beta

[superdave]

<div>who is in on beta. i am</div>

[Junaru]

I'm not.. How did they inform you that you got in beta? Email or PM?<div></div>

[superdave]

<div></div>i signed up and they send ya a email

[Junaru]

<div><span><blockquote><hr>superdave wrote:<div></div>i signed up and they send ya a email<hr></blockquote>Yeah I signed up but no email.. <span>:smileymad:</span></span></div>

[Harpax]

<div>You are also probably under NDA</div>

[superdave]

<div></div>yes. just wanted to know what other monks were in so we can compare notes as we beta test it to help everyone out.

[Dfoley3]

<div></div><p>NDA just states that you cant give info about the beta out yet, it doesnt say you cant ask whos on beta :-p</p><p> </p>

[Sandheaver]

<div><span><blockquote><hr>Dfoley323 wrote:<div></div><p>NDA just states that you cant give info about the beta out yet, it doesnt say you cant ask whos on beta :-p</p><hr></blockquote>it also says that you're not allowed to tell anyone you're in the beta.his bragging might get him removed.</span></div>

[Harpax]

<div><blockquote><hr>Sandheaver wrote:<span><div></div><blockquote><hr>Dfoley323 wrote:<div></div><p>NDA just states that you cant give info about the beta out yet, it doesnt say you cant ask whos on beta :-p</p><hr></blockquote><div>it also says that you're not allowed to tell anyone you're in the beta.his bragging might get him removed.</div><div> </div><div></span><hr></div></blockquote>Bingo</div>

[superdave]

<div></div><p>[expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] i didnt know that. that suck. i am sorry i really didnt know that</p>

[Sandheaver]

hehe.  sorry don't mean to laugh but you really should *read* those things before you click "I have read the terms of the agreement."<div></div>

[Junaru]

<div></div><div><span><blockquote><hr>Sandheaver wrote:hehe.  sorry don't mean to laugh but you really should *read* those things before you click "I have read the terms of the agreement."<div></div><hr></blockquote>Reading is bad for you..Beside I'm sure they would get more people reading it if they didn't make it so long and try to confuse people with law jargon.Rule #1:NO screen shotsRule #2:Can't speak about beta.Rule #3:Yeah Yeah Yeah..How hard is that to do?</span></div><p>Message Edited by Junaru on <span class="date_text">01-25-2006</span><span class="time_text">09:12 AM</span></p>

[zabor]

so it is Soe's fault that the player didnt read what he agreed to?

[Sandheaver]

<div><span><blockquote><hr>Junaru wrote:<div></div><div><span><blockquote><hr>Sandheaver wrote:hehe.  sorry don't mean to laugh but you really should *read* those things before you click "I have read the terms of the agreement."<div></div><hr></blockquote>Reading is bad for you..Beside I'm sure they would get more people reading it if they didn't make it so long and try to confuse people with law jargon.Rule #1:NO screen shotsRule #2:Can't speak about beta.Rule #3:Yeah Yeah Yeah..How hard is that to do?</span></div><hr></blockquote>not hard, but also not enforceable in court.  the language of the law is hard to read because it takes that kind of vocabulary to be as specific as is needed. learn to read or suffer the consequences.</span></div>

[Stryyfe]

How many posts does it take for a post to become completley pointless after being merely pointless in the first place?1..2...3............<div></div>

[ShashLigai]

<div></div><p>the language of law is hard to read cause lawyers need to protect their jobs...</p><p>and i believe this post qualifies as <u>absolutely</u> pointless</p>

[Sandheaver]

the language of the law is such because it tries to extinguish ambiguity.  reading the dev's posts (which are entirely clear) then reading all the questions that have already been answered prove that no one reads anything anyway. the point of lawyerly language is to remove ambiguity for those that choose to read the language.  this country is run by laws, and if you choose to ignore them by not knowing them or knowingly breaking them (the same thing in the eyes of the law), then you will pay some sort of price for that.<div></div>

[x0rtrun]

<div></div>Unfair contracts are those that place an undue burden on the average lay person with the use of extrenuous legal concepts. Is it really fair to have the average person consult their lawyer before accepting an EULA?Not saying people don't need to educate themselves, but unnecessary and intentional obfuscation are a problem in legal contracts presented to completely lay end users.Sure the rule of law is paramount, but can it really be considered binding if only 1% of the population can understand it to follow it?<div></div><p>Message Edited by x0rtrunks on <span class="date_text">01-26-2006</span><span class="time_text">03:26 PM</span></p>

[-UGG-Andy]

<div></div>i think a lot of EULA's are not legally binding in europe,due to them conflicting with local laws.I read an article in a gaming mag once :smileyhappy:

[x0rtrun]

There's also the little issue of having to open the package and install the software before you can even reaad the EULA, meaning that if you disagree with it, the store won't take it back anyway cause you've already opened it.<div></div>

[Asheng]

the binding legality of eula's vary's by state, including enforcement/punishment<div></div>