Untitled 1

CSS Library

Playstation gift cards

Reviews

Videos

Images

Sections

Other

 

News

Sponsored by


Free MMO Games

cg-now

 Video Game Lies

 

 

 Family Friendly Gaming Devotional January

 Family Friendly Gaming Devotional February

FFG Originals

Animal Super Squad

FFG Gear

Super Mario Party

Pure Farming 2018

Farm Together

Family Friendly Gaming Hall of Fame




News

Guilty Until Proven Innocent

 

 

Cordova, TN; January 1, in the year of our Lord 2016--Family Friendly Gaming, the industry leader in covering the family friendly video games is addressing companies that treat consumers like they are guilty first, and must prove their innocence. In my personal, professional, and legal opinion companies doing this are completely backwards. In Coffin v. United States the Supreme Court affirmed the presumption of innocence. There is not a presumption of being guilty as many of these companies are treating consumers. Here is what the Supreme Court of the United States had to say:

”The principle that there is a presumption of innocence in favor of the accused is the undoubted law, axiomatic and elementary, and its enforcement lies at the foundation of the administration of our criminal law. … Concluding, then, that the presumption of innocence is evidence in favor of the accused, introduced by the law in his behalf, let us consider what is 'reasonable doubt.' It is, of necessity, the condition of mind produced by the proof resulting from the evidence in the cause. It is the result of the proof, not the proof itself, whereas the presumption of innocence is one of the instruments of proof, going to bring about the proof from which reasonable doubt arises; thus one is a cause, the other an effect. To say that the one is the equivalent of the other is therefore to say that legal evidence can be excluded from the jury, and that such exclusion may be cured by instructing them correctly in regard to the method by which they are required to reach their conclusion upon the proof actually before them; in other words, that the exclusion of an important element of proof can be justified by correctly instructing as to the proof admitted. The evolution of the principle of the presumption of innocence, and its resultant, the doctrine of reasonable doubt, make more apparent the correctness of these views, and indicate the necessity of enforcing the one in order that the other may continue to exist.”

As many of ya’ll know Family Friendly Gaming recently went through a server upgrade with CCGR.NET. There were a few issues here and there. There always are. One of the most frustrating issues was with the email server. Microsoft decided since the server was a brand new server it must be up to nefarious deeds, and blocked it. It took multiple attempts from multiple people to finally get Microsoft to acknowledge we were legitimate, honest, real, and true people. We had to prove to them we were not spammers, or up to some other illegal activity. In essence Microsoft decided we were guilty and had to prove our innocence. Microsoft acted the exact opposite of the law. I am still disgusted by Microsoft’s backwards business practice.

They are not the only ones either. A few years ago I was pulling into my drive way by turning to the right. I had my blinker on, and someone decided to pass me on the right. As you can probably figure out from those facts, they hit me on my right side as I was turning to the right. They got a ticket, and their insurance company was paying for the damages their client caused. The insurance company offered me a rental car. I was reluctant to accept this at first because I figured we could survive one week without my vehicle. I went down to the car rental place who demanded a credit card. I follow Dave Ramsey’s system, and do not use credit cards at all. Since I did not have a credit card, they wanted access to my bank account to withdraw $300.00. Why? In case I damaged the rental car, they would immediately have money and access to get more from me. I refused, and after talking to a manager I left. I had never wronged them, and do not have any record of wronging them or any company like them. Why should I accept them treating me like a guilty person?

I have noticed a variety of companies in the video game industry treating consumers as if we are all guilty of piracy, and have to prove we have legitimate copies of the games we paid them for. I am personally sick of it. I am sick of having to connect to their servers to prove the game I purchased from a local retailer is legal. These companies need to stop treating us consumers as guilty. They need to stop forcing us to prove our innocence. I am waiting for someone to sue them, and have them pay out a massive amount of money for their disobedience of the law. Why do they even do it? Is it because of their greed?


God bless,
Paul Bury
Family Friendly Gaming

   

Back to Archives