Use of Sony's online services, including the PlayStation Network (PSN), which was hacked to pieces a few months ago when digital thieves made off with millions of users' personal information, is now subject to terms and conditions that see you waiving your rights to collectively sue the company for any reason, including future security breaches.
Anyone taking issue with Sony in the future will be unable to take class action (which is when a group of people collectively sue), and instead will have to work with an arbitrator of Sony's choosing "on an individual basis" to resolve the problem, the BBC reports.
Like most terms of service, you won't be able to use Sony's services unless you agree to them, so PlayStation gamers will find themselves locked out of the PlayStation Network if they don't want to play by the new rules.
You can read through the legalese-heavy terms yourself if you like, but the important bit reads as follows, in a section titled 'Class Action Waiver':
"Any dispute resolution proceedings, whether in arbitration or court, will be conducted only on an individual basis and not in a class or representative action or as a named or unnamed member in a class, consolidated, representative or private attorney general legal action."
Why is Sony doing this? In April a class action lawsuit was filed against Sony after the catastrophic PSN data loss that could reportedly cost the company billions of dollars. These new rules won't apply to that lawsuit (or any class actions filed before 20 August, 2011), but they could stop users of Sony's services from taking class action in the future.
We'd bet our last Rolo that most users will hit the 'Agree' button without spotting the new terms, that could reduce your options if you ever wanted to sue Sony.
You can opt out of the waiver, but to do so you'll need to post (yeah, post) a letter to Sony's Los Angeles address, for the attention of the legal team. You've got to do so within 30 days, and the letter must contain your name, address, PSN account number (if you've got one) and a written statement that you "do not wish to resolve disputes with any Sony entity through arbitration."
We suspect the new terms and conditions are largely aimed at the US, because class action lawsuits are mainly an American phenomenon. Still, we're sure many gamers will be unhappy with the inclusion of these new rules.
Is it fair for Sony to stick this in its terms of service? Let us know in the comments, or on our Facebook wall.
Android App 
RSS Feeds 
iPhone App 
Newsletters 
Comments 19
Add your comment
anonymous 16 September, 2011 18:43
I'm disgusted and amazed that Sony are allowed to continue reducing their service to its millions of customers.
I've just bought a new PS3 slim to replace dodgy fat one. With the games, controllers etc. it totals around a £1000; who isn't going to press the 'accept' button when they've invested this much into the company?
If Sony are happy to refund my money for all their equipment then i might act differently..
Ibrahim L. Serafy 16 September, 2011 18:44
I say people should take a class action lawsuit against the inclusion of a clause banning a class action lawsuit
anonymous 16 September, 2011 19:19
Plenty of other companies have the ame TOS, why is nobody complaing about them? This just seems to be media sh1tstirring..
www.t-mobile.com/Templates/Popup.aspx?PAsset=Ftr_Ftr_TermsAndConditions&print=true
anonymous 16 September, 2011 20:35
This is absolutely unfair to the users of Sony devices. It's sad that people still buy systems that are locked down, designed to block the freedoms of its users, when there are gaming alternatives that are free (as in speech). Unfair terms of agreement are pretty standard for proprietary software, which is just one more reason to avoid it.
anonymous 16 September, 2011 20:38
Nobody is forced to buy anything from the yellow peril that SONY has become.
That's one of the few rights we have left. More of us need to exercise it or it will go away.
pablouk1 16 September, 2011 21:12
I can see Sony being hacked on a daily basis after this rubbish.
Dean Shepherd 16 September, 2011 22:04
I see it as quite stupid really that people are complaining that they have lost their 'freedom' to sue if things happen...thats just a mockery really.
I mean if sony had done something extremely poor like start charging psn users just to create accounts similar to xbox live and then said "the resulting cost offset to the user is to pay for upgrading the security measure" then maybe I could understand this outcry....but to cry because your now NOT allowed to sue sony as a class action? this just strikes me as poor little boys crying for the sake of crying...
lost freedom? freedom for what exactly?
anonymous 16 September, 2011 22:40
I called my legal counsel and he said I was right that Sony can't cut off any thing bought before this new TOS came out yesterday and if they do there breaking the law. When we bought the systems and games we said yes to there terms and they have to stick to those terms if we do not agree with new terms they try to make us sine. They have to keep providing the same services for items bought before Sep 15, 2011 or it breaks blackmail laws. Only systems and games gotten after the new TOS would be forced by law to stick to the new TOS. Cutting off People from PSN for not agreeing to new TOS is BLACKMAIL any way you look at it.
Dean Shepherd 17 September, 2011 02:33
@ anonymous 16 September, 2011 22:40
all sony are doing are removing the 'freedom' (As others put it) to file class action lawsuits...they are not changing anything else to their system or infrastructure..
and to the 'banning' I do think Cnet might of dramatised this a little....basically if you don't click agree to the TOS, then you don't get signed up...its that simple...but thats the same with ANY TOS with any product or service or software etc...if you don't like it, don't use it...they are not blackmailing people if you really think bout it.
99% of the psn users joke about suing after the hacking exploits the other month, but none actually would its always the minority that finally do get round to it, so the majority, including you anon and others posted here, it doesn't affect...you will still have the same service and nothing changes because I highly doubt you were going to or even plan to file action against them.
so really like I said this is mostly a bunch of uptight kids crying because they want to, just like the miriad of users who all cried sue when the hacks first appeared, even AFTER it was obvious that no one lost any credit card information or money and all they lost was online gaming which for sony users is free (compared to xbox users)....wow...are people that desperate for online gaming that they instantly cry sue if its down? and then after they lose the option to sue they cry some more?
sorry but all this seems rather petty to be fair....its still a free service and like I said above, maybe start complaining if they start a xbox live style charge system just to get online in the first place...then maybe you can have valid reasons.
anonymous 17 September, 2011 08:33
Well not too much of a problem for me, im british. Suing people left right centre isnt exactly our thing lol.
however if they start taking away more important rights from me, Im gonna be pissed.
Sean Riordan 17 September, 2011 08:37
£1000 pound for a new ps3 slim? Dunno where you go shopping but you just got ripped! A ps3 aint cost that mutch since its release date!
Dean Shepherd 17 September, 2011 17:47
@ anonymous 17 September, 2011 08:33
exactly my point, when Sony start cutting core parts out then everyone can be annoyed...but not over this lol
@ Sean Riordan 17 September, 2011 08:37
The poster did mention games/controllers etc...so I think they were adding EVERYTHING together, but at FULL retail value...which means either they are crying the full price just to 'prove' something, or they have no head for shopping around for cheaper/secondhand games etc lol
Hell my other half picked a ps3 up off ebay for just over £100 and has probably spent maybe....40 quid on a number of games from gamestation since then maybe all secondhand etc...so not bad..
doesnt beat my old school xbox for like 20 quid though and like 2 quid a game haha...now thats bargain :P
Sean Riordan 17 September, 2011 20:37
Well I’ve never wanted a ps3 and plan on keeping it that way. As for the PlayStation Network let it burn! What do you guys expect for a free service? I’m happy with my 360 and even happier paying for the Xbox live service knowing I’m getting a quality service because i pay for it. Unlike the ps3 network don’t forget it wasn’t just ps3 users that got screwed pc gamers that subscribe to SOE games like everquest or DC Universe got screwed out of there paid subscription time that they paid for when the network went down.
Dean Shepherd 18 September, 2011 17:41
well im not going to get into a "whos better" style argument...I'm just going to say that most of these users who are upset at this are upset over nothing really.
anonymous 19 September, 2011 04:59
Technically, it IS a ban and verging on blackmail - if you don't agree to the ever changing ToS then you lose access to PSN and online gaming - i.e. you can lose access to something that you already had.
Of course, I'm sure Sony has a clause that says something about "this service only being available until such time as we don't want to offer it any longer, OR you don't sign our ever changing ToS".
Sean Riordan 19 September, 2011 08:44
Well this is kind of what i meant because it’s a free service they can change the terms and conditions all they want because you were never paying for its development in the first place. Unlike the Xbox live service where if anything did go wrong you would more than have the right to complain or sue because you paid for the service. I don’t understand why the PSN don’t just do the same thing and have a subscription charge like Xbox. All those using PSN have no real right to complain since they never really lost out on anything on a free service. It’s no different than having a Sky TV channel that suddenly isn’t free to view anymore.
anonymous 19 September, 2011 11:51
This is absolutely outrageous.
Fortunately you can opt out in writing (though only in writing) within 30 days of agreeing to the terms.
Luckily the chaps at cmpnr.com have made this particularly easy...
I'e added this campaign so people can send their letters online to sidestep Sony's cheeky little maneouvre.
http://cmpnr.com/Sony-TOS-Changes
anonymous 20 September, 2011 22:11
I really don't get how Sony can get away with this. This surely conflicts with the data protection act!
anonymous 27 September, 2011 17:10
Sony ever heard if the concept of unfair terms of contract? This would NOT stand up in law. You can't legislate against being sued for neglegence. You cannot take away "rights" which exist under law. At least in my country. As such this is meaningless. These terms have no basis in law.
It is correct that games bought prior to these terms beig cut off unless they are signed constitute a legal blackhole. Games which were sold in the basis of network play. Sony taking licence cannot absolve themselves when taking this away from even 3rd party games. Especially when tge market the ps3 with network play as part of the product as they do in my country. As such psn is an "intrinsic" component to Sony's "offer".
As for free psn. Psn is NOT free it comes as an "intrinsic" component of the ps3 as such it must provide it. It is BOUGHT AND PAID FOR. The fact it incurs zero "monthly" fee is irrelevant and only a result of Sony following a different business model. But I will say it again. PSN is NOT free.
What this does tell us however is that Sony has learned little from the recent debacle. They clearly continue to put themselves first at the expense of their customers. Companies which do this rarely survive without major admussion of getting it wrong. Sony needa to learn humility because going by all the recent results it is a company which really cannot afford such arrogance.