Legal Perspective: Witnessed a Scammer Get Banned

General Discussion
Prev 1 7 8 9 15 Next
I really hate the scumbags of this game and the !@#$% that stick up for them.

I wish Blizzard would ban more of them.

Your "friend" will buy another copy or quit. Who cares.


This is the type of thought process that brings down a nation and keeps a third world country in the s-hole for generations.

Nothing matters until it happens to them.


That's weird, because from what I've seen, it's that thought process that goes and helps them.

It's people that sit around trying to rule lawyer in the exact opposition direction of what devs, cms, and the rules themselves state because in their armchair quarterbacking, they've interpreted things differently (even when it's stated without any or minimal legalese) or just outright ignore / gloss over what does exist so that they can pretend they're not hurting anybody with malicious behavior or that "I only did it a few times so cut me some slack." or whatever other excuses they dredge up.

Much like your glossing over my previous post because "lol u insulted me cuz u hav no point." Weird how I had only one sentence containing insults, which resulted in one line out of seven being anything other than a paraphrasing of multiple sections of the rules and years of posts throughout any of Blizzard's forums, especially this one, and even that one was exactly that, just tinged with disappointment at a professed law student's utter inability to read basic English.
Looking at your hero list its pretty obvious who your "friend" really was.

Gratz on buying a new account.

+1 fail.


I am pretty sure in my original post i stated that i started training my character this summer during vacation...

It's fascinating to discuss how false accusations lead to harming innocent people and you have effectively accused me of being a double with broscience.


I'm not implying that you are the person that scammed, but it is possible you indicated you were starting your character as a way to deflect from people thinking it was you who got caught scamming. Similar to when someone say's "I have a friend that does drugs and wanted to know what harm "x drug" does," meanwhile they are talking about themselves.

All in all though, if this person was scamming or attempting to scam regardless of the rules set by Blizzard, and you knew he was.. why do you care if he got banned.
OK ENUF:

Assuming what the OP said actually happened and the guy who substituted the lesser item did it intentionally:

Is it THE RIGHT THING to do to ban players who steal from other players by scamming? Of course it is!

Is it ILLEGAL under the TOS to ban players who steal from other players by scamming? Only a judge can tell you that. The purpose of the legal system is to resolve disputes.

Does D3 have an ANTI-SCAMMING POLICY? Don't know-Don't care. Just ban them if they are guilty as charged, they are thieves and if they are young best they learn their lessons here rather than in Juvenile Court.

DOES D3 HAVE A FAIR PROCESS that gives the accused a fair opportunity to defend himself against mistaken accusations and to know upon what evidence he was banned? Dunno-never been there, but it should.

Is the ITEMIZATION in D3 so boring that we just spent 8 pages of drivel!? Yes!
The greater ethical violation was by Blizzard than by the scammer. We are increasingly living in a world where it's acceptable to force buyers into no-fault contracts or put them in situations where they don't actually own the things they buy.

Whether you condone the behavior of the individual or not (and only a sociopath would), condoning the similarly negative reaction of Blizzard perpetuates a policy of stealing a product from a legitimate buyer because you didn't like the way in which he used it. Make no mistake: selling a product with caveats attached to it is in bad faith, and taking away that product for reasons other than is supported by law is theft by any ethical standard.

Please keep in mind that I don't condone the actions of the scammer. Scamming in a game with real money attached to its economy is theft. But enforcing rules about theft is far outside of the jurisdiction of an independent corporation.
OP is just pulling EULA phrases out of context to prove points and ignoring several areas of clear points on scam policy (or just being lazy and not reading them - aka he may just be ignorant).

I feel sad for his law career when he has to rely on logical fallacies to prove his point.....

He is also doing the same with the Second Life case which seems to be a bit more intricate than he can comprehend.
Despite the case, perhaps I should point out that not all contracts are legally binding and enforceable.

Edit: Capital
The greater ethical violation was by Blizzard than by the scammer. We are increasingly living in a world where it's acceptable to force buyers into no-fault contracts or put them in situations where they don't actually own the things they buy.

Whether you condone the behavior of the individual or not (and only a sociopath would), condoning the similarly negative reaction of Blizzard perpetuates a policy of stealing a product from a legitimate buyer because you didn't like the way in which he used it. Make no mistake: selling a product with caveats attached to it is in bad faith, and taking away that product for reasons other than is supported by law is theft by any ethical standard.

Please keep in mind that I don't condone the actions of the scammer. Scamming in a game with real money attached to its economy is theft. But enforcing rules about theft is far outside of the jurisdiction of an independent corporation.


Now while I think the OP is off his rocker, this is more of an intelligent statement. These type of contracts are unethical, however for anybody the knows law, ethical and legal are two separate things. I would say that the EULA is unethical and could cause some real issues in other cases, but the policy of banning scammers and their actions is not only ethical, but legal to boot assuming that there is documented evidence.
06/09/2013 11:27 AMPosted by Calamiter
Despite the case, perhaps i should point out that not all contracts are legally binding and enforceable.


No, but show me the part in this "contract" where it guarantees continued service? You purchased an online game. They control access to their servers. The only part where I could see a real issue, is if there is a leftover Bnet balance and they do not allow access, unless they can prove that every penny was gained through a way that clearly breached the EULA.
Hmm blizzard can ban me for any or no reason.

Now the last question is when am i going to get banned for playing the game or for no reason at all.
It's a sad world we live in where doing the right thing becomes subject to "well, legally, they don't have a policy for this so they shouldn't have done it". It's a joke!

In real life, if I scammed someone, i would be responsible for my actions. In a game where real money is used to buy items, why shouldn't the same restrictions be in place? Chat logs can prove the scammers intent.

if you scam, you should be banned. fine by me. Wish it would happen more.
Despite the case, perhaps i should point out that not all contracts are legally binding and enforceable.


No, but show me the part in this "contract" where it guarantees continued service? You purchased an online game. They control access to their servers. The only part where I could see a real issue, is if there is a leftover Bnet balance and they do not allow access, unless they can prove that every penny was gained through a way that clearly breached the EULA.


I sincerely hope you understand the word "despite".
And, for example: an illegal contract.

PS:
The reason why I raise my statement is that I see people saying like:
I accepted the contract so yes I am legally binding to the terms of use.
Again, despite the case, not all contracts are legally binding and enforceable.

Edit: Capital
06/09/2013 12:44 AMPosted by Soupermann
Without getting into ethical debate about honesty, his frustration is not entirely without merit.


Yes, if we ignore the part where he was scamming people, his frustration has merit.

And if I ignore all the food I ate last night, that giant !@#$ I just took was COMPLETELY UNJUSTIFIED.
Ok I think I'm gonna scam someone so I will get banned, I just noticed I have played 1,932 hours. Assuming a 40 hour work week that's like working D3 for over 11 months. Will someone please teach me how to scam so I can get banned and get back to the RL.
The greater ethical violation was by Blizzard than by the scammer. We are increasingly living in a world where it's acceptable to force buyers into no-fault contracts or put them in situations where they don't actually own the things they buy.

Whether you condone the behavior of the individual or not (and only a sociopath would), condoning the similarly negative reaction of Blizzard perpetuates a policy of stealing a product from a legitimate buyer because you didn't like the way in which he used it. Make no mistake: selling a product with caveats attached to it is in bad faith, and taking away that product for reasons other than is supported by law is theft by any ethical standard.

Please keep in mind that I don't condone the actions of the scammer. Scamming in a game with real money attached to its economy is theft. But enforcing rules about theft is far outside of the jurisdiction of an independent corporation.


Welcome to Corporatocracy USA
06/09/2013 11:21 AMPosted by familia
I'm sure you missed the small font somewhere that states, "WE, BLIZZARD, CAN DO WHATEVER THE HELL WE WANT." Okay, case closed.


Are you sure you are not confusing the Blizzard TOS with the latest JP Morgan Chase settlement with the Justice Department?
Pretty sure the reason the SL EULA was challenged successfully is because their promotions for said IP intimated you would own the ingame currency and whatnot you purchased, not Linden or whomever, and that using the EULA to effectively take it away from people was directly contrary to that, and a breach of contract or somesuch. /insert applicable legal terms, I don't really care if I used the right ones or not, though.

Since, afaik, not having reread the TOS or EULA recently enough to have it's entirety committed to memory, Blizzard specifically states you're not paying for absolute ownership of things via the rmah, or permanent access to their servers via one license, they're well within their rights to banhammer you or anybody else for doing bad things.

Especially bad things they tell you not to do, which scamming is one they do tell you is bad and that you shouldn't do it.
06/09/2013 11:54 AMPosted by hawkeye
I'm sure you missed the small font somewhere that states, "WE, BLIZZARD, CAN DO WHATEVER THE HELL WE WANT." Okay, case closed.


Are you sure you are not confusing the Blizzard TOS with the latest JP Morgan Chase settlement with the Justice Department?


i get that you think you're intelligent. I think WE ALL GET IT. You're a big bad first year law student. Awesome.
06/09/2013 11:35 AMPosted by RhymingDemon
Despite the case, perhaps i should point out that not all contracts are legally binding and enforceable.


No, but show me the part in this "contract" where it guarantees continued service? You purchased an online game. They control access to their servers. The only part where I could see a real issue, is if there is a leftover Bnet balance and they do not allow access, unless they can prove that every penny was gained through a way that clearly breached the EULA.


My first online game was Earth and Beyond by EA. It was a great game and had the best community and server - wide chat system ever - no trolls, no QQ, no insults - just a lot of good humored fun. There were only about 2,000 players /server so it seemed everyone knew everyone else.

Well not only did EA shut it down, they refused to sell it to other companies who were making substantial offers to buy it. You could not pay me enough to buy another EA game.
I call COMPLETE BULLCRAP!

"*Acquiring items or any other 'possessions' from another player through misinformation, confusion, or fraud (Scamming)"
(Caveat: Blizzard apparently did a "thorough investigation" but due to privacy concerns they cannot talk about the process.


Blizzard never sent this message. No one has ever been banned for "trade window scamming" but for some reason this ONE dude was... yeah... OP you made all of this up.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum