Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War had a brief price glitch that made the game available for super cheap, and it is now being revoked by Sony.
Way to go Sony!!! They should have to let everyone that bought the game keep it. If I go to a store and buy a product and it’s priced incorrectly I get to keep it.
That's in-store. It's not like they are going to hunt you down and demand you hand over the mislriced product back to them.
If you ran a business you’d think differently.
That's not even true, I work in a shop and the amount of times I've heard that shit from customers is unreal. If an item is priced wrong then its just a ticketing error it doesn't entitle you to that price at all. Some stores will let you have it at that price purely to keep customers happy, but there is absolutely no obligation for the store to give you the incorrect price. However you are right in saying that if you did get away with buying something at the wrong price they can't hunt you down to get the rest of the money off you. But welcome to the digital world.
There are laws in place to keep companies from putting one price on something and charging you differently. Digital content should be no different. Consumer protection laws vary from state to state but there are absolutely states that they would have to honor the price I’m sure there are loopholes dealing with a digital product but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s a classless move
@Donnie81 No. No store in any state in the U.S. - nor even in the UK where customer rights are often more expansive - has any legal obligation to "honor" a labelled price. You just made that up. Why, I don't know. As for "buying an incorrectly priced item", if you've *already purchased the item* from a physical store, then yeah, there's not much the sellers can do. ocelot07 is correct and it's strange that anyone is disagreeing with a fact. But if they notice incorrect pricing *before* the sale then you don't even get to buy it in order to potentially keep it in the first place, unless as a goodwill gesture.
California B&P Code #12024.2. (a) It is unlawful for any person, at the time of sale of a commodity, to do any of the following: (1) Charge an amount greater than the price, or to compute an amount greater than a true extension of a price per unit, that is then advertised, posted, marked, displayed, or quoted for that commodity. (2) Charge an amount greater than the lowest price posted on the commodity itself or on a shelf tag that corresponds to the commodity, notwithstanding any limitation of the time period for which the posted price is in effect. (b) A violation of this section is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not less than twenty-five dollars ($25) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), by imprisonment in the county jail for a period not exceeding one year, or by both, if the violation is willful or grossly negligent, or when the overcharge is more than one dollar ($1). (c) A violation of this section is an infraction punishable by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars ($100) when the overcharge is one dollar ($1) or less. (d) As used in subdivisions (b) and (c), “overcharge” means the amount by which the charge for a commodity exceeds a price that is advertised, posted, marked, displayed, or quoted to that consumer for that commodity at the time of sale. (e) Except as provided in subdivision (f), for purposes of this section, when more than one price for the same commodity is advertised, posted, marked, displayed, or quoted, the person offering the commodity for sale shall charge the lowest of those prices. (f) Pricing may be subject to a condition of sale, such as membership in a retailer-sponsored club, the purchase of a minimum quantity, or the purchase of multiples of the same item, provided that the condition is conspicuously posted in the same location as the price.
Depends on the country. In Canada there is a "displayed price" law, Section 74.05 of the competiton act "prohibits the sale or rent of a product at a price higher than its advertised price" section 54 "prohibits the supply of a product at a price that exceeds the lowest of two or more prices clearly expressed in respect of the product." A sale is also considered legally final once money changes hands. This applies to online digital sales also. Meaning Sony could potentially be criminally charged with theft over this, as under Canadian law, the game licence was no longer their property to take back.
I don't know about your country but in mine, by law a store has to sell any given item by the amount that is in the price tag. If a store had a €2000 tv mistakenly priced at €500 then a costumer would have the right to pay €500 and take the TV home.
I have no clue about who’s in the right or wrong ... but surely if they had to sell an item at advertised price then what’s to stop people from swapping price tags for a cheaper price tag ... even a dodgy person selling counterfeit price tags could make a lot of money ?
the transaction was made though, so your comparison doesn't equate. If you were trying to check out and the system was saying price error or something, then your story would be relatable. But if you've already bought it, the transaction is complete and should be considered as such. Especially since we are talking about a month later here.
Can't believe people disagree. If a physical store sells you something at a low price by mistake and you take it home, it is still yours. This is consumer mistreatment.
Exactly. Consumers are not allowed to return/refund games on the Playstation store - so why are Sony? :) All Playstation Store sales are final (unless you are Sony).
@Ryushaa Well I got owned lol. Thanks for sharing that
MTVBG I don’t know if the law differs in dealing with digital products compared to physical but I can tell you for a fact the state I live in if it’s priced a certain way you are expected to honor that price. I’m sure if something was supposed to be 499 not 4.99 there might be a clause but Sony should honor those purchases
If you purchase something for clearly the wrongly labeled price, you aren’t entitled to a thing. Hell if a glitch on a website allowed me to buy a car for $30 instead of $30k- I know I wouldn’t be allowed to keep the car without paying its actual full price. The entitlement of the gaming community is wild
Entitlement isn't just the gaming community dude. Its people as a collective. You'll see that same dispute in any retailer the world over. People who haven't a clue about their consumer rights are often the ones using them in disputes rather comically
It isn't entitlement, it's the law. In Canada if something is advertised for the wrong price, retailers are legally obligated to honor the lower price. They also cannot cancel the transaction once money has been exchanged. Glitch or not, it has to be honored. As someone pointed out above, the same is true in other places such as California.
Invitation to treat. Not all countries have the same laws sure but in a lot of them an advertised price is not a contractual obligation. If you are informed of the higher price before paying then the retailer is absolutely not liable to give it to you for the lower price.
This is false - please point me to that law, because everything Im seeing online shows that as soon as the retailer can prove it was not false advertising (aka they correct the price), the buyer has no legal right to claim they can keep it. Now will either party want to go to court over a $60 videogame, no - but the simple fact that gamers take the stance of "Im entitled to this because of the store's fuck up" - is just silly
@Duke19 - if you took a game home the store you bought it from can literally do NOTHING else at that point. Once you step out of the store with the transaction completed it's a done deal. They cannot legally make you give it back.
It’s not that simple. I have seen many judgements of these disputes overruling the general case of law and cancelling orders with obvious mistakes (not to be confused with a seller change of mind). Just look for it and you’ll find how these rules are applied in real world.
For decades we've always technically been sold a license to play games as opposed to buying the games outright, a license they could always theoretically revoke. Back in the day it wasn't realistically logistical to revoke a license and/or enforce that. It's interesting seeing digital become so big that this whole "license" thing I'd snigger at as a kid became something publishers/sellers could actually enforce. I don't think they shouldn't be able to do it, but it is another reason we should resist the move away from physical.
I have been spoiled by amazon for this. When they make a price error, those guys honor it. Back in Wii U days, I got Xenoblade Chronicles X for 19.99 cad new on release day because they made an error for like 5 minutes and they honored the lowest price.
As an attorney in the US, I can count the number of accurate posts about consumer law in this thread on one hand.
What everyone here is failing to see is the transaction was already made. A store couldn't hunt you down after buying a game for half price by mistake and make you give it back. This is a bad move by Sony. Correct the price and lick your wounds. Revoking licenses from people who bought it due to THEIR error and not in any ways the consumers is just shady AF. If this was MS or Nintendo I can only imagine the level of vitrol that would be said about those two companies. But it's Sony, so of course they are right. This is not the same as someone walking up to a counter with a game in hand and then the clerk saying that it was priced in error. Don't even compare the two.
Poor move - not a good look. If I go into Walmart and buy something at 50% discount via mispricing, they won't come to my house and take it back. A nice reminder that game companies are not your friend.
Still better than paying double the amount for XBL. lol
Who is paying double the advertised price for XBL?
That was already reversed before you even made this comment. Get with the times.
People stupidity on here is baffling, this isn’t a Walmart you walk into, this is an online store, completely different, Sony have the right to revoke a license even if the mistake is on there part, same goes for any company with there games on an online store, its actually stated in there policy’s.
While I agree that physical vs 'the internet' is different, the premise remains the same that you handed over cash, and received goods/a service in return. The consumer rights should outweigh the corporations rights. We shouldn't defend the company in this scenario. If you don't want to price things incorrectly/lose money, write better code, don't make mistakes, hire better staff.
The ToS can say anything, that doesn't actually matter. Those terms do not supercede actual law. For example, Valve's ToS states that by agreeing you give up your legal right to class action lawsuits. That is illegal and would never be upheld in court.
Unfortunately terms of service are made up by these corporations within the law, so in this case Sony have the right as does any game company to revoke a license if it goes against there TOS.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.