These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

IS boxer Software and it's legality under the EULA

First post First post First post
Author
Randi Fleetstalker
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#161 - 2013-05-22 20:29:13 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Randi Fleetstalker wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Randi Fleetstalker wrote:

How is it not on topic? It's doing exactly and precisely the same thing. How is there no need for one, if you feel there is a need to prohibit exactly the same thing from ISBoxer? What good would that do the game, to ban the software but not hardware with identcal function?


Please read the EULA and point me to the subsection regarding hardware.

This goes both ways: Please point us all to the subsection that ISBoxer violates.



It's on the first page of this thread. I'm surprised you missed it. It is what this entire thread is about.

So unfortunately, it does not go both ways. You are making a wild accusation, I am arguing a vague interpretation.

I specifically responded to the original post, on page 1 of this thread. I'm surprised you missed it. The OP claimed ISBoxer was doing something it was not, and used this as the case to say that "clearly" ISBoxer is violating the EULA.

I don't want the OP's misinformation which was already shot down, on page 1. I want you to tell me what part of the EULA you think ISBoxer is violating, and how it is violating it.
Cambarus
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#162 - 2013-05-22 20:48:23 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:

All you posted was the equivalent of "I am speaking for CCP" by actually trying to say I am wrong because you believe I am. Welcome to interpretation, milord.
I don't have to speak for CCP, they've done it just fine on their own. What we have here is someone who disagrees with CCPs interpretation of their own rules to which I say: Too...bad?

Your argument about people NOT using isboxer and using "multibox" as a reference are not synonymous. You can use either one without the other.

Murk Paradox wrote:

It may be hard for you.

That doesn't mean it is hard for everyone else. I have it, and have used it. I already mentioned that I stopped using it not because of the difficulty (it isn't difficult at all), but because the way I play and how I play do not require me to.

The reason I stopped was that I could manually multibox more easily than I could with ISBoxer, though that's largely irrelevant here.
Murk Paradox wrote:

Next time, keep it simple. Speak for yourself. Do not speak for others. You will be more likely to get your point across when you speak from experience, not assumption.
My first post in this thread, I opened with "As someone who used to multibox with ISBoxer..." I AM speaking from experience. It is NOT as easy to run multiple accounts strung together as it is to run one, and I know this, having done it extensively for a fairly long time.

Murk Paradox wrote:

In regards to babysitting a thread... it isn't my thread to babysit.
Have a look at the last several pages, it's mostly you arguing against various people. It may not be your thread, but you're certainly looking after it.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#163 - 2013-05-22 20:55:18 UTC
Randi Fleetstalker wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Randi Fleetstalker wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Randi Fleetstalker wrote:

How is it not on topic? It's doing exactly and precisely the same thing. How is there no need for one, if you feel there is a need to prohibit exactly the same thing from ISBoxer? What good would that do the game, to ban the software but not hardware with identcal function?


Please read the EULA and point me to the subsection regarding hardware.

This goes both ways: Please point us all to the subsection that ISBoxer violates.



It's on the first page of this thread. I'm surprised you missed it. It is what this entire thread is about.

So unfortunately, it does not go both ways. You are making a wild accusation, I am arguing a vague interpretation.

I specifically responded to the original post, on page 1 of this thread. I'm surprised you missed it. The OP claimed ISBoxer was doing something it was not, and used this as the case to say that "clearly" ISBoxer is violating the EULA.

I don't want the OP's misinformation which was already shot down, on page 1. I want you to tell me what part of the EULA you think ISBoxer is violating, and how it is violating it.



That has been done already. I am not going to "replicate" my answer. Ask a new question.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.

Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#164 - 2013-05-22 20:59:30 UTC
Cambarus wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:

All you posted was the equivalent of "I am speaking for CCP" by actually trying to say I am wrong because you believe I am. Welcome to interpretation, milord.
I don't have to speak for CCP, they've done it just fine on their own. What we have here is someone who disagrees with CCPs interpretation of their own rules to which I say: Too...bad?

Your argument about people NOT using isboxer and using "multibox" as a reference are not synonymous. You can use either one without the other.

Murk Paradox wrote:

It may be hard for you.

That doesn't mean it is hard for everyone else. I have it, and have used it. I already mentioned that I stopped using it not because of the difficulty (it isn't difficult at all), but because the way I play and how I play do not require me to.

The reason I stopped was that I could manually multibox more easily than I could with ISBoxer, though that's largely irrelevant here.
Murk Paradox wrote:

Next time, keep it simple. Speak for yourself. Do not speak for others. You will be more likely to get your point across when you speak from experience, not assumption.
My first post in this thread, I opened with "As someone who used to multibox with ISBoxer..." I AM speaking from experience. It is NOT as easy to run multiple accounts strung together as it is to run one, and I know this, having done it extensively for a fairly long time.

Murk Paradox wrote:

In regards to babysitting a thread... it isn't my thread to babysit.
Have a look at the last several pages, it's mostly you arguing against various people. It may not be your thread, but you're certainly looking after it.



Of course I am. It interests me. As it does you, or you wouldn't be here.

A typical kneejerk reaction would be to call me a babysitter.

This will not do. So it comes down to the fact you want to take apart posts into some sort of belligerent wall of text multi quoting to make things difficult and get things lost in the translation of what you are trying to say, or you can keep things civil and simple in some sort of a discussion.

Simply quoting and misinterpreting someone else's speech does not make you a part of the conversation unless you have a specific question you wish to ask (that is relevant to the thread).

So again, to keep things on track, what is it you wish to know?

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#165 - 2013-05-22 21:32:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Murk Paradox wrote:
Hit F1, fire gun. Hit F1 again, fire gun again. Replication.
No, that's repetition. The game already has that part built in.

Quote:
Hit F1 once. Gun fires on 20 accounts at once. 19 accounts were automated with 0 human input.
No, 19 inputs were replicated, and with 1 human input. This is built into DirectX.
If there was no human input, those 20 accounts would do the same thing (since it's only replication): nothing. If they were automated, they would do stuff without the input.

You're confusing what's essentially a (short-circuited) KVM switch with a robot. The two are not the same, no matter how much you stomp and cry, and CCP are well aware of this, which is why replication is allowed and automation isn't.

Quote:
I did in fact mention that the one account used human input.
Incorrect. All 20 did. Without human input, they would all do absolutely nothing since there is no automation involved.

Quote:
1 is inputted using isboxer, and that PROGRAM replicates the action across the 19 OTHER accounts.
…and replication is not against the EULA; automation is.

Quote:
That has been done already. I am not going to "replicate" my answer. Ask a new question.
So… if you admit to being wrong (since your answer as been proven wrong) why do you keep harping on with this counterfactual nonsense?
Gurrrr Yotosala
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#166 - 2013-05-22 21:57:05 UTC
I'll just add my 2 scents in this conversation. I've been playing games for a very long time and this is a conversation which seems to come back every few years.

I define a macro as any button or keybind which allows you do do multiples actions at once. This definition is somewhat broad and it should be. In the right hands, macros are extremely powerful tools.

Propagating a command most certainly fall within the scope of this definition. For me, denying this is playing on words. Right now, in Québec, we have a commission inquiring on collusion. For me, it's the same exact thing, peoples denying the obvious truth and trying to rephrase it so that they can keep going with their everyday business. You can say it however you want, IS Boxer is a form of macroing.

And before you go asking, I do have 2 accounts. It does require quite a bit more micromanagement to run even 2 accounts without using IS Boxer. I don't think that a single player could reasonably manage more then 2 or 3 accounts without a program like IS Boxer. Beyond that, macros are almost without question required.
Lexar Mundi
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#167 - 2013-05-22 22:04:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Lexar Mundi
All I am going to say is I would get rid of ISBoxer and the software that came with it because it will be against the EULA / ToS once CCP gets things sorted out. I thought it was cool until my friend informed me what it could really do. If i were you guys I would get rid of it.

I hope this post is ok I just wanted to warn people about it. What?
Valari Nala Zena
Perkone
Caldari State
#168 - 2013-05-22 22:04:50 UTC
We can discuss this how we want, and i think people have made themselves very clear on both views on a couple of thread-naughts.

CCP ruled in isboxers favor on what it does currently, though will not officially endorse it, because CCP doesn't control any additions/updates made to the program that could potentially put it in clear violation.

Fact remains, people discussed this many times now, CCP doesn't mind what isboxer does at this point. CCP simply has final say on their own rules, CCP is the judge and the hammer went down.

What it does now, it's allowed, now when an updates comes that would change the program in some way, you are free to again make a threadnaught about it.

Now, have fun using it, or don't, w/e
Sabotaged
Veritas Vincit
#169 - 2013-05-23 00:17:49 UTC
rswfire wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Ginger Barbarella wrote:
Anyone care to bet on whether IsBoxer will suddenly be made against EULA

If that happens I will unsubscribe the 9 accounts I just signed up for. 10 ship Exequror sniper gang coming up.


Please do. Playing ten characters simultaneously and in synchronization is, imo, cheating. It's extra DPS from one player using one command. I have just as many accounts as you and I do not use multiboxing software. I also find it rather annoying to see 20 mining characters in a belt being controlled by a single person in an NPC corp. I think most people intuitively find people who use this software to be (insert expletive). CCP really should make it against the EULA, but for whatever reason, they haven't...so enjoy your advantage and feel awesome because you've created a 10x multiplier for each command you use.


You have just completely shown your ignorance. Since you obviously have no idea what your talking about because you haven't done it, like with most people who think you press one button and its instantly perfect "cheating", you would know you really can't synchronize well in this game.

I manage 12 accounts at once, and the only viable option is to cut up the screen and manage the modules individually. Different skills, different timers, its impossible to do what you 'think' it is. As far as 20 mining characters, roids are different sizes and pop all the time.

No MMORPG has made it illegal. That tells you that *YOU* and people like you are wrong. The real reason is you and people like you are jealous of people who can afford so many accounts.

The only time I use that one command cheating your talking about is when signing into the game, so I don't have to type in the password 7 times. Otherwise the reason why I use it is so I can split each client across a single screen and control the performance of each client.

http://oi44.tinypic.com/2m5xqq0.jpg

as you can see I have to have everyones overview, drone overview, modules, and targets listed. Also drones don't always attack and you sometimes get target scrammed and roids pop at different times.

Where's this sync cheating your talking about?
Klymer
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#170 - 2013-05-23 01:32:08 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:

That's where I draw the line at the EULA.


...and we finally get to the heart of the problem, you think your opinion matters.

When you have a red box that says GM in front of your name like this person then maybe I'll take you seriously, until then....


Lexar Mundi
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#171 - 2013-05-23 03:19:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Lexar Mundi
Klymer wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:

That's where I draw the line at the EULA.


...and we finally get to the heart of the problem, you think your opinion matters.

When you have a red box that says GM in front of your name like this person then maybe I'll take you seriously, until then....




but when that person with the red box says

Quote:
CCP does not officially endorse ISBoxer or any other multiboxing software. Use of third-party programs is, as outlined in Stillman's blog, done entirely at your own risk and we'll quite simply not be able to state outright that this software or that software can be legitimately used under the EVE EULA since they are after all third-party programs.


Why chance your accounts? I use Windowed helper to help me. I am not against multiboxing nor am i against programs that work like ISBoxer. BUT read the fine print before you continue using ISBoxer.
Implying Implications
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#172 - 2013-05-23 03:45:06 UTC
Isboxer is literally botting. Kind of like how growing your own food is like printing money.
Sabotaged
Veritas Vincit
#173 - 2013-05-23 04:01:16 UTC
Quote:
hear your views on the legality of this piece of software as regards the eve EULA.
The only view that matters is CCP's view, and they said it's legal. Looks like another attempt to spread rumors and lies and distortions of the truth about ISBoxer.

Quote:
I ask you all to Watch this tutorial from start to end http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RBRp9GEji4E
That is a great video.

Quote:
and then tell me that this DOESN'T break the rules set out in the EULA,
Only CCP has the authority to interpret it's EULA policy, not you or anyone else.

Quote:
Clearly, IS Boxer breaks the EULA rules right from the start as it allows you to login multiple accounts all at the same time without having to enter account name and password details etc..... (ahem - remember this "other stored rapid keystrokes
Clearly you are a liar. CCP allows isboxer and feels it does not violate their EULA, who the hell are you to say otherwise?

Can you show me how to login without my account name and my passwords please. I did not realize ISBOXER does this. How does it know what characters belong to me? I know, magic!

I use keepass for my very long passwords, by your logic pressing CTRL-V on the password box is considered to be "stored rapid keystrokes" Better report me and my 12 accounts to CCP.

Quote:
Never mind the fact that you can position windows so that modules on your ships like Guns and shields can all be activated on multiple accounts simultaneously and with just a single click.
Can you show me how I can activate my Guns and Shields on multiple accounts with just a single click please? I wasn't aware ISBOXER does this either.

Pressing a key and have all your guns activate is an example of key broadcasting.

Pressing a key and having all your guns and shields activate, is an example of MACROING. ISBOXER DOES NOT DO MACROING.

A better example. I press a key to activate a single laser on all my characters. - KEY BROADCASTING

example 2, I press a key, miners warp to belt, mine ore, warp to station, drop off ore, leave station, warp to belt, repeat - MACROING

I know you would like to think broadcasting and macroing are the same, but in this place that we like to call reality it is not.

Sabotaged
Veritas Vincit
#174 - 2013-05-23 04:01:48 UTC
Quote:
So it would seem that CCP encourage people to break the rules.
I would not trash talk about CCP. God knows I've tested their patience and they have impressed me.

Quote:
I have to ask myself the question - I wonder how many people are using this software, and if it's large, organised corporations that are doing so.........
I have to ask myself the question, I wonder why your ego believes it has the right and/or authority to such information.

Quote:
Imagine how a fleet of 20 miners under control of IS boxer could affect the local market mineral prices,
I can do better. Imagine the 100 man ice miner fleet. Its easier. He has to spend 80 hours a month ice mining to break even, let alone make any ISK. People pay cash for ISK buying PLEX's. Real Cheating. Where do you think this ISK comes from? cheap fuel prices, where do you think that comes from too?

He's got 100 accounts, he should be banned because ice mining is too easy. Moving that orca every few minutes after paying 35 billion isk so I can make 77 mil an hour, is just to easy. Yeah. People shouldn't pay CCP cash for ISK. We want more expensive fuel. We want less POS's. More expensive T3 ships. Must be in highschool if you don't understand economics.

Quote:
Imagine how a fleet of PvP ships could take down your T3 ship if you didn't have to alt tab all the while or even worse, you have two gangs of tacklers IS boxing to keep your ship jammed/scrammed etc while the rest of the fleet guns you down.
Imagine how a fleet of 10 ships could take down your T3. No one who spends 30-40 billion ISK and months of training time per account, 4-5 billion isk a month to pay for the accounts, should be able to kill your T3.

It makes total sense.

Somehow you believe there are no costs involved, as if multiboxers somehow get everything for FREE. I WISH!

Quote:
This software should be banned - It breaks the mechanics of the game and it's clearly cheating.
You don't dictate CCP policy. It does not break mechanics, and it is not cheating. In fact CCP disagrees with you and they are the authority that determines such things. That means your a liar.

The Truth:
People make statements that have no basis on reality because they have not multibox'ed with ISBoxer and 5-10 accounts.

Synchronization is unreliable in this game. Sure, press F1 and all your guns might fire. Right click in space, select station and dock, sure they might all do the same. Or more like 3-5 will just totally ignore what your doing all together.

My point is, key broadcasting is by far and large not dependable. Sure it works sometimes. Maybe half the time.

Different firing rates, skills, distances, even the overviews are unsyncable to be reliable. If it's off by a single pixel that could be the difference between repeating a command to doing absolutely nothing to warping through the wrong gate and getting podded.

PVP? had 5 frigs, lost a 45 mil manticore and it's 100mil pod to an abaddon. Thought I could outdps him before his warrior 2's killed me. I was wrong. Lost another ship, but luckily got his pod out. What's this crap about not having to alt-tab? well technically I press ctrl-alt-1 etc. The point is if I wasn't multiboxing I could have saved that 100mil pod.

PVE? Just lost an Ishtar because for some reason it decided to move 60km into the blob.

Once I was in lowsec and jumped my 5 frigs through a gate. 1 ship went through a totally different gate and got podded. When you got 4 ships sitting on a gate in lowsec, it's not really the time to be alt-tabbing around.

Oh wait I don't have to alt-tab at all do I.

Seriously, what is it your smoking, cause I want some. That's some premium stuff.

pwn.
Lexar Mundi
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#175 - 2013-05-23 04:08:25 UTC
Quote:
He's got 100 accounts, he should be banned because ice mining is too easy. Moving that orca every few minutes after paying 35 billion isk so I can make 77 mil an hour, is just to easy. Yeah. People shouldn't pay CCP cash for ISK. We want more expensive fuel. We want less POS's. More expensive T3 ships. Must be in highschool if you don't understand economics.


They are changing ice mining, you know that right?
SB Rico
Dos Pollos Hermanos
#176 - 2013-05-23 04:33:02 UTC
I would point out that the EULA/TOS is deliberately worded to be broad giving CCP the right to deal with unforeseen circumstances as they see fit.

In fact the lines quoted could equally be applied to mouse and keyboard macros which allow rapid input of commands or at a stretch running your finger from F1 to F8.
In this case CCP have applied their discretion to decide what is covered and are allowing ISboxer. Until something in the program changes they are not in a situation where they can really say more without looking like a climb down at best, or indecisive at worst.

BTW I do personally multibox but don't use ISboxer, not from a moral stance I just don't want to pay for it :)

Scammers are currently selling killrights on this toon for up to 5mil, if you have paid for this service demand your money back at once.

Killing me should be for free.

Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#177 - 2013-05-23 07:55:13 UTC
rswfire wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Ginger Barbarella wrote:
Anyone care to bet on whether IsBoxer will suddenly be made against EULA

If that happens I will unsubscribe the 9 accounts I just signed up for. 10 ship Exequror sniper gang coming up.


Please do. Playing ten characters simultaneously and in synchronization is, imo, cheating. It's extra DPS from one player using one command. I have just as many accounts as you and I do not use multiboxing software. I also find it rather annoying to see 20 mining characters in a belt being controlled by a single person in an NPC corp. I think most people intuitively find people who use this software to be (insert expletive). CCP really should make it against the EULA, but for whatever reason, they haven't...so enjoy your advantage and feel awesome because you've created a 10x multiplier for each command you use.

What's the difference between 10 players trying to kill me and me with 10 accounts trying to kill them? Still 10 accounts on each side. I say they're cheating cause they have an advantage still. They should be nerfed.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)

Janssen
General Services
#178 - 2013-05-23 11:29:41 UTC
Implying Implications wrote:
Isboxer is literally botting. Kind of like how growing your own food is like printing money.


Dude! That is just so deep and, yet, so succinct.
rswfire
#179 - 2013-05-23 19:20:52 UTC  |  Edited by: rswfire
Sabotaged wrote:
You have just completely shown your ignorance. Since you obviously have no idea what your talking about because you haven't done it, like with most people who think you press one button and its instantly perfect "cheating", you would know you really can't synchronize well in this game.


I'm very well versed on this subject matter. Just because it requires some tweaking to get it right doesn't mean I'm wrong. And if you were being honest right now, you wouldn't dispute a thing I said. You have been given the okay, so why deny it?

Sabotaged wrote:
No MMORPG has made it illegal. That tells you that *YOU* and people like you are wrong. The real reason is you and people like you are jealous of people who can afford so many accounts.


That's hilarious...

Do a search on Eveboard for "rswfire" -- each character that is returned is a separate, active account.
Roime
Yamagata Syndicate
Shadow Cartel
#180 - 2013-05-23 20:36:46 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:

What's the difference between 10 players trying to kill me and me with 10 accounts trying to kill them? Still 10 accounts on each side. I say they're cheating cause they have an advantage still. They should be nerfed.


Difference is that they are playing the game as it was designed, and their success depends on teamwork, experience and execution.

Your success depends on a third party program controlling game clients on your behalf, enabling actions that would be impossible to execute by a single player without the third party program.

What's the difference between a player recording an action and his botting program repeating it 10 times, and you performing an action and your ISbotting program repeating it 10 times?

.