Solve : Microsoft bullies the little guy.?

1.	Solve : Microsoft bullies the little guy.?
Answer» Interesting article right here: http://lewisdenby.wordpress.com/2009/09/21/embarguments/ I am actually the Community Manager and a reviewer on Go! Gaming Giant, the site in question. I wasn't around for the founding of the site, but I've been there since its latter INFANCY. It's an up-and-coming gaming site that is slowly gaining recognition in the gaming community and we have been featured on all sorts of similar sites, as well as some publisher/developer sites. I even had one of my reviews featured on Bethesda's site at one point. Anyway, the main gist of the article is that Nick, one of our reviewers, managed to buy Halo ODST last week (I believe; I don't know the proper date) when his local game shop released the game early. Obviously excited, he bought the game, played it, and posted a review. Well, apparently, this is a breach of the embargo that we didn't agree to. After all, the game was purchased at a store; it wasn't an advanced copy from Microsoft, nor was it pirated (he has proof of purchase). Also worth noting is that an embargo isn't a regulation enforced by law; it is only enforced by the company itself. However, with Microsoft threatening a lawsuit if we failed to remove the review, we eventually had to comply because nobody on the site can afford any sort of attorney. This is just a amateur site, and I am one of the oldest staff members, which should say something because I am currently only 24. As the article above states, the review was removed. We were also blacklisted by Microsoft and barred from any of their future events. However, the site owner/founder Matt has been speaking with them and we are supposedly in the clear, but I don't know all of the details. Although I am a longtime member of the site, I only recently joined the staff. The review is back up because the embargo ended on Saturday, but it has left a bitter taste in many people's mouths. On the plus side, it is giving us a decent amount of publicity. They always say there's no such thing as bad publicity, right? I just thought I'd share this little story with everyone because I personally find it interesting. Perhaps I have a bit of a bias, but still...I'm curious to see what some of you think about it. Feel free to discuss it here, and you are of course also welcome to visit the site or join the forum.heh, I love the insistence that they MUST show a proof of purchase. "F-off, douchebags. I bought the game, I reviewed it, the only agreement I agreed to was the EULA which says nothing expressly or implicitly about any embargo, which I might add is not a legally enforceable concept except in the satellite case where I actually agreed to something of that nature." But we must remember; this is coming from MS... remember the WHOLE, "opening of this package constitutes agreement to the enclosed EULA" crap? They can get AWAY with a lot of stuff that they wouldn't otherwise because they have an army of lawyers.Yeah, good point. Although I'd like to think that a judge would lean in our favor, with their arsenal of lawyers, they'd probably find some way to make us all guilty of agreeing to an embargo (and then breaking it), pirating the game, selling copies of the pirated game, blowing up the Twin Towers, and murdering prostitutes in the 1800's. Heck, I'm already partially convinced. Heh.Quote from: CBMatt on September 22, 2009, 04:49:13 AM they'd probably find some way to make us all guilty of agreeing to an embargo (and then breaking it), pirating the game, selling copies of the pirated game, blowing up the Twin Towers, and murdering prostitutes in the 1800's. Don't forget about stealing candy from babies.Actually, we might be a little guilty of that one. Here's another article about the situation: http://gaming.icrontic.com/articles/halo_3_odst_broken_embargo This one just briefly mentions us: http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=67244&provider=top The whole thing is bringing in a lot of publicity for us, which is a good thing. But I've got to admit that it bothers me slightly that so many people seem to think that breaking the embargo was on PURPOSE. When you're able to purchase a game and take it home and play it, it's not really something that crosses your mind. The way I see it: if a game is available for purchase, there's no reason to think that an embargo is still in place. A lot of people also fault G3 for not taking the review down quickly enough (although it really wasn't up all that long), but they don't realize that this isn't some major site with an office building full of employees. G3 should have been more prepared (which is why some of us are now exchanging phone numbers), but nothing like this has ever happened on the site. Ignorance is not an excuse, of course...but for what it's worth, a lesson has been learned. The sad part is that we weren't even the first site to review the game; there were several others before us. We just got Microsoft's attention because we're on the N4G aggregator. And I think they saw it as a very good opportunity to spark some interest in their new game. Oh well. As long as we don't get completely blacklisted (the details are fuzzy at the moment), I think it's mostly a win/win.It seems a bit childish to me. I understand their reasoning, although I don't agree with it. From the one article, it sounds like the retailer is at fault for allowing him to get the game early. On the other hand, not being aware of the "rules" of the industry isn't an excuse either. Hopefully, everything will work out alright for you guys.I agree with both of those...I think the store (Newegg) is at fault, but somebody should've found out the embargo date. I'm still new to the staff, though, so I'm not sure how that works exactly. Matt, the owner, says that things are good between us and Microsoft now, but he hasn't given us any details yet, so that could mean anything.I personally find it quite disturbing, and I'm one who will stick it to the man. It just baffles me that M$ have to stick there noses into everything and take everything as an attack. Your man has done nothing wrong he legally purchased a game and reviewed it. He did not go on to tpb and download an illegal copy and stick two fingers up to M$. I think M$ have there heads up there own... well you know. They think if they send an email threatening someone that the person will automatically bow down and submit. I'm just glad it had the opposite effect to promote the site.. Other reviewers are upset with us and I can understand that because they all waited like they were supposed to. But I think it is ridiculous for Microsoft to get so upset about the whole thing, especially when it was quite a positive review. We have already provided them with proof of a legal purchase, so if they want to get upset with someone, their beef should be with Newegg. Newegg agreed to certain terms; we agreed to nothing, nor were we asked to agree to anything. But this situation isn't black and white, I suppose. With all of the different ways you can look at it, everyone is at fault in their own way. Personally, I think everything could be resolved with a nice friendly sleepover.CBMatt, Thanks for a good topic. Very interesting. IMO Microsoft is at fault. If they they want to prevent premature reviews, they have the means to do that. that. I suspect this may have been a planned "leak" to help draw attention. Microsoft is an expert at getting free publicity, at the expense of others. Of course that is IMO. So far I have not yet read any EULA stating I can not have an opinion. But that may change.In Microsoft's DEFENSE, I don't think they planned on having Newegg break the street release date. However, they should've been aware that Newegg is known for doing this. The did the same thing for Fable 2. So...I dunno, maybe Microsoft really did expect it. However, only a select few got ODST early, so it's really hard to say. And while part of me thinks that this is part of a promotion plot, it also must be kept in mind that Microsoft didn't have any sort of "press release" about this and neither did we or N4G. This only got around because someone basically found out through a friend of a friend. That's not exactly how it worked, but it's the same general idea. Until then, nobody really knew about it. And although this is a lot of publicity for us, it's a tiny amount for a company like Microsoft. If this was all part of their evil plan, they may need to think a bit bigger next time. They attempt to prevent premature reviews by placing these embargos. Heh. For the most part, people tend to abide by embargos. Those who don't usually aren't given another chance and won't be sent any future review copies. We weren't sent one at all, so the plan was to buy the game once it was released and review it then. And that's exactly what happened...it was just a bit earlier than planned. We receive tons of review copies from companies and always abide by the embargos set in place. People think we intentionally rushed this out because it's such a huge release (I disagree with this grand scale), but that's just ridiculous. One of our guys got Scribblenauts a couple of weeks ago, and that is a highly-anticipated game, but the review wasn't even posted until today. This wasn't some kind of race for us; just a misunderstanding. This is, of course, a misunderstanding that won't happen again. And I will soon be confirming the embargo date of the new Guitar Hero game with Activision before I even think of attempting a review. Ha. Here's another article, by the way. Please note that it contains language not suitable for children: http://www.gorillajumpers.com/articles/gj_ms.htm

Answer»

Interesting article right here:
http://lewisdenby.wordpress.com/2009/09/21/embarguments/

I am actually the Community Manager and a reviewer on Go! Gaming Giant, the site in question. I wasn't around for the founding of the site, but I've been there since its latter INFANCY. It's an up-and-coming gaming site that is slowly gaining recognition in the gaming community and we have been featured on all sorts of similar sites, as well as some publisher/developer sites. I even had one of my reviews featured on Bethesda's site at one point.

Anyway, the main gist of the article is that Nick, one of our reviewers, managed to buy Halo ODST last week (I believe; I don't know the proper date) when his local game shop released the game early. Obviously excited, he bought the game, played it, and posted a review. Well, apparently, this is a breach of the embargo that we didn't agree to. After all, the game was purchased at a store; it wasn't an advanced copy from Microsoft, nor was it pirated (he has proof of purchase). Also worth noting is that an embargo isn't a regulation enforced by law; it is only enforced by the company itself. However, with Microsoft threatening a lawsuit if we failed to remove the review, we eventually had to comply because nobody on the site can afford any sort of attorney. This is just a amateur site, and I am one of the oldest staff members, which should say something because I am currently only 24.

As the article above states, the review was removed. We were also blacklisted by Microsoft and barred from any of their future events. However, the site owner/founder Matt has been speaking with them and we are supposedly in the clear, but I don't know all of the details. Although I am a longtime member of the site, I only recently joined the staff. The review is back up because the embargo ended on Saturday, but it has left a bitter taste in many people's mouths. On the plus side, it is giving us a decent amount of publicity. They always say there's no such thing as bad publicity, right?

I just thought I'd share this little story with everyone because I personally find it interesting. Perhaps I have a bit of a bias, but still...I'm curious to see what some of you think about it. Feel free to discuss it here, and you are of course also welcome to visit the site or join the forum.heh, I love the insistence that they MUST show a proof of purchase.

"F-off, douchebags. I bought the game, I reviewed it, the only agreement I agreed to was the EULA which says nothing expressly or implicitly about any embargo, which I might add is not a legally enforceable concept except in the satellite case where I actually agreed to something of that nature."

But we must remember; this is coming from MS... remember the WHOLE, "opening of this package constitutes agreement to the enclosed EULA" crap?

They can get AWAY with a lot of stuff that they wouldn't otherwise because they have an army of lawyers.Yeah, good point. Although I'd like to think that a judge would lean in our favor, with their arsenal of lawyers, they'd probably find some way to make us all guilty of agreeing to an embargo (and then breaking it), pirating the game, selling copies of the pirated game, blowing up the Twin Towers, and murdering prostitutes in the 1800's. Heck, I'm already partially convinced. Heh.Quote from: CBMatt on September 22, 2009, 04:49:13 AM

they'd probably find some way to make us all guilty of agreeing to an embargo (and then breaking it), pirating the game, selling copies of the pirated game, blowing up the Twin Towers, and murdering prostitutes in the 1800's.

Don't forget about stealing candy from babies.Actually, we might be a little guilty of that one.

Here's another article about the situation:
http://gaming.icrontic.com/articles/halo_3_odst_broken_embargo

This one just briefly mentions us:
http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=67244&provider=top

The whole thing is bringing in a lot of publicity for us, which is a good thing. But I've got to admit that it bothers me slightly that so many people seem to think that breaking the embargo was on PURPOSE. When you're able to purchase a game and take it home and play it, it's not really something that crosses your mind. The way I see it: if a game is available for purchase, there's no reason to think that an embargo is still in place. A lot of people also fault G3 for not taking the review down quickly enough (although it really wasn't up all that long), but they don't realize that this isn't some major site with an office building full of employees. G3 should have been more prepared (which is why some of us are now exchanging phone numbers), but nothing like this has ever happened on the site. Ignorance is not an excuse, of course...but for what it's worth, a lesson has been learned.

The sad part is that we weren't even the first site to review the game; there were several others before us. We just got Microsoft's attention because we're on the N4G aggregator. And I think they saw it as a very good opportunity to spark some interest in their new game. Oh well. As long as we don't get completely blacklisted (the details are fuzzy at the moment), I think it's mostly a win/win.It seems a bit childish to me. I understand their reasoning, although I don't agree with it.

From the one article, it sounds like the retailer is at fault for allowing him to get the game early.

On the other hand, not being aware of the "rules" of the industry isn't an excuse either. Hopefully, everything will work out alright for you guys.I agree with both of those...I think the store (Newegg) is at fault, but somebody should've found out the embargo date. I'm still new to the staff, though, so I'm not sure how that works exactly.

Matt, the owner, says that things are good between us and Microsoft now, but he hasn't given us any details yet, so that could mean anything.I personally find it quite disturbing, and I'm one who will stick it to the man. It just baffles me that M$ have to stick there noses into everything and take everything as an attack.
Your man has done nothing wrong he legally purchased a game and reviewed it. He did not go on to tpb and download an illegal copy and stick two fingers up to M$. I think M$ have there heads up there own... well you know. They think if they send an email threatening someone that the person will automatically bow down and submit.
I'm just glad it had the opposite effect to promote the site.. Other reviewers are upset with us and I can understand that because they all waited like they were supposed to. But I think it is ridiculous for Microsoft to get so upset about the whole thing, especially when it was quite a positive review. We have already provided them with proof of a legal purchase, so if they want to get upset with someone, their beef should be with Newegg. Newegg agreed to certain terms; we agreed to nothing, nor were we asked to agree to anything. But this situation isn't black and white, I suppose. With all of the different ways you can look at it, everyone is at fault in their own way. Personally, I think everything could be resolved with a nice friendly sleepover.CBMatt,
Thanks for a good topic. Very interesting.
IMO Microsoft is at fault. If they they want to prevent premature reviews, they have the means to do that. that. I suspect this may have been a planned "leak" to help draw attention. Microsoft is an expert at getting free publicity, at the expense of others. Of course that is IMO. So far I have not yet read any EULA stating I can not have an opinion. But that may change.In Microsoft's DEFENSE, I don't think they planned on having Newegg break the street release date. However, they should've been aware that Newegg is known for doing this. The did the same thing for Fable 2. So...I dunno, maybe Microsoft really did expect it. However, only a select few got ODST early, so it's really hard to say.

And while part of me thinks that this is part of a promotion plot, it also must be kept in mind that Microsoft didn't have any sort of "press release" about this and neither did we or N4G. This only got around because someone basically found out through a friend of a friend. That's not exactly how it worked, but it's the same general idea. Until then, nobody really knew about it. And although this is a lot of publicity for us, it's a tiny amount for a company like Microsoft. If this was all part of their evil plan, they may need to think a bit bigger next time.

They attempt to prevent premature reviews by placing these embargos. Heh. For the most part, people tend to abide by embargos. Those who don't usually aren't given another chance and won't be sent any future review copies. We weren't sent one at all, so the plan was to buy the game once it was released and review it then. And that's exactly what happened...it was just a bit earlier than planned. We receive tons of review copies from companies and always abide by the embargos set in place. People think we intentionally rushed this out because it's such a huge release (I disagree with this grand scale), but that's just ridiculous. One of our guys got Scribblenauts a couple of weeks ago, and that is a highly-anticipated game, but the review wasn't even posted until today. This wasn't some kind of race for us; just a misunderstanding.

This is, of course, a misunderstanding that won't happen again. And I will soon be confirming the embargo date of the new Guitar Hero game with Activision before I even think of attempting a review. Ha.

Here's another article, by the way. Please note that it contains language not suitable for children:
http://www.gorillajumpers.com/articles/gj_ms.htm

Solve : Microsoft bullies the little guy.?

Discussion

No Comment Found

Related InterviewSolutions

Reply to Comment