[T] KFTC Says Blizzard Must Change B.net Terms - Page 7

On June 22 2010 07:45 JayDee_ wrote:


I'm a new user ( coming from the quake community ), but this concerns me. Why was this user banned for this post? It isn't spam or malicious, he's just stating his opinion on the subject.

On June 22 2010 05:00 illu wrote:


Wait. Say I wrote a novel using Microsoft Word, since I used tools created by Microsoft, does that mean that Microsoft owns the copyright of my novel?

Similarly, if I make a movie using Microsoft Movie maker specifically to be played by Microsoft Media Player, does Microsoft own copyright for that, too?

Now, if I make a map using Blizzard's map maker specifically to be played for a Blizzard's game, should Blizzard own copyright for that,too?

I believe replays and maps should be free, but not owned by Blizzard. I think it's more fair if they were under some sort of GNU license.

On June 22 2010 13:45 Grond wrote:
How about banks should be controlled by the government because their executives can behave recklessly and force the taxpayers to give them hundreds of billions of dollars so the economy doesn't collapse? I'm not sure what your experience is with Blizzard but this is not the same Blizzard that put out Starcraft and Warcraft 3.

On June 22 2010 15:16 dogabutila wrote:



Different licences and purposes for the software to begin with. Nice try, but your example was too simplistic.




Not the same blizzard, a merger and a BUNCH of personell changes later.....



For all those on ~page3 saying being banned from B.net would make it impossible to play the game, incorrect. There will be an offline mode as stated many, many times in blizzard interviews. SP // campaigns will be playable, obviously you wont get achievements and stuff from it though. Just don't do anything questionable or be a dick to people online and you wont get banned anyways.

On June 22 2010 21:39 sikyon wrote:
I really don't see what the problem everyone has with EULAs is. It's a contract between you and a company. Unless it violates some fundamental law (ie you can't sell yourself into slavery), what's wrong with it? Furthermore, if you don't like it, just don't agree to it. It's not like you have a right to play computer games or use computer software.

On June 22 2010 05:11 Half wrote:
Please explain to me who would buy that replay.

On June 22 2010 02:44 NuKedUFirst wrote:


This makes me extremely angry, but alot of websites are like this, If Dustin Browder gets in a fight with his wife (just an example) he could go on a Battle.net banning spree just because he can, similar to Xbox, Youtube, etc. They claim they can take your account away without question, etc.

On June 22 2010 21:39 sikyon wrote:
I really don't see what the problem everyone has with EULAs is. It's a contract between you and a company. Unless it violates some fundamental law (ie you can't sell yourself into slavery), what's wrong with it? Furthermore, if you don't like it, just don't agree to it. It's not like you have a right to play computer games or use computer software.

On June 23 2010 07:32 Archerofaiur wrote:
Once again does anyone know if this just applies to korea or all countries terms of use?


I can haz consumer rights?

On June 23 2010 08:32 CagedMind wrote:
Correct me If I'm wrong but its impossible for blizz to have rights of any maps that someone made correct? The design is something you can up with. If blizz said they it belonged to them couldn't you just sue them for stealing ideas.