EVE Search - Intellectual property rights in virtual commodities Survey

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Intellectual property rights in virtual commodities Survey

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Christy D Floyd Astra Research 110	Posted - 2012.11.30 18:04:00 - [1] - Quote I ask you, do you believe if suported in a court of law that rejects electronic standardGÇôform agreements and finds the contract unenforceable by resonable standards that items earned in an online game actually belong to the individual or do they still belong to the designer? Had a nice long disccusion on TS last night with a prelaw pilot and this is what it boiled down too. Money is better than poverty, if only for financial reasons.
Unsuccessful At Everything The Troll Bridge 562	Posted - 2012.11.30 18:08:00 - [2] - Quote Find me a lawyer who wont tell you what you want to hear for money, and ill show you a lawyer who tells the truth. Words from my father right before he lost his divorce. *Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?*
Cannibal Kane Praetorian Cannibals 739	Posted - 2012.11.30 18:08:00 - [3] - Quote When you Click I agree when you first launched EVE. You signed your rights away to owning anything in game, IP of CCP. Everything belongs to CCP. I'm not a Pirate, I'm a Terrorist. The Crazy Space Poor South African. *Hair done by LGÇÖOr+¬al, because I'm worth it.
Mistah Ewedynao Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 104	Posted - 2012.11.30 18:11:00 - [4] - Quote Quote: prelaw pilot That's enough for me. So really the question is can I sell my Character or my stuff for real cash on E-Bay? I wish.....maybe.
Simetraz State War Academy Caldari State 460	Posted - 2012.11.30 18:13:00 - [5] - Quote Possession is 9/10 of the law right ? And all of our assets are sitting on servers owned buy CCP. We rent game time. So I would say no. If a college or company can say anything you produce while using there facilities / assets is the property of the college or company and this has been held up in a court of law. Then tell me why anything you produce in a game would be any different. You are still using the game owners servers and program they created. The courts should just throw these cases right out as a complete waste of tax payers money. EVERYBODY KNOWS
Christy D Floyd Astra Research 110	Posted - 2012.11.30 18:16:00 - [6] - Quote Simetraz wrote: Possession is 9/10 of the law right ? And all of our assets are sitting on servers owned buy CCP. We rent game time. So I would say no. If a college or company can say anything you produce while using there facilities is the property of the college or company and this has been held up in a court of law. Then tell me why anything you produce in a game would be any different. You are still using game owners servers and program they created. The courts should just throw these cases right out as a complete waste of tax payers money. That was a basis of the argument. Lets say I use autocad or some sort of software to design a better mousetrap does that mean the designer of that software owns a portion of the invention? Money is better than poverty, if only for financial reasons.
Simetraz State War Academy Caldari State 460	Posted - 2012.11.30 18:28:00 - [7] - Quote Christy D Floyd wrote: Simetraz wrote: Possession is 9/10 of the law right ? And all of our assets are sitting on servers owned buy CCP. We rent game time. So I would say no. If a college or company can say anything you produce while using there facilities is the property of the college or company and this has been held up in a court of law. Then tell me why anything you produce in a game would be any different. You are still using game owners servers and program they created. The courts should just throw these cases right out as a complete waste of tax payers money. That was a basis of the argument. Lets say I use autocad or some sort of software to design a better mousetrap does that mean the designer of that software owns a portion of the invention? You described a totally different situation. Purchasing software and designing something at your house is not the same as. WOrking for a company that has autocad and whatever you design becomes the property of the company you work for not autocad. You are using your companies assets. The same can be said for playing video games and creating a character / assets on a game server. CCP in this case controls what you can and can't do because you are using their equipment. Once again you are only renting game time that is it. Even if say they are using a game engine from a different company CCP still have claim on what you are making and can remove all your work tomorrow if they feel like it and you can't stop them. That is perhaps the most critical part of ownership. If CCP deletes your character, could you demand that CCP bring back your character and would they have to do it. The answer is no they can kill at just for the fun of it. And as such you don't own it. EVERYBODY KNOWS
Ginger Barbarella State War Academy Caldari State 263	Posted - 2012.11.30 18:30:00 - [8] - Quote Christy D Floyd wrote: I ask you, do you believe if suported in a court of law that rejects electronic standardGÇôform agreements and finds the contract unenforceable by resonable standards that items earned in an online game actually belong to the individual or do they still belong to the designer? Had a nice long disccusion on TS last night with a prelaw pilot and this is what it boiled down too. Any working lawyer who doesn't play vidya games will tell you to get a real job.
Simetraz State War Academy Caldari State 460	Posted - 2012.11.30 18:34:00 - [9] - Quote And just to add on to that. If you really did own said character & assets then CCP could charge you a storage and maintenance fee. Something you couldn't get out of by cancelling your account. Those charges would be on top of the current rental fee for server time. EVERYBODY KNOWS
Cutter Isaacson Nouvelle Rouvenor 2151	Posted - 2012.11.30 18:35:00 - [10] - Quote Christy D Floyd wrote: Simetraz wrote: Possession is 9/10 of the law right ? And all of our assets are sitting on servers owned buy CCP. We rent game time. So I would say no. If a college or company can say anything you produce while using there facilities is the property of the college or company and this has been held up in a court of law. Then tell me why anything you produce in a game would be any different. You are still using game owners servers and program they created. The courts should just throw these cases right out as a complete waste of tax payers money. That was a basis of the argument. Lets say I use autocad or some sort of software to design a better mousetrap does that mean the designer of that software owns a portion of the invention? Your AutoCAD analogy is flawed. AutoCAD does not come up with the design for you, it merely allows you to transfer it from your mind to the screen, the ownership of the design lays entirely with you. The only time this would not be the case is if you worked for a design company whose employment contract states that anything created by an employee is actually owned by the company, not the individual. In the case of EVE all the players do is pay to access a collection of predefined, pre-fabricated set of options. We design nothing, with the exception of our character names and any back history we choose to apply to said character. Even then, as far as I am aware, any copyrighted or trademarked material involved in those histories also belongs to CCP and cannot be sold, transferred or otherwise exchanged without CCP's express permission. So I would suggest that the answer is that no court would ignore the legal rights of the IP holder in favour of someone else. "The truth is usually just an excuse for a lack of imagination." Elim Garak.
Aziesta Sathainn Braithrean Cartel Apocalypse Now. 147	Posted - 2012.11.30 18:36:00 - [11] - Quote The only game I could see you possibly having a case is something like Entropia, where there's a real-cash economy, with established conversion rates and advertised means of depositing and withdrawing money.
Cutter Isaacson Nouvelle Rouvenor 2151	Posted - 2012.11.30 18:49:00 - [12] - Quote Aziesta wrote: The only game I could see you possibly having a case is something like Entropia, where there's a real-cash economy, with established conversion rates and advertised means of depositing and withdrawing money. Another obvious example would be Second Life, but those are both systems that are designed with such things in mind and whose respective TOS and EULA's both cover the legality of the sale of in-game items for real world currencies. EVE's legally binding agreements specifically forbid such things, so anyone signing it would be constrained by the letter of the law. "The truth is usually just an excuse for a lack of imagination." Elim Garak.
Christy D Floyd Astra Research 110	Posted - 2012.11.30 19:11:00 - [13] - Quote Cutter Isaacson wrote: EVE's legally binding agreements specifically forbid such things, so anyone signing it would be constrained by the letter of the law. I agree with you but what if a nations law contradicts a developers TOS contract? Money is better than poverty, if only for financial reasons.
Christy D Floyd Astra Research 110	Posted - 2012.11.30 19:25:00 - [14] - Quote Cutter Isaacson wrote: We design nothing, with the exception of our character names and any back history we choose to apply to said character. Does that inclued the metagame? The real question is does a games Virtual commodities have a real money value? I would say yes and if so then it should be legal tender. If I sold the video card I bought with plex for real world currency well above retail prices does that violate the TOS by CCP? Money is better than poverty, if only for financial reasons.
TriadSte IronPig Sev3rance 133	Posted - 2012.11.30 19:28:00 - [15] - Quote Actually there is some guy who creates clothing items in another game and seels them for real life money and hes rumoured to have earned upwards of -ú70k a year [$130k ish] I forgot the game but for sure this is factual.
Eugene Kerner TunDraGon 221	Posted - 2012.11.30 19:35:00 - [16] - Quote I will just say it once. Possession does not equal ownership. "Also, your boobs " -á CCP Eterne, 2012
Borascus Red Core Paradigm Shift Alliance 125	Posted - 2012.11.30 19:38:00 - [17] - Quote Christy D Floyd wrote: Simetraz wrote: Possession is 9/10 of the law right ? And all of our assets are sitting on servers owned buy CCP. We rent game time. So I would say no. If a college or company can say anything you produce while using there facilities is the property of the college or company and this has been held up in a court of law. Then tell me why anything you produce in a game would be any different. You are still using game owners servers and program they created. The courts should just throw these cases right out as a complete waste of tax payers money. That was a basis of the argument. Lets say I use autocad or some sort of software to design a better mousetrap does that mean the designer of that software owns a portion of the invention? In this specific instance AutoCAD software designer would not own any of the intellectual property as it is a program used to illustrate a concept / prototype within your patent application. On the other hand you would not be able to copyright / file for ownership any part of the AutoCAD program. It would be a tool. America's Senate went for a full-blown first past the post methodology last year, didn't read the whole article. This would have excluded the UK law establishing common ground and copyright in the build up to a patent application. I.e. You design a product. Copyright it at home. You're assocaite views the document on a cloud computing model where the copyright claim is also clearly stated, and then files patent on the design of the product. \|\|\| In this circumstance it is arguable that intellectual property was held by yourself when the association viewed the document with the copyright claim. In the proposed American First-past-the-post system, the concept would remain the property of the filing party, eliminating any form of safe collaboration. In EVE, all models and designs are part of the Intellectual property owned by CCP Games. meaning you couldn't use any skins, modules, fittings, rig slots etc as they are part of the IP. It would be like patenting a meccano truck
The Protato Protus Correction Facility Inc. 90	Posted - 2012.11.30 19:44:00 - [18] - Quote Unsuccessful At Everything wrote: Find me a lawyer who wont tell you what you want to hear for money, and ill show you a lawyer who tells the truth. Words from my father right before he lost his divorce. Ah, ignorance.
Destination SkillQueue Are We There Yet 3046	Posted - 2012.11.30 19:46:00 - [19] - Quote Eugene Kerner wrote: I will just say it once. Possession does not equal ownership. No, but you're going to need clear evidence of ownership to have a good case without posession. If the ownership is unclear, the one in posession of it is presumed to be the rightful owner.
Eugene Kerner TunDraGon 221	Posted - 2012.11.30 19:50:00 - [20] - Quote Destination SkillQueue wrote: Eugene Kerner wrote: I will just say it once. Possession does not equal ownership. No, but you're going to need clear evidence of ownership to have a good case without posession. If the ownership is unclear, the one in posession of it is presumed to be the rightful owner. Would the source code be such an evidence? "Also, your boobs " -á CCP Eterne, 2012
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 10469	Posted - 2012.11.30 19:52:00 - [21] - Quote Christy D Floyd wrote: That was a basis of the argument. Lets say I use autocad or some sort of software to design a better mousetrap does that mean the designer of that software owns a portion of the invention? Different creation. If you use AutoCAD to create splines and nurbs and squircles, and then save in a proprietary file format, then yes, Autodesk owns the maths behind those lines, surfaces and volumes, their likeness, and the way they're stored. They do not own the idiosyncratic combinations of those primitives that you create and sell to your customers. Likewise, CCP owns the ships, modules, ISK, and other primitives and their storage method (and even the storage, since it never leaves their system) GÇö they do not own the game experience your particular combination of those parts create, nor do they own the third-party creations (e.g. API-linked software) that is built using the hooks made available by the developers. Then there's the whole licensing issue. A normal AutoCAD license explicitly says that the drawings you create with the program are yours to do whatever you want withGÇª assuming you picked that license rather than, say, an educational or trial license. If you didn't, then yes, Autodesk could conceivably claim GÇö if not actual ownership of their own GÇö then at least that your ownership is restricted since you had the wrong license to use their software in such a way as to create commercial products with it. You'd still have the copyright, but you wouldn't be allowed to do much with it. Similarly, CCP doesn't license its software for any kind of creation that makes you the owner ofGÇª wellGÇª anything. You have to create your own stuff outside of the system to own it. It's not a creative license (much less a commercial one) like the one you get if you buy AutoCAD or Photoshop or Cubase or whatever. Quote: If I sold the video card I bought with plex for real world currency well above retail prices does that violate the TOS by CCP? Nah. CCP's reach ended when you gave them permission them to hand over half of that PLEX-cash to nVidia and cash in the rest. At best you'd be breaking some absurd nVidia EULA or retailer licensing by reselling physical stuff you owned (which is what CCP would come after you for doing if you tried to resell GTC/ETC). GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
Janet Patton Brony Express 56	Posted - 2012.11.30 19:57:00 - [22] - Quote TriadSte wrote: Actually there is some guy who creates clothing items in another game and seels them for real life money and hes rumoured to have earned upwards of -ú70k a year [$130k ish] I forgot the game but for sure this is factual. It is probably Second Life. There are hundreds of people that do that. Clothing, Animations, Avatars, Buildings, Vehicles, Scripts, Ect... almost anything you can think of. Why do I have this sig? I don't smoke.
Christy D Floyd Astra Research 110	Posted - 2012.11.30 20:06:00 - [23] - Quote The Cad analogy was bad I apoligize. I understand why CCP outlaws RMT for the simple fact if a monetary value is placed on in-game items then if CCP was to go out of business then 400k+ subscibers would be asking for compensation for those items. Why not write in a no refund policy in the TOS and allow RMT, this protects CCP from any legal recourse unless the RMT ban is purely financial jealousy. Money is better than poverty, if only for financial reasons.
BoBoZoBo MGroup9 Quantum Cafe 112	Posted - 2012.11.30 20:10:00 - [24] - Quote Trying to understand, what did anyone in here actually create as oppose to use? Primary Test Subject GÇó SmackTalker Elite
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 10469	Posted - 2012.11.30 20:23:00 - [25] - Quote BoBoZoBo wrote: Trying to understand, what did anyone in here actually create as oppose to use? Arguably, the marketplace (as in the combination of wares on it and their prices) and the sov map. GÇªand of course, the whole game experience and OOG politics bit. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ Get a good start: newbie skill plan.
Borascus Red Core Paradigm Shift Alliance 126	Posted - 2012.11.30 20:36:00 - [26] - Quote The reference included a fine-point stipulation regarding metacontent. That could be anything from a fight strategem to fan-fic intended for Machinima This Patent Application illustrates an attempt to claim ownership of virtual transactions / processes citing various games as a potential customer. This would fail for me as the Entropia Universe stipulation lacks the registered trademark symbol. It does however, include drawings <-> situational contexts that would show you how using the situational model would not infringe intellectual property law, whilst using an engine variation to demonstrate a similar design in a similar context within a different Virtual Universe.
Pinks Taco Perkone Caldari State 2	Posted - 2012.11.30 20:58:00 - [27] - Quote Eve is a hobby like bowling , fishing, and crap like that. Once you start to make money off your hobby its now called a profession. CCP doesnt want you to make money off your hobby but im usre many players do why not let the rest of us.
Borascus Red Core Paradigm Shift Alliance 126	Posted - 2012.11.30 21:04:00 - [28] - Quote There isn't really a withdraw function with EVE. There was a bloke that mortgaged his house to play a RMT game and actually survived. It's too close to gambling to be relevant in EVE.
Konrad Kane Dirt Nap Squad 27	Posted - 2012.12.01 08:54:00 - [29] - Quote Cannibal Kane wrote: When you Click I agree when you first launched EVE. You signed your rights away to owning anything in game, IP of CCP. Everything belongs to CCP. ^ this, don't like the terms; don't use the service.
Borascus Red Core Paradigm Shift Alliance 127	Posted - 2012.12.01 09:42:00 - [30] - Quote Konrad Kane wrote: Cannibal Kane wrote: When you Click I agree when you first launched EVE. You signed your rights away to owning anything in game, IP of CCP. Everything belongs to CCP. ^ this, don't like the terms; don't use the service. There used to be a loophole whereby you could accept the terms for a series of patches, then choose "No I don't accept" at which point no information is relayed back to the service provider, no logs are updated with your preference and as long as you don't log in you waive the EULA on your account. Never heard of it working on an EVE account though...

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.