On the day of the 2004 Christmas, a explosive news appeared in the well-known "World of Warcraft" data station in China. The content is "Gamesloot.Net's Patrick has received the first premium from the Want Di 's warning. C & D Letter, requires them to stop all violations of the "World of Warcraft" End User Agreement (EULA) and Terms of Use (Tou). Blizzard repeatedly reaffirmed their property rights for all content of "World of Warcraft", this Kaked off its prelude to the "World of Warcraft" virtual property lines. " This news quickly was widely reproduced by major game websites, causing a new round of intense debate - who is the virtual property? Inadvertently, my country's first virtual property litigation is also settling at this time. "Online game" Red Moon "player Li Hongchen, the hard-working equipment disappeared overnight. To this end, he will report the" Red Moon "Operators Arctic Ice Technology Development Co., Ltd., on December 16, 2004, Beijing City Second Households the first test judgment of the first "virtual property" stolen in the country, the Arctic ice company is required to recover the lost virtual equipment of Li Hongchen, and return its purchase of 105 burst of 420 yuan, as well as transportation, etc. The economic losses totaled 1140 yuan. "This judgment emphasized that virtual property in online games serve as valuable intangible property owned by the player.
Online game players are no longer "news" because of their accounts and character equipment, and the news is no longer "news". It is an integral part of the player's intention of the player's rights in our law. The blizzard statement from the other side of the ocean has issued the manufacturer's public call to the player "no". Virtual currency, virtual equipment, original only a string of data strings consisting of "0" and "1", but when they bring the players to varying various game fun, they will inevitably be given certain Virtual value. Who is this value? Can you hook the real value? If the virtual property is owned by the developer, how to make the player's interest should be guaranteed; if the virtual property belongs to the player, how do the developers have left their own ways to ensure the player's rights? The virtual property transaction "reasonable" is still "legal" my country's current regulations on online game virtual items, but more and more judgments and proceedings have gradually incorporated the content of virtual items into the legal adjustment. More and more players demand that the state will introduce relevant laws and regulations to provide a security guarantee for their virtual goods and cash transactions. The actual situation is that in order to reduce the risk of players private exchanges, many large-scale online trading platforms have emerged, providing guarantees and intermediary services for players. There are some game operators, choose the "Free Game, Toll" model, and the high-grade virtual props in the game operate will be marked with the player. It can be seen that whether it is still in the dark, virtual goods trading has become an unavoidable social phenomenon in our country. This blizzard made a statement, and the attitude firmly said that all items in the World of Warcraft are owned by Blizzard, and the real deals between players is prohibited. Although it is only announced in the country, China has not received a similar information, but according to the strong hardship The style is inferred, with the "World of Warcraft" officially landed in China, similar statement comes to the world is only late and later. In this way, Blizzard has adopted the opposite practice of most game manufacturers in China, highlighting the banner of virtual goods trading, and there is a meaningful meaning of "big". "Mountain rain is full of wind full house", not waiting for the nine city to speak, pay attention to the "World of Warcraft" has been self-defairing two camps, the tongue is endless. Blizzard believes that virtual goods trading, bring the rich and the poor in reality into the game, destroy the balance of the game, shorten the life of the game; the opponents insist on the freedom and rights of the players, how to deal with virtual goods It belongs to the scope of personal rights, and others have no right to interfere. From another perspective, it is necessary to make the blizzard of this ban. What kind of consideration is, be sure to list the real transaction of the virtual item as a restricted area? Is it really just to maintain game order and balance? Still, as some players speculate, there is also a shirk responsibility, the purpose of setting up the things? Different people have different ways of playing the same game, some people are more investment, some are relaxed. The people who are invested will naturally get more virtual currency and equipment than leisure people in the game, which is the inevitable result of "paying the final return". Offline transactions between the two types of people can see as the process of mutual exchange of labor and reality in the game world. I am willing to pay for the third party, and there is no significant or deterioration or deterioration of legitimate items in the game. It should be considered a reasonable player. Anyone is also difficult to find enough reason to stop or prohibit this communication, you can only ignore this communication, excavate the fun of your own game. The author believes that the game order and balance should be truly, which should be the fraudulent behavior of plug-in and operators, which have been stolen by our legal attitude. The law is silencing under the virtual item line, perhaps, perhaps, based on the above factors. In fact, Western economics have long told us that demand determines the market.
The appearance of the trading under the virtual item line reflects that some players require the need to enjoy the fun of the game in the absence of time and energy. Only when this requirement has been fundamentally improved with the increasingness of the game quality, the phenomenon of cash transactions can be improved. Everything has a "visible hand" silently manipulating, not a statement and ban on a single game company, and even the administrative regulations can decide. Players and service providers are "natural enemies" or "allies" since they have online games, manufacturers and consumers - players seem to have failed to stand on a front. For example, external problems, manufacturers believe that plug-in is illegal behavior, and the hangs should naturally kill; players feel that the game itself is a hundred holes, don't need to do how to play? The result of the dispute is often a defeated, and the manufacturer wins the player and withdraws the game and the new joy; the player wins the manufacturer and only the eyes are only able to have the eyes. In terms of value identification of virtual items, manufacturers and players are also destined to agree. Vendors know that if virtual goods become the property belonging to players, they will become home for homemates due to various subjective, objective reasons, manufacturers and players. Players become increasingly beaten under the hiking behavior of hacking, backup, fraud, cheating, and is eager to introduce more laws and regulations to maintain their legitimate rights as a vulnerable group. Is their contradiction really uncomfortable? Is there a moderate way to seek common? In fact, the fundamental interests of manufacturers and players are unified, that is, "Happy Game, Health Consumption". Vendors, certainly do not want their game vulnerabilities, scams are rampant, the basic social order in the virtual world cannot be maintained; the player is actually not born, it is not happy to use the hazardous dangers to use various plugs, or the day and practice robot, each A advanced equipment has to be purchased with RMB. The reason is a "natural enemy" because exploring the online game industry has no clear legal provisions to protect their common interests, and constrain individual violations. The manufacturers and players in the free state tend to maximize the interests, and the distance between the two sides is getting farther and farther ... As the game operator, the manufacturer should strengthen the technology investment, and better protect the player data security. Players provide a stable, balanced, clean game space. As a consumer, players should strengthen their self-discipline, do not make things that harm other players and game fairness. As the management department, the government-related leaders should strengthen the sense of responsibility, less improved industries, and see more practical difficulties, and solve the problem of conflicts of manufacturers and players from the system. Virtual property surname "play" is still surname "Shang", a deputy professor of Wang Zongyu, Renmin University of China, believes that there is a substitute, whether there is a substance, or a valuable, because people pay labor and wisdom during creation. Weapons and equipment in online games are players spend time, money, and energy, should be labor-age, belonging to the scope of private property. In terms of content, it is a kind of intellectual results close to intellectual property. my country's civil law has the provisions of intangible property, so "virtual property" is also a legal statement. This disconnector has received the first hospitality in the recent final judgment. The court believes that when players play games, get the game time and equipment game cards to purchase currency, so these virtual "weapon equipment" is valuable intangible property and should get legal appropriate evaluation and relief. Although my country did not implement the judgment system, as the first virtual property case in China, its judgment must have an impact on the processing of similar disputes later. This shows that virtual property belongs to the concept of private property in the player is gradually being accepted by mainstream thoughts in China. Even in the most developed Korea of the online game, it has clearly stated that the virtual roles and virtual items in online games have property value independently of service providers. The service provider only provides a place where the player's private property is stored, and there is no right to modify or delete it. This nature of this network is not essentially different from the money in bank accounts. The wind of Blizzard is completely "I am in my own" and is not affected by other companies in the industry.
This announcement "all content in the virtual world belongs to me", but it is a continuation of the hard style in the past. Most of the blizzard game fans are mostly in those years, the blizzards have fallen countless times in the "Diablo" series of works, and the Blizzard has fallen countlessly Ban to fall. The problem is that the BN is free, and all income of "World of Warcraft" comes from the player paying the point card or month card, spending money to buy a service, and the value created in the service is not myself, I am afraid it is not every player. Can be accepted calmly. It is certain that these agreements for Blizzard avoid a lot of unknown troubles, in the future, in the future, the players will suffer losses, and Blizzard will not bear any relevant responsibility. Once the World of Warcraft is started in China, can the above terms can be implemented? Maybe some players will say that "the user agreement is in the first, people who feel unfair can choose not to play", but if the players who prescribe "I agree" option, the players in the virtual property will dispute with the nine cities in the virtual property dispute, and must be definitely still I hope the court refers to the "Red Moon" case precedent for ruling. Blizzard has been pursuing a pure game world that is perfectly influenced. They don't want their perfect games in their minds to be tarnished, just like this world, is there really? The information conveyed by these two news is closely related to the player's interest. Naturally, the close attention and rational evaluation of a large number of players and industry people. Let us see what they say: The first "World of Warcraft" network transaction litigation strong supporters ★ The virtual world is a virtual world, should be completely separated from reality, and I strongly ask law to prohibit virtual property reality transactions. Including a game service provider, they can only provide players to enter the virtual world and maintain the virtual world service, and collect certain service charges, and cannot implement self-exhibiting for virtual property! ★ I think the wealth accumulated in the game does not have any economic significance, just a set of data in a form, only in a specific gaming program can play a role, and its intellectual value should certainly belong to the game crew. . Almost everyone in the competition will speculate in a variety of ways in competition, perhaps legal, perhaps illegal. Some people take the plug-in procedure, plug-in must be eliminated - it is not a game, directly undermined the original rules of the game; some people rely on the real capacity to speculate, more time, more money. If the ban, the cash transaction is to resist such speculative behavior, it is not realistic. In the game, the object transaction is allowed, and the resource redistribution in the reality team is allowed. The way in the team allocates resources is free, and the people who have more money can "invite" a team "to accompany" him to play, this is legal, and even officially welcomed. This money is easy to have the distribution of team resources - virtual coins, props, and even role accounts, which is reasonable for collation. So I think that the fair pursuit of untroven is childish, although there are many people working hard. Questioning against opponents ★ Blizzard This is for hypere, as the saying goes, "Qingguan is difficult to break the family," this private trading behavior is not checked. And we have no more than a hard-working game currency, sell itself to another player, and don't force other players to buy, is there anything wrong? ★ Blizzard is not so good. If a player is playing, I suddenly encountered any questions, I'm deleted by no reason, and the other party replied to the official claims. I said that this thing belongs to us. If I haven't, what should I do? ★ Players accumulated currency, equipment, I think it should belong to private property, because it is a lot of time, money, and energetic. To some extent, it should be a labor income. This property is both valuable, and has the value of use, which can be transferred. What is the right of the game company plundering the items of our labor?
