foad01: If they suspend your account you won't have access to your games and to your wallet. It is up to GOG whether this suspension is temporary or permanent...
Suspension is temporary.
Termination is permanent.
foad01: This discussion ended up being about semantics as many other threads...
When you are dealing with legal (or quasi legal) matters, syntax, semantics and precise wording are key issues.
foad01: If you have a problem with the new user agreements then you have three options...
Indeed - and for many people, there may be strong legal grounds for action (aside from the whole "you accept this change by revisiting our webpage" spiel which is already non-binding in some places) since in countries that impose tighter restrictions on consumer contracts, clauses allowing the taking of previously paid-for goods/services away without refund would be deemed invalid.
But legal action is never an easy option (cost or convenience wise) and frankly, GOG could (and should) offer a better way out along the lines of "We'll suspend your forum posting privileges until you agree, but you can still access your library and download updates".
Taking the line that "nothing has changed" though is clearly false and if you think this is a non-issue and that everyone disagreeing with you is a whiner/weiner/whatever (cue breach of Code of Conduct?) then why on earth are you still posting?
InkPanther: Ok, two things.
Firstly, in relation to paragraph 11.1 (g). It's not about the changes, it's about what it says...
If it hasn't changed in substance (and since the changes made just list examples) then I'd argue it as irrelevant in a discussion about a new TOS. If anything, having examples may be of
benefit to users since they serve to "tighten up" what content GOG can act upon.
InkPanther: ...per paragraph 17.2, may lead to account termination. If you do not believe me, please reread paragraph 1.1 stating that the User Agreement applies to, among others, the GOG web forums
Section 11 can be criticised for being overly broad (though many other fora have similar provisions) but the Code of Conduct ("at GOG's discretion") is, I would argue, far wider. And having that included in the new 17.2 is significant.
However, the more one-sided GOG's Terms and Conditions are, the less chance of them standing up in any court case. I've no intention of testing them myself (I'm still effectively boycotting GOG as per
this thread) but highlighting specific issues would (a) help GOG ameliorate their T&Cs (on the off-chance that they're paying attention to this and related threads) or (b) help posters falling foul of an irate moderator identify their legal options.