> Class action civil case should still be doable? Nope, because there's a stance...

b112 · 2026-09-03T19:14:38

So you've verified this? In this specific case? Or are you just being a wise guy.

Regardless, these sorts of things have been fought before, over and over. Often, courts don't care about an EULA when wrongful action has been taken.

The jurisdiction matters too, of course.

skrellm · 2026-09-04T13:03:15

> So you've verified this?

Yes, verified. I would not have said it otherwise.

https://www.playstation.com/en-us/legal/terms-of-service/

> 14.5. Class Action Waiver. > YOU AND THE SONY ENTITY WITH WHICH YOU HAVE A DISPUTE AGREE THAT ARBITRATION WILL BE CONDUCTED ONLY ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS AND NOT IN A CLASS OR REPRESENTATIVE ACTION [...]

> Regardless, these sorts of things have been fought before, over and over.

This specific case BTW: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.47...

I'm no lawyer, but IMHO they probably will reply that Sony has indeed violated CA. AB 2426 (effective since 01-jan-2025) and that Sony illegally tried to restrict customer rights in the first place, as per McGill v. Citibank https://law.justia.com/cases/california/supreme-court/2017/s...

b112 · 2026-09-04T17:21:25

Thanks. I'm in Quebec, and there are very strong protections here, consumer wise.

But it's Napoleonic civil code, so sometimes things don't work out as my common law brain thinks.

(It'll be interesting to read your California link.