Blizzard Sues StarCraft II Cheat Makers

[Ferisar]

Despite being in support of Blizzard in trying to put a very real financial stop to an exploitation system that's sold for money, I also don't know how much I like the idea of a lawsuit being filed on the claims of "violation of digital property". Whilst these people clearly impact the game, it's also not without assumption that real-world laws should probably not apply here. The various agreements and signatures that we go through to access an online experience are, by and large, not actual legal documents, and I'd personally prefer them to stay that way. Being removed from the game is one thing, being charged under court for "cheating in SC2" scares the shit out of me, regardless of me not using any such exploits.

Assuming this case -only- involves the people who come out with these methods, especially on the counts of charging for their infringing product, then I suppose yeah, it's fine. If it becomes a precedent of accusation that extends to actual players, fuck that. I don't need a company swinging its dick around on its playerbase and impacting a real-world situation based on online experiences that aren't inherently breaking legality.

Oh look Blizzard is throwing a hissy fit.

You know this wouldn't be that big of a problem if we could just cheat in the first place.

Uhhh, what?

"Cheat in the first place?" What does that even mean? They're not suing some dude for creating single-player mission cheats or some-such nonsense.

 

[Karadalis]

As an example, I have a brother-in-law who would use cheat codes in just about every long campaign-type game he played (HoMM series being the one I remember most). When I asked him about it he said it'd take him too long to play it legitimately what with having to re-load earlier saves or even worse re-start entire scenarios just because he didn't know the maps or enemy strategies yet and lost part-way through. Cheating was the only way he could get through the games to the end and experience the full story even if it wasn't "earned".

The problem with those "long" games is that most of its content is repetitive busy work. Basicly you allways do the same thing in the hero games, first you gather resources, build up your town and hero. Wait till you get the super unit of your faction and then go stomp the AI if it didnt unfairly screw you over... not because it plays smarter then you but because it gets a shitload of units for free despite the fact that it should not be able to produce that many, theres for example no way of bleeding out a AIs resources.

So yeah.. those long campaign games.. kinda get where the notion to cheat in them comes from because sometimes they are really frustrating. Especialy when the ubber army of the AI comes along to roflstomp you midgame and you have to start at zero because no matter how often you reload the last turn there is no way of beating the enemy.

Charging for the cheat-mod means that (A) they have no chance in court and (B) they're in serious risk of being reeled in by the money trail.

As with many things the devils in the detail. They are not chargine for the cheat mod per say.. they are charging for a "premium" forum membership that so happens to contain the ability to download files from their site.

Biiiig difference in legal terms actually. And while i get all the outrage i do not like the idea that all mods are basicly copyright infringments. Cheating should be treated like doping is treated in sports. You get banned from ever participating in any sports event and have to pay a hefty fine if they catch you, but the last one is reserved for the pros. Everyone else just gets banned... a practice that happens today allready.

 

[Baron_BJ]

This case concerns me. If they win based upon some of the grounds they've stated (violations of the EULA for example) then the precedent that it sets/solidifies (the legal power behind EULA's is something that's still up in the air in a number of countries) is only going to harm consumers in the long run.

However if Blizzard wins purely on the grounds that the cheat is harmful to their business then I'm going to be quite pleased. Multiplayer cheating is scummy bullshit, however I'd rather have the legal wiggle room to laugh off the EULA and deal with some cheaters that will eventually get banned anyway than not and not.

 

[Roofstone]

This happens every now and then, people cheat/hack/Whatever in a blizz game, blizz sues. And then blizz wins. Which is pretty awesome.
You'd think people learn by now..

Wasn't there a guy last year that ended up owing them a few millions?

 

[shirkbot]

This case concerns me. If they win based upon some of the grounds they've stated (violations of the EULA for example) then the precedent that it sets/solidifies (the legal power behind EULA's is something that's still up in the air in a number of countries) is only going to harm consumers in the long run.

However if Blizzard wins purely on the grounds that the cheat is harmful to their business then I'm going to be quite pleased. Multiplayer cheating is scummy bullshit, however I'd rather have the legal wiggle room to laugh off the EULA and deal with some cheaters that will eventually get banned anyway than not and not.

This covers many of my concerns. Additionally, I'm not sure I like their use of the DMCA/copyright law in the claim. It's one thing to accuse someone of theft or plagiarism, but this is closer to developing a tool specifically designed for a given product. It's gaming Croc Butter for jerks. I think most people that don't cheat online (IE Most People) are against it, but we need to be careful that we don't accidentally condone negative legal precedent...

 

[Ranorak]

Oh look Blizzard is throwing a hissy fit.

You know this wouldn't be that big of a problem if we could just cheat in the first place.

You do realize there are actually perfectly legit cheats for the single player parts, right?
You can cheat, just not in multiplayer.

If your argument is that cheating in multiplayer games should be allowed, I am afraid that you might have a very egocentric view on the world then.

 

[milijanko]

I'm actually fine with this right now. But I can already see this as a legal precedent that opened the floodgates for EA to sue every modder out there who tries to "fix" one of many broken EA games and takes away even the smallest cut from their DLC sales by modding the game.

 

[Scars Unseen]

This case concerns me. If they win based upon some of the grounds they've stated (violations of the EULA for example) then the precedent that it sets/solidifies (the legal power behind EULA's is something that's still up in the air in a number of countries) is only going to harm consumers in the long run.

However if Blizzard wins purely on the grounds that the cheat is harmful to their business then I'm going to be quite pleased. Multiplayer cheating is scummy bullshit, however I'd rather have the legal wiggle room to laugh off the EULA and deal with some cheaters that will eventually get banned anyway than not and not.

Your words echo my thoughts. I don't want there to be strong legal precedent for enforcing contracts you aren't privy to prior to purchase on products you can't return.

 

[tdylan]

I'm actually fine with this right now. But I can already see this as a legal precedent that opened the floodgates for EA to sue every modder out there who tries to "fix" one of many broken EA games and takes away even the smallest cut from their DLC sales by modding the game.

That's what I'm worried about as well. I still play mods (for BF2 and Command & Conquer Generals primarily). I'm worried this will make it legal to deem mods "a violation of the EULA because 'it infringes on our intellectual property,' or whatever. For example, there are guys that ran a community for a BF2 mod that would ask for donations to keep their site/severs up and running. I wouldn't be surprised if EA (or someone) says that "these guys are profiting off of our product via their "mod," under the guise of "donations."

On the one hand, it sucks that there are people out there that will use hacks/cheats to ruin the experiences of others. On the other, I do enjoy seeing companies get riled up with other people use language like "donations" as a workaround in the hopes of avoiding litigation. To me, it's like fucking with the big guy. The way politicians accept "donations" and "campaign contributions," because outright saying "yeah, I'll take your money and as a result be more prone to cater to your interests" well, that'd be just "wrong."

 

[Athinira]

It always a puzzle to me why these people don't operate out of countries where they can't get sued.

If you want to make a living out of this, you should at least protect yourself against lawsuits, especially from Blizzard who has sued cheatmakers before. Take it from the guy who creater the Glider Bot for WoW. He got sued by Blizzard and lost almost everything, as he explains in this very interesting video from DEFCON about cheating (worth watching all 50 minutes).

 

[Athinira]

This is a great move to help curb online cheating. I agree with everything this lawsuit is aiming at all the way down to these cheats down right making a game look bad and in turn a potential loss of sales.

I hope this will pick up steam and other publishers start taking action.

Cheaters actually increase sales, they don't decrease it.

Cheaters cheat because they get a kick out of it, and since they run the risk of getting banned, they often purchase multiple accounts (I've heard of cheaters who have upwards 20 paid accounts just for one game), or maybe they just have one account that they just repurchase if they getbanned. So in fact cheaters are actually paying the most to the company on a per-customer basis.
This, btw, is also one of the reasons that companies does 'Ban waves' (banning a lot of cheaters at the same time, rather than banning cheaters the instant they detect them). Instant and frequent bans reduces the chance that cheaters will repurchase accounts, but occasional bans keeps them around. Ban waves are also good for marketing, since the game company can boast that it does something about cheaters, when in reality they are holding back.

The 'lost sales' argument is also a rather weak argument, although I'm sure it's still an easy sell in court. Unless the game is subscription based, like an MMO, people have already purchased the game, and since games sell most of their copies in the initial time of existence, your game will really need to have accrued a very bad reputation as a 'cheaters paradise'. And even then, most people who still buy it will still be unaware of that until they experience it first-hand. There is also little to no evidence that cheaters is a strong reason that people stop playing a certain game.

If this picks up, then cheaters will simply modify their tactics, and start releasing cheats from countries where they can't be prosecuted. You can make a lot of money with cheats (some people have made millions of dollars), so there isn't exactly a lack of motivation for relocating yourself if necessary.

So in short, this solves nothing, neither in the short or the long run, regarding cheaters. It does, however, have the potential to set a scary precedence regarding software modification (including mods that aren't cheating-related). So i sure as hell doesn't hope that this picks up... or at least i don't hope it's gonna have consequences for software modification outside of cheating.

 

[Varis]

I am completely behind Blizz in this one. Given that I haaaaaate spambots, hackers, cheating in games (minus of course using them in single-player and just messing around not harming anyone else)and just ruining people's days. Oh and gold sellers. God, I hate gold sellers.

captcha: one, two, three *DINGDINGDING*

 

[Ferisar]

Oh look Blizzard is throwing a hissy fit.

You know this wouldn't be that big of a problem if we could just cheat in the first place.

You do realize there are actually perfectly legit cheats for the single player parts, right?
You can cheat, just not in multiplayer.

If your argument is that cheating in multiplayer games should be allowed, I am afraid that you might have a very egocentric view on the world then.

Of course cheating in multiplayer should be allowed, as long as both parties agree to allow it. It can be a lot of fun.

What you're describing is custom games, and they exist already. This isn't talking about "mods", this is talking about taking the competetive experience on the ladder which is extremely rigid in its format, not "for funsies played with a friend" scenario. Blizzard doesn't sue people who just make stuff like in-editor maps (except that one thing that one time because of legit copyright concerns, but whatever).

 

[Ranorak]

Oh look Blizzard is throwing a hissy fit.

You know this wouldn't be that big of a problem if we could just cheat in the first place.

You do realize there are actually perfectly legit cheats for the single player parts, right?
You can cheat, just not in multiplayer.

If your argument is that cheating in multiplayer games should be allowed, I am afraid that you might have a very egocentric view on the world then.

Of course cheating in multiplayer should be allowed, as long as both parties agree to allow it. It can be a lot of fun.

Then play a custom map, this is about ranked matches.

 

[Micalas]

It always a puzzle to me why these people don't operate out of countries where they can't get sued.

If you want to make a living out of this, you should at least protect yourself against lawsuits, especially from Blizzard who has sued cheatmakers before. Take it from the guy who creater the Glider Bot for WoW. He got sued by Blizzard and lost almost everything, as he explains in this very interesting video from DEFCON about cheating (worth watching all 50 minutes).

Very interesting video. Defcon always seems to bring interesting speakers.

 

[Pyrian]

Charging for the cheat-mod means that (A) they have no chance in court and (B) they're in serious risk of being reeled in by the money trail.

They are not chargine for the cheat mod per say.. they are charging for a "premium" forum membership that so happens to contain the ability to download files from their site.

Biiiig difference in legal terms actually.

Zero difference in legal terms actually. "We're not charging you for the product, we're charging you for entering the store, picking the product off the shelf, and walking to the checkout. The product is free!" That will not fly in any courtroom.

 

[tdylan]

Charging for the cheat-mod means that (A) they have no chance in court and (B) they're in serious risk of being reeled in by the money trail.

They are not chargine for the cheat mod per say.. they are charging for a "premium" forum membership that so happens to contain the ability to download files from their site.

Biiiig difference in legal terms actually.

Zero difference in legal terms actually. "We're not charging you for the product, we're charging you for entering the store, picking the product off the shelf, and walking to the checkout. The product is free!" That will not fly in any courtroom.

I think it would "fly." It's like streaming services being able to say that you're not paying them for the product that you're streaming, you're paying them for the ability to stream the product. Once you are no longer paying for the ability to stream it, you lose access to it. You can't claim "I should still be able to use the product" because legally, you were never paying for the product itself. It makes me think "campaign contributions," which are perfectly legal. Are you "paying for a congressman to vote in your favor?" No, silly. Of course not. THAT would be illegal. Now, if you were to make a sizable donation to his/her campaign, he/she win, and down the road, they were to be a voice in some debate that just happened to be in your favor well, that is COMPLETELY unrelated to any "contributions" that you made

 

[AdagioBoognish]

sue them to oblivion, nuke those cheaters offices from orbit and salt the earth so that nothing may ever grow in that place ever again... and thats only if they say they are sorry

if they dont, well, first we must find a way to bring Cthulhu to this realm...

Is that not already happening? I've been having weird dreams lately..

Glad they're going after these companies. I'm not super against hackers or the guys that make these programs, in the sense that I don't think they should be demonized or anything super harsh, but I'm really happy to see game companies protect their customers and work to insure people get the gaming experience they paid for.