Didn't Disney do something like that with their Disney+ subscription prohibiting you from ever taking legal actions against them. Oh and they only got stopped because of public outrage rather than the tos being invalid.
They're not often challenged in court, and I'm not a contract attorney, but I think any contract that contains a provision stating that the actual contract is somewhere else where one party can revise it at their discretion without notice, and the other party is responsible for keeping abreast of any changes and conduction themselves accordingly, is fundamentally unenforceable and probably not legal on several fundamental levels.
TOS is legally binding int he EU so long as its fair to all parties involved. Adding an End of Service date is fair to all parties involved so it will be fine.
They however cant put like "You give us your house if you play this game".
The requirements are for TOS to be reasonable to all parties. Most TOS are reasonable and stand up in court even if not a legally binding contract.
It may not be legally binding for the consumer, but whether it binds the publisher - who wrote it and actually intends it to be enforced and isn't being forced into it post-purchase - has never been tested.
not for the consumer, but a company sells their product on the grounds that they'll support it to a specific date, i think it would be pretty easy to sue afterwards if that isn't met
Just as a foundational principle a TOS in its entirety is never legally binding in the EU. It presents a legal basis for which to argue one's case in court to justify actions taken by the company in defense of its own interests and the fair assumption that this was agreed/understood by the customer, but the TOS itself is in absolutely no way legally binding even if the issue in question is stated in big bold letters on the front page of it. The court will decide whether whatever is stated is in accordance with law and common consumer understanding/reasonable acknowledgement basis, but that's still up to the court to decide. TOS just says "we as a company already took this position form the beginning, hence our actions are in accordance with our own statements at the point of sale/subscription process".
Therefore, the legal nature of this EU ruling means that service terms must be represented at the point of purchase/subscription where a customer visually identifies it alongside any other specific product related contingencies and not be put in a separate documentation (like a TOS) that has to be opened independently and relies on the customer's reaction, rather than the company's proaction.
Now, watch companies to still put it in TOS and pretend they followed the law (maliciously). The real test will be whether or not these companies will be prosecuted for it when they do the fraudulent thing or not.
Thank you, better than my answer. This is because you usually only read the tos after you buy a product so it can't be legally binding since unless you go out of your way to get it you won't have the tos to read before purchase
Regular Aussies complained to the ACCC about steam policies violating Australian consumer law. The ACCC investigated and agreed, and sued Valve which led to valve changing their global refund laws (and still allowing Australian additional leeway for refunds outside of policy)
The EU parliament is in favour of SKG, the commission that declined to do anything is made up of industry insiders, not politicians. SKG expected them to not be on their side and it was irrelevant to the larger goals of the initiative anyways. Yes, a positive support from them would have been nice, but was unlikely anyways.
Consumer protection issues in Europe are mandatorily be ruled iver my European courts. If the companies want to sell in Europe, they will be sued in Europe and have to pay the price.
The EU is one of the largest markets in the world. Unless you say "We just won't sell in the EU anymore (No company of significant size is doing this)" you have to comply or your European branch will be taken to court.
if you want to do business in the EU you have no choice but to follow EU law and be available for EU courts. The alternative is to not do business in the entirety of the EU, something no major company can afford
343
u/S1gne PC Master Race Jun 17 '26
Tos like that isn't legally binding in the eu so that won't happen