Well that sentences were more of an summary. The flaw is that you want the user to have all the rights he/she may have. But any right one person has limits on the same time the rights of another person. And since Blizzards consists of person you limit the rights of them. But there is no reason why one side should enjoy all possible rights and the other be completely limited to what the law may garantue them as a minimum. Instead, we get licenses and terms of use
[quote]Even the court granted that, with no law restricting the programs you can run on your computer, there was nothing intrinscally illegal about Glider. We don't require laws to make action legal. Laws are limitations on what you can do, not permission - even 'rights' like the Bill of rights are limitations on what the government can do - 'i.e.. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or restricting the free exercise thereof . . .' is not something that magically
[quote]You can argue that the law is less than perfectly clear, you cannot argue that you have no right to cheat your own game.[/quote] I argue that the law does not give you the right to cheat in a game, thus it is legal to ban cheats from a game, aka bots. [quote]That does not say anything about playing a game. That you're not really playing WOW when you run a bot is irrelevant. If I want to turn mech commander into a program that spits out he
Installing issues usually ouccur only once per user. Also you dont download all the patches more than a few times. So if the new user has installing issues and downloads all the patches, SD has to pay for additional support. Also you have another one downloading and using impusle whitout paying aynthing. Not to mention that nothing stops you from keeping a fully patched copy of the game somewhere. Reselling of software simp
Sorry for the late answer. I had my head elsewhere ;) Thats exactly what i found. But there there is not a word about inofficial extensions and cheats. And thats what i was talking about. And i do not see how the paragraphs you posted have would garantee you the right to cheat in a computer game, ect.. You obviously misunderstood my post. To clarify: Since bots are neither _essential_ for the utilization of WoW(you dont eve
[quote]In the new update (the latest version of the postbox, in particular), the default behavior of the enter key seems now to insert a paragraph tag, rather than a line break. You can still do a line break via shift-enter, though.[/quote] And i already thought it was because i updated to firefox 3.
I got to agree that it is not fleshed out enough to be treatened as something like law. But it can serve to deliver some guidelines for the gaming industry. The unavailbility of broadband connections in some regions is more of a technology and development of infrastructure problem. Also, gamers are expecting the industry to always make better and larger games. You cannot at the same time expect them to make those games work with 56k modems.
[quote]The law does not give you the right to cheat in a game. (if you dont think that botting is cheating you should get a dose of morale values yourself instead of accusing other of having none) The law does not give you the right to use any _inofficial_ "extensions" to a program. So i do not see how you could get the right the use a bot from the law. Yeah, it actually does - IF you have "owner of a copy" protection under section 117. Which expla
[quote] Even if you are guaranteed certain rights under the law? Lets make this clear - do you believe anyone that owns any intellectual property has the right to deprive you of the rights to use that property that were granted under the law?[/quote] [quote] Well, yes there is something forcing them to give me some. The law. The law that this case says anyone with an EULA can ignore if they've written it properly.[/quote] The
[quote]Given a simple acknowledgement of the EULA before downloading the software? Well, I would consider it insufficient, but I'm sure some courts would support it. Given a proper version of going over the EULA by paragraphs like you have to do with a lease or a cell contract? Even I would consider that sufficient, and it's not like the web couldn't do it.[/quote] In case of WoW, you dont sign the eula when downloading the client. You do it when buying an account. All bills the player
[quote]I think you're assuming a lot more ambiguity in contract law than is actually there -[/quote] Maybe, but something just came up in my mind: You dont need to buy the retail WoW to play it. You can download the entire Client for free from the WoW Homepage. And even buy a license there(completely seperated from the download). No physical cd is required. Now do you want to base this case on the users who a) buyed the retail WoW and used the cd to i
[quote]Here's the thing - if you accept 4), then 5) follows inexorably if the buyer is a consumer. The CD is the original item being sold[/quote] Not necessarily. You are buying a game, yes, but it is only an assumption that you are buying the cd inside the box. If there is a fair warning that you purchase a license and the cd is simply provided for you to get the a copy of the software, your assumption is useless. Now you can argue what a "fair warning" is. But that decision has to
[quote]The Owners of Program B are now liable for contributory infringement because the use of their program rescinded the license.[/quote] Since its the sole purpose of program B, yes they are liable. Maybe that does not make the program immediatly illegal, but the maker of it is still responsible for the damages done. Because he made it to do damages. [quote]Again, the problem is that Blizzard is stating that you don't actually own the physical CD.[/quote] Exactl
[quote]Because the simple existence of them is enough to brainwash most people into believing their surroundings are necessary. This isn't even a particularly impressive example of sheeple, a particularly dumb one perhaps, but various groups of people have shafted themselves far worse for far less reason on countless occasions simply because they thought the status quo was necessary.[/quote] I am just not as paranoid to believe that companies act out of pure evilness. Its either pro
[quote]Which in turn means that, regardless of the legality of any other program created, there is no legal way of not applying exactly this logic to *whatever program Company X doesn't like*. Even, arguably, any action taken by their customer that they don't like - after all, the customer *accepted* the EULA, not their fault they weren't aware that by donating to the democratic or republican party they were violating the EULA.r[/quote] Now there is a differnce between banning a whole c
[quote]Ahah. Ahaha. I can't stop laughing... It's just so funny... What the hell do you think an expansion is? An expansion modifies the pre-existing game. That we give two identical things two different names because they come in different contextual environments does not change reality. If you can expand on a game without violating copyright, and the scenario I gave DOES NOT VIOLATE COPYRIGHT, it's legal. It's your right to do so, the EULA, by banning such things, VIOLATES YOUR RIGHTS. Yeah, I
[quote]Glider is a perfectly legal program which in no way in and of itself infringes upon the intellectual property of Blizzard.[/quote] I dont agree with this. "I feel that's important enough to bear repeating." I dont agree with this. I dont agree with this. I dont agree with this. I dont agree with this. I dont agree with this. I dont agree with this. I dont agree with this. I dont agree with this.
[quote]If the police arrest two people fighting on the street, and the police pull the 400 pound 6'5" boxer off of the 5'10 170 pound teenager, do you consider this an evidence of 'bias' against large people? If the that gets shot with a BB gun shoots back with a machine gun, is the attempted murder charge a result of 'bias' against gun owners? My god Willy's right - there is a built in bias towards the powerful not being allowed to overreact.[/quote] Weapons dont kill
[quote]Most EULA's are written to fuck competitors, not consumers. Don't you even realize that?[/quote] psychoak, you need to rethink what reverse engeneering means. It allows you to view the source code (or at least something similar to it) and copy it to use in your programs. Which does violate copyright law. But since you cant track that, they dont allow you do reverse engeneer at all. ALSO, if you are making a competionor product, a program with a similar use, it do
The Topic "Game Cheats are Illegal" is a bit misleading. Blizzard did not sue the cheaters (they simply get banned when caught for a good reason) but the one who made a bot program and sold it (without money to get they would not sue anyone). Blizzards argument: It circumiats Warden. (And so violating the "Digital Millennium Copyright Act") The Judge's argument: The program makes illegal copies of WoW, since they are not needed to run WoW alone. This has rather little
[quote]I find this to be such an odd statement - you say you either will not purchase the game or you'll abide by their rules . . . when the whole point of this argument is that you don't know their rules when you purchase their software?[/quote] As it has been repeadtily said, the link to the WoW eula is shown on the box so you can read them before you purchase. Also any mmorpg is very likely to have a kind of HP where you can create your account and read any agrrement you need to
I cannot agree with any theory/philsophy that does not have any evidnece beyond ones own experience and a feeling that i would be right. Nor does any example proofs that something is true in the way you are trying to do. And last but not least: if you believe in something, why cant you do it silently?
