DUST Search - UK/EU consumer protection regulations

All Channels

General Discussions

UK/EU consumer protection regulations

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1106	Posted - 2014.05.06 17:33:00 - [1] - Quote UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations.
Force Seventrum Negative-Impact The East India Co. 16	Posted - 2014.05.06 17:35:00 - [2] - Quote Getting some popcorn! Green Light EVE:Legion!
Mobius Wyvern Ahrendee Mercenaries Dirt Nap Squad. 5212	Posted - 2014.05.06 17:35:00 - [3] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Self-entitled man-child post. Nothing to see here.
Chunky Munkey Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 4409	Posted - 2014.05.06 17:37:00 - [4] - Quote Lmao. Well f*cking done Ryme. Let's see the EULA cheerleaders respond to this. RIP Stinky Sleeve. RIP Dust514. See you on Destiny. PSN: GSDSteVB
Hin Raven Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 34	Posted - 2014.05.06 17:37:00 - [5] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3[/url wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available ]here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. Never happen
Chunky Munkey Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 4409	Posted - 2014.05.06 17:38:00 - [6] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Self-entitled man-child post. Nothing to see here. Not sure if trolling or serious. RIP Stinky Sleeve. RIP Dust514. See you on Destiny. PSN: GSDSteVB
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1106	Posted - 2014.05.06 17:38:00 - [7] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Self-entitled man-child post. Nothing to see here. Learn2Law
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1108	Posted - 2014.05.06 17:47:00 - [8] - Quote Hin Raven wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3[/url wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available ]here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. Never happen This is the actual law. It already happened (in 2008).
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 14739	Posted - 2014.05.06 17:49:00 - [9] - Quote Popcorns* I wonder if the law applies to both parners of the trade? CPM 0 Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior, Annoying Artist \\= Advanced Caldari Assault // Unlocked
Chunky Munkey Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 4415	Posted - 2014.05.06 17:50:00 - [10] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Mobius Wyvern wrote: Self-entitled man-child post. Learn2Law Don't forget these guys are probably American. They aren't used to having actual consumer protection laws. RIP Stinky Sleeve. RIP Dust514. See you on Destiny. PSN: GSDSteVB

Isaa Quade Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 477	Posted - 2014.05.06 17:51:00 - [11] - Quote Look, while CCP's behavior has been absolutely despicable, I highly doubt theres a legal case against them. That being said, I would sort of like one of you to ACTUALLY file instead of just bitching about it on the forums. It would at least be interesting. My reaction to Legion
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 14739	Posted - 2014.05.06 17:55:00 - [12] - Quote Chunky Munkey wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Mobius Wyvern wrote: Self-entitled man-child post. Learn2Law Don't forget these guys are probably American. They aren't used to having actual consumer protection laws. True we sue for just about everY reason if there is a chance to win that case, we have starving lawyers in the states. CPM 0 Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior, Annoying Artist \\= Advanced Caldari Assault // Unlocked
Chunky Munkey Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 4415	Posted - 2014.05.06 17:58:00 - [13] - Quote Isaa Quade wrote: Look, while CCP's behavior has been absolutely despicable, I highly doubt theres a legal case against them. That being said, I would sort of like one of you to ACTUALLY file instead of just bitching about it on the forums. It would at least be interesting. There wouldn't be a lawsuit, not unless CCP or Sony wanted to contest the refund of a few hundred quids worth of Aurum packs from the store. RIP Stinky Sleeve. RIP Dust514. See you on Destiny. PSN: GSDSteVB
843 Epidemic BurgezzE.T.F General Tso's Alliance 1031	Posted - 2014.05.06 18:01:00 - [14] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. LAW BABY When Dust is ashes, then you will have my permission to Dance.
Jastaddd Death seeker NegativeKDR 43	Posted - 2014.05.06 18:02:00 - [15] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Popcorns* I wonder if the law applies to both parners of the trade? Don't matter, if you SELL in my country and i have a Consumer protect LAW , your country LAW can go **** themselves. We have many problem in Italy, but EU law are pretty strict on consumer right. Thats why here in europe Apple products have 2 year warranty for free.
Isaa Quade Namtar Elite Gallente Federation 478	Posted - 2014.05.06 18:03:00 - [16] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Chunky Munkey wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Mobius Wyvern wrote: Self-entitled man-child post. Learn2Law Don't forget these guys are probably American. They aren't used to having actual consumer protection laws. True we sue for just about everY reason if there is a chance to win that case, we have starving lawyers in the states. Except when there is coal ash in our rivers or pet coke in our air. Then there isn't legal punishment in sight My reaction to Legion
Pushing Charlie 12	Posted - 2014.05.06 18:15:00 - [17] - Quote I e-mailed Sony asking for a refund three days ago, they said they were busy and haven't replied yet. /SCEECustomerSupport Knight Soiaire
Jax Saurian GunFall Mobilization 219	Posted - 2014.05.06 18:28:00 - [18] - Quote I'm just gonna leave
NomaDz 2K The Rainbow Effect 168	Posted - 2014.05.06 18:39:00 - [19] - Quote God Save the Queen 1. God save our gracious Queen Long live our noble Queen God save the Queen Send her victorious Happy and glorious Long to reign over us God save the Queen 2. O Lord our God arise Scatter her enemies And make them fall Confound their politics Frustrate their knavish tricks On Thee our hopes we fix God save us all 3. Thy choicest gifts in store On her be pleased to pour Long may she reign May she defend our laws And ever give us cause To sing with heart and voice God save the Queen 4. Not in this land alone But be God's mercies known From shore to shore Lord make the nations see That men should brothers be And form one family The wide world over 5. From every latent foe From the assassins blow God save the Queen O'er her thine arm extend For Britain's sake defend Our mother, prince, and friend God save the Queen DON'T SPEND CA$H ON DUST 514 CCP WILL ONLY GIVE YOU AUR AFTER THEY REMOVE YOUR BPOs WHICH U SPENT REAL MONGé¼Y ON!
NomaDz 2K The Rainbow Effect 172	Posted - 2014.05.06 18:50:00 - [20] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca U make me so proud, DON'T SPEND CA$H ON DUST 514 CCP WILL ONLY GIVE YOU AUR AFTER THEY REMOVE YOUR BPOs WHICH U SPENT REAL MONGé¼Y ON!

CEOPyrex CloneA The Unholy Legion Of DarkStar DARKSTAR ARMY 697	Posted - 2014.05.06 18:58:00 - [21] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. Oh dear..... good luck with that. (Sony will tell you to talk to CCP and CCP are based in Iceland, which as im sure you all know isnt in the EU) Jus Sayin bro
Jastaddd Death seeker NegativeKDR 46	Posted - 2014.05.06 19:11:00 - [22] - Quote CEOPyrex CloneA wrote: Oh dear..... good luck with that. (Sony will tell you to talk to CCP and CCP are based in Iceland, which as im sure you all know isnt in the EU) Jus Sayin bro EU Law make clear that the first responsible for Warranty is who sell the "final product" not who build it. But the seller can choose the "less worst" solution. Sorry if i'm unclear, as you can understand english is not my first language Thats why Sony is refunding people with PSN cash
NomaDz 2K The Rainbow Effect 175	Posted - 2014.05.06 19:11:00 - [23] - Quote CEOPyrex CloneA wrote: Oh dear..... good luck with that. (Sony will tell you to talk to CCP and CCP are based in Iceland, which as im sure you all know isnt in the EU) Jus Sayin bro Luck has nothing to do with it but FACTS and the fact that PSN is in the EU and UK but nice try m8, u working on gettin a CCP LEGION BETA Nice try though m8 DON'T SPEND CA$H ON DUST 514 CCP WILL ONLY GIVE YOU AUR AFTER THEY REMOVE YOUR BPOs WHICH U SPENT REAL MONGé¼Y ON!
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7976	Posted - 2014.05.06 19:12:00 - [24] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: Apologist gargling on CCP's [expletive] Nothing to see here. inb4 The Lock!
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7976	Posted - 2014.05.06 19:16:00 - [25] - Quote CEOPyrex CloneA wrote: Oh dear..... good luck with that. (Sony will tell you to talk to CCP and CCP are based in Iceland, which as im sure you all know isnt in the EU) Jus Sayin bro Politically, yes it is. Though the purchase(s) were made in the UK, so its still fair game. inb4 The Lock!
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1119	Posted - 2014.05.06 19:16:00 - [26] - Quote CEOPyrex CloneA wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. Oh dear..... good luck with that. (Sony will tell you to talk to CCP and CCP are based in Iceland, which as im sure you all know isnt in the EU) Jus Sayin bro If you trade in a country you are subject to its laws. It's really not hard to grasp.
Nazz'Dragg Chemical Renegades Inc. 28	Posted - 2014.05.06 19:22:00 - [27] - Quote CEOPyrex CloneA wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. Oh dear..... good luck with that. (Sony will tell you to talk to CCP and CCP are based in Iceland, which as im sure you all know isnt in the EU) Jus Sayin bro Ah but Iceland wants to be part of the European Economic Area, which means that Iceland and by extent CCP will need to conform with EU law. I myself look forward to this outcome with batted breath. DUST is not dead yet. But it soon will be.
R F Gyro Clones 4u 1372	Posted - 2014.05.06 19:22:00 - [28] - Quote I'd be reasonably confident that the law would be applied to each purchase, rather than to all your Dust purchases as a whole. So you paid for Aurum, and got Aurum, as described in the product literature. Or you paid for a booster, and got that. What you probably haven't done, in the eyes of the law, is paid for Dust itself based on any kind of binding longevity promise. However, its probably worth at least writing a letter to Sony/CCP asking for a refund if its important to you. RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
NomaDz 2K The Rainbow Effect 175	Posted - 2014.05.06 19:23:00 - [29] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: If you trade in a country you are subject to its laws. It's really not hard to grasp. Yep and not to mention that we are also protected by british laws even abroad because we are Royal Subjects DON'T SPEND CA$H ON DUST 514 CCP WILL ONLY GIVE YOU AUR AFTER THEY REMOVE YOUR BPOs WHICH U SPENT REAL MONGé¼Y ON!
DaReaperPW Net 7 The Last Brigade 6	Posted - 2014.05.06 19:27:00 - [30] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. How did they mislead you? How was the information provided misleading? And you do know that they said devlopment of dust will keep going, so that pretty much nullifies any law suite you have. You do remember that just because you found a random law, that you have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you were mislead. From what i know, however, you were not. Spending money, and assuming its going to devlope and add new things to dust, was on you. Unless ccp told you, spacificly, that if you but this stuff it will bring you XXX then you were not misled. Case dismissed you lose.

Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7982	Posted - 2014.05.06 19:30:00 - [31] - Quote How did they mislead us? Just read this thread. inb4 The Lock!
NomaDz 2K The Rainbow Effect 175	Posted - 2014.05.06 19:31:00 - [32] - Quote DaReaperPW wrote: How did they mislead you? How was the information provided misleading? And you do know that they said devlopment of dust will keep going, so that pretty much nullifies any law suite you have. You do remember that just because you found a random law, that you have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you were mislead. From what i know, however, you were not. Spending money, and assuming its going to devlope and add new things to dust, was on you. Unless ccp told you, spacificly, that if you but this stuff it will bring you XXX then you were not misled. Case dismissed you lose. People have already been refunded based upon THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH SO HELP ME GOD - AMEN DON'T SPEND CA$H ON DUST 514 CCP WILL ONLY GIVE YOU AUR AFTER THEY REMOVE YOUR BPOs WHICH U SPENT REAL MONGé¼Y ON!
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1119	Posted - 2014.05.06 19:37:00 - [33] - Quote R F Gyro wrote: I'd be reasonably confident that the law would be applied to each purchase, rather than to all your Dust purchases as a whole. So you paid for Aurum, and got Aurum, as described in the product literature. Or you paid for a booster, and got that. What you probably haven't done, in the eyes of the law, is paid for Dust itself based on any kind of binding longevity promise. "A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision". So the outlines of a case would be: 1. Over the last several months CCP provided misleading information/deceptively presented information (e.g. 'laser-focused on PS3'). 2. This resulted in consumers making different decisions than they otherwise would (e.g. to buy AUR). 3. Therefore, a misleading action has occurred and consumer protection regulations have been breached. There is no need for any 'binding longevity promise' or anything of the sort. All that is required is that misleading/deceptively presented information was provided at some stage, which materially impacted on consumers' decisions.
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1122	Posted - 2014.05.06 19:43:00 - [34] - Quote DaReaperPW wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. How did they mislead you? How was the information provided misleading? And you do know that they said devlopment of dust will keep going, so that pretty much nullifies any law suite you have. You do remember that just because you found a random law, that you have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you were mislead. From what i know, however, you were not. Spending money, and assuming its going to devlope and add new things to dust, was on you. Unless ccp told you, spacificly, that if you but this stuff it will bring you XXX then you were not misled. Case dismissed you lose. 'Laser-focused on PS3' - somewhat misleading, no? Regarding reasonable doubt, that standard is only required in criminal cases. The standard in civil cases is the balance of probabilities. I get the impression that I have a rather firmer grasp of UK law than you do.
NomaDz 2K The Rainbow Effect 176	Posted - 2014.05.06 19:43:00 - [35] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: R F Gyro wrote: I'd be reasonably confident that the law would be applied to each purchase, rather than to all your Dust purchases as a whole. So you paid for Aurum, and got Aurum, as described in the product literature. Or you paid for a booster, and got that. What you probably haven't done, in the eyes of the law, is paid for Dust itself based on any kind of binding longevity promise. "A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision". So the outlines of a case would be: 1. Over the last several months CCP provided misleading information/deceptively presented information (e.g. 'laser-focused on PS3'). 2. This resulted in consumers making different decisions than they otherwise would (e.g. to buy AUR). 3. Therefore, a misleading action has occurred and consumer protection regulations have been breached. There is no need for any 'binding longevity promise' or anything of the sort. All that is required is that misleading/deceptively presented information was provided at some stage, which materially impacted on consumers' decisions. Ryme U Make Me Feel Like SUCH AN ASSISTANT P.I.M.P :D DON'T SPEND CA$H ON DUST 514 CCP WILL ONLY GIVE YOU AUR AFTER THEY REMOVE YOUR BPOs WHICH U SPENT REAL MONGé¼Y ON!
DaReaperPW Net 7 The Last Brigade 6	Posted - 2014.05.06 19:54:00 - [36] - Quote NomaDz 2K wrote: DaReaperPW wrote: How did they mislead you? How was the information provided misleading? And you do know that they said devlopment of dust will keep going, so that pretty much nullifies any law suite you have. You do remember that just because you found a random law, that you have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you were mislead. From what i know, however, you were not. Spending money, and assuming its going to devlope and add new things to dust, was on you. Unless ccp told you, spacificly, that if you but this stuff it will bring you XXX then you were not misled. Case dismissed you lose. People have already been refunded based upon THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH SO HELP ME GOD - AMEN no, you prolly got refunded due to sonys return policy.
Ryder Azorria Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 899	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:02:00 - [37] - Quote Yes these laws exist, only problem is CCP didn't breach them - which you would see if you weren't in the midst of a toddler style tantrum.
DaReaperPW Net 7 The Last Brigade 7	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:02:00 - [38] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: DaReaperPW wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. How did they mislead you? How was the information provided misleading? And you do know that they said devlopment of dust will keep going, so that pretty much nullifies any law suite you have. You do remember that just because you found a random law, that you have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you were mislead. From what i know, however, you were not. Spending money, and assuming its going to devlope and add new things to dust, was on you. Unless ccp told you, spacificly, that if you but this stuff it will bring you XXX then you were not misled. Case dismissed you lose. 'Laser-focused on PS3' - somewhat misleading, no? Regarding reasonable doubt, that standard is only required in criminal cases. The standard in civil cases is the balance of probabilities. I get the impression that I have a rather firmer grasp of UK law than you do. No, thats called marketing jargon. And because they looked at what dust was and changed stratigies thats on them. This is like you buying a pinto and expecting ford to make a pinto mark two, so you bought the pinto thinking they will use the money to get you a pinto, if they can the pinto, well thats your problem. You can play dust, even if they told you they were going to bring stuff soon(tm) and are lazor focused on ps3, at the time of said statement they prolly were lazor focused on ps3. Then they decided as a company to change gears. They do not need to tell you they are changing gears. As you are playing dust because its dust. If you are playing dust for the hope of what it might be, then thats on you. As you have to look at the product at face value. Unless they said "We are bringing you the player market on may 14th 2014, so but your gear now to prepair for that" That is a misleading statement. And a flat out lie. its also used as bait for you to spend your money. On the contrary, if you went to get into dust and one of the things on the offical website, by an offical member of ccp said "Dust has a fully functioning player market! come spend XXX to use it" and you bought dust and aurum for that reason, before you got into the game, then you have a case. It doesn;t matter if they tell you that you will be gods soon(tm) and able to fire lazor beams out your butt. As long as they don;t give you an explicite date you still lose. A promise =! a guarentee. Thats the difference. And its a free game, you CHOSE to spend money. If you did not do your research into what CCP has stated for eve, and failed to deliver, thats on you. So again, none of this was misleading to anyone. For all they have to do, is show a memo saying in march they are focused on ps3, then another in april givin the reasons why they have to get off the ps3. And they are fine. as 'lazor focused' is just a marketing tool. So can you show where they said "Hey guys, you are getting XXX on this exact date yyy" and because of this information, you went out and bought aurum? One more point. If you coudl sue for marketing terms, there are a ton of game companies you can sue. You can;t however, as there was no spacifics. What does 'lazor focused on ps3' mean? And the fact is, if they keep making updates that they can for dust, then they are technically lazor focused.
PR0FESSOR CHAOS Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 40	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:04:00 - [39] - Quote Sony is responsible for all transactions on their network laugh as you may but legal action is being brought on Sony regarding this issue. I suspect sony will settle all disputes and internally deal with CCP. Sony is taking this very serious they understand the value of consumer confidence and have built the playstation brand on that principle. They do not want there reputation dragged through the mud based on a third party developer. Good. Use your aggressive feelings, boy. Let the hate flow through you.
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7985	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:04:00 - [40] - Quote Actually, they did give a explicit time. 10 Years. inb4 The Lock!

Ryder Azorria Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 899	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:06:00 - [41] - Quote PR0FESSOR CHAOS wrote: Sony is responsible for all transactions on their network laugh as you may but legal action is being brought on Sony regarding this issue. I suspect sony will settle all disputes and internally deal with CCP. Sony is taking this very serious they understand the value of consumer confidence and have built the playstation brand on that principle. They do not want there reputation dragged through the mud based on ~~a third party developer~~ overly entitled neckbeards throwing a hissy fit FTFY
DaReaperPW Net 7 The Last Brigade 7	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:08:00 - [42] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: R F Gyro wrote: I'd be reasonably confident that the law would be applied to each purchase, rather than to all your Dust purchases as a whole. So you paid for Aurum, and got Aurum, as described in the product literature. Or you paid for a booster, and got that. What you probably haven't done, in the eyes of the law, is paid for Dust itself based on any kind of binding longevity promise. "A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision". So the outlines of a case would be: 1. Over the last several months CCP provided misleading information/deceptively presented information (e.g. 'laser-focused on PS3'). 2. This resulted in consumers making different decisions than they otherwise would (e.g. to buy AUR). 3. Therefore, a misleading action has occurred and consumer protection regulations have been breached. There is no need for any 'binding longevity promise' or anything of the sort. All that is required is that misleading/deceptively presented information was provided at some stage, which materially impacted on consumers' decisions. Except again, the term lazor focused, means nothing. You have to show where they spacificly mislead you. So if you went to buy a car, because the ad had a line from a car magizine that said 'Funest car i ever drove..." and you bought the car and drove it and it sucked, were you mislead? no. You would however be mislead of said car was said to have a V8 and the sales people assured you that yes it had a v8, and the paperwork and documents all said it had a v8, but once you had the car and drove it off the lot you realized that no it has a v4. Then you have a case.
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7985	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:10:00 - [43] - Quote Ryder Azorria wrote: PR0FESSOR CHAOS wrote: Sony is responsible for all transactions on their network laugh as you may but legal action is being brought on Sony regarding this issue. I suspect sony will settle all disputes and internally deal with CCP. Sony is taking this very serious they understand the value of consumer confidence and have built the playstation brand on that principle. They do not want there reputation dragged through the mud based on ~~a third party developer~~ overly entitled neckbeards throwing a hissy fit FTFY So expecting companies to follow the law is overly entitled? I really hope you never run for a political office that holds power... inb4 The Lock!
Ryder Azorria Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 899	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:10:00 - [44] - Quote Atiim wrote: Actually, they did give a explicit time. 10 Years. Saying you have a ten year plan for a game and providing no other details of said plan is not a legally binding commitment to follow through with said plan, nor is it a commitment not to change platforms. And incase you live in some fantasy land where the case goes in your favour ('Merica), enjoy your refund of the full retail cost of the game $0.00. EDIT: Atiim wrote: Ryder Azorria wrote: PR0FESSOR CHAOS wrote: Sony is responsible for all transactions on their network laugh as you may but legal action is being brought on Sony regarding this issue. I suspect sony will settle all disputes and internally deal with CCP. Sony is taking this very serious they understand the value of consumer confidence and have built the playstation brand on that principle. They do not want there reputation dragged through the mud based on ~~a third party developer~~ overly entitled neckbeards throwing a hissy fit FTFY So expecting companies to follow the law is overly entitled? I really hope you never run for a political office that holds power... They. Did. You're either horribly twisting CCPs actions to the point of fiction in order to make them violate those laws, or you're horribly twisting the laws to fit CCPs actions - probably a little of both.
PR0FESSOR CHAOS Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 40	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:11:00 - [45] - Quote Playstation has built a reputation for having the best exclusive titles that are quality products. Franchises like killzone , uncharted, little big planet have won game of the year and are exclusive. Trust me sony wants dust to succeed to put them on that pedistal but not if it's not capable of standing on its own. They will not let CCP pr machine tarnish that image. Good. Use your aggressive feelings, boy. Let the hate flow through you.
DaReaperPW Net 7 The Last Brigade 7	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:15:00 - [46] - Quote Atiim wrote: Actually, they did give a explicit time. 10 Years. no they didn't. That is again, marketing jargon. So can you sue Black Phrophacys devolper for killing an mmo that bombed becuase they said there will be updates for years to come? no. Did you spcaificly buy aurum, becuase of the 'we will devlope for ps3 for 10 years' if you did then i think i have a bridge to show you. as anyone with since would of looked at that and gone 'wait the ps4 just came out...
R F Gyro Clones 4u 1372	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:16:00 - [47] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: R F Gyro wrote: I'd be reasonably confident that the law would be applied to each purchase, rather than to all your Dust purchases as a whole. So you paid for Aurum, and got Aurum, as described in the product literature. Or you paid for a booster, and got that. What you probably haven't done, in the eyes of the law, is paid for Dust itself based on any kind of binding longevity promise. "A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision". So the outlines of a case would be: 1. Over the last several months CCP provided misleading information/deceptively presented information (e.g. 'laser-focused on PS3'). 2. This resulted in consumers making different decisions than they otherwise would (e.g. to buy AUR). 3. Therefore, a misleading action has occurred and consumer protection regulations have been breached. There is no need for any 'binding longevity promise' or anything of the sort. All that is required is that misleading/deceptively presented information was provided at some stage, which materially impacted on consumers' decisions. You could well be right. Personally I still doubt it would work out like that if it were tested in court, but even if you could convince me it still wouldn't matter. What you need to do is convince Sony/CCP that there is enough of a risk that you're right that they decide to avoid that risk by paying you off. Or, you need to be so convinced yourself that you are willing to pay the price of litigating it. RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
PR0FESSOR CHAOS Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 40	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:18:00 - [48] - Quote There are enough materials on the dust514 website, psn store descriptions, npe tutorials, and CCP press releases and media to more then prove fraud right now. My guess is you will see a white wash of all information currently available to a new player and replace it with ambiguous speak. I challenge you to take your CCP glasses off right now, pretend your a new. Start by reading the dust514 website, then load the game and pay attention to everything because your new, then watch fanfest presentation on dust514. Dafuq basic fraud. Good. Use your aggressive feelings, boy. Let the hate flow through you.
Mojo XXXIII Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 279	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:19:00 - [49] - Quote DaReaperPW wrote: Atiim wrote: Actually, they did give a explicit time. 10 Years. no they didn't. That is again, marketing jargon. So can you sue Black Phrophacys devolper for killing an mmo that bombed becuase they said there will be updates for years to come? no. Did you spcaificly buy aurum, becuase of the 'we will devlope for ps3 for 10 years' if you did then i think i have a bridge to show you. as anyone with since would of looked at that and gone 'wait the ps4 just came out... Again, CCP knew exactly where the PS3 was in the console life cycle, and that PS4 was right around the corner, and yet they made their promises anyway. Our only mistake was believing them.
Operative 1125 Lokaas True Companion Planetary Requisitions 91	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:21:00 - [50] - Quote People don't realize that in America, CCP most likely could be prosecuted for there product misrepresentation. Of course, this is why they don't set one foot in America with DUST 514 and pretty much not with EVE (not sure about what they have going at their California office). Maybe if it was WoD there would have been legal recourse. I'm assuming that though the company has satellite offices in America it can't be prosecuted through those since the game and company HQ is in Iceland and China. If there is any possibility I'd love any lawyer types to find the loophole. "We watch what they (players) do, not what they say" -Hilmar

Byozuma Kegawa Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 255	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:23:00 - [51] - Quote Not that I care what CCP does, so long as it's something, but I find all this backlash to be hysterically depressing. Ever since the PS4 came out people have been clamoring, "Drop the PS3, move to PS4!" and "Give us a PC port!" Well, look at that, Dust is being redeveloped and rebranded as Eve Legion (because a straight port would have been impossible thanks to Dust being developed to use the PS3's specific architecture and software) and will be on the PC (and maybe the PS4 afterwards) and everyone is shitting bricks between rage-fests. "Is this not what you wanted? Are you not entertained?!"
PR0FESSOR CHAOS Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 40	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:25:00 - [52] - Quote Again it doesn't matter where you are and where Iceland is, every country that sells playstation has consumer protection laws. You bought services from Sony that are fraudulent it's between you and Sony, they will sort CCP out on there own accord. Everyone here can make claim against Sony no matter where they live. Good. Use your aggressive feelings, boy. Let the hate flow through you.
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1127	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:27:00 - [53] - Quote DaReaperPW wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: DaReaperPW wrote: How did they mislead you? How was the information provided misleading? And you do know that they said devlopment of dust will keep going, so that pretty much nullifies any law suite you have. You do remember that just because you found a random law, that you have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you were mislead. From what i know, however, you were not. Spending money, and assuming its going to devlope and add new things to dust, was on you. Unless ccp told you, spacificly, that if you but this stuff it will bring you XXX then you were not misled. Case dismissed you lose. 'Laser-focused on PS3' - somewhat misleading, no? Regarding reasonable doubt, that standard is only required in criminal cases. The standard in civil cases is the balance of probabilities. I get the impression that I have a rather firmer grasp of UK law than you do. No, thats called marketing jargon. And because they looked at what dust was and changed stratigies thats on them. This is like you buying a pinto and expecting ford to make a pinto mark two, so you bought the pinto thinking they will use the money to get you a pinto, if they can the pinto, well thats your problem. You can play dust, even if they told you they were going to bring stuff soon(tm) and are lazor focused on ps3, at the time of said statement they prolly were lazor focused on ps3. Then they decided as a company to change gears. They do not need to tell you they are changing gears. As you are playing dust because its dust. If you are playing dust for the hope of what it might be, then thats on you. As you have to look at the product at face value. Unless they said "We are bringing you the player market on may 14th 2014, so but your gear now to prepair for that" That is a misleading statement. And a flat out lie. its also used as bait for you to spend your money. On the contrary, if you went to get into dust and one of the things on the offical website, by an offical member of ccp said "Dust has a fully functioning player market! come spend XXX to use it" and you bought dust and aurum for that reason, before you got into the game, then you have a case. It doesn;t matter if they tell you that you will be gods soon(tm) and able to fire lazor beams out your butt. As long as they don;t give you an explicite date you still lose. A promise =! a guarentee. Thats the difference. And its a free game, you CHOSE to spend money. If you did not do your research into what CCP has stated for eve, and failed to deliver, thats on you. So again, none of this was misleading to anyone. For all they have to do, is show a memo saying in march they are focused on ps3, then another in april givin the reasons why they have to get off the ps3. And they are fine. as 'lazor focused' is just a marketing tool. So can you show where they said "Hey guys, you are getting XXX on this exact date yyy" and because of this information, you went out and bought aurum? One more point. If you coudl sue for marketing terms, there are a ton of game companies you can sue. You can;t however, as there was no spacifics. What does 'lazor focused on ps3' mean? And the fact is, if they keep making updates that they can for dust, then they are technically lazor focused. Incredible stuff! Keep it coming, Kavanagh QC. I've put a few highlights in bold. There is no requirement of a specific date in order for an action to be misleading. There is no special exemption for 'marketing jargon'. The fact that the company in question has failed to deliver on promises previously is no defence, obviously. Are you, by any chance, CCP's in-house counsel?
DaReaperPW Net 7 The Last Brigade 7	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:27:00 - [54] - Quote Atiim wrote: How did they mislead us? Just read this thread. promises =! guarentee.
PR0FESSOR CHAOS Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 40	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:32:00 - [55] - Quote If you are serious about pursuing legal recourse Mark Kahlil is the executive Vice President Sony and lead Legal Council his office is currently preparing. Good luck mark you'll need it. Good. Use your aggressive feelings, boy. Let the hate flow through you.
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1127	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:34:00 - [56] - Quote R F Gyro wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: R F Gyro wrote: I'd be reasonably confident that the law would be applied to each purchase, rather than to all your Dust purchases as a whole. So you paid for Aurum, and got Aurum, as described in the product literature. Or you paid for a booster, and got that. What you probably haven't done, in the eyes of the law, is paid for Dust itself based on any kind of binding longevity promise. "A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision". So the outlines of a case would be: 1. Over the last several months CCP provided misleading information/deceptively presented information (e.g. 'laser-focused on PS3'). 2. This resulted in consumers making different decisions than they otherwise would (e.g. to buy AUR). 3. Therefore, a misleading action has occurred and consumer protection regulations have been breached. There is no need for any 'binding longevity promise' or anything of the sort. All that is required is that misleading/deceptively presented information was provided at some stage, which materially impacted on consumers' decisions. You could well be right. Personally I still doubt it would work out like that if it were tested in court, but even if you could convince me it still wouldn't matter. What you need to do is convince Sony/CCP that there is enough of a risk that you're right that they decide to avoid that risk by paying you off. Or, you need to be so convinced yourself that you are willing to pay the price of litigating it. The beautiful thing is that there's no cost to litigating it. You just make a complaint to Citizens Advice who pass it on to Trading Standards to investigate. They will enforce as they see fit and provide compensation where appropriate. I should emphasize that you should try to get money back from CCP/Sony before you try this. Citizens Advice may require that you do that before you go to them.
Ender Storm Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 75	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:38:00 - [57] - Quote This community is funny.
Atiim Heaven's Lost Property Dirt Nap Squad. 7992	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:43:00 - [58] - Quote DaReaperPW wrote: promises =! guarentee. Not according to Meriam-Webster's Dictionary Promise wrote: a declaration that one will do or refrain from doing something specified a legally binding declaration that gives the person to whom it is made a right to expect or to claim the performance or forbearance of a specified act reason to expect something [little promise of relief]; especially : ground for expectation of success, improvement, or excellence [shows considerable promise] Your Turn. inb4 The Lock!
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1127	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:44:00 - [59] - Quote Operative 1125 Lokaas wrote: People don't realize that in America, CCP most likely could be prosecuted for there product misrepresentation. Of course, this is why they don't set one foot in America with DUST 514 and pretty much not with EVE (not sure about what they have going at their California office). Maybe if it was WoD there would have been legal recourse. I'm assuming that though the company has satellite offices in America it can't be prosecuted through those since the game and company HQ is in Iceland and China. If there is any possibility I'd love any lawyer types to find the loophole. Pretty sure US courts would have jurisdiction over AUR sales made in US dollars to US customers. It may well be that any liability would rest with Sony rather than CCP, though. The main problem is that you may have to litigate under contract law as I don't believe US consumer protection is as robust as EU regulations. Nevertheless a class action may be viable.
PR0FESSOR CHAOS Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 41	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:44:00 - [60] - Quote Yes please contact sony first they will stop at teir two support and forward to teir three in San Mateo CA via e/mail. They will then ask you to conduct a customer service survey, be explicit on this. Then forward all of your responses and requests to at least three vp lvl executives. (Google and linked in will get you a list) I would suggest legal, service, and operations vp based in the states. Nothing an executive hates more is than dealing with plebes they will push it downstairs with the intent it's resolved and never seen again. If your not satisfied rinse and repeat untill they tell you to talk to legal. As wrong as you may be in the end they would rather help you than pay there own attorneys to to tell them to do the same. Good. Use your aggressive feelings, boy. Let the hate flow through you.

Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 14741	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:49:00 - [61] - Quote Remember the UK court allows Candy Crush saga to sue Banner Saga and win. 'Banner Saga' can never be used in a future title becuase of the outcome. CPM 0 Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior, Annoying Artist \\= Advanced Caldari Assault // Unlocked
NomaDz 2K The Rainbow Effect 178	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:52:00 - [62] - Quote DaReaperPW wrote: You would however be mislead of said car was said to have a V8 and the sales people assured you that yes it had a v8, and the paperwork and documents all said it had a v8, but once you had the car and drove it off the lot you realized that no it has a v4. Then you have a case. It's virtually at the same level, get it, virtually cause itz a digital product get it DON'T SPEND CA$H ON DUST 514 CCP WILL ONLY GIVE YOU AUR AFTER THEY REMOVE YOUR BPOs WHICH U SPENT REAL MONGé¼Y ON!
NomaDz 2K The Rainbow Effect 178	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:56:00 - [63] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Remember the UK court allows Candy Crush saga to sue Banner Saga and win. 'Banner Saga' can never be used in a future title becuase of the outcome. INFIDEL SILENCE I KILL U DON'T SPEND CA$H ON DUST 514 CCP WILL ONLY GIVE YOU AUR AFTER THEY REMOVE YOUR BPOs WHICH U SPENT REAL MONGé¼Y ON!
KING SALASI MAJOR DISTRIBUTION 249	Posted - 2014.05.06 20:56:00 - [64] - Quote So what I took from this is CCP turned into EA. No wonder Sony is giving refunds back what a disaster.
steadyhand amarr TeamPlayers Dirt Nap Squad. 3053	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:02:00 - [65] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. please provide the misleading information iv looked the EULA on ARU is water tight you buying a currency to use on ingame items, thats all ARU is CCP coins to by boosters... all a booster is to gain skill points faster both of which CCP did, so huh good luck with that one, the law does not care about anything extra you made up in your head on why you are buying something "i dont care about you or your goals, just show me the dam isk" winner of EU squad cup GOGO power rangers
THE 2000 SWINE Commando Perkone Caldari State 9	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:03:00 - [66] - Quote CEOPyrex CloneA wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. Oh dear..... good luck with that. (Sony will tell you to talk to CCP and CCP are based in Iceland, which as im sure you all know isnt in the EU) Jus Sayin bro In the States, you would name both SONY and CCP as Defendants, and the court of residence would have jurisdiction over the case. CCP does business across the internet with EVE players and SONY is everywhere. Criminal or Civil makes no difference. In the State we have "small claims court" and when we left England in 1629, we improved common law in that there is no claw back of legal fees.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 5409	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:03:00 - [67] - Quote There are similar laws in New Zealand, Australia and a few other countries around the place. They form part of the grounds on which many people have been requesting their refunds from Sony, and I know of a few people who have gotten said refunds. I've helped one of my friends get a refund himself. If you have a phone number you can call for Sony Support, that's more likely to get you a prompt resolution than an email, so I'd suggest trying that if you're given a "this could take a while" email response.
PR0FESSOR CHAOS Brutor Vanguard Minmatar Republic 42	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:05:00 - [68] - Quote Amar you should work for CCP legal I'm sure it will be an improvement. On the other hand Sony legal is stressing this right now so who knows maybe there not as air tight as you think. Good. Use your aggressive feelings, boy. Let the hate flow through you.
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1130	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:10:00 - [69] - Quote Garrett Blacknova wrote: There are similar laws in New Zealand, Australia and a few other countries around the place. They form part of the grounds on which many people have been requesting their refunds from Sony, and I know of a few people who have gotten said refunds. I've helped one of my friends get a refund himself. If you have a phone number you can call for Sony Support, that's more likely to get you a prompt resolution than an email, so I'd suggest trying that if you're given a "this could take a while" email response. EU and Oceania numbers are here.
THE 2000 SWINE Commando Perkone Caldari State 9	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:14:00 - [70] - Quote steadyhand amarr wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. please provide the misleading information iv looked the EULA on ARU is water tight you buying a currency to use on ingame items, thats all ARU is CCP coins to by boosters... all a booster is to gain skill points faster both of which CCP did, so huh good luck with that one, the law does not care about anything extra you made up in your head on why you are buying something I have an EMAIL and it says "ONE UNIVERSE...ONE SERVER" do you have one of these. "Come on Jack you are such a boyscout"

Koshh Seere Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 4	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:16:00 - [71] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. Did you read the Dust 514 Eula/ToS before you posted this?
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1133	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:19:00 - [72] - Quote steadyhand amarr wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. please provide the misleading information iv looked the EULA on ARU is water tight you buying a currency to use on ingame items, thats all ARU is CCP coins to by boosters... all a booster is to gain skill points faster both of which CCP did, so huh good luck with that one, the law does not care about anything extra you made up in your head on why you are buying something The EULA does not stop UK law from applying. Any -ú purchase by a UK consumer is covered by consumer protection regulations. You buy AUR with -ú, hence those transactions are covered. The law does not care about things people made up in their heads (thanks for that clarification, Perry Mason ) but it does care about misleading information/deceptive presentation of information that affects purchasing decisions.
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1133	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:22:00 - [73] - Quote Koshh Seere wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. Did you read the Dust 514 Eula/ToS before you posted this? Again, the EULA does not stop consumer protection regulations from applying.
steadyhand amarr TeamPlayers Dirt Nap Squad. 3053	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:22:00 - [74] - Quote THE 2000 SWINE wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. please provide the misleading information iv looked the EULA on ARU is water tight you buying a currency to use on ingame items, thats all ARU is CCP coins to by boosters... all a booster is to gain skill points faster both of which CCP did, so huh good luck with that one, the law does not care about anything extra you made up in your head on why you are buying something I have an EMAIL and it says "ONE UNIVERSE...ONE SERVER" do you have one of these. "Come on Jack you are such a boyscout" ... ok the trolling ability of this fourm has nose dived...just wow... its just .... you know what ... you should sue red bull because wings and just prove you really are dumass, dust does connect to same sever as EvE so yep one universe one server. sorry i cant think straight i head desked to hard "i dont care about you or your goals, just show me the dam isk" winner of EU squad cup GOGO power rangers
MINA Longstrike 755	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:25:00 - [75] - Quote Koshh Seere wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. Did you read the Dust 514 Eula/ToS before you posted this? Pretty sure that informing people of their legal rights doesn't violate EULA / TOS. Also in many places you CANNOT LEGALLY SIGN YOUR RIGHTS AWAY EVER, So the EULA could outright state 'you have no rights when it comes to this game' and then violate your rights and many people would think that you'd be without recourse, which is completely wrong, because you cannot sign your rights away Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
bigolenuts Ancient Exiles. 816	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:28:00 - [76] - Quote DaReaperPW wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. How did they mislead you? How was the information provided misleading? And you do know that they said devlopment of dust will keep going, so that pretty much nullifies any law suite you have. You do remember that just because you found a random law, that you have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you were mislead. From what i know, however, you were not. Spending money, and assuming its going to devlope and add new things to dust, was on you. Unless ccp told you, spacificly, that if you but this stuff it will bring you XXX then you were not misled. Case dismissed you lose. Read page 1, 4th post down. Written by CCP Saberwing. Can you explain to me what he is saying? https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2138998#post2138998 "CCP encourages respect, dialog, interaction and cooperation on a deeper level between its employees and customers"
Argent Mordred DUST University Ivy League 66	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:33:00 - [77] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: The EULA does not stop UK law from applying. Any -ú purchase by a UK consumer is covered by consumer protection regulations. You buy AUR with -ú, hence those transactions are covered. The law does not care about things people made up in their heads (thanks for that clarification, Perry Mason ) but it does care about misleading information/deceptive presentation of information that affects purchasing decisions. No but writing a EULA for a software product from a company like CCP or Sony entails a herd of lawyers specializing in the consumer laws for each country that the product is to be sold in. So I guarantee that the laws will have been dealt with to the letter. Maybe you will get lucky, but I doubt it.
Hecarim Van Hohen 1363	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:34:00 - [78] - Quote 3/10 But if this was a serious post (like that Yensha Min Mao dude) I'd like to see some action besides all of this useless text State your stance on EVE:Legion t¢«_t¢«
NomaDz 2K The Rainbow Effect 180	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:34:00 - [79] - Quote bigolenuts wrote: How did they mislead you? How was the information provided misleading? And you do know that they said devlopment of dust will keep going, so that pretty much nullifies any law suite you have. You do remember that just because you found a random law, that you have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you were mislead. From what i know, however, you were not. Spending money, and assuming its going to devlope and add new things to dust, was on you. Unless ccp told you, spacificly, that if you but this stuff it will bring you XXX then you were not misled. Case dismissed you lose. Read page 1, 4th post down. Written by CCP Saberwing. Can you explain to me what he is saying? This was less than 2 weeks before FanFest 2014. Maybe I am missing something in the message. Clarify for me. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2138998#post2138998[/quote] He Said : CCP Saberwing wrote: The Attorney General wrote: Dust next? No. We are still fully committed to developing EVE, DUST and Valkyrie. Lots of things will be shown around the games in the EVE Universe come Fanfest. DON'T SPEND CA$H ON DUST 514 CCP WILL ONLY GIVE YOU AUR AFTER THEY REMOVE YOUR BPOs WHICH U SPENT REAL MONGé¼Y ON!
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1140	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:37:00 - [80] - Quote bigolenuts wrote: DaReaperPW wrote: How did they mislead you? How was the information provided misleading? And you do know that they said devlopment of dust will keep going, so that pretty much nullifies any law suite you have. You do remember that just because you found a random law, that you have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you were mislead. From what i know, however, you were not. Spending money, and assuming its going to devlope and add new things to dust, was on you. Unless ccp told you, spacificly, that if you but this stuff it will bring you XXX then you were not misled. Case dismissed you lose. Read page 1, 4th post down. Written by CCP Saberwing. Can you explain to me what he is saying? This was less than 2 weeks before FanFest 2014. Maybe I am missing something in the message. Clarify for me. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2138998#post2138998 Yep, looks pretty misleading in my book: CCP Saberwing wrote: No. We are still fully committed to developing EVE, DUST and Valkyrie. Lots of things will be shown around the games in the EVE Universe come Fanfest

Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1145	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:50:00 - [81] - Quote Argent Mordred wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: The EULA does not stop UK law from applying. Any -ú purchase by a UK consumer is covered by consumer protection regulations. You buy AUR with -ú, hence those transactions are covered. The law does not care about things people made up in their heads (thanks for that clarification, Perry Mason ) but it does care about misleading information/deceptive presentation of information that affects purchasing decisions. No but writing a EULA for a software product from a company like CCP or Sony entails a herd of lawyers specializing in the consumer laws for each country that the product is to be sold in. So I guarantee that the laws will have been dealt with to the letter. Maybe you will get lucky, but I doubt it. There is no way to just make laws go away with lawyerly words. All they do is say 'as far as permitted by law', i.e. they admit that they are still subject to applicable laws, but try to limit any claim beyond those laws. See, for instance, this: SEN ToS wrote: 19. Limits on our liability and your rights As far as permitted by law, we are not responsible or liable for nor do we give warranty or representation in relation to: (i) The quality, functionality, availability, completeness, accuracy or performance of the SEN or its services; (ii) Any errors, bugs or viruses in, or malicious use of, the SEN or its services; (iii) Inability to purchase or use any services available via the SEN; (iv) The activity and shared materials of other SEN users or hackers; (v) Services provided by third parties; (vi) Incompatibility of services with Sony systems licensed for sale outside of Europe, the Middle East, Africa, India, Russia and Oceania; (vii) Loss of data, loss of or damage to software or hardware or unauthorised access to your SEN account as a result of using or accessing the SEN; and (viii) Your Internet connection, including connection, data and roaming charges and any failure to have sufficient bandwidth to download or stream services from SEN. We may withdraw access to free services or subscription trials at any time. As far as permitted by law: (a) if we fail to deliver any paid-for service available via the SEN, our liability and your only remedy is (at our option) either re-providing the service or adding the amount you paid for the service to your SEN wallet; and (b) our liability and your only remedy in any other case is limited to -ú50 (or local currency equivalent) or, if higher, the amount of unused funds in your SEN wallet. So no, these agreements offer Sony/CCP no protection against claims made under consumer protection regulations.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 5412	Posted - 2014.05.06 21:53:00 - [82] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Pretty sure that informing people of their legal rights doesn't violate EULA / TOS. Also in many places you CANNOT LEGALLY SIGN YOUR RIGHTS AWAY EVER, So the EULA could outright state 'you have no rights when it comes to this game' and then violate your rights and many people would think that you'd be without recourse, which is completely wrong, because you cannot sign your rights away And those laws are the reason most contracts with a "you have no rights" clause also have an "if any part of this contract would be illegal, only that portion is void, and the rest of the contract will remain valid and binding to whatever extent is permitted by law", because if they don't include a clause like that, someone in a region where you can't sign away your legal rights could just point to that line then effectively ignore the entire remainder of the contract because it's no longer legally binding and they're free to do whatever.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 5412	Posted - 2014.05.06 22:01:00 - [83] - Quote Argent Mordred wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: The EULA does not stop UK law from applying. Any -ú purchase by a UK consumer is covered by consumer protection regulations. You buy AUR with -ú, hence those transactions are covered. The law does not care about things people made up in their heads (thanks for that clarification, Perry Mason ) but it does care about misleading information/deceptive presentation of information that affects purchasing decisions. No but writing a EULA for a software product from a company like CCP or Sony entails a herd of lawyers specializing in the consumer laws for each country that the product is to be sold in. So I guarantee that the laws will have been dealt with to the letter. Maybe you will get lucky, but I doubt it. Just to focus down and clarify on this part: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: The EULA does not stop UK law from applying. Any -ú purchase by a UK consumer is covered by consumer protection regulations. You buy AUR with -ú, hence those transactions are covered. The consumer protection laws are applicable as soon as a purchase is made. The company making the sale is, by making the product available for purchase in the country, and by agreeing to the sale with a customer, agreeing to be bound to protect the rights of that customer as laid out in the law. Until you've not only bought the game, but installed it, read the license agreement (or skipped it) and clicked "Accept", you aren't bound by the EULA. Because it takes effect after the consumer protection laws, they apply first and foremost, and can negate anything (or everything) in any EULA.
Scheherazade VII SAM-MIK General Tso's Alliance 457	Posted - 2014.05.06 22:02:00 - [84] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. your name is after some strange place near Yeovil, I remember driving past it on the way Yeovil and thought "thats a weird place" and carried on driving.
xxwhitedevilxx M Maphia Clan Unit Unicorn 2814	Posted - 2014.05.06 22:12:00 - [85] - Quote steadyhand amarr wrote: ... ok the trolling ability of this fourm has nose dived...just wow... its just .... you know what ... you should sue red bull because wings Actually... Guinea Dust Bunnies are watching you, CCP Rouge.
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1145	Posted - 2014.05.06 22:13:00 - [86] - Quote Scheherazade VII wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. your name is after some strange place near Yeovil, I remember driving past it on the way Yeovil and thought "thats a weird place" and carried on driving. Yes it is, there are lots of weird village names around there that could be a futuristic merc (e.g. Toller Porcorum, Minterne Magna), I went with this one.
THE 2000 SWINE Commando Perkone Caldari State 10	Posted - 2014.05.06 22:18:00 - [87] - Quote Ryder Azorria wrote: Atiim wrote: Actually, they did give a explicit time. 10 Years. Saying you have a ten year plan for a game and providing no other details of said plan is not a legally binding commitment to follow through with said plan, nor is it a commitment not to change platforms. And incase you live in some fantasy land where the case goes in your favour ('Merica), enjoy your refund of the full retail cost of the game $0.00. EDIT: Atiim wrote: Ryder Azorria wrote: PR0FESSOR CHAOS wrote: Sony is responsible for all transactions on their network laugh as you may but legal action is being brought on Sony regarding this issue. I suspect sony will settle all disputes and internally deal with CCP. Sony is taking this very serious they understand the value of consumer confidence and have built the playstation brand on that principle. They do not want there reputation dragged through the mud based on ~~a third party developer~~ overly entitled neckbeards throwing a hissy fit FTFY So expecting companies to follow the law is overly entitled? I really hope you never run for a political office that holds power... They. Did. You're either horribly twisting CCPs actions to the point of fiction in order to make them violate those laws, or you're horribly twisting the laws to fit CCPs actions - probably a little of both. CCP is the one who enticed, all the while pointing at their devotion to EVE and that dedication would be manifest in DUST514. Merica haha ya from Norman decent, you son of a saxon dog!
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2775	Posted - 2014.05.06 22:28:00 - [88] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. This relates to the selling of the product. The brief of DUST 514 is that it is a F2P FPS set within New Eden, which it meets perfectly. The brief for DUST 514 Origin Packs and Aurum Items is that they will provide you with in game items of a specific nature, which it meets perfectly. After that the Law has no more effect. What CCP choose to do with your money, or what they develop with it, is entirely their own perogative. If you are attempting to insuate that CCP tricked you into buying Aurum to support DUST when they were in matter of fact funding legion, please feel free to show documentation of CCP saying where the money from Aurum goes. At no point do they actually say Aurum sales in DUST go directly to DUST development. As much as I wanna kick CCP in the pants, please don't sound like such a self righteous ***** Looks like its back to FPS Military Shooter 56 Monkey Mac - Just another pile of discarded ashes on the battlefield!
xxwhitedevilxx M Maphia Clan Unit Unicorn 2814	Posted - 2014.05.06 22:32:00 - [89] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. This relates to the selling of the product. The brief of DUST 514 is that it is a F2P FPS set within New Eden, which it meets perfectly. The brief for DUST 514 Origin Packs and Aurum Items is that they will provide you with in game items of a specific nature, which it meets perfectly. After that the Law has no more effect. What CCP choose to do with your money, or what they develop with it, is entirely their own perogative. If you are attempting to insuate that CCP tricked you into buying Aurum to support DUST when they were in matter of fact funding legion, please feel free to show documentation of CCP saying where the money from Aurum goes. At no point do they actually say Aurum sales in DUST go directly to DUST development. As much as I wanna kick CCP in the pants, please don't sound like such a self righteous *** decreto legislativo 206/2005 wrote:** ci si riferisce a pubblicit+á ingannevole come qualsiasi pubblicit+á che in qualunque modo, compresa la sua presentazione, sia idonea ad indurre in errore le persone fisiche o giuridiche alle quali +¿ rivolta o che essa raggiunge e che, a causa del suo carattere ingannevole, possa pregiudicare il loro comportamento economico ovvero che, per questo motivo, sia idonea a ledere un concorrente Guinea Dust Bunnies are watching you, CCP Rouge.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2777	Posted - 2014.05.06 23:05:00 - [90] - Quote xxwhitedevilxx M wrote: decreto legislativo 206/2005 wrote: ci si riferisce a pubblicit+á ingannevole come qualsiasi pubblicit+á che in qualunque modo, compresa la sua presentazione, sia idonea ad indurre in errore le persone fisiche o giuridiche alle quali +¿ rivolta o che essa raggiunge e che, a causa del suo carattere ingannevole, possa pregiudicare il loro comportamento economico ovvero che, per questo motivo, sia idonea a ledere un concorrente Aah interesting, you are here by saying that CCP mislead you to believe that money from DUST Aurum packs would go to DUST because the Aurum Packs had images of DUST Content? Unfortunately this would be thrown as the 'Packaging' is directly advertising the product. It is not inferred, suggested or misleading you into believing DUST bought Aurum funds DUST. Otherwise Lucozade, Walkers, and numerous other companies would come under this law to, by buying an Aurum Pack you are aware you are paying a company (CCP) for a service, they are not 'tricking' you into believing that when you buy a bottle of lucozade, the money goes to lucozade it infacts goes to the company that owns lucozade. Yet you assume it does. DUST Aurum packs in no way infer that DUST will benifit from, the only thing they infer is that you will get a load of cool sh*t, which you do. The way you interpret it as singular person is not enough to prosecute. Otherwise how would they have funded DUST, they couldn't have done it using EvE money by the same pretence. So where would CCP get the money? Looks like its back to FPS Military Shooter 56 Monkey Mac - Just another pile of discarded ashes on the battlefield!

Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1146	Posted - 2014.05.06 23:06:00 - [91] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. This relates to the selling of the product. The brief of DUST 514 is that it is a F2P FPS set within New Eden, which it meets perfectly. The brief for DUST 514 Origin Packs and Aurum Items is that they will provide you with in game items of a specific nature, which it meets perfectly. After that the Law has no more effect. What CCP choose to do with your money, or what they develop with it, is entirely their own perogative. If you are attempting to insuate that CCP tricked you into buying Aurum to support DUST when they were in matter of fact funding legion, please feel free to show documentation of CCP saying where the money from Aurum goes. At no point do they actually say Aurum sales in DUST go directly to DUST development. As much as I wanna kick CCP in the pants, please don't sound like such a self righteous ***** CCP stated on numerous occasions between October 2013 and April 2014 that they were 'laser-focused on PS3' and 'fully committed to development on Dust'. This lead people to purchase AUR in the reasonable expectation that there would be major content releases at least until the end of 2014. Thus, there is a case for saying that 'A misleading action occur[ed] [as] a practice mislead ... through the information it contain[ed] ... and cause[d] ... the average consumer to take a different decision'. I have no idea where you're getting the notion that how CCP spends their money has anything to do with UK consumer protection regulations. They can put it in a swimming pool in Reykjavik and swim around in it as far as the law is concerned. What they cannot legally do, however, is get that money through misleading or deceiving UK customers in a way that affects their purchasing decisions. I realize that it's a bit much to expect the CCP apologists to recognize basic legal distinctions, but can you at least try to read the posts you're responding to before you embarrass yourselves further.
NomaDz 2K The Rainbow Effect 183	Posted - 2014.05.06 23:21:00 - [92] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: xxwhitedevilxx M wrote: decreto legislativo 206/2005 wrote: ci si riferisce a pubblicit+á ingannevole come qualsiasi pubblicit+á che in qualunque modo, compresa la sua presentazione, sia idonea ad indurre in errore le persone fisiche o giuridiche alle quali +¿ rivolta o che essa raggiunge e che, a causa del suo carattere ingannevole, possa pregiudicare il loro comportamento economico ovvero che, per questo motivo, sia idonea a ledere un concorrente Aah interesting, you are here by saying that CCP mislead you to believe that money from DUST Aurum packs would go to DUST because the Aurum Packs had images of DUST Content? Unfortunately this would be thrown as the 'Packaging' is directly advertising the product. It is not inferred, suggested or misleading you into believing DUST bought Aurum funds DUST. Otherwise Lucozade, Walkers, and numerous other companies would come under this law to, by buying an Aurum Pack you are aware you are paying a company (CCP) for a service, they are not 'tricking' you into believing that when you buy a bottle of lucozade, the money goes to lucozade it infacts goes to the company that owns lucozade. Yet you assume it does. DUST Aurum packs in no way infer that DUST will benifit from, the only thing they infer is that you will get a load of cool sht, which you do. The way you interpret it as singular person is not enough to prosecute. Otherwise how would they have funded DUST, they couldn't have done it using EvE money by the same pretence. So where would CCP get the money? Nope he is stating I believe a Legal Italian Act Number 260 in Date 2005. Or shall we state that basically it accepts EU laws about protecting consumers from False Advertising which by EU Law CCP has offended and not to mention the entire PS3 Dust community. Basically the same Law applied in the UK: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. Guilty As Charged -Case Closed - Next NB the Only difference is that this Law was first applied in Italy in 2005 then in the UK in 2008 but it's the exact same thing it only got applied at different dates. DON'T SPEND CA$H ON DUST 514 CCP WILL ONLY GIVE YOU AUR AFTER THEY REMOVE YOUR BPOs WHICH U SPENT REAL MONGé¼Y ON!*
Beld Errmon 1652	Posted - 2014.05.06 23:25:00 - [93] - Quote Ah the second step in the Neckbeard rage cycle the "internet lawyer" phase, none of you are gunna do diddly about squat, though many of you are liers and will say anything while you are going through your neckbeard flow period, would be interested to see one shred of evidence that anyone has gotten a refund or done anything more then rant at a call centre chick about how PSN stole your redbull money. Pilot - Tanker - FOTM (insert here)
NomaDz 2K The Rainbow Effect 184	Posted - 2014.05.06 23:35:00 - [94] - Quote Beld Errmon wrote: Ah the second step in the Neckbeard rage cycle the "internet lawyer" phase, none of you are gunna do diddly about squat, though many of you are liers and will say anything while you are going through your neckbeard flow period, would be interested to see one shred of evidence that anyone has gotten a refund or done anything more then rant at a call centre chick about how PSN stole your redbull money. We are on about real laws which tutor consumers, people which purchase anything and demand satisfaction. If you don't stand up for your rights, soon you will find yourself without any. The fact that people in the past and present have obtained at least a PSN Refund is due to the way CCP handles their shady business goes to show that it's true and mark my words people will still get them unless CCP decides to change their marketing and PR practices. DON'T SPEND CA$H ON DUST 514 CCP WILL ONLY GIVE YOU AUR AFTER THEY REMOVE YOUR BPOs WHICH U SPENT REAL MONGé¼Y ON!
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1149	Posted - 2014.05.06 23:43:00 - [95] - Quote NomaDz 2K wrote: Beld Errmon wrote: Ah the second step in the Neckbeard rage cycle the "internet lawyer" phase, none of you are gunna do diddly about squat, though many of you are liers and will say anything while you are going through your neckbeard flow period, would be interested to see one shred of evidence that anyone has gotten a refund or done anything more then rant at a call centre chick about how PSN stole your redbull money. We are on about real laws which tutor consumers, people which purchase anything and demand satisfaction. If you don't stand up for your rights, soon you will find yourself without any. The fact that people in the past and present have obtained at least a PSN Refund is due to the way CCP handles their shady business. This goes to show that it's true and mark my words people will still get them unless CCP decides to change their marketing and PR practices. Was about to get on this but seems my paralegal/assistant pimp NomaDz already slapped your ***** ass down.
Michael Arck Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu Lokun Listamenn 4335	Posted - 2014.05.06 23:49:00 - [96] - Quote Nothing was misleading about you spending 20 bucks for AUR. The only way people are getting refunds is due to sympathy, I believe. I also believe Sony has spoken with CCP and no the refund possibility has slimmed. You bought a add-on that you received and consumed. You can ask for a refund for a hamburger you just ate. What's even more interesting is that many who wanted refunds would still return to the game if its pushed to PS4 and do the same thing all over again. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Are you OUKH?
Ayrie Coronach DUST University Ivy League 190	Posted - 2014.05.06 23:54:00 - [97] - Quote Beld Errmon wrote: Ah the second step in the Neckbeard rage cycle the "internet lawyer" phase, none of you are gunna do diddly about squat, though many of you are liers and will say anything while you are going through your neckbeard flow period, would be interested to see one shred of evidence that anyone has gotten a refund or done anything more then rant at a call centre chick about how PSN stole your redbull money. k. One shred of evidence. Anything else? Or are you done speaking out of the wrong end now? CALL 1-800-345-SONY. PRESS '2' AND THEN '2' AGAIN. AURUM PURCHASES CAN BE REFUNDED WITHIN 90 DAYS!
NomaDz 2K The Rainbow Effect 184	Posted - 2014.05.06 23:59:00 - [98] - Quote Ayrie Coronach wrote: Beld Errmon wrote: Ah the second step in the Neckbeard rage cycle the "internet lawyer" phase, none of you are gunna do diddly about squat, though many of you are liers and will say anything while you are going through your neckbeard flow period, would be interested to see one shred of evidence that anyone has gotten a refund or done anything more then rant at a call centre chick about how PSN stole your redbull money. k. One shred of evidence. Anything else? Or are you done speaking out of the wrong end now? We have another happy Sony Customer, i wonder if they will ever give CA$H 2 CCP EVER AGAIN and I hope U learned your lesson Ayrie , never trust strangers Viva La Resistance CCP Rouge PS We have just started DON'T SPEND CA$H ON DUST 514 CCP WILL ONLY GIVE YOU AUR AFTER THEY REMOVE YOUR BPOs WHICH U SPENT REAL MONGé¼Y ON!
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1150	Posted - 2014.05.07 00:09:00 - [99] - Quote Michael Arck wrote: Nothing was misleading about you spending 20 bucks for AUR. I'm going to bed now, but I'll leave a challenge for anyone who wants to come into this thread and dispute the basis for a claim under UK consumer protection regulations. Tell me which step of the following is false in your judgment: 1. Over the last several months CCP provided misleading information/deceptively presented information (e.g. 'laser-focused on PS3', 'fully committed to developing Dust'). 2. This resulted in consumers making different decisions than they otherwise would (e.g. to buy AUR). 3. Therefore, a misleading action has occurred and consumer protection regulations have been breached. At the moment you guys are just swinging wildly, for instance conflating steps 1 and 2 like Michael Arck here, and not even starting to engage with the legal argument. Hopefully the above structure will help you to arrange your thoughts more coherently.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2779	Posted - 2014.05.07 00:10:00 - [100] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. This relates to the selling of the product. The brief of DUST 514 is that it is a F2P FPS set within New Eden, which it meets perfectly. The brief for DUST 514 Origin Packs and Aurum Items is that they will provide you with in game items of a specific nature, which it meets perfectly. After that the Law has no more effect. What CCP choose to do with your money, or what they develop with it, is entirely their own perogative. If you are attempting to insuate that CCP tricked you into buying Aurum to support DUST when they were in matter of fact funding legion, please feel free to show documentation of CCP saying where the money from Aurum goes. At no point do they actually say Aurum sales in DUST go directly to DUST development. As much as I wanna kick CCP in the pants, please don't sound like such a self righteous ***** CCP stated on numerous occasions between October 2013 and April 2014 that they were 'laser-focused on PS3' and 'fully committed to development on Dust', which we now know was not the case. These statements lead people to purchase AUR in the reasonable expectation that there would be major content releases at least until the end of 2014. Thus, there is a case for saying that 'A misleading action occur[ed] [as] a practice mislead ... through the information it contain[ed] ... and cause[d] ... the average consumer to take a different decision'. I have no idea where you're getting the notion that how CCP spends their money has anything to do with UK consumer protection regulations. They can put it in a swimming pool in Reykjavik and swim around in it as far as the law is concerned. What they cannot legally do, however, is get that money through misleading or deceiving UK customers in a way that affects their purchasing decisions. I realize that it's a bit much to expect the CCP apologists to recognize basic legal distinctions, but can you at least try to read the posts you're responding to before you embarrass yourselves further. Once again you are assuming CCP are misleading you, which once again as far as the sale of Aurum goes, they did not do. By saying they were laser focuse on PS3 they did not trick you into buying aurum based on the assumption that the product was helping DUST, which is effectively what you are arguing. If they had however put on the poster "Support Dust Development by Buying Aurum" then you would have every right to say they were misleading you. But you bought a product/service that was exactly as advertised, you are effectively construding 2 intangible points together, I would very much enjoy seeing you try to actually take action agaibst CCP with this, but you and I both know you won't because you would be laughed out of the court. CCP telling me they were 'laser-focused' did not encourage me to buy Aurum, which is in exact contradiction with your statement, because both statements are infact opinions. If however this is because you want money back that you spent on DUST there is a SONY hotline you can call if someone would be kind enough to post it here. Otherwise don't forget to invite me along to the hearing (Ill bring lots of popcorn) P.S Read my intial reactions, I was just as unhappy as you are. Looks like its back to FPS Military Shooter 56 Monkey Mac - Just another pile of discarded ashes on the battlefield!

Kinky Burrito Ametat Security Amarr Empire 222	Posted - 2014.05.07 00:13:00 - [101] - Quote There is no legal case. They are not shutting down the game. You can't sue them just because the game isn't going to be as good as you thought it would be.
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1155	Posted - 2014.05.07 00:15:00 - [102] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: This relates to the selling of the product. The brief of DUST 514 is that it is a F2P FPS set within New Eden, which it meets perfectly. The brief for DUST 514 Origin Packs and Aurum Items is that they will provide you with in game items of a specific nature, which it meets perfectly. After that the Law has no more effect. What CCP choose to do with your money, or what they develop with it, is entirely their own perogative. If you are attempting to insuate that CCP tricked you into buying Aurum to support DUST when they were in matter of fact funding legion, please feel free to show documentation of CCP saying where the money from Aurum goes. At no point do they actually say Aurum sales in DUST go directly to DUST development. As much as I wanna kick CCP in the pants, please don't sound like such a self righteous ***** CCP stated on numerous occasions between October 2013 and April 2014 that they were 'laser-focused on PS3' and 'fully committed to development on Dust', which we now know was not the case. These statements lead people to purchase AUR in the reasonable expectation that there would be major content releases at least until the end of 2014. Thus, there is a case for saying that 'A misleading action occur[ed] [as] a practice mislead ... through the information it contain[ed] ... and cause[d] ... the average consumer to take a different decision'. I have no idea where you're getting the notion that how CCP spends their money has anything to do with UK consumer protection regulations. They can put it in a swimming pool in Reykjavik and swim around in it as far as the law is concerned. What they cannot legally do, however, is get that money through misleading or deceiving UK customers in a way that affects their purchasing decisions. I realize that it's a bit much to expect the CCP apologists to recognize basic legal distinctions, but can you at least try to read the posts you're responding to before you embarrass yourselves further. Once again you are assuming CCP are misleading you, which once again as far as the sale of Aurum goes, they did not do. By saying they were laser focuse on PS3 they did not trick you into buying aurum based on the assumption that the product was helping DUST, which is effectively what you are arguing. If they had however put on the poster "Support Dust Development by Buying Aurum" then you would have every right to say they were misleading you. But you bought a product/service that was exactly as advertised, you are effectively construding 2 intangible points together, I would very much enjoy seeing you try to actually take action agaibst CCP with this, but you and I both know you won't because you would be laughed out of the court. CCP telling me they were 'laser-focused' did not encourage me to buy Aurum, which is in exact contradiction with your statement, because both statements are infact opinions. If however this is because you want money back that you spent on DUST there is a SONY hotline you can call if someone would be kind enough to post it here. Otherwise don't forget to invite me along to the hearing (Ill bring lots of popcorn) P.S Read my intial reactions, I was just as unhappy as you are. Like Michael Arck above you are conflating steps 1 and 2 in the argument. See my previous post and tell me which step you are disputing. PS really am going to bed now
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2779	Posted - 2014.05.07 00:18:00 - [103] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Michael Arck wrote: Nothing was misleading about you spending 20 bucks for AUR. I'm going to bed now, but I'll leave a challenge for anyone who wants to come into this thread and dispute the basis for a claim under UK consumer protection regulations. Tell me which step of the following is false in your judgment: 1. Over the last several months CCP provided misleading information/deceptively presented information (e.g. 'laser-focused on PS3', 'fully committed to developing Dust'). 2. This resulted in consumers making different decisions than they otherwise would (e.g. to buy AUR). 3. Therefore, a misleading action has occurred and consumer protection regulations have been breached. At the moment you guys are just swinging wildly, for instance conflating steps 1 and 2 like Michael Arck here, and not even starting to engage with the legal argument. Hopefully the above structure will help you to arrange your thoughts more coherently. Statement 2 is false, unless the majority of the playerbase believed DUST to be near out of commision, which most of us did not, you might have a valid case, except for the fact that CCP stopped saying DUST and started saying 'Games within the new eden universe' like they did here! Looks like its back to FPS Military Shooter 56 Monkey Mac - Just another pile of discarded ashes on the battlefield!
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 5423	Posted - 2014.05.07 00:21:00 - [104] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Once again you are assuming CCP are misleading you, which once again as far as the sale of Aurum goes, they did not do. By saying they were laser focuse on PS3 they did not trick you into buying aurum based on the assumption that the product was helping DUST, which is effectively what you are arguing. If they had however put on the poster "Support Dust Development by Buying Aurum" then you would have every right to say they were misleading you. But you bought a product/service that was exactly as advertised, you are effectively construding 2 intangible points together, I would very much enjoy seeing you try to actually take action agaibst CCP with this, but you and I both know you won't because you would be laughed out of the court. CCP telling me they were 'laser-focused' did not encourage me to buy Aurum, which is in exact contradiction with your statement, because both statements are infact opinions. If however this is because you want money back that you spent on DUST there is a SONY hotline you can call if someone would be kind enough to post it here. Otherwise don't forget to invite me along to the hearing (Ill bring lots of popcorn) P.S Read my intial reactions, I was just as unhappy as you are. So you're saying that public statements made directly to their customers by representatives of CCP in their capacity as representatives for the company aren't valid grounds on which to consider yourself to have been "misled"? Yeah, good luck winning a case with that argument. I wouldn't hire you as my lawyer.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 5425	Posted - 2014.05.07 00:30:00 - [105] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Michael Arck wrote: Nothing was misleading about you spending 20 bucks for AUR. I'm going to bed now, but I'll leave a challenge for anyone who wants to come into this thread and dispute the basis for a claim under UK consumer protection regulations. Tell me which step of the following is false in your judgment: 1. Over the last several months CCP provided misleading information/deceptively presented information (e.g. 'laser-focused on PS3', 'fully committed to developing Dust'). 2. This resulted in consumers making different decisions than they otherwise would (e.g. to buy AUR). 3. Therefore, a misleading action has occurred and consumer protection regulations have been breached. At the moment you guys are just swinging wildly, for instance conflating steps 1 and 2 like Michael Arck here, and not even starting to engage with the legal argument. Hopefully the above structure will help you to arrange your thoughts more coherently. Statement 2 is false, unless the majority of the playerbase believed DUST to be near out of commision, which most of us did not, you might have a valid case, except for the fact that CCP stopped saying DUST and started saying 'Games within the new eden universe' like they did here! You mean like they did here? Where they explicitly stated that they were FULLY COMMITED TO DEVELOPING DUST not only in the same thread you linked, but in a later post than the one you linked to? Statement 2 is true, because the statements made by the devs IN THE THREAD YOU LINKED, along with their statements elsewhere, and comments made by Sony representatives at E3, had led the playerbase to believe that the game would: 1. Not be getting shut down or have full support discontinued any time soon, 2. Be on PS3 with continuing updates and new content on that console for the foreseeable future, and 3. Be coming to PS4 within a reasonable timeframe. As soon as the plan was made to move the majority of the team from developing DUST on PS3 to developing Legion on PC, any Aurum sales where the purchaser had bought Aurum in the expectation of moving to PS4 in future were based on misleading information beceause CCP actively AVOIDED correcting us on that point. From the moment Legion was underway, anyone buying Aurum with the expectation of a reasonable amount of new content on the PS3 was misled, because CCP didn't advise us they were cutting off all plans for future expansions for DUST.
Michael Arck Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu Lokun Listamenn 4336	Posted - 2014.05.07 00:32:00 - [106] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: This relates to the selling of the product. The brief of DUST 514 is that it is a F2P FPS set within New Eden, which it meets perfectly. The brief for DUST 514 Origin Packs and Aurum Items is that they will provide you with in game items of a specific nature, which it meets perfectly. After that the Law has no more effect. What CCP choose to do with your money, or what they develop with it, is entirely their own perogative. If you are attempting to insuate that CCP tricked you into buying Aurum to support DUST when they were in matter of fact funding legion, please feel free to show documentation of CCP saying where the money from Aurum goes. At no point do they actually say Aurum sales in DUST go directly to DUST development. As much as I wanna kick CCP in the pants, please don't sound like such a self righteous ***** CCP stated on numerous occasions between October 2013 and April 2014 that they were 'laser-focused on PS3' and 'fully committed to development on Dust', which we now know was not the case. These statements lead people to purchase AUR in the reasonable expectation that there would be major content releases at least until the end of 2014. Thus, there is a case for saying that 'A misleading action occur[ed] [as] a practice mislead ... through the information it contain[ed] ... and cause[d] ... the average consumer to take a different decision'. I have no idea where you're getting the notion that how CCP spends their money has anything to do with UK consumer protection regulations. They can put it in a swimming pool in Reykjavik and swim around in it as far as the law is concerned. What they cannot legally do, however, is get that money through misleading or deceiving UK customers in a way that affects their purchasing decisions. I realize that it's a bit much to expect the CCP apologists to recognize basic legal distinctions, but can you at least try to read the posts you're responding to before you embarrass yourselves further. Once again you are assuming CCP are misleading you, which once again as far as the sale of Aurum goes, they did not do. By saying they were laser focuse on PS3 they did not trick you into buying aurum based on the assumption that the product was helping DUST, which is effectively what you are arguing. If they had however put on the poster "Support Dust Development by Buying Aurum" then you would have every right to say they were misleading you. But you bought a product/service that was exactly as advertised, you are effectively construding 2 intangible points together, I would very much enjoy seeing you try to actually take action agaibst CCP with this, but you and I both know you won't because you would be laughed out of the court. CCP telling me they were 'laser-focused' did not encourage me to buy Aurum, which is in exact contradiction with your statement, because both statements are infact opinions. If however this is because you want money back that you spent on DUST there is a SONY hotline you can call if someone would be kind enough to post it here. Otherwise don't forget to invite me along to the hearing (Ill bring lots of popcorn) P.S Read my intial reactions, I was just as unhappy as you are. Like Michael Arck above you are conflating steps 1 and 2 in the argument. See my previous post and tell me which step you are disputing. PS really am going to bed now I don't need to look at your steps to use some common sense to declare it's a fool's adventure. I understand you're upset but the game is still going. It's still being developed. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Are you OUKH?
lrian Locust Chatelain Rapid Response Gallente Federation 437	Posted - 2014.05.07 00:34:00 - [107] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: we have starving lawyers in the states. There's just waaaaaay to many lawyers in the US - 14 times the average of European countries, I read.
Ayrie Coronach DUST University Ivy League 194	Posted - 2014.05.07 00:40:00 - [108] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Michael Arck wrote: Nothing was misleading about you spending 20 bucks for AUR. I'm going to bed now, but I'll leave a challenge for anyone who wants to come into this thread and dispute the basis for a claim under UK consumer protection regulations. Tell me which step of the following is false in your judgment: 1. Over the last several months CCP provided misleading information/deceptively presented information (e.g. 'laser-focused on PS3', 'fully committed to developing Dust'). 2. This resulted in consumers making different decisions than they otherwise would (e.g. to buy AUR). 3. Therefore, a misleading action has occurred and consumer protection regulations have been breached. At the moment you guys are just swinging wildly, for instance conflating steps 1 and 2 like Michael Arck here, and not even starting to engage with the legal argument. Hopefully the above structure will help you to arrange your thoughts more coherently. Statement 2 is false, unless the majority of the playerbase believed DUST to be near out of commision, which most of us did not, you might have a valid case, except for the fact that CCP stopped saying DUST and started saying 'Games within the new eden universe' like they did here! Statement two is NOT false, and certainly not for the reasons you seem to think it is. Statement two is accurate, I am an example of statement two. By not disclosing that planned and advertised development of expanded content on DUST 514 for the PS3 had radically shifted (read: HALTED) months ago, long before fanfest and long before that quote of yours (which really doesn't prove the point you think it does, by the way) I continued to purchase aurum as though nothing had changed. As far as I was made aware, everything was on the same track four days ago that it had been on for the past year, as attested to by CCP personnel in interviews and press events. I was making purchases based upon bad information that CCP had disseminated, and my purchases may have well been very different had CCP informed the player base (and by extension, me) about the change in development direction before or at the time that such change was made. By continuing to operate as if nothing had changed (and in fact making ASSURANCES that nothing had changed) in the development direction of DUST 514, CCP engaged in a deception of the community, a lie of omission if not a straight bald-faced lie. Acting upon that deceiving information, people (like myself) made purchases we otherwise might not have. This is a clear example of fulfillment of conditions one and two. Which means that condition three may well have been met. CALL 1-800-345-SONY. PRESS '2' AND THEN '2' AGAIN. AURUM PURCHASES CAN BE REFUNDED WITHIN 90 DAYS!
Michael Arck Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu Lokun Listamenn 4336	Posted - 2014.05.07 00:53:00 - [109] - Quote Ayrie Coronach wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Michael Arck wrote: Nothing was misleading about you spending 20 bucks for AUR. I'm going to bed now, but I'll leave a challenge for anyone who wants to come into this thread and dispute the basis for a claim under UK consumer protection regulations. Tell me which step of the following is false in your judgment: 1. Over the last several months CCP provided misleading information/deceptively presented information (e.g. 'laser-focused on PS3', 'fully committed to developing Dust'). 2. This resulted in consumers making different decisions than they otherwise would (e.g. to buy AUR). 3. Therefore, a misleading action has occurred and consumer protection regulations have been breached. At the moment you guys are just swinging wildly, for instance conflating steps 1 and 2 like Michael Arck here, and not even starting to engage with the legal argument. Hopefully the above structure will help you to arrange your thoughts more coherently. Statement 2 is false, unless the majority of the playerbase believed DUST to be near out of commision, which most of us did not, you might have a valid case, except for the fact that CCP stopped saying DUST and started saying 'Games within the new eden universe' like they did here! Statement two is NOT false, and certainly not for the reasons you seem to think it is. Statement two is accurate, I am an example of statement two. By not disclosing that planned and advertised development of expanded content on DUST 514 for the PS3 had radically shifted (read: HALTED) months ago, long before fanfest and long before that quote of yours (which really doesn't prove the point you think it does, by the way) I continued to purchase aurum as though nothing had changed. As far as I was made aware, everything was on the same track four days ago that it had been on for the past year, as attested to by CCP personnel in interviews and press events. I was making purchases based upon bad information that CCP had disseminated, and my purchases may have well been very different had CCP informed the player base (and by extension, me) about the change in development direction before or at the time that such change was made. By continuing to operate as if nothing had changed (and in fact making ASSURANCES that nothing had changed) in the development direction of DUST 514, CCP engaged in a deception of the community, a lie of omission if not a straight bald-faced lie. Acting upon that deceiving information, people (like myself) made purchases we otherwise might not have. This is a clear example of fulfillment of conditions one and two. Which means that condition three may well have been met. Seriously, how can you ask a refund and still use CCP's forums to voice your opinions? Isn't that kind of backwards here? You made purchases for products you received. While many others cheered you on in your thread, the whole ordeal was wrong. Once Sony got wind (I suspect, they talked to CCP), they stopped giving out refunds to many who later visited your thread. Because you bought an AUR pack for AUR. Not for continuous development. This is what microtransactions are and here lies the problem with it. If things don't go the customer's way, they want their money back. And this is for items that has already been consumed. It's messed up because nowhere in the sale does it state, "buying this product continues the development of Dust 514" Plus this game was F2P. YOU made the choice to buy add-ons. You weren't forced or lied to about what you were receiving. And the funny thing is? If Legion was released on PS4, you would head over there and do the same thing over again. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Are you OUKH?
xxwhitedevilxx M Maphia Clan Unit Unicorn 2814	Posted - 2014.05.07 01:13:00 - [110] - Quote wrong quotes...rewriting.... Guinea Dust Bunnies are watching you, CCP Rouge.

Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 5431	Posted - 2014.05.07 01:19:00 - [111] - Quote Kinky Burrito wrote: There is no legal case. They are not shutting down the game. You can't sue them just because the game isn't going to be as good as you thought it would be. A car that's been driven over 300,000km doesn't have to break down for the buyer to have been misled when they were told it had only traveled 10,000km. When you buy a sealed package labeled "red paint" then open it up to find that it's blue, the store won't say "there's still paint in the can" and refuse to take it back. Misleading a customer is still misleading a customer. And outright lying to a customer is still outright lying to them, even if the lies and deception don't involve the product being broken or ceasing to exist.
Leeroy Gannarsein Shining Flame Amarr Empire 7	Posted - 2014.05.07 01:25:00 - [112] - Quote Michael Arck wrote: Ayrie Coronach wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Michael Arck wrote: Nothing was misleading about you spending 20 bucks for AUR. I'm going to bed now, but I'll leave a challenge for anyone who wants to come into this thread and dispute the basis for a claim under UK consumer protection regulations. Tell me which step of the following is false in your judgment: 1. Over the last several months CCP provided misleading information/deceptively presented information (e.g. 'laser-focused on PS3', 'fully committed to developing Dust'). 2. This resulted in consumers making different decisions than they otherwise would (e.g. to buy AUR). 3. Therefore, a misleading action has occurred and consumer protection regulations have been breached. At the moment you guys are just swinging wildly, for instance conflating steps 1 and 2 like Michael Arck here, and not even starting to engage with the legal argument. Hopefully the above structure will help you to arrange your thoughts more coherently. Statement 2 is false, unless the majority of the playerbase believed DUST to be near out of commision, which most of us did not, you might have a valid case, except for the fact that CCP stopped saying DUST and started saying 'Games within the new eden universe' like they did here! Statement two is NOT false, and certainly not for the reasons you seem to think it is. Statement two is accurate, I am an example of statement two. By not disclosing that planned and advertised development of expanded content on DUST 514 for the PS3 had radically shifted (read: HALTED) months ago, long before fanfest and long before that quote of yours (which really doesn't prove the point you think it does, by the way) I continued to purchase aurum as though nothing had changed. As far as I was made aware, everything was on the same track four days ago that it had been on for the past year, as attested to by CCP personnel in interviews and press events. I was making purchases based upon bad information that CCP had disseminated, and my purchases may have well been very different had CCP informed the player base (and by extension, me) about the change in development direction before or at the time that such change was made. By continuing to operate as if nothing had changed (and in fact making ASSURANCES that nothing had changed) in the development direction of DUST 514, CCP engaged in a deception of the community, a lie of omission if not a straight bald-faced lie. Acting upon that deceiving information, people (like myself) made purchases we otherwise might not have. This is a clear example of fulfillment of conditions one and two. Which means that condition three may well have been met. Seriously, how can you ask a refund and still use CCP's forums to voice your opinions? Isn't that kind of backwards here? You made purchases for products you received. While many others cheered you on in your thread, the whole ordeal was wrong. Once Sony got wind (I suspect, they talked to CCP), they stopped giving out refunds to many who later visited your thread. Because you bought an AUR pack for AUR. Not for continuous development. This is what microtransactions are and here lies the problem with it. If things don't go the customer's way, they want their money back. And this is for items that has already been consumed. It's messed up because nowhere in the sale does it state, "buying this product continues the development of Dust 514" Plus this game was F2P. YOU made the choice to buy add-ons. You weren't forced or lied to about what you were receiving. And the funny thing is? If Legion was released on PS4, you would head over there and do the same thing over again. I bought AUR packs for AUR, that part is true. Why did I buy them? Because CCP failed to disclose to me that development on DUST had, to all intents and purposes, ceased, while both explicitly and implicitly, through advertising and through representative statements (i.e. Those made by Sabrewing and Logibro), at the time and over the past five years. I'm not requesting a refund; I'm looking forward to Legion. But their rights have been breached insofar as their AUR purchases in the last six months are concerned, and should they request a refund I support their actions and expect their satisfaction. MY ACTUAL NAME IS LORHAK
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 10175	Posted - 2014.05.07 01:27:00 - [113] - Quote Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH I AM A SCRUB BLAH BLAH BLAH I NEED TO GET ON TRUE'S LEVEL! Did you seriously get banned Lorhak? Markdown:
Mobius Wyvern Ahrendee Mercenaries Dirt Nap Squad. 5219	Posted - 2014.05.07 01:29:00 - [114] - Quote Chunky Munkey wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Mobius Wyvern wrote: Self-entitled man-child post. Learn2Law Don't forget these guys are probably American. They aren't used to having actual consumer protection laws. Wow, that's really mature. The moment someone calls you out on your whining you just offhandedly dismiss them because of their country?
LEHON Xeon Ahrendee Mercenaries Dirt Nap Squad. 659	Posted - 2014.05.07 01:30:00 - [115] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: Chunky Munkey wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Mobius Wyvern wrote: Self-entitled man-child post. Learn2Law Don't forget these guys are probably American. They aren't used to having actual consumer protection laws. Wow, that's really mature. The moment someone calls you out on your whining you just offhandedly dismiss them because of their country? Still in here eh Mobius? I thought everybody up and left by now considering all of the furor has died down now.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 5441	Posted - 2014.05.07 01:33:00 - [116] - Quote Mobius Wyvern wrote: Chunky Munkey wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Mobius Wyvern wrote: Self-entitled man-child post. Learn2Law Don't forget these guys are probably American. They aren't used to having actual consumer protection laws. Wow, that's really mature. The moment someone calls you out on your whining you just offhandedly dismiss them because of their country? Actually, I think he's pointing out that their apparently-irrational disregard for a topic based on solid legal concepts is based on the lack of similar laws in their country. It's not a "dismissal" of those people. They're the ones trying to dismiss the argument in the first place. It's pointing out a valid reason for their ignorance of the topic. Really mature of you to imply immaturity from someone who's actually trying to give people the benefit of the doubt.
Mojo XXXIII Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 297	Posted - 2014.05.07 01:33:00 - [117] - Quote Just to keep the analogy train rolling, because analogies are fun: If you bought a one-year membersip at your local health club, and they willingly sold you that membership without telling you that they were planning on closing their doors and moving to another city in a week.
Jastaddd Death seeker NegativeKDR 51	Posted - 2014.05.07 01:48:00 - [118] - Quote Argent Mordred wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: The EULA does not stop UK law from applying. Any -ú purchase by a UK consumer is covered by consumer protection regulations. You buy AUR with -ú, hence those transactions are covered. The law does not care about things people made up in their heads (thanks for that clarification, Perry Mason ) but it does care about misleading information/deceptive presentation of information that affects purchasing decisions. No but writing a EULA for a software product from a company like CCP or Sony entails a herd of lawyers specializing in the consumer laws for each country that the product is to be sold in. So I guarantee that the laws will have been dealt with to the letter. Maybe you will get lucky, but I doubt it. Sorry but Lawyer usually lost to politician that want do seem great to the audience, just for grab a +1 vote. The EUALA is WW document and it's valid, IF your country LAW don't say otherwise. In may country the LAW specifically tell you THAT if you sign something that is not following the LAW itself, the contract is VOID.
Pete B Dogs of War Gaming Zero-Day 146	Posted - 2014.05.07 02:05:00 - [119] - Quote I did a bit of work experience for a railway data logging company and by law, any machine sold in the UK has to be 'Electromagnetically friendly', so it cannot emit silly amounts of EM radiation in multiple spectrums that could mess with signals and at the same time they should be able to withstand taking in some EM noise or a minor EM pulse. So normally at the start and end of circuits (or at least for this company) they have what looks like an inductor inducing magnetic flux into a free capacitor (which acts like like an EM magnet core), which soaks up whatever flux is emitted while dissipating whatever pulses come their way. Point is, if this company was to make a contract after each sale that said within 'these machines may not contain EM protection, and any complaint about so is null and void', the law would be all over their ass as EM protection is a legal necessity and cannot be made null and void. If they told the clients 'These machines have EM protection that will work for 10 years' and it lasted for 3, again, the law would be all over their ass. In the UK, if they said the EM protection would work for 10 years, it lasted 3 and said no refunds, the law would say "**** that noise, you are obliged by us to refund, or fix/improve for free". Thing is my example still works for Dust. OK minor adjustments might be needed, but the general point of consumer rights still stands.
Ayrie Coronach DUST University Ivy League 195	Posted - 2014.05.07 02:49:00 - [120] - Quote Michael Arck wrote: Seriously, how can you ask a refund and still use CCP's forums to voice your opinions? Isn't that kind of backwards here? You made purchases for products you received. While many others cheered you on in your thread, the whole ordeal was wrong. Once Sony got wind (I suspect, they talked to CCP), they stopped giving out refunds to many who later visited your thread. Because you bought an AUR pack for AUR. Not for continuous development. This is what microtransactions are and here lies the problem with it. If things don't go the customer's way, they want their money back. And this is for items that has already been consumed. It's messed up because nowhere in the sale does it state, "buying this product continues the development of Dust 514" Plus this game was F2P. YOU made the choice to buy add-ons. You weren't forced or lied to about what you were receiving. And the funny thing is? If Legion was released on PS4, you would head over there and do the same thing over again. Alright, you know what? Getting tired of people conflating the issues here. Or at this point I suspect, willfully choosing to miss the point. So I will break down my situation and position as clearly as possible, in hopes that at least SOME of you will finally get it. I am, or rather SHOULD be all for Legion. I think it looks great, I can't see any way that it could end up worse off than DUST 514 was. CCP is on their home turf (PC) and they've had two years of live-fire practice before they called their "do-over." They've built up some experience and taken their first steps as FPS makers, there would be nowhere for them to go but up. For several years I flew around playing internet spaceships in EVE Online, and I am (or was, until a few days ago) eager to jump aboard any new points of ingress to the fascinating New Eden universe CCP have built. EVE, DUST 514, Valkyrie, Legion, whatever. All about it, and I look(ed) forward to it. The announcements at fanfest would have been a WONDERFUL thing to me, with no drawbacks or downsides (to me personally, I have a gaming PC I am confident will be capable of handling Legion) other than the loss of those that are bound for one reason or another to the PS3 platform. The loss of those people that will not be able to join us on PC would have been literally the only negative thing I'd have felt about the whole announcement and future of DUST 514/Legion. But I would have accepted it and moved past it in order to focus on the positive aspects. So, I should be in CCP's corner right now. There is nothing in the CONTENT of the announcements that offends me. PS3 has to be left behind to grow, okay. Those systems and gameplay elements we've been waiting on are attainable now, sweet. We should be able to keep our progress in the new game, awesome. What I AM offended by is lies. Personally, professionally or just in general, I don't like liars. When my money has been obtained by way of lies? Deception, misdirection, obfuscation, disinformation, misrepresentation, half-truths or just good old fashioned bald-faced lies? I move beyond offense and into righteous indignation. THAT is my one and only issue with CCP right now. Forget Legion for the moment, move past CCPs bad attempts at PR and lack of sensitivity toward the PS3-bound community they are abandoning. All of that I could totally get over. But by changing the development paradigm and not disclosing such a change in the game plan until MONTHS after the fact, while accepting (and even ENCOURAGING) the continuation of micro-transaction purchases from players that remained unaware the status quo had been altered, CCP has to my mind obtained people's money through use of deceptive business practices. i.e. they lied, and potentially made money off of those lies. Now, do I think they can be held liable in a court, and have damages awarded against them? I'm unsure. It doesn't make any practical difference to me because I was able to obtain a refund of the money I spent since the estimated cessation of DUST 514 development. I wouldn't have a dog in this specific fight in any case, as I live in the U.S.A. and the E.U.'s consumer protection laws wouldn't apply to me. But here's the rub; legal or not, it was shady business. Regardless of statute, it was immoral. It has soured any prospect I ever held about doing business of any kind with CCP ever again, in spite of how much I'd love to play Legion. My ethics aren't for sale, and I find it very difficult to overlook them for the sake of a game, no matter how appealing it personally is to me. CALL 1-800-345-SONY. PRESS '2' AND THEN '2' AGAIN. AURUM PURCHASES CAN BE REFUNDED WITHIN 90 DAYS!

Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1164	Posted - 2014.05.07 10:30:00 - [121] - Quote Phoned Sony. They said the US has already made a decision on Dust refunds (I got the impression that the decision was to refund). The EU has not but it is in their 'incident tracker', the lawyers are looking at it, and I will be told when a decision is made. Was expecting to have to make the consumer protection argument myself but they already know about it; the guy on the phone said the lawyers would be 'sweating bullets'. Have to say he was very helpful. Think Sony will be glad to see the back of CCP...
Kaughst Nyain San Dirt Nap Squad. 481	Posted - 2014.05.07 10:48:00 - [122] - Quote This reminds me of that autistic kid who tried to sue Blizzard because he thought they were sucking money out of consumers for making them walk everywhere in World of Warcraft. "He said he has a alt in STB." "Everyone has a alt in STB."
iceyburnz Crux Special Tasks Group Gallente Federation 1383	Posted - 2014.05.07 10:52:00 - [123] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Popcorns* I wonder if the law applies to both parners of the trade? Costumers don't count as partners, they count as customers. "We spent so much time huddling inside buildings with tanks circling outside like a swarm of sharks around bait"
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1164	Posted - 2014.05.07 10:55:00 - [124] - Quote Kaughst wrote: Tries and fails to grasp UK consumer protection regulations between bites of Cheetos found in neckbeard.
Kincate DUST University Ivy League 46	Posted - 2014.05.07 11:01:00 - [125] - Quote Yeah except CCP did not release any misleading information, they did not release any information. Besides you payed for items in a game. CCP said the game will continue on. What CCP does with the money you paid afterwards is not relavent. If they took all the money people paid and bought strippers and beer video tapped it and put it on the internet you as the consumer have not been mislead. So if they want to take the money they earned and use it to take half the development team away from one game and put them on another they can. How exactly have you been mislead?
Shion Typhon Intara Direct Action Caldari State 640	Posted - 2014.05.07 11:04:00 - [126] - Quote I have no real insight into the law in the UK/EU but I've been working in consumer protection prosecution for years and to be honest, there is actually the possibility of a reasonable case being argued under Australian law. While it absolutely would not be worth the $'s it would cost to pursue it (and difficulties with foreign jurisdictions), there's a fair bit of precedent for misleading and deceptive conduct and false advertising. A good Trade Practices Act lawyer could probably make a go of it. It's not as dismissable as people think, I've written legal briefs on flimsier grounds than that.
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1169	Posted - 2014.05.07 11:10:00 - [127] - Quote Kincate wrote: Yeah except CCP did not release any misleading information, they did not release any information. Besides you payed for items in a game. CCP said the game will continue on. What CCP does with the money you paid afterwards is not relavent. If they took all the money people paid and bought strippers and beer video tapped it and put it on the internet you as the consumer have not been mislead. So if they want to take the money they earned and use it to take half the development team away from one game and put them on another they can. How exactly have you been mislead? They repeatedly said they were 'laser-focused' or 'fully committed' to developing Dust when they were actually winding down development. Keeping the servers open Gëá development. Thus, they mislead people. Furthermore, some people, like me, bought AUR on the basis of this misleading information. I would not have bought any AUR over the last six months had CCP been honest and said that major development was ending shortly. As I've said before, it is irrelevant what CCP do with the money they bring in. What is relevant is whether they have mislead people in ways, such as the above, which impact their purchasing decisions.
Leeroy Gannarsein Shining Flame Amarr Empire 11	Posted - 2014.05.07 11:13:00 - [128] - Quote Kincate wrote: Yeah except CCP did not release any misleading information, they did not release any information. Besides you payed for items in a game. CCP said the game will continue on. What CCP does with the money you paid afterwards is not relavent. If they took all the money people paid and bought strippers and beer video tapped it and put it on the internet you as the consumer have not been mislead. So if they want to take the money they earned and use it to take half the development team away from one game and put them on another they can. How exactly have you been mislead? Plenty of sources of misleading information, and just so you're aware, a lie by omission, which this is, insofar as the failure to provide accurate information regarding the changed prospects of the game is concerned, is still a lie. Which is misleading. Which is a breach of consumer protection laws. Which is another way of saying "I'm nothing more than an armchair lawyer, but I still understand the (not very subtle) nuances of consumer protection better than you." MY ACTUAL NAME IS LORHAK
Kaughst Nyain San Dirt Nap Squad. 481	Posted - 2014.05.07 11:14:00 - [129] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Kaughst wrote: Tries and fails to grasp UK consumer protection regulations between bites of Cheetos found in neckbeard. Good luck not getting anywhere. "He said he has a alt in STB." "Everyone has a alt in STB."
Leeroy Gannarsein Shining Flame Amarr Empire 11	Posted - 2014.05.07 11:16:00 - [130] - Quote Kaughst wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Kaughst wrote: Tries and fails to grasp UK consumer protection regulations between bites of Cheetos found in neckbeard. Good luck not getting anywhere. Plenty of people got anywhere on the strength of these arguments. MY ACTUAL NAME IS LORHAK

Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1169	Posted - 2014.05.07 11:16:00 - [131] - Quote As enjoyable as it is laughing at people's total incomprehension of basic legal principles I have a pile of work to do. I won't be visiting these forums again until I hear back from Sony.
Kaughst Nyain San Dirt Nap Squad. 481	Posted - 2014.05.07 11:17:00 - [132] - Quote Leeroy Gannarsein wrote: Kaughst wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Kaughst wrote: Tries and fails to grasp UK consumer protection regulations between bites of Cheetos found in neckbeard. Good luck not getting anywhere. Plenty of people got anywhere on the strength of these arguments. The point is he is the autistic child arguing frivolous arguments. "He said he has a alt in STB." "Everyone has a alt in STB."
m621 zma Seraphim Initiative.. 120	Posted - 2014.05.07 11:46:00 - [133] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: Scheherazade VII wrote: your name is after some strange place near Yeovil, I remember driving past it on the way Yeovil and thought "thats a weird place" and carried on driving. Yes it is, there are lots of weird village names around there that could be a futuristic merc (e.g. Toller Porcorum, Minterne Magna), I went with this one. South West massive repraaaazent!!!!
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 5487	Posted - 2014.05.07 11:47:00 - [134] - Quote Kincate wrote: Yeah except CCP did not release any misleading information, they did not release any information. Besides you payed for items in a game. CCP said the game will continue on. What CCP does with the money you paid afterwards is not relavent. If they took all the money people paid and bought strippers and beer video tapped it and put it on the internet you as the consumer have not been mislead. So if they want to take the money they earned and use it to take half the development team away from one game and put them on another they can. How exactly have you been mislead? They never released any misleading information. They never released any misleading information. They never released any misleading information. The game was directly stated to be continuing on PS3 and when that changed, they misled us with a lie of omission by witholding that information. The game was directly stated to be receiving ongoing support AFTER they had stopped supporting it and moved most of the development team to Legion. The game was directly advertised as coming to PS4 as the primary next-gen platform for development, and again, there was a lie of omission when that change wasn't communicated to us until AFTER pushing Aurum with multiple sales. If none of that is misleading, neither is this.
jimmybroon brown 29	Posted - 2014.05.07 12:49:00 - [135] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Remember the UK court allows Candy Crush saga to sue Banner Saga and win. 'Banner Saga' can never be used in a future title becuase of the outcome. Im n+¦t surprised that your trying to make a joke out of it rather than actually give some helpfull advice
Vala Prime Death by Disassociation Top Men. 48	Posted - 2014.05.08 21:32:00 - [136] - Quote Does the burning tree have to obey the law. I bet if you told eve players they moving eve to ps3 bet they be mad too. I fought the law the law won. Oh s*** ban. Time to troll
Beld Errmon 1653	Posted - 2014.05.27 10:40:00 - [137] - Quote So weeks later did the big bad internet lawyer crowd do a single thing? I'll go ahead and answer that one, nope, full of ****. Pilot - Tanker - FOTM (insert here)
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 5574	Posted - 2014.05.27 10:44:00 - [138] - Quote Beld Errmon wrote: So weeks later did the big bad internet lawyer crowd do a single thing? I'll go ahead and answer that one, nope, full of ****. I talked half a dozen friends in New Zealand, Australia and the UK through getting refunds over the issue, so I'd say most of us probably did all we needed to.
steadyhand amarr shadows of 514 3131	Posted - 2014.05.27 12:23:00 - [139] - Quote Naw people trickrd sony into a diffrent uk law which is anything that is bought can be returned in 30 days, once the level 1 support guys where told they cant undo the transaction if the customer used the ARU in question they promptly stopped the refunds, Ccp clearly stated you are buying ARU which is in game currancy The ARU can be used to buy in game items Boosters are sold for a 30 day boost to sp. Simply put CCP as not mislead in any adverts of these products (they are seprate productd to the game itself) If CCP closed the game down tomorrow they would have to then refund any ARU or unused boosters. But the game is still running. So again when u buy a product read what you are getting thats all the law cares about. You got what u paid for ARU and boosters that run for 30 days. The only refunds handed out if itall (internet bull likely here) was a 30 day refund law which should not have been handed out because the product got used. "i dont care about you or your goals, just show me the dam isk" winner of EU squad cup GOGO power rangers
TechMechMeds KLEENEX INC. 3441	Posted - 2014.05.27 12:32:00 - [140] - Quote NomaDz 2K wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: If you trade in a country you are subject to its laws. It's really not hard to grasp. Yep and not to mention that we are also protected by british laws even abroad because we are Royal Subjects what commonwealth country are you from mate?. Yeah our law protects a lot of people from their own governments, its actually quite sad. Eve Legion FTW!

TechMechMeds KLEENEX INC. 3441	Posted - 2014.05.27 12:39:00 - [141] - Quote Kaughst wrote: This reminds me of that autistic kid who tried to sue Blizzard because he thought they were sucking money out of consumers for making them walk everywhere in World of Warcraft. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHASHA. Had to convince a buddy once that he wasnt an orange while he was tripping as he was trying to peel his skin off!. I was tripping as well so you can imagine how nightmarish it was lol. not laughing at the kid either, just the context. Eve Legion FTW!
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 1561	Posted - 2014.05.27 12:41:00 - [142] - Quote TechMechMeds wrote: NomaDz 2K wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: If you trade in a country you are subject to its laws. It's really not hard to grasp. Yep and not to mention that we are also protected by british laws even abroad because we are Royal Subjects what commonwealth country are you from mate?. Yeah our law protects a lot of people from their own governments, its actually quite sad. Unfortunately they don't protect Americans from ours.... Your welcome to add me on PSN, just give your Dust name in the request. PSN ID: AlbelNox2569 MAG Vet ~ Raven
TechMechMeds KLEENEX INC. 3441	Posted - 2014.05.27 12:45:00 - [143] - Quote This is a much harder case to deal with then anyone in this thread seems to grasp unfortunately People got misled We all accepted the EULA which states that CCP owns our profiles basically We knowingly bought a currency to spend in game We were told that its got a long road map It is staying on the sony network though Theres more but its really not a simple thing and there were no actual promises ever. No worker at CCP ever PROMISED anything and the EULA states that they own everything. Eve Legion FTW!
TechMechMeds KLEENEX INC. 3442	Posted - 2014.05.27 12:50:00 - [144] - Quote Baal Omniscient wrote: TechMechMeds wrote: NomaDz 2K wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: If you trade in a country you are subject to its laws. It's really not hard to grasp. Yep and not to mention that we are also protected by british laws even abroad because we are Royal Subjects what commonwealth country are you from mate?. Yeah our law protects a lot of people from their own governments, its actually quite sad. Unfortunately they don't protect Americans from ours.... Your ancestors wanted freedom and got it and for a time (about 30 years if that?) it was actually good but then reality kicked in and so did the fed. Eve Legion FTW!
The Rainbow Affect The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 1	Posted - 2014.05.27 12:57:00 - [145] - Quote With so many blue tags on the forums these days.... Is there any chance we can get some official stand from CCP's side on this entire matter? I doubt it but it would be "proper". LOL, my bad, CCP =/= proper...
Baal Omniscient L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 1562	Posted - 2014.05.27 12:58:00 - [146] - Quote TechMechMeds wrote: Baal Omniscient wrote: TechMechMeds wrote: NomaDz 2K wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: If you trade in a country you are subject to its laws. It's really not hard to grasp. Yep and not to mention that we are also protected by british laws even abroad because we are Royal Subjects what commonwealth country are you from mate?. Yeah our law protects a lot of people from their own governments, its actually quite sad. Unfortunately they don't protect Americans from ours.... Your ancestors wanted freedom and got it and for a time (about 30 years if that?) it was actually good but then reality kicked in and so did the fed. Things were tolerable politically (race and sex discrimination related things aside) until the corporations took over everything in the 1970's and 80's. And once the Citizens United ruling went through, things bottomed out hardcore. Now wolf-pac.com is the only (distant) hope left for us to correct things. It's a sad sad world we live in these days... Your welcome to add me on PSN, just give your Dust name in the request. PSN ID: AlbelNox2569 MAG Vet ~ Raven
Hansei Kaizen The Jackson Five 207	Posted - 2014.05.27 13:02:00 - [147] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 7.3 wrote: A misleading action occurs when a practice misleads through the information it contains, or its deceptive presentation, and causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a different decision. So if a company provided misleading information, or presented information in a misleading way, regarding their product, with the result that consumers made purchases they otherwise would not, they are in breach of consumer protection regulations. Legal remedies include civil and criminal enforcement, which aim to: UK government guidance on the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, section 11.3 wrote: GÇó change the behaviour of the offender GÇó eliminate any financial gain or benefit from noncompliance GÇó be responsive and consider what is appropriate for the particular offender and regulatory issue GÇó be proportionate to the nature of the offence and the harm caused GÇó restore the harm caused by the regulatory noncompliance, where appropriate, and GÇó deter further non-compliance. The full UK government guidance is available here. Details on making a complaint are available here. Please note that there are similar regulations elsewhere in Europe as the UK simply follows EU consumer protection regulations. You can start practicing for the formulation of your complaint by posting here in which way you where misled. Show us on this doll where they took your money pulls out tiny empty pockets The answer to your complaint is PvE. Always. NPE status: (Gò»°Gûí°n+ëGò»n+¦ Gö+GöüGö+ Casual solo
TechMechMeds KLEENEX INC. 3442	Posted - 2014.05.27 13:04:00 - [148] - Quote I was just laughing because your ancestors are mine as well. I had family on booth sides of the revolution and the civil war with family coming back to the UK around 1899 but whether im from the offshoot coming back or not i Don't know. there was once a town called valeene that my ancestors founded with others and lived at one point as well. I dont know a great deal about it though. i have a long lost cousin who e mailed me about my great uncle George dying as well which was strange, n never knew either lol. Eve Legion FTW!
Captain-Awesome Imperfects Negative-Feedback 565	Posted - 2014.05.27 13:15:00 - [149] - Quote honestly, did you expect CCP 10 year plan to stay on playstation 3 that had already been relegated to last gen? how can this community prove to be anymore stupid? make this thread. Seriously. Grow some balls, man the ** up, you sound an old man reluctant to change. we all knew and accepted that CCP was going to move from PS3. Now when they announce it, you hit the roof. idiots. Try sue CCP, spend more of your hard earned money on something you will never win. You was stupid enough to spend money on this game in the first place so why not carry on with the tradition. here is what I hope CCP thinks about this community [url]https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/7782390016/h42060F1F/[/url] > Registered: March 2011 >Role:** Logistics Waiting for dust to go on PS4
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 15209	Posted - 2014.05.27 13:59:00 - [150] - Quote Ryme Intrinseca wrote: 'Laser-focused on PS3' - somewhat misleading, no? Regarding reasonable doubt, that standard is only required in criminal cases. The standard in civil cases is the balance of probabilities. I get the impression that I have a rather firmer grasp of UK law than you do. Statement of Laser Focused was made back in October 2013; well before Legion was an inkling in anyone's eyes. Also 10 year plan does not include platform if you look back at all the soundbites. While some people have 20/20 past vision others have a muddle of recollection of the timeline of past events and highly reliant on human methods in remembering. Finally I never heard any of the previous 'lawsuits' getting into court ever. Sony is the sort of people you do not want to sue; I mean read about this case. http://www.1up.com/news/sony-lawsuits-force-lik-sang-closure you'd think the consumers would win out here. CPM 0 Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior, Annoying Artist \\= Advanced Caldari Assault // Unlocked

Freccia di Lybra Maphia Clan Corporation 97	Posted - 2014.05.27 15:11:00 - [151] - Quote Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: 'Laser-focused on PS3' - somewhat misleading, no? Regarding reasonable doubt, that standard is only required in criminal cases. The standard in civil cases is the balance of probabilities. I get the impression that I have a rather firmer grasp of UK law than you do. Statement of Laser Focused was made back in October 2013; well before Legion was an inkling in anyone's eyes. Also 10 year plan does not include platform if you look back at all the soundbites. While some people have 20/20 past vision others have a muddle of recollection of the timeline of past events and highly reliant on human methods in remembering. You realize that we were all expecting the next gen to be PS4, right? Or at least a PC/PS4 cross platform (which will be stupid, but at least would have saved many complaints). If they even said a "maybe we will work on PC too" it would have been much different. Considering their player base is on Playstation, they should have continued developing on Playstation, that's it. That's completely different from the PC vs Console argument.
Iron Wolf Saber Den of Swords 15211	Posted - 2014.05.27 16:08:00 - [152] - Quote Freccia di Lybra wrote: Iron Wolf Saber wrote: Ryme Intrinseca wrote: 'Laser-focused on PS3' - somewhat misleading, no? Regarding reasonable doubt, that standard is only required in criminal cases. The standard in civil cases is the balance of probabilities. I get the impression that I have a rather firmer grasp of UK law than you do. Statement of Laser Focused was made back in October 2013; well before Legion was an inkling in anyone's eyes. Also 10 year plan does not include platform if you look back at all the soundbites. While some people have 20/20 past vision others have a muddle of recollection of the timeline of past events and highly reliant on human methods in remembering. You realize that we were all expecting the next gen to be PS4, right? Or at least a PC/PS4 cross platform (which will be stupid, but at least would have saved many complaints). If they even said a "maybe we will work on PC too" it would have been much different. Considering their player base is on Playstation, they should have continued developing on Playstation, that's it. That's completely different from the PC vs Console argument. Next Gen can still mean PS4. CPM 0 Secretary Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior, Annoying Artist \\= Advanced Caldari Assault // Unlocked


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.