Hi Sloe,
You may wanna try reading a couple pages back where i detailed that law needs to catch up but it doesn't justify it.
dunno if this "you" is aimed to me, I quoted you
here as did StrangeLove. And as he did I doubted the "car comparision".
For years it was also possible to distribute music and other works cause law just had no real grounds to work on.
Not correct. Here in Germany (& other European countries) there's an explicit law allowing to copy music and give it to friends and relatives, if done without commercial intentions. (
text of law - use translator on it)
You see, here already start the problems. There's different laws in different countries.
Our law books needed to catch up. Guess what, there's been precedences set in virtual property, so that argument is pretty moot.
Again, not correct.
- There hasn't been precedences in every possible country that might be involved, for sure.
- And the importance of precedences differs a lot in the different systems of jurisdiction.
- And there doesn't exist what we'd need here, kind of global court jurisdiction/ court system/ whatever to deal with cases like the present case.
You see, it's completely different to stealing a car. If you'd visit Germany and would borrow my car, not returning it, I'd have not much problems:
- My car assurance would replace it's value (and the costs for a rented car for a certain time) if it's not to be found again.
- The police would have it in their computers and if you'd happen to be seen before getting it out of Germany, you'd have serious problems.
- I'd have your real life identity, and, since stealing cars is prohibited in your country too, your countries authorities would come after you after they'd have been informed by the German police. Again, you'd have serious problems. Even if you'd manage to escape Germany fast enough, because your name would be on the "wanted lists" and as soon as you'd try to check in at the airport you'd get busted.
The situation discussed in this thread is a completely different one. This starts with this:
EULA 4.1 said:
Virtual items are fictional in-world graphical objects with a predefined set of parameters in Entropia Universe and will often have names similar or identical to corresponding physical categories such as "people", "real estate", "possessions”, “currency”, “cloths” and the names of specific items in those categories such as "house", "rifle", "tools", "armor", “coat”, “money” etc. (“Virtual Items”). Despite the similarity in terminology, all Virtual Items, including virtual currency, are part of the Entropia Universe System and/or features of the Entropia Universe, and MindArk and/or respective Mindark’s Planet Partner(s) retains all rights, title, and interest in all parts including, but not limited to Avatars, Skills and Virtual Items. These retained rights include, without limitation, patent, copyright, trademark, trade secret and other proprietary rights throughout the world. Notwithstanding any other language or context to the contrary, as used in this EULA and/or in the Entropia Universe in the context of Virtual Items, You expressly acknowledge that all terms like “exchange of”, “trade with”, “purchase of”, “sale of” or “use of” Virtual Items, and all similar terms in context of transactions with Virtual Items, refers to the licensed right to use a certain feature of the Entropia Universe or the Entropia Universe System in accordance with the terms and conditions of this EULA.
Find it
here, and check what I have highlighted!
We're not talking about property that could be stolen, according to the laws of quite some countries, we talk about a
"right to use a fictional in-world graphical objects with a predefined set of parameters in Entropia Universe".
Ignoring that we deal with a
"fictional graphics object" (that would give us enough problems already explaining the cause to the authorities) that admittedly has one parameter named "TT value", this parameter by far not represents the money we value it for (TT + markup). Have fun convincing your local authorities that PEAuction, or the in game markup window, could be used to detect the actual value ...
Add to it the term
"right to use".
You ever leased a car, to stay with your example? Then you'll know this term - leasing a car buys you the right to use.
You ever got a leased car stolen?
I did. Tell you what happened: Went to police, reported it. Police filed the case, gave me an file number, told me to inform my leasing company that would need to file a complaint before they could do anything. I couldn't file the complaint because I was not the owner.
Will MA file a complaint when I loan my EP-40 to you, and you're not returning it? You bet ...
What's what we learn from this?
- It's highly risky to loan any item in such an environment, without matching collateral.
- We maybe MIGHT succeed in such a case asking for help the RL authorities, but it might easily cost us a lot of money to spent on lawyers.
- The jurisdiction in such cases is very rudimentary, and there might be more countries involved, with different systems of jurisprudence.
- Depending of the financial situation of the scammer and the country it lives in we might, even if we are most lucky in court, get absolute nothing for our loss, and our expenses.
- MA will maybe provide some logs if asked, but otherwise tells us again & again that trades are final, and that loaning is bad & dangerous.
- The forums are full of cases of trust scams even, and especially, among the most skilled & wealthy participants - so nobody can plead to "I didn't know ..."
So giving away any item without collateral, to anyone we don't know very well, personally and in RL, without the intention that it might become a gift, can be considered basically stupid. IMHO.
Everyone understands it's wrong, some just pretend it's less so cause it's not outright illegal and spelled out in ink.
[...]
Getting away with something never made that something moral.
[...]
I said that just because law hasn't caught up, it doesn't somehow throw morals out the window. You may actually want to reread my posts cause u either skimmed over it fast or just lack basic understanding of the difference between morality and legality.
Sloe, this did hurt me. I guess it wasn't meant this way, but it did hurt.
Did you read somewhere in this thread someone defending the scammers? Especially, did you read such from me?
Stealing is stealing, abusing trust is abusing trust, doing wrong is doing wrong, IMHO.
It's just - if you loan 15K USD to this nice guy in the bar that you drunk with for 2 months now, without having it's ID, without having a signed contract, or without any collateral, your just plain stupid, IMHO.
This doesn't ease at all the crime this guy committed when taking the money & running, but my pity for you will be limited.
Another case is the armor upgrade scams. I had met a fresh newbie, had helped a little with team hunts after the sweating phase, had donated some armor parts when he made his first deposit to finally start over, but did forget to warn him of these. He lost his brand new, shiny, finally fully repaired complete Goblin armor, and even his TT sword & Opalo to such an upgrade scammer. For sure, he never ever logged in again.
Without reducing the guilt of the Uber scammers, this is even worse, IMHO. And even more hurting the game. But usually laughed at.
Strange world. No fun.
