Web Gaming Dispute Grows

I'm not a lawyer, but I've been around long enough to know that you don't just blow someone off when they claim that you owe them money--especially if you DO owe them money because they've deposited it in an account with you. I can't possibly imagine what argument Linden Labs will put forth to claim that they have the right to confiscate cash unless they actually bill the person for the amount in their account and can document what they are being billed for.

Linden dollars or Linden land are something else, as they essentially all belong to Linden Labs anyhow. The courts really will have to sort that one out.

This guy found a way to bid on sims that weren't supposed to be up for auction yet.

He won in auctions that nobody else even knew about.

It was underhanded and unethical.

It also got him booted. Good for LL.

If you found a way to buy a sim for a thousandth of the regular price would you buy it or ask LL if it was a glitch?

Either he's really really naive and didn't know that he was taking advantage of an exploit, or he knew exactly what he was doing. Either way, it doesn't really matter.

This is where I think LL may have a problem:



I could most definitely see this happening.

{bold added to assist people in understanding this comment is far from being anything other than merely speculative and based on nothing more than the potentially flawed reports from one party involved in the dispute.}

I'd imagine that Linden Labs in the end will have to refund any US $ if they can't prove that those dollars were owed to them, unless they specifically post some fee associated with shutting down an account and repairing any damage associated with "exploits." It also sounds like the fellow in Florida actually warned Linden Labs that the exploit was possible, and they didn't pay attention.

I'm not a lawyer, but I've been around long enough to know that you don't just blow someone off when they claim that you owe them money--especially if you DO owe them money because they've deposited it in an account with you. I can't possibly imagine what argument Linden Labs will put forth to claim that they have the right to confiscate cash unless they actually bill the person for the amount in their account and can document what they are being billed for.

Linden dollars or Linden land are something else, as they essentially all belong to Linden Labs anyhow. The courts really will have to sort that one out.

Copyright 2006.
Warren Communications News, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

WASHINGTON INTERNET DAILY

Monday, May 15, 2006 Vol. 7, No. 93

WEB GAMING DISPUTE GROWS as other Second Life users surface
with claims of being locked out of the game unfairly.
Federal court case in the works, user says. (P. 3)

More Court Complaints?

Plot Thickens in Second Life Scuffle

A real world lawsuit over a virtual land deal gone sour
could spur more legal action if the company at the center of
the controversy doesn't make amends with its users. A suit
filed last week by attorney Marc Bragg against Second Life, a
3-dimensional Web game created by Linden Lab (WID May 9 p3),
has prompted other players to contact Washington Internet
Daily to tell similar stories about being owed money and
seeing their accounts frozen. Linden's lawyers continued to
decline to discuss the allegations with reporters.

Last week's suit, filed in W. Chester, Pa. small claims
court was the tip of the iceberg, users told us. That
complaint sought $8,000 in financial damages, in part for a
breach of a virtual land auction contract and for violation
of the state's Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection
Law. Web developer and Second Life gamer Paul Coates, who
has been barred from the game over a land deal, said he was
putting the finishing touches on a complaint Fri. to be filed
in U.S. Dist. Court, Ocala, Fla. The stakes in his suit will
be higher than Bragg's, he told us.

Coates, whose game name is "Mezentius Speculaas," bought
several plots of land in an auction, kept one and resold the
rest for a profit. The cut-rate price he paid for the land
was a red flag for Second Life administrators he alleges
barred him from the game and confiscated the virtual
property. Coates said Linden notified him by e-mail that the
land had been acquired through an unauthorized exploit.

I'm talking about land he put up for auction, someone buys, then claims a 'mistake' so its reversed. Nothing about stolen land, and LL should have something up to prevent bids of 3 dollars anyway..

1.4 Second Life "currency" is a limited license right available for purchase or free distribution at Linden Lab's discretion, and is not redeemable for monetary value from Linden Lab.

3.3 Linden Lab retains ownership of the account and related data, regardless of intellectual property rights you may have in content you create or otherwise own.

You agree that even though you may retain certain copyright or other intellectual property rights with respect to Content you create while using the Service, you do not own the account you use to access the Service, nor do you own any data Linden Lab stores on Linden Lab servers (including without limitation any data representing or embodying any or all of your Content).

"Well we ran into a bug, the person thought it was on sale for 10K but it sold for 100K to her. We refunded the money and gave your land back, you are not at a loss."

Forgive me if this appears to be a stupid or obvious question but I have seen this issue mentioned a number of times here in the forums.
...
The reason I really want to know is because I want to know how solid the Linden system really is, in other words can I enter an auction with any hope that it is an actual open, transparent and fair system and not rigged?

Although I find they are quite clear in their TOS I find the rest of their documentation and rules at best, murky.

SL is untrustworthy in my eyes.

not his fault people get buyers remorse and his land sales get reversed.

LL doesn't have a problem with that message. Wishing luck in an auction is not the same as giving the green light to bid. The auction in question was still closed.