Slashdot Mirror
Lineage II Addiction Lawsuit Makes It Past the EULA
We recently discussed a man who sued NCsoft for making Lineage II "too addictive" after he spent 20,000 hours over five years playing it. Now, several readers have pointed out that the lawsuit has progressed past its first major hurdle: the EULA. Quoting:
"NC Interactive has responded the way most software companies and online services have for more than a decade: it argued that the claims are barred by its end-user license agreement, which in this case capped the company's liability to the amount Smallwood paid in fees over six months prior to his filing his complaint (or thereabouts). One portion of the EULA specifically stated that lawsuits could only be brought in Texas state court in Travis County, where NC Interactive is located. ... But the judge in this case, US District Judge Alan C. Kay, noted that both Texas and Hawaii law bar contract provisions that waive in advance the ability to make gross-negligence claims. He also declined to dismiss Smallwood's claims for negligence, defamation, and negligent infliction of emotional distress."
... because if it does, I'll have a killer suit against Burger King for making their food too delicious.
Yeah... this attempt is very interesting. A Texas company writing a license agreement in a state requiring any legal claims against them be brought in Texas and limiting liabilities in ways that are expressly prohibited under Texas law? Hrm! Either that EULA came from a boiler-plate that originated from out of state (not a good excuse) or they simply thought they could get away with it and got caught. This is rather like the "new patent troll" story where people are trying to benefit themselves through legal means when they actually have no right to claim such.
I wonder if the pendulum is actually starting to swing the other way now?
Its a good idea when planning a class action lawsuit to ensure that your target actually has any money to be paid out. I think /. likely fails in this regard :P
I am sure its generating some money, but I doubt its huge...
"The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
Can I sue my company for making me addicted to my job? Because of them, I get up at the same exact time and go to the same place everyday monday to friday where I meet same people and spend next 8 hours doing boring and repetitive stuff. If that's not addiction, then I don't know what it is.
If you post as an AC, don't expect me to spend a mod point on you.
So this man played a game for an average of just under 12 hours a day, every day, for five years?
Emotions! In your brain!
that we're no longer responsible for our own actions.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
More good comes from modern religion than you can imagine.
War. Racism. Homophobia. Sexism. Indoctrination of children. Rejection of science/reason. Rejection of contraception leading to the spread of STDs.
So what's the good bit? It better be fucking massive.
It's a stupid lawsuit, but I favor any ruling that weakens the EULA. Those things are near-evil.
Qxe4
Peace, tolerance, acceptance, equality, taking good care of your family, critical thought, responsibility.
I'm sure you can find something in that list that should appeal to you.
Why do you describe buddhism when we are talking about religion?
The woman suing Mc Donalds wasn't stupid. A: she got quite a lot of cash out of it, and B: the reason why she won the case was that was shown that Ms Donalds put profit before safety. http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm
I can have more of that without religion than with it.
peace: without a religion, many wars cease to exist, since there's no "promised land" to fight over, no divine commands to wage war that would otherwise not be necessary. There's no holy war, and no infidels to conquer or convert, no crusades to wage. Certainly, war doesn't disappear completely if you remove religion, but the amount of reasons to wage it shrinks considerably.
acceptance: of what you mean more specifically? But generally I'm a very "whatever floats your boat" kind of person. I think that all victimless crimes should be decriminalized. Religion isn't very accepting of many kinds of those, though.
equality: The bible isn't big on this, especially regarding women, who for instance may not speak in church (Corinthians 14:34). Religion is very much coming in conflict with equality. For instance, the opposition to gay marriage and ordaining women.
taking good care of your family: I don't think there's been a single society on this planet that thought differently. Of course the standards for what "taking good care of your family" means exactly vary widely, but everybody seems to agree on that it's a must.
critical thought: right. Critical thought and blind obedience are mutually exclusive. Did Abraham exericse a lot of critical thought in pondering whether to sacrifice his son? Now of course he was stopped at the last moment, but the whole event is a show of the complete lack of any kind of thought. When told to sacrifice he does, and when told to stop he does.
responsibility: more details on this is needed, but about the same deal as the family one if I understood you correctly.
responsibility: more details on this is needed, but about the same deal as the family one if I understood you correctly.
You can do anything you want, as long as you confess it to a priest later and say you're sorry. If you do that all the consequences go away.
So basically, he's suing for 3 million dollars over 5 years because he's addicted to a video game? If he won, that would make him the first person to make $600,000 a year playing video games. At 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year, that averages out to $288.46 cents an hour for playing Lineage 2. Most of us will never make that sort of money doing anything, let alone for playing an MMO.
No portion of this post may be rebroadcast without the express, written consent of Major League Baseball.
Buddhism doesn't involve believing in any gods (though some people worship Buddha apparently), so you can be an atheist Buddhist..
which is totally what she said
You're picking and choosing very specific verses that suit your argument.
That doesn't make him wrong. Would you rather he picked versus completely unrelated to anything he was saying?
I've read the whole of the bible twice btw. God directly started wars in the old testament. That sounds like religion giving reasons for war to me, unless you're saying that the Israelite leaders were just pretending that God said something as an excuse for war? *gasp* Would humans ever do something like that, make up gods and beliefs to control people and get their own way? Surely not!
which is totally what she said
With all due respect, stop being a fucking moron. Nobody here has suggested killing all Christians. Nobody here has suggested burning a church, much less all churches. To not only ascribe nonsense to people but declare it to be some sort of sexual thrill for them has to make you one of the most shallow, despicable excuses for a human being I have ever seen in my life. One who obviously has nothing intelligent to say, so he just makes shit up to attack as it pleases him . I'm sure you sleep awfully well at night having defeated your invented evils, don't you? Must be awfully hard to lose an argument when you just decide what the other side thinks and says and declare it to be truth.
Are you truly so dense that you can't separate politics and religion? Lots of people hate Rush Limbaugh or Sarah Palin, and it has nothing to do with their religion. It has to do with their politics.
I'm sure many of them would. What the fuck is your point?
All else aside, if you can't understand the difference between not caring if somebody dies or feeling the world is better off for it and actively suggesting they should be killed or killing them... well, I was going to ask how dense you could possibly be but at this point the question is becoming rhetorical.
I would consider somebody like Rush Limbaugh dying to be one of the better things to happen to this country because of the way he simply whips people into partisan furors to serve his own set of interests. It doesn't mean I wish death on him, and it especially doesn't mean I think he should be killed. If he WERE killed, I would expect the person locked in prison for the rest of his life and declare him a murderer, not a hero.
Yes, because clearly instead of talking about things or making a logical argument ("bitching on the Internet" in your little world) the correct solution is to kill everybody who disagrees with you. Holy hell, you really are a whackjob. Do you honestly believe you're one of the "normal[s]?" Because I have a newsflash for you. You're a fool, as bad as any religious or anti-religious nutter out there.
For that matter, you need to realize that being anti-religion and anti-theist are wildly different things. Believe in god if you want, I really don't give a fuck. Vapor-lock your lips to some religion's ass without thinking thoroughly about it all and what you truly believe, tell everybody they have to believe what you and your buddies believe, and I have major problems with it and with you. And much as I might think the world is better off without you in it, that doesn't cause me to orgasm to the thought of killing you. Sorry to disappoint.
Let me clue you in, since you're obviously too feeble-minded to reach these realizations on your own. People who don't believe in religion, who don't believe in God, who don't believe in an afterlife believe that this is all there is. They don't support running off and killing people to any degree more than believers do (there are bad apples in both groups, naturally). They don't support fucking each other over. They believe you should be good and tolerant toward one another because you don't get a second chance. Making somebody's life miserable is unconscionable when you can't pretend to believe that no matter how long they live, no matter what you do to them, they'll "live" an eternity longer in perfect bliss with their creator. Not believing in eter
Killing all Christians and burning all churches = wet dream of every slashdot anti-theist
Don't be such a fucking clown. I think Christianity and all religions have it dead wrong, but I don't want to kill everyone who has beliefs. I can understand and even respect some religious beliefs, and I see that religion does provide positive influences in some people's lives, though on a larger scale it has many negative effects.
which is totally what she said
You may think so, but apparently even Dalai Lama isn't too fond of atheists and thinks they are no better than religious extremists.
If you post as an AC, don't expect me to spend a mod point on you.
Excellent point. From the linked article:
"WHEN I was a boy in Tibet, I felt that my own Buddhist religion must be the best — and that other faiths were somehow inferior. Now I see how naïve I was, and how dangerous the extremes of religious intolerance can be today."
Of *course* the lawsuit made it past the EULA - who reads those, ever?
The judge probably just thought "blah blah blah, click OK".
No, they don't count because they're political, rather than religious. Religion was just an excuse. The people in power used religion to keep people in line, which makes heresy basically rebellion. The crusades weren't religious, but cultural. "Those people are different and getting closer! Let's go take their stuff!"
And how do you not think that organized religions do not have rules to keep people in line? Even if the people in power were corrupt its the religions they used to instill the fear they didn't get all the soldiers to fight and torture for them by saying it was for their culture they told them that it was for their religion and their god.
Which ones exactly are fighting for religion? It seems to me most are fighting for freedom or against cultural suppression. They feel put down, so they rise up.
I don't know maybe the thousands that are fighting for Sharia Law?
You mean the people who are insane murderers? I'd like to know what kind of religion inspires that kind of murder.
The one this group follows apparently
I'm not denying that. Many people are willing to die for what they believe in, rather than renounce that belief. Is that wrong of those people? Or is it wrong of the people who kill them? (You know, the ones in power who feel their power threatened by people who believe something they can't control?)
sure that's a nice way to look at it but I was more talking about the millions that died in wars in the name of religion.
That is what Christianity teaches. Or should be teaching. A lot of confused christians keep getting in the way.
Ghandi once said: "If Christians would really live according to the teachings of Christ, as found in the Bible, all of India would be Christian today." (I thought he said it would be irresistible, but this is what Google gave me.) It's not the teachings that are wrong. It's the people.
You pretty much said it for me religions are not what they should be they are corrupt. Todays religions are nothing more than a political system trying to control people.
You know, the story of Abraham and Lot always made me think the Christian God is more than a little bit of a sadist. Why exactly would I want to worship a Deity that thinks its hunky dory to ask for the head of one of his loyal follower's children, or makes bets with the enemy that cause one of his most loyal to have his family murdered and to be tortured? If any man did that we'd call him a sick fuck, but a Deity equals that's cool? Then again a whole lot of the bible never made any damned sense to me. Take Lucifer: Here you have the best and the brightest, the number one guy taking a shot at the title. Now he lost the first round but knows they'll be a second shot at the title. So instead of rallying his troops, trying to build a large army and giving them what they need to win, he and his generals are supposed to beat the shit and torture the crap out of those that are gonna be fighting FOR him? WTF? Is he supposed to be retarded?
As for TFA, ever since we saw that bitch, and I'm sorry but she was an absolute bitch that should have had her kids taken away, sue McDonald's because the lazy heifer fed her kids NOTHING but McDonald's for their ENTIRE life and then sued because they were fat and diabetic, then I knew the court system in this country is completely fucked up. What's next? Ohh I got a blister playing HL2, Valve owes me a million dollars! Oh and seeing those install screens on XP and Windows 7 all day gives me a headache, I want 10 million from MSFT AND a dozen top of the line x360s with lifetime XBL gold AND a pony! (Black 2010 convertible preferably) Give me a fricking break! Is this numbnuts gonna have to actually pay for all the time he wastes of the court, or is that just another bill We, The People get to enjoy?
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
McDonald's was the stupid one. All she wanted was the medical bills for her 3rd degree burns paid; I think that's quite reasonable. McDonalds said "No way, bitch, sue us". Dumb. They deserved getting their asses handed to them on a platter, they BEGGED for it.
Free Martian Whores!
Ok. He claims to have spent 20000 hours over the course of 5 years. 20000 hours / 24 = 833.33 days played 833.33 days/ 365 = 2.28 Years So in the past 5 years, he has spent nearly 50% of his time playing this game. Is it a sign of addiction or just plan sad
Like any religion Buddhism has countless sects. I'm sure there are some sects, especially the sort that seem to be popular in Hollywood, that are more secular in nature. Just like there are sects of Christianity that are drastically different from the more common forms.
Exactly, so believing in gods is not one of the basic things that makes Buddhism Buddhism.
I wasn't going by Hollywood, while I was checking what I was saying about Buddhism and Atheism I was using this link: http://buddhism.about.com/od/basicbuddhistteachings/a/buddhaatheism.htm
It does say:
The many mythological creatures and beings that populate Mahayana Buddhism art and literature are often called "gods" or "deities." But, again, just believing in them is not the point.
which is totally what she said
The McDonald's coffee wasn't just coffee hot, it was boiling hot; far hotter than anyone would expect coffee to be and far hotter than coffee should be. You're sitting in a car with a cup of coffee it's going to be over your lap. With normal coffee if you spill it it's going to hurt like hell, but you're not going to need medical attention. McDonald's coffee gave her third degree burns. It looks to me like McDonald's was the negligent one.
Pizza is expected to be firey hot when it comes out of the oven. Coffee isn't expected to be just a few degrees below boiling; that is, unless you get it from McDonalds. Its coffee is insanely hot; I always put ice in it to cool it down enough to drink, otherwise I'd have to wait an hour for it to be drinkable.
McDonald's coffee is stupidly hot.
Free Martian Whores!
So if you sold someone some pizza and they shoved a piece of the melted cheese onto their "nether region", and they got burns, its your fault ?
What person in their right mind, regardless of "how hot" something is puts an OPEN container of coffee between their thighs ? If someone said "I put my hot coffee between my thighs and I got burned - Its your fault." came to me I'd say sue too.. because I'd think there is no way this can be my fault.
Regarding your pizza example: no, they'd just be an idiot.
Regarding McDonald's: "McDonald's required franchises to serve coffee at 180–190 F (82–88 C). At that temperature, the coffee would cause a third-degree burn in two to seven seconds. Prior to her lawsuit, there had been approximately 700 other burn cases involving McDonald's between 1982 and 1992." (Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants)
I agree it wasn't a good idea to put the coffee in her lap but she spent eight days in a hospital, required skin grafts and two years of medical treatment just because she spilled it on herself. I don't know if you've ever ended up with a hot beverage in your lap but it usually just hurts for an hour and gets a little red; it doesn't involve a trip to the hospital. Her original plan was to settle with McDonald's to cover her medical costs and they offered her $800. After that, they filed a suit for gross negligence for providing "unreasonably dangerous" and "defectively manufactured" coffee.
They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
This is completely wrong. Buddhism is a religion but you could claim that it is not a theology. There is a difference. It is a religion because it involves things like souls and the afterlife/reincarnation. It is the combination of a philosophy and a fairy tale, a way of living your life and a fantastical reason why it should be that way. That is pretty much the definition of a religion. Now, in most Asian countries, the "Buddhas" are treated as gods. Why? Well because when they converted to Buddhism they took their old gods and made them enlightened ones (Buddhas). The same way that old African gods became saints in places where Christianity took over. The same story is repeated every place one religion comes to supplant another. In traditional (Indian) Buddhism, this is not the case, they accepted the old Hindu stories as useful parables but mostly moved on from their old beliefs.