Beyond griefing: Virtual crime

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2010.09.003Get rights and content

Abstract

Because there is so much money involved in virtual worlds these days, there has been an increase in criminal activity in these worlds as well. The gaming community calls people who promote conflict “griefers”. Griefers are people who like nothing better than to kill team-mates or obstruct the game’s objectives. Griefers scam, cheat and abuse. Recently, they have begun to set up Ponzi schemes. In games that attempt to encourage complex and enduring interactions among thousands of players, “griefing” has evolved from being an isolated nuisance to a social disease. Much in the same way crime has become the real world’s social disease. Grief is turning into crime.

Introduction

Because there is so much money involved in virtual worlds these days, there has been an increase in criminal activity in these worlds as well. The gaming community calls people who promote conflict “griefers”. Griefers are people who like nothing better than to kill team-mates or obstruct the game’s objectives. Griefers scam, cheat and abuse. Recently, they have begun to set up Ponzi schemes. In games that attempt to encourage complex and enduring interactions among thousands of players, “griefing” has evolved from being an isolated nuisance to a social disease. Much in the same way crime has become the real world’s social disease. Grief is turning into crime.

Some consider virtual worlds to be a game and therefore outside the realms of real law and merely subject to the rules of the game. However, some virtual worlds have become an increasingly important as a method of commerce and means of communication. In most circumstances the law is reluctant to intrude into the rules of the game, but it will do so if necessary (Lastowka and Hunter, 2004). Criminal law applies in virtual worlds as it does in the real world, but not necessarily in the manner that a player would expect or want. The law looks at the real consequences of actions, not the on-screen representations (Kennedy, 2009).

According to one study, the majority of online crime is theft (73.3%) and fraud (20.2%). The average value of the online gaming loss is about $459 with 34.3% of the criminal loss between $100 and $300 (Chen, 2005). These figures come predominantly from Korea and Taiwan as there has been no study elsewhere. However a Newsweek commentator estimates that one million dollars in virtual goods are stolen every year (Spring, 2006). In fact in the United States, police will not provide any assistance in recovering or investigating virtual theft. Final Fantasy XI player, Geoff Lurrs, brought his case before the Blaine, Minnesota police department after having $4000 in virtual goods and currency stolen. He was refused any help (Cavalli, 2008).

Although there are acceptable forms of theft in the rules of game play in most virtual worlds which have a questing theme, this is not the sort of theft which is producing the statistics above. It is important to distinguish between in-game and out-of-game theft. If a character's in-game job description is “thief”, he may steal from other characters within the game. He may ‘steal’ a valuable object while the owner’s attention is diverted. He may ‘kill’ or ‘harm’ the other player in battle and take his goods. If this is within the magic circle of game play, then there is no crime. This is part of the risks that a player takes within the game. The courts are unlikely to intervene unless there is actual cheating as, other in-game scams which may amount to theft or fraud. The most common include: (1) “Trade Window Switch” where the thief attempts to pass a valueless item as valuable only because it is graphically similar to a valuable item; (2) “Anni Scam (muling scam)” which occurs only when the items cannot be traded through a trade window, but instead must be dropped on the ground and left for anyone to pick up; (3) “Guess Who Scam” where the thief pretends to know the player only to ask for an item loan; and (4) “Item Switch Scam” where the player, after a trade, receives an item of less value than anticipated (Darnoc Postings, 2005).

Then there are out-of-game thefts when a player attempts to obtain access to another player’s virtual items through subterfuge, e.g., phishing and hacking. The Council of Europe’s Convention on Cybercrime is the leading international instrument defining computer-related criminal offences of this nature. There are four categories: (1) offences against the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of computer data and systems; (2) computer-related offences; (3) content-related offences; and (4) offences related to infringement of copyrights and related rights. This is an excellent tool for conventional computer crime. But a distinction must be made between hacking and exploiting. Hacking is the equivalent of bending the laws of time and space to acquire someone else’s property. Exploiting is finding a flaw in the game and making the most of it. The ‘gold dupe’ is a classic example. The character finds the gold dupe flaw and duplicates currency to the point of devaluing the currency of the entire world. This is not quite counterfeiting but rather finding an ATM which endlessly provides £100 notes instead of £10 notes (White, 2008). However, even within the scope of activities permitted in virtual worlds, transactions do go wrong. Some of these ‘bad’ transactions, in fact, are real-world fraud pure and simple.

Section snippets

Theft

Section 1 of the United Kingdom’s Theft Act 1968 defines theft: “A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it…”. Section 15(4) of the Theft Act states: “For the purposes of this section ‘deception’ means any deception (whether deliberate or reckless) by words or conduct as to fact or as to law, including a deception as to the present intentions of the person using the deception or any other

Eve intergalactic bank

EVE Online is a science-fiction-based massively multiplayer online game set in an outer space persistent world. Players take the role of spaceship pilots seeking fame, fortune, and adventure in a huge, exciting, and sometimes hostile galaxy (EVE Online, FAQ). Unlike other virtual worlds with a wild-west-style space opera theme, the world of EVE Online is unique in two ways. First, unlike most virtual worlds, EVE Online does not “shard”, that is, all players in the entire universe exist on the

Conclusion

If in the real world, a swindled investor can resort to the courts, in most case, to recover their principal and punish the offender, why should a player in a virtual world not seek a similar right? According to the gaming companies, the “gods” of these worlds, there are only two ways to deal with these situations. The first, a hard-line approach taken in the above example, refuses to recognize any player’s right to in-game property and maintains all property rights are held by the company

References (45)

  • A. Adrian

    Intellectual property v intangible chattel

    J Int Commer Law Technol

    (2006)
  • A. Arias

    Life, liberty, and the pursuit of swords and armour: regulating the theft of virtual goods

    Emory Law J

    (2008)
  • W. Byassee

    Jurisdiction of cyberspace: applying real world precedent to the virtual community

    Wake Forest Law Rev

    (1995)
  • Cally “confession” is available at

  • E. Cavalli

    Police refuse to aid in virtual theft case

  • Y. Chen

    An analysis of online gaming crime characteristics

    Internet Res

    (2005)
  • Comment, theft of labor and services

    Stanford Law Rev

    (1960)
  • Darnoc Postings
  • S. Dunn

    Defining the scope of copyright protection for computer software

    Stanford Law Rev

    (1986)
  • EVE Online, Corporation Guide

  • EVE Online, EVE Insider Forums

  • EVE Online, End User License Agreement

  • EVE Online, Frequently Asked Questions

  • EVE Online, Press release

    EVE Online reaches the 100,000 subscriber mark available at

  • EVE Online, Terms of Service

  • A. Faier

    Digital slaves of the render farms?: virtual actors and intellectual property rights

    J Law Technol Policy

    (2004)
  • J. Fairfield

    Virtual property

    Boston Univ Law Rev

    (2005)
  • C. Franks

    Comment, analyzing the urge to merge: conversion of intangible property and the merger doctrine in the Wake of Kremen v. Cohen

    Houst Law Rev

    (2005)
  • B. Glusko

    Tales of the (virtual) city: governing property disputes in virtual worlds

    Berkeley Technol Law J

    (2007)
  • S. Green

    Lying, misleading, and falsely denying: how moral concepts Inform the law of Perjury, fraud, and false statements

    Hastings Law J

    (2001)
  • S. Green

    Plagiarism, norms, and the limits of theft law: some observations on the use of criminal sanctions in enforcing intellectual property rights

    Hastings Law J

    (2002)
  • C. Husemann

    All about the ISK

  • Cited by (15)

    • Correlation between university students’ online trolling behavior and online trolling victimization forms, current conditions, and personality traits

      2018, Telematics and Informatics
      Citation Excerpt :

      Aside from posting and disseminating information, online trolling behavior may include many Internet behaviors that interfere with other gaming interests (Griffiths, 2014). Adrian (2010) believed that a person who shows trolling behavior in online gaming could be considered a griefer; a troll in a game wants to obstruct team hunts or goals; and a troll can describe a person who wants to destroy the game. Since online trolling behavior is a form of cyberbullying (Griffiths, 2014; Morrissey, 2010), cyberbullies tend to have clearer identities and simpler intents (Lenhardt, 2013).

    • The development and validation of the Grief Play Scale (GPS) in MMORPGs

      2017, Personality and Individual Differences
      Citation Excerpt :

      However, we do know that grief play victims, feeling unable to combat grief play, sometimes abandon the MMORPG along with all their investments, whether financial or emotional, in the virtual world (Davis, 2002; Foo, 2008). Whether they commit serious fraud (e.g., Adrian, 2010) or cause minor irritation, griefers are a cause for concern. However, there is a paucity of literature addressing griefers.

    • Social acts in digital environments

      2021, Phenomenology and Mind
    • Boundaries, Trust and Reputation in Virtual and Illicit Markets

      2019, 12th Digital Games Research Association International Conference, DiGRA 2019
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text