Valve Removes Right For Class Action Claims From EULA

trawg writes "Valve has joined the list of companies that have altered their terms and conditions to prevent users from filing a class action suit. Their official statement says that such claims 'impose unnecessary expense and delay' and are 'designed to benefit the class action lawyers.' In its stead, they've added a new arbitration process, in which Valve will reimburse costs (under certain circumstances) when dispute resolution can't be solved through their normal support process."

Comments

I deeply dislike the end-run aroudn the courts

[Nursie]

It just seems wrong that a product EULA can make you forfeit your rights like this.

But at the same time they are absolutely correct, class action seldom really benefits anyone but the law firms.

Re:I deeply dislike the end-run aroudn the courts

[morcego]

For Valve's defense, their reasoning for this is more than valid. Valve has always been a good company and continues to be so.

The fact they are forcing arbitration pretty much destroys your argument.

Arbitration, as a choice, is a wonderful thing. Making it mandatory is spitting in the face of customers and their rights.

Re:I deeply dislike the end-run aroudn the courts

[Theophany]

It's not about getting rich

Tell the lawyers that.

Re:I deeply dislike the end-run aroudn the courts

[cheekyjohnson]

How is this better than class action lawsuits, which from my experience has the lawyers sue a company I do/did business with, end up with a settlement where the lawyers get $10 per person and I get $1 for the company's supposed screwing me illegaly for $10?

Class action lawsuits are clearly not so you can make a lot of money. I'd say they're more for teaching the company a lesson. And frankly, I would find it absolutely idiotic if a mere EULA was able to take that right away.

Re:I deeply dislike the end-run aroudn the courts

[dkleinsc]

The idea of a class-action lawsuit is ridiculous, unsatisfying nonsense perpetuated by the lawyers who profit from them.

They can be completely legitimate.

Imagine an electric company that overcharges all its customers $10. Now each customer in theory could sue them in small claims to win your $10 but it's probably not worth their time, which means the company would make millions by doing that. What prevents them from just doing that regularly is the risk that somebody will notice the pattern and sue them in a class action all at once rather than each individual having to try to recover their $10 on their own.

-1 Evil

[gman003]

Yeah, normally I'm a big Valve fan, but I've gotta admit, I can't defend this one. I mean, they're right about "class actions only make money for the lawyers", but still...

I may not start boycotting you now, Valve, but you just lost a few points of rep with *this* faction.

Re:opt out

[SolitaryMan]

I don't understand, If I don't accept this new EULA, will I get a refund for all my games or what?

Re:Sony/BMG Rootkit AGAIN?

[cheekyjohnson]

The answer is to sue individually

Yeah, and how many people are going to do that when the damages are small? Most likely, not very many. Which means the company can pretty much do whatever they please.

Besides, if I want to enter a class action lawsuit, that's my choice. If I want to risk getting less money than I lost from getting ripped off, that is, again, my choice. I don't see why people want to remove that choice from individuals just because they hate lawyers.