Bot issues

[Goji1639]

I guess I'm not the only one here that doesn't understand contract law. It seems you and I are in the same boat.

But you're just taking this around in circles and moving the goalpost, so if you could provide me with a written statement from someone at SE stating that they "know their ability to terminate your access to their service is restricted by contract law" and all that, that would be great. I'm just stating what's in the user agreement, but you seem to speak for SE themselves, so if this is a legal matter, why not back it up with a statement from them? Or do you not have access to that? Then maybe you should leave the assumptions at home or maybe taking one more contract law class for good measure.

There's nothing illegal about terminating your account if they feel like it. You agreed to allow them to do it. If it was illegal I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be able to put it in their user agreement, I would think. Weird that you play and sub to a game that breaks the law, though. Does that mean you're breaking the law by agreeing to it? I don't know, I'm not a lawyer like you.

As for the slave labour thing, I read the agreement before signing. It's not that long. And if you have time to argue about this, you have time to read it too. I suggest you do.

Back up your claims with real facts and not conjecture. My defence is the user agreement itself. All you have is opinions, it seems.

SE isn't going to release a written statement that they're bound by contract law. All businesses are bound by contract law; it's common knowledge. These protections are exactly why you can't accidentally "sign" yourself into slavery, just because page 200 in a 500 page contract had a "slave" clause you missed.

The problem is that you, and many others, don't actually understand how contracts work.

I think the specific wording of the ToS is SE kind of taking advantage of that fact. It's amazing to me that you honestly believe SE can take your money for $100's in promissory digital services, and then just refuse you access to those services for absolutely no reason. I wonder how many people lost accounts for no reason, and didn't even bother to contest it because they thought clicking "agree" on something made stealing from them perfectly legal.

[Doozer]

It's amazing to me that you honestly believe SE can take your money for $100's of promissory digital services, and just refuse you access to those services for absolutely no reason. I wonder how many people lost accounts for no reason, and didn't even bother to contest it because they thought clicking "agree" on something made stealing from them perfectly legal.

Oh good. Now I know you didn't read it. That makes leaving you to your ignorance a lot easier.

By the way, I'll repeat it again, in the agreement it says,

YOU ACQUIRE NO OWNERSHIP OR PROPERTY RIGHTS IN ANY CHARACTER OR OTHER IN-GAME VIRTUAL GOOD, AND ARE ONLY LICENSED TO USE SUCH CHARACTERS AND ASSETS ASSOCIATED WITH YOUR FFXIV SERVICE ACCOUNT SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THE AGREEMENTS. YOU AGREE THAT YOUR FFXIV SERVICE ACCOUNT AND ANY VIRTUAL GOODS AND CHARACTERS DO NOT HAVE ANY MONETARY VALUE. SQUARE ENIX MAY SUSPEND, TERMINATE, MODIFY, OR DELETE FFXIV SERVICE ACCOUNTS, CHARACTERS, VIRTUAL GOODS, OR THE SERVICE ALTOGETHER, AT ANY TIME FOR ANY REASON OR FOR NO REASON, WITH OR WITHOUT NOTICE OR LIABILITY TO YOU.

It's not "$100's of promissory digital services" because those things have no monetary value if you sign the agreement. Which you did. Ponder on that, because clearly I could copy and paste the whole agreement here and you would still say "uhhh I can't read, take a class on contract law please".

This is getting off topic anyway. Let's just move on. I'm getting tired of this. I can only show you the agreement in question so many times before it gets irritating that you're not even trying. You can argue against this, but I won't be here to see it.

[Goji1639]

Oh good. Now I know you didn't read it. That makes leaving you to your ignorance a lot easier.

By the way, I'll repeat it again, in the agreement it says,



It's not "$100's of promissory digital services" because those things have no monetary value if you sign the agreement. Which you did. Ponder on that, because clearly I could copy and paste the whole agreement here and you would still say "uhhh I can't read, take a class on contract law please".

This is getting off topic anyway. Let's just move on. I'm getting tired of this. I can only show you the agreement in question so many times before it gets irritating that you're not even trying. You can argue against this, but I won't be here to see it.

The items and characters have no monetary value, but your access to them does. Access to all of the digital content you paid for is the "$100's of promissory digital service," SE is supposed to be providing you for your money. Taking your money and yet denying you access "for no reason," is not legal.

You read the ToS, but you don't really understand what it's saying or what a contract actually is. Everything written in a contract has implied restrictions set by contract law. Being written in a contract doesn't make things like theft, slavery, murder, etc. legal. SE KNOWS that their ToS would NEVER hold up if they just took your money and "for no reason" decided not to provide you the service you paid for.

[Ultimatecalibur]

Oh good. Now I know you didn't read it. That makes leaving you to your ignorance a lot easier.

By the way, I'll repeat it again, in the agreement it says,



It's not "$100's of promissory digital services" because those things have no monetary value if you sign the agreement. Which you did. Ponder on that, because clearly I could copy and paste the whole agreement here and you would still say "uhhh I can't read, take a class on contract law please".

This is getting off topic anyway. Let's just move on. I'm getting tired of this. I can only show you the agreement in question so many times before it gets irritating that you're not even trying. You can argue against this, but I won't be here to see it.

I believe that clause is there to protect SE from liability if something required or forced them to delete characters and accounts. Without that clause there SE is open for a lawsuit if an accident or malicious action destroys the character/account data or SE decides to prune inactive accounts and characters. That clause limits the possibility of a lawsuit if anything modified or removed character/account data.

Someone could still sue, but it would be much more of an uphill battle.