As an avid Wow player for the past year I think I can fully understand this.
As Jafo said, #70 hit the nail right on the head.
These bots are a thorough discouragement to honest players.



Blizzard DOES incurr expense trying to fight these things. They are constantly having to develop measures to catch them.   and the bot creators are constantly trying to circumvent Blizzards newest counter measures. Proof positive of malicious behaviour.


WTF was the call for that?

I believe games should be about Exploring the Possibilities of the Universe, and not about Enforcement of Simulated Achievement

Games like EVE and World of Warcraft are supposed to be fun and involving, and they are to a certain extent...

...and not a place to live (Second Life?)

My point is that we purposely bog ourselves down in rules that don't need to apply in a simulated environment. If we lived as kings on the internet, we would tire of it very quickly, and realize there are things more important than status...

Hopefully, we would explore other aspects of humanity than simple accumulation...

What do you think?

Thats a fair call - wouldnt deny that.

I just hope, that for once, in resolving what was to say the least - undeniably an esoteric judgement - all concern approach this in the frame of mind "how do we fix this and move on sensibly", not "lets tear off his right arm and beat him with the soggy end".

Regards
Zy

For the matter of copyright infringment or whatever. I have been playing WOW for a while now. Blizzard does allow 3rd party programs, to AID in the gameplay. Simply Blizzard allows addons where the player (person) is still in control of their character and operating the computer (game). Anything other than that is considered a violation of the EULA. Anything that is considered an exploit or hack is in violation also. The rumored toolbox. which allows a character to edit their stats, essentially going up and one shotting a boss, well obviously that is a violation, as it conflicts with the original manner of gameplay mechanics. Within WOW, there is a fine line between hacks, cheats, exploits, and strategie.

 

I havent read what "Bot" this guy was using. But if he was using anything that effected any other character, group, or the economy of the server for personal gain, he will be dealt with by blizzard accordingly to the full extent of the law.

And so fo the copyright portion, from my ideas on it. If the person bought a WOW client, and purchased an account, blizzard grants them ACCESS to the server. Under the EULA, the user agrees when logging into the game the first time, that from then on, using their account they are by law to follow the EULA. Stating that they are not to upload any 3rd party programs that effect the world of warcraft environment, enhabitants, or economy. Along with many other things. If this person created/sold a "bot" that did so hes in violation of EULA, and EULA being a contract it is not a copyright issue. However, one could say that him selling this program IS copyright issue. As it is a transfering of data that withholds information that BLIZZARD has copyrighted.

For an analogy. Since CDs are a big issue with copyright. A person goes and buys a CD from a store. The person goes home and plays the CD. They dont like how the CD sounds, so they go on their computer and create a mix/remix of the CD and sell it. The person uses the same tempo and beat, but changes the lyrics. (weird al yankovich has been sued by almost every artist he has done parodies of. Coolio with Gangsters Paradise, weird al doing Amish Paradise)

Now its not the SAME thing. But copyright law doesnt state that it has to pertain to COPYING, just because its in the name. It also has to due with the alteration of the original media for resale. This of course has to do with copyright laws of media, as there are different types. So this guy selling a bot/hack with blizzard data on the program IS a copyright issue.

Thats a pretty good way of putting it. I agree totally re Legal Precedence, with the emphasis on "Legal". Waters get muddied when alledged precedence is used to refure Legal decisions, or the incorrect ones are used in the wrong Legal Argument. Its easy to draw parrallels, and think "thats nailed it", we all do that if we are honest with each other, but the reality is, unless our supposition is tested and agreed we go in circles.

Legal precedence is a complex thing, and one thing's for sure I am supremely glad I can just yack about it, not be held Accountable for it - "better men than I Gungda Din" as they say   

I just get the feeling that too many times out there in the real world, motivations are "rip off [whoever's] arm and beat [whoever] with the soggy end". Not pull together and fix the issue. I doubt that will change of course, human nature can be a strange thing at times ..... but you never know, hope springs eternal   

Regards
Zy

Who cares what some hilbilly judge in a lower court decides. If you guys knew how many of those rulings got overturned by someone higher up in the chain who actually knows how to interpret the text, you wouldent be so upset. Im pretty sure that this ruling will go down the drain once it work its way through the system. Copyright infringement my ass. This is a blatant misuse of the law if i ever saw it. But then sadly there are so many retards working with the law in the US that it can make anyone sick.

There is no way in hell that this is copyright infringement, anyone with half a brain can see that. Try to actually learn how the law works before thumping your chest and coming up with some half-brained-excuse-for-an-argument in support of such rubbish.

And by the way, a ruling by a lower court judge in no way sets a precedent of substantial value. At best it will be up to the next judge to deliberate the issue for himself. (this is not the supreme court guys but some hillbilly on a rampage)If every crazy decision made by a judge in the US were to stand as a precedent for futher rulings you would not believe the crazy things that would happen, thankfully it is not so.

And blizzard can kiss my ass, for bringing such a lame-ass-case to the courts when the court system has a desperate need for fewer stupid cases so they can actually focus on the important ones, like judging killers and rapists!

Lower court or not, he is still a federal judge, appointed by a president and confirmed by Congress. For some reason I feel his opinion is more relavant than yours.



Learn law before pontificating, please. ALL court rulings are precedents in their jurisdiction unless they are overturned by a higher court. The reason Supreme Court rulings are scrutinized so closely is that, by definition, they cannot be overturned by a higher court. They can be reversed by a later Supreme Court, although IIRC at least one member must be different for the case to be considered.



Federal courts are rarely involved in criminal cases at all - only if the crime happened on federal land. Most "criminal" cases they hear involve overturning a conviction due to rights violations, not directly deciding anyone's guilt. Intellectual property law (and commerse law in general) is one of the most important areas of federal law. Again, know what you're talking about before spewing nonsense.

Regretably you got that right   



Three great videos which should get anyone going - unless they are totally brain dead and a lost cause. Go to this page
Think About It" Videos
Watch (2/3 mins each, they are not long)
"Nature of Success" - end of page
"Power of Attitude" - middle of page
"Welcome the Rain" - Top of the page.

Mandatory for anyone who cant "keep the faith", in any event they got some catchy music and some incredible photos, cheer up anyone's day if nothing else   

Regards
Zy

For one thing, I hate having to search for a needle in a haystack, and so many news places simply aren't citing their sources, and it drives me CRAZY. Here are the proceedings, in case anybody is interested:

http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-azdce/case_no-2:2006cv02555/case_id-322017/



Yes. To RAM. That's how the judge ruled.

The judge ruled that the purchaser is a licensee, not an owner, and therefore any violation of the EULA and TOU (Terms of Use) is a violation of copyright.

Any tampering with code or copyrighted materials As per agreed by EULA, are actionable in a civil court. Uploading said materials for others to use falls under Illegal redistribution and should carry stiff fines. But should be restricted to Civil court And not fall under Criminal law.

If Michael used any portion of the game to create the bot then he was in full violation of Eula as well as copyright infringement .

If not then this should have fallen under breach of contract, and his access removed, and possibly sued for any damages incurred by the enforcement of the EULA, as well as for man hours spent fixing the damage done to the the game if any.

When you agree to a EULA you agree to all stipulations within the contract, that contract is legal and binding so if it states you will be held monetarily liable for any Expenses incurred during enforcement of the contract. You agreed to it.

Read your EULA's and TOS's carefully.

In this case I think they did it to not only remove him from the game but to make a point to other hackers /cheats. By taking him to court, they may have ended his career as a cheat developer. I imagine it will be hard to pay for net service as well as a PC etc,, when you are selling every thing off to pay off a huge law suit..


I say good for them. I for over a decade fought hackers and cheater/glitchers in games,it ruins the fun for all who Play games for skill with an even playing field as the rest of the players, when some bone head comes in with a hack and is invincible, or can run faster than the other player's or does 4x the amount of damage any one else can. etc..

IMO you have to be pretty bad off in the self esteem dept, to need to cheat at a game to feel better about your self. If being the best Cheat on the net is your life's biggest claim to fame. My condolences.

He was also found to be directly violating the EULA, as creating the program required reverse engineering the Warden system. And in about a dozen other ways.

thank u Jafo.
though I think neutering could be a little severe.
maybe they should make him keep this quiet, and have him release an 'updated' version of his program that automatically bans anyone who trys 2 us it. maybe they should add a fine clause in the EULA. then they can take their loses out of anyone dumb enough to use that program. talk about sweet revenge...

as Zydor in 73:

we're not trying to protect the hacker/modder in any way. as u pointed out, to wrongs don't make a right. that doesn't make the 'direction it moves in' any more correct. the basic and underling technicality the judge apparently used opens the door to the logic that any owner of any copyrighted work could sue any user of their software simply for having more of the program than is needed to run it in the random access memory, at least if I understand correctly.

I think we're all arguing about the same thing. does anyone disagree w/ this:

the hacker/modder was wrong, legally and ethically
the judges call was BS
and blizzard was well within it's rights to sue/ seek compensation

anyone got a problem w/ that