Please don't mistake this for another whine-fest thread about how the RHAM is unfair or unbalancing, and I'm not suggesting people start a lawsuit. I was talking with a friend last night about the legality of the RMAH, and we were wondering about 2 possible scenarios in which Blizzard may be open to legal ramifications.
1) People buying items on the Hardcore RMAH, dying to server lag, and losing hundreds, possibly thousands of dollars that was out of their control. I realize that when you create a Hardcore character you agree that you cannot have the character restored due to latency, but when Blizzard's servers go down or severely lag, I have to think that people could have legitimate legal recourse.
If I have an Etrade or Scottrade account and I go to place a buy/sell, their servers work and I (ideally) make money. If I bought stock, then it disappeared a few days later due to "server issues", you can bet your ass that company is on the line for the investments that I lost. If the Blizzard servers are performing poorly and kill my character, I have to think they could be subject to legal action. Again, I know these are different scenarios, but it makes sense that if Blizzard is charging fees for selling items that they should be on the hook for some expected levels of service.
From the EULA which was in all caps, which I find ironic because Battle.net forum mods seem to take great offense to threads or posts in all caps:
"BLIZZARD IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF YOUR USE OF THE SERVICE OR YOUR INABILITY TO USE THE SERVICE. IN NO CASE SHALL BLIZZARD BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, PUNITIVE OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING FROM YOUR USE OF THE SERVICE, THE BATTLE.NET BALANCE SERVICE, ANY GAME OR ANY GAME CLIENT. IN NO CASE SHALL THE LIABILITY OF BLIZZARD EXCEED THE AMOUNT THAT YOU PAID TO US DURING THE SIX (6) MONTHS PRIOR TO THE TIME YOUR CAUSE OF ACTION AROSE"
Sure, people agree to this, but I really think there's an attorney out there somewhere who can get around this. I'm not an attorney/paralegal/whatever, but the line where it says "DAMAGES ARISING FROM YOUR USE OF THE SERVICE" makes me think they could be open. The problem arises when we CANNOT use the service as intended, thus losing a character.
2) People spending money to deck out a toon, then Blizzard nerfs something like IAS. This one is a bit weaker, but it makes more sense if you think about it. Say I spend $500 to gear up my character with 5000 of stat A. Next month Blizzard decides that stay A is too strong, and it needs to be nerfed. After the nerf, stat B is much more appealing. I then have to go back to the RMAH and buy that gear because I'm no longer as strong as I was before.
Don't mistake this for an expansion reset, because that's not what this is. Blizzard is sanctioning the purchasing of items in game. In the past, if people wanted to buy things with RL money they would have to go to a 3rd party website, and if in-game things were changed, that's too bad. Now, with Blizzard taking a cut of all RMAH sales, they can possibly manipulate the market creating sales by lowering/increasing the usefulness of certain stats.
I'm not trying to start a flame-war or a petition to sue or anything, I just want to get other's opinions on legality of the RMAH. Thanks!
It's alllllll in the EULA and TOS. Games have items for sale for years. The only difference with D3 is there's an auction house, but under that people are still paying for virtual items.
Please don't mistake this for another whine-fest thread about how the RHAM is unfair or unbalancing, and I'm not suggesting people start a lawsuit. I was talking with a friend last night about the legality of the RMAH, and we were wondering about 2 possible scenarios in which Blizzard may be open to legal ramifications.
1) People buying items on the Hardcore RMAH, dying to server lag, and losing hundreds, possibly thousands of dollars that was out of their control. I realize that when you create a Hardcore character you agree that you cannot have the character restored due to latency, but when Blizzard's servers go down or severely lag, I have to think that people could have legitimate legal recourse.
If I have an Etrade or Scottrade account and I go to place a buy/sell, their servers work and I (ideally) make money. If I bought stock, then it disappeared a few days later due to "server issues", you can bet your ass that company is on the line for the investments that I lost. If the Blizzard servers are performing poorly and kill my character, I have to think they could be subject to legal action. Again, I know these are different scenarios, but it makes sense that if Blizzard is charging fees for selling items that they should be on the hook for some expected levels of service.
From the EULA which was in all caps, which I find ironic because Battle.net forum mods seem to take great offense to threads or posts in all caps:
"BLIZZARD IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF YOUR USE OF THE SERVICE OR YOUR INABILITY TO USE THE SERVICE. IN NO CASE SHALL BLIZZARD BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, PUNITIVE OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING FROM YOUR USE OF THE SERVICE, THE BATTLE.NET BALANCE SERVICE, ANY GAME OR ANY GAME CLIENT. IN NO CASE SHALL THE LIABILITY OF BLIZZARD EXCEED THE AMOUNT THAT YOU PAID TO US DURING THE SIX (6) MONTHS PRIOR TO THE TIME YOUR CAUSE OF ACTION AROSE"
Sure, people agree to this, but I really think there's an attorney out there somewhere who can get around this. I'm not an attorney/paralegal/whatever, but the line where it says "DAMAGES ARISING FROM YOUR USE OF THE SERVICE" makes me think they could be open. The problem arises when we CANNOT use the service as intended, thus losing a character.
2) People spending money to deck out a toon, then Blizzard nerfs something like IAS. This one is a bit weaker, but it makes more sense if you think about it. Say I spend $500 to gear up my character with 5000 of stat A. Next month Blizzard decides that stay A is too strong, and it needs to be nerfed. After the nerf, stat B is much more appealing. I then have to go back to the RMAH and buy that gear because I'm no longer as strong as I was before.
Don't mistake this for an expansion reset, because that's not what this is. Blizzard is sanctioning the purchasing of items in game. In the past, if people wanted to buy things with RL money they would have to go to a 3rd party website, and if in-game things were changed, that's too bad. Now, with Blizzard taking a cut of all RMAH sales, they can possibly manipulate the market creating sales by lowering/increasing the usefulness of certain stats.
I'm not trying to start a flame-war or a petition to sue or anything, I just want to get other's opinions on legality of the RMAH. Thanks!
OR YOUR INABILITY TO USE THE SERVICE , did you not read this part when you said "the problem arises when we CANNOT use the service as intended." Inability to use also means not being able to use as intended, meaning if it bugs out and you lose something or money, they are still not liable, They are completely covered.
Edit: Also, they will probably announce if a stat is going to be nerfed, which most likely there will only be one that would be nerfed when it comes to mind, crit damage. If they announce they are going to nerf something, just dont buy the item, if you cant take 1 min and look at diablo3.com for updates, then too bad for them.In the EULA/tos, it says that the player does not actually own or have rights to any virtual items in the game
This means that you go to court and you say "The item I bought to own was changed, it was misleading", blizzard can just say "You agreed to the writing that says you don't own any items you get in game, therefore we nerfed something that was ours not yours, you just payed to use it at the time".
Oh I'm sorry, I was under the impression that there was a hardcore RMAH. Okay good to know, so what about #2? Nerfs to things people spend RL money on?
There's also the fact that any purchases can be considered purchases of consumables, and therefore any loss of that item constitutes loss from usage. Can't bitch when you guy a hotdog and the hotdog gets dropped on the ground.
Also the fact that you don't own anything you're buying, you're purchasing a lease on property that belongs to blizzard from another player.
Nothing you pay for is considered your personal property under the law from the RMAH.
Here is one point that never gets brought up in the conspiracy threads: Blizzard has a legal department. Do you actually believe that during all of the development and testing of all of this, that their legal department didn't give a thumbs up to all of this? Everything is covered in the ToS, its a legal document that you've agreed to, before you ever even set foot in the game. If you want to take Blizzard to small claims court for your $100 digital sword, go right ahead. Do us a favor and post how much in court costs you'll be paying out after Blizz's legal team gets you laughed out of court.
I know it's not super official blue text but it does come from Jay Wilson.
OP, you make some valid points. I'm not sure that #2 would hold up in court. I think the EULA and TOS basically say that Blizzard still owns everything in the end. You can only use said item in the Blizzard game, so really you just bought a license to use that item/armor in game.
There are interesting considerations as far as the legality of the RMAH, particularly when you consider all of the jurisdictions involved. However, good luck suing Blizzard. In the US, I suppose you could start a class action lawsuit as that's about the only way to recover minor damages from a giant corporation here, and then in 20 years when the case can't be drug out any longer, you can get back $50 of your $500 purchase.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
...and if you disagree with me, you're probably <insert random ad hominem attack here>.
2) People spending money to deck out a toon, then Blizzard nerfs something like IAS. This one is a bit weaker, but it makes more sense if you think about it. Say I spend $500 to gear up my character with 5000 of stat A. Next month Blizzard decides that stay A is too strong, and it needs to be nerfed. After the nerf, stat B is much more appealing. I then have to go back to the RMAH and buy that gear because I'm no longer as strong as I was before.
This isn't much different than buying X amount of stock and then having it lose 20% of its value a week from now because of some changes within the company.
Blizzard does not guarantee a 'status' or 'value' of an item when you purchase it, they only guarantee that you get what you purchase (the item).
I hope I made myself clear.
For the other one, this is probably one of the reasons why blizzard does not have a RMAH.
Again, I'm not saying that I am going to sue Blizzard, but class action lawsuits are often extremely profitable for an attorneys office and they will take on several cases at a time know that it will stretch on for years.
I worked for a fast-food restaurant in college and I got a letter from an attorney saying I could participate in a CAL against them for unpaid overtime wages. 3 years later I got a check for $1500. Sadly, most companies just end up settling after years of the legal process has gone by, because it's probably less expensive to just settle than it is to go through even more years of paying attorneys and legal teams.
I doubt there will ever be a lawsuit over the RMAH (it'd have to be class action, and they'd have to find a WHOLE bunch of people who want in on it, AND actually were "injured").
I personally hope they don't, at least in the US, because we are in serious need of precedents stating that physical rights extend into the digital realm (just cause e-mail is on a server, doesn't mean the gov't should have free access to it, as they argue), and this is, IMO, a poor argument for digital goods and physical goods have some equivalence. Also, EULA's need to be seriously beat down, what with we have no equal footing to negotiate. I think some countries actually have that as part of their law, I don't think the US does.
Again, I'm not saying that I am going to sue Blizzard, but class action lawsuits are often extremely profitable for an attorneys office and they will take on several cases at a time know that it will stretch on for years.
I worked for a fast-food restaurant in college and I got a letter from an attorney saying I could participate in a CAL against them for unpaid overtime wages. 3 years later I got a check for $1500. Sadly, most companies just end up settling after years of the legal process has gone by, because it's probably less expensive to just settle than it is to go through even more years of paying attorneys and legal teams.
Rekanos,
I have actually written a report on this kind of topic. You are semi-correct, it all comes down to the legitimacy of ownership of virtual items. In the past there have been many court battles with manufacturers losing a majority of them (look up Vernor v. Autodesk).But company's have gotten much smarter since then and if you read the very first lines of the EULA or TOU you will see a phrase of something like "this software is licensed and not sold."
This is basically the key reason: you DO NOT own anything in Diablo 3 If Blizzard f's up their servers and you lose your 200+ hour hardcore character, then you try to take Blizzard to court... well Blizzard can point to this very blatant statement at the top of their agreements (so you can't make a click/shrinkwrap argument) that you did not own that hardcore character and thus you can not sue them over something you don't own.
Hope that helps.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blizzard used to care about releasing Diablo III, then they all took an arrow in the knee...
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
1) People buying items on the Hardcore RMAH, dying to server lag, and losing hundreds, possibly thousands of dollars that was out of their control. I realize that when you create a Hardcore character you agree that you cannot have the character restored due to latency, but when Blizzard's servers go down or severely lag, I have to think that people could have legitimate legal recourse.
If I have an Etrade or Scottrade account and I go to place a buy/sell, their servers work and I (ideally) make money. If I bought stock, then it disappeared a few days later due to "server issues", you can bet your ass that company is on the line for the investments that I lost. If the Blizzard servers are performing poorly and kill my character, I have to think they could be subject to legal action. Again, I know these are different scenarios, but it makes sense that if Blizzard is charging fees for selling items that they should be on the hook for some expected levels of service.
From the EULA which was in all caps, which I find ironic because Battle.net forum mods seem to take great offense to threads or posts in all caps:
"BLIZZARD IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF YOUR USE OF THE SERVICE OR YOUR INABILITY TO USE THE SERVICE. IN NO CASE SHALL BLIZZARD BE LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, PUNITIVE OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING FROM YOUR USE OF THE SERVICE, THE BATTLE.NET BALANCE SERVICE, ANY GAME OR ANY GAME CLIENT. IN NO CASE SHALL THE LIABILITY OF BLIZZARD EXCEED THE AMOUNT THAT YOU PAID TO US DURING THE SIX (6) MONTHS PRIOR TO THE TIME YOUR CAUSE OF ACTION AROSE"
Sure, people agree to this, but I really think there's an attorney out there somewhere who can get around this. I'm not an attorney/paralegal/whatever, but the line where it says "DAMAGES ARISING FROM YOUR USE OF THE SERVICE" makes me think they could be open. The problem arises when we CANNOT use the service as intended, thus losing a character.
2) People spending money to deck out a toon, then Blizzard nerfs something like IAS. This one is a bit weaker, but it makes more sense if you think about it. Say I spend $500 to gear up my character with 5000 of stat A. Next month Blizzard decides that stay A is too strong, and it needs to be nerfed. After the nerf, stat B is much more appealing. I then have to go back to the RMAH and buy that gear because I'm no longer as strong as I was before.
Don't mistake this for an expansion reset, because that's not what this is. Blizzard is sanctioning the purchasing of items in game. In the past, if people wanted to buy things with RL money they would have to go to a 3rd party website, and if in-game things were changed, that's too bad. Now, with Blizzard taking a cut of all RMAH sales, they can possibly manipulate the market creating sales by lowering/increasing the usefulness of certain stats.
I'm not trying to start a flame-war or a petition to sue or anything, I just want to get other's opinions on legality of the RMAH. Thanks!
Also, there's no RMAH in HC mode.
There is not hardcore RMAH.
There we go, problem solved, nothing to see here move along.
OR YOUR INABILITY TO USE THE SERVICE , did you not read this part when you said "the problem arises when we CANNOT use the service as intended." Inability to use also means not being able to use as intended, meaning if it bugs out and you lose something or money, they are still not liable, They are completely covered.
Edit: Also, they will probably announce if a stat is going to be nerfed, which most likely there will only be one that would be nerfed when it comes to mind, crit damage. If they announce they are going to nerf something, just dont buy the item, if you cant take 1 min and look at diablo3.com for updates, then too bad for them.In the EULA/tos, it says that the player does not actually own or have rights to any virtual items in the game
This means that you go to court and you say "The item I bought to own was changed, it was misleading", blizzard can just say "You agreed to the writing that says you don't own any items you get in game, therefore we nerfed something that was ours not yours, you just payed to use it at the time".
Is there a hardcore RMAH yet?
Also the fact that you don't own anything you're buying, you're purchasing a lease on property that belongs to blizzard from another player.
Nothing you pay for is considered your personal property under the law from the RMAH.
https://twitter.com/angryrobotics/status/178561116513898496
I know it's not super official blue text but it does come from Jay Wilson.
OP, you make some valid points. I'm not sure that #2 would hold up in court. I think the EULA and TOS basically say that Blizzard still owns everything in the end. You can only use said item in the Blizzard game, so really you just bought a license to use that item/armor in game.
This isn't much different than buying X amount of stock and then having it lose 20% of its value a week from now because of some changes within the company.
Blizzard does not guarantee a 'status' or 'value' of an item when you purchase it, they only guarantee that you get what you purchase (the item).
I hope I made myself clear.
For the other one, this is probably one of the reasons why blizzard does not have a RMAH.
I worked for a fast-food restaurant in college and I got a letter from an attorney saying I could participate in a CAL against them for unpaid overtime wages. 3 years later I got a check for $1500. Sadly, most companies just end up settling after years of the legal process has gone by, because it's probably less expensive to just settle than it is to go through even more years of paying attorneys and legal teams.
I personally hope they don't, at least in the US, because we are in serious need of precedents stating that physical rights extend into the digital realm (just cause e-mail is on a server, doesn't mean the gov't should have free access to it, as they argue), and this is, IMO, a poor argument for digital goods and physical goods have some equivalence. Also, EULA's need to be seriously beat down, what with we have no equal footing to negotiate. I think some countries actually have that as part of their law, I don't think the US does.
Rekanos,
I have actually written a report on this kind of topic. You are semi-correct, it all comes down to the legitimacy of ownership of virtual items. In the past there have been many court battles with manufacturers losing a majority of them (look up Vernor v. Autodesk).But company's have gotten much smarter since then and if you read the very first lines of the EULA or TOU you will see a phrase of something like "this software is licensed and not sold."
This is basically the key reason: you DO NOT own anything in Diablo 3 If Blizzard f's up their servers and you lose your 200+ hour hardcore character, then you try to take Blizzard to court... well Blizzard can point to this very blatant statement at the top of their agreements (so you can't make a click/shrinkwrap argument) that you did not own that hardcore character and thus you can not sue them over something you don't own.
Hope that helps.