[MUD-Dev] Blacksnow revisted
kylotan at kylotan.eidosnet.co.uk
Sat Apr 6 12:47:23 New Zealand Daylight Time 2002
On Thursday, April 04, 2002 3:41 AM,
Mark Eaton <marke at mac.com> wrote:
> On Monday, April 1, 2002, at 11:31 PM, Eli Stevens wrote:
>> From my point of view, Mythic owns the toys, and the rest follows
>> naturally from that. If we disagree on the ownership part of the
>> equation, it seems THAT is what we should be talking about. And
>> from what I can tell, we _do_ disagree on that point, which I
>> find hard to understand.
> I think the source of this notion is that players are allowed, no
> encouraged to trade items amongst themselves in game. Players are
> allowed to sell items for in game currency. This is all encouraged
> under the rubrik of 'in game economy'.
> If players have no ownership whatsoever how is the above fair?
Just to throw in another angle into this debate... perhaps the
player's -character- has ownership of in-game items, but the player
does not. Ownership is not transitive, as the players do not own the
character as such.  Characters are entitled and encouraged to
trade items. Players are, of course, necessary to facilitate the
process. But players themselves could be forbidden (by game rules
and/or EULA, whatever) to arrange for the trade of goods directly.
Would such a distinction be easier to justify than the whole "you
can give it away but you can't sell it" concept? Personally I think
it would make it clearer about how goods can be traded and why, but
on the other hand it opens up the whole player/character debate
too. So maybe it's no better. And is it any more policeable?
I suppose it would at least mean that any web site dealing with the
trade of goods would obviously be a player concept rather than a
character concept and would be easy to nail under this rule without
it feeling like a 'special clause' added just to stop the player
making money from the game.
 They may own some of the intellectual property attributed or
attached to it, but that is going to be descriptions, biographies,
portraits etc, not a particular arrangement of equipment which
contains no original authorship as such. Besides, just as a book's
author may own the text but not own my particular copy of his or
her book, a player may own part of the IP on a character but they
don't own the actual instance of the character on the
server. (There, that's my analogy for this thread, to go with all
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
More information about the MUD-Dev