BigDave
Exanimo Inc
Triumvirate.
   |
Posted - 2007.11.08 23:38:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: Von Ulrich
Originally by: Dr Fighter
Originally by: Rodj Blake
If you buy a watch from a bloke down the pub, and it later turns out that it was stolen, I'm pretty sure that you don't get to keep the timepiece
thats very true, however....
in eve when you buy ANYTHING its the same way, market or direct trade, there is no guy down the pub.
its more like buying a watch from a shop, and it turns out later the shop gets busted for selloing stolen good, now if oyu paid on your credit card (aka not cash) im pretty sure youd get your cash back, and ofc hav to give the item back.
That is the basic argument here. All buyers, engaging in good faith purchases, on the systems created by CCP should be protected even if the seller aquired the items in a manner outside the rules. Promissory Estoppel should be the rule in EvE. CCP created a system, sanctioned by them, assumed to be the valid market place, to be used by the players of this game. There are no means provided to the buyer to check the legitimacy of the item. There is no way for the buyer to check the legitmacy of the funds used to aquire the item up for sale. Since CCP sanctions this form of sale, and holds it out to be the legitimate method, the good faith buyer should always be protected.
Also, this maybe the case with buyers in EvE and how CCP deals with buying and selling in the game. I hear rumours about GM's taking items away but still we are provided with few hard examples and instead deal with urban legends, IMO. It is difficult to formulate a sound conclusion based on the few second hand stories bantered about.
This concept works for purchases made from established and reputable merchants - such as Naga, MCorp, BIG etc. - because the merchant's reputation may be presumed to be worth more than the value of goods being traded and as such substitutes nicely for due diligence (or title insurance, or assumed risk, depending on the buyer's preference). A complementary principle with much better-established precedent applies for dealing with individuals in direct station trades: caveat emptor. The Market fits neither of these two models, but due to seller anonymity prior to the transaction, I would agree that promissory estoppel seems fair for reasonably-priced goods. Where this becomes a problem is if items appear on the market at prices "too good to be true." I submit anyone looking to take advantage of such a situation assumes some fair risk that the goods may be illicit.
Remember: the Eve marketplace is much more cold and harsh than lowsec belts - and is where the highest-stakes PvP is conducted.
-----
Dang, signatures keep getting smaller and smaller, unless you count the bits where ISD colors outside the lines... |