EVE Search - VIrtual Economies Attract Real World Tax Authorities

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

VIrtual Economies Attract Real World Tax Authorities

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Steno The Department of Justice	Posted - 2006.10.16 14:41:00 - [1] http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061016/lf_nm/life_secondlife_tax_dc;_ylt=AgcMpUUrI5IFc6Zc36Ip4YJJTb8F;_ylu=X3oDMTA5aHJvMDdwBHNlYwN5bmNhdA-- Quote: Virtual economies attract real-world tax attention By Adam Pasick Users of online worlds such as Second Life and World of Warcraft transact millions of dollars worth of virtual goods and services every day, and these virtual economies are beginning to draw the attention of real-world authorities. "Right now we're at the preliminary stages of looking at the issue and what kind of public policy questions virtual economies raise -- taxes, barter exchanges, property and wealth," said Dan Miller, senior economist for the Joint Economic Committee of the U.S. Congress. "You could argue that to a certain degree the law has fallen (behind) because you can have a virtual asset and virtual capital gains, but there's no mechanism by which you're taxed on this stuff," he told Reuters in a telephone interview. The increasing size and public profile of virtual economies, the largest of which have millions of users and gross domestic products that rival those of small countries, have made them increasingly difficult for lawmakers and regulators to ignore. Second Life, for example, was specifically designed by San Francisco-based Linden Lab to have a free-flowing market economy. Its internal currency, the Linden dollar, can be converted into U.S. dollars through an open currency exchange, making it effectively "real" money. Inside Second Life, users can buy and sell virtual objects from T-shirts to helicopters, develop virtual real estate, or hire out services ranging from architecture to exotic dancing. Up to $500,000 in user-to-user transactions take place every day, and the Second Life economy is growing by 10 to 15 percent a month. "Ownership, property rights, all that stuff needs to be decided. There's just too much money floating around," said game designer Sam Lewis, who trained as an economist and has worked on games such as Star Wars Galaxies. He is currently lead designer for an upcoming game from Cartoon Network. "The tax laws don't know how to behave because these are virtual items: ones and zeros on a database we're allowing you to play in," he said. Even if it is inevitable, Lewis is not exactly looking forward to having real-life tax collectors enter the virtual world. "I'm a designer that thinks any sort of boundaries or rules actually give you an interesting challenge to overcome, but I don't particularly want the IRS coming in," he said. The rapid emergence of virtual economies has outstripped current tax law in many areas, but there are some clear-cut guidelines that already apply. For example, people who cash out of virtual economies by converting their assets into real-world currencies are required to report their incomes to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service or the tax authority where they live in the real world. It is less clear how to deal with income and capital gains that never leave the virtual economy, income and capital gains that in the real world would be subject to taxes. "Let's say the IRS decides they want a valuation of your assets. We don't have a stock market where we can as of the 31st of December, these assets went up, these went down," Lewis said. Miller, of the Joint Economic Committee, who became interested in the issue when he began exploring some of the virtual worlds in his free time, said he has an open mind about how real world tax authorities should interact with virtual economies. "We are starting with a blank slate and going through the various dimensions of virtual economies, and seeing where they might intersect with public policy," he said. Miller hopes to have a rough draft of a report done by the end of the year. But first, he has to educate some of his colleagues. --- All comments are my own and in no way are official statements for my corp or alliance
Steno The Department of Justice	Posted - 2006.10.16 14:42:00 - [2] Quote: "I found that talking about this issue with some of the other economists on the committee, they are not really familiar with what a virtual economy is. The idea of Second Life or World of Warcraft or some of these other synthetic universes, they have trouble wrapping their head around it," he said. However, there are probably some on Capitol Hill who won't require much explanation. "I can almost guarantee that there are some members of Congress spending time in Second Life or World of Warcraft," he said. (For more coverage of Second Life, where Reuters is opening a virtual news bureau, go to http://secondlife.reuters.com) --- All comments are my own and in no way are official statements for my corp or alliance
Roshan longshot Gallente Order of the Arrow	Posted - 2006.10.16 14:48:00 - [3] Old news I am afraid. They been trying to Tax on-line games for along time. The problem is, Not everoyone sells on E-bay. So they dont generate an income. Free-form Professions, ensure no limetations on professions. Be a trader, fighter, industialist, researcher, hunter *pirate* or mixture of them all. [i]As read from the original box.
Tarazed Aquilae	Posted - 2006.10.16 15:13:00 - [4] Problem is the IRS (or whatever tax agency) would have to collect their taxes in ISK. So the tax collectors would have to have Eve accounts or we couldnÆt transfer the ISK to them. Tax agencies use the threat of real world violence to force people to pay their taxes. This is against the EULA so the tax collector would be banned. Therefore governments canÆt tax the Eve economyà Podding a tax collector would be a lot of fun though.
Cmdr Sy Off Balance Sheet Entity	Posted - 2006.10.16 15:28:00 - [5] There may be some weak argument for this in games which are virtual property vendors (officially so - eg Project Entropia, etc), but in games where conversions between real and virtual property are not intended and not supported, they would have a hard time making their case indeed. In future, I expect any such clumsy efforts would end up violating the EULAs.
Rodj Blake Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2006.10.16 15:32:00 - [6] Edited by: Rodj Blake on 16/10/2006 15:35:34 Edited by: Rodj Blake on 16/10/2006 15:32:28 If the Inland Revenue tries to tax my ISK I will: * Apply for my monthly subscription to be tax deductible as a business expense. * Invest my ISK into ships and class them as assets. I am quite confident that if this happens HM Government will in fact end up owing me money because I basically suck at making ISK. Dulce et decorum est, pro imperator mori
Nicoli Voldkif Caelli-Merced	Posted - 2006.10.16 15:52:00 - [7] Originally by: Rodj Blake Edited by: Rodj Blake on 16/10/2006 15:35:34 Edited by: Rodj Blake on 16/10/2006 15:32:28 If the Inland Revenue tries to tax my ISK I will: * Apply for my monthly subscription to be tax deductible as a business expense. * Invest my ISK into ships and class them as assets. I am quite confident that if this happens HM Government will in fact end up owing me money because I basically suck at making ISK. Oooohhh.. I like..
Caffeine Junkie Caldari The Ministry Of Funny Walks	Posted - 2006.10.16 15:57:00 - [8] Originally by: Rodj Blake Edited by: Rodj Blake on 16/10/2006 15:35:34 Edited by: Rodj Blake on 16/10/2006 15:32:28 If the Inland Revenue tries to tax my ISK I will: * Apply for my monthly subscription to be tax deductible as a business expense. * Invest my ISK into ships and class them as assets. I am quite confident that if this happens HM Government will in fact end up owing me money because I basically suck at making ISK. Thats a good point, spend enough time playing EVE really badly, and you could actually wind up not paying any real world tax, bring it on! Loving the idea of podding a tax collector! _______________________________________________ I'm pretty new at this, so don't rip it out of me too much if i'm asking dumb questions!
ExploitedB	Posted - 2006.10.16 16:04:00 - [9] All virtual property in eve is property of CCP as stated in EULA so there is nothing to collect.
Balklanac Freezoner	Posted - 2006.10.16 16:25:00 - [10] Originally by: Tarazed Aquilae Problem is the IRS (or whatever tax agency) would have to collect their taxes in ISK. So the tax collectors would have to have Eve accounts or we couldnÆt transfer the ISK to them. Tax agencies use the threat of real world violence to force people to pay their taxes. This is against the EULA so the tax collector would be banned. Therefore governments canÆt tax the Eve economyà Podding a tax collector would be a lot of fun though. Or any other real world authority for that matter 'You have the right to remain silent, in the case you cho...' 'Stfu n00b' --------- I would love to see a bounty pilot get some friend or an alt to pod them to collect the isk if that resulted in a two week delay before their 'personality' was uploaded to a new clone.
Clementina Eye of God Axiom Empire	Posted - 2006.10.16 16:29:00 - [11] The Tax men who would do this are quite possibily, some of the dumbest people on the face of the earth. First, taxing someone for making isk in a game is like taxing someone for making a sandwitch, and eating the sandwitch. They added value to their life, but didn't recieve any money for it. Same as playing a video game and 'earning' isk. No extra money = no tax. Second, they would have to collect tax in isk for all the people who don't ebay. What are they going to do with it? I can only speak for America now, but somehow, I don't think our creditors will be amused if we paid off the US Federal Debt in isk.
Za Po Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.16 16:31:00 - [12] Originally by: ExploitedB All virtual property in eve is property of CCP as stated in EULA so there is nothing to collect. QFT. To be more accurate, there is no "property" in a MMORPG; not in a real-life sense. By playing, we are merely modifying the state of a database. When we use eBay, or Project Entropia's own facilities, to "sell in-game money", what we are really doing in a legal sense is providing a service, not trading. You are paying me to do a specific job, which is to modify a few bits in a database. No exchange of goods is involved. Therefore, there is really no way to "convert game assets to real-world money", because there is no such thing as a "game asset". A service is taxable, so someone who sells ISK could be taxed, but normal players cannot, because they don't "own assets" in any legal sense. I can see this fairly clearly because I'm an expert player and I know a bit about the reasoning behind taxation. But most people in parliaments don't have our perspective. I hope they don't make a mistake and really try to tax MMORPG "property"; that would make no legal sense whatsoever and only result in a big mess.
Adjasarcanter Amarr	Posted - 2006.10.16 16:32:00 - [13] This is ludicrous. I mean, it's a computer game ffs. Fair enough, if people were actually making a real world living from it (as I know some people do with other games,) and it was legal to do so within the rules of the game, then go ahead and tax them. Hell, it's as much of a taxable income to them as trading in real world assets. But, as someone mentioned earlier, that is against the EULA. EvE was and is intended by CCP to be a GAME that SIMULATES a real economy and NOT a tool for real world income. The main reason I play a game like this is to escape the real world and indulge myself in fantasy. If the real world starts encroaching on my fantasies like this and CCP cannot or will not stop it I will cancel my subscription and stop playing the game. I imagine I won't be alone either...
Insidi Us Amarr The Imperial Commonwealth Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.10.16 16:49:00 - [14] They need to separate Second Life away from every other game, because that's the only one with a sanctioned game currency to real currency conversion. They already require eBay sales of virtual economy items to be reported. -----------
Za Po Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.16 16:59:00 - [15] The way I see it, it's crystal clear. If and when you sell in-game stuff for real money, you can be taxed. You're earning money, so you got to pay. But no earlier. I may make a gazillion ISKs, but until the second I sell them on eBay, I haven't earned a penny. Incidentally, this would be a hit to farmers, and I wouldn't shed a tear for them.
Ghoest	Posted - 2006.10.16 17:00:00 - [16] In a game like WOW all the tie ins to real world economys are illegal. If you make real profit you have to report it, but you cant be changed for items in game because technically you dont own them. When you ebay gold from WOW the money you make is technically pofit from fraud. Wherever you went - here you are.
Adjasarcanter Amarr	Posted - 2006.10.16 17:02:00 - [17] Originally by: Za Po The way I see it, it's crystal clear. If and when you sell in-game stuff for real money, you can be taxed. You're earning money, so you got to pay. But no earlier. I may make a gazillion ISKs, but until the second I sell them on eBay, I haven't earned a penny. Incidentally, this would be a hit to farmers, and I wouldn't shed a tear for them. I agree with this completely.
000Hunter000 Gallente Leviathan Corperation LTD	Posted - 2006.10.16 17:15:00 - [18] If i would get taxed for my earnings in EVE i'd laugh my ass off then take it to court. Banner will be updated shortly
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2006.10.16 17:38:00 - [19] Originally by: Za Po Originally by: ExploitedB All virtual property in eve is property of CCP as stated in EULA so there is nothing to collect. QFT. To be more accurate, there is no "property" in a MMORPG; not in a real-life sense. By playing, we are merely modifying the state of a database. Technically, most banking and other RL trading these days is simply changing the state of a database, it's just the rules are slightly stricter. I'm with you on the analysis of the rest of it though. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2006.10.16 17:45:00 - [20] Originally by: Ghoest In a game like WOW all the tie ins to real world economys are illegal. If you make real profit you have to report it, but you cant be changed for items in game because technically you dont own them. When you ebay gold from WOW the money you make is technically pofit from fraud. They are not illegal. They are violations of the EULA which has been variously charciterized as uneforceable and a guidline, not a contract. Meaning, under the law, nothing is illegal about selling in game currencies. Even in games where it is against the rules. The issue here is that they aren't going to just up and tax you on what you have in online games. They are first going to legally redifine who owns what. And that is going to single handedly shut down the MMO worlds. Because as soon as CCP is legally liable for your "property" loss, this game can't be sustained. ___________________________________________ The deeper you stick it in your vein, the deeper the thoughts there's no more pain. ___________________________________________
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2006.10.16 17:49:00 - [21] Originally by: Locke DieDrake The issue here is that they aren't going to just up and tax you on what you have in online games. They are first going to legally redifine who owns what. And that is going to single handedly shut down the MMO worlds. Because as soon as CCP is legally liable for your "property" loss, this game can't be sustained. Depends how it is viewed. Casino's don't get sued when you lose money on their games, for example. As long as the potential for loss is made clear to the player and forms part of their agreement to play, then I can't see it would be a problem. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
Flax Volcanus Tea And Sympathy Ltd. Liability	Posted - 2006.10.16 17:54:00 - [22] I couldn't tell whether the OP is legit or some urban myth. If the former, it would never fly in the U.S., even if the Dems win the House in a few weeks. If the latter, at least it has good entertainment value. I kinda wish it were true. Then I could add all my unreimbursed losses to crime to my itemizations and save a buttload on my taxes.
Ghoest	Posted - 2006.10.16 17:57:00 - [23] Originally by: Locke DieDrake Originally by: Ghoest In a game like WOW all the tie ins to real world economys are illegal. If you make real profit you have to report it, but you cant be changed for items in game because technically you dont own them. When you ebay gold from WOW the money you make is technically pofit from fraud. They are not illegal. They are violations of the EULA which has been variously charciterized as uneforceable and a guidline, not a contract. Meaning, under the law, nothing is illegal about selling in game currencies. Even in games where it is against the rules. The issue here is that they aren't going to just up and tax you on what you have in online games. They are first going to legally redifine who owns what. And that is going to single handedly shut down the MMO worlds. Because as soon as CCP is legally liable for your "property" loss, this game can't be sustained. No they are illegal if the service provider says they are. All transactions take place in part on the the server which is owned/opperated by the game company. They are allowed to dictate what happend on their server. If it was as you said the game operaters would not be allowed to ban accounts and "seize" assets in the account for breaking the EULA. Wherever you went - here you are.
000Hunter000 Gallente Leviathan Corperation LTD	Posted - 2006.10.16 18:02:00 - [24] mebbe a bit OT but i read something last week that made me chill to the bone... Looks like criminal organisations are actually forcing people (not by economics like sweatshops but by threat of violence and hostage taking) to act as sweatshoppers. Now thats really bad Banner will be updated shortly
Too Kind	Posted - 2006.10.16 18:05:00 - [25] Originally by: Za Po The way I see it, it's crystal clear. If and when you sell in-game stuff for real money, you can be taxed. You're earning money, so you got to pay. But no earlier. I may make a gazillion ISKs, but until the second I sell them on eBay, I haven't earned a penny. Incidentally, this would be a hit to farmers, and I wouldn't shed a tear for them. Agree, but I'm afraid polititians, lawyers etc. are usually not interested in common sense or logical thinking, when it comes to such things. One day they forbid us to do pvp, because we destroy the assets of someone else. Or in the end, CCP has to refund people, when EVE finally closes it's doors, because all virtual wealth gets destroyed. ( We're talking about stuff worth millions of dollars. ) -------------------------- Post with your main !!!111
Leianna Entropy Tech.	Posted - 2006.10.16 18:42:00 - [26] Originally by: Insidi Us They need to separate Second Life away from every other game, because that's the only one with a sanctioned game currency to real currency conversion. They already require eBay sales of virtual economy items to be reported. Not just Second Life. Entropia Universe is the same, but graphics and gameplay wise it makes second life look like an Atari rip-off. ======================== Entropy Tech. Oipo II - Moon 19 Ishukone Watch Logistics
Argenton Sayvers	Posted - 2006.10.16 18:42:00 - [27] Originally by: Ghoest No they are illegal if the service provider says they are. All transactions take place in part on the the server which is owned/opperated by the game company. They are allowed to dictate what happend on their server. If it was as you said the game operaters would not be allowed to ban accounts and "seize" assets in the account for breaking the EULA. 1. they are "illegal" (as in, not supported by the rules. Moving a pawn from d2 to d5 is "illegal") 2. they are (most likely) not illegal (against the law - stealing for personal profit is illegal). In order for something to be illegal, there needs to be a law passed by the lawmakers (parliaments in most relevant countries). In order for a person to be punished for doing something illegal, there needs to be a ruling by a judge (note that there are exceptions for small stuff like fines for speeding, but those are a bit more complicated. When in doubt, a judge decides.). *********** What a company deems illegal is irrelevant for now. (but the world is changing) *********** Law trumps contracts. For example, contracts involving trade of organs are illegal (in most places), and there are countries that even regulate the amount of interest you can receive. If a contract breaks current law, the contract is void, even if both parties signed it. This is of course, a general statement on law systems of western nations. Since law is something national, it can vary depending on your location. The general principles are valid in all "western" countries i have heard of. So while you can argue that selling ISK on ebay (a clear violation of the EULA) is fraud, you could as well argue that the passage in the EULA that regulates RMT is illegal for various reasons. A judge decides, not the macro-hating plebs, nor the company. As for the topic: taxing money from RMT is pretty obvious (if its above the general limits, no point taxing a school kid who made 150$.). Taxing virtual property is pathetic.
Kaynard Stormwalker Stormriders	Posted - 2006.10.16 18:51:00 - [28] Politician 1 > Damn, I couldnt buy a new beach house this year. Politician 2 > Yeah, I wanted to get a new SUV but I spend too much on diamons. Politician 1 > Well...my son plays that World of Warcraft game, I heard it has billion subscribers. If only we could take a bit of that money... Politician 3 (that until now was just listening) > Heh..well I do have an idea. People suck.
Taram Caldar Caldari Acheron Vanguard Armada The Shadow Ascension	Posted - 2006.10.16 19:00:00 - [29] LOL I would love to see them try to tax virtual worlds. What a can of worms that'd open. And podding tax collectors and congressmen would just be too damn fun for words. They all suck anyway.
Ghoest	Posted - 2006.10.16 19:07:00 - [30] If an MMO provider took away some kids items that he bought on EBAY his parents could not sue the company and win. They could could sue the seller for fraud though and probably win(assumming they could actually find the seller.) I use the example of a kid becuase it gives an avenue for the buy to avoid blame. (And yes in a jury trial anything is possible, but remember just because a jury let OJ commit murder that doesnt make murder illegal.) You can argue the semantics of "legal" all you want. But in practice it would be fraud and thus illigal by the standards that matter most. Wherever you went - here you are.
Elgar1 Lightfoot Industries	Posted - 2006.10.16 19:09:00 - [31] It's an interesting topic, however the EULA states that CCP own ALL of the items in EVE. We own nothing but the right to access their servers when they allow us. The only thing the Tax man could possibly tax is the income anyone has from selling virtual items. The legality of selling virtual items doesn't come into it. They can tax prostitutes, even in countries where the profession is illegal.
emepror Gallente Flying Spaghetti Monsterz Serenus Letum	Posted - 2006.10.16 19:28:00 - [32] your already being taxed through the corperate tax the station mineral tax and alliance taxes
Magunus The Forsakened Few The ARR0W Project	Posted - 2006.10.16 19:28:00 - [33] Originally by: Ghoest <snip> (And yes in a jury trial anything is possible, but remember just because a jury let OJ commit murder that doesnt make murder illegal.) Correct! Murder is illegal for entirely different reasons! Soz, couldn't resist that one. --- In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. -- Douglas Adams, 'The Restaurant at the End of the Universe'
Viktor Fyretracker Caldari Worms Corp	Posted - 2006.10.16 19:41:00 - [34] heh if they ever tried to tax my MMO stuff then i would write my mage in WoW off as a dependant(needs food and water in that virtual world). and write my raven, Ferox, shuttles(all 50 of them), Kestrel, Caracal, badgers, sigils omens off as company cars. oh and write off my ammo expenses too.
Miss Overlord Gallente EUROPEANS	Posted - 2006.10.16 19:47:00 - [35] Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker heh if they ever tried to tax my MMO stuff then i would write my mage in WoW off as a dependant(needs food and water in that virtual world). and write my raven, Ferox, shuttles(all 50 of them), Kestrel, Caracal, badgers, sigils omens off as company cars. oh and write off my ammo expenses too. thats just so wrong
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2006.10.16 19:49:00 - [36] Originally by: Ghoest Originally by: Locke DieDrake Originally by: Ghoest In a game like WOW all the tie ins to real world economys are illegal. If you make real profit you have to report it, but you cant be changed for items in game because technically you dont own them. When you ebay gold from WOW the money you make is technically pofit from fraud. They are not illegal. They are violations of the EULA which has been variously charciterized as uneforceable and a guidline, not a contract. Meaning, under the law, nothing is illegal about selling in game currencies. Even in games where it is against the rules. The issue here is that they aren't going to just up and tax you on what you have in online games. They are first going to legally redifine who owns what. And that is going to single handedly shut down the MMO worlds. Because as soon as CCP is legally liable for your "property" loss, this game can't be sustained. No they are illegal if the service provider says they are. All transactions take place in part on the the server which is owned/opperated by the game company. They are allowed to dictate what happend on their server. If it was as you said the game operaters would not be allowed to ban accounts and "seize" assets in the account for breaking the EULA. Incorrect. The service provide doesn't decide what is illegal and what isn't. Period. The LAW does. Which means lawyers, courts and parliment/lobbyists. The service provider can decide what is AGAINST THE RULES. But being against the rules is not the same as being against the law. You are foolish if you believe otherwise. The reason they can ban you, is because you have agreed to a contract to follow the rules they set out. If you break the rules, you can be barred from using the service. There is no LAW that makes rule breaking a crime. Simply there is a law that says if you sign/agree to a contract, you are bound by it. In that contract, CCP's only action is to ban/temp ban people. No one to date has ever been PROSECUTED for RMT or other rule violations in a game. Saying the rules of the game are laws is like saying that cheating at candy land is a felony. It's assinine. It may be you just don't have any real world experiance, or it may be you are just ignorant. Thats fine, but get educated before you start spouting non-sense. RULE /=/ LAW. ___________________________________________ The deeper you stick it in your vein, the deeper the thoughts there's no more pain. ___________________________________________
Sanctus Maleficus Oberon Incorporated Prime Orbital Systems	Posted - 2006.10.16 19:51:00 - [37] This doesn't suprise me. The US Goverment's tax collection is extremely shady. The income tax itself is actually illegal (http://www.originalintent.org/edu/fedincometax.php). Not much you can do about it though, since the IRS will strongarm you into paying. But hey, whatever. ;)
Miss Overlord Gallente EUROPEANS	Posted - 2006.10.16 19:51:00 - [38] the IRS are youre friend
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2006.10.16 19:54:00 - [39] Originally by: Ghoest If an MMO provider took away some kids items that he bought on EBAY his parents could not sue the company and win. They could could sue the seller for fraud though and probably win(assumming they could actually find the seller.) I use the example of a kid becuase it gives an avenue for the buy to avoid blame. (And yes in a jury trial anything is possible, but remember just because a jury let OJ commit murder that doesnt make murder illegal.) You can argue the semantics of "legal" all you want. But in practice it would be fraud and thus illigal by the standards that matter most. Again you misunderstand the law. You can't sue a drug dealer for selling you fake dope. Because the deal in the first place was on it's face illegal/fraudulent, and if you didn't know that, you should have. Same applies to RMT transactions, while they aren't strictly illegal, they are TOS violations and any participation in them makes all praties culpable. Which also means that no party has any legal recourse. In addition to the fact that if the seller delivered what he said he would, and CCP later took it away, there was no fraud. Go to ebay and look at any EVE auction, note the disclaimer : This auction is for the TIME it took to acquire these in game items, all items are property of CCP. Which means that in addition to the fact that you have no legal basis to sue in the first place because you knew you were breaking the rules, there was no fraud because the seller clearly states no ownership. ___________________________________________ The deeper you stick it in your vein, the deeper the thoughts there's no more pain. ___________________________________________
Ghoest	Posted - 2006.10.16 20:01:00 - [40] Edited by: Ghoest on 16/10/2006 20:04:17 As I explained and you keep dodging the rules and control of the server create defacto ownership. Once ownership is established we have plenty of existing laws to govern it, unless they write a new more specific law to superceded the existing laws. Eulas may not be legally binding as contracts. But ownership is clearly defined in this case none the less. You seem to have confused the insubstancial nature of Eulas with the server owners ability to claim his property. My previous example clearly show who has ownerships(the server operator) in as long they dont dont specificaly give it away, in which case it could be argued. EDIT: I dont misunderstand the law. Your analogy was pathetic. A better analogy would be trying to sell the engine parts from a car you have rented. Its fraud because you dont own them. Wherever you went - here you are.
Argenton Sayvers	Posted - 2006.10.16 20:06:00 - [41] Originally by: Ghoest You can argue the semantics of "legal" all you want. But in practice it would be fraud and thus illigal by the standards that matter most. So how many people went to prison for ebay-ing or got sued for fraud? Repeat with me: Companies dont make laws. it doesnt matter what CCP says. What kind of blinded fanboi puts a EULA over the law (that is passed by elected representatives of the people!). Well politicians are sleezy and incompetent, but at least they are elected and somewhat responsible. Corporate Trash however, is not (not that im saying CCP falls in that category). It DOESNT matter what CCP says. What matters is what judges say. And so far, there is no court decision pointing in the direction in any country with western (roman) law system. Please dont counter this argument with the EULA. either give court decisions, or at least pending law suits. No, Black snow doesnt count (BS sued mythic, not the other way around), neither does anything with hacking in it.
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2006.10.16 20:18:00 - [42] Originally by: Locke DieDrake The reason they can ban you, is because you have agreed to a contract to follow the rules they set out. If you break the rules, you can be barred from using the service. There is no LAW that makes rule breaking a crime. I'm pretty sure you'd stand a good chance with the computer misuse laws most countries have these days. They generally make unathorized access to, or use of, a computer system a specific crime. The Service Provider decides who is allowed to access their system, and what conditions that access must abide by. If someone does not abide by those rules, then they are accessing and using the system in an unauthorized manner. The main reason MMO companies settle for a ban rather than use this, is because it's not worth the court fees or bad press over your average misbehaving player. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
Detavi Kade	Posted - 2006.10.16 20:19:00 - [43] Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker heh if they ever tried to tax my MMO stuff then i would write my mage in WoW off as a dependant(needs food and water in that virtual world). and write my raven, Ferox, shuttles(all 50 of them), Kestrel, Caracal, badgers, sigils omens off as company cars. oh and write off my ammo expenses too. This made me chuckle.
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2006.10.16 20:34:00 - [44] Originally by: Ghoest Edited by: Ghoest on 16/10/2006 20:04:17 As I explained and you keep dodging the rules and control of the server create defacto ownership. Once ownership is established we have plenty of existing laws to govern it, unless they write a new more specific law to superceded the existing laws. Eulas may not be legally binding as contracts. But ownership is clearly defined in this case none the less. You seem to have confused the insubstancial nature of Eulas with the server owners ability to claim his property. My previous example clearly show who has ownerships(the server operator) in as long they dont dont specificaly give it away, in which case it could be argued. EDIT: I dont misunderstand the law. Your analogy was pathetic. A better analogy would be trying to sell the engine parts from a car you have rented. Its fraud because you dont own them. Still not getting it. While CCP clearly owns the "property", you aren't buying property when you buy isk or ships. You are paying for time to acquire that property. Quote: Disclaimer: All characters, items and ISK in Eve Online are the sole property of CCP, Simon and Schuster a Viacom company. This auction is NOT for the ownership of their intellectual property but it is merely for the time I spent acquiring the ISK or items and getting them to you. By bidding on this auction you are stating that you are in NO way affiliated with CCP, Simon and Schuster or a Viacom affiliated company. Eve Online is a trademark of CCP, Simon and Schuster interactive a division of Simon and Schuster the publishing operation of Viacom Inc. Taken from ebay isk seller. There is no fraud taking place. Get a clue. ___________________________________________ The deeper you stick it in your vein, the deeper the thoughts there's no more pain. ___________________________________________
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2006.10.16 20:37:00 - [45] Originally by: Matthew Originally by: Locke DieDrake The reason they can ban you, is because you have agreed to a contract to follow the rules they set out. If you break the rules, you can be barred from using the service. There is no LAW that makes rule breaking a crime. I'm pretty sure you'd stand a good chance with the computer misuse laws most countries have these days. They generally make unathorized access to, or use of, a computer system a specific crime. The Service Provider decides who is allowed to access their system, and what conditions that access must abide by. If someone does not abide by those rules, then they are accessing and using the system in an unauthorized manner. The main reason MMO companies settle for a ban rather than use this, is because it's not worth the court fees or bad press over your average misbehaving player. That would normally only apply if you had already been banned and then hacked your way back in thru illicit means. Look it up. ___________________________________________ The deeper you stick it in your vein, the deeper the thoughts there's no more pain. ___________________________________________
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2006.10.16 20:39:00 - [46] Originally by: Argenton Sayvers Classical Ownership doesnt really apply, since you are not selling CCP property. You dont sell the servers. Googlemail doesnt own the rights to the book i wrote, just because i sent it to a friend for a preview, thus it ending up saved on their servers. Even if they claim so in the EULA. They may not own the rights to the work, but they do have the right to dictate when and how you can store and retrieve it from their server. You wouldn't be authorized to access the copy stored as an attachment in your friend's inbox, for example, even though you have the copyright on the book. Googlemail would be quite within their rights to say that you cannot sell for money the copy of your book hosted on their server. They couldn't stop you selling the book, but they can stop you using their server to do it. Eve could use a similar argument. You can sell all you like, but if you access CCP's servers to transfer or recieve sold items, then that is an unauthorized use and thus illegal under the computer misuse act. You could always try providing the items as out-of-game data, but it wouldn't be of any use, and CCP will hold the copyright to all in-game code etc, so you'd fall foul of that. It's the same as a book in that respect. When you buy a book, you buy the right to have a copy of that information, as it appears in the book. You don't have the right to copy, transfer or modify the contents of that book into other forms though. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2006.10.16 20:41:00 - [47] Originally by: Locke DieDrake That would normally only apply if you had already been banned and then hacked your way back in thru illicit means. Look it up. Actually, I have. There's plenty of case law of people being convicted for using systems they had been given access to in a way that they were not authorized to do so. There's actually a disturbing number of cases involving misuse of the police national computer. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2006.10.16 20:43:00 - [48] Originally by: Locke DieDrake Still not getting it. While CCP clearly owns the "property", you aren't buying property when you buy isk or ships. You are paying for time to acquire that property. So by the same argument, if I buy a pirated CD, it's ok because I'm paying for the time taken to burn it, not the CD itself. Plenty of case law against that one. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2006.10.16 20:46:00 - [49] Originally by: Matthew Originally by: Locke DieDrake That would normally only apply if you had already been banned and then hacked your way back in thru illicit means. Look it up. Actually, I have. There's plenty of case law of people being convicted for using systems they had been given access to in a way that they were not authorized to do so. There's actually a disturbing number of cases involving misuse of the police national computer. Point being, CCP can't use the law against you if you are using your account login. Even if you break the eula while doing it. Your actions in the virtual world do not consititute any crime in the real world, because (currently) the virtual world has no real wolrd relationship. The only way the computer misuse laws can be used is if you make a tangible effect on the real world. Information is tangible in legal terms. Virtual property is not. (yet) ___________________________________________ The deeper you stick it in your vein, the deeper the thoughts there's no more pain. ___________________________________________
Nanobotter Mk2	Posted - 2006.10.16 20:47:00 - [50] This is scarey only because the people they want to tax do not live in the USA thus they will never pay it. AKA almsot all farmers who sell virtual money live in 3rd world countries. I not sure they can figure out a way to tax it, and there also is a large hurdle that alot of the players are what under 16?
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2006.10.16 20:49:00 - [51] Originally by: Matthew It's the same as a book in that respect. When you buy a book, you buy the right to have a copy of that information, as it appears in the book. You don't have the right to copy, transfer or modify the contents of that book into other forms though. Yes, you do. In the USA you have a right called "format shifting" which is part of the fair use law. ___________________________________________ The deeper you stick it in your vein, the deeper the thoughts there's no more pain. ___________________________________________
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2006.10.16 20:50:00 - [52] Originally by: Matthew Originally by: Locke DieDrake Still not getting it. While CCP clearly owns the "property", you aren't buying property when you buy isk or ships. You are paying for time to acquire that property. So by the same argument, if I buy a pirated CD, it's ok because I'm paying for the time taken to burn it, not the CD itself. Plenty of case law against that one. Isk isn't copyrighted. Are you really this missguided? ___________________________________________ The deeper you stick it in your vein, the deeper the thoughts there's no more pain. ___________________________________________
Stephar The High Priest	Posted - 2006.10.16 20:52:00 - [53] ISK in Eve is the equivalent of that fake money you get with your Monopoly board game. It only has value within the game, and people that are willing to exchange real money for fake monopoly money are simply taking the game too seriously. But if they insist on taxing in-game assets, they should be paid with in-game currency. Of course, due to the EULA, it will be illegal for the government to exchange their virtual currency for real-world currency. They'll be forced to create accounts... And if CCP assigns them a special corporation like "U.S. Internal Revenue Service," we can suicide gank them. That's a good way to get people to quit running missions. Why run missions when you can gank the IRS?
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2006.10.16 20:54:00 - [54] Originally by: Locke DieDrake Originally by: Matthew Originally by: Locke DieDrake That would normally only apply if you had already been banned and then hacked your way back in thru illicit means. Look it up. Actually, I have. There's plenty of case law of people being convicted for using systems they had been given access to in a way that they were not authorized to do so. There's actually a disturbing number of cases involving misuse of the police national computer. Point being, CCP can't use the law against you if you are using your account login. Even if you break the eula while doing it. Your actions in the virtual world do not consititute any crime in the real world, because (currently) the virtual world has no real wolrd relationship. The only way the computer misuse laws can be used is if you make a tangible effect on the real world. Information is tangible in legal terms. Virtual property is not. (yet) Yes they can. Because when you log-in, you agree to abide by certain limitations on what actions you will and will not perform. If you break those limitations, you have exceeded your access authorization, and are using the system in an unauthorized manner. It's exactly the same as the PNC cases - the officer had a login to the PNC, but was not allowed to use that access in the way that they did. I'll also note that the people involved didn't have to have actually done anything with the data, nor change it in any way. Merely accessing it was sufficient for the prosecution. Also, "Virtual Property" is information in the real world. When you get right down to it, it's just a string of zero's and one's just like any other information in any other database. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2006.10.16 20:59:00 - [55] Originally by: Locke DieDrake Isk isn't copyrighted. Are you really this missguided? No, isk isn't copyrighted. However the data structures and code that make it meaningful are. That's the thing. The binary value 10101010 may represent a value of isk. But only when it is stored in the correct position within a database (who's structure is copyrighted), and accessed by the correct software (which is also copyrighted). The question is, can you really claim to be transferring isk unless that value comes along with the database and software that makes the value meaningful (and which you do not have the right to copy or sell). ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
SadisticSavior Caldari Edenists	Posted - 2006.10.16 21:01:00 - [56] Quote: Problem is the IRS (or whatever tax agency) would have to collect their taxes in ISK. So the tax collectors would have to have Eve accounts or we couldnÆt transfer the ISK to them. Incorrect. The tax is only on the real-world money...not the virtual money. If you never "sell" your ISK for real-world dollars, you have no actual income, and therefore owe no taxes. Quote: All virtual property in eve is property of CCP as stated in EULA so there is nothing to collect. If you eBay your ISK for real-world dollars, you are getting actual real-world income. And that income can be taxed just like any other income. They are not talking about virtual income...only real income. Quote: When we use eBay, or Project Entropia's own facilities, to "sell in-game money", what we are really doing in a legal sense is providing a service, not trading. You are paying me to do a specific job, which is to modify a few bits in a database. The reason for the income is irrelevant. If you are getting real-world dollars (from whatever source), it is taxable income. It doesnt matter if they are paying you for your time, for in-game goods, or merely for your opinion. it is still income. Quote: The way I see it, it's crystal clear. If and when you sell in-game stuff for real money, you can be taxed. THANK you. At least someone gets it. Quote: Incidentally, this would be a hit to farmers, and I wouldn't shed a tear for them. Good point. So maybe this is a good thing. Quote: No they are illegal if the service provider says they are. No, they are not. The provider cannot take you to court and sue you for violating the EULA. All they can do is eject you from their game. That is what he meant by it not being illegal. EULAs are not enforcable outside their game. The EULA basically removes your ability to sue the game company if you violate it. Doesnt work the other way around though. Quote: While CCP clearly owns the "property", you aren't buying property when you buy isk or ships. You are paying for time to acquire that property. The ISK itself is a number on CCP's servers. CCP owns the ISK ultimately. Quote: This is scarey only because the people they want to tax do not live in the USA thus they will never pay it. It has already been that way for a long time in the US, even between states. For example, I live in Colorado. I can buy stuff online from companies in California and not have to pay the California State tax, because I dont live there. I also dont have to pay the Colorado state tax, because I am not buying a the product in Colorado.
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2006.10.16 21:01:00 - [57] Originally by: Matthew Originally by: Locke DieDrake Originally by: Matthew Originally by: Locke DieDrake That would normally only apply if you had already been banned and then hacked your way back in thru illicit means. Look it up. Actually, I have. There's plenty of case law of people being convicted for using systems they had been given access to in a way that they were not authorized to do so. There's actually a disturbing number of cases involving misuse of the police national computer. Point being, CCP can't use the law against you if you are using your account login. Even if you break the eula while doing it. Your actions in the virtual world do not consititute any crime in the real world, because (currently) the virtual world has no real wolrd relationship. The only way the computer misuse laws can be used is if you make a tangible effect on the real world. Information is tangible in legal terms. Virtual property is not. (yet) Yes they can. Because when you log-in, you agree to abide by certain limitations on what actions you will and will not perform. If you break those limitations, you have exceeded your access authorization, and are using the system in an unauthorized manner. It's exactly the same as the PNC cases - the officer had a login to the PNC, but was not allowed to use that access in the way that they did. I'll also note that the people involved didn't have to have actually done anything with the data, nor change it in any way. Merely accessing it was sufficient for the prosecution. Also, "Virtual Property" is information in the real world. When you get right down to it, it's just a string of zero's and one's just like any other information in any other database. This is not the time or place to argue about as yet undefined legal precident. As of this writting, not a single person on earth has been prosecuted under any law for breaking the EULA of a video game. End of conversation. Coulda, woulda shoulda don't mean **** in the legal world. Welcome to reality. ___________________________________________ The deeper you stick it in your vein, the deeper the thoughts there's no more pain. ___________________________________________
Ghoest	Posted - 2006.10.16 21:03:00 - [58] Originally by: Locke DieDrake Originally by: Ghoest Edited by: Ghoest on 16/10/2006 20:04:17 As I explained and you keep dodging the rules and control of the server create defacto ownership. Once ownership is established we have plenty of existing laws to govern it, unless they write a new more specific law to superceded the existing laws. Eulas may not be legally binding as contracts. But ownership is clearly defined in this case none the less. You seem to have confused the insubstancial nature of Eulas with the server owners ability to claim his property. My previous example clearly show who has ownerships(the server operator) in as long they dont dont specificaly give it away, in which case it could be argued. EDIT: I dont misunderstand the law. Your analogy was pathetic. A better analogy would be trying to sell the engine parts from a car you have rented. Its fraud because you dont own them. Still not getting it. While CCP clearly owns the "property", you aren't buying property when you buy isk or ships. You are paying for time to acquire that property. Quote: Disclaimer: All characters, items and ISK in Eve Online are the sole property of CCP, Simon and Schuster a Viacom company. This auction is NOT for the ownership of their intellectual property but it is merely for the time I spent acquiring the ISK or items and getting them to you. By bidding on this auction you are stating that you are in NO way affiliated with CCP, Simon and Schuster or a Viacom affiliated company. Eve Online is a trademark of CCP, Simon and Schuster interactive a division of Simon and Schuster the publishing operation of Viacom Inc. Taken from ebay isk seller. There is no fraud taking place. Get a clue. Ah ha - your mistake is not looking in the context of this disscussion. My entire case was based on a senerio where the Goverment decided to pursue virtual money and items as capital gains. Read my original post. If the Goverment decided to pursue virtual property as a capital gain then that it really doesnt matter if the Ebayer uses a little caveat like that. If the caveat was accept it would mean the govrt wasnt pursuing capital gains hich the condition this entire line of argument is based on You argued your self into a hole, you cant have it both ways. Now hush. Back to my original point. If the Goverment did decide to asign value to virtual items based on ebay sales the only protection gamers will have is if the service provider claims ownership of all content and thus makes all real world sales fraudulent. Wherever you went - here you are.
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2006.10.16 21:04:00 - [59] Originally by: Matthew Originally by: Locke DieDrake Isk isn't copyrighted. Are you really this missguided? No, isk isn't copyrighted. However the data structures and code that make it meaningful are. That's the thing. The binary value 10101010 may represent a value of isk. But only when it is stored in the correct position within a database (who's structure is copyrighted), and accessed by the correct software (which is also copyrighted). The question is, can you really claim to be transferring isk unless that value comes along with the database and software that makes the value meaningful (and which you do not have the right to copy or sell). You can only transfer isk to people that play EVE, in which case the copyrighted software and database are in fact already present. Also ª is what your binary comes out to. OR ¦. Depending on if you use ASCII or not. ___________________________________________ The deeper you stick it in your vein, the deeper the thoughts there's no more pain. ___________________________________________
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2006.10.16 21:04:00 - [60] Originally by: Locke DieDrake As of this writting, not a single person on earth has been prosecuted under any law for breaking the EULA of a video game. End of conversation. Coulda, woulda shoulda don't mean **** in the legal world. No, but they have been prosecuted for breaking terms of access on other systems. Because really, that's all an EULA is, your terms of access to the system. Call it an End User License Agreement, Terms of Service, Statement of Appropriate use, it's all the same thing. That sets a precedent. And precedent means a lot in the legal world. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2006.10.16 21:10:00 - [61] Originally by: Ghoest Originally by: Locke DieDrake Originally by: Ghoest Edited by: Ghoest on 16/10/2006 20:04:17 As I explained and you keep dodging the rules and control of the server create defacto ownership. Once ownership is established we have plenty of existing laws to govern it, unless they write a new more specific law to superceded the existing laws. Eulas may not be legally binding as contracts. But ownership is clearly defined in this case none the less. You seem to have confused the insubstancial nature of Eulas with the server owners ability to claim his property. My previous example clearly show who has ownerships(the server operator) in as long they dont dont specificaly give it away, in which case it could be argued. EDIT: I dont misunderstand the law. Your analogy was pathetic. A better analogy would be trying to sell the engine parts from a car you have rented. Its fraud because you dont own them. Still not getting it. While CCP clearly owns the "property", you aren't buying property when you buy isk or ships. You are paying for time to acquire that property. Quote: Disclaimer: All characters, items and ISK in Eve Online are the sole property of CCP, Simon and Schuster a Viacom company. This auction is NOT for the ownership of their intellectual property but it is merely for the time I spent acquiring the ISK or items and getting them to you. By bidding on this auction you are stating that you are in NO way affiliated with CCP, Simon and Schuster or a Viacom affiliated company. Eve Online is a trademark of CCP, Simon and Schuster interactive a division of Simon and Schuster the publishing operation of Viacom Inc. Taken from ebay isk seller. There is no fraud taking place. Get a clue. Ah ha - your mistake is not looking in the context of this disscussion. My entire case was based on a senerio where the Goverment decided to pursue virtual money and items as capital gains. Read my original post. If the Goverment decided to pursue virtual property as a capital gain then that it really doesnt matter if the Ebayer uses a little caveat like that. If the caveat was accept it would mean the govrt wasnt pursuing capital gains hich the condition this entire line of argument is based on You argued your self into a hole, you cant have it both ways. Now hush. Back to my original point. If the Goverment did decide to asign value to virtual items based on ebay sales the only protection gamers will have is if the service provider claims ownership of all content and thus makes all real world sales fraudulent. Originally by: Locke DieDrake The issue here is that they aren't going to just up and tax you on what you have in online games. They are first going to legally redifine who owns what. And that is going to single handedly shut down the MMO worlds. Because as soon as CCP is legally liable for your "property" loss, this game can't be sustained. From my first post in this thread. I don't think I have it both ways. My point all along has been that the current legal structure for virtual property can't be used if virtual property is to be assigned real world values. You can't use current legal precedent on tax and property law to apply to virtual property. It doesn't work. See the **AA and talk to them about digital property. Current legal systems provide protection for property that can not be readily copied and moved around instantly. There are DIFFERENT laws for property that can be be. And those laws will diverge EVEN further. Just wait and see. ___________________________________________ The deeper you stick it in your vein, the deeper the thoughts there's no more pain. ___________________________________________
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2006.10.16 21:10:00 - [62] Originally by: Locke DieDrake You can only transfer isk to people that play EVE, in which case the copyrighted software and database are in fact already present. However you are not permitted to access the software and database for the purpose of transferring isk in exchange for real money. Originally by: Locke DieDrake Also ¬ is what your binary comes out to. OR ¦. Depending on if you use ASCII or not. Sorry, I didn't see that the exact value made a difference to my argument. Incidentally, if you interpret it as an unsigned integer instead of a character, it's 170. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2006.10.16 21:14:00 - [63] Originally by: Matthew Originally by: Locke DieDrake As of this writting, not a single person on earth has been prosecuted under any law for breaking the EULA of a video game. End of conversation. Coulda, woulda shoulda don't mean **** in the legal world. No, but they have been prosecuted for breaking terms of access on other systems. Because really, that's all an EULA is, your terms of access to the system. Call it an End User License Agreement, Terms of Service, Statement of Appropriate use, it's all the same thing. That sets a precedent. And precedent means a lot in the legal world. But those other systems, where that precedent was set have real world impactable infomation. Where as eve doesn't. (if you don't count credit card information, which is seperate from the game server and a different class of information). Also, those precendents don't specificly apply to online games. Only online information services, where the information is not generally considered public. No court is going to extend that protection to an online game. The only way those computer missuse laws can be applied is if you disrupted eve's operation and therefore had a tangible effect on CCP. ___________________________________________ The deeper you stick it in your vein, the deeper the thoughts there's no more pain. ___________________________________________
Titen	Posted - 2006.10.16 21:18:00 - [64] Edited by: Titen on 16/10/2006 21:18:57 Scenario. You own your own RL business. You invest big bucks into a lot of materials to run your business with. Your building burns down and, to make matters worse, someone steals your company car. There you have it. A serious business loss. A tax writeoff. So now, swap it over to virtual gaming. You've Ebay'd some stuff, so there is now a precident set for it's value.. but wait! Someone ganked your hauler full of zyd on your way to make a delivery.. Billions in writeoffs. It'll never happen anyway.. just because of that example. If you put a RL monetary value on virtual goods, then you (meaning the tax man) have to allot you RL monetary value for the loss of those goods. Heck, for 180 bucks a year I'll take a few billion in writeoffs on my taxes.. bring it on!
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2006.10.16 21:18:00 - [65] Originally by: Matthew Originally by: Locke DieDrake You can only transfer isk to people that play EVE, in which case the copyrighted software and database are in fact already present. However you are not permitted to access the software and database for the purpose of transferring isk in exchange for real money. True, but at the same time, no one has ever been legally prossecuted for such actions, and until such time, those actions are not illegal. Enforcement is Law. Unenforced laws are just fluf. Quote: Originally by: Locke DieDrake Also ¬ is what your binary comes out to. OR ¦. Depending on if you use ASCII or not. Sorry, I didn't see that the exact value made a difference to my argument. Incidentally, if you interpret it as an unsigned integer instead of a character, it's 170. Well yes, I suppose thats true. Not much in the way of isk. And of course it doesn't have relevance. But this whole thread is like that. No relevance in the real world. ___________________________________________ The deeper you stick it in your vein, the deeper the thoughts there's no more pain. ___________________________________________
Goumindong Amarr The Forsakened Companions Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.10.16 21:20:00 - [66] Originally by: Tarazed Aquilae Problem is the IRS (or whatever tax agency) would have to collect their taxes in ISK. So the tax collectors would have to have Eve accounts or we couldnÆt transfer the ISK to them. Tax agencies use the threat of real world violence to force people to pay their taxes. This is against the EULA so the tax collector would be banned. Therefore governments canÆt tax the Eve economyà Podding a tax collector would be a lot of fun though. Seriously, i thought the same thing. What the heck is any government going to do with isk? Buy time cards? Does it go to fund public works and services in the game? Certianly not, those are created by fiat and have no overhead except the cash it takes CCP to do that, which is payed for by subscriptions, which is already taxed. There isnt anything to worry about, no gonvernment can use the assets they would collect and no government could justify the expendature for such a program anyway.
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2006.10.16 21:26:00 - [67] Originally by: Locke DieDrake But those other systems, where that precedent was set have real world impactable infomation. Where as eve doesn't. Information doesn't just drop out of the real world just because it describes a virtual world. A fiction novel is no less copyrighted just because it describes something that isn't real. The Computer Misuse Act also does not refer to any type of data being more or less protected than another. Originally by: Locke DieDrake Also, those precendents don't specificly apply to online games. Only online information services, where the information is not generally considered public. Are the contents of my hangar generally considered public? The transaction list in my wallet? No, they are not. They are accessible to me, to people I choose to grant access (i.e. my corp security officers and higher for hangar contents), and administrators of the system. Just the same as any other information service. Originally by: Locke DieDrake No court is going to extend that protection to an online game. Why not? Just because the server describes a game world, rather than a chat room, email server, banking system, or anything else, does not change the fundamental fact that it is a computer system, and thus governed under the Computer Misuse Act. Originally by: Locke DieDrake The only way those computer missuse laws can be applied is if you disrupted eve's operation and therefore had a tangible effect on CCP. The Computer Misuse Act does not require there to be any harmful consequences from the unauthorized access, for that access to be a crime. It also does not make any differentiation over the type or purpose of the program or data involved: Originally by: Computer Misuse Act 1.ù(1) A person is guilty of an offence ifù (a) he causes a computer to perform any function with intent to secure access to any program or data held in any computer; (b) the access he intends to secure is unauthorised; and (c) he knows at the time when he causes the computer to perform the function that that is the case. (2) The intent a person has to have to commit an offence under this section need not be directed atù (a) any particular program or data; (b) a program or data of any particular kind; or (c) a program or data held in any particular computer. (3) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or to both. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2006.10.16 21:30:00 - [68] Originally by: Locke DieDrake True, but at the same time, no one has ever been legally prossecuted for such actions, and until such time, those actions are not illegal. Enforcement is Law. Unenforced laws are just fluf. I wish you luck using that defence in court. If something isn't illegal until someone has been prosecuted for it, how do you ever get to prosecute the first person? After all, by your argument it's not let illegal, so there's no crime to prosecute. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
Ehranavaar	Posted - 2006.10.16 21:42:00 - [69] Originally by: Rodj Blake Edited by: Rodj Blake on 16/10/2006 15:35:34 Edited by: Rodj Blake on 16/10/2006 15:32:28 If the Inland Revenue tries to tax my ISK I will: * Apply for my monthly subscription to be tax deductible as a business expense. * Invest my ISK into ships and class them as assets. I am quite confident that if this happens HM Government will in fact end up owing me money because I basically suck at making ISK. you may think you made a joke but it's actually a perfectly valid point. if they want to tax you on the in game profits then you will be able to write off rl costs incurred to earn the ingame profits. same sort of principle was in play when that florida judge ruled that a drug dealers bribes to police officers were a valid business expense in his line of work. it was quite surreal.
Ghoest	Posted - 2006.10.16 21:43:00 - [70] Like I pointed ou earlier he is just argueing the semantics of "legal". Does a law make some thing illegal or does a precident? Really hes just argueing in circles. He is vastly over extending the ramifications of some aspects of EULAs being uninforcable. And most hes just argueing even beyond his on self contridictions. Wherever you went - here you are.
Locke DieDrake Human Information Virus	Posted - 2006.10.16 21:47:00 - [71] Originally by: Matthew Originally by: Locke DieDrake True, but at the same time, no one has ever been legally prossecuted for such actions, and until such time, those actions are not illegal. Enforcement is Law. Unenforced laws are just fluf. I wish you luck using that defence in court. If something isn't illegal until someone has been prosecuted for it, how do you ever get to prosecute the first person? After all, by your argument it's not let illegal, so there's no crime to prosecute. Have people broken EULAs in video games? Yes Have they done so using real world money? Yes Has anyone, ever been prosecuted because of it? No. Draw whatever conclusion you like from that. Ghoest- now you can't even bother replying specificly, you are just going to simply state I'm wrong. Strong case you have there. ___________________________________________ The deeper you stick it in your vein, the deeper the thoughts there's no more pain. ___________________________________________
Matthew Caldari BloodStar Technologies	Posted - 2006.10.16 21:57:00 - [72] Originally by: Locke DieDrake Originally by: Matthew Originally by: Locke DieDrake True, but at the same time, no one has ever been legally prossecuted for such actions, and until such time, those actions are not illegal. Enforcement is Law. Unenforced laws are just fluf. I wish you luck using that defence in court. If something isn't illegal until someone has been prosecuted for it, how do you ever get to prosecute the first person? After all, by your argument it's not let illegal, so there's no crime to prosecute. Have people broken EULAs in video games? Yes Have they done so using real world money? Yes Has anyone, ever been prosecuted because of it? No. Draw whatever conclusion you like from that. My conclusion is that the current legal system imposes a high cost bar for such prosecutions, especially when they may involve extradition, and the violations are not viewed as being serious enough for people to overcome that cost bar and press charges. Of course we don't know 100% whether such a prosecution would be successful, but we can make a measured guess. But by the same argument you use, we can't know whether someone stealing an inflatable bunny while unicycling round trafalgar square singing god save the queen (something I'm pretty sure hasn't been prosecuted for before). However, it's quite likely they would be convicted of theft just like any other thief. Of course, get 10 lawyers in a room, and you'll come out with 11 mutually exclusive legal opinions anyway. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines.
Ghoest	Posted - 2006.10.16 22:08:00 - [73] I proved you wrong already. Your response was "I don't think I have it both ways." Then you took 2 steps back and repeated the point I had just shown to be moot based on the context of the discussion. Im not going to argue any more with you. Its as if I explained to you how you cant ride a bicycle on water, and you keep saying I am wrong then explain who you ride on the streat. Any way I was telling Matthew to dismiss you. I was not trying to re-engage you. Wherever you went - here you are.
Vanye Inovske Two Brothers Mining Corp. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.10.16 23:21:00 - [74] The idea that ISK or ships or whatever are "virtual assets" is so ridiculous as to be laughable. CCP could shut down EVE tomorrow and owe none of us a damn thing, and no one would have the slightest bit of legal recourse against them over our loss of ISK and ships. If something is really an asset, people can't take it away from me without me having legal recourse. If my Apoc is REALLY an asset, then if I get ganked and it's blown up, I should be able to sue (in real life courts) the gankers for compensation. If CCP decides EVE is losing money and shuts it down, I should be able to sue them for taking my character and all my virtual goodies away without compensating me. That's what it is for something to be property. That's what it is for something to be an asset. But I couldn't do that. (Well, okay, I could file suit, but I'd be laughed out of court.) If I sell isk or ships online for real money, then I've got myself an asset. The real money can't be taken from me, not without giving me legal recourse. You mug me and take my wallet, I can not only press criminal charges but sue for compensation. Virtual assets? They aren't worth the paper they're printed on.
Alessar Kaldorei Caldari Astral Wolves	Posted - 2006.10.16 23:39:00 - [75] I think this would be awesome if it were to happen. Once the goverment accepts that virtual assets can be taxable, they're not just saying that you have to pay taxes for them. They're saying you can pay your real work income taxes with isk as well. After all, if they say they're assets, you can surrender them to the goverment to pay for your taxes.
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.10.17 02:29:00 - [76] Originally by: Locke DieDrake Originally by: Ghoest In a game like WOW all the tie ins to real world economys are illegal. If you make real profit you have to report it, but you cant be changed for items in game because technically you dont own them. When you ebay gold from WOW the money you make is technically pofit from fraud. They are not illegal. They are violations of the EULA which has been variously charciterized as uneforceable and a guidline, not a contract. Meaning, under the law, nothing is illegal about selling in game currencies. Even in games where it is against the rules. The issue here is that they aren't going to just up and tax you on what you have in online games. They are first going to legally redifine who owns what. And that is going to single handedly shut down the MMO worlds. Because as soon as CCP is legally liable for your "property" loss, this game can't be sustained. What our lawmakers do here in the US, does not dicate how an Icelandic business will be run, Originally by: kieron The Carrier was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile.
Seventh Paradox Gallente XenTech	Posted - 2006.10.17 06:05:00 - [77] It's classed as a hobby in the Australian tax system. As long as you don't make over $50,000 a year from it you don't get taxed.
Argenton Sayvers	Posted - 2006.10.17 18:16:00 - [78] Originally by: Matthew No, but they have been prosecuted for breaking terms of access on other systems. Because really, that's all an EULA is, your terms of access to the system. Call it an End User License Agreement, Terms of Service, Statement of Appropriate use, it's all the same thing. That sets a precedent. And precedent means a lot in the legal world. I actually agree with this view. It is entirely possible that this legal trick might lead to success. Note that you avoid the actual problem (ZOMG CCP SAYS ITS ALL THEIRS, THEFT!!!) and instead use something that indeed has many legal precedents (and is taken a lot more seriously by the general population - everyone fears the nerdy linux hacker ;) ) in a way that doesnt make "common" sense. The possibilty of arresting people for using macros in MMORPGs, or even "playing the game in a way that wasnt intended" is a great way to show that law can go both ways. A court is (in theory) immune to the threats of big companies and their selfish interests, but in the same way, they are immune to common sense. However, the terms of service may still be deemed illegal ("You cannot use this email service for anything but sending spam plus, you have to sacrifice a virgin every second month"). Note that many countries regard "good faith" higher then the actual text of a contract. There were many rulings that deemed contracts void that contained "suprising" clauses in the small print even though those conditions were not "indecent" themself.
Hllaxiu Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2006.10.17 19:06:00 - [79] Originally by: Malthros Zenobia What our lawmakers do here in the US, does not dicate how an Icelandic business will be run, Well, actually if Kieron wants to get paid, they better stick to US laws. --- Our greatest glory is not in never failing, but in rising up every time we fail. - Emerson
Gobblock Caldari AlderTrans Incorporated	Posted - 2006.10.17 19:25:00 - [80] i really want to see the irs decide to tax ore mining they can either pay me real world money to haul it to them, i mean, its real money, and they are keeping me away from mining, which according to them is real income. or they can send a freighter around to pick up everyones ore, and i will gladly find 50 some people to pop in their 500k sp kestral alts. The whole conecpt is comletly ******* insane, i dont put rl money in or out of eve, and ifthey want to tax me they can have some isk
Winterblink Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.10.17 19:30:00 - [81] How they can consider taxing something they repeatedly refer to as "virtual" is something I'll never understand. Warp Drive Active \| EVE: Nature Vraie
Acama	Posted - 2006.10.17 21:27:00 - [82] If ISK => real cash can be taxed, how do they handle the fact that ccp/a ccp employee can create ISK at will? How can a good have value if there is a truly infinite supply?
Sandeman Reserve	Posted - 2006.10.17 22:22:00 - [83] The ONLY way that this can work is with cash-out... eg: If you sell your in-game goodies for RL money. All they can do then is tax that money you've received as income. This is currently already taxed. If they start taxing people for capital gains due to in-game 'property', then they'll have to start chasing the people who scam you of your in-game property, as it then becomes ACTUAL theft... Rob
Ansuru Starlancer The Phoenix Rising Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.10.17 22:39:00 - [84] Y'know, the internal economy of a game world should just be considered its own sovereign state and be done with it. It's a game, f'cryin' out loud! The day the IRS pokes its evil fingers into mmo economies is the day the genre dies. I mean, hell, they aren't even all run by companies located in the US...take Eve for example! Not to mention the fact that the idea also cuts right across any pretense of intellectual property protections (not that copyright law isn't severely outdated and in need of major, major reforms to fit the current data culture).
Ansuru Starlancer The Phoenix Rising Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.10.17 22:47:00 - [85] Originally by: Acama If ISK => real cash can be taxed, how do they handle the fact that ccp/a ccp employee can create ISK at will? How can a good have value if there is a truly infinite supply? The us government can print money at will, as well. And yet we have seen in the past what happens when you try to solve your money problems by printing as much as you want: the currency's value drops. However, that analogy does bring up an interesting point...should the in-game world of Eve be considered a sovereign nation? It's got its own government, economy, and population, prints its own money, has its own internal laws... faux french accent VIVA LA REVOLUTION!!!! Ze Federation, eet shall stand supreme again!! (Hey, I'm Gallente...we're supposedly descended from the French, iirc...)
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.10.18 00:00:00 - [86] Originally by: Acama How can a good have value if there is a truly infinite supply? It's easy. Originally by: kieron The Carrier was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile.
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.10.18 00:03:00 - [87] Originally by: Hllaxiu Originally by: Malthros Zenobia What our lawmakers do here in the US, does not dicate how an Icelandic business will be run, Well, actually if Kieron wants to get paid, they better stick to US laws. Nothing stopping them from paying him at an icelandic address via a work visa, even if he lives in the US. Originally by: kieron The Carrier was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile.

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one 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.