Gamer slays rival after online dispute
By Cao Li and Jiao Xiaoyang (China Daily)
Updated: 2005-03-30 00:12
A Shanghai online game player murdered a competitor
who he claimed sold his cyperweapon, a court was told Tuesday.
Shanghai No 2 Intermediate People's Court Tuesday
heard Qiu Chengwei, 41, allegedly stabbed competitor
Zhu Caoyuan repeatedly in the chest after he was told
Zhu had sold his Dragon Sabre used in the popular
online game, Legend of Mir III.
Qiu and a friend jointly won the weapon last February,
and lent it to Zhu who then sold it for 7,200 yuan (US$871).
Qui went to the police to report the "theft" but was
told the weapon was not counted a real property protected
by law.
Zhu promised to handover the cash but an angry Qui lost
patience and attacked Zhu at his home, stabbing him in
the left chest "with great force," and killing him, the
court was told.
Qui gave himself up to police and on the advice of his
lawyer, has pleaded guilty to intentional injury, claiming
he never meant to kill Zhu.
However, the court's prosecutor told the court:
"As cyberweapon is not under the protection of any law in
our country, Zhu was faultless in this case."
The court has yet to issue its verdict, but either charge
can result in capital punishment under China's Criminal Law.
Qiu has a chance to appeal to the city's higher court
for a second trail, which will be conclusive.
The case has caused a legal dilemma in China where no
law exists for the ownership of Internet gaming weapons.
In November 2003, a 23-year-old player from North China's
Hebei Province sued Beijing-based Internet game
provider Arctic Ice Technology, after he found all the
weapons and points he amassed for months playing the
company's game Red Moon were stolen.
It was the first time in China where disputes over
virtual assets in an online game were handed to the court.
Now more and more gamers are seeking justice through
the courts over stolen weapons and credits.
"The armours and swords in games should be deemed as
private property as players have to spend money and
time for them," said Wang Zongyu, an associate professor
at the law school of Beijing's Renmin University of China.
"These virtual objects are often tradable among players,"
he added.
But other experts are calling for caution.
"The `assets' of one player could mean nothing to others
as they are by nature just data created by game providers,"
said a lawyer for a Shanghai-based Internet game company.
Online game companies in Shanghai -- the city with the
most players -- are planning to set up a dispute system
where aggrieved players can find recourse.
Shang Jiangang, a lawyer with the newly established
Shanghai Online Game Association, said: "The association
has drafted some measures to facilitate the settlement
of disputes over virtual assets."
He added: "Once any cyberweapon stealing occurs, players
can report to the operator, which will then sort it out
according to the circumstances."
[url="http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-03/30/content_429246.htm"]..... Click To View Source .....[/url]
My 2 cents: F******* idiots. I cant play those games,
I find them so damn boring and time wasting.
I cant believe people can be crazy enough to kill/pay for
a bitmap image of a weapon. I guess when your world is
that small a 'cyberweapon' means a lot.
indeed.
that's just crazy, i can understand why he'd be pissed though, if indeed the weapon could be sold for hard currency (and a lot of it). in a sence he really did run off with the money - and i would say that the firend killed him over that, not the virtual weapon. afterall, they both worked to get the weapon, he deserved some of the profits. so i wonder how much of that is motivation from him selling a virual item they worked so hard to get, or that fact that he kept all the money.
either way, murder probably went a tad bit too far...
There was a similar incident last year, where a guy created a business out of buying and selling game items, particularly in mmorpg's.
He went to the authorities, and after explaining several times how he makes money by selling "virtual" itmes to players, and that one of his customers had refused to pay real money for his virtual item, the authorities decided that the guy selling non-existent items was in fact the crook.
Since when did games become a market for trading anyway? Are we going to have a mini stock-market for in-game items? Game companies should outlaw this practice, as it is tantamount to cheating anyway.
Heh, given the heavy taxation Australia has, I?d imagine so. They would probably also make you pay duty and GST for purchasing a virtual game item from an overseas source. A few days in World of Warcraft and not only do you get hit with the credit card bill for the server access, and the phone bill for being online, but also great big bill from Australian Customs...
wow