Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I don't know what the allegations are, and I am having trouble finding them. If it's anything like this chart shows, then not only do I not see the problem, but I don't even see how it resembles RMT. The little cycle they show has "ad revenue" being transferred from TMC to The Mittani, as if to suggest that:
1.) the ad revenue is part of the cycle
and
2.) The Mittani is a third party separate from TMC

But even still, there is a gap in the chain. Where it shows "content" moving from player to TMC, there is no explanation as to what this content contains but I think we all know it's juicy stories. It attempts to link it such that the "content" is seen as some sort of transferable good or service when in fact it isn't even traded so much as it is collected by TMC researchers.

Sure, if you want to draw a deliberately disingenuous graph, you can pretend to explain anything as being whatever you want it to be. But ultimately what I see here is reporters reporting on EVE and not performing any RMT within it, while on the sidelines and legally disconnected from it all, they are collecting real money as advertisement revenue from their web hosting which they are paying for.

But maybe that's not the scandal I'm hearing people talk about. I don't know how to research this stuff anymore because all I find are an endless stream of allegations with no substance to explain what people are talking about.

That is not the only reason for rmt rules. But I see your first question questions the basis for having rmt rules at all.

Of course to the extent ccp is concerned with people getting scammed that is even more reason to prevent for profit corporations from trading in isk. As was pointed out earlier in the thread, by doing business through a corporation people can escape legal liability for not fulfilling their end of the bargain. So this is just another reason not to have corporations in the isk trading business.




I think if we are talking about a hobby it is no big deal. But if we are talking about a for profit business that incorporated then it takes on a different tone.

There are allot of eve players who might do web design and set up. The back end coding for this has little to do with eve. The same is true for optimizing websites. These designs can cost businesses quite a bit of money. My wife is in the business and I know from offers I received with my own business how much people can charge for these services. I also know these services are very important for businesses. And when 1.2 trillion isk = about $15,000 the values can be sizable.

I don't think people who do not own a business realize the costs. CCP might want to consider the cost in manhours of their own websites design and upkeep to get an idea of how much this can cost. That can be allot of isk trading for real goods and services.

Now if the site is exclusively about eve that does take some of the edge off. But I think unless you say the site must exclusively be about eve then you are looking at a hopelessly blurry line.

sorry i may have missed this but where are you getting this "for profit corporations"? how do you know things are done for pure profit?

I am not paranoid. I am an adult who lives in the real world. My company is small (25 people) and we have been sued multiple times on bogus charges. It isn't paranoid to set up a legal structure that protects you from losing your house, it's common sense to any adult.

Yes, every EVE blogger should absolutely set up an LLC and do business as that legal entity. Work a few years in the real world and it will be obvious why they should. $300 and an hour of your time is a small price to pay to guarentee you won't lose your house and retirement savings due to a bogus lawsuit.

And yet again, a pure profit motive really only applies to a C-Corp. No EVE related entity (including CCP) is a C-Corp. You do know there are different types of corporations, right?

Incorporating does not protect you from bogus liability. It primarily protects you if the claims are proven in court and you are deemed to be actually liable. Look at the times you were sued. Incorporating saved you nothing. I know this because you refereed to your company in the present tense. If one of those lawsuits were not bogus - like for example it was proven you said you would do something you didn't do then those you wronged would only be able to get your corporate assets. But since you are still in business you have enough corporate assets to cover your liabilities and the same would be true if you ran the business as a sole proprietor or a partnership.

I have worked in the real world and I know plenty about litigation, liability, and the protections corporations can provide those who would like to scam people. It is just one more reason ccp should limit corporations engaging in isk trading.

It is not the case that spending $300 will guarantee you will not lose your house and retirement due to a bogus lawsuit. You need to actually run the company like a seperate entity. And again if the lawsuit is not proven then you will likely not benefit at all from your $300 spent and the time you took to maintain the seperate corporate identity. Its only if the lawsuit is valid and proven that the the corporate shield will help you. Finally when it comes to potential liability surrounding websites it is not the case that only the entity registering the website can be liable.



Not entirely. Just for those who use a corporation to pay for services in isk. The vast majority of blogs would not be effected and those that were effected could decide whether they wanted to continue to run their site as a for profit corporation or not. I imagine many would just decide to drop the corporation out of the equation. But yes some might choose that if they can't spend their isk through the corporation, and it would just have to be a hobby, then they would stop. Other people who are not out for real money would fill in some of the gaps.

1) Look up piercing the corporate veil. You should do this before you keep telling everyone that they just have to pay $300 and then they never have to worry about personal assets being targeted. The laws can vary from state to state and I am not sure if there is a similar provision in other countries.

2) Its not the case that litigation about a website can only ever be brought against the company that owns the website. For example if you libel someone on a website you can be personally liable even if you have a company own the website.

3) The rest of my points stand as far as what protections a corporation provides. Against bogus lawsuits it really provides nothing. Against legitimate lawsuits it provides protection. Again to the extent ccp prevents rmt in order to protect players from scams it makes sense that they would prevent corporations from paying their costs in isk.

I do know what I am talking about, and you would do well to take your time and actually try to understand what I am saying.

You may have learned about piercing the corporate veil from a ten second google search but I learned it in law school and in doing legal research required to litigate cases where it was an issue.

Are you just going to fold up your corp due to a bogus lawsuit? If not then it won't provide you any protection from them. The primary advantage of the corporate protection is if you run into a legitimate lawsuit that could be proven against you in court.




I don't think you do understand what I am saying. Because I am not saying sites like tmc are rmt. I am proposing that ccp draw a distinction between corporations and hobbyists when it comes to whether they can use isk to obtain goods and services. Lines have been blurred by websites that have left allot of people wondering whether ccp allows people to do an end around their rmt policies and clearly make real money from in-game items. They have good reason to wonder because it can very well happen unless ccp clarifies some things. Its better to do this beforehand and in the open rather than after the fact where no one really knows the scoop.



Whether the corporation has shareholders versus members is of little importance in this debate. You are quibbling over irrelevant minutia. I will not pursue the red herring.

A privately held corporation and a publicly held corporation are different. But I am not sure why that is relevant. Not all c-corps are publicly traded and c-corps are not really all that different from s-corps or llcs. C corps have certain tax issues they need to deal with so they are not double taxed and usually smaller businesses will opt for an s-corp or an llc for that reason, but again the us tax schemes seem irrelevant to our concerns.

I am not saying that the only reason to incorporate is to increase profits. It likely will not increase your profits just by incorporating. But I am saying the purpose of a for profit corporation is to make a profit. A real money profit. So what is the point of allowing these entities to trade in isk? If we look at the reasons ccp bans rmt they clearly fit as an entity that should not be isk trading. None of the reasoning behind the exceptions seems to apply to corporations.

I don't mind if people disagree and think real life corporations should be able to pay for their real life costs through isk. But allowing that cuts against all the reasons ccp offered as to why players shouldn't be able to rmt.

Can somebody please explain what TMC is doing that is under debate? I still don't know what we're talking about, and it isn't for lack of research.

You're flat out refuting the legal benefits limited liability offers an owner. I never said a corporation would fold (you put those words in my mouth), I said your personal assets are more at risk with a GP compared to an LLC.

That's the traditional understanding of the purpose of a publicly traded corporation with shareholders who don't have personal interests aligned. It isn't the traditional understanding of *any* company. Most smaller businesses exist for a purpose, and as long as they make enough cash to cover expenses, maximizing profitability is a byproduct.

Back to your original idea (convo me in game/send me a message if you want to keep talking about lawsuits, we are getting fairly off topic with that particular tangent) There are already rules surrounding RMT. Making more hard line rules ahead of time around what third party services can/cannot use isk would do nothing but limit creativity and emergent gameplay. Deal with the issues on a one-off basis, don't create sweeping rules that could limit content creation more than it helps it.

So why should people be able to pay for services they profit from but not corporations? considering at least in the US corporations are legally persons