Curse

[email protected] · Jun 09, 2005, 12:57 AM // 00:57

Ever heard of Legends of Mir 3 or Droiyan online? Must be some serious games..I'll stick to GW for now.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BEIJING (Reuters) - A Shanghai online game player who stabbed a competitor to death for selling his cyber-sword has been given a suspended death sentence, which in effect means life imprisonment, state media said Wednesday. The case had created a dilemma in China where no law exists for the ownership of virtual weapons.

Qiu Chengwei, 41, stabbed competitor Zhu Caoyuan in the chest after he was told Zhu had sold his "dragon saber," used in the popular online game, "Legend of Mir 3," the China Daily said.

"Legend of Mir 3" features heroes and villains, sorcerers and warriors, many of whom wield enormous swords.

Qiu was sentenced to death "with a two-year reprieve," which in effect means life behind bars. That, in turn, could be reduced to 15 years if he behaves well, the newspaper said of the sentence which has angered the victim's family.

"My son was only 26 when he died," said Zhu Huimin, the dead man's father, who is planning to appeal. "He was sleeping when Qiu broke into his home. He was barely able to put on his pants before Qiu stabbed him.

"We want Qiu to die, and immediately."

Qiu and a friend jointly won their weapon last February, and lent it to Zhu who then sold it for 7,200 yuan (US$870), the newspaper said.

Qui went to the police to report the "theft" but was told the weapon was not real property protected by law.

"Zhu promised to hand over the cash but an angry Qui lost patience and attacked Zhu at his home, stabbing him in the left chest with great force and killing him," the court was told.

More and more online gamers were seeking justice through the courts over stolen weapons and credits, the newspaper said at the time the case went to trial.

"The armor and swords in games should be deemed as private property as players have to spend money and time for them," Wang Zongyu, an associate law professor at Beijing's Renmin University of China, was quoted as saying.

But other experts have called for caution. "The 'assets' of one player could mean nothing to others as they are by nature just data created by game providers," a lawyer for a Shanghai-based Internet game company was quoted as saying.

Madjik · Jun 09, 2005, 02:33 AM // 02:33

....I....am shocked. I truely am. over virtual items?? Im scared for the human race.

EDIT:: The human race also scares me from time to time, this is one rare case where both emotions are evoked.

airbox · Jun 09, 2005, 02:54 AM // 02:54

This is pretty old. Well, if it were only meaningless virtual data, it wouldn't have been such a dramatic incident following the "jacking". But like stated, that sword was worth a lot of $$. Don't be so shocked, relate to the situation, if some guy took a few thousands dollar from you, would you not be angry? Angry is one thing, killing, well, a crazy guy like that would have ended up killing someone anyways. Lol.

Principa Discordia · Jun 09, 2005, 07:17 AM // 07:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by airbox

This is pretty old. Well, if it were only meaningless virtual data, it wouldn't have been such a dramatic incident following the "jacking". But like stated, that sword was worth a lot of $$. Don't be so shocked, relate to the situation, if some guy took a few thousands dollar from you, would you not be angry? Angry is one thing, killing, well, a crazy guy like that would have ended up killing someone anyways. Lol.

Nah it's not old. The incident itself happened on March 30th, but he hasn't been convicted of the murder until now.

I'm glad he got life anyway. If he's unstable enough to kill someone over a game as crap as Legend Of Mir, imagine the massacre he'd cause over Guild Wars.

And if you're defending him and "understand where he's coming from", you're dumb as a pile of rocks.

Mimu · Jun 09, 2005, 10:45 AM // 10:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Principa Discordia

I'm glad he got life anyway. If he's unstable enough to kill someone over a game as crap as Legend Of Mir, imagine the massacre he'd cause over Guild Wars.

And if you're defending him and "understand where he's coming from", you're dumb as a pile of rocks.

I do "understand where he's coming from" but I am not protecting him, and I do think he may have over-reacted just a little.

It says in the original post that it was sold on ebay for $870..people have been murdered for less than that before, so saying that this was about the game is ridiculous, it is more likely that he was killed over the money.

Judas Hawksriff · Jun 09, 2005, 10:58 AM // 10:58

Bank accounts are virtual data - its not until you withdraw the money that its real. Paypal being a prime example of this, transactions happen all the time with no physical evidience,

The equivalent in this article is him selling the sword "data" for a monetry amount. I personally don't see any difference, between this and "real life".

People work jobs - put in time and effort so that the virtual data in their bank accounts goes up - wheres the difference there?

If bill gates closed his bank accounts, theres not enough money in the world to hand him, his virtual data exceeds that of any physical data!

EnDinG · Jun 09, 2005, 12:14 PM // 12:14

Could have sworn I heard about this last year or something... *Shrugs*

Spirit Firefly · Jun 09, 2005, 12:19 PM // 12:19

I saw somet bout an American guy committing suicide over something that happened on EQ2 and i saw in Korea 2 Koreans died, 1 was found dead at the keyboard in an internet cafe frozen with his hand on the mouse having believed to have been playing starcraft or somet for 72 hours straight and another one that went to the toilet and never came back and was found in there dead foaming from the mouth with a massive nose bleed. He had been playing CS for a similar amount of time, but never heard of actions on other people over gaming items but i don't doubt that there has been other unlinked incidencies!

Pevil Lihatuh · Jun 09, 2005, 01:47 PM // 13:47

being killed for money doesn't make it any less ridiculous. Killing anyone for anything other than actually threatening your life is ridiculous. Ah well... this is why all computer gamers need to go back to being geeks that never leave their parents basements

Harlas Kije · Jun 09, 2005, 01:51 PM // 13:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnDinG

Could have sworn I heard about this last year or something... *Shrugs*

There was an article about the high crime rate in Korea concerning Lineage I think.

Here is a link to the article.
http://www.time.com/time/interactive.../gangs_np.html

Dreamsmith · Jun 09, 2005, 03:18 PM // 15:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madjik

....I....am shocked. I truely am. over virtual items?? Im scared for the human race.

Would you be less scared if it wasn't a virtual item? Had it been a real piece of metal, would that have been more worth killing over?

Shamblemonkee · Jun 09, 2005, 03:24 PM // 15:24

If you squint and look at it sligtly skewed then people have been killed for information for longer than any of us have been alive.

Vengeance · Jun 09, 2005, 03:32 PM // 15:32

Wow ... this is a real can of worms isn't it? One of the questions here is when does something stop being virtual and become actual property? Certainly there is no excuse for a situation to result in death ... but at what threshold does something become tangible and protected by law?

It has been mentioned on this thread that something becomes property the minute that actual cash becomes involved. Lord knows that's what Bill Gates has been preaching about all of these years in his crusade against piracy. He wrote code which is being used and he is not seeing payments for that. So could the argument not be made then that if I give someone a virtual item in game and they begin to use it, that I should also expect some kind of remuneration?

It's a very compelling argument. After all if I have an idea and someone else uses it without paying me proper credit, you can persue legal action. An idea is no more tangible than an item in game. It is just words and concepts, nothing that you can put into your hand and physically grasp. Granted that's why the patent system was invented ... to protect an individual's rights to these virtual concepts.

So ... ignoring whether or not something is virtual or real ... If I've got a kickass dragon sword ... which I earned by spending hours in game ... is that sword truly mine or is it part of a global public forum? Let's say I'm the first person in the world to play Halo ... and I find that first Warthog ... do I have a right to go after other people and tell them to stay away from that same warthog in their game? No.

So ... should these items which exist in a public game be considered private property? No. Is it therefore wrong for people to sell these items? IMHO, yes. However, consider this ... you could probably go down to sunny tropical destinations and have people try to sell you authentic sand in a bottle. Most people would just look at the beach and wonder why you wouldn't do that yourself. Does it make the seller unethical? A little yeah ... after all he's preying on the naviety and sloth-like nature of people. Is the seller in a position to be attacked legally? I don't know ...

Bottom line ... that kid had some things going WAY wrong in his head ... clearly ... but I honestly don't think that virtual items can ever be truly viewed as a private possesion ... simply based on the fact that they exist within a public forum.

Now ... I have some nice canisters of Fresh Canadian Air here for sale ... anyone interested?

airbox · Jun 09, 2005, 03:34 PM // 15:34

How am i defending him, i'm just saying some guy stole from him and he overeacted, i mentioned it in my last sentence.

-Three months is pretty old for an event.

SOT · Jun 09, 2005, 04:16 PM // 16:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by airbox

This is pretty old. Well, if it were only meaningless virtual data, it wouldn't have been such a dramatic incident following the "jacking". But like stated, that sword was worth a lot of $$. Don't be so shocked, relate to the situation, if some guy took a few thousands dollar from you, would you not be angry? Angry is one thing, killing, well, a crazy guy like that would have ended up killing someone anyways. Lol.

Anyone would be angry. I however, would not stab him to death. Common sense please!

Dreamsmith · Jun 09, 2005, 11:28 PM // 23:28

Incidently, here's a BBC News link to the story, for those who prefer to get their news from the Beeb.

Interesting quote: "While China has no laws to deal with the theft of virtual property, South Korea has a section of its police force that investigates in-game crime."

"CSI: Lion's Arch" in 3... 2... 1...

[email protected] · Jun 10, 2005, 12:39 AM // 00:39

Online items themselves have no trace of anything physical, it's more of a prescence in a public forum.

When $850 dollars cash gets involved, theres a physical object. It's clear online items have value, thus they should be protected by law.

Media likes to use stories like this to bash video games. How often do you hear "..and in other news, another violent crime has been commited by a man who watched TV.."?

Yojinj · Jun 10, 2005, 04:09 AM // 04:09

I think its rather funny.
"You sold my pikachu? gonna murder yooo!"
^^

Sad sad world...

ManadartheHealer · Jun 10, 2005, 04:24 AM // 04:24

Things like this are rediculous.

Sting · Jun 10, 2005, 04:38 AM // 04:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Principa Discordia

I'm glad he got life anyway. If he's unstable enough to kill someone over a game as crap as Legend Of Mir, imagine the massacre he'd cause over Guild Wars.

And if you're defending him and "understand where he's coming from", you're dumb as a pile of rocks.

Ah one thing about GW there really isnt any items rare or not that would give someone enough of an advantage to kill someone over.