David Cedarbridge
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
261
   |
Posted - 2013.04.18 16:25:00 -
[1] - Quote
Lallante wrote:People arguing that it needs to be clearer what is legal and what is illegal are completely wrong.
The whole point is that it needs to be sufficiently broad to allow CCP to take whatever action it feels necessary to safeguard the game, and not have its hands tied because someone has found a particular angle that is "technically" within the EULA but in practice is highly abusive.
If you are worried that your actions might be deemed cheating, unfair, exploits, gamebreaking, or otherwise circumventing a deliberately designed game limitation, then don't do them.
By your own admission, nobody can or should know for sure if something they are doing is a violation of the above conditions. I really wish you'd make up your mind instead of playing two-faced posting games here. Either CCP gives a briteline and states what is and is not against their policies or they don't.
In the condition that they do present this briteline then players are actually capable of knowing what they can and can't do without fear of reprisal. This is an optimal situation as players then know what is and is not a punishable situation. They don't have to guess. They don't have to infer. They don't have to do any legwork at all. If the rules are sufficiently clear then none of that is even an issue. Your statement that players should avoid doing what they "are worried" about just creates pointless paranoia. This is entertainment software not some sort of coercion experiment. Having players walk on eggshells for fear of being banned for whatever CCP whims to ban them for with no previous indications is a bad model and you should feel bad for suggesting that it is a legitimate concept.
Additionally, justifying intentionally vague EULA (a puedo-legal document) on the basis of avoiding people from exploiting the same EULA is logically bankrupt. Dragging the real world into this (gasp, EULAs exist in the real work so here we go), laws that are intentionally vague or do not establish britelines and standards for violation and non-violation are routinely struck down for that exact reason. People cannot be expected to follow a standard that is not properly defined. Stating that you won't give anyone a better chance of following that standard than guessing is just asking for a can of "unintended consequences" that nobody wants to deal with.
|