Blizzard Cracks Down on World of Warcraft Ebaying

Last Friday Blizzard put up a message on the World of Warcraft site stating that Ebaying of in-game items would not be tolerated. This is the first time a MMOG developer has come out of the gate with so strong a policy, and combined with their tough policy on hacking is a heartening sign that community infractions will be taken seriously. TerraNova has commentary on the development as well. From the article: "If they do [succeed], we might have to start thinking of World of Warcraft as the first of a new generation of virtual worlds. It may not seem all that different in terms of some design aspects, but if its war against eBayers succeeds, it will end up being very different in terms of atmosphere."

Comments

I think we all saw this coming...

[EvilBunnyGoddess]

A LOT of people are going to lose out of money on this. I thought they would crack down on D2 but it looks like they started with WoW. I'm extremely impressed with this and glad they are doing it. I am tired of going to play and all you see are "BUY NOW" "BUY NOW" "BUY NOW" It will also cut back a lot on the botting which can cause extreme server downtime and also hopefully cut back on the hacking and such now that a profit can't be made. I'm sure people will find a way around it, but i'm glad Blizz is finally cracking down.

Re:I think we all saw this coming...

[b3s]

D2 became so annoying with the channel spam. So much so that I just couldn't bring myself to play it anymore.

The WoW built-in auction house and their attempts to take care of the eBay crap means that this game will probably remain a very immersive world with very little "bad" spam.

Re:I think we all saw this coming...

[satoshi1]

The most recent patch (1.10, almost a year after the previous patch) doesn't automagically log you onto the chat rooms anymore. When you go to B.net, you're at a screen with the options to join/create a game, quit b.net, and join public chatroom. It's really nice.

Re:I think we all saw this coming...

[Austerity Empowers]

I guess I don't see why botting is bad at all, but perhaps I misunderstand. I usually play 2 accounts on EQ at once, it's a way of getting something done without having to wait for a group. Maybe I'm a rich yuppie bastard for paying for 2 accounts but I see nothing wrong with it. I guess I fail to see why it's necessary in WoW, but if people do it so what? They're paying for the accounts and bandwidth...

As for eBay, I see 2 real problems with it:

1) The temptation for Blizzard to make money on the side selling stuff on eBay using a second company. This gets worse as they make in game items harder to get in game to help boost up their eBay biz. EQ I think suffered from this in the later days at least insofar as it was hard for a truly new person to "break in" to EQ without eBay.

2) People buying high level characters they are not competant to drive. In WoW you don't have to group if you don't want to. If you group you will pay the price. But at least in EQ this happened but was uncommon. People that liked the game enough to eBay also understood how to play it, at least in general, there were a few obvious screwballs.

I guess it just seems to me Blizzard should worry about the game itself. It's great but it's not perfect.

Re:I think we all saw this coming...

[MoriaOrc]

What you're describing isn't botting. It's usually called Dual Boxing. Botting is when you let an automated program that levels while you are AFK for whatever reason run your character.

Why is this so bad?

[vasqzr]

What's so bad about this?

Other than "It's not fair"

Re:Why is this so bad?

[TheRealMindChild]

Uh... when you are PAYING for a game, it is pretty important that the game be "fair"

Re:Why is this so bad?

[servognome]

How does somebody else paying for items hurt your enjoyment of the game beyond jealousy?
There are things you can do in game to prevent spawn pharmers or 'boters, why do you need to have it translate to real world crackdown on item sales?

Re:Why is this so bad?

[deanj]

Disclaimer: I don't play WoW.

I'm guessing that most people are against this because of PvP play. A person that is equipped with purchased items could slaughter players that earned everything in game.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[MORTAR_COMBAT!]

A person that is equipped with purchased items could slaughter players that earned everything in game.

How? This is a ridiculous notion. A person equipped with purchased items is equipped with items earned in the game -- albeit by other people. We're not talking server-hacked items. If you spend $1000 and outfit yourself in badass "leet" gear, all I have to do is spend a few hours in an instance dungeon (where you can't follow and PvP) and get similar gear, and then I'll whip your ass because I learned a bit of how to play by... wow... playing the game.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[radimvice]

What's so bad about this?
Other than "It's not fair"

What's bad about this basically stems from what it means to be a "game" and not an extension of the real life economic market, and how the uncontrolled influence of real-world money into the picture destroys this separation.

For those of you who can't seem to follow the logical link from "it's not fair" to "it's wrong," think about the reasons why purchasing services from game players using real-world money leads inevitably to corruption and is not tolerated and strictly regulated in any game.

I strongly support Blizzard's attempt to keep World of Warcraft a place where people can continue to play and have fun without competing with sweatshop workers trying to make a living.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[Wtcher]

...Because every little bit they do to discourage mob farming and 'boters will improve the playability of the game. Aside from fairness issues with regards to equipment and money, if the market grows enough then you will get huge groups of people killing mobs everywhere, making it hard for regular players to level and complete quests. You'll end up with a thousand silent players who never talk or interact and are focused only on making money. I'd rather have a smaller population of people I can have fun with than a huge population of resource-sucking scenary. It kills the economy and the atmosphere - perhaps moreso on the roleplaying servers. I suspect Blizzard would be able to retain a larger customer base if these farmers didn't exist because farming does discourage people from playing games.

In any case, some of those people in the Terra Nova blog also mentioned that dealing with eBayers would also be a good way to determine who were farming, selling and buying in-game items.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[pezpunk]

well, for one thing, when there's an incentive for profit, it greatly increases the incentive for the invention of hacks and exploits, as well as bots.

in Everquest, i've heard that foreign sweatshops constantly camp and farm certain resources / monsters to the point where they have a virtual monopoly on certain items or resources, so that purchasing it from them is virtually the only way to acquire it.

in addition, from a legal standpoint, the ebayers are selling something that technically doesn't belong to them. the game data and code on the servers belongs to blizzard. regardless of your stance on intellectual property laws, this IS stated pretty clearly in the Terms of Service.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[xero314]

I think alot of people are missing the real point here. Blizzard is not cracking down on item sales because of any sense of fairness. Blizzard, like Sony before them, is looking to protect their intelectual property. Many people have come to accept and agree that sharing of MP3s is an illegal activity and should not be done. The items in WoW, and other MMOGs, are not being given away, they are being sold for profit. I don't know about you, but I would be very upset if I produced a product that people turned around and sold without expressed rights granted by me. I assume no one would find it acceptable to be producing copies of the game, or CD keys, and selling those. Selling in game items is no different, they do not belong to the players, read you EULA.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[mabhatter654]

That's not a good enough reason though... if the items had "real world value" then Blizzard would be legally compelled to allow the "trading" much like Wizards with Magic cards or Ty with Beanies...Collectible companies have to be very careful to keep their fingers strictly off the "secondary" market.

The argument that DOES work however is that Blizzard has set certian rules to "play in their sandbox". Much like Champion tennis player can't give me their Wimbelton trophy and I expect to just walk into the place...or a counrty club enforcing the golf rules. Blizzard is selling the "service" to play a "fair game" free from outside influances.

A better example would be an "all you can eat buffet" club...but where ten people [paying] come into the resturant and spend all day "hoarding" the ice cream and pies from the buffet then selling favorites back to your other paying customers. That's the similar thing to what's going on. If the "customers" were consuming the pies for themselves it would be an inconvenience, but part of the store's "offer" but in the MMORGS like my example, they are just there to take away from the other paying customers...which ruins it for everyone.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[xero314]

Your first few lines confuse the transfer of physical property and the transfer of intelectual property. Had Wizards of the Coast licensed their Trading cards in a manor that did not transfer ownership then people would not be able to sell them. The best example of this type of situation applies to leased cars. When you lease a car you do not have the right to sell or transfer ownership of the car because you do not actually own the vehicle. In the case of an MMOG, the player or licensee does not actually own the characters or items, ownership is retained by the creating, or publishing company. See the follwing quotes from select World of Warcraft documentation.

From the Blizzard EULA
All title, ownership rights and intellectual property rights in and to the Game and all copies thereof (including, but not limited to, any titles, computer code, themes, objects, characters, character names, stories, dialog, catch phrases, locations, concepts, artwork, character inventories, structural or landscape designs, animations, sounds, musical compositions, audio-visual effects, storylines, character likenesses, methods of operation, moral rights, any related documentation, and "applets" incorporated into the Game) are owned or expressly licensed by [Blizzard Inc.].

From the Terms of Use of The World of War Craft:
7. Selling of Items.
Remember, at the outset of these Terms of Use, where we discussed how you were "licensed" the right to use World of Warcraft, and that your license was "limited"? Well, here is one of the more important areas where these license limitations come into effect. Note that Blizzard Entertainment either owns, or has exclusively licensed, all of the content which appears in World of Warcraft. Therefore, no one has the right to "sell" Blizzard Entertainment's content, except Blizzard Entertainment! So Blizzard Entertainment does not recognize any property claims outside of World of Warcraft or the purported "sale" in the "real world" of anything related to World of Warcraft. Accordingly, you may not sell items for "real" money or trade items for things of value outside of World of Warcraft.

Just trying to make people aware of what they are actually agreeing to when they click the big yes at the end of and EULA.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[Lord Kano]

It isn't so much the items that are being sold as the time needed to acquire them. Spend 10 days of your life to gain the experience necessary to go into the dangerous places that have the item in question and then spend another 2 days looking for the item or spend $20 in the real world to save yourself all of that time.

It isn't about Blizzard IP because none of the items will ever turn up outside of the game.

LK

Re:Why is this so bad?

[TLLOTS]

Actually they're more looking out for their asses by stating that the items and such do not belong to the players. The reason for that is that if say a server was significantly damaged somehow, such that player data was lost, then Blizzard would then be liable for that lost data, including items. So if those things are allowed to have real world value for people, then Blizzard could potentially be required to compensate players for their losses or face a lawsuit.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[droleary]

What's bad about this basically stems from what it means to be a "game" and not an extension of the real life economic market, and how the uncontrolled influence of real-world money into the picture destroys this separation.

There is no such distinct economy, regardless of how much you and Blizzard wish there to be one. The simple fact is that it already costs real-world money to play their little game. They were the ones that put a $15/month price tag on the experience, and it is foolish for them to say "Hey, we require you to to spend time in an alternate reality gathering resources so that you can spend time in our reality, but you're not allowed to apply time spent in our reality gathering resources to that alternate reality." If they had any clue at all, they would create an isolated economy, but they haven't and it's wrong for them to punish their customers for a split economy that Blizzard itself (and seemingly every other MMORPG) has created.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[realityfighter]

In order for anyone to sell online items to anyone else, both the buyer and the seller have to already be paying a monthly fee to play on the game's proprietary servers. In this situation, actual IP infringement is impossible.

You may be able to "sell" an item in the online game, but the eventual transaction is just moving data from one part of the proprietary realm to another. You have not, for instance, taken a screenshot of the game and sold it for profit - which would be an infringement of the copyrights held on all the artwork you see in the game, because you have stepped in and distributed it outside channels authorized by the creator. If you found a way to create WoW accounts that didn't need to be paid for, and then you gave it to someone, you would also be standing in as an illegal distributor.

But if you hand another Blizzard customer a Blizzard item inside a Blizzard game, you aren't acting as a distributor. The game has already been distributed to you. You aren't leaking it to anyone who didn't pay Blizzard the price that Blizzard asked for it. That you made money on the deal is beside the point. If you charged people $50 a pop to give them master chess moves out of a book in the middle of a game, that would be cheating, but all the pieces are still on the table. You haven't stolen anything.

You're also incorrect about the CDs and CD keys. Once you buy a CD, it is yours. You own it. The CD-key is also yours to keep forever. It's the contents of the disk - the code, artwork, sounds, etc - that belong to Blizzard. They give you freedom to use those assets under the terms of the ToS. If you violate the ToS, they can ban you from playing the game, but they can't reposess the game discs. You own them, free and forever.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[Boronx]

They aren't selling an item, they're selling a service, the transfer of in-game virtual ownership, a service they have the right to perform. Why not lot them get fair value for carrying it out? And if Blizard doesn't want them to get fair value, then why do they let them have the right?

Re:Why is this so bad?

[Pofy]

>in addition, from a legal standpoint, the
>ebayers are selling something that technically
>doesn't belong to them. the game data and code
>on the servers belongs to blizzard.

Claiming data to be property is in my opinion going a bit to far. Claiming that the reason you can't sell stuff in the game because you don't "own" it thus makes little sense. This trying to make data or whatever you want to call it in an imaginary world the same as real physical property is just plain sily.

In addition, by that reasoning, you can't simply give away an item in game either. How could you give something away that is not yours? Can you even pick up something? It is not yours you know? Also note that when you sell an item, or just give it away, it is not like you take it away from Blizzard, it is still there. You aren't affecting them in any way at all.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[Pofy]

>Many people have come to accept and agree that
>sharing of MP3s is an illegal activity and
>should not be done.

That typically involve making a new copy of the music. This is a violation of copyright in most cases. You are NOT making a copy of something when you sell something in a game.

>I assume no one would find it acceptable to be
>producing copies of the game, or CD keys, and
>selling those.

Again, making new copies would be a copyright violation, you can't do that. No one is making a copy of anything when seeling things in the game.

You are not removing the items (or whatever you sell) from the game, you don't create new ones and so on. the only thing you do is change the item from one character to another. That is most definately allowed would you say not? There is even trade windows and auction houses to do so. If someone want to pay someone for something they do or don't do is completely up to them and is for the most cases neither illegal nor of anyone elses bussiness.

>Selling in game items is no different, they do
>not belong to the players, read you EULA.

But it is OK to simply give away something that is not yours? Can my character give your character an item? Claiming ownership of data is one thing, claiming that someone can't give money to someone else is another.

>Blizzard, like Sony before them, is looking to
>protect their intelectual property.

Data is for the most part not "intellectual property". You don't get copyright on data for example. You can't claim that a sword is a trademark or that there is a patent on the Iron Boots and so on. SO the whole intellectual property thing doesn't really fit in.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[Pofy]

But you are not transfering any ownership. The items (or whatever you "sell") are stil there on Blizzards realms. You did not create a new copy either. SUre, a new character holds the item but the player playing a character is hardly the owner of the items, right? Since it is Blizzard, so transfering an item between characters is hardly transfering ownership. By that logic, simply giving away an item in the game would be equally disallowed (and you wouldn't be able to claim it is Blizzard that "own" them to start with).

Besdies, I would say that the whole idea of "ownership" of characters, items and such data as if it was physical obkects is rediculous to start with, but that is perhaps another story.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[xero314]

You are correct you do own the CD and the CD Keys but this does not give you the right to create and sell copies of those items. If you read the license agreement you will see that to sell any part of the game you must sell the entire thing, all packaging and documentation, and forgo all your rights in regards to the licensing.

The point here is the same as it is any where, regardless of what you feel is fair, you have agreed to a particual license that control the use and sale of the product and the intelectual property of the company. Please see my other post http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=132616&cid=110 77870 which has direct quotes from the license and terms of use which explain why it is that you can not legaly sell characters, items, any object or information you have gained through playing the game.

Somehow alot of people failed to read this specific line in the Terms of Use. "Therefore, no one has the right to "sell" Blizzard Entertainment's content, except Blizzard Entertainment! So Blizzard Entertainment does not recognize any property claims outside of World of Warcraft or the purported "sale" in the "real world" of anything related to World of Warcraft"
I am not a blizzard representative, and in many cases I fight against intellectual property laws, but in cases like this where people are atempting to profit on another persons works without aquire the appropriate license (one which alows the resale of the work) I have to speak up and inform those making the sales that they are breaking the law.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[xero314]

>That typically involve making a new copy of the music. This is a violation of copyright in most cases. You are NOT making a copy of something when you sell something in a game.

Ok I agree, so allow me to use another analogy that will make a more direct correlation. Making music or video publicly available even without copying is considered violations of copyright. If I were to allow you to listen to the mp3s on my pc through a streaming means I would still be breaking the law, more specificaly the DMCA. Regardless of how I distribute it, the data is not mine to distribute or sell, even if there is only a single copy.

>If someone want to pay someone for something they do or don't do is completely up to them and is for the most cases neither illegal nor of anyone elses bussiness.

Based on this statement I would have to conclude that you live in a country where prostitution is legal. Here in the US it is not. This shows that your right to take money from someone is not always legal, when it can be determined that your are receiving it as payment for illegal serivces or products. The fact that most of the sale of online items is done through online auction houses or matching serivces there is an easy trail to track the money as part of an illegal purchase.

>Data is for the most part not "intellectual property".

Hmmm, I guess we can all throw out the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which states specificaly that Digital Media (which some people refere to as Data) is protected by copyright. As a mater of fact it is more stringently protected. But once again I believe that only applies to the United States, which does cover Blizzards data. I am not a lawer but have studied copyright law (not to be confused with patents or trademarks) so I am very certain I am right on this one.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because the reason there are so many boters is because of real world item sales. If EQ could ban all plat and item sales, they would almost half their server population.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[Pofy]

Regarding your first analogy, selling items is not distribution either och public performance. The item is on the realm, it stayes there, and you don't perform any action that is a copyright violation. If it was a copyright violation they would not even have to state it in any EULA since they could just go after people directly. The whole thing is contract isse were one can claim that one has to agree to not sell items if you want to play. If that is an okey demand to make or not is another story.

>Based on this statement I would have to conclude
>that you live in a country where prostitution is
>legal. Here in the US it is not.

Yes I do, it is legal. Actually the BUYER is the one making something illegal (paying for sex). This is Sweden by the way. However, this is a case were there are specific laws saying that you can't sell or buy (depending on country) sexual services. There is no such law saying that you can't sell virtual property in online games. At least I have not heared about any such law. Usulayy it is very specific cases (like sex) that have individual laws.

>Hmmm, I guess we can all throw out the Digital
>Millennium Copyright Act, which states
>specificaly that Digital Media (which some people
>refere to as Data) is protected by copyright.

I don't live in USA and am not as familiar with the DMCA as with copyright law so can't comment. Are you saying that as soon as some data, fact or info is in digital form it is suddenly protected with copyright? That seems very strange. Still I would say that it won't have much impact since the act of selling an item really does not require any action that would be considered a copyright infringement. At most it involves the transfer of an ingame item from one character to another and I have yet to see a game were one would claim you are not allowed to do that. It is certainly allowed in WoW.

By the way, Blizzard DO sell the current game in other countries than USA, like Australia, New Zeeland and Canada, no?

Re:Why is this so bad?

[xero314]

Actually the way copyrights work, digital or otherwise is that the creater gains and maintains all rights to all works of authorship including computer software. Remeber that the items that are being traded are backed back physical software somewhere. People not familiar with copyrights tend not to realize that copyrights are granted at the time of the authorship and no registration of the copyright is required. The whole point behind the copyright issue and WoW is that Blizzard controls the rights to what can and can not be done with their works, and in there licensing they have expressly stated that no one other than Blizzard is allowed to sell those works out side the means given within the game itself. The DMCA grants this right to them, as does standard copyright law (the DMCA only clarifies how copyrights effect digital media).

Since you are outside of the United States you have to realize this does not put you outside of US law. It does in the fact that Blizzard may not be able to bring litigation against you (Please check with your local law enforcement) but it does not stop them from revoking your rights on there service, or taking legal action against US companies that support illegal activity (In this case it would have been Ebay).

This entire argument was already brought up by Sony a few years ago, and if you look you will notice that no Everquest items are sold on EBay or by any other legitimate source. Just remember that all players of WoW have entered into a contract with Blizzard, a legal and binding contract.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[Pofy]

I am very familiar with copyright law. And no, you don't gain "all" rights. You gain some rights specifically mentioned in copyright law. Use is NOT such a right. Thus copyright law does not grant the copyright holder the right to control use. At least not through copyright. The fact that they do it through a user agreement is something else. it is about contract and contract law and has nothing to do with copyright.

Me living outside USA and Blizzard selling their game in my country (they still don't) means THEY have to follow the laws in my country of course. If they don't like that, they should not do bussiness here. They can't sell games or anything else here wanting some other laws to apply. When it comes to copyright laws, they are usually quite similar though. In this case we deal with contract law at most though as I explained.

How eBay do something illegal is beyoned me as they have not (as far as I would guess), agreed to any EULA with Blizzard, hence they are not abound by it. The reason you don't see EQ items, and probably not WoW items either is because eBay themselves have decided that they don't want to participate in it. Not because of some law or due to any EULA.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[xero314]

At this point you have proven your lack of knowledge of Copyright law as it pertains to the United States. You have show that you are not aware that in the US it is illegal to facilitate of assit in a crime.

As for your country I can not comment, it may actually be legal in your country to reproduce copyright material and sell it (even if that is not the actual case here). It may be legal for you to sell a leased or rented product that you yoursel do not actually own. It may also turn out that your country does not honor the laws of other countries, I really do not know.

What ever the situation may be, my orginal point was that Blizzard is not restricting sales based on any idea of fair play, but instead as an act to protected their own Intelectual Property. No mater what laws in what country are granting those rights, be it copyright, patent, or license agreement, Blizzard has a right to enforce their right over their property, even if that means revoking accounts of violators.

Hopefully that clears up my original point. If you are not able to see why or how that is, then there is nothing more I could say to help, and I would suggest reviewing US and international Law as it pertains to Copyrights, Licensing, Intelectual Propery and those which partake and assist in criminal activity.

As it happens to turn out in the US it is a crime to not only facilitate a crime, but to witness a crime and not report it. This is what holds Ebay responsible for their own actions.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[deanj]

No no...you don't get what I'm saying. These jokers DON'T have similar gear.

You're assuming the stuff the people are buying are things you can earn at your level. When people buy things, they usually buy things that you can't yet earn in the game because you're not high enough level. Go against a guy like that in-game, and bang, you're dead.

At least, that's how it was in EQ for a long time.
In EQ2, a low level character can't use things that are way beyond their level, since gear is rated. Not sure about WoW.

Personally, I think people that buy things they can earn in-game are complete idiots. It's like power leveling. If they do it wrong, they end up with a character with a ton of levels, but none of the skill stats (eg 1hb, 30 out of 200).

Re:Why is this so bad?

[Pofy]

>What ever the situation may be, my orginal point
>was that Blizzard is not restricting sales based
>on any idea of fair play, but instead as an act
>to protected their own Intelectual Property.

Actually I would say THE reason is more fair play than anything else. Again, show me how (in US law then) copyright law applies at all to the sell of in game items. What infringement do one comit when "selling" it? (As oposed to simply giveing away an item in game for example). What "right" are they enforcing that you claim exist in copyright law (or patent or trademark or whatever you refer to by "their property")?

Re:Why is this so bad?

[xero314]

Allow me to point you in th right direction. Expressing the reasons that US and International Copyrights protect a creator of Intelectual Property from unliscened and unwarranted sales would take many hours without the all parties having extensive knowledge of the many laws and acts involved.

First look at the US Copyright law:
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/

Then take a look at the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999 and the Intellectual Property and High Technology Technical Amendments Acts of 2001 and 2002:
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/dcom/olia/aipa/in dex.htm

Both of these site contain alot of technical and legal information. There are many sites devoted to IP both in the US and internationaly:
http://www.wipo.int/ and http://www.aipla.org/ are just a couple.

Once you have a good understanding of Intellectual Property law read over the WoW End User License Agreement and Terms of Use both of which I have quoted else where in this thread: http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/legal/eula.html
http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/legal/termsofuse.ht ml

Pay Close attention to EULA Section 3 and 13 (which states you agree to the laws of the state of California) and TOU section 2 subsection H, Section 7 and Section 10.

That should clarify the situation. If you need more information feel free to ask questions and, time permiting I will look up specific case law. I would also suggest contact a legal profesional in your area who is familiar with US Intellectual Property law.

Re:Why is this so bad?

[Pofy]

Please, I *have* read both the copyright law of my own country and even US copyright law many times. I have read the WoW agreement also. Again, there is nothing in the laws that says you can't take money for a virtual item in a game. This is not a sale of propery as in sale of a CD, a book, a car or whatever. You are not creating a new copy either. It is no more different that me giving another character in the game an item from my own character. That is also copyright infringement according to you? If not, why would giving me money suddenly turn it into copyright infringement?

The licence agreemtn is a completely different thing and really have nothing directly to do with copyright although some things in it have connection. I have never claimed it doesn't cover selling items, what I say is that it has nothing to do with copyright, it has to do with contract and contract law.

Please note that for an american, yes indeed state laws of california might apply, I have no idea if those claim that selling virtual items is considered copyright infringement (I would guess copyright law in US is a federal issue though). As for someone outside US and people buying the game in other countries, most countries do not allow a sale or an agreement connected to a sale to be governed by other countries laws. The reason should be obvious.

So instead of doing like anyone else, pointing vagule in general to copyright (with tons of links, which is of course nice, although I allready know about almost all of them). Why not tell how or what more exactly is the infringement? We can agree that Blizzard has an agreement that makes you not allowed. I hope we can agree that an agreement is all about contract law and have nothing to do with copyright. Copyright infringmenet is basically infringing on the right of a copyright holder which are basically copying and distribution of such copies, public performance and creating derived work. You are doing NOTHING close to that when selling items in a game.

That's Sony's policy as well...

[Anonymous Coward]

but it's not the official policy that's important, it's whether they enforce it or not. (And maybe even whether they *can* enforce it.)

Re:That's Sony's policy as well...

[Paolomania]

Speaking of which, does eBay assisst in shutting down illegal sales? It seems like Blizzard would need their cooperation in shutting down the trading of currency. Otherwise Blizzard would have to track the currency dealers themselves - namely characters that have a tendency to in-game-email gold to many other players, or characters that tend to buy trash at the auction-house for strangely large sums of money.

Re:That's Sony's policy as well...

[MindStalker]

Why would they need to shutdown the eBay sale. Let the sale progress, then delete the item that just got sold. Suddenly noone is buying WoW items on ebay anymore.

Re:That's Sony's policy as well...

[MMaestro]

Generally, game companies such as Blizzard have to do this sort of tracking down themselves beyond sending eBay an e-mail telling them to bring the auction down. From selling to buying you'll go through no less than 4 step.

1. Auction site/Trading site/College bulletin board (take your pick)
2. Adverisement/Referal (its underground now, so expect to do some research to find it)
3. Paypal/bank/credit card (or equal, gotta have the money trail or its all hot air)
4. Connecting the auctioner's information with the buyer's and seller's WoW accounts. (Gotta know who to ban)

Take all this, web proxys, fake e-mail addresses, companies that are usually outside of the U.S., very little information, and the fact that you can't monitor this stuff in game (is XYZ players trading legit or did they buy it with real money?) makes this a very complicated business. Chances are the only reason why Blizzard is so successful right now is because its early, its fairly obvious and its learning from the mistakes of other games. Give it a few months and Blizzard is gonna start missing a lot of these guys or hitting the wrong people.

Re:That's Sony's policy as well...

[MuNansen]

As soon as any alternate route for sales like these becomes popular, though, it's easy to stop it. If they get a method where the seller is completely anonymous until the in-game transaction, they can just bait sellers with GMs disguised as buyers. They'll never STOP the sales, but they can sure put a very large dent in them. I just think that WoW is the first MMORPG popular enough, and popular because of the quality of the game and not the size of the community, where Blizzard can just say "screw the re-sellers, we don't care if we lose their accounts because we've got plenty others, including ones that choose to play WoW BECAUSE we are so vigilant with the re-sellers/botters." Although on the other side, I don't actually mind the re-selling much, and it really is an interesting economical phenomenon. Especially considering the gold in Ultima Online was at one time worth more than the Mexican peso.

Re:That's Sony's policy as well...

[clarkcox3]

How would they know which item to delete? The buyer and seller exchange money, and only then do they let each other know their in-game character names. Then, inside the game, the seller's character gives the item to the buyer's character. With no way to link the in-game transaction to the real-life transaction.

Re:That's Sony's policy as well...

[MindStalker]

Yes, there is no obvious way to track these things. But they are threatening to delete items at the very least, and ban accounts if they have to. Personally they may not be able to prove many of them, but when they start seeing single individuals who are "giving" away many very expensive items, it won't take much investigation to prove something is up. Then when they take the items away from the buyers, people will talk, and not be willing to take the risk of loosing hundreds of dollars on something that Blizzard can take away. Yea, you may still be able to get away with selling a few small items, but large trafficing will get flagged and noticed. Not something that will be worth the time. Especially as Blizzard is also heavily pursuing bots, so noone is really going to have the time to create these expensive items in the first place. What you will end up having is a few older players will try to sell some of the items that they don't need anymore, and some of it will slip through the cracks.

Re:That's Sony's policy as well...

[KevinKnSC]

First, Blizzard can have eBay give them the real name of the seller, and then shut down that person's accounts. Second, Blizzard can pose as the buyer, win the auction, and then shut down the account.

Re:That's Sony's policy as well...

[Devalia]

And eBay UK will have a (max) £5000 fine to pay the minute they pass on my real name to them. Per offense.

Data Protection Act is nice. Besides, there *are* other auction sites, inevitably one wont help Blizzard

Re:That's Sony's policy as well...

[karmatic]

The trick is to require payment up front, and don't sell anything for less than the cost of the game. Use wifi hotspots if you're worried about an IP ban.

Payment up front - even undercover, you still only lose time, not money. To some people, it's worth it.

So happy.

[eviltypeguy]

I am so wonderfully happy to hear this. Like any game, people should have to earn their rank and position.

I don't have any problem with someone using the in-game auction houses to get items, and I think this will help foster a much better sense of community.

Re:So happy.

[GoofyBoy]

>Like any game, people should have to earn their rank and position.

No, the main point of games is that the player should have fun.

After a certain point in the game, MMORPG are dependent on how lucky your drops are or how much time you can spend sitting in-front of a keyboard doing the same thing X times. For some people, that isn't fun.

If a person is willing to pay to have more fun playing a game, what is wrong with that?

Re:So happy.

[Cecil]

people should have to earn their rank and position.

The problem with this mindset is that it ensures that the *only* way of investing yourself in the game is by investing time. This gives a unique advantage to the kids who find the time to play the game 40 hours a week, and 18 hours a day during the summer. Which in and of itself isn't bad, except that it alienates the "older kids" among us, myself included, who have full-time jobs and many responsibilities beyond that, because we're lucky when we can fit in a few hours a week. We're willing to pay for our entertainment, or at least I am, but with no way of improving our characters beyond time -- which we don't have -- we remain eternal newbies. Which is really not that fun, no matter how you try to spin it.

The people who purchase equipment and characters and experience and gold and whatever else, are typically not doing it so they can roll into your zone and start hogging all the loot 24 hours a day and get an unfair advantage over you... some do, but they're not the majority.

Re:So happy.

[eviltypeguy]

I have maybe an hour to play each day at most. And Blizzard has specifically designed this game to be played by people who don't have that much time to devote to it. For example, the more time your character spends logged out and resting at an inn, the longer the amount of time that character will receive 200% of the normal XP given by quests, discoveries, and monsters. So I'm going to have to disagree with your argument.

Because of how they've balanced the game, I've managed to get to my 24th level already with as little as I've been playing. Sure, there are people that are already at level 40, but it's not a grind, and it's fun.

Besides, I feel my opinion is just as legitimate as yours given that i'm no "kid" either at my age.

And before you use the old fart argument, my guild leader is 55 years old. I'm only level 24, and he's level 41 even though we've both been playing since day one.

Re:So happy.

[eviltypeguy]

No, the main point of games is that the player should have fun.

After a certain point in the game, MMORPG are dependent on how lucky your drops are or how much time you can spend sitting in-front of a keyboard doing the same thing X times. For some people, that isn't fun.

But World of Warcraft doesn't suffer from those problems. At no point have I felt like I'm in a level grind, and I've spent more time playing other games in the past than I have World of Warcraft with far more results.

Other MMORPGs may be dependent on how lucky drops are or the like, but this game is not one of those.

Re:So happy.

[lobsterGun]

The problem is that the items that folks buy off of ebay have to come from somewhere. ...That means that when I (a casual player) enter the Tomb of Dread in search of the (Ultra Valuable) Short Sword of Uberness, there is already some clown standing ther waiting for it to drop. And when it does drop he'll log that character out and log in another character to wait for it to drop again.

and that spoils my gaming experience.

Hence I don't play MMOGS that support ebaying.

Re:So happy.

[weizur]

This isn't really much of a problem with this game, the game is such that with only a few hours of playing you can get each level. I work full time and have gotten about a level a day since launch. Even if you can only play 4-5 hours a week you could get to max level in only 6 months, super short time form MOG standpoint.

Re:So happy.

[GoofyBoy]

>is already some clown standing ther waiting for it to drop.

There is only one place to get a powerful sword that people want and there is a line-up. Its a problem with the game, not with people selling stuff on ebay.

Or is part of the gameplay "waiting in line"?

Re:So happy.

[fireduck]

this is solved by judicious use of instancing, which WoW obviously incorporates. Simply make Tomb of Dread an instanced dungeon, and you won't have a single camper waiting for the Uber sword, as they'll all be in their own dungeons waiting for it.

Re:So happy.

[Kaa]

The problem is that the items that folks buy off of ebay have to come from somewhere. ...That means that when I (a casual player) enter the Tomb of Dread in search of the (Ultra Valuable) Short Sword of Uberness, there is already some clown standing ther waiting for it to drop. And when it does drop he'll log that character out and log in another character to wait for it to drop again.

Of course, in WoW the major dungeons are instanced -- meaning you get your own private version of the Tomb of Dread, just as the ebay clown does, and both of you get your own uberloot without stepping on each other's toes.

So, no, that argument does not fly at all.

Re:So happy.

[Glog]

Yep, what you describe is a problem in other games such as Everquest. However, WoW uses the so called "instancing" - i.e. each party gets their own instance of the dungeon so that camping is avoided altogether. You will never ever see another party in the same dungeon and that solves your problem right there.

Re:So happy.

[Hwaguy]

For example, the more time your character spends logged out and resting at an inn, the longer the amount of time that character will receive 200% of the normal XP given by quests, discoveries, and monsters.

You only get the "rested" XP bonus for killing monsters.

Re:So happy.

[Chyeld]

Unfortunatly, your arguement, while at face value appears relavant, is completely wrong.

Yes. The 'big' dungeons are instanced. However the majority of the 'uber' stuff you can get in them is bind on pick-up. Meaning it can not be traded, only destroyed (either manually or by selling to an NPC vendor.)

The items which CAN be sold, traded, or just plain given away, are typically OUTSIDE those dungeons or are assembled from resources which can and are already being camped. So you still have a problem with being able to compete with bots or jackasses to get the materials you need to make your own stuff.

Re:So happy.

[MrBigInThePants]

How on earth is this "Insightful"??

Two Words: Instanced dungeons.

I guess that is the problem with public moderation...too many uninformed people

Re:So happy.

[asretfroodle]

So how does going after eBay trades help with this at all?

You're still going to have to compete with campers. People who can no longer get it from eBay will now be lined up in front of you as well.

As others have said, this seems more a problem of the game than anything else.

Re:So happy.

[Anonymous Coward]

As far as I've seen the uber stuff dropped in instanced dungeons or received from quests is far, far ahead of the items you get elsewhere. I'm not sure why anyone would ebay a 10dps Short Sword of Uberness when they could do a simple quest that yields a 20dps Mace of Smiting as a drop along the way to getting some Uber Pantaloons.

I think raiding eBay is intended to make board trolls happy more than resolving game issues.

Re:So happy.

[tsm_sf]

If a person is willing to pay to have more fun playing a game, what is wrong with that?

Nothing, if it's a single-player game. What would you think about a version of chess or monopoly where players could buy their way into a better position? Not much fun if you're the guy with less money to spend on the game. MMORPGs are no different, even though you're not always face-to-face with your opponent.

Re:So happy.

[GoofyBoy]

>What would you think about a version of chess or monopoly where players could buy their way into a better position?

Chess and monopoly are zero-sum games. For you to "win", another player has to "lose".

MMORPG are not zero-sum. You can have zero Uber-swords or 10 in the game, but it does not take away from your own advancement.

Re:So happy.

[tsm_sf]

You forgot Poland... er, PvP.
MMORPGs that include an active PvP environment are definitely zero-sum. Maybe a better example would be allowing counterstrike players to purchase better ping times.

I'd also make the argument that impressing the masses with your Uber-sword is much less likely to happen if everyone knows you can buy them on ebay for $5.

Re:So happy.

[cluke]

Instanced? What the hell is massively multiplayer about that?
Seriously though, does being instanced detract from the experience in any way?

Re:So happy.

[DrSkwid]

Is that similar to the instanced dungeon system that everquest uses ?

Re:So happy.

[delus10n0]

1) Life isn't fair.

2) It's just a game.

3) Try playing a "single player" RPG, along the lines of Star Wars: KotoR, Dungeon Siege, etc.

Re:So happy.

[glowimperial]

In addition, most of the rteally powerful gear is both level limited, and bind on pickup, which means that it cannot ever be traded once it has been looted. Blizzards binind process basically means that most of the really, really good items in the game have to be looted directly by their user. And the really excellent quest loot is tied to quests that can't be activated until you have finished other quests and you are at the proper level. It is nigh impossible to operate the kind of virtual item for real money economy that we have seen in other games. It would be far more profitable, in WoW to charge cash for the service of being led through the instance dungeons by a high level player, so that the lower level player can get loot that is usually out of their grasp. Or you could just join an ingame guild and do instances with higher level players without spending a dime, and have a good time to boot.

Re:So happy.

[gilmet]

Instancing is a neat idea, but kind of lame. So now you have lots of people with the uber item that previously spawned in one place... thus making it not uber, right? The problem with "you" people is that you only want the illusion of uber. Anyway, I could care less if you go on lying to yourselves.

I realized a couple years ago that mmorpg's are fun if you treat them like real life... at which point I realized I could just play real life.

Re:So happy.

[ildon]

Have you actually played the game? Resource and mob spawns rates are proportional to the number of people harvesting/killing them. The only time there has been a problem getting something that I've seen was on release day in the newbie zones. And even then, with a few hundred people in the newbie zone with you, it was possible to complete the "kill 10 of monster X" quests without too much trouble.

Re:So happy.

[Anonymous Coward]

But at least those other campers, that are apparently going to now have the dirve to get the items themselves when they were not willing to do so before, are atleast other players, and not just someone who is getting the item to sell.

Players are generally, not always of course, more fun to play with than bots or people who are there just for their job...

Re:So happy.

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem with "you" people is that you only want the illusion of uber.

"You" people? Extra points for condescendance.

It takes long hours of sitting on your behind to get the "uber" items.

And the truly "uber" ones, are only 1 per server.

Anyway, I could care less if you go on lying to yourselves.

You could care less? Thats great. But please, stop posting, and stop caring. We'll both be happy, I'm sure.

at which point I realized I could just play real life.

You're posting on slashdot.org.
Guess what? You fail at life.

Re:So happy.

[gilmet]

Ah yes... another wannabe pedantic.

"You" people? Extra points for condescendance.

Miscommunication on the "you". If I had intended "condescendance" (sic), I would have written *you*. My intent with the quotes was to imply I wasn't speaking to everyone in the thread -- only those that think camp spawning is lame.

You're posting on slashdot.org.
Guess what? You fail at life

Can't argue there. I never imagined I'd read so poignant a thought... and on slashdot no less!

So what's your excuse?

Re:So happy.

[Anonymous Coward]

The whole point of instancing is to avoid the dreaded EQ-esque "camp the ubber-baddy" syndrome. I understand that you could get several groups of people camping a single once-a-day spawn in hopes of being the ones to pounce on it first and get the goodies. Never played EQ myself, so I have no idea how accurate my scenario is.

With instanced dungeons, that issue goes out the window. Anyone who wants to go get a crack at Captain Halitosis and his horde of Wedgy Monsters so they can take the Dentures of Greater Breath Weapon from his messy corpse can take their shot, no waiting.

And with the realitive ease with which people can get Phat Lute (such as the aforementioned Dentures), along with "bind on pickup" items (where picking up a Really Good item renders it untradeable), they're really puting a dent in the real-world-selling potential.

All the best stuff has to be earned, and its not campable, so everyone has a shot at earning it.

Plus their "resting XP bonus" makes it easier to level as a casual gamer (as has been mentioned previously).

Overall, I'd say WoW was designed with curbing real-money-for-virtual-goods in mind.

I also have reason to believe that they kept in mind the whole "fun" thing. Good game. Love it.

Economic Inevitability

[DLWormwood]

How does Blizzard expect to enforce this? eBay isn't the only auction house on the web, and even assuming that they hire a largish tech team to spy^H^H^Hwatch many sites, they can't see everything. Battle.net account termination can only occur if Blizzard discovers the trade in the first place.

If nothing else, people will just turn to older, more obscure venues like USENET to engage in trades, or even do it over e-mail or in person. How can Blizzard expect to stop the black market trade if world governments can't do it in the real world?

Re:Economic Inevitability

[MacBrave]

The quick answer is they can't. But Blizzard can wave it's ban stick around and hope to scare it's subscriber base into submission.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[rogueMonkey]

Answer: 80/20 rule. Stop the 20% sellers that sell 80% of the stuff and the problem becomes marginal and can probably be ignored. How can we live in society with murder and rape? We try to catch as many wrong-doers as we can and convince others that they have more to lose from breaking the rules than from obeying them. We can't eradicate crime, but we can try to control it.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[snwcrash]

Real word governments can't track every item traded and look at a database full of who is doing what. They know about the trade, it's just a question of them identifying which are the illegal trades. But if you profile people who make something great for nothing trades, than you can probably look closer at them...

Re:Economic Inevitability

[BrynM]

eBay isn't the only auction house on the web, and even assuming that they hire a largish tech team to spy^H^H^Hwatch many sites, they can't see everything.

It wouldn't take much to whip up some bot scripts that troll various auction sites for keywords and such. Sure, sellers could try the whole 1337 writing style stuff that spam has become so notorious for, but that will just make the items less likely to sell due to seeming fraudulent or at least unsavory. Yes the eBay alternatives would be harder to track than eBay, but the customers won't be as plentiful. eBay is sure to help them out citing copyright and trademark violations.

I think Blizzard has a good chance of severly curbing auctioning or at least making a royal pain in the ass to do. If they manage to make it almost as hard as actually earning the item, then they have won. The final word being Blizzard's of course. They can can/ban you for anything they feel like and not care much about false positives if they so choose.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[DLWormwood]

If they manage to make it almost as hard as actually earning the item, then they have won. The final word being Blizzard's of course. They can can/ban you for anything they feel like and not care much about false positives if they so choose.

It is this kind of issue that keep me from playing MMORPGs in the first place. (The closest I've played is Diablo II.) Having these kinds of restrictions on ToS, level ranges, account balance ceilings, etc., reminds too much of the Real World that I play games to escape from.

I personally think that unless "virtual worlds" mutate into some form of real world interaction proxy, the continued warfare between developers and end users is just going to make the MMORPG genre collape in on itself. It almost to the point now where game operators are treating their "players" the same way employers during the Industrial Revolution made "serfs" of their employees via issuing of scrip, denial of ownership rights, and social pressures or requirements to invest excessive amounts of time in company activity.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[BrynM]

It is this kind of issue that keep me from playing MMORPGs in the first place. (The closest I've played is Diablo II.)

We have something in common then. :D I can't imagine paying maintenance costs... er... a subscription for a game just to have some sweeping rules change or other "technicality" screw up all of my planning. Saw that happen to too many folks on the old versions of EQ. I can get ripped off in the real world, thanks.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[Moo Moo Cow of Death]

Most sites out there barring eBay have already gone to court over such rulings and have won. What has actually come out over these cases is that it is ILLEGAL for certain companies, subsidiaries or third party employees to puruse or bid on these sites with the intent or interest of transmitting personal or non-personal (game character names) information to the said company.

Basically this means Blizzard and Sony would lose horribly if someone from these sites found out about a "spy" and they'd take a hit in the pocketbook that would make Bill Gates turn white.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[Anonymous Coward]

It almost to the point now where game operators are treating their "players" the same way employers during the Industrial Revolution made "serfs" of their employees via issuing of scrip, denial of ownership rights, and social pressures or requirements to invest excessive amounts of time in company activity.

The difference being that the exploited employees back then had only two options - put up with it or starve. You have a third option: choose a different hobby.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[Kris_J]

I seriously hope you didn't just compare the sale of virtual items to rape and murder. One being an interesting copyright issue which may not even be illegal, the others being rape and murder.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[BrynM]

Basically this means Blizzard and Sony would lose horribly if someone from these sites found out about a "spy" and they'd take a hit in the pocketbook that would make Bill Gates turn white.

Where do you get the information about lawsuits from? There wouldn't need to be any spying. All it would take is some eBay searching and a compaint to the eBay VeRO Program. They don't have an "About Me" page on the VeRO information, but that doesn't mean that they aren't involved. eBay will bend over backwards to help them as long as they don't file a suit against eBay itself, like Tiffany did.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[baalz]

I think you're overestimating the difficulty here. Blizzard is banning accounts, a rather large cost to being caught so their rate of catching people doesn't have to be very high. Imagine they employ a single clueful techie even half time to find any infringements. It won't stop all sales obviously, but it would stop most sales between people who didn't know each other already, reducing item sales by several orders of magnitude. Would you buy/sell something if there is a non-negligable chance you'll lose your account because somebody who knows what they're doing has bots scanning the USENET?

Re:Economic Inevitability

[Kaa]

I think Blizzard has a good chance of severly curbing auctioning or at least making a royal pain in the ass to do.

I very much doubt it.

First, Blizzard has no legal basis to prevent anyone from posting things like "Selling blue 1H sword +20 Str +30 Sta". Sure, the EULA might prohibit it, but the EULA isn't binding on, say, a website which hosts a board.

Second, it's trivially easy to arrange sales over boards, IRC channels, etc. etc. Paypal works without Ebay perfectly well. And it's not like it's hard to create one-off email addresses.

So in this case I think Blizzard is all bark and no bite.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[Anonymous Coward]

dumb ass. he's didn't say selling virtual items is like rape and/or murder. he just said that a strategy to stop the sale of virtual item is similiar to the strategy used to control crime. it's also the same strategy i use to train my dog.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[Anonymous Coward]

actually they can, there are webservices that blizzard could utilize to have a computer just sit there and look for auctions

Re:Economic Inevitability

[Schemat1c]

I seriously hope you didn't just compare the sale of virtual items to rape and murder.

I didn't see anywhere in that post where rape and murder were compared to anything . I read a very clear analogy comparing the technics of real world crime control to it's virtual world counterpart.

Maybe you should read the post again.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems to me they should just bid on the ebayed items themselves. When the seller arrives ban the account. Now they can easily pull their PayPal payment because the item was never recieved.

There are also large amounts of other statistical monitoring they can do. Large numbers of monitary trades w/ no associated items is probably the best method. I'm sure there is something they could do to check for character sales as well but for now they could easily tell which characters are for sale via screenshots (pretty easy to know who is ebaying when you know there is only one level 60 NE rogue with long blue hair and light purple skin). In the long run they could watch for characters whose CC name changes on the account as a basic list.

The fun thing about baning these accounts is that at first the ebayers are gonna buy new accounts. That just means more income for Blizzard plus keeping their other customers happy.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[pezpunk]

obviously people who REALLY REALLY want to buy / sell gear will probably be able to find a way. but if blizzard can keep it sufficiently underground, that is, off the major auction sites, then it won't be prevalent to a) ruin the game for others or b) support the foreign sweatshops that populate everquest.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[Starsmore]

True, Blizzard has no legal basis to keep people from advertising, but they do have the legal basis to find the person selling the "Blue 1H sword +20 Str +30 Sta", smack them, kick them off the game, and then find the guy that bought said sword, and delete the item.

It's called the 'Its My Sandbox' principle. If you don't like how Blizzard runs their game, there's a good half dozen others out there.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[xero314]

Blizzard can enforce this in the exact same way the RIAA has enforced the illegal distribution of Copyrighted music, litigation. Through litigation Blizzard, or any company protecting intelectual property, can make the risk of these illegal sales to high for it to be profitabl by big item shops. They may not be able to completely eliminate sales by individuals, but as you would find out with a short search around the net, the majority of in game items are sold by companies (many outside US jurisdiction) set up for the purpose of playing games for profit.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[Anonymous Coward]

Posting as AC and stuff, blah.

VeRO program is all good and stuff, but these days these types of auctions don't really go through ebay. Try this if you're really curious.

As for the buying and selling issue. I don't really see the problem with it. If someone wants to spend 40 hours making 100 Super-Expensive-MMO-Currency and then charge $100 for it I'm paying for the time I would have otherwise spent in the grind trying to get said 100 whatever.

It may be annoying to see newbies running around with +10 swords of universal destruction, but I can deal. As for e-bayed characters, well my policy on those is rather simple. If you don't know how to play your class you're not going to be in my guild, and if you happen to turn up in my group you're not gonna be in there for long either. Of course if you happen to find a group that will accept you that's no fault of your own.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[Kaa]

they do have the legal basis to find the person selling the "Blue 1H sword +20 Str +30 Sta", smack them, kick them off the game, and then find the guy that bought said sword, and delete the item.

True, but they don't have the capability :-)

Let's say I advertise on www.wowuberloot.com and let's say Blizzard reads it. So now they know that foo@hotmail.com wants to sell a sword that a couple of tens of thousands of people have in-game. This is going to help them how?

It's called the 'Its My Sandbox' principle.

Umm... no. This is called the "I'm writing the EULA and no one reads it anyway, so SCREW YOU" principle. Blizzard has legal rights to kick anyone out of the game, for no reason at all. So?

Re:Economic Inevitability

[Anonymous Coward]

It shouldn't be too hard if they ban accounts/cdkeys. Suppose you're a major seller and you get busted. All your loot (probably worth hundreds of dollars, if you could sell it) instantly disappears. You also lose your account, so now you need to go back to the store and pick up another WoW box. Better get another one while you're there too, so that you can use one account to store stuff and transfer to your other account when you make a transaction. But that's still a $50 cost to you every time Blizzard finds you. Your items/gold might be somewhat safe, but they're still at risk if Blizzard identifies you as a major operator and really goes after you. And we haven't even talked about the lawsuits, which Blizzard indicated they were willing to use as a tool if necessary. Blizzard might not stop all the selling, but they don't need to. They just need to make it more trouble than it's worth and the problem will mostly disappear.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[Metapsyborg]

I seriously hope you didn't just compare the sale of virtual items to rape and murder. One being an interesting copyright issue which may not even be illegal, the others being rape and murder

Yeah, because it would be simply ridiculous to compare two things that have absolutely no similarities whatsoever...oh, wait; all the things you speak of are illegal because of societal distinctions between right and wrong.

If Blizzard decides that the sale of virtual items is illegal in its virtual society, then it is; just like many cultures have decided that rape and murder are wrong.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[bedessen]

Sure they don't have a legal basis for preventing you from selling game items... on the other hand they DO have a legal basis to terminate your account or the account that posesses the traded object. It's their server, their rules, etc. So in effect they can't prevent you from selling the items but they sure can make sure that the parties involved get their accounts disabled if they can show that the items were sold outside of the game.

Re:Economic Inevitability

[Snaller]

True, Blizzard has no legal basis to keep people from advertising, but they do have the legal basis to find the person selling the "Blue 1H sword +20 Str +30 Sta", smack them, kick them off the game, and then find the guy that bought said sword, and delete the item.

I don't agree they have that legal basis either. He isn't charging for something which isn't real anyway, he is charging for his time. And they don't like it? Tough. Not their call.

hmmm...

[ack154]

I just did a quick search and most of the things I saw were a couple gold pieces or something and the people were strictly claiming in the auction that the "item" is property of Blizzard and that the person is paying for the time to gather it and process the transaction...

I wonder what Blizzard thinks of that? Still bad, I assume?

Re:hmmm...

[MindStalker]

Still not allowed by blizzards policy. Sugar coating the legal language isn't going to help you. If you want to trde, use the in-game trading system, which lets you trade virtual-items and virtual-money for other virtual-items and virtual-money. Blizzard can afford kick the players that are only there to make money off the system, so they will do it. The other MMORGS would do this too, but they are probably scared of turning away subsribers, when in reality, banning this activity could ulimatly bring in new subscribers.

Re:hmmm...

[ack154]

No, I totally agree with the practice. Just found it interesting that the people selling were already trying to cover their asses. But yes, they certainly have a large enough userbase to do as they wish at this point.

Re:hmmm...

[Moo Moo Cow of Death]

You don't have to sugar coat anything to see the past actual legal cases have been LOST to the ebayers.

And it's still very debatable whether banning people who are using third parties to influence the game actually hurts the economy or hurts playerbase. So far, ZERO researchers on that one...be the first :p

Re:hmmm...

[Vermifax]

"You don't have to sugar coat anything to see the past actual legal cases have been LOST to the ebayers"

Oh really? Which case law in the US?

Link us please.

Re:hmmm...

[droleary]

If you want to trde, use the in-game trading system, which lets you trade virtual-items and virtual-money for other virtual-items and virtual-money.

So how much virtual-money does it take to play the virtual-game for a month? Division by zero error, you say? Until you can use in-game money to pay to remain playing, pretending you can trade within the game economy is a joke.

Blizzard can afford kick the players that are only there to make money off the system, so they will do it.

No, they really can't afford to kick the people who continue to play their game. Just because I have gained two +6 swords (or whatever) and I can get rid of one for $15, allowing me to essentially play a month for free, doesn't mean I'm only playing to make money.

The other MMORGS would do this too, but they are probably scared of turning away subsribers, when in reality, banning this activity could ulimatly bring in new subscribers.

Funny, because the reverse is so obviously the case. People spend real time and money creating a virtual world for Blizzard, and Blizzard thinks they can turn around and say it was all a complete waste, and somehow such a sinkhole is going to attract new subscribers? If they, or any other MMORPG, really wanted to attract subscribers they would create an actual economy within the game first, and even then they have to allow people to transfer resources back and forth between the real world and the game world.

The simple reality is that even in virtual worlds it takes real money to create resources. If it takes a customer two months of play to get an item, they've created something that is worth at least $30. They can dance around the issue all they want and attempt to enforce their haphazard internal economy as much as they like, but it all still comes down to dollars and cents in the real world. Until they change their payment options to support game currency, they don't have an isolated economy. The paradox, of course, is that in accepting the internal currency they have to acknowledge that value in the game still translates to value out of game. Their current stance is so mentally confused I can't give them my money any more than I'd give money to the crazy person with the sign at the exit ramp.

Re:hmmm...

[MindStalker]

Interesting point, while I firmly believe most MMORPG players are not in it to make money, and would prefer people not buy their way into the system, and really hate the people with bots just so they can sell off good items. You do have a point that there probably is a large amount of people who do sell off their old junk, thus making the game more affordable to more users who are being suplimented by people with money to burn. It will be interesting to see how getting rid of such actions will influence the older players, and if older player simply leave the system once the game becomes less challenging and they don't have the opertunity to make money from it.

Re:hmmm...

[droleary]

Interesting point, while I firmly believe most MMORPG players are not in it to make money, and would prefer people not buy their way into the system, and really hate the people with bots just so they can sell off good items.

Why would you hate that? If someone can "game the game" (as it were) with a bot, doesn't that just point to the fact that that aspect of the game isn't worth your individual human effort to play? Wouldn't items so farmed actually be correspondingly cheaper than items that had to be gained by human efforts? And don't people buy their way into things all the time, with all manner of currency, both in games and in reality? The very foundation of WoW and other MMORPGs is that you have to subscribe! The only way to play is to buy their way into the system, so what's the big deal if they buy their way in with $15/month for 6 months or simply pay $200 to get a jump start? If anything, people in game should want a lesser player to come in hemorrhaging great wealth because that means you have a fool who has parted with their money once in reality and has set themselves up to part with it again in the game. Once you win their property fair and square in the game, maybe they'll give you the $200 to get it back so that they can start all over again.

You do have a point that there probably is a large amount of people who do sell off their old junk, thus making the game more affordable to more users who are being suplimented by people with money to burn.

Absolutely. Any long running game like EQ has a totally unbalanced economy because resources just spawn out of nowhere and end up getting saved more than spent. I have friends who have reported just giving newbies millions in treasure because there wasn't much else to do with it. They need a real economy, where wealth can be destroyed, to bring things back in check; I think being able to pay the monthly fee (or part of it) in game currency is one way to take wealth back out of the system.

It will be interesting to see how getting rid of such actions will influence the older players, and if older player simply leave the system once the game becomes less challenging and they don't have the opertunity to make money from it.

The games get stale because they don't have a proper ecosystem. Characters just level up until there is nothing left in the food chain that is interesting to fight. Or, at the low end, they just endlessly kill rats or goblins or whatever monster is in illogically infinite supply. Nothing ever seems to be hunted to extinction. The bottom never seems to fall out of any markets. In short, eventually it becomes clear that nothing interesting will ever happen, so players abandon the game. I think that's where the misguided concern over selling things is: the subscribers who leave and hope to get something back by selling to subscribers who are just joining. Blizzard is not really concerned about people who spawn camp making a bit of dough. Instead they're trying to control the loss of one subscriber, never realizing that selling game items makes the experience more interesting to many new subscribers.

Now You're Working for Something

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate how in most MMORPGs you'll work and slave building your character up and getting good equipment for him/her, and then some newbie will come along and buy all the phat loot off eBay so they'll start off with an advantage.

It's nice to know that anything you earn in WOW won't be commoditized and devalued.

Pointless for newbies

[Dekks]

From my brief time in beta, I was under the impression that most of the good items can't be used until a higher level anyway, so the only thing you could really get that would be useful is money, and a newbie probably wouldn't make much use of a few million gold anyway one would think?

Re:Pointless for newbies

[softspokenrevolution]

Well, you could probably pick up a character too while you're at it, though I don't quite know how that might work.

Re:Pointless for newbies

[Delphiki]

Selling characters is easier to detect than selling items, though, because someone has to keep paying for the character after it's been bought.

Re:Pointless for newbies

[KevinKnSC]

But there's nothing in-game to signal the transfer. If I buy the game with cash, pay the first month or two with pre-paid game cards, and then sell the account to you, the only trail is real-world, as opposed to selling an item or gold, where the transfer happens on Blizzard's servers. If we cover our tracks, there's no way for them to show that you didn't just buy the game yourself. Stuff like that would be limited to a very small scale, though, since attracting a lot of customers requires some amount of publicity.

Re:Pointless for newbies

[Starsmore]

As far as I'm aware (and this may have changed) in order to set up your account and get playing, you have to key in your name, address, and a credit card for preauth.

Could have changed, though.

Re:Pointless for newbies

[softspokenrevolution]

Yeah, it's probably easier to crack down on account auctions.

Blizzard Tax

[superpulpsicle]

Blizzard is just pissed cause the company is not able to capitalize on these items. If they WERE, they wouldn't be complaining.

They should setup some kind of tax system where they get 20% of the profit when you buy from ebay etc. If you don't pay the tax, they'd send down a grim reaper to fuck your character up.

Re:Blizzard Tax

[MindStalker]

Oh, I'm sure they could capitalize if they want to. Other games have. Blizzard has made a concous decision that they want their game to be different. Why must you assume the worse?

Re:Blizzard Tax

[satoshi1]

Because he's trolling?

Re:Blizzard Tax

[servognome]

The problem is it sends them down a dark legal road where they admit items in game = real money.
Server goes down and characters are reset - somebody then sues Blizzard because they lost their possessions worth $4000; they also become responsible for losses due to scams, bugs, nerfs (hey my $2000 ubersword got nerfed and is now only worth $5), etc. It also changes the dynamic of the game from entertainment to profit.

Re:Blizzard Tax

[superultra]

Blizzard is just pissed cause the company is not able to capitalize on these items. If they WERE, they wouldn't be complaining.

I could see this if there were some Blizzard sanctioned auction house, but there isn't. So what financial gain is there in ending these ebay auctions? Only that it is detrimental to gameplay (or so they would say). I think they are well aware of the Everquest effect, of people making a living off of selling items.

And then there's the whole Chinese mafia involvement in Lineage and the like. If I were a developer, money or no, I'd be concerned that games of my making were involved in that kind of activity. So why is Blizzard inherently evil?

Re:Blizzard Tax

[Anonymous Coward]

Interesting. In this case, by getting these objects, you are acquiring something of value, whether you actually sell it or not. In such a case, would you have to regard the accumulation of items of real-world value as income, and therefore subject to taxes? Or would it be capital gains, where you only have to pay taxes when the gains are realized?

that's too bad

[syrinx]

I paid for the D2 expansion pack by selling a sword or something that I found.

Seriously, though, this is a good thing. I am really being tempted to buy WoW, though I've never bought an MMORPG before.

The easy way is to encourage the vigilantes

[Fo0eY]

First of all, Blizzard will never be able to keep up if they try to catch and ban each party in a transaction.

What they need to do, is go after the major sellers/sites which are selling ingame goods. And from the wording on their site, it appears that they're going to start doing just that.

I don't think Blizzard will have any problem just outright suing/prosecuting anyone they catch selling ingame items. When you think about it, sellers are really committing fraud by selling something that's not theirs to start with.

They'd only have to bankrupt a few people before it'd stop real fast, or at least go far enough underground to make it a non-issue.

The real difficulty is finding the people doing the selling, and that's where the vigilantes come in. There are always TONS of people that get a mean hardon snitching out other gamers, so all Blizzard has to do is ask the "fans" for help in protecting their game, and they'll probably get more tips than they can deal with.

Re:The easy way is to encourage the vigilantes

[Anonymous Coward]

You made it quite obvious that you didn't think. Blizzard had no legal grounds to sue someone. Most importantly is that they are not selling an actual ITEM, they are selling a service, namely getting a few bytes of data from uber-moster-01 to you. True it may be against the EULA, but would hold no ground in court. If you have trouble believing this do some research before the inevitable scathing reply.

What Blizzard can do is start closing accounts. Though I somehow doubt that vigilantes will help matters at all. (No, really, that guy DID sell me this item, it has nothing to do with the fact that he called me a jerk for killing that spawn he was waiting on!)

I hope it works

[Fr05t]

ebay, IGE, etc have trashed other MMORPG economies. There isn't any way to get it all. Most (I'm speaking from my experience with FFXI) won't do anything or very little to stop it because they don't want to lose a paying customer.

All Blizzard needs to do(and I hope they do):
-Sue a couple people ebaying money/items/characters.
-Kick about 200 or so accounts for trying to buy/sell to IGE.
-Threaten IGE with legal action and ask for a list of their customers/dealers (ban those accounts too).

This will put enough fear in your average player to being things to an acceptable level.

Oh, before anyone tries to say this is what the RIAA is doing - it's not. It might be if RIAA suing people for downloading an MP3, selling it to a web company, then sold to someone else marked up by 80%.

It might cost Blizzard some lawyer money and less in monthly reviews in the short term. In the long term they won't need to worry about players waiting for a new MMORPG with a fresh economy, and lack of high level ebay fuck-tards.

Re:I hope it works

[Anonymous Coward]

No, no. Why do they need to sue? Simply terminating accounts, deleting characters, and banning people accomplishes the same purpose with less backlash.

Re:I hope it works

[lubricated]

> Sue a couple people ebaying money/items/characters.

There is no law against selling and buying stuff.

Re:I hope it works

[obsid1an]

Sorry, but IGE, ebay, etc have not trashed other other games economies. This includes FFXI, a game I also came from. Compared to the overall exchange and transfer of money in these game's economies, the money sold by IGE and players is nothing. Nowhere near enough to make a difference to the economy. In game problems like money dups have far more of an effect.

Second, you think any of the things you suggested Blizzard does would work? Not a chance. How is Blizzard going find how the accounts of players buy from IGE? How are they going to find IGE's accounts? Sure, Blizzard could buy money from IGE and ban the account who sends it to them, but that would be enough to ban one account. Good luck trying the ban buyers.

There is one thing this does have in common with the RIAA suing people. It would be just as effective as the RIAA has been in scaring people.

As far as a legal standing goes, IANAL, but this would be far from an open and shut civil case. I think the fact that this has been going on for years and there hasn't been a single case is testament enough to this.

Re:I hope it works

[ikkonoishi]

Okay then.

I'll buy your neighbor's car from you and lets see how far we get.

Re:I hope it works

[Starsmore]

After giving it some thought, all Blizzard needs to do is set up a sting operation.

They can easily create as much gold as they want, at whim, right? So make a couple dozen dummy accounts with RL alias and such, go talk to IGE about selling them the gold, and get the account information of the guys that pick it up.

Blizzard can probably get IP address ranges too for these guys. Just start banning.

Re:I hope it works

[Random832]

Nice analogy - except, in the MMORPG case, the seller isn't selling anything he doesn't have control over - sure, the code itself is blizzard's property, but he's just selling an agreement to enter in code [which, absent the money changing hands, he has the unchallenged privilege to do] to transfer a pointer to an instance of that object from "his" player object to "your" player object.

your analogy would stand if it was legal for him to give you his neighbor's car but not for him to sell it to you.

Re:I hope it works

[Anonymous Coward]

Plus, once you have the one account follow the money. It may bounce from account to account, but do nothing for a bit. Then when it starts going out to people you know who is buying. Delete their gold, as you know it came form a person selling, and then start banning the many seller accounts the money had probibly passed in and out of.

Re:I hope it works

[Fr05t]

Blizzards EULA states that everything in game is their property (Items/Coins/Characters) and users are not authorized to tranfser Blizzard's property in exchange for real money.

I think Blizzard probably could win a court case based on someone else making money reselling what does not belong to them.

The "selling my time" argument wouldn't really hold up either. It's like me saying "When I sold company X information from company B's database they were paying me for my time. Oh um no Company B didn't say it was ok for me to do that - actually they told me I couldn't do just that in a legal agreement I had to accept before I could access the database."

Re:I hope it works

[Random832]

At which it ceases to be an issue of blizzard owning the in-game items, and becomes an issue of blizzard using its ownership of the game _client software_ [or if it's in the TOS instead, the server] as a big stick to enforce compliance - it's not that they don't have a right to do it, it's that you're misconstruing what they're doing and _how_ they have that legal right.

also, it fights the bots

[Dr. Molf]

When there is a secondary market in selling in-game items (like gold) there is a greater incentive for people to install and run bots. Then, they take that gold and sell it on ebay. So, when you cut down on the market for re-selling these sort of items, you also decrease the number of people who are running illegal bots.

Brilliant! They Need an In-Game Vice Squad

[Anonymous Coward]

People working for Blizzard can go undercover with different characters and act like buyers. When they find someone who's dealing in contraband weapons/armor/gold, they bust them. I'd sign up to be part of this squad if they waived my monthly fee.

It's a threat, not a promise

[Moo Moo Cow of Death]

Blizzard can't actually risk suing anyone, because there's a very good chance they'd lose (won't make any predictions for that except it's probably slightly in favor of the money sellers).

Think about it this way, if they sue someone, IGE (a multi-million dollar company) will back them with the BEST lawyers available. Past court cases including Blacksnow Inc., Playerauctions.com and others have gone in favor of third party sellers (but not directly toward the discussion of if it's legal to actually DO so).

Let's pretend they lose (in the first scenario).

Now, every gamer and his brother's brother can sell items, money etc, LEGALLY without ANY possible reprecussion to their account. They may do whatever the hell they please with their characters including macro, bott, exploit, WHATEVER because all content (if Blizzard lost the case) that the player had direct access to would generally be considered the players and Blizzard would have no control over it except for changes to the game itself which could still conceivably be considered their own code.

NOW let's say they win.

In this case, the prospects for court cases against THEM suddenly open wide up. Now since Blizzard is accountable for items, characters, etc, everything suddenly has a direct value to be determined by money sucking lawyers. That's right people, a nerf could be seen as an attack on character (amoungest MANY other possibilities) and Blizzard would then be legally liable for any and all injustices done in game.

SO barring the possible THREAT of legalese (maybe scrounge a few bucks from the wimps in out of court settlements) you most likely won't see a real court case come out of this unless Blizzard is out of their goddamn mind.

Are there other scenarios? Yes, and I would love to list all of them since I'm an avid researcher on this exact circumstance but I don't have the time right now...I'm checking on my macro bott :p

(j/k I'm at work :)

P.S. A court case...win or lose...would not only set these rules of play for WoW, but most likely for ALL other games in existance since most court cases use past history and precedant (sp) to argue their cases (and it usually works since a large portion of law is facts and research).

Re:It's a threat, not a promise

[Delphiki]

You've got it mixed up. If Blizzard lost the case, and the items were then sellable, they would have monetary value. If something is illegal to sell, it has no monetary value, so nobody can sue Blizzard for damaging it. Even more, a ruling in Blizzard's favor would probably state that Blizzard owned all of the items. Nobody is going to be able to sue Blizzard for ruining their own stuff through a nerf.

Re:It's a threat, not a promise

[KevinKnSC]

First, go price a kilo of your recreational non-tobacco, non-alcohol drug of choice, and then rethink the value of things that are illegal to sell. Second, if this were to go to court the issue wouldn't be ownership of virtual items (which is a ridiculous concept, if you think about it), it would be breach of Blizzard's license agreement. Blizzard argues that the breach of license devalues their product. I can't come up with a good counterargument, but I'd be interested to see what someone came up with should something like this ever find its way to court.

Re:It's a threat, not a promise

[Gamelore]

How would them winning a lawsuit suddenly hold them accountible for nerfs?

A nerf could be officially described in in-game terms, in which case the game itself is a modifier of the item value. They can't be sued for changing their own core game, say.

They'd theoretically be accountible if items were irrecoverable after a crash, or taken away by a GM, etc. But those things could be explained as game-changes as well.

Now, if they ever wanted to take the game down permanently, I could see how this could open up a can of lawsuits... Winning the lawsuit would only mean the company has more responsibility over their items in the context of the game. Short of the game being shut-down, I don't see them being liable for any changes.

Re:It's a threat, not a promise

[vhold]

If I ruined all your cocaine do you think you'd be able to sue me for damages? I think that's the basic gist of what he meant.

On a different note, did anybody ever try to sue Wizards of the Coast when they came out with new Magic the Gathering cards that might have adversely affected the values of older ones? Such as new cards seemingly designed to counter overly powerful old ones? Seems like it'd be exactly the same situation, in a market that has absolutely zero question as to whether or not the cards have monetary value.

Re:It's a threat, not a promise

[Moo Moo Cow of Death]

I won't get too far into the nitty gritty but I would like to say at the point they win it becames a huge case of semantics dealing with who "rents" what and how everything is leased, etc, etc.

Basically, it's not a case for slashdot to be arguing really but for the theologians at terranova.blogs :)

I do see where your argument is coming from though :)

Re:It's a threat, not a promise

[Moo Moo Cow of Death]

The wizards of the cost game scenario is way off though, because the cards are sold as is to customers and they are FREE to sell, trade or give away whatever cards they want to other people. This would be the case if Blizzard lost.

Re:It's a threat, not a promise

[Moo Moo Cow of Death]

EULAs in general tend to be unenforceable due to varying state laws, personal opinion and the fact they don't hold up real well in court cases and most in fact carry a clause which states that the agreement is (obviously) null and void on both parts of the parties involved if it isn't enforceable.

Re:It's a threat, not a promise

[Moo Moo Cow of Death]

I'll shorten this up since there may have been some confusion as to what I thought would happen.

Currently virtual items have NO legal value. They don't even EXIST in the eyes of the law, not US law at least (check China and Korea). In EITHER case of winning or losing items would suddenly gain value.

If Blizzard LOST the value would be in the hands of the players, much like baseball cards where anyone could sell, trade, give away whatever they wanted.

If Blizzard WON the value would be in the hands of Blizzard who could be liable under certain laws of rental agreements and misc semantics which ramble on and on (cases based on less evidence and lower expectations have been won, don't doubt it:)

That's it in a nutshell :)

Re:It's a threat, not a promise

[Fjornir]

did anybody ever try to sue Wizards of the Coast when they came out with new Magic the Gathering cards that might have adversely affected the values of older ones

Yes. If memory serves in the mid 90s WoTC released a card (The shivan hatchling?) only at a convention, breaking the value of all of the previously "complete" sets collectors had amassed. Faced with a threatened class-action lawsuit (I don't know if the class was ever certified) they elected to distribute the card through other channels (shrinkwrap with a magazine for one) and dodged the bullet. This is hazy recollection and I was never really a magic-head, so someone who actually knows should chime in and correct me. :)

Soulbound items

[Bonewalker]

It seems to me that another thing they have done is to create Soulbound items. I could be wrong, but many of the nicer items are bound to you once you equip them. So, if they change that to automatically bound as soon as you receive an item, the only thing you can do with it is sell it to a vendor.

So, the only really valuable thing worth selling would be the in-game money. Boring.

Re:Soulbound items

[Kris_J]

Soulbinding sometimes triggers just on pickup. This is a PITA. It means that if you find something cool while soloing that one of your friends' characters could use, you can't give it to them.

Re:Soulbound items

[skadus]

Tell me about it... I was questing this one time during the beta in a group, and died during a boss fight. I rezzed just as he died and went to loot... and got the quest item (I shift-right-clicked rather than just right-clicked). It wouldn't trade, either.

I felt so bad after that that I helped the other guys in the group get the item, too. Loooong spawn, but it worked out okay in the end.

Re:Soulbound items

[Golias]

Quest items are often instanced in WoW. If you had six guys doing the quest together, they could each loot their very own Flobotinum Sword of Bring This To The Innkeeper For Phat Exp, all off the same dead boss.

Yes, it kind of breaks the realism of the game, but it makes it much more feasible to group when questing. None of that "we do the same quest over and over together six times, taking turns getting the Flobotinum Sword until everybody has one."

If that's what you were doing, you probably should have stopped and checked the boss corpse. You could have saved yourselves a lot of time.

Re:Soulbound items

[skadus]

Yeah, I found that was the case later on, but this particular time the loot was set wrong or the guy wasn't in the party... or something. Like I said, it was during the beta. :p I'm way past that point now.

I bumped into the multiple item thing in Ameth'Aran during one of the quests recently, and it was great. You still can't trade soulbound items though.

I'm happy and interested....

[Chyeld]

I'm interested in seeing how this plays out. I've been on the fence with Blizzard (didn't exactlly like their use of DMCA even through I could see the logic of their case against the B.net clone) but having played WoW this last week, I've been nothing but impressed by their product.

For those of you who don't know, WoW comes with the ability to customize your UI, adding, changing and removing functionality through a combination of XML and Lua scripting. They've already said that if you can do it with what they've opened up to you fromt here, it's ok to do. They'll take the responsibility to correct exploits if a way to abuse something is found. That, combined with their strong "out of the gates" oposition to botting and RL selling seems (IMO) to be the perfect combination of freedom (allowing legitimate enhancement of the game through the customization) while not allowing exploiters to take over the game to farm out item.

I'm really interested in seeing what the landscape is like a year from now.

legality

[MORTAR_COMBAT!]

it may not be illegal per the laws of the land, but it is in the WoW user agreement. don't like it, don't use the service. easy enough.

because it's also not illegal for Blizzard to thwack your account, losing you the use of your precious $200 staff of mightyness.

how is buying gold or weapons on ebay "unfair"

[MORTAR_COMBAT!]

not that I agree with it for /other/ reasons, but it's hardly unfair. a player still pops the item or gathers the gold, it is not a dupe trick, it is not hacking the server.

if selling gold or weapons on ebay is "unfair" then so is giving away gold or weapons to friends, or heck, just for fun.

please come up with a more compelling argument than "fairness" -- because that one falls flat on its face in my opinion. because "having money" or "knowing the right people" don't fundamentally differ as valid reasons for giving someone an item, in my opinion.

now, the selling of items is expressly forbidden by the terms of service, making selling items either grey "illegal" or at least simply "against the rules". but I honestly don't see it as "unfair".

if person A is willing to pay person B for not having to kill monster C a dozen times to get item D, who the hell cares? there are minimum level requirements for all the non-quest items I know of, and frankly if knowing that person A has item D bothers you, get a life. and "get a life" coming from someone who plays a MMORPG should be at least somewhat alarming.

the main reason (to me) to discourage ebaying such items is that there is little (to no) enforcement possible, thus you have no recourse if your money is taken and you don't get the item you want. because you can't complain to Blizzard or eBay or anyone else really, as they can easily point you at the terms of service. yet you'll feel screwed by "someone" and likely take it out on Blizzard or eBay employees.

Intersection of reality and fantasy..

[vhold]

I can't say that I've stayed away MMORPGs strictly for such a simple reason, but getting rid of the ebay overtone to the game would definitely improve a game like this slightly.

The idea of people spending $$$ to get ahead isn't what intrinsically bothers me, it's just the fact that the suspension of disbelief is dispelled when what should be a fully contained alternative universe intersects at the most fundamental level with the real one.

Also, I'm willing to admit that the kind of people that are willing to farm in one way or another all day in order to make a buck I'd really rather see move on to another game. They have a vested interest to make all kinds of forum arguments that everything should be more scarce, time consuming and difficult, along with having the time and persistence to be a very vocal minority.

Re:Intersection of reality and fantasy..

[realityfighter]

What we need is a farming MMO where the player manages bots to plant seed, fight off plagues of locusts, and bring the harvest in.

Harvest Moon Online, Summer 2006

Against eBaying for game reasons or legal reasons?

[Kevin143]

Blizzard, and almost all MMORPG developers have to have a pretense of being against eBay. Otherwise, a court could rule that the in game objects have value and that if there was a server crash, Blizzard would have to pay restitution. A similar scenario would exist if Blizzard were to shut the WOW servers down in five years.

If Sony were to shut-down Everquest 1, the 77th richest nation in the world and all the entailing wealth would be destroyed. It's bizarre to think about. Certainly any Everquest or WOW player would say that there character and virtual posessions have real world value. But Sony and Blizzard must reject that notion so they won't have to pay for the conversion of every in game item to real-world dollars every time there is a server crash.

Re:Brilliant! They Need an In-Game Vice Squad

[Anonymous Coward]

It'd be kinda fun to have a second narc character. A bit like playing as a cop
F#@k'em, Blizzard's TOS state that they own everything in the game and selling someone else's property in the real world is illegal.

anything in the EULA?

[Anonymous Coward]

for anyone who knows this stuff, I'm just curious about the EULA. Does it mention anything about RL selling? if so, what does it say? and how useful could that be in court? I think I remember reading a while back that EULA's aren't so strong in court.

I got this in the mail the other day

[supabeast!]

Ebay is sending this to anyone selling WoW accounts or items:

**PLEASE READ THIS IMPORTANT EMAIL REGARDING YOUR LISTING(S)**

We would like to let you know that we removed your listing:

XXX

because the intellectual property rights owner notified us, under penalty of perjury, that your listing or the item itself infringes their copyright, trademark, or other rights.

We have credited any associated fees to your account. We have also notified the bidders that the listing(s) was removed, and that they are not obligated to complete the transaction.

If you relist this or any other similar items on eBay, your account likely will be suspended.

If you believe your listing was ended in error, or have questions regarding the removal of this listing, please contact the intellectual property rights owner directly at:

ESA - Entertainment Software Association
dmca@theESA.com

eBay is available to answer questions, but since it is the rights owner that requested the removal of your listing(s), we encourage you to contact them first.

For more information on eBay's cooperation with rights owners through the VeRO Program, and a list of rights owners that have created About Me pages, please visit:

http://pages.ebay.com/help/confidence/vero-remov ed -listing.html
http://pages.ebay.com/help/communit y/vero-aboutme. html

Thank you for your cooperation.

Regards,

Customer Support (Trust and Safety Department)
eBay Inc

Re:I got this in the mail the other day

[Pofy]

>because the intellectual property rights owner
>notified us, under penalty of perjury, that
>your listing or the item itself infringes their
>copyright, trademark, or other rights.

What I would like to know is exactly WHAT illegal activity it is that they think one is doing. Copyright infringement? In what way? Trademark? Exactly what? And so on. Just generally and vaguely claiming "intellectual property" and infringement just doesn't cut it. What exactly do they claim?

Re:I got this in the mail the other day

[Anonymous Coward]

RTFA

Re:I got this in the mail the other day

[Pofy]

> RTFA

I have. I even did it before it turned new here on slashdot. It doesn't really give any clue at all. Besides, I was commenting on the email supposedly sent out from ebay which is the one mostly tossing arround "intellectual property" and how one infringe. Blizzard (and the article which basically is just citing Blizzards annoncement) doesn't really say such things much.

Re:I got this in the mail the other day

[Fr05t]

All your items are belong to Blizzard. Anyone who has WoW items for sale had to accept the EULA that states everything in game is their property.

Re:I got this in the mail the other day

[Pofy]

So, that is not what I ask about. Just by writing something, you can't turn it into something that copyright apply to. In addition, selling items does not in any way include activities that would be copyright infringement which is what I am commenting about, a mail supposedly sent by ebay claiming such things.

Re:I got this in the mail the other day

[Fr05t]

"because the intellectual property rights owner notified us, under penalty of perjury, that your listing or the item itself infringes their copyright, trademark, or other rights."

It's a fucking blanket email that gets sent out when someone hit's a button! This is not a personalized email written just for Joe user.

Re:I got this in the mail the other day

[Pofy]

So, what are those rights then? One can't just send out blankek mails claiming "you probably might have done something wrong according to some law or contract or something".

They can't succeed...

[petrus4]

...And here's why.

MMORPG live teams can't stop trading/brokering for the same reason the RIAA can't stop P2P, namely that the moment a company or group tries to step on it in one place, it will spring up in 10 different others. Blizzard might be able to intimidate/ally itself with Ebay so that *they* as one site/network don't allow WOW trading, but how many other trade oriented sites are there? You're also forgetting private transactions which can happen very easily. If the particulars are worked out on ICQ, Paypal doesn't even need to be told what the transaction is for...the people doing the deal could very well list it simply as a gift or donation.

Trading *is* one of the primary things that has killed (or at least mortally wounded) Ultima Online. Of course with UO there are a lot of other factors involved...but I definitely believe trading is one of them. It kills any challenge whatsoever in the game if you can use a credit card to get 10 million gp, not to mention what it does to the game's economy.

So to a degree I agree with what Blizzard are doing. What might work better for them though is if they did something like setting up a single server which was designated as allowing trades...then they could even offer brokering themselves if they have the manpower. The thing is though, if they did that, and provided some concrete incentives for those people who *wanted* to trade to only play on that server, it would score them some public relations capital which would then help them enforce a no trading rule on their other servers. The main reason why they would need the co-operation of the player community for that is because they have no hope of being able to do it otherwise.

Despite all of Blizzard's attempts with Diablo 1 and 2, the last time I played both of those anyway there were still tons of hacked items available for them. Griefers exist. So do adolescent Neo wannabes who spend all of their time looking for ways to beat a given system. These people aren't going to go away...and the trick is, to rather than making a futile effort to make them go away, give them what they want to a limited degree. That way they don't end up thinking you're a fascist and getting angry with you...which is something you really don't want.

Hell, if I was going to put together an MMORPG myself, (as part of a group, natch) I'd actually intentionally build some "easter egg" type hacks into the system, while making sure that they were a) reasonably obscure, and b) not genuinely upsetting to game balance. What you could then do is offer some kind of item possibly...say a rare of some kind...as a reward for finding them. The benefit of this would be that the kiddies would be kept so busy looking for your legit easter eggs, they wouldn't have as much time to go after genuinely harmful/disruptive bugs in the system.

Fascism can't win. But creativity can.

Re:They can't succeed...

[Anonymous Coward]

My first reaction was almost the opposite.
If i had a MMORPG, I'd have a hidden 'karma' system that would attach negative influences on all this kind of to-be-discouraged. Afew abuses (like somehow tracking sales of a few percent of the items on ebay) and your character would have such bad in-game luck it'd feel like the gods hated him.
People would be so afraid of getting one of these cursed items on ebay they'd stay away.

Outsider's opinion.

[Lord Kano]

I don't play MMORPGS. I most likely never will.

I think that it's idiotic for Blizzard or anyone else to try to regulate your conduct outside of their game. Blizzard's reputation for being heavy handed and in general real assholes is just going to grow because of this.

IMHO, if you want to pay someone for the time they need to spend to go and find an in game item and bring it back to you, that's between the two of you. Blizzard has no standing to attempt to punish you for conduct outside of their game. Ban cheaters, that's fine, but real world business transactions are none of their business.

LK

Re:Outsider's opinion.

[Starsmore]

IMHO, if you want to pay someone for the time they need to spend to go and find an in game item and bring it back to you, that's between the two of you. Blizzard has no standing to attempt to punish you for conduct outside of their game. Ban cheaters, that's fine, but real world business transactions are none of their business.

See, by paying IGE $50 for 500 million gold pieces harvested by a room-full of starved Chinese children, you are cheating. You, as a singular person playing the game, did not obtain those items within the confines of the game. You did not go out and skin dead animals for days on end to build up the leathers to sell to the traders. Therefore, you cheated, just as if you used a cheat code in GTA:San Andreas to get yourself $9999999999.

Re:Outsider's opinion.

[realityfighter]

Do people really run sweatshops on this sort of model? Somehow seems incredible to me that people would actually do this.

In defense of the grandparent, there are many games built with flaws that make it impossible to play unless you get an artificial boost of some sort. I don't know why you would want to play a game like that, and I think Blizzard is trying to assert that their game is well designed and supported enough that you'll never need to buy items off ebay to enjoy playing WoW.

Re:Outsider's opinion.

[Boronx]

How is that cheating? Your argument applies to anyone who is gifted any item. Are you saying that game mechanic ought to be removed?

Re:Outsider's opinion.

[Lord Kano]

See, by paying IGE $50 for 500 million gold pieces harvested by a room-full of starved Chinese children, you are cheating.

Wow, you raise elements of racism and child exploitation in your objection. I reject both. It doesn't matter how the gold or items in question are obtained as long as they're created through actual in game activity.

It's no different than encountering a friend online and having him or her give you the items that he or she isn't using.

LK

Re:Outsider's opinion.

[leland242]

Yes, people really do. I recall seeing an article about one maybe 6 months ago in Tijuana for...I dunno, some game. Personally, I think MMORPG's are crap, but they make for interesting articles/reading.

Here is a link: http://games.slashdot.org/games/03/11/24/0141243.s html?tid=209

Re:Outsider's opinion.

[DAldredge]

How is it racist to point that the Chinese people who are doing this are Chinese?

Bout time

[shoptroll]

Good. Shelling out real life cash for a virtual item is probably the first step towards major signs of addiction.

What's the point in shelling out cash for something that everyone has an equal (albeit slim) chance of obtaining at some point? It's like paying for a royal flush in poker.

Re:Bout time

[bhima]

"It's like paying for a royal flush in poker"

Doesn't that happen in Vegas all the time?

Don't think they'll be too successfull

[dnixon112]

Just take a look at this

Far from the only company that does this.

[will_die]

Blizzard is not the first to do this. Sony, Mythic and others all have policies restricting the sale of in game items for real world items.
Some have already contacted the major auction sites saying that sales should be forbidden.

What will happen is that you will be an initial handfull of people banned or punished then they will stop. It cost to much money to prevent it and even then you cannot stop the majority of it. If they were really serious about it go after the companies that sell money in game such as IGE. You will not see Blizzard doing that.
Why blizzard is following other companies in doing this is for legal protection. You make this policy and then if people get ripped off you can point to the policy and say it not suppose to of taken place , so they can do nothing about it.

Re:Against eBaying for game reasons or legal reaso

[realityfighter]

I'm pretty sure the WoW EULA and TOS would preempt any attempts to validate the real world value of ingame items, since the players basically agree that the items belong to Blizzard (and are therefore nonsalable by them), just by playing the game.

There are...

[realityfighter]

weirder things being sold on ebay. Some guy is farming completed Animal Crossing saves.

A firm forbidding me to sell my property? No way!

[Kosi]

I don't know what Blizzard thinks they are, but at least here in Germany no company will tell me when and how I can sell or do whatever else with my very own property!

Although I don't like the fact that rich people get better chances at the game (like in RL, isn't it?), there must be an other way to prevent this.

While there is a market for this sort of thing

[Carrot007]

it will continue to happen whatever.

Thats supply and demand for you.

Re:While there is a market for this sort of thing

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it will work, on the margins, and supply and demand is why.

When you make it more difficult for buyers to get the items, they have to spend time as well as well as the money on the item. To them, the costs (including effort) go up, shifting the supply curve up, adding intentional inefficiency into the market. The new equilibrium is met at a higher price and lower quantity. While this will not have the effect of eliminating all transactions, it will eliminate some transactions. The question is, is some enough?

Geez

[TheBot]

Id think people would rather play the game WoW(or any other MMO) than play the bidding game. Guess I was wrong, and, oh crap I just lost that short sword of the uber to some clown who bid faster. Wow, bidding just makes the whole game so much more fun!

it's not the first time

[Harlockjds]

I know Sony had the same policy at times in EQ1, and found it was impossible to enforce.

why is it whenever WoW does something that's already been done (or is being done just as well in other games) it's considered new and innovative? and why do we have to have news stories whenever Blizzard some something that's common (banning hackers, trying to stop ebaying blah blah blah)

Re:A firm forbidding me to sell my property? No wa

[rpillala]

Ingame items are not your property. It all exists on Blizzard's servers and as such they have ownership of any virtual items. What you're doing is renting time on their servers. Things that are "created" during that time still belong to Blizzard. Read the TOS I'm sure you'll find this contained in it. And given that Blizzard is actually trying to do something about this, it's probably pretty strong wording.

This is usually the basis for any legal challenge a company cares to make. You'll also see on eBay that the descriptions are carefully worded so as to avoid the appearance of selling ingame items (or characters) but really I don't think that's a defense.

Most quest items are locked to character

[Shivetya]

Seeing that a lot of these are very good items it does remove a significant incentive. Now the area where Blizzard will have issues with is the in game money system. Gold is something that people will sell and its hard to track any stackable item.

Now, what I am waiting for is these companies being held liable for downtime. They love to toss around the term "service" but that is last thing they want to be classified as.

If an ISP had as much downtime as some games they would be out of business or have regulators on their butts.

Re:A firm forbidding me to sell my property? No wa

[Ghent99]

You'll also see on eBay that the descriptions are carefully worded so as to avoid the appearance of selling ingame items (or characters) but really I don't think that's a defense.

I'd imagine its more of a defense then one thinks. Quoted from one auction:

We only provide service to help new players or players who are limited by time constraint to avoid the endless routine process. You are bidding on our time and effort.

The last section in bold is the important part. Whether you view this practice as a whole as good or bad, moral or immoral is basically unimportant. This person, whomever they may be, is technically not breaking the EULA or ToS. They are, by their own free will, trading you an item by their own choice. What you are paying for is exactly what they've stated, their investment of time, which no one owns, and no one has claim over except themselves.

I'm sure that many of you will flame me for this, and I want to be clear that I neither agree nor disagree with this practice of selling items in a virtual world, I'm simply speaking of the reality of the general situation and ways that are employed to get around it. Blizzard can not restrict people from selling their time and effort. No one can. And it is honestly extremely hard to determine what was done for what reason. A good example of this would by my guild. My guild is small and filled with close, real life, personal friends. I give my guildmates expensive items and money all the time, and they do the same for me. Am I going to get flagged and banned one day because I'm being generous? I gave my mage friend who was starting out a few blue(rare) items and about 10g to help him get caught up with us so we could play together. Am I breaking Blizzard's EULA / ToS? The currency that they paid in was friendship and fun, but it was currency nonetheless. It just wasn't direct monetary compensation.

To bring the point around to my original start, the same holds true for the people who label their auctions in that manner. It may be devious, and everyone knows the intention, but, unfortunately, it also neatly sidesteps the protection that the companies that own the IP put into place. And yes, the companies do own the items created in their virtual world, because they created it. But they do not own you, your time, or your effort.

Personally, I think the whole situation is interesting. People want a simulated world but they don't. You want free trade and an economy that ebbs and flows and acts like a real economy, but you really don't. Because that's exactly what this really is. Economies and such are all concepts, ideas that describe how events happen in an environment and what influences those events. For better or for worse, people selling things outside of the game influences the economy and changes it. People reject it out of a sense of fairness or because they are limited or feel that they are being somehow oppressed by this. Just because the world isn't real doesn't mean it should be a utopia. It wouldn't be an accurately simulated world if it didn't reflect the real world (in the sense of how the world works, not the people, places and species of the world). Unfortunately, the world isn't fair, real or virtual, and you have to deal with it one way or another, and that is truly what adds the flavor to MMO's. So, I wouldn't change a thing. Let it be and see where it goes and have fun on the way.

That's what you get

[Snaller]

When you make a game with ridiculous exp requirements and difficult to get objects.

I predict there is no way they are going to stop this - short of changing their game. Remember, EULAs are something that laywers love and users disrespect.

Re:Soulbound items? FALSE!

[Anonymous Coward]

There three levels of soul binding:
1) It won't bind. This is your plain-jane none too powerful item.
2) It binds when equiped. Most decent items are "bind on equiped". From what I've seen, all green-labeled equipment is "bind on equip".
3) Bind on pickup. These are the items you're talking about now... but they're not the only ones.

There are a number of Really Nice "bind on pickup" items that the various profession skills can create, along with quest rewards and item drops.

It won't work

[Snaller]

Why?

Because law is about how you phrase the argument: What they can say is that they are not selling virtual non real items they are asking for reimbursment for the their time spent, the object in itself is free. And there is nothing they can do about that.

Of course that assume someone has the guts/money to take a battle otherwise the big company usually win.

Re:A firm forbidding me to sell my property? No wa

[Kosi]

Ingame items are not your property.

Whose else than mine?

It all exists on Blizzard's servers and as such they have ownership of any virtual items.

LOL, if that was true, all the $$$ in your bank account would belong to the bank. Luckily, ownership does not end when the property becomes virtual.

And even if the stuff was really not my property, I own the right to use it, and I can sell this right to whomever I want. Neither way can Blizzard tell me what I can or can't do with my items!

Re:A firm forbidding me to sell my property? No wa

[rpillala]

You don't own the right to use it. You rent that right via a monthly fee.