The necessary relationship between Blizzard and law enforcement
by Mathew McCurley 
Dec 16th 2011 at 5:00PM
Back in 2009, a man named Alfred Hightower escaped to Canada from the United States after a warrant was issued for his arrest in Indiana for drug dealing and other charges. The Howard County Sheriff's Department had no idea where Hightower ran off to until a deputy figured out that Alfred Hightower was a World of Warcraft player. After a politely worded request for information about the guy to Blizzard, the detectives had everything they needed to find, alert the proper authorities in Canada, and arrest Alfred Hightower.
Blizzard didn't really have to easily comply with the information request by the Howard County Sheriffs Department but did so in a smooth and cooperative way. Sure, there are scenarios where some information would be compulsory and downright necessary (in the case of national emergency or someone in mortal danger), but this was just some dealer who ran to Canada. There's usually a longer process.
Antisec, the hacker anti-security movement, released a document back in November that allegedly discusses how Blizzard will respond to law enforcement information requests and provide law enforcement with a sort of a primer on World of Warcraft and what to expect from Blizzard's cooperation. What's interesting is that this primer and information packet had to have been created to streamline the process of helping out law enforcement. Someone made this packet to save time, which means there have been plenty of requests for people's information.
Now, we don't know exactly how much this document and primer for law enforcement has changed over the course of the years it has been in circulation or use, but the general gist of the document and its implications probably hasn't changed all that much. We can still infer that Blizzard keep records for the same amount of time and still has the same general attitude toward law enforcement -- a compelling reason by a bona fide law enforcement agency is all it takes for most of your WoW information to be on the table.
Your Information: Not really private
Being online in general is a bad idea if you want to lay low. Playing a massively multiplayer online game is worse -- you are logging into a service using an account you created using your name, address, and credit card information. That already screams "Find me, please!" Remember, these are video games, not bastions of free speech and civil liberties. WoW is not a physical extension of the land of the free -- it is a virtual world run by a corporation that licenses players to access its service.
The relationship that Blizzard has with law enforcement has been an intriguing topic to me because of how pervasive World of Warcraft is to such a large audience and how people still believe that what they do online is still a safe, anonymous place. The internet does nothing but collect and store information about you. Games on the internet do nothing but collect and store information about you and the characters you play.
Why so friendly?
Cooperating with the cops is one of the surefire ways not to get cops angry. Blizzard runs an enormous company with 10 million customers for World of Warcraft alone and has to keep this world running smoothly. A lot of people's lives and jobs depend on World of Warcraft's being a stable, fun, and accessible service. When criminals from the real world enter the virtual world, their motivations for doing so might not be criminal, but their presence can be destabilizing. Let me give you an example.
While Blizzard would most likely be exempt from liability for a lot of criminal activities that are planned through WoW because of carrier laws, imagine the trouble Blizzard could be in if it was found out that a child was kidnapped after two people planned and executed the kidnapping through World of Warcraft -- not "in trouble" trouble, but media attention. How much faith did people lose in Craigslist after you attached "killer" to their name? We don't need a branded World of Warcraft criminal presence for our game's image.
So when the authorities come to Blizzard, all types of information are basically up for grabs if it's an emergency or there's a compelling reason. The law enforcement guide discussed earlier even has a sample language for requests section that can be used to submit information requests. If you look through the document, you can also get a sense of how the information, like chat logs and IP timestamps, are displayed when Blizzard prints them out. This is pretty detailed stuff.
Playing World of Warcraft is almost like stepping foot into the public square and milling about with your friends, as far as information sharing is concerned. I don't see this as a bad thing, especially when accountability on the internet is such a foreign concept to so many people. I don't want to get preachy because it's really not my place to do so, but the anonymity of the internet has been spoiled by so many bad eggs and the weird personality change that happens when people do not know who you are. If you've got something to hide, maybe putting yourself into the public eye isn't the smartest idea.
I probably would feel different about the Blizzard law enforcement guide if there weren't children involved. As privacy is eroded and our lives go from cherishing the public sphere to fearing it on the internet, protecting kids is harder and harder. If my kid were playing World of Warcraft and was being stalked or harassed online, I'd really like Blizzard to take down those detailed records of the people who think it's a good idea to harass children.
As this law enforcement packet pertains to the United States, it hits me hard in the civil liberties center of my heart. I look at this document and I know its purpose, and I know the ramifications of the thing, but I still can't help but feel somewhat violated even though those feelings are totally inappropriate. Of course Blizzard is going to keep information about what you do, and of course it is going to share that information if and when it becomes relevant to a criminal investigation. The information could be subpoenaed anyway. Blizzard is just taking some of the time out of getting those subpoenas by opening up information. That fact does help with the This is unjust! chants slowly rising in the depths of my Californian heart.
What it comes down to is that your information is not private when you're on the internet. We all knew that, and it's a sad, rough reminder sometimes that everything we do is tracked, traced, archived, and available to law enforcement. If you're a career criminal, you shouldn't be alarmed when the feds knock down your door during a Dragon Soul raid. Blizzard isn't going to let its brand be spoiled and its work put in jeopardy because it didn't help out the cops find their next low-life.
This column is for entertainment only; if you need legal advice, contact a lawyer. For comments or general questions about law or for The Lawbringer, contact Mat at mat@wowinsider.com.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, The Lawbringer
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
taedrad Dec 16th 2011 5:05PM
Interesting read, thanks Matt.
Aucald Dec 16th 2011 5:24PM
It has always dumbfounded me at the level of implicit trust people put into the concept of "anonymity" on the Internet. The Internet is a place where entire systems of data-processing are in league to capture, quantify, recognize, and ultimately track you for reasons that are as varied as they are nebulous. Using the Internet does not render a person an instant, anonymous ghost... and I think most people would be surprised at just how easily their words and actions can come back to them, given the right circumstances.
Aucald Dec 16th 2011 5:25PM
Well, that wasn't meant to be a direct reply to you, taedrad. Sorry about that.
PeeWee Dec 16th 2011 5:13PM
If there is any image, text or recording of you that you do not potentially want everyone in the world to see, keep it off the internet. Seriously.
(cutaia) Dec 16th 2011 5:25PM
Wait, really?
*Google's "Cutaia streaking incident Superbowl 2009"*
Oh, crap.
Nathanyel Dec 16th 2011 7:27PM
I googled it and was really sad this article is the first result.
Chokaa Dec 16th 2011 9:53PM
Exactly. See, that's why he had to delete it a couple hours ago. To keep us pervs off it :D
paulmewis Dec 16th 2011 6:03PM
I know what you did last summer....
You posted it all over facebook.
Monion Dec 16th 2011 6:10PM
I don't disagree with this reasoning at all. The information is held by Blizzard, and within the bounds of the law, it's Blizzard's choice what to do with said information. Note that in the document, Blizzard states the specific requirements for specific pieces of information (real-time chat monitoring requires a wire-tapping warrant, other data may require a subpeona or warrant). In some cases, where crazy stuff is going down within the game itself (people pre-meditating crimes, etc.), Blizzard needs to be able to take action themselves. Read the document, it's not unreasonable at all.
But really, Mathew McCurley, you brought up the "Think of the Children!" line of reasoning? Your article would be much, much stronger had you stuck to the facts rather than trotting out that tired old piece of rhetoric. Because despite our converging opinions on the matter, all I see now is Maude Flanders screaming, "Won't someone please think of the children?" over, and over, and over again.
Al Dec 16th 2011 7:02PM
Helen Lovejoy, actually.
/endnerd
Monion Dec 16th 2011 7:25PM
@Al
I sit corrected. Thanks!
Mathew McCurley Dec 16th 2011 7:43PM
I did! If you notice I'm even pretty hesitant about it. Let me tell you why I actually went with it.
eStalking is a huge problem for adults. It's impossible to deal with jurisdictions, federal law, uncooperative state officers and government people, damaging, impossible to stop, and people never stop getting hounded by stalkers and general internet criminals. Now imagine all of that with a kid and family that just doesn't "jive" with the WoW mindset -- their little girl just plays the game, they don't understand anything else that goes with it.
I don't like "think of the children" is a good excuse, save for a few exceptions, and most internet things are rough for kids.
anonymous Dec 16th 2011 7:17PM
"...accountability on the internet is such a foreign concept to so many people."
I think you meant to say:
"...accountability is such a foreign concept to so many people."
And yes, I see the irony in making this point with my chosen username.
Eliandor Dec 17th 2011 1:35PM
"...accountability on the internet is such a foreign concept to so many people" because separate from offline, where if you say something nasty to someone you may get beaten, posting a lot of false rumors online does not put you in immediate harm and people often to not realize that just because you cannot see someone does not mean their identity is not known (or from the other side, that identity cannot be found out, sometimes without much work). Off topic I would rather see libel laws adjusted rather than all these cyber-bully laws created that probably won't work.
To your concern over civil liberty, restrictions can only apply to government. While the "series of tubes" may represent the routers, lines and networks that connect the various internet sites, the sites themselves are private property. When you visit a site, log into a game or enter a chat room, it is like walking into a store, business or coffee shop. Anything you do in a public place, whether online in a chat room or offline in a real room can be recorded and given to anyone else. It is only the scale, bad publicity, or lack of a profit motive that prevents a web site owner from publishing every action by every visitor. The owner of the location has certain rights and can take measures to protect themselves. They can also choose to supply any information to law enforcement voluntarily if they feel it is civil responsibility or create a procedure so that the economic harm to themselves is lessened if the information is requested with the force of law. However a business is restricted to refusing to serve/sell to/associate with you.
It is the government that has the power to take away your freedom or your money and where the restrictions must be placed. I can always stop doing business with a company and provide them no more information about me whenever I want.
Dementron Dec 16th 2011 9:51PM
Welp, guess I better start organizing that gambling ring somewhere else then.
tulipblossom Dec 17th 2011 12:40AM
So not on topic, but oh my god, your icon is adorable. O_O
Luotian Dec 18th 2011 2:41PM
Like I said when this was first posted, I don't see any problem with the document at all. If someone legally asks for something they will get what they are legally entitled to get. They aren't handing out the information to just anyone. Everyone freaking out seems silly to me.
dartht8ter Dec 18th 2011 7:24PM
Privacy is privacy. You either protect ours or you don't. Doesn't matter if its cops or hackers or whoever. A company that espouses privacy concerns as much as they do should not give private information away to anyone period. It should straight up be illegal for any company to give your info to anyone, it should be treated as private intellectual property. Your points are biased, irrelevant, and cowardly.
Jacques Dec 20th 2011 10:37AM
Privacy is only private when you personally own the location in which it takes place. If someone comes in to my home or business, and I tell them that I have security cameras, and they start harassing my family or customers, they can't claim a right to privacy when I get the cops involved. If they don't like it, they have the freedom to not come to my home or business. WoW is Blizzard's business and we are their customers. Some, including Blizzard's founders, would probably even say that we are their family. Everyone have a right to not play WoW, but do not have a right to claim privacy for what they do in Blizzard's business when they tell everyone they're recording everything.
Secondly, I'd like you to elaborate on why you think Matt's points are biased, irrelevant, or cowardly. Being that WoW Insider isn't an official fan site, they aren't required to always agree with Blizzard, so Matt has no reason to be biased towards these points, nor to fear for his job if he were to say otherwise.
I also don't see how anything in this article is not relevant to the topic of how law relates to WoW, video games, and the MMO genre, as is the entire point of The Lawbringer series.
So if you can intelligently elaborate on your points without resorting to baseless insults, I'm sure that everyone would be appreciative.
Jacques Dec 20th 2011 10:42AM
Additionally, the world isn't black and white. Neither is privacy. Blizzard definitely has the right to keep all of our information private under certain, but not all circumstances. Just because they agree to not sell it to whoever wants it doesn't mean that they can't cooperate with law enforcement agencies. And just because they decide to make their in-game world a safer place by working against those who are active criminals doesn't mean that they should just say "Bah, we don't care about privacy, let's go sell everyone's information to whoever wants it".