Stealing ingame is illegal

[DeletedUser16008]

Hash in fact I wrote about never employing a thief...

Ignoring your comparison as theres no point me also chopping off your head as HS has already done it admirably put it in perspective this is about a computer games online item...

I will bet that nearly every single person is a thief by definition something you took from someplace you didnt return intentionally or even lapse of memory or being lazy or seeing an opportunity or by definition of law HS makes it very clear ... .... there are very few saints in this world.

However there are degrees .... if you took every crime so seriously and didnt look at the details what the heck do you do for the serious crimes ? you have to have a scale here.

Taking a sweet off of a child or not taking them to the beach as promised is a form of abuse .... there are degrees

Also making a criminal of more and more people for less and less is imo counter productive, encouraging more criminal actions by same given they already have a record 50% on average reoffend. doing time in jail or even community service is a great place to meet others like minded and swop tips.

You have to have some kind of sensible balance and this case is not it. I will bet if you brought this before 99% of the other courts in the world that 90% would throw it out as theft

 

[DeletedUser30307]

lol, you're comparing this to rape and child abuse!?! Ridiculous.

Let us all now travel the route of slippery slope fallacy and false comparisons. Hashisfun, you wrote five paragraphs of fallacious reasoning (false/flawed logic). At the center of your fallacy is a critical bit of information you, and the courts, were not privy to. Theft only occurs when something is stolen... stealing entails ownership, a change in ownership. Ownership never changed hands, because the game company owns it all (as indicated in their terms of service). What occurred was assault with a deadly weapon, but no theft.

Review my earlier post for visual clarification --- http://forum.the-west.net/showpost.php?p=620289&postcount=75

Well....no comments

Hash in fact I wrote about never employing a thief...

Ignoring your comparison as theres no point me also chopping off your head as HS has already done it admirably put it in perspective this is about a computer games online item...

I will bet that nearly every single person is a thief by definition something you took from someplace you didnt return intentionally or even lapse of memory or being lazy or seeing an opportunity or by definition of law HS makes it very clear ... .... there are very few saints in this world.

However there are degrees .... if you took every crime so seriously and didnt look at the details what the heck do you do for the serious crimes ? you have to have a scale here.

Taking a sweet off of a child or not taking them to the beach as promised is a form of abuse .... there are degrees

Also making a criminal of more and more people for less and less is imo counter productive, encouraging more criminal actions by same given they already have a record 50% on average reoffend. doing time in jail or even community service is a great place to meet others like minded and swop tips.

You have to have some kind of sensible balance and this case is not it. I will bet if you brought this before 99% of the other courts in the world that 90% would throw it out as theft

a couple of things you said are valid and i would have liked to continue this debate/discussion but i'll refrain from doing so as there is no end to this. however....i would like to say just one thing about everyone being a thief is that; yes....more or less everyone is a thief, but is it their intention to steal ? or was it unintentional/mistake ! i think that you'll understand what i am trying to say

and no more from my side after this lol.

 

[DeletedUser]

hehe, so now we prosecute on intent? Welcome to 1984, how would you like your doublethink served?



note: referencing George Orwell's novella, entitled 1984.

 

[DeletedUser]

.....Theft only occurs when something is stolen... stealing entails ownership, a change in ownership......

You keep repeating this like a bible-belt Christian telling us that marriage is a sacrament between a man and a woman only. In fact, theft, like marriage, is a social construct whose meaning is not fixed. Also, legal terms are not always equivalent with their synonyms in everyday language.
The Dutch court did not miss anything that you fancy your eagle-eyes detected. It deemed the existing laws concerning "theft" to be applicable to de facto control of in-game goods as well as real-world goods. Or, if you want to keep your mantra intact, it extending "ownership" to the same. It was entitled to do this and was lucid in its explanation.
I can't put it any simpler. If you still can't see it then I guess this has become a religious discussion and I'll leave you to your flat-earth.

 

[DeletedUser]

You keep repeating this like a bible-belt Christian telling us that marriage is a sacrament between a man and a woman only. In fact, theft, like marriage, is a social construct whose meaning is not fixed. Also, legal terms are not always equivalent with their synonyms in everyday language.
The Dutch court did not miss anything that you fancy your eagle-eyes detected. It deemed the existing laws concerning "theft" to be applicable to de facto control of in-game goods as well as real-world goods. Or, if you want to keep your mantra intact, it extending "ownership" to the same. It was entitled to do this and was lucid in its explanation.
I can't put it any simpler. If you still can't see it then I guess this has become a religious discussion and I'll leave you to your flat-earth.

Where did gay marriage come into this? Any christian should be able to tell you that, as the bible is pretty clear on that issue, but back to the present topic there was no control or good for that matter as I stated earlier. In-game items are not real items they are lines of computer code represented as a graphic and he never had control of that code.

 

[DeletedUser]

Eli, what mantra? It's fact. The fact is the courts were never provided the Terms of Service, the defense failed to point out that the game, the copyrights, the images, the patents, the accounts, the characters, the items in the game, the servers, and the 1s and 0s stored in those servers, belonged "solely" to Jagex. The court papers also make it abundantly clear they "assumed" the kid owned the account, assumed the character belonged to the kid, and assumed the virtual items held by that character was the property of that kid. The de facto control revolved around this erroneous premise.

This isn't a mantra Eli, it's a core fact that should allow for a return to the appeal (assuming Holland's judicial laws allows such).

 

[DeletedUser]

Mod time!

From what I can tell all parties in this debate are just repeating the same arguments over and over, just trying to use a slight variation in wording to convince the other 'side' by brute force to change their mind.

Please stop doing that!

If you have anything new to say you can do that, but don't just repeat yourselves.

I do understand that one large part of a debate is to convince the bystanders, but I assure you that anyone that is even remotely interested in this issue has had all chances to see your points in multiple variations.

/Edlit

 

[DeletedUser]

Where did gay marriage come into this?

Get a dictionary and lookup "analogy".

there was no control or good for that matter as I stated earlier. In-game items are not real items they are lines of computer code represented as a graphic and he never had control of that code.

The court ruling dealt with this:
"The assertion that the objects are not goods because they consist of 'bits and bytes' is untenable. The virtual nature of these objects does not in itself preclude their being considered goods"

The court papers also make it abundantly clear they "assumed" the kid owned the account, assumed the character belonged to the kid, and assumed the virtual items held by that character was the property of that kid.

Not in the OP's link. If you have further documents then present them for consideration/verification.

 

[DeletedUser]

Thread closed, see above!

/Edlit