Chinese Justice

[Guest]

Thats exactly what I want.

I want rules against exploiting and cheating of course. But I think the player interaction should be left up to the players.

I think player behavior should be effected only by systemic changes to the game, no individual intervention(with the exception off of hacks and exploits as I said.)

[Jarulf]

According to the EULA or TOS (one of the two, or maybe both), Blizzard owns all of "your" in-game content.
[right][snapback]72712[/snapback][/right]

Well, in my opinion one first have to think about if there really is something to "own".

Next, we have to look at what we mean about this "own". Owning is typically about physical property. Someone might raise the copyright issue, but then, normal game data (actually data in general) is not something you get copyright on. In addition, for there to be a copyright violation, you need to, for example, copy something, which you never do.

Even if we DO assert that, for example, Blizzard "owns" something, what is the violation we have done? We have hardly removed their ownership (however we defined it) they still own it, it is still on their servers and so on.

This leads to another problem, the "selling" we normally talk about really doesn't take place in unless we actually own them, since ownership, regardless of who has it, doesn't change. At most we have a change of which character in the game holds the item/gold. However, we are certainly allowed to make such changes in the game, or there would be no possibility to change it to start with. If Blizzard owns it though, including the characters, they still own it afterwards, if they don't, no problem either.

So even though one use terms such as "own" and "sell", it really has nothing to do with what those concepts traditional means and hence one can't think as it would. What it boils down to is that it is a contractual thing (only, in my opinion, no copyright issue or similar) and weather it is possible to have the terms as they are and if it is valid for a third part (in this case Blizzard) to forbid two people to exchange money for whatever reason for doing something that in itself is perfectly allowed.

[savaughn]

Even if we DO assert that, for example, Blizzard "owns" something, what is the violation we have done? We have hardly removed their ownership (however we defined it) they still own it, it is still on their servers and so on.
[right][snapback]73004[/snapback][/right]

Your intellectual property arguments are really inaccurate (at least for US law) but here I agree with the essence of the argument. Blizzard can not pursue you legally for selling in game items. They similarly can't pursue you for much of anything outside of the DMCA (circumvent anything they can attempt to label a "security mechanism" - even to the point of posting protocol redaction and - and they have a case, though). They're pretty much just limited to terminating your account and keeping any money you've paid them. That, however, they can cheerfully do.

[liffuie]

actualy while working as a qa tester about a year ago, one of my co-workers told me this story.

he and his girlfriend at the time were living together and played EQ. He bought the initial game cd's (one for her one for him), but over time she took over payment of both accounts. couple years later, they broke up and she apperntly moved out. while doing this he said she changed the password on both their accounts and later sold the accounts on playerauctions. For some reason or another SOE wouldn't help him out, so he said he took her to civil court(maybe it was small claims court, I forget), and claimed he won, recieving a cash ruling, based on similar account prices on playerauctions listings.

always wondered if this was true, but does sort of hook up with whats being discussed.

one of the leads while working there was a korean native, when he last visisted home, he said the local police starting up a division for "gaming guild crimes". Thats not realy the right term, but from what he said, the local morpg culture in korea is one of local orginizations much like US unions or "gangs" in terms of orginazation. You join a gaming guild. That influences where you play at, as guilds usualy play together at the same internet cafe (sort of like a US club chapterhouse). The bigger guilds have chapers in mutiple cities etc.

THe problem he said is in mutiple instances, espiecily in Lineage guilds, one guild from city x will win in online battle/war over another guild based in city Y. THe city x guild will get together in RL, bus over to city x, and trash that guild in city x much like a gang beat down. I actualy believe wired magazine wrote an article about this a few months ago where being the recipitant of such a beating is a mark of pride for korean youths.

Then he said theres another smaller issue where "some" guilds, since their organized and full of young people, have subplanted local gangs and sidelined in drug selling, prositution (game player kiddies need there sex after a in game pk i gues), and other ilegal activites.

[Jarulf]

Your intellectual property arguments are really inaccurate (at least for US law) but here I agree with the essence of the argument.

I have not even spoken about "intellectual property". What do yo umean by that? I have mentioned copyright. That is hardly the same thing. For the record, I was also not talking specifically for US, but more in general. I still think it holds up in most cases though.

What part of it is different for USA? Are you saying one can get copyright on a sword with damag 12-15 in US? Can you get copyright for a diadem with ABS 14??? Can you get copyright on plain data in USA? If that is true, I am sure we are either soon out on having ANY sword in games, since there must by now (or pretty soon) be swords with data telling about any sort of damage you can make up.

If it is the other part, that copyright violation does not need to mean that you infringe on one of the (almost) exclusive rights a copyright holder has, I am a bit confused. Those rights are in USA as far as I have read, about the same as in most other countries, with some differences of course, but still, I don't see ANY act in the process of "selling" items or gold. You transfer an item inside the game, something that is OK, you give someone money, which is OK. What is the problem?

So perhpas you could tell what part I missed about US copyright law. And also explain to me, if copyright law DO make it illegal, why would they ever have to write special section for it in any contract they attempt to make with you????

[liffuie]

I sorta wonder, if blizards TOS clause that says they own all things in game wasn't there, just for the sake of argument.

would ingame items/accounts fit the definition of personal property? I know domain names, and e-mails have in certain circustames been ruled to be personal property sort of allowing for virtual property. Virtual goods in game, seem slike they could be argued to be personal property, as it has the most important characistic, value (sellable on player auctions).

[savaughn]

I have not even spoken about "intellectual property". What do yo umean by that? I have mentioned copyright. That is hardly the same thing.
[right][snapback]73131[/snapback][/right]

In US law, "intellectual property" law, or IP law is the section of law that deals with things that aren't tangible physical objects. This includes things like data theft, copyright, trademark, patent, etc. While copyright law specifically might not cover some of the things you've listed, other decisions that have been made in the IP space would. While, for example, it would might difficult to prove copyright or trademark over a particular piece of database data, the data is considered to be real tangible property in the US. Property is not limited to physical/tangible items.

Unfortunately, the way the courts have decided on IP is radically different between the various countries, which makes it difficult to generalize on international topics. In the US, at least, if Blizzard could prove a tangible loss due to an end user manipulating their data in violation of their service agreement, they have a real case they are likely to win in the US. That said, the fact remains that trading goods inside of a game is an intended feature and the financial transactions of users outside of the game are ancillary, so I heartedly agree with your main point. Blizz won't be able to prove tangible loss because of this activity and that limits their actions to pulling people's accounts.

Of course, since your only recourse if you feel your account is incorrectly pulled is to initiate a lawsuit (which will run tens of thousands of dollars) Blizz can pretty much do this with impunity short of a class action.

[savaughn]

I sorta wonder, if blizards TOS clause that says they own all things in game wasn't there, just for the sake of argument.

would ingame items/accounts fit the definition of personal property?  I know domain names, and e-mails have in certain circustames been ruled to be personal property sort of allowing for virtual property.  Virtual goods in game,  seem slike they could be argued to be personal property, as it has the most important characistic, value (sellable on player auctions).
[right][snapback]73136[/snapback][/right]

I don't think the stuff would qualify as property, per se, but they would be considered items that you have certain rights to and these rights could certainly be judged transferrable, so while they wouldn't be personal property it would be close enough that it might not make a difference.

Let me draw an analogy. If you rent a house, you don't own the house, but you have certain rights to live there as spelled out by your lease. As part of a legal settlement, the lease rights can be considered transferrable. So, for example, in the case of a divorcing couple leasing a house, the court can decide who gets to continue excercising the rights spelled out by the lease. In a similar vein, your EULA/TOS with Blizz gives you certain rights and the courts can certainly make decisions governing transferrance of these rights. I want to see the look on the face of the first judge who has to decide which side of a couple gets to keep their WoW account or, even better, what the financial value of the account is. Heh. :P

Of course, the courts could also decide to invalidate portions of the EULA/TOS as well, which would formally legitimize the selling of virtual goods.

[Jarulf]

In US law, "intellectual property" law, or IP law is the section of law that deals with things that aren't tangible physical objects.  This includes things like data theft, copyright, trademark, patent, etc.  While copyright law specifically might not cover some of the things you've listed, other decisions that have been made in the IP space would.  While, for example, it would might difficult to prove copyright or trademark over a particular piece of database data, the data is considered to be real tangible property in the US.  Property is not limited to physical/tangible items.

I know what people generally mean by "intellectual property", although when you want to speak about specifics, it becomes horrible saying IP, since it covers things that is quite different according to the law. It turns things confusing since people mix it up and assume that something applying for copyright applies to trademarks and so on. Hence it is horrible to argue based on what "IP law" says since one really doesn't know what you mean.

By the way, I have never heared anyone lumpin in "data theft" into the IP thing, but I assume it just goes to show the confusion. By the way, what do you mean by THAT (data theft) and would you care to enlighten us what specific laws you deal with here since none of the laws typically lumped into IP seems to be appropriate.

As for what is property, in that case (you claim it to be considered tangible property), we would not be dealing with IP laws at all, it would be normal property laws, right???

Of course, since your only recourse if you feel your account is incorrectly pulled is to initiate a lawsuit (which will run tens of thousands of dollars) Blizz can pretty much do this with impunity short of a class action.
[right][snapback]73189[/snapback][/right]

Depends on were you live you know, the law system works very different in some countries....