Install Theme

Video Game Nostalgia

Posts tagged with ‘law’
  • Share
Class Action Suit Filed Against Activision Blizzard
Activision Blizzard is facing a lawsuit from many frustrated users, lead by one Benjamin Bell, claiming that Blizzard has been using "deceptively and unfairly" methods to acquire an alleged $26 million from consumers. The complaint specifically refers to the $6.50 Authenticator that Blizzard sells, but Bell claims that 

"Defendants negligently, deliberately, and/or recklessly fail to ensure that adequate, reasonable procedures safeguard the private information stored on this website. As a result of these acts, the private information of plaintiffs and class members has been compromised and/or stolen since at least 2007…"
"Most recently, on or about May 19, 2012, reports proliferated that class members’ Battle.net accounts had suffered a security breach (‘hack’) at the hands of unknown parties (‘hackers’), and on or about August 4, 2012, hackers massively breached Battle.net’s security and acquired the private information of all of defendants’ customers in the United States, as well as the remainder of North America, Latin America, Australia, New Zealand, and Southeast Asia."

Bell is charging for a class action seeking charges on consumer fraud, unjust enrichment, negligence, breach of contract and bailment, saying that Blizzard did not adequately inform or protect clients from breaches and for “tacking on” costs post-purchase of the game to protect the user’s personal information.
Blizzard responded to IGN with an e-mail with a statement (which can be read after the break).
[[MORE]]The statement is as follows:

"This suit is without merit and filled with patently false information, and we will vigorously defend ourselves through the appropriate legal channels.
We want to reiterate that we take the security of our players’ data very seriously, and we’re fully committed to defending our network infrastructure. We also recognize that the cyber-threat landscape is always evolving, and we’re constantly working to track the latest developments and make improvements to our defenses.
The suit’s claim that we didn’t properly notify players regarding the August 2012 security breach is not true. Not only did Blizzard act quickly to provide information to the public about the situation, we explained the actions we were taking and let players know how the incident affected them, including the fact that no names, credit card numbers, or other sensitive financial information was disclosed. You can read our letter to players and a comprehensive FAQ related to the situation on our website.
The suit also claims that the Battle.net Authenticator is required in order to maintain a minimal level of security on the player’s Battle.net account information that’s stored on Blizzard’s network systems. This claim is also completely untrue and apparently based on a misunderstanding of the Authenticator’s purpose. The Battle.net Authenticator is an optional tool that players can use to further protect their Battle.net accounts in the event that their login credentials are compromised outside of Blizzard’s network infrastructure. Available as a physical device or as a free app for iOS or Android devices, it offers players an added level of security against account-theft attempts that stem from sources such as phishing attacks, viruses packaged with seemingly harmless file downloads, and websites embedded with malicious code.
When a player attaches an Authenticator to his or her account, it means that logging in to Battle.net will require the use of a random code generated by the Authenticator in addition to the player’s login credentials. This helps our systems identify when it’s actually the player who is logging in and not someone who might have stolen the player’s credentials by means of one of the external theft measures mentioned above, or as a result of the player using the same account name and password on another website or service that was compromised. Considering that players are ultimately responsible for securing their own computers, and that the extra step required by the Authenticator is an added inconvenience during the log in process, we ultimately leave it up to the players to decide whether they want to add an Authenticator to their account. However, we always strongly encourage it, and we try to make it as easy as possible to do.
Many players have voiced strong approval for our security-related efforts. Blizzard deeply appreciates the outpouring of support it has received from its players related to the frivolous claims in this particular suit.”

Class Action Suit Filed Against Activision Blizzard

Activision Blizzard is facing a lawsuit from many frustrated users, lead by one Benjamin Bell, claiming that Blizzard has been using "deceptively and unfairly" methods to acquire an alleged $26 million from consumers. The complaint specifically refers to the $6.50 Authenticator that Blizzard sells, but Bell claims that 

"Defendants negligently, deliberately, and/or recklessly fail to ensure that adequate, reasonable procedures safeguard the private information stored on this website. As a result of these acts, the private information of plaintiffs and class members has been compromised and/or stolen since at least 2007…"

"Most recently, on or about May 19, 2012, reports proliferated that class members’ Battle.net accounts had suffered a security breach (‘hack’) at the hands of unknown parties (‘hackers’), and on or about August 4, 2012, hackers massively breached Battle.net’s security and acquired the private information of all of defendants’ customers in the United States, as well as the remainder of North America, Latin America, Australia, New Zealand, and Southeast Asia."

Bell is charging for a class action seeking charges on consumer fraud, unjust enrichment, negligence, breach of contract and bailment, saying that Blizzard did not adequately inform or protect clients from breaches and for “tacking on” costs post-purchase of the game to protect the user’s personal information.

Blizzard responded to IGN with an e-mail with a statement (which can be read after the break).

  • Share
EA Sues Zynga Over The Ville, Claims Copyright Infringement
Maxis has decided to pursue a lawsuit against Zynga, claiming that its new game The Ville goes beyond “inspired by” and outright steals the style of their own The Sims Social title. The Ville was announced in June of this year, and allowed creators to create a character and invest in a house and career for themselves.[[MORE]]
EA had this to say on the issue:
“When The Ville was introduced in June 2012, the infringement of The Sims Social was unmistakable to those of us at Maxis as well as to players and the industry at large,” said Lucy Bradshaw, general manager of EA’s Maxis label. “The similarities go well beyond any superficial resemblance. Zynga’s design choices, animations, visual arrangements and character motions and actions have been directly lifted from The Sims Social. The copying was so comprehensive that the two games are, to an uninitiated observer, largely indistinguishable.”
Reggie Davis of Zynga responded to EA’s statement on IGN with a counter-claim:

“We are committed to creating the most fun, innovative, social and engaging games in every major genre that our players enjoy. The Ville is the newest game in our ‘ville’ franchise – it builds on every major innovation from our existing invest-and-express games dating back to YoVille and continuing through CityVille and CastleVille, and introduces a number of new social features and game mechanics not seen in social games today.
It’s unfortunate that EA thought that this was an appropriate response to our game, and clearly demonstrates a lack of understanding of basic copyright principles. It’s also ironic that EA brings this suit shortly after launching SimCity Social which bears an uncanny resemblance to Zynga’s CityVille game. Nonetheless, we plan to defend our rights to the fullest extent possible and intend to win with players.”

Despite what you may feel about either company, the evidence put forth by EA initially seemed pretty lackluster, since there are obvious influences from The Sims on The Ville’s screen but nothing too majorly similar about them- at least, not enough to claim outright theft.
Then, however, things get a little complicated… if it wasn’t for the helpful titles on top, it would genuinely be difficult to tell these two games apart from one another.
Be sure to click the links to check out the evidence and let us know: what do you think?

EA Sues Zynga Over The Ville, Claims Copyright Infringement

Maxis has decided to pursue a lawsuit against Zynga, claiming that its new game The Ville goes beyond “inspired by” and outright steals the style of their own The Sims Social title. The Ville was announced in June of this year, and allowed creators to create a character and invest in a house and career for themselves.

  • Share
EU Rules You Can Sell Downloaded Games
If you’re a European citizen, you now have the right to sell copies of downloaded or digital games. According to the Court of Justice of the European Union, publishers cannot prevent you from selling your licenses to the digital content you downloaded after you have paid for them, allowing you to resell your license at your leisure as though you own said content. Even if you agreed to a different set of rules, publishers cannot stop you from re-selling this content, as exclusive right of distribution of digital content is "exhausted on its first sale". 
There is one catch, however. When you sell your digital data, you must erase your license as well.

The ruling suggests that if you’ve bought a license for a game off your mate, you’re within your rights to download it from the publisher’s website. “Therefore the new acquirer of the user licence, such as a customer of UsedSoft, may, as a lawful acquirer of the corrected and updated copy of the computer program concerned, download that copy from the copyright holder’s website,” the Court said.

Whether or not major game publishers will be changing their European terms of service or other legal digital matters has yet to be seen, but we can be sure to see a new avenue emerge for digital distribution soon.

EU Rules You Can Sell Downloaded Games

If you’re a European citizen, you now have the right to sell copies of downloaded or digital games. According to the Court of Justice of the European Union, publishers cannot prevent you from selling your licenses to the digital content you downloaded after you have paid for them, allowing you to resell your license at your leisure as though you own said content. Even if you agreed to a different set of rules, publishers cannot stop you from re-selling this content, as exclusive right of distribution of digital content is "exhausted on its first sale". 

There is one catch, however. When you sell your digital data, you must erase your license as well.

The ruling suggests that if you’ve bought a license for a game off your mate, you’re within your rights to download it from the publisher’s website. “Therefore the new acquirer of the user licence, such as a customer of UsedSoft, may, as a lawful acquirer of the corrected and updated copy of the computer program concerned, download that copy from the copyright holder’s website,” the Court said.

Whether or not major game publishers will be changing their European terms of service or other legal digital matters has yet to be seen, but we can be sure to see a new avenue emerge for digital distribution soon.