[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Sony's 'No-Sue' PlayStation Network Use Clause is Anti-Consumer here

[JoeGraff]

The agreement not to sue in a contract in not enforceable. It may discourage the average consumer from suing, but you cannot sign away your right to legal recourse. That part of the contract is not valid--so no one should worry about it anyway...

[Horaciojevn]

When the new Xbox comes out, good bye Sony forever.

[RonZhu]

This contract itself can be sued due to limiting the freedom of speech and expression. Oh, the irony.

[CannibalCat]

Horaciojevn, on 19 September 2011 - 06:12 AM, said:

When the new Xbox comes out, good bye Sony forever.

Agreed. All Sony is doing is driving potential customers into the arms of their competitors.
There\s protecting your arse and there's just poor business practice.

[TechGuyChris]

You know, for all the verizon customers, you should cancel your agreement with them as well since they also have an arbitration cause in their contract preventing you from suing them as well =)So does most of your banks you do business with.

Not defending Sony in anyway, just saying the hype is a little biased and that most giant companies have already had arbitration. Sony just joined in cause of how consumers flipped about personal info thats availabe anywhere else.

[xyberviri]

yup yup

The Whole Arbitration clause argument is stupid, every contract out there has the "mandatory arbitration" clause in it. the only reason everyone ie freaking out is because it was added and some one noticed.

[daniel142005]

A good bit of the user base for Sony is also under 18. Can't a parent or guardian sue over whatever it is, when they may have never even seen the ToS, let alone agree to it?

There would have to be some sort of loop whole... I know there was against AT&T (who also has one of these) but I don't recall what they did exactly. The suit is still ongoing though.

[eoraptor2]

Actually, it's all quite legal. http://articles.lati...action-20110428

The same bought-and-paid-for court that allowed corporations to have unlimited campaign finance has said that yes, corporations CAN tell you to bend over and take it.

[mattpeckham]

eoraptor2, on 19 September 2011 - 08:50 AM, said:

Actually, it's all quite legal. http://articles.lati...action-20110428

The same bought-and-paid-for court that allowed corporations to have unlimited campaign finance has said that yes, corporations CAN tell you to bend over and take it.

Right, it's legal--I don't think anyone's saying (or even implying) that it's not. But whether it's wise, or right, or ethically defensible is another matter. And yes, as someone pointed out earlier, there's a *lot* about corporate practice we let ride, but not because we agree--rather we don't have time in a day to track what's being foisted on us daily. And it's that incapacity to scrutinize and react that makes it so, not the supposed well-wishes of a supportive public.

[BrianMacGowan]

RonZhu, on 19 September 2011 - 06:40 AM, said:

This contract itself can be sued due to limiting the freedom of speech and expression. Oh, the irony.

Only the government is not allowed to limit these rights. Why do people think that companies can not limit freedom of speech or expression? Granted they can only limit their employees and not their customers.

[Boomshadow]

What's the address of Sony Legal where we need to send the letter, and does anyone have recommended text?

[Boomshadow]

Boomshadow, on 19 September 2011 - 10:22 AM, said:

What's the address of Sony Legal where we need to send the letter, and does anyone have recommended text?

Never mind. A little Google-fu and I got it:

Sony Computer Entertainment America
Attn: Legal Department/Arbitration
6080 Center Drive, 10th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90045

Suggested text follows.

To Whom It May Concern:

We are hereby opting out of the lawsuit waiver clause as stipulated in the very, very long Terms of Service agreement now required for further participation in PSN and to obtain software upgrades for our PS3.

In future, please shorten and simplify your Terms of Service. You at Sony are not indispensable to us. We in the outside world are indispensable to you.

Sincerely,

[RNR19952]

F $ony

[RichardTietjensk0qu]

The solution is simple: Don't buy Sony products. Anyone who does so is a fool anyway; remember, Sony is the only Corporation in the world ever convicted of distributing computer viruses on audio CDs (google "Sony/BMG rootkit" for details).

[RichardTietjensk0qu]

RonZhu, on 19 September 2011 - 06:40 AM, said:

This contract itself can be sued due to limiting the freedom of speech and expression. Oh, the irony.

Incorrect, Ron. The US Constitution prevent the Government from stifling free speech; Corporations are not he Government (they only own the legislators, not the Government itself).

[TheOldTopkick]

It's his bat, his ball. What are you going to do? Start up your own? The law is what the courts say it is. Your opinion and mine is of no consequence. Or, to put it in its raw form, sue and be damned.

[SoLiOZuZ]

JoeGraff, on 19 September 2011 - 06:04 AM, said:

The agreement not to sue in a contract in not enforceable. It may discourage the average consumer from suing, but you cannot sign away your right to legal recourse. That part of the contract is not valid--so no one should worry about it anyway...

Yeah, I'm going to have to agree with this.

[ronin7752]

I expect Sony is setting a trend that will carry over to other companies. Most EULA's are anti-consumer -- Sony is just "ahead" of the pack.

[LordInsidious]

Arrg, 'tis a cowardly move to be sure, they should be keelhauled for this says I.