Man arrested for virtual crime
- Thread starter Rebar
- Start date
Oh for Pete's sake.
Look.
The TOS is a legally binding document. In the US, it's not enforced much, or it gets thrown out of court. In some places, it's treated with more respect.
The guy broke the rules of the game, and broke them heavily, for profit. The game operators are protecting paying clients, as they are paying to play in a fair game, not paying to play in a game where some people run a dozen bots 24/7 and have the best items in the game x100, and the law is being enforced.
I can't really imagine anyone defending the guy unless you are running macros/bots in WC3 and ebaying GP or something.
Next thing, I'll see people defending 14 year old kids commiting credit card fraud.
Look.
The TOS is a legally binding document. In the US, it's not enforced much, or it gets thrown out of court. In some places, it's treated with more respect.
The guy broke the rules of the game, and broke them heavily, for profit. The game operators are protecting paying clients, as they are paying to play in a fair game, not paying to play in a game where some people run a dozen bots 24/7 and have the best items in the game x100, and the law is being enforced.
I can't really imagine anyone defending the guy unless you are running macros/bots in WC3 and ebaying GP or something.
Next thing, I'll see people defending 14 year old kids commiting credit card fraud.
cracked butt
New member
Credit card fraud is a criminal act, doing so will get you charged with a crime.
Cheating at a video game is at the very worst, a breach of contract of which is on very thin and shaky ground at best. A broken contract falls under civil law, nort criminal. A software company could in theory take someone to court for cheating if the EULA specifically specifies cheating as a breach of contract with the software company, but very few judges are not going to throw such a suit out of court let alone find for the plaintiff.
To equate what the guy did to a criminal act is beyond absurd. There is no law prohibiting selling virtual stolen property from video games.
First off, this is in Japan, I really don't know if there is such a law there, but wouldn't be suprised.
Secondly, what would happen if I took personal, but not copyrighted information off your computer and sold it to the highest bidder? Is there nothing I could be charged under? Because if not, I think I just found my profession.
:barf:
:barf: :barf: The point of the game is to allow stealing property from other players, probably after defeating them in battle. It's the heavy duty cheating that got a response.
Anyway, this was in Japan, not the US. Similar arrests probably happen in South Korea. I don't see why someone shouldn't be arrested for disrupting the online economy of a pay-to-play game, one where they have agreed to abide by a contract while playing.
cracked butt
New member
Ah, but in many online games I've played, a character can bank or store any or all of their equipment. If a player chooses to equip a character with certain items, they do so with the knowledge that there's a chance that they will lose the equipment while playing.
The neat thing about CRPG's is that they are sort of a virtual shtf scenario. There are no rules against murder and theft, meaning that trust of unfamiliar characters is a very dangerous thing. On the flip side, such environments allow people to try out roles as complete sociopaths, scoundrels, and thieves, which can be a lot of fun in itself without causing anyone any real harm other than to their egos. Anyone who plays such games with ideas otherwise probably shouldn't be playing the games.
cracked butt
New member
Eitehr you cannot differentiate between virtual reality and real life, or you need to take an introductory law class.
All that is done with the understanding that everyone is on the same playing field, though. Not that some people are getting special abilities, or at least abilities that were not built into the game.
Maybe a better way to look at it would be fraud. He did something that made it look like he got something legitimently, but the way he did it meant that it was not legitiment. Kinda like wrecking your car or burning your house to collect insurance, claiming theft or arson.
Maybe a better way to look at it would be fraud. He did something that made it look like he got something legitimently, but the way he did it meant that it was not legitiment. Kinda like wrecking your car or burning your house to collect insurance, claiming theft or arson.
Rich Lucibella
Staff
Oy!
Let's start criminally prosecuting kids who cheat on their Math Tests. They rob others of potentially better college placement.
Let's start criminally prosecuting Olympic athletes for steroid use, rather than stripping them of their medals and disgracing them. They rob others of lucrative endorsement contracts.
I could go on, except I'm absolutely amazed we're even having this debate.
Rich
Let's start criminally prosecuting kids who cheat on their Math Tests. They rob others of potentially better college placement.
Let's start criminally prosecuting Olympic athletes for steroid use, rather than stripping them of their medals and disgracing them. They rob others of lucrative endorsement contracts.
I could go on, except I'm absolutely amazed we're even having this debate.
Rich
Rich Lucibella
Staff
Ooooh, Reality TV.
Lets start criminally prosecuting cheaters on Survivor, Apprentice and the like. They rob the American Public of proper Coliseum games.
Perhaps even Congressional Hearings, at taxpayer expense, on use of anabolics in pro sports....ooops, we already do that, don't we?
Rich
Lets start criminally prosecuting cheaters on Survivor, Apprentice and the like. They rob the American Public of proper Coliseum games.
Perhaps even Congressional Hearings, at taxpayer expense, on use of anabolics in pro sports....ooops, we already do that, don't we?
Rich
It's Japan. JAPAN, PEOPLE.
I still have no problem with someone breaking a contract and getting punished for it. For all we know, all the bots he was running affected the server and state of the game negatively.
People will probably never be prosecuted for this sort of thing here in the US, but I'm not exactly going to bemoan when it happens in SK or Japan.
Guess what- if some smacktart signs up for an account on my (around a month to final launch) webserver and starts breaking my terms of service to perform actions which are designed to make him money, he's about to enter courtville: population him.
I still have no problem with someone breaking a contract and getting punished for it. For all we know, all the bots he was running affected the server and state of the game negatively.
People will probably never be prosecuted for this sort of thing here in the US, but I'm not exactly going to bemoan when it happens in SK or Japan.
Guess what- if some smacktart signs up for an account on my (around a month to final launch) webserver and starts breaking my terms of service to perform actions which are designed to make him money, he's about to enter courtville: population him.
Last edited:
Rich Lucibella
Staff
Heist-
Ummm, I think we all know it's Japan. That was mentioned in the first post and has been repeated often.
If that's all this thread is about, it should be closed as Non-News. But I kinda thought it was about "Is this legally fair", in a US context, and "Is this morally fair" anywhere.
Did I miss something?
Rich
Ummm, I think we all know it's Japan. That was mentioned in the first post and has been repeated often.
If that's all this thread is about, it should be closed as Non-News. But I kinda thought it was about "Is this legally fair", in a US context, and "Is this morally fair" anywhere.
Did I miss something?
Rich
Well, I made a comparable analogy using something that could and probably will happen to me a few times here in the US. In Japan and SK, they take some things a little more seriously. Hopefully someone bites on my example.
I expect it to be another half decade or so before we catch up and start properly prosecuting for internet based crime. Heck, we aren't even doing that well against card frauders, phishers, botnet operators, and trojaners, let alone people that are on a gray criminal area.
The problem is a justice system that seems to think that even though nineteen year old johnny had backdoored and was spying on a few dozen people's financial information via their computers or even caused serious damage, since he was just "playing around on the internet", he doesn't deserve any serious punishment, if it gets anywhere at all instead of being put behind everything else when it comes to priority. Apologist groups for criminals like EFF don't exactly help matters easily, when what we really need to be doing to discourage these things is to get a few prominent e-thugs and crucify them in court with over the top punishments.
You know why spammers, fraudsters, and computer criminals being arrested/convicted is news? Because it happens so rarely, and that has crept into their attitudes. Now we have a generation of (I hate this word) cybercriminals who think they'll never face any consequences as long as they hide a little and plaster that bogus "internet privacy act signed by bill clinton" all over everything.
Whether you break into someone's house or break into their computer- there should be stiff penalties. - maybe that can provoke some interesting discussion as well.
I expect it to be another half decade or so before we catch up and start properly prosecuting for internet based crime. Heck, we aren't even doing that well against card frauders, phishers, botnet operators, and trojaners, let alone people that are on a gray criminal area.
The problem is a justice system that seems to think that even though nineteen year old johnny had backdoored and was spying on a few dozen people's financial information via their computers or even caused serious damage, since he was just "playing around on the internet", he doesn't deserve any serious punishment, if it gets anywhere at all instead of being put behind everything else when it comes to priority. Apologist groups for criminals like EFF don't exactly help matters easily, when what we really need to be doing to discourage these things is to get a few prominent e-thugs and crucify them in court with over the top punishments.
You know why spammers, fraudsters, and computer criminals being arrested/convicted is news? Because it happens so rarely, and that has crept into their attitudes. Now we have a generation of (I hate this word) cybercriminals who think they'll never face any consequences as long as they hide a little and plaster that bogus "internet privacy act signed by bill clinton" all over everything.
Whether you break into someone's house or break into their computer- there should be stiff penalties. - maybe that can provoke some interesting discussion as well.
Rich Lucibella
Staff
Heist-
Interesting. Where I come from philosophically, the only reason one demands the Govt step in with criminal action is when we don't think we can get proper satisfaction from civil proceedings. I've not seen one issue you mentioned that doesn't lend itself quite well to civil law.
I see an enormous and continuing trend in America to demand the government step in and prosecute all manner of actions that might well be served in the civil justice system. For instance, we don't like to confront our neighbors when their dog poops on our lawn....so we insist on our right to call the gendarmes. I used to call this trend "lazy" but I've since learned that people might be offended by that term, so now I just call it "silly".
No matter what you call it the end result is the same...Nanny State or Police State. Take your pick...they're identical in practice.
Rich
Interesting. Where I come from philosophically, the only reason one demands the Govt step in with criminal action is when we don't think we can get proper satisfaction from civil proceedings. I've not seen one issue you mentioned that doesn't lend itself quite well to civil law.
I see an enormous and continuing trend in America to demand the government step in and prosecute all manner of actions that might well be served in the civil justice system. For instance, we don't like to confront our neighbors when their dog poops on our lawn....so we insist on our right to call the gendarmes. I used to call this trend "lazy" but I've since learned that people might be offended by that term, so now I just call it "silly".
No matter what you call it the end result is the same...Nanny State or Police State. Take your pick...they're identical in practice.
Rich
How is Grandpa Mteebankaccount going to find out who 'hellmonkeys' who just ransacked his paypal is in order to take him to civil court? Unless you throw in private people who would have the authority to requisition the right logs and data to track someone down (a solution that would make a lovely legitimate career translation for me) or do some unauthorized entry of their own and provide the evidence, I see it as pretty darn hard for him to get some satisfaction.
The sad thing is that I agree with you completely when it comes to powers of government, but can't imagine anything I mentioned being handled appropriately by civil law in our immediate future for precisely the same reasons I listed for it not being handled appropriately by federal law. Sad because it doesn't seem likely to me that we're going to return to a status where it would work like it should.
The yearning for JBTs to run riot on your enemy of choice is a natural one that I think we all experience.
I'm up late on a weekend and I'm still having server instability problems, because some person managed to get in on a test account given to a friend who set their password to one that was dictionary-crackable, and this intruder has been running forkbombs (which eat cpu and ram like pacman) for the better part of the night. It seems to be tamed now, the account is secured, and I'm going to hit the sheets. See why I have little patience for internet mischiefmakers?
Of course not, as long as I have a slingshot and Malted Milkballs. Are you serious that people will call the police over that? Next thing you'll have me believe is someone trying to send a cashier to jail over a messed up happy meal.
Edit: I could touch on how I'd prefer to take someone who burglarizes my house to court myself, as long as I know who they are in order to do so, or how I think the civil court system is already awash and clogged in frivolous lawsuits which might make using it as a sole option of redress a little iffy. Seeing someone cost you a few hundred thousand dollars of business losses and damage and then get let off by a judge who doesn't see how their antics caused all the damage that you are claiming would be very unpleasant.
Then I realized:
I'm thinking about what would likely work implimented right now and launched into action, because I (partly selfishly, partly 'for the good of all', both of which are motives that should be closely watched) want a solution. More rightfully, I want to see justice. Heavy enforcment, with direct and impressive results over a year or three, likely followed by maintenance and a driving of webcrime overseas. Using private agencies and civil courts would be the better option, but is that ever likely to be a viable option, or even a possible one?
You're talking about how things should be. Where, again, I agree. There is probably little I wouldn't do to return us there.
Last edited:
Rich Lucibella
Staff
Sillier by the minute; greater hyperbole by the second:
Rich
Were these bots ransacking PayPal accounts? No. "Grandpa Mteebankaccount" can simply go to the Game Owner and have them issue him a brand new Secret Crucible Ring and restore his game time. The Game owner, knowing better than .gov who "Grandson Stole-the-Crucible Ring" can then take CIVIL action for tortuous interference.
Speak for yourself only. For my part, I find a rather perverse order in the Universe by seeking out those who have done me wrong and seeking personal justice. That is **exactly** what Civil Court is about. Can't remember the last time I called the Cops to solve a problem; and I'm hardly a law breaking vigilante.
Absolutely. We can develop whole new Federal Agencies just to protect us from personal internet inconveniences and "mischief". Imagine how many kids we might lock up on Halloween's Mischief Night under the same logic. Those eggs could put an eye out you know.
Rich
Wow.
But I wasn't talking about bots ransacking paypal accounts- although those things do certainly exist. Grandpa Mtee doesn't have anything to do with the game. I listed some examples including paypal fraud and theft. You said they were perfect for civil court, not federal action. So then I gave an example of how it would be difficult to go through civil court without heavy assistance- and now we're back at the game? I think I need to draw a diagram here.
You're also welcome to call the rampant issue of financial theft via backdoored personal computers 'hyperbole'. I'm sure the victims appreciate that.
Uh, yeah. That's the point. I'm admitting a fault here. It's natural for people to want justice/vengeance. I would have gone into more detail on how it's a desire for personal revenge OR having someone else do it, or on how it's more likely that in our current government incarnation that someone else will do it instead of Joe Vigilante.
What if I have taken part in violent and physical retaliation for financial harm caused by the actions of some member of an internet crime ring? I wouldn't talk about it here, and I might even avoid the whole concept of personal retaliation. Hmmmm.
See above, except I don't find it perverse, I find it flawless.
Again, how do you take someone to court when you don't have any idea who/where they are?
Someone entering a server, even if it was through a door that didn't require an overly complex lockpick, is a bit worse than an 'internet inconvenience'. Entering it and doing things that are analagous to taking a sledgehammer to the walls of a house is even worse.
If you want a comparison to 'egging', how about when a 13 year old learns of a cut-and-paste exploit for vBulletin, runs around looking for a nice large forum to destroy, and finds TFL? Zilch technical skill required and it's just "fun and games". Of course, once the forums are restored, there would be hundreds of blowhard posts talking about how they want to see the culprit sharing a cell with Bubba. Naturally, you'll tell them it was just some harmless inconveniance. (Which, under current law, civil or otherwise, it will be treated as.)
Let along having someone pry their way into the main TFL/SWAT server looking for credit card data and whatnot. Just internet mischief, right? You'll take them to civil court and get a nice big judgement against them, assuming you can even find out who or where they're from, unless they only have a thousand dollars in their bank account, a rusty Honda, and a doublewide in which case you'd wish you could just put them in jail as punishment. Yes, in an ideal country they'd work for you in labor of your choice until restitution is complete. Last I checked, this wasn't that ideal country.
As for federal agencies to combat these things, we already have the FBI and Secret Service which together are capable of handling it. I personally think we need to pare down our alphabet agencies, because a special 'internet crime' only bureau would probably be shockingly ineffective and/or abused.
And as for games, just give the game operators the legally enforced ability to fine people whatever they want for misconduct, as a condition of their contract. Save LE for the serious stuff.
But I wasn't talking about bots ransacking paypal accounts- although those things do certainly exist. Grandpa Mtee doesn't have anything to do with the game. I listed some examples including paypal fraud and theft. You said they were perfect for civil court, not federal action. So then I gave an example of how it would be difficult to go through civil court without heavy assistance- and now we're back at the game? I think I need to draw a diagram here.
You're also welcome to call the rampant issue of financial theft via backdoored personal computers 'hyperbole'. I'm sure the victims appreciate that.
Uh, yeah. That's the point. I'm admitting a fault here. It's natural for people to want justice/vengeance. I would have gone into more detail on how it's a desire for personal revenge OR having someone else do it, or on how it's more likely that in our current government incarnation that someone else will do it instead of Joe Vigilante.
What if I have taken part in violent and physical retaliation for financial harm caused by the actions of some member of an internet crime ring? I wouldn't talk about it here, and I might even avoid the whole concept of personal retaliation. Hmmmm.
See above, except I don't find it perverse, I find it flawless.
Again, how do you take someone to court when you don't have any idea who/where they are?
Someone entering a server, even if it was through a door that didn't require an overly complex lockpick, is a bit worse than an 'internet inconvenience'. Entering it and doing things that are analagous to taking a sledgehammer to the walls of a house is even worse.
If you want a comparison to 'egging', how about when a 13 year old learns of a cut-and-paste exploit for vBulletin, runs around looking for a nice large forum to destroy, and finds TFL? Zilch technical skill required and it's just "fun and games". Of course, once the forums are restored, there would be hundreds of blowhard posts talking about how they want to see the culprit sharing a cell with Bubba. Naturally, you'll tell them it was just some harmless inconveniance. (Which, under current law, civil or otherwise, it will be treated as.)
Let along having someone pry their way into the main TFL/SWAT server looking for credit card data and whatnot. Just internet mischief, right? You'll take them to civil court and get a nice big judgement against them, assuming you can even find out who or where they're from, unless they only have a thousand dollars in their bank account, a rusty Honda, and a doublewide in which case you'd wish you could just put them in jail as punishment. Yes, in an ideal country they'd work for you in labor of your choice until restitution is complete. Last I checked, this wasn't that ideal country.
As for federal agencies to combat these things, we already have the FBI and Secret Service which together are capable of handling it. I personally think we need to pare down our alphabet agencies, because a special 'internet crime' only bureau would probably be shockingly ineffective and/or abused.
And as for games, just give the game operators the legally enforced ability to fine people whatever they want for misconduct, as a condition of their contract. Save LE for the serious stuff.
Last edited: