Posted 09 April 2012 - 21:42
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
If you extend this into the creation of Turbine and the pseudo reality of a virtual world and their community vis a vis the company/customer relationship, their punting you from it arbitrarily can be seen as a violation of that article. It's a grey part here, but courts have been known to be willing to extend into the digital frontier.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
They do this all the time. 'nuff said. While we do post certain statements, we aren't making anything up, and conjecture is not fact or a statement of fact, it's theorizing. What Turbine did to Scormus and other people is a violation of this article. The reputation tool that Turbine provides could be legally construed as a measure of personal reputation within the community, and that when they attack it by using negative reputation, or just infracting and such for nothing more than an attempt to silence, they are also violating that article.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
The CoC is in violation of this one. Therefore, so is Turbine.
These are supposed to be International Law, not governmental rules. Businesses are not excluded from them, since most companies are incorporated (which is a fancy way of saying they are granted legal person-hood, and no person can violate law). Turbine can claim they do not have to uphold them, but that would be false. They can terminate a relationship, but they can't do so by violating the law. It might take money, but if someone can prove they are breaking international law by tarnishing a persons reputation and using other tactics, Turbine could lose.
I'm just tossing this out there. I for one wouldn't bother, they are what they are, and not worth the dirt in my toilet. BUT, the mere fact that it can be proven they break the law in their actions is enough damage. No one can really defend them without also defending the human rights violations included in their actions. People may scoff and laugh, but these things do matter. And since it is law breaking, the protections they think they have (no class action, venue, etc) no longer apply. You can't break the law, and then expect it to defend your actions. I for one wouldn't mind seeing a group of customers take Turbine to task for their violations, and see what the courts think of it, since legally Turbine is an entity that can be sued for the violations. It would be no different if the CEO actually walked up to you and physically silenced you, locked you out of the grounds, called you names in public and tarnished you reputation in print, and then basically stole money from you by ending your lifetime account without legal justification and no compensation offered, and took steps to cover it all up. The EULA itself contains violations of International Law.
[I'm theorizing here, law is not my specialty, but I can see the parallels. See, the thing is, if only governments are accountable to this law, then all corporations can act with impunity. But that isn't what it says. No person is to be allowed to infringe another person, for any reason.]
How did buying a lifetime account become a free ride, and an example of not supporting Turbine? That money left my pocket and they took it. Free it was not.