Well, you did throw a tantrum about not wanting to do something that was 100% voluntary... I'm afraid your investigation will come to the same conclusion.
First of all... which part was the tantrum? Care to quote it and explain why the concerns I present are worthy of being a 'tantrum'? (you clearly don't have kids)
Secondly, much like Starvault, you completely miss the point. Just because a process is voluntary, does not mean the process is outside the scope of privacy law. Taking ID's on a voluntary basis doesn't mean a company is not liable to provide a secure transmission mechanism for the ID's, secure storage of the ID's, and a secure revocation process for retiring the ID's.
Kind of off topic but I have to give props to many of the MO community for not lying down and taking the poor treatment you all seem to get over there obviously my eyes almost popped out of my head when I read this topic it's outrageous to say the least that a copany would ask people to so easily open themselves up to identity theft and this si coming from someone who knows little to nothing about privacy laws etc. I do know there is no way in hell I would be sending a scan of my identification when they already have cc information.
This smells extremely fishy to me stick to your guns people I know gaming is a passion many of us share but is financial ruin really worth trying to save a game with such clueless devs?
First of all... which part was the tantrum? Care to quote it and explain why the concerns I present are worthy of being a 'tantrum'? (you clearly don't have kids)
Secondly, much like Starvault, you completely miss the point. Just because a process is voluntary, does not mean the process is outside the scope of privacy law. Taking ID's on a voluntary basis doesn't mean a company is not liable to provide a secure transmission mechanism for the ID's, secure storage of the ID's, and a secure revocation process for retiring the ID's.
This.
Originally posted by ange10
I would volunteer but i just don't see why they need my ID, banning the accounts of the player or revolting their privallage is enough.
My guess is, they know that the stuff they're testing on the test server is a bunch of rubbish, as always, and they want to threaten players with lawsuits if they talk about it. They might even try to make a quick buck out of people who breach the NDA.. who knows.
100$ on intimidation. Although.. chances are good for identity theft too. Either by StarVault, or anyone who breaches their weak security mechanisms. Odds are 50/50. XD
Perhaps someone with more knowledge of these matters can correct me, but doesn't the freedom of information act, along with legally obliging the holder of information to divulge details on exactly what information it is they hold on an individual upon said individual's request, does it not also oblige them to explain what the data is used for and how it is stored?
Perhaps someone with more knowledge of these matters can correct me, but doesn't the freedom of information act, along with legally obliging the holder of information to divulge details on exactly what information it is they hold on an individual upon said individual's request, does it not also oblige them to explain what the data is used for and how it is stored?
Starvault is not a US company nor based in the US.
My guess is, they know that the stuff they're testing on the test server is a bunch of rubbish, as always, and they want to threaten players with lawsuits if they talk about it. They might even try to make a quick buck out of people who breach the NDA.. who knows.
They need to make money some how, MO's apparently not doing it.
I just think it was an attempt to placate the people wanting player testers. SV knows that not many people or the right people will sign up to test if an ID is required.
I really do not see the reason an ID is required for a released game. EVE SiSi does not require an ID. UO public test server does not ask for ID. You would think that SV would want real testers to help them make the game better.
Perhaps someone with more knowledge of these matters can correct me, but doesn't the freedom of information act, along with legally obliging the holder of information to divulge details on exactly what information it is they hold on an individual upon said individual's request, does it not also oblige them to explain what the data is used for and how it is stored?
Starvault is not a US company nor based in the US.
It will take a few decades before Americans notice that the internet isn't purely American.
Perhaps someone with more knowledge of these matters can correct me, but doesn't the freedom of information act, along with legally obliging the holder of information to divulge details on exactly what information it is they hold on an individual upon said individual's request, does it not also oblige them to explain what the data is used for and how it is stored?
Starvault is not a US company nor based in the US.
Most countries have their own version of the freedom of information act. Hell, even China has one of sorts, at least in theory.
Whether SV is governed by Swedish or EU law, I imagine that they are still legally bound to explain their reasons and methods for storing user IDs upon the customer's request. Someone should ask, they cant legally say no.
Perhaps someone with more knowledge of these matters can correct me, but doesn't the freedom of information act, along with legally obliging the holder of information to divulge details on exactly what information it is they hold on an individual upon said individual's request, does it not also oblige them to explain what the data is used for and how it is stored?
Starvault is not a US company nor based in the US.
Most countries have their own version of the freedom of information act. Hell, even China has one of sorts, at least in theory. Whether SV is governed by Swedish or EU law, I imagine that they are still legally bound to explain their reasons and methods for storing user IDs upon the customer's request. Someone should ask, they cant legally say no.
Comments
First of all... which part was the tantrum? Care to quote it and explain why the concerns I present are worthy of being a 'tantrum'? (you clearly don't have kids)
Secondly, much like Starvault, you completely miss the point. Just because a process is voluntary, does not mean the process is outside the scope of privacy law. Taking ID's on a voluntary basis doesn't mean a company is not liable to provide a secure transmission mechanism for the ID's, secure storage of the ID's, and a secure revocation process for retiring the ID's.
You simply haven't a clue.
Kind of off topic but I have to give props to many of the MO community for not lying down and taking the poor treatment you all seem to get over there obviously my eyes almost popped out of my head when I read this topic it's outrageous to say the least that a copany would ask people to so easily open themselves up to identity theft and this si coming from someone who knows little to nothing about privacy laws etc. I do know there is no way in hell I would be sending a scan of my identification when they already have cc information.
This smells extremely fishy to me stick to your guns people I know gaming is a passion many of us share but is financial ruin really worth trying to save a game with such clueless devs?
really only me funkmastd and billy are part of the mo community the rest jsut make trials and joke about on these forums.
there are 2 types of mmo, imitators and innovaters.
I would volunteer but i just don't see why they need my ID, banning the accounts of the player or revolting their privallage is enough.
This.
My guess is, they know that the stuff they're testing on the test server is a bunch of rubbish, as always, and they want to threaten players with lawsuits if they talk about it.
They might even try to make a quick buck out of people who breach the NDA.. who knows.
100$ on intimidation. Although.. chances are good for identity theft too. Either by StarVault, or anyone who breaches their weak security mechanisms. Odds are 50/50. XD
Starvault is not a US company nor based in the US.
I win!!! LOL@U
They need to make money some how, MO's apparently not doing it.
I win!!! LOL@U
I just think it was an attempt to placate the people wanting player testers. SV knows that not many people or the right people will sign up to test if an ID is required.
I really do not see the reason an ID is required for a released game. EVE SiSi does not require an ID. UO public test server does not ask for ID. You would think that SV would want real testers to help them make the game better.
It will take a few decades before Americans notice that the internet isn't purely American.
Starvault is not a US company nor based in the US.
Most countries have their own version of the freedom of information act. Hell, even China has one of sorts, at least in theory.Whether SV is governed by Swedish or EU law, I imagine that they are still legally bound to explain their reasons and methods for storing user IDs upon the customer's request. Someone should ask, they cant legally say no.
I did ask. They told me to fuck off.