If blizzard takes your money for something they never deliver, blames you, cancels your account and keeps your money while continuing to charge other people and not deliver, it’s fine in your country as long as they put it into the terms you must click “ok” to? I think not.
If they snuck in a clause where you were required to hand over your firstborn if you clicked “okay” without reading what you were accepting?
“We are not responsible for our bad performance and will not issue refunds and you have no legal standing to have a class action lawsuit.”
Yuck.
People used to stand behind their work and products, this is disgusting.
Can I add some ice cream to that hyper-bowl?
Now, of course, I want ice cream…
Lol laws don’t work like that.
I mean I know Blizz is slimy, but let’s not go that far…
I tend to forget how massive of a company this is and that the time it takes them to do things just does not add up.
TL;DR
Not much
Formatting changes
Wording Changes
Blizzard Gear store stuff yeeted to orbit (Gear store has it’s own terms)
Other stuff curbstomped as is covered by the EULA anyway
New refund policy , formalizing guidelines CS has used for exceptions
Somehow the EULA is in there somehow
That would of either been the Terms of Service or Terms of Use. Both of these have been superseded in favour of the Blizzard EULA which is more wide reaching then either of those documents.
The Terms of Sale agreement is a different beasty altogether.
No it doesn’t.
I think it’s important to clarify here - nothing in the terms of sale takes precedence over the Blizzard EULA nor does it suddenly make any consumer protection laws invalid.
For the most part very little about the Terms of Sale has changed. Sure there’s a new refund policy put in but from what hearing from my contacts , these were sort of guidelines they were already following internally anyway. Gear store has been yeeted to orbit as it’s largely unnecessary as the gear store has it’s own terms. The Dispute resolution policy is largely been a part of the EULA for years anyway. Indemnification clauses have also been part of the EULA for years as well.
So let’s take your hypothetical situation. You order a mount and you never receive it. I assume you put in a ticket for it. The GM can now look at their new official refund policy , and see that you haven’t claimed or opened it within the first 14 days after purchase and refund it. Before they could refuse as the Terms of sale said “All digital purchases are final”. Now they have more options available to them.
Meh, the only thing I’m buying off the shop is a spider mount or a bunny mount.
Other than that I’m not interested. I have over 300 mounts as it is, if they want extra money, it’s gotta be something I want, not just some new random shiny that gets dumped on the store.
The thing about boilerplate is that its boilerplate. Terms such as this are and can only be binding if the terms themselves do not either explicitly or implicitly deprive either party to the contract of legal rights or remedies.
Regardless of the terms written in the click-through a producer/reseller cannot through their terms or through inaction on their part deprive a purchaser/consumer of right to merchantability.
Of course the issue would be whether the value of the damage done through loss of merchantability would rise to the level necessary to be addressable in either small claims or in a civil action.
So, technically the language in the terms of sale may be egregiously inappropriate, but it would require at the very least a filing of intent to initiate civil action against Blizzard Entertainment. It isn’t likely that one person will do this as the expense of such action on an individual scale would outweigh the amount in potential damages incurable by at least an order of magnitude. However, if enough people made the same complaint, it has the potential to be joined as a class action. Again the damages would need to be both demonstrable, survivable, and at least one of the claimants would need to show standing.
Not a LIKELY scenario but a possible one depending on how much you value your time and interest in having the terms of sale having this clause excised.
But realistically how many of those potential members of the class are going to want to take the time and effort to join such class?
IT is almost as if they are going
Blizz: Rule number 1 it is never our fault
Blizz: Rule number 2 in the event that is our fault see rule number 1
thank you thank you thank you
Ok…things happen, no problem there.
Probably…but with their turn-around time on getting to tickets being absolutely atrocious, I dont find that as much a viable “consumer redress” option.
I’d rather not wait 14 days to be refunded. If you’re not gonna do anything about my problem for 14 days, then dont charge me for 14 days until you’re sure that what i bought is what i got. I mean, im not going to head into a Carl Jr’s pay for food and walk away with nothing pending a 14 day investigation into my burger.
I think you haven’t read either my post or the refund policy properly.
Here’s the refund policy for you to read -
I’ve read it.
I just dont care. I dont want to wait to be refunded any longer than the turn-around time it took, for them or anyone to take my money. It’s really that simple, they get their money instantly, i want to be refunded instantly.
Tell’em Furcas…this old age bug should of been fixed years back with these disappearing products that player base buys with hard earned money. This all started back in 2013 with these store brought mog items.
But now I see why it wasn’t fix…other things were more important to them then to fix huge issues like this.
The interesting question posed here (even if you didn’t realize it), is: CAN you sign your RIGHTS away?
Companies often put language in their contracts, all the while knowing that what they’re putting in isn’t even legal. If they get away with it, fine. Otherwise, it’s not going to be argued until they get to a court room, which isn’t likely to happen anyway.
The entire time, they can keep flexing over language that isn’t even legal.
Like, I used to rent some SFHs as a side-hustle and I had a clause that said I would return the security deposit NO SOONER than 31 days after the lease ended. It was clearly explained in my contract that I also had rights to examine the property in full and make sure all damages were addressed before returning security deposits, check’s in the mail, etc, and I allowed myself a full month for that process.
No one even questioned it. I mean, it’s certainly REASONABLE. They’re still getting their money. 27 days, 33 days… same-same.
The thing is, it’s not legal (not in my state). A security deposit HAS to be returned, BY LAW, in LESS than 30 days.
So, again, no one even questioned it. But… LEGALLY… could I have gotten away with it? Can a person SIGN THEIR RIGHTS AWAY? Or, if I HAD been taken to court, could they simply have said “I know I signed that contract, by the state law says that I’m entitled to my money sooner than that contract states.”
THAT to me is the interesting question. Because, Blizzard can say all they want. If you can’t sign away your rights, they don’t have a leg to stand on.
And yet you keep giving them money since 2013.
I didn’t know that you can defend a bug in paid store like this.