this post was submitted on 04 May 2024
368 points (95.5% liked)
Helldivers 2
1854 readers
20 users here now
Welcome to the Helldivers 2 Community on the Fediverse.
Links
Galactic War Status
Rules
- Be kind to other Citizens of Super Earth
- No discussion of cheats or bug exploits.
- Posts or comments with leaked / unreleased info must be clearly labelled. Example: Use [Spoiler] in the title or spoiler tag in comments.
- No spam or advertising (YouTube, Twitch, etc)
founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Wait, refunding being a offense that can get you banned doesn't sound legal at all.
Sony generally doesn't allow refunds, meaning the only recourse is to issue a charge back. They'll ban you for that.
Thats also not legal in EU.
Yes it is. A charge-back is you going to your bank, and making them "undo" the purchase.
A service is very much allowed to cancel your accounts if you do a charge-back.
No. Thats not how it works its marking a transaction as fraudulent not "undoing purchase" and no they aren't allowed to cancel ongoing contacts when another one is unfulfilled or canceled. Thats not how it works at all. Idk where you got such info but its wrong.
Yeah ok. Buy a game. Do a chargeback. And it's illegal for them to them ban your account?
Thats the opposite of what i explained and im 100% talking about EU (more specifically German) Laws
Its probably legal in muricaland, but not here.
And a charge back is for fraudulent charges. Not to "undo a purchase".
And yes you having 10 games on a account and doing that with the 11th cannot legally destroy your 10 other games.
That's not what I'm talking about either.
And yes. If someone does a charge-back instead of a refund. Something that is intended for fraud. They are misusing it. Which is a clear breach, and it would not be surprising if you could get banned for that.
You think all German laws are EU laws?
Ubisoft deleted lots of accounts from people everywhere due to "inactivity", even if you had paid games on it. I didn't see a successful lawsuit from germans.
No but they are the laws i learned and are very close to ths EU guidelines. So companies usually comply with the German laws on EU level because its the biggest market and otherwise it would be a unnecessary clusterfuck. The other EU countries have basically the same laws as Germany when there is a EU guideline for it.
So i don't think they are, but they literally kinda are.
Ubisoft deleted lots of accounts from people everywhere due to "inactivity", even if you had paid games on it. I didn't see a successful lawsuit from germans.
Thats their right, you have to show interest in keeping a contract running otherwise it can legally be canceled. Also, there is Noone suing because people that where effected either didn't want the account anymore or just logged in once. Ubisoft send out emails and tried to notify people about this, they even extended the time frame once because to make it 100% legal proof. I don't approve of that personally, but legally its perfectly fine.
They literally, are not. But if that's what you want to believe i cannot stop you.
And yes it is their right. Just like other services have the right to cancel your account if you are in breach with their policies.
E.g. issuing chargebacks, several months later just because you regret your purchase.
You seem to not understand laws.
And as i already said, charge back is for fraudulent transactions. Not because you regret buying something.
No it has nothing to do with their TOS, its literally laws.
Either learn law or shut up about things you obviously don't understand.
Yes... and if you try to issue a chargeback for a transaction you simply regret. That is you engadging in fradulent behavior. And the company have every right to ban your account for trying to defraud them.
Keep up...
No a charge back is blaming the company for fraudulent charges.
And no, the company doesn't have the right to cancel everything because one thing is not going good. That's not how it works, keep being law illiterate. And now shut it. You are obviously not interested in actually arguing a point, you just keep hitting a strawman.
Yes. That is the intended function.
But you know. Some people. They do things that are not intended. They're not supposed to. But they do it anyway. Maybe that's a difficult concept to grasp for a German. But take my word for it when I say that some people do those things.
And you keep claiming that its illegal for companies to cancel someone's account as consequence.
Please show me the EU guideline stating that. If you can't. Please shut up and realize you don't know shit.
Still no reason to cancel already ongoing things plus its not legal to withold refunds.
In the European Union, whether a company can cancel all contracts because one has failed depends on the specific circumstances of the contracts and the terms they contain. Generally, EU law prioritizes contractual freedom, meaning that the terms of the contract will usually dictate the rights and responsibilities of the parties involved.
However, there are principles and directives at the EU level that can influence such decisions, particularly in terms of consumer protection and business-to-business relations. For instance:
Principle of Proportionality: The decision to cancel all contracts must be proportionate to the breach or failure. This means the action taken (cancelling all contracts) should not exceed what is necessary to protect the legitimate interests of the party seeking to cancel the contracts.
Directive on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts (93/13/EEC): This directive protects consumers against unfair terms that create a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations. If the contracts are with consumers, and the term allowing for the cancellation of all contracts due to one failing is deemed unfair, such a term might be considered invalid.
Rome I Regulation (EC No 593/2008) on the law applicable to contractual obligations may also be relevant. This regulation governs choice of law in contracts and may influence the enforceability of terms across different EU member states.
If the contracts are interrelated (e.g., if they are part of a framework agreement or if the performance of one contract depends on the performance of the others), the cancellation of all contracts might be justified under certain conditions. However, each case must be evaluated based on the specifics of the contracts and the nature of the breach.
In practice, a unilateral decision to cancel all contracts because of one failure without a clear contractual basis or justifiable reason can lead to legal disputes, potentially involving claims for damages or enforcement actions.
For specific legal advice and the most accurate and up-to-date information, consulting a legal professional who specializes in EU contract law would be necessary.
Specified for Consumer contracts
For business-to-consumer (B2C) contracts within the European Union, the consumer rights are particularly protected under various EU directives and national laws that aim to ensure fairness and transparency. Here are some key points and directives relevant to B2C situations, where a business considers canceling all contracts because one contract failed:
Directive on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts (93/13/EEC): This directive is especially important in B2C contracts. It aims to protect consumers against unfair terms in a contract. For example, a clause that allows a business to cancel all contracts if one fails could be considered unfair if it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations to the detriment of the consumer. If a term is deemed unfair, it will not be binding on the consumer.
Consumer Rights Directive (2011/83/EU): This directive provides consumers with rights regarding transparency and information requirements for contracts. It ensures that consumers are adequately informed about the terms of the contract and the consequences of any breaches. It also includes rules on the right of withdrawal, which could be relevant in situations where contracts are being canceled.
General Principles of EU Law: Principles such as good faith and proportionality also play a role. These principles can influence the interpretation of contractual clauses, potentially impacting whether a business can cancel all contracts based on the failure of one.
In practical terms, a clause that allows a business to terminate all contracts with a consumer because one contract has failed would likely be scrutinized under the directive on unfair terms. Such a clause could be considered disproportionate and unfairly punitive to the consumer, thus risking being declared void.
In case a business seeks to implement such a drastic measure, it would need to:
For consumers faced with a situation where a business is attempting to cancel all contracts, it would be advisable to:
Legal routes could also be considered, such as lodging complaints with relevant authorities or pursuing legal action if consumers believe their rights have been violated. In every case, the specific contract terms and the legal context will be crucial in determining the outcome.
(for clarification, i used a LLM for the explanation in non legal speach the facts are correct)
What you link still does not make it illegal for a company to ban your account if you try to defraud them.
There are many situations where your right for a refund is expired. Most commonly. After a certain time. I can't refund my purchase of CS 1.6. It's not illegal for Valve to refuse my refund for that game.
And despite the query you sent chatGPT None of its answers point to an actual law that says it's illegal for a service to cancel your account if you endadge in defraudment.
It's not unreasonable to agree to losing the right to use a service if you attempt to defraud said service. That's not an unfair stipulation in a ToS.
Let me know when your successful lawsuit comes through. Good luck on that.
I think im arguing against a bot, I'll stop here, I've proved my point enough.
You're completely missing the point. If you have a contract broken on you, a chargeback is a completely legitimate mechanism to recoup funding as the contract was breached. It is not fraud to do this.
Says you. I'm pretty sure they have a completely different opinion regarding this being a breach of contract.
But I'm sure you know better. Because you read the entire ToS before clicking "I Agree" right?
I've heard of people refunding games or past purchases getting their accounts deactivated. For example, if your kid wracks up a $1,000 in Fortnite skins on PlayStation and you say "fuuuuck that, give me a refund because I'm not paying for that shit" they will most likely just ban your account.
That sounds textbook illegally unless they refund everything
The chargeback will get you your money back when you have a legitimate case. They are not legally allowed to stop you from doing a chargeback, they are allowed to no longer do business with you. This is actually what many companies will do if you chargeback.
Uh... No its 100% illegal to deny refund in EU (with some exceptions but digital goods dont fall under these) And charge back is for fraudulent/wrong transactions, so them not doing business with you may be ok in US but not in EU, it counts as regular failure to pay, its allowed to cancel the contract in question and only the one in question after sending a payment notice. So it isn't possible to just cancel everything based on that, especially already completed and ongoing contracts. TOS can say many things but they don't stand above the law.
And no they are also not allowed to not do business with you on that basis and they are not allowed to destroy already bought products/remotely disabled them.
I was actually very unsure which of you was right, but the best source I could find was this, and software on an online store is specifically exempted from the 14 day cooling off period.
I guess it would depend on whether remote deactivation would be considered a faulty product?
I think this would fall under a faulty product therefore 2 years warranty.
But most EU countries have stricter laws protecting the consumer even more, you linked the EU guideline wich is the minimum protection.
But in general, even online stores cannot refuse refunds all together (especially when the person buying something isn't legally allowed to form contracts, as is the case with the 1k fortnight stuff). faulty products cannot be refused refund within 1 year unless the seller can proof it being the customers fault (wich is impossible when the seller basically remotely destroyed it...) and 1 year afterwards when the customer can proof it being the fault of the seller.
This is the German laws i had to learn some years ago. But it would be up to a court to decide that because Sony would fight, they fight everything and everyone.
that is a chargeback, not a refund
Y'all sure are specific about your meme texts
Even though the marginal cost for Sony is as close to $0 as could be...
I see the other argument about this, but allow me to give you my personal example of where I am regarding charge backs, banned accounts and Helldivers using the PSN.
I love Monster Hunter. Monster Hunter World first released as a console exclusive, and I had a second hand PS4. Not wanting to give Sony my credit card due to previous data leaks, I purchased a pre-paid PSN gift card and wanted to use it to purchase Monster Hunter. I dig through their labyrinth of a store, found the game, selected on it, and was looking for a way to pay using the pre-paid card. Unable to find it, I googled and discovered I had to back up to some account menu. Being a primarily Switch+PC player, I am used to right face button for confirm and bottom for cancel, so when I came back to the console I picked up the controller and pressed the bottom face button, "X". Suddenly I had made a purchase using a credit card I didn't even know they had. One hour-long conversation later, their support agreed to refund the purchase, walked me through removing the credit card from my account, I bought the game with the prepaid card, and all was well.
Later, I wanted to play online. Well, I don't trust giving them my credit card after the last fiasco for certain, so I get my hands on a 12-month prepaid card for PSN. I add the card, hunt monsters online with my friends, no issues.
One year later, I get a notification: a ~$80 purchase from PlayStation was charged to my credit card. Uh, the fuck? So within 15 minutes, I am talking to their support, asking why in gods name they charged a credit card which I removed from the account for a purchase I didn't request. It is explained to me that when you use a pre-paid card to get a subscription to PSN, the automatic renewal is turned on. I, of course, say, "sure, but you guys walked me through removing my credit card the last time I interacted with you and I used a prepaid card to intentionally avoid autorenewal". Then, I am told that using a prepaid card turns on auto renewal with the last known payment method. I am shocked, demand a refund, am told that won't be a problem, then about 5 minutes later am instead told that I've used my "one lifetime refund request on a purchase of Monster Hunter World". There is more discussion and I explain that I will be getting my money back via charge back if they will not refund the unwanted purchase. They tell me my PSN account will be banned if I do that, so I restate, clearly, that I am receiving my money either way and they get to choose whether or not they have a customer after this conversation. I am politely and professionally told to fuck off, so I request the refund, and sure enough, my PSN account is banned.
Sony has, unfortunately, done nothing illegal by banning my account. The whole auto-renewal thing may set off some alarms in the EU, but here in North America, no one bats an eye.
Enter Helldivers. I see it requires a PSN account. I am concerned, but Steam has a gracious refund policy, so I purchase it. When I am met with the PSN account screen I consider: I could try my old account. It's likely I'll see a message about how this account can't be used to play this game, possible that it'll just work because the game doesn't really use the PSN, and at worst, it'll be permenantly bound with my Steam account, I will be banned and I'll just refund the game. Not wanting to give Sony anything that resembles new information due to a combination of my previous experiences and their penchant for losing customer data in security breeches, I try my ~5 year banned account. It works, first try, without issue. I've played ever since.
Now, with this renewed discussion on PSN account linking, the whole narrative from the Dev side is "this is so we can manage bans across both platforms". I am, obviously, concerned. Evidence suggests I am about to be retroactively banned from a game I purchased, have only used lawfully and ethically, and I will be long outside my refund window. I am waiting patiently to see how it all shakes out before I attempt a refund request via Steam.
I think I'm just going to go play some Solitaire.
You'd better have an old Windows 7 installation drive, because as far as I've read around, Solitaire has ads and microtransactions now
~~No foss solitaire?~~
Edit: No FOSSS?
Solitux? Tuxitaire?