2009 Final Fantasy XI Lawsuit Dismissed

December 27, 2011 -

Square Enix announced on Friday that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in California has dismissed with prejudice a class action lawsuit involving its MMORPG Final Fantasy XI. The ruling came on December 20. The lawsuit was filed by San Francisco's Esther Leong in 2009 on behalf of a class (Final Fantasy XI subscribers), that accused the publisher of "deceptive advertising, unfair business practices, and fraudulent concealment with respect to the online games at the point of purchase." The game was released in North America in 2003.

The plaintiff was seeking over $5 million in damages. Square Enix deputy general counsel Steve Ross called the suit "baseless" at the time. It turns out that a judge agrees with Square Enix.

Source: Gamasutra


Comments

Re: 2009 Final Fantasy XI Lawsuit Dismissed

I don't think people understand how Playonline's bill cycle is setup. If you start your service on a normal service you pay for one month. If you start you're service on the 31st last day of the month. The next day you'll get charged too months. Their cycle is every first of the month.

Needless to say thats why this game sucks or one of the many reasons. This game is also the reason why we have taxes on a video game because the Democratic Party here in Illionis assisted by Rod Blagoveich who before he tried to sell a Senate seat Democrats would say anything we said about the crazy stuff he does was Republican lies...hehehe anyways because a politican's son had a hard time canceling the IL Democratic Party whats controls the state investigated this made a law and then went after sales from online games which has become a trend

Re: 2009 Final Fantasy XI Lawsuit Dismissed

I've been playing FFXI since the US launch, which means Squeenix has received a LOT of my money over the years. Odd thing is, I enjoyed every minute of it. I've played many MMOs including WoW, Aion, Everquest, Ragnarok, and more. FFXI is the one I keep going back to. It's more fun for me.

I'll be the first to admit Playonline's billing is far from perfect, and Squeenix realizes this too, which is why they switched to another billing service earlier in the year.

And outside of actually buying the game disc, I didn't pay a single dime in taxes. Is it not natural to pay taxes on the things you buy? I don't quite understand the logic here. All I'm seeing is a rant on the evils of a democratic party that you don't agree with.

Re: 2009 Final Fantasy XI Lawsuit Dismissed

The highly Liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is the most overturned court in U.S History. Just because they ruled on something doesn't mean it will be stick. It typically doesn't

Re: 2009 Final Fantasy XI Lawsuit Dismissed

Pardon?

Re: 2009 Final Fantasy XI Lawsuit Dismissed

1. Licensing of the online games software disguised as a sale
2. Monthly fees ("fees") to play online games
3. Penalties for late payment fees
4. Interest charges for late payment fees
5. Charges while the online game account is suspended
6. Termination of the right to use the online game for late payment of the fees
7. User restrictions and conditions related to the online games
8. Termination of game data for late payment of the fees

So to clarify that I understand all claims

1) In practically every single EULA on the planet (I don't like it, but that's the way it is).

2) On the box. Probably one of many reasons I didn't buy it.

3) Seems logical

4) That's curious. Never seen that one before myself with regards to online games, then again I don't typicallyy play Pay-2-Play games.

5) Now, even I have to admit, that's screwed up but I doubt it affects an entire class.

6) Logical. You don't pay your electric bill, they cut off the power. You don't pay your car note, they repo it. Why should the game be any different?

7) Terms and conditions practically are tantamount to the status quo. Many more restrictive than others. Again, I don't like it, but it is what it is.

8) See 6, 3, and what is likely within the terms and conditions portion of the licensing agreement.

----
Papa Midnight

Re: 2009 Final Fantasy XI Lawsuit Dismissed

I've played many MMOs over the years, and none of them had late fees or interest. Some gave you a grace periord if you didn't pay, but most simply cut you off as soon as payment was due if you didn't have a recurring payment set up (or if the recurring payment was declined.

There's a key difference from the power company (or phone, cable, etc) here. You're paying at the start of the month for the MMO service, not at the end of the month for service already provided. Any service you get you already paid for, no payment no service, no service no outstanding balance.

This is closer to a gym membership than the electric company. In my state, gyms can't charge late fees and if they try the consumer can sue to collect. There's never an outstanding balance when you pay at the start of a month, because if payment isn't made there's no service to collect on.

Re: 2009 Final Fantasy XI Lawsuit Dismissed

That seems more accurate to the situation. Even I found the interest charged on late payments to be curious behavior.

----
Papa Midnight

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Sora-ChanI realize that they have ways getting around it, but one reason might be due to earthquakes.04/17/2014 - 4:42am
Matthew WilsonSF is a tech/ economic/ trade center it should be mostly tail building. this whole problem is because of the lack of tail buildings. How would having tail apartment buildings destroy SF? having tail buildings has not runed other cities around the US/world04/16/2014 - 10:51pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the issue is you can not build upwards anywhere in SF at the moment, and no you would not. You would bring prices to where they should have been before the market distortion. those prices are not economic or socially healthy.04/16/2014 - 10:46pm
ZippyDSMleeYou still wind up pushing people out of the non high rise aeras but tis least damage you can do all things considered.04/16/2014 - 10:26pm
ZippyDSMleeANd by mindlessly building upward you make it like every place else hurting property prices,ect,ect. You'll have to slowly segment the region into aeras where you will never build upward then alow some aeras to build upward.04/16/2014 - 10:25pm
Matthew WilsonSF have to build upwards they have natural growth limits. they can not grow outwards. ps growing outwards is terable just look at Orlando or Austin for that.04/16/2014 - 4:15pm
ZippyDSMleeIf they built upward then it would becoem like every other place making it worthless, if they don't build upward they will price people out making it worthless, what they need to do is a mix of things not just one exstreme or another.04/16/2014 - 4:00pm
Matthew Wilsonyou know the problem in SF was not the free market going wrong right? it was government distortion. by not allowing tall buildings to be build they limited supply. that is not free market.04/16/2014 - 3:48pm
ZippyDSMleeOh gaaa the free market is a lie as its currently leading them to no one living there becuse they can not afford it makign it worthless.04/16/2014 - 3:24pm
Matthew WilsonIf you have not read http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/04/introducing-steam-gauge-ars-reveals-steams-most-popular-games/ you should. It is a bit stats heavy, but worth the read.04/16/2014 - 2:04pm
Matthew Wilsonthe issue is when is doesn't work it can screw over millions in new york city's case. more often than not it is better to let the free market run its course without market distortion.04/16/2014 - 9:36am
NeenekoTrue, and overdone stagnation is a problem. It is a tricky balance. It does not help that when it does work, no one notices. Most people here have benifited from rent controls and not even realized it.04/16/2014 - 9:23am
ZippyDSMleehttp://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2014/04/15/riaa_files_civil_suit_against_megaupload04/16/2014 - 8:48am
ZippyDSMleeEither way you get stagnation as people can not afford the prices they set.04/16/2014 - 8:47am
Neenekowell, specifically it helps people already living there and hurts people who want to live there instead. As for 'way more hurt', majorities generally need less legal protection. yes it hurt more people then it helped, it was written for a minority04/16/2014 - 8:30am
MaskedPixelantehttp://torrentfreak.com/square-enix-drm-boosts-profits-and-its-here-to-stay-140415/ Square proves how incredibly out of touch they are by saying that DRM is the way of the future, and is here to stay.04/16/2014 - 8:29am
james_fudgeUnwinnable Weekly Telethon playing Metal Gear http://www.twitch.tv/rainydayletsplay04/16/2014 - 8:06am
ConsterTo be fair, there's so little left of the middle class that those numbers are skewing.04/16/2014 - 7:42am
Matthew Wilsonyes it help a sub section of the poor, but hurt both the middle and upper class. in the end way more people were hurt than helped. also, it hurt most poor people as well.04/16/2014 - 12:13am
SeanBJust goes to show what I have said for years. Your ability to have sex does not qualify you for parenthood.04/15/2014 - 9:21pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician