First answer to Activision Blizzard Lawyer / Antwort auf Klageschrift

Nep der hat echt in allen Punkten verloren !!!
Der arme -.-
VERDAMMT
Leben ohne HB ist kacke !!!

 

:S
Ich wart drauf bis Bossland das sagt!

 

W?rde auch gerne wissen was nur los is und ob es weiter geht will auch nicht ohne HB leben m?ssen :-/

 

Kann das einer Best?tigen? Kann ich mir kaum vorstellen !

 

W?hre jamal sowas von Hammer gewesen wenn:

Jemand angerannt kommt in den Saal dem Blizzard Activision
Vertreter ins GESICHT spuckt & schnell wieder abhaut XDD

 

View attachment 36956

Wartet auf Bossland.

 

Das kann ich mir fast nicht vorstellen, dass Bossland tats?chlich in allen Punkten verloren haben soll.,
bzw. den Prozess komplett verloren haben sollen.
Mir scheint eher einige User hier, haben nen Blick in Ihre Glaskugel geworfen...

 

Die wollen euch doch nur verarschen

 

Sicher das sie uns nur verarschen? Finde damit sollte man kein Spa? machen

 

Es gibt erst dann offizielle Informationen wenn diese von Bossland selbst kommen. Alles andere ist erstmal humbug und nicht ernst zu nehmen.
Also unterlasst bitte diese unn?tigen nervosit?t f?rdernden Kommentare.

greetz

Weischbier

 

klingt realistischer als das bossland wirklich in ALLEN Punkten verloren hat

 

Is it really that hard for you people to post your replies in the proper language this forum has always been using?
So that everyone can understand it... JEZUS it really pisses me off..

 

Bossland hat auch in allen Punkten kein Recht bekommen, au?er einem, der aber nur aufgeschoben wurde, also stimmt das im Grunde schon.

Bossland lost all points to blizzard, despite one, which is postponed.

 

Who told you Bossland lost all points except one?

 

Bossland in the german forum, but yeah, he lost all points, but one point is still left open for arguments on the 3.4.2012.

Look here:

http://www.thebuddyforum.com/forum-...verhandlung-hamburg-am-28-02-12-ergebnis.html

Its a german post.

 

Will someone please post some of the news in English please?

I am not asking a full translation of the whole court hearing, but a quick resumed post would be very welcome...

Can people fill me in on what's going on? I am back after nearly 2 years

 

Bossland posted an english version.... Just check the legal forums. Its there
http://www.thebuddyforum.com/thebud...trict-court-hamburg-28th-february-2012-a.html


Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk

 

Well until page 50 it is mainly about the amount of subscription, how widely known WoW is and some logic flaws.

Blizz said they knew only shortly of the "WoW Bot Gatherbuddy", when in fact they can proof they know it for about a year. The attacking side basically tries to say how important WoW is, even quoting the guiness world record, which in turn as an example is called as without evidence as the guiness world record did that just by the word of blizzard without verification.

Then it goes into a big round of cheatbot vs non cheatbot, warden's original code is attacked, because it took too much data. Then there is an argument about fairness over non botters which is countered by legal means of multiboxing. Mainpoint until this point is, that the bot can't do anything a human could not and therefor the botter is slower, since lower effeciency. This point is a bit weak, because the botter could play efficient as long as he can and then let the bot continue leaving the non botter at a disadvantage.

It is much bickering. Attacking side calls it avatar, one page later char..., they doubt the licence holding of blizzard activision. When I have slept a bit I will post you something more major if there is still a need at that point

 

Bossland/Hawker, there is a point missing, that I feel your lawyer should have talked about, or the professor that did the study in your name. I didn't read the full reply your lawyer gave yet ( only about half of it, but it seems that the point of multiboxing + botting is missing and it actually opens up flaws in your arguments.

As an example: The advantage of a multiboxer ( which is legitamized by blizz ) is compared to a single bot. Obviously the boter would be at an disadvantage here, but if their lawyer is up to snuff, he just needs to ask 4 questions:

How sophisticated can the actions of a multiboxed character be?
Could you multibox bots?
How sophisticated can the action of a bot be (maybe even direct ask in correlation of a standard G17 keyboard multiboxed one)

Why are you selling in bulk?

Arguments used by professor/lawyer are way too narrow in terms of a normal player using 1 bot and I feel those are *****s in the otherwise solid arguments.

I can understand why you would want to not even bring up that string of thoughts, because it will weaken your position. Half your arguments revolve around, that a bot cannot do more then one player could, but could 5 bots? 10 bots? Would they outpeform multiboxers? In a case of multiboxer vs player + several bots you would also lose the argument, that blizzard earns more money. 1 player + 4 bots vs 1 player + 4 multibox earns the same, yet the effectiveness of the first is quite higher.

Why are we botting and not multiboxing and so on. So I feel it might be better to defend in advance, before getting called out for it. I mean it is not like it is impossible to defend against it.

Anyway good luck and may your argument hold

 

are there so many spelling errors on purpose in that pdf? XD