Now it’s descended into trolling. I’m allowed to post wherever I please to as long as I have an account in good standing. You have no right to tell anyone where they can and cannot post.
Last post here, before I say something that might violate the Code of Conduct.
Good luck with whatever you decide to do…
You pay for general server access. If the server you primarily want has a log in queue, then there are several other available servers. If you choose to focus in on a high pop realm then yes, queues will be something you need to deal with from time to time.
I back this up 10000%, having dealt directly with the BBB for, eh, 12 years in regards to our business rating, etc.
I paid to have bad reviews removed.
I wrote letters defending our business’ point that resulted in reviews being removed nearly every time, whether we were right or wrong.
Eventually we simply opted out of the BBB, took the stickers off our doors, and let the chips fall where they may.
Pretty much nonsense, the whole BBB thing.
/shrug
Give it a rest slick… Good Lord. Go play rules lawyer elsewhere.
If you don’t like it and don’t want to participate, then why can no one else?
Blizzard has stated that our characters remain their sole property - only “leased” to users. If “leased” assets are not available to advertised and marketed service terms, then there’s a bit of an issue here.
@Perl - at this point you’ve failed to read above multiple times. This isn’t a measure of what Blizzard tells us is law, but the actual government bodies of the state they operate in. California makes consumer law, not Blizzard, perhaps to your dismay. /shrug
@Rufflebottom - Stay on topic, as stated above. If you want to discuss what is and is not trolling, find a thread for such.
I’ve read it just fine. You’ve yet to state which part of the EULA that you’ve agreed to is being violated or that violates your own definition of law.
Again, feel free to lawyer up and make sure you have them read the EULA so that they can better explain it to you since you’re not understanding it.
Yes I’ve only given it the good old college try for ten minutes, but all of the information I can find on legal action against gaming companies when their services go down is that the contract is, in effect, the binding document.
California has no consumer law in regards to online services that supersedes the service contract, AFAIK. As long as the contract is legal and you agreed to it, that’s it and that’s all.
This particular contract we are debating says flat out, the service won’t be available all the time. It’s AS-IS, which means, up, down… sideways, whatever.
Good luck.
You seem to be spouting nonsense trying to sound like you know what you are talking about. Blizzard isn’t telling you what is law. They provide an agreement. If you don’t agree with their terms, you uninstall the game. It states that explicitly in the EULA. The only one claiming Blizzard is trying to make consumer law is you.
You don’t pay for my subscription. I am not your minor child. You don’t get to dictate what I, or anyone else, posts.
Yeah, what California Law is Blizzard supposedly violating? Show us the actual case law?
Advisement is not restriction upon your posting. Please learn the difference, as debating such is a fruitless endeavor. Dictionaries exist if you need further clarification. I can certainly voice my opinion as strongly as you are making a case to be able to yourself. The Terms of Service though control off-topic commentary, which I relayed such reply to. Follow along.
@Ravenhawk - if I had such case law, why would I be asking about such on the forum? If such clear cut, why would a civil suit or class action take place without inquiring your precious opinion? Again - please follow along with comments and questions already asked. If one prefers not to read through the thread, one is not obligated to reply.
@Breakbeat - why not just offer an hour per month then? Such is legal, yes? Buy “30 days of gametime” isn’t legally obligated to be 30 days, no?
Means you don’t know what you are talking about…
Sorry, It’s to the point that off-topic disrespect just has to be reported. It doesn’t belong here.
EDIT: Appreciate your edit, but already logged.
Thank you for admitting that you don’t fully understand or have read what it is that you legally agreed to. It’s really unfortunate that you haven’t taken the time to read what it was you were agreeing to, but that’s not Blizzard’s fault.
Blizzard, very specifically, does not guarantee 100% up-time for servers. They also do not guarantee access to any specific server or character in their video game.
No, as posted above by Terise, what was agreed to was the “extent allowed by applicable law” NOT “whatever Blizzard deems just”. There’s a difference in that.
If you do not understand this difference, I am not here to teach it. @Breakbeat was the closest to even addressing the commentary rather than stepping up on a soapbox to discredit any notion of their beloved Blizzard.
Blizzard is following the law. They would not be legally allowed to make an EULA that did not follow the law.
Again, feel free to have an actual lawyer explain the EULA to you if you’re struggling with it.
I beg to differ. You were trying to dictate what I could discuss in this thread. Talking down to me doesn’t change what you said. Nor does it stop your posts from being trolling.
You were provided with the correct information, but because you didn’t appear to like the answers you bring up California law. You then talk down to the posters who posted things you didn’t agree with. Not exactly the stance to take if you don’t actually know the answer.
Because Blizzard does not own or control the internet connection you have to their servers. They can not guarantee your hour of access to their servers wouldn’t be interrupted by an internet outage between you and their servers. That is the reason why they state they can not guarantee 100% access to the servers in the EULA.
You can’t teach what you don’t understand yourself.
As you have cited, what is such law? I would hate to think that you are executing the blind assumption of law which I have been accused of.
@Rufflebottom you haven’t an idea what others understand. Until you do, please refrain.
I dunno, I’m not really here to speculate on subscription options that would have helped you be more satisfied. That’s a different thread for a different time. This thread is far too muddy already.
You’re the one claiming the EULA is not following the law, not me. You tell us which law it is that Blizzard is in violation of. I’m telling you that they have a very apt legal team that’s happy to argue the realities of it with your own lawyer if you feel that some sort of law is being violated.
I am not. I’m not sure where this was even conjured from, but it surely relates to the previous obfuscation and misdirection noted.
EULA defines guidance to what is applicable by law only. What is applicable by law was the question. Everything additional was your assumption.