Curse

Loviatar · Apr 04, 2008, 12:25 AM // 00:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gli

This is another point you should be highlighting. In many countries, people have certain unassailable rights that a EULA can't do away with. Obviously, something like that must be the case in Taiwan, or this issue wouldn't exist in the first place.

ex post facto law ring a chime?

blame and sue the government of taiwan for passing a local law protecting its gold farming industry at the games expense.

Anet does something to get rid of the bots/gold spammers/gold farming networks and taiwan passes a law to protect the income of the gold farmers we were all complaining about.

i wonder about bribe money to that legislature who passed it

deadlynoob · Apr 04, 2008, 12:48 AM // 00:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loviatar

ex post facto law ring a chime?

blame and sue the government of taiwan for passing a local law protecting its gold farming industry at the games expense.

Anet does something to get rid of the bots/gold spammers/gold farming networks and taiwan passes a law to protect the income of the gold farmers we were all complaining about.

i wonder about bribe money to that legislature who passed it

and that law is...? if you have read through the law, you will notice that the company still has the right to ban people who bot and stuff. No, the gold farming industry is not protected. the 7 days ban period only refer to as the MAXIMUM banning period if you are going to ban time-based. By violating the condition of section 19, usage of bots, virus, glitch, and affecting the fairness of the game could result to a perma ban (stop providing service)

Loviatar · Apr 04, 2008, 01:04 AM // 01:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by deadlynoob

and that law is...? if you have read through the law, you will notice that the company still has the right to ban people who bot and stuff. No, the gold farming industry is not protected. the 7 days ban period only refer to as the MAXIMUM banning period if you are going to ban time-based. By violating the condition of section 19, usage of bots, virus, glitch, and affecting the fairness of the game could result to a perma ban (stop providing service)

and NCsofts legal department found things you missed coming to the ANET decision and announcement here

Quote:

New government regulations in Taiwan, which take effect April 1, restrict game companies in that region from effectively suspending or banning accounts for participating in professional farming or real-money trading. Guild Wars is highly impacted by local regulations such as this, because Guild Wars operates in a seamless, connected manner between all territories. We cannot sustain a seamless connection when we are unable to effectively police the game in one territory, because professional farmers in that territory could severely damage the game’s economy throughout the world. Therefore, we are forced to disconnect Taiwanese service from the rest of the game world as of April 1.

ShoGunTheOne · Apr 04, 2008, 02:48 AM // 02:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by guolisong

線上遊戲定型化契約範本

If this is the one you are referring to (經濟部95年2月17日經授工字第09500511980號公告), It was from 1995,Feb 17th. So it isn't a new law, are you guys missing out on the new law then?

民国９５年＝２００６ Taiwan has their own calendar. so the correct date would be 2006, Feb, 17th, but it's still not brand new

ShoGunTheOne · Apr 04, 2008, 02:56 AM // 02:56

no idea, maybe it wasn't excuted untill the change of president because they had certain concerns or obsticles w/e, can you send me that doc file? i can't seem to find it any more

btw, i'm not living in china atm, talking about that in china would mean death sentence -_-b living in South Africa now

ShoGunTheOne · Apr 04, 2008, 03:12 AM // 03:12

>_> do i smell stereotyping.....?
btw, South Africa is like, THE richest country in whole of africa.... and no, there isn't a war going on here >_>
go learn your history about this country.....

不管怎样, Google了一下，发现了94年（２００５年）的草案，可以的话你看一下，我去睡觉了……凌晨5:12… …

Pinghan · Apr 04, 2008, 05:33 AM // 05:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by guolisong

線上遊戲定型化契約範本

If this is the one you are referring to (經濟部95年2月17日經授工字第09500511980號公告), It was from 1995,Feb 17th. So it isn't a new law, are you guys missing out on the new law then?

They are same law

Just change some articles of the old law , not making a new law to work

old article didnt say game company only can ban ppl for 7 days maxinum...
new article did

This law is more like an agreement between player and game company

In fact, those bot/farmer things could be resolved by new article

Bcos , there is an article says
If player using bot or 3rd party programs catched by game company
Game company can cancel the agreement and delete player's account

I think the same article may working to ban RMT ...
It also says , if player making any behavior cause unfair situations happen
Game company can cancel the agreement and delete player's account too

RMT case:
Seller sell large amount golds for real money
no matter these gold are clean or making by bot
These sellers did DAMAGE the game economy
This is UNFAIR for all ppl playing guild Wars

Dr Strangelove · Apr 04, 2008, 05:40 AM // 05:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gli

From what I've been reading on this thread, (and mind you, that's all the info I got) it would seem the 7 day refund thing that was mentioned somewhere might be the dealbreaker for ANet.

Imagine this: Buy an account, bot your ass off for 6.5 days or until ban, whichever happens first, then get a refund. Rinse and repeat.

Unfortunately, that's also the part that actually is justifiable. EULAs are inherently designed to screw customers over. If you buy a piece of software and click the "no" button on the EULA for whatever reason, it's not going to work, and you're not going to get your money back. With every other form of legal agreement in the world, you are allowed to review the terms before you put down money.

While games are usually pretty harmless about it, this can really be an issue for utility programs with heavy DRM restrictions, like iTunes or movie editing software. Taiwan is correct that EULAs are a broken form of legal agreement, they've just chosen a pants-on-head retarded way of fixing them.

Pinghan · Apr 04, 2008, 06:14 AM // 06:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by guolisong

Deadlynoob said that 7 days ban is the max for temporary ban, which doesn't affect the RMT policy. I don't see why that change would be the reason for cutting off the international access so there must be something else.

the 7 days ban is in article 16 <--- deal with like spamming in game or dirty word fighting stuffs ...

I think those BOT and RMT stuffs should deal with article 19
article 19 says what the timing that game campany can cancel the agreement

Player using bot and catched by ANET.
Player doing any behavior will cause unfair situations happen in game.
Player using game bugs to getting items or something bad.

This is not permanet ban , it talking about game company can delete player account if these situation happen ...

ShoGunTheOne · Apr 04, 2008, 09:04 AM // 09:04

經濟部工業局線上遊戲定型化契約範本草案
http://law.kingnet.com.tw/law_contex...cno=1125910668

Njaiguni Blaze · Apr 04, 2008, 01:40 PM // 13:40

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Gaile..._31_March_2008

Basically, some law in Taiwan prevents NCSoft from banning bots/gold sellers. That's why they're cutting communication. They will still be able to participate in international PvP and can still stay in their international guilds/alliances.

Pinghan · Apr 04, 2008, 03:10 PM // 15:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by guolisong

二、以利用外掛程式、病毒程式、遊戲程式漏洞或其他"違反公平合理"之方式進行遊戲。

That says Anet has the ability to ban accounts anytime they want if they caught people botting etc. I don't see how that would have affected their new RMT policy.

Gold seller will DAMAGE the game economy for sure

RMT case:
Seller sell large amount golds for real money
no matter these gold are clean or making by bot (if the player is bot, no matter he sell gold or not ,ANET can delete his account anytime)
These sellers did DAMAGE the game economy
This is UNFAIR for all ppl playing guild Wars ...

Personal behaviors making damgae to the game economy , game conomy effects all players around the world
This is unfair for sure.

Pinghan · Apr 04, 2008, 04:28 PM // 16:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by guolisong

My point is that law banning acc. or delete acc had always been there prior to this isolation district thing happened so what's the new law they are speaking of that's limiting their RMT policy to effectively ban accounts.

In fact ... I think we shold not call it as a law

It just an agreement made by goverment
which will be use between player and game company (before player starting play the game,he must press the AGREE button)

In that agreement
article 16 says game company cant ban player permanent (maxiunem period is 7 days)

but in article 19
it says game company can cancel the agreement with player
(means they can delete the player's account not just ban)

If the player using bot or bugs in game.
Or the player do some behavior in game will cause unfair situation happen.
(sell golds will damage game economy for sure, and this is a unfair situation for all llegal players)

I think ANET they just focus on article 16 (this article is protecting players)
But they forget article 19 , it give more power to game company to deal with player who against game rules

Loviatar · Apr 04, 2008, 04:31 PM // 16:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by guolisong

My point is that law banning acc. or delete acc had always been there prior to this isolation district thing happened so what's the new law they are speaking of that's limiting their RMT policy to effectively ban accounts.

hi

several points

1. ANET is completely owned/bouhjt/purchased by NCsoft

2. NCsoft is a local asisn compant of long standing in the asian online games market with a very large and competent legal staff who know the laws and more importantly what the effective result of a local ordanance will cause.

3. NCsofts LEGAL STAFF notified higher ups in NCsoft what the practical/ effective result of those regulations would have on ANETS ability to act effectively against taiwans gold farming INDUSTRY/RMT INDUSTRY

4. the NCsoft asian region legal staff reported the regulations would hamstring any effective means against that industry resulting in a gold/rmt industry safe haven.

5. NCsoft made a business decision based on the expert NCsoft legal staff not ANETS limited western knowledge of asian law/regulations

6. NCsoft told ANET to cut every connection which these gold selling/RMT INDUSTRY effected.

7. NCsoft owns Anet and Anet did exactly what their boss told them to do.

again i will repeat the announcement.

Quote:

new government regulations in Taiwan, which take effect April 1, restrict game companies in that region from effectively suspending or banning accounts for participating in professional farming or real-money trading.

Guild Wars is highly impacted by local regulations such as this, because Guild Wars operates in a seamless, connected manner between all territories. We cannot sustain a seamless connection when we are unable to effectively police the game in one territory, because professional farmers in that territory could severely damage the game’s economy throughout the world. Therefore, we are forced to disconnect Taiwanese service from the rest of the game world as of April 1.

if it had no effect NCsofts legal department would have stated so and no change would have occurred.

obviously their legal staff found things that were not posted here or were nor noticed as riders in other parts that effect the intent of the regulations.

i will trust the NCsoft legal staff over so called forum lawers

lietzaum · Apr 04, 2008, 04:37 PM // 16:37

i would figure that they A-net would fight for these areas to remain but if they didn't i trust there judgement if it is from botting i think there could be a different solution you cut real player and that is sad

taiwf · Apr 04, 2008, 09:39 PM // 21:39

cut real player just plain wrong!

kingleo · Apr 04, 2008, 10:41 PM // 22:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShoGunTheOne

經濟部工業局線上遊戲定型化契約範本草案
http://law.kingnet.com.tw/law_contex...cno=1125910668

這個資料在那個時候是列為草案(This report was an outline at that moment)
文中有提到 (here it said)

（本草案目前正於行政院消保會審議中） (this report canvassed by cpc[Consumer Protection Commission])

草案是不具效力的.
(the report is not availably as a law)

必須要消保會審議通過之後,才具有參考價值,所以後來這份資料是由消保會的部門網站提供下載(因為已經審議通過了).
it will be referable after pass the canvassed of cpc, so you can download it at cpc's website(because it already passed the canvassing)

以台灣的法律來說,由於法條的制定通過往往需要冗長的時間,所以在遇到有爭議糾紛而需要訴諸法律的時候,很多行政命令都會升格被拿來當作法條用,也因此其實台灣很多行政命令是跟法律有所牴觸的,端看法官怎麼去認定 ,以及舉告者與被告者雙方蒐集的證據多寡來判定結果.
it take a long time making a law in taiwan, so sometime an administrative decree will be used as a law, but some decree are not completed, so it may against the law, but judiciary has the final right to make the decision which one is useful depends on who get the most advantageous roof.

簡而言之,台灣的法律是保護懂法律的人,而不是受害人.律師們其實也是針對法律內文來玩文字遊戲,看誰手段高明,誰的贏面就比較大.
simply to tell this... the law protect who know what is the law, not the sufferer in Taiwan.
that's why ppl need lawyer.

sorry my english is not so good.

Turbobusa · Apr 04, 2008, 11:59 PM // 23:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by kingleo

這個資料在那個時候是列為草案
文中有提到

（本草案目前正於行政院消保會審議中）

草案是不具效力的.
必須要消保會審議通過之後,才具有參考價值,所以後來這份資料是由消保會的部門網站提供下載(因為已經審議通過了).
以台灣的法律來說,由於法條的制定通過往往需要冗長的時間,所以在遇到有爭議糾紛而需要訴諸法律的時候,很多行政命令都會升格被拿來當作法條用,也因此其實台灣很多行政命令是跟法律有所牴觸的,端看法官怎麼去認定 ,以及舉告者與被告者雙方蒐集的證據多寡來判定結果.
簡而言之,台灣的法律是保護懂法律的人,而不是受害人.律師們其實也是針對法律內文來玩文字遊戲,看誰手段高明,誰的贏面就比較大.

QFT!
whatever you said!

Articubone · Apr 05, 2008, 12:12 AM // 00:12

Guys, if you're going to post in another language, could you please add a translation of it at the bottom? I know it'll take a bit of extra effort, but this is primarily an English-speaking forum and, since we're all trying to work out what's going on, if you're posting something important we don't want to miss it!

kenny79321 · Apr 05, 2008, 01:31 AM // 01:31

Ya,I think it's ungracious to post Chinese here, though I am a Taiwanese.