Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against EA

[simcityman4ever 1]

Lol EA has got their selves into a heap of crap now!!!! By the way spore is stupid anyway, well that just my opinion.

[jabezscratch 159]

Yes, EA has been sued re: Spore's DRM: http://www.tomsguide.com/us/spore-DRM-securom-ea-sued,news-2637.html

I understand that EA has to protect against piracy but not this way. It is far too intrusive, invasive, and controlling. I specifically have not purchased Spore b/c of the the security controls that embed into the core of your system and can only be removed by a full format of the O/S partition. That's nuts IMO.

[Easy Bakes 253]

Reclaim You Game.
Lots of info about Securom.


http://reclaimyourgame.com/



They Also tell you how to remove it at the same site.

Securom Removal Instructions

 

Which ( If you belive them) proves it dosent uninstall when the game it came with is removed.

Those instruction seem to tell you how to edit your registry to remove securom.

I would how ever recomend you NOT remove it while any game that uses it is still installed.

Or if your not familier with registry editing.

 

[ricb 19]

Originally posted by: NMUSpidey

Originally posted by: masochist Also, in the McDonald's Coffee case, the lady originally only asked for the amount it would take to cover the cost of surgery done on the afflicted area. She wasn't looking to get rich.quote>

And she should still be punched in the face for her utter stupidity.quote>

Why is it stupid to seek legal remedies when a corporation acted in a reckless and dangerous manner?  Read up on the case.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm

Stella Liebeck of Albuquerque, New Mexico, was in the passenger seat of her grandson's car when she was severely burned by McDonalds' coffee in February 1992. Liebeck, 79 at the time, ordered coffee that was served in a styrofoam cup at the drivethrough window of a local McDonalds. After receiving the order, the grandson pulled his car forward and stopped momentarily so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. (Critics of civil justice, who have pounced on this case, often charge that Liebeck was driving the car or that the vehicle was in motion when she spilled the coffee; neither is true.) Liebeck placed the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the plastic lid from the cup. As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap.

The sweatpants Liebeck was wearing absorbed the coffee and held it next to her skin. A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered full thickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital and groin areas. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting. Liebeck, who also underwent debridement treatments, sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonalds refused. During discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks. This history documented McDonalds' knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard. McDonalds also said during discovery that, based on a consultants advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit to maintain optimum taste. He admitted that he had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees. Further, McDonalds' quality assurance manager testified that the company actively enforces a requirement that coffee be held in the pot at 185 degrees, plus or minus five degrees. He also testified that a burn hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above, and that McDonalds coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat. The quality assurance manager admitted that burns would occur, but testified that McDonalds had no intention of reducing the "holding temperature" of its coffee. Plaintiffs' expert, a scholar in thermodynamics applied to human skin burns, testified that liquids, at 180 degrees, will cause a full thickness burn to human skin in two to seven seconds. Other testimony showed that as the temperature decreases toward 155 degrees, the extent of the burn relative to that temperature decreases exponentially. Thus, if Liebeck's spill had involved coffee at 155 degrees, the liquid would have cooled and given her time to avoid a serious burn. McDonalds asserted that customers buy coffee on their way to work or home, intending to consume it there. However, the companys own research showed that customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while driving. McDonalds also argued that consumers know coffee is hot and that its customers want it that way. The company admitted its customers were unaware that they could suffer third degree burns from the coffee and that a statement on the side of the cup was not a "warning" but a "reminder" since the location of the writing would not warn customers of the hazard. The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages. This amount was reduced to $160,000 because the jury found Liebeck 20 percent at fault in the spill. The jury also awarded Liebeck $2.7 million in punitive damages, which equals about two days of McDonalds' coffee sales. Post-verdict investigation found that the temperature of coffee at the local Albuquerque McDonalds had dropped to 158 degrees fahrenheit. The trial court subsequently reduced the punitive award to $480,000 -- or three times compensatory damages -- even though the judge called McDonalds' conduct reckless, callous and willful. No one will ever know the final ending to this case. The parties eventually entered into a secret settlement which has never been revealed to the public, despite the fact that this was a public case, litigated in public and subjected to extensive media reporting. Such secret settlements, after public trials, should not be condoned.

[your_adress_here 11]

Originally posted by: NMUSpidey

Originally posted by: masochist Also, in the McDonald's Coffee case, the lady originally only asked for the amount it would take to cover the cost of surgery done on the afflicted area. She wasn't looking to get rich.quote>

And she should still be punched in the face for her utter stupidity.quote>

That's got to be one of the stupidest things I've read on these forums.

[Easy Bakes 253]

Cripes

Now look at this will you

none of my games work now.


https://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd178/elsimon1/LOTRFail.jpg

https://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd178/elsimon1/SporeFail.jpg

[your_adress_here 11]

Originally posted by: Easy Bakes

Cripes

Now look at this will you

none of my games work now.

https://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd178/elsimon1/LOTRFail.jpg

https://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd178/elsimon1/SporeFail.jpg

quote>

Is that because of securom, or because you tried to remove it?

[Easy Bakes 253]

Originally posted by: your_adress_here

Originally posted by: Easy Bakes

Cripes

Now look at this will you

none of my games work now.

https://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd178/elsimon1/LOTRFail.jpg

https://i224.photobucket.com/albums/dd178/elsimon1/SporeFail.jpg

quote>

Is that because of securom, or because you tried to remove it?quote>

 

Not sure still investigating. I did not try to remove it though.

I even went back to a restore point ( last monday) and still get the errors.

I may go back to a restore point before i loaded spore.

[your_adress_here 11]

Wow, that really sucks.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: your_adress_here

Originally posted by: NMUSpidey

Originally posted by: masochist Also, in the McDonald's Coffee case, the lady originally only asked for the amount it would take to cover the cost of surgery done on the afflicted area. She wasn't looking to get rich.quote>

And she should still be punched in the face for her utter stupidity.quote>

That's got to be one of the stupidest things I've read on these forums.quote>

How so? If you can't figure out that coffee is hot without a warning label to tell you so, I'd say you're pretty stupid and deserving of a good smack upside the head.

[NetPCDoc 1]

Okay - I admit I only read about half of the EULA - but that was more than enough -

According to the EULA you CAN NOT PLAY THE GAME without violating the EULA.

Any and all modifications are strictly prohibited!

Should you violate the EULA by making any modifications (such as creating a spore-ian?),

EA gets all (copy) rights to your modification(s) without any compensation to you!

Oh - and you must have an internet connection to valdiate the game with,

before you can play the game - just so you can make modifications that will violate the

EULA - and in so doing give EA all rights to your modifications without any compensation

to you.

Then - Violation of the EULA immediately revokes the EULA requiring you to destroy (remove)

all of the installed software from your system - and the only way to do this (as you must

remove all - including the undisclosed securom) is to re-format your hard drive! And then

re-install everything that you had had a legal license to prior to purchasing Spore.

Which brings to mind just how many times will Microsoft allow you to re-install your Windows

before they require you to buy a new license for Windows from them (Microsoft); etc.

Oh - and as for transferring the game to someone else - this is permitted only if the (un-named -

securom) software permits said transfer; and if you have already installed spore then maybe(?)

it won't allow you to transfer the game; and you won't really know that it won't let you transfer

until the buyer attempts to install and finds out that he/she hasn't got a proper license and must

purchase a new license from EA?

Say good-bye to all those thoughts of future fan sites and game mods,

under this EULA - only EA is allowed to have/make such.

Affectively and Effectively Electronic Arts gets to have ALL OF THE CAKE

and they (EA) want to EAT ALL OF THE CAKE too!

Then the EULA wonders into "Third Party Territory" - mentioning other parties

that provided certain dynamic link libraries (a.k.a. .dll files) and how these

other (third) parties have their own rights to mess with how you might try

to play this game / transfer this game / etc.

So once all the legal-ese is boiled out into lay-man's terms,

all you are legally entitled to do (according to the EULA) is open the box

and read the printed materials.

I don't know about you all - but as for me, myself and I -

I'm not going to pay that much for that little.

My (more than) two cents,

-NetPCDoc

No SPORE details may be micromanaged.

[purpledaddy 6]

Yes! It's my dreamworld! Lots & lots of technical words that no one would both to even skim, let alone read!

[Wrightguy0 40]

Wow, Is it just me, or is EA Screwing everyone. That's retarded, they take your creation, then they put a stranglehold on the mod community. Then they make it so by just playing the game you violate the EULA. There is no way they should be able to get away with this

[purpledaddy 6]

COMING SOON: Liberty City, a Tale of greed, power, money and life at the top in America's most corrupt city. quote>

... All awash in paperwork!!!

[GMT 389]

each n every day my love for ea goes down...

before i opened this thread, my love for ea (displayed on a number ray) was at about -infinite, now that I've read the thread, you can subtract another infinite

...

[Patricius Maximus 236]

NetPCDoc: What a scam! EA has cut their own throat with this -- no mods, no fansites, game dies out, no long-term sales.

I urge everyone to boycott this game as long as that EULA stands!

[Easy Bakes 253]

A shame realy cause i liked the game.

Now it seems ill have to reload my OS today.

Probably becuase of this item. No more spore for me untill they remove this in a patch.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Patricius Maximus I urge everyone to boycott this game as long as that EULA stands!quote>

Oh don't worry, I decided years ago I'm not paying money for anything with the EA logo on it.

[ricb 19]

Originally posted by: Duke87

Originally posted by: your_adress_here

Originally posted by: NMUSpidey

Originally posted by: masochist Also, in the McDonald's Coffee case, the lady originally only asked for the amount it would take to cover the cost of surgery done on the afflicted area. She wasn't looking to get rich.quote>

And she should still be punched in the face for her utter stupidity.quote>

That's got to be one of the stupidest things I've read on these forums.quote>

How so? If you can't figure out that coffee is hot without a warning label to tell you so, I'd say you're pretty stupid and deserving of a good smack upside the head.quote>

Actually your post makes me wonder about your reading comprehension skills.  Did you not read the facts of this case that I posted along with a link to them.  The cup design was such that the coffee splashed on her simply because she removed the lid.  McDonalds ignored repeated warnings that this could cause serious injury.  Your remarks are ignorant.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: ricb  Actually your post makes me wonder about your reading comprehension skills.  Did you not read the facts of this case that I posted along with a link to them. quote>

At the time I made that post, I had not (I have now). You don't read every wall of text that everyone posts, do you?

The cup design was such that the coffee splashed on her simply because she removed the lid. quote>

That risk exists with any full cup.

McDonalds ignored repeated warnings that this could cause serious injury.quote>

If that's true, than that changes things.

Your remarks are ignorant.quote>

I had the same level of knowledge of things as your average person.

This case is always portrayed as the woman having sued because there wasn't proper warning that the coffee was hot and might burn you, as a sort of epitome of how silly warnings get and need to state ridiculously obvious dangers, and that the lawsuit was nothing more than attempt to make some quick cash.

Your link certainly casts it in a different light.

Which is true? I'm not sure which to believe at this point. The common hype or some no-name website I've never heard of... Neither seems particularly reliable.

In any case, you will not deny that the a not insignificant portion of lawsuits in this country are stupid and frivolous.

[Patricius Maximus 236]

Oh don't worry, I decided years ago I'm not paying money for anything with the EA logo on it.quote>

Same here, only slightly different. I decided about 2 years ago that I would not purchase any more EA games, excepting repurchases of games I already had because of my disc being destroyed (happened to me twice).

However, I have not bought anything with the EA logo on it since 2006, and I'm proud of it.

- Patricius Maximus

[ricb 19]

Originally posted by: Duke87

In any case, you will not deny that the a not insignificant portion of lawsuits in this country are stupid and frivolous.quote>

I will not deny that frivolous lawsuits are filed, but I doubt that many get very far.  Any lawsuits is complicated, and there are thresholds within civil procedure that have to be reached.  I am aware of this as I was formerly on the Board of Directors of an agency that brought legal action in disability rights cases.  For instance in many states you must have expert witnesses in order to proceed with certain types of cases, such as medical malpractice.  Lawyers are not going to proceed with a case that they do not foresee going very far.  At any point a judge may issue a summary judgment throwing out a case.  And in the long run less than two percent of the civil cases in the United States end up with awards of more than $100,000.  The main thing driving the call to limit damages is the same thing driving the current financial crisis.  A desire to evade corporate responsibility.  Insurance companies are finding there profits in danger not because of big money awards, but because they have made the same stupid decisions that AIG and Lehman Brothers made.  Now they want the government to limit payouts when their corporate clients do something they should not have.  If the client keeps doing stupid things they should cancel their policy and refuse to insure them, but since thes guys are often on each others boards, that will not happen.  As for the stockholders of these companies, they should file suit to have these greedy swine removed because they are jeopardizing profits by doing stuff like this.  With the current regulatory environment being one of the fox guarding the henhouse, I am wary of anything smacking of tort reform.

[Hahayoudied 3]

When I remove a software, I expect ALL of the software to be gone, not some stupid anti copying part sticking around, causing chaos on your computer.

EA, you burnt my last straw, and now I will boycott your stupid products till you go to hell!

By the way, I will laugh if EA doesn't learn, and launches another game that have the anti copying software in it. I will expect MORE lawsuits and boycotting coming...

Also, several stores in my area are boycotting EA games, and they are selling non EA game products (I think it is because those stores got fed up with customers wanting a full refund on their EA products).

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Ho hum!  I was seriously considering getting Spore, but no longer.  That thing is a virus (trojan horse).  I don't want anyone with this nose in my machine except me.  What's the point of all my security stuff if they smash it like that!?

By the instrument of the creator, they won't get their hands under my kernels.

[JakeMD 107]

Thats too bad, I was really looking forward to Spore, but as N_O_Body said, this security issue has ruined any chances of me buying it.

[SimRabbit 48]

Patricius Maximus: You are really missing many great games like Crysis.

Just get a damn console, no DRM damn it (except if you have to install)

[Psycho_Teddy 25]

Gah, frivolous lawsuit... Is it causing undue harm to your system? No. Gotta love America... I hope it falls through...

[Hahayoudied 3]

I guess we should only buy the remaining excellent EA games that haven't be crapped up by EA yet to show EA that is it more worth it to sell games that will attracted many people for years than selling games that will only give quick, big cash injections.

[Explodingsims 3]

Originally posted by: SimRabbit Patricius Maximus: You are really missing many great games like Crysis.

Just get a damn console, no DRM damn it (except if you have to install)quote>

Eh, even Crysis wasn't that good. I mean sure, it was pretty, but beyond that it was kinda meh.

and it needed some sort of futuristic flying space computer to run it in all it's glory.

 As for buying a console, that works, and generally is better, but it also means that you lose the aspect of modding it.

Back to the topic, I would say this is an okay thing. We'll see if it gets through to EA though.

DRM + EA = FAIL. It's not a hard Equasion EA. And why did they have to tag it on a game with so much appeal too?

[Easy Bakes 253]

While i was trying to recover my computer operations

trying to remove the aplications that were failing ,Spore was the only one that crashed while trying to deinstall it. The error was acess denied to certian files when trying to deinstall.

Total format and reinstall got my PC back to normal.