Player Botting Notice e-mail

John · **Posted:** October 26th, 2011, 9:23 am

Quote:

Dear Player,

We have strong evidence that you may have purchased and used botting software in the past, specifically ibot software.

Botting and the cheating it brings is destroying your game, violates Jagex's rights under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), and any player that continues to engage in botting activity has no place in our community.

As part of bot nuke week we are offering you a 1 time amnesty and settlement lifeline, which is a chance to reform and change your ways. We'd like you to contribute to the community in a positive way, to compete on a level playing field as everyone else does and play in the true spirit of the game, with integrity. All of your accounts, main and otherwise, are now on our watch list and will be monitored for the use of ibot and all other inappropriate third-party software. Regardless of who you are or how long you've been with us, if you decide to cheat and bot ever again we will have no hesitation in: (1) permanently removing your account from our wonderful community in order to protect Jagex's rights under the DMCA, and (2) naming you as a defendant in Jagex Limited v. John Does, which is a lawsuit based on DMCA violations that is currently pending in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Civ. Action No. SACV11-00969-CJC).

Please note that this amnesty and settlement offer is protected under Fed. R. Evid. 408. If you ignore our offer and instead continue use botting software, we reserve our rights to pursue statutory damages against you for between $200 to $2,500 per act of past, present, and/or future botting in accordance with 17 U.S.C. 1203(c)(3).

We do hope you make the morally sound and lawful choice of turning your back on bots. We look forward to seeing you in game having fun in a way that is true to the spirit of fair play and respectful to your fellow players.

Yours sincerely,
Mark Gerhard

Quick find code: 14-15-831-63310676

Seems like a good move from Jagex in my opinion.

Kikori · **Posted:** October 26th, 2011, 11:15 am

Wow. If this ends up being legit and followed through with, it'll set a precedent for a lot of control over games in the future where rule breaking can earn this kinda punishment. O_o

Blackmage172 · **Posted:** October 26th, 2011, 1:32 pm

Jagex has been making me say "holy Fuzzy Bunny

" quite often this past week. I'm not sure how I mean that, either.

Market Man6 · **Posted:** October 26th, 2011, 1:49 pm

Wow. This is outstanding!!

Riptide · **Posted:** October 26th, 2011, 2:19 pm

500-2500 dollars.... I have to go with Blackmage on this one.

Holy Fuzzy Bunny

.

Rayseima · **Posted:** October 26th, 2011, 4:40 pm

Riptide wrote:

DEATHmage172 wrote:

"holy

"

Holy

.

I wonder what the lawsuit is about. Probably something on some guy saying "my business went out of business because of your nuke thingy waahhhhh legal action wahhhh[/bitch, whine, etc]"

Market Man6 · **Posted:** October 26th, 2011, 5:02 pm

Rayseima wrote:

Riptide wrote:

DEATHmage172 wrote:

"holy

"

Holy

.

I wonder what the lawsuit is about. Probably something on some guy saying "my business went out of business because of your nuke thingy waahhhhh legal action wahhhh[/bitch, whine, etc]"

It sounds like the lawsuit is JAGEX vs. Bot users/creators.
Jagex is suing bot users/creators for copying Jagex's code. The autoer program needs to take the script, copy parts of it, and repeat it. And that is stealing the work of Jagex.

Riptide · **Posted:** October 26th, 2011, 5:44 pm

So this is a pretty damn smart move on JaGex's part, then.

Loner · **Posted:** October 26th, 2011, 5:54 pm

Market Man6 wrote:

Rayseima wrote:

Riptide wrote:

DEATHmage172 wrote:

"holy

"

Holy

.

I wonder what the lawsuit is about. Probably something on some guy saying "my business went out of business because of your nuke thingy waahhhhh legal action wahhhh[/bitch, whine, etc]"

It sounds like the lawsuit is JAGEX vs. Bot users/creators.
Jagex is suing bot users/creators for copying Jagex's code. The autoer program needs to take the script, copy parts of it, and repeat it. And that is stealing the work of Jagex.

Sort of like how web browsers can edit a websites html?

No, it's not stealing the work of jagex. It is simply editing what the client can access. Stealing would be more akin to creating private servers.

Market Man6 · **Posted:** October 26th, 2011, 7:34 pm

Loner wrote:

Market Man6 wrote:

Rayseima wrote:

I wonder what the lawsuit is about. Probably something on some guy saying "my business went out of business because of your nuke thingy waahhhhh legal action wahhhh[/bitch, whine, etc]"

It sounds like the lawsuit is JAGEX vs. Bot users/creators.
Jagex is suing bot users/creators for copying Jagex's code. The autoer program needs to take the script, copy parts of it, and repeat it. And that is stealing the work of Jagex.

Sort of like how web browsers can edit a websites html?

No, it's not stealing the work of jagex. It is simply editing what the client can access. Stealing would be more akin to creating private servers.

plagiarize issues then?

Loner · **Posted:** October 27th, 2011, 1:27 am

eh possibly, but that would be realllllllly stretching it.

Simons Pure · **Posted:** October 27th, 2011, 9:47 am

500-2500? Not much compared to how much a botter can make...

Redrum Frank · **Posted:** October 28th, 2011, 4:17 am

Loner wrote:

Sort of like how web browsers can edit a websites html?

No, it's not stealing the work of jagex. It is simply editing what the client can access. Stealing would be more akin to creating private servers.

what i remember looking into this before is that jagex' copyright infringement case was thrown out because they never filed for a U.S. copyright. i **** you not. so attacking ibot was indefensible.

the DMCA on the other hand does cover stuff like breaking in on server information to access content. wouldn't detecting the unique item i.d. be like that?

as for the 'currently pending lawsuit', that don't mean much. they've had those before. the letter in general looks like a temp wrote it.

"Your honor, the prosecution would like to call to the stand fartyboi99, if you plox."
"Proceed."
"Fartyboi99, did you or did you not attempt to perform Data Interruptus on the Jagex servers between the dates of 2008 to 2011?"
"o snap!"

Aragorn Ix · **Posted:** October 30th, 2011, 7:17 am

If it's going through the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California doesn't that mean any ruling only applies to citizens of that state? Hardly far reaching?

EDIT: Just realised it's the DMCA (world treaty) that allows for the provision of fines, not this court case.

Scar · **Posted:** October 30th, 2011, 2:58 pm

Would there be anyway for Jagex to verifyabley prove who owns what account? Yea you sign up with your information when you get members, but how does Jagex go about proving someone is who they say they are when they sign up?

Loner · **Posted:** October 30th, 2011, 6:51 pm

Scar wrote:

Would there be anyway for Jagex to verifyabley prove who owns what account? Yea you sign up with your information when you get members, but how does Jagex go about proving someone is who they say they are when they sign up?

"We have strong evidence"

It's their game.
They are the judges.
They don't need to prove it.

John · **Posted:** October 31st, 2011, 9:56 am

http://www.impsoft.info/10-29-11%20Filing.pdf

Botting company suing Jagex, can't make head nor tails of it but I'm sure some people will understand it lol.

Godders · **Posted:** October 31st, 2011, 9:59 am

I assume Jagex have 99 Defence and 99 Hp.

Market Man6 · **Posted:** October 31st, 2011, 10:24 am

n00b 4 m1nin wrote:

I assume Jagex have 99 Defence and 99 Hp.

Lol

Kikori · **Posted:** October 31st, 2011, 12:22 pm

John wrote:

http://www.impsoft.info/10-29-11%20Filing.pdf

Botting company suing Jagex, can't make head nor tails of it but I'm sure some people will understand it lol.

A single sentence in this summarizes how Jagex attempted to legally work their case.

Quote:

Jagex LTD's counsel (including California counsel) abused its subpoena power, violated a Court Order, failed to supplement its discovery responses to inform Defendants of the CDC lawsuit, purposefully hid the fact of the CDC lawsuit when asked by the Defendants' counsel, and aided and abetted a violation of Due Process by not ensuring that Defendants and their customers were notified of the subpoena to Paypal.

Jagex all but illegally gained information from PayPal that effectively specified certain players as bot users from the website, which upon being revealed in said cases, caused a massive rift between customers and the bot business. Somewhere or another, it said that if a big enough percentage of these customers requested their refunds & drop the business through PayPal (more or less, I forget the exact wording), PayPal will quit servicing the bot business altogether. The damage is effectively done, JaGeX has the information and the business' customers are abandoning ship.

Also in a nutshell, the case seems to make it personal about how calculated and underhanded Jagex's tactics are, explicitly stating...

Quote:

"Plantiff (Jagex) and counsel should not be allowed to irreparably harm Defendants as they have done in concert by circumventing the Protective Order. Should the Court decide that this case should continue, in some form, counsel for Defendants firmly believe that Plantiff's counsel can not be trusted with any confidential information.

And apparently this is the actual result of the case, in terms of punishments / resolutions.

Quote:

A - Dismissal of the case with prejudice.
B - Plantiff's counsel dismisses the California case with prejudice, or in the alternative to stay in the case pending resolution of the instant case
C - Ordering Plantiff's counsel to file a copy of this Court's order responsive to this Motion so that the judge in the California case is fully aware of the misrepresentations represented in the California case
D - Ordering Plantiff to turn over to Defendants all documents obtained from Paypal in the CDC lawsuit, including the subpoena
E - Ordering Plaintiff to turn over to the Defendants the identity of any and all individuals who were sent the email
F - Plantiff must destroy any and all copies made of the documents of point D
G - Plantiff must send another email (approved by Defendants) and message posts (again approved) to said point E's individuals -retracting- the threat
H - Plantiff must include an apology (approved by Defendants) on both runescape.com and jagex.com, to be visible on the front page, for at least one year
I - Ordering Plantiff to take no action against any Runescape accounts learned about in the CDC lawsuit, and to undo any bans of the same peoples
J - Plantiff must take no further action to ban or prohibit Defendant's 'bots' from working on any of Plantiff's games
K - Plantiff pays all of Defendant's attorney fees and case fees
I - Further sanctioning of Plantiff's counsel, specifically "Ross Dannenberg" and "Timothy Meece" for their complicity in circumventing the Court's Protective Order
M - Any further sanctions that the Court feels apporpriate

i.e. Jagex got stupid in their approach, stuck their nose out too far legally, and let it get shot off.
My curiosity is if they actually have to follow points I and J. Even if they obtained the information in the GRAYEST of gray areas legally, it's still their game, with their rules to enforce, that the bots still very explicitly break.

EDIT: One thing that gets to me is the four page attorney-to-attorney letter at the bottom of the document. American attorney understands that Jagex, being from the UK, may not understand all of America's legal practices and protections, but is more infuriated at the California attorney/ies representing Jagex for playing along. If the fault lies with the attorney side of things more than the clients, why would Jagex be given such extreme punishments?

Player Botting Notice e-mail

Who is online