The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.

NINJA! In Game Theft Provokes Vic to Report to Police...

ZahaladeenZahaladeen Registered User regular
edited February 2008 in Debate and/or Discourse
...and they told him to bugger off.

LINK: http://www.twincities.com/ci_8134692...nclick_check=1

According to the police dept., in-game or "virtual" items have no monetary value, hence there was no crime involved. According to the article, over $2 billion is spent on virtual goods a year, ie: gold, plat, etc...

Perhaps I'm missing a step, but how is this not theft if it does represent a specific monetary value? If I stole a $40 bread maker from Wal Mart, I'd get knicked. But if I stole a $400 toon from a flatmate, it wouldn't be a big deal.

An investment of time, energy, and wealth into a game should constitute an item of real worth - but it doesn't.

Zahaladeen on

Posts

  • SerpentSerpent Sometimes Vancouver, BC, sometimes Brisbane, QLDRegistered User regular
    edited February 2008
    do you want to be taxed on your in game goods?

    Serpent on
  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Serpent wrote: »
    do you want to be taxed on your in game goods?

    Fuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud on
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2008
    What's the exact mechanism by which this guy "stole" the goods?

    ElJeffe on
    I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    EULA says it's not worth money (can't sell it without risking account action)

    We want that to mean it's worthless. Otherwise my taxes will Suuuuuck on things I never intended to turn into cash.

    It's entertainment. That's it. My soccer trophy? Not income.

    kildy on
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited February 2008
    A quick Googlenewsing says that the dumbass might have gave his account details to the friend, who he suspects of stealing his goooollld.

    Elki on
    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • ZahaladeenZahaladeen Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Serpent wrote: »
    do you want to be taxed on your in game goods?

    Wouldnt you like to keep your in game goods?

    Zahaladeen on
  • DracomicronDracomicron Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    That guy? He's an idiot.

    It's pretty obvious that he shared his login information with someone. I don't know about FFXI, but on WoW, you have utterly no official recourse if you're stupid enough to trust someone who is untrustworthy, and the contract you sign to play says that everything your character "owns" is actually owned by Blizzard and has no dollar value.

    I see Blizzard's model will probably set the standard, if it hasn't already, because it insulates them from corporate liability and puts the responsability on the individual player. Think of it like this: You pay to rent the court and the equipment: you spent the money so you can have fun, not so that you can invest in items. You don't suddenly own the court (though you might "pwn" the court if you get my drift... okay I'll shut up).

    Keyloggers and hackers are another story entirely, but since this was supposedly perpetrated by someone the player knew, I'm guessing that he's just a moron.

    Dracomicron on
  • FunkyWaltDoggFunkyWaltDogg Columbia, SCRegistered User regular
    edited February 2008
    If people who give their account information out and deserve to lose their shit anyway have to be screwed so that the rest of us aren't taxed on our glorified Monopoly money, I consider it a small price to pay.

    FunkyWaltDogg on
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Zahaladeen wrote: »
    Serpent wrote: »
    do you want to be taxed on your in game goods?

    Wouldnt you like to keep your in game goods?

    No. Paying taxes on them versus losing them when I switch games...

    I come out economically better to consider them entertainment that has no actual value.

    Presume for a second that you play a game for years because you enjoy it. Games decline in net RMT value. An older game with tons of things in the economy? Your nest egg is worth quite a bit less. It's like asking if people would be willing to give up taxes on their car in order to get no resale value out of it. If you plan on owning that car for a very long time, you'd wind up better if you could opt out of taxes, because it's not worth Dick when you hold on to it.

    As it is currently, sure you have no legal recourse. But on the other hand, it means your in hand RMT stock is untaxed until you actually sell it (at which point you Should file it as income). That's the best of both worlds.

    kildy on
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2008
    That guy? He's an idiot.

    It's pretty obvious that he shared his login information with someone. I don't know about FFXI, but on WoW, you have utterly no official recourse if you're stupid enough to trust someone who is untrustworthy, and the contract you sign to play says that everything your character "owns" is actually owned by Blizzard and has no dollar value.

    I see Blizzard's model will probably set the standard, if it hasn't already, because it insulates them from corporate liability and puts the responsability on the individual player. Think of it like this: You pay to rent the court and the equipment: you spent the money so you can have fun, not so that you can invest in items. You don't suddenly own the court (though you might "pwn" the court if you get my drift... okay I'll shut up).

    Keyloggers and hackers are another story entirely, but since this was supposedly perpetrated by someone the player knew, I'm guessing that he's just a moron.

    That's sort of where I was going with my question. If the guy who stole his l33t sword of pwnage actually did something illegal in the process, charge him on that. If the thief just used in-game or otherwise non-illegal mechanisms to access the stuff, then boo-fucking-hoo, next time be more careful.

    Though it would be helpful for this sort of thing if companies like Blizzard cracked down more effectively on the sales of in-game assets, and it would also benefit the gaming community.

    ElJeffe on
    I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
  • Satan.Satan. __BANNED USERS regular
    edited February 2008
    I'll admit it. When I was a kid, I played UO a lot. I was a dick (I can hear you gasping in shock). I was part of a roleplaying town (don't remember the name or even the shard) and had gained the trust of a very (in-game) wealthy man. After a while, I began to think of how I could get some of this guy's riches. He barely played anymore (save for roleplaying) and had a few accounts worth of alts to hold all his wealth (couple of castles and a tower). I faked a real life tragedy of some sort (don't remember, nothing too brutal) that 'forced me to cancel my account'. He (generously) offered me one of his alt accounts to get back going in the game, doing some mining and what have you.

    I fleeced him. With a couple of friends, we cleaned him out completely. I severed my contact with him outside the game, of course, and had to create new characters.

    To this day, I still feel like a complete and utter cock for doing that. I made an alt and went to the town some months later and he seemed to be just fine, but I'm sure I hurt him by violating his trust. Items for sale on eBay was a pretty new concept, but I'm pretty sure I snagged about $200 real world value (well, eBay value) of in-game goods from him. I never sold my account or goods and just let it lapse so I never saw that money. Is that actually theft?

    Satan. on
  • Raiden333Raiden333 Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    20040625h.jpg

    Raiden333 on
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2008
    Satan. wrote: »
    I'll admit it. When I was a kid, I played UO a lot. I was a dick (I can hear you gasping in shock). I was part of a roleplaying town (don't remember the name or even the shard) and had gained the trust of a very (in-game) wealthy man. After a while, I began to think of how I could get some of this guy's riches. He barely played anymore (save for roleplaying) and had a few accounts worth of alts to hold all his wealth (couple of castles and a tower). I faked a real life tragedy of some sort (don't remember, nothing too brutal) that 'forced me to cancel my account'. He (generously) offered me one of his alt accounts to get back going in the game, doing some mining and what have you.

    I fleeced him. With a couple of friends, we cleaned him out completely. I severed my contact with him outside the game, of course, and had to create new characters.

    To this day, I still feel like a complete and utter cock for doing that. I made an alt and went to the town some months later and he seemed to be just fine, but I'm sure I hurt him by violating his trust. Items for sale on eBay was a pretty new concept, but I'm pretty sure I snagged about $200 real world value (well, eBay value) of in-game goods from him. I never sold my account or goods and just let it lapse so I never saw that money. Is that actually theft?

    No, just a total dick move. Things can be total dick moves and still be legal.

    Anyway, if I was going to create a real-world analogue, it'd probably be a con and not theft.

    ElJeffe on
    I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    No, just a total dick move. Things can be total dick moves and still be legal.

    Anyway, if I was going to create a real-world analogue, it'd probably be a con and not theft.
    I don't think there is much difference from a legal standpoint. Don't most cons fall under "Larceny by False Promise" or some such?

    DevoutlyApathetic on
    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • DracomicronDracomicron Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Keyloggers and hackers are another story entirely, but since this was supposedly perpetrated by someone the player knew, I'm guessing that he's just a moron.

    That's sort of where I was going with my question. If the guy who stole his l33t sword of pwnage actually did something illegal in the process, charge him on that. If the thief just used in-game or otherwise non-illegal mechanisms to access the stuff, then boo-fucking-hoo, next time be more careful.

    Though it would be helpful for this sort of thing if companies like Blizzard cracked down more effectively on the sales of in-game assets, and it would also benefit the gaming community.

    If someone did something illegal to steal the guy's jive, through no fault of the victim, Blizzard would reset his stuff and ban the perpetrator, if it were known. At least that's what's been known to happen.

    Blizzard has understandably determined that it is nigh impossible (from a financial and strategic standpoint) to easily prosecute individuals or small sites who engage in gold selling or account stealing, so what they do is they gather information for a quarter or so and then reveal everything at once and shut down a few sites at once and ban a fuckload of accounts. Inevitably, new sites and fraudulent accounts pop up, but at least they've hit as many as possible with one swing of the [Corrupted Ashbringer] or whatnot.

    Dracomicron on
  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited February 2008
    The value of an item is determined by what people pay for it, i.e, its market value. As such, the electronic items have value.
    Electronic items have been legally upheld in two major areas of law: electronic accounts of money, and music. If you get someone else's debit card number, it is still illegal to transfer the "money" in his account to yourself. People have been charged for the production and distribution of electronic media not belonging to them. In both these cases, things with no mass have been held to be stolen.

    You would not be taxed for these items because, while they still have value, they are at most M2 in liquidity, and so are not classifiable as income. They would probably be closest in classification to mushrooms, which are often undomesticated but professionally gathered. In such a case, the tax would most likely be applied when items are sold.

    Scalfin on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Scalfin wrote: »
    The value of an item is determined by what people pay for it, i.e, its market value. As such, the electronic items have value.
    Electronic items have been legally upheld in two major areas of law: electronic accounts of money, and music. If you get someone else's debit card number, it is still illegal to transfer the "money" in his account to yourself. People have been charged for the production and distribution of electronic media not belonging to them. In both these cases, things with no mass have been held to be stolen.

    You would not be taxed for these items because, while they still have value, they are at most M2 in liquidity, and so are not classifiable as income. They would probably be closest in classification to mushrooms, which are often undomesticated but professionally gathered. In such a case, the tax would most likely be applied when items are sold.

    In both cases (electronic funds and music) they have actual physical representations, and the transaction is simply digital.

    The value of an item IS determined by what people pay for it, though what is considered value to The Government is different. The value of my infant son? Well, I'm sure I could find a buyer and put out some feels for bids. However, that does not give it a monetary value as far as The Government is concerned.

    Heck, in this case, it's closer to me selling cans of soda from a box I bought. Sure, they have value in that people will pay for them. However, they're all labeled Not For Resale. Now it gets legally murky as to who can actually sell them.

    In this case, people WILL pay money for in game items. However, the EULA specifically forbids said sales. So their value is up for legal debate. Then you get into ownership. The rules state you don't actually own any of the items. Only the owner can sue for theft.

    kildy on
  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited February 2008
    kildy wrote: »
    Scalfin wrote: »
    The value of an item is determined by what people pay for it, i.e, its market value. As such, the electronic items have value.
    Electronic items have been legally upheld in two major areas of law: electronic accounts of money, and music. If you get someone else's debit card number, it is still illegal to transfer the "money" in his account to yourself. People have been charged for the production and distribution of electronic media not belonging to them. In both these cases, things with no mass have been held to be stolen.

    You would not be taxed for these items because, while they still have value, they are at most M2 in liquidity, and so are not classifiable as income. They would probably be closest in classification to mushrooms, which are often undomesticated but professionally gathered. In such a case, the tax would most likely be applied when items are sold.

    In both cases (electronic funds and music) they have actual physical representations, and the transaction is simply digital.

    The value of an item IS determined by what people pay for it, though what is considered value to The Government is different. The value of my infant son? Well, I'm sure I could find a buyer and put out some feels for bids. However, that does not give it a monetary value as far as The Government is concerned.

    Heck, in this case, it's closer to me selling cans of soda from a box I bought. Sure, they have value in that people will pay for them. However, they're all labeled Not For Resale. Now it gets legally murky as to who can actually sell them.

    In this case, people WILL pay money for in game items. However, the EULA specifically forbids said sales. So their value is up for legal debate. Then you get into ownership. The rules state you don't actually own any of the items. Only the owner can sue for theft.

    Actually, the government does assess the value of human lives, both to figure out how to weigh the benefits of a traffic light v. its cost and for the 9/11 victims' fund.

    Scalfin on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Scalfin wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    Scalfin wrote: »
    The value of an item is determined by what people pay for it, i.e, its market value. As such, the electronic items have value.
    Electronic items have been legally upheld in two major areas of law: electronic accounts of money, and music. If you get someone else's debit card number, it is still illegal to transfer the "money" in his account to yourself. People have been charged for the production and distribution of electronic media not belonging to them. In both these cases, things with no mass have been held to be stolen.

    You would not be taxed for these items because, while they still have value, they are at most M2 in liquidity, and so are not classifiable as income. They would probably be closest in classification to mushrooms, which are often undomesticated but professionally gathered. In such a case, the tax would most likely be applied when items are sold.

    In both cases (electronic funds and music) they have actual physical representations, and the transaction is simply digital.

    The value of an item IS determined by what people pay for it, though what is considered value to The Government is different. The value of my infant son? Well, I'm sure I could find a buyer and put out some feels for bids. However, that does not give it a monetary value as far as The Government is concerned.

    Heck, in this case, it's closer to me selling cans of soda from a box I bought. Sure, they have value in that people will pay for them. However, they're all labeled Not For Resale. Now it gets legally murky as to who can actually sell them.

    In this case, people WILL pay money for in game items. However, the EULA specifically forbids said sales. So their value is up for legal debate. Then you get into ownership. The rules state you don't actually own any of the items. Only the owner can sue for theft.

    Actually, the government does assess the value of human lives, both to figure out how to weigh the benefits of a traffic light v. its cost and for the 9/11 victims' fund.

    However, if someone steals my child, it's not Theft, nor assessed by value of the child. Nor is actual value taken into account, it's a net average. My smart kid is obviously worth more than a C student, but you don't see it changing much.

    RMT has no value, you can't sell it without breaking a shitload of rules you agreed to. If it's stolen via a legitimate out of game means, you can sue them for various hacking laws. If you gave them account access and they took shit, no suit unless you had a contract with them (and then you're likely in violation of your contract with the game company per the current agreements)

    This is really, Really low on the legal radar, and if it starts becoming some huge money deal, it WILL be taxed. It's already come up in congress twice to tax shit like this.

    kildy on
  • ScalfinScalfin __BANNED USERS regular
    edited February 2008
    kildy wrote: »
    Scalfin wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    Scalfin wrote: »
    The value of an item is determined by what people pay for it, i.e, its market value. As such, the electronic items have value.
    Electronic items have been legally upheld in two major areas of law: electronic accounts of money, and music. If you get someone else's debit card number, it is still illegal to transfer the "money" in his account to yourself. People have been charged for the production and distribution of electronic media not belonging to them. In both these cases, things with no mass have been held to be stolen.

    You would not be taxed for these items because, while they still have value, they are at most M2 in liquidity, and so are not classifiable as income. They would probably be closest in classification to mushrooms, which are often undomesticated but professionally gathered. In such a case, the tax would most likely be applied when items are sold.

    In both cases (electronic funds and music) they have actual physical representations, and the transaction is simply digital.

    The value of an item IS determined by what people pay for it, though what is considered value to The Government is different. The value of my infant son? Well, I'm sure I could find a buyer and put out some feels for bids. However, that does not give it a monetary value as far as The Government is concerned.

    Heck, in this case, it's closer to me selling cans of soda from a box I bought. Sure, they have value in that people will pay for them. However, they're all labeled Not For Resale. Now it gets legally murky as to who can actually sell them.

    In this case, people WILL pay money for in game items. However, the EULA specifically forbids said sales. So their value is up for legal debate. Then you get into ownership. The rules state you don't actually own any of the items. Only the owner can sue for theft.

    Actually, the government does assess the value of human lives, both to figure out how to weigh the benefits of a traffic light v. its cost and for the 9/11 victims' fund.

    However, if someone steals my child, it's not Theft, nor assessed by value of the child. Nor is actual value taken into account, it's a net average. My smart kid is obviously worth more than a C student, but you don't see it changing much.

    RMT has no value, you can't sell it without breaking a shitload of rules you agreed to. If it's stolen via a legitimate out of game means, you can sue them for various hacking laws. If you gave them account access and they took shit, no suit unless you had a contract with them (and then you're likely in violation of your contract with the game company per the current agreements)

    This is really, Really low on the legal radar, and if it starts becoming some huge money deal, it WILL be taxed. It's already come up in congress twice to tax shit like this.

    So, does that mean that, per your earlier example, it is not theft if you take soda that I have already bought because I am not allowed to sell it, but instead can only consume it?

    Scalfin on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    The rest of you, I fucking hate you for the fact that I now have a blue dot on this god awful thread.
  • NeadenNeaden Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Scalfin wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    Scalfin wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    Scalfin wrote: »
    The value of an item is determined by what people pay for it, i.e, its market value. As such, the electronic items have value.
    Electronic items have been legally upheld in two major areas of law: electronic accounts of money, and music. If you get someone else's debit card number, it is still illegal to transfer the "money" in his account to yourself. People have been charged for the production and distribution of electronic media not belonging to them. In both these cases, things with no mass have been held to be stolen.

    You would not be taxed for these items because, while they still have value, they are at most M2 in liquidity, and so are not classifiable as income. They would probably be closest in classification to mushrooms, which are often undomesticated but professionally gathered. In such a case, the tax would most likely be applied when items are sold.

    In both cases (electronic funds and music) they have actual physical representations, and the transaction is simply digital.

    The value of an item IS determined by what people pay for it, though what is considered value to The Government is different. The value of my infant son? Well, I'm sure I could find a buyer and put out some feels for bids. However, that does not give it a monetary value as far as The Government is concerned.

    Heck, in this case, it's closer to me selling cans of soda from a box I bought. Sure, they have value in that people will pay for them. However, they're all labeled Not For Resale. Now it gets legally murky as to who can actually sell them.

    In this case, people WILL pay money for in game items. However, the EULA specifically forbids said sales. So their value is up for legal debate. Then you get into ownership. The rules state you don't actually own any of the items. Only the owner can sue for theft.

    Actually, the government does assess the value of human lives, both to figure out how to weigh the benefits of a traffic light v. its cost and for the 9/11 victims' fund.

    However, if someone steals my child, it's not Theft, nor assessed by value of the child. Nor is actual value taken into account, it's a net average. My smart kid is obviously worth more than a C student, but you don't see it changing much.

    RMT has no value, you can't sell it without breaking a shitload of rules you agreed to. If it's stolen via a legitimate out of game means, you can sue them for various hacking laws. If you gave them account access and they took shit, no suit unless you had a contract with them (and then you're likely in violation of your contract with the game company per the current agreements)

    This is really, Really low on the legal radar, and if it starts becoming some huge money deal, it WILL be taxed. It's already come up in congress twice to tax shit like this.

    So, does that mean that, per your earlier example, it is not theft if you take soda that I have already bought because I am not allowed to sell it, but instead can only consume it?
    No, because you legally own it. According to the EULA, you do not own any of your in game money, blizzard does.

    Neaden on
  • ZsetrekZsetrek Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    IIRC, the Australian government is looking into a tax on virtual assets.

    Zsetrek on
  • Apothe0sisApothe0sis Have you ever questioned the nature of your reality? Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Nope. The US government is looking into it.

    The Australian government has come out and said if you're making an income from second life, the it's to be treated like normal money and there's even stuff like GST to consider.

    Apothe0sis on
  • AdrienAdrien Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Apothe0sis wrote: »
    Nope. The US government is looking into it.

    The Australian government has come out and said if you're making an income from second life, the it's to be treated like normal money and there's even stuff like GST to consider.

    At the point where it turns into real money, it makes sense. But if I'm selling my writing at a buck a word, that doesn't mean everything I write is a valued asset.

    Adrien on
    tmkm.jpg
  • Eric_the_Amazing_RedEric_the_Amazing_Red Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    I play FFXI and Sots is on my server. I don't know him very well though. This kind of thing is very common in FFXI. I've heard this shit happens in WoW too but Blizzard will actually return your stolen stuff to you on the spot while Square Enix just laughs at you.

    The economy in FFXI is in a deep ass recession and RMTs in China have resorted to hacking FFXI accounts by putting viruses and shit on FFXI-related sites to meet their quotas by stripping accounts. I think about 500 accounts got hacked since November so the idea of losing your shit doesn't just apply to Sots but on a wider level. I don't know how bad it is with other MMOs with this shit but it would be nice to get it out in the open here so discuss.

    Eric_the_Amazing_Red on
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar VChatter Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited February 2008
    If they started taxing virtual garbage I would simply never again play a game with a virtual economy.

    Incenjucar on
  • Eric_the_Amazing_RedEric_the_Amazing_Red Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Taxing that shit would be a good way to bring in money for a defecit but would piss off the younger generation of voters that don't vote much to begin with so you see where I'm going with this lol.

    Best way to avoid this shit is to suspect everyone is out to get you and don't give your password to anyone, not even the dog...

    Eric_the_Amazing_Red on
  • Satan.Satan. __BANNED USERS regular
    edited February 2008
    Taxing that shit would be a good way to bring in money for a defecit but would piss off the younger generation of voters that don't vote much to begin with so you see where I'm going with this lol.

    Best way to avoid this shit is to suspect everyone is out to get you and don't give your password to anyone, not even the dog...
    Man, what the fuck was that D:

    Satan. on
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar VChatter Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Taxing this would just lead to untold numbers of stupid lawsuits and audits.

    Alternatively: I relish the notion of lawyers having to deal with that many furries and Asperger's sufferers.

    Incenjucar on
  • Eric_the_Amazing_RedEric_the_Amazing_Red Registered User regular
    edited February 2008
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Taxing this would just lead to untold numbers of stupid lawsuits and audits.

    Alternatively: I relish the notion of lawyers having to deal with that many furries and Asperger's sufferers.

    I agree but it would make for some funny convos around the water cooler on a Monday morning lol.

    Eric_the_Amazing_Red on
Sign In or Register to comment.