Xbox LIVE User Sues Microsoft for $500 Billion Over His Contract

An Arkansas man has filed a motion earlier last week in Seattle as he tries to use the terms of his Xbox Live contract against Microsoft asking the Redmond company to pay him $500 billion after he tried to amend his Xbox Live contract with the company and was ignored when he asked for legal […]

An Arkansas man has filed a motion earlier last week in Seattle as he tries to use the terms of his Xbox Live contract against Microsoft asking the Redmond company to pay him $500 billion after he tried to amend his Xbox Live contract with the company and was ignored when he asked for legal arbitration, reports Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

In the motion, David Stebbins claims that on May 6 he sent a notice to Microsoft that he was "unilaterally amending the terms of service" of his Xbox Live contract. He also claimed that if Microsoft did not terminate his contract with him within 10 days, it would have to accept the new terms of service.

Stebbins claims that after Microsoft didn't terminate the Xbox Live contract he then invited the company to have legal talks to discuss the case which he claims involve the $500 billion in damages. Microsoft didn't respond in which case Stebbins claims he is the automatic winner of that massive amount of money.

According to the report, here is how it happened:

"As a user of Xbox Live, Microsoft's online network for the Xbox 360 gaming console, Stebbins entered into a contract with Microsoft. Since such a contract is binding on both Microsoft and an Xbox Live user, Stebbins decided to try something radical.

On May 6, he "submitted a notice" to Microsoft that he was "unilaterally amending the terms of service," and if Microsoft did not terminate his Xbox Live membership, such changes would take effect in 10 days. Microsoft did not terminate his membership, Stebbins says, so he argues Microsoft accepted the new contract through inaction.

As he points out, companies often employ the same strategy with consumers. For example, if a company notifies a customer of a change in service contract terms, it can be assumed that the customer agreed to the new terms by continuing to use the service, Stebbins argues.

So, after Microsoft "agreed" to the new contract, Stebbins says, on May 18 he invited the company to arbitrate a legal dispute in which he claimed $500 billion in damages. He says that he included in his notice a "forfeit victory clause," which stated that if Microsoft didn't respond within 24 hours, Stebbins would automatically win.

"As you probably guessed," Stebbins wrote in his motion, "the Defendants did not accept the invitation to arbitrate within 24 hours of receiving it. Therefore, I automatically won on May 19, 2011, per the forfeit victory clause."

He argues Microsoft now owes him $500 billion."

The report also claims that Stebbins has also filed lawsuits against a number of other businesses with similar terms. Many of those lawsuits have been dismissed by the courts. Yet Stebbins says he is not just sending out frivolous lawsuits for the heck of it, claiming, "My true goal is not to just harass, and it's not just to get rich. My true goal is to level the playing field."

Microsoft declined to comment for seattlepi.com.