Menu
What's New
By:
Filters

Avatar Sharing is very clearly NOT allowed and...

Their is more terms and conditions btw and by accepting the tou you accept these two.

17. Additional Terms

Additional terms and conditions are incorporated into this agreement by the following documents:

a. MindArk’s Privacy Policy

b. General Real World Items Agreement

c. End User License Agreement

d. MindArk’s Participant Content Policy

e. Third Party Item’s Purchase Agreement

f. Entropia Universe Interconnect Services – Terms and conditions (T&C)

g. Voice Communication Service - Terms of Use

I haven't read all these but as far as the tou says, you give up your username and password anything happens tough luck. The only way sharing an account would be deemed unlawful is if the user is somehow gaining an unfair advantage over others. But il leave that to you guys.

https://account.entropiauniverse.com/support-faq/support-policies/unauthorized-account-acce/

Account Compromise Policy ^^
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everything_which_is_not_forbidden_is_allowed

The jocular saying is that, in England, "everything which is not forbidden is allowed", while, in Germany, the opposite applies, so "everything which is not allowed is forbidden". This may be extended to France—"everything is allowed even if it is forbidden"[5]—and Russia where "everything is forbidden, even that which is expressly allowed".[6] While in North Korea it is said that "everything that is not forbidden is compulsory"[4]
Click to expand...

http://constitution.org/mac/
 
Last edited:
Being an attorney doesn't mean only I can understand it...anyone can understand it, but only a few are imparting meaning to it which does not exist...namely Rusty. I just want to point out his flawed approach. Screaming to the world that it definitely allows it is ridiculous.

I admittedly leave boring contracts law to those that like not being excited, and do little of it. The fact that I am one does not make me smarter.

Nor does it mean I am arguing for the sake of arguing.

However, all I saw here and in other threads was someone wrongly attaching meaning to various portions of the ToU, and I just wanted to explain that is pointless, shady, and entirely misleading. It is almost like his goal is to make every noob in the forum think it is ok to use shared avatars for anything they want to in game. Not the case.

I just wanted to make my point:
The ToU, on it's face, is IMPOSSIBLE to use in deciding what is or isn't allowed, (and I believe if left to interpretation by a court, the language would lean toward it NOT being allowed)...however, as stated many times, this doesn't matter because for the most part, it seems ok to share, unless people are using it to the detriment of other players...which many people certainly do.

So quit saying it "allows" it, Rusty, you know you are wrong. And anyway, it is irrelevant. Instead, start talking about those players that use shared avatars to hurt other players in the game, and how MA allows it. That is the issue. If it wasn't for the outcry of the players, the 2nd Goldrush would have been won by shared avatars just like the first one was. Luckily Ark listened...but there are many other examples where sharing avatars hurts this game, and MA needs to keep limiting the influence of shared avatars!
 
Last edited:
I have to say...

Sunsout Gunsout said:
Being an attorney doesn't mean only I can understand it...anyone can understand it, but only a few are imparting meaning to it which does not exist...namely Rusty. I just want to point out his flawed approach. Screaming to the world that it definitely allows it is ridiculous.

I admittedly leave boring contracts law to those that like not being excited, and do little of it. The fact that I am one does not make me smarter.

Nor does it mean I am arguing for the sake of arguing.

However, all I saw here and in other threads was someone wrongly attaching meaning to various portions of the ToU, and I just wanted to explain that is pointless, shady, and entirely misleading. It is almost like his goal is to make every noob in the forum think it is ok to use shared avatars for anything they want to in game. Not the case.

I just wanted to make my point:
The ToU, on it's face, is IMPOSSIBLE to use in deciding what is or isn't allowed, (and I believe if left to interpretation by a court, the language would lean toward it NOT being allowed)...however, as stated many times, this doesn't matter because for the most part, it seems ok to share, unless people are using it to the detriment of other players...which many people certainly do.

So quit saying it "allows" it, Rusty, you know you are wrong. And anyway, it is irrelevant. Instead, start talking about those players that use shared avatars to hurt other players in the game, and how MA allows it. That is the issue. If it wasn't for the outcry of the players, the 2nd Goldrush would have been won by shared avatars just like the first one was. Luckily Ark listened...but there are many other examples where sharing avatars hurts this game, and MA needs to keep limiting the influence of shared avatars!
Click to expand...


...and I will only say it once. These are the cleanest posts from an intellectual reasoning and practical perspective I have ever read by Taco. So lean back...enjoy! He'll be back on crack and the hookers soon enough! :laugh:

Btw...I was only saying I'm not an attorney. Taco's profession and proclivities are common knowledge.

Brick
 
OZtwo said:
Rusty?? You having a bit of issues today?:drink:

Sorry but you are wrong here and by posting over and over text that you simply do not understand is making you look well.:scared:
Click to expand...

This isn't about opinion or right or wrong. This has been discussed many times as is allowed however greasy and bad it is
 
Sunsout Gunsout said:
However, all I saw here and in other threads was someone wrongly attaching meaning to various portions of the ToU, and I just wanted to explain that is pointless, shady, and entirely misleading.
Click to expand...

All I saw here and in other threads was someone wrongly attaching meaning to various Support Case responses, and I just wanted to explain that is pointless, shady, and entirely misleading.

Sunsout Gunsout said:
It is almost like his goal is to make every noob in the forum think it is ok to use shared avatars for anything they want to in game. Not the case.
Click to expand...

It is almost like his goal is to make every noob in the forum think it is not ok to responsibly share avatars in the game. Not the case.


Sunsout Gunsout said:
I just wanted to make my point:
The ToU, on it's face, is IMPOSSIBLE to use in deciding what is or isn't allowed, (and I believe if left to interpretation by a court, the language would lean toward it NOT being allowed)...however, as stated many times, this doesn't matter because for the most part, it seems ok to share, unless people are using it to the detriment of other players...which many people certainly do.
Click to expand...

I just wanted to make my point:
Support, on its face, is IMPOSSIBLE to use in deciding what is or isn't allowed, (and I believe if left to interpretation by a court, the language would lean towards profanity at their incompetence.)




Sunsout Gunsout said:
So quit saying it "allows" it, *censored*, you know you are wrong. And anyway, it is irrelevant. Instead, start talking about those players that use shared avatars to hurt other players in the game, and how MA allows it. That is the issue.
Click to expand...

So quit saying it "Does not allow" it, *censored*, you know you are wrong. And anyway, it is irrelevant. Instead start talking about those players that use any aspect of the game to hurt other players in the game, and how MA allows it. That is the issue.


Sunsout Gunsout said:
only a few are imparting meaning to it which does not exist...namely *censored*. I just want to point out his flawed approach. Screaming to the world that it definitely allows it is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

only a few are imparting any meaning to what Support says.... namely *censored*. I just want to point out their flawed approach. Screaming to the world that anything they says is relevant is ridiculous.


Sunsout Gunsout said:
Nor does it mean I am arguing for the sake of arguing.
Click to expand...

I however am more honest, and AM arguing for the sake of arguing, and eff anyone who tries to stop me.
Its been around two years since I had any direct motivation to be involved in this particular argument.
 
narfi said:
All I saw here and in other threads was someone wrongly attaching meaning to various Support Case responses, and I just wanted to explain that is pointless, shady, and entirely misleading.



It is almost like his goal is to make every noob in the forum think it is not ok to responsibly share avatars in the game. Not the case.




I just wanted to make my point:
Support, on its face, is IMPOSSIBLE to use in deciding what is or isn't allowed, (and I believe if left to interpretation by a court, the language would lean towards profanity at their incompetence.)






So quit saying it "Does not allow" it, *censored*, you know you are wrong. And anyway, it is irrelevant. Instead start talking about those players that use any aspect of the game to hurt other players in the game, and how MA allows it. That is the issue.




only a few are imparting any meaning to what Support says.... namely *censored*. I just want to point out their flawed approach. Screaming to the world that anything they says is relevant is ridiculous.




I however am more honest, and AM arguing for the sake of arguing, and eff anyone who tries to stop me.
Its been around two years since I had any direct motivation to be involved in this particular argument.
Click to expand...

Nice try with the blah bel bleh. He was wrong, I wasnt. He sucks, I dont. :D

It is fine to do it...obviously...unless you do it to gain an unfair advantage...since you don't do that, then I am not sure why you are so enamored by this topic. I am not against people doing it...just the shitty people that lie about it or use it to win all the events for the past 7 years. It is NOT ok to do it in EVERY situation...that is my point...and Rusty is wrong for claiming the ToU says it is ok to do whenever you want.
 
Last edited:
Sunsout Gunsout said:
nice try with the blah bel bleh. he was wrong, i wasnt. he sucks i dont. :D
Click to expand...

I do NOT say blah bel bleh! I only say blah bel bleh when I am saying, "I do NOT say blah bel bleh!"
 
Sunsout Gunsout said:
Nice try with the blah bel bleh. He was wrong, I wasnt. He sucks, I dont. :D

It is fine to do it...obviously...unless you do it to gain an unfair advantage...since you don't do that, then I am not sure why you are so enamored by this topic. I am not against people doing it...just the shitty people that lie about it or use it to win all the events for the past 7 years. It is NOT ok to do it in EVERY situation...that is my point...and Rusty is wrong for claiming the ToU says it is ok to do whenever you want.
Click to expand...

Tell me what is the advantage of such Avatar?

All known Events so far are based on a Timelimitation, if u do more hours than u need, your points get downcalculated on the base 40 hours or 65 hours (Arkadia Gold Rush) .
It gives ppl absolutly no Advantage in any Event if they have their Event faster done!!!

ppl that argue here "it's not allowed or its unfair" maybe just don't have close IRL friends, Girlfriends,Wife's that dont share the enthusiasm for the Game or see no point helping.

Faster done in a Event just means u have more spare time IRL for Family and Friends, and this is very Helpfull especially in time of Christmas!!!
Thats my Point of view.

Grave
 
Sunsout Gunsout said:
Nice try with the blah bel bleh. He was wrong, I wasnt. He sucks, I dont. :D

It is fine to do it...obviously...unless you do it to gain an unfair advantage...since you don't do that, then I am not sure why you are so enamored by this topic. I am not against people doing it...just the shitty people that lie about it or use it to win all the events for the past 7 years. It is NOT ok to do it in EVERY situation...that is my point...and Rusty is wrong for claiming the ToU says it is ok to do whenever you want.
Click to expand...

How can you say it's not allowed and also say it's fine to do it? How can you say they don't state explicitly either or not you can do it, then say it is not allowed? You are contradicting yourself.

I never said you can do whatever you want with it, obviously it is stated in the ToS that if you break the rules or someone else does on your account it is punishable.
 
Venture Bros said:
How can you say it's not allowed and also say it's fine to do it? How can you say they don't state explicitly either or not you can do it, then say it is not allowed? You are contradicting yourself.
Click to expand...

Firstly his discussing the clear answer given in the support case. "it is against the rules" "for this reason and many more it is not allowed". The 2nd part his given an opinion which his entitled to do, does not hold any merit but everyone can have an opinion.
 
Grave Digger said:
Tell me what is the advantage of such Avatar?

All known Events so far are based on a Timelimitation, if u do more hours than u need, your points get downcalculated on the base 40 hours or 65 hours (Arkadia Gold Rush) .
It gives ppl absolutly no Advantage in any Event if they have their Event faster done!!!

ppl that argue here "it's not allowed or its unfair" maybe just don't have close IRL friends, Girlfriends,Wife's that dont share the enthusiasm for the Game or see no point helping.

Faster done in a Event just means u have more spare time IRL for Family and Friends, and this is very Helpfull especially in time of Christmas!!!
Thats my Point of view.

Grave
Click to expand...

The first gold rush and almost 2nd gold rush had unlimited time. It was poorly designed but the 2nd one was made great. The first gr was won by those sharing avatars (allegedly) except for quin who decided to not have a life for weeks. It was a very socially destructive event.

I don't see advantages in time based events but we know that many avatars that run constantly do share or have special shooter companions.
 
The sad part is that it is not worthwhile to ask the MA to make a statement for sometimes it is ok for them and sometimes not ... depending on who is asking and what mood they are in..:proof:
 
Sunsout Gunsout said:
I am not sure why you are so enamored by this topic.
Click to expand...

Because you go overboard in one direction while someone else goes overboard in another.
Both viewpoints are absolutely wrong. (see what I did there?)
Using absolutes in an argument drives me insane and pisses me off, when I see it I feel the compulsion to play devils advocate.
Man up, be realistic, stop being confrontational, and I wouldn't have even bothered reading the thread.
IMO both sides of this argument walk away looking like idiots for having participated.
 
valentin said:
The sad part is that it is not worthwhile to ask the MA to make a statement for sometimes it is ok for them and sometimes not ... depending on who is asking and what mood they are in..:proof:
Click to expand...

yes like your not meant sell avatars or have more than one, but we know MA has allowed this this to happen in past.
 
narfi said:
Because you go overboard in one direction while someone else goes overboard in another.

Man up, be realistic, stop being confrontational, and I wouldn't have even bothered reading the thread.
IMO both sides of this argument walk away looking like idiots for having participated.
Click to expand...

What arguement ? :popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::handgun::handgun::hammer:
 
bigdaddy trim said:
yes like your not meant sell avatars or have more than one, but we know MA has allowed this this to happen in past.
Click to expand...

Lol if you only new about the "past" it hapends all the time so dont talk about the past...

Lake i asked MA if i can sell my Avatar, MA told me -> No....It was Before Stormer sold his Avatar and i have a few more namnes.:wtg:

I have even received a letter from an avatar which MA support writes that they should monitor his purchase of another Avatar..but MA writes that this is at your own risk when you ask them about this.
 
Last edited:
Venture Bros said:
States in ToS CLEARLY that it IS allowed.



The above states it is allowed, however the owner is responsible for any actions done.
They will ban you if the other person does things that are bannable offensives. Basically you ARE allowed to let others use your account, but you cannot say 'it wasn't me on my account, unban me my brother did it' as they will say it does not matter who uses an account.
Click to expand...

That is not what it means. This is very similar to the traffic rule which says that even if you give permission for someone that does not have a drivers license to drive your car, YOU are still responsible for what happens. It doesn't mean that you are allowed to give the permission for someone without a drivers license to drive your car. This is a very common way to formulate rules in an EULA/TOS or even in a law. It is commonly understood without further explanation.

I have never heard or seen any official statement from Mindark that Avatar sharing is allowed. I have how ever heard many many MANY times that it is not.
 
Allowed or not allowed just wondering how would MA physically check who is behind the pc when playing their game?

No way imo to check that out so it's all pointless.
 
Such a shame that MA cant even be bothered to clarify it in forum threads like this.
The core of the issue is MA and their serious lack of enforcement on the EULA. The lack of enforcement, and clarification of their own rules allows these issues to become a major problem.

I think its borderline criminal in how bad they run their business, and can really only see them in court trying to answer this in the end.
I do think though that if any cases made it to court, MA has set some precedence already that doesn't protect them very well in the end. A EULA is only as good as its enforcement remains in effect. (allowing some avatar sales over written rejections is just one of many examples, name changes are sporadic as well as many other policies that do not cater equally across the customer base) In fact it could open them up for discrimination without compelling reasons for allowing it for everyone.

But like everything else here, its just my opinion.
 
narfi said:
Because you go overboard in one direction while someone else goes overboard in another.
Both viewpoints are absolutely wrong. (see what I did there?)
Using absolutes in an argument drives me insane and pisses me off, when I see it I feel the compulsion to play devils advocate.
Man up, be realistic, stop being confrontational, and I wouldn't have even bothered reading the thread.
IMO both sides of this argument walk away looking like idiots for having participated.
Click to expand...

I fail to see how I went overboard by saying that the ToU is unclear, leans toward it being against the ToU to share avatars, and stated that though MA has made some statements against avatar sharing and contradicted themselves, it seems like they don't care and it is fine to do it.

And yes, people who construe the ToU as allowing it on it's face are idiots, because it doesn't. That is not overboard...that is just telling people they are dumb. Which some are.

The end result is it is ok for some to sell avatars, and not ok for others to do it. They passively allow people to share avatars from different timezones on a daily basis. Ma looks the other way too much, and needs to clarify their position on this. You can't have some rules for some, and different rules for others. If sharing or selling avatars (or giving it to a friend) is ok, they need to say so.
 
S4400Salvation said:
Allowed or not allowed just wondering how would MA physically check who is behind the pc when playing their game?

No way imo to check that out so it's all pointless.
Click to expand...
time for biometric scanners embedded in new version of goldcard... free for those of us with one already. :)

As far as official 2006 stance goes outside of support tickets:
Quote Originally Posted by ViagraFalls
I recall someone telling me there has been a thread where quote by MA was made or quoted saying secondary avatars are officially allowed.

Can anyone confirm this, or point me to the thread in question?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
Marco|SDS said:
One avatar per real person. Else you risk your account(s).
Click to expand...
Click to expand...


That was back pre SEE mess, so back then Marco WAS the official word from MA

As for support tickets since then...
Hi,

No, you are not allowed to have more than one active avatar/account.

Kind regards,
Entropia Universe Support
Click to expand...

Sadly old alts are still big problem since database is only so big...
Old support ticket from around 2010 or so:
Hi,
Thank you for your inquiry and please accept my apologies for the delay in my reply. I would like to thank you also for your link, but, unfortunately we have not bee able to confirm in our logs that the accont has been shared in previous years as the oldest logon logs from our participants are from 2008. However, please rest assured that appropriate action will be taken.

We are committed to make Entropia Universe an enjoyable experience for all and we thank you for helping us reach that goal.
Kind regards,
Tezla | Planet Calypso Support.
Click to expand...

so old alts from early on that are now uber are kinda grandfathered in as Mindark sucks at keeping track of stuff like login logs for any extended period of time... Maybe its better now but I would not count on it.

As far as support goes, a couple more from over the years:
…

One thing I would like to share with you about the selling of avatars is that technically you can, but once you need assistance from us it will be really difficult to get it because you won’t be able to verify the ownership of the avatar since the name of the original owner will be registered.

…

Have a great weekend,
Cameron | Planet Calypso Support
Click to expand...


Sorry to make things a bit confusing, I mean to say that technically you can sell your avatar but we don’t allow it and it’s prohibited.

Regards,
Cameron | Planet Calypso Support
Click to expand...

There is a BIG difference between saying that you can technically do something and that it's allowed. Technically you can break any law you want, but if it's allowed in the city, state or country you are in is something you just might want to think a little about before you start your next crime spree.

There have been A LOT of alt avatar use in Entropia for many, many years. Some of it is provable, some not so much... Lots of folks are pretty darn bold in how publicly they announce their use of alts on society websites, community forums, etc. Just a matter of doing some reading and paying attention to forums, websites, and in game chats to see a few of the blatent admissions.

Can Mindark stop it? Well... Could post a bunch of other stuff in here but well... read the sig.
 
Last edited:
mastermesh said:
time for biometric scanners embedded in new version of goldcard... free for those of us with one already. :)
Click to expand...
This tech is still quite costly, even more so if it will be used in uncontrolled environment. A device that won't be bypassed using some guide for dummies in 15 minutes would cost quite a lot.
So some ppl will get it free, others will buy it and all the rest will quit playing? Unfortunately, doesn't seem to be a very realistic solution, at least atm.

Rule that's impossible to enforce it's perfectly useless... cuz nothing will change and nobody's happy.
Those who believe in "Unless caught, not a thief" will keep breaking the rule and all the rest are mad why there's rules it they're not enforced in any way?

Which is a perfectly fair question. 1st thing they teach u about leadership: never give a command u can't enforce! :smoke:
 
Rule 2.1: says that you can ONLY join by creating an account, and that all participation must be done (uniquely associated) with that account.

The fault in reading this line is makeing too much weigth on the word you.
They are not refering to the physical person "You" but too the legal person that you sign in with.

What supports this is that MA allows 13 years old to play the game.
An 13 year old is not a legal person in Sweden and therefor his/her peers are his proxys.
Every action an proxy does relexts on the legal "You"

Meaning if iam an adult that sign over proxy it wont matter is its ME or my proxy signing in since we are in the EULAS term same person.

This combined with these lines in EULA
"You agree to hold MindArk free from liability for any improper or illegal use of Your Account. This includes illegal or improper use by someone to whom You have given permission" (Meaning you can allow players too be at your account since the YOU in 2.1 only referes too an person only can sign up for 1 account using 1 identity.
But the underaged log in clearly allows multiple persons in a single account.

From EU privacy Policy
"In your request please include your child's Entropia Universe account information (usename and password). Upon your request MindArk will take reasonable steps to remove your child’s personal information from the Entropia universe database."
 
Last edited:
Funny side note MA think they explained this very clear

"MindArk's policy regarding Account Compromise

As clearly explained in our Entropia Universe Account Terms of Use (ToU), you are solely responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of your Username and Password and for restricting access to your Entropia Universe account and your computer. This means that you are responsible for any use of your login information whether authorized by you or not.

By accepting the ToU, you also agree to accept personal liability for all actions that occur through your account or through the use of your username and/or password.

If you should happen to wilfully or otherwise reveal your login information, you have relinquished your right to any assistance regarding the possible outcomes or consequences based upon your actions (ToU, §3)."

The highlighted text is the only one thats truely intresting here.
MA states you wont get any help or your account might get consequences if you willingfull given up your account info.
But if the action wilfully reveal your log info is yielding consequences from MA does not say at any single spot in the EULA/TOU/Polices.
 
Please refer to...

carle said:
Rule 2.1: says that you can ONLY join by creating an account, and that all participation must be done (uniquely associated) with that account.

The fault in reading this line is makeing too much weigth on the word you.
They are not refering to the physical person "You" but too the legal person that you sign in with.

What supports this is that MA allows 13 years old to play the game.
An 13 year old is not a legal person in Sweden and therefor his/her peers are his proxys.
Every action an proxy does relexts on the legal "You"

Meaning if iam an adult that sign over proxy it wont matter is its ME or my proxy signing in since we are in the EULAS term same person.

This combined with these lines in EULA
"You agree to hold MindArk free from liability for any improper or illegal use of Your Account. This includes illegal or improper use by someone to whom You have given permission" (Meaning you can allow players too be at your account since the YOU in 2.1 only referes too an person only can sign up for 1 account using 1 identity.
But the underaged log in clearly allows multiple persons in a single account.

From EU privacy Policy
"In your request please include your child's Entropia Universe account information (usename and password). Upon your request MindArk will take reasonable steps to remove your child’s personal information from the Entropia universe database."
Click to expand...

...answer from support. Please refer to following explanation that I have prepared with much diligence and many exhibits:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlzuIfq1mqM

Brick
 
No worries I´ll sent support asking the question needing answered

"Is giving someone authorized Access to your account that is used within the game mechanics and rules an breach of paragraph 3 and can result in Account Banned and/or Terminated?"
 
carle said:
No worries I´ll sent support asking the question needing answered
"Is giving someone authorized Access to your account that is used within the game mechanics and rules an breach of paragraph 3 and can result in Account Banned and/or Terminated?"
Click to expand...

don't bother I already asked a long time ago and got an answer
2013-02-20 23:13 Entropia Universe Support:
we can assure you that this does not affect you gameplay and we won't take any actions against but if you wanna share your information with others is going to be under your own responsability.
Click to expand...
 
Sunsout Gunsout said:
I fail to see how I went overboard
Click to expand...

Your failure was in aggressively attacking one side of the argument without also refuting the opening statement of this thread.

jaydub said:
Avatar Sharing is very clearly NOT allowed and...
Here's the proof:
Click to expand...

I know you know, and everyone else also knows you know that this is NOT proof. Yet you choose to only be aggressive in the one direction.
Entropia's Support Department is the trophy wife of a shady businessman who knows nothing of the business he does answering questions when people call the house.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top