MARBLE MAN is out

[Otis Da HousKat]

If that's the case then they aren't doing a good job at upholding the ToS.

That's because it's Sega

[Ad Bot]

[Slammer1337]

Just please... I can't take bans anymore...uggh

Then follow the loving rules.

Jesus Christ stop acting like your dumbfounded or something.

[Cynical]

Here's the issue I see with the EULA, Badspot feel free to point out my flaw here if I'm incorrect.

Let's say I buy a key and use that key to backdoor scripts, break the game, etc.  Anything to break the EULA
Badspot revokes my key, so I can no longer access the game in either singeplayer or multiplayer.
I can't argue with this, it's clearly stated.

However, assume I buy TWO keys, and I never even read the first key or open the email.
I do something to break the EULA on key 1, and Badspot revokes both keys one and two

Whether or not you're the same person, one account has not accepted the EULA yet, so how can you revoke a product from someone who has never accepted your terms?

And assuming you're going to tie it to the person themselves reading the EULA, and not treating it as accounts (like it legally should), then how well is "Well I assumed from the IP it was the same person", going to stand up in a court of law?

Not saying I'm here to sue Badspot or any stuff like that, these are just legitimate questions I have that I would like to know the answer to, because from what in the EULA that I have read, it's not answered directly.

[Dreams_Of_Cheese]

Here's the issue I see with the EULA, Badspot feel free to point out my flaw here if I'm incorrect.

Let's say I buy a key and use that key to backdoor scripts, break the game, etc.  Anything to break the EULA
Badspot revokes my key, so I can no longer access the game in either singeplayer or multiplayer.
I can't argue with this, it's clearly stated.

However, assume I buy TWO keys, and I never even read the first key or open the email.
I do something to break the EULA on key 1, and Badspot revokes both keys one and two

Whether or not you're the same person, one account has not accepted the EULA yet, so how can you revoke a product from someone who has never accepted your terms?

And assuming you're going to tie it to the person themselves reading the EULA, and not treating it as accounts (like it legally should), then how well is "Well I assumed from the IP it was the same person", going to stand up in a court of law?

Not saying I'm here to sue Badspot or any stuff like that, these are just legitimate questions I have that I would like to know the answer to, because from what in the EULA that I have read, it's not answered directly.

Hey yola

[Nitro_Weavile]

Sad that a great modder is permad :'(

[Chrono]

That's because it's Sega

loving Sega.
Why you hate other countries?

Here's the issue I see with the EULA, Badspot feel free to point out my flaw here if I'm incorrect.

Let's say I buy a key and use that key to backdoor scripts, break the game, etc.  Anything to break the EULA
Badspot revokes my key, so I can no longer access the game in either singeplayer or multiplayer.
I can't argue with this, it's clearly stated.

However, assume I buy TWO keys, and I never even read the first key or open the email.
I do something to break the EULA on key 1, and Badspot revokes both keys one and two

Whether or not you're the same person, one account has not accepted the EULA yet, so how can you revoke a product from someone who has never accepted your terms?

And assuming you're going to tie it to the person themselves reading the EULA, and not treating it as accounts (like it legally should), then how well is "Well I assumed from the IP it was the same person", going to stand up in a court of law?

Not saying I'm here to sue Badspot or any stuff like that, these are just legitimate questions I have that I would like to know the answer to, because from what in the EULA that I have read, it's not answered directly.

Agreeing to the EULA is not bound by ID nor account. The key itself is also never mentioned in the EULA, only the software. The key is your personal access to the software. The way to prevent someone access to the software, which is what the EULA is bound to, is to disable the keys from working.

Sad that a great modder is permad :'(

As if there aren't anyone who could make anything he's made. Happy that a prick was permad.

[IkeTheGeneric]

However, assume I buy TWO keys, and I never even read the first key or open the email.
I do something to break the EULA on key 1, and Badspot revokes both keys one and two

Whether or not you're the same person, one account has not accepted the EULA yet, so how can you revoke a product from someone who has never accepted your terms?

And assuming you're going to tie it to the person themselves reading the EULA, and not treating it as accounts (like it legally should), then how well is "Well I assumed from the IP it was the same person", going to stand up in a court of law?

Not saying I'm here to sue Badspot or any stuff like that, these are just legitimate questions I have that I would like to know the answer to, because from what in the EULA that I have read, it's not answered directly.

In your case, if you're a repeat offender who has had multiple keys revoked for identical reasons, it's only to be expected to have your keys revoked again if you do the same thing that has gotten your keys revoked before. If you've violate the EULA on every key you've ever owned before key 1 and key 2, and then you violate the EULA on key 1, it's safe to assume you're going to do the same thing again on key 2.

Of course, this is just my understanding of it, correct me if I'm wrong.

[Moonstar Akemi]

Hey yola

Yola or not, that's a valid point. But I think we all already know the answer to that. Nobody's going to bother trying to sue Badspot anyway. That'd be a huge waste of time. I don't like the idea of him revoking multiple keys like that either, but in common sense, it's justified. Legally or not, common sense overpowers legality unless somebody actually wasted enough time to bring it to court (which I highly doubt they would).

[Otis Da HousKat]

loving Sega.
Why you hate other countries?

Sega as a video game maker only exists to create IP for Sammy to push onto pachinko machines which are the real money maker for the company. Sega's video game division bleeds money nonstop but their pachinko machines wouldn't be as popular if they weren't pushing their characters out into the public.

[Chrono]

Yola or not, that's a valid point. But I think we all already know the answer to that. Nobody's going to bother trying to sue Badspot anyway. That'd be a huge waste of time. I don't like the idea of him revoking multiple keys like that either, but in common sense, it's justified. Legally or not, common sense overpowers legality unless somebody actually wasted enough time to bring it to court (which I highly doubt they would).

It's also Eric's service. He can deny whoever from it. The only thing keeping him from just revoking keys for no reason is that he wont make any money by doing that. That and a sense of morals. Pretty sure there's no law there keeping him down.

[Cynical]

It's also Eric's service. He can deny whoever from it. The only thing keeping him from just revoking keys for no reason is that he wont make any money by doing that. That and a sense of morals. Pretty sure there's no law there keeping him down.

That's where you run into legal aspects that I don't know much about.

Assuming you pay for a service or product, legally the person providing it is required to provide them.  However inside the more virtual and nonphysical world where laws haven't caught up, is it still applicable?  If you never accepted terms then how can those terms be used to revoke the product?

[Gumba Jonny]

Then follow the loving rules.

Jesus Christ stop acting like your dumbfounded or something.

he's actually autistic

[Zeblote]

That's where you run into legal aspects that I don't know much about.

Assuming you pay for a service or product, legally the person providing it is required to provide them.  However inside the more virtual and nonphysical world where laws haven't caught up, is it still applicable?  If you never accepted terms then how can those terms be used to revoke the product?

If you don't accept the terms, you can't use the product either. Your point is?

[Cynical]

If you don't accept the terms, you can't use the product either. Your point is?

What is preventing you from accepting said terms after the previous account has been revoked, and so now you have nothing to be held against you

[Moonstar Akemi]

It's also Eric's service. He can deny whoever from it. The only thing keeping him from just revoking keys for no reason is that he wont make any money by doing that. That and a sense of morals. Pretty sure there's no law there keeping him down.

While that's most likely true, it still won't stop some angry douche canoe from trying to make a legal situation out of it. People make the most absurd lawsuits these days and I wouldn't doubt for a moment that it's possible to make one out of this game if somebody tried hard enough.