Was I in the wrong?

So, I frequent the Virtue Name Watch thread, and /t globals of the names I am interested in. Cool. Right? Well apparently there is some unspoken rule that if you obtain a name by trade or good will you're supposed to inform the person that you are deleting it so they may reclaim it.

I don't think so. Personally, if you are willing to give it up, because you're a good person and not using it for 'x' amount of time, or whatever, it doesn't become your name any more. It becomes mine to do with as I please. In which, if I chose to post the name on the Virtue Name Watch and trade it off to another, there should not be any complaints for said original owner. Right?

Personal thoughts?

If they want the name back, they should watch the thread too. I've given up a name, and I no longer consider it "mine" to reclaim.

I don't follow unspoken rules , heck I barely follow the posted rules .

I can personally see it from both sides, but don't care enough to agree with either one.

On one hand, you're right, it's not their name anymore, it's yours to do as you please with. They released it, you took it, end of story. But from their perspective, you're using a name that came from them to barter for new names. They could take it as a slight or that they wasted the name giving it to you, only to have you get rid of it this way.

But if that's so much of a problem, they should've realized who they were giving the name to in the first place. I don't even know you first hand Nadya, but I know you spend more money on renames than I do on groceries. Any name you get (besides Nadya and Naughty Nadya, most likely) are bound to be gotten rid of later on. I've seen you lust after names only to ditch them a few weeks later. I indirectly gave you a name once, Amazoness, and later saw you ditch it. I didn't care because I knew it'd happen when you got it, and I figured it at least got a little use. So what's the problem?

Know your audience, they say! It's just a mix up with etiquette and expectations.

E: There's also the possibility that the only reason they gave it up was they thought you'd use it more, and they wanted to see it have a good home. Failing you giving it one, they might want it back. This is understandable, but they should've made it clear when they gave it to you that they'd want it back if you changed your mind.

Yeah... sorry. If you give up a name, you give up the name. You don't have any more 'right' to that name than anyone else. It's certainly absurd to think that someone you don't know would somehow be able to read your mind to know if they give it up later that they should inform you. Telepathy is not in the game you know. I know I've had really good names, deleted that character then later on decided to remake them and found the name had been taken in the mean time. That's just the way it goes. If you give up the name, it's anybody's to claim.

Seems like the kind of thing that has to be negotiated before-hand. If the player REALLY liked that name, they could compromise that each person in the agreement keep each other informed of whether they're going to keep using the name or delete it later on.

Seems like this is more of a "lesson learned" situation than anything else, at least let's hope so for the offended party.

New player here, by the way! \o/ Hey guyz!

Hello Eata and welcome to the boards.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perfidus E: There's also the possibility that the only reason they gave it up was they thought you'd use it more, and they wanted to see it have a good home. Failing you giving it one, they might want it back. This is understandable, but they should've made it clear when they gave it to you that they'd want it back if you changed your mind.

This. If they don't say anything when they give up the name, well, sorry. If they wanted to keep the name they shouldn't have given it up. But once you trade it, well, it's no longer theirs. I don't see that you did anything wrong.

Yeah, I'm on the same page as most of the other people it seems. If you want the name back you've given to somebody else when they're not going to use it, that's something that needs to be established up front. If you don't let them know, you don't have much ground to stand on when that name moves somewhere else as far as complaints go. You can be annoyed, but it's your problem that you didn't work things out to your satisfaction up front.

And just to ensure there's no confusion, I gave away the name "Triumph" to a friend, who then passed it along not too long after to somebody I didn't know from a hole in the ground. Was I annoyed? Sure. But I was annoyed at myself for not letting them know that I'd rather have it back if they were no longer interested in it.

((From the Advanced Handbook for Players of MMORGS...))

Yeah, I'm hoping that quote is a joke Heroid, because those 'rules' are absurd to the point of insanity. Coming up with a name does not confer any kind of ownership over it. If you want that, best study up on trademark laws. And in any case, most MMO's terms of conduct specify that anything you create on their servers belongs to them, so when you make up a character you're giving over all rights to said character to them. Which is why it's not advisable that you use a character out of some story or comic of your invention that you intend to publish.

Given that the last 'rule' there is basically prompting people to harass, troll and slander someone who doesn't follow these 'rules', I can't see this as anything other than a fairly lame joke.

That quote was really long and lost my attention... or if I wanted to be an internet idiot 'Too long did not read'

But Hey, if they gave up the word, it don't belong to them no more. They have to follow the same rules as everyone else. Politely ask for the name back. If the answer is no, well dag nabbit and oh well.

*Insert hysterical laughter here*

Yeah...you obviously forgot to consult the Laws of Names. *rolling thunder*

I've let go of a name I kinda regret giving away, but whoever uses it is welcome to keep it. If they decide to free it, I'm not expecting them to -remember- who gave it up, let alone check with me.

The issue of "courtesy" comes up from time to time with these games. I feel, in the end, these kinds of discussions really end up boiling down to: what can you live with?

I would be miffed, if I had parked a name for a while for future use; then someone nagged me to release it, only to see them use it for a few days and then throw it away without the courtesy of asking if I'd like it back.

This probably doesn't describe the situation mentioned here, but I would always ask the person who originally gave it if they wanted it back. As in...

1: Are you gonna eat that cake?
2: Later maybe not right now.
1: Can I have it? I really want it.
2: Sure.
1: (looks at cake, then throws it away)

To me, courtesy would suggest 1 would simply ask if 2 would like it back, after they decide not to eat it. But that's just for me, and really these things are subjective, there are no "rules" for this kind of thing.

On this note though: And in any case, most MMO's terms of conduct specify that anything you create on their servers belongs to them, so when you make up a character you're giving over all rights to said character to them.

It would appear that way, but not so fast. The idea video game companies own everything you type into their client/server software has never been defended in court. So Paragon can say all they like, but it does not make it legal - not yet anyway. This has never been challenged as to its true legality, Paragon writing it into their user agreement, doesn't *necessarily* mean it is legal.

In fact, anything written in an agreement you click "okay" to, or sign, doesn't *necessarily* make it legally binding. It means you read the terms and agreed, but it does not mean that COH can now claim they own every creation ever made in their game, forever. That could be challenged, and the person challenging could win; in fact I'd say depending on circumstance they you'd have a good chance of winning, especially if it was just a name.

Just like, if someone sends you a cease-and-desist letter, doesn't necessarily mean the lawyer sending you the letter has more legal claim to something than you do. Sometimes it just amounts to bullying. If you own URLs, this happens all the time. Lawyers call you, threaten they have rights to the URL and even send you letters saying they do. Unless, I know they have a claim (hasn't happened yet), I throw them in the waste-paper basket. It's just scare tactics to get me to release a valuable URL.

The letter is sent merely to register that you were informed of one party's legal interpretation of their ownership or rights. It can be used in court against you, but it doesn't necessarily make their claim compliant with the law. You can challenge them anytime you like - and even win.

Same thing with the old "no wrongful termination" clauses your HR department makes you sign. They are, for the most part, largely meaningless. It's meant to seduce you into this false notion, that you've just waived your rights. You have not. If you were wrongfully terminated, and believe you can prove it, the paper you signed means nothing - you can still take them to court and win. In fact, that HR tactic is a text-book case of a company trying to make you believe something is legal, merely because you signed a piece of paper.

Contracts often contain things you can challenge, even after you signed them. They can certainly make your case a lot weaker, (lawyers will use the fact against you, that you were aware of the contract and signed it), but they don't prove legal rights or authority. The actual law supercedes any language in a private contract, which is what those software agreements amount to. Again, the HR example applies, people sue companies all the time for wrongful termination, despite signing those awful "we can terminate you for any reason" contracts.

Wizards claims they have a patent on "tapping" cards for example. This is why, Yugioh has to pay Wizards a small piece of their profit and report their earnings; any card that uses a "tapping" mechanic will get the same call from Wizards and arrangement. However, nobody has actually legally challenged whether the patent is legally binding. You can test it, and win, its just that the risk of doing so outweighs the cost/benefit. You might lose, and if you do, it would likley solidify Wizards patent so that it may never be challenged again.

I believe some elements of boiler-plate MMO agreements, can't stick. I await the day when someone challenges them. Now, if someone's business usurped obvious references, images and property of City of Heroes, that's another matter. You can't steal someone's IP like that.

However, one day, someone will write a novel, and some video game company will claim one of the characters in the novel was initially created by the author in their video game and sue. I believe unless the novel usurped many other elements of that game, that the author would win. I don't know for sure of course, because no legal predence exists for this (to my knowledge).

The opposite can happen, some dumb video game company could use some player's character or game-content/avatar without their permission and make money on it. And I believe the player could have a case they were owed some money, and win. I don't know this has never been challenged before, but I believe a smart lawyer could make a case and win.

Don't be fooled by what you agree to with "contracts". It means you were informed of the other party's position on a matter, but it does not mean that party's position can be legally enforced. Think of it this way: if you sign a contract saying you are my slave and owe me all your wages, it doesn't matter that you signed this agreement, it is not legally binding. This is an extreme example, but it illustrates the point.

And this is useful knowledge, if you ever made one of those awful pacts with Asmodeus as a teenager.

Once you give up a name...

I must not be an advanced player since I never heard of those rules before. Damn. Next thing you know they'll be making up rules how to brush your teeth.

I'm Peterbilt and I agree with Fenrisulfr!
....
I mean, I like pie!

The answer to your question is "Mu".

It's Mu for two reasons:
-Firstly posting a question like this on the boards will, as a rule, generate considerably more agreement with the OP than disagreement. And because going by what is, essentially, vox populo in these matters is irrelevant.
-Secondly because to an extent it depends on circumstances, understandings and agreements.

If you ask for my opinion regarding a created name, I would have to set myself somewhere between Heroid and the "relinquished is abandoned". There is a concept in Jewish law, dealing with losses, which is rather similar to what you have here. By law, if you find an object in the street, you are supposed to attempt to return it to its owners. Not returning it constitutes theft. There are two exceptions, however; if you cannot identify the owner of the object, that is, if it bears no identifying marks, then you cannot be expected to pull out a miracle out of your sleeve. So, to give an example, money constitutes an object which cannot be identified and thus should not be returned, because all money is the same, but a wallet with a sum of money is already identifiable, and can be returned to its proper owner. In addition, there is the concept of 'abandoned'.

Abandonment happens in two ways; either you have attempted to return the object by posting notes in the street, inquiring around, and so on for a prolonged period of time(by prolonged we mean quite lengthy; the precise duration varies but several moths seems to be the general consensus), or the person who lost the object said, explicitly, with his mouth, that he abandons it. Now, as a curious point, you did not need to have heard it; he could have said it to himself in his room. Nonetheless, abandoned it is. Once an object had been explicitly abandoned, it cannot be reclaimed.

I apply the concept to the issue of names with some judicious modifications.

Names in the game are objects of some value. They are a limited resource, which involves sometimes a substantial amount of effort. That, I think, is undisputed, because otherwise we would not need the Name Watch thread in the first place. It is also quite clear that initially a name belongs to its creator/owner. Just as clearly, since this case came up, we cannot think of the Name Watch thread as automatic abandonment.

Since they are objects of value, putting them out to the public should not automatically constitute abandonment. Just as no one would be insane enough to simply give up on a large sum of money and cards, so would one not wish to simply let a name fly merely because at present they cannot use it. If you "return" a name, which is clearly identifiable (uniquely so) it's only right that its original owner should claim it before abandonment occurs. If you do not remember who presented you with the name, it is possible to put up a note saying "I intend to re-release a name, its previous owner can receive it by signs."

The answer to your actual question, that is to your case (since I don't really believe in generalities) is:
*How long have you used the name, and how long has it been out of use?
*Has the person ever said, to you or elsewhere, that they no longer want the name?
*Did you have an agreement of what was to be done with the name in case you did not use it?
*Do you know who gave you the name, and can easily get in touch with them, or do you no longer remember?

In short, without knowing the details of your case but looking merely at generalities, since a name is the result of a creative process of significance and has value, caution should be exercised in what you do with it, if only for the sake of courtesy.

Were you wrong?

Short answer: Hell naw.