QUESTION FOR LAWYERS : can we take any legal actions against UBI ??

[fasol20]

And what chance do we have , is it worth trying ? There must be thousands of us.... I am from europe I guess it should be easier in US what do you think ???

[Pappy55]

In another post I made I said there is a law here in the UK regarding not delivering a service..

Buying software and agreeing to the EULA is basically a contract between you and the publisher.

If you have paid for the software and they are doing doing their part I think somwhere you have a case..

I know there was a lawsuit over EA's drm.

[Faamecanic]

This is brought up with every new SH release that I can remember..... but I think SH5 really deserves a CA lawsuit. This DRM is insane.

[Coldcall]

No i dont think so. You are entitled to your money back on a refund if the game's access is still blocked even when you meet the internet connection criteria, but i cant see how you could sue them.

Just take your game back to the store for a refund. Easy enough.

PS: Only reason i am holding onto my copy is because of the superb job the modders have done already within a couple weeks. If I thought the game was going to remain in its current state (more or less), I'd have returned it immediately after getting locked out by DRM. Im also hoping that eventually Ubisoft cant be bothered with hosting the DRm for it anymore and release a "freedom" patch.

[Echo76]

Any thoughts on STEAM, are they obliged to refund as this product is non-functional?

[Pappy55]

Any thoughts on STEAM, are they obliged to refund as this product is non-functional?

Good luck with that..

I am trying to get a different non functional game refunded from them and they wont do it.

[Fishu]

Just take your game back to the store for a refund. Easy enough.

That's not possible where I live, so it's not that simple; 1. the law explicitly revokes the right to return the game, 2. the stores over here haven't read the book on customer service - what is not required by the law is neither part of the service.

[PortoFerro]

Any thoughts on STEAM, are they obliged to refund as this product is non-functional?

They are refunding the GOLD version because of the swastikas in there, however only in Germany.

[Pappy55]

If we have a case in the UK it should be covered in here somwhere.

The Sale of Goods Act
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts1995/ukpga_19950028_en_1
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1979/cukpga_19790054_en_1

I just cant be arsed to read through it after a long day at work.

[AVGWarhawk]

That's not possible where I live, so it's not that simple; 1. the law explicitly revokes the right to return the game, 2. the stores over here haven't read the book on customer service - what is not required by the law is neither part of the service.


You were then made aware of the law concerning purchasing a game? It is a personal risk if one wishes to purchase any game knowing the law concerning returning of the game if not satisfied. Not much you can do there legally. :hmmm:

[Letum]

This is brought up with every new SH release that I can remember..... but I think SH5 really deserves a CA lawsuit. This DRM is insane.

Well, the last lawsuit with SH3 and other games with Starforce was a
success in so far as Ubi agreed to pay up out of court.

[Letum]

If we have a case in the UK it should be covered in here somwhere.

The Sale of Goods Act
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts1995/ukpga_19950028_en_1

I just cant be arsed to read through it after a long day at work.

No, it is not covered by the sale of goods act.
That doesn't mean that there isn't another another act that is applicable.

[brandtryan]

Ok--I'm a little confused as to where everyone is from. I'm from the USA--can I take my copy back to Walmart??

[Coldcall]

That's not possible where I live, so it's not that simple; 1. the law explicitly revokes the right to return the game, 2. the stores over here haven't read the book on customer service - what is not required by the law is neither part of the service.

Where is "over here"? I'm sorry if thats the case. Bloody outrageous!!

[VirtualVikingX]

I am a lawyer. And I would suggest that you start reading the EULA. Probably something there about the OSP. And anyhow, by Norwegian (and probably most EU-contries) law you can only claim what you have paid for the game. You cant go to court citing unlawfull terms of contract when you bought the game knowing about the DRM/OSP. And what would you demand instead? That they remove the OSP? The court cant decide that, we guys live in a free world.

And its not illegal for UBI to have a EULA (contract between you and them) that requieres you to have a permanent internet connection to play. Its a free market and this is a entertainment product, not a nessesity.

Compare it to iTunes/iPod-binding and DVD-zones. Controversial but not illegal.

[Pappy55]

Well, the last lawsuit with SH3 and other games with Starforce was a
success in so far as Ubi agreed to pay up out of court.

That site has all the uk laws on thre is one regarding services online or whatever but i forgot what its called/

[TDK1044]

Always a good laugh for the Moderators....how long will it take for the first "I want to file a lawsuit against Ubisoft" post.

I seem to remember that John Channing always used to win the bet. How did you do this time, John? :DL

[BigBANGtheory]

I posted this in another thread, but it seems appropriate for this topic also. Bottom line return the game to the store and let the UBI argue it out with the likes of Amazon...

Shops have a policy of 'do not accept returns on opened software' for obvious reasons, however a shops policy does not effect your consumer rights (which is dependent on where you live of course).

To put it bluntly if you take an opened game back to a store the manager will (unless instructed by their head office) not budge an inch. What you need to do is write a letter to the retailer's head office explaining that you wish to return the game for the following reasons with proof of purchase in return for a full refund and their failure to act on this within 28days is a breach of your consumer rights.

In the UK this is called:
Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994

I speak from personal experience, in my case I returned a retail version of Crysis cos the DRM system stopped the game working with my DVD drive. I got the usual sh*t from the store manager but 2 weeks later after writing them a letter explaining how they breached my consumer rights not only did I get a full refund I additionally got vouchers totalling the value of the game.

Most people do not understand their consumer rights and are taken advantage of. Now you know different, exercise your rights if you feel its the correct course of action for you.

[Coldcall]

No, it is not covered by the sale of goods act.
That doesn't mean that there isn't another another act that is applicable.

There would be something under "description of goods" type clause which would entitle a return in the UK. Ubsioft sort of shoot themsleves in the foot by making a big deal on the box about requiring an internet connection. So they make the consumer jump through that hoop but still fail to provide the service as described on the box.

I've not heard of anyone in the Uk having probs returning SH5, and I've seen quite a few posts on people having done it through amazon or play.com. There's no doubt that distributors will lean on Ubisoft if this starts costing them money in extra admin costs/returns etc...

[Coldcall]

I posted this in another thread, but it seems appropriate for this topic also. Bottom line return the game to the store and let the UBI argue it out with the likes of Amazon...

Shops have a policy of 'do not accept returns on opened software' for obvious reasons, however a shops policy does not effect your consumer rights (which is dependent on where you live of course).

To put it bluntly if you take an opened game back to a store the manager will (unless instructed by their head office) not budge an inch. What you need to do is write a letter to the retailer's head office explaining that you wish to return the game for the following reasons with proof of purchase in return for a full refund and their failure to act on this within 28days is a breach of your consumer rights.

In the UK this is called:
Sale and Supply of Goods Act 1994

I speak from personal experience, in my case I returned a retail version of Crysis cos the DRM system stopped the game working with my DVD drive. I got the usual sh*t from the store manager but 2 weeks later after writing them a letter explaining how they breached my consumer rights not only did I get a full refund I additionally got vouchers totalling the value of the game.

Most people do not understand their consumer rights and are taken advantage of. Now you know different, exercise your rights if you feel its the correct course of action for you.

Absolutely, I've returned many games in UK. It doesnt matter that retailers put caveats on some types of return, you have statutory rights and their caveats cannot over-ride those legislated rights. They might make a fuss but you will get your money back, just dont be put off because of the hassle.

[BigBANGtheory]

It is covered under the sale of goods act if you purchased the media, if you downloaded the game from somewhere like Steam of D2Drive I do not honestly know what your rights are in those circumstances.

Online retailers like Amazon and Play are covered by the distance selling act also.

As far as I know class action law suits do not apply to countries like the UK, so its down to the American members to answer that.

Remember it costs very little to write a letter you don't need to be a lawyer to do that just be clear and accurate.

[capthelm]

And what chance do we have , is it worth trying ? There must be thousands of us.... I am from europe I guess it should be easier in US what do you think ???


close these threads.:yawn:

[fasol20]

close these threads.:yawn:

Why ?? You dont rule in here so go try ruliling on your uboat. !:haha:

[Safe-Keeper]

Absolutely.

However, suing someone for making what you perceive to be a bad game is so ridiculous it would get you laughed out of court faster than... em... uhm... actually, I'm at a loss for examples.

:rotfl2::rotfl2::rotfl2:

Otherwise, I'd have sued Maxis for The Sims ages ago.

close these threads.:yawn:Nah, let them have their fun. Best way to kill trolls is to just ignore them. Or ridicule them. I just add them to my ignore list and forget about them.

Though there have been a lot of kids with 2 posts or so starting troll threads with low-quality content lately. Perhaps someone should do an IP comparison or two ;) ?

[IanC]

Absolutely.

However, suing someone for making what you perceive to be a bad game is so ridiculous it would get you laughed out of court faster than... em... uhm... actually, I'm at a loss for examples.

:rotfl2::rotfl2::rotfl2:


What he perceives to be a bad game? :haha:

[fasol20]

safe keeper : I want to be able to use what I paid for that's why I ask . Technical support is wortless. One party is not keeping agrrement ( UBISOFT) . Cut the bull**** with troll post etc , if you dont have anything to say just dont ! Are you LAWYER ????

[Piddyx]

You can sue them in Louisiana. The laws are different there because they are derived from civil law instead of common law.

[Coldcall]

You can sue them in Louisiana. The laws are different there because they are derived from civil law instead of common law.

In theory you could try to sue them anywhere if you want to spend the money with some lawyer, but i just cant see the grounds for damages type appeal.

Any court would just ask why you hadnt simply returned it for a refund, and i think thats reasonable. Should courts be tied up with litigants angry over a computer game?

OTT in my opinion.

[IanC]

Maybe if consumers had more legal power against game companies, we might just get finished games for a change. If we pay good money, we should get a good quality product. Crazy thought I know...

[thorn69]

Sure, you can sue UBI. Heck, you can sue anybody you want here in the US. But will you win? That's going to be up to a judge and how he/she feels that particular day. Is paying up to $400 per hour to a lawyer plus paying for court costs going to be worth it to you? I don't think so considering you only payed about $50 for the game in general. Don't forget that UBI has lawyers too and they are on a fixed salary. They can drag the case on for YEARS before a judge is allowed to make a determination. By then you, and everyone else (considering a CA lawsuit with multiple parties is involved) will be drained of all money and the payoff will not be worth it. Because by then, UBI will release Silent Hunter VI and and Assassins Creed 3 and they will have generated enough money to prolong the case even longer.

To me, a lawsuit seems ridiculous. You should be able to take the game back for a decent refund if you bought it from a retail store to get back most of your money. That would be the easiest solution and would hurt UBI a lot more if that's what you want to do. Just stop supporting them and all their software titles from here on out if that's how you really feel. If enough people do that, then UBI will fold and go bankrupt eventually. But then who will even come close to delivering us another submarine simulation? It's a double edge sword either way you look at it. Do what you want but I'm going to continue to support UBI because it's the only company that's been releasing decent submarine simulators in the past decade. Janes is dead and has been for sometime now. UBI is all there is. Thank God for them!

[IanC]

If enough people do that, then UBI will fold and go bankrupt eventually. But then who will even come close to delivering us another submarine simulation? It's a double edge sword either way you look at it. Do what you want but I'm going to continue to support UBI because it's the only company that's been releasing decent submarine simulators in the past decade. Janes is dead and has been for sometime now. UBI is all there is. Thank God for them!

Ah yes, the 'Support them no matter what they dish out, because they're the only ones making subsims' argument... :hmmm:

[gimpy117]

oh boy lets start another frivolous lawsuit!!!! :yeah:

[thorn69]

Ah yes, the 'Support them no matter what they dish out, because they're the only ones making subsims' argument... :hmmm:

Actually, it's the "Do whatever floats your boat" argument actually. What I choose to do is my choice, what you choose to do is your choice. The bottom line is that no other company is making submarine simulations right now. I'm not going to live forever, so I choose to support the one and only company that's at least attempting to cater to my likes at this particular time. If another company emerges from the depths and can deliver something better then I will go there but until then I'm stuck with UBI.

[Coldcall]

In a way it would be nice if SH5 was such a commercial dissapointment for Ubi that they sold the SH IP to a smaller development house to whom such a title would be real meat. It just seems that it is being under-developed because Ubi rather prioritise resources elsehwere on more profitble product streams.

If a poor SH release can still sell 200k copies at $50 a pop then thats still a gross figure of $10million in sales, so the commercials are in place for a smaller specialist developer - if Ubi let go of the IP that is.

[Pappy55]

Absolutely.

However, suing someone for making what you perceive to be a bad game is so ridiculous it would get you laughed out of court faster than... em... uhm... actually, I'm at a loss for examples.

:rotfl2::rotfl2::rotfl2:
?

Ermmmm I thought this was all about the DRM and not the game its self???

[Subwolf]

Well, as Ubi said, this isn't their fault. Sue those who attack their servers instead..

[IanC]

Actually, it's the "Do whatever floats your boat" argument actually. What I choose to do is my choice, what you choose to do is your choice. The bottom line is that no other company is making submarine simulations right now. I'm not going to live forever, so I choose to support the one and only company that's at least attempting to cater to my likes at this particular time. If another company emerges from the depths and can deliver something better then I will go there but until then I'm stuck with UBI.

By principle alone, I would not support a company that delivers an inferior product even if they're the only ones catering to said product.
You can use whatever analogy here... I like the bad barber one. If my town only had one barber, and he kept giving me bad haircuts, so bad my wife had to fix it once I got home, he would stop getting my business.
And just to keep this on topic, I might just think about suing him for psychological and emotional distress. :lol:

[BigBANGtheory]

Sueing someone for making what may be a poor game is just a complete nonsense and really not worth further discussion.

You will be arguing against consiquential entertainment loss next on the grounds you could have spent your free time better doing other things :haha:

Seriously return the game the retailer is your only sensible recourse, after that it is the retailers problem to sort out returns/damages/defective good etc.

To my mind UBI greatest sin in all this is the lack of information and communication, but there is no law against poor customer support I'm afraid (unless your like a government buying defence equipment in which case they change the law).

[JScones]

What are the grounds for legal action? Just DRM/OSP?

Meh, you knew the issues and risks beforehand. If you didn't, then you either a) didn't read these forums or b) didn't undertake your own research into DRM/OSP.

Not that the reason really makes a difference, mind you, but IMHO if you are unhappy you're much better just to put it all down to experience, get a refund if you can, and remember for the next time a "must have game" gets released by Ubisoft.

[Lanzfeld]

Sorry,

You were dumb enough to buy it...you are stuck with it. Natural selection my friends.:|\\ All the warning signs were there. EAT IT!

[Rockin Robbins]

I believe that existing laws probably don't properly cover the type of abuse that's happening here because the laws are behind the curve. Specifically, what we are being muscled with are modifications of the traditional fair use rights including but not limited to:



The right to sell your copy of the copyrighted material after you are through with it.
The right to lend it.
The right to give it away.
The right to use it without incurring other peripheral expenses, such as excessive internet charges in order to use the copyrighted materials.

Let's put it this way. We'll take a book as an example. You can lend it. You can give it away. You can sell it. You can read it in other places than where the publisher chooses. If a bookseller said you could only read the book you bought at the library, you'd laugh 'em out of town.

Yet, supposedly fair-minded people are perfectly happy with being bound to a chair, blindfolded and then being allowed to read the book.

This is the proper venue of legislative action in various countries. Unfortunately, with these corporate gangsters being the only ones hiring lobbyists and legislatures not being disposed to listen to ordinary people, we have an uphill battle.

No, probably in most countries, what Ubi is doing here is perfectly legal. But it should not be. People should serve jail time for this stuff. Companies should be dissolved for this type of customer abuse. We can help!

Until Ubi relents:

Refuse to buy SH5
Refuse to play SH5
Refuse to mod SH5
Refuse to produce tutorials for SH5
Refuse to make video of SH5

It only encourages the dinosaur.

[Lanzfeld]

I, proudly, obey those 5 laws! :salute::salute::salute::salute::salute:

[Madox58]

I do not obey those statements.

I bought the Game even though I can't play it.
(System is to behind)

I'll Mod the Game because that's what I enjoy doing.

I don't agree with Ubi and the DRM stuff,
But that won't stop me as I'll do what I need to do.

I support the DEV's!
Not the Tie wearing, Money snaching SOB's!
Thier time WILL come.
Count on that.

[Rockin Robbins]

Unfortunately your words and actions have no effect comparable to the effect of your money. You are whispering that you want needed changes and your money is shouting "I approve of the DRM. I don't expect to be able to sell copyrighted material on the used market. I accept and endorse unreasonable restrictions as to where and when this piece of (fill in the blank) can be used."

Guess what is the only thing Ubi hears? Once the money is spent your input is over.

As it is, Silent Hunter 5 is nothing more than a trojan horse, containing nasty malware. The more we by our actions, modding, making tutorials, posting videos, enhance the attractiveness of the trojan horse, the more Ubi will sell. They will say "it's working! Thanks Subsim! Our DRM is wonderful!"

Even worse, there is a published mod which makes it possible to play the game offline without interfering in any way with Ubi's DRM. If this gets widespread use, it will also encourage sales of SH5 as is. Ubi will merely look at the increased sales and say, "It's working! Lets do more of that." Even a partial solution makes the problem worse.

The only remedy for this situation is for our money to remain in our pocket. I had money put aside to purchase and was ready to purchase without reservations as to the completeness of the game. I wasn't worried about only one kind of U-Boat or the cutoff time or imperfections bound to happen in a cutting edge game. I was ready to jump in and do the same kinds of things I've done with and for Silent Hunter 4. I believe I've done a small part of enhancing the value of that product, teaching at least a dozen or two that manual targeting is fun and possible.

I won't be doing any of that for SH5 and I recommend that everyone examine the options and realize that my course is the only course that can result in change. Either Ubi will relent and we will have a product that respects our status as paying customers, fans and supporters or Ubi will die with its trojan horse and another company more focused on customer needs will emerge to take its place. It's tough love time and unless we act responsibly, we're just enabling this drunk. Yeah, he says he's going to use the money we give him to buy food, but we really know all that's happening is the sorry wino is headed to 7-Eleven for another quart of Pabst Blue Ribbon. Game over Ubi. Change or die.

[Madox58]

Umm,
I don't think that was directed at me only.

[Rockin Robbins]

Thank you privateer. No it was not directed at you only or even primarily you.

[Nordmann]

I support the DEV's!
Not the Tie wearing, Money snaching SOB's!
Thier time WILL come.
Count on that.

They are one and the same I'm afraid, even one of the devs on here has said as much. There are no suits screwing over the dev team, they are same same damned thing!

[Madox58]

Afraid not Mate!
Dan and the rest of the Dev's don't make the big picture!
I met Dan Face to Face!
I know a few things many don't!
So do not EVER put Dan and the rest of the Dev's in the Suit position!

You'd be stunned at what those guys went through just to give you
what you have so far!

I'll stand with them any day of the week and take a sniper position!
:up:

[Nafod81]

You can sue them in Louisiana. The laws are different there because they are derived from civil law instead of common law.


Civil Law? It's the Napoleanoic code Louisiana's state law system is based on.

[Exakt]

It is based on the French Civil Code, or as some calls it, Common Law.

I do know that in Quebec (Canada), you can sue for a defective product under the Consumer`s Protection Act. If any actions are to be taken, we have to coordinate our efforts. I will try to get some more info on my side, but IIRC, it has been done before (here in Quebec) for another program.

[NefariousKoel]

The 2 class actions suits against EA about spore won and the DRM was removed. However, the point of contention was that EA didn't properly specify what was required by the DRM.

So, evidentally, a class action lawsuit can make a company remove it's DRM. The rest of the stuff about unfinished product has never happened and is pretty frivolous.

The best thing to do is not purchase these games in the hopes that the suits will take the hint. Though they seem pretty thick-headed at times and prone to placing blame elsewhere in a fit of denial. Possibly even going so far as to like about repeated hacker DOS attacks.

[Immacolata]

I just knew it would be a bilge rat with a suggestion like that. Lawyers! Call the fire brigade! :yawn:

No, you can't use lawyers for anything than stealing your money and your time in this matter.:rotfl2:Do as nef suggests. White & Sea - if Ubi allows the patches to hit and the game is fixed: go buy it. I know I am! I cant wait to see all that gorgeous 3d-water.

[Uber Gruber]

Until Ubi relents:

Refuse to buy SH5
Refuse to play SH5
Refuse to mod SH5
Refuse to produce tutorials for SH5
Refuse to make video of SH5

It only encourages the dinosaur.

Well said Rocking Robbins....well said indeed.....if only more people thought like this... :shifty:

[Dowly]

So do not EVER put Dan and the rest of the Dev's in the Suit position!


Actually it was Dan who said himself that the suits and the devs shouldn't be separated, they're all in this together.

[jwilliams]

Actually it was Dan who said himself that the suits and the devs shouldn't be separated, they're all in this together.

I think he sorta had too. He's working for the company. You cant say your personal feelings (on a public forum) when your representing your employer..... Conflict of intrests :hmmm:

[Dowly]

I think he sorta had too. He's working for the company. You cant say your personal feelings (on a public forum) when your representing your employer..... Conflict of intrests :hmmm:

He could've not mentioned it at all. :03:

[jwilliams]

He could've not mentioned it at all. :03:

True, he could have said nothing but he was asked. And i guess he gave a diplomatic answer on it.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1292441&postcount=20

from this thread :-

What does elenaiba say...

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=163099

[Dowly]

True, he could have said nothing but he was asked. And i guess he gave a diplomatic answer on it.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1292441&postcount=20


I'm pretty sure he wasn't asked about the suits vs. devs stuff, just about what he thinks of the feedback. :hmmm:

Anywho, here's the quite from Dan I mean:

1) Ubisoft is a company, of which Ubisoft Romania is a part. Please stop separating the two. Not everything that is good is our merit, not everything that is bad is "the suits" fault. I, of all people, have my parts in the failures of SH5. The people "high up" could have simply decided not to do another SH, just as you guys can choose not to buy.

[jwilliams]

I'm pretty sure he wasn't asked about the suits vs. devs stuff, just about what he thinks of the feedback. :hmmm:

Anywho, here's the quite from Dan I mean:


I think it was in referance to this post :-

Dan, while you are here, maybe you can tell us only if you are at liberty to do so: who's responsible for game content? the development house or the publishing house?http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1292195&postcount=35

From this thread, which was the thread dan first answered in (that night/day, (damn time zones)) before the statment he gave :-
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=163013

[Armistead]

These threads always kill me....Like those among us are going to pay lawyers hundreds of thousands of dollars to sue...OK, I'm in, where do I send my dollar to the cause...:D

[Rockin Robbins]

A class action suit could be cool! We'd all get a Silent Hunter 5 bumper sticker and the lawyers would get $20,000,000 dollars or so. Fair, right?:-?

[shmall]

Well said Rocking Robbins....well said indeed.....if only more people thought like this... :shifty:

if thats the way you both think then why the hell are you on this thread?
I take it have not bought SH5, and therefore can not really bring legal action against them, can you..... :( ;)

and for anyone else that has bought it and can't get on with it ...TAKE IT BACK FOR A REFUND......simple :)

I only spent £22 on SH5.......and most people spend way more than that on Cigs and booze on a weekend pub night out, and some can't even remember it the next day lol ;)

legal action.....yeah right;) :)

[Nisgeis]

These threads always kill me....Like those among us are going to pay lawyers hundreds of thousands of dollars to sue...OK, I'm in, where do I send my dollar to the cause...:D

Please make your cheque out to the Citizens Against Silent Hunter fund, or you know, because that's a bit long, just make it out to the initials. That's CASH. So yeah, send me a cheque made out to CASH and then the legal process will start.

[the_belgian]

i'm not in for any sort of lawsuit.why?
in the first place the game will,in the end,reach the standard we want it to have(due to the effort of the community).
and secondly DRM will be a main point on ubisofts agenda on what went wrong the last couple of weeks.so they will have to come up with a solution if they don't want to risk loosing their clients for future titles or risk a lawsuit of those who want their rights now.therefore they have two options;create a legal patch to use SHV,and other games now using DRM,ofline or solve the problem on short notice.
i still hope for the offline-patch,as do many of us.

ubisoft,
-you made a product that requires permanent internetconnection to be played with DRM.
-you promissed an unprecedented subgame expierience.
-you set high demands on our hardware.

we,your customers,did our part of the deal,sometimes even bought complete new computers for this game.
now we have the right to play the game and if not with,then without DRM!

[JU_88]

Lawsuit over a $50 game? :-?

Theres a song about you people: :hmmm:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0tBkY2_xQQ

[longam]

Reminds me of when I purchase a packet for repossessed cars for $45.00. Turns out it was a fraud and somebody filed a class action lawsuit and won. I got a check for like $4.00 bucks. :haha: