Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Class action suit half life 2

Last response: in Video Games
Share
November 16, 2004 5:11:42 AM

if you bought half life 2 before november 16th at a store and are as pissed off as I am about not being able to play it please sign below. I would seriously like to get a class action suit going against vivindi. I bought the full version of a game in a box at a retail store and come to find out now I can't play it. I call bull. who's with me?!

Join the TomsHardware IRC channel <A HREF="http://chat.oddnet.net/tom/" target="_new">http://chat.oddnet.net/tom/&lt;/A>
November 16, 2004 9:52:12 AM

About 50 minutes after you posted this, the game was unlocked and playable for you. Do you really think your class action suit will have a chance?

Rest assured I'm not a friend of Vivendi's and I wish you the best of luck but I do not think you will even find a court where they want to take on your class action suit. This is going to be one big waste of money.


BigMac

<A HREF="http://www.p3int.com/product_center_NWO_The_Story.asp" target="_new">New World Order</A>
November 16, 2004 1:39:52 PM

Dood...deal with it...The game wasn't set for release until Nov 16, 2004 at 12:00am Pacific Standard Time. Now, I don't know what timezone your in, but maybe you whould tkae that into account.

Not to mention the fact that you were lucky you were even able to buy it before then.

The online verification system was turned on 12:01am PST. Suck it up, be a man, and just play the damn game.

XP2800+, Abit NF7, 1GB Dual-Channel DDR333, ATI R9800PRO 128MB, TT PurePower 420W, LG DVD+-R/RW
:redface: <font color=red>My wife says I suffer from premature ejaculation...I don't remember suffering<font color=red> :wink:
Related resources
November 16, 2004 1:44:07 PM

and if you won the class action, you would get pennies, while the attorneys get millions.
Class actions suits are for sukahs.

<font color=red><pre>_____________________________________
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>
November 16, 2004 8:48:45 PM

I dont care what other say but your right. They should not have allowed and DL done or any copy sold till those friggin servers where online.

<i><font color=red>Only an overclocker can make a computer into a convectional oven.</i></font color=red>
November 16, 2004 10:49:19 PM

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA.

The ignorance in this thread is laughable.

s signature has been formatted to fit your scr
November 17, 2004 1:30:59 AM

1st of all get over it, some people purchased HL2 months before it was released and couldnt play it. If you were anything of a gamer you would of knew that it wouldnt be activated until Nov 16th. For the time it was unlocked I was able to play it at 7:30am CST on Nov. 16. So that would have made the unlocking on or before that time.
November 17, 2004 10:59:12 AM

If you call the responses you got here flames, then be sure to wear your asbestos suit when you go out and play on the big forums out there (or any of the larger fori of THG for that matter).


BigMac

<A HREF="http://www.p3int.com/product_center_NWO_The_Story.asp" target="_new">New World Order</A>
November 19, 2004 5:53:10 AM

ya know big mac there's a reason I don't post that often anymore :D  it didn't used to be like this, back in the day when somebody complained everybody jumped on board and started complaining back. now everyone complains about complaining haha

Join the TomsHardware IRC channel <A HREF="http://chat.oddnet.net/tom/" target="_new">http://chat.oddnet.net/tom/&lt;/A>
November 19, 2004 8:28:56 AM

we all might have gotten on board if yur complaint had a point to it. I think people just get annoyed when they read stupid posts. Maybe the quality of posters has improved since u joined this forum??

"Its only when you look at ants closely with a magnifying glass on a sunny day that you realise how often they burst into flames"
November 19, 2004 8:53:23 AM

well wheres the fun in that, I want the most dispicable ragtag idiots possible to talk to haha

no I really was pretty pissed though I bought the full version of a game in a store got home, installed it and what the hell I can't play it yet? did some research and found out that I had to wait 6 more hours to play a game that wasn't released yet... but I had it in my hands... I never liked the idea of steam because I was afraid of [-peep-] like this happening. tell me you wouldn't complain if you went out and paid almost 60 bucks for a game you couldn't play? If other software publishers adopt this idea I'll gurantee you guys will have some more complaining on your hands.

Join the TomsHardware IRC channel <A HREF="http://chat.oddnet.net/tom/" target="_new">http://chat.oddnet.net/tom/&lt;/A>
November 19, 2004 12:18:00 PM

i wont argue cos I still don't even the have the game (problem with living 30+miles away from nearest games shop) and yeah I agree I think the steam verification process happens to be the biggest load of [-peep-] I have ever come accross.... ever. It appalls me that in order to play their game I have to go through that process.... Personally I reckon if there is a crack available by the time I get the game (Sunday) then I'll crack it

"Its only when you look at ants closely with a magnifying glass on a sunny day that you realise how often they burst into flames"
November 19, 2004 12:54:01 PM

Not liking what a publisher/developer of a game is doing, is no excuse for piracy. Just talk with your wallet. If you wanna play, buy it (and swallow activation, go to the valve forums and complain about it there). If you think steam is that bad an idea, dont play the game. If people would do that, that would be a signal to change a release policy. Pirating software only makes it worse as they will come up with even more devious schemes. Personally, steam is working great for me. And if you live in the middle of nowhere you should buy the game through steam, don't have to go out and buy it then. And you can back up your games (on CD or DVD), and no you will not have a booklet or CDs but the retail version does not have a booklet either, and CDs are dead cheap anyway.

The reason why Steam exists is not for controlling Piracy (although they try to utilize it for that) but for online distribution of games. By forcing customers to activate through steam you will also get to see all the great offers they will be distributing via steam only, later.


BigMac

<A HREF="http://www.p3int.com/product_center_NWO_The_Story.asp" target="_new">New World Order</A>
November 19, 2004 1:04:39 PM

I live in rural Kerry Ireland meaning I don't have a fast internet connection.... I connect to the net at 28.8k MAX so downloading games would require a wee bit of patience and a large chunk of my life which I'm not prepared to give. I also badly want to play HL2 meaning I'll but the game. Boycotting something like HL2 is not an option. Finally if its easier and faster for me to download a crack to play my game rather than register it with steam ( a friend of mine with a dialup took 2 hours to complete the process) then thats what I'll do.

"Its only when you look at ants closely with a magnifying glass on a sunny day that you realise how often they burst into flames"
November 20, 2004 12:34:37 PM

If you were living in Manhattan you would not buy it either, arguing that it is too expensive. Give me a break, you're just a common little thief. Because the chance of getting caught (or getting sued) is rather small there are many of those around lately.

I would love to drive a BMW if I had the money for one, but I don't and I'm not going to steal one, either. I'll just stick to salivating when one is overtaking me in traffic. Not buying something is always an option, it's a frequent option for me (wish I could buy more).

Not being able to play HL2 because your internet connection sucks is just too bad. Get a better connection. They don't offer it where you live? If you are really adamant about that, go live somewhere else. If you want my sympathy for your current living situation, you can have it (really), but it's never an excuse to steal (violate copyrights, for you nutpickers out there).


BigMac

<A HREF="http://www.p3int.com/product_center_NWO_The_Story.asp" target="_new">New World Order</A>
November 20, 2004 5:31:59 PM

Quote:
Get a better connection.

What about people with no internet or users such as post secondary students that are behind a firewall. To be fair online registration has always pissed me the hell off I never register online and HL2 wont change that. Now in this case I have to since I do have access to the internet. But cracking it for when I am at LAN parties with no internet connection is going to have to be a must.

Xeon

<font color=red>Post created with being a dickhead in mind.</font color=red>
<font color=white>For all emotional and slanderous statements contact THG for all law suits.</font color=white>
November 20, 2004 8:44:04 PM

you post good common sense, but in order for it to make sense, you have to have a functioning moral compass, and more and more people are proving that they don't have one or ignore it. The reality is that small crimes numb them and creates a sort of snowball effect, which leads to many of the problems with our country.


<font color=red><pre>\\//__________________________________
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>
November 21, 2004 1:13:26 AM

Better get then while the gettins good.

<font color=red><pre>\\//__________________________________
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>
November 22, 2004 8:54:55 AM

WTF???? I bought the game for christs sake and had every intention of buying the game... What I was saying was that if I could download a crack quicker to bypass the registering section than actually registering then I would. As it turned out I couldn't be bothered and just registered as normal and spent 2 hours twiddling my thumbs as a result... At no stage above did I say I was gonna download/obtain a pirated copy of the game.... take yur time and read my posts correctly in future. EDIT: dumbass.... (I felt an insult was warranted at the end there)

"Its only when you look at ants closely with a magnifying glass on a sunny day that you realise how often they burst into flames"<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by wolfy on 11/22/04 06:00 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
November 23, 2004 1:14:56 PM

I've got to agree with you wolfy. BigMac was being a Big ... something. I was able to follow you. In fact I agree with you. Had I not already registered, I'd have highly consider cracking to be free of Steam. I just didn't want to wait that long to play. :) 

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>
November 23, 2004 6:46:57 PM

If you enjoy insulting me, feel free to do so :smile: Just write your posts so clear that dumbasses like me can understand them, if you're annoyed at my response that is.

Did you read up on what ValvE did today? They banned 20000 accounts because these used an illegal key. Quite some amusing responses by people who say they bought a legit copy but used this key to activate their copy (duh?!).

Imagine what they would do if they could detect these fixes of bypassing steam (for example if the "fix" includes some code that will report back to ValvE once an internet connection is present). Btw, I agree with you that when someone has a legit copy, and just wants to use a hack/fix to bypass steam then they should be free to do so, but if you read the EULA that comes with HL2 then you will find that that is a violation of the EULA. Also ValvE is not alone in that, many publishers include such statements that you are not allowed to modify (such crucial parts of) the game in any way. Bottom line, if you do not want to adhere with such restrictions you should not be buying games that have them in their EULA.

The problem with such hacks/fixes is that they're prone to abuse (by people that do not buy legit copies).


BigMac

<A HREF="http://www.p3int.com/product_center_NWO_The_Story.asp" target="_new">New World Order</A>
November 24, 2004 3:47:36 PM

BigMac, no offense, but your logic isn't very logical. I suppose in your opinion no one should ever overclock any component of their PC either and if they do then their PC should report to a remote server and be deactivated permanently?

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>
November 25, 2004 4:54:34 AM

Quote:

BigMac, no offense, but your logic isn't very logical. I suppose in your opinion no one should ever overclock any component of their PC either and if they do then their PC should report to a remote server and be deactivated permanently?

No offense taken.

There are some differences between hardware and software so you cannot set up the perfect analogy between them. Biggest difference is, you can make a perfect digital copy of the software you own. Actually, that is not even correct, do you do not own software as you do hardware, you buy a license to use the software, and there are conditions for using that license. I think it is perfectly understandable and acceptable to take measures, in the software itself or otherwise, that detect EULA infringements and even counteracts it.

With hardware, it is usually not a profitable supposition to copy it, it is cheaper to buy another one. Also with hardware you own physical property, which is different than having a license for use. Usually there are lots of limitations in the product instructions for use, that you will loose your warrantee if you modify the product. Also, if the product contains specific intellectual property then this is guarded by patents. (software can be patented as well).

In short, it is a bit like comparing apples with pears, they're both fruit, and you like the one, the other or both, but they're definitely not the same thing. When you buy software, you buy an idea, basically, with little material cost, none if you download it directly from the net. You can compare it with buying a movie, music, or a book, which is why software falls under copyright law. I would find it acceptable, if a publisher were to publish a book that cannot be copied, as long as this is clearly communicated to potential buyers. It is then up to the customer whether he wants to make such a purchase.


BigMac

<A HREF="http://www.p3int.com/product_center_NWO_The_Story.asp" target="_new">New World Order</A>
November 27, 2004 2:40:55 PM

"Fair Use" laws make clear the right of a purchaser to make backups of purchased software for their own use. The lust by corporations for ever greater profits and the desire by the present probusiness american government makes for a probusiness supreme court that betrays the "rights" of individual purchasers to a proper action as regards "fair use" interpretation. To wit...one government branch lies and the other two swear to its validity. Such rancor in government has led to calls by some elected officials for software that corrupts P2P users computers.

I want to die like my Grandfather...in my sleep...not screaming in terror like his passengers.
November 28, 2004 7:03:21 AM

If backups were just made for personal use, we would not be in the mess we're now in. Btw, you can make as many backups as you like of your software bought via Steam.

If it were possible to differentiate between copies made for personal use (like copying a piece of purchased music to all your portable devices) and copies made with malicious intent then I'm sure this would be utilized and allowed. Also i think it is reasonable to charge differently for content you are allowed to use indefinitely or content that you can only use on one specific location or for a fixed time period.


BigMac

<A HREF="http://www.p3int.com/product_center_NWO_The_Story.asp" target="_new">New World Order</A>
November 29, 2004 7:44:23 PM

Quote:
Biggest difference is, you can make a perfect digital copy of the software you own.

How nice of you to bring up a point that I never did, nor has anyone else. No one here is arguing for theft, so there's no point in debating that. Without your reliance on that your posts would be much shorter.

Quote:
you do not own software as you do hardware

<i>That</i> is completely untrue. You <i>do</i> purchase software. In the U.S. at the very least, music, software, even books and printed media all work relatively the same way. You aren't purchasing the original work. You're purchasing content derived from the original. Once purchased, you <i>own</i> that content, but not the original.

It compares very much the same as a computer processor and the blueprints, patents, etc. that went into it. When you purchase a processor you aren't buying the original. You're buying a copy of derived media. Purchasing it doesn't give you the right to distribute content based on the original. It only gives you the right to do with your copy of the content as you please.

So whether it is OCing a processor, adding a spoiler to your coupe, modding HL2, or transferring Bach from your CD to MP3 files, you own that content and have every legal right to do these things.

Quote:
you buy a license to use the software, and there are conditions for using that license

Sorry, but that's so not true. Most EULAs won't even hold up in a court of law because they themselves aren't legal. Licenses are not laws, and are certainly not legally binding contracts. They're more like terms and conditions of a warranty. Follow them and you'll recieve fixes and support. Don't follow them and it's "use at your own risk".

Quote:
In short, it is a bit like comparing apples with pears

Only to the ignorant. To the educated it's more like comparing a Red Delicious to a Gala. Your problem is that you don't seem to know the difference between license and content. Copyright law protects content. Licenses are imaginary rules made up by companies to define <i>terms of support</i> that actually aren't <i>legally</i> binding. There's no signature. And in fact in many states minors couldn't even sign them if there were.

So if I were to crack my copy of HL2 so that I never had to see Steam again, what I am doing is in fact throwing my technical support for HL2 out the window. I may never see an update if Valve doesn't want to supply one to me. I may never recieve a response should I email them with a question. But I have done nothing illegal, because I purchased my content.

EULA's on the other hand are often questionably moral at best and in some cases have even been outright illegal. So have various 'protection' methods that have trodden upon my legal rights to use content that I have purchased. I just don't have the financial resources to buy favorable political clout to pass inane laws like the DCMA that supposedly make it illegal in certain cases to actually use my legal rights. However since my legal rights were established first, so long as I remain within my legal rights while breaking the DCMA I remain protected by my first-given rights.

<i>That's</i> the law.

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>
November 30, 2004 10:31:43 AM

I sense some hostility in your post which I find uncalled for but to each his own. I think Wolfy was right in feeling unjustly attacked because I did not read his post carefully, you on the other hand have no such reason as far as I can tell. Either you get impatient with me because you are smarter than me (or think so at least), or you feel threatened in some way. Either way, it's not very functional (if you try to convey your view on things that is). Moving on to content now...

The issue about the perfect copy is relevant in this discussion, at least in the sense for people to get an understanding of what they are buying. You are buying the rights to use an idea, I know you disagree with that but that is why EULA's and software licenses exist. You may not like them, but they do have a legal status, until you contest one because you think it contains illegal claims. Until a judge agrees with you, the EULA or any other licensing agreement stands as it is accepted by the customer. And before the software gets installed the installer makes sure you do accept the EULA or it will not install.

Quote:

Sorry, but that's so not true. Most EULAs won't even hold up in a court of law because they themselves aren't legal. Licenses are not laws, and are certainly not legally binding contracts. They're more like terms and conditions of a warranty. Follow them and you'll recieve fixes and support. Don't follow them and it's "use at your own risk".

You will have to back up your claim that most EULA's will not hold up in court. If you cannot affort the legal battle yourself (and who can affort such things?) you will have to provide adequate jurisprudence to back your claim. Can you quote some here? I assure you there would be such jurisprudence, if not initiated by angry consumers, then surely there would be jurisprudence on cases where a company sought to enforce the EULA via court and was rejected.

The EULA describes the terms, and if one of the terms is that you're not supposed to change the software by any means, that is a legal construct. If you disagree, don't agree to the EULA. Of course you wont be able to install the software either, unless you hack the installer itself or get the software from someone who did so. Do we agree on the fact that that is illegal (hacking the installer, or getting a hacked version)?

Quote:

Only to the ignorant. To the educated it's more like comparing a Red Delicious to a Gala. Your problem is that you don't seem to know the difference between license and content. Copyright law protects content. Licenses are imaginary rules made up by companies to define terms of support that actually aren't legally binding. There's no signature. And in fact in many states minors couldn't even sign them if there were.

Agreeing to a contract by clicking a button is just as valid as a verbal agreement or a signed agreement in a court of law. Of course a verbal agreement is harder to prove than a signed agreement but in terms of law they're all legally binding. To me it looks like you are inventing your own kind of law to suit you.

If I buy a software package, with three fixed licenses, do you really think it is legal to hack one of them and use those other versions (without company warranty)? Think again. Replace fixed licenses with floating for all I care.

Just to make my point more understandable, what is the economic value of the goods you are purchasing? Obviously the processor represents an economic value in itself. Software, as content, the bits so to speak, in itself has no economic value. You can copy it indefinitely with 0 production costs (except for some hardware write off). The economic value of the software is in the right that you have of using it for your purposes. Those rights are ruled by Copyright laws.

Closing off, I have no opinion on the DMCA, I'm not a USA citizen and I do not live there either. I've heard lots of (unfavorable) comments about it but I've never read it myself.


BigMac

<A HREF="http://www.p3int.com/product_center_NWO_The_Story.asp" target="_new">New World Order</A>
December 1, 2004 8:06:30 PM

Quote:
The issue about the perfect copy is relevant in this discussion, at least in the sense for people to get an understanding of what they are buying.

Actually, it has no relevence whatsoever, but obviously that is beyond you.

Quote:
You are buying the rights to use an idea

You see, this is where you have everything wrong. You aren't buying 'rights' at all. You're buying content. There's a huge difference.

Quote:
I know you disagree with that but that is why EULA's and software licenses exist. You may not like them, but they do have a legal status, until you contest one because you think it contains illegal claims.

You've got it bass ackwards I'm afraid. They have no legal status, period. To my knowledge one has not been decided upon by a judge one way or the other, ever. And software companies know this, which is why they always make sure to settle any case out of court where any EULA's validity might be questioned (or worse, decided upon) by the time the case has finished.

Quote:
Until a judge agrees with you, the EULA or any other licensing agreement stands as it is accepted by the customer.

In an accidental way, you hit it right on the head. The strength of the EULA stands only as long as it is accepted by consumers. We've all just assumed that they're legal and valid. Hardly anyone even realizes that they don't have to put up with this nonsense. And so the EULA seems to stand. It doesn't stand for any legal reason. It stands for the same reason that the common PC is such a target for virii. The average computer user is too unaware. (To put it nicely.)

Quote:
You will have to back up your claim that most EULA's will not hold up in court. If you cannot affort the legal battle yourself (and who can affort such things?) you will have to provide adequate jurisprudence to back your claim.

And I call the reverse. Provide one case where an EULA that trample's the user's rights has gone to court and been judged valid to the user's detriment. The simple fact is, there aren't trials that go <i>either</i> way because these things don't survive trials. Software companies are too worried that they might to let it happen. They fight hard to settle out of court as soon as any such (every such) trial looks to not go their way.

Quote:
Do we agree on the fact that that is illegal (hacking the installer, or getting a hacked version)?

I would assume that you believe it to be illegal. If so, then no, we don't agree. There <i>are</i> legal means and reasons.

Quote:
Agreeing to a contract by clicking a button is just as valid as a verbal agreement or a signed agreement in a court of law.

Actually, it isn't. There are a number of differences and there are gaping grey areas in the law regarding this.

Quote:
To me it looks like you are inventing your own kind of law to suit you.

Maybe that's because you don't seem to actually know US law.

Quote:
If I buy a software package, with three fixed licenses, do you really think it is legal to hack one of them and use those other versions (without company warranty)?

I'm not entirely following what you mean by "use those other versions", but if I am understanding you correctly, then yes, it is perfectly legal. Not only that, but it is done quite often.

Quote:
Just to make my point more understandable, what is the economic value of the goods you are purchasing? Obviously the processor represents an economic value in itself. Software, as content, the bits so to speak, in itself has no economic value.

That's a nonsensical question. The economic value is exactly what it is. What you're talking about is production value, which is a completely different thing. That aside, the production value is still above zero, and even if somehow in some magical world it weren't, that still wouldn't impact the economic value any. The value is in the content, not in the delivery medium.

And that's where you keep screwing up. You keep ignoring the simple fact that what you're purchasing is content, not the delivery medium.

Quote:
The economic value of the software is in the right that you have of using it for your purposes. Those rights are ruled by Copyright laws.

Actually, you've got that <i>really</i> screwed up. The economic value is in the content and the <i>author's</i> rights are ruled <i>in part</i> by copyright laws. Just as the owner's rights are <i>in part</i> protected by fair use laws.

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>
December 3, 2004 7:36:33 AM

The thing that pissed me off was I thought I was buying a game that I could take home load and play. I didn't get that. I wanted to play the game on a PC that will never be online. I didn't get that. Nowhere on the box is it clearly written that you have to have a steam account. I took it back and actually got money back for opened software that was against their policy (Meijer's) when I explained this to the section mgr.

Gort, Klaatu nicto barada...Patricia Neal
!