It's only bad if you use/used Glider. If you think it's bad, then you've probably used Glider and you're probably going to be sued out the ass.

Sheldon? Did you read the article.

It's GREAT that Glider has officially been shut down...

It's potentially a bad thing as the court case may have opened a can of worms in the future for less legitimate lawsuits... We don't really know yet though.

What people need to realize is that this is more than lol botter vs blizz.
This is what does a ToU or EULA mean and what is RAM?

For example do to this precedent anyone who has ever been suspended has committed copyright infringement.

HOW?

Say we have Bill. Bill was banned for 3 days. He was banned because he breached to ToU or EULA.

The new court precedent shows that you do not OWN anything. You are only given a license to play. By breaching the ToU or EULA you do not have the license any more.

But heres the kicker. Playing the game requires copying data into your RAM. Without a license they are declaring the copy to RAM illegal as it is copyright infringement because you have no license to copy it. Better yet, this is not something you INTENTIONALLY do. It is just a requirement of using a computer.

So a name called "lolwutomg" is against the EULA. -Sued
Temporarily banned -Sued
Anything against the ToU or ELAU -Sued


Blizz will of course not do this. however it sets a scary precedent. As anyone "could." Microsoft comes to mind but I am just paranoid like that.
Regestry Edits? SUED
Anything against their ToU? SUED

I could care less about botters and whatnot, people should be angry this happened. Sure the botter's were kicked, but we got some FAR worse collateral damage.

Sheldon, you are a dumbass and have completely missed the point of the article. That point was about precedent in copyright law. Did you even read the article before you comented?

No, it's bad overall because it means we could accidentally (or purposely) break apart of the ToS, and get done for copyright infringement. Even if that part of the Terms doesn't have anything to do with the copyright.

I don't know how Glider broke copyright laws, but they did break the ToS. Breaking the Terms of Service of a something is illegal as a ToS is a legal binding contract between the company who issued it and the client who signed it (in this case, every single WoW user).

In saying this, whose to say they actually subscribed to World of Warcraft? Technically speaking, if I never signed up for WoW I could do whatever I like, even if it breaks their ToS, because I never signed to their terms. If it breaks other laws (like copyright laws) then yes, I could be done. And that's why it's bad.

Anyone who makes a program for a game that breaks the ToS will be done for copyright infringement. Even if it either does not break copyright laws, or the developer didn't sign any Terms of Service Agreement.

Here's an interesting scenario. Lets say Blizzard accidently codes a bug where the damage reduction of Hand of Protection persists after the buff goes away. Now you are an invincible paladin walking around and destroying everything in your path. Blizzard determines that you are using an exploit to gain an unfair advantage and now your being sued.

That doesn't sounds like good news.

FYI - I'm not sure if exploiting a bug is technically a ToU violation, but you get the idea.

You will only get sued for copyright infringement if the copyright holder can how you are profiting (in real world money) from the breach or preventing the copyright holder from gaining revenue as a result of the copyright breach.

If Blizzard thinks you are using an exploit, you will simply get the typical ban for breach of EULA. IF Blizzard thinks you are using an exploit to gain real money at their expense, then you will get sued. If Blizzard thinks you are breaking the EULA for profit (i.e. gold farmer), you will get sued.

Alarmists pipe down.

KnowYourFacts said...
You will only get sued for copyright infringement if the copyright holder can how you are profiting (in real world money) from the breach or preventing the copyright holder from gaining revenue as a result of the copyright breach.

---

Ummm.... WRONG!

http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

""If I don't charge for it, it's not a violation."
False. Whether you charge can affect the damages awarded in court, but that's main difference under the law. It's still a violation if you give it away -- and there can still be serious damages if you hurt the commercial value of the property.

Just because you aren't profiting in real world money DOES NOT protect you from being sued for copyright infringement.

/Actually NOTHING protects you from being sued. You can be sued at anytime by anyone, albeit they don't necc. win.