Crime Blizzard Suing Alleged StarCraft 2 Hackers

[The Helper]

Earlier this month, Blizzard banned over 5,000 StarCraft 2 players from Battle.net for using cheats and hacks in online matches. Now Blizzard is taking a step further to go after the source, as GameSpot reports they've filed suit in the Los Angeles U.S. District Court against three alleged hackers they claim were responsible for creating and selling the StarCraft 2 cheats and hacks to begin with.

As the lawsuit reads, "Just days after the release of Starcraft 2, Defendants already had developed, marketed, and distributed to the public a variety of hacks and cheats designed to modify (and in fact destroy) the Starcraft 2 online game experience. In fact, on the very day that Starcraft 2 was released, representatives of the hacks Web site advised members of the public that 'our staff is already planning new releases for this game.'"

Blizzard claims the hacks violated the end-user license agreement for StarCraft 2, the Battle.net terms of use, and even copyright law. "When users of the Hacks download, install, and use the Hacks, they copy StarCraft 2 copyrighted content into their computer's RAM in excess of the scope of their limited license, as set forth in the EULA and ToU, and create derivative works of StarCraft 2," the lawsuit claims.

More about it here.

 

[Jedimindtrixxx]

good for them, sort of. i dont know if they are doing this to stop hackers, or because they are money hungry.

nontheless, less hacking in sc2 :thup:

i still remember the good old day in wc2 bnet where youd have winbots that set up matches and gave you free wins, and diablo 1 where you could change EVERYTHING about your char and even make your own weapons :3
hack prevention has come a long way

 

[Sevion]

Yes, it has. Now we've come so far as to sue them.

 

[Vellu]

I think the bans are enough. But those three guys made their cheats commercial, so I don't know. It's Blizzard's game.

 

[Vestras]

This stuff kind of worries me. Since I develop StarCraft 2 applications, in this case a third party editor, I'm worried that Blizzard may sue me too, especially if we implement some kind of debugger.
I'm unsure of how far this would go - do you guys think they would sue third party editor developers like me?

 

[Dan]

This stuff kind of worries me. Since I develop StarCraft 2 applications, in this case a third party editor, I'm worried that Blizzard may sue me too, especially if we implement some kind of debugger.
I'm unsure of how far this would go - do you guys think they would sue third party editor developers like me?

No.

_______________________________________________________________

As for "the bans are enough"... with the money that these guys make distributing their hack, They could easily buy another account. It's definitely not enough.


I Love that Blizzard is going after these people. If the community could, you know that they would chop off these hacker's balls for this d-bag move anyways. I know I would like to slap a hoe. These hacks break the game for so many people and it is just stupid. Good for them for figuring out HOW to hack the game... but really... use your powers for good, not being a d-bag.

 

[phyrex1an]

This stuff kind of worries me. Since I develop StarCraft 2 applications, in this case a third party editor, I'm worried that Blizzard may sue me too, especially if we implement some kind of debugger.
I'm unsure of how far this would go - do you guys think they would sue third party editor developers like me?

I'd send an email and ask blizzard if I where you. Being sued is probably not the biggest risk, being banned sounds rather likely actually.
FYI, blizzard is banning players who uses hacks in single player too.

 

[FireCat]

Hackers get what they deserve!

 

[Ninja_sheep]

FYI, blizzard is banning players who uses hacks in single player too.

Why would you even do that?

 

[seph ir oth]

One could say that this is "cold" of the company, but it "chills" my thoughts knowing that they are banning these people.

 

[Ninja_sheep]

Along with the fact that banning hackers get a better gaming expirience it also means more $$$ for blizz because at least some of those hackers are going to buy another copy of the game.

edit: I should've edited that in my previous post :>

 

[2-P]

“Blizzard Entertainment is not banning StarCraft II players just for using single-player cheats. There’s been some confusion in the last couple of days about the suspensions and bans meted out to players caught cheating in StarCraft II. It’s important to point out first, that many of the 3rd-party hacks and cheats developed for StarCraft II contain both single- and multiplayer functionality. In order to protect the integrity of multiplayer competition, we are actively detecting cheat programs used in multiplayer modes whether there are human opponents or not.

That said, players who opt to use any type of 3rd party hacks do so at their own risk — there are already built-in cheat codes for StarCraft II single-player that can be used safely. Blizzard Entertainment has always taken cheating seriously and will continue to aggressively crackdown on players who cheat in our games.”

Besides the fact that you deserve to be banned just for being stupid enough to even use hacks in single player.

do you guys think they would sue third party editor developers like me?

No.

 

[Slapshot136]

do you guys think they would sue third party editor developers like me?

not unless you were charging money for it

 

[phyrex1an]

Besides the fact that you deserve to be banned just for being stupid enough to even use hacks in single player.

I guess you're posting that quote as a proof for blizzard banning single player cheaters? Because that what it says.

we are actively detecting cheat programs used in multiplayer modes whether there are human opponents or not.
No human opponents happens to be the same thing as single player... Ofc, blizzard doesn't really want to put it that way, that's why they use double speak like "multiplayer mode" when they really mean you playing against a computer.

Now, the entire point of this is that developers of 3rd party programs (like Vestras who is thinking of making a debugger) is at risk being banned even if they only test their programs in single player.

Hence, my point still stands. Vestras should contact blizzard and ask them if he is at risk of being banned.

 

[Dan]

I guess you're posting that quote as a proof for blizzard banning single player cheaters? Because that what it says.

we are actively detecting cheat programs used in multiplayer modes whether there are human opponents or not.
No human opponents happens to be the same thing as single player... Ofc, blizzard doesn't really want to put it that way, that's why they use double speak like "multiplayer mode" when they really mean you playing against a computer.

Now, the entire point of this is that developers of 3rd party programs (like Vestras who is thinking of making a debugger) is at risk being banned even if they only test their programs in single player.

Hence, my point still stands. Vestras should contact blizzard and ask them if he is at risk of being banned.

In a very extremely hypothetical and completely unnecessary way: yes, this would be true. But in the real world, when you understand the different degrees... no. You see we live in a world where you have to cover yourself with tons of documentation in case someone tries fishy stuff... like hacking and the such. Most people break the law many times a month. The point is that you usually are not really doing anything very harmful. It takes motivation for someone to care enough to take legal action. If you aren't hurting anyone, then it won't be motivating for anyone to care. In your case, you are but a grain of sand in the desert posing no harm to anyone... for now. Don't cross the line. here it is ---> ______________

so my point still stands.

No.

 

[phyrex1an]

In a very extremely hypothetical and completely unnecessary way: yes, this would be true. But in the real world, when you understand the different degrees... no. You see we live in a world where you have to cover yourself with tons of documentation in case someone tries fishy stuff... like hacking and the such. Most people break the law many times a month. The point is that you usually are not really doing anything very harmful. It takes motivation for someone to care enough to take legal action. If you aren't hurting anyone, then it won't be motivating for anyone to care. In your case, you are but a grain of sand in the desert posing no harm to anyone... for now. Don't cross the line. here it is ---> ______________

so my point still stands.

I stopped talking about suing and started talking about banning a long time ago. Banning is a largely automated process and no one but blizzard can really say if their automated tools would flag a debugger as hacking tool or not. So, yet again my point still stands: Ask blizzard if you want to be sure. Read forum posts if you want to be "extremely hypothetical".

Edit: I'm actually somewhat puzzled as to why you write that response to me? Not once in this thread has I argued against your "no" response to the "can I be sued?" question Vestras asked.

 

[Dan]

I stopped talking about suing and started talking about banning a long time ago. Banning is a largely automated process and no one but blizzard can really say if their automated tools would flag a debugger as hacking tool or not. So, yet again my point still stands: Ask blizzard if you want to be sure. Read forum posts if you want to be "extremely hypothetical".

Edit: I'm actually somewhat puzzled as to why you write that response to me? Not once in this thread has I argued against your "no" response to the "can I be sued?" question Vestras asked.

idk. friends? <3

 

[Slapshot136]

there are single-player cheats for the campaign, so it's not like people need to use hacks for that anyways, except for the achievements (which the "official" cheats disable), and the only point of achievements is so you can brag in multilayer about them, so I don't have any problem with blizzard banning people who are trying to cheat their way into getting achievements they don't deserve

 

[Ioannes]

This stuff kind of worries me. Since I develop StarCraft 2 applications, in this case a third party editor, I'm worried that Blizzard may sue me too, especially if we implement some kind of debugger.
I'm unsure of how far this would go - do you guys think they would sue third party editor developers like me?

As many of the people above me said, no.

To elaborate, it is generally not a practice of game companies to sue people who do additional coding work on a game after they've bought a copy. Nobody sued the programmers who made the maphacks or the hero editors for D2. Or the various bonus apps for WoW that show you this and that on your HUD. EA or DICE didn't initiate legal action against the people who made the BF64SP mod, which allows you to play the really big maps with bots (to play them you'd normally need human players). Or the people who came together to make the Project Reality mod. These people produced additional pieces of code for the games and got away with it.

The reason for that is because the mods and other gadgets were free. Available for anyone with decent internet connection, the Jamellas and the mods were just a voluntary addition by fans who wanted to alter their game experience. TRUE, maphacks do result in CDkey bans by Activision Blizzard when in battle.net, but the hacks that do not give an unfair advantage are not ban-able. I suppose that free mods and so on are tolerated by game makers because they raise the interest in the game. If in world #1 there is the game Battlefield1942 that is unmod-able and in world #2 there exists an identical game Battlefield1942 which IS modifiable, then in world #2 people will generally be a bit more willing to buy it. A more extreme and relevant example is Blizzard's releases of map editors: would you still be playing Wc3 if the whole game was confined to the melee mode and a thing or two from the campaign? Obviously no, and there's the fact that some maps, like DotA have actually presented "games-in-the-game" that are arguably as popular as the original melee mode that ActiBlizz intended people to play Wc3 in. That's doubling the lifespan of the thing inside your WarCraft3: Reign of Chaos box. To the best of my knowledge.

Why would ActiBlizz then disapprove of purchase-able add-ons for their games? Well, I'd say it has an opposing effect to what I just said. In other words, once the cheats and hacks come out some people will start using them and others won't. Those who use them, although eventually banned, like Blizz did to maphackers, will generally be more successful than fair players and so fair players will lose more often. This will encourage fair players to become unfair and try out those hacks so that the odds are even. And so the hackmakers will have made money first when people just want to try the hacks and second when people want to get the hacks to counter other people's hacks. Which means that the hackmakers will have polluted a game (StarCraftII) made by someone else (Activision Blizzard) and profited. Activision Blizzard suffers from all this because the fair, objective Bnet gameplay is hurt and SC2 will be less fun and people will be less willing to buy/play it (because the real expense to play will be £34.99 - Amazon.co.uk - PLUS an additional £5-£10 or whatever). And so not only sales will drop due to the increased price but also ActiBlizz will not be compensated for that reduction and will have to share its profits with 3 wise guys from LA. Activision Blizzard doesn't have to share profits from RoC+TFT with the guys who made DotA, so it's fine, no court. But the hackers were technically taking some of ActiBlizz's money and that pissed Metzen&co. off).

I've probably exaggerated the numbers, but I'm pretty sure about the logic. And so, Vestras, as long as your work thus improves the longevity and interest in any Activision Blizzard product, you're cool.

 

[Adovid]

I dislike hackers as much as the next guy when playing in battle.net but--

Copyright infringement on the same machine in RAM? That's ridiculous, what if you open up more than one instance of the game, are you breaking the law then?