Handling Cheaters Gracefully vs Hardline ToS + Questionable legality of bans

[StealthPaladin]

You have a version of me in your mind that does not exist. Plus, there are many factual errors in what you have just said. There are also problems of "not even being wrong".

No individual has won a lawsuit after a permanent ban against a company.

No records of those lawsuits ever winning because while you keep saying TOS.

Not sure what the rest of this statement was supposed to be, but there are plenty of cases which set the precedent outlined. Though winning is not even the issue. To say that is somewhat revealing of a lack of understanding.

The ultimate one you click agree on, which does hold up legally, the EULA...

No. Only terms the court holds valid are valid. For any agreement, but as I pointed out the standard is far stricter for the type of software SE has. There is no point trying to convince anyone -- we are the judge of future attempts to take them to trial. Your argument that "oh it IS legally binding" doesn't matter. A lawyer convincing a judge that they should at least go to trial is all that matters. Not winning or losing, not what the ToS say not any of that.

Those are tools SE's lawyers use to say hey, lets dismiss the case look its in our ToS and our EULA. That doesn't mean the court is going to do it.

Oy... so tiring. ok here. Look a lot of this revolves around developments with what's known as the FAA regarding Supreme Court various rulings on arbitration and class action clauses especially. State courts, especially California but many states -- not cut across any political line, are finding ways to get around FAA and deny such clauses.

You can absolutely find records of such cases by doing citation-based searches. Look for recent cases citing any of these:
Buckeye Check Cashing v. Cardegna
Brewer v. Mo. Title Loans
Smith v. Nobiletti Builders, Inc
Figueroa v. THI of N.M. at Casa Arena Blanca LLC
Glob. Client Sols., LLC v. Ossello
Narayan v. Ritz-Carlton Dev. Co


That's ONE side, state courts treating class action clauses in many different ways. There are at least 5 often used major workarounds that effectively still end up triggering class action or equivalent. For example sometimes they just find that a choice-of-law clause in an arbitration agreement incorporates state law contrary to the FAA. They may use qui tam or a district known to be soft on unconscionability arguments. So many cases which do not go as expected

Then there's how the FTC fits into the FAA: sort of complimentary, sort of unrelated, sort of conflicting. Not well planned. If the FTC gets interested in a situation it gets very complicated. If a company is even edging on maybe violating some FTC rules, lower courts can use it in all kinds of ways. We would have to have a very long conversation to explain why the FTC cares about the client/server product/subscription model and digital assets. It is out there, if you want to find it you can find it.