TheMightyEthan Posted May 31, 2013 Report Share Posted May 31, 2013 I also always buy temporarily free DLC for games I might want in the future. Perfect example is the PSASBR characters I have sitting on my PS3 right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Deus Ex: The Fall doesn't allow shooting on jailbroken iOS devices. That's some bullshit right there. I don't mind it when devs do stuff like that to pirated versions of the game (like the cape thing on Arkham Asylum), but to do it to a purchased game just because the platform is unlocked is completely ridiculous. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 I think they did it because they assumed jailbroken = pirating it. Which is funny as the pirated version works. :/ Hate to think what they'd do if they'd put it out on Android where they're all basically "jailbroken". I know my banking app doesn't like to work (though TN mentioned workarounds) if you're on a rooted device. Which makes sense. But for a game to go "you're jailbroken therefore you're a pirate" is silly. Kinda bummed the reddit dudes first leap was "fuck S-E" and not "Fuck Eidos Montreal" when it'd be Eidos Montreal that made the game. S-E have put out tons of iOs and Android titles for years and so far I've heard nothing like "You're on a Jailbroken device, Phoenix Downs won't work". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 I just know that if I'd bought that game and that happened to me I would never buy another of their games ever again. I'd try to get a refund through customer support, but I don't think it's horribly likely that would be successful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 "Hey Apple, I bought a game through your store, and it doesn't work because I'm on a Jailbroken device an--*beeeeep* Dammit they hung up on me. In an email of all places too?!" Media attention and poor ratings would seem to be the way to go with this. And yeah refusal to buy future games too. Though they of course already have your money for this game. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Yeah, like I said, unlikely to be successful. Though I feel like they're asking for trouble given that 1) jailbroken devices are legal in the US and 2) there was originally no warning that it didn't work on them (though there is one now). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Jailbroken devices may be legal, but there's nothing saying Apple have to support them in anyway shape or form. So yeah you'd be SOL if your apps don't run on your jailbroken device. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Right, but they were selling the product, listing it as running on certain devices, without a warning that they have specifically disabled it on jailbroken devices. If they'd had (as they do now) a warning that it doesn't run on jailbroken devices then I'd agree with you, or if it were just a glitch and they weren't offering tech support again I'd agree with you, but this was specifically designed not to run on them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 But Apple don't support jailbroken devices. Which also means there's no required need to have it run on jailbroken devices or state they won't run on jailbroken devices. Sure it's a dick move, but a perfectly valid one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 I disagree with you that it's legally valid. Or at least that it's so clear-cut that it's legally valid. They still can't lie in their advertising, so if they say it's compatible with certain kinds of iOS devices, and it is NOT compatible with those devices once jailbroken, and that lack of compatibility is due to a specific design decision, then they have lied in their advertising. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 I'd imagine the TOS/EULA will get pretty specific on not jailbreaking your device and expecting apps to work fine and dandy. Jailbreaking may be legally fine and dandy, but I'd venture in a court of law they wouldn't be required to offer support given the user modified their own device and Apple cannot be reasonably required to to support every possible user modification of the device software. As for lying in advertising, they didn't say anywhere it would work with jailbroken devices. Though as it's unsupported there's not really much in the way of conventions to even do that anyway (compared to Android where many Play Store apps will specifically mark the requirement, or expanded features, of Rooted phones). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 (edited) Why do you insist on arguing with lawyers about what the law is? Especially in a country you don't live in? Again, we're not talking about a bug on jailbroken devices, we're talking about specifically disabling it for jailbroken devices with no warning. They say it will work with iPhone 5, and I have an iPhone 5, but it doesn't work, because they designed it not to work. Which means they lied. If they make a statement, and there is an intentional exception to that statement, but they don't tell you about the exception, that is false advertising. You can't make a general statement, knowing it's not true in all cases, and then say "well we didn't say it would work in that specific case." *Edit* - Essentially my point is that there's a difference between simply refusing to go out of your way to support jailbroken devices and explicitly going out of your way to make things not work, when talking about "supporting" them. I would agree they're not required to ensure that everything that claims to be compatible with iPhone 5 works on a jailbroken iPhone 5, but if they know that it doesn't because they designed it not to then they damn well better put a caveat. All they had to do (and now have done) was This product is compatible* with [these iOS devices]. *Not compatible with jailbroken devices. Edited July 12, 2013 by TheMightyEthan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Because it would seem weird that the law would apparently require that Apple provide support for user modifications of the device that they not only expressly forbid, void your warranty if you do it, but also have no hand in creating and implementing. But I concede, as an american lawyer you are more than likely right on that case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 (edited) Well and again, I'm not saying they'd be required to support the devices, just if they say it works on a given device it needs to specify that it does not work on jailbroken ones. Edited July 12, 2013 by TheMightyEthan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 But surely saying it doesn't work on jailbroken devices (which Apple would never call as such, and also they'd have to check as part of their approval process too) is surely akin to supported said devices. It'd also technically need to be listed on every single app in the app store too, since technically nothing works on a jailbroken device. Instead, it's in their TOS on the whole reverse engineer, modify software, blah blah legal stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 (edited) But again, there's a difference between just not providing support, and it either works or it doesn't, take your chances, and this where they specifically went out of their way to make it not work. The former is fine, the latter is where they need the warning. And yes, they would refer to it as such: ** Please be aware, the Deus Ex: The Fall play experience is currently restricted on jail broken devices. Do not purchase if you have voided your warranty and have Jail broken your device. *Edit* - I'm guessing it's like you said and the devs just assumed that anyone on a jailbroken device would have pirated it, it didn't occur to them that anyone would buy it through the store on such a device, so they didn't think to put a warning on the store. It also wouldn't surprise me if Apple didn't know about the anti-piracy "feature" initially. Edited July 12, 2013 by TheMightyEthan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Yes it's intentionally modified to not work on jailbroken devices, but you're still SOL as a jailbroken, unsupported, out of warranty, all that guff, user. The message added being a later addition following the media complaints, there's technically nothing saying they have to add that, or that there's anything that could be refunded if you'd bought it before hand due to you buying it without support. And yes Apple are quite likely to know about it, given the hold the keys to the garden, but it's nothing they have to care about as long as it still works for the users they do support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMightyEthan Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Yes it's intentionally modified to not work on jailbroken devices, but you're still SOL as a jailbroken, unsupported, out of warranty, all that guff, user. The message added being a later addition following the media complaints, there's technically nothing saying they have to add that, or that there's anything that could be refunded if you'd bought it before hand due to you buying it without support. That would be Apple's position, yes, and I'm not saying that's not how it would come out, I'm just saying that until someone sues them over it (which is almost certainly not going to happen) I don't think it's so clear-cut that that's the result that would come about in court. Apple/Square/Eidos provided a product, for money, to a consumer, stating it works on certain devices, knowing that it was designed not to work on a subset of those devices, but with no warning that those devices were disabled from playing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 The particular subset of users aren't meant to be using iOS, let alone the iTunes app store, though. Of course Apple probably could attempt some kind of method to check a jailbroken user and disable iTunes store access, but that's not exactly in their financial interests. As I said up top they've got your money, their lack of fucks is significantly reduced. It's shitty, and I'm someone that doesn't own an Apple device as I'm not keen on the shittiness they do and can get away with, but them's the breaks of using Apple's walled garden. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 The particular subset of users aren't meant to be using iOS, let alone the iTunes app store, though What the hell does this even mean? They're still running iOS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 As in Apples TOS for iOS (and apps) is along the lines of: Don't reverse engineer our software, don't modify it, don't subvert our security features. Those are the rules you agree to when getting iOS. It is their software and services after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 I fail to see how that means they aren't meant to be using iOS or the App Store. Are they supposed to install a new OS after jailbreaking? Are they supposed to fit into a cliche of "people only jailbreak to pirate" so they're not supposed to buy anymore apps from the App Store? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 They're not meant to jailbreak at all would be the point. You agree, in order to use iOS and the many apps and services that come with it, to not fuck about with the innards and such. You fucked about with the innards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faiblesse Des Sens Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Sorry, but it's software, not the innards. Software can be changed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanb Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Didn't say it can't be changed. Just that Apple put it in their TOS that it shouldn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.