Game Cheats Are Illegal?

Published on July 15, 2008 By kryo In Personal Computing

In his summary ruling on Blizzard's case against World of Warcraft cheat-maker Michael Donnelly (released yesterday), District Court Judge David Campbell has stated that the act of using a bot in violation of a game's license or terms of use qualifies as a copyright violation. Huh?

Just to get it out of the way, I'm as much against cheats as the next guy. As a WoW player in particular, I'm glad to see Blizzard shut down the cheaters and cheat-makers. But this ruling doesn't make much sense to me; it seems like a case of the judge just trying to find a way to cover something which doesn't really cross any real existing laws. Worse, it sets some (arguably) nasty precedent, effectively making EULAs law (any violation is a violation of copyright), rather than simple contracts where the most you can lose is your right to use the software.

Strangely, the judge actually dismissed Blizzard's claims that the cheats violated the DMCA. Given the amount of use the DMCA gets in such cases, you'd think that the ruling would have been the other way around, at least. In any case, it seems the case is now going to trial to decide the DMCA portion for certain.

What do you guys think? Should this ruling stand? Personally, I think that it shouldn't--stripping cheaters of their access to the game and perhaps making a civil claim against the cheat-makers for damaging the game for everyone else is justified, but making any EULA violations illegal, as Judge Campbell (inadvertently or otherwise) has done is going too far.

Comments (Page 12)

166

Jonnan001

on Jul 21, 2008

The particular cheat in question, as I understand it, doesn't modify anything. It basically just plays the game for you.

You wouldn't consider that a modification of the user interface?

Been away for a few days but honestly - if that is a sufficient modification of the user interface to violate the contract - then using a Dvorak Keyboard is sufficient modification of the user interface to constitute violation of the contract. For what is done, no modification of the game code, on disk or in memory, is necessary - only the ability to pipe info to stdin.

So, effectively, the court seems to me to have enforced a provision of the EULA that says someone cannot filter stdin on their PC.

Enforcing a EULA that effectively makes pipes illegal seems to me to be a stretch.

Jonnan

167

Jonnan001

on Jul 21, 2008

Here's a thought.
The 'bot' plays the game for you, however it was you who 'agreed' to the EULA...not the bot. Ergo the bot has no right to be playing the game as it did not indicate tacit agreement to the EULA....
AND he's selling it, too....
This bloke is screwed.
If he is not then the US Legal system is more screwed than most people imagine.
There IS no positive legal/defensible spin that can be placed on what his proggy does.
It's actually not a Game Cheat...such as being Invincible in Quake and beating your computer bots. It's a method to defraud/deny others of THEIR game enjoyment that they paid for...with a reasonable expectation of equitable treatment.
I'm on Blizzard's side....100%...

Counterpoint - I am not actually posting on this website - I am only poking keys on a keyboard, and software (In this case a suite of Ubuntu Linux kernals, applications, and TCP/IP protocols) is converting these keystrokes, storing them, and eventually allowing you to see them and realize I'm hear.

That software is no greater or lesser an extension of my will than that 'bot' installed on a machine is an extension of the owner will.

Or would you agree to the argument that a pirate distributing copies of your software wasn't *really* cheating you, because he was only distributing the machine code version, and while you own the source code a highly sophisticated compiler actually converted it to binary form - since no human hand adapted that binary data, and the compiler can't own a copyright itself, it must be in the public domain, right?

Of course not - the software is an extension of the computer owner - the 'bot' ran his game from his computer according to his wishes, just as the compiler converted source code to binary form according to your wishes.

An EULA should no more be able to place limitations on the software he runs on his PC than it should be able to place limitations on what compiler you use to convert source code to machine code.

Jonnan

Jonnan

168

Jonnan001

on Jul 21, 2008

For an analogy. Since CDs are a big issue with copyright. A person goes and buys a CD from a store. The person goes home and plays the CD. They dont like how the CD sounds, so they go on their computer and create a mix/remix of the CD and sell it. The person uses the same tempo and beat, but changes the lyrics. (weird al yankovich has been sued by almost every artist he has done parodies of. Coolio with Gangsters Paradise, weird al doing Amish Paradise)
Now its not the SAME thing. But copyright law doesnt state that it has to pertain to COPYING, just because its in the name. It also has to due with the alteration of the original media for resale. This of course has to do with copyright laws of media, as there are different types. So this guy selling a bot/hack with blizzard data on the program IS a copyright issue.

Just FYI - Ah - Weird Al lives and dies by two things:
A) The Parody exception for Fair Use. I don't think anyone has ever sued him.

Weird Al is, uh, incredibly polite. He doesn't *have* to ask for permission, he just does (Well, it also CYA's him, but strictly speaking he doesn't have to). Amish Paradise was a specific case where he was under the impression he had permission and didn't, so now Weird Al asks the artists directly and not the label.

Wikipedia: Weird Al: Reactions_from_original_artist

169

Jonnan001

on Jul 21, 2008

By Blizzard's estimate, it takes a typical player 8 months to reach level 50, compared to the bot doing it for you in less than one month.

Greg Dean will be so happy to know this - {G}

Jonnan

170

ProzacMann

on Jul 21, 2008

Jonnan001, welcome back fellow sleep deprived and/or insane one!

171

ProzacMann

on Jul 21, 2008

the argument that, because blizzard is still in business, anything that potential reduces their profits is OK is probably one of the most poorly thought out arguments on this entire forum. most people learn in elementary school that you can't do what ever you want whenever you want because either directly or indirectly you are hurting someone else or in some way violating their rights. that bot hurts every WOW user who doesn't use it as well as blizzard who has to combat it. aside from that it is a clear violation of the EULA which no one can dispute. regardless of how anyone may feel about the state of the legal system, It simply cannot be argued in any intelligent way that blizzard was wrong. It clearly says in many EULAs that violations will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of law, and that's what this is.

Please look back at the thread as I never said at anytime anyone can do what they want at anytime. What I did say is that I 'feel' (yes believe it or not these are opinions, including yours) that Blizzard just can't claim losses without proof and what I am saying is that what they are trying to prove is unprovable. Yes I know our legal system works that way however I am still entitled to think it is not ok and wish it changed. In fact I would wager that you don't agree with everything that happens in the world and it is your right to wish it would change, wouldn't call you childish or insane. As I said previously I am sure glad that people like Rosa Parks and our founding fathers didn't feel like you. I mean during their time people thought the way things were going was just fine! Does that make it 'right'?

172

ProzacMann

on Jul 21, 2008

no matter how much the point is argued, the company that made the bot will be put out of business. there were over 30 million in losses claimed, and the ones responsible aren't worth a tenth of that. they are completely screwed.

Well again there are others (http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/07/you-bought-it-you-dont-own-it ) like myself that disagree with you and on appeal or even without this case stands a very good chance of being overruled whether you like it or not. As you said the world is a complex place and just because you or a court says something is right doesn't mean it can't be changed!

173

ProzacMann

on Jul 21, 2008

By your standard of proof, I wouldn't be able to prove my own name! Nowhere in law is absolute proof of anything required. Criminal courts hold the standard as "beyond reasonable doubt" while civil court rulings are based on "the preponderance of evidence". Expecting absolute proof is a fantasy. God, I hope there's no one this deluded on the jury I'm sitting on tomorrow.

Sorry it is quite easy to legally prove your name that is exactly why there are things called birth certificates, in fact good luck to you in a court of law if you need to legally prove your name without hard documented proof. Saying I can estimate my name cause that is what 400,000 people call me ain't going to cut it, call me deluded if you like.

ProzacMann - A judge's overturn rate is one of the most common measures of competence, as each overturned case indicates a misreading of the law or serious procedural error. The judges promoted to higher courts are generally the ones with the fewest overturned cases - not saying that is the only criterion, but is one of the big ones. I'm happy to see you've downgraded your opinion of this ruling to "stupid". That's progress, of a sort.

Not going to argue this one anymore as it is off topic and I will never agree that just cause a judge was overruled that that makes him/her incompetent sorry.

As for this case it is still ridiculous, sorry my opinion has not changed and as I said it appears I am not the only insane one out there.

174

ProzacMann

on Jul 21, 2008

Ummmm.. no. Are you seriously listening to YOUR self? It would be more like comparing it to a locksmith selling the thief a key to perform the robbery. Blizzard is not suing the end users, they sued the guy that created the software. sheesh... get a grip will ya

Have you even read anything that I have typed? Cause I have said all along that that is who Blizzard should be sueing if they want to collect damages, the case they have come up with is terrible and they deserve nothing. The users that have decided to use the bot are the ones that caused the damage. They could have easily decided not to do it, but they chose to they are the ones that broke the EULA.

175

rakenan

on Jul 21, 2008

I take it you don't visit the auction house very much in WoW.
Uh yeah and I take it you have actually surveyed the multimillion WOW users to see if they have actually even heard of this bot! My bet is the vast majority would have no clue what you are talking about if you asked them, and I would even go so far as to say few of the millions would truely care.

The existence of farming bots is common knowledge in every WoW server I've visited - ways to mess with them, including exploiting their bot nature to get them into situations where they die horribly, are routine conversation in the various city general chat channels. It is essentially impossible to *AVOID* knowing about bots and still play WoW.

Many people ignore them completely, but at least on the servers I have played on, it's common knowledge that they exist.

176

crow_t_robot

on Jul 21, 2008

I think in any multiplayer game world cheating should be illegal. By illegal, I mean the punishment doesn't get past that game world. Suspend their account or whatever, but don't fine someone or throw them in jail in real life.

CHeating in single player games shouldn't be illegal. You're not hurtning anyone by cheating against a computer.

177

ProzacMann

on Jul 21, 2008

That is not what I was saying, I am not saying people don't know about BOTS, I am strictly talking about Glider. That is all I am saying, I would bet most people have no idea what specific BOT is in use. I that is the case then I think individula users should be held accountable.

178

ProzacMann

on Jul 21, 2008

Exactly, I agree and have no issue with that at all.

179

Helioforge

on Jul 21, 2008

It is essentially impossible to *AVOID* knowing about bots and still play WoW

Unless the player IS a bot!

180

Jafo

on Jul 21, 2008

Suspend their account or whatever, but don't fine someone or throw them in jail in real life.

I think some people may be in their role-playing games a little too much...and have a hazy understanding of where reality ends and fantasy begins.

The rules being broken are in REAL LIFE so the penalties will apply in real life....

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!