| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |

Grog Aftermath
Need more grog
40
|
Posted - 2014.08.21 02:56:00 -
[1] - Quote
Jenni LaCroix wrote:I am trying to understand the logic here of the many eve players that believe ISK has a monetary value, but first, my two cents.
Isk doesn't have a real value.
However it does have a replacement value (i.e. how much it would cost you to replace a lost ship/equipment if buying PLEX to sell for isk) which fluctuates with the market. Which is why people tend to think of it as having a real value.
|

Grog Aftermath
Need more grog
40
|
Posted - 2014.08.21 03:30:00 -
[2] - Quote
Hasikan Miallok wrote:BoBoZoBo wrote:
TL:DR - Time is money. And what people want have real value.
Honestly, what I do not understand is why people do not get this.
The courts get it and in the end their opinion matters more than any random group of forum trolling gamers :D Regardless of what game EULA's say or various forum lawyers claim, EULA are merely terms in a contract between the player and the gaming company. Courts throughout the world are starting to assess in-game assets as a thing with real world value (usually assessed by time take to acquire it) in criminal, contract and equity law.
Bolded and underlined the relevant bit.
What's the point in giving in-game items a value as the player doesn't own them the company does.
Player's can't own the items/characters because if they did it would put companies that supply the service in an impossible position.
|

Grog Aftermath
Need more grog
40
|
Posted - 2014.08.21 04:21:00 -
[3] - Quote
Hasikan Miallok wrote:Remiel Pollard wrote: Citations and examples required.
Example: Supreme Court of the Netherlands Ruling: LJN: BQ9251, Hoge Raad , 10/00101 J http://www.virtualpolicy.net/runescape-theft-dutch-supreme-court-decision.htmlQuote:The court ruled that:
- Virtual items have value in virtual of the effort and time invested in obtaining them - The value in Virtual items is recognised by those that play the game (including the defendents who went to the trouble to take them) - The Virtual items were under the exclusive control of the player GÇô who was relieved of this control
Quote:The court agreed that under the RuneScape terms and conditions, the virtual items in the game are owned by the publisher of RuneScape who grant the players have a GÇÿright to useGÇÖ. However it concluded that the items in question were under the GÇÿexclusive dominionGÇÖ of the victim until they were removed from them, hence the position of RuneScape being owners of the items (from the perspective of intellectual property / contract law) is GÇÿnot relevantGÇÖ in the context of the criminal case under consideration.Here the court made defence to money GÇô which is the property of the sate but can still be stolen. Quote:For the moment, this matter is restricted both to The Netherlands and to the specific matter of theft. However in China and South Korea there have been similar types of cases which have made it to the courts, in these judges have displayed a general trend to grant more rights to players than are stated in their contract and to see digital objects as being akin to physical property in certain important respects. The fact that a case in the EU has got to such a senior court and has ruled along the same lines is likely to carry some weight with other cases that may occur in the West. For details of the Chinese, Korean and other cases see tVPNGÇÖs white paper on Virtual Objects and Public Policy which examines both cases and statute in detail. http://www.virtualpolicy.net/wp-virtual-items-public-policy.html
Well that seems to be one of the dumbest ruling I've heard of.
Shouldn't have even got to court, should have been sorted out by Runescape.
|

Grog Aftermath
Need more grog
40
|
Posted - 2014.08.22 02:19:00 -
[4] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Jenni LaCroix wrote:
Actually, I am using my brain but I believe you simply are too ignorant to understand other people's opinions, thus that can be seen in your first reply where you basically state that all that don't think like you are daydreaming.
So right now, I am choosing out of my free time to write you a reply. It is done out of free will in my free time and to me this has absolutely no value. There is no codex of human behavior anywhere that states that each time I do something that it is out of my free will, that I must apply work time multiplied by my work value.
But I believe that people like you even think that each time they take a dump, that the turd is actually worth real life money, due to like you mentioned, taking a crap time (work) is multiplied by whatever you consider your work value is. Heh, I am sure the turds you drop that have the size of a banana must be worth gold to you.
There is NO such thing as free time... you can never ever get it back its gone spent. IT was NOT free. You spent the possibilities that your life had for that ime. NOthign is free. ANyone that do not grasp taht is a poor fool.
I have plenty of free time, technically it's all free, didn't have to pay for it.
People choose to place a monetary value on their time, it's just something people do. I don't look at it that way though, I take a far more casual approach.
Same with virtual items, people choose to place a value on them even though there really isn't one. Doubt there will ever be a time where a company can claim virtual items as financial assets in regard to their company. Something with 0 value can't be a financial asset.
In an mmo say like WoW where someone buys a mount from the shop. They're not purchasing the mount they're purchasing the ability/license to use it. |

Grog Aftermath
Need more grog
42
|
Posted - 2014.08.23 18:38:00 -
[5] - Quote
Adamai wrote:well the subscription alone puts a value on it !! the fact that 14.99 is 30 days!
Subscription doesn't put a value on in-game items, it only puts a value on the license.
|
| |
|