| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
kieron
   |
Posted - 2004.10.29 19:58:00 -
[1]
It is apparent by the number of e-mails coming in that there are questions about the use of Team Speak (or any other third party voice application) while playing EVE. In its current state, the Terms of Service do not bar the use of third party communication applications, as long as the use of these applications do not break the TOS, especially rules 16 and 20.
There are internal discussion on whether the charging of in-game ISK for the rental of third party voice server access and bandwidth is a violation of TOS rule 10. Until such a determination is made, I would ask that such services not be advertised. If the determination is that charging ISK for this rental is against the TOS, no action will be taken against players that have offered this service to this point as long as they do not continue to do so. If offering such a service is considered permissible, the TOS will be revised and clarified to state such.
kieron
Community Manager,
EVE Online
|
kieron
|
Posted - 2004.10.29 19:58:00 -
[2]
It is apparent by the number of e-mails coming in that there are questions about the use of Team Speak (or any other third party voice application) while playing EVE. In its current state, the Terms of Service do not bar the use of third party communication applications, as long as the use of these applications do not break the TOS, especially rules 16 and 20.
There are internal discussion on whether the charging of in-game ISK for the rental of third party voice server access and bandwidth is a violation of TOS rule 10. Until such a determination is made, I would ask that such services not be advertised. If the determination is that charging ISK for this rental is against the TOS, no action will be taken against players that have offered this service to this point as long as they do not continue to do so. If offering such a service is considered permissible, the TOS will be revised and clarified to state such.
kieron
Community Manager,
EVE Online
|
Woodbine
|
Posted - 2004.10.29 20:15:00 -
[3]
Thank you Kieron for a well placed reply. I look forward to the outcome.
Again Thank you
|
Woodbine
|
Posted - 2004.10.29 20:15:00 -
[4]
Thank you Kieron for a well placed reply. I look forward to the outcome.
Again Thank you
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.10.29 21:16:00 -
[5]
I don't see how this differs very far from people paying isk for a forum signature or killboard, tbh.
You're using ingame resources to pay for an out-of-game but related resource.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2004.10.29 21:16:00 -
[6]
I don't see how this differs very far from people paying isk for a forum signature or killboard, tbh.
You're using ingame resources to pay for an out-of-game but related resource.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Judicator
|
Posted - 2004.10.29 21:30:00 -
[7]
 Originally by: Joshua Calvert
I don't see how this differs very far from people paying isk for a forum signature or killboard, tbh.
You're using ingame resources to pay for an out-of-game but related resource.
I can follow your point, but, that is if you try and conclude positivly. They could end up concluding negativly.
Sometimes it's impossible to make a positive description of what is allowed, or what something is, for instance what a term covers, but quite possible to conclude negataivly, ie, what it is not.
So they could end up saying: Using in-game means is permissable unless it is used to pay for voice com/or web hosting. Or whatever they feel like.
Negativity has it's positive sides sometimes ;) |
Judicator
|
Posted - 2004.10.29 21:30:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Joshua Calvert
I don't see how this differs very far from people paying isk for a forum signature or killboard, tbh.
You're using ingame resources to pay for an out-of-game but related resource.
I can follow your point, but, that is if you try and conclude positivly. They could end up concluding negativly.
Sometimes it's impossible to make a positive description of what is allowed, or what something is, for instance what a term covers, but quite possible to conclude negataivly, ie, what it is not.
So they could end up saying: Using in-game means is permissable unless it is used to pay for voice com/or web hosting. Or whatever they feel like.
Negativity has it's positive sides sometimes ;) |
kieron
|
Posted - 2004.10.29 21:30:00 -
[9]
Joshua, exactly why there is discussion on this topic.
kieron
Community Manager,
EVE Online
|
kieron
|
Posted - 2004.10.29 21:30:00 -
[10]
Joshua, exactly why there is discussion on this topic.
kieron
Community Manager,
EVE Online
|
Vegeta
|
Posted - 2004.10.30 04:39:00 -
[11]
If you want my opinion, I dont think people should be barred from charging ISK for use of their Teamspeak servers. Teamspeak is sort of like an add-on for PVP, you can't really be without it. I think you guys should allow these people to charge for the servers since it will help people within the game who don't have access to TS get access.
Oh and Kieron, the avatars are broken again, get on it! 
2005.04.25 16:40:42 combat Your 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II perfectly strikes LawrenceNewton [WARAG], wrecking for 2706.9 damage.
|
Vegeta
|
Posted - 2004.10.30 04:39:00 -
[12]
If you want my opinion, I dont think people should be barred from charging ISK for use of their Teamspeak servers. Teamspeak is sort of like an add-on for PVP, you can't really be without it. I think you guys should allow these people to charge for the servers since it will help people within the game who don't have access to TS get access.
Oh and Kieron, the avatars are broken again, get on it!
2005.04.25 16:40:42 combat Your 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II perfectly strikes LawrenceNewton [WARAG], wrecking for 2706.9 damage.
|
VeNT
|
Posted - 2004.10.30 10:41:00 -
[13]
this also has a bearing on eve-radio and the isk for songs thingy
|
VeNT
|
Posted - 2004.10.30 10:41:00 -
[14]
this also has a bearing on eve-radio and the isk for songs thingy
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2004.10.30 11:13:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Nyphur on 30/10/2004 11:20:40
I feel like I've done something to help the community in aiding this being brought to light.
Thanks kieron. I'd be interested to know the outcome of the decision mae by the mods on not just teamspeak servers but also paying for signiatures and some fo Eve radio's schemes. Indeed, the very nature of ISK donation is being called into question. Is an in-game donation to say thank you for an out of game service the same as paying for the service? This is a decision not to be taken lightly by the devs and one in which they will have to judge each case separately - a single ruling or ammendment to TOS clause 10 will never cover these issues, but an exception made for specific actions will.
The devs have never officially condoned paying ISK for signiatures and such and so this is going to force them to make an example of the issue by telling people to stop or make it an exception to the rule and let paying ISK for signiatures continue.
Every rule has its exceptions, judged on a case-by-case basis. It'll be interesting to see how this one plays out in the developer's heads.
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2004.10.30 11:13:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Nyphur on 30/10/2004 11:20:40
I feel like I've done something to help the community in aiding this being brought to light.
Thanks kieron. I'd be interested to know the outcome of the decision mae by the mods on not just teamspeak servers but also paying for signiatures and some fo Eve radio's schemes. Indeed, the very nature of ISK donation is being called into question. Is an in-game donation to say thank you for an out of game service the same as paying for the service? This is a decision not to be taken lightly by the devs and one in which they will have to judge each case separately - a single ruling or ammendment to TOS clause 10 will never cover these issues, but an exception made for specific actions will.
The devs have never officially condoned paying ISK for signiatures and such and so this is going to force them to make an example of the issue by telling people to stop or make it an exception to the rule and let paying ISK for signiatures continue.
Every rule has its exceptions, judged on a case-by-case basis. It'll be interesting to see how this one plays out in the developer's heads.
|
Canthus Prime
|
Posted - 2004.10.30 12:59:00 -
[17]
"Progress is man's ability to complicate simplicity."
Thor-Heyerdahl quotes (Norwegian ethnologist, 1914-2002)
 |
Canthus Prime
|
Posted - 2004.10.30 12:59:00 -
[18]
"Progress is man's ability to complicate simplicity."
Thor-Heyerdahl quotes (Norwegian ethnologist, 1914-2002)
|
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2004.10.30 17:21:00 -
[19]
Let me add that this would also be of interest to Eve Guardian. Even though it has been several months since any payment, simply becuase I just felt to damned guilty about the service interuption, Eve Guardian does have isk paying advertisers.
While we commonly put the money back into Eve through sponsoring of events and what not it is something of a pertinent issue if it is being debated. (We avoid google ads becuase of similar EULA complications... and they suck for the ic angle anyway.) |
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2004.10.30 17:21:00 -
[20]
Let me add that this would also be of interest to Eve Guardian. Even though it has been several months since any payment, simply becuase I just felt to damned guilty about the service interuption, Eve Guardian does have isk paying advertisers.
While we commonly put the money back into Eve through sponsoring of events and what not it is something of a pertinent issue if it is being debated. (We avoid google ads becuase of similar EULA complications... and they suck for the ic angle anyway.) |
Shaelin Corpius
|
Posted - 2004.10.31 08:34:00 -
[21]
Even though its against EULA, I don't think it should be illegal to do anything with your isk. Seeing as is you pay to play, and its really not hurting anyone.
|
Shaelin Corpius
|
Posted - 2004.10.31 08:34:00 -
[22]
Even though its against EULA, I don't think it should be illegal to do anything with your isk. Seeing as is you pay to play, and its really not hurting anyone.
|
TRIGGER
|
Posted - 2004.10.31 09:58:00 -
[23]
I personally think it's a damn good idea to let people advertise the use of their own services for ingame isk . It only strengthens the game and helps out the community .
|
TRIGGER
|
Posted - 2004.10.31 09:58:00 -
[24]
I personally think it's a damn good idea to let people advertise the use of their own services for ingame isk . It only strengthens the game and helps out the community .
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2004.10.31 10:27:00 -
[25]
Originally by: TRIGGER
I personally think it's a damn good idea to let people advertise the use of their own services for ingame isk . It only strengthens the game and helps out the community .
I agree, to a point. A certain coalescence between in-game and out-of-game concepts in some cases would invariably strengthen the community as a whole. I still think they should be judged on a case-by-case basis, however. A single line cannot be drawn to cover ever concievable circumstance.
|
Nyphur
|
Posted - 2004.10.31 10:27:00 -
[26]
Originally by: TRIGGER
I personally think it's a damn good idea to let people advertise the use of their own services for ingame isk . It only strengthens the game and helps out the community .
I agree, to a point. A certain coalescence between in-game and out-of-game concepts in some cases would invariably strengthen the community as a whole. I still think they should be judged on a case-by-case basis, however. A single line cannot be drawn to cover ever concievable circumstance.
|
Canthus Prime
|
Posted - 2004.10.31 11:44:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Canthus Prime on 31/10/2004 11:46:57
I cant agree with the eBay idea. That is selling ingame items for real money. Not what this whole thread started from.
This thread started from using Teamspeak ingame and offering to host channels for other corps to use teamspeak ingame for ingame Isk. (too many ingames there ?)
The GMs are concidering the position and I am sure they know the arguements from all sides. There is little point in discussing it further as we will be informed about the result in due course.
Should this thread be now locked as it is an informative thread and not really open to discussion?
|
Canthus Prime
|
Posted - 2004.10.31 11:44:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Canthus Prime on 31/10/2004 11:46:57
I cant agree with the eBay idea. That is selling ingame items for real money. Not what this whole thread started from.
This thread started from using Teamspeak ingame and offering to host channels for other corps to use teamspeak ingame for ingame Isk. (too many ingames there ?)
The GMs are concidering the position and I am sure they know the arguements from all sides. There is little point in discussing it further as we will be informed about the result in due course.
Should this thread be now locked as it is an informative thread and not really open to discussion?
|
Einheriar Ulrich
|
Posted - 2004.10.31 12:42:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Einheriar Ulrich on 31/10/2004 12:46:01
Originally by: kieron
Joshua, exactly why there is discussion on this topic.
Even if it was against CCP to charge money i.g isk for it, you would have a hard time proving it.
In my opinion, its a good thing, it strenghten the community, and is essential, for big operations.
TS, Ventrillo or similar products on the Market only highten the experience of games like EVE, embrace it fully.
Kieron, I am not suggesting how to run your corp, but, what about alliance homepages, corp homepages, where, those who freely offer up bandwidth and pc power to host such programs ask for contributions
Its not overly expensive, but a contribution from members help run things smoothly.
I cannot see a problem in accepting isk instead of cash. I can understand that seeling of isk on E-bay is a problem, but its almost like fighting fire with fire.
Aslong as games are as succesfull as yours is (EVE), these things will happen.
So Say I. Einheriar Ulrich of the Bloodline of Einheriar.
****Minion Of VOTF****
|
Einheriar Ulrich
|
Posted - 2004.10.31 12:42:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Einheriar Ulrich on 31/10/2004 12:46:01
Originally by: kieron
Joshua, exactly why there is discussion on this topic.
Even if it was against CCP to charge money i.g isk for it, you would have a hard time proving it.
In my opinion, its a good thing, it strenghten the community, and is essential, for big operations.
TS, Ventrillo or similar products on the Market only highten the experience of games like EVE, embrace it fully.
Kieron, I am not suggesting how to run your corp, but, what about alliance homepages, corp homepages, where, those who freely offer up bandwidth and pc power to host such programs ask for contributions
Its not overly expensive, but a contribution from members help run things smoothly.
I cannot see a problem in accepting isk instead of cash. I can understand that seeling of isk on E-bay is a problem, but its almost like fighting fire with fire.
Aslong as games are as succesfull as yours is (EVE), these things will happen.
So Say I. Einheriar Ulrich of the Bloodline of Einheriar.
****Minion Of VOTF****
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |