Manned Bot Usage

[Necropolis]

Re: Manned Bot Usage

Even if that law were to be applied here it doesn't matter. You don't OWN your character, you simply pay SE for the right to have access to it every month. They can do whatever they wisih if they feel it violates their TOS. If you wish to void your contract, SE can wish to void your character because its store on THEIR servers that THEY pay the bandwidth and maintenance for.

That what what I was more or less trying to say in previous post, was that even though I pay for something, it is not mine. I'm paying to access it, which I feel is not entirely fair. I feel as though if I pay for something it should me mine, and thus become part of my property.

It is stored on thier servers, and they do technically pay for the bandwidth, but they do so with my money and all the other paying customers. I'm sure that SE is still making a profit from the game, why else would they continue to support it?

I'm all for banning those that bot and violate other aspects of the ToS, but I'm also strongly for a better way to define ownership of electronic data. I do not like that the things I spend the most money on, are not even truely my property. This of course is off topic, and a post here I'm sure will change nothing about how companies, SE included, define such things.

I think we would get more response if more people actually broke thier agreements with companies that just reject users for violating a ToS. Businesses do this because they know that people will sit there and take it. But a business is not a business if they arn't making a profit, or at least not in business very long. If SE's choice was to be stubburn and ban everyone for any infringment on the ToS, no matter how small, they would lose a lot of support. Which is thier dilema with banning users of a Windower. If SE banned all windower users they could not stay in the black. If a crafting bot was a widely used as a Windower, then I expect we would see the same reaction from SE.

But that being said, I wouldn't and don't intend on using a bot or windower for that matter. Just fed up with companies that feel like they own something that I put my time and effort into. I bought the software, I pay the subscription, so to me it is mine and mine alone. I pay them to store my digital data and access it when I please. I just think there is a clearer and more efficient way of conducting digital business.

[Murphie]

Re: Manned Bot Usage

You're paying for a service, not for a physical object. You pay for services all the time without looking for something that you "own", so why now?

You didn't buy the software. You bought the rights to use a copy of the software. There is a difference. You don't own FFXI. You (at best) own a few CDs or DVDs with data on it that will allow you to access a service provided by SE. You have no rights beyond that.

[Taskmage]

Re: Manned Bot Usage

If paying = ownership I have a few apartments, some parking spaces, and a whole ton of movies and video games I need to take back, not to mention a bunch of women who I guess are now my indentured servants. ... No wait, forget that last part.

[Necropolis]

Re: Manned Bot Usage

You're paying for a service, not for a physical object. You pay for services all the time without looking for something that you "own", so why now?

You didn't buy the software. You bought the rights to use a copy of the software. There is a difference. You don't own FFXI. You (at best) own a few CDs or DVDs with data on it that will allow you to access a service provided by SE. You have no rights beyond that.

That is what I'm argueing. That I think that services and ownership of digital property need to be revamped. Wont happen here or else where, but doesn't make it any more less valid.

I seldom pay for services. I like owning tangiable things. I own, not rent. I buy, not lease. I just feel that paying for a digital item should be the same. I should own said digital item, not rent or lease it. SE can say what they like, but I own my character and will do with it as I please. Tell me I'm wrong I don't care. It is mine, I control it. And I will be the one to one day delete it.

But this is off-topic at best. Botting is against ToS, but so is windower, so if we are argueing that any "immoral" act against SE's sacred ToS should be banned, why don't they ban Windower users. Simply they could not survive the results of it. If thier were more botters, then SE would react the same way. People control businesses weather they know it or not. Business just know how to market things to make it seem like people are nothing more but mindless sheep that must do what a company says. I disagree, and I digress. I won't agrue what I think the corprate world should be anymore, and let the mindless sheep think that they are slaves to a ToS.

[Theyaden]

Re: Manned Bot Usage

In answer to questions regarding SE allowing manned botting lets examine some of the possible consequenses. I'll asume for the sake of arguement the bot adds nothing beyond perfect timing and that you remain in sight of the computer at all times.

Invite bot: Send an invite to anyone who shouts [Teleport Altep] exc while your sitting at the keyboard.
Result: The manned botter will get more fares because his invites will be quicker.
Unfair advantage to the 3rd party tool user deserving of a ban

Craftbot: once the synth delay is completed automatically loads another crystal and materials and starts new synth.
Result: Will be able to run through a skillup a little faster than a non botted player due to getting the timming right each time for starting the next synth
Unfair advantage making botted skillup easier for the manned botter. May these all rot in Mordin Gual without their synthing materials.

Fishbot: Perfect timing of the next cast automated real in at the best possible time
Result fewer broken lines and fish getting away. Slightly faster fish rate due to not accidently delaying longer than neccisary.
Feed to nearest Banshee

Voke/claim bot: Auto attacks, vokes exc preprogramed to claim a certain mob or nm as soon as it appears.
Result: your character attacks before you notice your prey has poped increasing your responce time. The ammount this helps depends on your normal situational awareness. (May said character be set on fire by the nearest GM)

[Kirsteena]

Re: Manned Bot Usage

Sorry for the second part of my entry earlier, I know it was hypothetical, but I do get annoyed by fishbots, so tend to go off on one!

[Liquidedust]

Re: Manned Bot Usage

Yes, again because when you click on the Accept button you're affirming a pledge to abide by the rules that SE set forth, regardless of how silly or poorly written those rules may be. The wrongness has nothing to do with breaking the rule that SE made, it's in breaking your own promise to abide by the silly rule.

Well technically the ToS isn't even binding in Sweden, since by swedish law an agreement or contract has to be physically or digitially signed with a by the swedish state approved signature in order to be binding in Sweden.

Reason this paragraph were introduced into contract law were due to people scamming other over telephone, regular mail as well as e-mail.

And contracts and agreement are by de facto law signed in Sweden if it is done on your computer physically present in Sweden, so the agreement ofthe ToS is actually automatically void the way it is presented in Sweden.

Also Swedish law finds agreements and contracts signed in Sweden without abiding to the above to automatically become void.

Also by swedish law even if I play on a server in Japan or in US, anything I do in-game as long as I physically sit in front of my computer in Sweden the actions I preform, illegal or legal, are to be governed by Swedish law even if an agreement says otherwise since the action were performed in Sweden.

And on a similar topic this has also created a lot of headaches for the IFPI and MPAA in US. Due to Swedish laws on personal integrety as well as agreement and contract law these two organizations are not allowed work against pirating software as well as copyright infringement in Sweden.

The equalent to these organizations in Sweden due to using the same methods as they use in US to find and locate "pirates" actually leads to them being sued and convicted in court here in Sweden since they try to apply US copyright and agreement law in Sweden which is illegal by itself.

This has also lead to the above organizations listing Sweden on their pirate watch list of countries that doesn't follow their ruleset. Sweden just happens to be a country where we value our own laws and ruleset higher then foreign countries organizations.

They did try about a year ago to shut down a big torrent tracker which were physically in Sweden. This actually lead to the state being sued by the swedish people since it infringed on people's personal integrity (actually over 1000 summons were sent in to the bereau that handles cases against the state here).

Either way if a rule has to be broken in order for me to log in to the game when I am actually no doing anything de facto wrong I don't see me as wrong I see the rule as wrong and in need of replacing.

And there is no way to get the rule to change unless it is worked against and broken so the people who wrote the rule becomes aware of the absurdity and wrongfulness of the rule.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Manned Bot Usage

I'm all for banning those that bot and violate other aspects of the ToS, but I'm also strongly for a better way to define ownership of electronic data. I do not like that the things I spend the most money on, are not even truely my property. This of course is off topic, and a post here I'm sure will change nothing about how companies, SE included, define such things

(etc.)

In 1988, Batman fans were allowed to decide the fate of Jason Todd, the second Robin. The the character had always had mixed reactions amoung fans and the writers of the comic were interested in finding out whether the readers cared if character lived or died.

And so a storyline began, having Batman and Robin trotting to globe in search of Jason Todd's mother. He had been thought to be orphaned, but some things came up leading them to think otherwise. This search led them to find a woman in the Middle East and ultimately as a confrontation with The Joker.

In issue #427 Robin was lured into a trap intended for Batman and beaten savagely by the Joker with a crowbar. He was tied up in a warehouse with his supposed mother and the Joker had left a timebomb with them. Robin and the woman manage to free themselves, but when they reached the door, it was too late and the door was locked. They were caught in the explosion.

At the end of issue #427, readers were asked to do a call-in vote on September 18th, 1987 between 8am to 8pm EST. This way before the internet and an unprecedented moment in comic book history. Never before had readers been allowed to have such a direct influence on the outcome of a story. It was common for talent shows to have call-in votes, but not comic books.

It was actually a close vote, 5,271 said he should live and 5,343 voted Todd should die

So Jason Todd was killed.

The vote created a small controversy in the media, the readers themselves had killed an a fictional icon and a beloved one at that. Newsweek even said "The real murderers are the Batman readers."

The choice of those readers has affected how Batman's character was written for the last 19 years, Batman returned to his original role as a loner for quite some time, darker and haunted by the events of this storyline. Lots of stuff has happened since 1988 in Batman's world, but the result of that vote still influences how the stories are written today and the character of Batman himself.

So, do the readers own Batman or does DC comics own Batman? Truth is, regardless of the choice made by the readers, the resulting stories are that of the writers and artists of Batman. When the readers buy the comic book, they only pay for a copy of the experience. They do not own Batman, they were just given a chance to influence his world.

Your subscription to FFXI is not ownership, either. Think of your subscription as a ticket into an amusement part. When you pay to enter, you consent to the conduct they expect on their private property or in this case, their servers. You pay to partake in the experience, to roleplay as the jobs of Final Fantasy and be a part of that world and its story.

But that world belongs to SE, its story belongs to them. And when you log in, you consent to their rules. Your character is SE's property. The concept art for the characters was done by Tetsuya Nomura, the designs of monsters, armor and lots of things were handled by other artists. The story was written by others, the music, the gameplay. Everything.

You're just paying to experience it. The only thing you really take away from this experience is the memory of the story and the friendships you make, those are yours and yours alone.

You may feel you own your characters because you have paid to play the game, but when my subscription for Batman runs out, I no longer have the privilege to recieve the continuation of his adventures. Just the way it is. You don't own your character and I don't own Batman.

[Taskmage]

Re: Manned Bot Usage

Liquidedust, laws have no bearing on determining what is moral or not, as you alluded to in your first post in this thread. Regardless whether you feel the basis of the agreement is invalid or whether your local government will hold you to it, you entered into it on your word and honor, and it is breaking your word that is wrong. Unless you are going to tell me that it is morally correct to break promises or that personal gratification justifies wrongdoing then anything else you say is moot.

Furthermore, just because nobody gives a damn that it's wrong (including me!) doesn't change the fact that it's wrong.

As for this whole reenacting the civil rights movement scenario, that's the most absurd thing I've ever heard. First of all, who's rights are we fighting for anyway? Botters? This thread started with an outpouring of negative sentiment towards botters, but now someone's put it in the light of contesting an unjust law and we're all rallying against the ToS? What sheep! Do you really think that by continuing to play FFXI on your Vista machine or by using a bot to cheat honest fishermen out of a living that you're sticking it to the "man" somehow? SE isn't even going to notice you unless you do something they percieve as destructive to their game, and if they do they are going to ban or suspend you without a second thought. All that happens is they lose any subscription fees you might have paid in the future, which incidentally is what would've happened anyway if you hadn't made the false promise that you were going to abide by the rules and kept playing. If they lose so many subscribers that way that the game becomes unprofitable, they're not going to apologize and give your account back and say, "Sorry I guess you can cheat now as long as you keep giving me money," they're going to shut down the servers and move on to another game. They make those. A lot of them.

I've clearly become too frustrated with this conversation to continue civilly. I'm bowing out.

[Omniblast]

Re: Manned Bot Usage

Well technically the ToS isn't even binding in Sweden, since by swedish law an agreement or contract has to be physically or digitially signed with a by the swedish state approved signature in order to be binding in Sweden.

Um... SE doesn't give a shit what country your in, if you do anything they don't like they can ban you and not give a rat's ass who you are. It's their game, they can do whatever they want with it. Including not letting you play.

Sorry it's just a fact.

[Liquidedust]

Re: Manned Bot Usage

Liquidedust, laws have no bearing on determining what is moral or not, as you alluded to in your first post in this thread. Regardless whether you feel the basis of the agreement is invalid or whether your local government will hold you to it, you entered into it on your word and honor, and it is breaking your word that is wrong. Unless you are going to tell me that it is morally correct to break promises or that personal gratification justifies wrongdoing then anything else you say is moot.

Furthermore, just because nobody gives a damn that it's wrong (including me!) doesn't change the fact that it's wrong.

As for this whole reenacting the civil rights movement scenario, that's the most absurd thing I've ever heard. First of all, who's rights are we fighting for anyway? Botters? This thread started with an outpouring of negative sentiment towards botters, but now someone's put it in the light of contesting an unjust law and we're all rallying against the ToS? What sheep! Do you really think that by continuing to play FFXI on your Vista machine or by using a bot to cheat honest fishermen out of a living that you're sticking it to the "man" somehow? SE isn't even going to notice you unless you do something they percieve as destructive to their game, and if they do they are going to ban or suspend you without a second thought. All that happens is they lose any subscription fees you might have paid in the future, which incidentally is what would've happened anyway if you hadn't made the false promise that you were going to abide by the rules and kept playing. If they lose so many subscribers that way that the game becomes unprofitable, they're not going to apologize and give your account back and say, "Sorry I guess you can cheat now as long as you keep giving me money," they're going to shut down the servers and move on to another game. They make those. A lot of them.

I've clearly become too frustrated with this conversation to continue civilly. I'm bowing out.

---- subtopic ----

Actually depending on how laws function and govern your behaviour it has everything to do with morals to be honest. Since the fundementals of law govern if something is correct or incorrect for a particular individual, and in extension morals. (Now I also argue against laws which I find morally wrong but bare with me).

So we have a ruleset that I have to abide to when logging in to the game, but this ruleset is de facto not legal in Sweden (the way it is presented).

So by default the agreement doesn't exist to start with in Sweden due to how it is presented. So I never break the argeement to start with, since it doesn't exist when I play the game (e.g. swedish laws tells me when I am in Sweden this agreement is voided by default).

But this is by going by the letter of the law, which kinda is against the point (or is it, since people advocate by the letter of the ToS )

---- end subtopic ----

And no I don't see me using FFXI on Vista morally wrong even though it is against the rules set by S-E, since I find the rulesset in this scenario to be unlawful since I pay for the service to use FFXI but the rules tell me I am not allowed to use it due to how my OS functions (this because of the syntax in their Terms of Service).

And really this is just a game, while I in no way support cheating, hacking or botting since I believe it destroys the enjoyment for all that play the game, I however don't find it morally wrong in any way to actually access a service I pay for, even though it in this case is by technicality is wrong.

The issue at hand is not right or wrong, since breaking a rule is wrong. The issue is if it is morally wrong to break a rule which I in this case find it isn't (playing FFXI on Vista).

[Liquidedust]

Re: Manned Bot Usage

Um... SE doesn't give a shit what country your in, if you do anything they don't like they can ban you and not give a rat's ass who you are. It's their game, they can do whatever they want with it. Including not letting you play.

Sorry it's just a fact.

Of course this I do not oppose in any form or way.

But I were discussing the morals of breaking a rule and how people's as well as countries view on an agreement will govern if it morally defensable to break a rule. (And in some cases even if the stated rules to begin are considered immoral by a specific individual and/or state).

And I thought we were debating not just stating black & white

[Manatra]

Re: Manned Bot Usage

The ToS isn't legally binding in any way shape or form and probably wouldn't be held up in a court if it were actually tested (note, IANAL).

Whether it is legally binding or not doesn't matter anyway. It gives SE the grounds and excuse they need to ban people as they deem fit. That's basically all its there for.

Anyway, for all of you people talking about morals, ethics, and laws, might I suggest you go read up on some Plato, Artistotle, etc.? http://people.brandeis.edu/~teuber/philclassics.html

[Clever Ninja]

Re: Manned Bot Usage

The ToS isn't legally binding in any way shape or form and probably wouldn't be held up in a court if it were actually tested (note, IANAL).

Whether it is legally binding or not doesn't matter anyway. It gives SE the grounds and excuse they need to ban people as they deem fit. That's basically all its there for.

It doesn't need to be legally binding since they are the true owners of the character. ToS is more of a 'this is what we're letting you know what we don't want you doing with our stuff' guidelines for players.

[Omni]

Re: Manned Bot Usage

I think when this thread began turning to more real life situations it wasnt to give sympathy to botters. i think the notion of botting was already established before this thread that it is wrong. The civil rights thing was more regarding the ToS and Windows Vista topic that was brought up.

Am I wrong for using vista and playing ffxi on it? Should I or could I be banned for it? Is it poor foresight on the writers of the ToS to say that no other OS is allowed? I think the intentions of some ideas were mixed up. I was in no way trying to justify botting as OK by drawing parallels to civil rights.

As far as ownership goes, it's a very sticky situation. I work for a web hosting company. We own all the hardware, network infrastructure, co-location space etc etc. If a client develops their website or web application on our equipment, who does it belong to? It's their creative property right? but it's our hardware. If they dont pay, we cut off access to their db, web root, etc but that does not mean we own their website. they pay us to use our hardware and bandwidth and switches and firewalls. not paying means we cut those services off but does not mean we own what they have created.

ok i lost my train of thought, i dont know where i was running with this.