Legal battle over World of Warcraft 'bot'

[Jeeba Jabba]

The makers of World of Warcraft are locked in a legal battle with a firm that has produced a tool to automate many actions in the virtual world.

Blizzard is suing Michael Donnelly, the creator of the MMO Glider program, which performs key tasks in the game automatically, such as fighting.

Both sides have submitted legal summaries to a court in Arizona.

Blizzard says Glide is a software bot which infringes the company's copyright and potentially damages the game.

In its legal submission to the court last week, the firm said: "Blizzard's designs expectations are frustrated, and resources are allocated unevenly, when bots are introduced into the WoW universe, because bots spend far more time in-game than an ordinary player would and consume resources the entire time."

'Infringed agreement'

Blizzard argued that Michael Donnelly's tool also infringed the End User License Agreement that all parties have to adhere to when playing the game.

More than 100,000 copies of the tool have been sold, according to Mr Donnelly. More than 10 million people around the world play Warcraft.

Mr Donnelly said the first time had had been aware of potential legal action over his program was when a lawyer from Vivendi games, which publishes Warcraft, and an "unnamed private investigator" appeared at his home.

In his legal submission, he detailed: "When they arrived, they presented Donnelly with a copy of a complaint that they indicated would be filed the next day in the US District Court for the Central District of California if Donnelly did not immediately agree to stop selling Glider and return all profits that he made from Glider sales."

"Blizzard's audacious threats offended Donnelly," according to the legal papers.

Mr Donnelly says his tool does not infringe Blizzard's copyright because no "copy" of the Warcraft game client software is ever made.

Blizzard has said the tool infringes copyright because it copies the game into RAM in order to avoid detection by anti-cheat software.

The two parties are now awaiting a summary judgement in the case.

Link

[Covar]

seems cut and dry to me. the bot program clearly violates the EULA.

[Quzar]

seems cut and dry to me. the bot program clearly violates the EULA.

Which would bar users from using it, but I'm fairly sure that would have little recourse against a non end user entity. Also, havn't EULA's been for the most part deemed laughable legally, as many include things like assertion of opening the box of software as consenting to the EULA?

[showka]

I'm no bot fan, but I hope Blizzard loses this case. Companies shouldn't be able to write the law anyway they want to just because they slipped something into an EULA. Clicking a button, even if it's a radio button, isn't the same as putting your signature on a paper contract in ink.

The whole argument that copying the software into RAM is copyright infringement is a really dirty tactic legally although I remember reading about companies having success using it in the past.

Blizzard is really mis-using the law and I hope the guy counter-sues them. But what will probably happen is that they'll drain him financially by keeping him tied up in court until he's forced to give up, similar to what happened when Sony sued Bleem.

[az_bont]

seems cut and dry to me. the bot program clearly violates the EULA.

Which would bar users from using it, but I'm fairly sure that would have little recourse against a non end user entity.

What about inducement to breach of contract?

[Ex-Cyber]

Also, havn't EULA's been for the most part deemed laughable legally, as many include things like assertion of opening the box of software as consenting to the EULA?

The whole idea that an "EULA" is even necessary for ordinary retail software is legally questionable at best. U.S. courts have interpreted it differently in different cases, but the core argument against EULAs is that the regular rules applying to commerce say (quite reasonably) that a retail sale involves a transfer of ownership of property. In the case of buying software, the property is presumably the copy of the software. Software publishers have this weird idea that when you go to Best Buy, walk up to the register with a box of software, swipe your credit card, and then walk away with the software and a receipt of sale, you do not even own the physical contents of the box; you have merely purchased an opportunity to contract with the publisher to use the contents of the box, which are still the property of the publisher. I'm not talking about copyright; I'm saying that the legal argument for EULAs is that the software publisher still literally owns the physical disc that the software comes on, at least until you agree to the EULA (although I think some have claimed perpetual ownership).

In the case of WoW, however, the ability to run the software alone is somewhat useless, and Blizzard owns all of the legit servers (as far as I know). In a practical sense, users have to play by Blizzard's rules.

[Covar]

In the case of WoW, however, the ability to run the software alone is somewhat useless, and Blizzard owns all of the legit servers (as far as I know). In a practical sense, users have to play by Blizzard's rules.

and I believe that that is the main point of their EULA and the other agreement you have to agree to. its the biggest reason you have to agree to both each time they patch the game. you agree to their rules and they let you play on the server.

and i'm against bots for the same reason i'm against goldfarmers, they drag down the experience. people buying characters is also a gripe of mine. nothing worse than having to deal with a lvl70 decked out in epics, who doesn't even know how to play is class or worse: the game.

[lackofsense]

I'm no bot fan, but I hope Blizzard loses this case. Companies shouldn't be able to write the law anyway they want to just because they slipped something into an EULA. Clicking a button, even if it's a radio button, isn't the same as putting your signature on a paper contract in ink.

The whole argument that copying the software into RAM is copyright infringement is a really dirty tactic legally although I remember reading about companies having success using it in the past.

Blizzard is really mis-using the law and I hope the guy counter-sues them. But what will probably happen is that they'll drain him financially by keeping him tied up in court until he's forced to give up, similar to what happened when Sony sued Bleem.

or lik sang for that matter