Microsoft just put verbiage in their newest XBL update that explicitly forbids you to take part in a class action against them... To them I say... good luck with that LOL
On Thursday, December 8, 2011 11:08:51 AM UTC-5, joel witherspoon wrote: > > >"Banning users" (not sure exactly what you mean by that) is one thing, >> >but disabling an app that someone has already paid for? I don't think >> >Microsoft or Oracle would do that. I think they'd be leaving >> >themselves open to lawsuits. They can refuse to do any future business >> >with anyone they want, but once a customer has purchased a product or >> >service, they can't just renege on the contract. >> >> Microsoft, Oracle, AT&T, Verizon, etc. all do this. It's in there EULA > and TOU contracts. When you accept that contract, you accept their > administration of the product. They aren't reneging on a contract, they are > enforcing it. That's why they can cut off your cable, DSL, phone, and > computer game at a moments notice. Notice how root-kits got so much bad > press then game publishers came out with tools such as "Steam" and > "Origin"? Up front, in your face root kits. Read a EULA, you'll be amazed > at what they can do to what you "own." > > As far as John is concerned, if it's in his EULA or TOU and the users > accepts it or uses the product, they have to accept the kill switch. > Rendall is correct, "no one has a inherent right to the application." This > is not a social contract, it is a business contract. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Discuss" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/android-discuss/-/1ryEuV-mnG0J. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en.
