULA, I agreed to let Webroot disregard that part of copyright law.

www.eff.org The Dangers of EULAs

Tell me how being forbidden to speak negatively about a product does not violate freedom of speech.
 
Last edited:
IMO, EULA's and TOS's should be standardised. That's one of the main gripes I have, it should not be acceptable to have a multipage EULA that you need to read before installation or purchase (and sometimes can't read before purchase).

Seriously, it's absurd, what other product do you need to read a 20 page list of conditions before purchasing?

As for the "bill of rights", no offense, but that's just a silly idea. For one, you don't actually want half the things you're asking for. As DeathPrincess pointed out, many of the conditions simply do not work for all types of games and services in the way you want them to work.

Now, the 2nd petition, "Limit the power of End User License Agreements", is getting closer, but it's still wrong.

"I propose that no EULA or ToS shall override or trump civil rights, copyright laws or consumer protection laws." <- EULAs already cannot trump laws. They cannot trump copyright laws.

"All EULAs and ToS must be straightforward, upfront and specific as to ALL software that being installed." <- This is on the right track, but it is vague. Who defines straightforward? Who defines upfront? Who defines specific? If you actually read a EULA, most are written in language anyone can understand (at least the ones I've read), they are just so painfully long and convoluted that you can't actually find pertinent information.

Hence why I think EULAs should be standardised to some extent. All the wishy washy crap should not have to be read through for each and every product you buy.

"The consumer has the right to return any software for a full refund if they do not agree with the EULA." <- You can already do this as far as I'm aware. Certainly in many countries if not all, if terms you disagree with are presented that were not available at point of sale you can ask for a refund.
 
NeghVar said:
Copyright Law
Chapter 1
Section 117
Subsection C-1

(c) Machine Maintenance or Repair.&#8212;Notwithstanding the provisions
of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner or lessee of a machine to
make or authorize the making of a copy of a computer program if such copy is
made solely by virtue of the activation of a machine that lawfully contains an
authorized copy of the computer program, for purposes only of maintenance or
repair of that machine, if&#8212;
(1) such new copy is used in no other manner and is destroyed immediately
after the maintenance or repair is completed;

In other words, to buy a single copy and use it on a system for maintenance and the then uninstall it to use on another system for maintenance is permitted.

When I worked for a PC sales and service shop, we bought SpySweeper and after our third install, we got a message that the key was now invalid due to too many activations. I called Webroot and explained the situation and quoted the copyright laws. I was then told that by agreeing to the EULA, I agreed to let Webroot disregard that part of copyright law.

www.eff.org The Dangers of EULAs

Tell me how being forbidden to speak negatively about a product does not violate freedom of speech.
Click to expand...

No, the EULA is NOT violating copyright law. What the copyright law is saying is that you, the end user, are not infringing copyright by changing software from one system to another. It DOES NOT say that a software provider has to allow you to change from one system to another, the ability to change from one system to another is a LISENCE issue. Note that the exact point you quoted refers to "the owner or lessee of a machine" NOT being in violation for transferring something, rather than the person who sold you the software being in violation for not letting you transfer (which is what you have inferred).

EULA's can't legally violate laws, we don't need something that says EULAs can't violate laws because they already can't violate laws. Any contract which has terms that would be against the law is immediately invalid/void/whatever.
 
Last edited:
naticus said:
quit pre-ordering shit.

quit buying shitty console ports.

quit buying games you know are going to suck ass, but you wear rose tinted nostalgia glasses.

quit expecting every game to be the next 'next'.

quit being a lackey.

quit buying horseshit if you hate horseshit.
Click to expand...

You made me laugh :D

But you speak the truth. Especially the first statement.
 
NeghVar said:
When I worked for a PC sales and service shop, we bought SpySweeper and after our third install, we got a message that the key was now invalid due to too many activations. I called Webroot and explained the situation and quoted the copyright laws. I was then told that by agreeing to the EULA, I agreed to let Webroot disregard that part of copyright law.
Click to expand...

You could try to fight webroot in court; they aren't the final authority. For example: It's illegal for homeowners associations to prohibit people from installing a typical satellite dish (http://www.fcc.gov/guides/over-air-reception-devices-rule), but many have rules attempting to prohibit this anyway.

NeghVar said:
Tell me how being forbidden to speak negatively about a product does not violate freedom of speech.
Click to expand...

In the US the legal basis for "freedom of speech" comes from the first amendment. It is one sentence and it start out, "Congress shall make no law ...". The only thing the first amendment does is prevent congress from passing certain types of laws. It doesn't place any restrictions on you as a citizen or any other group. You are free to enter into contracts that prevent you from speaking about certain topics.
 
Last edited:
Mozex said:
You could try to fight webroot in court; they aren't the final authority.
Click to expand...
You wouldn't get very far unless your country has specific rules saying software providers need to provide a means to allow you to change from one machine to another, which is NOT what the copyright law he quoted actually refers to.

If the guy at Webroot truly said that by agreeing to the EULA was agreeing to let them disregard copyright law, the guy at Webroot was wrong... he should have said that they aren't in violation of copyright law (though I can understand if you were talking over the phone, the guy on the other end of the line probably just got confused and was probably poorly qualified to deal with such a complaint).

Taking webroot to court, at most, might get them to admit they told you the wrong thing in that they aren't allowed to override law, but you won't actually get anywhere with it because they aren't overriding law in the first place (unless, as I said, your country has a specific law stating they have to allow you the ability to change software from one machine to another).
 
Tudz said:
You wouldn't get very far unless your country has specific rules saying software providers need to provide a means to allow you to change from one machine to another, which is NOT what the copyright law he quoted actually refers to.
Click to expand...

I agree with you; I don't think the item he quoted means what he thinks it means.
 
Tudz said:
IMO, EULA's and TOS's should be standardised. That's one of the main gripes I have, it should not be acceptable to have a multipage EULA that you need to read before installation or purchase (and sometimes can't read before purchase).

Seriously, it's absurd, what other product do you need to read a 20 page list of conditions before purchasing?
Click to expand...

A standarization like this in which the main points are made clear and at the top.
Wikipedia's usage agreement
 
NeghVar said:
A standarization like this in which the main points are made clear and at the top.
Wikipedia's usage agreement
Click to expand...

Not just that, but rather a standardisation where a lot of the obligations of both the licensor and licensee are defined and universal instead of being needed to be explicitly stated for each and every product.

You won't necessarily have one EULA to rule them all as different types of software (not just games) require different license agreements, but you'd have a family of EULAs and the publisher would have to specify which type of EULA pertains to the product they are selling, and then if they have specific clauses they want to add they can add them as long as they don't violate any of the standard conditions in the universal EULA.
 
This has grossed an impressive amount of support. A whopping total of 4 people have opted to support this petition in over a weeks time. HooraY!
 
leeleatherwood said:
How about you add this to the petition:

"Gamers have the right to not buy games.

Gamers can also call their credit card issuer and perform a chargeback if they are not happy with the purchase."

Essentially, this petition is stupid.
Click to expand...

Chargebacks are usually done due to fraud or some other extenuating circumstance. Not being happy with product while keeping said product is fraud in itself. Gamers just need to not purchase or pre-order games before reading reviews. Force developers to earn their paycheck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top