I'm hereby throwing my hat into the ring as MMORPG's proof reader. If you already have one, smack him across the face and tell him he's been replaced. Seriously, I'll do it for free and lately, its becoming obvious that you guys need some quality control.
The sad thing is that I once knew someone working at Worlds, and she didn't seem to mind other companies using their "patented concept". She actually enjoyed playing said games. This was back in '98 and '99.
The other nice touch is now you know why I have always had a personal grudge against PB and MJ at Mythic, with their case against Mythica. The way that was handled was no less than an epic mess, and should have revealed the kind of characters those two are to everyone.
Waiting for- Tera, Jumpgate Evo, WH40K, WWE, WOD, TSW -- -- "Hey, if Activision liked it, then they should have put a ring on it," Double Fine President Tim Schafer said. "Oh great, now Beyonce is going to sue me too."
Seriously, there's almost nothing correct about this article.
Calling Worlds.com a trademark case (it's not), not understanding what a trademark does, not noticing that the Square Enix case is a class action and that $5 million would go to ALL final fantasy XI players, etc. Shoddy work overall, absolutely shoddy.
Are you really surprised? Most of the articles presented on this site are poorly researched, if at all. In addition to the Glider suit being called silly in the title, and then expressly called a good idea in the body, the article is full of contradictions and errors. That is just how they do things here.
Ive lurked for quite some time here, and I have to agree.
Seriously, there's almost nothing correct about this article.
Calling Worlds.com a trademark case (it's not), not understanding what a trademark does, not noticing that the Square Enix case is a class action and that $5 million would go to ALL final fantasy XI players, etc. Shoddy work overall, absolutely shoddy.
Are you really surprised? Most of the articles presented on this site are poorly researched, if at all. In addition to the Glider suit being called silly in the title, and then expressly called a good idea in the body, the article is full of contradictions and errors. That is just how they do things here.
I think you guys are being a bit ridiculous.
Its a mmo site.
What are you expecting?
Well all things considered, if you are writing as a columnist you should try and be unbiased and present factual information.
Ive seen the writers here on MMORPG be very biased..but its a whatever kind of thing, not a big deal.
I just think what Dana was writing about was beyond his understanding, and thats not meant as a jab at you Dana.
I also dont think Dana was as off on his article as Jester makes it out to be. The Mythic RVR one as an example. Dana understands its a trademark infringement, but thinks Mythic should have allowed it and beat Auran at their own game. I disagree with Dana on that and I agree with Mythic its their property they shouldnt let anyone use it, unless they want to liscense (and pay for it).
But whatever I say.
Jester is within rights to throw Dana under the bus on the shoddy research.
"I understand that if I hear any more words come pouring out of your **** mouth, Ill have to eat every fucking chicken in this room."
LOL. I remember #1, when I saw that article in the "MMO news article" e-mail I immediately logged onto my xbl acc and sent out a message to all friends. Then went into a party with some of my best friends and we all had a good laugh about it. I also told a bunch of my friends at school, that lawsuit was so ridicuously funny. Provided new jokes and laughter for quite awhile =P
Surprised the Ultima Online suit wasn't on there. I believe is was about the box advertising you could play 24/7, and in reality the servers coming down for 1 hour a day made that impossible.
If people think so little of their time in your game that they'll let a bot play their character in order to advance, maybe you should look a bit harder at the fun factor of your game. Most battlegrounds have a few characters AFK at the entrance to the battleground, which is no different in principle, yet Blizzard does nothing to stop it.
Yet another Blizzard-hater piece of propaganda. It's so "leet" and "kewl" to be a Blizzard-hater on MMORPG.com. Whoopedy doo....you gain 10 reputation points with the other WoW haters of a gaming forum. /rolls eyes Are they giving certificates of achievement or something for this now here on this site? It's really getting OLD.
First of all, the people that are botting in games (WoW in particular, but I have also seen bots in EVERY MMO I have played) are RARELY botting "in order to advance" their characters. Most bots are farming gold to sell for real world cash. And you ARE right....the people that run those bots think "very little of the game," because to an opportunist that will go to any length, including breaking laws, just to make a buck....they not only think little of the games they're botting, but they think nothing of the other gamers playing the game either. They are basically self-absorbed individuals with no sense of real world integrity. They don't care if it destroys the in game economy, or makes playing the game less enjoyable for those that play honestly and just want to enjoy the hobby that they pay a monthly fee to enjoy. The only thing they care about is their own financial interests, and legalities and other such "nonsense" make no difference to them. Essentially....they're just common cowardly criminals.
REAL gamers do not "let bots play their characters." That is the fodder of the gold farmer. A REAL gamer that dislikes a game...just moves on and plays something else....OR....they come bitch about everything they hate about a game on MMORPG.com and otherwise "do nothing about it." So while you're saying Blizzard does nothing about it (which is untrue)....consider that. Apparently there are plenty of people still enjoying what Blizzard has made. If you're not one of them....no big deal. Go play the games that you don't have any complaints about.....and good luck FINDING one of those games too.
If people think so little of their time in your game that they'll let a bot play their character in order to advance, maybe you should look a bit harder at the fun factor of your game. Most battlegrounds have a few characters AFK at the entrance to the battleground, which is no different in principle, yet Blizzard does nothing to stop it.
Yet another Blizzard-hater piece of propaganda. It's so "leet" and "kewl" to be a Blizzard-hater on MMORPG.com. Whoopedy doo....you gain 10 reputation points with the other WoW haters of a gaming forum. /rolls eyes Are they giving certificates of achievement or something for this now here on this site? It's really getting OLD.
First of all, the people that are botting in games (WoW in particular, but I have also seen bots in EVERY MMO I have played) are RARELY botting "in order to advance" their characters. Most bots are farming gold to sell for real world cash. And you ARE right....the people that run those bots think "very little of the game," because to an opportunist that will go to any length, including breaking laws, just to make a buck....they not only think little of the games they're botting, but they think nothing of the other gamers playing the game either. They are basically self-absorbed individuals with no sense of real world integrity. They don't care if it destroys the in game economy, or makes playing the game less enjoyable for those that play honestly and just want to enjoy the hobby that they pay a monthly fee to enjoy. The only thing they care about is their own financial interests, and legalities and other such "nonsense" make no difference to them. Essentially....they're just common cowardly criminals.
REAL gamers do not "let bots play their characters." That is the fodder of the gold farmer. A REAL gamer that dislikes a game...just moves on and plays something else....OR....they come bitch about everything they hate about a game on MMORPG.com and otherwise "do nothing about it." So while you're saying Blizzard does nothing about it (which is untrue)....consider that. Apparently there are plenty of people still enjoying what Blizzard has made. If you're not one of them....no big deal. Go play the games that you don't have any complaints about.....and good luck FINDING one of those games too.
I consider myself to be a real gamer, and after leveling several characters legit, decided to let glider do the work on future ones for me. I botted to advance, not for gold. But TBH, yes most modern MMO's have bots, why , because the game are so easy they don't require an intelligent human being to defeat the content, a mindless bot that repeatedly mashes the same button config will do just fine. You never saw bots in EQ classic, why? Because it was too hard. I'm not a WoW hater although I no longer play the game. Fact is, there is so much of an emphasis on end game, and "the game starts at max level" to make leveling any thing other than a cleverly disguised chore. That being said, at the time you didn't make enough money botting from 1-60 to endanger the economy, made just about enough to buy your epic mount. Also, while I'm not defending/condoning botting ,as much inflation as they cause by creating more money and devaluing it, they also introduce more BoE items to the system ,which is good for the AH consumer.
This article is absolutely rife with factual errors. The list of them has been outlined here: http://www.gameslaw.net/2009/09/01/five-silliest-mmo-lawsuits/ Seriously, there's almost nothing correct about this article. Calling Worlds.com a trademark case (it's not), not understanding what a trademark does, not noticing that the Square Enix case is a class action and that $5 million would go to ALL final fantasy XI players, etc. Shoddy work overall, absolutely shoddy.
Well, that was an interesting read.
Rebuttle?
Ok, I suppose I should probably step in here for a second.
First, I want to say that I think in hindsight, this article was probably mis-titled. It should have been Five Memorable MMO lawsuits.
Now, I understand that coming from a website that's dedicated to the law, and the law surrounding video games and virtual worlds is going to have a better grasp of the actual legalities surrounding these cases. I agreed with some of the criticism where obviously I didn't have their level of legal understanding (I thought I prefaced that pretty specifically at the top of the article), and apparently I confused some terms. So yeah, I agree with some of that. There's other stuff in that critique that I don't agree with, but it's completely their right to say whatever it is they want.
So, I apologize for not being up on my specific legalese and confusing some terms including, but I'm sure not limited to: trademark, and class action lawsuit. I'm also sorry for a misleading title.
With that said, I just want to reference back to the opening section of the column: "I am by no means a legal expert. I don’t even play one on TV, so I honestly can’t speak to the legalese involved in any of these cases so let’s all just sit down and have a good time, ok?
If your idea of a good time is to tear the thing apart, then awesome, have at it. These columns are meant to be fun. Other sections of the site are reserved for harder news. This column is, quite obviously and plainly stated, just for kicks.
You're article is entitled "Five Sillies MMO Lawsuits", yet you put Blizzard vs. MMO Glider. You, then, go on to praise Blizzard for doing what you wish other companies would do, and end the paragraph by saying "So, I’m going to say something I don’t normally say: Good job Blizzard. Bravo."
Dude?
Just wanted to let everyone know that I changed the title to better reflect the feel of the column.
I am surprised Apogee and ID software and Atari dont sue them for attempting to make copyrights on their material.
3d world...using a client...many players...and a reactive environment....
You know i still remember playing a 16 player duke match...and i recall doing a 6 player co-op doom game....those where alot of fun.....great fun those days where...^_^
This article is absolutely rife with factual errors. The list of them has been outlined here: http://www.gameslaw.net/2009/09/01/five-silliest-mmo-lawsuits/ Seriously, there's almost nothing correct about this article. Calling Worlds.com a trademark case (it's not), not understanding what a trademark does, not noticing that the Square Enix case is a class action and that $5 million would go to ALL final fantasy XI players, etc. Shoddy work overall, absolutely shoddy.
Well, that was an interesting read.
Rebuttle?
Ok, I suppose I should probably step in here for a second.
First, I want to say that I think in hindsight, this article was probably mis-titled. It should have been Five Memorable MMO lawsuits.
Now, I understand that coming from a website that's dedicated to the law, and the law surrounding video games and virtual worlds is going to have a better grasp of the actual legalities surrounding these cases. I agreed with some of the criticism where obviously I didn't have their level of legal understanding (I thought I prefaced that pretty specifically at the top of the article), and apparently I confused some terms. So yeah, I agree with some of that. There's other stuff in that critique that I don't agree with, but it's completely their right to say whatever it is they want.
So, I apologize for not being up on my specific legalese and confusing some terms including, but I'm sure not limited to: trademark, and class action lawsuit. I'm also sorry for a misleading title.
With that said, I just want to reference back to the opening section of the column: "I am by no means a legal expert. I don’t even play one on TV, so I honestly can’t speak to the legalese involved in any of these cases so let’s all just sit down and have a good time, ok?
If your idea of a good time is to tear the thing apart, then awesome, have at it. These columns are meant to be fun. Other sections of the site are reserved for harder news. This column is, quite obviously and plainly stated, just for kicks.
I can assure you that as a fellow journalist, I take no pleasure in tearing anyone else's work apart. I've had columns of mine ripped apart by readers (not just at gameslaw, but in larger and more public outlets as well), and I'm thankful for them pointing out my mistakes, and I will correct them where I have been wrong. But fair commentary is fair commentary. When the fundamental facts about what happened are wrong, then you are doing your readers a disservice; doubly so when it involves the law.
For instance the Square Enix case. Your entire segment on it is premised on the mistaken belief that there was just one plaintiff. You were literally taunting her for being greedy, when in fact the money would have been split between potentially tens of thousands of class members.
Or the Mythic case. You don't seem to understand that if a company does not enforce their trademarks, they risk losing them. Regardless of whether they think the issue is really important, in order to maintain their protections they HAVE to do it. So that entire section was taunting a company for doing something that they HAVE to do in order to continue making money in the games industry.
Or the Worlds.com case. Your argument is that because they were claiming to have invented the modern MMO in 2000, they are laughable. Except they claimed to invent it in 1996, and it is questionable but entirely possible that for purposes of patent law they are correct. That's the whole reason that the case is important enough to merit discussion on my panel at PAX this week; discussion at Game:business:law, discussion at GDC in multiple sessions; and is being closely watched by patent attorneys worldwide. You got the fundamental facts wrong on this one.
So yes, I do feel it is worth picking apart because it was worth my time when checking through my PR distribution list to see that email about it, click the link, read through two pages, and note significant problems with it. You can pass it off as "soft news" or whatever, but it doesn't excuse factual error. If I had done that in any of my print outlets (hell, even in most of my web outlets) I would have been fired on the spot. I think you owe it to your readers to give them the correct information. Even with an edited title, the errors still haven't been fixed -- you are still telling them the wrong thing, still giving them wrong information; worse you're doing it knowingly. I don't think that is the right thing to do, and while I take no pleasure in calling you out on it, it'd be wrong for me not to say something.
Ahh, I came in late and thought it odd that the Marvel vs. NCsoft / Cryptic Studios wasn't listed. That could have been a big one if Marvel had been successful instead of settling out of court.
EDIT: But then I read it was originally the 'silliest' MMO lawsuits, which even then it wasn't.
The case was settled in favor of the employees aka unpaid volunteers. Good for them.
Unpaid volunteering for a "for profit company " is both ridiculous and absurd. Any company *cough cough* that doesn't pay such employees is unethical and should be ashamed.
Unethical perhaps, but not unheard of by far. Many persistent world games treat their gamemasters as unpaid volunteers. Funcom for instance did it for Age of Conan to cut down on paid GM staff (I should know, I was one). They farm the grunt work out to those guys and let the paid employees deal with other stuff. I can think of at least three other MMORPG's that do the same thing.
This article is absolutely rife with factual errors. The list of them has been outlined here: http://www.gameslaw.net/2009/09/01/five-silliest-mmo-lawsuits/ Seriously, there's almost nothing correct about this article. Calling Worlds.com a trademark case (it's not), not understanding what a trademark does, not noticing that the Square Enix case is a class action and that $5 million would go to ALL final fantasy XI players, etc. Shoddy work overall, absolutely shoddy.
Well, that was an interesting read.
Rebuttle?
Ok, I suppose I should probably step in here for a second.
First, I want to say that I think in hindsight, this article was probably mis-titled. It should have been Five Memorable MMO lawsuits.
Now, I understand that coming from a website that's dedicated to the law, and the law surrounding video games and virtual worlds is going to have a better grasp of the actual legalities surrounding these cases. I agreed with some of the criticism where obviously I didn't have their level of legal understanding (I thought I prefaced that pretty specifically at the top of the article), and apparently I confused some terms. So yeah, I agree with some of that. There's other stuff in that critique that I don't agree with, but it's completely their right to say whatever it is they want.
So, I apologize for not being up on my specific legalese and confusing some terms including, but I'm sure not limited to: trademark, and class action lawsuit. I'm also sorry for a misleading title.
With that said, I just want to reference back to the opening section of the column: "I am by no means a legal expert. I don’t even play one on TV, so I honestly can’t speak to the legalese involved in any of these cases so let’s all just sit down and have a good time, ok?
If your idea of a good time is to tear the thing apart, then awesome, have at it. These columns are meant to be fun. Other sections of the site are reserved for harder news. This column is, quite obviously and plainly stated, just for kicks.
A case of the hit dog barking the loudest? Sorry, but I have to agree with Jester there, it's one thing to get some legal terms wrong, it's another thing to pull wrong info out of dark places. Your article is really full of major errors, your "I am by no means a legal expert" doesn't cut it as an excuse for that. Neither is "oh it's just a column just for kicks". Making fun of people for doing the right thing is not kicks, it's stupid, plain and simple.
Besides, if you have absolutely no clue about the whats and whys of something, why do you feel you should write about it? And bashing at people for pointing out your errors doesn't speak for you either I'm afraid.
If people think so little of their time in your game that they'll let a bot play their character in order to advance, maybe you should look a bit harder at the fun factor of your game. Most battlegrounds have a few characters AFK at the entrance to the battleground, which is no different in principle, yet Blizzard does nothing to stop it.
Yet another Blizzard-hater piece of propaganda. It's so "leet" and "kewl" to be a Blizzard-hater on MMORPG.com. Whoopedy doo....you gain 10 reputation points with the other WoW haters of a gaming forum. /rolls eyes Are they giving certificates of achievement or something for this now here on this site? It's really getting OLD.
First of all, the people that are botting in games (WoW in particular, but I have also seen bots in EVERY MMO I have played) are RARELY botting "in order to advance" their characters. Most bots are farming gold to sell for real world cash. And you ARE right....the people that run those bots think "very little of the game," because to an opportunist that will go to any length, including breaking laws, just to make a buck....they not only think little of the games they're botting, but they think nothing of the other gamers playing the game either. They are basically self-absorbed individuals with no sense of real world integrity. They don't care if it destroys the in game economy, or makes playing the game less enjoyable for those that play honestly and just want to enjoy the hobby that they pay a monthly fee to enjoy. The only thing they care about is their own financial interests, and legalities and other such "nonsense" make no difference to them. Essentially....they're just common cowardly criminals.
REAL gamers do not "let bots play their characters." That is the fodder of the gold farmer. A REAL gamer that dislikes a game...just moves on and plays something else....OR....they come bitch about everything they hate about a game on MMORPG.com and otherwise "do nothing about it." So while you're saying Blizzard does nothing about it (which is untrue)....consider that. Apparently there are plenty of people still enjoying what Blizzard has made. If you're not one of them....no big deal. Go play the games that you don't have any complaints about.....and good luck FINDING one of those games too.
I consider myself to be a real gamer, and after leveling several characters legit, decided to let glider do the work on future ones for me. I botted to advance, not for gold. But TBH, yes most modern MMO's have bots, why , because the game are so easy they don't require an intelligent human being to defeat the content, a mindless bot that repeatedly mashes the same button config will do just fine. You never saw bots in EQ classic, why? Because it was too hard. I'm not a WoW hater although I no longer play the game. Fact is, there is so much of an emphasis on end game, and "the game starts at max level" to make leveling any thing other than a cleverly disguised chore. That being said, at the time you didn't make enough money botting from 1-60 to endanger the economy, made just about enough to buy your epic mount. Also, while I'm not defending/condoning botting ,as much inflation as they cause by creating more money and devaluing it, they also introduce more BoE items to the system ,which is good for the AH consumer.
Fair enough. I don't disagree with a LOT of what you say here, in fact. However, I still wonder why people continue to play a game in ANY manner if they're so bored with it. LOL Seriously...I don't get that. When I get bored with a game, I don't start using a bot....I go find a game that doesn't bore me. And I will do that EVEN if it's only to take a BREAK from a game that has temporarily become boring. But I suppose every gamer has their own "style" of dealing.
I played original EQ and UO also, and you're correct....never saw a bot. EQ2...is LOADED with them, by the way, sadly. Most modern MMOs are, just as you said.
I've played an awfully lot of MMOs, both paid and f2p, and honestly....I get bored eventually with EVERY SINGLE ONE. Some may take longer to wear on me tha others, but I always end up moving on to something else at some point, whether that's after years of playing, or months.
Yeah the worlds.com lawsuit is a joke. The patent itself has no grounds to stand on with tons of prior history to invalidate it. NCSoft should get damages from them for filing a nuisance lawsuit. I just wish Congress would do something with the debacle the patent office has become. Of course knowing Congress, they would probably make it worse.
I think Turbine's lawsuit has some teeth behind it. The company who bought the Atari name has had some really questionable dealings with other companies.
Originally posted by Stradden Originally posted by Ghostmind Originally posted by SWATJester This article is absolutely rife with factual errors. The list of them has been outlined here: http://www.gameslaw.net/2009/09/01/five-silliest-mmo-lawsuits/ Seriously, there's almost nothing correct about this article. Calling Worlds.com a trademark case (it's not), not understanding what a trademark does, not noticing that the Square Enix case is a class action and that $5 million would go to ALL final fantasy XI players, etc. Shoddy work overall, absolutely shoddy.
Well, that was an interesting read. Rebuttle? Ok, I suppose I should probably step in here for a second. First, I want to say that I think in hindsight, this article was probably mis-titled. It should have been Five Memorable MMO lawsuits. Now, I understand that coming from a website that's dedicated to the law, and the law surrounding video games and virtual worlds is going to have a better grasp of the actual legalities surrounding these cases. I agreed with some of the criticism where obviously I didn't have their level of legal understanding (I thought I prefaced that pretty specifically at the top of the article), and apparently I confused some terms. So yeah, I agree with some of that. There's other stuff in that critique that I don't agree with, but it's completely their right to say whatever it is they want. So, I apologize for not being up on my specific legalese and confusing some terms including, but I'm sure not limited to: trademark, and class action lawsuit. I'm also sorry for a misleading title. With that said, I just want to reference back to the opening section of the column: "I am by no means a legal expert. I dont even play one on TV, so I honestly cant speak to the legalese involved in any of these cases so lets all just sit down and have a good time, ok? If your idea of a good time is to tear the thing apart, then awesome, have at it. These columns are meant to be fun. Other sections of the site are reserved for harder news. This column is, quite obviously and plainly stated, just for kicks.
Don't let the bastards get to ya. It was an interesting read. This isn't the New York Times for christ sake.
A website devoted to "In-depth legal analysis and news for video games and virtual worlds"? Ooh boy, hold me back that sounds like the best site ever! (*sarcasm*)
You just keep doing what you do man, this site gets a ton more traffic than that crappy site and the guy's just looking for attention.
The UO " unpaid employee" lawsuit was certainly important. www.salon.com/tech/log/2000/09/21/ultima_volunteers/ The case was settled in favor of the employees aka unpaid volunteers. Good for them. Unpaid volunteering for a "for profit company " is both ridiculous and absurd. Any company *cough cough* that doesn't pay such employees is unethical and should be ashamed.
Acutally I think that was probably the dumbest lawsuit yet in this genre. 99.9% of the volunteers enjoyed what they were doing and they were not unpaid as they got to play the game for free. Removing them hurt the game. So the idiots that brought the lawsuit just ruined it for the vast majority. What the volunteers were doing was neither ridiculous nor absurd. Typical response of someone on the outside completely misunderstanding the issues.
But I do agree that the lawsuit was more significant than some of those that are listed in the article in how it has effected the genre.
"The "Get ready to rumble" guy sued us but good on that one...hard to forget that one. He has tradmarked all "fight related use of the word rumble". We won't be having anything "rumble related" any time ever again.
The UO " unpaid employee" lawsuit was certainly important. www.salon.com/tech/log/2000/09/21/ultima_volunteers/ The case was settled in favor of the employees aka unpaid volunteers. Good for them. Unpaid volunteering for a "for profit company " is both ridiculous and absurd. Any company *cough cough* that doesn't pay such employees is unethical and should be ashamed.
Acutally I think that was probably the dumbest lawsuit yet in this genre. 99.9% of the volunteers enjoyed what they were doing and they were not unpaid as they got to play the game for free. Removing them hurt the game. So the idiots that brought the lawsuit just ruined it for the vast majority. What the volunteers were doing was neither ridiculous nor absurd. Typical response of someone on the outside completely misunderstanding the issues.
But I do agree that the lawsuit was more significant than some of those that are listed in the article in how it has effected the genre.
QFT
I've seen so many times where people who are volunteering then try to sue for money. IF a company says we have work but would like you to do it for free, you have no right to money. If they promise money then don't pay up, fine, but to demand money that you agreed to not take? Sad... Intern programs are like this. Would I have loved to have gotten paid for being an intern at a law firm? Absolutely! But was it fact at the time that enough people wanted the position badly enough that people were willing to do it for free? It still is. Because of cut backs I'm out of the program, (still can't figure out how you can be too broke to afford free workers), but will return the second they let me or when I find another program. While I did get compensation in free gas money to and from work I never got paid and don't care because the experience is what I need more than anything.
You're article is entitled "Five Sillies MMO Lawsuits", yet you put Blizzard vs. MMO Glider. You, then, go on to praise Blizzard for doing what you wish other companies would do, and end the paragraph by saying "So, I’m going to say something I don’t normally say: Good job Blizzard. Bravo."
Dude?
The title said most "memorable" lawsuits, not the most silly. Author also said that "often" there are humor to be found and not "always".
Plus if you think about it, that lawsuit can be considered humorous in that it is completely fruitless attempt and Blizzard know it. Even if they win against WoW glider, they cannot stop goldfarmers in WoW much less the entire mmorpg industry. I do appreciate the fact they went for it, but truthfully the outcome is pretty much the same whether Blizzard win, lose, or settled.
Comments
lol
for real
I'm hereby throwing my hat into the ring as MMORPG's proof reader. If you already have one, smack him across the face and tell him he's been replaced. Seriously, I'll do it for free and lately, its becoming obvious that you guys need some quality control.
The sad thing is that I once knew someone working at Worlds, and she didn't seem to mind other companies using their "patented concept". She actually enjoyed playing said games. This was back in '98 and '99.
The other nice touch is now you know why I have always had a personal grudge against PB and MJ at Mythic, with their case against Mythica. The way that was handled was no less than an epic mess, and should have revealed the kind of characters those two are to everyone.
-----------------------
Tried- L2, Ryzom, WAR, DDO, PWI, Tab Rasa, Requiem, Champs, AA, JD, PWI, SUN, Dawntide
Played- SWG (pre-cu), AoC, VG, WoW, LoTRO,CoX, EQ2, DAOC, GW, PotBS, Aion, MO,APB, NASA, Fallen Earth, DCUO, Rift
Playing- EVE, Black Prophecy, TOR
Waiting for- Tera, Jumpgate Evo, WH40K, WWE, WOD, TSW
--
--
"Hey, if Activision liked it, then they should have put a ring on it," Double Fine President Tim Schafer said. "Oh great, now Beyonce is going to sue me too."
Are you really surprised? Most of the articles presented on this site are poorly researched, if at all. In addition to the Glider suit being called silly in the title, and then expressly called a good idea in the body, the article is full of contradictions and errors. That is just how they do things here.
Ive lurked for quite some time here, and I have to agree.
Are you really surprised? Most of the articles presented on this site are poorly researched, if at all. In addition to the Glider suit being called silly in the title, and then expressly called a good idea in the body, the article is full of contradictions and errors. That is just how they do things here.
I think you guys are being a bit ridiculous.
Its a mmo site.
What are you expecting?
Well all things considered, if you are writing as a columnist you should try and be unbiased and present factual information.
Ive seen the writers here on MMORPG be very biased..but its a whatever kind of thing, not a big deal.
I just think what Dana was writing about was beyond his understanding, and thats not meant as a jab at you Dana.
I also dont think Dana was as off on his article as Jester makes it out to be. The Mythic RVR one as an example. Dana understands its a trademark infringement, but thinks Mythic should have allowed it and beat Auran at their own game. I disagree with Dana on that and I agree with Mythic its their property they shouldnt let anyone use it, unless they want to liscense (and pay for it).
But whatever I say.
Jester is within rights to throw Dana under the bus on the shoddy research.
"I understand that if I hear any more words come pouring out of your **** mouth, Ill have to eat every fucking chicken in this room."
LOL. I remember #1, when I saw that article in the "MMO news article" e-mail I immediately logged onto my xbl acc and sent out a message to all friends. Then went into a party with some of my best friends and we all had a good laugh about it. I also told a bunch of my friends at school, that lawsuit was so ridicuously funny. Provided new jokes and laughter for quite awhile =P
Surprised the Ultima Online suit wasn't on there. I believe is was about the box advertising you could play 24/7, and in reality the servers coming down for 1 hour a day made that impossible.
Yet another Blizzard-hater piece of propaganda. It's so "leet" and "kewl" to be a Blizzard-hater on MMORPG.com. Whoopedy doo....you gain 10 reputation points with the other WoW haters of a gaming forum. /rolls eyes Are they giving certificates of achievement or something for this now here on this site? It's really getting OLD.
First of all, the people that are botting in games (WoW in particular, but I have also seen bots in EVERY MMO I have played) are RARELY botting "in order to advance" their characters. Most bots are farming gold to sell for real world cash. And you ARE right....the people that run those bots think "very little of the game," because to an opportunist that will go to any length, including breaking laws, just to make a buck....they not only think little of the games they're botting, but they think nothing of the other gamers playing the game either. They are basically self-absorbed individuals with no sense of real world integrity. They don't care if it destroys the in game economy, or makes playing the game less enjoyable for those that play honestly and just want to enjoy the hobby that they pay a monthly fee to enjoy. The only thing they care about is their own financial interests, and legalities and other such "nonsense" make no difference to them. Essentially....they're just common cowardly criminals.
REAL gamers do not "let bots play their characters." That is the fodder of the gold farmer. A REAL gamer that dislikes a game...just moves on and plays something else....OR....they come bitch about everything they hate about a game on MMORPG.com and otherwise "do nothing about it." So while you're saying Blizzard does nothing about it (which is untrue)....consider that. Apparently there are plenty of people still enjoying what Blizzard has made. If you're not one of them....no big deal. Go play the games that you don't have any complaints about.....and good luck FINDING one of those games too.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
Yet another Blizzard-hater piece of propaganda. It's so "leet" and "kewl" to be a Blizzard-hater on MMORPG.com. Whoopedy doo....you gain 10 reputation points with the other WoW haters of a gaming forum. /rolls eyes Are they giving certificates of achievement or something for this now here on this site? It's really getting OLD.
First of all, the people that are botting in games (WoW in particular, but I have also seen bots in EVERY MMO I have played) are RARELY botting "in order to advance" their characters. Most bots are farming gold to sell for real world cash. And you ARE right....the people that run those bots think "very little of the game," because to an opportunist that will go to any length, including breaking laws, just to make a buck....they not only think little of the games they're botting, but they think nothing of the other gamers playing the game either. They are basically self-absorbed individuals with no sense of real world integrity. They don't care if it destroys the in game economy, or makes playing the game less enjoyable for those that play honestly and just want to enjoy the hobby that they pay a monthly fee to enjoy. The only thing they care about is their own financial interests, and legalities and other such "nonsense" make no difference to them. Essentially....they're just common cowardly criminals.
REAL gamers do not "let bots play their characters." That is the fodder of the gold farmer. A REAL gamer that dislikes a game...just moves on and plays something else....OR....they come bitch about everything they hate about a game on MMORPG.com and otherwise "do nothing about it." So while you're saying Blizzard does nothing about it (which is untrue)....consider that. Apparently there are plenty of people still enjoying what Blizzard has made. If you're not one of them....no big deal. Go play the games that you don't have any complaints about.....and good luck FINDING one of those games too.
I consider myself to be a real gamer, and after leveling several characters legit, decided to let glider do the work on future ones for me. I botted to advance, not for gold. But TBH, yes most modern MMO's have bots, why , because the game are so easy they don't require an intelligent human being to defeat the content, a mindless bot that repeatedly mashes the same button config will do just fine. You never saw bots in EQ classic, why? Because it was too hard. I'm not a WoW hater although I no longer play the game. Fact is, there is so much of an emphasis on end game, and "the game starts at max level" to make leveling any thing other than a cleverly disguised chore. That being said, at the time you didn't make enough money botting from 1-60 to endanger the economy, made just about enough to buy your epic mount. Also, while I'm not defending/condoning botting ,as much inflation as they cause by creating more money and devaluing it, they also introduce more BoE items to the system ,which is good for the AH consumer.
Well, that was an interesting read.
Rebuttle?
Ok, I suppose I should probably step in here for a second.
First, I want to say that I think in hindsight, this article was probably mis-titled. It should have been Five Memorable MMO lawsuits.
Now, I understand that coming from a website that's dedicated to the law, and the law surrounding video games and virtual worlds is going to have a better grasp of the actual legalities surrounding these cases. I agreed with some of the criticism where obviously I didn't have their level of legal understanding (I thought I prefaced that pretty specifically at the top of the article), and apparently I confused some terms. So yeah, I agree with some of that. There's other stuff in that critique that I don't agree with, but it's completely their right to say whatever it is they want.
So, I apologize for not being up on my specific legalese and confusing some terms including, but I'm sure not limited to: trademark, and class action lawsuit. I'm also sorry for a misleading title.
With that said, I just want to reference back to the opening section of the column: "I am by no means a legal expert. I don’t even play one on TV, so I honestly can’t speak to the legalese involved in any of these cases so let’s all just sit down and have a good time, ok?
If your idea of a good time is to tear the thing apart, then awesome, have at it. These columns are meant to be fun. Other sections of the site are reserved for harder news. This column is, quite obviously and plainly stated, just for kicks.
Cheers,
Jon Wood
Managing Editor
MMORPG.com
Hokie, Jon wrote this one. Not Dana.
I do think it's bad business practice on the part of SquareEnix with the way they handle the subscription.
--------
"Chemistry: 'We do stuff in lab that would be a felony in your garage.'"
The most awesomest after school special T-shirt:
Front: UNO Chemistry Club
Back: /\OH --> Bad Decisions
Just wanted to let everyone know that I changed the title to better reflect the feel of the column.
Cheers,
Jon Wood
Managing Editor
MMORPG.com
Ahh yes worlds.com
I am surprised Apogee and ID software and Atari dont sue them for attempting to make copyrights on their material.
3d world...using a client...many players...and a reactive environment....
You know i still remember playing a 16 player duke match...and i recall doing a 6 player co-op doom game....those where alot of fun.....great fun those days where...^_^
Well, that was an interesting read.
Rebuttle?
Ok, I suppose I should probably step in here for a second.
First, I want to say that I think in hindsight, this article was probably mis-titled. It should have been Five Memorable MMO lawsuits.
Now, I understand that coming from a website that's dedicated to the law, and the law surrounding video games and virtual worlds is going to have a better grasp of the actual legalities surrounding these cases. I agreed with some of the criticism where obviously I didn't have their level of legal understanding (I thought I prefaced that pretty specifically at the top of the article), and apparently I confused some terms. So yeah, I agree with some of that. There's other stuff in that critique that I don't agree with, but it's completely their right to say whatever it is they want.
So, I apologize for not being up on my specific legalese and confusing some terms including, but I'm sure not limited to: trademark, and class action lawsuit. I'm also sorry for a misleading title.
With that said, I just want to reference back to the opening section of the column: "I am by no means a legal expert. I don’t even play one on TV, so I honestly can’t speak to the legalese involved in any of these cases so let’s all just sit down and have a good time, ok?
If your idea of a good time is to tear the thing apart, then awesome, have at it. These columns are meant to be fun. Other sections of the site are reserved for harder news. This column is, quite obviously and plainly stated, just for kicks.
I can assure you that as a fellow journalist, I take no pleasure in tearing anyone else's work apart. I've had columns of mine ripped apart by readers (not just at gameslaw, but in larger and more public outlets as well), and I'm thankful for them pointing out my mistakes, and I will correct them where I have been wrong. But fair commentary is fair commentary. When the fundamental facts about what happened are wrong, then you are doing your readers a disservice; doubly so when it involves the law.
For instance the Square Enix case. Your entire segment on it is premised on the mistaken belief that there was just one plaintiff. You were literally taunting her for being greedy, when in fact the money would have been split between potentially tens of thousands of class members.
Or the Mythic case. You don't seem to understand that if a company does not enforce their trademarks, they risk losing them. Regardless of whether they think the issue is really important, in order to maintain their protections they HAVE to do it. So that entire section was taunting a company for doing something that they HAVE to do in order to continue making money in the games industry.
Or the Worlds.com case. Your argument is that because they were claiming to have invented the modern MMO in 2000, they are laughable. Except they claimed to invent it in 1996, and it is questionable but entirely possible that for purposes of patent law they are correct. That's the whole reason that the case is important enough to merit discussion on my panel at PAX this week; discussion at Game:business:law, discussion at GDC in multiple sessions; and is being closely watched by patent attorneys worldwide. You got the fundamental facts wrong on this one.
So yes, I do feel it is worth picking apart because it was worth my time when checking through my PR distribution list to see that email about it, click the link, read through two pages, and note significant problems with it. You can pass it off as "soft news" or whatever, but it doesn't excuse factual error. If I had done that in any of my print outlets (hell, even in most of my web outlets) I would have been fired on the spot. I think you owe it to your readers to give them the correct information. Even with an edited title, the errors still haven't been fixed -- you are still telling them the wrong thing, still giving them wrong information; worse you're doing it knowingly. I don't think that is the right thing to do, and while I take no pleasure in calling you out on it, it'd be wrong for me not to say something.
Executive Director,
GamesLaw.net
Ahh, I came in late and thought it odd that the Marvel vs. NCsoft / Cryptic Studios wasn't listed. That could have been a big one if Marvel had been successful instead of settling out of court.
EDIT: But then I read it was originally the 'silliest' MMO lawsuits, which even then it wasn't.
The UO " unpaid employee" lawsuit was certainly important. www.salon.com/tech/log/2000/09/21/ultima_volunteers/
The case was settled in favor of the employees aka unpaid volunteers. Good for them.
Unpaid volunteering for a "for profit company " is both ridiculous and absurd. Any company *cough cough* that doesn't pay such employees is unethical and should be ashamed.
Unethical perhaps, but not unheard of by far. Many persistent world games treat their gamemasters as unpaid volunteers. Funcom for instance did it for Age of Conan to cut down on paid GM staff (I should know, I was one). They farm the grunt work out to those guys and let the paid employees deal with other stuff. I can think of at least three other MMORPG's that do the same thing.
Executive Director,
GamesLaw.net
Well, that was an interesting read.
Rebuttle?
Ok, I suppose I should probably step in here for a second.
First, I want to say that I think in hindsight, this article was probably mis-titled. It should have been Five Memorable MMO lawsuits.
Now, I understand that coming from a website that's dedicated to the law, and the law surrounding video games and virtual worlds is going to have a better grasp of the actual legalities surrounding these cases. I agreed with some of the criticism where obviously I didn't have their level of legal understanding (I thought I prefaced that pretty specifically at the top of the article), and apparently I confused some terms. So yeah, I agree with some of that. There's other stuff in that critique that I don't agree with, but it's completely their right to say whatever it is they want.
So, I apologize for not being up on my specific legalese and confusing some terms including, but I'm sure not limited to: trademark, and class action lawsuit. I'm also sorry for a misleading title.
With that said, I just want to reference back to the opening section of the column: "I am by no means a legal expert. I don’t even play one on TV, so I honestly can’t speak to the legalese involved in any of these cases so let’s all just sit down and have a good time, ok?
If your idea of a good time is to tear the thing apart, then awesome, have at it. These columns are meant to be fun. Other sections of the site are reserved for harder news. This column is, quite obviously and plainly stated, just for kicks.
A case of the hit dog barking the loudest? Sorry, but I have to agree with Jester there, it's one thing to get some legal terms wrong, it's another thing to pull wrong info out of dark places. Your article is really full of major errors, your "I am by no means a legal expert" doesn't cut it as an excuse for that. Neither is "oh it's just a column just for kicks". Making fun of people for doing the right thing is not kicks, it's stupid, plain and simple.
Besides, if you have absolutely no clue about the whats and whys of something, why do you feel you should write about it? And bashing at people for pointing out your errors doesn't speak for you either I'm afraid.
My Signature
Yet another Blizzard-hater piece of propaganda. It's so "leet" and "kewl" to be a Blizzard-hater on MMORPG.com. Whoopedy doo....you gain 10 reputation points with the other WoW haters of a gaming forum. /rolls eyes Are they giving certificates of achievement or something for this now here on this site? It's really getting OLD.
First of all, the people that are botting in games (WoW in particular, but I have also seen bots in EVERY MMO I have played) are RARELY botting "in order to advance" their characters. Most bots are farming gold to sell for real world cash. And you ARE right....the people that run those bots think "very little of the game," because to an opportunist that will go to any length, including breaking laws, just to make a buck....they not only think little of the games they're botting, but they think nothing of the other gamers playing the game either. They are basically self-absorbed individuals with no sense of real world integrity. They don't care if it destroys the in game economy, or makes playing the game less enjoyable for those that play honestly and just want to enjoy the hobby that they pay a monthly fee to enjoy. The only thing they care about is their own financial interests, and legalities and other such "nonsense" make no difference to them. Essentially....they're just common cowardly criminals.
REAL gamers do not "let bots play their characters." That is the fodder of the gold farmer. A REAL gamer that dislikes a game...just moves on and plays something else....OR....they come bitch about everything they hate about a game on MMORPG.com and otherwise "do nothing about it." So while you're saying Blizzard does nothing about it (which is untrue)....consider that. Apparently there are plenty of people still enjoying what Blizzard has made. If you're not one of them....no big deal. Go play the games that you don't have any complaints about.....and good luck FINDING one of those games too.
I consider myself to be a real gamer, and after leveling several characters legit, decided to let glider do the work on future ones for me. I botted to advance, not for gold. But TBH, yes most modern MMO's have bots, why , because the game are so easy they don't require an intelligent human being to defeat the content, a mindless bot that repeatedly mashes the same button config will do just fine. You never saw bots in EQ classic, why? Because it was too hard. I'm not a WoW hater although I no longer play the game. Fact is, there is so much of an emphasis on end game, and "the game starts at max level" to make leveling any thing other than a cleverly disguised chore. That being said, at the time you didn't make enough money botting from 1-60 to endanger the economy, made just about enough to buy your epic mount. Also, while I'm not defending/condoning botting ,as much inflation as they cause by creating more money and devaluing it, they also introduce more BoE items to the system ,which is good for the AH consumer.
Fair enough. I don't disagree with a LOT of what you say here, in fact. However, I still wonder why people continue to play a game in ANY manner if they're so bored with it. LOL Seriously...I don't get that. When I get bored with a game, I don't start using a bot....I go find a game that doesn't bore me. And I will do that EVEN if it's only to take a BREAK from a game that has temporarily become boring. But I suppose every gamer has their own "style" of dealing.
I played original EQ and UO also, and you're correct....never saw a bot. EQ2...is LOADED with them, by the way, sadly. Most modern MMOs are, just as you said.
I've played an awfully lot of MMOs, both paid and f2p, and honestly....I get bored eventually with EVERY SINGLE ONE. Some may take longer to wear on me tha others, but I always end up moving on to something else at some point, whether that's after years of playing, or months.
Anyway...good converation! Thank you.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
Yeah the worlds.com lawsuit is a joke. The patent itself has no grounds to stand on with tons of prior history to invalidate it. NCSoft should get damages from them for filing a nuisance lawsuit. I just wish Congress would do something with the debacle the patent office has become. Of course knowing Congress, they would probably make it worse.
I think Turbine's lawsuit has some teeth behind it. The company who bought the Atari name has had some really questionable dealings with other companies.
Rebuttle?
Ok, I suppose I should probably step in here for a second.
First, I want to say that I think in hindsight, this article was probably mis-titled. It should have been Five Memorable MMO lawsuits.
Now, I understand that coming from a website that's dedicated to the law, and the law surrounding video games and virtual worlds is going to have a better grasp of the actual legalities surrounding these cases. I agreed with some of the criticism where obviously I didn't have their level of legal understanding (I thought I prefaced that pretty specifically at the top of the article), and apparently I confused some terms. So yeah, I agree with some of that. There's other stuff in that critique that I don't agree with, but it's completely their right to say whatever it is they want.
So, I apologize for not being up on my specific legalese and confusing some terms including, but I'm sure not limited to: trademark, and class action lawsuit. I'm also sorry for a misleading title.
With that said, I just want to reference back to the opening section of the column: "I am by no means a legal expert. I dont even play one on TV, so I honestly cant speak to the legalese involved in any of these cases so lets all just sit down and have a good time, ok?
If your idea of a good time is to tear the thing apart, then awesome, have at it. These columns are meant to be fun. Other sections of the site are reserved for harder news. This column is, quite obviously and plainly stated, just for kicks.
Don't let the bastards get to ya. It was an interesting read. This isn't the New York Times for christ sake.
A website devoted to "In-depth legal analysis and news for video games and virtual worlds"? Ooh boy, hold me back that sounds like the best site ever! (*sarcasm*)
You just keep doing what you do man, this site gets a ton more traffic than that crappy site and the guy's just looking for attention.
Acutally I think that was probably the dumbest lawsuit yet in this genre. 99.9% of the volunteers enjoyed what they were doing and they were not unpaid as they got to play the game for free. Removing them hurt the game. So the idiots that brought the lawsuit just ruined it for the vast majority. What the volunteers were doing was neither ridiculous nor absurd. Typical response of someone on the outside completely misunderstanding the issues.
But I do agree that the lawsuit was more significant than some of those that are listed in the article in how it has effected the genre.
Great read.
A lot of good arguments from the posters too.
This is my favorite type of articles.
In the category of silly lawsuits:
Funcom got sued some years ago over the use the phrase "Rubi-Ka Rumble".
Quote by Game Director Colin "Means" Craig in the thread on his July 24th weekly letter:
http://forums.anarchy-online.com/showthread.php?p=5578312&highlight=rumble#post5578312
Quote:
"The "Get ready to rumble" guy sued us but good on that one...hard to forget that one. He has tradmarked all "fight related use of the word rumble". We won't be having anything "rumble related" any time ever again.
~\_/~\_O
Acutally I think that was probably the dumbest lawsuit yet in this genre. 99.9% of the volunteers enjoyed what they were doing and they were not unpaid as they got to play the game for free. Removing them hurt the game. So the idiots that brought the lawsuit just ruined it for the vast majority. What the volunteers were doing was neither ridiculous nor absurd. Typical response of someone on the outside completely misunderstanding the issues.
But I do agree that the lawsuit was more significant than some of those that are listed in the article in how it has effected the genre.
QFT
I've seen so many times where people who are volunteering then try to sue for money. IF a company says we have work but would like you to do it for free, you have no right to money. If they promise money then don't pay up, fine, but to demand money that you agreed to not take? Sad... Intern programs are like this. Would I have loved to have gotten paid for being an intern at a law firm? Absolutely! But was it fact at the time that enough people wanted the position badly enough that people were willing to do it for free? It still is. Because of cut backs I'm out of the program, (still can't figure out how you can be too broke to afford free workers), but will return the second they let me or when I find another program. While I did get compensation in free gas money to and from work I never got paid and don't care because the experience is what I need more than anything.
The title said most "memorable" lawsuits, not the most silly. Author also said that "often" there are humor to be found and not "always".
Plus if you think about it, that lawsuit can be considered humorous in that it is completely fruitless attempt and Blizzard know it. Even if they win against WoW glider, they cannot stop goldfarmers in WoW much less the entire mmorpg industry. I do appreciate the fact they went for it, but truthfully the outcome is pretty much the same whether Blizzard win, lose, or settled.