This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
I disagree with the train of thought presented by Aris. Blizzard isn't "charging" anything by allowing third-party developers or users like us to create addons and then incorporate similar features. They are allowing us to playtest their game and giving us the tools to tailor it. Then they're turning these little tweaks into official changes. I wouldn't say that's charging--maybe saving money, but not charging.
To the people not caring about the "loss of addons" Why write anything? All you're saying is you only care about yourself. Awesome? To the people saying "botz r der sux!1" Yeah great, but thats not really the important issue, and you sound a little too lost in the videogame to notice. The issue is why the hell is the law getting involved in something that is clearly suppost to be under the control of Blizzard? Blizzard has FULL RIGHT to block anything they want from their game, and even sue anyone using their server code to host games without authorization. But not, with this, and perhaps the 9th courth, they are basically telling you what you can run on your system, by law. Its become more than a risk of some nerd getting banned and I dont think alot of people are seeing that slippery slope and are way too entrenched in their virtual fantasies to see it. If it was possible for them to enforce any of their addon "rules" by law, it would be a sad day for the legal system.
yes lawyers are sharks, they get paid no matter which side they are on they HAVE to do what they are paid to BUT some do go over board, in this case BLIZZ has the right to say... Hey its ok for you to create mods for this game BUT its not ok for you to get paid off of our product. Now ( just my belief) that if I made a product that the whole world is using and someone creates a mod and offers it for money, my next move would be to do what Blizz did BUT first offer them the chance to sell that product to me, as a way out of legal action. Now in the case of ( that lvling mod),THAT was a slap in the face to EVERYONE who plays this game the right way and grinds their way to max lvls. I have been playing this game for almost 2 years now and as frustrated as I have gotten I never once used a lvling mod, now I am human and HAVE thought about it but I also know that those things compromise you account, and leave you wide open to hacks. Blizz didn't foresee this as a potential problem at launch because "Good People" don't think that other "Good People" will try to benefit from "Free" "Freedom" ...If you get my drift. Like I said before, IF its my product that YOU want to be PAID from offer it to ME and I'll pay YOU for it. IF its a product I want then I'm sure all sides will be pleased, if not then its back to the drawing board
Xantham9 I appreciate your points, and they are really valid, important points, but you have to realize we as the user do have a right, one very huge right. We have the right to stop playing the game.Our dollar is really the ultimate power here. That is how a free market society is supposed to operate, that the consumer's dollar keeps everything in check. If blizzard messes up the game badly everyone will quit and go to a new game, and all their future profits are gone. There is too much money at stake here for blizz to do something ridiculous like say name your first born Uldar.Now obviously it doesn't always work this way. There's tons of scams out there and consumers do need laws to keep them safe. Just look at the banking industry and mortgages these days and it's obvious many laws and regulations are needed. But what blizz is doing in this particular case is cracking down on a botter and actually protecting the consumer and their profits imo. They are trying to keep the game enjoyable and the integirty of it intact.I don't think they should make asking for donations against the tos, because most open source coders ask for donations, but making all the code go through them seems acceptable to me. They're just policing their product and trying to maintain a high level of quality.
From the interview: