EVE General Discussion

iff constarntly dokked fore um alt then obvs

if not aye am shure sum wun will soret tha owt fore yoo soun

Yeah, or maybe you need remedial reading. You do know what the word "IF" means? Google is your friend. Wannabee forum maven.

Some points:

1, People mentioned that "EULAs don't mean a thing in court", it is theoretically true. However, in this specific case, due to CCP's significant revenue/employment contribution to Iceland and the jurisdiction of Icelandic court on this case, the EULA will mean a thing, and will be used as a major evidence.

You live in a real world that both theory value and practice value will be considered.


2, Legally/Realistically speaking, players do not and can not claim ownership on the most of virtual properties in a game like EVE Online, except account and characters, as most of the virtual properties in EVE can be destroyed by other players or transferred via intended manners to other players. Using contract to transfer/trade virtual properties is an intended manner, as well as other "scam" methods.

As the legal owner of the virtual properties, CCP can decide if to make a rule to forbid so-called "scam" as "unfair trade". It is practically possible in EVE online and has been adapted by many mmo-developers, but it is also clear that CCP decided not to make such rule, in order to maintain the characteristic of "Sandbox game", with the idea that "rules should be made by players".


3, Of course, EVE is yet to be well consistent on the "sandbox game" idea. Partially "sandboxed" and partially "ruled" mechanisms sometimes appear to be worse than totally ruled ones. Some of the chaos in EVE that CCP smug about, are not actually caused by so-called "human's evil nature". The enforced broken mechanisms prevent players from making the game world more civilized.

You mentioned the word "steal". It is wrong

No the PLEX was not stolen, it is only traded "unfairly".

"Theft
A criminal act in which property belonging to another is taken without that person's consent."
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/theft


When you flip a corp hangar or POS hangar, you've been given permission(the role with access) to do so (of course the mechanism is so broken that people have to give permission that they didn't meant to give, that's another story). Ninja looting could be a kind of "in-game theft", but it has nothing to do with real life.

If you really want to incriminate "theft" in game, then attacking someone's POS and loot the lab/hangar will be "theft", attacking the MTU and loot it will be "theft", and pvps? they are "robbery"! which don't make any sense.


I kind of agree that PLEX which directly sold by CCP are on the borderline of normal "virtual property". But there is no officially backed price to claim "unfair trade", and whenever a player decide to undock with PLEX in cargo, they have accept the risk of potential attack from other players.


I would like the idea that scrap PLEX and use AUR instead, which will be more convenient and makes more sense. Anyway we don't have to haul "gold bars" as currency in order to generate more in-game contents.

Sell only AUR on the online shops, GTC are converted to AUR in game, add AUR-ISK transaction to the market

The thing is, by deliberately choosing to trade in in-game items, you also choose to play by in-game rules, which are always a gamble of sorts. You can have the kinds of guarantees you're talking about already — again, if you choose to — by going through the trading channels that come with far more restrictions.

Why should gameplay be limited just because you chose to gamble and lost?

Then again, that's probably where the case would be tossed out on its ears since the contract is not text in local, but the contract itself, where the terms are made very clear and where they can't be changed after the fact. The text in local can be excused as a spelling error; the actual terms cannot.

That only really leaves station trading, where you can exploit update bugs to some extent to do such a change (but then again, I seem to recall that those exploits are something you can petition and have reversed anyway).

Not always true.

A few days ago I was super lucky and scored a PLEX from SOMER blink. Considering my account is already in good standing for a few more months and I had no need for the extra 30 days of game time, nor did I feel like holding onto the PLEX - I decided to sell it. Open up market and check things out.

Best *buy* order for PLEX was something like 605 million. Best sell was something like 625 million. So, to sell @ 605 (after taking sales tax and broker tax out of the profit) would score me something like 588mil. So, instead of selling it via the market, I simply said hello in Jita local, and offered a PLEX for sale @ 615 million. 5 mins later, I had sold my PLEX @ 615 (more then I would have gotten from the market) and the buyer saved 10 million by doing a direct trade with me. Everyone wins.

A lot of the stuff you will see in Jita local is a scam, but not even close to all of it. I have scored some killer deals on rigged ships by watching local as well.

EULA's are general contracts between two parties that don't necessarily reflect your consumer rights in the real world. Generally if an EULA says something that doesn't conflict with law its enforceable.

As an example, Steam reserves the right to change its rules governing the sale of your private information at its discretion and without notice however do you think that means Steam could legally sell your private information with complete disregard for your privacy?

There was a case in the US regarding the non-sale of licences, the company EULA proposed that paying for the licence only granted you the right to use of the software, not to the resale of the software and licence. But the court found that this was not valid and that despite the EULA, since you purchased the item (box + licence) you had a right to resale that box and licence to another person if you uninstalled it and ceased using it under that licence.

Same thing really.



A Plex is something you buy with money. Not something created in game. The item created in game is simply a virtual representation of the Plex you purchased. Its even called a Plex both on the page you buy it and in game.

It has been said time and again that a PLEX is an in game item and it it treated as such opposed to a GTC.
When you buy a plex, put it in your ship's cargo hold and undock and you get ganked CCP won´t give you your PLEX back.

The fact that in such cases PLEX can drop and can be picked up and used by other players should tell you everything you need to know about it.

No, it's not. Read the EULA. Once the item is created in game it has zero real world value. If you were correct in your assumption, where are the court cases where players who have been scammed out of and shot down with PLEX's getting their money back somehow?

Do you really think a company like CCP would introduce the PLEX system into game if they did not have their bases covered?