Consumer rights and Entropia

[gwit]

My points for what they are worth :-

1. Unless you really really have to, DO NOT litigate, the only people who win are us lawyers, and believe me when it is a matter of principle, we win big time !!

2. Get your lawyers to write a very stern letter threatening legal action, but do bear in mind point 1 above.

3. As a last resort prepare a press release to be issued on your behalf pointing out the errors in the system and the effect on you. Take legal advice on this press release, because you don't want to fall foul of point 1. In my experience this usually works

 

[chielsen]

There has already been a (small) class case against MA. As they signed a NDA i don't know the details not the outcome, but you wouldn't be the first.

 

[aridash]

There has already been a (small) class case against MA. As they signed a NDA i don't know the details not the outcome, but you wouldn't be the first.

really? wouldnt there be a public record of that? unless they settled out of court, how does a NDA work in public court? enve then there would surely be a record of the case taking place.

 

[Moonbiter]

I hope you get sorted it out.

For what is worth, i can just tell that some other Land Areas got flattened with one of the recent pathces, so i hope yours will be fixed as well.

Being a miner, i completely understand your frustration in this. Whole of shinook was a relatively flat area with ok'ish ores. And now lots of mountains everywhere and lyst as well making mining there not as attractive.

 

[chielsen]

really? wouldnt there be a public record of that? unless they settled out of court, how does a NDA work in public court? enve then there would surely be a record of the case taking place.

They settled yes, i don't know if it was in or outside of court and which court it was.

I don't think private cases are all publicated ?

Btw just did a search, i also found this: http://virtualecon.blogspot.com/2007/12/project-entropia-scam.html
and
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-87796405.html

Seems their lawyers are not without work.

 

[Konve]

They settled yes, i don't know if it was in or outside of court and which court it was.

I don't think private cases are all publicated ?

Btw just did a search, i also found this: http://virtualecon.blogspot.com/2007/12/project-entropia-scam.html
and
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-87796405.html

Seems their lawyers are not without work.

The first link I can't tell you much about, other then the quotes sounding much like the average forum troll and following their logic; space flights to CND should be about 500 PED each way by now.

The second link is terribly old news. Mindark was cleared and issued (I don't know what the correct term is) a 'counter-lawsuit' agains that software-group-whatever-it-was-called with MS as one part in it.

 

[milduser]

Just to provoke some legal thoughts on consumer rights.

Here are some facts to note:

1) All players (EU account holders) are considered investors, irrespective of amounts (0 peds to millions of peds). That means any deposits made can be withdrawn at anytime but subject to conditions.

2) All players can own virtual items (from sweat and dungs to land areas) with TT values and property rights of use etc.

3) All players are governed by the EULA. Is this the ultimate agreement?

Any lawyer out there to enlighten us with this case example of consumer rights on this digital economy? It would be an interesting test case to watch.

 

[NotVF]

There's always something like the Electronic Consumers Association (ECA). They might be able to offer you some advice.

http://www.theeca.com/

 

[Brooklyn]

This was far up the thread but I think it deserve to repeated as way forward.

It might interesting and productive
to set up an Entropian Ombudsman and arbitration panel in game
as part of an emerging legal structure for this brave new world of legalities.
​

 

[gwit]

Honestly, don't seek a test case. With a publicity hungry company, the suggesstion of a negative press release always works wonders especially now the machine is in full operation pushing the sale of CP.

As an experienced lawyer believe me when I say the only people who win out of litigation are lawyers !!

 

[Lavawalker]

Honestly, don't seek a test case. With a publicity hungry company, the suggesstion of a negative press release always works wonders especially now the machine is in full operation pushing the sale of CP.

As an experienced lawyer believe me when I say the only people who win out of litigation are lawyers !!

I do not think this needs to go that far.

MindArk has made progress on their royal screwup of not having followed any form of "Ethics/Duty of Care" policy in the Cry2 conversion process when it comes to that which they no longer own yet have a legal responsibility to maintain the backend systems which support the virtual asset they sold along with its ethical upkeep over time.

I feel this will be resolved in due course as the manpower to do so becomes available.

With MindArk & FPC on holidays, only a skeleton crew and minimal management sweating it out is in place - There is not much that be done right now.

Please give FPC (inc MA) the chance to rectify this over the next few months in the hope they have learned lessons from their mistakes before seeking to travel any legal paths.

As far as law is concerned if such a path needs to be travelled (I hope not)
A site recently has been put in place to handle such issues as they unfold

... www.entropialaw.com

PS. No it is not my site.

 

[Konve]

Just to provoke some legal thoughts on consumer rights.

Here are some facts to note:

1) All players (EU account holders) are considered investors, irrespective of amounts (0 peds to millions of peds). That means any deposits made can be withdrawn at anytime but subject to conditions.

2) All players can own virtual items (from sweat and dungs to land areas) with TT values and property rights of use etc.

3) All players are governed by the EULA. Is this the ultimate agreement?

Any lawyer out there to enlighten us with this case example of consumer rights on this digital economy? It would be an interesting test case to watch.

1) No, they're not. Look below.*

2) No, you can't. Read the EULA.

3) I don't know, but assuming the EULA to be the ultimate agreement, 1) and 2) are both wrong.

The system belongs to Mindark. All PED, items and estates inside Entropia are part of the system = they belong to Mindark. Mindark will grant you the right to withdraw raw funds from the system, at their own discretion.

*As you're not buying anything to which you have any rights what-so-ever, you can't claim to be an investor.

 

[Lavawalker]

The system belongs to Mindark. All PED, items and estates inside Entropia are part of the system = they belong to Mindark. Mindark will grant you the right to withdraw raw funds from the system, at their own discretion.

*As you're not buying anything to which you have any rights what-so-ever, you can't claim to be an investor.

You are correct in your assumption ... that being that you have assumed the EULA to be the law when actually it is not, it is a mere guideline you have agreed to follow - Or agreed with a publicly announced expression of acceptance.

This is the problem, this EULA will not stand up (to any great degree) in a court of law under the ratified treaties of which they claim it to be devised under - They do not suit as you have not been sold anything.

Including PED which is a mere token resemblance of your USD account balance in the MindArk system 10:1 of which PED is not a virtual product in its own right which you buy and sell at any point.

Ref > About PED

EULAs are mere agreements, something to remember.
They are not law and only hold a certain amount of weight in a court of law.

It is funny repeating this where people still don't get it.

If the road and traffic authority places up a sign saying detour which leads off the side of a bridge.

Do you then continue to drive off the side of a bridge because it said to ?

... Yet you have undertaken the agreement to obey all directions given to you in accepting your license to drive your vehicle from the roads and traffic authority, including all signs placed up by them on the road to follow

 

[Tree-doctor]

To be frank, I was about to make investement inside EU. Not to buy CP but at least an LA.

I guess I have a gardian angel cause I decided to do other things with the money, such as buying me a new BMW (I have it not this saturday but the other, time they configure it as I want), a freaking new sniping carabine (Sako finlight 85) with a great scope (khales CSX 10x50), a pair of Meopta binocular (way more efficient than Swarovski ones ...), and a new computer for me and bought a netbook for my wife. Once I got the car I will share some photos for the fun

Ok thats a lot but I worked hard in 2009

I guess I made the correct choice to not trust Mindark around this part, since I see more and more smart investorz getting screwed hard like that.

It is way tooooo dangerous. The only way to profit inside EU seems to be crossing the fingers and making extrem quik returns.

 

[nutter]

Ok, so for arguments sake MA decide to close down the game.

The suggestion that they have an obligation to continue to service the servers because 'your property' resides there is incredulous. They would simply switch off the server and give you whatever you were owed as per the EULA. There would be no recourse whatsoever.

The game is not an investment platform. It is a service in which other services can be rented using tokens. Tokens that you purchase with $

I will continue to insist that the EULA is the game 'law' until all you armchair lawyers decide to get some balls and actually try to take on MA in a courtroom. But you never will. You know this, I know this, MA know this. Which is why arguing about it is like pissing in the wind.

Some people here simply like to flap their tongues (or fingers in the case of typing here...I suppose) and gather the addoration of those who know no different, and argue the 'law' when nothing of the sort is applicable. MA have not said this is an 'investment platform' and it is not regulated by any authority that could possibly enforse any player 'assumed' rights or protections. They do nothing criminal and break no laws and therefore it would be a civil matter for anyone to take up in regards to recovering their 'investment'.

Until someone does take MA to court, its all in the EULA...

 

[Einstein]

I think LA owners should act more as a group, and more public.

If you look at MA's history that seems to be the way you have to do something to get something, unless you're Deathifier, ND, ...

 

[M3kkie]

To be frank, I was about to make investement inside EU. Not to buy CP but at least an LA.

I guess I have a gardian angel cause I decided to do other things with the money, such as buying me a new BMW (I have it not this saturday but the other, time they configure it as I want), a freaking new sniping carabine (Sako finlight 85) with a great scope (khales CSX 10x50), a pair of Meopta binocular (way more efficient than Swarovski ones ...), and a new computer for me and bought a netbook for my wife. Once I got the car I will share some photos for the fun

Ok thats a lot but I worked hard in 2009

I guess I made the correct choice to not trust Mindark around this part, since I see more and more smart investorz getting screwed hard like that.

It is way tooooo dangerous. The only way to profit inside EU seems to be crossing the fingers and making extrem quik returns.

How is buying a new BMW and a few toys a better way to spend your money then an income generating asset?

A LA might not be a good investment, but it's way better then a brand new car..

 

[Pirx Danford]

Just something about the weight of EULA versus law.

First off at least in Germany an EULA is weighed as agreement between business partners in this case the service provider (Mindark) and the customer (the player) and any such agreement can only regulate things within the boundary of the law.
Paragraphs that are against some law are void and null.

All this is unimportant however as long as nothing is carried to court.
Only then a judge will weigh law against the matter at hand.

There would be two situations where you could successfully go to court with.

Either Mindark would violate their agreement towards the player.
This is why they practically agree to no responsibilities within the EULA,
because if they would so, nearly every court will hold them accountable on their own assurances.
Or Mindark violates a right a customer does have by law, then you could go to court with that.

A very classical example which happens a lot in Germany is trouble in regards to rectification of a defect.
Many companies try to get a customer to let rectify a faulty device multiple times.
Thus a law clarifies that no one has to endure more than 3 rectification attempts before having the right for money back or a completely new device.
Even though a company can try and write more than 3 times in their general terms and conditions this will be invalid and void and not hold up in a court.

 

[nutrageti]

some good ideas here but if I may try and give some(hopefully usefull advice) I think what MA/FPC need to get things done is pressure. You (OP) said earlier that you tried contacting them in every way except knocking on their door. Maybe that is what you should do. Go spend a week in their city or send a lawyer to talk things out. You will at least (hopefully) get a clear answer: we will (record them on that and make them sign it somewhere) or we will not fix your problems. This emailing and calling has no effect.
Right now all they are doing is evading your demands

 

[Sneaky B'stard]

Unfortunately the value of any real estate in EU is "market value" - the deed itself has no actual tt value - so if they change the landscape and the market value drops - there is not much that can be done about it except complain to MA until its fixed....Now if the deed had a tt value that changed after the VU - then you might have had a legal leg to stand on....Just my 2 pec...

 

[aridash]

They settled yes, i don't know if it was in or outside of court and which court it was.

I don't think private cases are all publicated ?

Btw just did a search, i also found this: http://virtualecon.blogspot.com/2007/12/project-entropia-scam.html

sorry to come back to this but a post by nobody, quoted on some nobody's blog? the clue its rubissh is that it claims Mastercard dont work with MA, which my credit card would deny. In the UK at least, all cases brought before a court are a matter of public record, i'd expect the same in Sweden.

 

[ruslan]

MA have not said this is an 'investment platform' and it is not regulated by any authority that could possibly enforse any player 'assumed' rights or protections. They do nothing criminal and break no laws and therefore it would be a civil matter for anyone to take up in regards to recovering their 'investment'.

Until someone does take MA to court, its all in the EULA...

https://account.entropiauniverse.com/account/index.xml?ccode=calypso&plang=

Read:
Deposit

Think Future - Invest in your Avatar!

Choose from a range of deposit options.

---

But yea, I know what you mean.

 

[trance]

changing landscape ?

i never understand, why they made a full different landscape in VU10. They should know, that this generate a lot big problems. In my eyes, this was the main bad they was doing to the game!

Why the developers don't just use the old High maps for this. I just hope they know now: Changing landscape where are LA owners, apartment and shop owners, just generate large problems !!!

 

[craystar]

I would have said that you would have the same consumer rights as any Swedish citizen as the transaction took place there - that is, if you can prove that a virtual transaction is real. Clearly the real transaction would have been any deposit - the auction for the LA might not count. It'll probably take a conversation with an expensive Swedish Lawyer

 

[NotVF]

I would have said that you would have the same consumer rights as any Swedish citizen as the transaction took place there - that is, if you can prove that a virtual transaction is real. Clearly the real transaction would have been any deposit - the auction for the LA might not count. It'll probably take a conversation with an expensive Swedish Lawyer

A virtual transaction is no less real than a real life transaction. Just as virtual theft is deemed the same as real life theft by courts. MindArk has logfiles of every transaction, so it can even be proven the transaction took place.

I'm not sure whether a judge will be able to get hisw head around the idea of virtual items being deemed intrinsically"near-worthless by MindArk, but having a market value, but any lawyer worth their money would easily compare this to a painting where the value of the canvas and paint might not be very high, but the actual value being quite a bit more.

 

[Sunab Naverith]

i never understand, why they made a full different landscape in VU10. They should know, that this generate a lot big problems. In my eyes, this was the main bad they was doing to the game!

Why the developers don't just use the old High maps for this. I just hope they know now: Changing landscape where are LA owners, apartment and shop owners, just generate large problems !!!

There was a logical reason for this considering the storyline they used.
YOU set off a 200+kiloton explosion by a multi-million metric ton device slammed into a planet at 3/4 light speed, and tell me how it DOESN'T end up causing catastrophic tetonic plate shifting .

 

[Lavawalker]

There was a logical reason for this considering the storyline they used.
YOU set off a 200+kiloton explosion by a multi-million metric ton device slammed into a planet at 3/4 light speed, and tell me how it DOESN'T end up causing catastrophic tetonic plate shifting .

And you see this giving MA the right to screw around with that which they no longer own ?

Come on seriously

That would be like me publishing some form of fiction in the public arena how there are magical creatures running aorund the streets scavenging for building materials and mechanical parts in Sweden and that I am one of these creatures ...

Then going off to Jans' , Marcos' and other directors of the board in the MindGroup of companies and taking parts off their vehicles and away from their gardens & house externally and internally while remodeling various aspects of these assets they own in the process and saying that the story published gave me the right to do it, even though I do not own their houses or their cars

Fine if they remodel anything they own on Calypso, but that which they have sold off to another party, they need to follow an ethics policy to ensure 'Duty of Care' is taken not to effect that which was sold off 'as it was' when it was sold or as close as is feasibly possible without agreed consent.

Not willy nilly changing things as they please without consent of the owning party.

This is where they have literally killed and mutilated confidence in the entire rce concept with respect to 'virtual assets' sold by them and owned by others maintained on their backend systems.

People may argue, you bought the rights to.

Correct, the rights to how it was before, not what there remains now after being mutilated without consent.

ie. It is no longer what they purchased and invested their money, time and effort into promoting and operating as a RCE business venture.

The law as determined by a judge would see what they have done exactly as how they would see me publishing the above example in the public arena and then going off to do what I detailed in the example.

Besides the point, please allow FPC (inc MA) the opportunity to fix what they so royal screwed up on first. They are making many reversions back to how things were after realising this epic oopsie.

It is just a matter of manpower holding them up to get this all back to an ethically acceptable state. I do not personally feel waving around the big legalities hammer is really necessary.

 

[Sunab Naverith]

Lava, it's my understanding that the purchase of the deed does NOT give you rights of ownership of the LA, but rather the ability to manage the basic functions within that LA, as well as the RIGHT to gain taxes based upon how well you manage the LA.

At least, that's my understanding from that rather infamous line within the EULA that states that you don't own anything, MA does... yada yada.

p.s. - before you pull up buzz, deathifier and ND, those are, IMO, 'partners' due to both the money spent as well as the concept. Deathifier was the first major investor in LA, ND and buzz each are now classified as partners, due to their LAs/areas actually being removed from Calypso itself.

 

[Lavawalker]

Lava, it's my understanding that the purchase of the deed does NOT give you rights of ownership of the LA, but rather the ability to manage the basic functions within that LA, as well as the RIGHT to gain taxes based upon how well you manage the LA.

At least, that's my understanding from that rather infamous line within the EULA that states that you don't own anything, MA does... yada yada.

p.s. - before you pull up buzz, deathifier and ND, those are, IMO, 'partners' due to both the money spent as well as the concept. Deathifier was the first major investor in LA, ND and buzz each are now classified as partners, due to their LAs/areas actually being removed from Calypso itself.

So you make an assumed exception to the rule based on your personal opinion granting these people rights above every other financially invested participant into environment.

This is where people are brain-washed on what has been written in the EULA.

And as advised many a times, seek your own legal advise and representation in Sweden so that you know where you stand before making any investment into Entropia for 'virtual assets'

EULA is an agreement and not the law which can be challenged on many fronts, including both ethical & commercial grounds since it involves real life finance etc.

Most of the EULA is based around a treaty which has nothing to do with supporting that PED is purchased by the participant and sold back to MindArk with MindArk owning everything yet does support the fact that the said 'virtual asset' was sold off by the organisation in the form of an Auction sale resulting in a legal writ of ownership 'aka. a 'deed'

Not to mention the paper trail of real world evidence that states the facts as spoken by company officials at both MindArk and FPC.

Here is a post of examples:

Link > examples

There are many dozens of others, both in the written word and recordings spoken by MA officials verbally as podcasts at conferences and in interviews.

 

[NotVF]

Lava, it's my understanding that the purchase of the deed does NOT give you rights of ownership of the LA, but rather the ability to manage the basic functions within that LA, as well as the RIGHT to gain taxes based upon how well you manage the LA.

By their own admittance, FPC stated that the changing of these shops etc went directly against their claim that they will never change the stats of an existing item, unless it's a clear bug.

In that case, and similarly with all the LAs and apartments and shops that magically grew hills, moved to completely different locations, further distance from the tp, etc, those properties might not be item "stats"as such, but by messing with them, FPC gives off a signal that on their whim, stuff can change. That directly discourages a lot of people from feeling this is a safe investment environment, and frankly, rightfully so.

It's awesome to see they finally saw the light with the deer mall shops, and we, as a community, can only hope they will reverse the changes made to LAs and all other real estate as well.

A storyline should not be an excuse for tossing all virtual property into the air and just waiting to see how things land again. Certain plots were valued higher by people than others, and there's a reason for that. Messing with those reasons is just plain not done in a professional environment.