Blizzard Squeezes $88 Million From Private Server Owner

[Corvuus]

Haha. I love the comments here.

When the music industry sues a housewife 133 thousand dollars a song, they're evil. When Blizzard does it, it's suddenly 'harsh but justified'.

You have to love hypocrisy.

This alone should be a reason to boycot Blizzard and all of its products, but the slaving addicts won't even consider such a thing, of course.

The problem with your statement is that the woman probably didnt make money re-selling the song she downloaded, because she probably didnt, the same thing here.
I dont think Blizzard people mind free servers that much, but the woman had microtransactions on her server and was making money on something that isnt hers

While that's indeed a minor difference, it doesn't detract from the comparison. The woman downloading 'cost' the Industry money. This woman, one way or another, also cost a company money. That she made money, as opposed to that 'poor housewife who just wanted some songs', is of little consequence. Both 'stole', if only, the Blizzard-woman only stole in a more profitable fashion.

The comparison still stands, and thus the hypocrisy remains standing as well.

Are you complaining about hypocrisy of the general public, yourself or what?

Both companies are in the right to protect themselves and pursue those who break copyright. Both have full legal right, won in court, etc. etc. So there is no hypocrisy by the companies themselves. (unless you wish to argue why they picked only that one target and not 'everyone')

As to people, everyone is a hypcrit in some ways (some more than others) and I wouldn't be surprised at all if the people who balk at the fine given to the defendants (song, Wow private) also cheer the fines given to microsoft, 'big cigarette/tobacco' companies, etc.

Subjectively, people can think and do whatever they like, including cognitive dissonance with regards to music companies and blizzard. If you like the company, you can rationalize their behavior, if you dislike them, you can vilify it, etc. to fit your viewpoint. Either way, your personal view is most likely hypocritical as well just based on your general statements. Either you don't like blizzard, or you like the music companies. Since i think it is relatively unlikely that you like the music companies themselves (not the artist, but the money making production, etc.) then you most likely dislike/bitter against Blizzard... which is hypocritical of you.

C

 

[ThePurpleStuff]

World of Warcraft is so not worth getting slapped with an 88 million dollar debt. I thought Nexon was bad when it came to their Maplestory private servers, but at least all they do is send C&D letters and the server owners apply with the demands and shut theirs down. It's the smart thing to do, to save yourself from digging your own grave, like this women should have done but didn't. Sure, it's illegal for private servers to exist, but for those who want to play the "pay to play" games, you gotta do what you gotta do if you don't have the green for it.

OT: She had the chance to save herself and prevent this, but she denied it and kept on going which stopped me from feeling sorry for her, she was greedy and stupid for not listening to Blizzard.

 

[itf cho]

I'm aware that plenty of people have run, and do run, private servers for WoW and other games so that their friends can play free of charge. Not condoning it, but people do it. However, when you go so far as to steal Blizzard's MMO and then setup a micro transaction economy and start charging people for it? Well, then you deserve to get sued. 80 million is a lot, so I wonder how much she raked in with this little scam. Over three million in 'disgorged profits' they say... so that would seem to mean that if the people playing on her server had been playing WoW legit - that Blizz would have made over 3 mil on them. That's a lot of people.

 

[FaceFaceFace]

I don't really think it's that unfair. It's like how they used to cut off your hand for robbery. It's not about proportionate punishment, it's stopping anyone else from even thinking about committing the crime.

But we agree that cutting off someone's hand for robbery is unfair punishment, correct?

Cutting off someone's hand for robbery is unfair punishment, assuming that what the robber stole wasn't somebody else's hand.

Exactly, so I put forward that Alyson did not steal 80,000,000 worth of property from Blizzard.
What FaceFaceFace was saying is that this is OK because its to make an example of her, much like cutting a hand of for robbery regardless of its fairness makes an example to other robbers.

This is the longest stream of quotes I have ever been a part of. And I noticed that my username sounds idiotic when used in actual discussion.

OT: Yes, both punishments are grossly unfair. However, compared to the modern day idea of justice, ie locking people up in relatively good living conditions with opportunities to get a college degree or watch television, I woulld personally prefer to go the Tony Stark route and employ the punishment you only have to administer once. That cash register looks a lot less inviting if you have to risk your hand for it.

 

[Digital_Utopia]

I didn't misquote you. I paraphrased what you actually said in english. If it is a misquote, it is due to vagueness on your part. So read what you wrote without already knowing what you want to say in your mind.
---
I did show you that they are being harmed, if you consider them losing even a single dollar as being harmed. If you can't prove that all pirating/private servers are people who would have never even bought/played/gave business to blizzard, then blizzard is harmed by what they are doing, even if it is 'chump change'. It is really quite simple.
--
I don't think you fully understand your own post or mine. No one said that 'piracy' doesn't have potentially 'positive' affects in the sense that people can 'trial' a game and then buy it. It is 'nebulous' but it can and does happen. But to claim there is no "negative" affect from piracy at all is silly. And to claim that somehow piracy is good because "hey there are still maybe benefits we haven't figured out yet" is naive. It is like saying smoking is good because "there are probably some benefits we haven't figured out yet" while knowing that it is bad because it will reduce average lifespan/kill you.
----
Your private server argument is amusing but it is still flat out wrong. Sure, you can be interesting, unique, offer "4 times experience", better loot drops, etc. and sure you can do other things to advertise, get donations, etc.

The instant the defendant started micro-transactions, then they are wrong. It isn't a 'free private server for enjoyment' or anything else. It is for profit. So if you want to get a somewhat sub-par 'free experience' of a private server, then that is a choice. If someone wants to make money off of you, then it is illegal. You can think of it in terms of anime/manga downloads in relation to U.S./Japan copyright.

If you download/watch/read anime/manga that isn't copyrighted in the U.S. yet then it is 100% legal. Heck, even doing it after it is 'dubbed/ported/copyrighted' over is still a 'pirating' choice that alot of people make. However, EVERYONE (well, i'm assuming common sense) would know and say that it is wrong for someone to try to make profit off of translating and selling 'fansub/subbed work' etc. that isn't their own.

Hey! I translated naruto, bleach, etc., pay me money for it.

Donation to keep server running is one thing. Helping out is another, and supporting 'fan-translations', etc. .... But flat-out profiting is not acceptable in any sense in any media.

------

Of course Blizzard isn't entitled to your money. Your utilities aren't entitled to your money either. If you don't want to pay or use their service, then you don't have to.

But if you want to use it/enjoy it, then you are entitled to pay. Don't want electricity or internet? Don't pay for it. If you want it, pay up. If you want food, then pay for it. If you want entertainment in the form of clowns, las vegas shows, movies, free youtube-videos, etc. then you go for it.

No one is holding a gun to your head (or their head) and yeah, you can steal food, sneak into shows, and do whatever you want based on what you feel you deserve (entitled) to. Just don't be surprised when there are reprecussions based on the fact that it is blatantly illegal to steal which is what you would be doing.

---
I still don't understand your point of view. Does 400 thousand people doing something somehow make it right or make this an acceptable business practice? Are we supposed to care that there are people who may have, in good faith, donated money towards server cost without realizing it was 3 million + dollars being used in private fashion? That we should let the servers continue to honor their good faith? In an illegal contractual agreement?

I seriously don't see how you could have any training or study of law/copyright and yet believe that the defendant had the right to do what she did.

C

Agreed.

It has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not you like how Blizzard runs their servers, or whether or not someone playing on a private server would actually play on Blizzard's servers if given no other choice. The simple fact of the matter is that it's Blizzard's game, and they have every right to maintain control over how it's used.

If you create a game with the explicit requirement that someone pays you a subscription in order to make use of it, and someone else undercuts you by allowing them to play your game without paying you a subscription, or paying them money, then how is that even on the same continent as fair?

Piracy is mostly unrelated - unless you're talking about people who actually sell pirated games/movies. Otherwise you're just talking theoretical loss of profits, instead of someone else actually making a profit off of your work.

 

[Marmooset]

Seeking to shut the server down and protect their financial assets from others "stealing" money from their IP? Fine. Ruining someone's entire financial future and even life so that they may as well start living on the street or kill themselves now? Not fine, that's just a dick move, and sounds exactly like the sort of thing that stems from having someone with the mentality of Kotick as your CEO.

Not really. Know what happens when you just go "Oh we'll shut you down but won't do anything else to you"? They just start up a new one, more people start them up. Doing something ridiculous like this, whether they actually get the money or not, sends out a message that they're not BSing this and will hopefully get people to stop the private servers. They tried playing it nice by sending out cease and desist warnings and politely shutting a few down, making it clear that they're not allowed. But people won't stop. What do you want them to to do?

It's true.
If Sir Topham Hat would string just one Troublesome Truck from Cranky's hook and set it afire while the others watched, his freight disaster ratio would drop by at least 50%.

 

[Marmooset]

snip

snip

snip

Really? How blind can you get? I want you to think about why, the 427 thousand people who played on the private server, did what they did. Do you really believe any more than 0.1% of those people would've played on Blizzard's WoW servers, were private servers not an option? There is a reason these exist, and that's because people don't want to pay.

Who cares whether or not they would pay?
You're missing the simple point that Blizzard has made: you don't pay, you don't get. No shouldas or wouldas involved.

More power to them.

 

[FailingwithStyle]

Although Blizzard has every right to protect their product, the ruling was way too harsh. I hardly think the private server has made a dent in their profits whatsoever. And ffs, there's tons of private servers, why did they pick on this one?

 

[veloper]

Harsh, but Blizzard is in the right.

If you are going to run a private server make sure you're doing it in some country without copyright laws or treaties with the US.

 

[SenseOfTumour]

I'm completely ignorant when it comes law and the cash awarded to people?

Who decides $3 million, 88 million, etc?

If it's Blizzard, then they're being ridiculous, $100,000 is enough to pretty destroy a normal person's life. If it's the judge, then it's just another sign of them having no clue about the real world. I'm of course taking into account that they've already been awarded the $3 million she made from microtransactions.

To me, if I had control, I'd strip her of all profits, give her a fine in the tens of thousands so she knew not to do it again (or a short jail sentence), and let it be.

The amounts are stupid anyways, as no-one has this kinda money except Blizzard.

 

[poiuppx]

I fully stand behind Blizzard on this one (guess according to that Vaviel or whatshisface earlier in the thread that means I have a pitch black soul of nasty evil). Someone hosts a private server, fine. It's illegal and wrong, but a lot of companies just shrug at it since it's more work to kill one than to let it die its own natural death in due course. Someone is not only hosting a private server, but has close to a half-million users grand total, bilks them for over 3 mil, and brags about how she used the money for personal reasons rather than for server stuff. This is a multiple-time-e whammy.

Wrong? How is it wrong to want to play a free game on the internet? Furthermore, Blizzard will always have people and newer updates. Let's also think about another option for the game. The supposed "pirate" has to pay for a server, updates... The list could go on. But saying she is owed such a large amount just shows how bad the copyright laws are, not that she's a criminal.

Consider; that's not just theft in terms of offering the service for free. That's outrightly tainting the pool. Those people will think of this experience of paying extra to someone who wasn't even using it for the game, and will equate it mentally with the game. Potentially, those gamers are lost customers because of her. I'd be damn pissed too.

Define "theft" when she has stolen nothing from Blizzard.

You say it's overkill? I say it's not only neccesary, it's vital. Not just to send a message to other private server hosters, but to send one that clearly says 'If you profit off us and give our product a bad name, we will SMITE you'.

This sounds to have been legal too. [http://www.geekosystem.com/federal-officials-take-down-nine-domains-for-offering-first-run-films/] More money =/ Moral high ground

The irony? They probably never expected a final settlement to come to those numbers. But her failure to show up and contest it more or less cinched those numbers in. Hell, that probably even surprised Blizzard's own lawyers; who would expect someone NOT to show up to fight something like that? But no. As she did before, she shrugged it all off. And this time, she has to pay the penalty due her.

It's uncanny when someone believes this could actually be fair. Even more depressing that someone believes this supposed punishment fits the crime.

Those of you saying she was wronged by this number, please pause and consider: she broke the law, misused funds, potentially tainted a massive number of users against the product, and then didn't even bother to defend herself when called on all this. If it were your company, your product, your time and energy- hell, not just yours, but that of all those around you who helped make this happen -being twisted for the sake of this woman, can you honestly in your heart of hearts say you'd do any less?

Broke what law?

Misused what funds?

Did she hold the users at gunpoint to play on her server?

Or perhaps she found it to be a foregone conclusion that Blizzard could attack any private server and claim they are infringing a copyright and winning in court that favors Blizzard's draconian ruling. Yeah... Rock and a hard place.

Especially when one private server is essentially dying for the sins of ALL private servers.

It's wrong because the game in and of itself also serves as a service. A service they facilitated, and created from the ground up. Had it been her own game, no one could fault her actions, at least not seriously. But she was using someone else's hard work and publically offered for-profit product and service to line her own pockets to the tune of three million dollars.

And if you want to define theft, let's define it in lost market share, given half a million people were on her server.

Money isn't the issue here; she lined her pockets with the efforts of others who were never legally reimbursed and whose product she had no right to use in that fashion.

And again, she could have fought this; she CHOSE not to show up. Summary decision comes into play automatically, which means the full asked for ammount automatically is entered in. She could have fought this, hell, she could have tried to make a case she didn't owe them a red cent. She'd have likely lost, but regardless, the judge likely wouldn't have forced the full ammount upon her. Or more accurately, wouldn't have been forced to force the full ammount upon her.

And no, she didn't force anyone to play on her server. But don't try to lie to me and tell me she figured running her own private server and bilking her users for 'server update' money she then bragged about using for a personal jaccuzi was on the up and up. Oh, and she also could have... I dunno... NOT run an illegal server?

Blame Blizzard, blame the law, blame it on the bossa nova all you want. She KNEW she was doing something illegal with IPs that she didn't own, cutting into the business of a major company that was bound to notice, and then had the sheer hutzpah to not even defend herself in court when her BS was called. May she rot in peace for all I care.

 

[maxben]

I don't really think it's that unfair. It's like how they used to cut off your hand for robbery. It's not about proportionate punishment, it's stopping anyone else from even thinking about committing the crime.

But we agree that cutting off someone's hand for robbery is unfair punishment, correct?

Cutting off someone's hand for robbery is unfair punishment, assuming that what the robber stole wasn't somebody else's hand.

Exactly, so I put forward that Alyson did not steal 80,000,000 worth of property from Blizzard.
What FaceFaceFace was saying is that this is OK because its to make an example of her, much like cutting a hand of for robbery regardless of its fairness makes an example to other robbers.

This is the longest stream of quotes I have ever been a part of. And I noticed that my username sounds idiotic when used in actual discussion.

OT: Yes, both punishments are grossly unfair. However, compared to the modern day idea of justice, ie locking people up in relatively good living conditions with opportunities to get a college degree or watch television, I woulld personally prefer to go the Tony Stark route and employ the punishment you only have to administer once. That cash register looks a lot less inviting if you have to risk your hand for it.

Haha, I've been in far longer arguments
My issue with your form of punishment is where does it end?
I mean, if the punishment should not be equal or even related to the crime but only equal to the deterrence value of the punishment itself, then punishment is a stand alone concept from crime.
If this is the case, why don't we make every crime punishable by death?
Its quick, cost little money if done right (the Chinese bullet to the head method comes to mind), and is by far the most deterring punishment out there.
It shouldn't matter if the crime is a theft, a murder, or a speeding ticket because relating the punishment to the crime takes a backseat to deterrence.

It's taking it to the extreme, I know, but law is based on precedence and logic, if your logic is allowed to control laws then we have a problem because then there are no constraints on how much punishment is allowed because there is no such thing as too much punishment (as more punishment increases deterrence).

Though this rant doesn't really work in this situation, apparently Alyson did not show up in Court so the Court just gave Blizzard anything it wanted. So in that case its her fault as she didn't give the court the chance to rule fairly.

 

[Gindil]

I didn't misquote you. I paraphrased what you actually said in english. If it is a misquote, it is due to vagueness on your part. So read what you wrote without already knowing what you want to say in your mind.

Here's what I'm saying to take away the vagueness. This server runs Warcraft. That much we can agree on. Causing one person to have to pay for potential profit is an asinine argument, which is what I'm arguing. Those 400K people don't owe Blizzard money. The argument that she has to pay 88 million is rather ludicrous and harsh for copyright infringement. Basically it's like the RIAA going after Jammie Thomas for downloading songs. Which spinozaad has already called attention to. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.225965-Blizzard-Squeezes-88-Million-From-Private-Server-Owner?page=13#7732413]
---

I did show you that they are being harmed, if you consider them losing even a single dollar as being harmed. If you can't prove that all pirating/private servers are people who would have never even bought/played/gave business to blizzard, then blizzard is harmed by what they are doing, even if it is 'chump change'. It is really quite simple.

Again, this is a losing argument. It's a logical fallacy. Blizzard continues to make money because of the fact that they have the official servers. They are the first to update. The graphics are best on their servers. People continue to play on their servers and the thing that Blizzard has to do is continue to update and keep those people happy or they move to private servers.

--

I don't think you fully understand your own post or mine. No one said that 'piracy' doesn't have potentially 'positive' affects in the sense that people can 'trial' a game and then buy it. It is 'nebulous' but it can and does happen. But to claim there is no "negative" affect from piracy at all is silly. And to claim that somehow piracy is good because "hey there are still maybe benefits we haven't figured out yet" is naive. It is like saying smoking is good because "there are probably some benefits we haven't figured out yet" while knowing that it is bad because it will reduce average lifespan/kill you.

Your entire argument always alludes to "They're being harmed because these people aren't paying for Warcraft (Blizzard)". The fact of the matter is that if you google "Warcraft, private server" you can find a nice selection of people who aren't paying for Warcraft but still enjoying the game. Should they pay for it as well? It's the start of a slippery slope argument with a crazy judgement such as this 88 million dollars for supposed lost profits. It's the same as the recording industry's claim that piracy is harming them when it's in fact helping out the music industry as a whole.

I am not, nor have I ever said that piracy doesn't have ill effects. When I quoted you it was mainly your last two paragraphs that I don't agree with:

The discussion is generally about whether or not $88 million dollars is a fair and justifiable assessment of the revenue Blizzard lost to "piracy". I think it is absolutely justifiable given 427,000 people playing WoW for a year (I'm assuming the timeframe, I don't have information about how long the servers were up) while circumventing the subscription fee = 88 million dollars of potential revenue lost, which is what was awarded in damages.

Like I said, I was pleasantly surprised that the number seemed reasonable, and not hyperinflated like the RIAA's lawsuits where they seek trillions of dollars for 12 songs, which I don't believe is justifiable at all.

I fail to see how an impossible amount that could barely be paid by one person, is over half of Blizzard's revenue in 2010, and is mainly statutory damages for not showing up, is going to truly be justifiable as not cruel and unusual punishment. When you look at the 3 million s/he made in donations, I doubt that puts a dent in it. This is why I'm criticizing the entire "piracy = lost profits" deal. It means the money is being spent elsewhere, to which Blizzard isn't entitled to. They want it, they can make it worth my while with other incentives.
----

Your private server argument is amusing but it is still flat out wrong. Sure, you can be interesting, unique, offer "4 times experience", better loot drops, etc. and sure you can do other things to advertise, get donations, etc.

The instant the defendant started micro-transactions, then they are wrong. It isn't a 'free private server for enjoyment' or anything else. It is for profit. So if you want to get a somewhat sub-par 'free experience' of a private server, then that is a choice. If someone wants to make money off of you, then it is illegal. You can think of it in terms of anime/manga downloads in relation to U.S./Japan copyright.

Do you mean the DMCA? The Sonny Bono Extension act? I'm aware of copyright law. What you're not understanding is that this actually serves as free advertising in some regards. For example, this one person [http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1754698&cid=33255404] played on a private server, then went to Blizzard.

Again, since I don't know all of the details on the micro-transactions, I won't comment on them. Right now, I'm playing League of Legends and know that with the right amount of money I could buy anything I want at whatever price is asked. It's a choice just like getting the uber sword of Hyper Love +5 equals $500.

If you download/watch/read anime/manga that isn't copyrighted in the U.S. yet then it is 100% legal. Heck, even doing it after it is 'dubbed/ported/copyrighted' over is still a 'pirating' choice that alot of people make. However, EVERYONE (well, i'm assuming common sense) would know and say that it is wrong for someone to try to make profit off of translating and selling 'fansub/subbed work' etc. that isn't their own.

Donation to keep server running is one thing. Helping out is another, and supporting 'fan-translations', etc. .... But flat-out profiting is not acceptable in any sense in any media.

...

You do realize this is more a grey area right? Recently there's been a shift in anime and manga where the "official" translators (Viz especially [http://www.viz.com/news/newsroom/?id=617]) have changed their tune on scanlation. Just a small note. Personally, I see scanlation doing two things:

1) free advertising for newer manga/anime
2) focuses a company on what may sell next in the US

The belief that Viz and others have that piracy is killing them ignores the fact that manga/anime are online. They have to put their products online. I went to Viz's place and they're still under a belief that if you give someone 3 chapters online, they'll like the book so much, they'll buy the series online or in a store.

Then there's manga like One Piece. Do you realize it has 50+ books right now? 50 books x $10 = $500 for a series that's only half way done. ;
------

No one is holding a gun to your head (or their head) and yeah, you can steal food, sneak into shows, and do whatever you want based on what you feel you deserve (entitled) to. Just don't be surprised when there are reprecussions based on the fact that it is blatantly illegal to steal which is what you would be doing.

Again, piracy =/ stealing. And the punishment should fit the crime, which it doesn't in this case. It just shows how broken copyright law is along with how broken statutory judgements can be.

---

I still don't understand your point of view. Does 400 thousand people doing something somehow make it right or make this an acceptable business practice? Are we supposed to care that there are people who may have, in good faith, donated money towards server cost without realizing it was 3 million + dollars being used in private fashion? That we should let the servers continue to honor their good faith? In an illegal contractual agreement?

I seriously don't see how you could have any training or study of law/copyright and yet believe that the defendant had the right to do what she did.

I criticize the amount because, as I've explained before, it's an excessive amount that has no way of being paid in full for the reasons given. If she were to give up the donation amounts, I would agree with that. If she were to pay a charge for lawyering up, that I can agree with. But this high amount is just ludicrous.

I'm not too sure if this is about the lesser of two evils. In one corner we have Blizzard going against a smaller place that couldn't possibly fight such a titan. More than likely, without Blizzard's interference, the place would have died on its own from the problems that were surfacing.

And after reading the statutory damages clause [http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html#504], it seems like a nuclear launch button for going after one person. If anything, the statutory damages, as read, were supposed to be used against a company that was on the same level as Blizzard, not consumers. It's just really disappointing to see our government coincide that this is "fair" to her.

 

[ryo02]

this is just stupid so much for doing so little this crap is just gonna go on and on ... well until it causes a suicide which is probably inevitable sooner or later.

 

[Mighty the Moose]

Chairman Mao says, "Kill the chicken to scare the monkey!"

 

[DarkPanda XIII]

........uhh...wow for the WoW makers.

 

[Redratson]

HOLY MOTHER OF GOD! ARE YOU SERIOUS?!? Blizz I know you guys are pretty protective of ur own shit but dear Lord wtf? Tooooooooooooooooo much in my opinion a couple mill juussssst maybe, MAYBE, but 88 mil?

 

[Gindil]

I'm completely ignorant when it comes law and the cash awarded to people?

Who decides $3 million, 88 million, etc?

If it's Blizzard, then they're being ridiculous, $100,000 is enough to pretty destroy a normal person's life. If it's the judge, then it's just another sign of them having no clue about the real world. I'm of course taking into account that they've already been awarded the $3 million she made from microtransactions.

To me, if I had control, I'd strip her of all profits, give her a fine in the tens of thousands so she knew not to do it again (or a short jail sentence), and let it be.

The amounts are stupid anyways, as no-one has this kinda money except Blizzard.

I really don't think they did it expecting to actually receive that full amount... ever.
They made an example out of that private server owner. Decapitated them and put their head on a pike as a warning to all others.

Wanna know more? Blizzard was going for even more money but they were nixed on it. Source [http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2010/08/the-88-million-server-private-wow-server-op-loses-big.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss]

Blizzard also argued that every Paypal transaction constituted a circumvention, but the court struck that one down. The amount Blizzard claimed it was owed looking at the Paypal transactions? An additional $20,886,200 in statutory damages.