Account Termination

[The Real Sandro]

If I was BeatingU I would be arguing that my account is an entity in-and-of itself, and the account is sold something akin to how you sell a business - assets/bank accounts and all. This value can be greater if the account/business has a good reputation - this is called "goodwill".

The sum of gold in the bank could be seen as an asset of the account as a whole, and therefore it comes with the account as an entity in-and-of itself - therefore the value of the gold appreciates at the point of sale because it is sold for more gold due to the nature of the account.

It's too bad BeatingU has probably already tried to get by on some kind of nonsense argument which has no basis because it conflicts with what he said.

Terrible shame.

I think if the time and effort is put in, one should be able to sell their stuff. I looked at what he was putting on the table, and obviously it could have went for a good bit.

On the flip side, I have 2 words, "Contract Law." Derrick posted in the forums, I think, on February 29th 2009 stating that an individual(s) can have their accounts banned if the individual participates in selling their in game items for currency.

I all the sudden got really lazy while typing this out, so I am not going to go into the detail I planned on at the beginning. However I will end you with a little something.

The only individuals who can really have a case against Derrick are individuals who created an account before his post and "had full intentions" of selling their in game items for currency. Therefore an entity in some sense could have been created, but this would be considered more of an hobby. There really isn't a goodwill presence here. Beatingu wasn't selling his business because their wasn't one ever created. Their isn't a fair market value benchmark either on the UO items. Only thing Beatingu could do is go after whether or not it's reasonable for Derrick to not allow this transaction. However this will not work for obvious reasons. Derrick wins.

Also, don't be like me and protect yourself by investing in identity theft insurance!

[Mens Rea]

If you knew anything about contract law then you'd know that a contract is not binding without CONSIDERATION.

But hey - I don't expect laypeople to understand the finer points of what they are talking about when they get into legal discussions. Let me boil it down for you - OFFER + ACCEPTANCE + CONSIDERATION FLOWING BETWEEN THE PARTIES + INTENTION TO CREATE LEGAL RELATIONS = CONTRACT. Sorry nancy boy but not today.

Derrick doesn't need to rely on contract law - there is no consideration flowing between the users and Derrick which creates a binding contract. Rather, Derrick let's people connect to his private property - akin to letting people into his house - and he can let people in and out as he pleases. It doesn't matter what Derrick purports to be a "contract" - it is unenforceable on his side, and it is unenforceable on our side. Don't even try to pretend you know the first thing about contract law. You didn't get lazy, you just all of a sudden realized that you have no idea what you are talking about.

[GuardianKnight]

So if I were to visit derrick and try to stay at his house for 2 months for free and eat all his food, would there be a loophole that says that I deserve to do it?

Let's get our best people on this!

[Mens Rea]

If he knew you were there and either assented or acquiesced your presence then he would have very little, if anything, in terms of recourse to recover the cost of accomdation or food from you. However, if he asked you to leave you would have to leave as you then become a trespasser.

If Derrick had said come and stay at my house for 2 months for a nominal sum of $1, and you had agreed to this and payed the money, and you ate his food and stayed at his house then - providing there is no specific regional law providing minimum entitlements in residential tenancies or leases - this would be prima facie an enforceable contract and you could sue Derrick for the cost of finding equivilent accomdation for the remainder of the 2 month period if he unilaterally terminated the contract.

If he didn't know you were there/did not consent to you being there then you would have committed a criminal offence.

Whether or not you deserve to do it is a question of morality and does not come into contract law - unless there is specific legislation or common law which covers situations like unconscionability, oppression, duress, incapacity, etc.

In short - don't annoy Derrick because he can do whatever he likes irl and on his server. His rules are his policies and there is no binding contract between you and Derrick - you cannot have his decisions reviewed in any way, shape or form so people like BeatingU are owned 1 vs 1.

[Hemperor]

At the end of the day, the people caught trying to sell stuff for money are consistantly the ones that do not donate...

Put yourself in Derrick's position, attending to the server daily at no-profit and then every so often some guy goes and sells his ingame stuff for hundreds.

I think it's just common decency, if this were a pay to play server it would be different.

[Ronk]

What if someones account was sold for food...isn't that a moral delima? Not really, but some people think everything is a moral delima.

[Kelektra]

What if someones account was sold for food...isn't that a moral delima? Not really, but some people think everything is a moral delima.

So someone has the money for a computer and internet access but doesnt have money for food?

[SJane3384]

Agreed with the action here. BeatingU was an ok guy, but he had this coming in a lot of different ways for awhile. The dude was just plain dishonest in all dealings here (in comically stupid ways a lot of the time).

I do have a question though, relating sort of back to the Chaos/Pristiq post. Say I am broke as hell in RL (I am), but I want to help out the shard with donations. Would it be alright to sell ingame gold/items to help the shard? Transactions could be done transparently in the forums, and all proof would take was a screenshot of the payment made.

In the past, I've thought of doing something similar to a White Elephant Auction, with ingame stuff, and RL donations. It would be awesome (and helpful to the shard), but the "legality" of the thing seemed iffy.

So someone has the money for a computer and internet access but doesn't have money for food?

A little off-topic, but I've actually almost been there recently. We're in BAD financial shape, but since my husband's job requires internet, it was actually more important than food in a way. So I guess in a weird way (though ridiculously unlikely), Ronk's suggestion is plausible.

[The Real Sandro]

If you knew anything about contract law then you'd know that a contract is not binding without CONSIDERATION.

But hey - I don't expect laypeople to understand the finer points of what they are talking about when they get into legal discussions. Let me boil it down for you - OFFER + ACCEPTANCE + CONSIDERATION FLOWING BETWEEN THE PARTIES + INTENTION TO CREATE LEGAL RELATIONS = CONTRACT. Sorry nancy boy but not today.

Derrick doesn't need to rely on contract law - there is no consideration flowing between the users and Derrick which creates a binding contract. Rather, Derrick let's people connect to his private property - akin to letting people into his house - and he can let people in and out as he pleases. It doesn't matter what Derrick purports to be a "contract" - it is unenforceable on his side, and it is unenforceable on our side. Don't even try to pretend you know the first thing about contract law. You didn't get lazy, you just all of a sudden realized that you have no idea what you are talking about.

You took this on a personal level with only a very basic understanding of what you are talking about. I don't need to go in detail with you due to your lack of credibility. You are the one who tried to bring goodwill into the discussion when there clearly isn't a presence. This should have been a red flag for me knowing I am dealing with an individual who doesn't understand business. However, if you are so interested and want to move forward and expand on your knowledge, you should look into FMV, or Fair Market Value. Consideration is the most irrelevant part of a contract due to FMV, and I don't want to write a book explaining why. Besides, I am not confident in your intelligence level at this point. Don't take it so hard nancy boy once you spend the 3 hours discovering you are wrong. Derrick can enforce his ruleset and his post about selling items against anyone creating an account on his shard. Their is a service provided, and the consideration is equal to 0 in this case. Offer and acceptance is also present because he has his rulset clearly visable on his webpage. So if litigation ever occured he is protected. I see where this is going, and it's only going to be a headache for me, so get your last word in, but you are not confusing the people who know what they are talking about.

[Kabal]

He broke the rules and now hes banned . . . period.

[Corbin]

I do have a question though, relating sort of back to the Chaos/Pristiq post. Say I am broke as hell in RL (I am), but I want to help out the shard with donations. Would it be alright to sell ingame gold/items to help the shard? Transactions could be done transparently in the forums, and all proof would take was a screenshot of the payment made.

No because there is far too much room for exploiting something like that.

[Mens Rea]

Dear Nancy Boy,

You are completely ignorant for these reasons:

"You are the one who tried to bring goodwill into the discussion when there clearly isn't a presence."

You will note I was making an analogy - "sold something *akin* to how you sell a business", "gold in the bank *could be seen as* an asset of the account as a whole". I'm sorry that you never learned to read, and being in the second year of your commerce degree isn't doing anything to change that. Please learn to read and understand when people are being figurative and reasoning by analogy. I never said he could argue the existance of goodwill in real life, rather, something akin to goodwill AS A REASON TO JUSTIFY ASKING FOR GOLD TO PURCHASE GOLD AS PART OF AN ACCOUNT. You seem to have missed this.

"Their is a service provided, and the consideration is equal to 0 in this case."

No. Consideration must have value. This is a fundamental principle of the formation of a contract. Contracts without valuable consideration are unenforceable. PS you are an idiot.

"So if litigation ever occured he is protected."

Litigation won't occur. Not in the jurisdiction of contract law, anyway. Please go and complete a law degree before trying to engage with me this subject. PS you are an idiot.

"I see where this is going, and it's only going to be a headache for me..."

Kind of like trying to tow a big load with a very small engine. Listen to it whine. PS you are an idiot.

"...so get your last word in..."

Okay here goes. PS you are an idiot.

"...but you are not confusing the people who know what they are talking about."

That's because so far I am the only one who knows what I/they are talking about. PS you are an idiot.

[Mens Rea]

In the past, I've thought of doing something similar to a White Elephant Auction, with ingame stuff, and RL donations. It would be awesome (and helpful to the shard), but the "legality" of the thing seemed iffy.

There are 4 elements to the offence of selling in game wares/accounts for money - viewtopic.php?f=11&t=5204

"Soliciting"
"anything on Second age"
"for real currency, or in trade for items of tangible value/expense"
"through the forums, be it public or private communication or in IRC or in-game"

If you can say you are doing all these things then it is not "legal" to do it on the shard and Derrick can use his discretion to own you 1 vs 1 like BeatingU. I'd be asking what soliciting is in this context.

[Hans]

I do have a question though, relating sort of back to the Chaos/Pristiq post. Say I am broke as hell in RL (I am), but I want to help out the shard with donations. Would it be alright to sell ingame gold/items to help the shard? Transactions could be done transparently in the forums, and all proof would take was a screenshot of the payment made.

No because there is far too much room for exploiting something like that.

Indeed, give them an inch and they'll take a mile.

If you are broke IRL and you want to help the shard, there are many ways to do this. Help a new player get started (training, tips, etc). Answer questions in IRC or on forums. Get involved with the community.

AS A REASON TO JUSTIFY ASKING FOR GOLD TO PURCHASE GOLD AS PART OF AN ACCOUNT.

Not to butt in to your argument, but it is absurd to charge gold for gold. If I give you 5mil gp plus other goods, and then you give me 10mil gp as payment, why wouldn't you just give me 5mil gp for the goods and call it even?

[Mens Rea]

Not to butt in to your argument, but it is absurd to charge gold for gold. If I give you 5mil gp plus other goods, and then you give me 10mil gp as payment, why wouldn't you just give me 5mil gp for the goods and call it even?

good will: (accounting) an intangible asset valued according to the advantage or reputation a business has acquired (over and above its tangible assets) - http://www.google.co.nz/search?hl=en&so ... l0.2.5.1.1

I made a figurative comment that BeatingU could REASON BY ANALOGY to say he was demonstrating the overall value of his account to sell it akin to how you would sell a business. When you sell a company, for instance, you don't empty the bank accounts rather they are sold with the company. BeatingU could (AS AN ANALOGY TO SELLING A BUSINESS) argue (TO DERRICK) that he was selling his account for gold but mentioned the gold on the accounts to demonstrate the value of the accounts - so he could acquire a higher gold value through goodwill.