News EA to face class action lawsuit over Spore DRM

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2008/09/26/ea-to-face-class-action-lawsuit-over-spore-drm/1

EA is to face a class action lawsuit apparently, after plaintiffs have emerged who allege that SecuROM breaches consumer law.

 

It was about time something like this to happen. Hopefully they think twice before spending money on DRM again.

 

An interestingly phrased poll - a SecuROM Bad Y/N type question would overwhelmingly be yes. However I find myself agreeing with both answers. So in that way, it's poorly phrased. Regardless...

It is understandable that EA want to protect their investment.

It is also unforgivable that SecuROM is presented in such a way that the only time it is actually a nuisance is to legitimate purchasers of the product it is included on.

Therefore I can understand why EA have used it, but find their execution of the system unforgivable and therefore do not wish to support it.

 

It's deliberately poorly phrased. You can't have it both ways.

 

I gathered that much. Just trying to explain why I couldn't agree 100% with either option.

 

Personally I feel that people who start suing like that should be taken out back and shot.. if you don't like it... uninstall the game.

I agree that the box should say "uses SecuROM" or something like that, which I believe it does not.

EA made the game and can sell it with what ever they want, be that DRM, links to P0rn sites, offers for ridiculous loans what ever, as long as it says so on the box so that you can make your decision based on that.

At the end of the day it's a question of weighing your "desire" to play the game vs your aversion for DRM such as SecuROM.

I think we can all understand that companies like EA would like to somehow prevent their product which has costs them a lot of money to create to be easily copied, even if we all know that DRM like this gets cracked almost before the game is released.

 

I hope EA get shafted big time by this.
either way, EA should learn a lesson (if they don't have their heads stuffed up their collective asses), and this will at the very least, bring attention to game developers that including draconian anti-piracy systems on any of their products is going to backfire on them and f- their sales figures up.
it would be funny to see a shelf at game stores labeled 'secuROM games' with a bunch of game boxes covered in dust and cob-webs.

 

And EA have already got your money... you can't return it open after all. I think is the main cause of the upset here. The EULA is only presented to you *after* you've bought that game. So if you reject it... what? You've just bought a shiny £30 drinks coaster. Even just saying on the box 'this product contains secuROM' doesn't help as again, it tells you nothing about what you are actually buying with that product.

The only way around this is to:
1) Somehow make the EULA available *before* the product is purchased
2) Accept full-money refunds for anyone who rejects the EULA after purchase of the product.

I mean really, think about this, it's absolutely ridiculous that with software like this you are presented with the terms of the license *after* you have bought the product! How does that make any kind of sense? Try and apply that bizarre logic to any other situation and see how you'd feel

 

Tyrmot - excellent comment, agree %100

If you don't' like the policy don't buy the game, but you have to be made aware first of the policy... which is what i would go after in this case..

 

-> Tyrmot
I agree with you, making the EULA available before you buy a product would be a good way to go forward.

I guess what I'm aiming at is that I'm dead tired of people feeling that suing is the only way to solve a problem. I mean think about it.. lets say EA has to now pay out a couple mill $, where is that money coming from? Well either it will come out of the development budget for the next game EA is making or it will just be passed onto the price of the next game... who are we really hurting? You may argue that a couple of mill is nothing for a company the size of EA, but really what happened to dialog? Has the people now suing EA actually tried to start a dialog with EA before suing (I don't know), or have they just been screaming "we don't want DRM"?
You could probably get the companies to make each game's EULA available through their website so that you can read it before you buy the game, in reality probably no more 0.0001% of the people even thinking about buying the game would actually go read it though.

 

question: who here reads the EULA?

 

Seconded. Made the same point at /. and some guy responds by posting a link to some third-party site containing the EULA. Yeah, because the fact that it's visible SOMEWHERE prior to purchase (not even on the publisher's own site!) makes it OK. So I'm done with EA, and done with other companies that use similar tactics. If they want to use DRM, fine, but I'll do like everyone always says and vote with my wallet.

 

If you don't like it don't buy it. Don't clog up the CJS with BS lawsuits. I hate EA 110% and would like to see them shutdown but it's their game to do whatever they want with it.

It's bad enough everyone had to invest in getting the rating system pasted all over products.

 

In all my years I'm proud to have never read one

 

Yeah, your right UrbanMarine.. it is their game and they can put whatever they want in it

but ... it's MY computer and I have a right to determine what goes on it .. if I have to pay money for something only to find that it has something I dont agree with AFTER the fact, I'm suposed to suck it up and take the loss???

.. and then try the same thing all over again with someone elses product ???

 

I give the EULA a quick scan just to make sure I'm not agreeing to anything nasty.

 

I personally feel bad for Will Wright. This is his brainchild that he wanted to create so badly for everyone to play and they won't just enjoy the game because of EA's DRM bulls**t. (even though he's filthy rich) I personally don't care about the DRM, I know it's there and I agreed to install it. If it's in the EULA, I do not see this lawsuit standing any ground.

 

Yes and no. You do have the right to determine what goes on your PC. But the thing is some user agreements state that the game/software even though you bought it isn't yours and the company has the right to do what they want. They also sometimes state that they're not responsible for hardware damage etc etc.

ex. Blizzard has all the rights to my copy and wow account. Based on the user agreement they have the right to terminate my account and I don't get a refund. I can't even sell my copy to someone because it violates the user agreement. Which in turn violates the wonderful legal system.

Real life ex. I paid for my drivers license but the state has the right to take it away from me because in their agreement it states that my license is state property.

Anyways the whole anti-piracy war is just a waste of money. Spore was cracked in a few days by the pirate community and now millions of dollars are going to be wasted in court over something that wasn't even worth it.

 

I actually did - few times. But it was just for one purpose - what rights I had when I bought game 10 years ago and what rights I have now when I buy game. 10 years ago - you were forbidden to decompile, modify software...and so on...but: you owned the right to use the software and you were even allowed to make backup copies!!! Now - you're forbidden to make backup copies(and if your disc(s) gets damaged you'll have to pay undisclosed price for new one), you don't own game - it's rent to you.

Some week ago, chrisuk wrote:
"And no, you don't have any right to put it on more than one machine......all that has changed is that the technologies now exist to enforce what has been in EULAs for a long long long time."

I think it's exactly the opposite - They're changing EULA because they (think they) have technology to enforce it.
---

But I must say I feel very pitty for developers(especially for guys behind Spore) - they often put so much effort just to see their effort being ruined by intrusive DRM. If only some publishers put more trust in gamers...

On the other hand - just read through the news section of SecuROM(Sony DADC) webpage. It's really OUTRAGEOUS they attribute success of some high-selling games to themselves!!! Not even EA deserves to suffer for whatever brainwashing techniques SecuRom uses against them to lure them to use their DRM.

 

Whether SecuROM is illegal or not, I will not be purchasing any game that implements it, which is a shame really, cause I really did fancy Spore and Red Alert 3.

I'm sure there are many other potential customers like me, I thought we'd established by now the DRM = BAD and is effectively shooting yourself in the foot, especially the draconian versions like SecuROM