Roquilly (2011)
Contents
Source Details
| Roquilly (2011) | |
| Title: | Control Over Virtual Worlds by Game Companies: Issues and Recommendations |
| Author(s): | Roquilly, C. |
| Year: | 2011 |
| Citation: | Roquily, C. (2011) Control Over Virtual Worlds by Game Companies: Issues and Recommendations. MIS Quarterly, 35(3) |
| Link(s): | Open Access |
| Key Related Studies: | |
| Discipline: | |
| Linked by: | |
| About the Data | |
| Data Description: | Data were obtained from the EULAs/ToS of 20 virtual worlds. Selections were determined based on popularity, age and type (both MMORPs and MMOGs). |
| Data Type: | Primary and Secondary data |
| Secondary Data Sources: | |
| Data Collection Methods: | |
| Data Analysis Methods: | |
| Industry(ies): | |
| Country(ies): | |
| Cross Country Study?: | Yes |
| Comparative Study?: | No |
| Literature review?: | No |
| Government or policy study?: | No |
| Time Period(s) of Collection: | |
| Funder(s): | |
Abstract
“Game companies use five components—four core components and one complementary one—in a 5 Cs model to ensure the control and development of virtual worlds. A multidisciplinary review of the literature reveals that game companies make use of copyright, codes, creativity, and community to do this. They use the contract as a complementary component to reinforce their control over the four basic components and to compensate for the lacunae they present. In order to examine the extent to which game companies use the contract in this way, an analysis is performed of all contractual documents from a sample of 20 virtual worlds, providing evidence of general trends and emphasizing any differences between the virtual worlds in terms of the business and gaming models sought by each game company. An explanation is provided of why these contracts do not constitute a sustainable model for the game companies, given the high level of legal insecurity they present. Some basic recommendations can be made in order to improve the sustainability of the 5Cs model by modifying these contracts in such a way that they are enforceable and by matching their content with appropriate business and gaming models. This could lead to further studies aimed at providing answers to some of the intriguing issues affecting scholars and practitioner”
Main Results of the Study
• The study proposes a 5C’s model of governance of virtual worlds: copyright, codes, creativity and community – all are bolstered by the contract (the EULA or terms of service).
• With the exception of only one game (Second Life), no EULAs recognise the copyright or property rights of the user in a virtual world in respect of their characters or virtual content. This appears to be treated differently than user-generated content more broadly construed, for which the majority of EULAs require a licence from the user, whilst permitting them to retain their copyright (35%). No agreements authorise the creation of any derivative works based on the game content.
• EULAs restrict ownership of virtual world accounts, with 50% stating that the user has no ownership), and 95% forbidding the resale of a game account. Similarly, 70% of EULAs forbid the sale of virtual property outside the game world.
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
Whilst the study does not make any explicit policy recommendations, the author advises that in free to play business models that rely on user-generated content, copyright should be ‘totally or partially attributed to users, who should be allowed to trade the virtual items they own for real money’.
Coverage of Study
Datasets
| Sample size: | 20 |
| Level of aggregation: | Virtual World |
| Period of material under study: |
