04-04-2005, 11:03 PM
Darian,Apr 3 2005, 04:06 AM Wrote:That was pretty much what I was getting at with this. The moment any jurisdiction ever hears a property theft case between two parties -- one of them not being the game provider -- and issues a ruling which in any way favors the "victim" or punishes the thief... the jig is up, as from that point forward no game will be able to claim that in-game property belongs to them.Disagree. They will still be able to claim that right - they will simply have to close the definition so it circumvents the initial ruling. Remember, the only way this can go to court is civil, not criminal. The rulings made continue to be civil. Any ruling, thus, would only apply as "end-user" vs. "end-user" and proving perponderance of evidence in such a case would unlikely be seen to have any impact on "end-user" vs. "owner".
[right][snapback]72838[/snapback][/right]
Plus, if Blizz chooses to make a move, it's EULA lets it play in both the civil and criminal arenas - not that it's ever likely to do so. Most corporations do NOT want to bring their EULA to court. These things are on shakey ground, legally. To date, no one has brought either MS's EULA or the GNU copyleft to court (that I know of). Show me a reasonable challenge to MS's EULA and I'll show you a case that will be settled out of court.