New EA TOS posted in EA Account

[Sevin0oo0]

This will mean that you can no longer trade your account like you used to be able to

So is this thing actually official yet?
and of the ROC?
I have not done Anything with my account thus far, and i WILL be trading and/or selling my account.
Should I get a disposable email addy to link it to? (when the acct goes, the 'linked' email address can go with it).
People w/ multiple accts get no respect?
If it's now against the 'rulz' is this subject now taboo on Forum?
If we have a question about something, where is resolution, a support ticket?

 

[Rupert Avery]

I just noticed the "official account transfer system" is no longer there.. unless I am missing it

 

[Tina Small]

If you go to Origin.com, which is where all the old UO knowledgebase information seems to now be housed, put this phrase into the Search box and see where it takes you: Account Access Transfer Program.

You'll find that the information on this program seems to have survived the move to the new "help database in the cloud," but without the attached form.

Someone should probably just submit a question to Customer Support and see if they can say whether or not the program has truly survived the move, is temporarily disabled, or is gone forever.

 

[BahamaMama]

Unless expressly authorized by EA, you may not sell, buy, trade or otherwise transfer your Account or any personal access to EA Services, Content or Entitlements, including by use of auction websites.​

I suspect they will re-instate the official Account Transfer Program in some form. Otherwise why use the terms above (in bold by me).

 

[Rupert Avery]

Unless expressly authorized by EA, you may not sell, buy, trade or otherwise transfer your Account or any personal access to EA Services, Content or Entitlements, including by use of auction websites.​

I suspect they will re-instate the official Account Transfer Program in some form. Otherwise why use the terms above (in bold by me).

Agreed.

 

[Woodsman]

This will mean that you can no longer trade your account like you used to be able to, so you can't for instance transfer to a family member or otherwise trade the accounts. Which means many veteran accounts will go to waste and new players will have no way of getting these benefits whatsoever.

Its further complicated with the link to the EA account, as a sale would have to sell the entire EA account with everything on it.

I have several games on my EA account, so I will never be able to sell my account. I am still debating with myself whether it was a good idea to return to UO at this time.

Ubisoft was clearly looking to block people selling games or to be the means for selling games - they were going to bind games to accounts, and you'd have to pay Ubisoft a price to transfer it. It was all about the used game market at the time. I don't know if they changed their stance, as I stopped buying their games, but I read somewhere that they were dropping some of the draconian aspects of their new DRM after games had been out a year or so.

Even though an MMORPG is in a different category than what they were having issues with, this could be one of those things where we get caught up in it.

If EA makes it so that we can unlink games, then we should be alright.

 

[Woodsman]

And Joystiq is taking reader comments about the changes in EA's EULA last week.

The Daily Grind: Does Origin's new EULA make you feel better about playing an EA game? | Massively

A few crafty fans of the upcoming MMO looked more deeply into the service, which sparked an eruption of rage. Origin was denounced as everything from spyware to an elaborate identify theft system. EA recently responded by changing the service's EULA, making it absolutely clear that the company is not out to steal anyone's personal information.

But is that enough for you? Has Origin completely soured you on SWTOR and any other EA game, or do you trust the new Origin EULA? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below!

I'm actually surprised EA responded as quickly as they did, but it did generate a lot of rage around the internet.

 

[Cloak&Dagger]

If EA makes it so that we can unlink games, then we should be alright.

You mean an easy way to do it? Because right now you can get customer service to do it.

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

If EA makes it so that we can unlink games, then we should be alright.

You mean an easy way to do it? Because right now you can get customer service to do it.

RMTers would LOVE for it to be free and untracked ...

 

[Woodsman]

You mean an easy way to do it? Because right now you can get customer service to do it.

An easy way to do it. Going through customer service is not an easy way to do it, even if it only takes 10 minutes.

Given how many games EA sells in a year, and how many games they discontinue support for every year, whoever designed the new account system really should have thought this through a lot more. Once everything is finished being integrated (including our UO accounts with the main Origin system that tracks our other games), it's easy to see people adding half a dozen games or more through Origin every year, and on the EA Sports side, removing/unlinking that many every year.

 

[Sevin0oo0]

hence why I read mention of a stored "cd key"? makes a little bit of warped sense now - it forces someone to 'buy the game' in order to use any existing account, But, on a re-install, or on a different box, does what? Hope that contamination doesn't spread to us

 

[Woodsman]

hence why I read mention of a stored "cd key"? makes a little bit of warped sense now - it forces someone to 'buy the game' in order to use any existing account, But, on a re-install, or on a different box, does what? Hope that contamination doesn't spread to us

I do worry that UO will be accidentally caught up in it.

When Ubisoft implemented it, people knew right away they were going after used game sales. Even if they reduce the DRM/account lock-in after a year, they are still locking you in during a period when that game will have its highest used price.

Meanwhile the people actually pirating the game won't have those problems.

 

[Fayled Dhreams]

hence why I read mention of a stored "cd key"? makes a little bit of warped sense now - it forces someone to 'buy the game' in order to use any existing account, But, on a re-install, or on a different box, does what? Hope that contamination doesn't spread to us

heh!
What >need< is there to "un-link" ANY account?
Your game right?
if you ain't paying or playing it ... so?
Put a filter on the account page
show ALL games, show Active games only
*shrugs*
I forgot I had that game ... will be seen less and less
as an excuse/alibi
Its for your own good, an EAs convenience

I can go to any box in the world, download a client, install and login and Play My Paid for game

but I want to give my game to someone else to play
okay, give them the account name and login Password ... let them play
You only need remember: Its STILL Your account and your responsibility FOR that play
Don't want to be responsible for Them
okay, go to EA and have them remove your data(ownership/responsibility)
Let them set up their own responsibility/contract with EA ...
EA will remove it from YOUR linked accounts
won't matter how you set your filter All game/ Active games
>that game< ain't yours no more

didn't use to be that way
Heh! didn't used to be 2011

/simple and easy

 

[Zosimus]

hence why I read mention of a stored "cd key"? makes a little bit of warped sense now - it forces someone to 'buy the game' in order to use any existing account, But, on a re-install, or on a different box, does what? Hope that contamination doesn't spread to us

In my opinion, this is what EA is trying to accomplish. They want all the sales and possible future sales of the game itself. I believe they are targeting 3rd party RMT sites from reselling their product, which at this moment in time, they are not making any money off of their product.

By buying a used account that already has all the expansions from a RMT site, that player may have saved quite an x amount of money by buying that account. EA does not benefit from this because the product for that account was only bought once to upgrade that particular account.

EA is actually loses sales from possible new players or players adding extra accounts when they buy used accounts. Those players would of have to buy the extra content for a new account does not come with from EA.

So if 1000 people bought 1000 used accounts that were already updated to the latest expansion when they bought them, that is a 1000+ digital sales updates lost that EA could of sold. Now if these 1000 players are forced to buy new accounts plus any updated content/expansions then EA is making "more" money that way then letting old used accounts be resold by third party sites.

 

[Woodsman]

I really doubt UO is being specifically targeted, the least of which this EULA/TOS is for every game that touches Origin, and UO would be way down the list in terms of revenue/players. I was mentioning that Ubisoft was building things into their account system to cripple used game sales or to force people go through them and pay a fee of sorts if they buy used games, and it turns out EA has already been doing this (with BioWare titles no less - Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age Origins):

Ubisoft Joins the Used Game Punishment Party

Starting with Driver: San Francisco, Ubisoft will require a voucher, cutely called a “Uplay Passport,” to play its most popular new console games online. One voucher is included with each new copy of the game. Buyers of used games will have to pay $10 for a new voucher.

This trend began with Electronic Arts, which started requiring “Online Passes” for some of its games last year. THQ quickly followed with its own $10 voucher program, and Warner Bros. started requiring a $10 online pass with the launch of Mortal Kombat in April. Sony took a different approach with SOCOM 4, charging used game buyers for extra multiplayer features, but now plans to launch its own $10 voucher program, called PSN Pass, with the launch of Resistance 3 in September.

That doesn't mean that UO won't get caught up in this some way, and some of what you said could tie UO into such a system, at least as far as selling old UO accounts. I don't see EA making exceptions to old games. In their eyes, a used game sale that they don't get any money from is almost criminal.

 

[Zosimus]

I really doubt UO is being specifically targeted, the least of which this EULA/TOS is for every game that touches Origin, and UO would be way down the list in terms of revenue/players. I was mentioning that Ubisoft was building things into their account system to cripple used game sales or to force people go through them and pay a fee of sorts if they buy used games, and it turns out EA has already been doing this (with BioWare titles no less - Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age Origins):

Ubisoft Joins the Used Game Punishment Party



That doesn't mean that UO won't get caught up in this some way, and some of what you said could tie UO into such a system, at least as far as selling old UO accounts. I don't see EA making exceptions to old games. In their eyes, a used game sale that they don't get any money from is almost criminal.

With the EA Master Account migration and the new TOS they are putting up for all their games this kind of makes sense. They could do the same for any EA game under Origin have the $10.00 voucher for used accounts.

Now would that make used accounts prices go up or down though by RMT sites if they did apply a $10.00 voucher?

In truth EA should just take over a limted version of virtual sales (including used accounts) on their own site since we do see comments on stratics from time to time that resources are needed back into UO. This would eliminate alot of the headaches of the TOS for players in all their games.

 

[Rupert Avery]

In their eyes, a used game sale that they don't get any money from is almost criminal.

The reason they are doing this is because they cannot make it criminal... So they have to come up with inventive ways to stop it...

this isn't me disagreeing just confirming what you said from my point of view

 

[Woodsman]

With the EA Master Account migration and the new TOS they are putting up for all their games this kind of makes sense. They could do the same for any EA game under Origin have the $10.00 voucher for used accounts.

It's going to be a lot easier for them to track this under the new Origin.com system, and I really wonder about the real reasons why EA is pulling their titles off of Steam. I've read what they've said were the reasons, but at the same time EA is getting complete control of the distribution channels slowly but surely. Since they tried the $10 fee out on Dragon Age: Origins and Mass Effect 2, I'm sure it will exist in some form for Mass Effect 3. Battlefield 3 will definitely have it - they would be fools not to.

But we should probably watch and see what happens with Star Wars and used accounts. There are going to be millions trying to buy it, and EA is already limiting availability to help keep the servers up and running during the first few weeks of launch. I could see a bunch of Star Wars accounts popping up for sale in short order to take advantage of high demand and limited availability.

Keep in mind that EA has not retroactively applied it to any other games (the media would crucify them for it), and we should see how the whole account unlinking situation develops. If they make it easy to unlink and easy for you to change the billing information, then we might have no need to worry for UO.

 

[geogex]

On A diffrent note does anyone no how long it would take after I cancled my email account before I could use that name again?

 

[HD2300]

Steam gets 30%, EA 70%. If EA uses origin.com, EA gets 100%.
see http://steamreview.org/posts/finances/

 

[Tina Small]

I submitted a question to Customer Support asking if the Account Access Transfer program is still available for $30 and whether the form and process are still the same, since the form is no longer attached to the Q&A about the program that you find in the Help database on Origin.com. I'll post if I get a reply.

 

[Sevin0oo0]

ORIGIN - Ultima Online - Main
form is in a zip

 

[Sevin0oo0]

so if you have 2 accts, currently paying for both, and you want to officially transfer one to, say your own child, as a gift, you can't keep paying for it - least ways not w/ the same CC
"A new credit card must be placed on file. NO EXCEPTIONS."
seems kinda goofy to me - some kids might be old enough to have an account, but Not a CC?

 

[goldenpower]

if you have nothing more than original registration or maybe an upgrade code will the EA customer support give away the account password and EA account information?

 

[Ezekiel Zane]

if you have nothing more than original registration or maybe an upgrade code will the EA customer support give away the account password and EA account information?

According to this thread they apparently will

http://vboards.stratics.com/uhall/258294-hacked-new-account-system.html

 

[goldenpower]

edit:

I'm moving this post to the other thread http://vboards.stratics.com/uhall/258294-hacked-new-account-system.html

 

[Gawin]

This is EXACTLY why people complain when things happen...because they do not READ the ToS...they just scroll down and click *I Accept*

They could probably put in there*..and you also agree to give EA your social security benefits* and 95% of the people wouldn't even know it.

READ the ToS EVERY time for EVERYTHING you download/play...VERY IMPORTANT!

But you should read it.... remember punk busters TOS giving them the rite to scan all your files and send them any info they wanted.

 

[TheScoundrelRico]

I could have sworn it said somewhere in the wall of words that by accepting those terms, you give the full rights of your soul and first born to EA...la

 

[Adrianas]

In my dayjob, I am just a lowly legal secretary/paralegal. But I have been in business law for many, many years. It appears as though they are doing what many businesses do - they are trying to develop a 'boiler-plate' ToS that will cover all of their games in all circumstances, and still be 'legal' (i.e. likely to stand up in court if they are sued).

It's hard to do, but if you read the fine print on any software you purchase (not just games), you will find much of this same language. As far as privacy goes, I worry a lot more about Facebook than I ever would EA. So that part doesn't worry me. Perhaps those who use hacks might need to be more concerned.

As to buying-selling accounts (or other 'goods'), I'm sure there will be clarification coming. But first, the EA folks will have to get with their attorneys and say 'what does this mean?' lol. The document probably started with EA telling their attorneys they wanted 'x, y, and z' in the document and then the attorneys just complied and built it. I'm sure that many in EA are just as confused about it. And it will likely continue to be tweaked for a while.

But this is just my humble, non-attorney opinion.

 

[RaDian FlGith]

This is EXACTLY why people complain when things happen...because they do not READ the ToS...they just scroll down and click *I Accept*

They could probably put in there*..and you also agree to give EA your social security benefits* and 95% of the people wouldn't even know it.

READ the ToS EVERY time for EVERYTHING you download/play...VERY IMPORTANT!

No... quite frankly, this is what's wrong with the U.S. legal system. Documents like that should be taken out and shot. Agree to this, that, and the other sale of your soul in order to play said content that, as the companies who draft those ridiculous documents know fully well, you're paying to play in the first place.

Of course most people don't read that garbage. About the only thing worse is home mortgage documentation, which people should take more seriously, but just as often do not, presuming that they can trust whomever it is in front of them saying "go ahead and sign."

Someone, somewhere, needs to take a stand against the legal mumbo jumbo and require that software licenses be written in English, not Gibberish, and that they are simple, clear, concise, and to the point. But then, dear god, what would all the lawyers have to do for a living?


Edited to add that all of these stupid documents should be legally required, when changed/updated, to highlight (1) what has changed, (2) what it was before it was changed, and (3) what that change means to you. I always read the stupid TOS, but seriously, I couldn't tell you what changed from one version to the next because I have no intention of memorizing that document. All I look for is for something that might affect me... which typically there isn't. But that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be required to make it OBVIOUS as to what's changed when they update the document, because believe me, THEY KNOW, and they're COUNTING on us NOT knowing.

 

[RaDian FlGith]

But you should read it.... remember punk busters TOS giving them the rite to scan all your files and send them any info they wanted.

Well, and that's the crux of these stupid documents anyway:

Just because they put it in writing and you agree to it doesn't actually make it legally binding in any way, shape, or form unless, of course, the wording and effect of that binding itself is actually legal.

Say someone put into a TOS that you had to murder your mother on the first Thursday of January in order to continue to play. You click "accept" and then they terminate your service for not having murdered your mother. It's an extreme example, but true nonetheless.

Better example are the signs in grocery parking lots (most of which, by the way, have been removed in recent years) that said, "[name of grocery store] cannot be responsible for damage caused by unattended shopping carts." Guess what? They absolutely, positively were responsible.

It's a silly, silly world we live in. There's a good reason for the old joke about 18,000 lawyers at the bottom of the sea...

 

[Tazar]

No... quite frankly, this is what's wrong with the U.S. legal system. Documents like that should be taken out and shot. Agree to this, that, and the other sale of your soul in order to play said content that, as the companies who draft those ridiculous documents know fully well, you're paying to play in the first place.

Actually - that was a British Game Company - not the US. 7,500 Online Shoppers Unknowingly Sold Their Souls | Fox News

 

[Gawin]

Well, and that's the crux of these stupid documents anyway:

Just because they put it in writing and you agree to it doesn't actually make it legally binding in any way, shape, or form unless, of course, the wording and effect of that binding itself is actually legal..........

It's a silly, silly world we live in. There's a good reason for the old joke about 18,000 lawyers at the bottom of the sea...

Not only that but unless the language it is written in is considered clear and concise to a layman then it is not binding. That and clicking "accept" button is not a legal contract in any US court and has never once been upheld.