Well it is with great regret that I must say this.

[eikniwt]

Auww, you had to break it for him. Let him carry on, he's a joke that nobody even laughs at.

That's all you got ? Lel.

[BananaBandit]

Bitcoin can be equated to a tangible monetary value depending on the exchange rate at the time of the judgement. Bitcoin is treated much the same as any other currency since it is publicly available. Publicly traded goods fall under common law.

Nothing in Rohan is publicly available. You can't purchase an upgrade weapon using Francs. You can buy, using PWI's facilities, virtual currency usable in PWI's private systems. That virtual currency cannot be sold outside of that private system for legal tender. (reality is that it can, but then you are doing it illegally outside of PWI where you can indeed seek legal compensation).

Also realize that French law is not International law. What may apply to you in France may not be equally binding to someone outside of France. You might find that legal actions taken in that manner far more expensive than what you lost in this game to thieves. That is if you can find a lawyer that will take the case.

I would still strongly advise you speak to your attorney if you feel you have grounds to sue someone over activities taking place in a controlled-access computer system. You may find international litigation a very expensive thing to do if it is even possible.

[eikniwt]

Bitcoin can be equated to a tangible monetary value depending on the exchange rate at the time of the judgement. Bitcoin is treated much the same as any other currency since it is publicly available. Publicly traded goods fall under common law.

Nothing in Rohan is publicly available. You can't purchase an upgrade weapon using Francs. You can buy, using PWI's facilities, virtual currency usable in PWI's private systems. That virtual currency cannot be sold outside of that private system.

Also realize that French law is not International law. What may apply to you in France may not be equally binding to someone outside of France. You might find that legal actions taken in that manner far more expensive than what you lost in this game to thieves. That is if you can find a lawyer that will take the case.

I would still strongly advise you speak to your attorney if you feel you have grounds to sue someone over activities taking place in a controlled-access computer system.

RPS are considered to be the same thing with any BTC platform.

[eikniwt]

But still, if it goes to court against one individual, he can't raise of a contract I signed only with PLW and not with him. There is no contract between him and me, so the law actually applies. And I can value a good based on how many real money it did cost me to get it.

[BananaBandit]

Not at all. Bitcoins may be bought, sold and traded for products on the common market. That is not the case with RPs. You cannot use RPs to purchase goods in any store. You can with bitcoins as there are businesses out there that accept them as currency.

Bitcoins != RPs.

I am afraid that if you are attempting to get compensation for PWI virtual goods that were stolen from you, your only recourse is through PWI. If that fails, of course you certainly have the option of addressing PWI with your legal suit.

Talk to your lawyer.

[eikniwt]

Not at all. Bitcoins may be bought, sold and traded for products on the common market. That is not the case with RPs. You cannot use RPs to purchase goods in any store. You can with bitcoins as there are businesses out there that accept them as currency.

Bitcoins != RPs.

I am afraid that if you are attempting to get compensation for PWI virtual goods that were stolen from you, your only recourse is through PWI. If that fails, of course you certainly have the option of addressing PWI with your legal suit.

Talk to your lawyer.

Under the US law, maybe. Not with the french law (which is applicable to my case). To summarize it, I file a complaint in french court, and he will request data to PLW (through a californian judge that will order PLW to deliver it). Once it's done, the judge is going to seek the identity of the thief, then file an extradition request (aswell usually through an Interpol blue notice) to the country were he lives in order for him to be trialed in france.

The moment I'm doing it, that guy is going to go in France with handcuffs.


And plw's tos have nothing to do with it. I don't even see why you are raising a contract I only signed with PLW. That'd be like raising the contract I signed with Hyundai or Ferrari, while I've been stolen the car by someone else.

The guy that stole me would be american, lithuanian, or from any other country, that's still not an international litigation and falls by the french law : stealing is a crime, and as a citizen of France it falls under the french law that protects me.

[treintram]

Under the US law, maybe. Not with the french law (which is applicable to my case). To summarize it, I file a complaint in french court, and he will request data to PLW (through a californian judge that will order PLW to deliver it). Once it's done, the judge is going to seek the identity of the thief, then file an extradition request (aswell usually through an Interpol blue notice) to the country were he lives in order for him to be trialed in france.

The moment I'm doing it, that guy is going to go in France with handcuffs.


And plw's tos have nothing to do with it. I don't even see why you are raising a contract I only signed with PLW. That'd be like raising the contract I signed with Hyundai or Ferrari, while I've been stolen the car by someone else.

The guy that stole me would be american, lithuanian, or from any other country, that's still not an international litigation and falls by the french law : stealing is a crime, and as a citizen of France it falls under the french law that protects me.

One would think a french diplomat would be smarter than thinking his country is going to risk an international conflict over some virtual items.
But then again history tells us that France is mostly all talk and waving white flags.

[LadyIntegra666]

Under the US law, maybe. Not with the french law (which is applicable to my case). To summarize it, I file a complaint in french court, and he will request data to PLW (through a californian judge that will order PLW to deliver it). Once it's done, the judge is going to seek the identity of the thief, then file an extradition request (aswell usually through an Interpol blue notice) to the country were he lives in order for him to be trialed in france.

The moment I'm doing it, that guy is going to go in France with handcuffs.


And plw's tos have nothing to do with it. I don't even see why you are raising a contract I only signed with PLW. That'd be like raising the contract I signed with Hyundai or Ferrari, while I've been stolen the car by someone else.

The guy that stole me would be american, lithuanian, or from any other country, that's still not an international litigation and falls by the french law : stealing is a crime, and as a citizen of France it falls under the french law that protects me.

Treating virtual goods as personal property would not address the problems of diminution or elimination of the value of virtual goods due to (i) alteration of the difficulty of acquisition through modifications in the game play or duplication of virtual items by game operators; (ii) modification or deletion of virtual items by game operators; (iii) illegitimate duplication of virtual items by means of third party exploitations of errors or weaknesses in the games’ source code; (iv) the third party use of computer programs that automatically play online games to acquire virtual items; (v) game operators suspending or terminating user accounts as a result of violations of the terms of service (such as abusive or obscene communications); and (vi) game operators shutting down or otherwise ceasing to support games due to declining player participation and/or revenues, insolvency or sale of the operators, or any other reason.




You signed and agreed on PWI ToS, thus they are real owners of all your property and no lawyer is going to save you.

But then again France might be retarded, after all they have you.

[eikniwt]

Treating virtual goods as personal property would not address the problems of diminution or elimination of the value of virtual goods due to (i) alteration of the difficulty of acquisition through modifications in the game play or duplication of virtual items by game operators; (ii) modification or deletion of virtual items by game operators; (iii) illegitimate duplication of virtual items by means of third party exploitations of errors or weaknesses in the games’ source code; (iv) the third party use of computer programs that automatically play online games to acquire virtual items; (v) game operators suspending or terminating user accounts as a result of violations of the terms of service (such as abusive or obscene communications); and (vi) game operators shutting down or otherwise ceasing to support games due to declining player participation and/or revenues, insolvency or sale of the operators, or any other reason.




You signed and agreed on PWI ToS, thus they are real owners of all your property and no lawyer is going to save you.

But then again France might be retarded, after all they have you.

"To date, there have been very few lawsuits in the U.S. involving virtual goods. One case against the operator of Second Life settled out of court and another seeking to define the rights of purchasers of virtual property in Second Life is ongoing. As is frequently the case, technology far outpaces the law and the law struggles to catch up. Given the large amounts of money at stake, hopefully the uncertainty of the legal status of virtual goods will be resolved sooner rather than later."

That question has been already answered in France, as there are already four legal precedents, all going with personnal property definition.

There are actually no legal status of virtual goods in USA and the ToS doesn't apply if there is a sue against one individual (and not against PLW). One individual can't raise a contract that hasn't been signed between the two parties involved in the law dispute ; so the law applies (or legal precedents) and the ToS are irrelevant.

[ShadowAce]

"To date, there have been very few lawsuits in the U.S. involving virtual goods. One case against the operator of Second Life settled out of court and another seeking to define the rights of purchasers of virtual property in Second Life is ongoing. As is frequently the case, technology far outpaces the law and the law struggles to catch up. Given the large amounts of money at stake, hopefully the uncertainty of the legal status of virtual goods will be resolved sooner rather than later."

That question has been already answered in France, as there are already four legal precedents, all going with personnal property definition.

There are actually no legal status of virtual goods in USA and the ToS doesn't apply if there is a sue against one individual (and not against PLW). One individual can't raise a contract that hasn't been signed between the two parties involved in the law dispute ; so the law applies (or legal precedents) and the ToS are irrelevant.

It should be noted that lindens are an exchangeable currency unlike rps.