Regarding New GDPR Compliance Pop-Up [Mod Edited Title for Clarity]

Josh056

If I decline this new Privacy Notice will I not be allowed to play any longer?

Comments

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Spidermonkey902

Hi kabam

I get you have to follow UK and EU rules however we as people have a right to decline companies from gathering data about us especially in light of recent data breaches from the likes of Facebook it is unacceptable to give the option to decline but if we do we can no longer play this I believe is against the law please address your reasoning behind this action! We have a right to know!

Mirage_Turtle

Why would it be against the law?

If you don't agree with the terms of service, don't use the service (in this case, the game).

DarthPhal

They’ve already said that the data collected is necessary for the game to function.

Spidermonkey902

It's hard to agree to my details being collected when it doesn't make clear what details they will be keeping if its a term of service they need to confirm the information they collect I have a right to say I don't want my details collected and be able to play the game its like saying you can play the game as long as I let them keep my name address and anything else they want I should have a choice!

buggysitehaveaccont

DNA3000 wrote: »

buggysitehaveaccont wrote: »

also, a click is not a signature so it is never binding unless the click is with a e-security id which i doubt phone games would bother with

DNA3000 wrote: »

buggysitehaveaccont wrote: »

if your supreme court set a precedent where "I agree" buttons are X person clicking that "I agree" button then Im glad we have more normal courts here

I still think you're confusing the question of electronic signatures and contracts. You're also mistaken that this is a US law peculiarity. If you're in the EU, here's relevant precedent from the CJEU court regarding the intepretation of Article 23 of the Brussels Convention as it applies to clickwrap agreements: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=164356&pageIndex=0&doclang=en&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=251717

Summary: "Article 23(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that the method of accepting the general terms and conditions of a contract for sale by ‘click-wrapping’, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, concluded by electronic means, which contains an agreement conferring jurisdiction, constitutes a communication by electronic means which provides a durable record of the agreement, within the meaning of that provision, where that method makes it possible to print and save the text of those terms and conditions before the conclusion of the contract."

In other words, click wrap agreements are legally recognized as a means for communicating a binding agreement.

Another summary of the judgment: https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=437b207e-f24c-4a12-8bad-9d9fc06c62f9

Your confusion is probably due to the subtle difference between what the purpose of an agreement is, and what the purpose of an electronic signature is. The purpose of an electronic signature is to *identify* the person signing the document and *authenticate* that the signature is valid. But contracts and agreements do not require electronic signatures. They don't require signatures of any kind. Contracts can be orally agreed to in some cases for example.

In the case of the GDPR, the primary requirements are that the account holder is notified and acceptance properly recorded. Electronic signatures are not required because it is not legally required that you identify the person agreeing to the disclosure statement. Kabam only has to make the case that the account holder, whomever that is, was notified and agreed. They do not need to account for other people clicking the button, because admission that someone else was using your account is grounds for account termination anyway. You, and you alone, are supposed to be the only person using that account, and you are responsible for any act taken on that account as the account holder.

In fact, pretty much universally everything I've read about GDPR compliance recommends clickwrap privacy policies to be used to satisfy the notification and consent requirements. That's why almost everyone is using them.

1st, just gonna say i dont care what the eu court say, they should not have any rule over any sovereign nations and hopefully the EU will crash and burn when UK finally leave without paying a dime for leaving.

2nd, last will and testament is considered a contract, but you are saying verbal agreement would work ? lol whut ? where? here they need to check if the person writing the will is sane and know what they are doing and no pressure is exerted over them, plus witnesses who also sign
you keep saying click wrapping and im confusing that with e sign, but it seems more like it is the courts that seem to be confused about what is what.
you did not answer me if there was a supreme court precedent, so I assume no then.
about feldman vs google, that was "United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania" so pretty much lowest of the lowest courts ? then again I dont think I could support my self if I tried to appeal google to a higher court, I guess feldman need to eat
I just did a google search on "click wrap supreme court precedent" and found nothing which means no precedent have been set yet, unless google is trolling the answers.

these "I agree" or "click wrap" need to be binding to be legal in what little Ive read, ofc im no supreme court judge, but it kinda stupid to think you can force something on someone because his "friend" clicked agree while you were on the toilet, even a cat can agree, my dogs nose also affect the touchscreen.
if they want these "I agree" or "click wrap" to be legal then they must use e sign as I understand basic law(not saying I know laws of other countries, but laws are often based in logic and these "I agree" or "click wrap can never be proven to be the owner of the device).

I see the links and mentioned to other small courts, but again we have **** cases that the perp is freed 50% of the time, but if appealed those 50% freed often 80% are sentenced.
low courts are like asking the guy/girl in the grocery store whats what, you never get a real answer until you ask someone who knows, which is the higher courts and I would love to see this being tested in the supreme court, here or in the USA, I dont care(not canada), just to get a precedent somewhere.

btw I used to have to deal with drunk lawyers and prosecutors, like in any job there are good and bad ones and the good ones often climb the latter, that is why I dislike small courts as they are often wrong and decision often reversed when appealed, they should deal with parking tickets only :P

"kabam only has to make the case that the account holder, whomever that is, was notified and agreed."

and how do they make that case? without e sign they cant, that is why I said it is more like a thing to make companies feel secure in my earlier post

"Electronic signatures are not required because it is not legally required that you identify the person agreeing to the disclosure statement. "

if you read that quoted message only, do you see how stupid(not calling your name, saying that quote of words, but I guess I have to write this here as not everyone would understand something that easy and get offended) that sound ?

it could pretty much say "we dont care who or what you are, click agree and stfu"

just to repeat if there are anyone sensitive reading this, nothing here is to insult anyone, just a normal discussion going on

DarthPhal

Its like they’re saying you can’t play the game if you decline the collection of data that allows the game to work.

Darkwolf1981

I'm sure they are working on an answer, just make sure it's worded right so no more fuss isn't created. It's the same data they have been collecting from the start. Just amended to get approval.

DarthPhal

Darkwolf1981

Makes sense spidermonkey, but I'm sure it's the data they have been collecting since day one. Now they just have to get consent for legal purposes. Which if consent is not given u really shouldn't be playing a game that collects such data.

Spidermonkey902

We still deserve to know what that information is especially after the Facebook controversy I get it may be what they have been collecting but again I've never seen anything explaining what information they collect.

DarthPhal

Spidermonkey902 wrote: »

We still deserve to know what that information is especially after the Facebook controversy I get it may be what they have been collecting but again I've never seen anything explaining what information they collect.

Scroll up to the orange letters

Gwendoline

Spidermonkey902 wrote: »

It's hard to agree to my details being collected when it doesn't make clear what details they will be keeping if its a term of service they need to confirm the information they collect I have a right to say I don't want my details collected and be able to play the game its like saying you can play the game as long as I let them keep my name address and anything else they want I should have a choice!

You have a choice. You can choose not to play. It’s like saying that children, if they don’t agree with the rules of the school, they don’t have to follow them, but can still go to that school. They haven’t agreed to rules, so they should be able to not do that, will still have all the benifits. Makes zero sense.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Spidermonkey902

Gwendoline wrote: »

Spidermonkey902 wrote: »

It's hard to agree to my details being collected when it doesn't make clear what details they will be keeping if its a term of service they need to confirm the information they collect I have a right to say I don't want my details collected and be able to play the game its like saying you can play the game as long as I let them keep my name address and anything else they want I should have a choice!

You have a choice. You can choose not to play. It’s like saying that children, if they don’t agree with the rules of the school, they don’t have to follow them, but can still go to that school. They haven’t agreed to rules, so they should be able to not do that, will still have all the benifits. Makes zero sense.

This makes no sense I'm simply asking for clarification of what they collect they didn't provide this when this pop up came up and I can't consent to something that I don't have the full information for it's like saying yes to a question before being asked or signing a blank cheque you just wouldn't do it would you we have a right to full disclosure this pop up does not provide that therefore cannot be legally allowed surely

DarthPhal

They already clarified it and I reposted the clarification. At this point it’s a reading comprehension issue.

DNA3000

Spidermonkey902 wrote: »

Gwendoline wrote: »

Spidermonkey902 wrote: »

It's hard to agree to my details being collected when it doesn't make clear what details they will be keeping if its a term of service they need to confirm the information they collect I have a right to say I don't want my details collected and be able to play the game its like saying you can play the game as long as I let them keep my name address and anything else they want I should have a choice!

You have a choice. You can choose not to play. It’s like saying that children, if they don’t agree with the rules of the school, they don’t have to follow them, but can still go to that school. They haven’t agreed to rules, so they should be able to not do that, will still have all the benifits. Makes zero sense.

This makes no sense I'm simply asking for clarification of what they collect they didn't provide this when this pop up came up and I can't consent to something that I don't have the full information for it's like saying yes to a question before being asked or signing a blank cheque you just wouldn't do it would you we have a right to full disclosure this pop up does not provide that therefore cannot be legally allowed surely

Although they were not specific, they did state what information they collect. The pop up states:

This privacy notice applies to all personal data provided by you to us or collected by us through your use of our app to play this game.

In other words, the information they collect is specifically and explicitly only the information you gave to them in the first place, or the information they collect by the game itself when you play the game. So they only have it if you gave it to them, if it is something related to how good you evade Spiderman, or if you perhaps said it in chat and it might in the game server chat logs.

Since the privacy notice specifically states that it ONLY applies to that information, you are only consenting for them to continue to hold and use that information. If Kabam is somehow collecting other information, the privacy notice wouldn't apply to that information nor would you be assenting to collecting it. You aren't giving blanket consent for Kabam to collect anything they want. The privacy notice explicitly states:

By consenting, you agree to allow Kabam to perform the data collection and processing activities described in this notice.

(emphasis mine)

DNA3000

Spidermonkey902 wrote: »

Hi kabam

I get you have to follow UK and EU rules however we as people have a right to decline companies from gathering data about us especially in light of recent data breaches from the likes of Facebook it is unacceptable to give the option to decline but if we do we can no longer play this I believe is against the law please address your reasoning behind this action! We have a right to know!

The GDPR requires Kabam to get consent to collection information. It does not require them to continue to deliver service when that is impossible. If they purge your login information and all of your game data, how exactly do you expect them to continue allowing you to play the game? Because that's the information they have and continue to collect from you, and is the information they are asking for permission to continue to keep and collect. That's literally impossible.

DrVD99

I read somewhere that Kabam do not sell your info to 3rd party companies. They give it to them free. Do the 3rd party companies sell your information?

I read the terms and conditions and a lot of it is still transparent. Do we need to be lawyers now to understand why your company collects this data.

buggysitehaveaccont

DNA3000 wrote: »

Spidermonkey902 wrote: »

Hi kabam

I get you have to follow UK and EU rules however we as people have a right to decline companies from gathering data about us especially in light of recent data breaches from the likes of Facebook it is unacceptable to give the option to decline but if we do we can no longer play this I believe is against the law please address your reasoning behind this action! We have a right to know!

The GDPR requires Kabam to get consent to collection information. It does not require them to continue to deliver service when that is impossible. If they purge your login information and all of your game data, how exactly do you expect them to continue allowing you to play the game? Because that's the information they have and continue to collect from you, and is the information they are asking for permission to continue to keep and collect. That's literally impossible.

but they cant get consent unless they know who is giving it and they dont know who is giving it as it is not a legal e sign