Quesion to you lawyer types...

[Devin]

Computer crime and hacking are a crime, and in addition to civil claim can fall under the criminal code, especially where there is financial loss. Might change a thing or two if gree didn't simply ban a hacker, but had them charged for computer crime and/or persued civil claim. Is there any reason you can see that a hacker in modern war would be exempt from civil or criminal prosecution?

Conspiracy to commit fraud. If gree fails to act, is complacent because the computer crime benefits them, or worse knowingly tolerates or supports it, would that not see gree potentially subject to laws around conspiracy to commit fraud?

Edit: no I'm not proposing anyone start calling lawyers to action, it's more a mental question I am curious about... And when I'm curious I ask questions of those that know more than I.

I'm not saying gree is doing this or not doing this, or if they're doing a good/bad job (although there's certainly no confidence they have a handle on modern war hacking). PJ does identify key problems with computer crime, being limited resources and jurisdiction.

I have, in a past life, been involved in an online gaming system (no cash transactions), and we had the FBI involved in 1 computer crime/hacking situation...and we were purely free, no monies or other forms of payment.

[Zach3432]

I can only ask my girlfriend when she wakes up. Although she might not want to think about any other law subject until after finals are over. I'll be more than happy to try or research it now that I am curious.

[Yankster]

Shoot I've got a great legal question for those of you who love challenges...

[PIRATE JUSTICE]

Criminal charges bring publicity, assuming a stae prosecutor would even pursue such actions.

A county level prosecutor in California, for example, would not want to waste limited resources pursuing an alleged criminal in South Carolina, for instance.

I doubt that any US Attorney would take much interest in tying up federal investigative and prosecutoriual resources with these types of level actions.

A US Attorney could easily pursue a target in Alabama while operating out of San Francisco. But, that same US Attorney would have no interest pursuing an alleged perpetrator residing in London, Berlin, or Seoul.

I think you begin to see the complexity of criminal charges, which I'm sure the VICTIM wouldn't want to frighten away potential customers with this bad publicity.

[Devin]

Criminal charges bring publicity, assuming a stae prosecutor would even pursue such actions.

A county level prosecutor in California, for example, would not want to waste limited resources pursuing an alleged criminal in South Carolina, for instance.

I doubt that any US Attorney would take much interest in tying up federal investigative and prosecutoriual resources with these types of level actions.

A US Attorney could easily pursue a target in Alabama while operating out of San Francisco. But, that same US Attorney would have no interest pursuing an alleged perpetrator residing in London, Berlin, or Seoul.

I think you begin to see the complexity of criminal charges, which I'm sure the VICTIM wouldn't want to frighten away potential customers with this bad publicity.

Got it on why gree would have a disincentive and potentially no luck getting criminal charges against a hacker laid. And civil action?

And conspiracy to commit fraud?

[PIRATE JUSTICE]

Got it on why gree would have a disincentive and potentially no luck getting criminal charges against a hacker laid. And civil action?

And conspiracy to commit fraud?

Any adult playing here can bring a civil action on their own behalf in the equivalent of a small claims court in their locale.

A conspiracy case, that's in the criminal realm again.

That's also much harder to prove a conspiracy.

[ohgreatitsryan]

Because of the cumulative penalties involved with contest violations in California, and the specific disbursement of funds required in the applicable limitation of action, a California prosecutor would actually be very interested in taking the case, I would assume.
Due to the dollar figures involved it would be potentially career making, if they were to win.
Fair contest violations would be the best option, and the most applicable, but they prevent a private right of action.

[WI(AusNz)]

Would this be like McDonald's taking someone to court because they littered the hamburger wrapper?

Does'nt really make sense to me..

[Devin]

Would this be like McDonald's taking someone to court because they littered the hamburger wrapper?

Does'nt really make sense to me..

Hacking mw causes gree financial harm, as the hackers deprive gree of it's revenue stream and create costs gree must pay to clean up and remediate. If this forum is to be believed, the value of the losses would exceed $5,000, which is a thresthold in usa law re computer crime. That is more than an irritation to gree, that's flat out illegal and can result in criminal prosecution. Gree also has rights under civil law (aka sue a hacker).

It's a bit different with McDonald as its a physical good, but, if you stole $5,000 worth of cheeseburgers that is also illegal.

[bahighroller]

Hacking mw causes gree financial harm, as the hackers deprive gree of it's revenue stream and create costs gree must pay to clean up and remediate. If this forum is to be believed, the value of the losses would exceed $5,000, which is a thresthold in usa law re computer crime. That is more than an irritation to gree, that's flat out illegal and can result in criminal prosecution. Gree also has rights under civil law (aka sue a hacker).

It's a bit different with McDonald as its a physical good, but, if you stole $5,000 worth of cheeseburgers that is also illegal.

Actually if the people hacking would never have bought gold in the first place it is costing Gree nothing. I would argue it actually makes Gree more money as others that obviously have more money than most to spend on a game then buy more gold to keep up with those hackers. I don't have dog in this fight. I buy a little gold but not much, $20 a month maybe. and thats not every month. I also don't hack. but ill be honest because the game has been so slanted toward the richest real life players I don't blame people for it. They allow everyone no matter their ability to spend to play the game. problem is gold is SO expensive that unless you have the discretionary income to spend thousands of dollars a month on this game you have no chance to ever be anywhere near the top. So new players coming in basically have 2 choices, spend that kind of money if they can to be near the top. Or if they cant then just plan on never being able to get near the top no matter how smart you think you are at the game. I take that back. the 3rd choice is to not play but why should people have to quit playing only because they are not rich? Don't you think a more even playing field would be more fun and challenging? I mean I can be the biggest baddest player here if I just hit powerball and spend about $100k real money to do it. How is that fun for the ones who cannot do that? And don't we want new players to keep coming in so the game doesn't go stale?

[Max Power]

You would have to be able to prove true loss and the ends would have to justify the means. I think the latter is why many actionable claims are never filed. It's just gonna cost you more than you will get.

[-TANGO-]

The farmer is nearly ready to take his cattle to the 'house' why does he care how much of his grass they ate?