ian, you should not be twisting my
words like that.

do not twist my words.

what i *am* saying is that *somebody* is going to
challenge TOS documents because it makes
sense to do that.

and your forshadowing that uri is going to sue EA, well good luck, but i think he will probably be crushed like a bug, no offense, but uri is not worth billions of dollars, and can not afford johnny cochran.

there is trade in game characters and game properties and game “stuff” out there in the out-of-game world. these properties etc acquire
real-world dollar values because of that trading.

if a company like EA decides to off a character for reasons of its own, AND part of offing the character is the destruction of that player/character’s in-game property, well, it has done an action that has real-world consequences, because the character’s property has real-world economic value. the player suffers a real-world loss because of the company’s decision to off the character.

i believe that it is lawrence lessig who makes the following example:

a poor guy plays a game maybe at the library or some place and creates a valuable character and property for himself in game. that property can be sold etc. so after a while the guy is in a position that the most valuable asset he owns is
an in-game character and property. that’s his net worth right there.

the question is: does the corporation have the right to take that property from him? isn’t the property his? didn’t he work to create it?

and if the corp does have that right, isn’t that a step backwards about 700 years into a kind of fuedalism, where the corporation plays the role of the lord of the manor? should we bow and tip our hats when tigger walks by? is that where we live?

the TOS is absolutely open to interpretation, and it will be interpreted. it is only a matter of time.

LET RIGHT BE DONE

-humdog

Again, the TOS is OF COURSE open to interpretation, just as every contract is. That’s why we have contract law and civil courts. It’s just a contract folks. Tigger is there to give the EA interpretation, but that doesn’t make it the correct interpretation. It is simply the interpretation to one party in a contractual dispute.

this is incorrect. The TOS is not a set of rules handed down on Mount Arrarat to Tigger. It is a contract between EA and the users. If there is a dispute about the interpretation of the contract or about whether certain clauses of the contract are binding, you cannot respove the interpretation or dispute by running to Tigger. Tigger/EA is merely one party to the dispute and is merely giving us the interpretation of the contract that EA would like to have, not one that an independent court would sanction.

please rb, “only” 16, your images in your arguments are terrible, and you are stealing them because you dont have an account. this boy who is “only” 16, can make images godly if you think “Animation Factory” is grea.t

Uri…my remarks arent trying to be sexist, but it is just odd that some random chick is speaking for you, rather than you your self. You can just sit back while she answers for you. male or female, where the hell is your collar and chain hum?

you got a problem with strong women? you got
a problem with women, period?

its just interesting that your ummm big
gun against a woman who disagrees with you
is the good ole boy’s “obviously the
little lady is agreeing with a Man.”

women got the vote about 100 years ago, ian.
the last guy i met who thought that men
determine what women think has been dead
about 20 years.

you must be a dead guy, ian. your brain must be
full of spider webs. the burial shroud must
be falling away from your body in little shreds.
you must have maggots crawling in your eye sockets.

how the hell did you make it through elementary school, anyway?

you and coco have yet to come up with a real
argument. everything you guys say comes down
to a statement that uri violated coco’s version
of the TOS, and coco won’t explain how she arrived at her version of the TOS, probably because she can’t.

and, until coco becomes the general counsel of EA, that argument is horseshit.

go home, ian.

LET RIGHT BE DONE

- RB