These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Lying About Identity No Longer Allowed Under EULA

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#61 - 2013-09-10 00:17:32 UTC
OMG THEY'LL BAN THE DAMSEL IN DISTRESS !!!! O_O
Xzi Shihari
Shadow Legion X
Seriously Suspicious
#62 - 2013-09-10 00:20:29 UTC
Shade Millith wrote:
CCP Guard wrote:
Hey everyone. It's evening here in Reykjavík, our senior staff are presumably at home with their families and it may take until tomorrow to get this all cleared up in an official manner.

I can assure you that this is intended in the best way, as clarification of policy that's been in effect for a long time so I hope we have your patience until office hours tomorrow. Nothing bad will happen in the meantime.

If it turns out that this change to the wording is actually too far reaching, goes against its intended purpose, or is somehow confusing things rather than clarifying them, that will be taken care of...trust me. If it turns out to make sense despite the worries you guys have, proper explanations will be provided.

I want to give the people responsible for drafting the policy a chance to read your posts and address the matter. Agreed?



Quote:
You may not impersonate or falsely present yourself to be a representative of another player, group of players, character or NPC entity.


The problem is that this is too broadly worded. All players of a corp are representing their group of people by their actions and words. It's why corps often have some form of rule of conduct. Simply by wearing their corp name is representing them. By legalese-ing it, it's now a TOS violation for -


* All Spying (To Spy you falsely present yourself as a member of the corp)
* AWOXing (To AWOX you falsely present yourself as a member of the target's corp)
* Joining a corp to steal from it (Same as spying and AWOX)
* Several Scams ("I represent Goons, and I want to sell you space")


It needs to say that it only applies to using your character name to falsely present others.


EDIT: Someone mentioned that in the actions of the character in this official trailer would go against the new TOS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGplrpWvz0I


Thank you. That video is the reason I got hooked on this game. Taking out any of those aspects or wording that may effect those aspects are intolerable.
None ofthe Above
#63 - 2013-09-10 00:25:26 UTC
Shade Millith wrote:


* All Spying (To Spy you falsely represent yourself as a member of the corp to work)
* AWOXing (To AWOX you falsely represent yourself as a member of the target's corp to work)
* Joining a corp to steal from it (Same as spying and AWOX)
* Several Scams ("I represent Goons, and I want to sell you space")

It needs to mention that it only applies to using your character NAME to falsely represent.


I have to say, interpreting the new language to make joining a corp under false pretenses a breach of the EULA is quite the stretch. One that borders on hysteria. Pretty sure that's not the intent or the practice that would come out of it. Because most of the EULA is meant as a guideline, and they can always invoke the "for any reason" clause, I don't think this is quite as dire as many are making it out to be. That slope is already as slippery as it can be, the only thing holding things back is the goodwill and (by and large) rational decisions of GMs and Devs.

I agree that several common scams are probably under threat probably unintentionally and that probably should be clarified. Understandable that certain organizations that encourage this behavior might be up in arms about it.

It's actually interesting to note a lot of what goes on in the game is arguably against the EULA already. Recently being taken advantage of by selective "weaponized petitioning".

One wonders, what if I made an alt named Blawrf McTaggant in a corp named Gewnwoof of alliance Gewnswath Federation to scam some people looking to rent from CFC?

Which parts of that are against the EULA? Which ones were before the change? What would I have to change to make it legal?

How is this distinct from role-players like CVA and various groups "pretending" to represent or be aligned to NPC organizations? How to draw the lines?


The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Khergit Deserters
Crom's Angels
#64 - 2013-09-10 00:26:03 UTC
NEONOVUS wrote:
So let's go with this
How many people are taking up courses in logic, speaking, and other similar fields in order to choke lawyers with how worded their scams will be?

I'm adding an asterisk to all mine, how about you?

Yes, this has been an exercise in statutory construction. How to construe the meaning of the text of a statute (rule). Luckily, this isn't RL. We should have some rational and logical clarification from the rule-makers soon.
Malcolm Shinhwa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#65 - 2013-09-10 00:28:41 UTC
Had our fun picking on the ISD in the many, many locked threads. We got what we asked for in a forum to discuss the issue. Seems like the decent thing to do is leave them alone at this point.

[i]"The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense. The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental[/i]."
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#66 - 2013-09-10 00:29:31 UTC
Malcolm Shinhwa wrote:
Had our fun picking on the ISD in the many, many locked threads. We got what we asked for in a forum to discuss the issue. Seems like the decent thing to do is leave them alone at this point.

Yep. Now that we have a thread, let's just leave it well enough alone.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#67 - 2013-09-10 00:32:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Poetic Stanziel
There's some suggestion that the recent changes to the EVE Online Terms of Service was a knee-jerk reaction by CCP Games to the pizza debacle. CCP will never admit that this is the case, or that they're knee-jerking a reaction, but they were unhappy with the pizza story.

What is the pizza debacle? Apparently a couple of dudes ransomed the ship of another dude for a pizza. An actual pizza delivery.

To me, that obviously falls under the auspices of an RMT (real-money trading) transaction. If CCP wants to make it super clear that this sort of garbage is not allowed, then the current Terms of Service changes are far too overly broad.

If they want to hone in the behaviour they want to stamp out, then why not just ban in-game transaction for anything other than in-game transactions. I'm no lawyer, but the text of such a change could read something like this:
Quote:
No in-game goods or services may be exchanged for anything but other in-game goods and services.

Voila! No more real-world pizza transactions. Problem solved. Of course, this creates an issue for folks that write for sites like EVENews24.com and TheMittani.com, who are paid in ISK, but I'm sure the language could be expanded to continue to allow those sorts of transactions.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#68 - 2013-09-10 00:37:40 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
If they want to hone in the behaviour they want to stamp out, then why not just ban in-game transaction for anything other than in-game transactions. I'm no lawyer, but the text of such a change could read something like this:
Quote:
No in-game goods or services may be exchanged for anything but other in-game goods and services.

Voila! No more real-world pizza transactions. Problem solved. Of course, this creates an issue for folks that write for sites like EVENews24.com and TheMittani.com, who are paid in ISK, but I'm sure the language could be expanded to continue to allow those sorts of transactions.

No, just ban that too.

While we may have to sacrifice en24, it's worthwhile to rid ourselves of the mittanis internet videogame journalism which serves to propagate procfc propaganda.

If you read tmc you would think that n3 is being beaten up, instead of progressing on their plan to destroy gsf

Now with less capitalization or puncutation,

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#69 - 2013-09-10 00:40:12 UTC
So, this is already being abused by the crybabies, I can tell you. Just saw someone launch a petition against someone (might have been me, I was involved in the conversation too) for "falsely claiming to be a noob" (when in fact he just got scammed), and that "CCP says that's illegal now".

Revert this as fast as possible to prevent abuse.

Then, we can have a dialogue as to why this nonsense was put in, and what we can do about whatever issue warranted this change.

(Btw, does anyone actually know why the heck this was put in?)

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#70 - 2013-09-10 00:48:35 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
So, this is already being abused by the crybabies, I can tell you. Just saw someone launch a petition against someone (might have been me, I was involved in the conversation too) for "falsely claiming to be a noob" (when in fact he just got scammed), and that "CCP says that's illegal now".

Revert this as fast as possible to prevent abuse.

Then, we can have a dialogue as to why this nonsense was put in, and what we can do about whatever issue warranted this change.

(Btw, does anyone actually know why the heck this was put in?)

I doubt we need a dialogue. It's like this guy comes down with tablets from the gods and you want to debate

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Shade Millith
Tactical Farmers.
Pandemic Horde
#71 - 2013-09-10 00:49:12 UTC
None ofthe Above wrote:

I have to say, interpreting the new language to make joining a corp under false pretenses a breach of the EULA is quite the stretch. One that borders on hysteria. Pretty sure that's not the intent or the practice that would come out of it. Because most of the EULA is meant as a guideline, and they can always invoke the "for any reason" clause, I don't think this is quite as dire as many are making it out to be. That slope is already as slippery as it can be, the only thing holding things back is the goodwill and (by and large) rational decisions of GMs and Devs.


That's why I said 'If you legalese it'. I'm not hysterical, I know it's a stretch, and I'm sure it's not their intent to stop these things (At least, I hope not), but I don't like it when there's that kind of ambiguousness about it.


Better to just nip it in the butt now, and simply clarify that it's specifically referring to using misleading character names, before it can cause any potential issues.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#72 - 2013-09-10 00:50:35 UTC
Shade Millith wrote:
None ofthe Above wrote:

I have to say, interpreting the new language to make joining a corp under false pretenses a breach of the EULA is quite the stretch. One that borders on hysteria. Pretty sure that's not the intent or the practice that would come out of it. Because most of the EULA is meant as a guideline, and they can always invoke the "for any reason" clause, I don't think this is quite as dire as many are making it out to be. That slope is already as slippery as it can be, the only thing holding things back is the goodwill and (by and large) rational decisions of GMs and Devs.

That's why I said 'If you legalese it'. I'm not hysterical, I know it's a stretch, and I'm sure it's not their intent to stop these things (At least, I hope not), but I don't like it when there's that kind of ambiguousness about it.

Better to just nip it in the butt now, and simply clarify that it's specifically referring to using misleading character names, before it can cause any potential issues.

But it's not, it's about claiming things as well.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Gorgoth24
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#73 - 2013-09-10 00:52:17 UTC
Agreed. (Regarding CCP Guard's post)

I can see what PIZZA did as being clearly out of bounds, but the wording of the 'clarification' seems far too vague for my taste. Simply putting in a clause that forbids using Official EVE sites to scam, and/or impersonation the verification of CCP staff seems far more 'clear'.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#74 - 2013-09-10 00:55:06 UTC
You should expand it to events like fanfest as well

Wouldn't want someone to get scammed there either

And then heck, someone might post at fanfest

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
None ofthe Above
#75 - 2013-09-10 00:58:40 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
from http://poeticstanziel.blogspot.ca/2013/09/a-knee-jerk-reaction-to-pizza-debacle.html

There's some suggestion that the recent changes to the EVE Online Terms of Service was a knee-jerk reaction by CCP Games to the pizza debacle. CCP will never admit that this is the case, or that they're knee-jerking a reaction, but they were unhappy with the pizza story.

What is the pizza debacle? Apparently a couple of dudes ransomed the ship of another dude for a pizza. An actual pizza delivery.

To me, that obviously falls under the auspices of an RMT (real-money trading) transaction. If CCP wants to make it super clear that this sort of garbage is not allowed, then the current Terms of Service changes are far too overly broad.

If they want to hone in the behaviour they want to stamp out, then why not just ban in-game transaction for anything other than in-game transactions. I'm no lawyer, but the text of such a change could read something like this:
Quote:
No in-game goods or services may be exchanged for anything but other in-game goods and services.

Voila! No more real-world pizza transactions. Problem solved. Of course, this creates an issue for folks that write for sites like EVENews24.com and TheMittani.com, who are paid in ISK, but I'm sure the language could be expanded to continue to allow those sorts of transactions.


Unless this is another one of your humor posts: I think you have been trolled.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#76 - 2013-09-10 01:22:41 UTC
Um....



Scammer tears best tears.


Sorry, had to do it.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Yonis Kador
KADORCORP
#77 - 2013-09-10 01:31:45 UTC
Solstice Project wrote:
OMG THEY'LL BAN THE DAMSEL IN DISTRESS !!!! O_O


(That's a great example of a player claiming to be an "official" npc.)

With so much grey area, I'm forced to join the pro-clarification posse.

I've been playing this game as part of Kador Family since I created my character nearly 2 years ago. I've seen players with surnames of Tash Murkon and Kor-Azor. And it was deliberate. I intended to bring the backstory into local everywhere I went. I have characters with the surname of Oiritsuu also.

Quote:
You may not impersonate or falsely present yourself to be a representative of another player, group of players, character or NPC entity.


Though I'm sure banning this sort of gameplay from EVE wasn't the intent, could this be interpreted as "presenting myself to be a representative of an NPC entity?" Maybe. I hope not. But completely sure? No.

I have no problem with a more-specific re-wording that will achieve the intent of the rule.

YK
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#78 - 2013-09-10 01:38:28 UTC
if you want me to explain the joke again just send a pm
Tasha Saisima
Doomheim
#79 - 2013-09-10 02:13:19 UTC
good job to ISD
Kelleris
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#80 - 2013-09-10 03:08:14 UTC
Putting this in the TOS vs. naming policy is the difference between tapping someone on the shoulder and asking them to quiet down a bit and smashing them in the face with a hammer. A character rename (for example) isn't a big deal, but getting banned because you scammed the wrong dude? Ouch.

CCP really needs to reconsider who they are serving with their policies.

Also, this thread should not be locked, if they do, the players will just create another one. Ignoring a problem will not make it go away.