MagicalFlyingFox

WG's EULA Changes NA

51 posts in this topic

A lot of it means shit barring recent purchases and so forth as its EULA. Only matters on official WG sites.

Totally differs from the signing of a contract, which WG needs to remember that a certain WGLNA player has material to sue WG for trying to violate said written contract if said player truly wanted to go through with it (and did have funds for).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, MagicalFlyingFox said:

In Australia at least, we own it. This has been established with legal precedent. 

 

Steam provide a marketplace in which we buy digital goods from.

Any legal action taken in Australia will likely result in setting up a concrete precedence for in-game items or in-software items such as e-books since no company is stupid enough to have let these things go to court. 

WG are subject to bait and switch laws which is why ANZ EULA specifically does not have clauses such as 5.4.

http://legal.asia.wargaming.net/en/end-user-license-agreement-new-aunz/

 

7 hours ago, Assassin7 said:

oh, yeah I see that. though, does that still cover it? Its not "I agreed to buy the tank with these stats and changing them is not what I agreed to buy" its "I agreed to buy the tank under this contract, I did not agree to have the contract changed and to own the tank under the new contract" 

not arguing about changing the tank, arguing about changing the contract itself to terms I disagree with. Unless WG has a claus that states they are allowed to change the contract if they so desire after I have agreed to it, (which kinda sounds illegal in itself tbh) 

In New Zealand at least, I would imagine that there is some part of the consumer garuntees act that would at least have some form of defence against this. But Im not sure myself. And Im not sure whos laws would apply if im buying from an American company based in America and playing on an American server. though I am pretty sure that the Australian law Fox mentioned for digital goods is similar or the same in New Zealand. 

7 hours ago, MagicalFlyingFox said:

This would be covered under bait and switch, which is probably just as illegal in NZ as it is in Australia. 

I'm not 100% sure about the jurisdiction but I'd assume that you as a New Zealander buying a product online while in New Zealand, that it would still have to adhere to New Zealand laws. 
Amazon for example has stopped Australia from accessing every other amazon site besides amazon.com.au because of the new laws regarding GST on online purchases or something like that because allowing us to purchase from overseas amazon sites would be in breach of our laws. 

The main distinction is that if you were to file a suit, it would be to WG NA specifically. 

 

I admittedly know nothing about Aussie law, but there is this tidbit from the Asia ToS in 2015

Quote

8.2 We set out below the rules that apply to Virtual Goods:

  • (a) Virtual Goods have no real world monetary value and do not constitute real world currency or property of any type; however if and to the extent that any Virtual Goods are determined by law to constitute real world currency or property, then they are the property of Wargaming;
  • (b) Virtual Goods may only be redeemed for other Virtual Goods where permitted in the Services;
  • (c) once you have purchased Virtual Goods, those Virtual Goods are non-refundable and non-exchangeable (whether or not you use them), unless otherwise provided for by the laws of your country;
  • (d) Virtual Goods cannot be sold or transferred to anyone, but you may buy Virtual Goods for another user of a Game through the gift shop applicable to that Game;
  • (e) Virtual Goods cannot be exchanged for cash or any goods or services (except other Virtual Goods as permitted in the Services);
  • (f) to acquire Virtual Goods, you need to follow the instructions provided in the Services; this can include making a payment and providing personal and financial details (which you should ensure are complete and accurate);
  • (g) the price payable for the Virtual Goods (including any value added tax or other applicable taxes of duties) will be as set out on our Sites or as part of the Services (as applicable), but we reserve the right to change the price of Virtual Goods at any time at our discretion;
  • (h) we do not make any promises about how or when Virtual Goods may be available and can update or change Virtual Goods at any time;
  • (i) you may only acquire Virtual Goods from us (or from any person that we authorise for this purpose) or from another user of a Game as a gift through the gift shop applicable to that Game, and you must not obtain Virtual Goods from any other person or in any other way or attempt to do so; and
  • (j) we may limit or block a request to acquire Virtual Goods for any reason.

Although you can challenge 8.2c given your legal precedent, 8.2h basically says WG can change whatever they want at any time, where 8.2a reinforces the fact you don't actually own any of the virtual goods.

The following concerns NA users only. Bolded parts are my emphasis.

Quote

8.1 Virtual Goods. The Services may permit you to acquire and accumulate certain virtual goods as made available by Wargaming ("Virtual Goods"). Virtual Goods constitute a limited, non-transferable, revocable right to use features of the Services when, as, and if allowed by Wargaming and solely as governed by and permitted under these Terms of Service. Subject to these Terms of Service, Virtual Goods may be exchanged for access to upgraded features, may be exchanged for other Virtual Goods, or used in connection with other features made available by Wargaming through the Services. Virtual Goods are not real-world currency, have no monetary value, and cannot be used, exchanged, or redeemed except as provided in these Terms of Service, and cannot be transferred, in any case. For avoidance of doubt, Virtual Goods are not redeemable or refundable for any sum of money or monetary value from Wargaming or any third party at any time; provided, however, if and to the extent that any Virtual Goods are determined by applicable law to constitute real world currency or property, then they are the property of Wargaming.

8.2 Acquiring Virtual Goods. You may accrue Virtual Goods in a variety of ways. Wargaming may distribute Virtual Goods in exchange for taking certain actions (either directly within the Services, or in connection with a third party service), for a fee, or without any fee or required action, in its sole discretion. Wargaming may charge fees for the right to exercise rights associated with Virtual Goods. You agree that you do not "own" the Virtual Goods and that Wargaming has the absolute right to manage, regulate, control, modify and/or eliminate such Virtual Goods in its sole discretion, in any general or specific case, and that Wargaming will have no liability to you based on its exercise of such right. Wargaming allows you to accumulate and manage your Virtual Goods, and may use terms such as "buy" and "sell" to refer to the grant or transfer of rights to use the Services. Use of terms such as "buy" or "sell" does not indicate any ownership right. The total amount of a purchase may be adjusted by adding a fee, if any, applicable to the payment method you selected and for mandatory tax payments, if any, required by law. If adjusted, the total amount of the purchase will be recalculated automatically and displayed before you confirm the purchase. If your payment is in a currency other than that of the purchase amount shown on the website, the exchange rate applied on the payment date will depend on the selected payment method.

NA users don't "own" anything, at least not since 2016.

 

Links for ease of access:
http://legal.na.wargaming.net/en/
http://legal.eu.wargaming.net/en/
http://legal.asia.wargaming.net/en/

 

1 hour ago, Fulcrous said:

A lot of it means shit barring recent purchases and so forth as its EULA. Only matters on official WG sites.

Totally differs from the signing of a contract, which WG needs to remember that a certain WGLNA player has material to sue WG for trying to violate said written contract if said player truly wanted to go through with it (and did have funds for).

RIP Fulcrum Gaming (aka Fnatic).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fulcrous said:

A lot of it means shit barring recent purchases and so forth as its EULA. Only matters on official WG sites.

Totally differs from the signing of a contract, which WG needs to remember that a certain WGLNA player has material to sue WG for trying to violate said written contract if said player truly wanted to go through with it (and did have funds for).

Could you elaborate more on that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Assassin7 said:

Could you elaborate more on that?

Pretty sure it's about Fnatic being fucked over and not permitted to go to the finals because of some internal politics fuckery. Jackie put up a thread about it a few years back, can't seem to find it though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just remember back in the day how a game developer averaging 35 million dollars a day on microtransactions not only tried to list on the Cyprus stock exchange (and ended up on the emerging market) but once they did they fucked their financials so bad that they got de-listed despite being a promising company. They were just sloppy and didnt give a shit. 

 

A company opens up for public interest and it should be one of the game-changers for the company whether it sinks or swims. I've seen companies opt out of the market but a company that generated close to a billion dollars a year with 1600 employees and 20 offices is a pretty good one getting _shut down_ means someone clearly fucked up. 

The story of WG: We Fuck Up But Who Gives A Shit LMAO You Agreed To The EULA You Fucking Dipshit - A documentary 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Haswell said:

Although you can challenge 8.2c given your legal precedent, 8.2h basically says WG can change whatever they want at any time, where 8.2a reinforces the fact you don't actually own any of the virtual goods.

Unfortunately 8.2h doesn't fly in AuNZ since it is under bait and switch laws. 8.2a is likely the point of contention but since it is referred to as a good, WG have pretty much dug their own hole and don't have a choice in the matter. 

1 hour ago, saru_richard said:

so how long you guys think this shit storm is going to last?

The real shitstorm will begin if they do a blanket change of PrefMM tanks. 

This is a direct response to PrefMM tank changes to minimise the refund losses if they go through with it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, saru_richard said:

so how long you guys think this shit storm is going to last?

It'll brew a while and then explode into everyone's face a year or two down the line, once they decide to bone-headedly force their broken vision and people react to it. The question is, who is going to have the longer breath? Will the players band together and force WG into backing down (lol @ the EULA disallowing class action law suits; I am no law expert, but I am fairly certain that such a clause, if not outright illegal, would rather blow up in the face of the one who wrote it into the EULA and tries to enforce it at court) or will WG "succeed" and all the prominent voices will just go silent and move on, along with pretty much everyone who has a passion for the game, consequentially just hastening the slow decline that the game's community is already on (not helped by the fact, that the vocal minority seems to just be increasingly exhausted and either apathetic or just plainly gone already). Either way, the game is going to be profitable for them for, at the very least, another five years or more. The simple and sad fact is, that 99% of the players just do not care about anything other than hitting the battle button 10 times a day, which WG so very clearly has understood just way too good.

I find it funny, how they backed themselves into a corner in that regard. It has been clear for a while now, that all the tanks need some rebalancing and this matter only got more pressing with their release of recent tanks and the changes they already implemented to the T10s and T9s. Currently, T8 is just flat out the bitch-tier. It doesn't shit on the tiers below as much as the tiers above do and a T8 has a high likelyhood to be the whipping boy for the T9s and T10s. All the while, T8 is designed to be the most heavily played tier by a huge margin. Yet they drag their feet about rebalancing. Sure, there's the Caern here or an uberpowerful new T8 tank there, but even those just further emphasize how utterly incapable they seem to be in both understanding and acknowledging what is fucking things up and how much dragging their feet is damaging things even further down the tiers by consequence. Obviously, their rebalancing has to include the prefMM-tanks rather sooner than later, as they are the prime-money earners within the prime-money earning tier and given the direction they choose with their T10 and T9 balances, these tanks are in an increasingly stupid place. They were already not as powerful as regular T8s, but now and somewhen in the near future, they'll just be even less competative, between more powerful tanks and the matchmaker-changes forcing them to be bottom-tier. Unless they want to just down-tier them to 7 and give them regular matchmaking, which they kinda have to do if they do not want to touch the pref-MMs' stats themselves, they simply have to buff or change them. There's just no way around it. (Though I do have to point out, that the player-base needs to realize this and be civil about it as well. It simply is a necessity, even if you'd force +1/-1MM...)

But hey, you could face these realities like an adult and go about fixing them or you can drag your feet and pretend everything bad happening as a result of your own actions is somebody or something else's fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Assassin7 said:

Could you elaborate more on that?

 

19 hours ago, Haswell said:

Pretty sure it's about Fnatic being fucked over and not permitted to go to the finals because of some internal politics fuckery. Jackie put up a thread about it a few years back, can't seem to find it though.

Let's just say there was nothing in the rulebook/contract that wouldnt allow a roster swap between teams mid-season/round-robin. So when Belarus disallowed it from occuring on NA, it was discussed with a lawyer and found to have significant possibility of taking it to civil court. Belarus/WGLNA backed down once they realized how badly they could have been fucked over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, perhaps I am a bit naive - but has there ever been any video game where the publisher was obligated to compensate players if the publisher decided to change the game, remove content, discontinue the game, or some other reason? 

I knew full well each time I pushed the BUY NOW button that what I was buying was a finite usage right for a game product that would some day be gone.  Buying a premium tank is no different than buying a movie ticket.  It does not entitle you to any real property.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To date, the legal status of virtual goods has not been resolved by neither law nor lawsuit, which is kind of amazing in a way. Normally however, the users percieve and treat virtual goods like real goods and property. EULAs and companies usually try to imply or subtly lead the users to percieve virtual goods as intellectual property of the company or, a more recent development, work hard on the "virtual goods as services"-narrative. It's clear that both views are going to clash and they usually do in a small scale. There's some ruckus here and there when things are buffed, nerfed or changed, but the vast majority of players accepts such changes without pushing the issue within reason. Conversely, companies have no interest in pushing an issue against their customers, if the pushback appears to become to strong, as can be seen when proposed changes are postponed or dropped after "community feedback".

It is clear that both sides can live with the current legal limbo, despite some clashes here and there and either side is and should be scared shitless about what is going to happen if this ever explodes into a lawsuit or explicit legal regulation, due to one company pushing things too far. I can guarantee you one thing, however, this issue is going to be pushed to far sooner or later, as companies are increasingly greedy stupid fucks, as can be seen by pushing the lootbox-issue too far so very recently and it is impossible to say how this would be resolved. There's a good chance that the courts and the lawmakers would favour a property-interpretation of things and companies are scared shitless of that possible outcome, hence usually try to change things slowly or butter up their customers, if the pill is too hard to swallow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/4/2018 at 6:16 AM, Archaic_One said:

I'm sorry, perhaps I am a bit naive - but has there ever been any video game where the publisher was obligated to compensate players if the publisher decided to change the game, remove content, discontinue the game, or some other reason? 

I knew full well each time I pushed the BUY NOW button that what I was buying was a finite usage right for a game product that would some day be gone.  Buying a premium tank is no different than buying a movie ticket.  It does not entitle you to any real property.

This is not really the issue though. The problem is WG's immediate change to the EULA in regards to nerfing/changing premium tanks. They were stuck for a while because the community is in uproar about it but they were like "haHAAAa LoL LeTS cHaNGE ThE EuLA, GoTTEM" and now are able to completely change said tanks without really worrying about refunding.

 

:feelsbad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Proloser said:

This is not really the issue though. The problem is WG's immediate change to the EULA in regards to nerfing/changing premium tanks. They were stuck for a while because the community is in uproar about it but they were like "haHAAAa LoL LeTS cHaNGE ThE EuLA, GoTTEM" and now are able to completely change said tanks without really worrying about refunding.

 

:feelsbad:

To be completely honest, that didn't stop them from outright nerfing the Type 59 back in the days. Multiple times. Before refunds or exchanges were a thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think, from what I have read all this is not at all compatible with EU law, so it doesn't look they are trying this with EU. 

It is basically a dick move though, instead of coming out and engaging with the community and their concerns, they do this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, tajj7 said:

I think, from what I have read all this is not at all compatible with EU law, so it doesn't look they are trying this with EU. 

It is basically a dick move though, instead of coming out and engaging with the community and their concerns, they do this. 

it really looks like they are going for a scorched earth policy to monetisation. 

 

Fuck everyone over for a quick buck then leave. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MagicalFlyingFox said:

it really looks like they are going for a scorched earth policy to monetisation. 

 

Fuck everyone over for a quick buck then leave. 

Been wondering about that ever since they started having tons of premium tanks on sale at the same time, since a couple of months ago. Their marketing got so agressive, for lack of a better word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Madner Kami said:

Been wondering about that ever since they started having tons of premium tanks on sale at the same time, since a couple of months ago. Their marketing got so agressive, for lack of a better word.

Playing on my t49 account I keep recieving discounts to buy premium tanks. Am i the only one who gets these or they have hit rock bottom?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone mentioned that on sea as well. Most I got personally was a week's rental of the skorp on an alt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, MagicalFlyingFox said:

it really looks like they are going for a scorched earth policy to monetisation. 

 

Fuck everyone over for a quick buck then leave. 

They already did that with Planes, you Tanks and Ships players are just late for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MagicalFlyingFox said:

Its a shame because tanks would have a lot more life left in it had they actually gotten a competent balance department. 

To be honest, I refuse to believe that the balancing departement in and of itself is at blame. I'd rather put the blame at the corporate heads (including the licksplittling lackey they put at the head of the balancing departement), who laid out the roadmap for catering to tomatoes and potatoes and thus decided to make (super)heavy tanks and corridor meta increasingly a thing, as well as shit-balanced premiums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, MagicalFlyingFox said:

it really looks like they are going for a scorched earth policy to monetisation.... Fuck everyone over for a quick buck then leave. 

Ok, so WoT as, like, the 8th most profitable game in the world is doomed and they grab the moneyz off?

No?

The game needs to change, players perceive MM as the biggest problem. Limited MM prems are a problem and need to change. So, well, doomsaying is so popular here but that doesn't make it right or even clever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's because you are in EU where you have hundreds of thousands of players per night.

There is a reason NA has collapsed into a central server. There is a reason why ASIA server keeps getting merged with other servers.

WG can't hide the drop in players on the ASIA server anymore because there isn't a server to merge with anymore. 

There is a noticeable drop in PCCP in this game for our servers and glossing over that is completely stupid. 

There is a drop in PCCP in EU but you guys have so much further to drop you won't even notice.

 

The game is on the decline, just look at the data. I'm not being clever, I'm just pointing out that WG aren't interested in bringing up the player count anymore and haven't for a very long time.

If WG keep up this current course, the only servers this game will have will all be in Europe and Russia. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, it is in decline, it fell from 2nd most prfitable game to 8th most profitable game in the world and it will likely drop more - but even if it was only the 50th most profitable, it would still have plenty of reasons to continue it. SO WG will certainly not raze it for a quick profit.

And Tanks have always been an Europen/Russia thing. They didn't play much of a role in the Amerikas and neither in Asia and both regions are not very focussed on the WW1 - WW2 timescale on top of that.

And finally: WoT e-sports is rofl and both Asia and Amerikas are more E-spots oriented than EU/Ru.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.