These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Plex scammers is it legal?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#61 - 2014-02-10 14:34:08 UTC
Layla Firoue wrote:
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.

Putting a plex in a ship and undocking implies consent to possible ship destruction and loss of all cargo. Its is a different thing to telling someone you will give them something for the plex and then not giving them what you told them you would.



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..... :)
djentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#62 - 2014-02-10 15:16:46 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Putting a plex in a ship and undocking implies consent to possible ship destruction and loss of all cargo. Its is a different thing to telling someone you will give them something for the plex and then not giving them what you told them you would.


You are missing the point.

Once purchased, the item has NO REAL WORLD VALUE. The only way any kind of legal claim could be brought is if CCP failed to live up to it's end of the agreement (giving you the NO VALUE ITEM in game).

Once that has happened, what you do with the item is totally up to you - it no longer has any real world value. If you use it, sell it for 1 mil or 100mil or 100bil isk - none of these things have any value. The plex has no value. The ISK has no value.

As I asked earlier in this thread; if this was somehow untrue and a talented internet space lawyer could somehow prove that scamming internet spaceship pilots out of hard earned valueless currency and valueless internet space items - where's the case histories? Why have scams for billions and billions of ISK never seen a day in court? Why have the countless people too busy to actually read the valueless contracts they accept to trade valueless currency or valueless items for far less then the amount of valueless currency they expected to get from the baseline internet space market trading average of valueless currency not had their day in court?

Oh, I know why. In world items have no value. Also, it sounds totally stupid when you say it out loud. Simple when you think about it.
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#63 - 2014-02-10 15:27:54 UTC
djentropy Ovaert wrote:


As I asked earlier in this thread; if this was somehow untrue and a talented internet space lawyer could somehow prove that scamming internet spaceship pilots out of hard earned valueless currency and valueless internet space items - where's the case histories?


all in due course ... it takes a while for the law to catch up

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=warning&l=http%3a%2f%2fwww.rechtspraak.nl%2fOrganisatie%2fHoge-Raad%2fSupreme-court%2fSummaries-of-some-important-rulings-of-the-Supreme-Court%2fPages%2fExtractfromthejudgment.aspx&domain=rechtspraak.nl

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2202/1944-2866.1070/abstract

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bragg_v._Linden_Lab


djentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#64 - 2014-02-10 15:45:42 UTC  |  Edited by: DJentropy Ovaert
Hasikan Miallok wrote:
djentropy Ovaert wrote:


As I asked earlier in this thread; if this was somehow untrue and a talented internet space lawyer could somehow prove that scamming internet spaceship pilots out of hard earned valueless currency and valueless internet space items - where's the case histories?


all in due course ... it takes a while for the law to catch up

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=warning&l=http%3a%2f%2fwww.rechtspraak.nl%2fOrganisatie%2fHoge-Raad%2fSupreme-court%2fSummaries-of-some-important-rulings-of-the-Supreme-Court%2fPages%2fExtractfromthejudgment.aspx&domain=rechtspraak.nl

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2202/1944-2866.1070/abstract

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bragg_v._Linden_Lab




So in other words. No. Also, none of those links have anything remotely similar to the issue being discussed here.

First link was a case of using REAL WORLD THREATS OF VIOLENCE to get in game items out of a player. Totally not cool. Also, way off topic.

Second link is to a overview of a book of case studies. You're not citing any specific case. You're citing a whole book of cases. You'll need to be more specific. As in, a lot more specific.

Last link is total LOL for off topic. Really? Second life? Here you have a user who was banned for exploiting using malformed URLs to procure in-game resources (With actual value, unlike here in EVE those resources could be sold and converted back to USD or other actual currencies). After some drama, he was unbanned and the security hole he was exploiting (malformed URLs) was closed up. Comparing this to the topic at hand is like comparing apples to warp drive operation.

Stay on topic.
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#65 - 2014-02-10 16:07:41 UTC
djentropy Ovaert wrote:


First link was a case of using REAL WORLD THREATS OF VIOLENCE to get in game items out of a player. Totally not cool.


The relevance of this one is that virtual property has been deemed in one (civil law) jurisdiction as something that can be stolen.

In the case of ingame scamming you also have the much more difficult job of proving the victim was unlawfully deprived somehow of their rights to this property. The dutch courts merely declare the virtual good could be stolen which in some jurisdictions (like the US) remains controversial.

I would point out that even in common law jurisdictions its unlikely that common law precedents based on case law will evolve fast enough to be useful as this area is changing too quickly.

At some point this issue will become significant enough to require clarification and that will probably occur as a political intervention in the form of legislation. What emerges from that will be interesting.
djentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#66 - 2014-02-10 16:25:25 UTC  |  Edited by: DJentropy Ovaert
*delete me*

*double post*
djentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#67 - 2014-02-10 16:26:11 UTC  |  Edited by: DJentropy Ovaert
djentropy Ovaert wrote:
Hasikan Miallok wrote:
[quote=djentropy Ovaert]

First link was a case of using REAL WORLD THREATS OF VIOLENCE to get in game items out of a player. Totally not cool.


The relevance of this one is that virtual property has been deemed in one (civil law) jurisdiction as something that can be stolen.

In the case of ingame scamming you also have the much more difficult job of proving the victim was unlawfully deprived somehow of their rights to this property. The dutch courts merely declare the virtual good could be stolen which in some jurisdictions (like the US) remains controversial.

I would point out that even in common law jurisdictions its unlikely that common law precedents based on case law will evolve fast enough to be useful as this area is changing too quickly.

At some point this issue will become significant enough to require clarification and that will probably occur as a political intervention in the form of legislation. What emerges from that will be interesting.


I except a whole bunch of *nothing* will come from it. The relevance is that real world violence was used in this case. In the event that logging into a PVP game and then crying to the law when you manage to lose some of your items of no value or money of no value results in successful lawsuits - I will quit online gaming for good.
Emma Muutaras
State War Academy
Caldari State
#68 - 2014-02-10 17:12:53 UTC
djentropy Ovaert wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Putting a plex in a ship and undocking implies consent to possible ship destruction and loss of all cargo. Its is a different thing to telling someone you will give them something for the plex and then not giving them what you told them you would.


You are missing the point.

Once purchased, the item has NO REAL WORLD VALUE. The only way any kind of legal claim could be brought is if CCP failed to live up to it's end of the agreement (giving you the NO VALUE ITEM in game).

Once that has happened, what you do with the item is totally up to you - it no longer has any real world value. If you use it, sell it for 1 mil or 100mil or 100bil isk - none of these things have any value. The plex has no value. The ISK has no value.

As I asked earlier in this thread; if this was somehow untrue and a talented internet space lawyer could somehow prove that scamming internet spaceship pilots out of hard earned valueless currency and valueless internet space items - where's the case histories? Why have scams for billions and billions of ISK never seen a day in court? Why have the countless people too busy to actually read the valueless contracts they accept to trade valueless currency or valueless items for far less then the amount of valueless currency they expected to get from the baseline internet space market trading average of valueless currency not had their day in court?

Oh, I know why. In world items have no value. Also, it sounds totally stupid when you say it out loud. Simple when you think about it.


while i have the information i was after saying it has no real world value is incorrect it has the value of 30 days game time without it you need to pay a sub fee so even with the item in game it still has the value of a sub fee
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#69 - 2014-02-10 17:33:15 UTC
djentropy Ovaert wrote:
In the event that logging into a PVP game and then crying to the law when you manage to lose some of your items of no value or money of no value results in successful lawsuits - I will quit online gaming for good.


In that event online gaming will likely be dead. Do you think any game developer will want to or have the resources to mitigate that kind of risk?

Emma Muutaras wrote:
while i have the information i was after saying it has no real world value is incorrect it has the value of 30 days game time without it you need to pay a sub fee so even with the item in game it still has the value of a sub fee


Um no it doesn't. Now it may have a value to you. But in the legal sense a PLEX is an in game item which is the sole property of CCP, not the player. And has no legal real world value as a virtual item.
djentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#70 - 2014-02-10 17:41:50 UTC  |  Edited by: DJentropy Ovaert
Emma Muutaras wrote:

while i have the information i was after saying it has no real world value is incorrect it has the value of 30 days game time without it you need to pay a sub fee so even with the item in game it still has the value of a sub fee


No.

The EULA that you agreed to clearly states that NOTHING in the game, ISK, items, PLEXES, ships, modules - none of it belongs to you. You hold no rights to claim value for property you do not own in the first place, virtual or otherwise. The fact that CCP allows a player to use a PLEX for 30 days of game time is irrelevant. It's not even your gametime. It's CCP's. They own it. Not you. They could ban you right now with reason "lol banned" and there's not a damn thing you could do about it (Lucky for us, CCP is not mean like that!)

From the EULA that you accepted:

"Your Account, and all attributes of your Account, including all corporations, actions, groups, titles and characters, and all objects, currency and items acquired, developed or delivered by or to characters as a result of play through your Accounts, are the sole and exclusive property of CCP, including any and all copyrights and intellectual property rights in or to any and all of the same, all of which are hereby expressly reserved."

In other words - everything you own in game is not yours, and you have no rights to claim them as personal property. It's all property of CCP, and they can do whatever the want with it, whenever they want to do it. They could decide "Hey, this Eve thing has been fun, but we are done. Cya, suckers!" right after I make this post, and every single PLEX, item, ISK, everything - gone, and there's nothing you can do about it. If you don't like this, unsubscribe.

Welcome to the internets - read the EULA before playing.
djentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#71 - 2014-02-10 17:44:08 UTC

Emma Muutaras wrote:
while i have the information i was after saying it has no real world value is incorrect it has the value of 30 days game time without it you need to pay a sub fee so even with the item in game it still has the value of a sub fee


Derath Ellecon wrote:

Um no it doesn't. Now it may have a value to you. But in the legal sense a PLEX is an in game item which is the sole property of CCP, not the player. And has no legal real world value as a virtual item.


I don't think Emma gets this. And it's so simple :(
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#72 - 2014-02-10 17:48:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Vera Algaert
Kogh Ayon wrote:
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.

Along the same lines Ankhwhatshername claimed (for all what that is worth) that it is basically impossible to find an Icelandic lawyer who will agree to represent you against CCP as most of them have done work for CCP in some capacity and will excuse themselves due to the obvious conflict of interest.

.
djentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#73 - 2014-02-10 17:51:04 UTC
Vera Algaert wrote:

Along the same lines Ankhwhatshername claimed (for all what that is worth) that it is basically impossible to find an Icelandic lawyer who will agree to represent you against CCP as most of them have done work for CCP in some capacity and will excuse themselves due to the obvious conflict of interest.


Somehow I doubt this. I would imagine one could find a lawyer who would gladly take your money in return for having your "case" dismissed in about 30 seconds after being put in front of a judge. :P
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#74 - 2014-02-11 02:00:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Emma Muutaras wrote:

while i have the information i was after saying it has no real world value is incorrect it has the value of 30 days game time without it you need to pay a sub fee so even with the item in game it still has the value of a sub fee

While it is true that a PLEX can be used as substitute for a subscription, used in this manner it can't be directly exchanged for real currency, at least not legally. It can only be used to save the cash that you already had.

Therefore the only value it has is in a digital sense, a digital asset that can only be used in two ways, as a digital replacement sub fee, or exchanged for a digital currency.

The only ways to lose a PLEX is to undock with it or get scammed for it, either way you're a fool.

if you must move a redeemed PLEX, do a reverse redeem on it and drop it back into the redeeming system, get to wherever you're going and then redeem it back into your hanger. If you flog it on contract the buyer can do the same. Nope I'm wrong about this, however you can redeem one for game time from anywhere if it's in your assets

Undocking with a PLEX, and then losing it to a gank is entirely on the owner of the PLEX, the owner of the PLEX makes a choice and takes a known risk by doing so. The same goes for buying up multiple PLEX's and shipping them to nullsec, WHY U DO DIS?.

Don't stop though, the killmails are hilarious.

Getting scammed out of a PLEX by contract is the same, you're a fool. If the item has such value, why don't you read the bloody contract? It's there right in front of you, it's in english or the regionalised language, not in legalese. Read the damn thing before accepting.

Losing one via the trade window generally means you should take yourself out back and headbutt the nearest tree for a while, hopefully it'll knock some sense in.

Mr Bumble wrote:
The law is an ass
And never more so than in the digital realm.

edited to correct some incorrect information.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#75 - 2014-02-11 05:50:01 UTC
Emma Muutaras wrote:
djentropy Ovaert wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Putting a plex in a ship and undocking implies consent to possible ship destruction and loss of all cargo. Its is a different thing to telling someone you will give them something for the plex and then not giving them what you told them you would.


You are missing the point.

Once purchased, the item has NO REAL WORLD VALUE. The only way any kind of legal claim could be brought is if CCP failed to live up to it's end of the agreement (giving you the NO VALUE ITEM in game).

Once that has happened, what you do with the item is totally up to you - it no longer has any real world value. If you use it, sell it for 1 mil or 100mil or 100bil isk - none of these things have any value. The plex has no value. The ISK has no value.

As I asked earlier in this thread; if this was somehow untrue and a talented internet space lawyer could somehow prove that scamming internet spaceship pilots out of hard earned valueless currency and valueless internet space items - where's the case histories? Why have scams for billions and billions of ISK never seen a day in court? Why have the countless people too busy to actually read the valueless contracts they accept to trade valueless currency or valueless items for far less then the amount of valueless currency they expected to get from the baseline internet space market trading average of valueless currency not had their day in court?

Oh, I know why. In world items have no value. Also, it sounds totally stupid when you say it out loud. Simple when you think about it.


while i have the information i was after saying it has no real world value is incorrect it has the value of 30 days game time without it you need to pay a sub fee so even with the item in game it still has the value of a sub fee

No you're missing the point. EULAs are civil contracts, they're the lowest form of "law". Consumer law overrides all EULA terms and conditions if there is a conflict. If consumer law says "If you pay for something you have a right to resell that something when you no longer use it" than a clause in an EULA stating the opposite is void.

If no consumer law offering protection exists, then the EULA might apply as long as it's untested. If they are tested they can be found to be unfair and voided. Every contract must comply with contract law or is void.

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..... :)
Layla Firoue
Doomheim
#76 - 2014-02-11 08:17:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Layla Firoue
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Emma Muutaras wrote:
djentropy Ovaert wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:

Putting a plex in a ship and undocking implies consent to possible ship destruction and loss of all cargo. Its is a different thing to telling someone you will give them something for the plex and then not giving them what you told them you would.


You are missing the point.

Once purchased, the item has NO REAL WORLD VALUE. The only way any kind of legal claim could be brought is if CCP failed to live up to it's end of the agreement (giving you the NO VALUE ITEM in game).

Once that has happened, what you do with the item is totally up to you - it no longer has any real world value. If you use it, sell it for 1 mil or 100mil or 100bil isk - none of these things have any value. The plex has no value. The ISK has no value.

As I asked earlier in this thread; if this was somehow untrue and a talented internet space lawyer could somehow prove that scamming internet spaceship pilots out of hard earned valueless currency and valueless internet space items - where's the case histories? Why have scams for billions and billions of ISK never seen a day in court? Why have the countless people too busy to actually read the valueless contracts they accept to trade valueless currency or valueless items for far less then the amount of valueless currency they expected to get from the baseline internet space market trading average of valueless currency not had their day in court?

Oh, I know why. In world items have no value. Also, it sounds totally stupid when you say it out loud. Simple when you think about it.


while i have the information i was after saying it has no real world value is incorrect it has the value of 30 days game time without it you need to pay a sub fee so even with the item in game it still has the value of a sub fee

No you're missing the point. EULAs are civil contracts, they're the lowest form of "law". Consumer law overrides all EULA terms and conditions if there is a conflict. If consumer law says "If you pay for something you have a right to resell that something when you no longer use it" than a clause in an EULA stating the opposite is void.

If no consumer law offering protection exists, then the EULA might apply as long as it's untested. If they are tested they can be found to be unfair and voided. Every contract must comply with contract law or is void.



Unless a contract is found to be illicit by the appropriate authorities it is binding and so far CCPs EULA has not been found illicit by anyone except some internet armchair lawyers with no real clue.
djentropy Ovaert
The Conference Elite
Safety.
#77 - 2014-02-11 08:42:00 UTC
Layla Firoue wrote:

Unless a contract is found to be illicit by the appropriate authorities it is binding and so far CCPs EULA has not been found illicit by anyone except some internet armchair lawyers with no real clue.


This.

Get back to dock, internet spaceship lawyers.