Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

Dutch Teen Arrested for Virtual Property Theft 183

Posted by Zonk from the should-have-stuck-with-robbing-monsters dept.
vuo writes "A story on the BBC website reports that Dutch police have arrested a teenager for robbery of virtual furniture worth roughly $5900. The crime took place in the virtual world/social network Habbo Hotel, a website run by Sulake Corporation. Sulake has 80 million registered users of its sites in 31 countries. ' Habbo users can create their own characters, decorate their own rooms and play a number of games, paying with Habbo Credits, which they have to buy with real cash. "It is a theft because the furniture is paid for with real money. But the only way to be a thief in Habbo is to get people's usernames and passwords and then log in and take the furniture. We got involved because of an increasing number of sites which are pretending to be Habbo. People might then try and log in and get their details stolen."'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Dutch Teen Arrested for Virtual Property Theft More

Dutch Teen Arrested for Virtual Property Theft

Comments Filter:
  • Will this be handled by a virtual legal system, with other players taking the roles of the police, judges, bailiffs, attorneys, paralegals, etc? Will there be virtual subpoenas, a virtual trial, and possibly a virtual jail for the virtual (alleged) thief?

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by discord5 ( 798235 )

      virtual jail

      Not just any virtual jail, virtual man jail with virtual soap getting dropped in the shower

    • Will this be handled by a virtual legal system, with other players taking the roles of the police, judges, bailiffs, attorneys, paralegals, etc? Will there be virtual subpoenas, a virtual trial, and possibly a virtual jail for the virtual (alleged) thief?

      Where he'll be virtually sodomized by other virtual inmates while waiting for his virtual appeal. =)

      At least the summary points out this is actually a case in which you have to essentially steal someone's password, and then steal things they've paid actual

      • At least the summary points out this is actually a case in which you have to essentially steal someone's password, and then steal things they've paid actual money for. This is one of the few rare ones which actually seems to amount of fraud.

        Agreed, It might also be prosecutable under identity theft laws as the criminal is using stolen logins - representing himself as somebody else.

        I'm still waiting for trials for virtual murder in RPGs as people kill of other player characters for fun

        I'm pretty sure that '

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by FLEB ( 312391 )
          The only sticky point with something like that though, is making the out-of-game punishment equal to the out-of-game cost of the crime (which still exists, even if the "crime" is perpetrated in-game). You'd need to somehow restrict the real person behind the avatar from simply dumping their account and creating a new one to get around the punishment.

          Unless, I suppose, wealth was easily regained, and getting robbed was all part of the ebb and flow of the game.
          • The only sticky point with something like that though, is making the out-of-game punishment equal to the out-of-game cost of the crime (which still exists, even if the "crime" is perpetrated in-game).

            My point was that, as long as you aren't committing a 'real world' crime like hacking accounts or violating the TOS by exploiting bugs, if you're playing a MMRPG like 'Mob Wars 2175', While your avatar will be commiting many 'virtual' crimes that are part of the game - even when it's to the detriment of other p

          • Unless, I suppose, wealth was easily regained, and getting robbed was all part of the ebb and flow of the game.

            Isn't that the essential distinction between a "game" and "real life" anyway? I mean, the difference between America's Army and enlisting is that you respawn when you get killed in the game. The difference between Monopoly and investing is that you don't become homeless when you go lose. The difference between sports (e.g. baseball, archery) and hunting is that you don't starve when you miss the t

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by FLEB ( 312391 )
              It depends on the game. If killing and theft are a significant part of the game, a properly balanced game will make it so being on the receiving end of a kill isn't that bad. Either you respawn with a penalty, or characters are disposable enough not to matter.

              If you have some sort of game where it takes extensive time or real money to build in-game advantages, and these advantages can be permanently "stolen" through brute theft or killing, an in-game punishment would not serve as a useful deterrent, unless

    • Re:Virtual jail (Score:4, Insightful)

      by oo7tushar ( 311912 ) <slash.@tushar.cx> on Wednesday November 14, 2007 @12:45PM (#21351599) Homepage
      I'd say yes if it was done by a virtual being but it wasn't. This was real world action in order to steal virtual property purchased with real world currency...so probably a violation of TOS and breaking of some rules by logging in as other people.
      • Correct me if I'm wrong, but returning the stolen property is a matter of a few database commands, once you know what's happened. I'm definitely no bleeding-heart "pity the poor thief" kind of guy, but since there was apparently little damage, punishment should be proportionally small -- not on the order of physical property theft, which is extremely difficult to recover and get restitution for.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Froboz23 ( 690392 )
          If someone hacked into my bank account and stole $10,000, that could also be "fixed with a few database commands." It's just bits on a disk, but it also translates to $10,000 in the real world. So it's grand theft, and fraud. Throw the book at the guy.
          • No, hacking into your bank account couldn't be fixed with a few database commands, because you couldn't do anything about the stolen money being used to buy goods elsewhere. OTOH, in this game, the stolen furniture can be removed from the thief's position AND returned to the owner.
            • But it is NOT as simple as a few database commands done on a whim. Scammers would *so* work that angle.. the people that hold the database keys would have no idea what outside deal you make with someone to then turn around and scam them back out of it. Everything has to go through the proper channels. With the increasing values of items in places such as Entropia (where a big hoopla is going on currently about a trust scam involving a set of armor worth well in excess of $5k usd.. and that is one of the low

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Intron ( 870560 )
        theft: "the act of taking something from someone unlawfully"

        Questions:

        How far was the stolen property taken or is it in fact in the same place?

        Did the accused take the stolen property or was it in fact moved by the server?

        Is the owner of the server an accomplice to the theft?
        • In a lot of theft cases the items in question don't even need to leave the building. Denying the lawful owner the use of the property can in most cases constitute theft.

          The "moved by the server" and many other questions should be answered by the courts when it goes to trial. Apparently, the accused thieves were setting up fake sights and luring people to it. They then convince him to log in and take the login information for use in transferring the property to another account where it is then resold or held
  • I wonder how much a stolen virtual chair is worth on the virtual black-market?

    But really... I got to wonder what is exactly is the point of this 'theft' from the point of view of the guy who did it. Is there really money in trying to somehow re-sell any of this, or was it just for laughs?
    • I wonder how much a stolen virtual chair is worth on the virtual black-market?

      Depends. If it's a virtual signed Ballmer original...

  • What of Photoshop? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Cathoderoytube ( 1088737 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2007 @12:40PM (#21351499)
    You don't hear about anybody getting arrested for downloading copies of Photoshop anymore these days. Thankfully I can still download whatever illegal software I want and not get caught, but if I pinch a copy of a digital couch that can't actually be used for anything other than an avatar to sit on I'm looking at hard time.

    Funny how life works.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by sdhankin ( 213671 )
      When you download a copy of Photoshop, it's a copy. The site you download it from still has it.

      These guys didn't make a copy - they took the original. They now have it. The original owner does not.

      Phishing and fraud are irrelevant. I you phish or otherwise fraudulently obtain someone's bank account number and PIN, and subsequently empty their account of their "virtual money" (it's all just bits, right?) you have stolen from them. It is theft, pure and simple.

      I really doubt the bank would "just restore

      • Re:What of Photoshop? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by JesseMcDonald ( 536341 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2007 @03:23PM (#21354049) Homepage

        These guys didn't make a copy - they took the original. They now have it. The original owner does not.

        These guys didn't "take" anything: they fraudulently misrepresented themselves as someone else in order to gain access to a server. That's the only part they're actually guilty of, although they would, of course, be liable for any costs resulting from this fraud.

        Phishing and fraud are irrelevant. I[f] you phish or otherwise fraudulently obtain someone's bank account number and PIN, and subsequently empty their account of their "virtual money" (it's all just bits, right?) you have stolen from them. It is theft, pure and simple.

        No, it's still fraud, and the victim of the fraud is the bank. (If you look carefully you'll find that deposits, unlike the contents of a safety-deposit box, belong to the bank until they are withdrawn, not the depositor.) How the bank's misfortune at being defrauded affects the depositor depends entirely on the account agreement in place.

  • Argh, it's intangible! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Joe the Lesser ( 533425 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2007 @12:41PM (#21351509) Homepage Journal
    The Habbo admins/GMs/whatever can recreate the furniture for free! (I should hope so) So nothing is lost!

    If there's an issue with people hacking the game, deal with it in terms of hacking, not 'theft'.

    • I'm the king of the playground (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Kid: Teacher, little Jimmy stole my idea.
      Teacher: Well Steve, tell Jimmy to play nice.
      Kid: but he stole my IP.
      Teacher: You can't steal ideas Steve, now go back outside and play.
      Kid: Jimmy is a pussy, I'm going to fucking kill Jimmy.
      Teacher: Put that chair down!

    • Re:Argh, it's intangible! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by 4D6963 ( 933028 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2007 @12:52PM (#21351749)

      The Habbo admins/GMs/whatever can recreate the furniture for free!

      Isn't it a bit like saying "The US Mint can print as many bills as they like!" ?

      • Isn't it a bit like saying "The US Mint can print as many bills as they like!" ?

        I'd tend to say that it is right along that saying - with the same caveat that that would mean that since there's more furniture in the market due to their replacing it, that the value of any given piece of furniture would decline(inflation).

        Though I'll note that as a monetary system, it's a good thing that it's virtual. Furniture is up there with the huge stone rings used as money by some tribes in history for unportability..

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by mrchaotica ( 681592 ) *

        No, because they can also delete the stolen goods.

        Oh yeah, and also it's a damn game, not real life!

        • Oh yeah, and also it's a damn game, not real life!

          I hate to see stupid shit like that get modded Insightful. There's no Real Life that is distinct from online activities that take place in Habbo Hotel or Second Life.

          There's a good case to be made that in an actual game, like WoW or Monopoly, breaking the games rules (i.e. cheating) shouldn't be against the law. But Habbo Hotel is not a game. It is a virtual environment but activities that take place there are real. It is of course not a trivial issue, in te

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Alsee ( 515537 )
          Oh yeah, and also it's a damn game

          Ummm, were you referring to Habbo? Or the US Mint?
          Chuckle.

          -
      • Isn't it a bit like saying "The US Mint can print as many bills as they like!" ?

        Under the current system [wikipedia.org] that is pretty much true.

        But otherwise, most online services still retain ownership of the virtual items. Which is why Sony can force Ebay to take down virtual gold auctions.

        Lastly, for virtual items to have value they must be backed by something of worth. That could be actual property or ownership (like the shares on the stock exchange) or just plain old fashioned money.

        As in... I print off a piece of p

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by MikeFM ( 12491 )
        No, because more bills creates an issue for the system, more data doesn't. It's easy to delete the stolen objects, or just return them to their rightful owner, and just ban the user that stole them. Making this a criminal issue is stupid.

        Next time someone steals a handful of Monopoly money when I grab a soda I'm going to have to press charges I guess. Afterall, I paid real money to buy that Monopoly money so snatching it must be a real crime. Doh.
        • It's just oh so easy to say something like that looking in from the outside. Thing is it doesn't work that way. A real crime was committed, thus a real crime should be prosecuted. When you're dealing with RCE systems, the admins will NOT go around willy nilly deleting and giving stuff back. Too many angles scammers can play like that. It does not work that way, nor should it.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Sibko ( 1036168 )

        Isn't it a bit like saying "The US Mint can print as many bills as they like!" ?

        What? No. It's not even close. What the crack are you smoking? To mint a coin you need physical materials. There's a finite amount of nickel and copper in the Earth, the supply is not limitless.

        This, on the other hand, is completely different. An admin can almost literally wish 10 billion dollars worth of furniture into the game at a moments' notice. He could make a chair worth 5 cents or 5 trillion cents. Making another chair requires him to input a short character string. It's nothing like real life t

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by ColdSam ( 884768 )
          You're ignoring the time it takes the admin to verify that data theft occurred and to recreate that object. That time is also a limited resource.

          And you don't think the government couldn't also just digitally add another 10 billion dollars to the money supply if they chose to?

          You get defrauded by a Nigerian scammer? No problem, just send an email to the treasury and ask them to wire the same amount of money back into your bank account. That would be a lot more efficient than trying to prosecute the s
          • But you can't in turn *take* the money back from the Nigerian scammers. Why can't the admins remove the "stolen" furniture from the accused accounts, and "return" it to the rightful owners? And then ban the faulty parties from the system?
        • You are completely and totally losing the plot with any kind of RCE environment. That E on the end of RCE stands for *E*conomy, something that would go bust should the admins tinker the wrong way with it, leaving them with a bunch of pissed off customers with no trust that their items will retain value selling out and a sinking ship headed to bankruptcy. Regardless of how lightly you might take the value of these properties I can assure you that there are many people that take it quite seriously. And as far
          • But why couldn't you get that $30k item back? It's purely digital, it'd be trivial to restore things to as they should. Supply and demand shouldn't come in....they're not making a new copy for you, they'd be removing the stolen copy and returning it to how it should be.
            • You have to prove it was stolen, because THEY have to know it was stolen so they know you are not scamming someone else. File police reports and do the whole "real life" thing, which was my whole point. This is the only way the companies themselves keep from being scammed, and the point behind the "all trades are final" deal.
      • The US Mint can print as many bills as they like
         
        Counterfeiting is illegal. The US Mints only make coins; any bills they printed would have to be with their color laser printer. The Bureau of Engraving and Printing prints the bills.
    • They are so asking for the various government angencies to step in and tax them.

      If any of these virtual items change hands they what will be their defense? If you can go to jail for stealing virtual items surely you can be taxed for selling them as well.

      then again, is this more of a crime of stealing passwords than virtual items?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Corbets ( 169101 )
      And it's not really hacking, which any of the low-UIDs here can tell you originally referred to tinkering. Cracking might be a better term.

      Quite being so pedantic and accept that the meanings of words in any language change over time, and that time has become smaller and smaller in the modern age of communication.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Quarters ( 18322 )
      Yes, something was lost. If they make replacement furniture then the virtual economy has been diluted by $5900 (or whatever it was). This reduces the real-world value of everyone's in-game property. If Habbo did this every time a theft happened then the virtual economy would crash and people would be out a lot of real-world money.
  • I guess restoring from backups is out of the question.
    • When you're dealing with a real cash economy platform that constantly changes.. you bet your booty it is for anything less than catastrophic hardware failure.

  • Jurisdictional nightmare. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Corpuscavernosa ( 996139 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2007 @12:45PM (#21351589)
    Does anyone else think this is all getting just a little bit silly?

    Is someone going to be virtually fined or virtually imprisoned over this? It would be kinda cool to have your virtual character locked up in the clink and have to deal with virtual prison issues that plague real prisons. I wonder how virtual gang-prison-ass-rape would play out.

    It will be really interesting to see how the laws develop in this arena. Who has jurisdiction to hear this matter? If the server is in Germany, the "theif" is in South Africa, and the "victim" is in Canada, what's the venue?

    What laws are applied?

    • Not in this case, no.

      From the summary, it's clear that the individual was fraudulently obtaining access information to other people's accounts. He was then using that information to access their accounts and "steal" data for which they had paid real money.

      As a result, he obtained the value of the data without paying for it. Moreover, he also prevented his victims from enjoying the value of the data they'd purchased.

      This is really a pretty simple wire fraud situation. The only interesting part about it is
    • I don't think it is silly. There is no jurisdictional confusion between the virtual and real world because we have an actual, real world crime. If it were a virtual crime we'd have a different situation.

      If the game system allowed the user's character to walk into a virtual house and make off with virtual property, then I'd say it's part of the game. Anybody should understand that in the game, virtual property is subject to virtual theft. THAT is a virtual crime, and it should be paid by the virtual cha
      • Yay! :D Great post. Yes, the scamming angle is still a bit fuzzy, but it would, in all the RCE platforms I've experienced be considered as you doing the trading.. but the scam itself can be hard to work out who exactly is being played. First rule is, buyer beware. Know what your buying and what it's worth.. if you don't and overpay that's your own fault. Secondly, who really is being scammed.. the user crying "scam!" (which could in all actuality be a reverse scam on the other person) or the company providi
    • It is plain and simple. This guy stole somebody elses identity. He deserves to be stripped of his identity. Shave off all of his hair, make his eyes black with contact lenses, and paint his toenails pink to match his tutu. Then let him out into a busy city center.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mqduck ( 232646 )

      I wonder how virtual gang-prison-ass-rape would play out.
      Now this is the kind of MMORPG I could get into.
  • Should the charge not be some kind of hacking/cybercrime for stealing and/or cracking other peoples accounts, rather than for "virtual theft". The crime should be no different than hacking, and the victims should be able to demand restitution of the virtual goods.
    • I'd FAR prefer to be run up on the $5,900 "virtual theft" charge than the Federal PMITA hacking charge.
    • I imagine the charge (if any) will be the hacking/phishing. Most of that article is made up of the Habbo spokesman talking, not of any statements by the Dutch legal system. That just doesn't make as "interesting" of an article to read.
  • It's theft because a company exchanged money for goods. But it's not theft because it happened online and nothing was "really" stolen?

    I think we're the wrong people to be debating the merits of this. We won't steal physical media but most have no qualms about downloading data even if it is protected by license or copy write. Is phishing and cracking the wrong in this case? Well of course, but have we jailed people for stealing WoW accounts/items yet?

  • This is completely insane (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pclminion ( 145572 ) on Wednesday November 14, 2007 @01:21PM (#21352213)

    How the fuck can there be theft in a world where the game administrators can reinstitute the guy's property WITH THE PUSH OF A BUTTON? It's not like this kid has "deprived" anybody of anything that can't be instantly recreated. Hell, applying the word "create" is even too generous.

    The lunatic who spent $5900 on "virtual furniture" needs to be committed to a small, padded cell until he can get a grip on reality. And if the game admins refuse to give the furniture back to him, toss them in jail for fraud. And charge the kid with cracking, that's all he did.

    This isn't cute. It's fucking nuts, and it scares the crap out of me that people are losing their grip on reality and people might go to prison for it. Holy shit.

    • This is just a sensationalist article. The kids won't be charged with "virtual theft", they'll be charge with hacking and phishing to get people's account information, then using that information to access their accounts. No need to get all worried about "virtual property" and such. It's just a Habbo spokesman running off at the mouth.
    • Actually, from TFA, I get the impression that he nabbed a total of $5900 worth of property from several different users.

      Also, its theft because he's taking something (data) for which someone (the other users) paid value. In the process, he gets value for which he did not pay, and also denies the others the value that they paid.

      Sure, an admin can create a new virtual item, but that doesn't balance things between him and his victims.

      --AC

      • Sure, an admin can create a new virtual item, but that doesn't balance things between him and his victims.

        How does it not balance things? The kid goes to jail/probation for cracking (his ACTUAL crime), so he's punished. The freak with the furniture gets his "property" back. What is lacking here?

        Personally, I think any virtual reality game that will willingly take thousands of your real dollars in return for a few bits in a stick of RAM somewhere is committing fraud, but hey... I don't play these games

        • "the game administrator could quite easily and legally make a billion copies of this guy's "expensive furniture" and sell them for dirt cheap, massively devaluing his "investment." Like I said, only a completely insane person would spend their money this way."

          Yes, the admin could indeed do this. The thing I'm seeing is that there is a world of difference between "could" and "would". Now.. *would* an admin do this? Knowing that it would devalue his users investments, in turn completely pissing them off so th

          • Imagine that, maybe everybody doesn't think the same way you do.. and maybe that's not a bad thing. Paying for entertainment... who'da thunk it.

            To each his own, I agree. But we're not talking a $39.95 monthly subscription. We're not even talking a $100 monthly subscription. That I can even understand. But we're talking $5900 for virtual furniture here.

            Compare with bottled water. I also think this is a massive scam, but I don't have any problem with people who want to drink bottled water. As if it's an

    • If someone steals my truck, does no damage to it, and returns it a week later with a full tank of gas and a thank you note... should that person not be charged with theft?

      I got my truck back.
      During that week it was gone, I didn't have it... much like this guy won't have his virtual furniture until an admin returns it.

      Dunno... doesn't seem so cut/dry.

      • In real life, scarcity is real. The rules that enforce it, were created by no one. You lack your truck after it is stolen, because that's how the universe works. We blame God, except he's untouchable.

        In the game, scarcity is fake and arbitrary. The rules that enforce it, were created by the game designers. They could have just as easily written it so that whenever someone steals your virtual furniture, you still have it. Blame God again, except God has a name and you can point at him.

        Blame the rulem

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Dahamma ( 304068 )
          But you chose to play THE STOCK MARKET; nobody chose to play in life. Thus, the victim also shares some of the blame, when this happens inside THE STOCK MARKET.

          So, if someone puts money in a brokerage account and it gets hacked, is it the victim's fault, too?

          • So, if someone puts money in a brokerage account and it gets hacked, is it the victim's fault, too?

            The "reality" of electronic currency is created by LAW. If somebody takes the money out of your account electronically, there is REAL WORLD HURT because the laws of the land say that "Money cannot be created out of thin air, except by the goverment." Therefore somebody has to PAY in order for you to get your money back. I don't see how I can make the concept any clearer -- virtual property can only have tr

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by jjohnson ( 62583 )
      Years of downloading MP3s has warped your moral definition of theft. It's not the practical "deprivation of use by the rightful owner" that makes it theft, it's the "taking without right" that makes it theft. Besides, while the admins *could* replace the stolen virtual furniture, they probably won't because they don't know how to deal with proving that someone's stuff got stolen, and avoiding opening another avenue for fraud of reporting fake theft.

      I'll admit that the fact that it's virtual, and the depri

      • Years of downloading MP3s has warped your moral definition of theft.

        Years of hanging out in your mother's basement has warped you idea of what constitutes reality. We all depend every day on "virtual" objects to act as if they are real. The money in your bank account, the database which indicates how many shares of Intel stock you own. The only reason any of this is "real" is because we have laws which say so. Without the laws, it is all NOTHING. I'm not even getting into the comparison between copyrigh

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by MWoody ( 222806 )
      I don't entirely disagree with you, but I must point out that your example is a bit flawed. Lets extrapolate to real life: governments print money. It retains its value only because it is a limited commodity and because it is traded for goods and services.

      If you get money stolen in real life, does the mint print you up new money to replace it? No. Why? Because the surest way to devalue a good whose value exists entirely in its scarcity is to create more.

      When you realize that most real money these days

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dbcad7 ( 771464 )
        When you realize that most real money these days is itself intangible, existing entirely within networks of communicating banks and such, the analogy becomes even clearer.

        And yet the bank WILL replace your money when there are charges to your credit card you didn't make.

  • Pool's closed (Score:2, Funny)

    by bersl2 ( 689221 )
    due to an ongoing criminal investigation.

    Sorry.

    ---The Management

Slashdot Top Deals

"...a most excellent barbarian ... Genghis Kahn!" -- _Bill And Ted's Excellent Adventure_

Close