The Lawbringer: Legal gold sales? Not a Blizzard's chance in Hell

As an introduction to our promised discussion on gold farming, I wanted to address an idea that's been circulating in the WoW blogosphere. There has been some talk that Blizzard could solve the problem of gold farming and hacked accounts in one fell swoop by simply selling the gold themselves. It's an attractive idea on its face, as some feel as though Blizzard's current ban on Real Money Transaction for gold ("RMT") is nothing but an ill advised Prohibition. Permit people to buy gold through Blizzard, the argument goes, and the keyloggers, site spoofers, hackers, and spammers will go back to the rock from under which they came, just like the Mafia disappeared after alcohol sales were permitted in 1933. Oh wait...
The obvious problems have been pointed out before, including: rich brats will have more advantages over folks with jobs and bills; inflation will cause Azeroth to resemble Zimbabwe, the Weimar Republic, or -- God forbid -- Norrath; players will be forced to pay up to stay competitive; WoW-clone MMOs will follow Blizzard's lead, leaving players with few refuges from RMT markets; Blizzard devs will be "encouraged" to design the game around acquiring and spending more gold; players who can't remember website names will still think "www.l3g!t-w0rlduvw0wcr@ft-g0ld.c0m" is Blizzard's website and download keyloggers, etc. Some don't believe this parade of horribles is enough to discourage Blizzard from creating this quixotic market. To the doubters, let me add some legal issues that would affect Blizzard and players, namely: property rights, taxation, and investment advice.
Any of that sound like improvements to you?
The Current Situation
Let's begin by first examining the current legal situation. We, as players, are in a contractual relationship with Blizzard. This contract is composed of two documents, the End User License Agreement and the Terms of Use, that define the rights, responsibilities, and privileges of each party. So let's see what the documents have to say.
The End User License Agreement states:
And just in case you missed it, the Terms of Use state:2. . . . You agree that you will not, under any circumstances: . . . C. exploit the Game or any of its parts, including without limitation the Game Client, for any commercial purpose, including without limitation ... (b) for gathering in-game currency, items or resources for sale outside the Game;
So, Blizzard is quite clear about this--you are not allowed to sell gold. Why not? Well, let's start with the fact that you don't actually own "your" gold.2. . . . You agree that you will not, under any circumstances: . . . B. exploit the Game or any of its parts, including without limitation the Service, for any commercial purpose, including without limitation ... (b) for gathering in-game currency, items or resources for sale outside the Game;
Missed it? Here it is again:4. Ownership.
A. All title, ownership rights and intellectual property rights in and to the Game and all copies thereof (including without limitation any . . . objects, . . . character inventories, . . .) are owned or licensed by Blizzard.
So right now, gold sellers are selling to you what belongs to Blizzard, not the poor sap they "stole" it from. If Blizzard was to sell gold, you would pay money to buy something that would still belong to Blizzard. Now, as a premium service, it doesn't cause any legal issues per se, but it edges Blizzard closer to the line that Linden Labs is walking with Second Life.Ownership.
All rights and title in and to the Service (including without limitation any user accounts, . . . objects, characters, . . character profile information, . . . ) are owned by Blizzard or its licensors.
Linden Lab's Market
Now, as we've already covered, Linden Lab has the LindeX®, a market to exchange dollars for Linden Dollars ("$L") (Get the impression that Linden likes the look of his name?) As a result, all the business tycoons of Second Life are playing with currency only one exchange away from "real" money. However, Linden has this clause in their Terms of Service:
If Blizzard were to set up a BlizzX, they would likely have similar provisions in its terms of use. Here's the thing -- we don't know if this clause could be enforced. This provision was challenged by Marc Bragg, a Second Life user who had his account banned for allegedly using an exploit to buy land. As discussed a few weeks ago, the case never made it to trial; after losing a pretrial motion to have the case moved to arbitration, Linden Labs settled the case. In his opinions, however, the judge did suggest that Linden Lab's advertisement that "you own your stuff in Second Life!" contrasted sharply with the above provision. It is entirely possible that a judge may find such provisions are improper -- that if the gold is bought like real money and is spent like real money, it can't just be appropriated like Monopoly® money. He may find that gold is a virtual property to which we, as players, have ownership rights. In which case, our relationship with Blizzard and our gold will radically change.1.4 Second Life "currency" is a limited license right available for purchase or free distribution at Linden Lab's discretion, and is not redeemable for monetary value from Linden Lab.
You acknowledge that the Service presently includes a component of in-world fictional currency ("Currency" or "Linden Dollars" or "L$"), which constitutes a limited license right to use a feature of our product when, as, and if allowed by Linden Lab. Linden Lab may charge fees for the right to use Linden Dollars, or may distribute Linden Dollars without charge, in its sole discretion. Regardless of terminology used, Linden Dollars represent a limited license right governed solely under the terms of this Agreement, and are not redeemable for any sum of money or monetary value from Linden Lab at any time. You agree that Linden Lab has the absolute right to manage, regulate, control, modify and/or eliminate such Currency as it sees fit in its sole discretion, in any general or specific case, and that Linden Lab will have no liability to you based on its exercise of such right.
Problems with Owning Gold
So what happens in a world where we own our gold? First, obviously, Blizzard's lawyers will be busy rewriting our EULAs and TOUs. Who wants Blizzard redirecting money for game development to the lawyers? (And I see the lawyers in the crowd are the only ones with raised hands.) Next problem: the kind of crazy judge who says that players deserve property rights in their gold is the same kind of crazy judge who would still make Blizzard responsible for safeguarding it. So now, when some moron visits www.ub@r-ch33p-w0w-g01d.c0m and downloads a keylogger, Blizzard would have to convince a jury pool that the little innocent mama's boy in the witness chair was not a helpless victim of the evil foreign gold farming company taking advantage of big bad Blizzard not investing in account security. Who thinks this is a good use of Blizzard's resources? (I see the lawyers are again raising their hands.) So us owning our gold means less money for Blizzard to make new toys. Sound like an improvement?
Taxation
Next problem deals with our relationship to our government. (I'm speaking to the Americans here, but this isn't only an American issue.) The idea of taxing MMO generated revenue has been tossed around for a while. For the record, the IRS says that when one sells gold, an account, or power leveling services, one does owe taxes on that income. Whether non "cashed out" gold is subject to taxes has been a gray area, with the IRS declining to step in yet. It's certainly with the purview of the government to tax such an "income" source. Here's what the IRS says on the matter:
The report then goes on to explain the reasons why IRS may choose not to subject our phat loot to taxation, including the difficulty in valuing the property we have accumulated in game. This issue goes away in the presence of a Blizzard sponsored exchange. If we assume an exchange rate of $5/1000 gold, I have "earned" a grand total of $50 in the last year. Now this may seem like couch money, but for some people, that total comes up to be a substantial amount of money. Furthermore, perhaps you have seen this graph:[A] person is generally subject to tax upon finding or earning money or treasure, winning a lottery, prize or award, stealing property, or trading one piece of property for another, potentially leading some to conclude that transactions involving virtual property are or should be subject to tax.
As you can see, the people in charge of government spending have the fiscal discipline
Investment
Finally, if gold is treated as players' property, then Auction House PVP become a real life investment, just like playing the penny stocks. Which means that gold selling guides become investment advice. Which means the Securities and Exchange Commission now can get involved. Which means that people who give AH PVP advice, like our very own Basil Berntsen, would have to file a Investment Advisory Registration, including full disclosures on their own investments on the AH Commodities Market. Is this a path we really want to go down?
Let me explain again -- No, there is too much. Let me sum up: gold selling could radically change our relationship to Blizzard, forcing them to spend more money on non-game development. It would likely prompt a government desperate for cash in taxing our now easy to value virtual wealth, and it would subject the people who help us increase that wealth to ridiculous SEC rules. And this is on top of the complaints that everyone has already mentioned about the idea. This is why I predict that the odds of Blizzard setting up a gold exchange are less than a Blizzard's chance in Hell.
Stay tuned next week, when we look at a novel theory for attacking gold farmers -- tortious interference in contract.
The Lawbringer is provided for your entertainment and is not legal advice. If you have a real legal problem, contact a real lawyer. If you have general questions about law or law school, shoot me an email at lawbringerjd@aol.com or tweet me @wowlawbringer.
Filed under: The Lawbringer
Patch 5.3 interview with Ghostcrawler
Mystery of the Unborn Val'kyr
The latest patch 5.3 news
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria news





Reader Comments (Page 5 of 7)
jfofla Mar 16th 2010 6:06PM
Don't forget Gold Raids.
On my PVP server the largest guilds sell raid slots for titles like Kingslayer or the Ulduar drakes.
There are also gold based runs where the guild takes "buyers" that buy the drops, the gold is distributed to the guild.
jfofla Mar 16th 2010 6:03PM
Nice use of "quixotic"
Warren Mar 16th 2010 6:07PM
Gold sellers will never give up so maybe Blizzard should allow the in game Auction Houses the option to buy gold or other loot with real Money. Let a Free market decide what the price of Gold or other loot should be.
To me this is like Prostitution or drugs you'll NEVER get rid of it, you'll spend ridiculous amounts of time and money in a futile struggle to stop it so you may as well legalize and tax it.
Blizzard could take a % of all transactions I'm sure they need ways to keep their Shareholders happy because let's face it subscriber growth will not rise forever so this could be a way to create new revenue which they obviously are trying to create *cough* Virtual Pets, Loot in Trading Cards, and so on...
Is there a can of worms here? Well yes there is it's called a New Paradigm, The "Virtual" economy. It's already opened on Second Life and others time for Blizz to face the future.
peon47 Mar 17th 2010 12:54AM
"Gold sellers will never give up"
So blizzard should? You think they're gonna do that?
At the moment, the majority of gold for sale comes from hacked accounts. Once blizzard gets that sorted (free authenticators with cataclysm, say) that's it. Gold sellers are screwed.
Celess Mar 17th 2010 5:25AM
I love the defeatist attitude here, and again, did you actually read the article and those oh-so-difficult bits in grey italics? Or have you, like a good 20% of the replies here, just scrolled down to the bottom and commented?
Hagu Mar 16th 2010 6:08PM
I doubt Activision will ever do this for WoW, at least until it gets close to end-of-life. Big companies tend to be conservative with changes to their cash cows. Small competitors ("disruptive technologies" the book refers to them as) are forced to try different things.
However:
1) I frequently remind people that "just because something is a bad idea, does not mean that it is not the best idea." In the USA, after the 18th amendment and before the 21st, the Volstead act prohibited alcohol, which led to the Al Capones of crime.
So you can both believe that
a) Blizzard selling gold would be bad
b) It would be preferable that the current situation where anyone who wants to can buy gold; It is advertised on in game trade every few minutes. And the gold farmers have great incentive to bot and hack accounts. Also, people who are willing to violate the TOS have a bigger advantage now since the rule-abbiding players will not buy it.
The question is not whether gold sales would be bad, but whether it would be worse than the current situation. Can you possible say that there is no amount of in game gold spam, websites spelled out with dead gnomes, underground mining bots, and hacking that would be worse than Blizzard sales? You can make a strong market that we are not there yet, but never?
2) Linden/SL has been doing this for long enough, clearly this can be made to work.
3) The tides of gaming are going against this. Free-to-play with RMT is really gaining market share. How many times will a gaming executive read about the DDO experience of 500% revenue after F2P and some people spending $50/mo ($15 no longer caps how much you can spend) before deciding that is a lot more attractive than trying to take on the 13,000,000 pound WoW gorilla in the $15/month all-you-can-eat arena? And what exactly are the moral and practical differences between microtransactions and just selling gold?
nowAFK.com Mar 16th 2010 6:24PM
I'm curious why some people think this will stop the hacks. Hacker's can always undercut blizzard because their gold is "free". So even if Blizzard sells gold they will never have a monopoly, and official gold selling will not deter hackers.
Evari Thalia Mar 16th 2010 6:34PM
"... players will be forced to pay up to stay competitive..."
That's not necessarily the case though for World of Warcraft. The best gear in the game is BoP, so unless raiding guilds start selling spots on farm runs (ZA mount runs?) for gear (which is NOT guaranteed to drop), achievement titles, or mounts, there is nothing to spend the money on for your character. A couple of BoE epics for your particular class/spec combo, and your offspec, enchants, gems, AND all of that stuff for your alts, and there is nothing left to buy.
In a game like Ragnarok Online where they do not have a bind system, loot is traded freely among alts, guild members and account thieves, money can become king. WoW is not designed that way though.
Celess Mar 17th 2010 5:27AM
GDKP runs are getting more common. You think they wouldn't suddenly skyrocket if they made this legal?
People already roll against each other in PUGs then put it up for bid in /ra. The good ol' "Anyone want this item I just rolled on and won? Starting at 6k!". You think THIS wouldn't suddenly skyrocket if they made this legal?
lokitx Mar 16th 2010 7:17PM
You can argue whether they should do it or not all day long. I'm just saying it's not illegal and it has no tax implications. They could do it if they wanted to - so this post is largely in correct.
Philosophically, you can argue either way. I'm just saying that this fits with most fantasy archetypes, but that's not really a necessity.
I do think you are confused though. There are a large number of gamers in the world who have real jobs - that take a lot of time. Why should Blizzard not make more money (which one might assume would at least partially go to making the game better) to allow them to trade some money for some time?
I mean, if you work 40+ hours a week it isn't very much fun to login and have some moron character tell you to run here, then there, and then back here, 20 times so you can get some gold. Yeah it's easy. No it's not fun. Yeah I would trade money to note have to do that. I'd rather spend my limited play time doing stuff that's actually engaging and interesting like new instances.
The fact is they are leaving a lot of money on the table and making the game less fun for a large part of their audience by not enabling some in game purchases. It doesn't have to be gold. Let me pay $50 for my epic mount or something.
Anyway, this is probably about the same as arguing about other dumb ideas like god and socialism with fanatics.
Daedalus Mar 17th 2010 9:23AM
Okay, first off, the author never said it was illegal, so that's kind of moot. As for there not being any tax implications, you still haven't given any actual refutation to the arguments the author makes for why there would be. The fact is, there probably aren't any right now, but that could change very quickly if Blizzard got into this kind of business.
Now, as far as the argument that it's not fun to work 40 hours a week, then log and try to make money in the game too, my question is: what are you playing for? You mention new instances, but I fail to see how having huge piles of money laying around would improve your experience there. Epic flying? It's nice, but it's not a necessity, and hardly worth ruining the game over. (And make no mistake: sanctioned gold selling would ruin the game, for all the reasons the author mentions, and many, many more.)
Sorry, but the author has made some very good points here about why gold selling would hurt the game, and the best refutation you seem to be able to come up with boils down to "nuh-uh" and "but this other game does it." Not terribly convincing, I'm afraid.
Jafari Mar 17th 2010 10:05AM
I agree that there are no bizzare tax implications. Selling gold, standing alone, is like the sale of any other in-game item. It's income for Blizzard, it's subject to sales tax, and it affects Blizzard's profits. Just like the plushie/mounts or pets.
The author's amusing conjectures are all based on the premise that Blizzard would also *buy* gold from players, or support RMT between players, a'la Second Life. That's a different discussion altogether.
Jason P Mar 16th 2010 7:13PM
"[A] person is generally subject to tax upon finding or earning money or treasure, winning a lottery, prize or award, stealing property, or trading one piece of property for another, potentially leading some to conclude that transactions involving virtual property are or should be subject to tax."
You have to pay taxes on stolen property? Exactly how is this enforced? Form 99-B Taxation on Claimed Stolen Property
Line 1. How much is the estimated value of property you stole in the previous year?
Line 2. How much money did you steal in the previous year?
Line 3. What is your current address? Please remain there while the police come to arrest you.
icepyro Mar 16th 2010 7:38PM
I lol'd at the use of .c0m
I rofl'd at the fact it has a link.
I was sad at the lack of rickroll
There were more lolz for me with those "made up sites", but I think it's just me being odd.
Otherwise, awesome read. I had a comment about the $5/1000g example not being taxworthy, but now that I think about it, I found enough flaws as I explained that I withdraw the comment. Incidentally, becoming goldcapped from 0 would mean an income of $1073.75 at that exchange rate.
icepyro Mar 16th 2010 8:25PM
In reading some of these replies, I guess I do need to point out that there is a ridiculously low threshold for "not taxable" income. I want to say it's like $100. Buying epic flying for $50 when it can be bought in-game for 5k comes to a $1:100g exchange rate (easily ascertainable value). I've recently bought epic flying for one and am well on my way for another. That's a lot of gold exchanging hands. Even at the generous example of $5:1000g, I've "earned" enough gold in game to be taxed between playing the AH and farming/crafting.
Therefore, the idea of "no tax implications" is really about whether you report it and how much the IRS cares when they audit you. It is very easy with just about any reasonably priced gold to earn enough income to pay taxes for it or for it to impact your tax situation. Also, this means Blizzard has to give everyone tax documents each year, etc.
Now having items which have no ascertainable gold value is of interest to me. I would love to see how the economy would work out for auctionable game time for instance.
I think the first step Blizzard could take on this would be to change how the pets bought in the store work. Rather than mailing each toon of an account with a BoP, they could mail one toon (your choice) a BoE item that when used becomes a BoA pet. You could then mail it to all your alts so they all get this (well once they work out cross-server BoA mail). This would allow you to sell the pets on the AH for gold or you can keep it yourself. They could also sell them for cheaper to be BoE one use. Either way, it would be interesting to see the how this works out with the economy.
Jafari Mar 17th 2010 9:53AM
You are falling into the same fallacy as the author. Merely being capable of converting warcraft gold into a dollar amount does not make warcraft gold taxable. I could sell bell peppers for a dollar a piece, but if I grow peppers in my backyard and eat them, I am not taxed for that.
Additionally, accepting your logic would mean that grinding out dailies is *already* a taxable event. The IRS could easily determine how much your gold from dailies is worth by checking out the prices charged by existing gold sellers. Like my bell peppers from my garden, however, you aren't taxed on the gold you make from dailies, but you would be taxed on any sales of that gold.
Jafari Mar 17th 2010 9:53AM
Blizzard would not have to give you tax documents unless THEY paid YOU as a contractor or employee. Nothing about them selling gold would create an obligation to send a W2 or 1099, any more than them selling you your subscription or pets.
icepyro Mar 17th 2010 7:41PM
You miss the fact that, currently, gold selling is in violation of all the contracts that pertain to the method of business being performed. The IRS couldn't tax the speakeasies for alcohol sales during prohibition, could they? So yes, I was saying that grinding dailies counts as a job. While you giving me peppers for helping you garden isn't taxable, I still wonder if that has more to do with the "easily ascertainable value" of those specific peppers and how much the IRS cares (read: not that much). They may care a little more about Blizzard who has millions of subscribers. I also can't buy goods or services with those peppers on any grand scale. If I could trade those peppers for a new pair of shoes in any legitimate business, that may change.
Still, you have a couple points. I am no expert, and in the end I think there is still far more reasons for Blizzard not to sell gold than any justification could ever be made to do so than this. This is literally like pouring a glass of water into a swimming pool. Although, I still think Blizz should allow store pets and other items with no in-game ability to purchase/sell to be sold on the AH. That would literally not introduce any gold into the economy and still be a method of RL money to translate into potential gold for some.
jonahb Mar 16th 2010 8:52PM
i played evefor a time right after BC was realesed and i thought the money system was fair mainly becuase it was the players selling the gold
@evryone
why are you guysall up on como he just has an opinon like everyone else dont drown him becuase of that its really insulting
even though i know im going to be downvoted and my comment will be so dark that no one willl be able to read it but im doing it anyway
adyuaa Mar 16th 2010 9:16PM
For me, it was because he told a blogger not to share an opinion, and a law student to stick to what they know and not write about law.