IS:WindowSnapper - PIP on Speed

[Suribusi]

InnerSpace is the foundation on which the other apps were based.

the ban wave was back in the spring (here's a blog on it http://onwarden.blogspot.com/2008/05...e-wow-242.html )

the 'one keypress => one action per game window' rule of thumb takes for granted that you are not mucking with game memory. what would keep someone from reading passwords or changing various client side data? this is exactly what glider did and why blizzard went after it

Lets leave the misinformation out of this thread please, ok? Your points are misleading to the actual cause and irrelevant to the discussion, on top of being inaccurate.

-S

[keyclone]

i read the other thread and purposefully did not respond to your advertisement. i barely respond in any of these threads (ie: octopus, ahk, hkn) unless there is something that could get an unsuspecting user in trouble.

to say that you have access to in-game memory, but you promise to be good... is just funny. you have OBVIOUSLY crossed the line once you have access to their applications memory. i would even go as far as to say that glider did nothing wrong as it behaved as any innerspace mod would. the root problem wasn't the type of mod but the mechanism that breached the line in the first place. (i would have to read the EULA to see if you violate any reverse-engineering wording by reading the binary and acting on it)

if you are saying that it is perfectly acceptable with Blizzard for your application to be in the same memory space as wow, i would love to hear your justification.

for those that are unaware, having full access to blizzard's in-game memory could give InnerSpace various in-game knowledge, like passwords, locations of players, npcs, as well as resources. depending on wow's messaging protocol and client/server model, he could even introduce packet drops that could minimize damage, decrease timers or increase damage output (although i'm fairly certain blizzard checks their timers on the server)

to say that Blizzard would be fine with that is just funny.

[eqjoe]

i read the other thread and purposefully did not respond to your advertisement. i barely respond in any of these threads (ie: octopus, ahk, hkn) unless there is something that could get an unsuspecting user in trouble.

to say that you have access to in-game memory, but you promise to be good... is just funny. you have OBVIOUSLY crossed the line once you have access to their applications memory. i would even go as far as to say that glider did nothing wrong as it behaved as any innerspace mod would. the root problem wasn't the type of mod but the mechanism that breached the line in the first place. (i would have to read the EULA to see if you violate any reverse-engineering wording by reading the binary and acting on it)

if you are saying that it is perfectly acceptable with Blizzard for your application to be in the same memory space as wow, i would love to hear your justification.

for those that are unaware, having full access to blizzard's in-game memory could give InnerSpace various in-game knowledge, like passwords, locations of players, npcs, as well as resources. depending on wow's messaging protocol and client/server model, he could even introduce packet drops that could minimize damage, decrease timers or increase damage output (although i'm fairly certain blizzard checks their timers on the server)

to say that Blizzard would be fine with that is just funny.

IS works with ANY DX game. It knows nothing of WoW or the WoW client and has zero in-game knowledge. You would need in depth knowledge of the client memory structures to get information such as passwords and game object data such as NPC location and resources. How exactly would an application that is not written specifically for WoW and in fact, this same application have the same functionality for any DX game "OBVIOUSLY" cross this so called "line"?

Sorry Rob, I have a lot of respect for you and your project. KeyClone is a fine tool and I have thoroughly enjoyed using it. I respectfully disagree with your point of view on this subject.

-j

[Lax]

i read the other thread and purposefully did not respond to your advertisement. i barely respond in any of these threads (ie: octopus, ahk, hkn) unless there is something that could get an unsuspecting user in trouble.

to say that you have access to in-game memory, but you promise to be good... is just funny. you have OBVIOUSLY crossed the line once you have access to their applications memory. i would even go as far as to say that glider did nothing wrong as it behaved as any innerspace mod would. the root problem wasn't the type of mod but the mechanism that breached the line in the first place. (i would have to read the EULA to see if you violate any reverse-engineering wording by reading the binary and acting on it)

if you are saying that it is perfectly acceptable with Blizzard for your application to be in the same memory space as wow, i would love to hear your justification.

for those that are unaware, having full access to blizzard's in-game memory could give InnerSpace various in-game knowledge, like passwords, locations of players, npcs, as well as resources. depending on wow's messaging protocol and client/server model, he could even introduce packet drops that could minimize damage, decrease timers or increase damage output (although i'm fairly certain blizzard checks their timers on the server)

to say that Blizzard would be fine with that is just funny.

My "advertisement" never included me linking to my site, or trying to market my product. Other people do that just fine. If I was here to advertise at this time, you would see a link to my products next to the links to yours. I came here to respond to misinformation, and it sounds like you are trying to assist in spreading that misinformation. I am not here to argue with you, I have attempted to be respectful to you and your product and to the other people here who support you. I can see that you have the wrong idea about a number of things, so I will try to help you out.

Reverse engineering is the act of taking something apart to interpret its engineering. Reverse engineering tools include things called Disassemblers. Inner Space is as much a "reverse engineering tool" as KeyClone is. Neither are. I do or have done reverse engineering on a number of targets, including Warden, including World of Warcraft, EverQuest, EverQuest 2, and a number of other games. The purpose of reverse engineering as it relates to Inner Space is for interoperability -- to find out why Inner Space is not compatible with a particular game's usage of Windows API, and to solve that problem. Wine developers would be doing pretty much the same thing to fix the same sorts of problems with Wine. However, using software such as Inner Space that is supported by its developers performing reverse engineering, does not make you a reverse engineer, and does not cause YOU to violate the Terms of Service. As a reverse engineer, I am well aware that any reverse engineering of World of Warcraft or its components causes me to violate the ToS, but as reverse engineering for the purpose of interoperability is explicitly allowed by the DMCA, I believe I am RIGHT to do so, even if it may mean that Blizzard can ban my account for my actions.

It is acceptable for my application to be in the same memory space as World of Warcraft. A number of other applications also reside in the World of Warcraft memory-space. I gave examples in the other thread, but off the top of my head: Anti-virus software, anti-spyware software, Logitech mouse software, Trillian (instant messaging software) all have components that reside in-game. Do you think Blizzard is going to ban me for using Trillian, just because it has a component that lives inside the game process? Because I don't. Also, residing OUT of game does not prevent you from accessing World of Warcraft's memory, and the only difference is the METHOD of doing so. Also, Inner Space has absolutely no knowledge of World of Warcraft's game memory, and it would be utterly stupid to give it any -- Inner Space is extensible, if someone wanted to do any of that stuff, they don't need it build into the platform, they could go hack away on their own. I also find it reprehensible that you would suggest that Inner Space has any more access to anyone's World of Warcraft password than KeyClone does -- do you see me saying that nobody should use KeyClone because it's made of the same stuff that keyloggers are made of?

The same arguments you are making about what Inner Space "could" do could also be made about KeyClone, or anti-virus software, or anti-spyware software, or Logitech mouse software, or literally any software running on your PC. Not only is your argument misleading, but it also suggests that you lack the technical knowledge to make these distinctions, and this is why it is ultimately not up to YOU, but it is up to the appropriate team at Blizzard. To me (and actually other people said this to me before I read your initial responses on this thread) it just looks like you feel threatened by my product and you are trying to spread FUD, in the same way that politicians sling mud in order to try to get people to vote for them instead of the other guy, and I don't think that is appropriate for these forums.

[keyclone]

amazing. you actually think that an instant message client is in the same memory space as wow, or any other application? that's pretty funny.

<snip>

i had a bunch of paragraphs going on about protected memory and application spaces and how inner space would breach these lines. i decided to drop it and not continue the thread, thereby giving you what you want.... continued discussion.

instead, i'll defer to the blues on the wow forums:
"I'd personally avoid this as it does appear to be very questionable." - Reythur [ link ]

inner space was caught up in the ban wave, and lax has stated that he had to give depositions to Blizzard attorneys. that's just about as bad as it gets without jail time or high fines.

i was multi-boxing with keyclone for over a year before i came to dual-boxing.com. the community is friendly and helpful. your responses are counter to that and come with the added bonus of pissing off Blizzard.

and for the record, i do not like the thought of you risking the multi-boxing community with your product.

[Suribusi]

to say that you have access to in-game memory, but you promise to be good... is just funny. you have OBVIOUSLY crossed the line once you have access to their applications memory.
*snip*
if you are saying that it is perfectly acceptable with Blizzard for your application to be in the same memory space as wow, i would love to hear your justification.

for those that are unaware, having full access to blizzard's in-game memory could give InnerSpace various in-game knowledge, like passwords, locations of players, npcs, as well as resources. depending on wow's messaging protocol and client/server model, he could even introduce packet drops that could minimize damage, decrease timers or increase damage output (although i'm fairly certain blizzard checks their timers on the server)

to say that Blizzard would be fine with that is just funny.

With all do respect sir (as I agree with eqjoe on your tools, and support of them), but here is a popular product that does about everything you are arguing against, and last I checked they had 100,000 and counting profiles.
http://wow.magelo.com/home.jspa

-S

[Lax]

amazing. you actually think that an instant message client is in the same memory space as wow, or any other application? that's pretty funny.

Really? You are going to try to argue on this one?

Let's see what's loaded in the Inner Space process. Surely, there should not be anything related to an IM client?

Module 0x00400000-0x004A2000: C:\Program Files\InnerSpace\InnerSpace.exe (Wed Oct 22 03:19:05 2008)
Module 0x00980000-0x00993000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\vlsp.dll (Mon Jan 24 18:33:00 2005)
Module 0x00F60000-0x01317000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\d3dx9_37.dll (Wed Mar 05 00:54:53 2008)
Module 0x018C0000-0x018DE000: C:\Program Files\InnerSpace\IS-D3D9Engine.dll (Wed Oct 22 01:18:51 2008)
Module 0x01C00000-0x01C3A000: C:\Program Files\InnerSpace\IS-VirtualInput.dll (Sat Oct 04 18:34:34 2008)
Module 0x020E0000-0x020E6000: C:\windows\printer.dll (Wed Jun 28 16:31:06 2006)
Module 0x020F0000-0x0210C000: c:\progra~1\mcafee.com\vso\McVSSkt.dll (Wed Apr 28 17:54:11 2004)
Module 0x02370000-0x02398000: C:\Program Files\Trillian\events.dll (Wed Oct 01 19:13:22 2008)
Module 0x023A0000-0x023AF000: C:\Program Files\WIDCOMM\Bluetooth Software\btkeyind.dll (Thu Jul 07 22:22:17 2005)
Module 0x023C0000-0x023D3000: C:\Program Files\Dell\QuickSet\dadkeyb.dll (Tue Jun 17 16:50:06 2003)
Module 0x02440000-0x02567000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\urlmon.dll (Tue Aug 26 07:24:30 2008)
Module 0x03000000-0x03164000: C:\Program Files\InnerSpace\IS-Kernel.dll (Wed Oct 22 03:18:57 2008)
Module 0x05000000-0x05151000: C:\Program Files\InnerSpace\ISUI.dll (Wed Oct 22 03:18:23 2008)
Module 0x070D0000-0x0710B000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\WMASF.DLL (Sat Oct 20 13:01:30 2007)
Module 0x086C0000-0x08904000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\WMVCore.dll (Thu Dec 07 06:38:52 2006)
Module 0x0FFD0000-0x0FFF8000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\rsaenh.dll (Wed Jul 07 02:17:12 2004)
Module 0x10000000-0x1001E000: C:\Program Files\InnerSpace\Lavish.dll (Tue Oct 30 17:12:23 2007)
Module 0x4FDD0000-0x4FF76000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\d3d9.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:03 2004)
Module 0x5B860000-0x5B8B4000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\netapi32.dll (Wed Oct 15 16:57:55 2008)
Module 0x5D090000-0x5D12A000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\COMCTL32.dll (Fri Aug 25 15:45:58 2006)
Module 0x60610000-0x60616000: c:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\fusi on.dll (Wed Oct 24 03:28:45 2007)
Module 0x662B0000-0x66308000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\hnetcfg.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:16 2004)
Module 0x688F0000-0x688F9000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\HID.DLL (Wed Aug 04 07:56:12 2004)
Module 0x6CE10000-0x6CE48000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\DINPUT8.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:32 2004)
Module 0x6D990000-0x6D996000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\d3d8thk.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:02 2004)
Module 0x71A50000-0x71A8F000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\mswsock.dll (Fri Jun 20 17:41:10 2008)
Module 0x71A90000-0x71A98000: C:\WINDOWS\System32\wshtcpip.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:57:49 2004)
Module 0x71AA0000-0x71AA8000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\WS2HELP.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:57:39 2004)
Module 0x71AB0000-0x71AC7000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\WS2_32.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:57:38 2004)
Module 0x74720000-0x7476B000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\MSCTF.dll (Tue Feb 26 11:59:50 2008)
Module 0x74D90000-0x74DFB000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\usp10.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:42 2004)
Module 0x755C0000-0x755EE000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\msctfime.ime (Wed Aug 04 07:57:31 2004)
Module 0x76380000-0x76385000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\MSIMG32.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:58:31 2004)
Module 0x76390000-0x763AD000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\IMM32.DLL (Wed Aug 04 07:56:30 2004)
Module 0x763B0000-0x763F9000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\comdlg32.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:32 2004)
Module 0x76B40000-0x76B6D000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\WINMM.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:57:10 2004)
Module 0x76BF0000-0x76BFB000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\PSAPI.DLL (Wed Aug 04 07:56:58 2004)
Module 0x76C30000-0x76C5E000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\WINTRUST.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:41 2004)
Module 0x76C90000-0x76CB8000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\IMAGEHLP.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:25 2004)
Module 0x76D60000-0x76D79000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\iphlpapi.dll (Fri May 19 12:59:41 2006)
Module 0x76F20000-0x76F47000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\DNSAPI.dll (Fri Jun 20 17:41:10 2008)
Module 0x76F60000-0x76F8C000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\WLDAP32.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:43 2004)
Module 0x76FB0000-0x76FB8000: C:\WINDOWS\System32\winrnr.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:35 2004)
Module 0x76FC0000-0x76FC6000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\rasadhlp.dll (Mon Jun 26 17:37:10 2006)
Module 0x76FD0000-0x7704F000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\CLBCATQ.DLL (Tue Jul 26 04:39:44 2005)
Module 0x77050000-0x77115000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\COMRes.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:36 2004)
Module 0x77120000-0x771AB000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\OLEAUT32.dll (Tue Dec 04 18:38:12 2007)
Module 0x773D0000-0x774D3000: C:\WINDOWS\WinSxS\x86_Microsoft.Windows.Common-Controls_6595b64144ccf1df_6.0.2600.2982_x-ww_ac3f9c03\comctl32.dll (Fri Aug 25 15:45:55 2006)
Module 0x774E0000-0x7761D000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\ole32.dll (Tue Jul 26 04:39:47 2005)
Module 0x77920000-0x77A13000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\SETUPAPI.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:32 2004)
Module 0x77A80000-0x77B14000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\CRYPT32.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:01 2004)
Module 0x77B20000-0x77B32000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\MSASN1.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:57:23 2004)
Module 0x77B40000-0x77B62000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\appHelp.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:36 2004)
Module 0x77C00000-0x77C08000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\VERSION.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:39 2004)
Module 0x77C10000-0x77C68000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\msvcrt.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:59:14 2004)
Module 0x77DD0000-0x77E6B000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\ADVAPI32.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:23 2004)
Module 0x77E70000-0x77F02000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\RPCRT4.dll (Mon Jul 09 13:09:42 2007)
Module 0x77F10000-0x77F57000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\GDI32.dll (Wed Feb 20 06:51:05 2008)
Module 0x77F60000-0x77FD6000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\SHLWAPI.dll (Fri Jun 15 08:12:29 2007)
Module 0x77FE0000-0x77FF1000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\Secur32.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:49 2004)
Module 0x78000000-0x78045000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\iertutil.dll (Tue Aug 26 07:24:34 2008)
Module 0x78130000-0x781CB000: C:\WINDOWS\WinSxS\x86_Microsoft.VC80.CRT_1fc8b3b9a 1e18e3b_8.0.50727.1433_x-ww_5cf844d2\MSVCR80.dll (Wed Oct 24 03:02:06 2007)
Module 0x79000000-0x79046000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\mscoree.dll (Wed Oct 24 07:35:46 2007)
Module 0x79E70000-0x7A3FF000: c:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\msco rwks.dll (Wed Oct 24 07:41:29 2007)
Module 0x7C340000-0x7C396000: C:\Program Files\Trillian\MSVCR71.dll (Fri Feb 21 12:42:20 2003)
Module 0x7C800000-0x7C8F5000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\kernel32.dll (Mon Apr 16 15:52:53 2007)
Module 0x7C900000-0x7C9B0000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\ntdll.dll (Wed Aug 04 07:56:36 2004)
Module 0x7C9C0000-0x7D1D7000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\SHELL32.dll (Fri Oct 26 03:33:59 2007)
Module 0x7E410000-0x7E4A0000: C:\WINDOWS\system32\USER32.dll (Thu Mar 08 15:36:28 2007)

There is, in fact, Trillian-related components loaded in my process. I didn't put it there. There's also an application from Dell (I'm on a Dell laptop), a bluetooth software component, McAfee anti-virus component... You're really just opening yourself up here for a beating that I really do not want to be giving you, but if you insist on continuing, I will continue.

[Lax]

I hit the post size limit from my paste of loaded modules, so here's the rest of my post.

i had a bunch of paragraphs going on about protected memory and application spaces and how inner space would breach these lines. i decided to drop it and not continue the thread, thereby giving you what you want.... continued discussion.

instead, i'll defer to the blues on the wow forums:
"I'd personally avoid this as it does appear to be very questionable." - Reythur [ link ]

inner space was caught up in the ban wave, and lax has stated that he had to give depositions to Blizzard attorneys. that's just about as bad as it gets without jail time or high fines.

i was multi-boxing with keyclone for over a year before i came to dual-boxing.com. the community is friendly and helpful. your responses are counter to that and come with the added bonus of pissing off Blizzard.

and for the record, i do not like the thought of you risking the multi-boxing community with your product.

1. That is a very nice quote for you to take out of context. The quote could be applied to anything, and you're not taking into account the fact that the thread he was posting on started and ended with incorrect information, which would mislead any reader, and this obviously contributed to his guarded response. Also, Reythur himself indicated on another thread started by Vyndree that OTHER GM's have a better understanding than he would. There was also a recent news article (I wish I could find it now) about a study showing that people will believe false rumors, even after the false information had been corrected by the author.

2. I indeed I had to give a deposition to a Blizzard attorney in November 2007. The reason I had to give that deposition is because I did business with MDY, the developer of Glider. Being deposed does not make you a criminal or anything of the sort, nor does it imply that you have done anything wrong. It means that you have information they are interested in. In a deposition they ask you questions that you are required to answer, unless your attorney tells you not to answer and has some valid reason. It is part of the legal process. As part of my deposition, they did ask me questions about Inner Space, as well as ISXWarden, and that gave them information that was probably useful to them in was unrelated to the Glider case. They did not insist to me at my deposition that I had done anything wrong.

3. "Inner Space was caught up in the ban wave" is misleading. Firstly, there have been many ban waves, most of which had nothing to do with Inner Space or people using it for whatever reason. Secondly, the bans were for ISXWoW and/or ISXWarden, not for Inner Space itself. ISXWoW and ISXWarden violate the Terms of Service, Inner Space does not. You would have to seek out and download ISXWoW and ISXWarden somewhere other than where you would get Inner Space. I do understand that you, and some others, do not discern a difference between Inner Space, ISXWarden, and/or ISXWoW. However, there is a difference, and people who do have a technical understanding, do in fact understand that difference. Blizzard is not stupid, and they are not quick to ban people -- these are their paying customers, who are doing nothing wrong, and banning is NOT something they take lightly. I am also 5-boxing with Inner Space, I pay for my WoW accounts with my own credit card, I use my real name and address, wouldn't you think I would be the first one they ban if they are so against Inner Space?

4. I would absolutely love for you to show any evidence that I am "pissing off Blizzard". I have been multi-boxing with my own products, and sharing them, since EverQuest 1, with my company being started with an audience of multi-boxers in 2004 -- I guess that gives me 4+ years of experience with technical support and development in multi-boxing software. I don't see where I am being unfriendly, or unhelpful -- I have been responding to completely unrelated threads with helpful information where I can give it. You on the other hand are spreading your clearly biased FUD about me and/or my product, and I am sharing facts and/or evidenced knowledge. All of my posts except those on unrelated threads have been defending myself against ridiculous claims like your own.

5. Great, thank you for your opinion. For the record, I do not like the thought of you spreading absolute FUD about my product. Do not speak about that which you do not know, which is just about everything you have said in this thread so far. I am not here talking shit about you or your product, and again I have attempted to be as respectful to you as possible, but the more you attack me, the more I can only show you the same level of respect I get from you.

I'm not asking you for continued discussion. I would prefer that you keep your FUD in your head, and not spread it on these forums. If you actually had a valid point on any of the above, there might be a discussion. As it stands, it's just you making random claims, and isn't much different from the other threads, and in fact nearly all of the points you think you are making have already been refuted in the other threads, so I'm just repeating myself. That is just one more big reason why I believe all you are trying to do is think with your wallet, because you feel threatened by my product's ability to outperform yours, especially considering that information came from a respected member of this community. In the end I will let my product speak for itself, I do not need to spread false information about yours.

[phara]

Sorry, didn't mean to kick this up again. I'm with keyclone in saying that manipulating how the directx device is obtained is crossing the line (not going to debate that point, just as a software developer and a end user familiar with the TOS that is my conclusion).

I DO however feel that some solution like I mentioned is completely legit. Tools like maximizer kick off the game exe, let it initialize it's own directx devices, then modify the window size / decorations through windows API calls. Using a GDI method to modify which adapter is the primary before and after the game exe gets run is no different than me setting them manually through desktop properties before and after running them (which is the current workaround)- I just think it would be useful to have it baked into a tool like maximizer instead of doing it manually or writing windows scripts to do it.

[Lax]

Sorry, didn't mean to kick this up again. I'm with keyclone in saying that manipulating how the directx device is obtained is crossing the line (not going to debate that point, just as a software developer and a end user familiar with the TOS that is my conclusion).

Again I will fall back to my points about WinEQ 2 and Cedega (and Wine). All of these are a similar layer, used by the game, that "manipulate" in the same fashion. If being a layer between the game and the Operating System is "crossing the line" then why would "the line" apply to Inner Space, but not apply to WinEQ 2 or Cedega? They did un-ban the people using those that were banned in err, and they did give those people additional time on their WoW subscription, and to me that would imply that it is not "crossing the line". If you or anyone else is bringing up the ToS please quote the relevant portion -- so far everyone has missed the relevant portions but successfully quoted portions that don't apply. I'm backing up my response with things that have actually taken place, please explain what backs up your position if you're going to respond.

I understand and respect that it's your opinion, and you are free to have your opinion. I believe Blizzard's opinion of whether THAT is crossing the line is very clearly evidenced by history.