Blizzard Sues StarCraft II Cheat Makers

Recommended Videos

Baron_BJ

Tired. Cold. Bored.
Nov 13, 2009
499
0
11
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

New member
May 13, 2010
1,641
0
0
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

New member
Apr 15, 2013
433
0
0
Baron_BJ said:
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

Tamer of the Coffee mug!
Feb 17, 2010
1,946
0
41
Valderis said:
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

New member
Nov 19, 2013
27
0
0
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

^ ^ v v < > < > B A
May 7, 2009
3,028
0
0
Baron_BJ said:
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

New member
Jun 17, 2011
381
0
0
milijanko said:
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

New member
Jan 25, 2010
804
0
0
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

New member
Jan 25, 2010
804
0
0
XenoScifi said:
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

lp0 on fire
Feb 24, 2012
154
0
0
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

New member
Oct 2, 2010
814
0
0
Valderis said:
Ranorak said:
Valderis said:
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

Tamer of the Coffee mug!
Feb 17, 2010
1,946
0
41
Valderis said:
Ranorak said:
Valderis said:
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

New member
Mar 5, 2011
793
0
0
Athinira said:
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

Hat Man
Legacy
Jul 8, 2011
1,399
8
13
San Diego, CA
Country
US
Gender
Male
Pyrian said:
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

New member
Jun 17, 2011
381
0
0
Pyrian said:
Pyrian said:
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

Member?
Nov 5, 2013
244
0
0
NuclearKangaroo said:
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.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,756
0
0
Bat Vader said:
It's cheaters like this that make cheaters like me look bad. I only cheat in single player since it doesn't effect anyone else but the idea of cheating in multiplayer just disgusts me.
The two shouldn't even be compared for all intents and purposes. What you do with your own experience is one thing. What you do in an online game, especially one that has competitive MP is another entirely.

BigTuk said:
Also this has nothing to do with murderers and rapists. Locking one up means at the very least *that* murderer/rapist will not be out and about.
Shutting down the manufacturer of cheats means there's at least one less manufacturer of cheats. And since that is kind of necessary in this equation, then you've accomplished the same goal.

Heck right now it was costing peoples $63... the makers may out of sheer spite put it up for free on some torrent site out of Tonga or those other 'safe-haven' countries.
Well, no. They've been updating it to keep ahead of Blizzard. Without the developers, you still need someone else to fill their shoes. That could happen, but there's no guarantee that someone else will. Meanwhile, the file's been publicly available for years now. You can't normally use it without paying, still, but a Google search indicates that there are cracked versions. No honour amongst thieves, I guess.

So the worst case scenario is really that someone else takes up the reins and continues to do what's being done. There is no loss here, because all I had to do was hit Google for 30 seconds to find that the doomsday scenario here is already happening.

Alpha Maeko said:
I cheat hardcore every time I play Call of Duty...

.. by using whatever n00btube is available :D
Yeah, I've been accused of cheating, hacking, etc. for simply getting more kills than someone else.

If I were gonna cheat, my KDR would probably be a little better than it is, but when has logic ever factored in?

Avaholic03 said:
If their real names are unknown, how do they expect to enforce any ruling? Do their online personas have assets that can be seized?
You can file a suit or get a warrant against an unnamed person to get the ball rolling and then use the law to identify them. In this case, it may be the only way to get such information (legally).

shirkbot said:
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.
If done so with Blizzard's code, then there's legal precedent.

milijanko said:
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.
I'm pretty sure the legal precedent is already there, too. I doubt this will be the case that leads to it.
 

Bat Vader

Elite Member
Mar 11, 2009
4,997
2
43
Zachary Amaranth said:
I agree. Sadly though there are people out there who view cheating in Multiplayer and cheating in single player as the same thing. Mainly that is why I felt the need to disassociate myself with them.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,756
0
0
BigTuk said:
Considering that the names of the manufacturers are unknown I fail to see how this does anything to stop them or any of the dozen other enterprising tweakers out there.
Well, I already addressed the whole thing about the Doe listings. This is necessary in order to continue. It doesn't mean they will remain anonymous or be tried in absentia.

Never mind that the hack already exists so it does nothing to stop the distribution in anyway.
And that it needed to be updated to keep up with Blizzard's security.

As I mentioned in the rest of the post... before people had to pay $63 to get it...I can imagine the makers of this thing putting it up for free on the torrent sites just to spite Blizzard.
And the fact that it was made available online several years ago.

It won't stop cheaters... or slow them down.
I've already given reasons why that's not true.

The best they can do is just keep closing the loopholes the cheaters are exploiting in the eternal game of whackamole.
And if they close the loopholes and shut down the devs who are making the updates, rendering it no longer financially viable, that's better. So no, it's not the best they can do. You may not have heard of this, but it was a big, popular program before the suit. And popular enough to be cracked itself. I'm not even playing Starcraft and looking to cheat. This was easy to find, even without already being invested in the game. But again, I'm repeating myself.
 

RicoADF

Welcome back Commander
Jun 2, 2009
3,146
0
0
Pyrian said:
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.
Not necessarily, depending on how the cheat runs Blizzard may not have a case. EULA's aren't legally binding (not sure about USA but most countries disregard them). Blizzard are being dicks because their butt hurt over some people having fun with cheats in their game, sure using cheats in MP is being an ass but SP is only the users business.