Hacking EU Users: Super Ban - GDPR Template

[V-Temp]

Licensed software is your property when bought in Europe otherwise you couldn't sell it
https://www.engadget.com/2012/07/03/eu-court-rules-its-legal-to-resell-digital-games-software/

Nintendo isn't banning your account which owns the game license, its banning the console. You're not losing you 'property', at most this would make it such that Nintendo in EU has to always allow unlinking of accounts from banned consoles.

The law does not state that a device (not you) has a right to access a title that you paid for, it just says you have to be able to access it. Which you can, with another Switch.

Otherwise, think about it. If I buy a game on Nintendo's online store but do not own a Switch... do I have a right to demand a Switch from Nintendo? Of course not. I own the product by my account, not my console.

 

[kumikochan]

Wrong. This would be true only if everything you can sell is property. Obviously you can sell things that are not property, like e.g. rights.

CORRECT. It even says so in the article. You can because you can sell digitally bought items

 

[c80]

Not anymore.
That was done when the initial bans were being handed over.
Now they are going full-on ban mode.

even a full-on ban won't block you from receiving updates. You still can get the update from a cart or from another console. They only block access to their service, which is totally legal

 

[kumikochan]

No, read carefully. The license is your property. Not the software itself. The license comes with conditions you must abide by if the license is to remain valid. Whenever you break the terms of that license, the licensor doesn't take it away per se, but the license ceases to exist due to it being breached by you. You can transfer your ownership of the license to someone else, but that license can still be voided.

No it doesn't. The European union fined steam for deleting accounts wich were bought by users. A license can't be terminated.


Since the copyright holder cannot object to the resale of a copy of a computer program for which that rightholder's distribution right is exhausted under Article 4(2) of Directive 2009/24, it must be concluded that a second acquirer of that copy and any subsequent acquirer are ‘lawful acquirers' of it within the meaning of Article 5(1) of Directive 2009/24.
Consequently, in the event of a resale of the copy of the computer program by the first acquirer, the new acquirer will be able, in accordance with Article 5(1) of Directive 2009/24, to download onto his computer the copy sold to him by the first acquirer. Such a download must be regarded as a reproduction of a computer program that is necessary to enable the new acquirer to use the program in accordance with its intended purpose.

 

[Buurmanzz92]

Legal or not they are the most stupid pigs ever they could at least gave us 1 second chanse to get unbanned. now i wont ever buy anything from nintendo anymore just to boycot them

 

[snarkyerica]

No it doesn't. The European union fined steam for deleting accounts wich were bought by users. A license can't be terminated

[citation needed]. If licenses (contracts) could not be terminated, then we'd have bigger issues than arguing on an internet forum about whether it's legal for Nintendo to take away your ability to use their services. The only semi-relevant info I could find about Steam being fined was by the Australian government, not the EU, and it was for refusing to provide refunds.

 

[c80]

CORRECT. It even says so in the article. You can because you can sell digitally bought items

Bullshit. The article does not even mention the word property. The article is talking about rights: "The exclusive right of distribution of a copy of a computer program covered by such a licence is exhausted on its first sale," the court has found.

 

[kumikochan]

[citation needed]. If licenses (contracts) could not be terminated, then we'd have bigger issues than arguing on an internet forum about whether it's legal for Nintendo to take away your ability to use their services. The only semi-relevant info I could find about Steam being fined was by the Australian government, not the EU, and it was for refusing to provide refunds.

http://www.gamerlaw.co.uk/2014/eu-digital-resale-rights-state-of-play/
Multiple cases regarding Europe

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Bullshit. The article does not even mention the word property. The article is talking about rights: "The exclusive right of distribution of a copy of a computer program covered by such a licence is exhausted on its first sale," the court has found.

No it's not. Here is the court ruling btw. What you said is nowhere to be seen in the court ruling

Since the copyright holder cannot object to the resale of a copy of a computer program for which that rightholder's distribution right is exhausted under Article 4(2) of Directive 2009/24, it must be concluded that a second acquirer of that copy and any subsequent acquirer are ‘lawful acquirers' of it within the meaning of Article 5(1) of Directive 2009/24.
Consequently, in the event of a resale of the copy of the computer program by the first acquirer, the new acquirer will be able, in accordance with Article 5(1) of Directive 2009/24, to download onto his computer the copy sold to him by the first acquirer. Such a download must be regarded as a reproduction of a computer program that is necessary to enable the new acquirer to use the program in accordance with its intended purpose.

 

[snarkyerica]

http://www.gamerlaw.co.uk/2014/eu-digital-resale-rights-state-of-play/
Multiple cases regarding Europe

Again, this is talking about resale rights. Which are well established. Not revocation of licenses.

 

[c80]

http://www.gamerlaw.co.uk/2014/eu-digital-resale-rights-state-of-play/
Multiple cases regarding Europe

The link you provided does not say that a license can't be terminated.

 

[kumikochan]

Again, this is talking about resale rights. Which are well established. Not revocation of licenses.

It is talking about a lot more then just licensing

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

The link you provided does not say that a license can't be terminated.

Why are you constantly white knighting Nintendo by the way ? I see you posting so much defending Nintendo regarding every post that is made against Nintendo. You do know that as a consumer your selling your soul to a corporation who doesn't give a shit about so I really don't get the constant white knighting from you regarding Nintendo constantly

 

[snarkyerica]

It is talking about a lot more then just licensing

Hmm, yeah. I don't think I'm going to pursue this argument further. Your citation exclusively deals with resale rights, nothing about license termination due to an EULA breach, and honestly, I don't think you're going to get it. I'd rather not fill up the thread with pages of bickering that will be deleted eventually. No matter how 'evil' you think Nintendo is for banning your precious Switch for breaking their rules is, that does not make them banning you or revoking your game licenses illegal.

 

[c80]

No it's not. Here is the court ruling btw. What you said is nowhere to be seen in the court ruling

Uhmm, I said that this ruling is not about property. That you can't find the word property in the ruling, proves that I'm right.

 

[kumikochan]

Uhmm, I said that this ruling is not about property. That you can't find the word property in the ruling, proves that I'm right.

Well since you're constantly white knighting against every post that is made against Nintendo this will be my last reply towards you since i'm really not in the mood to argue with a fanboy. Nothing so toxic then a fanboy

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Hmm, yeah. I don't think I'm going to pursue this argument further. Your citation exclusively deals with resale rights, nothing about license termination due to an EULA breach, and honestly, I don't think you're going to get it. I'd rather not fill up the thread with pages of bickering that will be deleted eventually. No matter how 'evil' you think Nintendo is for banning your precious Switch for breaking their rules is, that does not make them banning you or revoking your game licenses illegal.

i'm not banned

 

[c80]

Why are you constantly white knighting Nintendo by the way ?

I don't. I just correct people if they say wrong things.

I see you posting so much defending Nintendo regarding every post that is made against Nintendo.

Oh, you need to read again. I'm arguing pro Nintendo, I'm just correcting false statements.

 

[Shelly88]

Well since you're constantly white knighting against every post that is made against Nintendo

He just told you that the ruling is not about property but rights. This is neither pro Nintendo nor con, he just pointed out a fact. How is this white knighting?

 

[kumikochan]

He just told you that the ruling is not about property but rights. This is neither pro Nintendo nor con, he just pointed out a fact. How is this white knighting?

Look at all the pages previous to this one. I'm guessing there are over 20 - 30 posts only from him

 

[snarkyerica]

Look at all the pages previous to this one. I'm guessing there are over 20 - 30 posts only from him

Being corrected when you've said categorically untrue things isn't white knighting. Disagreements aren't trolling or being "toxic". I'm trying to be cordial about it (and so was he, up until the very end at least), and all you seem to want to do is call people white knights or fanboys or "lol ur on my ignore list".

 

[kumikochan]

Being corrected when you've said categorically untrue things isn't white knighting. Disagreements aren't trolling or being "toxic". I'm trying to be cordial about it (and so was he, up until the very end at least), and all you seem to want to do is call people white knights or fanboys or "lol ur on my ignore list".

Jezus, no he wasn't arguing with me constantly but with fucking everybody. He even ignored all my other points I made a ton of pages back. He is white knighting constantly and everyone can clearly see that just scrolling through all the pages.

 

[Shelly88]

Look at all the pages previous to this one. I'm guessing there are over 20 - 30 posts only from him

Ok, that only means that he posted often. That does not mean that he is white knighting. I've read the whole thread and I don't remember him saying anything directly about Nintendo. He is talking about GDPR, licenses, property and so on. From what I've read, nothing he said is wrong or pro Nintendo. What exactly do you mean?

 

[snarkyerica]

Jezus, no he wasn't arguing with me constantly but with fucking everybody. He even ignored all my other points I made a ton of pages back. He is white knighting constantly and everyone can clearly see that just scrolling through all the pages.

Sure, he was being a little bit more abrasive with his language, calling people dumb as such, but he still wasn't wrong.

 

[kumikochan]

Sure, he was being a little bit more abrasive with his language, calling people dumb as such, but he still wasn't wrong.

That is being a fanboy. It is clear by scrolling through all the pages that he was being a fanboy. I just don't argue with fanboys, especially with fanboys calling people dumb and more. I'm not saying some points he made were incorrect btw