WOW: World of Warcraft, Ebay and Selling your Game Box + A..

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

WOW: World of Warcraft, Ebay and Selling your Game Box + Account
Suspension

*Selling Game Box + Account*
If you were selling your World of Warcraft Game BOX and account in
eBay and Blizzard has canceled your account there are a few things you
can do:

First tell them you were not selling item(s) but were selling your
physical game box and account. Second ask them if it is their policy
to go against the doctrine of first sale of not allowing for the sale
of the game box.

Then if you have a subscription with them and paid with VISA and that
subscription was canceled by them call up visa and ask to CHARGE BACK
the subscription fee when you get your statement. Say you paid for a
month's access with blizzard yet they suspended your account so you
did not get full service. Feel free to tell them that you were
selling your physical game box on eBay but you were not selling
item(s).

If you can, try and charge back the game-box since it's now useless to
you.

There also have been reports of people putting up fake eBay listings
with other people's characters supposedly for sale, with eBay/blizzard
taking down those postings and suspending innocent/not involved
people. If this has happened to you try and talk to them, but I doubt
they will listen.

Smacker404

KW: eBay, World of Warcraft, WOW, blizzard, blizzard entertainment,
charge back, subscription, visa, account, account closed, closing,
suspension

Doctrine of first sale: if you buy a copyrighted work, like a book,
DVD or CD, you have the right to resell that item (like in a used book
store).

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

In article <bae5a343.0501291426.2f76b22e@posting.google.com>,
synfreenet@yahoo.ca (Synonymous) wrote:

> WOW: World of Warcraft, Ebay and Selling your Game Box + Account
> Suspension
>
> *Selling Game Box + Account*
> If you were selling your World of Warcraft Game BOX and account in
> eBay and Blizzard has canceled your account there are a few things you
> can do:
>
> First tell them you were not selling item(s) but were selling your
> physical game box and account. Second ask them if it is their policy
> to go against the doctrine of first sale of not allowing for the sale
> of the game box.

This is explicitly stated in the Terms Of Use -- Blizzards policy *IS*
counter to the doctrine of first sale; they do *NOT* recognize transfers
of account (or other WoW assets, of which your account is one) that
happen outside of Blizzard, and Blizzard doesn't transfer accounts.

Yeah, it really *IS* just that simple!

--
Please take off your shoes before arriving at my in-box.
I will not, no matter how "good" the deal, patronise any business which sends
unsolicited commercial e-mail or that advertises in discussion newsgroups.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

In article <bae5a343.0501291426.2f76b22e@posting.google.com>, Synonymous
wrote:
> First tell them you were not selling item(s) but were selling your
> physical game box and account. Second ask them if it is their policy to
> go against the doctrine of first sale of not allowing for the sale of the
> game box.

Generally, spouting legal terms you don't understand is not productive,
unless your goal is to make lawyers laugh.

....
> Doctrine of first sale: if you buy a copyrighted work, like a book, DVD or
> CD, you have the right to resell that item (like in a used book store).

Wrong. A more accurate statement of the doctrine of first sale would be:
if you own a copy of a copyrighted work, selling that copy does not violate
copyright.

Because of the doctrine of first sale, there's nothing much Blizzard can do
to stop anyone from selling their CD and game manual. However, there is
nothing in the doctrine of first sale, or any other part of copyright law,
that requires Blizzard to provide service to the buyer.

--
--Tim Smith

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

In article <Misc-DAD085.13264530012005@individual.net>, Miss Elaine Eos
wrote:
> This is explicitly stated in the Terms Of Use -- Blizzards policy *IS*
> counter to the doctrine of first sale; they do *NOT* recognize transfers
> of account (or other WoW assets, of which your account is one) that happen
> outside of Blizzard, and Blizzard doesn't transfer accounts.
>
> Yeah, it really *IS* just that simple!

No, it's not that simple. Blizzard's policy is neither in accord with nor
counter to first sale. It is orthogonal to first sale. First sale is a
matter of *copyright* law, which has nothing to do with WoW accounts.

--
--Tim Smith

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>No, it's not that simple. Blizzard's policy is neither in accord with nor
>counter to first sale. It is orthogonal to first sale. First sale is a
>matter of *copyright* law, which has nothing to do with WoW accounts.

No, first sale is a part of commercial law that overrides copyright law.

Ross Ridge

--
l/ // Ross Ridge -- The Great HTMU
[oo][oo] rridge@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
-()-/()/ http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/u/rridge/
db //

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

In article <ctpe0k$6t5$1@rumours.uwaterloo.ca>, Ross Ridge wrote:
> Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>No, it's not that simple. Blizzard's policy is neither in accord with nor
>>counter to first sale. It is orthogonal to first sale. First sale is a
>>matter of *copyright* law, which has nothing to do with WoW accounts.
>
> No, first sale is a part of commercial law that overrides copyright law.

Perhaps in Canada, where you seem to be posting from, but not in the US. In
the US, first sale was a judicially created doctrine of copyright law, and
was later codified into the copyright statute at 17 USC 109.

--
--Tim Smith

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

In article <UEQLd.3942$cl1.852@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

> Because of the doctrine of first sale, there's nothing much Blizzard can do
> to stop anyone from selling their CD and game manual. However, there is
> nothing in the doctrine of first sale, or any other part of copyright law,
> that requires Blizzard to provide service to the buyer.

Right. And that's the part I was trying to get at in my original:
Blizzards stated policy is that they will *NOT* provide service to the
buyer.

[earlier, I wrote]
> they do *NOT* recognize transfers
> of account (or other WoW assets, of which your account is one) that happen
> outside of Blizzard, and Blizzard doesn't transfer accounts.
>
> Yeah, it really *IS* just that simple!

My "it's really that simple" was meant to apply to this policy, not my
misstatement about Doctrine of First Sale. (Thanks for the catch, Tim!)

--
Please take off your shoes before arriving at my in-box.
I will not, no matter how "good" the deal, patronise any business which sends
unsolicited commercial e-mail or that advertises in discussion newsgroups.

 

[Shadows]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 2005-02-02, Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> In article <ctpe0k$6t5$1@rumours.uwaterloo.ca>, Ross Ridge wrote:
>> Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>>No, it's not that simple. Blizzard's policy is neither in accord with nor
>>>counter to first sale. It is orthogonal to first sale. First sale is a
>>>matter of *copyright* law, which has nothing to do with WoW accounts.
>>
>> No, first sale is a part of commercial law that overrides copyright law.
>
> Perhaps in Canada, where you seem to be posting from, but not in the US. In
> the US, first sale was a judicially created doctrine of copyright law, and
> was later codified into the copyright statute at 17 USC 109.

Was this before or after Canada burnt the White House?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 12:34:28 GMT, shadows wrote:

> On 2005-02-02, Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>> In article <ctpe0k$6t5$1@rumours.uwaterloo.ca>, Ross Ridge wrote:
>>> Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>>>No, it's not that simple. Blizzard's policy is neither in accord with nor
>>>>counter to first sale. It is orthogonal to first sale. First sale is a
>>>>matter of *copyright* law, which has nothing to do with WoW accounts.
>>>
>>> No, first sale is a part of commercial law that overrides copyright law.
>>
>> Perhaps in Canada, where you seem to be posting from, but not in the US. In
>> the US, first sale was a judicially created doctrine of copyright law, and
>> was later codified into the copyright statute at 17 USC 109.
>
> Was this before or after Canada burnt the White House?

Most likely after the US burned York.
--
RJB
2/2/2005 11:21:38 AM

I love California. I practically grew up in Phoenix.
--Dan Quayle

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>No, it's not that simple. Blizzard's policy is neither in accord with nor
>counter to first sale. It is orthogonal to first sale. First sale is a
>matter of *copyright* law, which has nothing to do with WoW accounts.

Ross Ridge wrote:
> No, first sale is a part of commercial law that overrides copyright law.

Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>Perhaps in Canada, where you seem to be posting from, but not in the US. In
>the US, first sale was a judicially created doctrine of copyright law, and
>was later codified into the copyright statute at 17 USC 109.

Hmm... you're right. My mistake.

Ross Ridge

--
l/ // Ross Ridge -- The Great HTMU
[oo][oo] rridge@csclub.uwaterloo.ca
-()-/()/ http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/u/rridge/
db //