These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

EULA and You? or me ? Eve is real? or not?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
CPT Jack Swallows
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#1 - 2015-06-02 14:41:23 UTC  |  Edited by: CPT Jack Swallows
How do you define rude, offensive, belligerent or threatening in a game which almost sole goal is to destroy another ship or and entity?
This is one of many things that stand without reason in the EULA and is basicly a blank slip, just cause i think it's rude if people talk over me, can i report them to CCP?
How about if someone is proceeding with belligerent activities like waging war or engaging in war?
As belligerent has a quite clear meaning in the dictionary, the act of declaring war on someone is belligerent, which is against the EULA.

How about if i go to lowsec or nullsec and someone says in local that they will destroy my ship in a threatening manner and i feel alarmed, should i report this to CCP?

It's also stated in the EULA that while playing the game we can encounter people acting this way, is there a possibility of clicking a button like the safety button to turn off all interaction with other players to shield my feelings from getting assaulted and defiled by fiends in a simulated universe?


Excerpt from the EULA:

" You may encounter and converse with people who are rude, offensive, belligerent, and who may use indecent, obscene, and/or threatening or harassing language while playing the Game or otherwise interacting within EVE. You may report any instances of such behavior to CCP. "

" You assume all risk associated with playing the Game, and CCP assumes no responsibility for the conduct of any other players, and shall not be liable to you or any other person for their conduct. "
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#2 - 2015-06-02 15:26:50 UTC
Well, you could file a support ticket and ask the people who make the rules, or you could start a forum thread where the likely outcome is conjecture, rumour, trolling and mockery.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
CPT Jack Swallows
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#3 - 2015-06-02 16:03:47 UTC
admiral root wrote:
Well, you could file a support ticket and ask the people who make the rules, or you could start a forum thread where the likely outcome is conjecture, rumour, trolling and mockery.




Well you are entitled to have an opinion, sadly enough it's the wrong opinion
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#4 - 2015-06-02 21:10:58 UTC
CPT Jack Swallows wrote:
How do you define rude, offensive, belligerent or threatening in a game which almost sole goal is to destroy another ship or and entity?
This is one of many things that stand without reason in the EULA and is basicly a blank slip, just cause i think it's rude if people talk over me, can i report them to CCP?
How about if someone is proceeding with belligerent activities like waging war or engaging in war?
As belligerent has a quite clear meaning in the dictionary, the act of declaring war on someone is belligerent, which is against the EULA.

How about if i go to lowsec or nullsec and someone says in local that they will destroy my ship in a threatening manner and i feel alarmed, should i report this to CCP?

It's also stated in the EULA that while playing the game we can encounter people acting this way, is there a possibility of clicking a button like the safety button to turn off all interaction with other players to shield my feelings from getting assaulted and defiled by fiends in a simulated universe?


Excerpt from the EULA:

" You may encounter and converse with people who are rude, offensive, belligerent, and who may use indecent, obscene, and/or threatening or harassing language while playing the Game or otherwise interacting within EVE. You may report any instances of such behavior to CCP. "

" You assume all risk associated with playing the Game, and CCP assumes no responsibility for the conduct of any other players, and shall not be liable to you or any other person for their conduct. "



"I'm going to hunt you down and destroy your corp!" = fine, threaten away! Do not bother reporting them (unless you want to give the GMs a laugh)

"I'm going to hunt you down and skin you in front of your family" = not fine, do not make threats like this! Also, report them.

In short: keep it in game, and remember that it's only a game.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
CPT Jack Swallows
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#5 - 2015-06-02 21:14:24 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
CPT Jack Swallows wrote:
How do you define rude, offensive, belligerent or threatening in a game which almost sole goal is to destroy another ship or and entity?
This is one of many things that stand without reason in the EULA and is basicly a blank slip, just cause i think it's rude if people talk over me, can i report them to CCP?
How about if someone is proceeding with belligerent activities like waging war or engaging in war?
As belligerent has a quite clear meaning in the dictionary, the act of declaring war on someone is belligerent, which is against the EULA.

How about if i go to lowsec or nullsec and someone says in local that they will destroy my ship in a threatening manner and i feel alarmed, should i report this to CCP?

It's also stated in the EULA that while playing the game we can encounter people acting this way, is there a possibility of clicking a button like the safety button to turn off all interaction with other players to shield my feelings from getting assaulted and defiled by fiends in a simulated universe?


Excerpt from the EULA:

" You may encounter and converse with people who are rude, offensive, belligerent, and who may use indecent, obscene, and/or threatening or harassing language while playing the Game or otherwise interacting within EVE. You may report any instances of such behavior to CCP. "

" You assume all risk associated with playing the Game, and CCP assumes no responsibility for the conduct of any other players, and shall not be liable to you or any other person for their conduct. "



"I'm going to hunt you down and destroy your corp!" = fine, threaten away! Do not bother reporting them (unless you want to give the GMs a laugh)

"I'm going to hunt you down and skin you in front of your family" = not fine, do not make threats like this! Also, report them.

In short: keep it in game, and remember that it's only a game.


So you are saying it is okay to threat ingame, just that i dont imply physical violence?
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#6 - 2015-06-02 21:16:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Dersen Lowery
War decs are a specific, explicit gameplay mechanic. Intended gameplay is not against the EULA for what I hope are obvious reasons.

Dersen threatening to blow up your ship and following through is intended gameplay, whether or not it sends your heart into your throat. Spaceboat violence is one of the basic features of the game.

Me, as in the person behind Dersen, losing my cool and abusing and threatening you, the player of CPT Jack Sparrow, is what is against the EULA, because the EULA addresses conduct of and between players.

Remember Dersen's Law: if you find yourself playing internet lawyer with the EULA, you're almost certainly wrong.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
CPT Jack Swallows
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#7 - 2015-06-02 21:25:10 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:
War decs are a specific, explicit gameplay mechanic. Intended gameplay is not against the EULA for what I hope are obvious reasons.

Dersen threatening to blow up your ship and following through is intended gameplay, whether or not it sends your heart into your throat. Spaceboat violence is one of the basic features of the game.

Me, as in the person behind Dersen, losing my cool and abusing and threatening you, the player of CPT Jack Sparrow, is what is against the EULA, because the EULA addresses conduct of and between players.

Remember Dersen's Law: if you find yourself playing internet lawyer with the EULA, you're almost certainly wrong.


The Mittani was banned for statements out of game, so the separation of character and player does not exist. Thus a threat of a person either ingame or out of game should carry the same EULA breach, however you twist and bend it.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#8 - 2015-06-02 21:28:00 UTC
CPT Jack Swallows wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
CPT Jack Swallows wrote:
How do you define rude, offensive, belligerent or threatening in a game which almost sole goal is to destroy another ship or and entity?
This is one of many things that stand without reason in the EULA and is basicly a blank slip, just cause i think it's rude if people talk over me, can i report them to CCP?
How about if someone is proceeding with belligerent activities like waging war or engaging in war?
As belligerent has a quite clear meaning in the dictionary, the act of declaring war on someone is belligerent, which is against the EULA.

How about if i go to lowsec or nullsec and someone says in local that they will destroy my ship in a threatening manner and i feel alarmed, should i report this to CCP?

It's also stated in the EULA that while playing the game we can encounter people acting this way, is there a possibility of clicking a button like the safety button to turn off all interaction with other players to shield my feelings from getting assaulted and defiled by fiends in a simulated universe?


Excerpt from the EULA:

" You may encounter and converse with people who are rude, offensive, belligerent, and who may use indecent, obscene, and/or threatening or harassing language while playing the Game or otherwise interacting within EVE. You may report any instances of such behavior to CCP. "

" You assume all risk associated with playing the Game, and CCP assumes no responsibility for the conduct of any other players, and shall not be liable to you or any other person for their conduct. "



"I'm going to hunt you down and destroy your corp!" = fine, threaten away! Do not bother reporting them (unless you want to give the GMs a laugh)

"I'm going to hunt you down and skin you in front of your family" = not fine, do not make threats like this! Also, report them.

In short: keep it in game, and remember that it's only a game.


So you are saying it is okay to threat ingame, just that i dont imply physical violence?


Yes. Make all the in game threats you want. Threaten the character, not the player. It's a pretty simple concept.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#9 - 2015-06-02 21:30:13 UTC
CPT Jack Swallows wrote:
Dersen Lowery wrote:
War decs are a specific, explicit gameplay mechanic. Intended gameplay is not against the EULA for what I hope are obvious reasons.

Dersen threatening to blow up your ship and following through is intended gameplay, whether or not it sends your heart into your throat. Spaceboat violence is one of the basic features of the game.

Me, as in the person behind Dersen, losing my cool and abusing and threatening you, the player of CPT Jack Sparrow, is what is against the EULA, because the EULA addresses conduct of and between players.

Remember Dersen's Law: if you find yourself playing internet lawyer with the EULA, you're almost certainly wrong.


The Mittani was banned for statements out of game, so the separation of character and player does not exist. Thus a threat of a person either ingame or out of game should carry the same EULA breach, however you twist and bend it.


His breach was to incite people to send harrassing evemails concerning the player, not the character.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
CPT Jack Swallows
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#10 - 2015-06-02 21:33:15 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
CPT Jack Swallows wrote:
Dersen Lowery wrote:
War decs are a specific, explicit gameplay mechanic. Intended gameplay is not against the EULA for what I hope are obvious reasons.

Dersen threatening to blow up your ship and following through is intended gameplay, whether or not it sends your heart into your throat. Spaceboat violence is one of the basic features of the game.

Me, as in the person behind Dersen, losing my cool and abusing and threatening you, the player of CPT Jack Sparrow, is what is against the EULA, because the EULA addresses conduct of and between players.

Remember Dersen's Law: if you find yourself playing internet lawyer with the EULA, you're almost certainly wrong.


The Mittani was banned for statements out of game, so the separation of character and player does not exist. Thus a threat of a person either ingame or out of game should carry the same EULA breach, however you twist and bend it.


His breach was to incite people to send harrassing evemails concerning the player, not the character.



"evemails" Thus an ingame feature focused on the character and not the person.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#11 - 2015-06-02 21:47:10 UTC
CPT Jack Swallows wrote:
"evemails" Thus an ingame feature focused on the character and not the person.


No, the abuse was explicitly focused on the person behind the character. And the venue was Fanfest, on stage, and therefore part of an official CCP event centered on EVE, which is why CCP decided to punish him.

You can use in-game means to harass a real person, just as you can use out-of-game means (TeamSpeak, etc.) to play the game legitimately.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
CPT Jack Swallows
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#12 - 2015-06-02 21:57:30 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:
CPT Jack Swallows wrote:
"evemails" Thus an ingame feature focused on the character and not the person.


No, the abuse was explicitly focused on the person behind the character. And the venue was Fanfest, on stage, and therefore part of an official CCP event centered on EVE, which is why CCP decided to punish him.

You can use in-game means to harass a real person, just as you can use out-of-game means (TeamSpeak, etc.) to play the game legitimately.



Rewatch the videos on youtube, the call to action was explicitly against the character and not the person. Also if you read through the end user legal agreement it has nothing involving out of game gathering, fanfest or the Harpa Center. The end user legal agreement focuses only on the system called Eve Online.

Otherwise they have added it quite recently.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#13 - 2015-06-02 23:07:48 UTC
Ok well you seem to have this all worked out and have successfully proved to your own satisfaction that black is white. I'm sure CCP will get right on with implementing your suggestion using exactly the same logic.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#14 - 2015-06-02 23:50:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Dersen Lowery
CPT Jack Swallows wrote:

Rewatch the videos on youtube, the call to action was explicitly against the character and not the person. Also if you read through the end user legal agreement it has nothing involving out of game gathering, fanfest or the Harpa Center. The end user legal agreement focuses only on the system called Eve Online.


No.

The miner said he, the player, was suicidally depressed. The Mittani told people to send him EVE mail encouraging him to kill himself. The fact that in-game EVE mail has to be addressed to a character is irrelevant. The threat was obviously addressed to something the player said about his RL condition. This was hashed out ad nauseam. If you want to disagree, fine; just realize that you're disagreeing with The Mittani's own sense of what he meant.

As to whether the stage on Fanfest counts as EVE: there was some discussion about that, too, but in the end CCP decided it did. You can disagree with their decision all day. It means nothing. They are the final authority.

You're going to need a better space lawyer. The one you have is giving you terrible advice.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
CPT Jack Swallows
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#15 - 2015-06-03 00:26:35 UTC
Quote:
The miner said he, the player, was suicidally depressed. The Mittani told people to send him EVE mail encouraging him to kill himself. The fact that in-game EVE mail has to be addressed to a character is irrelevant. The threat was obviously addressed to something the player said about his RL condition. This was hashed out ad nauseam. If you want to disagree, fine; just realize that you're disagreeing with The Mittani's own sense of what he meant.

As to whether the stage on Fanfest counts as EVE: there was some discussion about that, too, but in the end CCP decided it did. You can disagree with their decision all day. It means nothing. They are the final authority.

You're going to need a better space lawyer. The one you have is giving you terrible advice.
<- No need to be rude, it's against the EULA.


Well that depends on how you define it, as the person is writing as his ingame persona that has perhaps gone through a divorce, as there is nothing in the game that says you cannot roleplay being divorced or depressed. As there is nothing against roleplaying being a woman in eve online.

Transcript of the actual ingame evemail.

" So now it looks like you will still gank me and i work hard to keep going in this game. Sorry I am very mad that was more plexs for my guys. Yes i can make that back easily mining if i could mine.
Now i will just get popped by you guys no matter what and 400mil is nothing. That is like 3 maybe 4 hours of mining for me. Sorry it is hard when i had own alliance members send people out to gank me. Now i feel i have been suckered into giving away 1.3 bil isks.
Since my divorce all i want to do is die. and i have been doing alot in this game.
I am sorry i did not understand. Iam just sick and tired of sitting here alone and having to play with myself. Everyone that i have helped out in this game and in real life just takes what you have and that is it. Never hear from them again. Iam getting tired of everything. It was nice mining ice while it lasted took my mind off everything. Even thought some people may say i am a bot, i am not. I run all 22 accounts myself it is not easy but it keeps a man sane.
sorry for making you mad at me. I will leave you alone now and never enter your space again, i will be off looking for a nice quiet corner somewhere. "

By this mail that the person in question wrote on his own accord, he both references out of game and ingame, he defines his 22 accounts as "his guys" , thus he is roleplaying that he is in fact 22 different personas. We have already established that telling people to go and suicide, could be determined by alot of things.
If it was meant out of game it is a matter of Icelandic Law Enforcement but if it's ingame it's technically alright from the "legal" standpoint.

So it delves to a deeper thought, is fanfest part of new eden or is it not?

EVE IS REAL!
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#16 - 2015-06-03 07:41:58 UTC
Let me take a wild guess: you're still pretty young, right?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
CPT Jack Swallows
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#17 - 2015-06-03 09:53:33 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Let me take a wild guess: you're still pretty young, right?



Not at all actually, i'm really only measuring with the ruler that CCP uses which is a non predefined ruler that can either be 20 centimeters if you ask one person and 30 centimeters if you ask another person. In that reasoning it can both be right and wrong at the same time by asking two different people.

That's why other companies often have strict EULA's.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#18 - 2015-06-03 17:58:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Dersen Lowery
CPT Jack Swallows wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Let me take a wild guess: you're still pretty young, right?



Not at all actually, i'm really only measuring with the ruler that CCP uses which is a non predefined ruler that can either be 20 centimeters if you ask one person and 30 centimeters if you ask another person. In that reasoning it can both be right and wrong at the same time by asking two different people.

That's why other companies often have strict EULA's.


The meaning of the The Wiz's EVE mail, and The Mittani's reaction to it, are both plainly obvious--unless you go hunting for any hypothetically possible ambiguity, in which case you will be continually flustered by the fact that natural language generally, and English particularly, is imprecise.

The reason CCP doesn't have a strictly worded EULA is so that they can't be gamed by people with very accurate rulers and bad faith interpretations of the EULA. There's even a catch-all clause that allows CCP to punish people at their sole discretion, in case someone figures out a way to abuse the game without technically crossing any bright lines. Who decides what constitutes abuse of the game? CCP does. It's their game.

And if you think I'm rude, you're going to have to report about 80% of the forum. I was honestly trying to wake you up to the repeatedly observed fact that trying to play internet lawyer with CCP doesn't usually end well.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
CPT Jack Swallows
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#19 - 2015-06-03 18:13:28 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:

The meaning of the The Wiz's EVE mail, and The Mittani's reaction to it, are both plainly obvious--unless you go hunting for any hypothetically possible ambiguity, in which case you will be continually flustered by the fact that natural language generally, and English particularly, is imprecise.

The reason CCP doesn't have a strictly worded EULA is so that they can't be gamed by people with very accurate rulers and bad faith interpretations of the EULA. There's even a catch-all clause that allows CCP to punish people at their sole discretion, in case someone figures out a way to abuse the game without technically crossing any bright lines. Who decides what constitutes abuse of the game? CCP does. It's their game.

And if you think I'm rude, you're going to have to report about 80% of the forum. I was honestly trying to wake you up to the repeatedly observed fact that trying to play internet lawyer with CCP doesn't usually end well.


The English language is not precise but the manner in which some people write or talk in it is incorrect. It has certain things we call words and words have meanings like belligerent as an example. By saying it is imprecise is like saying the dictionary have no meaning to what the words actually mean.

Second thought, about having a strict EULA you cannot have a bad faith interpretation like you have now, It is CCP property and they have the right to ban anyone from it, but then they need to say that he was banned under that section of the EULA and they didn't.

Have you ever seen a speeder get charged with attempted suicide? No because it is ridiculous and so is drawing a line where we enforce conduct on how players behave at any venue.

Also it is quite rude, because my internet lawyer went to internet Harvard and got an internet degree in internet law and focuses on internet law related claims at his internet law firm which is among the better internet law firms around.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#20 - 2015-06-03 18:31:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Dersen Lowery
CPT Jack Swallows wrote:
The English language is not precise but the manner in which some people write or talk in it is incorrect.


And you have to account for that when you read it. For example, this bit of word salad:

CPT Jack Swallows wrote:
It has certain things we call words and words have meanings like belligerent as an example. By saying it is imprecise is like saying the dictionary have no meaning to what the words actually mean.


No, it just means that the meanings aren't as clear as the average mathematical symbol. In this case, the obvious thing you're overlooking is 12 years of people blowing each others' ships up as designed and intended gameplay. Intended gameplay is not against the EULA, trivially.

Were I so inclined, I could see your aggressive insistence as belligerent, too, by some definitions. But it implies violence ('belli-') and so it probably refers to threats of RL violence, probably hate speech, and other explicit threats against other players.

CPT Jack Swallows wrote:
Second thought, about having a strict EULA you cannot have a bad faith interpretation like you have now, It is CCP property and they have the right to ban anyone from it, but then they need to say that he was banned under that section of the EULA and they didn't.


CCP just got done banning a whole bunch of people who were just certain that they were technically in the right while still getting away with something that CCP expressly didn't want them to do, so your first assertion is simply wrong.

They're also under no obligation to tell you which part of the EULA you were punished under. Even if they were, they could point to the "because we said so" clause which you agreed to when you first launched the game.

CPT Jack Swallows wrote:
Have you ever seen a speeder get charged with attempted suicide? No because it is ridiculous and so is drawing a line where we enforce conduct on how players behave at any venue.


EULAs are not laws; laws are not EULAs. CCP is not a government. You are not a private citizen of EVE. If you don't like the EULA you're free to not play the game. I can assure you that going on the forums and insisting that they're doing it wrong will get you nowhere.

What are you trying to do, anyway?

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
12Next page