WoW 3.1 Multibox love :) Looting on all clients

[Iceorbz]

I wasn't saying what should or should not be, I was pointing out the argument that "If Program X gets banned/subject to regulation/whatever (WoWglider, Napster), copy cats with just crop up to replace it, therefore we shouldn't have banned the original in the first place" is invalid by reductio ad absurdum. There's a market for human trafficing, and shutting down one ring means another will just pop up to replace it. By applying that same reasoning, we shouldn't bother shutting down human trafficing.

There's a plethora of reasons why you can call the decision made in this case wrong. "People will still do it anyway" isn't one of them.

If it's deemed wrong then it will be, but based on response on the wow forums to topic and such i think blizzard ent. gave to much PR to this case and probably made their problems worse. How many people went to check out napster and limewire when they were in the media, i know personally i did. I picked up a copy of DVD X-Copy when it was being published by 3-2-1 Studios and a little article came into my gaming magazine about how it worked and the MPAA was all pissed off about, off to the store i went to get a copy. I just think the way blizzard is playing this out presents a false sense of security to other wow players, as soon as one company goes down many more pop up since the market share is open. I really don't think alot of players realize that since the case and free advertisements, subscriptions have probably gone up. I mean honestly, they went after a company of 4-5 people on a case that will be looked at by many in regards to digital copyrights and software laws. And I really believe that we would see different rulings (at this current point in time) if the people making the software were a bit bigger and more powerful. I really just don't want to see what I can & cant use on my computer get dicated by a company, and have it legally binding. If it breaks a rule, or is against there terms ( where they could just deny service ) thats fine, but being able to fine and put someone in jail for it? I think its absurd.

[Souca]

Were talking about hundreds of thousands of people that have done this does it mean we should send them all to jail for putting apps apple doesn't want on a phone *you* purchased?

Dear god! We need to act right now! Hundreds of thousand of god fearing citizens are going to go to jail! The sky is falling, the sky is falling!

- Souca -

*sigh* Not going to waste my time point out things to someone with tunnel vision, our conversation here is over and is starting to derail this thread.

How nice of you to classify me as having tunnel vision. You know nothing of my point on the matter, yet you feel capable of defining my views? My response was based off the manner in which you have been discussing this topic. You provide no basis for your arguments while making wild accusations and tangential suppositions that people will end up in jail. This isn't a conversation; this is you having a nerdrage over something without bothering to actually discuss it.

If you had cited your sources for all your claims, I would have read them and considered them, but as it stands you come off as someone on rant with no real concept of the situation. It doesn't matter if you are right or fully understand what is going on if you can't remain rational enough to discuss it.

As for claiming I'm derailing the thread, that's pretty hypocritical for someone talking about the legal implications of a court case in a thread about a new keybinding. We were speculating if the change in keybinds were related to the case, not whether the case was an injustice or held merit. I do believe you took us into that area.

I welcome a rebuttal or a discussion, but I have a feeling I will likely just get a personal attack or claims that I have no idea what I'm talking about. If the latter is the case, I can give you an apropriate response in advance: "mad cuz ur bad?"

- Souca -