I honestly hope we haven't given up already. Have you given up?
By
Ael Rhiana,
Posted on: 2012-11-08 17:31 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
Quote:
Your clarifications don't change anything. Would you want the government telling you you can't get out of a business you're running at the moment because it happens to be profitable? How profitable, by the way? What if you think it is about to become unprofitable in the near future? What if you just want to retire? Are you forced to sell it? Do you think you'll get a good price when everyone else knows you're being FORCED to sell? |
Originally Posted by Starsman
So basically: if the service is profitable it should not be allowed to be killed. Not saying I entirely agree, not with just those small clauses, but he was not saying that no one should not ever be allowed for no reason at all to cancel any service.
|
It's a terrible idea.
Villains: Annie Alias, Dr. Amperical, Shade Golem, Knight Marksman
Heroes: The Clockwork Mime, Soccerpunch, The Fissioneer, Samurai Houston, Oversteer
Join The X-Patriots on Virtue!
Quote:
It might work in a country with no IP laws and no international agreement with that country with IP laws. Also probably cant be a citizen or traced back to a citizen of a country with enforceable IP laws. |
Originally Posted by Snow Globe
Actually some IP laws state they have to vigorously try blocking unapproved uses or lose the rights to those properties.
|
Seems this board though is given NCSoft plenty of places to start their investigation though and possible evidence if one was to come to fruitation.
Like while MCDonalds is based in the US, someone in some place like India cannot think they are automatically immune to IP laws and open up a resturant and call it MCDonalds. They might still get sued.
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard.  Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
Which is why I said "if" they had no plans for the property. Doesn't mean they won't fire off a C&D anyway just to be jerks about it, but who knows? I don't think anyone is actively going after Ultima Online emulators, are they? Other games, sure. But not all of them bother to defend against small-time free emulator operations.
|
Originally Posted by Snow Globe
Actually some IP laws state they have to vigorously try blocking unapproved uses or lose the rights to those properties.
|
Villains: Annie Alias, Dr. Amperical, Shade Golem, Knight Marksman
Heroes: The Clockwork Mime, Soccerpunch, The Fissioneer, Samurai Houston, Oversteer
Join The X-Patriots on Virtue!
Quote:
What laws? What country? In the US the only "IP" you can lose if you don't enforce your rights are Trade Marks.
|
Originally Posted by Snow Globe
Actually some IP laws state they have to vigorously try blocking unapproved uses or lose the rights to those properties.
|
Quote:
It sounds wonderful in theory, but seriously, what's the alternative? |
Originally Posted by Evil_Legacy
I think consumers should have more rights, but I dont think it should be at the expense of adding extra uneeded laws on buisnesses.
|
How to you entice an ethical change in an entity that exists under the principle of maximizing profit by any legal means necessary? That's like telling a carnivore to stop being an apex predator. That code of 'ethics' immediately makes social morality and empathy an inconvenient afterthought at best, and at worst, an unnecessary impediment to success.
Quote:
No joke. |
Originally Posted by Evil_Legacy
Like while MCDonalds is based in the US, someone in some place like India cannot think they are automatically immune to IP laws and open up a resturant and call it MCDonalds. They might still get sued.
|
McDonalds must have an army of lawyers that do nothing all day but look for anything starting with the letters "MC". We had a product name once that started with the abbreviation "MCU" (as in, "Micro-Controller Unit") and after filing for a trademark, received a call from a McDonalds lawyer asking for info. Of course they just went, "Oh, okay. Nevermind, thanks!" and hung up. But still...
Saw a story once that they've even harassed people in Scotland for having products starting with "Mc" in the name! Think about that a second.
Villains: Annie Alias, Dr. Amperical, Shade Golem, Knight Marksman
Heroes: The Clockwork Mime, Soccerpunch, The Fissioneer, Samurai Houston, Oversteer
Join The X-Patriots on Virtue!
Quote:
I haven't really participated much in these discussions, but I'm seeing a lot of this kind of rebuttal when it comes to "allowing" a company to shut down a service like this that we've sunk money into. Comparing this to an axed model of vehicle or really ANY physical product doesnt work, simply because even if they cut off production, does that mean your older crown vic stops functioning? if apple stopped making ipods, do you think that all of your old ones would simply shut off forever? no.|
Originally Posted by Evil_Legacy
The Lincoln TC was still making a profit and America's best selling luxury vehicle yet they discontinued the product and many workers that worked in the factory that made cars on that platform lost their jobs. Now if the proposed law was in effect, Ford would still be forced to make that vehicle, and the Crown Vic, and the Grand Marquis. Yes, lot of Ford customers was pissed about that, especially the livery market when they killed the TC.
|
This is a physical purchase that a lot of us made, and a lot of us put money into, that we will effectively never be able to use again in 20 days. I didnt spend as much on the game as a lot of people have, and I'm still pretty mad that they advertised "PLAY FOREVER" rather recently, and then just decide to cut the game off at the knees, instead of allowing it to at least go into a still-playable maintainance mode. sure, they have the right to do it, but its still a crappy move, and people are absolutely right to be angry that thier product is now rendered completely useless.
@Ashen Fury
Ashen Fury - KM/EA Scrapper
Erika Tempest - Ice/EM Tanker
Scion of Restoration - Emp/Sonic Defender
This may explain a little more of how UO emulator got away with it.
http://uo.stratics.com/content/guides/emulatorfaq.shtml
Although it seems to mean you cannot run a public UO server for others to play on, and you cannot play on someone elses server. And also distinguish it from "a server emulator".
I guess it depends on the approach used. Yeah, single player or private server shard emulators probably will go un noticed, but if someone opens up a public server, especially making.collecting funds, then that may be a red flag and may darw some attention.
Then again, there still is a risk for a C&D for the artwork but so far the makers of Ultima have not issued one and probably wont. Wouldnt it be easier to just ask permission to use the artwork?
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard. Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
My clarification changes the scope of the statement by a huge margin. But I think where this is headed so I will stop at stating my opinion on one simple matter (hopefully not to spark argument but to STOP any argument because you wont ever change my mind on it and likely I wont change your mind either)|
Originally Posted by Zem
Your clarifications don't change anything. Would you want the government telling you you can't get out of a business you're running at the moment because it happens to be profitable? How profitable, by the way? What if you think it is about to become unprofitable in the near future? What if you just want to retire? Are you forced to sell it? Do you think you'll get a good price when everyone else knows you're being FORCED to sell?
It's a terrible idea. |
I believe it IS the job of the government to institute regulations that protect consumers from ripoffs, frauds and even bad management. In the age of cloud computing, new regulations will be required. I'm not a fan of Google, but at least they are doing their best to make sure you can jump ship at any time with all your data. (Please don't counterpoint this, you made your point clear already, this is precisely so you understand that's a dead end in discussing this we just wont ever agree.)
As for retiring, thats a horrible example. If you want to retire and kill your services you wont get a penny for your company. Anyone in their right mind would keep things running until they find an interested buyer and THEN retire.
Some may be arguing for the actual online service to continue but I think most are wanting a way to access what they've paid for after the original online service is shut down, even if it is just a offline/local mode and requiring that shouldn't be much of a burden.
And businesses don't do what's "right" unless it also happens to be what's most profitable, so the only way to make businesses do the "right" thing is to make it too expensive not to. If corporations could prove themselves responsible citizens (they are people now) of the world it wouldn't have to be that way but when someone's moral calculus can be stated in entirety as "does it increase profits?" they aren't going to play nice without a lot of supervision.
Quote:
There is no bill posted here so not sure what law you talking about. If you are talking about a law on "services", no, they would have been free to discontinue the car BUT still service its parts (and car makers actually keep servicing parts for years to come.)|
Originally Posted by Evil_Legacy
The Lincoln TC was still making a profit and America's best selling luxury vehicle yet they discontinued the product and many workers that worked in the factory that made cars on that platform lost their jobs. Now if the proposed law was in effect, Ford would still be forced to make that vehicle, and the Crown Vic, and the Grand Marquis. Yes, lot of Ford customers was pissed about that, especially the livery market when they killed the TC
|
If you talk "cloud services" or "online services" then it would have not been affected at all.
Quote:
Yeah true, this isnt a physical product. Yet, since it wasnt a physical product, and basically paying for something intangible like "fun" and stuff, did you get your money worth? Which makes it even more of a question why should they be forced to keep it running. When it shuts down, you dont have to sink money into again, so there is no loss. I guess the better analogy would have been a them park. You pay to get in to ride the rides and go home only to come back next weekend with the money in hand to get in to buy the fun again, to find out it's closed. Should the park operator be forced to maintain opening for the park by law beause some people been going there for years, spent ton of money on food, candy and drinks while they was there, and people still want to go there for fun? Difference here is that instead of actual games, this is virtual game but when a park of that type closes, then like here, there no longer access to that park or the rides although just like in games, you can find similar things/rides elsewhere but wont always be the same, i.e this particluar park had the best Twiple Twist Roller coaster and while other parks have roller coasters, they dont have the one you enjoy. |
Originally Posted by Ashen_Fury
I haven't really participated much in these discussions, but I'm seeing a lot of this kind of rebuttal when it comes to "allowing" a company to shut down a service like this that we've sunk money into. Comparing this to an axed model of vehicle or really ANY physical product doesnt work, simply because even if they cut off production, does that mean your older crown vic stops functioning? if apple stopped making ipods, do you think that all of your old ones would simply shut off forever? no.
This is a physical purchase that a lot of us made, and a lot of us put money into, that we will effectively never be able to use again in 20 days. I didnt spend as much on the game as a lot of people have, and I'm still pretty mad that they advertised "PLAY FOREVER" rather recently, and then just decide to cut the game off at the knees, instead of allowing it to at least go into a still-playable maintainance mode. sure, they have the right to do it, but its still a crappy move, and people are absolutely right to be angry that thier product is now rendered completely useless. |
Never said there was no right to be angry or it wasnt a crappy move. Anything can be considered a crappy move or anger can happen with any product that is discontinued. But just because people are angry and a buisness made a "crappy" move, should there be a law against companies having angry customers? If that was the case, then I dont think any buisness open today or the past would be within that law.
With the play forever ad, then maybe that may be a lawsuit for false advertising if ya feel ripped off. Best to talk to a lawyer to see if you have a case. There are already laws for that in place.
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard. Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
True but even then it's not always forever. While MBZ still make parts for every model they made, some companies like GM dont even make the parts for their platform that the Impala/Caprice/Fleetwood/Roadmaster is built on from the mid 90s. |
Originally Posted by Starsman
There is no bill posted here so not sure what law you talking about. If you are talking about a law on "services", no, they would have been free to discontinue the car BUT still service its parts (and car makers actually keep servicing parts for years to come.)
If you talk "cloud services" or "online services" then it would have not been affected at all. |
I'm talking about the theoritical law being discussed that would prevent game companies from shutting down a game on thw whim. I'm saying that a law like that probably cant just be made for game companies when any company can stop a product on the whim.
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard. Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
Isnt there an emulator, legal one, in the works for that? |
Originally Posted by Ogi
Some may be arguing for the actual online service to continue but I think most are wanting a way to access what they've paid for after the original online service is shut down, even if it is just a offline/local mode and requiring that shouldn't be much of a burden.
And businesses don't do what's "right" unless it also happens to be what's most profitable, so the only way to make businesses do the "right" thing is to make it too expensive not to. If corporations could prove themselves responsible citizens (they are people now) of the world it wouldn't have to be that way but when someone's moral calculus can be stated in entirety as "does it increase profits?" they aren't going to play nice without a lot of supervision. |
If being able to shutdown a game isnt right, then the best thing to do is stop giving them money. As long as they make money, they will keep on doing it. I dont see a reason for a law to force a game company to keep a game running. I think consumers have to make better choices with the buisnesses they choose to give their money too and what they "invest" in. You pay you get a service. They own the game, they invested in making it, and they invested in keeping it running. They own the "rides", we just was renting access to get on the ride.
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard. Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
There is power on both sides. It's called 'voting with your wallet'. If you think that $15 a month gives you more rights than that, you're delusional. And "long-term investment"??? This is a GAME, not a bank. You weren't investing. You were paying a monthly fee for a service, just like your phone or cable TV.|
Originally Posted by TimTheEnchanter
But yes, there should be the power of give & take on both sides of the customer/business relationship, particularly when it comes to long-term investment.
|
Quote:
| Nobody should be allowed to suddenly discontinue a service such as this anymore than they have the right to nuke a city (that was still in the black, no less) on a "whim." |
Paragon City Search And Rescue
The Mentor Project
Quote:
Don't do business with them. But if they don't even notice the loss of business, that means the majority of their customers aren't aligned with YOUR principles.
|
Originally Posted by TimTheEnchanter
It sounds wonderful in theory, but seriously, what's the alternative?
How to you entice an ethical change in an entity that exists under the principle of maximizing profit by any legal means necessary? |
Paragon City Search And Rescue
The Mentor Project
Quote:
+1
|
Originally Posted by Ironblade
Don't do business with them. But if they don't even notice the loss of business, that means the majority of their customers aren't aligned with YOUR principles.
|
-Female Player-
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mauk2
Evil_Legacy became one of my favorite posters with two words.
"Kick Rocks." I laffed so hard. Never change, E_L! |
Quote:
Anyone expecting any such law to provide perpetuity is fooling themselves. Such law should simply provide either proper methods for transitioning to an equivalent service or the ability to take the service offline or self-host should the service be unique enough to be non-transferable.|
Originally Posted by Evil_Legacy
True but even then it's not always forever.
|
Quote:
| While MBZ still make parts for every model they made, some companies like GM dont even make the parts for their platform that the Impala/Caprice/Fleetwood/Roadmaster is built on from the mid 90s. |
With non-open-source software, once the company that sold the product goes out of business, discontinues the product or your support contract is up, you are out of luck. With open-source (as in pop-open-the-hood) you can open up the code, change something and recompile, or hire someone to do the custom changes for you.
A service protection law may have such a thing as a goal, not to make infinite service but to at least force the hood open once services are discontinued.
Quote:
| I'm talking about the theoritical law being discussed that would prevent game companies from shutting down a game on thw whim. I'm saying that a law like that probably cant just be made for game companies when any company can stop a product on the whim. |
I would predict completely free services to be exempt of such laws. Services that accept money, even optionally or for upgraded treatment will likely not be exempt. This is all guesswork, should this EVER come to the table in the next century (and within a century digital will be so important that laws regulating it WILL be drafted.)
Quote:
Except I DO agree. There are real issues in the realm of cloud services that people need to keep an eye on. I just don't think this is one of them. Unlike an e-book, a song, or some document I write on Google docs, the items in the CoH cash shop didn't correspond to anything I could reasonably "take with me" outside the game. Not only are they only accessible within the game, their only USE and purpose is within the game.|
Originally Posted by Starsman
I believe it IS the job of the government to institute regulations that protect consumers from ripoffs, frauds and even bad management. In the age of cloud computing, new regulations will be required. I'm not a fan of Google, but at least they are doing their best to make sure you can jump ship at any time with all your data. (Please don't counterpoint this, you made your point clear already, this is precisely so you understand that's a dead end in discussing this we just wont ever agree.)
|
I can see regulation that might require a notification period and refunds for some limited amount of time for items purchased in the cash shop, but I don't see that time limit being more than a few months. More than that and you're demanding the company run the business for a lengthy period of time without the expectation of reasonable revenues. Because who is going to be spending money on a game that's not going to be around in a few months?
Villains: Annie Alias, Dr. Amperical, Shade Golem, Knight Marksman
Heroes: The Clockwork Mime, Soccerpunch, The Fissioneer, Samurai Houston, Oversteer
Join The X-Patriots on Virtue!
Quote:
Sorry, no. Monthly fees for a service IS an investment. One could go out an buy themselves a fricking CAR for less money than some monthly gaming fees would cost them for the amount of time CoH has been running. And I didn't even even go into the time sink that MMO's incur. There are also people out there who actually earn a living from MMO trading.|
Originally Posted by Ironblade
There is power on both sides. It's called 'voting with your wallet'. If you think that $15 a month gives you more rights than that, you're delusional. And "long-term investment"??? This is a GAME, not a bank. You weren't investing. You were paying a monthly fee for a service, just like your phone or cable TV.
|
And if you're saying it's not the same because the value of the investment becomes irrelevant the moment the servers shut down, well 'news flash' the same is true of every man-made system in the universe, money included.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ironblade
Don't do business with them. But if they don't even notice the loss of business, that means the majority of their customers aren't aligned with YOUR principles.
|
As long as the foolish rats outnumber the smart ones, having the wisdom to "vote with your wallet" accomplishes diddly squat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-LE0ycgkBQ
Quote:
Nonsense. Your saying it's an 'investment' doesn't make it one. It's a game. It's a monthly service. You CHOSE to play a game rather than going out and buying that car.
|
Originally Posted by TimTheEnchanter
Sorry, no. Monthly fees for a service IS an investment. One could go out an buy themselves a fricking CAR for less money than some monthly gaming fees would cost them for the amount of time CoH has been running.
|
Paragon City Search And Rescue
The Mentor Project
Quote:
Your saying it's not an investment doesn't make it a non-investment.
|
Originally Posted by Ironblade
Your saying it's an 'investment' doesn't make it one.
|
I, too, have given up. Seriously... less than 3 weeks until the closure, NC won't sell for under 80million... If people *still* think that this game will somehow be magically saved in 20 days... I actually feel sorry for you. I had hope in the beginning; I had hope through September. In October I was like...ok, this isn't happening and I moved on to another MMO.
The people of Titan may be able to come up with a way to make a single-server thing in the distant future, but how many people would play something like that and stay? I wouldn't.
This game had its run, just let it go. It isn't going to be saved.
"Certain it is and sure: love burns, ale burns, fire burns, politics burns, but cold were life without them." - Romulan proverb
My Characters
Quote:
Who's "we", who's "us" and who owns the game? I'm starting to fear a little on the effect "things not working out" may be having on you personally. |
Originally Posted by Golden Girl
We're still doing everything that we can - but if things don't work out, then the campaign to get NCSoft to give us back our game will continue past December 1st.
|
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom (or freem?) fighter; just as one man's exploit is another man's feature.
Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters