Message from the MPQ Team About Recent Server Issues (8/5)

Unknown

As you don't even know me, it's easy to assume what I've seen and what not.

What you just described could be applied the other way round should Iso be a product. This is just law, and you can make interpretations whether you are on one side or the other. You consider Iso as a product, and I don't. This is the only difference. Iso is not a product, it is a currency. Therefore, your explanations are not valid.

As a lawyer, you should also know that terms and conditions of a contract is not law, and can abuse the consumer who can defend himself if necessary.

I won enough cases in the last years to know how law is working. Thank you for your concern.

As I said, the matter will be investigated thoroughly and I was not expecting you to interpret consumer's law in France. It's funny how someone with a law degree may think he is knowledgeable in international law.

Unknown

I would still like to hear a response to HM's question about what happens if someone buys a "mother-lode" of iso and then a month later its now 30% less? Should they be compensated too? Where is the line drawn? 2 days? 1 year?

You bought iso, nobody forced you into it. It just so happens that soon after, the prices came down. That's life.

If i buy an iTunes gift card for $15 and then there was a deal to buy a $20 card for $15 the following week, should i be compensated? No i shouldn't.

If everyone thought they should be compensated when item prices are changed, it would be a funny old world.

Unknown

TheUnwiseOne wrote:

I would still like to hear a response to HM's question about what happens if someone buys a "mother-lode" of iso and then a month later it's on sale for 30% less? Should they be compensated too? Where is the line drawn? 2 days? 1 year?

You bought iso, nobody forced you into it. It just so happens that soon after, the prices came down. That's life.

If i buy an iTunes gift card for $15 and then there was a deal to buy a $20 card for $15 the following week, should i be compensated? No i shouldn't.

If everyone thought they should be compensated when items go on sale, it would be a funny old world.

There's no need to keep on arguing TU1. We will not agree whatever we may say. As I said, I'll have this investigated by people who know what they are talking about.

HailMary

arktos1971 wrote:

This is just law, and you can make interpretations whether you are on one side or the other.

You're absolutely right. This is why lawyers are useless, because anyone can interpret the law however they want. Law is just like post-modernist art.

arktos1971 wrote:

You consider Iso as a product, and I don't. This is the only difference. Iso is not a product, it is a currency.

From earlier: Even if it was a currency devaluation issue, let's say you exchanged 1000 euros for USD two days ago, and today the USD dropped in value by 20%, AFAIK, no one is under any obligation to refund you the 200-euro difference.

Also from earlier, by atomzed: (Note: the fact that the virtual currency valuation is determined solely by D3 do not matter, bec in national currency, a country can choose to use a fix exchange rate as determined by the country govt. Note 2: the fact that money can be traded and D3 currency can't be traded, also does not matter. Because a country currency can be taken off the exchange, i.e. other countries refused to trade it nor accept it for transaction.)

If Iso is a currency, your arguments have already been destroyed (repeatedly).
If Iso is a product, your arguments have already been destroyed (repeatedly).

I hope your next move isn't to claim that Iso is an emotion ("They cheapened my ennui!").

arktos1971 wrote:

As a lawyer, you should also know that terms and conditions of a contract is not law, and can abuse the consumer who can defend himself if necessary.

As a literate person, you should know that claiming Iso is a currency, but isn't a currency, but really is a currency, except in ways that it isn't a currency, aside from the fact that it is a currency, isn't a terribly compelling argument.

arktos1971 wrote:

I won enough cases in the last years to know how law is working.

It's just law, though. Anyone can interpret it however they please, right?

Unknown

arktos1971 wrote:

TheUnwiseOne wrote:

I would still like to hear a response to HM's question about what happens if someone buys a "mother-lode" of iso and then a month later it's on sale for 30% less? Should they be compensated too? Where is the line drawn? 2 days? 1 year?

You bought iso, nobody forced you into it. It just so happens that soon after, the prices came down. That's life.

If i buy an iTunes gift card for $15 and then there was a deal to buy a $20 card for $15 the following week, should i be compensated? No i shouldn't.

If everyone thought they should be compensated when items go on sale, it would be a funny old world.

There's no need to keep on arguing TU1. We will not agree whatever we may say. As I said, I'll have this investigated by people who know what they are talking about.

Where is the argument? I asked a valid question. If you don't like people's responses, then that's your choice. But if you post something, of course someone will respond. That's forum life

Unknown

I would answer, you would answer and it's never ending. It happened numerous times in the past.

You hate the fact I'm a big spender on this game, and try to make fun of it on each occasion. So, that's probably not the kind of subject we will agree on.

Move on.

Unknown

arktos1971 wrote:

I would answer, you would answer and it's never ending. It happened numerous times in the past.

You hate the fact I'm a big spender on this game, and try to make fun of it on each occasion. So, that's probably not the kind of subject we will agree on.

Move on.

I promise I will not answer if you give your response. Pinky promise.

Unknown

Let's bump this up to a class action suit against every business that's ever existed. I've had everything I've ever bought devalued due to price lowering, and I figured I'm owed the value I originally paid for. The automotive industry is horrible at this, too. My 14 year old car has been devalued so bad by the automotive industry. I'm going to sue them in French courts over this, cuz lowering prices on goods is illegal there.

Edit: I'm also going to pay my French lawyer in ISO-8, since it's now an official currency in France.

Unknown

Wow. Your ignorance is spectacular. But what's even more spectacular is your plain-out refusal to understand the way things work.

Did it ever occur to you that consumer law in the European Union is pretty much exactly the same? You're French apparently. Guess what? I happen to be a citizen of the Union as well. Now guess which of us knows about consumer law? I'll give you a hint, because you clearly need it: It's not you.
Also, guess which one of us was taught International Law at university, including UN contract law? Again, not you.
But yes, apparently law is nothing binding, but rather something open to interpretation by everybody and his goldfish. Thanks for educating me about the wonderful system of making up our own law. I'll declare a few contracts void and ask for my money back because a couple of my things have gotten old and are much cheaper now. Oh, and I'll sue for damages, because how dare they harm my tender consumer soul by selling them cheaper now? I feel totally betrayed now. Fidsah, I'm with you.

For the last time: If you buy iso, you buy a product. But even if it were an official currency, you'd be buying it. It's that simple.

Go start a lawsuit. Sue D3. They'll laugh at you. Oh, and good luck finding a lawyer for that. One who won't just take the case to take your money, that is, because you'll have to pay him no matter whether you win or lose, sadly there are plenty of lawyers about who do just that - but then again, it really serves some people right. And then you can sue your lawyer (who, in your openion, doesn't know a thing about law anyway because it's open to interpretation). Hint: That rarely works out well for the claimant.

atomzed

@Rico, chill man. Maybe arktos know something that we don't, and he can 'revolutionise' the legal scene.

My plan is to migrate to whatever country artkos lawsuit succeed, go buy stuff that will be 'devalued', and sue the companies. This will be my new job, and I welcome partners (fisdah I see that you are interested)

HairyDave

HailMary wrote:

("They cheapened my ennui!").

That needs to be a tagline for the Djangos

Unknown

atomzed wrote:

@Rico, chill man. Maybe arktos know something that we don't, and he can 'revolutionise' the legal scene.

My plan is to migrate to whatever country artkos lawsuit succeed, go buy stuff that will be 'devalued', and sue the companies. This will be my new job, and I welcome partners (fisdah I see that you are interested)

I'm in! Think of all the cool stuff we're gonna have, and when it gets outdated or something cooler pops up on the market, we'll just sue and get something better. Let's also sue for damages, because then we'll be filthy rich. Best. Job. Ever.

atomzed

Rico Dredd wrote:

atomzed wrote:

@Rico, chill man. Maybe arktos know something that we don't, and he can 'revolutionise' the legal scene.

My plan is to migrate to whatever country artkos lawsuit succeed, go buy stuff that will be 'devalued', and sue the companies. This will be my new job, and I welcome partners (fisdah I see that you are interested)

I'm in! Think of all the cool stuff we're gonna have, and when it gets outdated or something cooler pops up on the market, we'll just sue and get something better. Let's also sue for damages, because then we'll be filthy rich. Best. Job. Ever.

No way I'm going to let you into the partnership cos you just hit me for 28 pts!!!
....
Just kidding!was kinda surprised to see a familiar name when the 'hit' list came up nice daken sentry you have there heh.

Unknown

I hear the real reason is because every opponent in the entire game simultaneously fired off 3 team ups in a row causing the server crash.

Unknown

atomzed wrote:

Rico Dredd wrote:

atomzed wrote:

@Rico, chill man. Maybe arktos know something that we don't, and he can 'revolutionise' the legal scene.

My plan is to migrate to whatever country artkos lawsuit succeed, go buy stuff that will be 'devalued', and sue the companies. This will be my new job, and I welcome partners (fisdah I see that you are interested)

I'm in! Think of all the cool stuff we're gonna have, and when it gets outdated or something cooler pops up on the market, we'll just sue and get something better. Let's also sue for damages, because then we'll be filthy rich. Best. Job. Ever.

No way I'm going to let you into the partnership cos you just hit me for 28 pts!!!
....
Just kidding!was kinda surprised to see a familiar name when the 'hit' list came up nice daken sentry you have there heh.

Sorry about that I did feel kinda bad about it, but all the other opponents I was offered were worth 20 points or less, or else a lot of work really not worth the points. Sometimes I really don't get how that system works.

The first 28 shiny iso dollars I make from our lawsuits shall be yours or you could sue me for devaluing your team?

Unknown

Rico Dredd wrote:

Wow. Your ignorance is spectacular. But what's even more spectacular is your plain-out refusal to understand the way things work.

Did it ever occur to you that consumer law in the European Union is pretty much exactly the same? You're French apparently. Guess what? I happen to be a citizen of the Union as well. Now guess which of us knows about consumer law? I'll give you a hint, because you clearly need it: It's not you.
Also, guess which one of us was taught International Law at university, including UN contract law? Again, not you.
But yes, apparently law is nothing binding, but rather something open to interpretation by everybody and his goldfish. Thanks for educating me about the wonderful system of making up our own law. I'll declare a few contracts void and ask for my money back because a couple of my things have gotten old and are much cheaper now. Oh, and I'll sue for damages, because how dare they harm my tender consumer soul by selling them cheaper now? I feel totally betrayed now. Fidsah, I'm with you.

For the last time: If you buy iso, you buy a product. But even if it were an official currency, you'd be buying it. It's that simple.

Go start a lawsuit. Sue D3. They'll laugh at you. Oh, and good luck finding a lawyer for that. One who won't just take the case to take your money, that is, because you'll have to pay him no matter whether you win or lose, sadly there are plenty of lawyers about who do just that - but then again, it really serves some people right. And then you can sue your lawyer (who, in your openion, doesn't know a thing about law anyway because it's open to interpretation). Hint: That rarely works out well for the claimant.

So with this silly logic every time I put a quarter into an arcade machine (does this make me old?) I'm making a down-payment towards the purchase of the machine?

There's a big difference between paying for usage and ownership. When I go to a movie theater, I'm not buying something to own, I'm investing in an experience. In the same way, Arktos wants to spend thousands of dollars to have fun, some of us prefer sneaking into the back entrance of the theater to watch the exact same movie. It's one thing to say you pay 100 dollars for one thing but never receive it or give you only half of it. It's another thing to say that after a month, a developer drops the price on their product and to demand a partial refund because people who waiting to buy it later got a discount.

No one hates you Arktos for spending a ton of money on the game. If there weren't others like you who payed to keep the game afloat, there would be no game. Hell we can thank that other alliance for buying server time for D3. It's another thing to call it skill for using a P2W mechanic to your advantage by paying for it. D3 doesn't owe us anything for the servers going down beyond a polite message - sorry the servers crashed and we're doing our best to get it up and running. It's a nice customer service gesture that costs them basically nothing to say, here's a little iso/hp for your trouble.

I'd rather they focus on fixing and improving the game though than slaving over handouts but if it raises general moral, maybe it's a good thing.

Unknown

Silly logic, eh? I can tell you have no degree in law either.
If you "buy" a ticket to a movie, legally you haven't bought anything. That "paying for the experience" is a service contract. You pay, they let you see the movie. True, there are some online games where you have to pay to play them for a certain time (like WoW, I believe). Those contracts, too, are service contracts. With MPQ, however, you don't pay to be able to play in the first place. You choose to pay for certain things the game wouldn't give to you otherwise. That's a purchase contract.

What Arktos does with his money is his own problem. Hell, he can light a bonfire with it or feed it to The Tiny Kitty, I don't care. There are worse things one can do with his money than support a game with it. I don't get why one would have to spend so much money on iso when the game gives you loads of it anyway (I spent some money on hero points myself, but very little on iso), but this is not the point here. The point is that he claims D3P owe him money (or iso, or whatever), which - and you seem to agree with that - is absurd.

Unknown

The most important thing here is that we understood Rico Dredd is an excellent lawyer, and I am a silly twit

Case closed on this forum.

HailMary

Ummmm, I think LoreNYC accidentally quoted the wrong person/comment.

arktos1971 wrote:

The most important thing here is that we understood Rico Dredd is an excellent lawyer, and I am a silly twit

Indeed, I never knew Rico was a lawyer.

Unknown

Wow, this thread was so off the rails I just had to grab some popcorn...