Any Land Owners interested in a class action suit?

"Like WoW .. okay .. Gimmeh a DOUBLE YOU! oh! DOUBLE YOU!"

I am not ranting and of course i've read the whole thing. I never said anything about the entire TOS being invalid, from my point of view, although the Judge invalidates the enitre TOS, by just invalidating the parts of it he was attacking which were applicable.

But really this Bragg thing is JUST the tip of the iceberg. The stuff that is really wrong with the SL system, where the real violations and future problems for them are, are huge and as things are totally unsurmountable unless tended too.

Dude, actually, and I am far more awake than you seem to ever be able to muster.

If one doesn't have a clue what one is talking about, one should stop advertising one's own stupidity to the world, ya know?

A "crooked land scammer" didn't win ANYthing. LL settled the case before the real merits of the case were ever considered. Personally, I think they should have roasted his chestnuts over an open flame in court, but that's just me.



Not with regard to this topic, they aren't. However, I will agree that they are in all kinds of messes (and I happily and regularly point them out all the time). Doesn't change the fact that this one is nothing more than a strawman.



When all of that happens, I will GO SOMEWHERE ELSE and spend my money. I'm the last person in the world ANYone can accuse of giving LL quarter for some of the stupid shit they have pulled. However, yeah, at the end of that day, I would be that sucker, and SL would have been a bad investment.

I'm not the one drinking my own kool-aid here.

Since my comments about this are just going to be repeating myself again at this point I will pass on further stuff. Very short memories around here. Alot of very naive people. PT Barnum is still alive and well.

All he won was the right not to be dismissed "for lack of personal jurisdiction". That's a long way from actually winning any case.
(I know, Trout, but it's so hard to resist.)

Umm, assumes facts not in evidence.


/me blushes...

Sorry, don't usually contribute to the mean spiritedness, but could not resist!

When you start calling names and saying that the rest of us are drinking kool aid, I perceive you as ranting.

There is no actual judgment about the propriety of LL's remedies. The judgment is that LL cannot confiscate your assets and force you into an expensive arbitration to get it back. That is all. It does not say that LL cannot freeze assets; all it means is that if they take action, they can be sued.

This is the only upshot to take away from the decision:



What, exactly, does this invalidate in the TOS, Rebecca? Tell me. I'm really curious.

From an objective standpoint, LL SHOULD be able to freeze assets for a number of practical reasons. But it doesn't mean that you should not have access to the Courts to get it back.

I really don't want to participate in this discussion anymore. It's useless. read the judges words in the PDF file, he annialates the tos. This is NOTHING compared to what LL is going to be up against in the future if they don't change and get real with their fictional world.

And BTW Colette, my use of WOW as an example many times is not cheerleading. It's simply to point to a highly successful and functional company that has learned over many years how to do things right in an online world. SL is a primitive toy compared to wow and they actually care about their customers.

They also arent violating banking, security and investment laws and they don't allow scamming in their world.

I have read it, twice, and have distilled the salient point. You haven't backed yours up. I want to know how what I quoted invalidates the rest of the TOS.

If you say so.

LOL!

Yeah Blizz cares so much about their players that when the dev team got bored with the game, they started turning it into World of PVPcraft. Hardly no one raids anymore, it's all but impossible to find a guild who does anything but arena. I can't tell you how many times I have tried to get something going in several guilds over the past year, only to be repeatedly told "Dude sorry but I am in Shatt, in the arena queue."

But anyway, if WoW is more your speed, and you think SL and LL and their playerbase are all such a bunch of morons, what are you doing here? You should be in WoW Arena, doing the same mindless thing over and over, so you can get your handout epics.

A quick pause to thank the lovely comments made by the previous posters. I am not a lawyer but I have several in my family and I had an attorney outside my family thoroughly
examine the LL ToS and other legal notices before committing my money to the project for any reason. With the exception of the arbitration clause, no other ruling has been made against the LL ToS thus the original ToS terms still stand. Additionally, since the lawsuit that's being discussed the ToS has been rewritten in places to make needed adjustments.



Wow if you agree to anything that simply then you are in for a tough road in life. It's completely irresponsible to say that you are entitled to things you don't deserve because you are too lazy to understand the rules before committing yourself to an agreement. when you click agree, you are stipulating that you are of legal age and do, in fact, agree with the terms of service as written. You know, adults making adult decisions. But the issue isn't about minors on the system, it's about Adults making choices and then becoming upset when things don't go their way.




This is a huge generalization in which you seem to claim that any and all Terms of Service agreements are automatically invalid because ... well I'm not sure how you claim that to be honest but that's what I get from the above statements. As long as the Terms of Service does not violate State of Federal laws then the agreement is VALID and your acceptance of the agreement is also VALID so you are tied to the agreement for the duration of your stay on that service. If something changes and you don't care for the change, you have the LEGAL RIGHT to opt out of the ToS (a binding contract between you and the service provider) and choose to no longer use the service. Linden Labs also reserves the right to terminate your use of their service AT ANY TIME without REFUND OR RECOMPENSE.

The definition of ToS is as follows... "Terms of Service (often abbreviated as "ToS" are rules by which one must agree to abide by in order to use a service. Usually, such terms are legally binding."

If I get some time later I will dig through the books and site some specific cases in which clients have found themselves at a dead end when they try to challenge the ToS in court. ToS agreements can only be invalid IF THEIR STIPULATIONS VIOLATE ANY SORT OF STATE AND FEDERAL LAW. In the case you site, the Judge ruled that LL's arbitration clause was invalid because as an internet company, LL ToS was subject to all jurisdictions and not just the California one where the HQ resides.



It would be fake and not hold water because you cannot create a document that states you have no rights. This is true. Again, legal agreements are bound by state and federal law. Unfortunately for all involved, the terms of the ToS you are questioning, specifically the right of Linden Labs to alter their pricing arrangements with or without prior notice and the fact that your account and accompanying 'assets' such as objects, textures and lindens, have held up repeatedly in court and in all cases I can recall reading about recently (I did some homework so I had a better perspective on this issue)... all clients of the service challenging these types of issues surrounding data 'ownership' and equipment 'ownership' met with sad derailments and only served to piss a whole lot of money down the drain on the petitioner's behalf.

So once again to summarize what has been stated repeatedly, Linden Labs has the right to delete, copy, modify, erase, move, stop, start, alter or change the service, terms of that service, data contained on their equipment and transmitted as a result of the use of that service, etc and that is their right as a company providing a service to the general public in which it requires you to agree to the terms before using their service.

It's an extension of the "We Reserver the Right to Refuse Service" sign. You can ignore the sign, but if the man tells you to get out of his place, then that's what has to happen. Private companies are not bound by any laws that say they are required to service anyone at all. If they closed the doors tomorrow and walked away there is literally nothing that could be done.

Since the Terms of Service do not say that you are required to break the law, and in no way do those terms of service differ from ANY OTHER LARGE SOFTWARE COMPANIES POLICIES... I'm not sure how much plainer it can be. At this point I have had 4 very experienced attorney's (only two of which I am related too ;P ) examine this document and my responses in this thread and none of them have found any flaws with the logic presented here.

When I asked my attorney what my legal recourse would be if Linden Labs shut the door today and closed all access to my Second Life account... he chuckled for a second and then told me I would have no leg to stand on in court. I live in the State of Oregon, and due to the ruling that we spoke about earlier, I could certainly bring a lawsuit, which is my right as a United States citizen (we get to sue anyone we want it's neat that way isn't it?)... I will no doubt get my ass handed to be backwards and forwards because of the Terms of Service.

WE did read them. Why don't you? he doesn't annihilate the ToS in its entirety; he annihilates SPECIFIC EFFIN' CLAUSES. The REST of the ToS was not challenged in any way, shape, or form.



..and both the game and the company STILL suck, as far as I am concerned. I will NEVER give Blizzard one PENNY of my money. EVER.

What does that say about Blizzard vs LL?



They don't provide a means for anyone to violate banking, security, and investment laws, and now, neither does LL. Scamming goes on all the time in WoW; like anyone is ever going to stop scams cold in ANY world. Won't happen. Ever. As long as there is someone gullible enough to pay someone else a mint for something otherwise worthless, there will be scamming. WoW can't prevent it, neither can LL, nor can you or anyone else.

WoW is a computer game

SL is trying not to be a computer game,

Expecting SL to follow WoW's example is really missing what LL and a lot of Residents want.

---------------------

Blizzard should release a true social game, that is meant to be a game, instead of people trying to get SL to be that.

It's worthwhile to point out that although you claim that you perceive this as a real world investment with real world money making potential, you use words like primitive toy and make statements reffering to the 'fictional world'.

As far as the Terms of Service, the only discussion is about arbitration... as quoted here...



The invalidated portions are the ones where the judge feels Second Life residents do not have sufficient recourse to resolve disputes... and nothing else is ever discussed.

Also...



What's really funny is to see all of the disgruntled lynch mob types rallying behind this story when essentially Bragg caused the biggest scandal by cheating the system to steal land from it which in any other environment would have gotten him ejected without cause. Double standards are never a good thing.

Two questions for you legal types. Was the judge in Bragg a Federal judge or a State judge? (yes, I am too lazy to look) And if it was just a state judge, how does that invalidate any of the TOS for anyone not living in his jurisdiction? Even in the Federal Courts, the different circuits often disagree, leading to one section of the country living under one ruling and the rest under another until the Surpremes decide to step in.

Don`t worry people with common sence knows what your refering too..........Some just want to start problems because they feel they are smarter then everyone. Yea right

As for Sl platform, its is behind the rest of thegaming world. And LLABS doesnt seem to even care. Well then again look at how much affort they are doing tosell the game as a business commucation form now. As many have said sooner of later even they will noticed how backwards things are here.

Usagi

"neo-conditioned idea" ?

He was a federal judge. And the TOS is not invalidated at all, just the arbitration clause. The judge, although in Pennsylvania, used California law to decide the case and federal law where applicable. Even so, both parties agreed California law applied.

Judge Eduardo Robreno is the federal court judge who has been assigned to this case. And as stated above, only the arbitration clause was challenged but the end result was mute.

The end result of Bragg v. Linden is moot, but the arbitration clause is a casualty. It has been determined to be invalid, and that has helped those who wish to sue LL out.

That came across pretty condescending IMHO. I suppose the inverse argument could be made but that wouldn't be prudent for intelligent debate.



To some it's a game and to other's it's a tool, still others use it as a business model or as a way to test out things they cannot do in the Real World. There is never ending potential for the system to grow but the core of it must be restructured to take advantage of distributed databases and load balancing.

Agreed. Unfortunately you have a right to sue anyone for any reason, it's a problem when so many people feel they are entitled to having things go their way and refuse to accept any sort of responsibility for their own behavior.

i have some land in Ahern if your friend is interested

but you know what? your friend will prolly be the one to win the big bucks in Lotto. i love his optimism, just remind him, if its too good to be true, yadda yadda...

No, sell to me!!!