Icarus Studios News

Essentially all virtual worlds (and many other software types) rely on some version of an end-user license agreement (EULA), typically presented as a contract the user must agree to before running the program. EULAs proscribe actions related to use of the software, and are often used to grant legal rights to the producer against other individuals or companies that might try to subvert the intent of the software. For personal software, the EULA is entirely a guard against profit-loss. For multiplayer software, it is also a method to prevent actions that would ruin the experience for other users.

A recent example of this is the WoW Glider case. A company wrote software that automates many actions in World of Warcraft, allowing players to “bot” their characters and leave the computer while the program gathers game rewards and advancement. WoW’s publisher, Blizzard, argues that this is against its EULA, and the reason for the prohibition is that the program upsets the balance of the game and drastically reduces the fun for players that aren’t using WoW Glider (the game’s economy is based on human players not having the patience to engage in repetitive and unchallenging gameplay for hours at a time). The makers of WoW Glider argue that their program’s primary purpose is to patch a flaw in WoW’s design: the difficulty of catching up to higher level friends in order to play together.

The Electronic Frontiers Foundation would likely support WoW Glider, as their stance is that EULAs in general are dangerous to the rights of individuals under law. They argue that many EULAs are designed to stifle legal competition and consumer rights in ways not permitted under normal product laws. The full legal argument for WoW Glider is along these lines, and if Blizzard loses the case it could make a precedent against further EULA cases and methods of enforcing the producer’s rights. For many types of software, weaker EULAs could be a great boon to users who want to fairly compare softwares, develop competition or unauthorized accessories, or otherwise do things that are normally legal but not necessarily in the interests of the producer.

But in the case of MMOs, a weaker ability to enforce the EULA could wind up being a serious detriment to normal users, as third-party programs become acceptable and accounted for in balance, such that those that don’t have them play a much more difficult game. The structured nature of virtual worlds, designed to maintain the fiction of the simulated reality, has always been at odds with the normal freedom to innovate within the online space, and a weak EULA may lead to a profound shift from producer control to user modification. Is a player’s right to control his or her own experience in a virtual world irreparably at odds with a designer’s ability to provide a specific play experience for a large audience? Can a simulated reality really feel robust without the firm control of the producer?

If the EULA dies, will virtual worlds survive?

-Stephen Cheney, Virtual Worlds Team