eula
Latest
15 Minutes of Fame: Members only
15 Minutes of Fame is WoW.com's look at World of Warcraft players of all shapes and sizes -- from the renowned to the relatively anonymous, the remarkable to the player next door. Tip us off to players you'd like to hear more about.As Blizzard re-imagines old Azeroth, sweeps tired systems out the door and injects new ways for players to connect and work together, we can't imagine why anyone would not want to take advantage of what this top-notch MMO and company have to offer. There are players, however, who choose a different path. These players game on private servers, where conditions range from near-original mirrors to god-mode gameplay with super-GM abilities.We don't condone private server play, which is clearly against Blizzard's Terms of Service and EULA. Still, there are plenty of players who believe differently, and we were curious why they've chosen the private server route. We visited with a player who plays on a relatively tame private server featuring near-"normal" game play. What can he do that we can't? And what do we have that he doesn't?
New perspective on EVE Online's latest bank embezzlement part two
We read about these things happening periodically, an EVE player pulls a runner with some huge amount of ISK and all sorts of drama ensues. It makes me wonder, what has the real life impact of this theft been on those of you involved with EBANK?If you are to trust the forum trolls, EVE is JUST a game. But having spent 2 years on this project, real-life money and a lot of sweat and tears, it hurts to see EBANK's name being dragged through the mud, and putting up with the drama. It of course causes a huge amount of real-life stress, and makes you wonder about a few things. I even almost managed to miss 2 exams, due to having to deal with this. But it also gave us the opportunity to realize just how many people EBANK have helped.2% of EVE's playerbase has an EBANK account, and we came to be the biggest investment venture in EVE, peaking at 2.5 TRILLION ISK. That, to me, is a pretty big thing, which I'm proud to take part in. But I can't answer this question on my own, hence here's my new CEO's take on it:
The Queue: You ain't nothin' but a Core Hound
Welcome back to The Queue, WoW Insider's daily Q&A column where the WoW Insider team answers your questions about the World of Warcraft. Adam Holisky will be your host today.There's a few good questions today of various voluptuous varieties: raiding, legal ToS (TNG > ToS, by the way), and new gaming hardware. Yummy.Start me off, Delks...Edit: Please be sure to listen to Fly Me To The Moon by Ol' Blue Eyes during today's Queue, or you can listen to the title's name sake song. Delks asked..."What's the point of running old world raids and instances?"
The Daily Grind: What if everyone turned over server logs?
One of the pieces of news that came out yesterday is the decision by SOE to fork over all server logs for the last four years of EverQuest II to a group of researchers from the American Association for the Advancement of Science. In saying "server log" one would assume that this means not only your combat log, what you've stuffed into the bank or sent through the mail, but also the entirety of your chat logs; public channels, guild chat, and private tells. The question today is - even though it is completely acceptable for MMO companies to do so per their TOS/EULA, how would you feel were you to find out your MMO company forked over all their information - including all your private discussion - to researchers? Would it cause you to seriously reconsider your membership in their games, if not cancel outright? Or would you be entirely OK with it, so long as it were only being used for scientific research? Updated to reflect new information from SOE stating they did not release chat logs.
The Queue: From Hell's heart I stab at thee...
Welcome back to The Queue, WoW Insider's daily Q&A column where the WoW Insider team answers your questions about the World of Warcraft. Adam Holisky will be your host today.To the last, I will grapple with thee... From Hell's heart, I stab at thee!For hate's sake, I spit my last breath at thee!Iceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Stooooooone!Dyluck asked..."I was wondering, do the EULA and TOS really change each patch?"
EULAs: The game outside the game
What the heck is an EULA? In theory, it is an End User Licensing Agreement. A legally binding contract between you and the provider of a product and/or service to indicate the rights and protections each of you has. As a user of software, or as a user of virtual environments and MMOGs, you've seen and indicated your agreement to many of these. Well, they're really kind of rubbish. Some sort of agreement of terms, rights and protections is clearly necessary, but these do not serve those purposes, for a number of reasons.
Psystar wins a battle, legal war just getting started
Previously in the Apple-Psystar legal battle, the clone maker amended its countersuit to charge that Apple was unfairly leveraging its copyright by binding Mac OS X to Mac hardware. On Friday, the federal judge assigned to the case ruled that the amendment will be heard by the court, a small victory for Psystar. It's something of a reversal for the company, since they had federal antitrust allegations thrown out in November. Similarly, Psystar's assertion that Apple is in violation of California's antitrust laws was thrown out Friday as well. Judge William Alsup said, "Psystar may well have a legitimate interest in establishing misuse [of copyright] independent of Apple's claims against it -- for example, to clarify the risks it confronts by marketing the products at issue in this case or others it may wish to develop." This isn't to say that the judge necessarily agrees with Psystar's point, but just that it's legally reasonable enough to be argued in court. Apple has also not yet revealed its 10 "John Doe" defendants: alleged conspirators who worked on Psystar's technique for loading Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware. The case will decide whether or not Apple can disallow other hardware makers -- including Psystar -- from including Mac OS X on computers shipped to end users. Last week, a company in Germany claimed that Mac OS X's End User License Agreement didn't apply to them, and is selling Mac clones to customers. The case is scheduled to go to trial on November 9. [Via Macworld.]
The Glider outcome and copyright law
Well, as you may have heard, Blizzard has all but finished off Glider -- pending one more appeal (which doesn't seem likely to win), Glider is getting shut down for good next week. Good news for Blizzard, but not so good for copyfighters? Blizzard used a controversial argument for copyright in its case -- they claimed that by circumventing the ToS, the Glider folks were actually breaking copyright law, and an interest group called Public Knowledge didn't take kindly to that. They argued that a decision for Blizzard would mean that any software developer could then prevent any customer from doing anything they didn't want to do, just by calling it a copyright infrigement. Blizzard responded that "buying" your WoW software was actually "licensing" it, but of course that didn't settle anyone down.And now, Glider has lost -- so what next?
LGJ: FTC could target EULAs
Each week Mark Methenitis contributes Law of the Game on Joystiq ("LGJ"), a column on legal issues as they relate to video games: A few weeks back, I mentioned that the FTC was looking into regulating DRM. Well, in part on some discussions at the Game::Business::Law Conference, I have a sneaking suspicion that the FTC likely won't stop with DRM. In fact, I would be willing to guess that within the next few years, the often maligned End User License Agreement ("EULA") may fall into the realm of being regulated as further "consumer protection." Is it necessary? Well, that's a matter of opinion, really. The only certainty is that it will be able to bring in additional revenue for the government, which is certainly short on cash these days.If the FTC opts to regulate EULAs, I see three probable scenarios to accomplish its goal. Before I get ahead of myself, I should describe what the theoretical goal of consumer protection is: to prevent companies from taking advantage of consumers. Generally, though, it isn't necessarily the average consumer who's seeing the greatest benefit from the regulations. Often it's the most uneducated consumer, which usually means the regulations tone things down to a level of near absurdity.
SteelSeries WoW mouse dangerous in no uncertain Terms (of Use)
We had an article here not too long ago about the SteelSeries WoW mouse, purportedly das ubermaus, replete with glowing fissures and lookin' all like a Templar helmet. We actually had kind of a hard time finding out just how the mouse performed -- it was advertised months before it came out, and it doesn't appear that many gamers actually got to use the mouse prior to pre-ordering it and did so based on Blizzard's official licensing of the WoW name on the product.The few that did use it, those that played around with it at BlizzCon, actually reported to us that it felt cheap, flimsy, and about to break. That was a bit disconcerting to read, of course, and it wasn't actually an isolated incident--all of the emails we've received about it thus far have been negative reviews. Folks complained of broken buttons or strange key reassignments with the accompanying software.Now, our sister site Engadget just released their own impressions on the device and they appear to like it, offering a large size, good weight, and robust software among their list of pros.The inconsistency in reviews of the product thus far isn't what really bothers me, though. It's the fact that the mouse is a WoW-licensed product that performs functions that are against Blizzard's policies.
With new claims, Psystar tries another angle
You have to admire Psystar's tenacity. Since Judge William Alsup's decision to disallow federal antitrust claims against Apple in Psystar's countersuit, Psystar is amending its countersuit, alleging the misuse of copyright based on different antitrust claims. It boggles the mind. Apple is already suing Psystar, of course, claiming that they are violating Mac OS X's End User License Agreement (EULA). Psystar, in its new set of counterclaims, says that Apple is improperly extending the scope of copyright law to include its argument that Psystar broke the EULA. Psystar claims that -- while admitting that it can't make arguments based on federal antitrust law -- Apple has "leveraged" the power granted them by the Copyright Act and extended it to lock in users post-sale. This, Psystar says, is unlawfully monopolistic, and makes Apple's copyrights unenforceable. Psystar is also seeking to prove that Apple's behavior is illegal under California's unfair competition statute. The judge will decide in January if the new claims can be argued in court. [Via Ars Technica.]
Apple piles on Psystar, wins trademark suit
In yet another new facet to this already-draining legal battle surrounding Psystar's sales of non-Apple hardware that runs Mac OS X, Apple has amended its original suit after it discovered "additional information," according to Computerworld. Apple now claims Psystar circumvented Apple's copyright protection code, in violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Apple said in its original filing that Psystar was in violation of the Mac OS X End-User License Agreement, but tacked on this additional charge last week. The amendment also names 10 "John Does" -- persons who were not part of the Psystar company, but broke the copyright protection scheme. Apple doesn't know who they are yet, but plans to name names when its lawyers find out who they are. In other Apple legal news, Apple won a trademark infringement case in China against New Apple Concept Digital Technology Co., Ltd., based in Shenzen. Judges decided that the Chinese company had a logo too similar to Apple's. New Ap -- aw, eff it -- NACDTCL was ordered to pay 400,000 yuan (≈ US$58,000) to Apple, Inc. [Via Cult of Mac.]
Confessions of an EVE Online macro'er
You've encountered them before. Those guys. Them. Next to the ISK spammers, they're a plague within EVE Online.They have gibberish names and sit in ice belts all day in exhumers, macro controlling large mining operations. At the first sign of trouble they gang warp out to safety. Or they're automating courier missions in an endless procession of macro'ed industrials, day in and day out. Or they're part of the infinite army of 0.0 ratting Ravens that automatically warp to a safespot and cloak once someone enters the system. They're all in China, right? The macros are all used by large ISK farming operations where people work in 23/7 shifts... right? Apparently, that's wrong. EVE-Mag is running an article written by a self-proclaimed macro'er. Only he doesn't work in a sweatshop in a developing nation. He doesn't grind long shifts for ISK. He's an American in his early thirties, with two kids and a family dog. Just a regular guy. He writes under the pseudonym "EVE Player" and poses a question to his readers, "I have macro'ed the holy crap out of certain video games. I've been doing it for more than 8 years now so tell me; at what point did you notice your EVE experience going down the tubes because of me? I'll bet your downward spiral really has nothing to do with me macro'ing, now does it?"
WAR hotfix patch cleans up quests and PQs, hides EULA
Following the release of patch 1.0.5, a further update to Warhammer Online has addressed a large number of bugs in various quests and PQs, the full list of which can be found in the hot fix patch notes. A handful of RVR-related problems were also quashed, most notably the lack of Healer NPCs in Kadrin Valley warcamp, and some missing set items in Tier 3 Gold Keep bags.Further tinkering with client performance and stability made it into this hot fix as well, with a focus on "periods of intense combat" -- we'll have to see how that one pans out. However, arguably the best part of the patch is one of the simplest changes -- WAR's EULA will now only need to be agreed to when changes are made to it. Joy! It's the little things in life that make us happy.
Interplay between ownership and game mechanics in EVE Online
The concept of ownership established in the real world doesn't always equate with 'reality' in the virtual. When someone robs a person in real life, we don't just hope that they will be punished for this, we expect it. We demand it. Theft runs counter to law. But within the virtual, what if theft of another's property falls within game mechanics? If something is a crime in the eyes of players but doesn't violate the EULA, and the crime is committed fully within permitted game mechanics in the virtual space -- the game world equivalent of 'law' -- can it even be called "crime" at all? An article at The West Georgian titled "A Nerdy Commentary on Governments, Games, and Property", written by Jacob Lovell, explores this interplay between real world concepts of ownership and the virtual world's crimes. To do so, Lovell looks back on what stands -- to this day -- as one of the most significant ways people pushed the boundaries of what's permissible in an MMO: the Guiding Hand Social Club's (GHSC) defining act of espionage in EVE Online from 2005. Most EVE players are quite familiar with the event, when the GHSC took a contract to bring down their 'client's' rival corporation, Ubiqua Seraph. Operatives in the Guiding Hand Social Club spent roughly one year infiltrating the target corporation, until the codeword 'Nicole' was called out. At that moment, operatives at all levels within the target corporation raided its assets. The heist coincided with an assassination of the Ubiqua Seraph CEO, by her own trusted lieutenant... also a GHSC operative who led her into the trap, followed by some excellent PR spin.
EVE's second Council of Stellar Management applicants announced
EVE Online differs from other MMOs in a number of ways. Differences in game mechanics and setting aside, even the dynamics among the players is different than with your standard sharded MMO. The single server approach puts all of the players in one world, sometimes creating a tense social dynamic between the players, and especially between CCP Games and the EVE subscribers. The player-elected Council of Stellar Management (CSM) is an attempt to have a group of players bridge this gap, and represent the interests of the playerbase as a whole by advising CCP on how to keep the game in step with what the players want. Although the first CSM is still in office, the next election process is well underway. EVE dev CCP Diagoras posted a breakdown of the applications for the second Council of Stellar Management, listing statistics and information about those who have their eyes set on a place among the CSM, and plenty to read about each of the individuals in the running.
What rights should we have to our virtual goods?
Are you aware of your property rights as they pertain to the virtual goods in your favorite MMO? Are you aware of the laws in your country as they pertain to virtual goods? Heck, do you even read the EULA?It seems like these lawyer-speak agreements are becoming more prevalent lately, as we impatiently click the 'agree' button in anticipation of playing the latest MMO. In fact, even older games are reinstating their EULA on the loading screens, forcing players to click through before entering their world. The reason for this basically boils down to inevitable litigation as gaming grows in popularity.
EVE Online trojan warning
CCP Games issued a warning today, regarding a trojan found in a macro for EVE Online. CCP Wrangler said that the macro is being offered by 'Gold Harvest Macro Solutions' and ostensibly allows a player to automate their skill-training with a queue, eliminating the need to periodically log in and change skills. CCP became aware of it and put it through testing; here's a shocker -- the shady software contains a trojan. Please contain your surprise. CCP Wrangler's full announcement (login required): "A number of players have recently received an advertisement for a skill training macro, this macro is sent by Gold Harvest Macro Solutions who claims that the macro will let you create a skill training plan and have your character automatically train your skills. This macro has been tested and it contains a Trojan, so make sure you do not download any software from these people. If you downloaded the program, make sure that you run a complete scan of your system and then change all of your passwords!"Not that anyone who uses programs like this doesn't really understand they're breaking the accepted rules of the game, but pretty much using any 3rd-party automation with the EVE client is a bad move.
The debatable concept of ownership in virtual spaces
Game security news and analysis site PlayNoEvil recently looked at the concept of ownership in the virtual space, in an article called "The Quixotic Quest for Avatar Rights." It explores the question that's been around since the very beginning of virtual interactions: Does the player who invests his or her time into finding, creating, and using an item 'own' it, or is it really just server data that's company property? For most game and virtual world operations, there's little room for debate. They create the environment and everything in it, right down to a gamer's or user's avatar. However one view expressed at an Austin GDC panel is that while companies work to ensure their legal claim to virtual property, they also foster the illusion that the player has some degree of ownership. While the mindset of the industry isn't likely to change any time soon, there are those involved on the development and business end that would like to see changes regarding 'avatar rights.' Others are pushing for an improved EULA which would ensure the continued growth of virtual worlds, where users have greater control over their own created content. What's your view on this? Do companies have any responsibility to their subscribers or users to relinquish control over player-created content? Are gamers and virtual worlds users unreasonable in thinking the situation should change?
Picking apart the MetaPlace Bill of Rights
MetaPlace is not an MMOG. It's a platform for creating virtual spaces that can be used for anything the creators can imagine. As such, the traditional MMO EULA is completely inadequate. Raph Koster -- the head honcho on the MetaPlace project -- made that clear in a panel at AGDC08. So, the folks working on MetaPlace had to come up with a whole new set of rules -- rules that allow users ownership of their virtual property, for example. There's a veritable landmine of problems awaiting this endeavor, of course. That's not to say it's impossible. It's just going to be extremely challenging.Koster published a first draft of the Terms of Service for MetaPlace on his blog the other day. It's based based on the Declaration of the Rights of Avatars that he conceived back in 2000. Readers of the MetaPlace ToS are likely to come away with two impressions. The first: that it's really cool and admirable and that in a general sense, Koster and friends are on the right track. Two is that the MetaPlace team seems to be underestimating just how epic a quest it's committed itself to.
