The Auction House III: Evil is Back

[Frag]

No, try reading the disclaimer and EULA section on hardcore, they're not liable for jack.

What Foxbat said. EULAs don't mean jack until they're proven in a court of law, and even then that varies from state to state (California, for example, has much more inalienable consumer protection rights than most other states). I'm no lawyer, but I guarantee you having a RMAH for HC characters would get them into trouble. It doesn't always matter if a lawsuit has merit or not; they still have to challenge it, and it's bad publicity.

I'm glad to hear that you're not a lawyer, but you can guarantee things will legally turn out in your favor. The EULA stands until it's proven otherwise as you've stated, and I think it's foolish to assume Blizzard's legal team didn't vet it.

If they left the skill runes in, it would be a pretty valid argument for monetization. Also, the stated timeframe of the change is incorrect and seems somewhat telling.

I'm sorry, were you in the beta when they made the changes? No? They took runes out as items around mid- to late-February. The Beta ended beginning of May. That's just over 2 months time. So, explain to me again how the "stated timeframe of the change is incorrect?" And "seems somewhat telling?" Of what? Do some research before you start to question someone, and when you do at least make your arguments understandable.

Why is my beta status relevant?

They announced the change to skill runes on April 19th, the beta ended on May 1st, that's two and a half months. It seems somewhat telling that you ignore the development and iteration time needed to produce such a change, because the manner presented made it seem like a last minute change.

Your point is what, exactly?

People who jump to conclusions rarely alight on them.