TQ Working Outside European Law?

[Vert1go]

I've just done some research with the Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform as well as my local Trading Standars office, and apparently... TQ cannot legally sell anybody in the EU these Dragonballs.

The Sale Of Goods act (which is a law) indicates that to have legally purchased any product you need to receive a physical object. The only exceptions are membership schemes and services.

So, TQ have registered these 'DragonBalls' as a product however in there TOS or T&C they state that all in-game dynamics remain the intellectual proprerty of TQ digital. Basically they're taking your money and giving you NOTHING in return.

Not sure about american law though...

Interesting topic.. eh?

[Queen-Of-Evil]

Under European Law the Sale of Dragonballs is still legal, except its actual meaning of buying is diffrent, its the T&C that is illegal in the European Member States. It comes down to the fact that under European Law the Account Information Legally belongs to YOU the account holder under the Data Protection Act of October 2001, because it contains your details. Therefor all account Information is yours, not TQ's, though its irrelavant because short of a Legal case against TQ under the DataProtectionAct and the ComputerFraudAndMisuseAct under the way the accounts are dealt with. Though again this is pointless as TQ could easily forbid peaple the European Countries permission to play on there servers, so basically, they know this, and we should bear in mind to not to not rock the boat as it where

[Vert1go]

Originally Posted by Queen-Of-Evil

Under European Law the Sale of Dragonballs is still legal, except its actual meaning of buying is diffrent, its the T&C that is illegal in the European Member States. It comes down to the fact that under European Law the Account Information Legally belongs to YOU the account holder under the Data Protection Act of October 2001, because it contains your details. Therefor all account Information is yours, not TQ's, though its irrelavant because short of a Legal case against TQ under the DataProtectionAct and the ComputerFraudAndMisuseAct under the way the accounts are dealt with. Though again this is pointless as TQ could easily forbid peaple the European Countries permission to play on there servers, so basically, they know this, and we should bear in mind to not to not rock the boat as it where

But i like rocking the boat lol

What do you mean by "its actual meaning of buying is different"?

Mehhh, i forgot your thanks as the first poster

[cardgame132]

maybe it is because the db codes you get are the object. as stated on their site, when you purchase DB Codes they can be exchanged for dbs ingame. Now you bought the codes with the knowledge of getting the codes not the dbs. you never really have to use the codes but then whats the point?

[Sinzorz]

Yup Yup, besides TQ is an american company sooo they arent so tightly bound are they?

[XxDarkKillaxX]

Originally Posted by Sinzorz

Yup Yup, besides TQ is an american company sooo they arent so tightly bound are they?

tq is a chineese company but they get stuff from netdragonw hich has an office in california

[Vert1go]

Originally Posted by XxDarkKillaxX

tq is a chineese company but they get stuff from netdragonw hich has an office in california

I dont think TQ or NetDragon give a **** who they screw over. As long as their turnover is high enough they dont care

[Sinzorz]

I got schooled o.- thought it just originated in china then the americans coopoerized it :X my bad.

[Lunatic_Calm]

Originally Posted by cardgame132

maybe it is because the db codes you get are the object. as stated on their site, when you purchase DB Codes they can be exchanged for dbs ingame. Now you bought the codes with the knowledge of getting the codes not the dbs. you never really have to use the codes but then whats the point?

makes good sense to me

and also i read this
18. CHOICE OF LAW AND VENUE.

This Agreement is governed by and shall be construed and enforced under the laws of the State of California, without applying any conflicts of law principles that would require application of the law of any other jurisdiction. You agree that all actions or proceedings arising in connection with this Agreement shall be tried and litigated exclusively in the state or federal (if permitted by law and a party elects to file an action in federal court) courts located in Los Angeles, State of California.




im probably wrong but doesnt that stipulate we are all bound by U.S. law?

[Matt.dk]

Originally Posted by Lunatic_Calm

makes good sense to me

and also i read this
18. CHOICE OF LAW AND VENUE.

This Agreement is governed by and shall be construed and enforced under the laws of the State of California, without applying any conflicts of law principles that would require application of the law of any other jurisdiction. You agree that all actions or proceedings arising in connection with this Agreement shall be tried and litigated exclusively in the state or federal (if permitted by law and a party elects to file an action in federal court) courts located in Los Angeles, State of California.


im probably wrong but doesnt that stipulate we are all bound by U.S. law?

It is against many UN trade sanctions for any company involved in international business to limit litigation to a said area.

It only applies to US citizens.

[Vert1go]

Originally Posted by Matt.dk

It is against many UN trade sanctions for any company involved in international business to limit litigation to a said area.

It only applies to US citizens.

<< What he said.. grr how dare you get here first

[nataro]

Originally Posted by Matt.dk

It is against many UN trade sanctions for any company involved in international business to limit litigation to a said area.

It only applies to US citizens.

UN? They aren't even technically legit.

[Vert1go]

Originally Posted by nataro

UN? They aren't even technically legit.

Since when do us Europeans get hung up on technicalities? If it seems a od idea at the time, we do it

Like:
Person 1: 'Heres a good idea, lets send our soldiers to die in iraq'
Person 2: 'But, its nothing to do with us though...'
Person 1: 'Shhhhh, dont get so technical *presses self-destruct button*)

[Matt.dk]

Originally Posted by nataro

UN? They aren't even technically legit.

UN trade sanctions apply to all international business transactions, so long as the transaction (on both ends) has a member of the UN. They will not directly deal with it per say, but they have sancations against it.

If a Euro sued TQ, and TQ tried to force them to litigate in the USA, then that Euro's lawyer would potentially contact his closest UN represntitive, and the matter would be dealt with "behind closed curtians", and litigation would take place then in Europe. So to say, you wouldn't see the CEO of TQ sitting in the UN building getting bitched at by the offical reps - they more then likely would not even get involved, if anything glance at some paperwork involving the case and nothing more.

So long as all offical reps that sit in the UN house agree to these sanctions, they will be imposed and they actively are, but you don't hear any public news about such things.. What's gonna bring in CNN more ratings, a 10 minute excerpt on Terrorism, or a 10 minute excerpt over some dude in Turkey suing over bad foreign beef imports - who is having said beef producer attempting to force him to come to the US for litigation? Bad example because in that case a physical product was sold from the us but you get the idea.

[nataro]

Originally Posted by Matt.dk

UN trade sanctions apply to all international business transactions, so long as the transaction (on both ends) has a member of the UN. They will not directly deal with it per say, but they have sancations against it.

If a Euro sued TQ, and TQ tried to force them to litigate in the USA, then that Euro's lawyer would potentially contact his closest UN represntitive, and the matter would be dealt with "behind closed curtians", and litigation would take place then in Europe. So to say, you wouldn't see the CEO of TQ sitting in the UN building getting bitched at by the offical reps - they more then likely would not even get involved, if anything glace at some paperwork involving the case and nothing more.

Since when has the people of any Nation Voted for the UN 2 be a leading body? And for that matter when has anyone voted for who their leaders are? People talk about Democracy, And how good it is, But yet the UN goes around dictating 2 everyone, Yet none of us Civilians ever voted for them or any of their representatives, They choose all their own Leaders between themselves, Then they preach 2 other countries about Democracy, Even though the Parties getting Voted in are been Dictated 2 by an Undemocratic Body (aka UN). Think about that.

I'm a strong supporter of Democracy, Thats why I'm against the UN, Its against everything Democracy is about.