Quote:
Originally Posted by DawnFalcon
I edited some of the more inflamatory material, because I'm trying not to sink to your level.
|
Or was it because you realised your post made it abundantly clear to all that the basis of your argument is...
"Look at me! Look at me!! I have secret and confidential evidence that I'm not going to share with anyone that proves I'm right and you all are wrong!!! Trust me, I really do!"
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DawnFalcon
No, it's your contention and now I'm going to point to it and grin. Because I never contended anything of the sort, so you only place it could come from is you. Now, you can explain where you came up with it from in UK law.
|
Hmmm, lets see.........
Post #95, page 7
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PKFFW
It seems many here are getting the two confused. Believing that by purchasing an Xbox one is bestowed with some legal right to access the Xbox live service. This is not the case. It is akin to saying "I have the right to access Xbox live and shouldn't have to pay the access fee because I own an Xbox". Of course you don't. You only have the right to access Xbox live if you abide by all the terms of service of the agreement, including paying the access fee and accessing it with an Xbox that has not been modded.
|
Clearly I am contending that purchase of an Xbox does not bestow the right to access Xbox live upon the purchaser.
To which DawnFalcon replies in post #99, page 7
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DawnFalcon
pkffw - Yes, you do. The right is established by Microsoft's advertising. Lumping them together in UK advertising was...unsmart.
|
And clearly you are contending that purchase of an Xbox bestows the right to access Xbox live upon the purchaser.
Pretty clear who is claiming what but just to be sure.......
Post #103, page 7
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DawnFalcon
And if Xbox Live and the 360 are advertised as being part of the same service, in the same advert, as the UK adverts suggest? Yes, that creates an expectation of service. This is a mistake on Microsoft UK's part with the current advert run.
|
Post #111, page 8
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DawnFalcon
I'm also not going to argue UK advertising law with you either, two law students agree with me that there's a clear expectation issue regarding the adverts. And if there is an expectation, then that does indeed tie Microsoft's hands
|
Then in post #133, page 9 I again make my point clear....
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PKFFW
Firstly, my original statement was that regardless of the advertising, purchase of the Xbox does not bestow any right to access the Xbox live service. You claimed this was not so.
|
To which you reply in post #136, page 10
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DawnFalcon
Microsoft have, by their UK adverts, established a link. This is...their own choice, and they have to take the consequences for that.
|
Which certainly seems to imply if not outright say that you believe there is some sort of right bestowed on all purchasers of an Xbox to access the Xbox live service.
Should I go on or is it abundantly clear now who is claiming what with regards to the right to access Xbox live?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DawnFalcon
And you are still persisting in refusing at all costs to admit how UK contract law works. It's based on plain language and simplicity - the unfair terms are there, and anything which fits them and the easily-readable guidence you can do something about, if you so wish. Simply because nobody has not yet brought the specific case does not make the terms fair! And the advertising is part of it, as it allways has been, creating direct consumer expectations does indeed generate implicit rights.
|
Of course you can do something about it, I never said you couldn't.
Just as MS can do something about whatever you do. It generally ends up being referred to as a court case. In such events it is debated in court as to whether the T&C's are in fact "automatically unfair". Sorry to tell you, those T&C's are not by default considered "automatically unfair" just because someone claims they are.
Now,
if those T&C's are ruled to be automatically unfair by the court those specific T&C's will be removed. The court does not simply rule the entire contract to be thrown out.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DawnFalcon
And of course I haven't provided specific links to the laws. No. You keep on believing that.
|
You have provided specific links to the laws. You did that because you knew that is not what I was asking you to provide. What I asked you to provide was links to any rulings that had declared MS's T&C's to be automatically unfair. Since you can't do that, you choose to link to the laws that may be used to bring a case against MS in the hopes that with this misdirection you will seem to be answering my point without having done so.
Cheers,
PKFFW