The Blizzard Thread.

[Paradigm Shifter]

By following the angle they are, they are going the route where the next logical step is killing off modding of PC games.

Joy - they can screw us with DLC even more...

...

What happened to that ruling that EULAs were non-enforceable?

[DaFox]

What happened to that ruling that EULAs were non-enforceable?

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/sroosa/software-license-agreement-takes-it-chin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Galoob_Toys,_Inc._v._Nintendo_of_America,_Inc. This is VERY relative to the Blizzhackers case. (though nothing to do with EULAs specifically.)

Blizzard has actually won on these grounds before against MDY Industries, LLC. whom was creating and selling World of Warcraft automation tools (basically doing the boring parts of the game like slowly gaining levels while you're sleeping etc.)
http://www.mmoglider.com/legal/Complaint1.pdf

Here's the full Document for the recent filing from Blizzard.
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/california/cacdce/8:2010cv01495/483953/1/

Another funny (read: sickening) note is that one of the guys they are targeting, "linuxisawesome" his hack does not even touch SC2's memory (unlike all of the other hacks which only do that.) His hack is simply a packet sniffer (ala something like WinPCap or Etheral) which then can be used to recreate the playing field to see the enemies units and position (This stuff is sent across the wire at all times for in game replay recording.)

Oh and blizzard was sending out C&D and [badly written] DMCA notices some months ago.
http://i56.tinypic.com/30vzukg.jpg

The site that I moderate at filed a counter-notification and hasn't heard anything back from them... Aside from the sueing of some of our members of course.

[The_cranky_hermit]

I'm not really sure what you're getting at here

I'm not "getting at" anything. I'm flat-out saying it. You seemed to think there was something amusingly ironic about two unrelated and non-contradictory facts. I said:
There's no irony here.
And then explained why it was actually not ironic.

Also, I don't see what any of those links have to with EULA enforcement. DMCA violation, Terms of Service violation, and EULA enforcement are all different things.

Another funny (read: sickening) note is that one of the guys they are targeting, "linuxisawesome" his hack does not even touch SC2's memory (unlike all of the other hacks which only do that.) His hack is simply a packet sniffer (ala something like WinPCap or Etheral) which then can be used to recreate the playing field to see the enemies units and position (This stuff is sent across the wire at all times for in game replay recording.)

Does it really matter how the hack actually works? It's still cheating, and still harms Battle.net, so I don't see how Blizzard has less of a right to complain.

[GeneralAdmission]

By following the angle they are, they are going the route where the next logical step is killing off modding of PC games.

No surprise that Activision is already doing the full-court press on mod killing with the CoD series. Others will follow suit.

What happened to that ruling that EULAs were non-enforceable?

Well, here in the US the crazy 9th Circuit just ruled that EULAs are pretty much binding on whatever they say:
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/09/first-sale-doctrine/

I really hope the Supreme Court injects some counterweight into that case...

[DaFox]

Does it really matter how the hack actually works? It's still cheating, and still harms Battle.net, so I don't see how Blizzard has less of a right to complain.

Of course, this is all about HOW they are complaining though. I have nothing against them wanting to protect their game, I do dislike how they are calling this copywrite infringement though.

[StingingVelvet]

I don't really care what happens to multiplayer cheaters, but as said calling it copyright infringement sets a terrible precedent on top of one they already set with those WoW hacks they sued over. That sucker is still in appeal waiting for a common sense judge.

And as much as it seems related to the singleplayer banning issue it's not really. I don't care about banning people from battlenet or suing hackers, I only care about the fact that a ban from battlenet includes a ban from the singleplayer game, which is disgusting to me and I can't believe people defend it.

[The_cranky_hermit]

Is someone defending that? I seem to be the only one in this topic defending Blizzard for doing anything at all, and I definitely do not approve of banning people from singleplayer mode. Permanently disabling achievements and other meta-rewards seems like a pretty good idea, though.

[StingingVelvet]

Is someone defending that? I seem to be the only one in this topic defending Blizzard for doing anything at all, and I definitely do not approve of banning people from singleplayer mode. Permanently disabling achievements and other meta-rewards seems like a pretty good idea, though.

Not here, but many people are. Same with people who defend Valve for everything they could ever possibly do, some people are fanboys. It's one of the reasons Valve and Blizzard go to such lengths to do "good guy things" from time to time, to cultivate that sort of auto-defense.

[DaFox]

Is someone defending that? I seem to be the only one in this topic defending Blizzard for doing anything at all, and I definitely do not approve of banning people from singleplayer mode. Permanently disabling achievements and other meta-rewards seems like a pretty good idea, though.

I think we're more or less all on the same page. Correct me if I'm wrong on any of these points please.

We are all against getting a singleplayer ban what so ever.
We are all against getting a multiplayer ban for cheating in singleplayer.
We are all for Blizzard stopping multiplayer cheating.
We are all against HOW Blizzard is stopping multiplayer cheating (Saying that these applications somehow infringe on their copyright.)

[StingingVelvet]

We are all against getting a multiplayer ban for cheating in singleplayer.

Well, if Blizzard say they can't tell whether your hack was used only for singleplayer or not I can't really scream at them for disabling multiplayer with any kind of cheat program detected while you're signed-in to battle.net. I mean, there is probably a better way but I can't flip out about it. My sole problem really is a battle.net ban meaning you can't activate the game, it should be seperate like Steam and VAC.

[The_cranky_hermit]

How hard could it possibly be to tell the difference? If they can have achievements that are specific to singleplayer or multiplayer, surely they have the means to implement cheat detection that is specific to multiplayer.

[Paradigm Shifter]

Agreed, also... surely multiplayer involves significantly more Battle.net traffic, and of a completely different nature to single player, too?

[DaFox]

Agreed, also... surely multiplayer involves significantly more Battle.net traffic, and of a completely different nature to single player, too?

I'm sure they could have made them identical (just creating a multiplayer game with a player limit of 1 etc) But that is not the case. They are different enough that it would be TRIVIAL to tell Warden (their Anti-Cheat) to at the very least ignore singleplayer games. The games state is different.

[DaFox]

http://www.shacknews.com/laryn.x?story=66277

Who isn't Blizzard sueing?

What are your thoughts on this?

Personally, I mean TV broadcasting is slightly different but what the fuck... What's next? Exclusive rights to SC2 Videos on youtube? That's a scary thought.

[Tanuki]

It is like a Harry Potter video game franchise.

If we didn't have a Harry Potter video game franchise.

What's next? Exclusive rights to SC2 Videos on youtube? That's a scary thought.

Their are some issues with screenshots so vids wouldn't be exempt.

[DaFox]

It is like a Harry Potter video game franchise.

If we didn't have a Harry Potter video game franchise.

This comment on Shack News was great.

All this litigation by Blizzard popping up lately. There has to be a Starcraft gameplay strategy analogy for this.

Lawyer rush. kekekekekeke

[GeneralAdmission]

In the previous millennium, when I acquired my first decent gaming computer, the first games I purchased were Half Life and the Blizzard battle-chest (Diablo, Warcraft II, Starcraft). I think I can safely say I was a Blizzard fanboy back then. Chapter jump forward to now and it appears Blizzard's strongest skill is finding new ways to cure me of my previous affection. What a difference a decade makes...

All this litigation by Blizzard popping up lately. There has to be a Starcraft gameplay strategy analogy for this.

Lawyer rush. kekekekekeke

That is the rich frosting of internet parlance right there. Beautiful.

[Silastar]

I do not know where to stand with this.... The issue is that if I get caught cheating on SCII, and get ban, this will also impact my WoW subscription, being linked to my Battle.net and all...
But imho, I do not see issues with people "cheating" in single players... If by cheating we mean using the codes that Blizzard implemented in the games in the first place (remember the "All your bases belong to us"?)

[Paradigm Shifter]

(remember the "All your bases belong to us"?)

All Your Base Are Belong To Us :mrgreen:

[DaFox]

I do not know where to stand with this.... The issue is that if I get caught cheating on SCII, and get ban, this will also impact my WoW subscription, being linked to my Battle.net and all...
But imho, I do not see issues with people "cheating" in single players... If by cheating we mean using the codes that Blizzard implemented in the games in the first place (remember the "All your bases belong to us"?)

It doesn't effect your battle.net account, just SC2. And the cheats are third party trainers.