cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Facebook account required for new Oculus hmd users Oct 2020 - existing users can wait to Jan 2023

RuneSR2
Level 16
More here:

https://www.oculus.com/blog/a-single-way-to-log-into-oculus-and-unlock-social-features/

Today, we’re announcing some important updates to how people log into Oculus devices, while still keeping their VR profile. Starting in October 2020:

  • Everyone using an Oculus device for the first time will need to log in with a Facebook account.

  • If you’re an existing user and already have an Oculus account, you’ll have the option to log in with Facebook and merge your Oculus and Facebook accounts.

  • If you’re an existing user and choose not to merge your accounts, you can continue using your Oculus account for two years.

After January 1, 2023, we will end support for Oculus accounts. If you choose not to merge your accounts at that time, you can continue using your device, but full functionality will require a Facebook account. We will take steps to allow you to keep using content you have purchased, though we expect some games and apps may no longer work. This could be because they include features that require a Facebook account or because a developer has chosen to no longer support the app or game you purchased. All future unreleased Oculus devices will require a Facebook account, even if you already have an Oculus account.

i7 7700K (4.5GHz); MSI GTX 1080 8GB Gaming X (oc 2100MHz gpu boost, 11GHz mem speed); 16GB 3200MHz; MSI Z270I (VR-Ready) mainboard; Samsung 961 NVMe 128GB (OS) + Samsung 860 4TB SSD (games) + Toshiba P300 HDD 3TB (games); Win10; Valve Index and Oculus Rift CV1 using super sampling 2.0.      "Ask not what VR can do for you – ask what you can do for VR"

1,250 REPLIES 1,250

Zenbane
Level 16

Well, I guess we'll just have to wait and see what actually happens, when a company makes this kind of decision it's always going to get at least some backlash, the severity of which can make them either change their mind to conform to their community (like leaving facebook as an option and not a requirement) or just plowing forward and having it be a requirement despite it losing them probably up to if not more than 1/3 of it's userbase.


Agreed on the "wait and see" approach. We do have some historical context here though. People have tried to boycott Facebook in the past. Especially after the Cambridge data scandal. Yet Facebook is more successful now than ever, with stock prices reaching record highs. Every Facebook controversy results in people claiming that they will lose a large portion of their consumer base, yet it never seems to happen.

Losing 1/3 of PCVR users is pretty much... losing "dozens" of accounts. Compared to the thousands they gain in return.

I know the situation sucks. But the reality is that it will likely work out in the end.

edmg
Level 10

Zenbane said:
Unfortunately that is not the case. These are standard ToS that are 100% legally binding here in the US as defined by Contract Law guidelines, in addition to regulations around Intellectual Property.


Maybe you should ask Patreon about that.

Zenbane
Level 16

edmg said:

Maybe you should ask Patreon about that.



Patreon doesn't work the same as Facebook. And you'll need to be more specific. Just saying "Patreon" doesn't disprove the entire Justice System.

EDIT:
I just looked up the Patreon issue. It's not even remotely close to being the same thing. Patreon is banning people for their own interpretation of "hate speech." That's an entirely different situation that has nothing to do with the FB/Oculus account linking. lmao

Shadowmask72
Level 16
I'm not reading through 250 posts on this, but I will repeat myself. All Facebook/Oculus has to do is announce half dome, next gen VR headset and all you scaly molluscs will come crawling back like the limpets you are and won't give a hoot about having to have a FB account.

 😄 


System Specs: ASUS NVIDIA RTX 3090 TUF GAMING OC 24GB , i9 9900K CPU, 16 GB DDR 4 RAM, Win 10 64 Bit OS.

Morgrum
Level 11
gdoqpfwje3fi.gif
Well Shadow Facebook better start cracking then!
WAAAGH!

Mradr
Level 13

Zenbane said:


edmg said:

It's highly unlikely that most of these contracts are legally binding.



Unfortunately that is not the case. These are standard ToS that are 100% legally binding here in the US as defined by Contract Law guidelines, in addition to regulations around Intellectual Property.

Facebook owns all rights to their products, not the consumer. The ToS merely explains the full extent of those rights.

So in essence, you are saying that it is highly unlikely that a company has legal rights to their own intellectual property. Surely you can see how that is not the case. Your neighbor can't just come and take your house or car, right?

Facebook is completely free to change their product/services as they see fit within the confines of the law. The change, in and of itself, is not a violation of the law. Any more than you changing the color of paint on your vehicle, or re-decorating a room in your home.


Not 100% true - just because the ToS could say they own your dog by using this service - doesnt make it legal for them to do so. ToS dont get hold up in curt as easy. The problem is that most ToS are used as a fall back if the judge doesnt see the point in the law suit. There have been many ToS that fail to be able to be up held as well. At best they're used to inform the user that the IP/service/platform/etc is control by the business and they hold the right to make changes, set the rules on how the service works, and that can change at any time. If I remember right, a ToS can not harm, break laws, remove rights, and etc from a person. Then again ToS is not the same as contract even though a ToS is like a contract. Mostly because contracts have to do extra steps like having someone at present, legally sign signatures, and etc to make them binding.

Take WoW for example, in the ToS they said they own the data to the program and that even by reading said data in RAM it was against the ToS. They ban many people for doing it until someone lunch a law suit and it was found legal to do so. That reading the ram on their system was 100% legal to do so. The only difference is that you can not make changes to the data that is generated by the program.

Fun fact - making a fake FB account is against the ToS.

Zenbane
Level 16


Mradr said:


Zenbane said:


edmg said:

It's highly unlikely that most of these contracts are legally binding.



Unfortunately that is not the case. These are standard ToS that are 100% legally binding here in the US as defined by Contract Law guidelines, in addition to regulations around Intellectual Property.

Facebook owns all rights to their products, not the consumer. The ToS merely explains the full extent of those rights.

So in essence, you are saying that it is highly unlikely that a company has legal rights to their own intellectual property. Surely you can see how that is not the case. Your neighbor can't just come and take your house or car, right?

Facebook is completely free to change their product/services as they see fit within the confines of the law. The change, in and of itself, is not a violation of the law. Any more than you changing the color of paint on your vehicle, or re-decorating a room in your home.


Not 100% true - just because the ToS could say they own your dog by using this service



The ToS says nothing about dog owning. And your comment takes us back to the reading problems you keep imposing. I'll quote the important part, but history dictates it won't help this conversation much,

"Facebook is completely free to change their product/services as they see fit within the confines of the law."

Pay attention to the part in bold. Because your reply introduced a situation where FB would be operating outside the confines of the law.

So if you read my post comprehensively and completely, with full understanding, then everything I said is 100% true.

Cpt_Custard
Level 5


I'm not reading through 250 posts on this, but I will repeat myself. All Facebook/Oculus has to do is announce half dome, next gen VR headset and all you scaly molluscs will come crawling back like the limpets you are and won't give a hoot about having to have a FB account.

 😄 


To a larger extent, this will be true but there will still be a good few who stick to their guns. It will also hurt app sales and this is their primary income because they certainly don't make much on the hardware.

I for one am back to buying PC games via steam and PC is my primary use of VR

Do you think FB has the balls to make Quest work for FB games only to keep the app revenue? Could they even enforce that with reive etc?

Mradr
Level 13

Zenbane said:



Mradr said:


Zenbane said:


edmg said:

It's highly unlikely that most of these contracts are legally binding.



Unfortunately that is not the case. These are standard ToS that are 100% legally binding here in the US as defined by Contract Law guidelines, in addition to regulations around Intellectual Property.

Facebook owns all rights to their products, not the consumer. The ToS merely explains the full extent of those rights.

So in essence, you are saying that it is highly unlikely that a company has legal rights to their own intellectual property. Surely you can see how that is not the case. Your neighbor can't just come and take your house or car, right?

Facebook is completely free to change their product/services as they see fit within the confines of the law. The change, in and of itself, is not a violation of the law. Any more than you changing the color of paint on your vehicle, or re-decorating a room in your home.


Not 100% true - just because the ToS could say they own your dog by using this service



The ToS says nothing about dog owning. And your comment takes us back to the reading problems you keep imposing. I'll quote the important part, but history dictates it won't help this conversation much,

"Facebook is completely free to change their product/services as they see fit within the confines of the law."

Pay attention to the part in bold. Because your reply introduced a situation where FB would be operating outside the confines of the law.

So if you read my post comprehensively and completely, with full understanding, then everything I said is 100% true.


Where did I say they own your dog? I said, "just because the ToS could say they own your dog by using this service..." Thus, just because you can say it - doesnt make it 100% legally binding. 

I gave an example of where a company though they was inside the law as well - but was not inside their rights or the law. Blizzard ToS was also "
100% legally binding" until the court case - then it wasn't and nor was the time they ban all those people when Blizzard broke the legality of it all.

Having a ToS is 100% legal - but everything inside the ToS is up for decision if its legal or not.

JohnnyDioxin
Level 11
I bought Pro Putt for my Quest a couple of days ago - better get swinging that club cos I've only got 2 years to achieve a hole-in-one!

i5 9600k @4.5GHz; 16GB DDR4 3200; 6xSSD; RTX2080ti; Gigabyte Z390D Mobo
Rift CV1; Index; Quest; Quest 2