Submitted by Zee - February 26, 2007 at 3:29 pm -050083.83.30.242
Have to say, I find the debate here rather amusing. Somewhere things seem to have been gotten confused a bit though. If you read the counterclaim it's quite obvious no way has Blizzard been saying that the actual ingame gold is worth money. They merely allege that they have lost revenue due to the fact that the botters using this program drive people away from the game, and that this results in a loss of revenue. Along with the 'fact' that the botters themselves are banned means that they lose out on the revenue from those as well.
As for the whole copyright thing, it's true that this guy wrote the program himself, but it's made for the express purpouse of botting in WoW, it has no other use. To do that, it has to bypass the launcher blizzard made for the game, which is in itself protected, and alters it, which can quite simply be construed as a copyright violation.
I think blizzard made a mistake in trying to get the court to award them ownership of the program though. Personally I'd have tried to let him keep ownership but to seek an injunction against the program making any contact with blizzard's servers, and holding him liable for every instance in which this does happen. This way, if he loses, he'll just throw out a few copies out on the net and people can go on with it independantly, after they strip out the copy protection the guy put in it.
In the end though, it can't be denied that the guy made a program that's only usable with WoW (can't be adapted for anything else, as it's making use of an interface specific to the interaction between WoW's client and the server) and is making money off it. That in itself will likely be what will sway the court in Blizzard's favor.
Can anyone seriously see things ending differently than that the guy gets told to stop, no matter what rhetoric is behind it?
Posted 07/09/08 at 12:40am Jack Wessels: @PHOENIXZERO: Do you really think that would stop him?
Posted 07/09/08 at 12:29am PHOENIXZERO: Wonder if Jack ever got the memo that attacking a judge, especially the one who presided over your own hearing will only make him look worse.
Posted 07/08/08 at 11:10pm Shadow Darkman Anti-Thesis of : Dennis you should post that story about JT insulting Judge Tunis. There might be more you could find that Kotaku missed.
Posted 07/08/08 at 08:32pm lordlundar: Jack should realize that when you call everyone crazy, then the only crazy one is the you.
Posted 07/08/08 at 06:06pm DarkTetsuya: @GP I just fear for the safety of your fax machine cause you didn't post it :P
Posted 07/08/08 at 06:02pm PHOENIXZERO: @Krono Yeah, that's probably where it came from. Don't remember if a source was mentioned. Other than it being called a "story" or "study".
Posted 07/08/08 at 06:02pm PHOENIXZERO: Because I was bored and channel surfing. =(
Posted 07/08/08 at 05:59pm GRIZZAM PRIME: PHEONIXZERO, Why the hell are you watching CNN's sodomy butt baby(HLN)?
Posted 07/08/08 at 05:53pm Krono: @PHOENIXZERO: Would that be the AP story about how schools should teach 11+ year old how to avoid abusive datings relationships?
Posted 07/08/08 at 05:34pm PHOENIXZERO: Oh joy, new subject and they bring out Cooper Lawrence who takes a mention about videogames. It's a segment called "Sex Normal for 11-Year-Olds" having to do more so with mental and physical abuse in "relationships" of 11-14 year olds and not sex. >_<
Posted 07/08/08 at 05:28pm PHOENIXZERO: Certainly a stupid segment with their "adolescent psychologist" and a game is different than a movie. Two callers, underwhelming. >_>
Posted 07/08/08 at 05:24pm PHOENIXZERO: CNN has wanted to be Fox Jr since Fox started spanking them in the ratings and Turner was removed from power.
Posted 07/08/08 at 05:11pm PHOENIXZERO: UGH, they have the CT AG on there... He sounds like Jack.
Posted 07/08/08 at 05:09pm PHOENIXZERO: >_> You can call in 1-800-TELL-HLN.
Posted 07/08/08 at 05:09pm PHOENIXZERO: CNN HLN is doing a segment on Beer Pong with their other "morality" blowhard Mike Galanos.
Posted 07/08/08 at 03:47pm Jabrwock: This just in! Jack insults someone. News@11
Posted 07/08/08 at 03:44pm mogbert: I think we can skip that story, we can't cover JT every time he insults someone, we would run out of server space...
Posted 07/08/08 at 03:43pm gamepolitics: nah, intentionally didn't post that... it's just a publicity grab... I only have so much JT tolerance, save 4 more relevant news
Posted 07/08/08 at 02:57pm Xlorep DarkHelm: Dennis doesn't post every little tidbit of information about Whacky-Jacky.
Posted 07/08/08 at 02:52pm DarkTetsuya: freak4all: I just posted that ... but yeah they did
As for the whole copyright thing, it's true that this guy wrote the program himself, but it's made for the express purpouse of botting in WoW, it has no other use. To do that, it has to bypass the launcher blizzard made for the game, which is in itself protected, and alters it, which can quite simply be construed as a copyright violation.
I think blizzard made a mistake in trying to get the court to award them ownership of the program though. Personally I'd have tried to let him keep ownership but to seek an injunction against the program making any contact with blizzard's servers, and holding him liable for every instance in which this does happen. This way, if he loses, he'll just throw out a few copies out on the net and people can go on with it independantly, after they strip out the copy protection the guy put in it.
In the end though, it can't be denied that the guy made a program that's only usable with WoW (can't be adapted for anything else, as it's making use of an interface specific to the interaction between WoW's client and the server) and is making money off it. That in itself will likely be what will sway the court in Blizzard's favor.
Can anyone seriously see things ending differently than that the guy gets told to stop, no matter what rhetoric is behind it?