2011-09-11, 06:35 PM
Owl Wrote:Eos are YOU a lawyer???
And there's a massive difference between slapping a sticker in a car and destroying PHYSICAL property as opposed to something that exists in a VIRTUAL world. Nexon owns the rights to the "property" that we the "players" consider ours. But we don't OWN any of it, as stated by Nexon in the terms of service. ""all content included therein (including without limitation graphics, artwork, music, choreography, characters, character IDs, Forum IDs, account IDs, Cash Items and/or other items acquired or created in the Service, including through the Cash Shop) are owned by Nexon America or its licensors," What we sign up for, by playing the game is the RIGHT to USE the PROPERTY of Nexon. This is why they have the right to revoke any rights we have to use their property in the form of banning players from the game, rollbacks, etc.
Lets bring that to the car analogy from previously. But lets say, instead of YOUR car, it's your friends car. "Hey man, here's a car for you to use a long as you want" Woo! Free car! So you take this car, and put a ton of money into it, put in new upholstery, tint the windows, and add amazing stereo. It's a super awesome car now!
Well, then someone comes along, and since the car is say, of older design, it's easy to break in to. But your friend didn't know that when he LOANED it to you. The jerk that breaks in, steals your crap, pisses all over the interior, and breaks your windows. It's completely un-usable now unless you start all over to repair it.
What are you going to do now? Sue your friend because he didn't know it was an easy target to break into? Demand that your friend pay you all the money you put into the car because it was HIS car to start with?? I think not. I'm not a massive fan of Nexon by any means, but I doubt they were very aware that they had made a huge hole in their security. Either way, it's their game, we don't own a single pixal of it.
By that same logic, how would tenants of apartment be able to file a suit against irresponsible land owners? If an apartment that you've rented out (not your property but that of a landlord) is in a liveable condition and, over a given amount of time, somehow becomes unlivable through, say, another tenant busting their pipes and flooding their apartment, consequently causing water damage to your own, the overall responsibility falls towards both the other tenant and the land lord. If the landlord decides to perform renovations and your apartment becomes damaged then it's still the land lord's responsibility. If the landlord leaves the apartment building unlocked during the night with no security at the door, and you somehow got robbed, it's the land lord's responsibility.
You see where I'm getting at here? We're allowed to use Nexon's property, but if something befalls Nexon which would compromise our use of their property, the responsibility still lies with Nexon, whether or not their terms of service says it does or does not.
The problem with your analogy is that Nexon is also responsible for the protection of our accounts on their servers, unlike your friend with the car. Of course Nexon isn't responsible for hackings that happen to an individual, whose particular situation was totally random and out of their control. The difference is that this was within their control. No one dare say anything along the lines of "Well all things can be hacked" because if they could have fixed this problem after the fact, they could have easily done it before.
The most similar real life situation to this would be when Sony got hacked (I'm not saying Sony is as bad as Nexon, I'm just comparing the similarities of the situations) and user information for thousands of customers were left in the open to be taken, the blame didn't go to the customers, the blame went towards Sony. I'm pretty sure that Sony's terms of use for PSN is similar in wording to Nexon's in which they're not responsible for so and so. That lack of responsibility can apply to stuff like selling accounts, trading stuff for real life money, hacking, but it can't apply to something that is, in every way you look at it, the company's fault.

