Blizzard raided by police!

[HalloweenJack]

The Korean Fair Trade Commission raided the studio's Seoul office to gather evidence as to whether or not Blizzard violated the country's law. There had been complaints in Korea that Blizzard was refusing to refund players who purchased and were attempting to return Diablo III.

Miffed punters who couldn't log into the game were denied a full refund by Blizzard, which said that it was under no obligation to do so under the game's contract. The studio claims that it has a strict policy of "no refunds" in the country if a product is used.

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/27...aided-in-korea


youch!

[zhuzh]

Police XP bonus!

[KeyboardDemon]

You can't get a refund if the product has been used, well that makes sense, but technically buying a game that you can't run due to lack of servers or server downtime shows means you haven't 'used' the product. Or does it?

[kalniel]

You can't get a refund if the product has been used, well that makes sense,

Well what if you used it and discovered it didn't fulfil the advertised purpose? In the UK if I buy a tin of brown paint that says it paints things brown, then I use it and discover it's painted them blue, I'd be entitled to a refund despite the fact I used the product

[Allen]

Well what if you used it and discovered it didn't fulfil the advertised purpose? In the UK if I buy a tin of brown paint that says it paints things brown, then I use it and discover it's painted them blue, I'd be entitled to a refund despite the fact I used the product

May be so, but I'm sure that pots of paint don't have disclaimers like Steam and probably Blizzard saying you can't get a refund on purchases and despite you paying them for a service, they don't have to legally provide it.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Lets hope they survive the Bliz..sorry..storm!!

[jim]

May be so, but I'm sure that pots of paint don't have disclaimers like Steam and probably Blizzard saying you can't get a refund on purchases and despite you paying them for a service, they don't have to legally provide it.

I'd like to see them defend that in court.

[Jonj1611]

It really doesn't matter what is written on anything, its the law of the land that's applicable

[Hicks12]

Exactly, doesnt matter how many disclaimers or agreements... end of the day you cant say Oh you agreed so the law is wrong on the basis that your agreement is that you will be able to use the product!.

Hopefully they get done, ive got bored of d3 already silly blizzard messing things up. After playing the torchlight 2 beta i was hooked and so was my friend, it was more enjoyable than D3 and yet it only cost me £11.25 and i felt like i could customise my character , dont understand blizzard having things like achievement for having two of the same class when they will be EXACTLY the same .

[sniper2o2o]

Exactly, doesnt matter how many disclaimers or agreements... end of the day you cant say Oh you agreed so the law is wrong on the basis that your agreement is that you will be able to use the product!.

Hopefully they get done, ive got bored of d3 already silly blizzard messing things up. After playing the torchlight 2 beta i was hooked and so was my friend, it was more enjoyable than D3 and yet it only cost me £11.25 and i felt like i could customise my character , dont understand blizzard having things like achievement for having two of the same class when they will be EXACTLY the same .

Wow I thought I was the only one who found Torchlight 2 far more satisfying to play, I was lucky in getting Diablo cause a friend had pre ordered it, of course it didn't turn up in time so bought it online and i got a free copy certainly makes it a lot easier to leave sitting there not being run .

[DrATty]

I haven't read the terms for this game but most the online games that I have looked at say that servers will be available for 30 days after release. After that, who knows?
I first became aware of this lovely cop-out in ASDA where they were selling expensive games a few months after release that said there was no guarantee that they would work on the box. The writing was rather small. Incredible.

[AlexGTR]

Isnt that why they register the game to your account so they can slip out of giving you your money back?

[Allen]

As far as I am aware, no-one has ever successfully got a refund from Steam for a game that doesn't work. I have tried before, twice, and got nowhere. I have also ready similar stories and none saying they were successful in getting a refund.

I guess Blizzard would have the same kind of backing if they count it as selling you a service rather then a product.

[jim]

As far as I am aware, no-one has ever successfully got a refund from Steam for a game that doesn't work. I have tried before, twice, and got nowhere. I have also ready similar stories and none saying they were successful in getting a refund.

I guess Blizzard would have the same kind of backing if they count it as selling you a service rather then a product.

It's hardly surprising. They maintain that they aren't selling anything and therefore don't need to give refunds... unless someone challenges them in court they've got no good reason to back down from that position.

And for the sake of a £30 game, I doubt many people would go that far.

Point is, they can say whatever they like - doesn't necessarily mean that it's legal. Besides which, this case is in Korea where the law could be totally different.

[Agent]

May be so, but I'm sure that pots of paint don't have disclaimers like Steam and probably Blizzard saying you can't get a refund on purchases and despite you paying them for a service, they don't have to legally provide it.

?

That's like saying "I pay my insurance company for the service of keeping my car insured, but they don't legally have to provide it as they include a disclaimer".

A disclaimer and the law of the land are two different things.

[Knoxville]

There are instances where that would be true of an insurance company though right? They're only legally oblidged to pay out on whatever policy you have with them provided the accident in question meets the terms agreed to. I don't know Korean contract law all too well but it sounds like a lot of people have clicked "I Agree" before reading and are going to get the short end of the stick for it unfortunately