Surely if you're a lawyer you must come across vague provisions all the time, or perhaps have to determine what is "reasonable".Quote:
Originally Posted by LegionOK
SC's TOS would have been drafted by their lawyers to give them maximum protection/scope for action.
They're already covered. The Communication Decency Act states that where user generated content is concerned, the hosting service is not the publisher and therefore cannot be held liable. This has been upheld in case law and actually was the case law prior to the CDA. Of course, that's just in the United States and this is a very international game, but what assets do they have outside the United States to sue for? I'm guessing none.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirky
One of my longtime clients is a software company and the fact is that where TOSes are concerned, they're all pretty much the same. Someone probably wrote a TOS back in 1991 or so and as lawyers do, if we find something good, we steal it and use it for our own clients. The SC TOS looks pretty similar, if not exactly the same to many others I've seen. Whether they are actually enforceable at all is an interesting question.
Here's my issue--many of us have spent actual money on this thing. Vague provisions like this tend to make me very wary that SC could arbitrarily confiscate what I've paid for. What we are talking about is SC having almost a quasi-quasi-quasi-criminal system in that they are the police, judge, jury and executioner and there are no rules, really. That is a little concerning. I mean there are some, but these catch all provisions in the TOS do not help me to understand what is going on there.
When you drive your car on the road, there are statutes and regulations which govern your use of your car on the road. When you build a factory, there are OSHA and EPA and other regulatory rules that you have to comply with. These are all known rules and we can just elect to follow them. Would you prefer the motor vehicle statutes say "use your common sense"?
So says every generation about the one which precedes them. A great man once said "Times are bad. Children no longer obey their parents and everyone is writing a book." That man was Cicero and he said that around 30 B.C.E. I guess we've been in decline ever since?Quote:
Originally Posted by VincentVegas
Ummm i thought supercell wasn't a US company? pretty sure they're Finnish (citation needed). So i'm guessing they have many assets outside the USA ahahaha.Quote:
Originally Posted by LegionOK
Didn't know that, but more than likely, Finnish law is similar. And to be fair, they're now owned 51% by Japanese companies.Quote:
Originally Posted by THEBANDIT240
I can't imagine under EU or Finnish law that a non-publisher could be held accountable for user generated content. I mean, if someone was to spray paint a swastika on a storefront window, [not protected speech in the EU] could the shopkeeper be held liable?
OK, so now I'm confused. You start by asking for guidance on what can/can't be included in a clan description without looking at the terms you sign up to. Once you've seen the terms you try to make an issue of the fact a term is not well defined. Now you seem to have a long term client who is a software customer with similar terms of service.Quote:
Originally Posted by LegionOK
Surely as a lawyer with experience in the software industry with a question about how you can be banned, you would first look to the TOS, realise its the same as you've seen before and then have the skills and experience to understand what that means legally.
Very true they are judge, jury and executioner, unless you want too take a case on it. Maybe you should just keep your clan description friendly so you don't get caught.Quote:
Originally Posted by LegionOK
I don't live in the US, so I'm not familiar with the specific statutes. The statute I am familiar with has specific rules, but still requires some interpretation. That's why we have courts as you know. Sometimes the interpretation requires complex analysis, sometimes it reverts to little more than common sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by LegionOK
Here the rule is that you can't include something that is otherwise objectionable in your clan description. This needs to be interpreted. I don't see why common sense is such a bad route here.
But, we are not talking about statute here, we are talking about a terms of service that you are free to accept or decline. If you don't like the terms, you don't have to accept them.
Well, my client isn't a game company and doesn't have to deal with user generated content. I'm just saying that most TOS don't have a lot of thought put into them and tend to be boilerplate. I am pointing out that this language leaves much to be interpreted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirky
Legally, it tells me a few specific things which are not permitted, but then says.. well.. you can be banned for well.. anything. No one's skill or experience is going to tell me how that clause will be interpreted. Someone needs to tell us what it means.Quote:
Surely as a lawyer with experience in the software industry with a question about how you can be banned, you would first look to the TOS, realise its the same as you've seen before and then have the skills and experience to understand what that means legally.
I'm not just worried about my clan. It's a community standards issue. What is acceptable, what is not? What should I report, what should I ignore?Quote:
Very true they are judge, jury and executioner, unless you want too take a case on it. Maybe you should just keep your clan description friendly so you don't get caught.
Common sense tells me nothing. Might a TH6 person find a clan which says in their description "TH9 and up only" discriminatory and therefore "otherwise objectionable"? Maybe.Quote:
Here the rule is that you can't include something that is otherwise objectionable in your clan description. This needs to be interpreted. I don't see why common sense is such a bad route here.
Obviously, I accepted them a long time ago. That still doesn't mean that an explanation as to what they mean might be helpful to me and the community at large.Quote:
But, we are not talking about statute here, we are talking about a terms of service that you are free to accept or decline. If you don't like the terms, you don't have to accept them.
I'll ask you the same thing I asked the other gentleman who was objecting to my line of inquiry. Why are you apparently opposed to having more information regarding what conduct is permissible?
You honestly don't know whether the examples you've cited above cross the line?Quote:
Originally Posted by LegionOK
Please.
Maybe I do, but what of the community at large? I'll bet less than 1% of CoC players read these forums which means probably fewer than that number are aware that SC is even policing clan descriptions. I'm a long-time, pretty well informed player and I wasn't aware of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyBGood
That being the case, I suppose reporting someone with an inappropriate message a might be an acceptable war tactic then.. It's pretty easy to win a war when you get the co leaders and leader suspended for the war, right?
Considering the fact that global is basically the sewer of the internet and it requires an act of God for anyone to face consequences there for their behavior, most wouldn't even think there would be an outside chance that there is an opportunity to have their accounts suspended or banned based on what they put in the clan description and at the very least, there could be some iron clad guidelines as to what would be appropriate or not.
interesting topic guys but we have a bigger issue that is affecting every clan that has a mixture of th10-8 and that issue is called matchmaking system. clan description are optional so a clan choose to have no description or entry requirements as their description .trash talking isn't for the public