The Lawbringer: Questions and answers from the mailbag

Pop law abounds in The Lawbringer, your weekly dose of WoW, the law, video games and the MMO genre. Running parallel to the games we love and enjoy is a world full of rules, regulations, pitfalls and traps. How about you hang out with us as we discuss some of the more esoteric aspects of the games we love to play?
Welcome, friends. Take a seat. Your journey must have been long and difficult. Fear not, we are a house of respite here at The Lawbringer, where you get to kick your feet up on the chair in front of you before going back to the drudgery of Friday afterno -- Oh. Well, then.Answering mail is fun. In fact, it's something I do a lot of. As WoW Insider's addon and UI columnist, I get many questions a day about all sorts of user interface problems, concerns, and opinions. After writing The Lawbringer, I began to get a new brand of email that was all about readers having awesome thoughts and questions about Blizzard policy, types of decision-making criteria, and issues all over the board. I love it! So this week, I'm dedicating some time to answering a few questions from my email that I think are worthy topics.
And, just a reminder: If you've got a question for The Lawbringer column or me, please drop me an email at mat@wowinsider.com. I love taking questions, and they make some pretty great article-fodder for columns such as the one you are about to read.
Machinima, take 2
Our first email question/topic comes from Spíder on the Saurfang (EU) server. He wants to know about Blizzard's machinima policies.
G'day Mat!
After having gone through one of my periodic "Bored with the game" phases that I suppose everyone who has plated WoW since the launch of vanilla gets from time to time, I have decided to turn my hand to machinima making.
Now I was sitting thinking about the whole thing, while simultaneously waiting for Sony Vegas to render a video, and for a separate video to upload to Youtube. Just how legal IS using the games graphics, music, characters, sound effects and any other number of things ripped from the MPQ archives on your hard drive, mixing them all up and producing a movie from them? Surely that is technically breaching all sorts of copyrights? After all, it must take hundreds, if not THOUSANDS of people a very considerable number of hours to create those items in the first place. And of course it all amounts to, in the end, all falling under the umbrella of Blizzard's intellectual property yet Blizzard seem to take a "We'll look the other way" approach on the matter.
I really have no idea where you would begin on this one, it's a huge can of worms. Unless of course Blizzard has stated publicly that all of it's assets are free to be used etc.
I hope you decide to accept this particular challenge. I believe it would be most interesting to see the results.
Thank you for taking the time to read this, and thank you for your awesome and informative columns.
Spíder - Saurfang (EU)
Back a few months ago, I wrote an entire Lawbringer on Blizzard and machinima, coming to the conclusion that Blizzard was one of the most open and fair entities when it came to using its intellectual property and assets in fan-made movies. That is all still true to this day.
Blizzard is very up front about its machinima policies for two very good reasons. First, by being up front and precise with machinima rules, you illustrate the value that the machinima community brings to the World of Warcraft experience. Much like the way machinima creators expanded and added to the value of the Halo universe with stuff like Red vs. Blue, WoW's machinima community has added untold value to the World of Warcraft brand name with original works, songs, movies, episodic content, and a host of other interesting projects. Blizzard knows it, and by spelling out clearly and precisely its aims, it sets up a situation in which machinima artists don't have to be afraid of Blizzard's lawyers knocking down their doors or takedown notices becoming all too commonplace. Basically, clear rules tell the public, "Here's our end of the bargain."
The second reason Blizzard's machinima rules and licensing are clear-cut is because it benefits Blizzard to have clear-cut rules in its favor. If Blizzard were stingy with its machinima rights to creators, machinima artists would always be toeing some kind of line. The most important aspect of the legal world is predictability. By having predictable rules and consequences, people can continue to make value judgments and risk assessments with the best information available. We are, after all, beings that make the best decisions (for the most part) based on potential risk and potential reward. Clear policies allow creators to be more relaxed about the lines they can't cross, opening up possibilities to explore.

Abuse of economy
The last thing Blizzard wants to do is punish members of its vast community for offenses they didn't even know they committed. Because of the innate knowledge barrier of what items are gained through perfectly "game legal" mechanics and which are bought with gold from a seller or hacked items, you'll probably never be banned over buying an item from an unknown person that was gained in an unscrupulous fashion. It just isn't good business. Going after the customer for gold buying doesn't get rid of the gold buying -- it only works to strike a little bit of fear into the gold-buying community. It is much more effective, rather, to devise strategies to combat the gold sellers and make gold buying a less attractive option or not an option at all.Hey Mat,
I had a question for you, and possibly The Lawbringer column. Recently a friend of mine who has been playing WoW since release had his account banned for "Terms of Use Violation -- Exploitative Activity: Abuse of the Economy." He has been a very active person on our realm economy and has amassed quite a bit of gold (somewhere in the hundred thousand range). He has said that he never used or is using any program that is against the ToS or EULA, including bots, and that the recent ban is probably because he has bought goods that were likely obtained by people using bots or other programs that violate EULA or ToS. My questions is this: Is it a violation of the ToS or EULA to purchase goods that were obtained illegally? If so, how are players supposed to know who has obtained goods legally and who has not?
Thanks much
Rudolph - Tichondrius (US)
That being said, Blizzard does use the Exploitative Activity - Abuse of the Economy closure reason for large amounts of gold selling and/or buying for sellers and players alike. It is rare in a player's case, however. Your email didn't provide the entire email sent to your friend, but the large amounts of gold being shoveled back and forth might have set off a false positive for some type of real money transaction. The full text of the "abuse of the economy" emails usually reads something like this:
Your friend's best bet is to ask Blizzard what happened, maybe get a little bit more information, and see if the ban was the result of some kind of gold selling deal. The bots or illegal program explanation probably doesn't fly, as that would show up as something different with Warden. Buying goods from someone who did exploit would not necessarily be cause for a ban because there is a gap in knowledge -- how do you know, as a player, what is safe to buy and what isn't within the game world? There is no way to guarantee, since the item doesn't say.Reason for Closure: Terms of Use Violation -- Exploitative Activity: Abuse of the Economy
This account was closed because one or more characters were identified exchanging, or contributing to the exchange of, in-game property (items or gold) for "real-world" currency. This exchange process negatively impacts the World of Warcraft game environment by detracting from the value of the in-game economy.
Even if this behavior is the result of a third party accessing the account instead of the registered user (for example, a friend, family member, or leveling service) then the account can still be held responsible for the penalty because of the impact it had on the game environment.
We've found the above behavior is many times directly related to groups responsible for compromising World of Warcraft accounts; we take these issues very seriously. To better understand our position against exploitative activity and the risks involved, please review this article: http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/info/basics/antigold.html
The exploitative activity that took place on this account violates the World of Warcraft Terms of Use. We ask you take a moment to review these terms at http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/legal/termsofuse.html. Any recurring subscriptions on this account have been suspended to prevent further monetary charges.
Exalted no more
Hey Lawbringer,
I don't know if you are following the drama involved with the Exalted Title and patch 4.06. It's some interesting reading and can be found on their forum including the blue post here:
I thought this would make an interesting article for you. The long and the short of it is that Blizzard removed the title from all players and upgraded the requirements.
I know that according to the TOS they can certianly do this. I certainly feel though, that there is a kind of social contract with
expectations here that they appear to breach. Is there any recourse for this activity or are we best served by quitting if we disagree?
Thanks for your time.
Andrew
MMO Terms of Use (like World of Warcraft's) always have a clause in them that grants the operator of the MMO license to do whatever it wants to its game world, including making additions and taking out pieces whenever it feels like it. It is the company's world, after all, and you are basically licensing its content and databases. In fact, here it is:
Changes to the Terms of Use or the Game.
Blizzard reserves the right, at its sole and absolute discretion, to change, modify, add to, supplement or delete, at any time, any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, any feature of the Game or the Service, hours of availability, content, data, software or equipment needed to access the Game or the Service, effective with or without prior notice; provided, however, that material changes to this Terms of Use Agreement will not be applied retroactively. If any future changes to this Agreement are unacceptable to you or cause you to no longer be in compliance with this Agreement, you must terminate, and immediately stop using, the Game. Your continued use of the Game following any revision to this Agreement constitutes your complete and irrevocable acceptance of any and all such changes. Blizzard may change, modify, suspend, or discontinue any aspect of the Game at any time. Blizzard may also impose limits on certain features or restrict your access to parts or all of the Game without notice or liability.
Basically, Blizzard does what it wants to because it is Blizzard's game world. Frankly, rules like this have to be implemented for a million and one reasons, but the biggest of them all is a little thing called liability.
When you begin to gain some kind of stake in the World of Warcraft, your rights change. Blizzard's aim is not to force you out of the loop -- that's just the ultimate conclusion. Issues arise when you are owed something. The last thing that Blizzard wants (and couldn't ever afford) would be treating 12 million players like 12 million employees or 12 million potential lawsuits. That's the crux of liability with a company that is providing you such a fun game with a friendly aura of community -- you have to be kept close for the purposes of community involvement, but you have to be kept as legally far away from any types of rights or ownership, or else someone will find a way in, so to speak.
Don't take that as a slight against you, the player, though. It's just business. In terms of WoW, a little business goes a long way, especially for a virtual world. Blizzard protects its ass so as to continue to stay in operation. You know that adage that one spoiled apple ruins the bushel ... or something. I'm not even that big of a fan of apples.
Nonetheless, issues like The Exalted title and gameplay concerns are best left to discussion out of the "what am I owed" in a contract sense, and more to the "what am I owed" from a community standpoint. Blizzard has every right to change the way The Exalted title works, but don't protest on a social contract platform -- protest on a platform of information. The community is owed timely information about decisions that effect the virtual world, not necessarily that changes should be implemented by the whims of the vocal minority/majority. Expectations are a very interesting topic, aren't they?
The best way to show any company, really, that you disagree with its policies is to stop buying its products or services. If The Exalted title change is quit-worthy for you, the thing that gets to the heart of the problem is your continued support of something you don't, in fact, support.
Speaking of the whole social contract thing, I wouldn't bring that up.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, The Lawbringer






Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Pyromelter Feb 25th 2011 8:24PM
I've known a lot of people who have gotten bans for "Abuse of Economy" when all they did was transfer a big chunk of gold from an alt to a main (or vice versa). Apparently large gold transfers trigger some kind of review or something from blizzard's end. This is especially a big deal when you have 2 accounts. Also transferring to another character on the same account that is not in your same guild seems to cause this to happen too.
This is actually quite a big deal, blizzard gets quite a few false negatives on this. Fortunately, everyone I've known that has had this happen to them has had their account and all items restored once they get the matter cleared up, but it can take up to a week or longer to get it all straightened out.
Massdps88 Feb 25th 2011 8:40PM
Things like this make me nervous.
The other day one of my friends got hacked, one of his guildies went into his account while it was getting hacked and sent all the gold on his main to another character on the friend's account. I'm afraid my friend's guildie could get in trouble when what he really did was try to protect my friend.
I don't know how it works in reality, but this "fail safe" of sort almost sounds like it could create more problems than it may fix.
Pyromelter Feb 25th 2011 9:05PM
"I don't know how it works in reality, but this "fail safe" of sort almost sounds like it could create more problems than it may fix."
It seems too. Hackers seem to empty accounts very, very quickly; by the time blizzard reviews and shuts down accounts, it's far too late. So this economy penalty is really BS a lot of the time. Not to mention the fact that blizzard themselves break their own TOU by circumventing their own rules through rare loot cards and rare pets (like if you bought SC2 collectors edition).
I understand why blizzard does it though, it's a very gray area that allows them to make more money, and as long as they aren't directly supporting cash-for-gold then they can get away with it ad infinitum, seemingly.
As far as your friend, yeah, they could get into some real troubles.
The bigger problem as I see it is blizzard's completely awful, terrible, horrendous login security. I still to this day never ever see people talking about the simplicty of brute-force hacking. I say this time and again: There is NO penalty for failed logins, and on top of that, the login passwords are NOT case-sensitive. (try both, if you don't believe me.) You can fail a login a billion times and nothing will happen. I fail to believe that people who have a decade or more of internet usage without having any passwords being stolen, and then suddenly their accounts get hacked by blizzard, are doing something wrong themselves. There are far more valuable things that can be hacked for way more money.
Blizz had a real big chance to up their security by at least giving everyone an authenticator free with their purchase of cataclysm. I feel they really missed an opportunity and screwed up by not doing this, especially based on how insecure the basic login to battle net/wow is.
paul Feb 25th 2011 9:08PM
how much is a 'big chunk of gold'? 1000g? 10000g? 100000g?
neminem Feb 25th 2011 9:20PM
But... authenticators *are* free. In the sense that the mobile authenticator is free, and if you don't have any devices that run iOS or Android, you probably at least have an old computer somewhere you could run an Android emulator on. Barring that, running the Android emulator on your primary computer isn't quite as secure, but still way better than no authenticator (as your would-be hacker would have to be running a screenscraper on your computer, rather than just password-guessing you. Spoken as someone who once got password-guessed, and who took that as a sign to go grab the mobile authenticator and start using it.)
Drakkenfyre Feb 25th 2011 9:22PM
A few years ago I noticed lots of people getting banned for sending large amounts of money around. They would post on the message boards, and say they had been banned, and recieved a message like that.
Usually they would say something like "I was lending my friend 5000g to buy Epic flying training", or "I was sending 5000g to my other account to buy Epic flying training."
Were they buying gold? Could be, but the sheer amount seemed like all of them were legitimate. What lends credence to their claims were alot of the time a CM would step in, investigate, say they made a mistake, apologized, and unbanned them. At the time buying gold for Epic flying training was the most common reason for sending/recieving that much gold, and it seems like they had an automatic system, and they were getting flagged and banned innocently.
This seemed to have gone down, but people still seem to be nailed by this. I have read stories of people having thousands and thousands of gold (hundreds and hundreds of thousands), and nothing, And someone with ten or twenty thousand, and they send it to another character or friend, and bam, banned.
I would like to know what is getting these people banned if their accounts are ok, and they have no history or connection to gold buying. Having a monopoly over one of the markets can get you banned, but if they do nothing but have a large amount of gold, why do they get banned?
Pyromelter Feb 25th 2011 9:35PM
You can be ringed up for this for sending as little as 5k, which makes no sense. 10k and up will possibly send up red flags.
Then again I also know a lot of people who have a zillion dollars and bank alts and multiple accounts and have never had an issue. I've transferred over 10k many times (mostly to spread out my gold between my alts) without an issue.
It doesn't seem like there is any rhyme or reason to it, so who knows, but getting banned and then unbanned with an apology is fairly common in my experience.
Noyou Feb 25th 2011 10:19PM
There has to be more to the story than that. I have transferred 12.5k from my main to an alt 3 times to make a chopper. Last 2 times were a couple weeks back. I also had a friend give me 12.5k to make him a chopper. Sure a transfer of that amount can send up a red flag which then might cause a GM to look into it. It is some undisclosed activity that is getting the players in question banned. This is also why they don't allow "hearsay" evidence in a court of law. People often find it more convenient to them if they omit a fact here or there.
:)
Drakkenfyre Feb 26th 2011 12:04AM
Noyou, I have seen CM's step in on the message board, and say "Oops, we made a mistake. You have been unbanned."
Jason Ralph Feb 25th 2011 10:29PM
Example: my wife & myself. She has a lot of Alts. So many so she has two accounts. I have one account and one character in WoW. I can't count the number of times I have loaned out gold for epic flying, and I've never been banned or have had any problems. She sends gold for epic flying to an alt on her other account and BAM!! Thrall's mighty Doomhammer comes crashing down. Still think that was funny as heck. And unfortunately told her so. Slept outside in a tent until Blizzard fixed it. S'mores anyone?
Shade Feb 25th 2011 11:47PM
In the same way you're supposed to notify your bank when traveling overseas to prevent your credit cards from being locked down, I wonder if Blizz could implement some sort of verification system for large-scale money transfers? Just stick an item such as the following on a General Goods vendor:
Bank Note
Use: Specify an amount of gold to credit to the note. Players with no authenticator will be directed to a GM for approval.
Using the item prompts either an authenticator box for accounts with authenticators, or opens a GM ticket for non-authenticated accounts. Then just trade/send the item to the desired character, who can then sell the note to any vendor much like Fortune Cards work now.
Saeadame Feb 26th 2011 2:16AM
The problem is a lot of hackers stick an authenticator on the accounts they hack... so it wouldn't really help that problem if the system would "ignore" accounts with authenticators. I guess there could be a time limit, eg, ignores transfers made by an account that has had an authenticator for more than 3 days or a week or w/e.
Dugmet Feb 25th 2011 11:53PM
Played on a server where it is common to see people selling 30-day game cards for in-game gold. It was so common a new player would not even expect it to be a violation.
Adrammalich Feb 26th 2011 6:47AM
I suspect someone's taking lessons from EVE... as in selling the Pilor License Extensions (PLEX) for ISK on the market, or doing the same through the official forums using CCP's system for it on your account for 60-day timecards.
Dragonrose Feb 26th 2011 8:32AM
When checking the transaction, don't GMs check the entire ingame email? If so, you could simply write something like:
Mass Gold Transfer
From: (character name)
To: (character name)
Both characters are on the same account belonging to: (account holder)
OR Characters on different accounts belonging to: (accounts holder)
This gold is being transfered for reasons of: (buying expensive mounts/storage/etc)
I am aware of this transaction.
(signed account(s) holder)
Seems silly to go through all those lengths but maybe it would be a way of telling whomever comes check upon this "illegal transaction" that it's in fact legal.
Amaxe Feb 26th 2011 10:03AM
I like this answer to questions format for the Lawbringer. Perhaps we could see this approach used in the future as well.
bmecher2000 Mar 2nd 2011 9:50AM
I got the same letter in my RL e-mail. I had been hacked without knowing about it, I am a casual player so I am not on consistantly. I got my account fixed. I suspect if that speed bump software hadn't been there, I would have been SOL because my stuff would have ben buried too deep or autodeleted out of the logs by the next time I logged on.
This is a 2 edged sword, but I suspect it is dooing more good than harm. It catches the Hacks as they happen, and might catch gold sellers making transfers. I wouldn't be surprised if it is a case of lots of "different account" activity in big sums rather than shufling money on the same account.