Curse

Fril Estelin · Jan 29, 2007, 10:50 AM // 10:50

Hi,

I really hope that this will make the life of those who want to make profit out of GW much harder, as ebay was such a convenience to them. They are like parasites trying to take some share in the profit that Anet is doing, trying to extend the virtual world into the real one to their very own benefit.

I hope this will not go to the next level, as for WoW where the army of lawyers jumped in, even automating their work! This is real madness and a true corruption of the GW spirit.

Burst Cancel · Jan 29, 2007, 04:35 PM // 16:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omega X

That is why Ebay's policy states that you cannot sell virtual items there unless the owner of that intellectual property allows it. Which usually means most games with in-game currency/items. I won't pretend to know the MTGO situation but is sounds similar. It all depends on how Wizard's agreements are worded.

It is unclear to me what eBay's policy actually states. A quick look at eBay's list of "Prohibited and Restricted Items" (url here: http://pages.ebay.com/help/policies/items-ov.html ) doesn't give me an obvious category for virtual item sales. The initial inclination is to put virtual sales under "Digitally Delivered Goods", but that's not technically accurate, because no goods are actually delivered - again, the crux of the entire virtual item issue. The products that traditionally fall into this category are things like eBooks, downloadable software, etc. where actual transfer of ownership takes place. A virtual item sale is *not* an analogous situation for reasons I have already stated in previous posts.

The most accurate category actually appears to be "Prohibited Services", but eBay's description for exactly what constitutes a prohibited service excludes virtual items: "Sellers are not permitted to offer or solicit services on the eBay site that are illegal, sexual in nature or that violate eBay’s User Agreement". Virtual items are not illegal, sexual in nature (well, in general. you could argue that selling an account with scantily-clad characters is sexual in nature, but I doubt anybody finds a GW platinum piece sexy), and do not explicitly violate the User Agreement.

What's more interesting about this list, however, is that many of the prohibited items are common listings on eBay, including pornographic materials, modchips, counterfeit software, etc. They are so common, in fact, that I wasn't even sure that those items were explicitly prohibited on eBay until reading the list.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omega X

And it probably will stay that way until a new law comes along to change it. Which is probably only a matter of time.

The decision that needs to be made is whether EULAs can be considered legally-binding documents. Frankly, I would prefer that they were not, so that people can continue clicking "I Accept" and "Next" without worrying that they are signing over their house or their firstborn to a software company, but there are pros and cons on both sides.

Malice Black · Jan 29, 2007, 05:46 PM // 17:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omega X

Anything against them would be better than nothing at all.

Not really, it just proves how weak game companies are when it comes to these matters. Granted Ebay caved in but after how many years?? and I feel it was because of the bad press they were getting from certain corners and not the game companies whispering in their ear pleading with them to stop.

Fril Estelin · Jan 29, 2007, 06:10 PM // 18:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Admins Bane

Not really, it just proves how weak game companies are when it comes to these matters. Granted Ebay caved in but after how many years?? and I feel it was because of the bad press they were getting from certain corners and not the game companies whispering in their ear pleading with them to stop.

Well, in the end it's about an industry against another one, and it's not always in A's interest to satisfy B's interests. It's a shame because overall this kind of thing does harm a lot of businesses, directly or indirectly, and in the short or long run. Not to mention the users that are usually the last ones to be consulted on these matters, left to "fight" between those who consume and those who offer.

But I think that most companies misunderstood the benefit of the virtual, thinking that bringing it back to the real world to make money would work easily as most people do not care so much about virtual things. Well, they don't, as long as they stay virtual! (it's a bit like spam, it makes 70% of the email traffic but no one complains as long as they don't get too much ...)

dwc89 · Jan 29, 2007, 06:32 PM // 18:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by lishi

people instead using ebay will just need click on some random banner in any MMORPG site to buy gold

actually if you look to the left side of Guildwiki's page you will see "ads" by google - gold sellers, power leveling, etc.

I love wiki, but that is a bit much.

sindex · Jan 29, 2007, 10:50 PM // 22:50

All I have to say is, "so will begin the E-bay black market v1.0, to the end of E-bay's ethics stance." Also noted is the idea of what will happen with those Goggle ads carry a significant amount of Spy-Ware; and will cause future problems with Goggle, unfortunately.

Paperfly · Jan 30, 2007, 09:45 AM // 09:45

Quote:

The problem with any decision to place legal obligations on the game companies towards their customers is the way in which online games operate. Game companies need to retain full control of the content on their servers in order to properly administer the game service. If players actually had any form of ownership over game content, routine things like shutting down servers for maintenance, or modifications of characters/items, would be legally challengeable, and that's an unacceptable situation for game companies. If Anet shuts down the servers tomorrow, there's not a damn thing any of us can do about it. We all play the game with the understanding that the game content is not under our control.

Well, obviously. That's why I said nobody's too eager to test this in court, as a single questionable decision could undermine every MMO's business model and send them all instantly offline in legal self-defense. In practice, however, this means that online gaming will follow the de facto terms set by the corporations that produce online content, which historically hasn't exactly led to the protection of the consumer.

...Having said all that, I'm pretty sure that if ANet had closed down all the servers and run off with the cash a couple of days after the release of Nightfall (say) they'd've been hit with a pretty meritorious class action suit, EULA or no EULA.

(again, IANAL&etc)

Oh, and regarding EBay's policies - they're determined entirely by what they can get away with + public perception. There's no internal consistency whatsoever - they'll just pull down whatever gets complained about. For instance, you can't sell freeloader discs that allow you to play (legit) games on consoles from other regions, but you can put up thousands of pirated Game Boy Advance cartridges without any fear of reprisal. The former is legal, the latter illegal; the former got complained about by corporate interests, the latter hasn't been.

b0n3 · Jan 30, 2007, 10:14 AM // 10:14

Correct me if im wrong but GWguru once had a banner/advertisement to another site on its homepage about buying gold?

RTSFirebat · Jan 30, 2007, 10:24 AM // 10:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by dwc89

actually if you look to the left side of Guildwiki's page you will see "ads" by google - gold sellers, power leveling, etc.

I love wiki, but that is a bit much.

That isn't GuildWiki fault, that is Google ads just putting them on there.

And GuildWiki needs money from those ads to keep online.

Shmanka · Jan 30, 2007, 02:51 PM // 14:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Admins Bane

Not really, it just proves how weak game companies are when it comes to these matters. Granted Ebay caved in but after how many years?? and I feel it was because of the bad press they were getting from certain corners and not the game companies whispering in their ear pleading with them to stop.

I more or less agree, and let's be honest with each other. Ebay is a business you are in business to do one thing, make money. I truly do not see how this action promotes ebay business whatsoever. Yet I am somewhat thankful, maybe people will stop accusing me of Ebaying my FoW armor and realize I ran Sanctum Cay + Desert missions for hours on end.

Tyrnne · Jan 30, 2007, 03:10 PM // 15:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shmanka

maybe people will stop accusing me of Ebaying my FoW armor and realize I ran Sanctum Cay + Desert missions for hours on end.

Isn't all armor customized? Or are people buying whole accounts to get lvl 20 chars + armor?

Malice Black · Jan 30, 2007, 04:15 PM // 16:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrnne

Isn't all armor customized? Or are people buying whole accounts to get lvl 20 chars + armor?

He/she meant they were accused of buying the gold to pay for the armor. You can buy whole accounts with FoW armor or ranked PvP chars.

Shmanka · Jan 30, 2007, 06:41 PM // 18:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Admins Bane

He/she meant they were accused of buying the gold to pay for the armor. You can buy whole accounts with FoW armor or ranked PvP chars.

Is the display pic that awkward? I'm a guy.

... for real...
... maybe I should change that picture...
... nah Chun Li is amazing

Former Ruling · Jan 30, 2007, 06:56 PM // 18:56

Too bad the bulk of gold bought in games doesn't go through Ebay at all...But through indepenent sellers and communities.

MagicWarrior · Jan 30, 2007, 07:26 PM // 19:26

I can see why banning the sale of GW items is a good thing... but "all virtual items" in general? There are a lot of other games out there where people are actually spending money for these "virtual items".

For instance... in GW you can farm gold/items/etc. and sell them for money. Didn't cost you anything except for time and effort.

Other games (Magic Online comes to mind) actually has people using real money to buy virtual items (packs of virtual magic cards). eBay should really allow these items to continue listing.

Omega X · Jan 30, 2007, 08:05 PM // 20:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by sindex

Also noted is the idea of what will happen with those Goggle ads carry a significant amount of Spy-Ware; and will cause future problems with Goggle, unfortunately.

I highly doubt that.

Google has a lot of control over its ads business. And anyone can report an ad for distributing spyware.

Matter of fact, the Guildwiki people could filter out those gold ads if they really wanted to.

manitoba1073 · Jan 30, 2007, 08:07 PM // 20:07

Yeap what a shame people may actually have to do something(put effort) in game to get the goods. Or we'll see people start whining for Anet to sell gold in the online-store so they dont have to put any effort in the game.

dansamy · Feb 06, 2007, 05:03 PM // 17:03

Well where am I gonna get an Eth BotD now?

Nice move, eBay. Btw, eBay still gets paid for the listings that you list and they close.

GUE Tech · Feb 06, 2007, 05:09 PM // 17:09

Oh yes, this will exponentially change the game for everyone. Although somewhat noteworthy, big deal.

Artkin · Feb 06, 2007, 05:50 PM // 17:50

The WHOLE reason AND ONLY reason ebay banned virtual items was the gold sellers from mainly China. I had first hand knowledge and knew about the upcoming ban on items back in October. Ebays problem with the market was...the gold sellers were listing say 1 mil gold at 8 cents, but actually selling it for say $50. Doing this allowed them to skirt ebays final value fees. So back in October the lead programmer from ebay contacted me and said that they DID NOT have a problem with legit sellers of virtual items, but that since the gold sellers continued to skirt the rules they decided to block the entire market.

So it sucks that the actions of a few ruined the marketplace for all. Ebay was a good way to sell say a godly sword at a fair market price. Since GWs doesn't have an auction house.