It is my opinion that game companies have a right to place any limits and conditions they please on THEIR game.  If the player doesn't like it., then the player does not have to play..  Plain and simple.. no debate.

Originally posted by Kasmar

It is my opinion that game companies have a right to place any limits and conditions they please on THEIR game.  If the player doesn't like it., then the player does not have to play..  Plain and simple.. no debate.

 

You rent an apartment and while you're living there, buy things to put in your apartment. After two years of living there, a friend (or you) throws a party that gets out of hand and the landlord changes your locks and doesn't let you back in to get your stuff (unless you can somehow prove your innocence).

This is (sort of) how the EULA works. No one is arguing the fact that the game company does or doesn't own their code and product. The catch comes with the time spent in the game. Is this time worth something? As far as the EULA is concerned, your time spent isn't separate from their property/code.

As others have mentioned, there's also the issue with people paying REAL money for one type of a product or game and then having that game changed drastically halfway through (as is the case with SWG). In this case, it'd be like ordering one product and then the company turning around and giving you a completely different one, then telling you there's nothing you can do about it. This isn't legal, but they make it very difficult for people to bring them to court by making a very vague "we can change the game however we like." Honestly, no one would buy groceries at a grocery store if the store had the right to stop you as you're walking out with your groceries after buying them and then remove and replace your items with whatever they'd like. But MMOs are getting away with it because they can wave the EULA around saying that they "warned" players that changes could be made at any time and they agreed to it.

Sometimes it's a good thing that companies are able to cover their rears. But the EULAs do need to change so that players aren't treated like crack addicts who only get their addictions if they behave, take whatever is handed to them and keep shelling out the money.

I always read the EULA the 1st time I install a game.  Honestly though I only skim over it when it gets updated over the course of a game's evolution.

Regardless, that document clearly states what you can and can't do with their game.  Ok, well maybe "clearly" is a bit relative with all the legalese in the text.  In real life there is a statment that "ignorance of the law is no defense" that meaning that even if I don't know that stealing is illegal, I can still get arrested for stealing.  Same applies here, if I didn't know selling ingame currancy is against EULA doesn't mean that I can do it without penalty.

I know it will suck, but honestly folks read it at least once all the way through. 

I think the problem is that players do not read the EULA.  They have no idea what it says or limits.  When I did live in apartments I always read the contract.  If the contract said that you could have no loud parties then I would make a decision if I wanted to move in or not.  It is the same with online games.  It is not the game companies fault if players do not want to read the EULA..  I do read them.  I know what I am agreeing to when I click accept.  My game is EQ2 and I know that SOE can change the game any way they wish.  And they have.  Online games are entertainment.  You pay a monthly fee, for most of them, for the entertainment you are receiving while you play.   The monthly fee is not something you are entitled to get back if something is changed which causes you to no longer enjoy your play time.  If that is the case.  you quit.  But you are not entitled to get any compensation for past playing time.  That just doesn't make sense. 

I say let players have ownership of their characters. When they quit, give them a digital download of a binary file that's useless to all but the curious, with no way of uploading it back in. There, they own it, do what they want with that file.

Originally posted by jmerriex

EULAs are interesting beasts.  I know with Sword of the New World we spent about 3 months going through and writing, editing, re-writing and re-wording the EULA to make sure it fit Federal and International laws.  The biggest issue truely is 'ownership'.  Without our ownership clause I know we would have a lot of issues with removing players (even with it, there are myriad legal snaffoos with banning accounts).  The most important of which is not refunding an account blocked for violation of policies.

As a player I understand that there are rules and if I break said rules I lose my rights to any monies I spent on the game.  As a publisher this is critical since it opens up a whole can of legal worms.  Which is why the 'ownership' clause is important.

As far as content changes, I do feel that certain major changes deserve a refund but others do not.  We are not going to give you a refund because we nerfed a class (especially one that was clearly overpowered).  But when we made our move to Free2Play we did MAJOR compensations and infact refunded players who were no longer going to be playing our game due to the change.  But in reality that is more of a courtesy thing.  It is understandable that a major change like that would require fair compensation and sometimes full refund.  Unfortunately not every company is willing to make consessions for their players and that doesn't really have anything to do with a EULA, that has to do with basic customer satisfaction.

Umm, I fail to see the problem with banning and not refunding accounts for violations.  Every company is allowed the rights to service.  i.e. The right to provide or deny service.  Criminally, that right can't be broken.  Civil rights however can cause cases where the company is sued, but then again, if you look at someone funny or breath the wrong way, at least in the US, you can be sued.  I understand the issue of having the funds to actually fight the perpetual battle that will ensue from things of that nature, however, setting precedence would probably solve the issue quickly.

As to EULAs.  Did any of you sit down and spend millions in development cost and years of coding and testing to make the game?  Are any of you providing space, bandwidth, facilities or any other form of support to the company besides having an account?  As an IT professional, I am well aware of the enormous task involved in setting all this up.  For a real life example that everyone can equate to, if you built a house with your own hands, would you not have rules about what happened inside that house.  If one of your friends came over and trashed that house you worked on so hard, would you say, "Oh well" and let them continue to come to your house?  The EULA is a contract, yet companies like Black ICE entertainment and IGE have made a mockery of them, thereby making contracts no longer a valid legal stance.  However, in the US, remember that, playing MMOs is not a right.  It's a privilege, and with any privilege, it can be removed.  Again another real life example, you do not have the right to have a driver's license, you have the privilege.  If you speed too much or have too many accidents, that privilege will be removed.  Also, as Kasmar pointed out, ignorance of the law, or rules, does not make breaking the law, or rules, right.

Originally posted by soulwynd

You're not required to accept an EULA, but then you don't play. If you don't like the EULA, don't play, state you're not playing because the eula and spread the word to other players about the horrible rules they don't know they abide to. That's the best you can do.

So let's say I buy a MMORPG at timecard, open it, install it, run it, read the EULA and decide it doesn't match the advertising or I just don't agree to it. Can I return the game and timecard for a full refund? Most stores don't let you return opened merchandice and that goes double for software unless you can prove there's a physical defect. Why should I have to waste $60+ on a game before finding out it has a bad EULA or otherwise doesn't live up to the advertisment?

Originally posted by Alverant

 

Originally posted by soulwynd

You're not required to accept an EULA, but then you don't play. If you don't like the EULA, don't play, state you're not playing because the eula and spread the word to other players about the horrible rules they don't know they abide to. That's the best you can do.

 

So let's say I buy a MMORPG at timecard, open it, install it, run it, read the EULA and decide it doesn't match the advertising or I just don't agree to it. Can I return the game and timecard for a full refund? Most stores don't let you return opened merchandice and that goes double for software unless you can prove there's a physical defect. Why should I have to waste $60+ on a game before finding out it has a bad EULA or otherwise doesn't live up to the advertisment?

Most companies provide a trial issue of some short time, simply because they are aware the retailers are taking advantage of the customers by not allowing them to return merchandise that did not suit their gaming need.  The answer to your question is therefore obvious.  Take the trial time and see if you like it before you buy it.

Originally posted by streea

 

Originally posted by Kasmar

It is my opinion that game companies have a right to place any limits and conditions they please on THEIR game.  If the player doesn't like it., then the player does not have to play..  Plain and simple.. no debate.

 

The problem is... there IS debate. Though no real life comparison works perfectly, here's one to give you an idea:

 

You rent an apartment and while you're living there, buy things to put in your apartment. After two years of living there, a friend (or you) throws a party that gets out of hand and the landlord changes your locks and doesn't let you back in to get your stuff (unless you can somehow prove your innocence).

This is (sort of) how the EULA works. No one is arguing the fact that the game company does or doesn't own their code and product. The catch comes with the time spent in the game. Is this time worth something? As far as the EULA is concerned, your time spent isn't separate from their property/code.

As others have mentioned, there's also the issue with people paying REAL money for one type of a product or game and then having that game changed drastically halfway through (as is the case with SWG). In this case, it'd be like ordering one product and then the company turning around and giving you a completely different one, then telling you there's nothing you can do about it. This isn't legal, but they make it very difficult for people to bring them to court by making a very vague "we can change the game however we like." Honestly, no one would buy groceries at a grocery store if the store had the right to stop you as you're walking out with your groceries after buying them and then remove and replace your items with whatever they'd like. But MMOs are getting away with it because they can wave the EULA around saying that they "warned" players that changes could be made at any time and they agreed to it.

Sometimes it's a good thing that companies are able to cover their rears. But the EULAs do need to change so that players aren't treated like crack addicts who only get their addictions if they behave, take whatever is handed to them and keep shelling out the money.

The money paid to the game company is for the right to access their server.  The price pay for the game is the cost paid when you buy it at the store.  So the month fee is a Service fee, all they have to show is that they provided that service.

So with items and characters on their server, its just game code it was their property from the start to the end regaurdless of the time you spend collecting it. Same with the content of the game code, its theirs always was and they can change it. 

Thats where the companies are coming from the players see it differently and laws and courts are still mostly vague on the topic.

Originally posted by Feldron

Originally posted by streea

 

Originally posted by Kasmar

It is my opinion that game companies have a right to place any limits and conditions they please on THEIR game.  If the player doesn't like it., then the player does not have to play..  Plain and simple.. no debate.

 

The problem is... there IS debate. Though no real life comparison works perfectly, here's one to give you an idea:

 

You rent an apartment and while you're living there, buy things to put in your apartment. After two years of living there, a friend (or you) throws a party that gets out of hand and the landlord changes your locks and doesn't let you back in to get your stuff (unless you can somehow prove your innocence).

This is (sort of) how the EULA works. No one is arguing the fact that the game company does or doesn't own their code and product. The catch comes with the time spent in the game. Is this time worth something? As far as the EULA is concerned, your time spent isn't separate from their property/code.

As others have mentioned, there's also the issue with people paying REAL money for one type of a product or game and then having that game changed drastically halfway through (as is the case with SWG). In this case, it'd be like ordering one product and then the company turning around and giving you a completely different one, then telling you there's nothing you can do about it. This isn't legal, but they make it very difficult for people to bring them to court by making a very vague "we can change the game however we like." Honestly, no one would buy groceries at a grocery store if the store had the right to stop you as you're walking out with your groceries after buying them and then remove and replace your items with whatever they'd like. But MMOs are getting away with it because they can wave the EULA around saying that they "warned" players that changes could be made at any time and they agreed to it.

Sometimes it's a good thing that companies are able to cover their rears. But the EULAs do need to change so that players aren't treated like crack addicts who only get their addictions if they behave, take whatever is handed to them and keep shelling out the money.

The money paid to the game company is for the right to access their server.  The price pay for the game is the cost paid when you buy it at the store.  So the month fee is a Service fee, all they have to show is that they provided that service.

So with items and characters on their server, its just game code it was their property from the start to the end regaurdless of the time you spend collecting it. Same with the content of the game code, its theirs always was and they can change it. 

Thats where the companies are coming from the players see it differently and laws and courts are still mostly vague on the topic.

A lot of people are on the same page with what you wrote.  There is debate, and IF (perhaps BIG IF) something happens in law or interpretation of law, everything could go out the window.

Very nice article, it got me thinking a lot.

My thoughts on EULA's are very simple.  It's a crying shame that we even need them.  Some lady burns the roof of her mouth from a cup of McDonald's coffee; then sues McDonald's for millions (and wins) because there wasn't a warning label on the cup that read "This shit is hot!", and suddenly video games have to go through a huge mess of legal crap.

*sigh*  Oh, how I wish issues like this could just be solved with some plain, old-fashioned common damn sense.  This is precisely the reason why I should be the king of the world, where I reserve the right to judge all people(s) and their issues.  If you *uck someone over.... the penalty would be easy to predeict - I *uck you over!  End of story.

The world would be so much happier if I were king.  Vote for me in 2016!

While I agree that EULA's are important, I believe they are misnamed.  They are End User License Demands, pure and simple.  An agreement is drafted between two parties, with benefits for those parties.  EULA's are drafted by the game company, and are designed solely to protect the game company.  As joe schmoe gamer, my rights and concerns are not addressed in EULA's.  I have the option to either agree to them or not, with no input or reasonable feedback option. 

Then there's the problem with them changing.  Sure, when I start playing the game, I read through the EULA, but down the road, the company decides to change something, or sometimes several somethings over the course of my playing.  I have no idea these changes are implemented, but I still click play anyway, just because I believe I am bound to my original agreement.  I think an easy way to address this would be just require the companies post 45 days in advance their intentions to change the EULA, what the changes are, and how they affect me.  Then I can decide, 'ok, I disagree, and wish to cancel my payments prior to the change,' and off I go, looking for a new MMO to play.  No fuss, no muss.

I agree that companies need to protect themselves.  I just think that I as the End User should be represented in the drafting of these EULA's.  I don't know how to accomplish that, other than the project mentioned in the article.  I think that's a great step in the right direction, and a game should have some sort of badge saying they follow the EULA that is drafted by this project, providing it turn out beneficial to all, just like they have ESRB badges.  If a game chooses not to follow a standard like that, that is fine too, but I'd be a lot more likely to play games with said badge.

As to ownership, the software company has every right to ownership of your character and equipment.  Your time spent on the game is NOT an investment, if the game falls under the entertainment heading. Let's say I buy a tv, watch it 20 hours a week, then 2 years down the road, the channel I like is taken off the air.  I can't sue the manufacturer because the reason I bought the tv has been taken away.

It mainly boils down to the fact that I want any agreement between myself and a company to pay respect both to myself and the company, not just that company.  I want my consumer rights protected, and I don't think I should have to hire a lawyer to make that happen.  SOE is the prime example of what happens when the consumer has no say, because they are arrogant and don't listen to what customers say; that's why we have things like the SWG fiascos.  

I will be VERY happy if this EULA project comes out with some positive results.  I'd rather not have to drag the government into policing my gaming experience.  That will never turn out positive for anybody.  The IRS example alone sent chills down my spine.

Originally posted by mellobri

While I agree that EULA's are important, I believe they are misnamed.  They are End User License Demands, pure and simple.  An agreement is drafted between two parties, with benefits for those parties.  EULA's are drafted by the game company, and are designed solely to protect the game company.  As joe schmoe gamer, my rights and concerns are not addressed in EULA's.  I have the option to either agree to them or not, with no input or reasonable feedback option. 

Then there's the problem with them changing.  Sure, when I start playing the game, I read through the EULA, but down the road, the company decides to change something, or sometimes several somethings over the course of my playing.  I have no idea these changes are implemented, but I still click play anyway, just because I believe I am bound to my original agreement.  I think an easy way to address this would be just require the companies post 45 days in advance their intentions to change the EULA, what the changes are, and how they affect me.  Then I can decide, 'ok, I disagree, and wish to cancel my payments prior to the change,' and off I go, looking for a new MMO to play.  No fuss, no muss.

I agree that companies need to protect themselves.  I just think that I as the End User should be represented in the drafting of these EULA's.  I don't know how to accomplish that, other than the project mentioned in the article.  I think that's a great step in the right direction, and a game should have some sort of badge saying they follow the EULA that is drafted by this project, providing it turn out beneficial to all, just like they have ESRB badges.  If a game chooses not to follow a standard like that, that is fine too, but I'd be a lot more likely to play games with said badge.

As to ownership, the software company has every right to ownership of your character and equipment.  Your time spent on the game is NOT an investment, if the game falls under the entertainment heading. Let's say I buy a tv, watch it 20 hours a week, then 2 years down the road, the channel I like is taken off the air.  I can't sue the manufacturer because the reason I bought the tv has been taken away.

It mainly boils down to the fact that I want any agreement between myself and a company to pay respect both to myself and the company, not just that company.  I want my consumer rights protected, and I don't think I should have to hire a lawyer to make that happen.  SOE is the prime example of what happens when the consumer has no say, because they are arrogant and don't listen to what customers say; that's why we have things like the SWG fiascos.  

I will be VERY happy if this EULA project comes out with some positive results.  I'd rather not have to drag the government into policing my gaming experience.  That will never turn out positive for anybody.  The IRS example alone sent chills down my spine.

I like your idea of having the user's interested represented in the End User Agreement.  I also agree that users should be informed well in advance of changes that affect the service "agreement".

 I also understand, I think, your views on player progress not being an investment.  I think there are some fine, but important, lines here though.  For example, I'll stick with the television example you're using.  Let's say I respond to a marketting campaign by a cable or satellite company that says for 60 bucks a month I'll receive a bundle that includes the sci-fi channel, a movie channel and a sports channel.  Should this company be able to change my bundle from sci-fi, movies and sports to documentaries, fine arts and the BBC news immediately after they receive my payment?  Hell no.  Yet, this is pretty much exactly what SOE did with its NGE disaster, and they used EULA as their defense.  Any EULA that can be used to justify this type of blatantly unethical behaviour is a bad EULA.  Any steps that would prevent the existence and unethical use of "agreements" that are designed to undermine consumer rights would have my full support. 

I also still feel that EULAs should be very specific regarding what can and cannot change in a service.  There should be no surprises for the consumer.  Vaguely worded EULAs that do not give people the information they need to make an informed decision about subscribing need to be clarified.  Game companies can do this, and in my view should do this without any fuss.  The alternative only reflects a desire to reserve the right to dupe their playerbase.  If companies can make this adjustment on their own, excellent.  If they require oversight, so be it.  I still feel this will be a shameful waste of taxpayers money and legislators time and energy.  And, at the end of the day, government regulation may not look pretty to anyone, game companies or customers.  SOEs repeated wrecklessness, unfortunately, may already have initiated a chain of events in this regard.

On the side of the rights of the service provider.  Should they be able to ban people who clearly violate the terms of service?  Of course they should.  Should users receive compensation for subscription fees paid in advance?  My thinking here is much like my thinking on other EULA related issues.  Whether or not compensation is available should simply be made very clear in the EULA.  Users should just have the ability to make a truly informed decision about their decision to pay and play.

So,

-EULAs should be very clear about what may and may not change in the service being paid for.  This will eliminate unpleasant surprises like SOE's NGE.

-They should also be very clear about what constitutes a violation of the user agreement.

-They should then be very clear regarding how such violations will be addressed, and whether or not subscription fees are recoverable.

Ambiguity lends itselft to abuse.  It's more clarity that is needed in my view to protect the rights of both service providers and users.  There should be no loops holes left for the purpose of allowing one side or the other to crap on the other.  Right now, in some EULAs, such "crapholes" abound.  They can and should be sealed over with clear and accurate information. 

I can't remember where I read it, but EULA's are not valid in Europe. As I recall it was something about the fact that it is impossible the the customer to read the EULA and dis-/agree to it before actually unpacking it.

When the sofware is unpacked no store will refund it.

Will see if I can find it again.

greedy lawyers, scared devs, or devs with mindsets like they are gods (lotr anyone?). EULAS, got to hatem, cant play withoutem until the fans finally say enough or a company grabs it balls and takes subs from other more restricting games the message will simply die, and thats what the afore mentioned folks hope for.

As diverse as the demographics of all MMO's are, (8 year old school kids to 50 year old Accountants) its a wonder that there is not more attention to Virtual Property Law.  I feel after seeing this thread that a Lawyer could specialize in this field.  Standard EULA language could then be established as a industry norm.  This would highlight when a given game agreement deviates in its terms.

At any rate, I think this is an important issue for both parties rights to use a game.

My problems with most EULAs are twofold:

First, the company establishing it insists that you agree that they are not accountable for anything they do, ever.  You have no recourse, no right to due process, no right to fair and honest practices.  (This is also common in most contracts in general.)  Modern corporations take the ass-covering way too far; yes, you have to protect yourselves, but there's a line and almost all of them cross it.

Secondly, the EULA -- which is being read by a layman -- is presented in legalese.  They word it in such a way as to either be incomprehensible or very difficult reading for anyone without a law degree.  This results in players not fully understanding the ramifications of the agreement, and also in many people skipping the EULA entirely and just clicking "I accept" since they've already payed for the game, anyway.