These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

A Disincentive for Returning Players

Author
Techagunichxio
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1 - 2011-12-14 01:37:10 UTC
While I realise that it is apparently bad juju to discuss the results of petitions, I have a 'hypothetical' scenario and question for the Eve Community.

Account hacking and keylogging was (and probably still is) a problem for players who engaged wholeheartedly in the alliance communities of Eve. Often you would be logging into multiple forum sites of your various corporation, alliance and third party sites.

As such account securities could sometimes be compromised through these third party sites. From my relative experience, while account assets were sometimes stolen from these intrusive hacking attempts, few to my knowledge ever lost whole accounts and/or characters. Petitioning the theft of characters from your account was handled (hopefully) with professionalism and care by CCP representatives.

My question to the Eve Community is this. Let us say that a long term player becomes overwhelmed with the game and leaves for whatever reason, be it real life or in game politics or simply a resentment in CCPs direction. He has developed a character over several years of loyal subscription and has built up quite a hefty SP tree and asset collection. Let us also say that the same player returns to the game and the community after several years of hiatus. When he returns he finds his account details have been changed. When he petitions he is told that his main character has been transferred out of his account, several months or so after he left the game. He discovers that the account was accessed, his email, login details etc are changed over and payment details are also different.

*side note*
According to the EULA , it is illegal to access or obtain account details not belonging to you, as it is to disclose them. Furthermore the transfer of characters from accounts is ONLY valid if the account and characters themselves are yours to manage. Any transfers where there has been a breach of the EULA are void, with CCP exempt from accountability or liability.
*side note*

Hypothetically, after being told of the character transfer, the player verifies his identification to CCP and has the account returned to him, minus the character in question. Hypothetically, he is then told that the character can not be returned due not to the nature of transfer, but because so much time has elapsed between the transfer happening and him petitioning. Essentially then, the player has lost the character in question, all of its assets and has been received no compensation aside from a dusting of the hands by CCP.

My question to the Eve community is this. Was this a valid and reasonable response from CCP. Should there be or is there a statute of limitiations where breaches of the EULA can only be considered invalid up until a certain timeframe? Should of CCP banned the character in question due to the reasonably suspicious nature of transfers (none of which were conducted through the char market) and should the player receive the character back, or if not, receive any form of compensation?

With many players returning to Eve because of the so called change of direction Crucible represents, we may find that this hypothetical scenario could occur quite a few times, where old accounts are found to have been hacked or misused. Should CCPs response to any potential petitions look favorably upon a returning playerbase, or should they wash their hands of their EULA obligations due to the timeframe involved.

Because this is purely hypothetical in nature and does not discuss particulars of an actual petition, it is not against the forums rules to discuss this matter.





Daravel
#2 - 2011-12-14 01:45:01 UTC
If another player buys the stolen character in good faith and has played with them for a significant period of time (potentially equalling the time the original player had it for) then you really have a problem.

If the character was stolen and used by the theif, or the assets stripped or whatever then I think the character should be returned and compensation given (isk out of thin air if need be). Likewise, if the character has barely been used or has only just been sold to a player in good faith then it should be returned.

Where the character has been in the hands of a legit player for a long time... I'd be tempted to say that the returning player should have a character conjured from space dust (or have the old character returned and the newer player recieves isk enough to cover: the isk spent originally, isk enough to purchase a new character of equal SP - so, their original purchase price + isk = SP trained since purchase, and of course, isk to cover anything lost in the transfer).

Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
#3 - 2011-12-14 01:46:50 UTC
I empathize with CCP here. It's not like they banned someone from forums for 3 months for calling someone 'dim' or something insanely outrageous like that.

Many alliance drones account share, bot, and participate in various nefarious activities. It's not up to CCP to try to piece together what happened many years later. Don't share your passwords with anybody and this won't happen to you.

(It sounds like you gave your toon away to a corpmate and now you're back and want him back. If that's the case, stop wasting our time and go away.)
Apollo Gabriel
Kill'em all. Let Bob sort'em out.
Ushra'Khan
#4 - 2011-12-14 01:48:42 UTC
It's a very messy situation you describe here, I'd be surprised if CCP simply said "no" in this matter, as previously people who've bought billions of isk have been penalized as much as a 2 years after the act, in this case if the buyer was totally unaware of the impropriety, then it seems wrong to penalize him, but I'd suspect CCP would adequately compensate the owner, such as here are skill points and isk, while tracking down the person who did the crime.
Always ... Never ... Forget to check your references.   Peace out Zulu! Hope you land well!
YuuKnow
The Scope
#5 - 2011-12-14 01:51:57 UTC
TL;DR?
Techagunichxio
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2011-12-14 02:16:14 UTC
Daravel wrote:
If another player buys the stolen character in good faith and has played with them for a significant period of time (potentially equalling the time the original player had it for) then you really have a problem.

If the character was stolen and used by the theif, or the assets stripped or whatever then I think the character should be returned and compensation given (isk out of thin air if need be). Likewise, if the character has barely been used or has only just been sold to a player in good faith then it should be returned.

Where the character has been in the hands of a legit player for a long time... I'd be tempted to say that the returning player should have a character conjured from space dust (or have the old character returned and the newer player recieves isk enough to cover: the isk spent originally, isk enough to purchase a new character of equal SP - so, their original purchase price + isk = SP trained since purchase, and of course, isk to cover anything lost in the transfer).




Hypothetically if CCP did not share your generosity for the returning player, does this mar their image in your eyes?
Ai Shun
#7 - 2011-12-14 02:18:15 UTC
Techagunichxio wrote:
With many players returning to Eve because of the so called change of direction Crucible represents, we may find that this hypothetical scenario could occur quite a few times, where old accounts are found to have been hacked or misused. Should CCPs response to any potential petitions look favorably upon a returning playerbase, or should they wash their hands of their EULA obligations due to the timeframe involved.


How does somebody prove to CCP that they were hacked? Look at it this way:

1. Player leaves game.
2. Account is reactivated and character is sold.
3. Time passes
4. Player requests login details from CCP (Forgetful? It happens to all of us)
5. Player alleges they never sold the character; requests character back.

Now, CCP could give the player the original character as it was at the time. Could they? I don't think so, at least I don't think they will be able to do so without going into a backup type scenario as the character has been played since. (It would depend on their database structure and how they deal with things)

Or should they give the player the character as it is now?

But how do they know the player was hacked? They don't. This could just be someone who sold a character and profited from it and now want it back after hearing about Crucible. So do they have a new policy of returning all characters sold if the player claims they were hacked and needs their login information?

You can see the type of mess that creates. It is a tough one for them.

On the plus side, your friend has you around to help them get back on their feet and back into the game. Yeah, re-training all those skills is a PITA but ... on the other hand ... they could also buy a pilot of the bazaar.
Astrid Stjerna
Sebiestor Tribe
#8 - 2011-12-14 02:37:28 UTC
Techagunichxio wrote:

My question to the Eve community is this. Was this a valid and reasonable response from CCP.


Absolutely, it was valid and reasonable. CCP can't spend all of their time digging through six-month old database entries.

(And I sincerely don't like nitpicking grammar, but it's 'should have' (to indicate a past occurance), not 'should of' (which indicates ownership). :) )

I can't get rid of my darn signature!  Oh, wait....

Ghoest
#9 - 2011-12-14 02:56:19 UTC
Some of the answers above are a waste.

The problem is theres no right answer for CCP they screw over an innocent victim either way. So its best to screw over the one who made a mistake and didnt protect their account.

The only other alternative to what they did would be to give you a premade character - Im guessing they just dont want to start doing that.

Wherever You Went - Here You Are

Techagunichxio
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#10 - 2011-12-14 02:57:38 UTC
While I was using the hypothetical petition as a setting, my main query is as to whether or not there should be a statute of limitations upon the EULA. If there is a firm confirmation or at least suspicion of account insecurity and resulting loss, is there a time limit where those acts are no longer applicable to action under the EULA?

Potentially all breaches of EULA are thereby exempt from action so long as you wait long enough (a year or two) purely because CCP cannot verify the breach from their database.

This begs the question; How long are these logs kept and therefore how long does one have to hold out from being caught before the crime is lost in the ether

Techagunichxio
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#11 - 2011-12-14 03:00:33 UTC
Astrid Stjerna wrote:
Techagunichxio wrote:

My question to the Eve community is this. Was this a valid and reasonable response from CCP.


Absolutely, it was valid and reasonable. CCP can't spend all of their time digging through six-month old database entries.

(And I sincerely don't like nitpicking grammar, but it's 'should have' (to indicate a past occurance), not 'should of' (which indicates ownership). :) )



Im sure there are/were other ways to verify account securities, such as IP addresses, credit card details, history of payments, nature of character transfers etc etc
Ai Shun
#12 - 2011-12-14 03:19:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Ai Shun
Techagunichxio wrote:
While I was using the hypothetical petition as a setting, my main query is as to whether or not there should be a statute of limitations upon the EULA. If there is a firm confirmation or at least suspicion of account insecurity and resulting loss, is there a time limit where those acts are no longer applicable to action under the EULA?


You must have hidden that query very, very well in your OP.

There should not be a statute of limitations on the EULA. You break it, you get caught and it is proven; you deal with the consequences. No matter how long it takes.

Edit: Damn, took me a third read to catch the bit that was considered the "main" query. Right after the question marked as the "My query to the EVE Community is this:" bit. My apologies for bad reading skills Lol
Ghoest
#13 - 2011-12-14 03:20:47 UTC
Are you being intentionally dense for the sake of discussion?

As I explained this has nothing to do with the amount of time elapsed nor does it concern effort to dig through data bases.

There are 2 innocent parties - one must accept the damage. CCP is going to side with the one who did not screw up and allow their account to be hacked.

Wherever You Went - Here You Are

Jonathan Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
#14 - 2011-12-14 03:24:11 UTC
Ai Shun wrote:
There should not be a statute of limitations on the EULA. You break it, you get caught and it is proven; you deal with the consequences. No matter how long it takes.


I agree with this bit right up until 'no matter how long it takes.' If you present CCP with solid evidence 5 years later, yes, they should act on it. But if you make a claim 5 years later and ask them to investigate, no, they shouldn't devote significant resources to doing so 'no matter how long it takes.'

Once 5 years pass, the burden of proof passes to the plaintiff. And the standard of evidence is very very high.
Techagunichxio
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#15 - 2011-12-14 03:25:31 UTC
Ghoest wrote:
Are you being intentionally dense for the sake of discussion?

As I explained this has nothing to do with the amount of time elapsed nor does it concern effort to dig through data bases.

There are 2 innocent parties - one must accept the damage. CCP is going to side with the one who did not screw up and allow their account to be hacked.


Hypothetically you mean.

There is only one party that is somewhat innocent- the original player whose account was hacked. The person currently holding the char in question could well be just another alt of the hacker/ thief. This would be especially true if the transfer occurred through a private sale, as in this, hypothetical, example
Ai Shun
#16 - 2011-12-14 03:30:08 UTC
Techagunichxio wrote:
There is only one party that is somewhat innocent- the original player whose account was hacked. The person currently holding the char in question could well be just another alt of the hacker/ thief. This would be especially true if the transfer occurred through a private sale, as in this, hypothetical, example


The original player could be lying to get a high skill point character they knowingly sold back after a rage quit. Are they really innocent?

Hypothetically speaking.
Techagunichxio
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#17 - 2011-12-14 03:49:41 UTC
Ai Shun wrote:
Techagunichxio wrote:
There is only one party that is somewhat innocent- the original player whose account was hacked. The person currently holding the char in question could well be just another alt of the hacker/ thief. This would be especially true if the transfer occurred through a private sale, as in this, hypothetical, example


The original player could be lying to get a high skill point character they knowingly sold back after a rage quit. Are they really innocent?

Hypothetically speaking.


Yeah true, I suppose. Except if CCP were to see when the account details were changed prior to the char transfer. Otherwise it could indeed look like the original player is simply trying to get back a high skill point character. If it were shown that the account details were changed though, it would lean towards the idea that someone usurped the account

Again hypothetically speaking.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#18 - 2011-12-14 03:55:07 UTC
This is why I hate hypotheticals...
Astrid Stjerna
Sebiestor Tribe
#19 - 2011-12-14 16:29:51 UTC
Techagunichxio wrote:
Astrid Stjerna wrote:
Techagunichxio wrote:

My question to the Eve community is this. Was this a valid and reasonable response from CCP.


Absolutely, it was valid and reasonable. CCP can't spend all of their time digging through six-month old database entries.

(And I sincerely don't like nitpicking grammar, but it's 'should have' (to indicate a past occurance), not 'should of' (which indicates ownership). :) )



Im sure there are/were other ways to verify account securities, such as IP addresses, credit card details, history of payments, nature of character transfers etc etc


The thing is, there are upwards of thirty thousand people playing EVE at any given moment, each of which is creating dozens of entries into the database. Tracing the information you suggest means finding the one out-pf-place entry among millions of similar entries.

There is, eventually, a point where policy has to give way to practicality.

I can't get rid of my darn signature!  Oh, wait....

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#20 - 2011-12-14 16:44:18 UTC
Techagunichxio wrote:
Ghoest wrote:
Are you being intentionally dense for the sake of discussion?

As I explained this has nothing to do with the amount of time elapsed nor does it concern effort to dig through data bases.

There are 2 innocent parties - one must accept the damage. CCP is going to side with the one who did not screw up and allow their account to be hacked.
Hypothetically you mean.

There is only one party that is somewhat innocent- the original player whose account was hacked. The person currently holding the char in question could well be just another alt of the hacker/ thief. This would be especially true if the transfer occurred through a private sale, as in this, hypothetical, example
Not hypothetically, no — realistically.

Realistically, there is one party that undoubtably has made an error: the supposed previous owner. It is possible (but far from certain) that the current owner is also at fault, but of the two, he's the one who's a priori the most innocent. So it is indeed right that CCP doesn't side with the party that unquestionably screwed up.
12Next page