SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Back in 2012, developer Roberts Space Industries (RSI) launched a Kickstarter asking for money to fund Star Citizen—an ambitious space game in the mold of Wing Commander. It's 2018, and while parts of the game are playable in various forms, it's far from achieving what it set out to accomplish. So far, it's collected more than $200 million in funding from fans eager to play it.
Ken Lord was one of those fans, and an early backer of Star Citizen. He's got a Golden Ticket, a mark on his account that singles him out as an early member of the community. In April of 2013, Lord pledged $4,496 to the project. Five years later, the game still isn't out, and Lord wants his money back. RSI wouldn't refund it, so Lord took the developer to small-claims court in California.
It's a simple case of an investor who's upset he didn't get his money back, isn't it?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by richtopia on Thursday July 19 2018, @07:54PM (5 children)
After reading the article I have to side with Lord. He pledged the development of a space simulator game. The game being delivered now requires FPS gameplay. The product has sufficiently changed that Lord's MS disables him from using the purchase.
Now, if Star Citizen's lawyers want to argue that the game will never be made, then it is a failed kickstarter and you are screwed. However, the product is still be being made so they should be accountable for delivering the product as advertised.
Lastly, the bullshit with the judge only looking at the current Terms of Service gets me. Lord agreed to the TOS at time of purchase. That is the TOS that should be used here, unless both parties agree to update the TOS.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 19 2018, @08:32PM (1 child)
Most user agreements include a "subject to change with X days notice" clause specifically for this purpose. The user "agrees" automatically to whatever changes are made, unless the user employs some escape clause to revoke the agreement. (Said escape clause may not actually exist, and if it exists the procedure to invoke it is sure to be hidden in an undiscoverable segment of the company's website behind a sign saying "Beware of the Leopard" or some such.)
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 19 2018, @11:21PM
That sort of cap won't hold up in a court of law for serious term changes
by reading this message you agree to give me your first born child to be sacrificed in the name of Sek and I can alter this agreement at any time
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 19 2018, @10:17PM
I'm confident he made the purchase when his MS allowed him to play the current game. Otherwise, he woudln't have been around to complain about it now.
Which likely had one of those "terms may change" clauses meaning only the current TOS applies.
(Score: 3, Informative) by loonycyborg on Thursday July 19 2018, @10:39PM
TOS is an example of a contract of adhesion. There are legal limits on what sorts of clauses from them can be enforceable, and I think limitations on possible conflict resolution should be one of unenforceable ones.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Friday July 20 2018, @02:53PM
You may side with him. I'm sympathetic, slightly, to him. But failure to deliver an advertised product only applies to an investor if the investor has promised certain specifications absolutely and has no out clause. "But depending on the funding levels reached, we may have to limit the experience for the initially released game version." The experience won't necessarily be as promised. That's their out. Sucks, but maybe the investor should have asked for more specific promises, in writing, before investing any considerable sum.
Also, a reasonable investor might expect that a produced product does not necessarily match the initial specifications. Whether the current product was an apple when they were promised an orange, or an Apple when the were promised a PC, or an Apple when they were promised a rocket car may be a matter for a court. It's arguable, but it doesn't automatically hold up that they don't have it.
This sig for rent.