Emotional attachment is not a measure of ownership - that's why we have restraining orders!
Besides, avoiding getting too emotionally involved with your character is a well established rule of RPG.
I'm still not sure ownership is all you want - you want ownership and the ability to use that character in Blizzard's game.
Out of interest, if Blizzard offered a paid service to transfer characters between accounts, would this affect your argument?
A more interesting question is whether you can somehow acquire a right in something through creation.
For example, pretend you pay a guy ten bucks to rent an easel, a brush and some paint, with no other agreement in place. You then proceed to paint a beautiful picture. At the end of the hour, who has what rights? Can he keep the picture? Can he sell it to someone else? If he does, are you entitled to anything?
More fun: What if you take a picture of your artwork during the course of that hour. Can you sell the picture of what you painted? If you do, is he entitled to anything?
Rights in ephemeral things are kind of interesting. But yeah, arguing that you can sell your WoW account - not so much.
You even state that people get attached to their characters. So selling them would mean that the person is really just looking to make money off Blizzard's product. If they were really "attached" to their character, they would not sell it. People who sell characters will have a tough time proving that they are so attached to their characters, yet want to make a quick buck off them.
At least, that is my interpretation. Am I off?
NOTE - I'm really just trying to understand this. Again, I have no real legal education, so this post is really interesting to me. However, I always believed that most legal contracts were based around intent. And I am having trouble seeing how selling accounts meets the intent unless they really are just trying to make a buck off Blizzard's product.
Last edited by yjmark; 2013-02-21 at 10:23 PM.
To a point yes the licence is for that account. But ... you pay for either the game or the subscription to access the software or servers not for the account, and you do not own the software or subscription based characters/items etc you pay for the licence to use the software or the right to access and connect to the servers, but not for the Bnet account behind them. So yes you "may" have grounds to transfer the account but not anything included in the account as thats a seperate issue, which makes this all a moot point really.
Science has made us gods even before we are worthy of being men: Jean Rostand. Yeah, Atheism is a religion like bald is a hair colour!.
Classic: "The tank is the driver, the healer is the fuel, and the DPS are the kids sitting in the back seat screaming and asking if they're there yet."
Irony >> "do they even realize that having a state religion IS THE REASON WE LEFT BRITTEN? god these people are idiots"
Most communal items are rented and fungible. Not sure how it applies to wow accounts, mind you. There might be a way of thinking about these issues in terms of workmen and their tools though, if a workman borrows tools and materials but adds his own labour, what happens? Well, we usually call this being employed and you invariably get paid for being employed. So, while it's blizzards server etc etc none of that means anything much without the input from the player - they are arguably the most important part of the whole deal. No player, no game.
What Blizzard offers is 'entertainment' in return for fees. That it requires players is no different from any other communal activity - night clubs are pretty meaningless without the paying punters. People who regard their game as 'employment' are playing the wrong game. Many recreational activities require a lot of time and effort but this usually leads to a sense of achievement rather than entitlement.
Sure, but in a nightclub if you buy drinks and make friends you get to keep them. The club just provides the venue, in the same way that blizzard just provides the venue.What Blizzard offers is 'entertainment' in return for fees. That it requires players is no different from any other communal activity - night clubs are pretty meaningless without the paying punters.
And in other areas, what you achieve is yours. I'm not saying it's right, it's just another POV. Obviously the law doesn't seek truth, it merely argues one way or another and the prejudice of whoever is in charge on the day decides the victory. Currently the judges etc are older men who are steeped in ideas of ownership which are largely based on real, tangible, uncopiable items and so their approach to IP reflects that. As they die out and are replaced with younger people who have more experience of IP in day to day reality, I expect things to change.People who regard their game as 'employment' are playing the wrong game. Many recreational activities require a lot of time and effort but this usually leads to a sense of achievement rather than entitlement.
---------- Post added 2013-02-22 at 09:48 AM ----------
It's funny how law students believe they are smarter than a whole army of established lawyers. Of course, if someone wants to prove they are smarter than Blizzard when it comes to EULA and TOS and all the other crap, can do a very simple thing to convince me of their genius: sue Blizzard. And win
duno what out come was
there are afew others...
A woman should never invest in a relationship she wouldn't want her daughter in, nor allow any man to treat her in a way her son would get scoled for.
---------- Post added 2013-02-22 at 05:39 AM ----------
---------- Post added 2013-02-22 at 05:40 AM ----------
--- Want any of my Constitutional rights?, ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
I come from a time and a place where I judge people by the content of their character; I don't give a damn if you are tall or short; gay or straight; Jew or Gentile; White, Black, Brown or Green; Conservative or Liberal.