Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

Preview of SE official beta siteFollow

#1 Mar 01 2010 at 11:45 AM Rating: Good
**
572 posts
I stumbled on this website when I was browsing the web, I hope this is not breaking any rules since I have no invites to beta or alpha.

https://dev-na.ffxiv.com/soon/index.html

also;

https://dev-eu.ffxiv.com/soon/index.html
https://dev-jp.ffxiv.com/soon/index.html

Edited, Mar 1st 2010 12:51pm by Maldavian
#2 Mar 01 2010 at 11:49 AM Rating: Decent
**
621 posts
Don't worry, I don't see how posting a link to a webpage could be illegal.
____________________________
Kweh?!

...prophesizing the golden patch since october 2010.
#3 Mar 01 2010 at 11:58 AM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
Don't expect to see much out of a site only open to the alpha/beta testers.
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#4 Mar 01 2010 at 12:02 PM Rating: Default
**
572 posts
I saw a blog where somone has posted a picture of his confirmation email from SE to get accepted as a beta tester. I guess its illigal to post the link to that blog here ?
#5 Mar 01 2010 at 12:05 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
295 posts
someone posted this morning and it was removed at the request of the original poster and the thread was removed. It would be unwise.
#6 Mar 01 2010 at 12:33 PM Rating: Good
**
257 posts
It's quite a shame really. I can understand leaking actual information from the game but not being able to say whether you were accepted or not is pretty dumb.
____________________________
FFXI(retired 04/2006): Epedemicoptikz, Phoenix Server, 75 SAM/NIN/WAR

#7 Mar 01 2010 at 11:37 PM Rating: Decent
**
437 posts
link the blog so the rest can see it
#8 Mar 02 2010 at 1:56 AM Rating: Good
Sage
****
6,470 posts
EpedemicOptikz wrote:
It's quite a shame really. I can understand leaking actual information from the game but not being able to say whether you were accepted or not is pretty dumb.


The logic here, (and I think it's pretty well founded) is that once somebody says that they're in the beta, a ton of questions that will be tempting to answer will undoubtedly follow. Best to head all that off at the start.

Besides, what's the merit to saying that you're in the beta, other than to brag?
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#9 Mar 02 2010 at 2:00 AM Rating: Decent
Edited by bsphil
******
21,739 posts
Eske wrote:
Besides, what's the merit to saying that you're in the beta, other than to brag?
I think you're severely downplaying the importance of bragging that you're in the alpha test.

Seriously.

Oh **** dude.

The selection pool was so small.

And I (may or may not) have gotten picked.

That's so f*cking crazy.

Nobody was on AIM when I checked my email this morning before heading out, either. I (may or may not) have skipped class today just to freak out over this.

(b'-')b @ alla admins
____________________________
His Excellency Aethien wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.
Take the hint guys, please take the hint.
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.
#10 Mar 02 2010 at 5:24 AM Rating: Decent
**
621 posts
Is it breaking the NDA if you say that you are in the beta, and really is not (that is you are lying)?
____________________________
Kweh?!

...prophesizing the golden patch since october 2010.
#11 Mar 02 2010 at 6:27 AM Rating: Excellent
38 posts
Quote:
Is it breaking the NDA if you say that you are in the beta, and really is not (that is you are lying)?

Probably not but (at least on this forum) saying that would be about as dumb as telling a cop that you rob banks for a living.
#12 Mar 02 2010 at 7:14 AM Rating: Default
**
782 posts
Quote:
Don't worry, I don't see how posting a link to a webpage could be illegal.

You must be new to this whole Internet thing eh?
#13 Mar 02 2010 at 10:01 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,428 posts
I suppose it can vary by NDA, but when I would be invited to beta on the SONY Playstation forums and even for ffxi, they updated tags on peoples name automatically to show who was in beta. So it was not a secret who was in, but still the discussion of the game had to be in specific forums locked to only just testers.
____________________________
Direct Credit Card Payments Now Accepted! (01/26/2012)

http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/forum.html?forum=10&mid=1327570330215738540

If having an issue with card rejected, make sure your noscript is allowing globalcollect site gcsip.com as that is where transaction is routed when I updated.
#14 Mar 03 2010 at 12:31 PM Rating: Good
*
242 posts
I'm probably being overly technical here, but as one of (I presume) very few lawyers who read these forums I reserve the right to nitpick:

It's not ILLEGAL to break the NDA. You can't and won't go to jail.

It is a breach of contract, for which SE could pursue damage.

At the very least it's a bad idea. But not "illegal."

Just sayin'.
____________________________


#15 Mar 03 2010 at 9:58 PM Rating: Decent
*
59 posts
JayRams wrote:
It is a breach of contract, for which SE could pursue damage.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is electronic NDAs don't really hold-up in court. They would have a hard time claiming damages unless they sent out a legally binding NDA paper by mail which was required to be signed and returned to Square-Enix before given beta access.

They of course could kick you out of the beta and ban you (IP, SE Account, Name, Address, etc) from ever playing the final version of FFXIV as a punishment for breaking the NDA, without any possible recourse from you.
#16 Mar 04 2010 at 10:00 AM Rating: Good
*
242 posts
I've not done extensive research on whether electronic NDAs hold up in court. Maybe I'll pop onto Westlaw and do a search or two on it.

There have been serious questions in the last 15 years regarding the validity of the boilerplate software license agreements, and the results here vary on several factors: 1) which jurisdiction you're in (state to state), 2) whether you get the terms before or after you make your purchase (almost always after), 3) sometimes, the fairness of the terms of the contract itself, 4) the fairness of the process by which the agreement is entered into (has a lot of overlap with #2).

The majority rule though seems to be that electronically "signed" or acknowledged contracts are still binding; there are very few contracts which actually require a physical writing to comply with the Statute of Frauds, and software licenses are not among them (MYLEGS - marriage, contracts that can't possibly completed within a year, sale of land, executor / guarantor contracts, for goods $500+, and suretyships.... gogo first year contracts).

I haven't read the NDA, but it wouldn't surprise me if there were a "liquidated damages" clause in it. Sometimes those work, sometimes they don't.

There are at least two potential barriers to recovery: whether there was any "consideration" to show that there is a binding contract (what did the tester get from the bargain? arguably the tester is donating his time and getting nothing in return. I think the community makes it obvious that the opportunity to play the game early has value, so SE would likely win.) and whether SE actually suffered and can prove damages. If they can show some quantity of damage, like "if this info hadn't leaked, traffic on our website would've been xx% higher and we would've gotten $xx,xxx in ad revenue from increased traffic." That's speculative and likely wouldn't be enough proof, but it's just used to convey the idea.

I imagine a lot of the alpha/beta testers are "judgment-proof" too, with no assets that SE would be able to collect for a judgment.

TLDR version: They'd probably win a lawsuit, but the victory would likely be Pyrrhic. But a full-on ban is much more likely because lawsuits are expensive and wouldn't really do much anyhow. I was just nitpicking on "illegal" vs. "breach of contract."

Edited, Mar 4th 2010 11:01am by JayRams
____________________________


This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 19 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (19)