Slashdot Mirror
EULA Confusion w/ Used Copies of WoW?
They keep telling me they will not transfer an account. I keep telling them I do not want an account transferred, but want to create my own account. What appears to be the final answer is that 'an authentication key can only be used once, regardless of the number of owners.'
This is not stated anywhere in the EULA or Terms of Use. If it is, I have been unable to find it, and *Blizzard has repeatedly ignored my request that they identify where in the EULA or Terms of Use this is stated.*
I have the complete retail package, including the CD case with the Authentication Key. So what if it is has been used in the past? Whatever happened to the first-sale doctrine?
At one point, the Blizzard representative likened my request to buying an empty milk jug and returning to the store to demand more milk for free so I can use the jug. This is an incredibly inept analogy. What Blizzard is doing is allowing only the original purchaser of the jug to buy a refill; anyone else who happens to buy or be given the jug is prohibited from buying more milk to put in it.
Another item of interest is that the representative told me that they can not, for any reason, delete an account, not even at the account owner's request. The most they can do is to suspend the account. Unfortunately, that keeps a record of the Authentication Key in their system, preventing that key from ever being used again.
While the EULA expressly permits permanent transfer of ownership of the game to another person, nowhere does either the EULA or
the Terms of Use mention that such a transfer makes the game completely useless because Blizzard will not allow the new owner to use the game; the game cannot be played without an online account and a subscription to the service, and Blizzard
will not even allow the account to be created.
You might say the "easy" answer is to get the seller to give me the account info for the account he created. However, according to Blizzard's representative, not all of the original
account information can be modified. In fact, enough would be unchangable that the original owner of the account would be able to regain control of the account at any time, should he
desire to do so.
I had no expectation that a used copy of the game would be such a problem. After all, even all of Blizzard's previous games (Warcraft 2, Starcraft, BroodWar) had keys that could be used and passed on while maintaining the reasonable restriction that only one instance of the key could be used
at any one time. (I have never bought or played Warcraft 3, so I do not know about it.) In fact, I bought my copy of Starcraft used and never had any trouble with it.
I am not trying to cheat Blizzard out of anything. I *want* to pay them for a monthly subscription so I can play the game, but they will not allow it solely because at some point in the past someone else has used what is now my copy of the game.
So here's a warning to everyone out there; be very careful if you are thinking about buying a used copy of World of Warcraft. You may have a complete and legitimate set of all the game materials, but you will not be able to play it.
For all the lawyers, and the many IANALs, out there, what do you think of the chances of a lawsuit succeeding to change Blizzard's stance on this? Would anyone else be interested in taking this on with me?"
A question that comes to mind is whether the seller fulfilled all three parts of the Termination clause, section 5 of the EULA. If the seller failed to notify Blizzard of intention to terminate, it could be argued that the seller's licenses remain in effect and thus new license could not be given to the buyer of the used game. But one would hope Blizzard's customer service would at least make this clear to the buyer.
Maybe Blizzard just never expected anyone to RTFEULA.
:)
3B. You may permanently transfer ownership of the Game and all parts thereof, and all of your rights and obligations under the License Agreement, to another by physically transferring the CD-ROM, all original packaging, and all Manuals or other documentation associated with the Game, and by removing from all of your home or personal computers and destroying any remaining materials concerning the Game in your possession or control, provided the recipient agrees to the terms of this License Agreement. The transferor (i.e., you), and not the Licensor, agrees to be solely responsible for any taxes, fees, charges, duties, withholdings, assessments, and the like, together with any interest, penalties, and additions imposed in connection with such transfer.
It appears that you can indeed sell your game, provided you removed anything related to the game, which I think, includes the deactivation of the Authentication Key by the seller, maybe they haven't created the Deactivation Section yet
Rock that crushes, Paper & Scissors that don't matter.
As I understand it, Blizzard representatives cannot cancel any user's account even with their consent. However, it is possible to cancel one's account through the online account management site. Would cancelling your account in this way 'free up' the authentication key? If so, is it the previous owner's responsibility then to delete their account?
Assuming this is the case, then if the previous owner didn't delete their account, they have effectively ripped you off.
You bought a used copy, therefore you are transferring ownership from one person or entity to another. This logic does not apply to a retail store, because the ownership is not being transferred as the auth key is unused.
A stupid analogy would be buying used milk. If you bought the milk used from someone other than grocery store and it expired prior to the "best before" date, it is not the groceries store or the milk producers responsibility for the bad milk.
The only thing I see here is that you are using biased reasoning to justify your disgust at a fundamentally flawed licensing scheme.
Feed the need: Digitaladdiction.net
So what happens if you install WoW, then your hard drive crashes, then you reinstall WoW? Since your authentication key's already been used?
Actually, the initial cost isn't 100... There's a '10 day guest pass' included in the box, that can be upgraded to a full account without needing to purchase a second copy... Still a 50 dollar startup cost, but at least it's not 100.
This key is bound to an existing (probably now suspended, due to quitting) account, with billing information and personal details attached. Of course you can't use that key again.
However, you now have a perfectly legal copy of the game (even according to their EULA, which must be a first for a MMO game), without a functioning key. The solution is obvious: Have them send you a replacement key.
They lose nothing, you don't have someone else's baggage, and it should be standard procedure for when a retail key is compromised by store clerks or a 'friend'.
...a discussion about EULAs came up in the thread with the Microsoft guy. My contention then was some legal dept wrote it a decade ago and much of it is boilerplate the no one reads. You're just providing an example for my argument.
:-)
In this case, it wasn't YOU that didn't read it, it was the Blizzard guys. EULAs have gotten out of hand. Many of them have language in there that doesn't pertain to anything related with the product at all. It is in there because no one wants to pay the lawyer another couple hours of billing time to review any modifications.
You are SOL and your only real option is to get your money back from where you bought the game. If you do decide to hire a lawyer and go after Blizzard, expect to pay the lawyer 1000x the difference in the used/new prices of the box -- and probably not get anywhere.
It would be fun, though, if I won the lotto. Blizzard has proven themselves nothing but a bunch of dicks over their treatment of FreeCraft/Ale and the alternative server networks. I'd love to have the money to fuck them over with their own legalese.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Could now be the time that we finally get to test this idea in court? If a company must argue that they are not legally bound by the terms of their own EULA it could set a precedent allowing customers to argue the same thing.
What makes him so damn special is that he is following the License Agreement to the letter. Blizzard fucking told him he could do this, and then when he tried to they ignored the issue and gave him a round about analogy that does not apply to his situation, much like your windows + cd key analogy.
Note to self: No more arguing with the faithful.
If they refuse, take them to small claims court. 75% probability that they will fix the problem as soon as they get served. If not, then they won't show up and you will win the retail price by default.
Have you tried contacting the EFF? My hunch is they're looking for a test case.
Blizzard's customer service tends to be shaky at best, however you can get a new CD-key. Blizzard has a system in place to deal with stolen CD-keys. Treat this as a situation where you CD-key was stolen or non-functional. Do not tell them anything about wanting to transfer ownership of a CD-key. Keep it simple and tell them only what they need to know. Blizzard honestly doesn't care about what their EULA or packaging says. They do things their way and if the package promised something that wasn't in the game they will tell you tough luck.
l 0641p
#1) I recently purchased a copy of World of Warcraft
#2) When I try to sign up for an account the CD-key says it is already used
#3) I have the original CD-case with the CD-key sticker on it and read on your site I can mail them in to get a new CD-key
Remember the Diablo II players are famous for their acts of stupidity. They regularly get their CD-keys and accounts stolen. So if you just play the dumb "It says someone else has my CD-key and I don't know why" and then cite their CD-key replacement policy they should do it for you. If they tell you to return it to the store just tell them "the store doesn't take returns" and "it was the only copy I could find."
You may not be too keen on deceit, but honestly this is the only way blizzard will do anything. While they are fine about jerking around people who buy used copies of the game they will be much less eager to screw over someone who they think bought a new copy of the game that doesn't work.
More information about the process:
http://www.blizzard.com/support/?id=aal
You should really avoid offering to provide legal advice unless you are admitted in the poster's home state. Depending on the state you could be breaching the local ethics code which could be potentially be harmful down the line if you need to be admitted pro hac vice.
I happen to read the EULA for Max Payne, and it said according to the agreement, the ONLY (the word they specifically used) thing I could use the physical CD for was as an archival backup of the software. Sadly, the game required me to have the CD in the drive while playing it, so essentially the only way to play the game is either to bread the EULA or to install a NOCD crack, which would of course be against the DMCA's anti-circumvention provision.
And the industry wonders why EULA's are ignored.
It is quite hillarious:
A. Rules Related to User Names. Each user will select a user name for his or her character, or allow the World of Warcraft software to select the name for him or her. Additionally, users may form "guilds" and such guilds will be required to choose a name for the guild. When you choose a user name, create a guild, or otherwise create a label that can be seen by other players of World of Warcraft, you must abide by the following guidelines as well as the rules of common decency. If Blizzard Entertainment, in its sole discretion, finds such a label to be offensive, it reserves the right to change the name, remove the label and corresponding chat room, and/or suspend your use of World of Warcraft.
In particular, you may not use:
1. Names of another person with the intent to impersonate that person;
2. Names which incorporate 'swear' words or which are otherwise offensive, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable;
3. Names subject to the rights of any other person without authorization;
4. Names of popular culture or media personalities;
5. Names that are trademarks, or registered trademarks of Blizzard Entertainment or other companies);
6. Names of religious deities or figures;
7. Names of characters from Blizzard Entertainment's Warcraft products, including character names from the Warcraft series of novels; or
8. Names related to drugs, narcotics, or criminal activity, including references to drug substances; or
9. Name comprised of partial or complete sentences (e.g., "Inyourface", "Welovebeef", etc);
10. Names comprised of pure gibberish (eg, "Asdfasdf", "Jjxccm", "Hvlldrm");
11. Names that refer to pop culture icons or personas (e.g. "Britneyspears", "Austinpowers", "Batman")
12. Names that utilize "Leet" or "Dudespeak" (e.g., "Roflcopter", "xxnewbxx", "Roxxoryou")
13. Name that incorporate titles. The term "Titles" as used herein shall include 'rank' titles (e.g. , "CorporalTed," or "GeneralVlad") and/or fantasy titles (e.g., "KingMike", "LordSanchez")
Additionally, you may not use a misspelling or an alternative spelling to circumvent the name restrictions listed above, nor can you have a "first" and "last" name that, when combined, violate the above name restrictions.
I especially like the dudespeak one and "lordsanchez"
This is definitely one of the stupidest posts Slashdot has ever seen....
;) By the way, you do not get free refills of the jug if you are the original owner. Not unless you pay for a lifetime of free re-fills. Again, the original poster is just for lack of a better word, insane.
If you check the terms of use page linked in the OP, you can plainly see near the top:
1. Establishment of Your World of Warcraft Account.
A. You may establish one (1) user account ("Account") with which to play World of Warcraft by accessing Blizzard Entertainment's proprietary on-line service ("Service"), pursuant to the terms, conditions and restrictions contained in this Agreement.
as well as section 1-E:
E. Blizzard Entertainment does not recognize the transfer of Accounts between individuals.
I don't see how this person has any right whatsoever to have a new account registered for a CD key that already has an account registered with it.... it just doesn't make ANY sense. By that train of thought, one person could buy the game then hand it along to every person he knows, letting each new person register a new account and bypassing the purchase price of the game itself.... no sense whatsoever.
I do think relating it to buying a milk jug and expecting free refills on an empty jug is pretty funny though.
First of all this post doesnt even deserve the merit of a response. No offense, but you NEVER EVER BUY AN MMORPG THAT IS USED. NEVER. Unless the person gives you a copy of his username and password. No one should even be selling it! I thought this would be common knowledge by now. This article should be more about the lesson this guy learned by doing that, than the EULA. Who cares about the EULA, this is how MMORPGS work, you are getting into some pretty vague specifics to justify an inane purchase/decision in the first place!
It's not even fine print, it is clearly stated when creating the account using the trial key that you will have to purchase the retail game in order to continue playing once the trial period is up.
I'd post a screenshot of the registration process if I actually felt refuting your fine print comment was worth the time....
I stopped buying Blizzard games for this reason. I still like StarCraft though - but after they shutdown FreeCraft and/or the Battlenet server project, I made myself a promise to never give them another cent.
Slashdot is certainly a place to be heard - but sometimes you have to make a statement with your wallet.
I would FU*(#@$_ING love to see a boycott of Blizzard -
The right to transfer ownership of the tangible expression of a copyrighted work is fundamental to our system of intellectual property ownership: 17 U.S.C. sec. 109 (2000). I don't quote this provision to suggest that Blizzard is breaking the law, simply that the right to alienate (essentially a fancy legal term for "sell") your copy of a copyrighted work is enshrined in United States law (and in fact, is generally recognized throughout the world).
So what is Blizzard doing here? It is denying the initial purchaser of the game the right to sell his or her copy (who am I kidding? His) copy of the game in the open marketplace. The initial purchaser of the game agreed to Blizzard's End User Licensing Agreement (EULA) when he first started playing. (Of course, the legal enforceability of these EULAs is somewhat murky -- different states have different laws, although UCITA is the most common attempt to make EULAs enforceable.) Blizzard's argument is that it and its customer entered into an enforceable contract. Both sides gave consideration and both sides agreed to perform certain actions and to give the other side certain rights in exchange for either money or a service provided.
Now Blizzard (at least according to the poster) is attempting to renege on its side of the bargain, while still (presumably) insisting that the purchaser abide by all terms and conditions.
A couple of additional thoughts:
First, don't argue with front-line customer service. Get in touch with Blizzard corporate headquarters or other supervisory personnel. Recognize that, while you are probably correct, it's likely an issue of first impression under the new WoW system and as a pioneer, you're likely to get a slow response.
Second, make sure that the initial owner of the game took the proper steps to terminate his account before he sold it to you.
Third, recognize that Blizzard is perfectly correct to be suspicious of someone claiming that, simply because you have the key, it should terminate an existing account. Respect their view on this because it's a world of hurt for them if they wrongly start terminating accounts. I can easily foresee them asking someone five times "ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO PERMANENTLY DELETE THIS ACCOUNT? ARE YOUR SURE YOU'RE SURE?" and then getting a complaint the next day that their account isn't working. They really are in a no-win situation.
Fourth, while yes, I am a lawyer, I'm not your lawyer. Nothing in this post should be construed as providing legal advice.
Finally, Blizzard needs to get on the ball and recognize when they are wrong. This sounds like a cluck-up. (But then again, first line support people aren't supposed to be interpreting legal documents.) I'm guessing this is more a matter of getting this issue in front of someone with the authority to make it right.
So, according to this logic, if my computer dies and I buy a new one I should not be able to install my very expensive software on this new computer? That isn't a good idea. There is no way I will pay a few hundred dollars for software and not be able to install it if I ever get a new computer. The lifespan of modern computers isn't that high. People upgrade their computers way too much for a scheme like this to work.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -Albert Einstein
You should have told them that you bought a new copy of WoW, and the key is used...goddamn pirates and their keygen programs....
I think part of the problem is that EULAs in general say that you simply do not own the software that you have purchased. You may own the physical medium the software exists upon, but not the software itself. So, though the WoW EULA says that the rights and so on may be transferred to another owner, you're not really being transferred anything anyway. :)
Basically, I'm seeing that you've found something that Blizzard didn't think of, and now you're getting the runaround from customer service while they either 1) figure out what to do, or 2) hope you'll go away. In the end, though, Blizzard will want you to buy a new copy of the game... which is dumb, because if you buy it from anywhere other than directly from Blizzard, they already have the money for their game when they sold it to a distributor.
IAAL, too. I hope you are lying about being a lawyer though, since your research skills are lacking. I'll leave it to you to find ProCD Inc. v. Zeidenberg, 86 F.3d 1447 (7th Cir. 1996), reversing 908 F.Supp. 640 (W.D. Wis. 1996). BTW, I'm guessing you're a law student, not a lawyer (yet). Am I right?
no matter how much you or blizzard or vivendi want, a contract/eula cannot circumvent state or federal law. just because blizzare or vivendi desire the jurisdiction to be los angeles doesnt mean it circumvents state or federal law which states it might be elsewhere.
same reason why an EULA can't force you into indentured servitude to blizzard/vivendi.
This is not just a WoW issue. Many MMORPGs are doing this. For example I bought a new copy of City of Heros for my fiance. The tape didn't look quite right on the box, but the guy at the register swore that it had not been returned and it was thier only copy so I bought it. When I opened it everything did look new so I didn't think anything more of it at first. When we tried to set up her account though we ran into the problem of the key having been used. Atleast with them though I quick fax of the key and my reciept and we had a new key e-mailed within a day.
Actually, I get the idea this system of suspending accounts rather than deleting them is commonplace with these MMORPGs. This certainly isn't unique to Blizzard and WoW.
... but she simply had billing xferred to a new card and re-activated her game, and kept on playing.
I understand the reasoning behind it, but it can cause some irritating situations too.
EG. My ex-wife was a big Shadowbane addict for a few months preceding our divorce. She was using an account I created initially. (I'm the one who bought the game, played it for about 30 minutes, and decided I didn't like it after all. I let her try it, and she got hooked immediately - and begged me to buy her a 3 month subscription after that.) The interesting thing is, though, I couldn't seem to find any way to get Ubisoft to permanently erase her account after she moved out. I was able to sign on to the web site and deactivate the account, so she couldn't keep billing renewals to my credit card
Somehow, it doesn't seem right I wasn't even able to have her characters deleted on an account she effectively hijaacked from me - and now I still keep getting email notifications about her activities in the game (purchases of expansion sets, tech. support help, etc. etc.).
He's "SOL" according to Blizzard, who have an obvious interest in convincing people that the rights granted to them by the EULA are not actually granted to them when they become inconvenient to Blizzard.
An impartial third party familiar with contract law may well have a different interpretation than Blizzard does.
Read my blog.
All I had to do was allow the beta to automatically patch itself and I'm still running it fine.
A little bit more on topic: why on earth are people still paying for used boxes of this? I was reading reports about this exact complaint in early december when guys had tried the game for a day and hated the opening-day lag.
Blizzard isn't ripping you (OP) off, the guy that willingly sold you an unusable product key has; you're totally letting him get away with it by ignoring his role in the act!
::jafomatic
Indeed. There are games that not only provide the client for free, but give you some free time to try it out before you buy. The only good reason I can think of for doing this myself is that Blizzard knows they have their customer base by the short hairs and that their particular market will bear this kind of fee structure.
And the brethren went away edified.
Considering all that, why the heck would Blizzard give it away?
Well because A lot of people will continue to pay for it but i'm just not sure i would. Thats a 50 dollar gamble right there. Its truly a crapshoot if you think about it (you can always sell the game later on if it was a single player and recoupe your losses)
I was just hooked up with a 15 day free pass for COH the ONLY MMORPG i've ever considered buying and its quite awsome. SO awsome that i will continue to be charged 14.95 for the privlage of playing it. I am not going to give them 50 dollars for a useless cd and booklet. I'm not going to give their distibutor any money when MMORPG are the type of games YOU SELL DIRECTLY TO PEOPLE. Downloading the game only took me 2hrs on my broadband connection. I would of payed for the bandwith as well...because its not 50 dollars worth of bandwith at the end of the day.
If you cannot create a MMORPG that is stupid easy to pickup and play your going to dig yourself a early grave.
The secret to getting modded up is to allways say i've got karma to burn in your sig..
"if you are planning to pay the monthly subscription can you not just download the game installer for free?"
I imagine because a.) Demand is too high for their ability to supply. (i.e. They can only support so many users. b.) People are actually paying for it. In that case, it'd be stupid not to ask for it. c.) Maybe that's how they justify their current price of subscription. Sorta like how cell phones require a contract.
This is all academic, though. I don't know much about WoW.
"Derp de derp."
"Your Honor, I ask that you enforce section 3, but ignore section 13. Pretty please; I can't afford to travel to LA to file this to get my $40 back."
Amusingly enough, this argument frequently holds up, but only in California.
And of course, this kind of small-value transaction is exactly why they have small claims courts in the first place, which frequently is ruled on soft logic and what is right over exact wording of contracts. Vivendi may very well argue that the EULA should stand and that this should be transferred to a California court, but they'd have to show up in your jurisdiction to argue that to a judge. Otherwise you win a summary judgement. Even if they do show up, the judge would have to agree that nobody in their district should be afforded financial protection under the law against unscrupulous individuals doing business of value less than the total cost of a plane ticket.
Just be aware that filing in small claims court, at least in Massachusetts, costs 15 dollars. You would be doing it for the principle, not the money.
The ______ Agenda
The same question keeps popping up about Half-Life 2 and Steam. By all rights, once we buy a game, we should be able to sell it to another person if we don't want the game. With Half-Life 2, anyone can buy the CD/DVD in the store and that same person can turn around and sell it to Joe Blow after they're done playing. Unfortunately, for Joe Blow, he's screwed, and the original person can keep on playing.
Valve tries to compensate by allowing you to send in $10 and some information. But, in the long run, you're boned either way.
This kind of thing is going to keep cropping up over and over as companies like Valve and Blizzard test just how far they can abuse consumers. With such a young, unknowledgeable and apathetic targetted market group, it's just going to get worse until someone looks over the EULA and finds some way to sue the companies.
Like someone once mentioned, companies simply don't like us selling our used games once we're done. I think there was even a lawsuit a long time ago about the used market for CD's. The premise was that since the CD's don't wear out like cartridges, that they are considered, "like-new," condition and the companies should receive their cut of the profits. That would mean that I would have to give a cut of the profits to American Greetings every time I purchased a MIB Strawberry Shortcake Doll from eBay. Damn flawed logic if you ask me.
Since /. received some flak in the past for having AC posts of Church of Scientology material, I was wondering about posting large chunks of EULAs. If I was to take large portions of EULAs and posted them up here for discussion (as some posters have already done), would I be infringing on copyrighted material?
Linux at home
Wow, that's a great link! Though it does add $10 plus postage to the selling price, which may or may not raise the cost above retail for this guy. This does present an interesting delimma though. What is to stop someone from getting 5 keys from a single retail box? You have the actual key in the box, then you send in the receipt (after 30 days just so Blizzard has no real reason to harrass the retailer for lack of return), then you send in the manual, then the CD case, then one of the game CDs.
The $10 "fee" sounds to me like the real charge for the game before media, packaging, distro, and retailers get involved. Toss in another $2.95 for the download and they could call it "Snow". Sure you lose out the manual, the CD case, and the CD... but if it were an entirely online download, you wouldn't have those things anyway would you? Besides, it can't be hard to copy the game CDs seeing 1 authkey = 1 account, so there's no real need for insane heavy-duty copy-protection.
Please someone tell me there's a flaw in this plan or a way for Blizzard to know the identity of each individual booklet, CD case, and game CD availible... Otherwise it looks to me like $10 (and help from someone willing to lose a receipt, manual, CD case, or game CD) plus postage nets you a perfectly valid WoW account.
No penguins were harmed in the making of this post.
From what I understand, the majority of those BBB complaints are from disgruntled players who had their Diablo II, Warcraft III, and StarCraft II keys blocked from online play due to user violations.
The report suggests that you're half right. From the BBB report:
Recent complainants allege the company closed accounts on 130,000 users without providing notice, and accused them of using "hack" techniques to cheat on gaming. Most of these complainants deny any illegal usage, and in some cases, they challange[sic] the company to provide them some proof of the alleged violation.
So, it appears that many of the complaints are from players blocked due to accusations of cheating, but the accusations are disputed. The complainants apparently received no evidence they were cheating:
The company addressed a few complaints regarding account terminations by issuing the same letter in each instance of complaint, accusing the complainant of cheating, lying or using hack programs.
Of course, just because it's in a BBB report doesn't make it true. But I wouldn't assume that the banned players were all justifiably banned and even if so, surely the player should be given some evidence justifying the termination of his account, don't you think?
(To be fair to Vivendi: they might be concerned that if they showed their evidence, newer hacks wouldn't produce the evidence.)
Phiwum's law: anyone that names an obvious law after himself and then puts it in his own sig is just pathetic.