Corporate America loves protectionism. Why do you think Online Poker got banned. None of them were American companies. All the politicains were only too pleased to go along with it.
If you ban foreigners from providing MMO's to American's that leaves the market wide open to American companies only.
I'm sorry misfit, but I really don't know what you are getting at with all this "you don't own me stuff". I don't want to. What's your point?
Online Poker is alive and well though regulated by several governments because of the gambling aspect. Just like in real life gambling is regulated because of the issues that come about from it like people losing their kid's entire college savings on a bad poker beat or bad roll of dice.
You can't compare Online Poker to MMO Gold Sellers. They are not the even remotely the same in nature.
The American government had the capability to ban online poker companies in America, just as they could ban any other foreign companies they wished. MMO, goldseller or otherwise.
Corporate America weren't able to prevent this, in fact they didn't even attempt to. Politicians weren't able to prevent this, I don't suppose they even attempted to either.
All internet transactions made with American people are taxable by the U.S. government. Be they with foreign or domestic companies, the U.S. government , should they go ahead with their plans to tax in-game revenues would have absolutely no problem implimenting this.
Okay create a account on WoW and get banned. Then demand that Blizzard hand over "your" game data. Put your money where your mouth is right now. You own the cd's but you don't own the account or game data that was created on Blizzard's servers. Sorry but you will never stand a chance in court.
Put your money where your mouth is. Go and shut down a gold seller. See how far you get.
This is very childish. Why would I want to ? I don't really care if people buy virtual gold. As I said they have a right to sell their time to players in exchange for freely offering the virtual items they harvested but for which they do not own in game. Just as Blizzard has the right to ban accounts for life and the right to delete gold or items in game on your account for whatever reason they might come up with to do so.
As for standing a chance in court. It's already happened. So far there is a 100% track record of this standing up in court.
Really? Provide a link to a specific case dealing with the selling of virtual gold in a MMO game?
They don't have the right to delete your items. If you were inclined you could successfully sue them. It wouldn't be the first time.
As for being childish, I'm forced to reply "you started it".
Okay create a account on WoW and get banned. Then demand that Blizzard hand over "your" game data. Put your money where your mouth is right now. You own the cd's but you don't own the account or game data that was created on Blizzard's servers. Sorry but you will never stand a chance in court.
Put your money where your mouth is. Go and shut down a gold seller. See how far you get.
This is very childish. Why would I want to ? I don't really care if people buy virtual gold. As I said they have a right to sell their time to players in exchange for freely offering the virtual items they harvested but for which they do not own in game. Just as Blizzard has the right to ban accounts for life and the right to delete gold or items in game on your account for whatever reason they might come up with to do so.
As for standing a chance in court. It's already happened. So far there is a 100% track record of this standing up in court.
Really? Provide a link to a specific case dealing with the selling of virtual gold in a MMO game?
They don't have the right to delete your items. If you were inclined you could successfully sue them. It wouldn't be the first time. As for being childish, I'm forced to reply "you started it".
You a provided a link to nowhere. I hope you have a real link and that it relates to the US court system and a ruling handed down in our US court system.
P.S. I found a better link. To bad this ain't freaking China as I stated earlier! What happens in China in terms of MMO's has zero impact in the US.
The link refers to a Chinese court (they have MMO's there too) and is to my knowledge the first and only case to judge on virtual property. It made legal history.
If you are able to provide me with an instance of this from the American legal system I would be very intrested to read it. Not being American of course, I would prefer a British one. Who cares about the U.S. after all?
Given that Blizzard, an American company, has 5 million customers in China, what happens in China with regards to MMO's has a very large relevance in the U.S. The markets are very closely related, hence it's reporting in the U.S. media.
I doubt very much of course, that you will be able to bring any court case supporting your opinion to the table at all.
For American law you might be intrested in looking at the cases of Novell Inc. vs CPU Distribution Corp, in which the court rules that buying a software counts as sale not a lisence. It's purchase contractually provides ownership of all and parts thereof and specifically covers the right to sell your software and any part thereof under the First Sale Doctrine. See also Softman Vs Adobe.
The link refers to a Chinese court (they have MMO's there too) and is to my knowledge the first and only case to judge on virtual property. It made legal history. If you are able to provide me with an instance of this from the American legal system I would be very intrested to read it. Not being American of course, I would prefer a British one. Who cares about the U.S. after all? Given that Blizzard, an American company, has 5 million customers in China, what happens in China with regards to MMO's has a very large relevance in the U.S. The markets are very closely related, hence it's reporting in the U.S. media.
I doubt very much of course, that you will be able to bring any court case supporting your opinion to the table at all.
For American law you might be intrested in looking at the cases of Novell Inc. vs CPU Distribution Corp, in which the court rules that buying a software counts as sale not a lisence. It's purchase contractually provides ownership of all and parts thereof and specifically covers the right to sell your software and any part thereof under the First Sale Doctrine. See also Softman Vs Adobe.
That specific case had to do with the resale of bundled software. The case itself dealt with the ability to resell unopened software found with certain computers and the right to transfer over the EULA/TOS to a new potential buyer. It was ruled over in favor of the defendant "CPU Distribution Corp" in the 9th US Circuit court system in California. There are also several other cases that deal with the same issues in other US Circuit courts systems and local state court systems that have ruled in the opposite direction.
In fact there are cases like Blizzards own court case Blizzard vs BNETD ( Which has yet to be ruled on by the US Supreme Court ) and others found on the 7th and 8th US Court Circuit system of jurisdiction that reaffirm the idea of the "licensed-and-not-sold" argument. Blizzard's case exactly points to the fact that users do not have a right modify or manipulate software that bares their own copyright and IP because it violates the DMCA. They make the case that their software is "licensed-and-not-sold" and thus backward engineering their software is an illegal act as well as further establishing and paving the way for the issue of ownership of in game generated data.
The collective sum of all these rulings that were filed in the US 9th Circuit court system still do not allow ownership of the actual game software code itself or the IP of said software. They simply allow the user to resell the original packaged physical software storage mediums and allow former owners of said software the ability to transfer over the EULA/TOS that resides on these physical storage mediums ( like a cd-rom or dvd ) to other persons.
Again these rulings do not circumvent the copyright and IP systems in the US and neither do they allow users ownership of data which is generated on Blizzard's own servers or any other MMO servers. The data created on Blizzards servers using Blizzards software belongs to Blizzard. You can though freely sell your WoW dvds or cd-roms and transfer the EULA/TOS to another person but you do not own the game or the game data on Blizzard's servers.
You cannot backward engineer purchased software in order to make something like a free MMO private server. Neither are you given the right to claim ownership of said software code or in game IP that resides on your cd-rom as your own or data on a MMO server. This is why Blizzard can delete in game gold, items or even game accounts from their servers with no worries.
Yet all of this does not have anything to do with the act of a person selling their time to farm for in game virtual gold in exchange for money. As of yet there have been no court cases filed in the US dealing with this topic let alone the ownership of virtual items that reside on a separate physical server that is not owned or maintained by the client user.
Here's a link with more info on the subject of "First Sale Doctrine".
All I'm seeing is that people have a l ot less understand of legal issues than they think they do.......
I've worked in law for five years and I suppose for anyone in a particular profession its always interesting to see how people discuss the fields you work in. This thread isn't accomplishing anything other than watching individuals posture and preen.
The Old Timers Guild Laid back, not so serious, no drama. All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
Wouldn't it be a whole lot easier if Blizzard have undercover GMs actually buy gold from said dealers at the minimal ammount say $10.00 (ten bucks) have the entire proceedings recorded, then via internal accounts audit trace the account to the credit card used and then blanket ban every account that is linked to that card.
As a service company, they have the right to refuse service based on the grounds that the user violated the EULA.
Any legal type here see any problem with his?
If no, why can't they do this in the first place?
Oh, wait, they still want the monthly subscription from said "gold dealers".
I personally think that the letter is just fluff and nothing will come out of it. Its a PR move that gives the "general" less cynical subscribers something to cheer at, paints an image of Blizzard actually trying to do something but in the end, both the in game RMT (real money traders) and Blizzard wins.
I didn't want to get sucked into an intellectual properties legalize fest so I will simply say this, if Blizzard wants to file a law suit they can. If they are filing a law suit then most likely their legal department has already found grounds for the suit. Anything beyond that is pure speculation as far as their legal grounds for filing. Its always been my contention that if you wanted to stop gold farmer or those that sell virtual property you have to go after the vendors and not the sweat shop players in game.
I'll certainly keep an eye on this suit, if it does go to court we may see some interesting laws passed on virtual property. On a side note some of these cases are settled out of court, but again, I don't want to speculate.
The Old Timers Guild Laid back, not so serious, no drama. All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
Corporate America loves protectionism. Why do you think Online Poker got banned. None of them were American companies. All the politicains were only too pleased to go along with it.
If you ban foreigners from providing MMO's to American's that leaves the market wide open to American companies only.
I'm sorry misfit, but I really don't know what you are getting at with all this "you don't own me stuff". I don't want to. What's your point?
Online Poker is alive and well though regulated by several governments because of the gambling aspect. Just like in real life gambling is regulated because of the issues that come about from it like people losing their kid's entire college savings on a bad poker beat or bad roll of dice.
You can't compare Online Poker to MMO Gold Sellers. They are not the even remotely the same in nature.
The American government had the capability to ban online poker companies in America, just as they could ban any other foreign companies they wished. MMO, goldseller or otherwise.
Corporate America weren't able to prevent this, in fact they didn't even attempt to. Politicians weren't able to prevent this, I don't suppose they even attempted to either.
All internet transactions made with American people are taxable by the U.S. government. Be they with foreign or domestic companies, the U.S. government , should they go ahead with their plans to tax in-game revenues would have absolutely no problem implimenting this.
Online gambling was banned in america before the internet ever existed. The only reason it took so many years for a crackdown was that it wasn't perceived as a problem. No issue beit online gambling or gold selling has to do with protectionism.
Baff, it was actually corporate america that got the government to prosecute online gambling. It was the large casino's in america that perceived it as a threat to their tourism business that got the government enforce the law. The law actually was put in place to eliminate crimes involving horse racing and the mafia back in the 1970's.
American's only have to pay tax if the transaction occurs with a company based in the same state as the consumer unless specifically indicated by state law. I think there's 2 states that require tax on all transactions regardless of where the business is located.
Federal income tax is different and requires all income no matter what the source be reported and taxed. It's also not exactly legal under the constitution as it was never fully ratified by the US Congress. However evading federal income tax will land you in jail regardless of whether it was ratified or not.. i still can't figure that one out.
I would have thought that with the mounts costing close on to 5000 gold that the prices would have went down alot. But they didn't seem to at all. So since they spam me about gold almost daily this does get a big thumbs up from me.
If Blizzard wins the lawsuit it would set a precedent of game companies suing the crap out of these game spammers and gold seller sites. And as for people saying that they'll simply move their business elsewhere like to another country. It's not as simple as that. To run out of reach of U.S. law enforcement you have to move to a non-extradition treaty country and become a fugitive in the U.S. if there is an outstanding warrant of arrest (there are a few such countries like cuba, venezuela, and some central american or asian countries), then there's the issue of international law and for serious offenses the U.S. government can freeze all assets of the criminal pending criminal investigation as well as asking it's allies to freeze the offender's assets in their countries too. It's not as easy as you think to run away from U.S. government law enforcement's reach.
Alright, while I may not be very active on these boards, I caught this topic and found it to be very interesting. As a pre-law student at Rutgers (go RU!) I think I may have some insight into this topic. First of all, I would like to begin by stating that I am (hopefully) as non-biased as possible in this post. I quite honestly could care less if people buy gold or not, that's their own ordeal.
However, on the topic of property rights, Blizzard does own the world they have created. They have complete control over their servers, environment, including all items in said server. And Blizzard also has rights to suspend/delete your account, these rights come in the terms and agreements. In order to play you must be willing to allow blizzard to take control over your account for any reason they deem fit.
Now, on the argument that you're paying for the time spent collecting the gold/items, consider this analogy as corny as it may be. Suppose, in my backyard and on my property I have an apple tree (yes, its corny, but bear with me.) And lets say someone comes, and takes some of those apples, and sells them. Saying that he's not selling the apple's per se, he's just selling the time it took for him to go behind my house to pick the apples. Excluding the fact that he's stealing from my property (that’s irrelevant for this case) by law, he would still be found guilty of selling items that are not his. Since the apples are on my property, they are, in fact, my apples. I gave no right to the other guy to sell the apples. Therefore, by law, he would be guilty of selling items that are not his.
As you may have guessed, this apple case ties in with the selling of in-game gold. The gold is found in and part of Blizzard's server. Since Blizzard owns the server, it in fact, owns the items within it's server, gold included. Therefore, such as the person coming to my lawn to pick the apples and saying that he's selling his time of picking the apples would be guilty, so are those who attain and sell gold.
Therefore, yes, Blizzard does have a case ( a pretty strong one in my opinion) against those who sell in-game gold and items. Now, even though I've probably pissed a lot of people off right now, I ask everyone to please consider my points before firing off at me. If you find problems, or faults in my logic, please post, I'll be happy to consider and reply to your points.
Alright, while I may not be very active on these boards, I caught this topic and found it to be very interesting. As a pre-law student at Rutgers (go RU!) I think I may have some insight into this topic. First of all, I would like to begin by stating that I am (hopefully) as non-biased as possible in this post. I quite honestly could care less if people buy gold or not, that's their own ordeal. However, on the topic of property rights, Blizzard does own the world they have created. They have complete control over their servers, environment, including all items in said server. And Blizzard also has rights to suspend/delete your account, these rights come in the terms and agreements. In order to play you must be willing to allow blizzard to take control over your account for any reason they deem fit. Now, on the argument that you're paying for the time spent collecting the gold/items, consider this analogy as corny as it may be. Suppose, in my backyard and on my property I have an apple tree (yes, its corny, but bear with me.) And lets say someone comes, and takes some of those apples, and sells them. Saying that he's not selling the apple's per se, he's just selling the time it took for him to go behind my house to pick the apples. Excluding the fact that he's stealing from my property (that’s irrelevant for this case) by law, he would still be found guilty of selling items that are not his. Since the apples are on my property, they are, in fact, my apples. I gave no right to the other guy to sell the apples. Therefore, by law, he would be guilty of selling items that are not his. As you may have guessed, this apple case ties in with the selling of in-game gold. The gold is found in and part of Blizzard's server. Since Blizzard owns the server, it in fact, owns the items within it's server, gold included. Therefore, such as the person coming to my lawn to pick the apples and saying that he's selling his time of picking the apples would be guilty, so are those who attain and sell gold. Therefore, yes, Blizzard does have a case ( a pretty strong one in my opinion) against those who sell in-game gold and items. Now, even though I've probably pissed a lot of people off right now, I ask everyone to please consider my points before firing off at me. If you find problems, or faults in my logic, please post, I'll be happy to consider and reply to your points. Thanks For Reading!
Your analogy is a little flawed. No one is taking the gold off of World of Warcraft and selling it IRL. A better analogy would perhaps be walking into an Arcade (World of Warcraft) and you pay to play games that award you tokens (gold) which you can cash in for prizes(items, mounts, etc…). Now say someone won a lot of tokens and instead of purchasing the available prizes he decides to sell them to other players who don't want to spend the time winning the tokens(Gold Sellers!). Now I have no idea if that is illegal or not, but to me my example seems like a better way to view the gold selling problem.
well im my opion as i stated before all of whats going to happen if blizzard loses is this ... you will lose control of everything in game and here is what i mean....
Gold --- cannot be traded or given to any active player at all period.... can only be given to a non player npc or broker to buy item off auction etc..... and the market will be monitored by blizzard themselves so no one can charge outragious prices to sell such gold to another... in another words blizzard can cut off any gold seller easily and thats what will happen if they lose!
if you dont get that then there is no help for ya cause that what will happen across all mmo's if blizzard loses!
Originally posted by liddokun If Blizzard wins the lawsuit it would set a precedent of game companies suing the crap out of these game spammers and gold seller sites. And as for people saying that they'll simply move their business elsewhere like to another country. It's not as simple as that. To run out of reach of U.S. law enforcement you have to move to a non-extradition treaty country and become a fugitive in the U.S. if there is an outstanding warrant of arrest (there are a few such countries like cuba, venezuela, and some central american or asian countries), then there's the issue of international law and for serious offenses the U.S. government can freeze all assets of the criminal pending criminal investigation as well as asking it's allies to freeze the offender's assets in their countries too. It's not as easy as you think to run away from U.S. government law enforcement's reach.
Don't mistake a civil lawsuit for a criminal one. There is no law that says what companies like IGE do is illegal. Also this "cease and decease" order is about spamming and harassment of players in game with unwanted ads on a private network.
You seem to be stretching the facts when you think that somehow this would criminalize companies like IGE or their web based advertisement. In order for that to happen there would need to be a law passed that explicitly prohibits the sale of time spent for playing a game in exchange for cash that results in the transfer of virtual items a MMO.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Originally posted by o-co Alright, while I may not be very active on these boards, I caught this topic and found it to be very interesting. As a pre-law student at Rutgers (go RU!) I think I may have some insight into this topic. First of all, I would like to begin by stating that I am (hopefully) as non-biased as possible in this post. I quite honestly could care less if people buy gold or not, that's their own ordeal. However, on the topic of property rights, Blizzard does own the world they have created. They have complete control over their servers, environment, including all items in said server. And Blizzard also has rights to suspend/delete your account, these rights come in the terms and agreements. In order to play you must be willing to allow blizzard to take control over your account for any reason they deem fit. Now, on the argument that you're paying for the time spent collecting the gold/items, consider this analogy as corny as it may be. Suppose, in my backyard and on my property I have an apple tree (yes, its corny, but bear with me.) And lets say someone comes, and takes some of those apples, and sells them. Saying that he's not selling the apple's per se, he's just selling the time it took for him to go behind my house to pick the apples. Excluding the fact that he's stealing from my property (thats irrelevant for this case) by law, he would still be found guilty of selling items that are not his. Since the apples are on my property, they are, in fact, my apples. I gave no right to the other guy to sell the apples. Therefore, by law, he would be guilty of selling items that are not his. As you may have guessed, this apple case ties in with the selling of in-game gold. The gold is found in and part of Blizzard's server. Since Blizzard owns the server, it in fact, owns the items within it's server, gold included. Therefore, such as the person coming to my lawn to pick the apples and saying that he's selling his time of picking the apples would be guilty, so are those who attain and sell gold. Therefore, yes, Blizzard does have a case ( a pretty strong one in my opinion) against those who sell in-game gold and items. Now, even though I've probably pissed a lot of people off right now, I ask everyone to please consider my points before firing off at me. If you find problems, or faults in my logic, please post, I'll be happy to consider and reply to your points. Thanks For Reading!
You're analogy is very flawed. First of all these companies are paying to get onto MMO's. Your analogy assumes that the person going into your backyard went in there without your consent or without compensating you. Of course the reality of what is happening in MMO's is the direct opposite of what you just mentioned. Companies like IGE are paying for and opening accounts legally in MMO's. They aren't exactly forcing their way into these games as you detailed in your example. Thus your conclusion is false because your analogy is flawed and untrue.
Trust me when I say this right now. Smarter minds then you and I as well as more able individuals within the legal armies of companies like SOE and Blizzard have reviewed this situation over and over again. The only thing that Blizzard has gotten out of this situation that they can pin on "gold sellers" is the spam issue. Which is a valid issue but not the crux of the problem which they know they can't attack in court without running into a host of other issues and a sound defense that can lead to the opening of the flood gates if they lose their case.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Alright, while I may not be very active on these boards, I caught this topic and found it to be very interesting. As a pre-law student at Rutgers (go RU!) I think I may have some insight into this topic. First of all, I would like to begin by stating that I am (hopefully) as non-biased as possible in this post. I quite honestly could care less if people buy gold or not, that's their own ordeal.
However, on the topic of property rights, Blizzard does own the world they have created. They have complete control over their servers, environment, including all items in said server. And Blizzard also has rights to suspend/delete your account, these rights come in the terms and agreements. In order to play you must be willing to allow blizzard to take control over your account for any reason they deem fit.
Now, on the argument that you're paying for the time spent collecting the gold/items, consider this analogy as corny as it may be. Suppose, in my backyard and on my property I have an apple tree (yes, its corny, but bear with me.) And lets say someone comes, and takes some of those apples, and sells them. Saying that he's not selling the apple's per se, he's just selling the time it took for him to go behind my house to pick the apples. Excluding the fact that he's stealing from my property (that’s irrelevant for this case) by law, he would still be found guilty of selling items that are not his. Since the apples are on my property, they are, in fact, my apples. I gave no right to the other guy to sell the apples. Therefore, by law, he would be guilty of selling items that are not his.
As you may have guessed, this apple case ties in with the selling of in-game gold. The gold is found in and part of Blizzard's server. Since Blizzard owns the server, it in fact, owns the items within it's server, gold included. Therefore, such as the person coming to my lawn to pick the apples and saying that he's selling his time of picking the apples would be guilty, so are those who attain and sell gold.
Therefore, yes, Blizzard does have a case ( a pretty strong one in my opinion) against those who sell in-game gold and items. Now, even though I've probably pissed a lot of people off right now, I ask everyone to please consider my points before firing off at me. If you find problems, or faults in my logic, please post, I'll be happy to consider and reply to your points.
Thanks For Reading!
You're analogy is very flawed. First of all these companies are paying to get onto MMO's. Your analogy assumes that the person going into your backyard went in there without your consent or without compensating you. Of course the reality of what is happening in MMO's is the direct opposite of what you just mentioned. Companies like IGE are paying for and opening accounts legally in MMO's. They aren't exactly forcing their way into these games as you detailed in your example. Thus your conclusion is false because your analogy is flawed and untrue.
Trust me when I say this that smarter minds and more able individuals within the legal armies of companies like SOE and Blizzard have reviewed this situation over and over again. The only thing that they've gotten out of it that they can pin on "gold sellers" is the spam issue which is a valid issue but not the crux of the problem which they know they can't attack in court without running into a host of other issues and sound defense that can lead to the opening of the flood gates if they lose.
Now lets tell who is really flawed which is yours..... Now for a comapny to purposly notice the work on pupose to buy a account to get and sell of gold and say its for there time is wrong......... Meaning the companies are on purpose buying accounts to get gold and sell it this crap for time is wrong and flawed like you say...... They are not there to play the game there are there to make money ... if i was a judge i would rule in favor of blizzard cause the proof is in the pudding my firend...... name one gold selling company playing the character out as intended ther isnt one ... therefor they are there to make money on another product plain in simple there is non of this its my time crap !!!!!!!!!
Originally posted by o-co Alright, while I may not be very active on these boards, I caught this topic and found it to be very interesting. As a pre-law student at Rutgers (go RU!) I think I may have some insight into this topic. First of all, I would like to begin by stating that I am (hopefully) as non-biased as possible in this post. I quite honestly could care less if people buy gold or not, that's their own ordeal. However, on the topic of property rights, Blizzard does own the world they have created. They have complete control over their servers, environment, including all items in said server. And Blizzard also has rights to suspend/delete your account, these rights come in the terms and agreements. In order to play you must be willing to allow blizzard to take control over your account for any reason they deem fit. Now, on the argument that you're paying for the time spent collecting the gold/items, consider this analogy as corny as it may be. Suppose, in my backyard and on my property I have an apple tree (yes, its corny, but bear with me.) And lets say someone comes, and takes some of those apples, and sells them. Saying that he's not selling the apple's per se, he's just selling the time it took for him to go behind my house to pick the apples. Excluding the fact that he's stealing from my property (thats irrelevant for this case) by law, he would still be found guilty of selling items that are not his. Since the apples are on my property, they are, in fact, my apples. I gave no right to the other guy to sell the apples. Therefore, by law, he would be guilty of selling items that are not his. As you may have guessed, this apple case ties in with the selling of in-game gold. The gold is found in and part of Blizzard's server. Since Blizzard owns the server, it in fact, owns the items within it's server, gold included. Therefore, such as the person coming to my lawn to pick the apples and saying that he's selling his time of picking the apples would be guilty, so are those who attain and sell gold. Therefore, yes, Blizzard does have a case ( a pretty strong one in my opinion) against those who sell in-game gold and items. Now, even though I've probably pissed a lot of people off right now, I ask everyone to please consider my points before firing off at me. If you find problems, or faults in my logic, please post, I'll be happy to consider and reply to your points. Thanks For Reading!
You're analogy is very flawed. First of all these companies are paying to get onto MMO's. Your analogy assumes that the person going into your backyard went in there without your consent or without compensating you. Of course the reality of what is happening in MMO's is the direct opposite of what you just mentioned. Companies like IGE are paying for and opening accounts legally in MMO's. They aren't exactly forcing their way into these games as you detailed in your example. Thus your conclusion is false because your analogy is flawed and untrue. Trust me when I say this that smarter minds and more able individuals within the legal armies of companies like SOE and Blizzard have reviewed this situation over and over again. The only thing that they've gotten out of it that they can pin on "gold sellers" is the spam issue which is a valid issue but not the crux of the problem which they know they can't attack in court without running into a host of other issues and sound defense that can lead to the opening of the flood gates if they lose.
Now lets tell who is really flawed which is yours..... Now for a comapny to purposly notice the work on pupose to buy a account to get and sell of gold and say its for there time is wrong......... Meaning the companies are on purpose buying accounts to get gold and sell it this crap for time is wrong and flawed like you say...... They are not there to play the game there are there to make money ... if i was a judge i would rule in favor of blizzard cause the proof is in the pudding my firend...... name one gold selling company playing the character out as intended ther isnt one ... therefor they are there to make money on another product plain in simple there is non of this its my time crap !!!!!!!!!
Where is the law that states that they cannot purchase mulitple accounts? Please provide me with a link to the law in the US civil or criminal code of laws.
Where is the law that states that they cannot sell their time which they've spent harvesting virtual items in exchange for real world money. Which in turn results in them freely handing over what they have farmed ?
Or better yet the law that states that you must play a MMO for entertainment purposes only?
There are no laws. Again more able minds then yours have looked at the problem. It's not as easy or as simple as you think it might be because if it was Blizzard if not SOE would of taken a lot more bolder and harsher measures already.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
I find myself torn between the arguements here..........each makes good cases,but I believe that in the absolelute ent Blizzard finds themself in the winning zone, because either way, they CREATED the game, and should be able to govern the use of their software is made.
But at the same time, I believe that if RIGHT laws are kept the same, in the future, everyone will have to pay royalty fees to SOMEONE for making profit with a creation of someone else's....
This is no doubt a huge political battle ground SOMETIME in the future......
well i shall reply go to any and i say any gold selling site and show me anywhere it says that they are only selling time and not any one item from any said server of any company show me one...... and when they list it on thier site do they not list it like this...
50 gold = $7.95
100 gold = 14.95
(i see nothing of time , if it was for time it would look like)
50 min = $7.95
100 min = 14.95
it clearly show its not time but gold they are selling its on thier sites if you show it as such thats what you are doing soory but they will lose and i hope they all get shafted once blizzard wins the case others will jump in like soe etc...
sorry judges are not stupid and know the laws if it looks like gold selling like above it is says nothing of time sorry!
Originally posted by baphometslay I find myself torn between the arguements here..........each makes good cases,but I believe that in the absolelute ent Blizzard finds themself in the winning zone, because either way, they CREATED the game, and should be able to govern the use of their software is made. But at the same time, I believe that if RIGHT laws are kept the same, in the future, everyone will have to pay royalty fees to SOMEONE for making profit with a creation of someone else's....This is no doubt a huge political battle ground SOMETIME in the future......
Problem is that they do govern the game by banning accounts and deleting and tracking gold/items. As for it becoming a huge political battle I seriously doubt it. In the end it's just a game and the vast majority of US tax payers really don't give a rats arse about a game nerds play.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Oh trust me, I know. I've had a WoW account banned myself for ordering 200 gold.....
I dont have time to play like other people, I'm in college year round.....it just cripples me too much to keep up with others......unless of course I want to screw my grades.....
this is an important topic, that has several strong points on each side....
I dont agree with spamming in-game, because honestly it annoys the hell out of me too. I don't buy gold anymore....
Comments
Online Poker is alive and well though regulated by several governments because of the gambling aspect. Just like in real life gambling is regulated because of the issues that come about from it like people losing their kid's entire college savings on a bad poker beat or bad roll of dice.
You can't compare Online Poker to MMO Gold Sellers. They are not the even remotely the same in nature.
The American government had the capability to ban online poker companies in America, just as they could ban any other foreign companies they wished. MMO, goldseller or otherwise.
Corporate America weren't able to prevent this, in fact they didn't even attempt to. Politicians weren't able to prevent this, I don't suppose they even attempted to either.
All internet transactions made with American people are taxable by the U.S. government. Be they with foreign or domestic companies, the U.S. government , should they go ahead with their plans to tax in-game revenues would have absolutely no problem implimenting this.
This is very childish. Why would I want to ? I don't really care if people buy virtual gold. As I said they have a right to sell their time to players in exchange for freely offering the virtual items they harvested but for which they do not own in game. Just as Blizzard has the right to ban accounts for life and the right to delete gold or items in game on your account for whatever reason they might come up with to do so.
Really? Provide a link to a specific case dealing with the selling of virtual gold in a MMO game?
They don't have the right to delete your items. If you were inclined you could successfully sue them. It wouldn't be the first time.
As for being childish, I'm forced to reply "you started it".
Here's your link.
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn4510
"The court ruled that the games firm must return Hongchen's virtual belongings".
You a provided a link to nowhere. I hope you have a real link and that it relates to the US court system and a ruling handed down in our US court system.
P.S. I found a better link. To bad this ain't freaking China as I stated earlier! What happens in China in terms of MMO's has zero impact in the US.
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1000000189,39118804,00.htm
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Game(s) I Am Currently Playing:
GW2 (+LoL and BF3)
Sorry try it again.
The link refers to a Chinese court (they have MMO's there too) and is to my knowledge the first and only case to judge on virtual property. It made legal history.
If you are able to provide me with an instance of this from the American legal system I would be very intrested to read it. Not being American of course, I would prefer a British one. Who cares about the U.S. after all?
Given that Blizzard, an American company, has 5 million customers in China, what happens in China with regards to MMO's has a very large relevance in the U.S. The markets are very closely related, hence it's reporting in the U.S. media.
I doubt very much of course, that you will be able to bring any court case supporting your opinion to the table at all.
For American law you might be intrested in looking at the cases of Novell Inc. vs CPU Distribution Corp, in which the court rules that buying a software counts as sale not a lisence. It's purchase contractually provides ownership of all and parts thereof and specifically covers the right to sell your software and any part thereof under the First Sale Doctrine. See also Softman Vs Adobe.
That specific case had to do with the resale of bundled software. The case itself dealt with the ability to resell unopened software found with certain computers and the right to transfer over the EULA/TOS to a new potential buyer. It was ruled over in favor of the defendant "CPU Distribution Corp" in the 9th US Circuit court system in California. There are also several other cases that deal with the same issues in other US Circuit courts systems and local state court systems that have ruled in the opposite direction.
In fact there are cases like Blizzards own court case Blizzard vs BNETD ( Which has yet to be ruled on by the US Supreme Court ) and others found on the 7th and 8th US Court Circuit system of jurisdiction that reaffirm the idea of the "licensed-and-not-sold" argument. Blizzard's case exactly points to the fact that users do not have a right modify or manipulate software that bares their own copyright and IP because it violates the DMCA. They make the case that their software is "licensed-and-not-sold" and thus backward engineering their software is an illegal act as well as further establishing and paving the way for the issue of ownership of in game generated data.
The collective sum of all these rulings that were filed in the US 9th Circuit court system still do not allow ownership of the actual game software code itself or the IP of said software. They simply allow the user to resell the original packaged physical software storage mediums and allow former owners of said software the ability to transfer over the EULA/TOS that resides on these physical storage mediums ( like a cd-rom or dvd ) to other persons.
Again these rulings do not circumvent the copyright and IP systems in the US and neither do they allow users ownership of data which is generated on Blizzard's own servers or any other MMO servers. The data created on Blizzards servers using Blizzards software belongs to Blizzard. You can though freely sell your WoW dvds or cd-roms and transfer the EULA/TOS to another person but you do not own the game or the game data on Blizzard's servers.
You cannot backward engineer purchased software in order to make something like a free MMO private server. Neither are you given the right to claim ownership of said software code or in game IP that resides on your cd-rom as your own or data on a MMO server. This is why Blizzard can delete in game gold, items or even game accounts from their servers with no worries.
Yet all of this does not have anything to do with the act of a person selling their time to farm for in game virtual gold in exchange for money. As of yet there have been no court cases filed in the US dealing with this topic let alone the ownership of virtual items that reside on a separate physical server that is not owned or maintained by the client user.
Here's a link with more info on the subject of "First Sale Doctrine".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Game(s) I Am Currently Playing:
GW2 (+LoL and BF3)
The Old Timers Guild
Laid back, not so serious, no drama.
All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com
An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
Wouldn't it be a whole lot easier if Blizzard have undercover GMs actually buy gold from said dealers at the minimal ammount say $10.00 (ten bucks) have the entire proceedings recorded, then via internal accounts audit trace the account to the credit card used and then blanket ban every account that is linked to that card.
As a service company, they have the right to refuse service based on the grounds that the user violated the EULA.
Any legal type here see any problem with his?
If no, why can't they do this in the first place?
Oh, wait, they still want the monthly subscription from said "gold dealers".
I personally think that the letter is just fluff and nothing will come out of it. Its a PR move that gives the "general" less cynical subscribers something to cheer at, paints an image of Blizzard actually trying to do something but in the end, both the in game RMT (real money traders) and Blizzard wins.
I'll certainly keep an eye on this suit, if it does go to court we may see some interesting laws passed on virtual property. On a side note some of these cases are settled out of court, but again, I don't want to speculate.
The Old Timers Guild
Laid back, not so serious, no drama.
All about the fun!
www.oldtimersguild.com
An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it. - Jef Mallett
Online Poker is alive and well though regulated by several governments because of the gambling aspect. Just like in real life gambling is regulated because of the issues that come about from it like people losing their kid's entire college savings on a bad poker beat or bad roll of dice.
You can't compare Online Poker to MMO Gold Sellers. They are not the even remotely the same in nature.
The American government had the capability to ban online poker companies in America, just as they could ban any other foreign companies they wished. MMO, goldseller or otherwise.
Corporate America weren't able to prevent this, in fact they didn't even attempt to. Politicians weren't able to prevent this, I don't suppose they even attempted to either.
All internet transactions made with American people are taxable by the U.S. government. Be they with foreign or domestic companies, the U.S. government , should they go ahead with their plans to tax in-game revenues would have absolutely no problem implimenting this.
Online gambling was banned in america before the internet ever existed. The only reason it took so many years for a crackdown was that it wasn't perceived as a problem. No issue beit online gambling or gold selling has to do with protectionism.
Baff, it was actually corporate america that got the government to prosecute online gambling. It was the large casino's in america that perceived it as a threat to their tourism business that got the government enforce the law. The law actually was put in place to eliminate crimes involving horse racing and the mafia back in the 1970's.
American's only have to pay tax if the transaction occurs with a company based in the same state as the consumer unless specifically indicated by state law. I think there's 2 states that require tax on all transactions regardless of where the business is located.
Federal income tax is different and requires all income no matter what the source be reported and taxed. It's also not exactly legal under the constitution as it was never fully ratified by the US Congress. However evading federal income tax will land you in jail regardless of whether it was ratified or not.. i still can't figure that one out.
I would have thought that with the mounts costing close on to 5000 gold that the prices would have went down alot. But they didn't seem to at all. So since they spam me about gold almost daily this does get a big thumbs up from me.
Who
Alright, while I may not be very active on these boards, I caught this topic and found it to be very interesting. As a pre-law student at Rutgers (go RU!) I think I may have some insight into this topic. First of all, I would like to begin by stating that I am (hopefully) as non-biased as possible in this post. I quite honestly could care less if people buy gold or not, that's their own ordeal.
However, on the topic of property rights, Blizzard does own the world they have created. They have complete control over their servers, environment, including all items in said server. And Blizzard also has rights to suspend/delete your account, these rights come in the terms and agreements. In order to play you must be willing to allow blizzard to take control over your account for any reason they deem fit.
Now, on the argument that you're paying for the time spent collecting the gold/items, consider this analogy as corny as it may be. Suppose, in my backyard and on my property I have an apple tree (yes, its corny, but bear with me.) And lets say someone comes, and takes some of those apples, and sells them. Saying that he's not selling the apple's per se, he's just selling the time it took for him to go behind my house to pick the apples. Excluding the fact that he's stealing from my property (that’s irrelevant for this case) by law, he would still be found guilty of selling items that are not his. Since the apples are on my property, they are, in fact, my apples. I gave no right to the other guy to sell the apples. Therefore, by law, he would be guilty of selling items that are not his.
As you may have guessed, this apple case ties in with the selling of in-game gold. The gold is found in and part of Blizzard's server. Since Blizzard owns the server, it in fact, owns the items within it's server, gold included. Therefore, such as the person coming to my lawn to pick the apples and saying that he's selling his time of picking the apples would be guilty, so are those who attain and sell gold.
Therefore, yes, Blizzard does have a case ( a pretty strong one in my opinion) against those who sell in-game gold and items. Now, even though I've probably pissed a lot of people off right now, I ask everyone to please consider my points before firing off at me. If you find problems, or faults in my logic, please post, I'll be happy to consider and reply to your points.
Thanks For Reading!
Your analogy is a little flawed. No one is taking the gold off of World of Warcraft and selling it IRL. A better analogy would perhaps be walking into an Arcade (World of Warcraft) and you pay to play games that award you tokens (gold) which you can cash in for prizes(items, mounts, etc…). Now say someone won a lot of tokens and instead of purchasing the available prizes he decides to sell them to other players who don't want to spend the time winning the tokens(Gold Sellers!). Now I have no idea if that is illegal or not, but to me my example seems like a better way to view the gold selling problem.
well im my opion as i stated before all of whats going to happen if blizzard loses is this ... you will lose control of everything in game and here is what i mean....
Gold --- cannot be traded or given to any active player at all period.... can only be given to a non player npc or broker to buy item off auction etc..... and the market will be monitored by blizzard themselves so no one can charge outragious prices to sell such gold to another... in another words blizzard can cut off any gold seller easily and thats what will happen if they lose!
if you dont get that then there is no help for ya cause that what will happen across all mmo's if blizzard loses!
Don't mistake a civil lawsuit for a criminal one. There is no law that says what companies like IGE do is illegal. Also this "cease and decease" order is about spamming and harassment of players in game with unwanted ads on a private network.
You seem to be stretching the facts when you think that somehow this would criminalize companies like IGE or their web based advertisement. In order for that to happen there would need to be a law passed that explicitly prohibits the sale of time spent for playing a game in exchange for cash that results in the transfer of virtual items a MMO.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Game(s) I Am Currently Playing:
GW2 (+LoL and BF3)
You're analogy is very flawed. First of all these companies are paying to get onto MMO's. Your analogy assumes that the person going into your backyard went in there without your consent or without compensating you. Of course the reality of what is happening in MMO's is the direct opposite of what you just mentioned. Companies like IGE are paying for and opening accounts legally in MMO's. They aren't exactly forcing their way into these games as you detailed in your example. Thus your conclusion is false because your analogy is flawed and untrue.
Trust me when I say this right now. Smarter minds then you and I as well as more able individuals within the legal armies of companies like SOE and Blizzard have reviewed this situation over and over again. The only thing that Blizzard has gotten out of this situation that they can pin on "gold sellers" is the spam issue. Which is a valid issue but not the crux of the problem which they know they can't attack in court without running into a host of other issues and a sound defense that can lead to the opening of the flood gates if they lose their case.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Game(s) I Am Currently Playing:
GW2 (+LoL and BF3)
You're analogy is very flawed. First of all these companies are paying to get onto MMO's. Your analogy assumes that the person going into your backyard went in there without your consent or without compensating you. Of course the reality of what is happening in MMO's is the direct opposite of what you just mentioned. Companies like IGE are paying for and opening accounts legally in MMO's. They aren't exactly forcing their way into these games as you detailed in your example. Thus your conclusion is false because your analogy is flawed and untrue.
Trust me when I say this that smarter minds and more able individuals within the legal armies of companies like SOE and Blizzard have reviewed this situation over and over again. The only thing that they've gotten out of it that they can pin on "gold sellers" is the spam issue which is a valid issue but not the crux of the problem which they know they can't attack in court without running into a host of other issues and sound defense that can lead to the opening of the flood gates if they lose.
Now lets tell who is really flawed which is yours..... Now for a comapny to purposly notice the work on pupose to buy a account to get and sell of gold and say its for there time is wrong......... Meaning the companies are on purpose buying accounts to get gold and sell it this crap for time is wrong and flawed like you say...... They are not there to play the game there are there to make money ... if i was a judge i would rule in favor of blizzard cause the proof is in the pudding my firend...... name one gold selling company playing the character out as intended ther isnt one ... therefor they are there to make money on another product plain in simple there is non of this its my time crap !!!!!!!!!Where is the law that states that they cannot purchase mulitple accounts? Please provide me with a link to the law in the US civil or criminal code of laws.
Where is the law that states that they cannot sell their time which they've spent harvesting virtual items in exchange for real world money. Which in turn results in them freely handing over what they have farmed ?
Or better yet the law that states that you must play a MMO for entertainment purposes only?
There are no laws. Again more able minds then yours have looked at the problem. It's not as easy or as simple as you think it might be because if it was Blizzard if not SOE would of taken a lot more bolder and harsher measures already.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Game(s) I Am Currently Playing:
GW2 (+LoL and BF3)
But at the same time, I believe that if RIGHT laws are kept the same, in the future, everyone will have to pay royalty fees to SOMEONE for making profit with a creation of someone else's....
This is no doubt a huge political battle ground SOMETIME in the future......
well i shall reply go to any and i say any gold selling site and show me anywhere it says that they are only selling time and not any one item from any said server of any company show me one...... and when they list it on thier site do they not list it like this...
50 gold = $7.95
100 gold = 14.95
(i see nothing of time , if it was for time it would look like)
50 min = $7.95
100 min = 14.95
it clearly show its not time but gold they are selling its on thier sites if you show it as such thats what you are doing soory but they will lose and i hope they all get shafted once blizzard wins the case others will jump in like soe etc...
sorry judges are not stupid and know the laws if it looks like gold selling like above it is says nothing of time sorry!
Problem is that they do govern the game by banning accounts and deleting and tracking gold/items. As for it becoming a huge political battle I seriously doubt it. In the end it's just a game and the vast majority of US tax payers really don't give a rats arse about a game nerds play.
Games I've played/tried out:WAR, LOTRO, Tabula Rasa, AoC, EQ1, EQ2, WoW, Vangaurd, FFXI, D&DO, Lineage 2, Saga Of Ryzom, EvE Online, DAoC, Guild Wars,Star Wars Galaxies, Hell Gate London, Auto Assault, Grando Espada ( AKA SoTNW ), Archlord, CoV/H, Star Trek Online, APB, Champions Online, FFXIV, Rift Online, GW2.
Game(s) I Am Currently Playing:
GW2 (+LoL and BF3)
I dont have time to play like other people, I'm in college year round.....it just cripples me too much to keep up with others......unless of course I want to screw my grades.....
this is an important topic, that has several strong points on each side....
I dont agree with spamming in-game, because honestly it annoys the hell out of me too. I don't buy gold anymore....