Put Down My Dragon Saber And No One Gets Hurt!

[Jon Westfall]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050330/od_nm/life_china_sabre_dc' target='_blank'>http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=sto..._china_sabre_dc</a><br /><br /></div><i>"BEIJING (Reuters) - A Shanghai online game player stabbed to death a competitor who sold his cyber-sword, the China Daily said Wednesday, creating a dilemma in China where no law exists for the ownership of virtual weapons. Qiu Chengwei, 41, stabbed competitor Zhu Caoyuan repeatedly in the chest after he was told Zhu had sold his "dragon saber," used in the popular online game, "Legend of Mir 3," the newspaper said a Shanghai court was told Tuesday."</i><br /><br />Virtual property seems like something we all take for granted. Think about it: If you engage in any kind of recreational online game where objects or points are collected, you have some virtual possessions you've probably worked hard to gain (Even if its just a spot on the "top scores" board) and would be annoyed if lost. But if someone took your dragon saber or changed your name to theirs on the score board, is it a crime legally? Probably not. Should this change?

[jickbahtech]

In this day and age, I would really appreciate it if Government would stay as FAR away from my gaming as possible.

[foebea]

When you start saying legal things around games (other than the company is not legal obligated by thier own EULA to provide certain services) it can get very iffy.

It comes to a question of what is enough. Where is the line, etc.

If virtual property is lost, and it is countable in legal terms, what is the reparations needed; Would it be the fluctuating cost within the game itself, or could actual real world funds be taken? What is the actual worth in real world funds? Does that change over time?

And from there it could get worse extending further:
is someone responsible for lost 'wages' during a power outtage
should griefers face tougher sentencing?

As I am sure most of you would agree, these are stupid questions and should not be asked at all, let alone answered. Authors have received death threats for killing off popular fictional charactors, but if anyone went through with those threats there would not be any question of if the killing was justafiable through some perceived personal loss. Murder is murder. We need no extra laws to define it.

Until a MMORPJ or MMORPC (job, career) is released, I don't think any type of legislation is needed.

Just my two disorganized cents, and I happily accept in advance that I may be completely wrong on every point.

[Jon Westfall]

As I am sure most of you would agree, these are stupid questions and should not be asked at all, let alone answered.

If you decided to pay $5.95 a month to play an online game (lets say the horrible example of "The Sims Online", although I don't know how much the two squirrels that played that paid) and in the course of that game collected various virtual items, set up a virtual environment that you got enjoyment out of interacting with, and spent time (albeit leisure time) to do all of this, how would you feel if your paid account were hijacked through no fault of your own. In this case, its no different than using any kind of paid service other than its a game. Is it really so stupid to state that legal protections should extend to online goods and services?

[Jacob]

Is it really so stupid to state that legal protections should extend to online goods and services?

If I'm interpreting this correctly, it's not about protecting your account - to me that should obviously be protected.

I think it has to do with say if you in your Sims game found a golden nugget and someone else's online character stole it whether you can take legal recourse offline. They didn't hijack your account - but they stole a "virtual" posession - your account is still yours.

Or do I have this all wrong?

[foebea]

I have been unfortunate enough to use several of these games in the past, and I am in the habit of at least briefly reading through the EULA. In every case I can remember going through there is explicit language that the company providing the game is not responsible for any loss of any kind, be it real world or otherwise. In special circumstances if you lose something and petition the gods of the game they have been known to recompense to a point, but this is at thier discretion.

I think what is needed is a recourse ingame.

If it is possible for someone to steal something, or for a 'friend' to borrow an item of great value and not return it, there should be a way to get fair recourse in game. Ideally, you would take the law into your own hands and get a posse together to get the item back, or take vengence. If it is a Role Playing game, then roleplay the solution.

In my all time favorite MUD IgorMUD for example, there is an arena for duels when both parties are honorable about the dispute, and it is settled gladiatorially, if thats even a word. When the offender had no honor about it, the archmages (wizards, gods, whatever) would drag the offender to a guillotine just north of east of the center of town, and end that characters reign of terror more permanantly.

In most games however there is no recourse, and that makes the game unbalanced and not enjoyable. Specifically Eve Online. Right on the box the game came in, it says something along the lines of 'Choose your path, Ruler, Miner, Rogue, Pirate, Murderer'. When I chose Pirate and Murderer - heh - people did not take kindly to my actions and those of other Pirates. Main reason for the problems there was that while a Pirate could steal bounty, it was only snatchable during certain situations. If enough miners get together a bounty hunting force, they could kill the pirates but had no possible way to reclaim lost loot. UPDATE: I just reviewed the forums over at Eve, and it lookes like the law abiding users have come to terms with the nature of the game, and everything is happy again. So while in deep space, this is an example of lawless runs of high risk high gain. Maybe we can learn something from the 'Wild West' movies.

I think for this to work the road needs to go both ways, to coin a phrase.
Any solution outside of game would not make anything better, as there is no way to translate the actual worth of time, items, money, or life - unless you count eBay :lol:[/i]

[Felix Torres]

1- Not that I advocate killing anybody over property, virtual or otherwise, although I could be persuaded that some people are too obnoxious or too stupid to be allowed to survive... :twisted:

2- Virtual communities and shared environments *should* include mechanisms to deal with all forms of human behavior (lack of such led to an amusingly sleazy underworld on the SIMS online, for example).

3- But virtual property *does* have real-world value of two kinds; first, and obviously: monetary. In the form of connection time (and attendant charges) incurred in acquiring said object (say twenty hours to reach level 10's magic sword) or monetary payment needed to acquire that "property". XBOX LIVE, for example, is about to implement a micro-payments system for a virtual economy inside future LIVE-compatible games. People will be paying *real* money for these game objects so a mechanism will be needed to police human behavior in this hybrid virtual/real economy. LlVE has already establed mechanisms to address some kinds of anti-social behavior so it is likely there will be mechanisms to deal with the real-world impact of virtual world activity. How well they work, of course, remains to be seen...

4- The second kind of real-world value to be found in virtual or electronic property is the intellectual labor that went into acquiring or creating the virtual property. And while a lot of people refuse to believe in the commercial value of interlectual labor, and does refuse to accept there is such a thing as intellectual property rights, the plain and simple fact is that things such as game maps, artistic designs, formulas and algorithms do have intrinsic value that should be protected. Whether they exist as real objects in the real world or "merely" as logical constructs in an online digital one. They are the fruits of someone's labor and should be respected as such whether they came from toiling at a farm, a music studio, a keyboard, or a gamepad.

Now, killing somebody for theft is generally considered "cruel and unusual" so unless that chinese player was demonstrably mentally incompetent (not unheard of among online game players, right? :devilboy: ) they should throw the book at him.

But do make sure the case gets publicized so would-be thieves get the message:

Labor is labor and must be respected.

[szamot]

it should be a virtual crime with virtual punishment serverd in a virtual jail.

That would be interesting.

[foebea]

Ultima Online has that. if you are caught cheating in certain ways they put you in a jail for a specified period of time. if you log off and stay away for a week, when you come back your sentence picks up where it left off. 24 hours means 24 hours. I like it.

[Paundskumm]

I don't think there are enough capital "L's" in the world to tell you how big a LOSER this guy is. The guy is 41 years old for God's sake. I've had fun on computers since the early 80s and my Commodore 64 but there is a time to kind of grow up. There are about a billion bigger problems in China right now that whether some moron has issues about online virtual property. Can you say lets get "physical" property like my property rights to my house settled first? Kind of reminds me of how all these people talk about the digital divide in the world... as if a computer is going to help someone in Africa who needs clean water and food first... Lets get our priority straight people

[Ekkie Tepsupornchai]

While I certainly understand the frustration that would be involved in losing a virtual item that took the same kind of time and effort that it would take to obtain a real item, I'd have to say no to government-enforced laws... if for no other reason than the fact that a virtual item can always be recreated at little to no cost. In most cases, assuming the developer created the tools to do so, I'd imagine that the entire action (and all the impact caused by the action) could be reversed.

Of course, this case is peculiar and not just because of the idiotic act itself. The item was loaned to killer's competitor who turned around and sold the item for hefty amount ($870). So reversing this entire act would probably have to include repayment of the original funds, which would probably require govt intervention anyway. But more importantly than that, given that the item was willingly provided to the competitor (regardless of whether the intent was really a loan or not), I'm not even sure there'd be much of a case here even if the item were real. For example, if I loaned you an expensive Armani coat and you turned around and sold it, is that theft? Can I prove theft? Or am I just stupid for trusting you with complete control of a valued possession?

[mcsouth]

This is certainly not a easy subject to consider, due to the overall complexities involved. Personally, I think that it is time for the game developers or hosts to take more responsibility for what happens in their online game. If they are going to charge you a monthly fee to participate in their game, then I think they need to accept some responsibility for what is happening in their game. As many have stated, several hosts are doing that, including online "jail". As long as they provide a reasonable dispute mechanism, and address issues of online "theft" or cheating, rather than just shield themselves from responsibility with an EULA, then this sort of thing should have recourse through the game.

My wife drew an interesting parallel to this incident - anyone here remember some of the uproar over Dungeons and Dragons when its popularity peaked? Some individuals got so absorbed in the game, that they had trouble separating the game from reality. If a huge amount of your self esteem is built around your status and abilities in a game, then reactions like this incident are going to occur......

[wrightca]

These people should be sentenced to reality.

Grow up, it's just a stupid game.

[Jonathon Watkins]

Ultima Online has that. if you are caught cheating in certain ways they put you in a jail for a specified period of time. if you log off and stay away for a week, when you come back your sentence picks up where it left off. 24 hours means 24 hours. I like it.

Nice and simple. A good solution. The 'punishment' is in proportion and relation to the 'crime'.

[ccoletti]

If it's valuable enough to sell, it's valuable enough to steal. It doesn't matter if it's virtual, it still has value.

[mv]

Shame on you people discussing this. Games are games, not life. The gaming comunity may ban cheaters, or not... that´s their problem, not ours, there is not such thing as "virtual" property, because in fact, if something is virtual it means it´s not real anyway. If someone wants to pay real money for that, the reason it´s that he has too much money to spend.

[bjornkeizers]

Shame on you people discussing this. Games are games, not life. The gaming comunity may ban cheaters, or not... that´s their problem, not ours, there is not such thing as "virtual" property, because in fact, if something is virtual it means it´s not real anyway



That's where you're wrong - there *is* such a thing as virtual property.

If there wasn't, there wouldn't be any 'need' to try and stop piracy. After all, software is merely a collection of 1's and 0's. So I could just steal that, in your opinion?

Same thing with movies, mp3's or this website. Just because you can't touch it doesn't mean it's not property. Someone spent time and money to make it or acquire it, that means it does have value - maybe not to you or me, but at least to someone. I would be upset too if someone stole something / destroyed it / didn't return it.

[Rob Alexander]

I don't think there are enough capital "L's" in the world to tell you how big a LOSER this guy is. The guy is 41 years old for God's sake. I've had fun on computers since the early 80s and my Commodore 64 but there is a time to kind of grow up. There are about a billion bigger problems in China right now that whether some moron has issues about online virtual property. Can you say lets get "physical" property like my property rights to my house settled first? Kind of reminds me of how all these people talk about the digital divide in the world... as if a computer is going to help someone in Africa who needs clean water and food first... Lets get our priority straight people

Nicely said. You took the words right out of my mouth... errr, well my virtual mouth.

[Rob Alexander]

Shame on you people discussing this. Games are games, not life. The gaming comunity may ban cheaters, or not... that´s their problem, not ours, there is not such thing as "virtual" property, because in fact, if something is virtual it means it´s not real anyway



That's where you're wrong - there *is* such a thing as virtual property.

If there wasn't, there wouldn't be any 'need' to try and stop piracy. After all, software is merely a collection of 1's and 0's. So I could just steal that, in your opinion?


What you're describing is 'intellectual property'. That's real. 'Virtual property', as described in the original post, is not. The gold nuggets I used to collect in computer games (back when I was a kid and had nothing useful to do) were not real and should never be considered so. It's sad, and a little frightening, that we're even wasting time debating this.

[David C]

This is stupid. There are a lot of things that a person can do to you that is consider unethical, but they are not consider illegal. It, however, does not mean that you have the right to kill someone because of it.

If you know that someone has a shady reputation, you should not deal with them. If you do, and you loose, it's your loss.

[Cybrid]

Yawn!
Some people have way too much time on their hands.

Here's more of a conundurum, in a virtual landscape a virtual rape!
http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol2/issue4/mackinnon.html
Here's an item more worth discussion than virtual theft. Now remember it is illegal to sexually harrass someone at the office with obscene comments or drawings or some such. As such this should by the letter of the law be a crime but what do you say to that?

The sword thing? I have not researched did he sell it online for virtual money or sell it online for actual money.
If actual then he's defrauded the killer of a service. Worth actual money.

[Fuego]

I skimmed this thread and saw no mention of the words, asset and intangible (unless I skimmed too quickly).

bjornkeizers got close to it. Virtual property is an intangible asset, same as Intellectual Property (IP). IP is virtual property protected by specific laws, giving IP rights (IPR).

IP becomes real property (a tangible asset) when you exploit it by creating a product and selling it. If you sell the IPR directly then you are still selling an intangible asset and it would be tracked as such in the accounts of the purchaser and depreciated over its useful life.

That having been said, the specific case cited in this news item is more than a little sad.

[Kati Compton]

Yawn!
Some people have way too much time on their hands.

Here's more of a conundurum, in a virtual landscape a virtual rape!
http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol2/issue4/mackinnon.html
Here's an item more worth discussion than virtual theft. Now remember it is illegal to sexually harrass someone at the office with obscene comments or drawings or some such. As such this should by the letter of the law be a crime but what do you say to that?

While it may be an interesting intellectual discussion, this is an "adult" topic, and therefore not allowed on this forum... Thanks.

[Cybrid]

While it may be an interesting intellectual discussion, this is an "adult" topic, and therefore not allowed on this forum... Thanks.Whoa...sorry! I forgot how restrictive the U.S. was about the S. word. or anything even remotely related to it.
:rolleyes:
Back on topic, is a virtual crime still a crime? I'm merely pointing out that the murder was a crime. "He stole my imaginary sword!" is something a 6 year old could say. What I mean to imply that our most worthwhile intellectual efforts should be directed elsewhere.

[Kati Compton]

While it may be an interesting intellectual discussion, this is an "adult" topic, and therefore not allowed on this forum... Thanks.Whoa...sorry! I forgot how restrictive the U.S. was about the S. word. or anything even remotely related to it.
Actually, it's a Canadian site...