Courts Should Reject Blizzard's Assault on the First Sale Doctrine
from the contract-or-copyright? dept
We've written before about the ongoing fight over the legal status of end-user license agreements. Many software companies have tried to claim that breaking an EULA is copyright infringement, which often carries harsher penalties and stronger remedies than mere breaches of contract. The courts have generally resisted these arguments, holding that a copyright holder cannot expand the scope of copyright simply by attaching a "license" to its products. The Electronic Frontier Foundation points to the latest skirmish in this debate: Blizzard has taken the position that using a piece of software called Glider to cheat in World of Warcraft is not only contrary to the game's license agreement but is copyright infringement as well. Indeed, on Blizzard's theory, any violation of the license agreement would constitute copyright infringement.
Public Knowledge has submitted a brief in the case pointing out the real problems the courts would cause if they accepted Blizzard's argument. For example, among the terms of the World of Warcraft license are rules about what you can name your in-game characters. Blizzard's theory would mean that if you choose a name that violates those rules (such as naming your character after a "popular culture figure, celebrity, or media personality"), you would not only get kicked out of the game, but you would be liable for copyright infringement too! This is plainly not how copyright is supposed to work, and PK rightly urges the court to reject Blizzard's over-reaching argument. Perhaps most troubling, accepting Blizzard's argument would mean that software vendors would have the power to dictate who may make software that interoperates with their products. Outside of the much-reviled DMCA, copyright law has never given software vendors this kind of control, and there's no good reason to start now.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, eula, first sale, world of warcraft
Companies: blizzard, eff
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Or worse, what if your name happens to be the same as a celebrity's and you just want to use your own name?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Going wrong way round on this
As for the naming issues, yeah... it is dumb but they are trying to promote role playing... though on my server there is a toon named Neeyo who is always picked on in chat which violates that name thing...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Going wrong way round on this
If its the latter (which I don't believe it is) then we're talking about much greater penalties than copyright infringement. If its the latter then we've entered a grey area since cracking software isn't considered a crime by any means, a breach of the EULA contract perhaps, but nit a crime.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Going wrong way round on this
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Blizzard are the good guys
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Blizzard are the good guys
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If Blizzard can't police their own game, it's not our problem
If your game is pulling in ~$100 mil/month, and you can't afford to have a team of decent GMs patrolling the world - or failing that, at least checking out reported botters/crackers/whatever, then something is VERY wrong with the management of your gaming company!
The only think cheating does is violate your contract with the company - you agree to pay a fee and play by the rules in exchange for access to their servers. If you break the contract, you lose your access. That's it. That's the only penalty that makes any sense. Anything further is abuse of copyright law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
thanks for the name for the game
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
thanks for the name for the game"
The Streisand Effect at work. Ha ha ha! Take that Blizzard.
On a side note, I will not purchase another WoW subscription for this very reason. Unless they withdraw this case, at least.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lazy bastards...
I pay money for the use of the game, and for all the costs thereof, including people to moniter and make sure that as little cheating as possible happens. In fact, all WoW users have to agree to let Blizzard moniter thier RAM to ensure that as little cheating as possible is going on.
What happens when Microsoft decides that video games cause violence and says you can't use WoW on thier OS and puts that in thier EULA. To play WoW or GTA or any other supidly controvercial game suddenly becomes a crime, simply through stupid politicians leaning on companies to change thier EULAs.
Whafuck?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Lazy bastards...
Anyways, I don't get what the bother is for the other 90% of the game that's individual -- if someone else cheats and makes their life easier, they haven't made yours harder. They can't kill all the mobs, they can't mine all the ore. and if they want to pay $20/mo to have a bot play a game...? That may be dumb, but I fail to see how it's particularly harmful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You think that's bad
BioWare technical producer Derek French has said that the PC versions of both Mass Effect and Spore will make use of copy protection that will require online validation every ten days to continue working
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/52547
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's about grouping with cheaters
Then you have to kick them out of your group and and go back and look for another player to replace them. That wastes everyone's time and can ruin a night's play for a group of people.
That happens enough times and people start to get disenchanted with the game and the next thing you know, they stop playing and stop paying. That is what Blizzard is trying to avoid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's about grouping with cheaters
I submit that most people aren't that dumb, they want to play the game they're paying for. In this case you don't learn strategy from the tedius monster-grinding that Glide would automate, you learn it from running the bigger, more-interesting quests. If someone sets the bot to grind straight to Lv70 they're going to get approximately zero use out of the game: they won't be able to handle the quests on their own and they won't be able to hang on to a team. They'll constantly be frustrated and *they* will quit.
More likely, I think the issue is simply what they claimed early on: it futzes up resource allocation based on certain assumption they have on the way people play games. The existance of this bot and others like it would require them to reengineer their system. I think that is what they're trying to avoid, but I also think that it's a problem they'll have to deal with eventually, with or without the bots.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It's about grouping with cheaters
Are you alive?
Alot of people want things that they haven't worked for and will muck it up when they get it. This is repetitive in many, many areas of life, including World of Warcraft. To say that nobody ever wants the credit for something they didn't do, or that nobody ever wants to skip the hard work and get straight to the 'good part' is incredibly naive and gives the idiots that dominate the world WAAAAAAYYY too much credit.
People pay to get high-level characters that they didn't earn that they then use to blunder about my game with. It's cheating because it's against the rules. That's what cheating is, regardless of whom gains or loses what from it.
If I cheat on a test in college, I don't hurt anyone else, as long as it's not graded on a curve. So who cares? lets let everyone 'cheat'. It's not cheating unless someone else gets hurt, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
wow.
You're protesting WOW, eh? haha. It seems to be easier to pick on Blizzard than it is to blame those who are truly at fault. Look at the issue at hand: MDY's Glider creates an unfair advantage for some players in the game and is against the TOS (and it's just wrong... common sense folks. The "right" or "wrong" judgement call here is not even up for debate).
Bottom-Line: If you enjoy the game, play, and there's no issue. If you don't enjoy the game, save yourself time and money ($15/month and whatever Glider costs), and don't bother playing!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rose M. Welch
Oh and it's not cheating unless you get caught, in collage you will get expelled and marked ... in WoW you will get banned. But in WoW that will only cost you a month's subscription cost. However if you used Glider to BoT in-game gold and then sold it off ... I'm sure you're turning a profit anyways. Hey we should support Glider, it lets hobbyist gamers catch up with the elitist gamers! They spend the money made at their full time job and then funnel this money back to the elitist gamers ... creating a happy cycle. And Blizzard still gets the monthly charge from everyone ... shouldn't that make everyone happy?
Oh and lol
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You're an idiot.
Oh and lol.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ban the cheaters
allthough I think the way they are going about this is wrong.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
EULA funny stuff
EULA would last in court as far as a "no refund signs on a store counter"
Regardless of what you put it in the EULA, the customer will have the same rights as any other rental.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cheat: "to act dishonestly to gain an advantage". Breaking the rules does not mean you are necessary cheating. For example if you go competitive bike riding you may be required to wear highly visible clothing and helmet for your saftey. If you dont wear it you are breaking the rule but by no way are you cheating.
So what advantage was gained? You don't own your lvl 80 character blizzard does.. You have absouletly nothing. And no other players are any worse off becuase you used a bot because all other players have nothing as well. Their characters are worthing nothing.
If you own nothing, and get nothing more of a favourable outcome for using it then no cheating occured.
At the end of the day using a bot to play wow is no different than using a dishwasher to wash my dishes..
This isnt CS: source where you can shoot them in the head through the wall kind of stuff, or use an aimbot.
At the end of the day the ultra-rare magically sword is worth nothing, and no-one cares until you stab someone for it, as history proves.
Conclusion is you cant cheat on nothing to gain an non-existent/intangible advantage on nothing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]