• Home
  • About
  • Blog
  • News
  • Events
  • Media
  • Video
  • Glossary
  • Contact
  • Download
  • RSS

Contingent generativity comes to WoW

March 25th, 2009  |  by elisabeth  |  Published in Future of the Internet

Imagine that you’re playing World of Warcraft and you decide you could use a little help finishing your quest. So you go to a site that aggregates and distributes “add-ons”—independently-written programs that hook into WoW and create new functionality for game players. You choose a popular one called QuestHelper and go on your way. As you’re questing, a little window pops up asking if you’d like to donate to the program’s developer. Are you annoyed by the in-game intrusion, or happy to be reminded to send a few dollars to the useful app’s creator?

From now on, the choice won’t be yours to make. Blizzard Entertainment, creator of WoW, has issued new legal guidelines allowing these add-on programs but specifying that they must be free, can’t solicit in-game donations, and must not “negatively affect the game for other players.” (Developers can still solicit donations on their websites, but almost all apps are download through third-party distributor websites. Donations may also be solicited on the distributor websites, but developers will have to convince owners of those websites to do it on their behalf.) Blizzard has always been able to disable add-ons simply by updating the game technology. That’s the price of developing an ancillary program for a proprietary platform—the same is true for Facebook, iPhones, and so on. But the new guidelines are (quasi-?)contractual, not technological, and sweep much more broadly. Over on Slashdot, the developer of QuestHelper (“ZorbaTHut”), the popular program in the example above, says that this will likely make the cost of development unsustainable for him. He found that occasional in-game donation requests massively increased his income, and thinks that requests on his own website won’t be enough.

I can understand why Blizzard is doing this—they want to control the look and feel of the game, handle specific programs that have been problematic, and keep out annoying nagware (and maybe start their own app store someday). But is it worth it if they lose an app downloaded by tens of millions of people? Does it matter that the game for developers was changed in … mid-game?

This kind of question will come up more and more often in the new app/platform ecosystem, where developers are writing for tethered platforms and not generative PCs. What I find most interesting about the Slashdot and WoW forum debates is how strongly some people defend Blizzard—basically, “it’s their platform and they have the right to do whatever they want!” People say the same thing about Apple and the iPhone. Of course these companies are within their legal rights—that’s not the debate. But on the other hand, these independent programs are making Blizzard’s product better, right?  And under terms that could change at any time.

I think the question is, what do we, as users and developers, really want to see? Will developers actually walk away from platforms that reject apps inexplicably, or copy their better features, or tell developers they can’t charge? And do independent developers bring enough to these platforms that we users are willing to protest and ask for more open policies?

—By Elisabeth Oppenheimer

Comments are closed.

Blog

  • Dropbox Ran Afoul of Apple’s App Store Review Guidelines: So What?
  • Last week, a number of developers reported that Apple was rejecting iOS applications that used Dropbox, a popular cloud file storage and backup system. An initial thread on the Dropbox developers’ forum has led to a outpouring of tech news full of hyperbolic claims. However, none of this reporting has covered the real problem – Apple is now more concerned about protecting its business model than serving its users or its developers.  Read more »

  • Help pioneer Casebook: The Next Generation
  • We at the H2O project are seeking a full-time Project Manager. H2O is an online platform for textbook development and distribution, currently in a pilot stage. H2O is based on the open source model – instead of locking down materials in formalized textbooks, we believe that course books can be free (as in free speech) for everyone to access and, equally important, build upon.

    Using H2O, professors can freely pull together materials for a course by selecting cases, editing those cases to the sections that are most relevant, and grouping them into readings. Once the materials are assembled, they can be copied in part or in whole by other interested faculty and then edited further.  H2O has been successfully piloted in JZ’s 1L Torts class, and will be rolling out further over the coming year.

    H2O’s project manager will play a leading role in shepherding H2O into its next phase, which will focus on developing new materials and incorporating additional features, in order to expand the platform beyond its law school roots.

    H2O is a  joint project of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society and the Harvard Law School library.  The Project Manager will be housed at the HLS Library and work in close collaboration with lead members of the Library Innovation Lab team; he/she will also work closely with the Berkman Center and current H2O teams. More info and job posting here.

  • Meme patrol: “When something online is free, you’re not the customer, you’re the product.”
  • I participated in the Berkman Center’s fascinating HyperPublic symposium in the summer of 2011.  When moderating a panel I invoked the aphorism that “When something online is free, you’re not the customer, you’re the product.”  It’s a way of encapsulating the idea that online free services usually make money by extracting lots of data from users — and then selling that data, or using it for targeted availability of those users for advertising, to advertisers.  In that sense, the advertisers are the clients, and the users enjoying free content are what’s being sold.  (Of course, sometimes that happens even when the user pays.)

    I didn’t coin the phrase, and since it was featured (and attributed to me!) in wordsmith.org’s wildly popular “word a day” as a thought for the day accompanying the word “enceinte” — I sought to nail down its provenance.

    The first use of the quote that we can find is as a comment within the famed MetaFilter community  in August 2010. The user’s name is blue_beetle, who might be someone named Andrew Lewis.  It’s entirely possible I saw it there, as MeFi is one of my five favorite sites on the Web.

    Similar sentiments (whether drawn from that source or independently invented) have been expressed by Bruce Schneier in October 2010 and by Douglas Rushkoff in September ’11.

    The phrase “you’re the product” also apparently appeared in a 1986 speech by President Reagan about the drug war.

    Just say know.

    –KA and JZ

  • OS X Mountain Lion and Gatekeeper
  • This week, Apple announced that it was moving to a new, faster OS X operating system development cycle, starting with the release of Mountain Lion next summer.  It previewed a number of features for the OS, and released some parts in beta.

    Mountain Lion is slated to include a feature called Gatekeeper as part of the security and privacy settings. Gatekeeper allows administrators (those with full privileges on a Mac) to limit the applications that can run on the Mac.  They can choose among allowing apps downloaded from the Mac App Store only, or apps from outside the Store so long as they are digitally signed to Apple’s satisfaction by their developers, or apps from anywhere.  (The latter has been the way both Mac and Windows PCs have worked, for better or worse, since the introduction of the Apple II in 1977.) Read more »

  • GPS-based Insurance Rates: The Devil is in the (Data) Details
  • A British insurance company called Motaquote has teamed up with TomTom, the GPS manufacturer to offer insurance prices based on data gathered by GPS. Fair Pay Insurance, Motaquote’s new program, is an opt-in insurance pricing scheme where drivers will get a free GPS unit in return for potentially lower (but possibly higher) premiums. The GPS unit will provide all the traditional navigational services as well as warn drivers when they corner too sharply or brake too hard. Read more »

About Jonathan Zittrain

jonathan zittrain

Jonathan Zittrain is Professor of Law at Harvard Law School and co-founder of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School

RSS Tweets from Z

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

Blog Archives



Creative Commons BY-NC-SA Jonathan Zittrain unless otherwise noted.
Powered by WordPress using Gridline Lite.