|
 by Roma Victor, Level 48
Last updated at May 12, 2008, 4:54 pm
|
|
New shoulders, the subject
Of casual fantasy.
He wants them, so badly,
Knows that he has to trade.
So the WoW forums are alive with Blizzard's latest crackdown on the arena PR pimps and their desperate buyers. As a confessed shoulders buyer (remember, I play a paladin that is barred by statute from shoulders in 2v2/3v3) I'd be lying if I didn't feel some trepidation logging on this morning. Courtesy of Blizzard's incredibly shortsighted and anti-competitive PR requirements for S3 gear, virtually every casual I know either buys PR or points now. So I fully expect[ed] an enormous amount of casual players to be hit with suspensions or bans.
So far, so good but who knows if this is just the start of the latest witchhunt. It's sad because in S2, no casual I knew even bought points and win trading was a nonissue (for casuals). Everyone knew they'd eventually get all the arena PVP gear in S2, even though it would take about 5-6 weeks per piece. Now that ratings are apparently here to stay, arena exploitation has exploded into a very profitable business (see my previous posts on the subject).
Without rehashing why gear discrepancy is a Very Bad Idea in a lolcompetitive esport, let me just offer my condolences to anyone hit by the ban wave. I believe as the virtual economy continues to grow these kinds of opaque, no due process type actions will eventually succumb to the same legal requirements that protect regular property. Let me explain.
The Legal Angle
The U.S. Internal Revenue Service and Congress is already beginning to look at a tax on the sale of virtual currency because it can be converted into real currency at a fairly stable exchange rate. The IRS could basically consider the earning of in game gold as gross income. In fact, a Forbes article (can't find link anymore) I read a few years ago ranked WoW's virtual economy as something like the 39th largest if compared against other countries: higher than Argentina in fact (something insane like that). It's a billion dollar+ business. And like other billion dollar businesses, it's subject to the same kind of oversight, regulation and legal protection we expect in other industries, real or virtual.
Now I'm sure someone will pipe up here and say "Roma, you moron, they can do whatever they want, it says so in the ToS!!!11!!!". Well, that's true to a point. But virtual property is one of the Wild West frontiers of intellectual property law right now- an area I fully expect to explode in the very near future (and I wish to partake in that explosion when I pass the bar of course). Actions in equity provide a remedy where the normal legal remedy is insufficient. Let me provide a simple analogy.
Suppose you paid a membership fee to belong to an art studio. The membership gave you access to the art studio where you could use their paint, canvas, etc... to paint whatever you wanted. And suppose the membership agreement gave the art studio the right to cancel the membership agreement at will and retain all ownership rights in any paintings you create. Basically you were paying for the right to paint in their studio. Suppose you paint the equivalent of the Mona Lisa. The studio then discovers that you -- against their studio rules -- used oil paints purchased outside the studio. They cancel your membership and confiscate your painting, the Mona Lisa Deux.
How many of you believe that a court sitting in equity is going to let the studio reap the benefit of all your labor? And more importantly -- all that value. It's essentially unjust enrichment. Typically contract actions are limited to actual damages and keeping a priceless painting clearly seems excessive.
Someone is going to bring this kind of lawsuit in the next few years, guaranteed. Especially if they can convince a few lawmakers of all the potential revenue to be gained. I foresee a day soon when MMO companies merely provide the world and the content but players own the virtual property, subject to rules on ownership and transfer of property laid out by the legislature. If you're going to ban someone for a violation of an in game policy, costing them thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours in labor, be prepared to follow due process just as if you were going to repossess someone's car if they default on a loan.
Ruat caelum fiat justitia.
Attorney Coda: If I misstated the legal analysis anywhere, feel to correct me and I will edit accordingly.
Report Post
I've never played 2nd life or any of those other RL-mmo's but I would think something like this may start there first...
4 replies to Lipton (hide)
4 replies to Lipton (show)
Permalink
Quote
Post Reply
Reply to this comment
"“We are starting with a blank slate and going through the various
dimensions of virtual economies, and seeing where they might intersect
with public policy,”"
Looking for the positives in this, with more and more people playing MMOs with virtual economies, this means more people that will actually care about who is elected to govern and create these tax laws.
Example... say 1 million gamers have to pay taxes on the gold they make now, then lets say they are of voting age. Who are these 1 million gamers going to vote for? The old crusty conservative internet-dumb politician? Or the younger, smarter, Pro-internet politician?
Future president: "I promise NO MORE NEW MMO TAXES!" Gamers - w00t we votxorz u dood.
Now here is a question, what about gamers that are not of voting age or even taxable age... they should still be able to use Gold in a game, but how would they or even should they be taxed?
I hope you're using conservative in the literal sense and not the ideological context.
Now here is a question, what about gamers that are not of voting age or even taxable age... they should still be able to use Gold in a game, but how would they or even should they be taxed?
It's no different at all from a minor who earns income mowing lawns. If the income is below a certain threshold they pay no taxes, just like today (under U.S. law).
Correct- depriving someone of thousands of $$$ of virtual property that Blizzard did nothing to earn wouldn't likely be upheld if it were real property, so I fully expect these laws to eventually extend to virtual property.
it was easier to do so than today
I wonder what's the IRS going to try and do about those of us that are not american.
Nothing as far as income I would assume. But I highly doubt the EU (not sure where you're from, just guessing) would let that income go untaxed either.
yay for the wild wild south
For real? Where? Costa Rica? I so want to retire there on my ill gotten arena PR selling gains once I consolidate my ironfisted reign over Holyfusion's old territory.
so I type costa rica on google and I'm greeted with a map pic and http://www.surfersvillage.com/gal/pictures/Miss_Reef_Costa_Rica06_1Gal.jpg
I guess I feel like I'm living in the Holy Pally of 3rd world countries.
Even worse, I didn't read carefully and thought you wrote "Banana Republic", hence my guess at Costa Rica.
I know of what you speak and pretty much agree with what you wrote. It sucks.
Generally courts don't like to redesign contracts for people. As the breacher your only option (that I can think of right now, having just celebrated finishing my 1L exams for the 3rd night in a row) would be to sue off the contract under an unjust enrichment theory, but Blizzard doesn't resell the gold so they don't benefit in any way from stripping your account of valuables. The only other theory of remedy that I can think of that would work here would be to put both parties back to position they were before the contract was formed, which would still result in you getting screwed. Being the breacher here substantially limits your options, assuming that Blizzard can actually point to some way in which an offender has breached the TOS and they're not just enforcing their right to terminate at will.
A) That you know of.
B) They're still depriving you of your property, which has real value, without due process or meaningful recourse. Even black letter bankruptcy law doesn't let a secured creditor do this.
virtual property law and contract law. Perhaps some hanky-panky.
Thoughts?
The shoulders are admittedly less legitimate than this rock hard kill-boner I have while wearing them and smashing scrubs in BGs.
virtual property law and contract law. Perhaps some hanky-panky.
Thoughts?
Are you a Dutch blonde with that hot librarian look that I simply cannot resist?
Because if so... YES.
I respectfully disagree. The casual moniker reflects a person's attitude and lifestyle, not their arena ratings. There are casual gladiators and hardcore sub 1500 players. Skill is -- in general, but not always -- a non sequitur to someone's casualness.
However, many casuals are unable or unwilling to spend the time to get a group of people with the same goals, good skills and a compatible schedule. They therefore will not achieve high ratings.
Obvious subpoena target. BTW, I haven't heard if this is just for 2's thus far or for all brackets.
Am I at risk? This sounds like an STD after school special.
Somewhere along the way a Blizzard employee lost total sight of how this is a game and not a government/citizen relationship. Being punished doesn't really HELP anyone, but fixing the loopholes immediately does. Why blame the players when all the problems can be fixed through coding changes?
Like many big companies, they believe they are immune to market forces and therefore can treat their customers with contempt with complete impunity.
AFAIK just win trading, whatever the reason. The high profile targets seem to be getting hit hardest though.
ROMA PLEASE GO ON A MAN DATE WITH ME
The accused has a right to view the evidence that is being used against him, similar to the right to confront the accuser. The means by which he's being claimed to be a win trader would be info any accused would want to know to see if the algorithm is even valid, let alone fair.
As I understand it, when confidential information is discussed the court can do a variety of things, such as closing the court (ie, not open to public) and require parties to sign NDA's and such. They'd certainly argue that though and the subpoenaing attorney would want to brush up on the rules of evidence beforehand of course.
Isn't it? It was only in the last 10-15 years or so it was forced to adhere to "innocent until proven guilty" when going after taxpayers. Prior to that it was like any other fascist, police state organization where the taxpayer had to prove his innocence if acused.
Second Life is different since the in-game currency is already tied to dollars by definition.
But they haven't and they won't, so the current value of 1,000 gold is still ~30 dollars. See how that works?
"If the US mints printed 5 bajillion hundred dollar bills and dropped them out of crop dusting planes across the nation the dollar would become worthless. But they won't do that, same thing.
If the queen had balls, she'd be a king.
Your Comment is being posted. Please wait...