UK Politician Calls for Real Life Sentences for Virtual Item Thieves

[Karloff]

UK Politician Calls for Real Life Sentences for Virtual Item Thieves

Mike Weatherley, the Conservative Member of Parliament for Hove & Portslade, wants virtual criminals to get the same penalty as real world thieves.

UK Conservative Party MP and David Cameron's chief adviser on intellectual property, Mike Weatherley [http://www.mikeweatherleymp.com/], has called for those who steal virtual items with a real world value to get the same jail time as someone who steals real world items. Weatherley, a keen World of Warcraft player, says it's all about protection; people who own virtual stuff should expect the same level of protection as those who just own regular, mundane stuff.

"The perception from some people is if you steal online it's less of a crime than if you steal physically," says Weatherley [http://www.buzzfeed.com/jonstone/make-love-not-warcraft?bftw=uk]. "If it genuinely is someone who's paid in the game and they've had that stolen, that's probably no different to something in the physical world."

Weatherley took the question to the Mike Penning [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmhansrd/cm140721/text/140721w0001.htm#14072134000055], Minister of State for Justice and Policing, responded that the current law concerning theft and fraud online was adequate, and that sentencing was a matter for the courts.

Which is true so far as it goes, but it's hard to believe your local constable is going to be too happy if he has to investigate your claim that Darth_Lasagna nicked the guild's treasury, or any other MMORPG item with a real-world value. Weatherley isn't wrong when he says it's about perception, not value; but he's unlikely to get what he's after any time soon.

Source: Guardian [http://www.theguardian.com/technology/shortcuts/2014/jul/24/thieves-world-warcraft-real-prisons-tory-mike-weatherley]


Permalink

 

[SacremPyrobolum]

Christ, just wait till they tell him about EVE.

 

[Cowabungaa]

Christ, just wait till they tell him about EVE.

Thing is, isn't it pretty much sanctioned in EVE? As in, that's pretty much part of the game, acknowledged by CCP, and people actually find that alluring as a unique aspect of that player-run universe. From what I gathered anyway.

 

[Gizmo1990]

We don't have enough room for the crims we already have never mind people who steal virtual items. That being said next year is an election year and he is a Conservative who are about as popular with younger voters as EA.

 

[JoJo]

Ugh, I can understand the sentiment but it would be a minefield to enforce. I mean, what about online games where you're legitimately allowed to kill other players and take their stuff, would that then also be against the law or only if the offending 'thief' hacks the game? How about exploits?

 

[Mike Hoffman]

"The perception from some people is if you steal online it's less of a crime than if you steal physically."

It is less of a crime. It's a game. If you let someone into your guild and they take your crap, that's all permitted in the game. It's on the host of the game if they want to proceed on this. In my headcanon, Mike Weatherley is only pursuing this because his WoW guild got jacked and there is Blizzard is doing nothing about it.

 

[Doug]

Christ, just wait till they tell him about EVE.

Thing is, isn't it pretty much sanctioned in EVE? As in, that's pretty much part of the game, acknowledged by CCP, and people actually find that alluring as a unique aspect of that player-run universe. From what I gathered anyway.

I think the MP is just refering to people who hack accounts or steal items outside of the game's systems. And for paided for items, I think its not a bad idea. It's not clear from here if he does JUST mean that though.

 

[Chris Heyward]

Butthurt much? So if this does get launched, does that mean that the culprits behind EvE-Online's 'Guiding Hand Social Club Heist' are going to get well and truly screwed? This is just going to draw attention to him. Someone will find his character name in WoW and make him cry lol

 

[medv4380]

They're already eligible for real world jail time for hacking. Given that a virtual item that Blizzard can instantly restore is never really gone arguing that there is any loss would be difficult. Just leave it as a hacking crime. Otherwise, you've criminalized Standard Operating Procedure for games like EVE. You'd criminalize any game that focused around PvP in any meaningful way.

 

[Gearhead mk2]

We don't have enough room for the crims we already have never mind people who steal virtual items. That being said next year is an election year and he is a Conservative who are about as popular with younger voters as EA.

Please. The Tories wish they were as beloved as EA.

OT:Virtual goods are something that we need to talk about, but I HIGHLY doubt this is the right time or way to do it.

 

[josemlopes]

I think he is strictly talking about hacking and stuff like that, not exactly stealing the stuff inside the game like in EVE or other MMOs. For example, beating the shit out of the enemy and taking some ships/content (idk, I dont play EVE) would be cool but hacking the account of the owner of those ships/content and sending over to the thief would be a crime.

It has some sense since its stuff that even though virtual do have a real life price to it but it would be really hard to work with it and the best option seems to simply put better security measures and means of punishing the thief by banning the IP, user, etc..., since its virtual the item can probably be tracked and delivered back? Again, I dont know.

 

[Scarim Coral]

What next? Some companies will make insurances of the stuff that got stolen from you?

 

[Flatfrog]

What next? Some companies will make insurances of the stuff that got stolen from you?

Actually, that sounds like a genuinely workable business model - I can easily imagine there would be demand for it

 

[Chinchama]

It would be great if this went to a court and it was deemed that these virtual items paid for with $$$ were not actually of any value and therefore perhaps perpetuating out to make it unlawful to charge/produce stupid stupid stupid DLC (lookin at you EA) and go back to the good ol' days where updates were something you didn't pay 15$ for each time.

Chances of something like this happening though = 0%

 

[exobook]

Ugh, I can understand the sentiment but it would be a minefield to enforce. I mean, what about online games where you're legitimately allowed to kill other players and take their stuff, would that then also be against the law or only if the offending 'thief' hacks the game? How about exploits?

I agree, its a sentiment that you can agree with, the problem is it would be almost impossible to enforce, especially when games are often from multi-national companies. For example EVE online's developers are from Iceland, but the actual server that runs the game is in London. Who's law takes precedent? That and most law maker and enforcers don't seem to care about this.

But I suspect as the internet and social media become more and more central we may end up having to answer this.

 

[Cartographer]

It's nice how grown-up the reporting both here and on the Guardian's website is on this matter.
For years people have been complaining that companies and governments are behind the digital times, playing catchup and failing miserably. Here a politician actually sparks a debate about digital ownership and what protections you should expect to be in place for items you have paid for and he's greeted with scorn.
Jim Stirling and Shamus Young have both written about how, as an industry, games aren't taken seriously; nice perpetuation of that with such an amateur take on this issue, tabloid journalism at its finest.

 

[Lieju]

Yes, if he is talking about hacking and stuff that isn't part of the game, I can see where he's coming from.

But I also don't know enough of law or how these kinds of online-games work to say much more than that.
Since an item that's just data is a bit different from an actual physical item, and could be duplicated or copied.

Also how does this relate to something like stealing money from someone's bank account? Since that's just ones and zeroes too.

 

[Cartographer]

Ugh, I can understand the sentiment but it would be a minefield to enforce. I mean, what about online games where you're legitimately allowed to kill other players and take their stuff, would that then also be against the law or only if the offending 'thief' hacks the game? How about exploits?

I agree, its a sentiment that you can agree with, the problem is it would be almost impossible to enforce, especially when games are often from multi-national companies. For example EVE online's developers are from Iceland, but the actual server that runs the game is in London. Who's law takes precedent? That and most law maker and enforcers don't seem to care about this.

But I suspect as the internet and social media become more and more central we may end up having to answer this.

If only there were some governing body representing a large group of nations who have tied themselves economically together that could enforce laws beyond just their own borders and with enough clout to make threat of economic sanction something companies feared enough to stay in line...

Given there's already precedent on this, hell the article cites a 2008 case where a Dutch court convicted two teens for online item theft, I'd guess the enforcement would be a lot easier than you'd imagine, especially with it being virtually impossible to erase your tracks from the internet.

 

[Jadak]

This really depends on how we're defining 'stealing', or at least how things are being stolen.

Generally speaking, the only way for someone else to get your virtual items is either with your consent, through completely legitimate gameplay, or via hacking.

The first don't make sense to punish in the real world, and the latter is typically a real world crime anyways, so what exactly are we talking about?

Best I could guess is that it would be a good ol' fashioned theft charge added on to the typical hacking charges (whatever those are), and can't say I have a problem with that.

Of course, then you get into the mess of maybe it being the game companies responsibility to sort out that sort of thing, and what if the game shuts down? It happens, does that count as the company itself robbing it's players just because they chose to spend more money on intangible items?

I don't know, maybe just stick with charging people with hacking stuff, let the game deal with the rest.

 

[Flatfrog]

It's nice how grown-up the reporting both here and on the Guardian's website is on this matter.
For years people have been complaining that companies and governments are behind the digital times, playing catchup and failing miserably. Here a politician actually sparks a debate about digital ownership and what protections you should expect to be in place for items you have paid for and he's greeted with scorn.
Jim Stirling and Shamus Young have both written about how, as an industry, games aren't taken seriously; nice perpetuation of that with such an amateur take on this issue, tabloid journalism at its finest.

But as a number of people on this thread have pointed out, while on the face of it it's an interesting idea and worth pursuing, the whole thing does fall down when you examine it in any depth, so I don't think it's unreasonable to treat it humorously (not to mention that that is pretty much the house style for news reporting on the Escapist)

Just to summarise the reasons others have given, the suggestion makes no sense because:

1) Games are a fantasy world in which, by definition, the normal rules of the real world are suspended. If you can be prosecuted for stealing someone's stuff, how can you fantasy role-play as a thief?

2) If items are stolen by means of hacking or other exploits, existing laws of fraud and cybercrime should cover that. What's more, since all game code is under the control of the developers, there is nothing stopping them from redressing the issue and restoring the 'stolen' items to you.

So it's hard to think of any circumstance in which any new law is required. Perhaps the only thing that might be worthwhile would be a new extension to data protection, requiring game developers to safeguard the virtual property of their players. I could very easily imagine a circumstance in which that might be helpful.